tv Video with Superintendent Matthews and Dr. Aragon SFGTV March 12, 2020 2:00pm-5:31pm PDT
preston, walton, and peskin. i also want to thank our clerk, angela calvillo, and severin and frank from the b.l.a. office. we still do not know how far reaching and the wrongdoing in our local government is at this point. it doesn't stop the charges filed by the f.b.i., and we have a lot of work to rebuild public trust and prevent more corruption charges from occurring. the federal investigators and controller are doing their jobs to conduct audits and procedural investigation. those roles are critical, and we all have the utmost faith in the city attorney and controller to address their respective scopes of work, but what is also clear is that work
alone will not be enough. we have to complement those efforts with a third-party investigation appointed by the board of supervisors, tasked with effecting change. we will continue to provide direction where the focus of this special investigator will be and better defining this scope of work, but this is the next step in terms of actually moving forward. the motion allows us to move forward with the process of procurement, and i ask for everybody's support. >> president yee: okay. seeing no other name on the roster, can we take this same
house, same call? without objection, motion passes. [gavel]. >> president yee: next item. >> clerk: item 16 is an ordinance to amend the health code to require the medical examiner to report the information to the mayor and board of supervisors once every four months of deaths arising from drug overdoses. >> president yee: supervisor haney? >> supervisor haney: thank you, president yee. i want to thank the cosponsors of this, supervisors walton, fewer, ronen, and mar. as we've spoken about a number of times, the drug epidemic is the most deadly crisis facing our city. it's critical we have this data as soon as it is available for us to respond quickly to
prevent additional people dieing from overdose. this is a responsibility that we have to be vigilant and proactive, and to receive data is not it is available. right now, there is no requirement for us to regularly report and make public drug overdose deaths, and as i said, this is something that has sky rocketed the last few years, and in order to save lives, having that data available is critical. so i hope that we will support this, and i want to thank the medical examiner's office, the department of public health, for their partnership in making this available and in how quickly we can get this data and in using this data proactively to save lives. >> president yee: okay. can we take this same house, same call? without objection, this item is passed on first reading
unanimously. [gavel]. >> president yee: madam clerk, let's call item 17. >> this is to grant applications for discharge for accountability filed by the tax collector for the delinquency of property taxes on any property. >> president yee: colleagues, can we take this same house, same call? without objection, the item is passed on first reading. [gavel]. >> president yee: madam clerk, can you call item 18. [agenda item read]. >> president yee: supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: thank you, president yee, colleagues, and thank you to the members of the rule committee for forwarding this, and chair ronen for cosponsoring this.
it's an interesting story in and of itself, but the board of supervisors has long had the power to compel testimony pursuant to this body's unlimited power of inquiry in the form of subpoenas. it is not something that has been used lightly, it has not been used often, but was last used a few years ago in and around the millennium tower sinking and tilting matter where a number of parties ranging from architects to engineers to geotechnical engineers that did not want to voluntarily come to these chambers to talk about the infirmities of that structure, which we actually already voted on today relative to a settlement where in -- i'm not bringing up a past item, madam
city attorney, but where we all agreed to different them portions -- give them portions of our sidewalks for no money. that resulted in the issuance of a number of subpoenas. those subpoenas, as we all know, took quite a long time to issue, and i at that time proposed a change to the board rules to expedite that process and to delegate that authority to the government audit and oversight committee. it would have been a change in the board rules, a change in the board rules requires a super majority of eight out of 11 votes. i came one vote shy of that. i think a few of us are still left from those days. i think the one vote is a
cosponsor of this, supervisor ronen, who is sitting to my right, but to my left in political leanings. given the revelations that we are all very clear about, because the mayor just addressed them relative to additional alleged corruption that has resulted in the suspension of another department head, which will take on its own life -- the reason i am here before you is the instrument that is before us is almost item cal to what this board voted on a couple of years ago save for the fact that there is the additional
provision with regard to issuing an oath under penalty of perjury to department heads. the municipal executives association, not a union insofar as they are not members of the afl-cio, but a legitimate bargaining unit, they have asked to meet and confer with d.h.r. i was at the first of those meets. they will be at an additional meeting on march 24. we anticipated this. we duplicated the file in committee pending any potential meet and confer. so i am rising to remove the only things that are different between this board rule change and the board rule change that i voted for that -- not to all y'all out, but that supervisor fewer voted for, that president yee voted for, that supervisor
safai voted for, and that supervisor ronen voted against. i believe that everybody else, including supervisor stefani, was not on the board at the time that it won with seven votes but lost because at that time it did not have eight votes. so i would like to make a motion to remove at section 3.3.2 in paragraph one from lines 5 through 7, the clause that the provision that the clerk of the board could administer an oath to a department head. i'd like to remove the corresponding provision in section 6.7.1 that started at line 24 on the second page and goes to line 1 on the third page. and then, after meet and confer happens, i would like to resurrect the duplicate file in committee and bring those two provisions back. and with that, that is my
motion. >> president yee: supervisor ronen? >> supervisor ronen: can i ask the deputy city attorney a question about supervisor peskin's motion? so i understand that we have an obligation to meet and confer with unions or bargaining unions when it's an ordinance that perhaps would change their work conditions. but what we're doing here with this motion is changing our own internal board of supervisors rules, and it's not clear to me that anyone but the board of supervisors should have the right to weigh-in on those rules. can you explain why, when we were deciding how we're going to conduct ourselves as a body of elected officials, why anyone else should have a right to weigh-in on that? >> deputy city attorney ann
pearson. under state law when proposed legislation will have an effect on wages, hours, and conditions of employment, the city has to provide an opportunity for meet and confer. and whether or not a legislation triggers that -- you know, a change that would give that opportunity for meet and confer is something that's within the discretion of d.h.r. in this case, i know that m.e.a. has concluded, in fact, in their opinion, this has an effect on their members, the effect on their working conditions. and based on that, d.h.r. has granted the opportunity to meet and confer which is still in progress. and until that is completed, our advice that the board may not take action on this legislation until that process is done. >> supervisor ronen: this board, if we impact another department's working conditions in any way, we cannot change our board rules without conferring with the union.
is that what you're saying, and that's state law? >> it's a matter of state allow, and it's a part of our m.o.u.'s. when we enter into m.o.u.s with the union, it's a matter that we would not change the rules without a meet and confer. >> supervisor ronen: i really take issue with this. it doesn't make sense to me that any other department should weigh-in on this board decides to conduct its business. we are a governing body. we are an elected body that sets rules for ourselves, and while i appreciate and usually respect the rights of our
governments and unions to -- departments and unions to weigh-in on any sort of legislation that might impact them, i'm not sure that that is prepa appropriate for the rules themselves. i'm wondering if there were other people in the office that were consulted or if this was your call, and your call alone? >> i consulted many attorneys in the office on this? >> supervisor ronen: and this was the unanimous decision? >> this was the call of the office. >> supervisor ronen: and i'm not sure if i'm allowed to ask the clerk a question? is that proper? >> president yee: why don't you ask the question and we'll determine if it's proper. >> supervisor ronen: okay. great. so if i'm wondering if there
has ever been a situation in your tenure because you've been the clerk of the board for quite a long time, if the board has proposed to change their rules and they've had to meet and confer before doing so. >> president yee: madam clerk, if you'd like to answer. >> clerk: supervisor, in my 21 years in the department, generally, if they're changing rules and they impact other departments, just out of courtesy, i work with them. i will leave the legal interpretation to the city attorney's office and d.c.a. pearson, but this is the first time that i've seen the interaction with the m.e.a. association or any union' of a board rule. >> supervisor peskin: mr. president, if i can rise to a point of information. >> president yee: supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: i do
raise this as a matter of a shared history -- although she has been here continuously, and i have not. i cannot think of another rule that's been subject to meet and confer. having said that, i totally respect, and i think we all should, relative to a government's relationship with organized labor. but i do want to standup -- i'm not picking on the deputy city attorney. this is not a union, this is a bargaining unit that consists of some 1,000 people who are our department heads, who are our deputy department heads, and i don't want to politicize this matter, but the fact that they do not want to have their members readily come and tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth pursuant
to the penalty of perjury is mildly annoying, and that's my reservation. >> president yee: supervisor ronen? >> supervisor ronen: the reason why i ask this is because i've been here ten years, and i think we have a right to investigate this law. i think the right to subpoena someone and take their oath under penalty of perjury, a penalty that could lead to criminal consequences, is serious. and i thought it was better that a board, under a majority of six people, make that decision and not under g.a.l. i have reservations, and i continue to hold them. but i'll tell you what's
changed my mind. it's that every day, a new department head by the f.b.i. or our city attorney or some other entity has been charged with engaging in corruption. today, we learned that the head of d.b.i. met with a restricted source for dinners, that he estimated cost $30 that he never reported. but it's relatively potentially low level, although the fact that there were private communication between the d.b.i. director and one individual where no other member of the public had that direct line to him is more serious. it's that we have a culture of corruption in this city. for the first time, and after three times, the f.b.i. had to come in to catch someone on wiretap saying that in order to do business in san francisco, you have to pay to play, that
is so tremendously serious, and it's tremendously serious because people are going to lose faith in what we do in government, government that i believe is the best party to meet people's basic needs when they aren't able to meet those needs themselves, is extremely serious in this condition. we would like to engage in the city attorney's office, with the f.b.i., to the extent that they're engaged, to change this rampant culture of corruption in the city and county of san francisco. when we're finally about to do that, for the first time ever, we have to meet and confer with
managers who are being dismissed left and right in order to pass a law changing our own rules. it's very curious to me that we have to go through this extra step that i've never seen on the board of supervisors. i'm an attorney myself, and i find it extremely curious that we can't have this motion. we've had two meetings at the rule committee before we even heard for the first time that this was even an issue in the first place. so i find the process curious, and i'm frustrated by it, but i guess it is what it is. i will be voting in favor of this today, but i will make sure that we bring before us a follow-up version of this ordinance including department heads as soon as possible so that we can be part of the
process of rooting out this rampant corruption in this city once and for all. >> president yee: supervisor safai? >> supervisor safai: i want to thank supervisor peskin for bringing this motion forward. as supervisor peskin noted for the record, i did support this initially when i was first introduced. i have a little bit of reservations only because i know that there's two objectives i've heard the supervisor state. one is to save time, and one is to move the process forward. one i could not have contemplated at the time when we were first doing this is what objective are we trying to solve for? and this is just an honest question. i think at the end of the day when we have a city attorney, when we have outside attorneys, when we have u.s. attorneys, when we have different legal processes going forward, we
would not have the ability or would want to subpoena anyone involved in an ongoing investigation, so that's one thing. but the other thing is, right now, we have the ability -- i think you've said that on the record, so the second piece of what i'm trying to understand is how much time are we actually saving by transferring all of the board's authority, and i mean that by saying a majority of the board currently now can approve a subpoena, and we're qi that go to the government audits and oversight. if we stayed with the current process, and we wanted to do exactly what you wanted to do, we would still go through the government audits and oversight, and five days later, it would come to the board of supervisors for a final approval. so this isn't by no means --
this is honestly to ask you these questions and understand what we're trying to solve for ultimately. so if you could explain this, that would be helpful. and then, the second one, which i initially said, was in terms of impeding or initiating any ongoing investigation. >> president yee: supervisor peskin, would you like to answer that? >> supervisor peski >> supervisor peskin: president yee, through you to supervisor safai, thank you for your comments. let me address this in a number of ways on all of the issues that supervisor safai has asked and asked in good faith. first around the objective. the objective is satisfying our
unlimited power of inquirely not because we're interested in salacious details, but the branch of our government, in order to understand what legislative fixes we need to take, need to understand whatever actions we need to take, whether it's the millennium and the settlement that we need to take, or whether it's city government, whether it's going to inform us to changes to the administrative code, changes to the charter that may be proposed, the use of that unlimited power of inquiry so that we can actually do our fu
fu fundamental job of legislating is important. [please stand by] . >> supervisor peskin: we compelled them pursuant to the body's power of subpoena. that gets me to the next question, which is why would this body which has this power and the power to delegate it want to delegate it to a committee? and i would say for the same reason that the chair of the house intelligence committee, mr. schiff, was delegated the
powers in the investigation that led to impeachment to subpoena individuals to that body, and ultimately, we vote for a board president. that board president actually assigns committee members, can remove them at his or her pleasure. and if, god forbid, a committee was out of control and was misusing that, which is precisely what supervisor ronen's concerns were, that were not supervisor safai's concerns a number of years ago, then, the board president who a majority of us elect, could yank members, reappoint members of a committee. the answer is, we want to get that information, whether it's about corruption or sinking and tilting buildings in as close
to real-time as a government can get. so understand a supervisor, they would have to come in here and introduce something on a tuesday. if that supervisor wanted to put something on without reference to the city calendar, they could do that. for instance, if there was pressure from the m.e.a., the chief executive officer, and then, it depends on how fast it gets a committee hearing, how fast it comes to the board. so the answer is depending on how the system is played or gamed, it could be as much as five or six weeks as compared to -- and the city attorney is quite insistent that notice is very important -- as compared to one week.
i am happy to answer any and all additional questions through the president. >> president yee: supervisor safai? >> supervisor safai: yeah. so supervisor peskin, you and i agree 100% on the motive. we're absolutely in agreement on that. this body always has unlimited powers of inquiry. we want to strengthen that. what i would go back to is some of the things that i've learned from you in your time on this board, and the thing that you always talk about consistently is checks and balances. the check that this authority plays on, the executive. and it feels as though -- and i understand, with all due respect for the objective about expediting the process, i'm just not sure about the proposal. the example that you gave in the house judiciary, it was the power of the speaker of the house to invest someone in that particular position in it. i would feel more comfortable
that we did that through the board president, and the board president had the power to say under this circumstance because this president has this power -- if we vested that power in the president that we all select, then that board president could then say okay, we -- under these circumstances -- if there exists such a process, under these circumstances, i'm saying that the g.a.o. has the ability and authority under -- i'm concerned. my own reservation at this point is having two members of this body having more authority vested in them unlimited without the circumstances are right. that concerns me. our objectives are the same. i want us to be able to get to the bottom. i want us to require. i'm concerned about the shifting of the balance of power, but i think your main
concern, what i've heard you articulate, is time. >> supervisor peskin: we actually did have the opportunity to debate this before, and we did debate this before, although there were several members, yourself excluded, that was not amongst them. >> president yee: supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: thank you, president yee. i just want to add, first of all, i believe when this was first introduced, it was 2017, and i was not on the board at the time. had i been, i might have had those concerns about giving this power to people, since we
already have six that are able to do that. however, the reason why i voted for it in rules committee is if those two individuals were to get out of hand or abuse that power, i believe the president of the board of supervisors can change that committee and we can handle it. i voted yes for it because i do not want to stand in the way of getting to the bottom of any type of corruption, and i see supervisor safai's points. i understand why supervisor ronen may have had issue with it before, but given the fiact and circumstances that we face today, i believe there's enough protection against two people that may abuse it, that we're okay with it. i do have a question about the meet and confer, if i may ask that.
>> president yee: supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: city attorney, i'm concerned that this goes to m.e.a., and they say they're not going to be bound by it. what is the power of their meet and confer? >> you are not bound by it. you are bound by a process in which you listen to their opposition and you try and over come any obstacles, but you're not bound by this, you're just bound by the position until it's complete. >> supervisor stefani: okay. so if they meet and confer and come back to us, we still have the power to go forward with the legislation as originally written? >> that's correct. >> supervisor stefani: okay. thank you. >> president yee: supervisor walton. >> supervisor walton: thank you, supervisor yee. i just wanted to be added as a cosponsor. >> president yee: supervisor peskin?
>> supervisor peskin: i just want to say, as i alluded to earlier, i respect the process. i have already met and conferred, and the city will continue to meet and confer in good faith. i have made a motion to remove the clauses that are the subject of the meeting and conferring, and as we just heard from the city attorney, we do have a process, we do need to meet and confer, albeit as i stated and supervisor ronen states, it is interesting that we have to meet and confer over our specific rules that govern this body. but notwithstanding, everything that this was aimed to do in 2017 it still does, and we will get to the oath for department
heads after march 24. and as the city attorney said, we need to meet, we need to confer, we have to do it in good faith, but we don't ultimately have to agree. so if those discussions breakdown, and i hope that they don't, and i hope we're able to come to a resolution or that the municipal executive association that represents the highest, best paid etchelons o this government actually realize that this is something in their interests because having department heads tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, is probably good for the m.e.a. and something they should support, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. but, mr. president, i have a motion on the floor, and if there's a second on that, i would like to vote on this
matter. >> president yee: maybe if i can make any comments on that before we take the vote. so like my colleagues said, i was concerned about the ethical actions that have been relayed to us not only a few weeks ago, but today. i want to thank supervisor peskin for bringing this back and doing his best for making it more useable for the board. while i'm not convinced that this rule achieves the goal of expediting, i'm willing to try it, as we are duty bound to do. i want to thank supervisor ronen for duplicating the rule
so -- so supervisor peskin, do you hado -- supervisor safai, do you have anything else to add? unless there's the question has been called. >> supervisor safai: i do. so thank you, mr. president, and thank you for your comments, supervisor peskin. i just wanted to talk about the process and inquire if there was any additional way that we could have some check on two members of the board, but i think what you told me that was the most compelling argument and it makes me feel more comfortable, ultimately, in the end is that the board president has the ability to assign and appoint members of the government audits and oversight committee. and if that person, in their position, felt as though there was abuse or overuse or those two things, most importantly, then, the board president could
intervene to stop the process and/or guide it in a more appropriate manner. so i feel comfortable ultimately supporting this today, and i appreciate the debate. >> president yee: okay. so last word, supervisor peskin. >> like to be added as a cosponsor on this, and i thank the supervisor for his work. >> supervisor peskin: for the record, you are already added as a cosponsor. >> all right. it's not on the copy that i got that's on the agenda. >> president yee: okay. is there a second? seconded by supervisor safai. can we take this amendments without objection? >> supervisor safai: added me, right? >> president yee: and you would like to be added as a
cosponsor? anybody else that would like to be added as a cosponsor, raise your hand. supervisor haney just raised his hand. >> supervisor peskin: he's already a cosponsor. >> president yee: all right. do we need to take a roll call on this? if not, let's take this item as amended, same house, same call, and it passes. [gavel]. >> president yee: madam clerk, let's go to item 19, i believe. >> clerk: item 19 is a motion to reappoint juth juliet graf and margaret rothman. >> president yee: okay. colleagues, can we take this same house, same call?
without objection, this motion is approved unanimously. madam clerk, item 21. >> clerk: item 21, motion to appoint mark talindsey to the pedestrian safety committee for a term ending june 30, 2022. >> president yee: colleagues, can we take this same house, same call? without objection, this motion is approved unanimously. colleagues, we're not holding 2:30 special accommodations. we're not doing that until we hear otherwise. madam clerk, can we call the 3:00 special hearing? [agenda item read]. >> president yee: supervisor mandelman, would you like to make any remarks? >> supervisor mandelman: thank you, president yee. colleagues, you may recall that this item was continued from our meeting on february 11 to today's meeting.
in the intervening month, my office has been working with the project applicant and the appellants to be finalizing an appeal. i can report we've made significant progress toward a mediation, and because of that, both parties have requested an additional two weeks to finalize the details. accordingly, i would like
this matter, which is our public utilities commission, and their commission, and we will be meeting with them in closed session later this afternoon. as the short title read by the clerk indicates, this is consistent with a number of actions and policy positions that we have taken and the p.u.c. has taken. the p.u.c. is adopting a resolution that is very, very similar to the resolution that is before us. i want to thank supervisor ronen for her leadership around this issue and for her cosponsorship of this particular item that sets forth our continued policy priority to ultimately require the distribution and transmission system of pacific gas and electric within the city and county of san francisco that has been the subject of a number of public hearings, and as set forth in the resolution and other actions that we have
taken, underscore our support for climate change, affordability and equity, operational excellence, and improved service to city departments and the people of the city and county of san francisco. i hope this will pass unanimously, and i look forward to our closed session with the p.u.c. and its commission in 12 minutes. >> president yee: colleagues, can we take this same house, same call? colleagues, without objection, this item is adopted unanimously. madam clerk, will you please call roll call. >> clerk: that's correct. supervisor haney is first thed
labor protections that need to be expanded and strengthened during this time. i also have legislation that i am introducing today with supervisor walton that would require neighborhood foot patrols across the city that would create a new neighborhood station in each district, intended to increase foot patrols in each neighborhood with violent crime. foot patrols are more effective in both preventing crime and fostering better relationships between cops and the communities they serve. we know that by having regular foot beats with the same officers working the shift every day, we are able to better prevent crime and foster stronger relationships between police officers and the communities they serve.
residents contact me all the time in many parts of my district about the desire to see more foot beats, yet there is no regular city law that requires foot patrol officers. this will require foot patrols in the areas where we need them the most and provide specific training and oversight. it will create a neighborhood district unit in each district space station. the goal is to prioritize regular policing strategies and ensure foot patrols are in each station. it will create a strategy map created by the district station and the chief of police which will determine where foot patrols should be prioritized. it will provide new accountability and data
reporting which will help keep accountability by regular staffing, and this data must also be presented during each budget cycle. it will build long-term relationships with the community by requiring the minimumization of foot patrol officers, and will require officers assigned to this units participate in robust training and profession developments that serve diverse populations. we know this is a solution not just because communities are demanding it but because the research shows that foot patrols work to prevent crime. a 2017 california policy study showed that when sfpd doubled its foot patrols in 2017, there were significant decline in larceny and thefts specifically where the foot patrols were deployed. we drafted this legislation with our community partners and
constituents and mind because they want to feel protected by the community police officers that patrol their neighborhoods. we worked with commissioners petra dejesus, elias, hamasaki, and brookter. we're looking forward to working with the entire police commission, chief scott, and you to get this legislation right and accomplish its most important goal, which is to serve and protect our residents. i also want to note that supervisor mar has signed on as a cosponsor, as well. i rest i submit. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor haney. supervisor walton, did you want to make a comment? >> supervisor walton: just wanted to make a comment on that, if that's okay. >> president yee: go ahead. >> supervisor walton: part of the plan as a part of community
policing was increased foot beats. our legislation supports this need and it's in alignment with sfpds mission to maintain and build trust with community. we believe that this is the first step in repairing relationships and building trust with community. we know that we have some strained relationships with law enforcement and the community and the reemergence of foot patrols is a crime reducing strategy and community trust build strategy. this unit will receive intense training that will help build strong community relationships, building greater
approachability, trust, and relationships with police. following department of justice's recommendations, objective number three, community policing, the finding was that sfpd needs to formalize community engagement in support of community policing practices, and this legislation helps develop comprehensive strategy policing plan. the training officers will receive will help foster and build stronger relationships. having our police officers reflect and understand each community they serve is a win for all of us, and we look forward to reviewing the data
that will come out of this work, and i'm confident that it will result in a decrease in crime and an increase in community feeling safer. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor walton. supervisor mandelman, you're up next. submit? okay. thank you. supervisor mar? >> supervisor mar: thank you, madam clerk. colleagues, i have two items today. first, i'm calling for a hearing on the progress and finding of the hearings into progress and corruption of the city attorney. i announced i would be calling for this at the government audit and oversight committee. as reports from either investigation are released, we will have a full report at the government audit and oversight committee as instances of
unethical actions are disclosed, we will root them out. much has happened on the west side since a similar hearing was held last year, notably the housing bond, eraf funding dedicated to affordable housing, an update of the jobs housing linkage fee, which will bring in approximately $1 billion in affordable housing dollars over the next decade. advocating and emphasizing geographic balance allowed us to invest in capacity building which translated to real
permanent affordable housing to real people and families. i'm eager to learn from this report in the context of other work being done, including the planning department's upcoming reports on job housing fit, the work of abag and the updating of the planned bay area, which supervisor mandelman and i are engaged in, and the hearing on residential vacancies that i have called for. together, they can provide a fuller picture of our presidentsuccesses and challenges, and the rest i submit. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor. supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: submit. >> clerk: thank you. supervisor preston. >> supervisor preston: thank you, madam clerk. first, i'll be introducing a
ban on certain he li ban on certain evictions during the state of emergency, and i want to say that the response to this has been overwhelmingly positive not just from tenants in our district but people all over the city who are concerned about the health crisis, whether or not they'll be able to pay the rent next month. the city and department of h l public health have issued recommendations, that these recommendations themselves may put many tenants in a situation where they'll lose income. we don't want folks in a situation where they're doing the right thing, following public guidelines, while they're losing income, we don't want them to lose their housing, as well. we're making sure that during this state of emergency that we
are protecting public health and preventing transmission, and that avoiding unnecessary displacement and homelessness during that time is part of that. what this ordinance does is prohibit evictions during this state of emergency for nonpayment of rent if the tenant demonstrates that inability is due to coronavirus, due to the state of emergency or due to following government recommended coronavirus related precautions. and to invoke those protections under the ordinance that i'm introducing, tenants must notify the landlord of their inability to pay full rent and provide documentation to support their claim. i want to point out that nothing in this legislation relieves the tenant from being liable for the unpaid rent.
the landlord may take other actions after all of this is over. the ordinance also bans landlords from collecting late fees for rent, if that rent is delayed. it will ban other types of evictions during this state of emergency with very limited exceptions in the midst of this state of emergency. we as a city cannot allow residents to be forced from their homes. really, the goal of this legislation is to make sure this public health crisis doesn't also create a whole newhousing crisis in the upcoming weeks and months, and be secure in -- being secure in one's home is absolutely essential, and it prevents the spread of the coronavirus.
i also want to say that so many san franciscans who are impacted here are working class folks, communities of color, and they're impacted by losing wages, and we need to make sure that they don't lose housing. the second item, colleagues, i'm pleased to announce that today, at the request of san francisco black firefighters association, i'm introducing a resolution to rename a street in my district, willow street, in between buchanan and laguna, earl gage, jr., in honor of san
francisco's first black firefighter. the response has been really heartening, and neighbors seem to be really welcoming this change of street name. earl moved to san francisco in 1945, graduated from u.c. berkeley, was drafted in the army, got married in 1952. in 1955, when he was hired by the san francisco fire department, he became the first and only black firefighter in san francisco and remained the city's only black firefighter from 1955 to 1967. prior to his retirement from the fire department in 1983, he served as the department's director of community services and enacted a series of progressive hiring policies that served to increase racial diversity within the department and in turn city government. throughout his career, earl
gage, jr., worked to create equitable processes for the fire department to include integration and he continues to shape policy and civil rights policy in the city. he passed away on jouuly 30, 2017, at the age of 90. he is survived by his daughter, blondell chisolm, and numerous grandchildren and great grandchildren who would benefit greatly from this action in the area. i'm how so
i'm honored to be playing a role to celebrate this historic figure. >> supervisor peskin: mr. president, if i could be listed as a cosponsor and thank captain tillman. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor peskin, and supervisor ronen. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. i have three items, as well, and i would love to be added as a cosponsor. colleagues, i just want to thank every one of you and the mayor for just stepping up and showing incredible leadership in the face of what is the most broad reaching and immediate crisis that we've ever faced as a city, at least in recent memory. how the virus will spread and what its ultimate health impact will be is unknown to us today, but the collective seriousness
and willingness to work together and put aside political differences to make sure that no san francisco fights alone has been an inspiring thing to watch and be a part of. what we're seeing is the damage to our local economy is likely to be severe. the mayor confirmed that earlier today. several large corporations have already taken steps to follow public guidelines, and this is helpful, but we know it's not an option for many small businesses, most of whom survive month to month like many residents. a shutdown lasting weeks or even a slow down could mean the end of them or for them. in san francisco, there are thousands of these small
businesses employing hundreds of thousands of workers. small businesses are the life blood of our neighborhoods and our communities, and we simply can't let them go under, so i'm working with the city attorney and the treasurer's office to create a small business rent stabilization loan to issue no interest loans to businesses who are unable to meet rent, mortgage, or other fixed operating costs. i plan to introduce this next week. as the covid-19 crisis evolves, we want to send a message loud and clear. if you are following the city's department of public health's recommendations, which you all should do, we've got your back. san francisco is united and resilient, and we will not be driven by fear, but focused on sensible solutions, and i'll describe the details of this measure in more detail next week, when i introduce it. i also have been working with
supervisor ahsha safai to encourage banks to step up during this crisis. the second item that i will be requesting is a hearing from the s.h.a.r.p. office. on september 13, 2019, the mayor signed into existence the office of sexual harassment, assault, and rape prevention, the s.h.a.r.p. office. since then, the human rights office has only hired one of the three staff required by the ordinance and funded by the board. the office has only received and addressed one complaint, and no publicly available information about the office's
existence or services exists. there's just -- there's no outreach, no website, there's no information on the human rights' commission rights commission's website. the one complaint that they did issue was because the survivor came to our service and we passed them onto the s.h.a.r.p. office. this lej this legislation was passed several years ago when rape survivors stated their situations to the city. i am specifically requesting the presence of a leader who can answer all of our questions
about the hiring process from the department of human resources, preferably, the director of that department, the director of the human rights commission, and the director of s.h.a.r.p. final finally, today, i'm proposing changes to existing u.s. border policies. residents of san francisco deserve to live in safety and thriving communities where everyone is treated with respect, but because a city is located within 100 miles of a coastal border, san francisco is considered a border city. that means that families in san francisco are subjected to inhuman rights and make every person a recipient of the widespread corruption of the border agents. because san francisco is a border city, federal immigration agents can assert
the power to board public transportation and harass children on their way to school, parents on their way to work, or adults on the way to their grocery store all without reason, moorely with -- merely with suspicion. a new border vision offers an opportunity to move away from the myopic governance at our borders by forming national policy and grounding national politics in our values. specifically, this framework seeks to expand public safety by focusing border authorities and resources on legitimate public activities and ensuring
that all enforcement is held accountable. it seeks to protect human life by keeping families together, providing immediate aid to people in distress and allowing people to seek protection without barriers. finally, it seeks to welcome newcomers in a humane way by welcoming residents, immigrants, and asylum seekers, minimizing the pole throle thar authorities play in the immigrant community. it is incumbent upon us to lead again by embracing a new border vision that adequately protects human rights. i would like to thank the southern border communities coalition and the students and faculty of the berkeley law international human rights clinic for leading this critical campaign, to enhance human policy government at our coasts and our borders, and for
asking our government to be part of this collective effort, and the rest i submit. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor. supervisor safai? >> supervisor safai: thank you, madam clerk. today, i rise to talk about an introduction as it related to many of the things that have been talked about today with regard to covid-19 and our coronavirus and how it's impacting particularly working families. i know that supervisor peskin took the angle to tenants and those living in buildings where there's a landlord. this particular request -- i'm working on this with supervisor ronen, as she stated, but also supervisor fewer, yee, mar, haney, mandelman, peskin, preston, and stefani.
we're calling for a 60-day moratorium on the default of residential loans that are held by private individuals and small businesses, along with public utilities. that would include gas, electric, garbage, refuse, and water. and i know already from hearing from our public utilities commission that the director has asked the commission to do a halt on any cutoff on water services. we appreciate that. we would like all the different entities that we've named to come up with an action plan on how they're going to help families and help those through no fault of their own have had their livelihood and their jobs impacted. and i can tell you, having gone to a meeting with our janitor's union yesterday, speaking to our teamsters that do our refuse collection, talking to our nurses, many of the folks
in our frontline work hours, many of them are being impacted in terms of their work hours and potentially their salaries. in this time of crisis, they would potentially lose their homes -- they could potentially lose their homes, they could potentially lose their businesses, and we don't want any additional fines or fees imposed during this period. our partnership with mayor breed has made some aggressive recommendations for communities and our colleagues here, directed by the department of public health, and i'm fully in support of all of those recommendations talked about today. but because of that request and because of the impact on people's jobs, we want to take some aggressive steps, and we're asking for that 60-day moratorium. as you go out, as you've seen in san francisco, it's had a tremendous impact on small businesses and workers and
employers all over the city. and because of the cancelling of shifts and because of the loss of income, we feel like this is an appropriate step. there is precedent for it. when northern california and our area experienced natural disasters through fires, i know that our banks took some aggressive steps to ensure that fees weren't being attached to a.t.m.s and lay fees -- late fees and so on, and i think that's what we're asking in this instance. so all the banks and businesses that do business in san francisco and are conducting themselves in san francisco, we'd like to see immediate action. it looks like our public utilities commission are already taking those steps. we need to ensure the lives of our businesses and residents, although they're being disrupte disrupted -- we need to take immediate steps to protect our communities, that they're not having financial crises, as
well. the rest i submit. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor. supervisor stefani? >> supervis supervisor ronen, you wanted to speak? >> supervisor ronen: yes. i'm just a horrible human and did not thank my wonderful staff for all of this work. santiago, paul, and jennifer have been working nonstop on all of the items that i introduced, so thank you so much. >> clerk: thank you. thank you, supervisor stefani, for all of your patience. >> supervisor stefani: thank you, madam clerk. just want to thank my colleagues and the public for coming together against protecting us against covid-19. politicizing this in any way is not something we should be doing. it is my understanding that the
school district, the san francisco school district has voted not to close schools, and jo i don't know if that will change, but it does raise an issue for child care for those parents that need to get to work, and now they have no place to get their kids, so it's something that i will be following up with the mayor's office in the event that we need to figure out child care for schools that may close. i'm also announcing today that i've asked the city attorney to draft legislation that will save single screen theaters. it will a i am seeing this in my district with the closing of the clay theater, which is one of the oldest movie theaters in san francisco. for over 100 years, the clay theater has been one of the most successful cultural institutions in the neighborhood.
in the weeks since we learned that the clay will be closing, i have heard from so many residents, merchants, and neighborhood associations about how much of a loss it would be for the fillmore neighborhood commercial district and for the city as a whole. i will do everything i can to preserve these important cultural institutions, and i look forward to working with the city attorney to draft this legislation to ensure we save the clay theater and other single-screen theaters. i'm also submitting today a formal letter of inquiry to the department of public health regarding the no overdose advertising campaign. while i understand the intent of the campaign, the images that were brought to my attention provided a very incomplete and inaccurate picture of what drug overdose and addiction looks like. i'm absolutely in favor of harm reduction techniques like
providing narcan and overdose training and overdose prevention sites. this is not the only tool at our disposal, and we must be laser focused on promoting new cases and getting those suffering from the disease in treatment. i want to know more about how the campaign was set, and how much the city spent on the campaign. i also want to know if other departments had the opportunity to weigh-in on the conten. it is crimintical to our city t we get input from businesses and residents. i look forward to receiving a response from the department of public health and sitting down
to continue this discussion when i meet with the harm reduction coalition next week, and the rest i submit. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor stefani. supervisor walton? >> supervisor walton: thank you. first, i would like to be a cosponsor of supervisor preston's street naming legislation. if you could name me. first, i'm opposing the united states department of housing and urban development's proposed further fair housing rule that was announced on january 7, 2020, by secretary ben carson. i want to thank the tenant's union and the community for housing partnership for working with us, as well. there was no meaningful guidance on this law until
2015, when the affirmatively furthering fair housing rule was established. the affh requires all federal agencies, including hud and their funding recipients to proactively address segregation and programs and activities related to housing and community development. it also requires that these entities complete a robust analysis of segregation and fair housing disparities in order to receive hud funds. now hud is attempting to eliminate a key fair housing regulation that promotes diverse equitable and inclusive communities. this new rule will continue to advance the administrations deregulation agenda. hud's new proposal will not require jurisdictions and housing authorities to directly examine or address the legacy of unequal housing opportunities in our communities. instead, hud's proposal makes
fair housing an after thought rather than a starting point of discussion about a systemic lack of housing opportunities for communities of color or persons with disabilities. hud's new proposal will minimize oversight and accountability for communities that receive federal housing dollars. it will not require communities to advance housing policies for groups that have historically experiences housing discrimination. huds new regulation will stop the collection of data. it will also attack protections for tenants, workers, and the environment. huds proposal specifically identifies rent control as a potential obstacle to fair housing choice. the proposal also tries to use
this rule to discourage important labor and wage standards to govern housing rules. i urge my colleagues to join me in opposing huds new proposal. the rest i submit. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor walton. supervisor yee? >> president yee: colleagues, as we discussed earlier, i'm going to be introducing an imperative item for the board to ratify, the health officers declaration of local health emergency regarding the novel coronavirus disease, and this is going to be also cosponsored by supervisor peskin. as we are all aware, the city and county of san francisco is working tirelessly to address
the growing impacts of covid-19, and there -- this is given to extend the notification beyond seven days, into the foreseeable future. i believe th i -- the rest -- before i submit everything, supervisor peskin, i'd like to be named as a cosponsor for your street naming. the rest i submit. >> clerk: thank you, mr. president. supervisor fewer? >> supervisor fewer: thank you, madam clerk. colleagues, we are facing an unprecedented challenge during this time as the city is
responding to the novel coronavirus. i recognize that the city is working furiously to strengthen our citywide preparedness via the city operation center as much as possible and to mitigate the impacts to our most vulnerable populations, our seniors and people with underlying medical conditions. however, while departments like d.p.h. and d.e.m. are thinking of preparing us on a macrolevel, we as supervisors need to think on a microlevel. this is the time where we need to step up our leadership to bring people together while adhering to the health recommendations for social distancing. it is time for every supervisor to do a deep dive into the infrastructure of our districts, to assess where there might be gaps in the safety net serving our most vulnerable communities and to think critically and creatively about how we can meet those needs, we need to be in
communications with our senior service providers who best know the needs of their clients. we need to push the private sector as well, but it is also our responsibility to be a model employer, and i hope that for our public facing employees, our bus drivers, deputy sheriffs, and counter staff, and especially our health workers, how we are working to keep them safe and encouraging flexibility as an employer to reduce opportunities for spread of covid-19. i just want to make sure that we have clear plans for communicating to workers in each department in exploring steps like allowing workers to work from home and telecommute. i do appreciate the hard work of our administration and city department, and i will be working with the mayor's office
to explore how we can promote robust precautions for city workers. the rest i submit. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor fewer. mr. president, seeing no further names on the roster, that concludes special business. >> president yee: thank you. i want to remind my colleagues that if these hearings are not time sensitive, please refrain from trying to have these hearings, like, in the next week or so, so just take that into consideration. okay. madam clerk, let's go to public comment. >> clerk: at this time, the public may address the entire board of supervisors for two minutes in items appearing on the board agenda, and at this point, mr. president and members, i would like to deviate from my routine script. at the top of the meeting,
d.p.h. director tomas aragon presented information on the ongoing emergency. at the time, there is an opportunity to limit the spread of covid-19 to making changes on how we conduct business in our normal routines, in addition to doing so in the committee room. as president yee stated at the top of the meeting, the department is open for business, and we believe the decisions that we're making today will perhaps save some lives in the future. and to that end, although we are encouraging vulnerable populations to stay home and access the board's information remotely, we are changing some of our processes here at the board. [please stand by]
>> you all have no include about what is happening at the san that have to be accommodated at the san francisco general hospital, we don't have sufficient beds. we have about 80 beds. so you all talk about this and you talk about that, but i can see that you all cannot zero in on how to tackle the problem. so in other words, you talk the talk but you cannot walk the walk. >> get the virus off our shoulders. bring the cures that you have made and make the virus go away. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> linda chapman from knob hill. during your committee meeting recently on the subjects of corruption, i mentioned what a change there's been in terms of neighborhood affairs and
community involvement because of this kind of cultural corruption as you refer to it which was, you know, absent when i was a leader in knob hill neighbors for 14 years, and i look at this room, i see it full. it would be full. there was one organization that took money in those days, and that was help for the elderly. the planning commission meetings even had to be held here on our project because they would bus in vast numbers of elderly numbers of -- vast numbers of elderly ladies but the other organizations would come out for us and even when they were offered money, gordon, for example, was offered $50,000, consider a million dollars today with inflation. and he sat here where i'm standing, and he said to whether it was the commission or supervisors at that point, i can't remember, it went on for
seven years back and forth, back and forth, new conditional use or another. and he said, well, if you give them the permit, we'll take the money, but you can see that we're not here to support it. so he threw it back at them. like are you going to do this? and the developers with were corrupt. i sat here when he brought in that particular developer 1300 sacramento brought in my landlord. he sat here with the architect and lawyer, and i guess he thought that i was going to go and ask the at the nans union and all of knob hill neighbors and old st. mary's house committee to go home. i had to go home and tell my lawyer to give up my apartment that i love with a view down to the golden gate bridge. >> thank you. next speaker.
>> good afternoon, board of supervisors. first of all, i just want to say that i'm humbled to stand before you and also want to say thank you, supervisor, for presenting our agenda 29 in support of my partner and a good friend of mine as well. so i think if it's okay if i can have just a little bit more time. >> you have exactly two minutes like everybody else. >> first of all, my name is dalsi. i'm a bay area resident, community serving. i work at the justice reinvestment coalition as their campaign coordinator through the justice reinvestment coalition is a table comprised of 18 community-based organizations focused on restorative justice and also progressive criminal
justice policy. i myself am a refugee due to the vietnam war. my family resettled here in the early '80s in stockton, california, with pretty much a lack of resources and we came with nothing except for our love for each other. so i've groan up with that environment, made a lot of poor choices. when i was 17 years old, my older brother was murdered, and i didn't know where to turn to. and to seek help. so because of that, i made a horrible choice which led to my incarceration. so upon my incarceration, i sought help in therapy. and i finally found healing, and due to that, i became an advocate for self-help program and also help advocated and mentor other men in there.
and because of that, the board -- >> thank you, sir. thank you very much. next speaker. make it quick. two minutes thank you for your time for allowing me to address you. i appreciate it. that just, supervisor. my name is coen. i spent 20 years in prison. i was released last year in 2018 with a commitment to give back to the community. the first day i came home, i volunteered for san francisco pick up every first saturday of the month, and i also encouraged my peers to come out and help
clean the streets of san francisco. i also helped my peers navigate the city getting their ids, social security, medi-cal, and i work for family bridges to help the houseless. together teaming up with the city, i help move the houseless into the oakland -- into the oak street community. right now i'm running the oak street community cabin. that's some of the service i would like to expand here in san francisco. today i'm in danger of being deported because the trump and laos government has a verbal agreement to take people with a final removal order back home. i've been separated from my family to come to the united states at the age of seven and now i'm facing the same danger of being separated from my family again, so i'm asking for your sport, and i pray -- your
support, and i pray for your understanding to please sign the resolution. thank you so much. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, erin. i'm here in support of the resolution item 29. thank you for introducing this resolution and condemning the deportations of our lao and many other deportations that are happening. i want to acknowledge that everyone here there was an anonymous vote last year to support a similar resolution for southeast asian community members. thank you for cosponsoring, supervisor peskin. i want to share how important this is. that resolution led to the pardon of king hen and that i've had a chance to work with them closely. he was involved with one of the first va candidate forums in san francisco to share about how this impacted communities. during the first here danny was out i got to work with him, and he worked in congregations in
san francisco in supporting them to be sanctuary congregations. so both have been very involved here, and i really share my support for this resolution and believe that they are deeply rooted here and should not be separated. thanks. >> next speaker. >> i'm here in support of item 29 and in support of danny and him. san francisco has a history of supporting immigrant and refugee youth. this resolution is part of undoing the harm that happened in the early 2000s. mayor newsom implemented a policy -- arrested to felonies and under his mayorship the administration conducted a review of city's probations and referred 350 young people to
i.c.e., that is 350 families impacted by the fear of deportation and actual deportation. not speaking up for people impacted by incourse ration and deportation would contribute to san francisco's legacy of not fighting for people who fall at the intersection of incarceration and deportation. i met these two inside prison and they were found suitable for parole on their first try, which is a very rare occurrence but they were both found suitable on the first try meaning the board of parole hearings, rehabilitated and not a threat to the general public and ready to enter back into society where released they were sent to i.c.e. but because i.c.e. was not accepting lao nationals they were release and have significantly contributed to the city and county of san francisco and cleaning up the streets of oakland chinatown, and
redefining what it means to be a leader for social justice in the community. laos has begun accepting lao nationals and that means they both are susceptible to deportation. we need this city and county of san francisco to undo the history of criminalizing and punishing immigrant youth and pass a resolution in support of a full pardon for them both. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hi, there. i'm here to support item 29. my name is yen and i stand here to sport my colleagues and my friends. i work with asian support committee also known as apsc, an organization for incarcerated and formerly incarcerated communities. we facilitate weekly and monthly classes inside of the state prisons, and it's through those programs where we met danny and
sicon. they were both participants and leaders in our programs. it's really been a joy to see them home, more inspiring to see them in community and continuously working towards a more whole, healthy and just world. time and time again, i've seen these guys show up in our communities to support deportation defense efforts of our cambodian communities in northern california, and aye seen them bravely -- i've seen them bravely share their stories in the world. i've seen them make an impact in our community from cleaning up chinatown to mentoring our youth to facilitating important conversations about various social justice issues. they have done a lot and are valuable and beloved members of our community.
they have deported refugees from wars and both of their families, they were in refugee camps and resettled in the u.s. and i think as another consequence of they have to deal with unprocessed trauma and the violences of resettling into the u.s. in poverty. i stand here today to urge you all to really support them, beloved members and urging the governor to grant a full pardon. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hello, everyone. my name is maradi. i'm a bay area resident. i work for law caucus. i'm here to support item 29. i support them staying in the u.s. i work closely with both of them and they make our community safe. they guide and mentor the youth of the future and help solve
anti-deportation efforts. they build connections in community that only enriches and help us heal. i strongly ask you to support the resolution to stand with refugees and end family separation. thank you. >> next speaker. >> hi. i'm here on behalf of just cause along with my comrades behind me. we are here to speak on two items. the one i want to speak on is the motion to support the motion for the sf city government to enforce a moratorium on all eviction proceedings during the time of the covid19 crisis which preston and ronen have supported. we know there are working class and housing insecure members are more susceptible to illness and their safety is constantly compromised. working class folks often don't have the option to stay home from work or take the recommended necessary
precautions to protect them from disease. a moratorium on all evictions during this time is the bare minimum we can do to support our folks to stay safe and healthy. it is interactive we take every possible measure to ensure nobody loses their housing during this time as this would further expose them to instability. we welcome this step in the right direction and hope we can keep taking more steps for housing vulnerable and houseless community of san francisco to have their needs met during this health crisis and housing crisis. while most covid19 illness is mild, we need to move quickly to protect the most vulnerable people in our communities. the federal government's response is falling short and the bay area is ground zero given the number of cases and the divide between the wealthy and those struggling to make ends meet. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> i will be using
>> i will translate what she just shared. we are here with just cause to support the motion of sf city government to enforce a -- sorry, to support the pardon by governor newsom to grant full pardon to our comrades danny and sacon to remain with our community. the trump administration is getting ready to deport lao refugee communities. last week supervisor mar's office introduced a resolution condemning this decision and highlighted danny and sacon's story.
this refugee community has already seen a multigenerational trauma from violence in their homelands, and targeting them is draconian, racially misguided and inhumane. we know the administration is targeting community leaders and those who stand up against immigration persecution and xenophobia that is blatantly practiced by this administration. we have to protect community leaders who have worked tirelessly to make -- to work not only for self transformation but reentry, the conditions that lead to recidivism in our community. i will also speak on my behalf. >> ma'am, you get your own two minutes. >> thank you. danny, i'm also part of the justice investment coalition. danny is deeply loved and cherished member of our community.
he actually leads and coordinates the justice investment coalition. and this coalition is doing incredible work around restorative justice and reentry for immigrant black and economically marginalized communities. so we want to support him to continue to do the work that support the rest of our community to build community solutions to safety. we know that people not only deserve second chances but that it's not okay for them to be thrown under the bus, and this administration has done that over and over again. this is a question of double punishment. we already know that criminal injustice system is incredibly racist. we cannot allow to then also have another punishment by deporting them. these are members of our community who are incrediblely courageous and that are doing fantastic work to keep us all safe in a way that is
community. our community needs him on our side to keep building community solutions. please do not deny our community the opportunity to have him with us. >> thank you. >> [speaking spanish] >> i also, i'm here to support danny. i feel like he deserves all of our support as a community leader, as someone who is fighting tirelessly to make our community better. thank you. >> thank you.
next speaker. >> hello. first of all, thank you all for your service. my name is ruben. i'm a member of this here civil grand jury. to be clear, myself and many of my colleagues have concerns around issues centering on the homeless and mentally ill on our streets. today i've heard nothing about them and how the city is going to address their needs as a vulnerable population of san francisco. thank you. >> next speaker. >> it's only two minutes. i'll be back weekly until i can explain myself or get some justice. we all want people out of cars into public transportation. the city needs to warn the public what's going on. this reemergence of rat packs, singling out easy targets. usually that means the elite, as often as i've been experiencing it means a single white male who
looks a little older and to prey on them. i think what needs to happen, and i'll come back and explain in detail what i mean by that, is that put some context here, i was attacked twice recently. one was at 300-pound gorilla who was yanking my boxes out of my hand. i ended up injuring a prior industry. then she screamed, i hate white people, flung herself across the i'll on top of me, 300-pound gorilla, while the punches were irrelevant, having 300 pounds jump on you like that out of nowhere, again, injuring my back. saturday, last saturday night among a southbound van ness buses, first i'm punched by three kids, throwing those little white tissue caps are they? i don't know that they're called, gunpowder things that
explode. they got a remark from me, which is what they wanted and now they had a good reason to get into it with me. i let it roll. they got off the bus after i called the cops. they got back on later and started spitting on me, right out here, right in front here. the city to rename the hall of justice the bernard gats memorial hall. it's about time the parents take responsibility for their brats. let's put the parents in jail for three nights, weekend night like my weekend was spoiled, just like we do with truancy. not prison, not records, just like the -- what's it called -- >> thank you. thank you, sir. next speaker. >> [off mic] >> my name is julie roberts and i'm a public school parent, d-5
resident going to a d-3 school that largely serves d-6 students. i want to thank you for the work you and your staff have been doing at the time we have been hit by the coronavirus, and i mean even in this room including especially our janitors. public school families have been hit by two crises this week. one is the virus and the other is the cuts to our public schools and these are historic structural inequities that have been built in based on the fact that we can only net 8% of our funds to public schools. so we are on a time when many families can't come out to share a petition from 1,000 families asking that we get more not less and asking for support for supervisor mar's proposal to be introduced for $75,000 for public school support next tuesday. other parents here will talk about the impact this is having on some very specific schools as a part of the family's union and in the petition you can see the
impact this is happening in schools across our district. no one has told me we'll be fine. i've heard cuts from 50,000 to 500,000 and our school that largely serves immigrant families is trying to figure out which two or tree of five key staff people we are going to cut when last year we were looking at how we could expand literacy services and social services to our students. this is an emergency for our families. i want to remind us that as we think of the coronavirus response, that our schools are some of the most important places for prevention. we are working overtime to keep our schools clean. my children's school is one of 40 schools that have no nurse. so if we have an issue we call a community nurse who over the phone is supposed to tell us what response we are supposed to take. so i want to thank supervisor mar and other supervisors who have come out in support for $75 million. supervisor walton, preston, haney, i imagine there are
others in this room who will come out in support as you hear more of the impact that cuts are having. thank you. bye-bye. >> my name is kelly, and i'm a d-8 parent. and parent to a biracial black third grader at redding elementary in d-3. my son also has an i.e.p. and received his services through special education. the impact of these budget cuts is immense for my son and his ability to thrive in school. as well as many other students need extra support like him. yesterday at our meeting we represented with our proposed budget scenarios that all included losing two or more critical staff members to our site and to our students. we have to choose between our computer teacher, at a school where most of our families don't have computers at home and where our students are required to take tests from the state on
computers. our literacy teacher, where the majority of our families are english language leperrers and recent immigrants. our full-time social worker and our elementary adviser at a school where the vast majority of our families come from the low socioeconomic background and where we have many families who are facing homelessness as well as our introductional reform facilitator. my son who has behavior challenges due to disability is dependent upon our social worker and our elementary adviser to support his social emotional growth and behavior both within and outside the classroom, without them, i'm afraid he will be spending more time outside of our classroom and in detention due to his behavioral issues. these are critical to our student and key to disrupting the pipeline that we know impacts students like my son. our school is a wonderful and diverse school but we don't have the p.t.a. funds like more affluent schools to make up the
difference for these cuts, and we have much greater needs than those schools. i urge the board to approve the funding for our schools. thank you. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is brandy markman. i live in d-1, the richmond district. my son is a second-grader at the elementary school and i serve as school site counsel chair. to me it seems cruel that we live in a city with 70 billionaires and our schools are facing such painful cuts. our school, two-thirds of our families due to our unfair economic structure, live in poverty. two-thirds of our students are receiving english language learning services. we are faced with potential of -- or the possibility of losing a full-time social worker. and i know many of you have served on the board of education, and we are so grateful and so grateful for all
the work you did there for our wonderful restorative justice policy. however, it gets really hard to implement that if we don't have social workers and our students are at a huge disadvantage. our school is also one of the 40 out of 120sfusd schools that doesn't have a nurse. this is really to me unacceptable during a time of coronavirus in san francisco. further more, we need augmented janitorial services for additional sanitation protocols to make sure the virus is contained as much as possible. prop 13 has been so cruel the our children. please provide prioritize their safety by supporting the resolution through $75 million for our students. thank you. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is elita fisher. i live in district 11 and have students at the elementary school, everett middle school,
mission high school and city college. i'm the past chair of the community advisory committee for special education within sfusd. and i think it's really important as we talk about the state of funding in our schools to understand the impact of state and federal travesties for lack of a better word. speaking from a special education perspective, one in eight students in california first of all received special education services yet funding has stayed flat for decades. the majority of students who have i.e.p.s or need special education services sit in general education. in sfusd that's 75% of kids with i.e.p.s so when you underfund special education, you underfund all education. the same point in fact where a third of san francisco unified school district's general fund, unrestricted general fund actual covers special education costs. our costs are rising in
supporting special education students. in the past decade, between 2007 and 2008 and 2017, special education cost has risen 28%. yet our budget has stayed flat across the state. there is a $3.2 billion aspirational versus actual funding change difference from the federal level. and we've implemented laws like ab-114, which has shifted the entire funding of mental health support away from community mental health services on to the school district. we have implemented great laws like ab-1369 and that tells us we need to talk about dyslexia and put interventions in the school when one out of five kids probably has dyslexia. but there's no funding that's come with it. >> thank you.
next speaker. >> mr. president, i support the asian law caucus in every single way. i point out a little -- this is anecdotal, i'm not completely sure this is true, but in my -- what i've noticed. there's a big laos community in the fresno area which is the seat of arch republican delventhal nunez and i believe the community there actually supports him because they view the democratic party as being something akin to communism. certainly these ultraright wing politicians, they engage in this confrontational, sensationalist talk for one reason only, it's the only way they can get reelected. for the record, i have a bronchitis i've had for several years but there is a hack going
around, it's a coronavirus. it probably is not thee coronavirus, just for the supervisor sitting closest to the microphone. there was a -- i did work in this field for a while. i called some of my friends of my was there a lapse in how fast we are able to develop test kits. there is a capability in the bay area for doing this kind of work. and what you want to see is about a 5% positive result in these test kits, for every 20 tests they do about one in 20 people test positive. that's when they know they are spreading the tests out and really doing the epidemiology of it. and we haven't gotten to that point yet. so i appreciate what the mayor has done and what the city is doing. >> thank you. next speaker.
>> tom gilberti. reasonable and rational gets titled as radical. and she couldn't quite understand that. and it still makes sense. medy care for all -- medi-care for all gets people to doctors, but should we ban non-citizens? they could still have the virus. so everybody does better when everybody does better. again, we can do the medi-cal for all. bernie was in one of his debates in cnn and after they cut from him they cut to a commercial for pharmaceuticals.
where are we in changes are coming. a couple years ago, i was at a committee meeting with hillary ronen, and she had a couple guys from pg&e saying she could not understand why they would give approval to her -- people that were making their buildings, and then they would come back a little bit later and alter what was needed in those buildings, causing delay and more money. and it was public comment time, and i was about to get up, i didn't want to because i was going to say i would fire them all. previously, i've been asking for a powwow here with the board of supervisors and the community activists that would come and work with housing. but i don't think that's the
right time with this virus coming around. but we know it's coming. and we need to do something about it. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> i'm hoping that the mayor or that the mayor or legislature will have a delegation composed of the small business and merchants association, hotel association, tourism board members to our sister cities or to athletens. we are presently 70% of the merchants in the neighborhoods throughout the city are share enthusiasm, optimism regarding growth and sales and end of market potential, there is significant competition among new businesses to fill the relatively few commercial vacancies. i want you to weigh your present market assumptions against the
reality of athens. their liberal dynamic free market. i can't imagine a starker contrast than that which exists between the sister cities. the small neighborhood marketplace and the long running fragility of san francisco's commercial corridors. san francisco's neighborhood businesses are not being hard hit by the coronavirus. they went over some time ago to local policy decisions which such as placing -- on chains. tenants to local small business to learn and explore and to determine how athens have turned their neighborhood blocks to cornucopias of commercial prosperity. also there are three open positions on the ethics commission, investigative analyst, auditor and
commissioner i have requested you refer to the judgment of the u.s. attorney filling the empty watch posts. i understand some of you are eager to add $1.7 million to the covers. that could be misconstrued as an attempt to influence. the ability to impact the -- >> thank you, sir. any other speakers for public comment? seeing none, public comment is now closed. so madame clerk, let's call the for adoption committee reference item agendas, items 29 through 32. >> items 29 through 32 were introduced for adoption without reference to committee, a anonymous vote is required for resolutions on first reading, alternatively any member may
require a resolution to go to committee. >> colleagues, can we -- would anyone like to -- any items. seeing none then, colleagues can we take these items? >> we have a different house >> this is a different house. >> a roll call please. >> on items 29 through 32 -- [roll call vote] there are eight ayes. >> then any objection, the resolution is adopted and the motions are approved. madame clerk, let's go to imperative agenda. >> yes. we have an imperative motion on
behalf of president yee which would ratify the mar 6, 2020 city and county of san francisco health officers declaration of local health emergency regarding the coronavirus disease 2019. >> colleagues, we have an item which requires the board to adopt two separate findings by eight votes before unanimous adoption on the item itself. let's take the sunshine ordinance of finding first. is there a motion that finds this resolution is imperative as to threaten serious injury to the public interest? and thus meaning the standards of the sunshine ordinance? motion made by supervisor stefani and seconded by supervisor mandelman. then can we take -- >> different house
mr. president. >> roll call please. >> on the sunshine motion findings, [roll call vote] there are nine ayes. >> thank you. then without objection to accept it. now that, now to the brown act findings. is there a motion that finds the need to take action came to the attention of the board after agenda was posted and thus the motion meets the standard of the brown act. motion made by supervisor walton and seconded by supervisor ronen.
can we take this without objection? okay. then it's accepted. we must now take a public comment on this item. is there any member of the public who wishes to speak on the comparative item? seeing no speakers, public comment is now closed. and now on the substance of the imperative motion itself, a roll call vote. madame clerk. >> [roll call vote] there are ten ayes. >> okay. without objection, the motion is approved. madame clerk, please read the in
memoriums. >> i have none to report today. that leads us to the end of the agenda. is there any further business for us today? >> that concludes our business for today >> before i adjourn you i want to remind all of you that we have another meeting, a joint special meeting with this board of supervisors and public utilities commission coming right up as soon as i adjourn, we will readjourn in about five minutes, okay? so thank you. we are adjourned.
we have a quorum. >> thank you. would you please read the next item. item 2. citizens advisory committee report. information item. >> good morning, mr. larson. >> good morning commissioners, i am chair of the citizens advisory committee. this is my report on february 20th meeting of the cac. members welcomed the seamless
transit principles on item sixty the agenda working towards 27 bay area transit agencies to coordinate. one member commented the first subject he worked on was consolidation of regional transit agencies in 1984. other members affirmed addressing equity in the principals, importance of a geographically diverse coalition and proposed task force should look at creating a regional structure to accomplish the goal of providing seamless regional transit service. the cac had a number of follow-up questions concerning the proposed $61 million for light rail vehicle procurement. item 70 you your your an item s. these included pin breaks and
the overall performance goals. the specific issue arose over inclusion of approximately $19 million of education regular new funds in the $1.1 billion lrv4 funding plan. one member noted there are majorfunding issues for teachers and did not feel comfortable recommending the funds for education on eye transit project. they clarified the funds in the l r-4 funding plans were from a previous budget and did not include future funding. the cac requested a list of future projects slated to use the funding be presented to the body to see if the recommendation to redirect funds to education would be warranted in the future. item 8. $1.8 million for two safety projects the district 3m project
presented as informational item to the cac including new pedestrian scramble at carney and jackson. this generated several comments about the confusion that often results when scrambles have been implemented particularly those recently placed in the tenderloin. one issue was whether the diagonal cog crossing is permitted. could it include education such assigns and staffing to familiarize pedestrians to new crossing patterns. given the district 3 allocation was only informational i am bringing that concern and recommendation to you today as part of my report. lastly, we learned the new director tumlin will be attending the meeting on april 32. -- april 22. we look forward to discussing that with him.
>> item 8 to talk about that a little bit. any questions from commissioners? seeing none. any public comment on this item? public comment is closed. next item, please. >> approve the minutes of the february 25, 2020 meeting. this is an action item. >> public comment? seeing none. public comment opposed. motion and seconded a roll call please. [roll call]. we have final approval. >> next item please.
>> appoint one member to the citizens advisory committee. this is an action item. >> excuse me. ms. smith. i jumped over item 4. i was excited when sacramento. the floor is yours. >> april smith transportation authority. the transporttors authority has 11 member citizens advisory with each member serving two year terms. the board appoints individuals to appoint the seats. to qualify for point meant applicants must appear before the board at least once to speak to interest and qualifications. in the packet is a list of applicants with detailed information. the vacancy today is the result of the term experation of john
larson who is seeking reappointment. >> is there any before we hear from mr. larson, any members of the public or other interested parties in the cac seat who would like to testify? seeing none, public comment is closed. mr. larson any words you would like to say? we want to thank you for your ongoing service and leadership. the floor is yours. >> good morning. i am requesting reappointment to represent district 7 for the citizens advisory committee. i have lived in the park for 20 years and before that west portal for two years. i worked in the civic center over 20 years. over that time i have seen a lot of changes in the fab ri fabrice city. in district 7 i believe i get a
good global perspective on the dynamics of san francisco. i represented district 7 for six years and i would like to thank president yee for giving me this opportunity. i have completed the first two years as chair of the cac embarking on year three. i strife to balance being neutral and letting the different voices being heard with the need to represent the interests of one of the outer districts of the city. so they are heard and needs met. some of the objectives important to me are account ability, oversight of funding and fro progress. pedestrian safety and continuing support of vision zero and planning for future enhancements of su way light rail -- subway light rail and the equity issues
across the city. with that i will take any questions. >> thank you, mr. larson. commissioner yee would you like to make a motion? >> he has been my rep for a long time now and has, in my view, done a splendid job. i would like to have you support reappointing him for another term. >> i will take that as a motion. is there a second for the motion? >> commissioner mandelman. we have a house roll call please. [roll call] we have first
approval. >> next item, please. >> state and federal legislation update. this is an action item. >> now it is your turn. >> thank you, mr. chairman and board members. bear with me. there is more information today bus of the nate -- because of the nature of the point in time this meeting is convened. we were only able to finish up looking at a couple thousand bills the last week of session within the last two weeks. we have pulled together a fairly concise report. i hope to be not too extensive in my time. first off, table one in your agenda shows several bills taking new positions on, three are watch and two are recommendations for support with amendment. the watch bills that we are recommending start with ab2121, which is one of the first bills we have seen out of the zero --
i forget the name of the task force. the zero traffic fatalities task force. pardon me. the first bill would limit or provide a pathway to extending speed limits as desired within the community rather than sticking wholeheartedly to the standard old practices. that measure is we want to watch it to see how that may evolve over time. second bill is one of three measures that deal with free transit passes. a b2176 bias assembly member holden. it joins ab1350 which has made the way to the second house, which would provide free transit passes for school age and
younger. finally, ab2012 which is most recently introduced. it would deal with seniors, free passes for seniors. s.f.m.t.a. and your staff have met with the sponsor for at least one of the bills to talk about issues and look at ways to maybe develop a means to help with addressing the cost implications. we are going to watch those three bills. the new one is ab2176. third watch bill would be a bill ab2305 which would represent working at the state level on new language to address the issues that arose in aw1605 last year when the governor vetoed that measure. that has some work to do before
set for hearing. two bills to have new positions of support with amendments would be ab2824. that measure is by mr.bo mr. bo. mct has a proposal to teacher providing access for express buses as first order of businesses for westbound approaches. later the staff is recommending we work on amendments to concurrently plan on how to cross the bridge itself with maybe bus only lanes. initially we want the nct pomove forward and come in behind and support the regional approach to the measure. ab2828 by friedman is vision zero highe based task force reqe
the state to revisit the highway design model on a regular bases and implicate the design manual with policies and strategies that ensure that it is regularly refreshed with best practices. that is a watch at this point in time. table two in your agenda is an update on bills you have taken positions on. ab2057 is the spot bill at this present time to deal with the seamless bay area concept. that issue will have staff present several principlings to you after this presentation. ab278 is the spot bill that deals with the bay area proposal. last week they were intending to go to the bay area caucus. i have not spoken to their
office this week. as of friday they had not met, as far as i could tell. that is kind of in reaction to some of the developments in related sales tax measures in the state in the region. three last bills to bring to your attention. we will look at more deeply. sb141408 will attempt to address resiliency on state route 37 across the north bay. m.t.c. is working with north bay counties on this matter trying to figure out how best to position it within regional framework. there are two bills that a sister agency requested participation in supporting their position. these bills ab2011 by mr. holden
and sp1390 would seek to require san bernadino county to be deeply involved and help fund the extension of a light rail system from la county into san bernadino county. staff is looking at the impacts and ramifications of the bill and whether to react in support of this county of san bernadino's request. i will bring this to a close. if there are questions, i will be glad to answer them. >> are there questions from commissioners? are there any members of the public mthepublic who would likt on item 5. we are early in the cycle. at this point there is a resolution before us to adopt the support position o on ab2828
and condition support on ab824. is there a motion for in favor of that resolution? made by commissioner yee and seconded by commissioner mandelman. we have the same house, same call. item is approved. first item. >> adopt a support position for the seamless transit is principles. this is an action item. >> thank you. the action before usa support position for the seamless transit principles as presented by the bay area. a nonprofit whose mission is to get the 27 regional transit operators and other agency in the bay area to operate together in a way more customer focused and seamless. their ideas include way finding, more consistent fares and
governance reforms. they have been talking with the various boards and agencies to guide the work of the region as they try to make the system better. they seek resolution of support included as draft resolution in your packet. at the same time as mark wats mentioned they have been working with assembly member to sponsor ab2057 which is a spot bill but the intent is to put in place seamless transit reforms. we understand the bill will eventually be amended to include formation of a task force to make recommendations how to achieve that including formation of transit network manager. i also want to know that since the information in your memo was published, we have heard that there has been movement where the bill is moving and that it will likely not include a base bus fare any longer in favor of
waiting for m.t.c. fare integration study which is starting now. we support this move. we are recommending the board pass the attached resolution supporting the seamless tracks set principles and we will note staff will work with the area and the assembly men and other stakeholders to provide input on details to ensure the network manager include fronting representation for the urban core where the majority of today's transit riders are. i would like to introduce ian griffin. >> good morning. >> good morning. thank you for having me and considering this resolution. i am the policy director of seamless bay area, a non-profit that has existed since 2017 with this goal of creating an integrated system. we believe at the end of the day the reason why we need to have a
seamless transit system is we need hundreds of thousands of more people riding transit and adopting more sustain ability forms of mobility across the entire region. we have not made progress in reducing the overall share of driving continues in our region since the 1970s. we have had a 12% transit mode share across the region. this is one of the most pressing issues. transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gases. it is a regional issue that requires regional solutions. unfortunately, our region has had not a very successful track record in implementing those solutions. we see this resolution as a very important part of demonstrating there is broad support across different parts of the region as the cac mentioned. they supported having a diverse coalition of different parts of the bay area supporting this.
we have over 1600 members of the public who signed a petition supporting the seamless transit principles including several hundred san francisco residents. this is particularly important to address how we make our system seamless as we consider large new infrastructure projects and large amount of new spending on transportation. multi-billion dollar projects like second transbay crossing. it is critical to design the projects to enable a seamless system and we need the appropriate policies and governance structures in place to get the best value out of on you transportation doll flors for the ac-- dollars for access. this is equity as people don't necessarily live and work and recreate in the same part of the bay area. i am here to answer any
questions about the resolution and 2057. that is not the topic of the resolution today. thank you for considering this resolution. >> so everybody is clear, this has not happened among the 29 transit agencies for many reasons, some have t to do with agencies hanging onto their turf. it is important to remember. having do do with core systems like muni, bart, ac transit that have the vast majority of the ridership. more than three-quarters of it. as we do this we have to make sure that core capacity continues to stay robust and is not in any way harmed. i think that is one of the things we have to have our eyes wide open about. there is a lot of low hanging
fruit that can easily be done. we have a local example in a completely different an arena which is the park where you have private landowners all doing similar signage and making trail networks connect to one another. some of that is low hanging fruit that we can easily get to with seamless. with that are there any questions or comments from members? are there any members of the public who would like to speak to this item? >> commissioner yee. >> can i clarify what we are actually taking action on? is it the principals or forming a task force? >> it is a resolution adopting support for the positions set forth on page 39 through 41 of the packet, but it resolves that the ta adopts the support position for the principles
listed here in and agrees to publicly be listed as supporter and recommendation that any task force formed through legislation such as that structured in a way to reflect where the transit ridership is strong and be guided by a principle to avoid harming the core system which is what i spoke about. it affirms commitment be to working with state agencies, mtc, and other transit operators on pages 39 through 41. >> okay. we are voting on the resolves? >> is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. ms. bolu. you seem to want to say something more, you are welcome. if not is there a motion to adopt the resolution made by commissioner ronen and seconded
by commissioner stefani. roll call please. [roll call] we have first approval. >> next item, please. >> item 7. allocated approximately $60.1 million in prop k sales tax funds with conditions for the light rail vehicle procurement. this is an action item. >> deputy director for policy and programming at the transportation authority. i will give a presentation and the director of transit will make remarks about some information about the couplelers and the the sheer pins and
overhead lines that have recently surfaced. this is the request from the m.t.a. first was presented to the board in april of 2019. it was continued by the board at that time in light of safety and reliability issues surfaced about the doors, brakes and sheer pins. they conducted the en independet oversight to identify the problems and if solutions are covered by warranty. you heard from ty lynn last meeting on the independent oversight report. good progress is being made. we see increased availability and reliability of the vehicles that are currently on the rails. as you will hear, we have incorporated the recommendations from ty lynn's report into our recommendation for this allocation request.
we have nearly 2 $00 million in prop k sales tax funds for the projects. in 2014 it was the largest allocation we have made from the program. this additional $60.7 million will be added to $150 million or so and so my math is a little bit off. $1,030,000,000. the -- 130 million. the total procurement will end up at nearly $192 million. this is a reminder what the project is for the plaintiff of 151 new lrvs from semens replacing the brayda lrvs in operation as well as 68 additional expansion vehicles to expand the fleet. that 68 vehicle expansion fleet is what is currently operating
in the system. the schedule as originally presented to to board years ago in 2014 was procurement schedule that extended through 2027. based on negotiations that s.f.m.t.a. had with seamens we have shortened afternoon abbreviatorred the schedule so it would be done 14 to 16 months earlier at the end for replacement. the prop k funds that are before you for request today are highlighted in light blue. the total is just over $60.7 million. the total cost of the project reflects a $14 million cost increase since last april, a portion is for the passenger seating, reconfigurations and $4 million for cost escalation. this is ongoing discussion between sea men's and s.f.m.t.a.
it could increase. we are carefully monitoring the discussions. s.f.m.t.a. and metropolitan transportation commission are sharing cost of the $14 million cost increase. all of that is to say the net request of prop k funds has gone down $2 million since april of 2014. that $2 million could assist with cost escalation should that need arise. as i mentioned, the recommendations in our allocation are reflective of the recommendations from t y lynn's oversight report. there is a protocol which is an extension of the current level of oversight we have been doing on this project over the last nine months. we have conditioned reimbursement of the first
$31.5 million in prop k funds pop the phase one vehicles meeting the reliability demonstration test or passing the test. they have had 25,000 miles between failures that would require the vehicles to be taken out of service for a certain period of time. this means that they have passed this test for six consecutive months. we have required m.t.a. to have a preventative maintenance plan for the new vehicles as well as maintain in state of good repair. reporting will be done to the board at the chair and executive director's discretion. we have to do a strategic plan amendment to make funds available to meet the accelerated cash flow. i would like to invite julie kirsch ball up to make some
remarks. >> good morning. julyly kirsch baum. thank you for your consideration of this item. we have been on a long journey and i appreciate your time and at tension. i am pleased to reported that the preliminary numbers between failures when we look at the mechanical failures is 22000. that is up from 17,000 in january so we continue to make strong progress as we head towards that 25,000 goal. which we are required to keep for six months as part of the performance plan. i did also want to follow up a little bit on the sheer pin questions from the last meeting. i want to clarify and we
communicated by memo that it takes one person 45 minutes to replace the pins. we have done the second batch every placements. the sheer pins are replaced by the staff or we bill back the labor. not only are the pins covered but also the labor. they will provide a schedule this week and present new design elements to m.t.a. by may. i have strong confidence we have a design solution under way. i want to talk about one more issue i communicated by memo because i did not include it in my presentation in february. i thought it was actually important that the board be tracking it. it is largely an overhead line issue but it is an issue that is linked to the new train. i wanted you to be aware of it. in october of last year we identified about five locations
in the subway where we were seeing excessive wear on the over head wire. that because of the extended shut downs we're were able to get in closely to see the work replace overhead where we needed to. we also took a hard look at the new train because the issues coincided with the timing of the new train. that included equipping in lrv4 with a camera going through the system and with kind of a measuring device on top of it so we could see how the height changed over time. without the lrv14 knowing where we had issues in the subway they identified the same five locations as areas in the subway where the pantographs were
compressing more than minimum design height. we have a team including both overhead engineers and fleet engineers and overhead maintenance team and are observing the areas very closely. we have confirmed that the lrv4 does meet the specifications in the contract but we have also confirmed we have areas where the overhead wire is not implemented to design. in the next three to four weeks we do expect to have an overhead wire solution, particularly at our multiple location vanness crossover which is just before the vanness platform between vanness and church. this is not terribly unusual to have these types of vehicle infrastructure issues, but given everything else that we have been through with this vehicle i
want to make sure the board was aware of it. this is something that we will add and have met with ty lynn about as something that they are tracking as well. although it is largely at this point a overhead line issue, having their input and feedback will be valuable. that is all the additional information i wanted to share. >> i just neglected to give a note of appreciation to the metropolitan transportation commission who worked closely with our agency and s.f.m.t.a. to round out the funding. >> are there any questions or comments from members? if not why don't we open up to public comment. die have some comments. -- i do have some comments. any members of the public to testify on this $61 million
allocation? seeing none, public comment is closed. first of all, i want to thank s.f.m.t.a. staff, particularly ms. kirsch ball and our staff who got independent third-party oversight. i want to thank you, colleagues who have taken this very seriously. we withheld funding as everything from sensitive edges to cameras to sheer pins to mean distance between failures have been looked at and addressed by us and third-parties. we all know that there is urgency here as the fleet is getting older and failing and we have to get ahead of that. i have while i was very dubious to start with, i have become
increasingly convinced the m.t.a. and the semen'stro connect are the right direct to move forward with and that sea men's is going to back that product up. i have come to the point where i am ready to vote in favor of that. i realize that may not be held by all of you, but i wanted to get that out there. with that, commissioner fewer may have a contrary view. >> thank you, chair. i want to tell my colleagues that i am unable to support this allocation of almost $61 million today in light of some of the issues that have no not been resolved to my satisfaction. i think seamens determined the
bolts worry placed every 120 days. it is a burden. i want to make cheer that it -- make clear it is part of my makeup i am cautious about spending this amount of money on ona product that i am not assurd is going to actually meet all of the standards. it is just me, i am not saying to other colleagues don't vote for this. i want to share with you personally i am unable to allocate $61 million to this. thank you. >> any other members to comment or ask questions? if not a roll call please. >> motion and second? >> is there a motion to
allocator the $60.732 million in prop k funding for this vehicle procurement made by commissioner mandelman? is there a second? seconded by commissioner mar. a roll call please. >> item 7. [roll call ]. >> we have 10 eyes and one no. the motion passes. >> congratulations, good luck. next item, please. >> item 8. allocate $1.8 million in prop k
sales tax funds for two projects. this is an action item. >> hello again. the next allocation requests are also from the s.f.m.t.a., two requests to present to the board this morning. first is a neighborhood transportation improve meant program project from district 3. this would install a pedestrian scramble at carney and jackson and new crosswalk at stockton which is the design drawing that or the highlights of which you see on the screen in front of you. these improvements were evaluated by the neighborhood transportation improvement planning project underway and we expect to be presented to the board or acceptance in the next couple of months.
the request was not acted upon at the citizens advisory committee. there is an outstanding issue with the schedule. we are working to determine whether the project can be incorporated as a change order into the project works. they are assessing the schedule. if not if the scope is not implemented through that project, it will be incorporated into a future signals project. the cac voiced support for signage as the chair mentioned about how to use pedestrian scrambles. there is a lot of confusion when folks are at
increasingly in intersections on the corridor. interestingly enough, there is a lot of local exposure to that. i am fine with more education. it is prett pretty much under sn chinatown. >> thank you. the next allocation request is for the mission street excelsior safety project. this is a large capital improvement with pedestrian safety and loading improvements and location omission street
from geneva. there are a host of recommendations that are to be implemented through this project. there is also -- i thought there was a quick build project going on. i don't have that in my notes. perhaps the project manager could speak to that. he is in the audience. the funding request would round out the plan for the design phase. there is a ways to go on the construction phase funding. it is a significant investment to $17 million and we are happy to work with s.f.m.t.a. and other stakeholders to make sure the funding plan gets rounded out as soon as possible. with that i can take questions. the project managers are here. >> seeing no questions, do you
want to speak to the quick build aspects of the district 11 project? >> good morning, board members. we have a quick build project currently designed to be implemented this summer. that would bring forth the management changes on the street, light restriping that doesn't require hard scape like hard scape and muni service changes for better reliability for transit omission and geneva streets. >> commissioner safai. >> a few remarks. if there are questions i would be happy to let those happen first. >> i want to say on the record that we have been working with the s.f.m.t.a. to plan the commission street safety project since we came into office back in 2017. we have gone through an extensive community process to create the excelsior
neighborhood strategy to provide vision and parameters with the groundwork the m.t.a. was doing with the ta. i thank them for their hard work. i am thankful to approve thal lowcatioto approve theallocatio. this will be the largest investment the city has made in this part of town, save our library coming down the road in a year or two. close to $20 million in transportation improvements. we have had a lot of conversation about that. we are looking forward to reenvisioning this project. this $1 million will go toward working quickly to realize the funding available for construction. we also wanted the s.f.m.t.a. to work with the ta to aggressively go after grant opportunities that present themselves for prioritizing construction. i know we have been convening a number of working groups. i want to thank monaco from my
staff who is working on with her team and the s.f.m.t.a. thank you for for your hard wo. we will move bus stops and doing the quick implementations you talked about. i think people will start to realize the hard work is going to come to realty. i thank you, colleagues, i hope you support this allocation today. >> thank you, commissioner. any members of the public to testify on this item? sees none, public comment is closed. we have a motion to allocation $1.819 million made by commissioner peskin and seconded by commissioner safai. we have a different house.
roll call, please. [roll call] we have first approval. >> next item, please. >> item 79. amends the adopted fiscal year 2019/20 budget to increase revenues by $2.1 million, decrease expenditures by $71.89 million and decrease other funding sources by $67 million for a total net increase in fund balance of $7 million. this is an action item. >> this is an opportunity to revise revenue projections and expenditures since adoption of the budgofthe budget in june 20.
they approved the prop d tax. we added $7.7 million of new revenues and 3 $11,000 new funding for the peninsula avenue preenvironmental study. $236,000 for the pier e two. this is an item the board recently heard. we have in terms of neighborhood transportation improvement be projects we have added $194,000 for district 10 bus study. district 4 mobility improvement. district 5 for octavia study. we have had a revenue adjustment to investment incomeprol 1 poin-
income. we have also increased our program revenues and island improvement project. we have revenues where we are shifting out to next fiscal year as the project experienced delays. other delays we have in terms of prop k. approximately $56.7 million of delays or changes in scopes to the following projects. s.f.m.t.a. vehicle procurement for motor and trolleys and light rail and rapid transit. caltrain downtown. $4.1 million where we will shift into the future for expenditures. that is the prop aa s.f.m.t.a. muni enhancement.
public working work pedestrian t renovation and we have a shift $8.9 million for the island ramps improvement project for south gate realignment. you will hear this on item 11 in terms of contract award. last project for $2.7 million we are pushing out 101 to 80 express lane. we had a longer than anticipated initiation process. with all of the decreases, this amounts to a $2.1 million net increase for revenues and $71.9 million decrease in expenditures. there is no need to pull-down the loan of $67 million as anticipated back at our budget
adoption. this item was heard before the cac on february 26 and received a motion of support. with that i am happy to answer any questions on the budget amendment. >> thank you. any questions from members? any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues do we have a motion to amend the adopted fiscal year budget as described by ms. fong. colleagues we have the same house. same call. the item is adopted on first read. next item please. approve san francisco's draft plan day area 2050 fiscally constrained project list. action item. >> thank you, chair.
hello. policy and programming division of the transportation authority. i am here to talk about the 2050. we have brought updates on this to you already. i will do a brief recap what plan area 2050 is. the action is approval of the draft fiscally constrained listing of san francisco projects and programs. at the end i will talk about the next steps we are pursuing. plan bay area 2050 is update to the regional transportation plan and community strategy led and updated every four years. this began in 2018 with horizon, a blue sky planning process, very unconstrained. that process is informing plan
bay area 2050, which has a lot of coven restaurants from the state and federal government. there are many components. i am focusing specifically on the list we are asking for you. while horizon was unconstrained they have the components. the two big ones regional strategy to meet greenhouse gas reduction and demonstrate accommodating new housing growth at all income levels within region. the plan includes a road map for housing and job growth and implementation plan to meet policy goals. in the middle is the transportation investment strategy to cover the entire nine bay area counties region from 2021 through 2050. this is a big plan and they use a lot of inputs from the local
county processes to inform that including the prop k expenditu expenditure. the base for plan bay area is set of policy strategies which are found in the transportation, housing, economy and environment topics. the mtv and a bag just approved these to study to look at how the strategies can help us move towards that greenhouse gas emissions goal and housing our entire region's population growth. this is the basis for the fiscally constrained plan as well. as the san francisco congestion management authority we coordinate the city input into the planned bay area for the transportation. in june and you have this in your packet. this body approved the set of priority goals for the plan bay
area 2050 which are summarized here. we are looking for funding to operate and maintain the existing system. making sure we strengthen the corn of the transit system. as well as making sure all of san francisco's projects that we anticipate pursuing through 2050 are consistent with the plan. so the fiscally constrained transportation strateg strategyn we expect from the federal grants. we have a list of projects within the forecast and this also helps set policies and priorities for future investment such as from new regional transportation funding measures. for planned area 205 2050 this a
summary of revenues. you will notice that the local bucket, yellow in the middle is the largest. this is really important that we use that to help advocate for the competitive regional state and federal funding sources. in the past m.t.c. has included anticipated revenue not from an existing source but reflects the region has done a good job of passing new tax measures between plans so that is intended to accommodate those new revenues. for this plan cycle there i is a newcomis anew component with a w regional transportation revenue measure such as that proposed. for your approval today is the draft fiscally constrained project and program list.
this includes projects that increase transportation capacity. it is important to note this is a limited list. we have limited the named projects to those that increase capacity and that will be moving past environmental and construction phases between now and next plan adoption in 2025. [please stand by] new zealan
fiscally-constrained projects. and we'll also talk about things like ensuring there is funding that is links linked to our priority development regions, so it coincides with were the growth is happening. and we're making sure that working with m.p. c. that equity is prioritized across the board. i want to give a thank you to commissioner ronen for and we're making sure that the region is supporting vision zero goals. m.t.c. and aback are looking to approve the final blueprint for this plan in the fall. with that, i'll open up for any questions. >> any questions for ms. bullu? seeing none, is there any public comment on this item number 10.
seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, do we have a motion to approve the plan, the fiscally constrained project list as described, made by commissioner ronen, and seconded by commissioner yee. > and we have a house roll call? [roll call] >> we have first approval. >> all right. next item, please. >> item 11, awarded cross-examination contract to the lowest responsible bidder, an amount not to exceed $29.6 million.
and authorizing an additional construction of 10.9 million for a total construction allotment not to exceed $40.6 million. this is an action item. >> mr. cordoba. >> good morning. i'm happy to present item 11. we're ready for a construction contract award. i want to refresh your memory in terms of the improvements currently under construction, as well as in the future. we led the charge in turns of the y.b.i i. underbound ramps, and also included was the opening of the vista point in may 2017. cala road is currently under construction. the item in front of you is -- on the right in the mustard color, is the reopening of the ramp, which has been closed for approximately 15 years, as well as the realignment of the roadway that leads
into the interchange. over all project costs is approximately $64 million, funded by federal state, tida, and toll authority funds. we're looking to start construction this spring, specifically in april, after the award here in march. what we're doing here in the sketch in front of you shows, in essence, the off-ramp as you're approaching, and going towards 80, and it will come off on the lower deck of the bay bridge, on to a new south gate relocated road, as well as additional improvements for bicycle and pedestrian path. that is an aerial photo of the existing site as it is today, and to the right, the final configuration. i want to say thank you to all of the partners here. we've worked for the last three years, frankly, with the federal highway administration, with tida, and with particular the bay and toll authority to develop this project and lead it through the environmental phase, the
design, and now here to the award. a special thanks to caltrans and the coast guard for working with us through all of the approvals. the funding outlay is right there on the screen in front of you. just a special notice, the additional data funds that will be at the bay area toll authority oversite committee tomorrow morning, the final $7.7 million to make this a 100% completely funded project. once again, thank you to all of our partners. just to talk a little about the procurement. we follow caltrans and c.c. t.a.'s lead in that regard. the engineer's estimate was $26.7 million, and the enterprise goal was 16%. we opened the bids in december -- on december 3rd of 2019 -- i'm sorry, we released the authorization for bids in
december, and opened the bids in january. we did receive four bids. all of them a little over the engineer's estimate. of particular is the d.d. commitment. gordon ball was the overbidder in terms of the numbers, and we had to go through what is called a good faith effort review because they did not meet the bid. and as you can tell on the screen, the other two bidders did meet the bid and the d.d. commitment. we did that over the last couple of months. we conducted the good faith effort and evaluation presented by gordon ball. we had a reconsideration hearing, too, also in that regard, and we determined they did not meet the good faith effort requirements. caltrans also did an independent review and check and concurred in that regard. due to that, we are recommending award of the construction contract to
gillati construction. we have various agreements that we will execute with our partners as we move forward here, utility companies, etc., all lined up and ready to go. we also have additional construction allotment of $10.9 million, for a total not to exceed $40,645,870. that concludes my presentation. >> thank you. any questions? any public comment on item 11? seeing none, public comment is closed. is there a motion to award said construction contract as described by mr. cor mr. cordoba made by commissioner mandelman seconded by commissioner yee. and we have a different house yet again. >> on item 11?
[roll call] >> we have first approval. >> i'm 12, extend the transportation authority unless december 1st, 2020. this is an action item. >> good morning, commissioner. the vision zero committee was originally established as an ad hock committee at the transportation authority in 2013. it is set to sunset on april 10th. at the request of chair peskin, we're recommending an extension through december 31st of 2020. if the board does not act
to continue, the committee would discontinue on april 10th. and so with that, i can answer any questions. >> any questions for ms. lafort? >> no questions. but i definitely support this extension. i think the work that we've done in the committee has been valuable to leading to some of the vision zero actions that we've taken in the city in the past few years. and hopefully we'll continue pushing them a little. >> i will take that as a motion. is there a second for that motion? seconded by commissioner mar. is there any public comment on this item, please come forward. seeing none, public comment is closed. and our house has changed yet again. roll call, please. [roll call]
is.[roll call] >> we have first approval. >> is there any introduction of new items. seeing none, is there any general public comment? i have one card from mr. mason. i'm sorry, commissioner mar. my apologies. the floor is yours. >> no problem. thank you, chair peskin. i had two quick requests today, colleagues. first, following commissioner yee's resolution last year, requiring s.f. m.t.a. to daylight 1,00,000 intersections, my office worked with the staff to develop a data-driven statue for prioritizing 100 intersections. it is now moving forward to implementation and i would like to request a discussion on our approach
to daylighting in district 4a at the next meeting. and i would like to discuss an upcoming full board meeting, in setting and meeting the quarterly performance goals for muni, also known as the 90-day action plans. we previously held a hearing on this metrix at the land use at the board of supervisors last year, and i think an update will be appropriate. >> those items will be appropriately referred. if there and any other speakers, if you'll line up to your right, my left. the first speaker, first, please. mr. mason. >> good morning. thank you, commissioners. on tuesday, february 25th, westbound 24th street traffic was obstructed by about 20
commuter buses, bumper to bumper, some idling. additional buses were along the street median between 24th and 25th street. the cause was a stalled bus, causing the rerouting of the muni 48 line. the bus displayed no m.t.a. sticker, but it did display texas license plates. this vehicle had been reported and observed in early december twice, and once in mid-january. this bus operated for about three months without any intervention. how did this bus escape california public utility commission scrutiny? the commuter bus program has increased from about 350 vehicles in 2014to over 700 buses now. and currently 24th
street experiences over 100 buses in the morning. the efficient movement of people and goods is principle one of the transit first priority. i strongly recommend that this commuter bus program be re-evaluated. and how this bus, with texas license plates now, for over three months operated in this city is unacceptable. [buzzer] >> i just cannot believe it, that this was allowed to happen. thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. mason. and thank you, as always, for your diligence. and we have noted that. i'm sure staff will refer it to the appropriate authorities. i see the folks from s.f. m.t.a. nodding their heads up and down. are there any other members of the public for general public comment. seeing none, public comment is closed. and we are adjourned.