Skip to main content

tv   BOS Full Board of Supervisors  SFGTV  July 15, 2021 12:00am-5:00am PDT

12:00 am
there be dsc has confirmed there is toxic contamination on the site specifically pge found in a paper on site as well as in the surrounding neighborhoods likely due to higher use of the dry cleaner and the credit union and dtc both have voluntary cleanup agreements. under the terms of this agreement pt sc will address on-site contamination and fleet credit union will address on-site contamination originating from the 2550 irving site under the oversight of pds c and also as a result of the environmental testing for the 2550 irving site, pte has been detected at the parking lot across the street and it's likely associated with a former drycleaner so dsc is
12:01 am
working with the family trust that owns the property to establish a third voluntary cleanup agreement and i understand pte contamination is common in sites like these because old dry-cleaning operations it's also found in many household productsand air fresheners . nonetheless there are concerns in the neighborhood about this relatively new information. pte in the soil, in the vapor on these sites and now it's kind of spread to the surrounding neighborhoods so i guess i just had a question about ... this could be to the mayor's office if you could explain how your handling this, the pte contamination in the soil on-site and how that
12:02 am
relates to the proposed affordable housing development . >> so on the specific response plan, i will ask tndc to provide an overview of that plan but i'll note the project tndc has been communicating with the psc and the state department and you mentioned dtsc has been briefing stakeholders including yourself and the communitygroups , neighborhood groups and they have an engagement process tha they've been following . the response which i will let lamont has been removed renewed by dtsc and is out for public
12:03 am
comment andeverything we know about the response plan is available .there has been a process that's been going on for the course of this year around the environmental outlets and dtsc will speak directly to the response plan. >> thank you jamie and supervisor mar and safai for the opportunity to you today. i'm going to summarize briefly from the document called a committee update it was actually just emailed out to sites, mailed out that addresses both owners and occupants of the property within the radius of the site . the response plan that has been reviewed and approved by dtsc staff and is out for the final steps in theprocess will include five components . the first is to install a vapor intrusion mitigation system that is part of the foundation of the future building.
12:04 am
it consists of an engineer barrier and piping that allows vapor to be vented into the atmosphere above the building where it will naturally dissipate. the second component is to install clubs around underground utility corridors and ceiling utility piping to provide vapors from traveling off-site. the authorities collect samples to confirm the laborand mitigation system is operating as designed before we move people into the building . the fourth is to include a land-use covenant to allow residential use which would notify future owners of the property that the system is in place and needs tobe maintained and that is monitoring and maintaining the system to ensure it remains effective . >> chair: iq for that. this proposed response then to
12:05 am
the on-site pte contamination and dtsc's mitigations made public were released earlier this week and then dtsc opened a public participation process that is going to last 30days starting this week . so i think i appreciate the response plan that was developed by community and oversight that dtsc is providing to the important environmental cleanup issues on-site and bus ... the timing of the public participation process sorting this week will depend on august 13 and then following that i know dtsc will review the comments and issued their final evaluation of the
12:06 am
response plan for the on-site contamination and that's probably going to happen sometime after august 13 . the timing of the board approval of the $14.3 million on before the dtsc oversight to the response plan in their final approval of the response plan is very problematic. and i just wanted to say that it seems like it would be better and more respectful of the public participation process that just opened this week and more respectful and in support of the dtsc response for the environmental cleanup plan for us to continue our decision on the loan agreement until after that happens.
12:07 am
i just wanted to get a response from the mayor's office to this because i'd just say i would ask you why wasn't this, the timing of these important pieces of more, better. why couldn't the dtsc oversight and their approval of the response plan happen before the loan approval was being brough before court consideration ? >> thank you supervisor. i'll note again the public comment period as you noted remain open but the public engagement process actually began much earlier in that year and has involved many key stakeholders and i'll let katie lamont that engagement process but dtsc has beenengaged in . i'll note there has been for
12:08 am
this project since tndc was selected there's been a lot of engagement with you and your office. the community members across the board and that we will continue to do so and the project sponsor will continue to do so so although the specific public comment period opened recently the actual engagement around the environmental piece and engagement around the site selection and the development of the family housing hasbeen for the last over the last year . so with that i'll ask katie to speak specifically to the engagement. >> iq for the question supervisor. so we have a robust public participation process. they produce public participation plans and actually sent out the first set
12:09 am
of mailers in february so i'm going to read from the section of the plan that describes the public participation to date . february 2021 we met with the fort supervisor mark and his legislative aide the district family network, our sunset merchants association and the sunset neighborhood association to provide them with an update on the environmental activities and dtsc public participation process. in june 2021, dtsc held to drop in interview sessions where they spoke with five respondents. the agency also house a another reading with 18 board members from the mid-sunset neighborhood association and with district supervisor mar's office and in addition to those meetings idescribed , there was also a community survey that was instituted in april 2021 so that happened between the initial briefing infebruary and before the follow-up interviews in june. and then now we're in the final stages of the public participation process .
12:10 am
>> supervisor, i'd like to add the projects response plan has also had been reviewed by dtsc and has been preliminarily approved and that happened prior to the opening of the public commentperiod . we have coordinated the closing of the loan with the approval of the different agencies so that the due diligence period could flow concretely together. and get us to that closing date for site acquisition that it's working towards. >> for the responses and just i guess again my question is why it seems to me that it would be better to for us to have the dtsc oversight process and their approval for the response plan completed before the loan agreement is moved forward.
12:11 am
it's supported by the sport so i guess my question is why wasn't that, the sequencing of these important pieces plan better. >> thank you for that. as i said before the public engagement piece as been over the course of the 2021 year katie had mentioned and on top of that as jacob has said the due diligence of the site is done corporately with the bringing the site forward to the board. so that it's time leading up to the acquisition of the site. they overall around the site acquisition has happened over the course of the year since tndc was selected so i want to maybe just reframe a little bit in that the community
12:12 am
engagement piece weather around this environmental piece specifically or around the site selection in the project element has been actually quite lengthy and will continue on that engagement acquisition. unfortunately with the board timing the board will be in recess in august and there is a deadline with the purchase agreement to acquire the sitein august . so unfortunately it does not at this point we don't believe there would be any new information coming from dtsc. the response plan has already been reviewed and preliminarily approved and there won't be any new information coming from that process which will include in mid august and we want very much the board to site moving forward and to tndc to meet their acquisitiondeadline by the end of august .
12:13 am
>> supervisor mar: i support being able to meet the site acquisition deadline. and on moving forward with that controlfor affordable housing on-site , and again, it's very frustrating that there are very important environmental oversight and response plan and the official signoff by the state department control what that didn't happen sooner so that we wouldn't be in this awkward situation .i just have one final question on this and in this relates to the financing project and you see that on the contamination on-site as well as the contamination in the surrounding neighborhood. the two separate agreements that the tsc has four oversight
12:14 am
and cleanup of their contamination on-site. is thatgoing to , with that potentially impact the competitiveness of this project again for the most of the financing which is the state income tax credit. >> i don't think so. for the project moving forward we do need site control. that's the first step in the process so that's what we're trying to get to right now. after we had site control we will continue to engage with the community around the development of the project and assess how to best position the project or the state funding sources includingthe credits and the bond and really positioning the project to be competitive . i don't believe that there would be an issue and correctme if there's anything else to add
12:15 am
to that . >> the type of contamination that's been identified is very common and in organized areas and this response is also has been done often so people understand theissue , know what to do and the fact that the tsc is overseeing it and approving the response plan will give all lenders and investors credit. >> one last question, this is just the mayor's office. have there been other affordable housing developments that have been on sites that ever required cleanup of toxic contamination and oversight by dtsc? and if so, i'm just trying to understand the conflict. >>. >> i think katie has mentioned
12:16 am
this kind of issue is common as the project is located in urban areas and the site is the assessment for each site is different depending on the site conditions but this particular issue i think is common because of the sitebeing in an urbanized area . >> are you saying that there have been other mohcd subsidized projects that have been on sites that have required response plans or remediation plans for toxic contamination western mark. >> for these type of site conditions i'm sure there are. in terms of specific sites that have gone through this process i would have to get back to you and see whether or not there are specific sites that we can
12:17 am
but certainly the conditions are common. and that's not something that is unique to 2050 april 25, 1950 irving. >> we do have other sites paper barriers andjust , there's not a cleanup that's proposed here in this environmental plan. it's not that type of plan. this is in response plan based on one, one of the test sites at 66 registered just about screening level so there's requirements or these paper barriers. that is a common approach on urbanized sites for new housing. especially when you're converting a commercial to a residential view whereas i think it'simportant to point out that the commercial use would not require any kind of plan or approach . so it's that converting the site over to residential does require the cap to announce th potential for papers to come up
12:18 am
into the building .>> great. thank you for your responses and i'll leave it at that. thank you. >> thank you supervisor. i had a quick question about this issue of the dsc process. i just wanted to be clear in my understanding that the closing of the loan itself is conditioned upon dtsc approval of the response plan so if we were to approve and we were to pursue now , that there is still this conditioning of the actual closing of the loan on the approval. is that correct. can you clarify what is included and what it in terms of the conditioning of the
12:19 am
actual closing of the loan austin mark . >> yes, that is correct. it is the final approval from dtsc. dtsc has provided preliminary approval of the plan that started their public engagement process on monday the 12th. that will conclude on the 13th and following that, they could provide their final approval of theresponse plan. that is a requirement of the loan funding . >> got it, thank you. all right. i know we have a lot of people i'm surewaiting to give comment . we also have amendments but we can take those after public comment.
12:20 am
i have some further comments on this but i can save it till after public comment and supervisor safai will do the same. i appreciate you supervisor mar for your leadership and i greatly appreciate the work you've done to engage the community and neighborhood around this project. so with that, not a clerk can we open this for public comment? >> yes mister chair, there are approximately 91 colors listening in the queue. members of the public who wish to provide comment, please press star three to be added to the queue and wait until the system indicates you have been a muted area i believe you would like to provide one more color. >> chair: we will have one minute per color.
12:21 am
>> clerk: please unmute the first caller. >> caller: can you hear me? >> clerk: yes. >> caller: my name is lauren chin,fifth-generation san franciscan and member of the community coalition . i support building the maximum number of units in the affordable housing development without any delay. i grew up spending a lot of time in the sunset and i know how special the district is and i know how hard it is for families to move into the sunset or thepeople who thrown up to stay in their own neighborhood or even san francisco because of the lack
12:22 am
of affordable housing and i'm heartbroken by how opportunities for housing for people of color are limited in neighborhoods that have a history of disinvestment . the housing development will expand opportunities for working families by creating a safe and stable home. i urge you to support the maximum number of units and ensure the buildings for families at the lower end are at the city's disposal. i join my community and demanding that the city invest in affordable housing starting with 3050 irving. >> thank you for your comments. >> caller: my name is erin goodwin, born in sanfrancisco and i'm living in the outer sunset with my father and stepmom . i have a bachelors degree in mathematics and am currently a doctoral studentand even with a stipend againstsalary , i would not be able to afford to live in the outer sunset . it's clearly indicate that something is broken. people who aremaking the minimum wage should be able to
12:23 am
live . i support theaffordable housing unit at 2550 irving street . make it as affordable as possible with maximum occupancy and for it to be approved today. i support political democracy, economic democracy and that means our city needs to be affordable to its citizens. i thinkaffordable housing is key to a livable city . thank you very much. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: my name is ray carella and i live three blocks from 2550 irvingand and an ardent supporter of the irving project and affordable housing in general . i'm calling to express my support area 2550 irving is an affordable investment for san francisco. it critically addresses the
12:24 am
affordability crisis and supporting it meansdoing our part to make san francisco affordable to working families . last saturday tndc hosted a tour of affordable housing locations and i was afforded the opportunity to go on that tour. i saw firsthand how well-built and well-maintained these affordable housing locations are as were the other attendees. it was an eye-opening experience. this is why i'm asking all our supervisors to approve this loan and deliver this family affordable housing to the sunset. thank you very much. >> next speaker please. >> caller: i'm proposing this project because mohcd has no
12:25 am
consideration for aplan that has less impact and we can build more housing faster . also, i have a 76-year-old oncology patients living right next to the building. she needs to have some therapy, she's homebound and this will cause a serious health risk to her and she has had an institution in 2010, that's 1.5 times her body volume this will be detrimental to her health because a tndc study shows all your long ourhousing will be in shadow . overwhelmingly 90 percent of neighbors are opposing this project as proposed according to data .>> next speaker please.
12:26 am
>> caller: good morning supervisor.>> clerk: if you have a radio on, could you turn that off so that we can hear you clearly? much better. >> caller: i'm an expert on affordable housing.there is one item which is has been overlooked here by the sponsor. this vote will be in violation of san francisco administrative code to a .53. i'll be back, 28.53 which stipulates a separate public hearing is required on all controversial issues as is the case with the contaminated site and the vicinity with a young
12:27 am
cancer-causing chemicals. the authorization of funding for the site purchased with disregard and preempt consideration and imperative of public health. the cost of remediation of this highlyconcentrated condition , this aspect must be accounted for which has been my grossly oversimplified by the dtsc and its project sponsors. the vapor intrusions. >> caller: i am a lifelong resident of the sunset district and i'm opposed to the approval of this loan because it's unnecessary and there are no physical metrics developed to ensure success and protect the working-class taxpayers. the neighbors don't want this
12:28 am
project. there's already plenty of affordable housing.there are 1500units left and $2000 a month and in the city if you look at craigslist.why is the city providing a $14million loan to buy a $9 million property without any independent validation . why was there no market rate completed to independently validate the cost of the project . why was there no competitive bids . there are no metrics developed nor were there any metrics on the ongoing cost of development. this project and loan needs to be stopped because there's no fiscalresponsibility developed for this ideological project . how can we askthe working-class taxpayers to buy a property that has no control over the money to guarantee its success. iq . >> next speaker please. >> caller: my name is steve ward, i'm from the playa part coalition and i am a
12:29 am
neighborhood supply park village which is just west of the mid-sunset neighborhood. and besides adjusting to the whole project, i'm careful of the consequences that it will have for our neighborhood in terms of pointing a wrecking ball towards our neighborhood next .especially in that site on 43rd and june at church which is the most elegant building in our neighborhood which can be purchased for things like senior care, child care, community center and then free up space in the new teacher housing for proposal for a medical clinic which we need all these services.and so i'm opposed to this building and it does not comport with the general outline of the amphitheater.
12:30 am
>> clerk: thank you for your comments. >> caller: my name is permits, i live in the sunset district since 1993 area i support the city and county providing alone to finance the affordable housing project at 2550 irving street. providing the funding is a good first step. i know there are issues to resolve in the future but this is an importantaffordable housingproject so the first things come first. please support and approve the funding for the affordable housing project at 2550 irving street . thank you . >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: i'm a renter in district 2 and i lived in an
12:31 am
expensive one-bedroomapartment . i think the city definitely needs affordable housing, especially affordable housing for working-class people and that's why i support the proposed housing development at 2550 irving street. the whole city needs to work together to invest in affordable housing and i see four apartments and i think we need staff to delay and people in the sunset benefit from living in the city.if they didn't want to live in the city they could move to the suburbs. we need to fund buildings and stop building buildings and apartment buildings etc. and people that have are fortunate enough to have these stop other people from living here and can make it affordable but it will
12:32 am
be under invested andwe've invested a lot in affordable housing in this district and across the city . >> clerk: thank youfor your comments, next speaker please . >> caller: my name is ann, i'm a sunset resident and a staunch supporter of the affordable housing site built with the maximum number of units at 2550 irving. as everyone knows fs has become increasingly difficult to support for working families and it's critical we support our neighbors. housing is a human right and everyone deserves to have faith in the stable places to live in a dream and thrive ina communityespecially one as vibrant and welcoming as sunset . it would greatly saddened me if our city passed up the opportunity to help somebody in need while we have the resources to do so . thank you and please vote yes to approve this loan.
12:33 am
>> clerk: next speaker please. welcome caller. perhaps we could circle back to the scholar and take the next. >> caller: my name is steve leads and i'm a resident of the sunset district for 40+ years and a member of the westside community coalition. i support the 2550 irving street project being built maximum capacity and serving those with the lowest and middle income without delay. a lot has been spoken on this issue and an important question is what kind of city will sf be
12:34 am
in our future. our city is in need of deeply affordable housing and at 2550 irving is start with a significantnumber of vulnerable sunset residents are going to pay their rent and stay housed . deeply affordable housing is needed in every district and every neighborhood tomake sf san francisco a more just and caring community for all of us . supervisors, i urgeyou to reflect your deliberations about the question i raised . san francisco can and must do better. thank you and vote yes. >> caller: >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: i live in different for and i'm a supporter of the westside community coalitionand and a part of faith in action bay area . i support the maximum number of units at the lowest ami level for the proposed 100 percent
12:35 am
affordable housing development at 2550 irving street and i encourage you to approve the resolution without delay area and a young adult who moved to the neighborhood a year ago renting in that 94122 zip code with four other young people in order for us to afford living in the neighborhood and in san francisco where i worked. as a new resident i want you to declare our heart and ensuring that longtime residents of this neighborhood can stay here especially our lowest income residents and immigrants this is a critical piece of the comprehensive need to keep families in our community intact. our neighborhood must do our part and i look forward to welcoming our neighbors to move into the new development at february 5, 1950 irving. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> i live nearby the vast majority of the callers today
12:36 am
and i'm for increased housing but it's sustainable and maximizes the number of units filled with funds. it will cost $11 million per unit. $400 million project requires five years to build. there's a dus which supervisor mar is a strong advocate of. they build houses but i've never seen the construction of the tower which is most expensive and fulfills this option. infrastructure perceived by some weather wrongly has alternatives options given by those. what i'd like to address is last week on the report and follows up witha family with children and an elderly woman holding a sign says they want affordable housing . this is going to be an
12:37 am
integrated unit. >> time has elapsed. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: my name is robert hope, i'magainst the proposed 2550 irving street project. my family lives near the proposed project . i am concerned the proposed seven-story housing project is too big given thesurrounding neighborhood of small single-family homes and small apartment buildings . furthermore, the enormous size of the proposed project is not the way to buildaffordable housing. i grew up in a six-story low income housing project in chinatown . as a teenager, i personally felt the stigma and shame of living ina massive housing project for the poor. when it comes to affordable housing , maximizing density is the dehumanizingand not the way to build .
12:38 am
people who support maximizing density have never lived in this type of housing. 45, 50 irving should not be higher than four stories and it should be designed for respect for future tenants and the surrounding property owners. thank you and please vote number. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: myname is leslie roffman , i live at 5058 for 20 years. i support 11 stories of deeply affordable family housing at 2550 irving. as a christian teacher i can always afford a decent apartment and eventually i saved enough to buy a house on sunset. i focused on many papers and their stories are similar. i recently spoke to a married couple with three children. five of them live in this condo alone.
12:39 am
the costs are more than my down payment on the hard work doesn't get you housing anymore. this situation isn't good for anyone. we must figure out how everyone can have stable housing area no one group of people on the sunset that we do belong to each other . we need to find solutions for housing and public transportation . thank you. >> next speaker please. >> caller: my name is sarah allen and i live in district 1 area and a supporter and member of the westside community coalition. i support the proposed 100 percent affordable housing development at 2550 irving street . it's an important for people living in affordable housing to have that at the park and other important part of our community. we urgently need to address the
12:40 am
underinvestment in affordable housing. district for falls behind every other district when it comes to affordablehousing having only 17 new affordableunits over the last decade . with hundreds of rent-controlledapartments, rising housing prices andthe community displacement of families . this project cannot be delayed . every day is another possibility for another family and up on the street . the development will expand access and opportunity for working families and renters by creating safe and stable homes in our community. it will send as many families as possible and i urge you to support the numbers at 2550 irving street. >> there are 68colors in the queue and 103 listening. next color please .>> caller:
12:41 am
where a member of the council ofcommunity housing organizations . i'm calling to express my support for the sunset community tndc and supervisor mar. this hundred percent affordable housing development at 2550 irving street expand access and opportunities for district force working families and their children to stay in their neighborhood. district 4: behind every other district when it comes to opportunities for affordable housing with only 17 new affordable unitsadded over the last decade . san franciscans across the city including the westside agree with this mission of expanded affordable housing as evidenced by theoverwhelming voter support for proposition e , citywide rezoning and companion propositioning affordable housing bonds measures. securing the site acquisition
12:42 am
is a critical first step providingcertainty for affordable housing to become a reality on the west side . thank you forapproving the sit acquisition funding for 2550 irving . >> clerk: next speaker please . >> caller: i'm a member of westside community coalition and i support you 100 percent affordable housing at 2550 irving and demand the maximum number of units for families at the lower end of and i as a chinese-american resident my visionfor this neighborhood is one that is livable and safe . especially given the racist zoning laws and segregation in the city 2550 irving is one of many steps needed tobuild an inclusive neighborhood. this project can be delayed as it's becoming late with many families displaced and others
12:43 am
at risk , rising prices and other apartmentslosing rent control status. district 4 lags behind every other district while the city's housing crisis hasintensified . we affordable investment starting with 2550 irving . >> clerk: nextspeaker please . >> caller: [inaudible] hello? >> clerk: you are on. >> caller: is it my turn? >> clerk: yes. >> caller: i'm a sunset resident andi'm against this plan. my neighborsare also against the plan and also in the sunset neighborhood is already a
12:44 am
working family neighborhood . it was never a rich neighborhood .they always come to sunset but low housing here is already for working family districts and then the rentis already pretty low. already . so the most important thing is that most districts, my neighbors areagainst this project . thank you . >> next speakerplease . >> caller: my nameis don kissimmee and i live in district 1 and a member of the westside community coalition . i've been in community organizing in the richmond and thesunset district and i'm calling to support the proposed 100 percent affordable housing development at 2550 irving as a lifelong resident i can see how the city has historically enacted policies
12:45 am
that have harmed our communities . my old neighborhood was raised due to redevelopment. especially affordable housing will not repair the damage but at least it's a check on the ongoing gentrification of san francisco and provides an opportunity for working families. this city has a debt to pay to our communities and all those who have been displaced from their onceaffordable homes let's start by enacting policies that promote affordable and not market rate housing
12:46 am
12:47 am
>> caller: which has been organizing support for 2550 irving. i would not have been able to survive this pandemic without protections from evictions foreclosures as well as really from rent and mortgages people fought for last year. i wouldnot be here without aging and lgbt q community that has kept me safe in crisis after crisis . the fact thataffordable housing is a flight and nota right is an injustice in itself . this is why i'm fighting for 2550 irving .
12:48 am
generations after me don't just struggle to survive but also can thrive in this beautiful neighborhood i love. i urge the board to move this project forward without any delay and ensure thebuilding as the maximum number of units as well as house vulnerable families at orbelow 30 percent ofthe a.m. i'm in san francisco . accu .>> clerk: next speaker please . >> caller: goodafternoon supervisors , i'm a member of the community coalition. i'm excited to address you in support of 100 percent affordable housing for families at 2550 irving. while working in the sunset district for as a community organizer and counselor at the westside program ,we encountered the trauma and displacement that takes place daily in the sunset . people think this largely homeowner occupied action is immune to the displacement that's ravaged other
12:49 am
neighborhoods . unfortunately these assumptions are false. longtime low income homeowners able to keep up with their mortgage and arebeing displaced at an alarming rate . tndc's proposal to build housing represents stability and affordability a chance for families to stay in san francisco. this is how you build strong communities.i urge you to pass this project moveforward withoutdelay. thank you very much . >> clerk: next speaker please . >> caller: my name is james and i'm a codirector at the community housing organization at 21 affordable housing developers in san francisco. we've been leaning housing citywide and more affordable housing in the westside.
12:50 am
san franciscans occluding westside residents overwhelmingly support affordable housing in their neighborhood as demonstrated by huge passage of proposition e and westside for, affordable housing and passing proposition 820 past affordable housing throughout the city. i want to thank tndc, supervisor mar, westside coalition in its effort to bring affordable housing to th westside residents and running in the neighborhood for their children so that the neighborhood can grow into the future . we've had tremendous success or affordable housing and those successes have come through community organizing where people come and get out, speaking out for affordable housing. >> clerk: thank you, next speaker.
12:51 am
>> caller: my name is renita hermanand i'm a homeowner that lives four blocks away from the projected project . it's outrageous to consider a seven-story building with no consideration for traffic problems local density . this area is already difficult for traffic and the infrastructure and parking are justnot able to handle that kind of density . you'll be preventing at least 8 to 10 homes from ever seeing the sun and preventing them from the ability to install solar energy on their roots which by the way is a city requirement. for the city to spend 14 million on alone that will cost so many problems, more problems than it will solve is a mistake . the fact there is toxic land under this should be resolved and prior to any loan on this buildingand to associate parks with air fresheners is
12:52 am
disingenuous to say the least. there are many better options that could be investigated including afour-story building instead . they were would work presented about two weeks ago at the mid-neighborhood, mid-sunset neighborhood association . iq .>> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: this is helena this is from first-hand experience living at 26 and 30. density has reached an impasse with pedestrians and traffic. this corner is no place to go. adding additional population this size will increase the post covid stress. the windshear can be strong. this new building will cheer the high wind and split cars onto both sides and the house next to the building. the house blocked from light becomes even colder.
12:53 am
this large building massis too close to neighboring small homes . displaced residents, houses have been installed. the quality of life is not improving for us. 26 irving is overcrowded and people are not enjoying their residence additional means pushing beyond overcrowded . street pressure will increase already continues to be traffic noise all day . >> clerk: thank you for your comments, next speaker please. welcome caller. >> caller: [inaudible] >> clerk: it'syour turn to speak . it appears perhaps we can take thenext caller .
12:54 am
>> caller: my name is elliot. and i support this measure. i've worked in as a sign language interpreter for over 30 years. four years ago my daughter was then 16 and i
12:55 am
. >> caller: i worked my way to becoming relatively more privileged through what i have done seeing the changes in sunset and the growing separation of low income individuals in sunset compared
12:56 am
to where i was at, it makes my heart break we still can't have that communities still be in sunset and i'm hoping that we can still preserve the soul of what someone just mentioned right now, the soul of the sunset community and even more through mars leadership cases like the market and things like that. >> clerk: thankyou, next caller . >> caller: i'm a proud resident of the sunset district and organizer withthe west community coalition . i'd like to read heidi smith's comments so i would appreciate extra time area the issue of affordable housingis very personal to me . i built a happy life for myself as aschoolteacher with affordable housing .
12:57 am
when we talk about who's going to benefit from 98 units of affordable housing we're talking about who i consider friends, family, neighbors, mentors area when i worked in the neighborhood i see the lasting impacts of a peaceful history through world war ii sunset was closed to residents who were not white. segregation was enforced by racially restrictive covenants by neighborhoodassociations and lenders . the sunset is a key player in a racist history has had lasting impacts so we can begin to unravel this history starting today byfunding the development of themaximum number ofunits, rent affordable to families at or below 30 percent a.m. i . we cannot delay this project . please free us today . can i read the comments? >> clerk: no thankyou ma'am. equity we are only allowing one minute per caller .
12:58 am
>> caller: thank you. next caller please.>> caller: collingwood 100 percent of resolution item 210763 with no delay in approval. our city is long overdue for affordable housing development generally and this district in particular. the proposal for 2550 irving is a critical opportunity to correct this egregious oversight area as a proudnative san franciscan and woman of color , it is deeply important to me that our city sees opportunities such as this project to do the right thing and create affordable housing especially given the severe and deleterious effects of working families, renters and our homeless priced out of any
12:59 am
adequate housing since the ndc projects expand access, create safe and stable housing in our community is a true benefit to our entire city. i am urging support of the maximum number of units at 2550 irving and families at the lower end of ami. >> next speaker please. >> my name is alex campbell and my wife and i live in district 4 on 27th avenue. we have two little girls ages five and eight are the next generation of proud san franciscans and also attorney legal services nonprofit where i represent low income clients and advocate for justice for working-class people generally and i am a residentalso of the westside community coalition . i support this development 2550 irving street the maximum
1:00 am
number of unit and without any more delay. having grown up here in the city it means a lot to me and my wife to be raising our daughters in thecity . our family is here and our support network is all local i want to see my daughters grow up here and have the opportunity to be able to live here in the future but i want every family living in the city and the sunset to have those opportunities. we need to act urgently to create affordable housing in the sunset in particular . frankly it's embarrassing district 4 falls behind every other district when it comes to affordable housing and thank you. >> clerk: currently there are 57 colorsin the queue, 87 listening . >> clerk: welcome caller.
1:01 am
hello, caller. hello, caller. can you please takethe next caller and circle back to this one . >> caller: i live on 27th avenue at the proposed building and i aman advocate for housing for the homeless . but i don't want to see a building and stories i go up and it's too big. if you walk around the neighborhood there's signs on many of the houses. we are not against the project, i've never heard anyone say anythingabout don't bring these people tothis neighborhood at
1:02 am
all . what we're saying is it's too big . i think there's other alternatives to build different kinds of clusters of housing throughout the san francisco area but i don't want to see a seven story building go up right by my house area i don't think it will complement the neighborhood at all. >> clerk: next caller please. >> caller: i'm on the renter in san francisco and i'm a strong supporter of25 50 irving street . i'd like to remind the supervisors that district for as only got 17 units of affordable housing in the last 10 years. they're asking for all seven stories of 100 percent affordable housing. look around. there's a seven story building already in the same corner as the development area to giant surface parking lots could become affordable housing and
1:03 am
instead of this one project we should be debating how we can maximize the amount of affordable housing by developing the adjacent parkin lot , that's a surface parking lotuntil another seven stories of affordable housing . neighbors until they are securely house where fighting against this project. find it in your heart to all ouraffordable housing and please approve this $14 million loan . >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: my name is megan and i live in sunset district 4. i fully support the maximum number of units andhundred percent affordable housing plan or 2550 irving . my neighborhood desperately needsaffordable housing . we are behind every other district in developing
1:04 am
affordable housing.this area is dominated by small and expensive single-family homes and we cannot afford the high rent. the plan is a great start. we are facing ahousing crisis that can only be addressed with big plans and deliberate investment . delays hurt families who need affordable housing now. i'm in the westside community coalition and am urging you to vote yes and move us one step closer to housing for all without no delay >> clerk: next speaker please . >> caller: hello. this is from asia and i am calling today to actually support the affordable housing project but request some level of due diligence and fiduciary obligations fromthe board of supervisors . i support supervisor mar's
1:05 am
comments earlier today to continue this process and request a continuation until the dtsc assessment is completed. i love the appraisal supported the $9 million valuation and the appraiser merely stated on page 19 that they assumed the building site are clean of containment. the appraisal also on page 29 notices the comparable three using the appraisal has to have the purchase price adjusted once toxic contaminants is discovered. in this actuation if we were to use thesame valuation , the price of the purchase would need to be adjusted from $9 million to 6 and a half million dollars. this is not a competitive bid process for this piece of land. i heard the mohcd city of san francisco to work with the seller to request additional
1:06 am
time to complete due diligence. the board of supervisors had a hearing ... >> clerk: next speaker please. welcome, caller. hello, caller. >> caller: supervisors, this is peter callingwith the community housing organization you've heard from my colleagues earlier . we just wanted to again reinforce that the proposed project on irving street is an incredibly important step in the right direction of funding
1:07 am
affordable housing opportunities across the city including the westside, southside, east side, north side . the voters made it clear proclamation with received over 80 percent support we need to see affordable housing everywhere this is an incredible step forward and we encourage you toapprove the site acquisition funding . there's discussions going forward to get the best project but this is an important step and we're so glad our committee of housing organization can support one of our members in this groundbreaking project on the west side of san francisco. thank you for your support supervisor mar, supervisor amy and supervisor safai as well as the mayor andhousing . >>clerk: next speaker please . welcome, caller. >> caller: hello. >> clerk: yes, you can speak.
1:08 am
>> caller: my name is sherita emma and i'm a resident of district 4. i'd like to request that the board of supervisors complete full due diligence on this piece of property and this loan prior to engaging and approving this particular loan recommending it to the board of supervisors for full approval. the sellers should work with the city of san francisco was going to be the owner of the landto make sure all due diligence is completed . the fact that there are toxic contaminants of the site and the dest has not completed its assessment yet the city will recommend a $9 million kiss of a piece of land is hugely problematic situation and the board of supervisors would fail its fiduciary obligations to
1:09 am
the taxpayers of san francisco if they recommended this particular loan for approval without completingdue diligence . thank you. >> clerk: nextspeaker please . >> caller: on a renter in district 7 on the west side eking in strong support for the 100 percent affordable homes at 2550irving street . the westside needs to house more people. we're in a housing crisis area and how are we in this situation denmark becausemany san francisco neighbors don't welcome more neighbors . most people these days say i understand we need more housing but the is why we're in the situation. we need more homes and we especially need these affordable homes on the west side.
1:10 am
how many chances do we get to build 100 percent affordable housing one block on the metro train? we need to supportworking families in the city by putting our full support behind projects like this . build 98 affordablehomes. please approve this loan with no delay. iq . >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: my name is ashley and i'm a lifelong sunset resident and i live near the project site. i'm in fullsupport of approving the funding for 2550 irving street . i'm a public service married to a teacher with two children and i know how difficult it is to find affordablehousing. it's imperative the westside contribute to the stock in san francisco. it's been so long we have not
1:11 am
built housing . tndc has done a stellar job of outreach addressing concerns around issues the opposition is focusing on. i can't wait to seethe site built . i believe it's every person's right to live inaffordable housing . thank you. >> clerk: next speaker please. hello, caller. welcome, caller. perhaps we can circle back to this caller and take the next one. >> caller: hello. this is rita goldberger and i'm
1:12 am
a homeowner and i live half a block from the proposed site. i'm very much in favor of having 100 percent affordable housing built at that site. i think the proposal is a little too large. i think six stories would be better because that is what around their area my main concern is is the seller pushing us to buy this land now ? the whole reason is approved now is the sale has to be done before the board votes on vacation. why is the seller pushing to sell the land before the toxicity report is out ? we need to wait until the toxicity report isout and then we will have to take the price . that's my main concern. i'm really concerned about the toxicity .
1:13 am
we need parking for the housing and we don't want to do this until the toxicity reportcomes out and it'sstrange of the seller . >> clerk: next speaker please . >> caller: my name is nancy and i live at 27th avenue not far from this project. i speak in support of the project and approval of funds to develop the site. i'm getting tired of hearing fellow colleagues nursing assistants who can't afford to live here anymore and we are losing families and children . i am concerned about the tone that this has taken in our neighborhood with many residents being called communists and people subjected to bullhorns and whistles because they do support this . so i am asking that we classified you happens are
1:14 am
about the toxicity and the parking so hopefully those things can be worked out along the way but i think that i fully support this project and so we need affordable housing in san francisco, thank you. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: corey smith on behalf of the housing action coalition in strong support. we have a really fantastic opportunity here. we're talking about family housing, talking about 100 percent affordable housing . we're talking about homes for people a block from the park and a block from the n judah. there is quite literally the exact same intersection a 70 foot seven-storybuilding already there . so this fits within the framework of the current neighborhood and no matter what way you slice it, this is the absolute perfect project for
1:15 am
the sunset and any delay is a clear message that building 100 percent affordable family housing is not important. do not send a message, please approve the loan. >> thank you for your comments, next speaker please. >> i live in clinton park here in san francisco and i am callingtoday in support of the project at 2550 irving . it's very important for our city that we build more homes of every stripe and this in particular.we need to do something about that, we can't have a vibrant city without being able to live and this is
1:16 am
exactly the type of project that is going to support our lower and middle class residents and allow them to stay here. we have to take bold action in san francisco to build more housing allacross our city in every single neighborhood and i really look forward to seeing more housing being built in my neighborhood . not for the super rich but for everybody. for teachers, for nurses everybody across the city .
1:17 am
1:18 am
1:19 am
1:20 am
1:21 am
1:22 am
1:23 am
1:24 am
>>. >> caller: i grew up in san francisco. our family lost ourhomes when our rent was raised . i became unhoused.
1:25 am
i hope my representativeswill approve it . thank you so much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments, next speaker please. >> caller: good afternoon, can you hear me? >> clerk: yes. >> caller: i'm calling to express support forthe proposal on the affordable housing development at 2550 irving street . all the other districts in the city, lags behind when it comes to affordable housing and as someone who's experienced homelessness on the mother of two kids and i hope we invest in affordable housing and this will be the first step in securing the land and building affordable housing.i'm in strong support of 2550irving with the maximum amount .
1:26 am
thank you. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> my name is aiden. i like some of these other colors and a member of the school district andi am a resident . at the district we do what we can for the students in san francisco but the on affordability of housing is taking a terrible toll on our children's and families and it's taking a toll on our educators and we just hope and watch their talented teachers and administrators leave the district for more affordable locations. so i'm calling to ask for the boards support of this project
1:27 am
at maximum capacity, thank you. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: mine and name is gabby reese and i'm a platter at the community development enter, a faith-based organization in san francisco. we would like to express its enthusiastic support for the project at 2550 irving. we understand the dire need for more affordable housing options in all parts of the city and the past five years the majority of affordable housing developments have been in the city's easternneighborhoods . for example in a recent report in district 6 san francisco showed almost 3500 affordable housing units added to its housing stock while district for showed less than 20 affordable units in the past 10 years. this 100 percent affordable housing projects will expand access and opportunities for
1:28 am
district force working families and children tostay in their neighborhood . securing the site acquisition is a critical first step in providingcertain keys for affordable housing to become a reality . we ask that you please approve this project with no delay. thank youso much . >> clerk: currently there are 30 callers in the queue and 70 listening. if you would like to provide public comment on this item, please be reminded to press star 3 to be added to the queue and for those on hold until the system indicatesyou have been on unit . hello, caller.
1:29 am
>> caller: i'm john, i live in district 4 and istrongly encourage the assessment of this project . the average home price in sunset is over $1 million area it is ridiculous in this working-class neighborhood and i encourage this affordable project. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: my name is python murphyand i live in outer sunset . i'm calling to give my support to this proposed 100percent affordable housing development. at 2550 irving street . as a youth who's lived in outer sunset most of my life neighborhood gentrification has always ate a significant role and my perception of how urgently we need to cater and
1:30 am
address the sunset residents and those have been displaced from living entirely in district 4, unable to complete rights. so the 100 percent affordable housing development at 2550 irving street will extend access and opportunities for working families and renters by creating space and stable homes in ourcommunity . >> clerk: next speaker please . >> caller: i'm anita, i live i parkside and i'm calling to support the affordable housing project at 2550 irving . i think it's important to create opportunities for families to live here. it's so expensive to live in san francisco and so many
1:31 am
people mentioned it's a working class community but the average home as $1.5 million here. where no longer the working-class community that people got to experience when they moved here and the only way to bring back that character and put those in the neighborhood is to build more housing area we haven't met those goals much longer than we can afford to . >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: i've lived in sunset for most of my life and i support the development of affordable housingat the site for sunset and san franciscans and their families . it's easy for us to talk about the businesses and amenities that we enjoy in this neighborhood but we have to be able to help more workers and healthcare providers. i grew up in the outer sunset in a large low income family
1:32 am
and attribute my success to being able to be in the sunset surrounded by other families. this is a chance for families and individuals to build a great foundation and i urge you to supportthe maximum number of units at 2550 irving . >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: i just want to voice my support for this project. san francisco has been doing an okay job on the east side but a poor job on the west side and it's unfair because on the east side there's lotsof highways and stuff and it's not the same so i'd like to see more housing on the west side and this is of course the first encouragement . >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: i live at 26th avenue twohouses away and i
1:33 am
want to do a reality check . there is pce contamination at 2550 irving. at present nobody knows how much it will cost to remediate the land to make it safe. the presence oftoxins should reduce the purchase price instead of doubling it to $9 million . nobody disputes the need for affordable housing. the problems arise when you look at the details of this project . the immediate neighborshave looked at the details. supervisor mar has taken a leadership position against building on toxic land . he knowsyou can't decide on the loan before public comment and a dtsc response plan . the new information that dtsc will have is the public commen . you have to wait to see and we are not happy with the response plan because removing the toxics they're protecting the
1:34 am
new residentsand not the neighboring homes where the toxic plume has spread . your deadline is important but it's not more important than our health. six of my immediate neighbors have cancer. residential use is not just on the site . thank you, next speaker please. >> clerk: my name is tina saint corrado and i live five blocks away from thehousing . i'm proposing this project even though i do support the affordable housing incentive. please consider all the issues raised by the laborers that have not yet been answered by tndc. the first one is parking for the 100 units is invalid. also documents that will overwhelm thepublic
1:35 am
transportation which has not yet been addressed . more importantly the toxic bloom will cause harm to the neighbors during the construction and of course the tenants after the building is the have not been cleaned. at no time in the neighborhood can we uphold another 12,000 additionalresidents . finally the project is way overpriced at $1 million per unit. my question is does the city even review a conservative successful? >> clerk: thank you for your comment. the callers who have already provided their comments , would you please press star 3 to lower your hands. next color please.
1:36 am
>> caller: i'm a san francisco resident and member of sf pd and i support the proposed affordable housing development at 2550 irving. we have a housing affordability crisis and the impact is present in all our lives from what you see every day walking in my neighborhoodto the working families struggling to make ends meet .the project will provide affordable housing units that the city desperately needs and we can't delay this project or another second. we need the maximum number of units yesterday. do the right thing for our city and for the future residents working in this development . >> clerk: thank you, next speaker please. ... welcome, caller.
1:37 am
hello caller. perhaps we can circle back to thecaller and take the next . i have lived in district 4 for nearly a decade area and supporter of the westside community coalition and i support the proposal of 100 percent affordable housing at 2550 irving street without delay. i join my community and the coalition and demanding the city investment affordable housing by funding the maximum number of units at 2550irving and serving families at the lower end of a and i . >> clerk: next speaker please.
1:38 am
>> caller: this is more in strong support. we had 60 people out saying how much this is such an important project. what i really want to point to is the need to approve this project without delay because we need more projects just like this one all over the west side. we need to set a precedent here that we are going to quickly and happily say yes to affordable housing projects area the departments need to know that we have passed legislation that says we want affordable housing on the west side that we mean it andwe're not going to allow for delays that are really not based in reality . we need to show full throated support for moving quickly when we have opportunities like this
1:39 am
and if we show our department that we're going to allow them to be hamstrung and to get chewed up by the entitlement process, they're not going to be brave. they're not going to put forward projects like this one and i've heard some of the anti-housing people say they're really worried that this is the first of many and that's the truth . this isthe first of many and we need more projects like this one . >> clerk: next color please. >> caller: i was born and raised in san francisco and i support this project at 2550 irving street. i know people are concerned about theheight . i know people are concerned about people living in there. they are the everyday people who help you all. they go to hospitals and mail carriers.
1:40 am
it's really allover san francisco.i understand people are worried about the size . these go to look at the 200 beautifulparks we have in san francisco which i do . if you need access ask for transit to help you but please don't deny housing because you feel uncomfortable in the four walls of your home. iq. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. currently there are $34 and 24 in the queue. if you wish to provide public comment rest star 3. next color please. >> caller: my name is karen chang and i object to the matter before the committee. i support equitable public participation and residents should be given the opportunity to comment on the report.
1:41 am
the committee should consider the public's response before it approvesthis loan. it is the committee's fiduciary obligation to do so . furthermore the observation of funding would violate the admin code to a 53 until public hearing is held on the controversy involving the contaminated site and its surrounding phone should be postponed. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: [inaudible] >> clerk: hello, caller. >> caller: we live within a few blocks of this project we do not support this project at its current status . seven stories is too much.
1:42 am
for stories is more suitable. also i would hope that the board of supervisors usebetter due diligence . the site was a gas station as well as a laundromat so due diligence will be needed to restrict these, thank you. >> clerk: nextspeaker please . >> caller: i'd like to point out there's a problem with tndc's application. we discovered when tndc submitted its application in 2020 they intentionally decided not to notify the most affected by the project including the neighborhood association and sunset community alliance. neither were notified for the entire year. the group that they did notify on the application did not include any neighbors.
1:43 am
it is a violation of the requirement to submit a community engagement plan demonstrating the capacity for support. this alone should be sufficient grounds to table or continue from further hearings. if you live right next to the project it's very easy for you to say we support maximizing but please understand somerset is a beautiful city. we need moretime to discuss . we need time to let us do it right, not because of investors but because of us. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: hello. hello? >> clerk: we can hear you. >> caller: i just wanted to say seven floors is too big. 4 floors isokay .
1:44 am
that parking lot is not enough. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: i am steve martha, i'm calling in strong support of this project and many more affordable ones on the west side. i'm out here it's easy to forget about the housing crisis since we are removed from the visible homelessness of soma and the tenderloin but ifyou've ever driven around merced , you'll see there isa tremendous housing insecurity problem . the explosion of folksliving out of their cars , we need thisand many more projects just like it to address it . supervisor mar brought up a great point, why is the cost so high? half of the projects like this
1:45 am
are construction and building materials and the rest is permitting fees, legal fees, consulting fees and all the hearingsthat need to go into building thisproject so we need this project and we need to fix the process that makes this takes so long to be approved . >> chair: next speaker please . >> caller: hello. >> clerk: welcome, caller. >> caller: my name is kayla dimarco, a resident of the west side and i work for an affordable real estate developer and additionallyi'm a civil engineer and i'm coming to express support for this project . i wanted to provide commenton the text of three of the items being discussed . the report indicates it's not uncommon for any partial not just in san francisco but in a suburban neighborhood as well . pce in the soil is not very alarming and the steps that were proposed are typical
1:46 am
standard steps to take and it's improving to work. if you look at a lot of reports likethis , you seen the cost of these parcels and this is not something to stop affordable housing and the appropriate steps are going to be taken area as far as the height of the building i fully amin support of theheight . in a district that's no longer affordable , we need the neighborhood more than a seven story building. we're seeing homelessness increase and it's also going to change thenature of those neighborhoods . >> clerk: next color please. >> caller: my name is winston parsons, i'm calling in support of the affordable housing development and its seven-story form. my sister and i have had the great privilege ofbeing fourth generation san franciscans . my mom and grandmother grew up
1:47 am
in sunset and it's antithetical to the san francisco values that i was raisedon and makes our city less family-friendly for those saying seven-story building will harm the character , i neighborhoods character is not determined by the size of its structures but the relationships in how neighbors treat each other and providing stable housing literallyend homelessness so you don't get to complain about homelessness and then opposed affordable housing . i used to work for the ymca providing mentoring and his mom was constantly working her butt off she lived in a tiny unit in sunset and this man's bedroom was literally a closet. theydeserve to have the same opportunities for growth that myfamilies had me and my colleagues struggle to afford to live here . thank you .
1:48 am
>> clerk: next speaker please. >> good afternoon, my name is annie helton and i'm with south home for the elderly. i do represent thousands of seniors every year come to self-help for the elderly for assistance withtheir housing applications . every time affordable housing unit opens up they come to apply but thousands of them always time after time are disappointed because they're just not enough affordable units for our seniors. so i heard the supervisors to pass this resolution today to support tndc to move to acquisition and redevelopment of the project. the 98 units of housing for the sunset residents are desperately needed and asked supervisor mar stated only a handful of sunsetresidents , like 35.affordable housing last year who applied as sunset
1:49 am
residents and they have to live in other districts leaving their home and community behind area i think that i have confidence that tndc and mohcd will overcome opposition. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> clerk: >> caller: i'm planning commissioner and i support you 100 percent affordablehousing development . we hear how the board of supervisors supports affordabl housing and this is a great chance to follow through . housing delayed is housing denied and there would need to be a corresponding spectacular reason to delay the financing . when african-americans have a one percentchance of being affordably housed there's a crisis . please vote yes and approve this loanand move 2550 irving street forward .
1:50 am
>> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: my family is a long-term neighbor owner in the neighborhood. he needs to support residents in theneighborhood and the well-being of their neighbors this project is to be . it's not, it's currently not in the favor of the neighbors to get affordable housing. there's lots of vacancy right now in san francisco. we report over 70 percent vacancy we want housing right now, you can give the money to the current people and they pay for the rent. that'sthe immediate housing that you look for. the project itself is unaffordable. it's a waste of taxpayers money
1:51 am
. it's just using the funding to scratch the backs of the crony organizations that have been speaking out though i strongly oppose the project the way it is area iq. >> clerk: currently there are 15callers in the q and 34 listening . if you wish to comment please press star 3 to beadded to the queue . next colorplease . >> caller: goodafternoon supervisors, my name is robert pressman and i live in district 5 . the reason why the west side is no longer a working-class neighborhood is because housing has become unaffordableand the reason it's become unaffordable is due to a lack of housing . in the last 50 years san francisco has had tons of jobs and not enough housing so we need affordable housing now to stabilize the west side and i support this project, thank yo . >> clerk: next speaker please.
1:52 am
>> caller: i grew up in the sunset and went to college here and continueto live in the sunset . i love this neighborhood but we need tofocus on what'simportant . the neighborhood is unaffordable even for people who grow up here . even i wouldn't be able to stay if it weren't for rent control so i support this project wholeheartedly being built at maximum capacity and on schedule the sunset could be a more welcoming neighborhood and people could benefit from living in a wonderful neighborhood clean air . there's ahere and people need affordable homes. thank you so much for listening . >> clerk: next speaker please.
1:53 am
hello, caller. perhaps we can take the next caller and circle back to this one. welcome, caller. hello, caller. >> caller: i live in district . i'm in full supportof this affordable housing project . my current work is in crime prevention policy and i just want to say that affordable housing and housing insecurity is a fantastic way to deter
1:54 am
crime and have a true long-term impact on keeping not just neighborhoods butthe entire city safe . i look forward to having more neighbors and a more diverse neighborhood. that will come with this project. and i appreciate the public comment and hope we can have this project at 2550 irving roll out quickly and effectively. >> clerk: next speaker please. welcome, caller area hello, caller. it's your turn toprovide your comment .
1:55 am
please proceed. >> caller: can you hear me? ... [inaudible] we are already responsible forknowing there are serious site problems . the dsc plan is inadequate as proposed and it will affect the surroundingneighborhoods . please table the loan, allow public comment and call for the remediation to befully known . >> clerk: thank you for your comment. next speaker please. >> caller: my name is ben, i'm a district 5 resident and a member of community action and
1:56 am
i'm calling instrong support of this project . [please stand by]
1:57 am
>> i urge you to grant the financing to bring the maximum amount of affordable new homes to realty at this site. to supervisor mar, i applaud your sprent to support this. i look forward to seeing this through today without any delays. thanks a lot. i am looking forward to more of these proposals to come to realty. >> clerk: next speaker, please.
1:58 am
[roll call] >> i am a member to call in support of 2550 irving. everyone all ways says i support housing until it is next to them. there is a housing shortage. district 4 has not built. in the last decade they built 126 homes. you will build that many homes in one year. approve this loan and say yes to badly needed housing in the west side of san francisco today. thank you very much. i hope you approve the item. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i am a member of the west side
1:59 am
tenants. i am calling to express support to housing in 2550 irving and moving forward. our city is in need of affordable housing. we hear about people who can no longer afford to live in the living. the homelessness is twice as high. anytime these projects come up people object to they don't want more people in the neighborhood. we need more developments like this throughout the city. don't force people to leave home for maid up reasons. i can't believe it is putting people in homes. we need more housing. please approve this project. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: i am calling in
2:00 am
strong support of the loan approval today for 2550 irving. as board member of uv action this is not just a san francisco problem. i live in richmond. this is the first affordable housing propose understand the west side in a long time. i can't wait until we talk about the project down the street. we cannot afford to go project by project. every caller highlighted the dire housing crisis we are in especially for affordable homes. people need these. our actions are not meeting the scale of our problem. that is what we need leaders to do. we need more affordable housing throughout the west side. approve there and move to bigger and better projects throughout the west side of san francisco. >> clerk: next speaker, please.
2:01 am
>> caller: hi, this is janine. i grew up sunset neighborhood. when i found about this project initially i support it. i live two blocks away. this is good. san francisco needs more affordable housing. as i find out about how much it costs, i am against it. i think there should be better options out there. there are different vacant lands in sunset as well. why do we need to invest so much money into this land that has toxin. why are we paying over market value? there are a lot of questions unanswered. i live two blocks away. no one reached out to me for the survey. i never received anything, my neighbors didn't receive anything. my neighbors who live near me are against this. this project is shady. a lot
2:02 am
of things not disclosed. other people in other districts can agree. they are not immediately impacted. i support affordable housing. i am against the project. we need more time to re-enter this to see why this costs so much money. also -- >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: good afternoon. i live in district 6. as someone born and raised in san francisco and working for nonprofit and lived in multiple story apartments i support 100% affordable housing 2550 irving street. it has fallen behind in every other district.
2:03 am
adding only 17. it addresses affordable practice. doing our part to make san francisco be affordable to working families. thank you, supervisor mar and everyone should have an opportunity to live in the sunset. this can knot be delayed. we cannot wait any longer in san francisco. the more we wait, the more we lose opportunities to help people. i urge you all to approve this loan and approve 2550 irving. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. there are nine callers in the queue and 61 listening. final reminder if you would like to comment please press star 3 now to be added to the queue. please continue to wait until you are unmuted.
2:04 am
next caller, please. >> caller: hello. i am julie phoning in district 4. calling to support 100% affordable housing. i am a san francisco native, third generation. i believe affordable housing is the solution to combat homelessness in the city. we have now a reputation of unhoused people that we have more than enough power to help. please do the right thing. this is why i am asking for
2:05 am
supervisors to vote yes and deliver the first ever affordable housing in the sunset. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: hi. i am chris harriet in district 8. i want to call in strong support of approving this loan as fast as possible. we are in a climate crisis. people here have half the carbon emissions from the east bay. traffic is there and parking on site. environmental justice parks and schools around the corner. more importantly we talk about affordable housing. 98 families need stable housing yesterday. we love to talk about progressive values. it is time to put up or shut up.
2:06 am
approve this quickly and unanimously. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: good afternoon. i am martin. bay area native living and working in district 7. i am calling in enthusiastic support for 100% affordable housing at 2550 serve irving without delay. no one can test the scale of the housing scale in the sunset. i am sympathetic to neighbors who are securely housed and do not want a tall building. think of the kindness to a modest number of families. this is a rare and wonderful opportunity to share access to the neighborhood.
2:07 am
please approve the project in maximum capacity as soon as possible. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: i am living in the sunset district area 4. i also oppose the project because we want a safe environment for everybody. i want all to be aware of the situation and also the parking is only 11 units for 300 people. now we already don't have enough parking space. we really oppose this project.
2:08 am
hopefully, supervisors are aware of safety for everybody and also i don't agree with this project. also, the per unit $1 million to build it. that is too much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: i am supporting affordable housing at 2550 irving without delay. it is so important. providing more affordable housing will insure our city. i am familiar with the housing
2:09 am
development and confident. [indiscernable] thank you. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: hi, i am jenny, district 4 resident. i support the 100% affordable housing development at 2550 at irving. i only afford my apartment because it is rent controlled and i live with three roommates. i love my neighborhood. i am so excited to welcome 100 new families to the sunset. i am chinese american. it is opportunities like affordable housing that allow low income folks to make a home. i have had multiple friends with homeless because of housing insecurity. 2550 is an opportunity to
2:10 am
address the crisis that has been going on for too long in our city. it is about safety, ability and help. our community cannot wait. every day is a possible for another person to become homeless. i ask the supervisors to vote yes and deliver the first ever affordable housing. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: i am a district 7 resident in favor of this project. it is an amazing developer. we need transit oriented development, especially 100% affordable. we checked did boxes. cannot wait to see this built in district 7. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker, please.
2:11 am
>> caller: i am district 5 resident. i am calling in strong support of the project. affordable housing near transit what we need in the city as we the west coast with extreme weather. the sunset is moderate in climate. it. [indiscernable] it is what we should be doing. transit without parking, affordable is the kind of development we should see in the city and i am proud to see this. i would be more proud if this were approved and built as soon as possible. >> clerk: next speaker, please. there are six callers in the queue. >> i am sure re. i live in district 4 sunsets down the street from 2550.
2:12 am
i am opposed to the loan approval. the massive size and density of the proposed building at 7 stories and 100 units will overwhelm the neighborhood. there are unresolved issues regarding toxic substances. the neighborhood public should be allowed to comment on the dtsc report before the loan is approved. serious financial red flags for the project acquisition costs and infrastructure costs which have not been resolved. the neighborhood residents in the sunset put forward an alternative to create more affordable housing in the sunset than proposed for less costs in shorter amount of time. i suggest aways compromise is possible to provide needed affordable housing in the sunset and also takes into account neighborhood concerns.
2:13 am
such a could pro myself will start a serious dialogue. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: hello. i just want to bring up the fact i am for affordable housing and i hope the project is built. i urge the board of supervisors and everybody involved in the project to not absolve your obligations to san francisco. your moral obligation to the residents of d4 to approve a loan with toxic contaminants. there are health issues with the neighbors that will continue if these are not remead yaleed. as much as i respect the wishes of ore residents of san
2:14 am
francisco. the fact the people in d4 are incurring health issues and terminal and fatal health issues possibly related to contamination is not investigated, it is a huge moral issue. i also urge that not only are the existing residents exposed, the future residents as well. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> caller: good afternoon, board of supervisors. i live in district 5. i am calling in support of this affordable housing development in the sunset. there are way too few affordable housing units in the city. you enter a lottery one in 100 or one in a thousand chances to get a problem. to fix the problem make more affordable housing units.
2:15 am
i say it is good the unit is big. we need them all over the city in the sunset which doesn't have any. we need as many as we can get this. is a great step if that direction. thank you. >> clerk: five callers in the queue currently. next speaker, please. >> hello, supervisors. this is naomi in full support of the project at 2550-inching. district 1 resident and work in a nonprofit organization. i can say that through the work over the last four and a half years i have seen the crisis and housing needs our community is facing. that includes youth, families, seniors and unhoused neighbors. i see this project as great solution to this growing crisis the west side is facing.
2:16 am
i think the city in general. i just urge you, supervisor mar and other supervisors to vote fully in support for this loan and this funding so that they will do what they are best at doing building affordable housing for the city. thank you so much. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: hi. i am christy. i am from the sunset community. i am calling on behalf of the families. they are saying we are strongly oppose the building. we support affordable housing. seven stories is too high.
2:17 am
the budget is way out of reach. it costs $1 million per unit. those are the prop a tax moneys. we need to use the money nor wisely to help as many families as possible instead of over pricing this project. according to the tndc proposal, appraisal confirmed the land is best used to build 75 units only, not 100. also, i want to correct that the tndc mentioned they have actively seeked community engagement. this is wrong. >> clerk: next speaker, please.
2:18 am
>> caller: hi. i was born in richmond district of san francisco. i work for the city now. i spend a lot of time there. i am a huge supporter of the coalition in support of the 100% affordable housing at 2550 irving street. it needs to happen as soon as possible. this crisis is dire. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker. hi. i am sophie hayward in support of funding this loan. i live in district 1. advocates like supervisor mar have been working long and hard to identify funds and policies to support building affordable
2:19 am
housing on the west side. supporting the acquisition of sites like this represents years long work come to fruition. please vote today to fund the loan that will secure this privately owned site to ensure it is developed as affortable housing. this is about securing the site. engage with the community on the project details. today vote to fund the loan to ensure it is developed as affordable housing. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: i am a neighbor close to the site. we support affordable housing. i have a question who is eligible to live here. i looked into the details from the income restrictions. a lot of our teachers and
2:20 am
firefighters and essential workers are not qualified for this project. while the promotional materials talk like senior faces on them. when you look at the details seniors are not allowed to live here based on my understanding. i want to make sure to confirm what is the case. i was told because of the large percentage of unhoused population that is the reason seniors are not allowed. i don't think we should be able to allow seniors to go to a housing project like this. we need to make sure a house like this will allow teachers and essential workers and seniors to be part of the community. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> caller: it is too easy for
2:21 am
people outside of the district to be in favor of the project. you have to talk to studied it who live near the project. if you look at the rendering i haven't heard a single architect say that looks good. it shows the mass. it ask three to four times bigger than any other building. you talk about the building across the street. that is about a third the size of this building. i know supervisor mar is concerned with afford annual housing and fairness. cancer is common. that doesn't mean you shouldn't take action to prevent it. the planning department has made aware that the general plan referral was im parly issued. for such referral requires public hearing. there are many instances where i told the mayor and supervisor mar and others this is not consistent with the general
2:22 am
plan. it is completely out of scale, jarring an appearance, the wrong location. you need to have a hearing. thank you. >> four callers in the queue. >> good afternoon, supervisors. matt haney. i wanted to thank mr. yee, supervisor mar, my apologies for resilience in this conversation with our city's conservative. i know that affordable housing is essential to our city's success and too long it is opposed. the state mandates dictate realization many more units need to be built. they meteorresidential housing needs we need most of the west side. this is the beginning of a long and involved and large scale
2:23 am
conversation. i appreciate the political will necessary to have these difficult conversations with neighbors and come to the realization the healthiest choice for all of us is build near where the jobs, transit, a suburban metropolitan which is the city of san francisco. i thank the supervisors for courage in standing up to these attacks and continue to support affordable housing for our city. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: i am talking about inadequacy of community outreach. >> if you have provided comment, we would not be able to take additional comments from you. we can only provide one minute per person. thank you for your time. next caller, please.
2:24 am
>> caller: hello. [speaking foreign language]
2:25 am
clerk. >> caller: i think this is lack of transparency. a lot of residents in our district didn't know this resolution at all. we know that almost 95% of the merchants living in this district oppose this resolution.
2:26 am
also, collecting 2600 signatures. they are all opposed to this resolution as well. also, 800 residents oppose this resolution. we really think our supervisors didn't represent our wards. i want to say that the tndc didn't do a very good communication and also didn't do a good community outreach. i really think they really -- i do not think we should approve this. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker, please.
2:27 am
>> caller: supervisors, thank you for listening for all of these hours. i own the building across the street. to have the building built the way it is proposed for seven stories across from me is going to be hugely offensive to the building. it will cut off the light and cause problems. the bottom line i would ask you to put your hearts in the place. we are not against affordable housing. it is needed. during the whole conversation i listened for three hours. nobody is saying they are against affordable housing. assuming it is your money on the table to buy a piece of land to build, are you going to approve this kind of loan, approve your budget to put out this money to buy this land now when there are
2:28 am
so much uncertainty. 100% certainty litigation to follow because lack of process, lack of transparency and problems. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> caller: i am a long time affordable housing advocate for seniors and people with disabilities. i want to thank supervisor mar for 100% affordable housing at 2550 irving. i stand with annie chung and self-help for elderly in urging no delay in progress of this development. all of the 100% affordable
2:29 am
housing we can build as fast as we can build it. many of the objections that we have heard today, they can be resolved as natural part of this development process and should not be allowed to delay it. keep in mind essential workers, low income family, seniors and people with disabilities are already in the sunset in the neighborhood. you may not see them, but they are here. please don't deprive them of this opportunity. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. currently there are three callers and 51 listening. to those that have commented press star 3 to lower your hands. each caller is allowed one minute to speak. if you have already provided your comment, you will not be
2:30 am
able to speak. next caller, please. >> i am resident of district two in support of the motion. a lot of people in the sunset at risk of being priced out. people making minimum wage can qualify for this and it helps people stay in the city and we can keep the existing resident in the sunset. this project will help the san francisco goals for fair housing. we know that nearly all affordable housing is built on the east side of san francisco. it is great to have more affordable housing and high opportunity neighborhoods. you know, if you are for affordable housing you need to be for the apartments. if you cannot find a place in the neighborhood where you want
2:31 am
affordable housing you are pushed to somebody else. it doesn't make sense. the high price tag is because of costs like lawsuits and things they are promising to do against this. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> caller: hi, i am a resident of district for a few blocks away from the site calling to express it looking like the lack of diligence going on with this proposal and lack of diligence. lack of community interaction for this as well which is odd considering they are here and willing to help with this
2:32 am
proposal. really i don't think we have seen design for this as yet. we are voting on the money, not design. we are going to be stuck with huge white elephant at the end. it needs to be thought about a bit more. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: i am a resident of 27th avenue between irving and lincoln. supervisor mar and his questions of the staff developers asked about the timing of this process and concerns. there is no reason to recommend approval of the loan agreement today and not until these questions are answered. the tndc purchase agreement which we found out about yesterday with appraisal enables them to apply with extension to
2:33 am
november 29th. no reason why the october 31st deadline has to be met. also, the sf planning deputy general plan referral which approved june 21st application is in violation of code section 101 of the plan which gives priority policies specifically. two, to existing housing in neighborhoods character beacon served and protected. the staff comment refers only to the site not to the immediately adjoining houses and neighborhood. four states not over burdening streets. >> clerk: thank you. there are five callers in the queue. >> i propose irving project be reduced to four stories and more
2:34 am
parking spots because it not only leads to conjest one annoys -- congestion but a problem. please consider our request and look forward to hearing more about the project. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: i am a member of the san francisco tenants union and race and equity in all planning coalition in support of this project. hopefully, the budget and finance committee will move this forward. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> caller: i am district 6 resident and organizer in the tenderloin calling in support of
2:35 am
approval of the loan because we all know we need housing all over the city. every politician in every election says we need affordable housing this. is an opportunity to have one. i feel like this neighborhood is selfish in this project thinking about the shadow over their home, parking space and other things versus housing at least 100 people that is the minimum number. 500 people. housing is a problem in the city. it needs to be solved. please vote for this loan because we need house anything the city. i want to call out the opposesers and their reasons. it is all from calling supervisor mar communissan poor
2:36 am
people. you are saying they are more important. >> clerk: thank you. >> caller: hello. [speaking foreign language]
2:37 am
members of committee i want to say a lot of callers not from our district. they called to support this proposal. actually, i want to say that i am on behalf of the residents who directly impact this proposal. they didn't consider a lot of factors like the parking factors and the people are very much in our area another factor. the public transit is another
2:38 am
factor. i really think that tndc and our supervisors didn't consider our residents living in this district. also that they identify us into four categories. we cannot be earned. i hope our supervisors tndc considered the actual wishes of our residents. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker, please.
2:39 am
>> caller: tndc wants to buy contaminated property and build without cleaning it out. to spend $1 million to protect resident of their knowledge. at the same time -- of their building and say there is nothing to worry about. pce respects no property lines. it has moved to the nearby housing. they don't know how far. if nothing is done to clean it up, it will continue to spread. u.c.s.f. researchers looked at the same pce data see enough evidence of cancer and parkinson in the neighborhood to open the long-term human study. they don't do that on a whim. you know there is a serious
2:40 am
health risk that they aren't telling you about. we need extent of the contamination and clean it up. we need political help. the only leverage we have is to pause this loan. >> clerk: thank you. next caller, please. >> caller: i just want to say that, well, past callers said this is what tndc will do best. they designed a brilliant project in palo alto by engaging with the neighbors that is not what tndc has done. they haven't listened to the neighbors. they refuse to compromise. they don't allow them to ask questions in the chat. that is not good process that is
2:41 am
not right. this should be done right with a buy in from the neighbors. >> clerk: thank you. are there any other caller in the queue? >> that appears to be the last caller. >> clerk: this concludes the public comment for item 17. >> chair mar: public comment is closed. thank you everyone who called in. colleagues, comments, additional questions before i may being mine, supervisor mar. >> thanks, chair haney. i just want to thank every one who spoke during public comment. all of your -- so many of you
2:42 am
and your diverse perspectives on this project. i think it reflects the really important, huge importance of the project for sunset district and the city and important that it is successful and we get it right. i am clear about my support of the project as much needed and groundbreaking step in addressing the urgent housing affordable crisis in the city to preserve the historic character of sunset as a beacon for working class families. i campaigned on bringing affordable housing to the sunset. as district 4 supervisor this is one of my top priorities. 2550 irving housing for low and moderate workers is what we need to create in our neighborhood. getting the details right is also extremely important not only for the success of this
2:43 am
project in the neighborhood but the additional affordable housing projects to build in the sunset and on the west side. i want to clarify the action that the committee is considering today is only to approve loin agreement forsyth -- loan acquisition for the general parameters and goals in the funding allocation from the mayor such as prioritizing housing for low income families. most details are to be finalized with public input and based on the financing plan. thank you for bringing this forward. i have a set of proposed amendments to the draft resolution to present. they were e-mailed out by my staff this afternoon.
2:44 am
i just want to make a few points. regarding the environmental issues and over site. like all projects especially one with transparency and process matter. as leader on environmental oversight i have reservations to approve the loan ahead of the oversight process. i am convinced waiting for the environmental response will compromise. it is clear to have a public outcome when it comes to environmental oversight. frankly, it is frustrating that tndc didn't complete the oversight process before bringing this loan approval for the board to consider. i believe it would be prudent to postpone approval of the loan
2:45 am
agreement until the oversight process and approval of environmental response time is complete. finally, it is clear from public comment we heard today and a lot of e-mails and messages we received that 2550 irving has been controversial as new precedents are. how this is designed, height, scale, who it will serve and impact neighbors, congestion, fear for public safety have deeply divided the neighborhood. i believe there is room to address the issues and find solutions to build consensus. steps need to be taken to bring the neighborhood together as a committed long-term partner, tndc needs to work more closely with neighborhood stakeholders to build broad support for expanding in the sunset and west side.
2:46 am
tndc must improve community engagement and incorporate community input into project design and detail. while it has eliminated much of the formal public process once it goes to entitlement process we must go above and beyond formal requirements and elect for more neighborhood engagement as matter of being good neighbor and investment in successful project. we know from the city experience building affordable housing residents become leaders in the community. they fight for more neighborhood resources, public safety, advocate for better transit. with approval of the loan they have the opportunity to build bridges now and the relationship during predevelopment to create best foundations for both current and future residents to thrive.
2:47 am
colleagues i have a set of amendmentses to present then i want to make a motion that we continue this item to take action after the oversight process is complete. >> do you want to do the amendments now and we can make comments and turn it back to you for the motion? >> sure. i would be happy to do that. i worked on some amendments to ask an important details to the resolution that i felt should be included and work with the mayor's office on the language so they are good with amendments. they were e-mailed to you this afternoon. i could summarize them. there are seven new whereas clauses and two new resolve
2:48 am
clauses. in summary, three of the whereas clauses just are key points about the need for the project and urgent need to expand affordable housing in sunset district. one of the new whereas clauses is from bla report. it is adding a clause noting the city's intention to take ownership of the project and enter the ground lease for the properties. there is a whereas clause urging ocd to consider families living in hotel in the project. that is something the community has been advocating for. this is housing for low income
2:49 am
families, families living in the hotels are considered homeless in the city. finally, there is a whereas and resolve clause acknowledging the diverse perspectives expressed about this project through comments city officials received and urging the city to have a transparent community process to find equitable balance between maximizing housing units and addressing concerns of nearby residents about height and scale within the feasibility. that is a summary. >> you want to make a motion on those amendments? or do you have comments on the
2:50 am
amendments. why don't we take a motion. vote on the motion to accept those amendments. >> clerk: on the motion to accept the amendments articulated by supervisor mar. supervisor safai. >> aye. >> member mar. >> aye. >> chair haney. >> aye. >> three ayes. >> okay. amendments accepted. anything more before we make our comments. then back to you for the motion. >> there was one additional whereas clause in the set of amendments that i shared with you. i didn't mention verbally. that is a whereas clause describing the department of toxic substance control oversight over the environmental
2:51 am
assessment and response time. >> great. thank you. >> mr. chair, on that additional amendment. >> on the additional amendment supervisor mar. >> safai. >> aye. >> mar. >> aye. >> chair haney. >> aye. >> three ayes. >> it is accepted. >> supervisor safai. >> mr. chair. thank you, supervisor mar, for all your hard work on this. mayor's office of housing staff pndc and engagement. i know this has been baptism by fire for you to go through this process. it hasn't been the most enjoyable thing to be accused of
2:52 am
criticisms and all you are trying to do is bring an honest conversation for building affordable housing in the part of town as many have said that has produced 17 units over the course of its time. i say that from a place of experience. i represent part of san francisco excelsior, lake view that has the highest concentration of owner occupied single family homes. some of the longest standing generational families working families that are going through a very similar experience that the sunset district 4 have gone through where not that long ago
2:53 am
you could find a home on a salary of a working family, middle class family. you could afford to live in that neighborhood. for the families that have been there 30, 40, 50 years, let's rewind. think about what it costs for you to move into the sunset at that time. think what it costs to move to excelsior at that time. on a janitor's salary you could buy a home in district 11. in fact, we had the highest concentration of j anitors. many of the families are the same. today like my district the homes go for north of $1.5 million, $2 million in the sunset. the cost of housing is extremely
2:54 am
out of reach. i think supervisor mar reflects that about the changing nature and the survey done and response from that survey. almost 4400 people applied for affordable housing. only 35 were accepted in other parts of san francisco. we need to have balance where we provide affordable housing everywhere in the city so the time where neighborhoods would say they don't want affordable housing. that time has come and gone. the idea you might want 3, 4, 5 story building. that does not pencil out. i leave the final parameters and shape to the district supervisor respectfully. supervisor mar will continue that conversation. for those listening at home to
2:55 am
be competitive to get the funding you need to build affordable housing. the project has to be competitive with projects around the state. that is how they get the tax credit moneys for the local level. if this project is too small or not providing enough, it will not be chosen. we at the local level don't have that level of financing to fund $100 million development in one shot. we use local money and match with state and federal money. for me now thansitioning to pc -- transitioning to the dccs report. only one out of 66 samples were found to have pce. the recommendation every response to tndc was that a
2:56 am
vapor intrusion mitigation would be done. this is not unusual in development. [please stand by]
2:57 am
>> supervisor safai: conversation and negotiation, but we have to do more in terms of building affordable housing. so i'm speaking from experience of going through what district 4 is now in a conversation for.
2:58 am
i also think that i encourage you to do more aggressive community engagement. i think in the beginning there was not a lot of awareness. i believe this is a good opportunity to purchase land. had been in conversations with the police officers, credit union for over two years. they're coming to an end of that period and the fact that it would be conditions that said in terms of finalizing the loan there would have to be a certified action plan with regard to mitigating the environmental concerns it gives me the confidence this is the right thing to do and to move
2:59 am
forward with this purchase and respectfully, supervisor mar, i think we can continue to have the conversations around what i heard the most today. so thank you mr. chair. thank you supervisor mar for the amendments that you made today. they were very helpful to clarify and put in important point that is talk about process and involvement dtsc. it gives us clarity. we feel confident this is the right time to move forward. thank you, mr. chair. >> chairman: thank you, supervisor safai. before i make my comments, i did have a question for the folks from o.c.d. and that's about your rental housing
3:00 am
portfolio and district four in particular. i know there were many comments. how much of mocd's portfolio is in district four? >> we currently have another project in the pipeline which is a housing project about 130 units. that is mocd sponsored affordable housing. i don't believe we have any other city sponsored new construction, affordable housing other than that project. we have had a number of small site preservation projects that we have worked on with the supervisor, but i can double check with our team. i don't believe we have any other new construction, city sponsored new construction project with the exception of shirley village. >> so just to be clear, so in
3:01 am
the entirety of district four currently, there's not any existing city sponsored affordable housing that exists. there exists currently zero? >> yes, and it looks like from our team, that's correct. >> chairman: and how many vn built in district four. i assume in acquisitions?
3:02 am
>> it would be through the inclusion fair process and i can see if we've tracked that for district four. >> chairman: got it. i had listed somewhere where it was 18. >> i believe that's right from the housing that's what they would be tracking. >> chairman: got it. a couple things about that. the first thing i would say is, you know, how ground breaking and overdue this project is. i think we would all agree even some of the folks who had concerns about this project that there's a tremendous need for affordable housing in our city including in the sunset. home prices in the sunset in
3:03 am
district four have gone up exponentially. we know that subsidized affordable housing and i think that in and of itself is a very powerful overdue opportunity that we should be celebrating and that is a really incredible thing that this has never
3:04 am
happened. one of the things i hope that will come out of this project is that this should happen so much more is that we don't need more buildings like this, we need so many more across our city and it needs to happen much quicker and much more often. i think a situation where we have not had a single new construction affordable housing building ever built in district 4 in san francisco is absolutely shameful considering the need there. i represent district six. and i pulled up the numbers, we have over 14,000 affordable rental housing units in district six. we have over 3,000 multi-family union construction in 28 buildings. we have over the last ten years at over 4,000 affordable housing units in district six.
3:05 am
i think what this has demonstrated to me and i hope with a we can also understand is that it's completely unsustainable for us to continue to only build affordable housing in one corner of our city whether that's district six or parts of 10 and 9. that is unacceptable. it hasn't met the needs of our city and neighborhoods like the sunset can benefit tremendously from affordable housing and just like neighborhoods in mission bay. so i'm not only supportive of this project, i am overjoyed that it is and i feel overdue.
3:06 am
i think wherever you stand on this project you can be proud of the way your supervisor has gone and take everything he can to hear input, to hear peoples' voices, but also to stay focused on the needs of the residents that he represents who are strugling with the cost of housing. having heard the fact that this loan is conditioned on the project approval from d.t.s.c. already that there are a number of reasons why the loan should move forward today. there's also a number of parts of this project that still will needtor worked out and this is just one of the many steps that still need to be taken and i'm
3:07 am
also going to support our position moving forward today to get it done and many of the further details and community engagement will continue after today and i want to appreciate everyone from mocd, the mayor's office, mayor breed, tmbc. it has the name "tenderloin" in it and developed a lot in district six. this is a citywide affordable housing developer with an incredible reputation in our city and the people who will live in this building will add to the neighborhood, will help to improve the community, will only be a benefit to the neighbors and ultimately, 98
3:08 am
units is a step forward, but it's a small step forward. many larger steps forward and i think we as a city have to demonstrate we can move forward with this efficiently and quickly and effectively. with that, i'll turn it back over to you supervisor mar, and i enjoy the leadership of your team and i'll allow you to make the motion. >> supervisor mar: thank you, chair haney. and, actually, so i do want to say that, you know, i'm disappointed, you know, on my request to delay the vote on the resolution on the agreement until after the dtsc oversight process is complete and they sign off on the response plan, but i do appreciate both of you, your strong support of this project and all of your
3:09 am
words on encouragement to me and my constituents and, supervisor haney, your sort of contrast between district 6 and district 4, i think that's a pretty stark contrast and i don't know that district 4's ever going to get to the level of affordable housing development that you have in district six, but i think your point is well taken. i think affordable housing in the sunset is going to look different than it does in district six and it will look like it in district 11 and just given the physical make-up of our neighborhoods and honestly, that's been one of the forces of tension around this project because the size of the site and where it's located you know right next to single family homes is not an ideal site.
3:10 am
i think today, we're just considering action on the loan agreement. that will just allow the site acquisition or predevelopment work in the details of this project are still to be worked out by tndc and the mayor's office with community engagement and i'm fully committed to helping push for that. and i guess -- so i would like to move that we send this item over to the full board with positive recommendation and with my amendments, i would also like to be added as a cosponsor. >> chairman: great. i -- do we want to take a vote on this item as amended to the motion is moved to the full
3:11 am
board as amended. can we take a role call vote. >> clerk: mr. chair, prior to that consider their recommendations. >> chairman: yes. >> clerk: okay the bla added the proposed resolution to a purchase and sales agreement in which the city will take ownership of the land at 2550 irvine street and street the ground with a nonprofit affordable housing operator. >> supervisor mar: chair haney and madam clerk, that was included in my amendments. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor mar, for the
3:12 am
clarification. so i will now proceed into taking the vote on supervisor mar's motion to recommend the item to the full board as amended. on the motion, vice chair, safai, [roll call] there are three ayes. >> chairman: great. this will go to the full board with a above recommendation as amended and thank you supervisor mar and mocd and tndc, and everyone who called in today to supervisor safai for the conversation and this will move further. madam clerk, are there any other items in front of us today? >> clerk: no, mr. chair. clrm all right. meeting adjourned. thank you.
3:13 am
san francisco is surrounded on three sides by water, the fire boat station is intergal to maritime rescue and preparedness, not only for san francisco, but for all of the bay area. [sirens] >> fire station 35 was
3:14 am
built in 1915. so it is over 100 years old. and helped it, we're going to build fire boat station 35. >> so the finished capital planning committee, i think about three years ago, issued a guidance that all city facilities must exist on sea level rise. >> the station 35, construction cost is approximately $30 million. and the schedule was complicated because of what you call a float. it is being fabricated in china, and will be brought to treasure island, where the building site efficient will be constructed on top of it, and then brought to pier 22 and a half for installation. >> we're looking at late 2020 for final completion of the fire boat float. the historic firehouse
3:15 am
will remain on the embarcadero, and we will still respond out of the historic firehouse with our fire engine, and respond to medical calls and other incidences in the district. >> this totally has to incorporate between three to six feet of sea level rise over the next 100 years. that's what the city's guidance is requiring. it is built on the float, that can move up and down as the water level rises, and sits on four fixed guide piles. so if the seas go up, it can move up and down with that. >> it does have a full range of travel, from low tide to high tide of about 16 feet. so that allows for current tidal movements and sea lisle rises in the coming decades. >> the fire boat station float will also
3:16 am
incorporate a ramp for ambulance deployment and access. >> the access ramp is rigidly connected to the land side, with more of a pivot or hinge connection, and then it is sliding over the top of the float. in that way the ramp can flex up and down like a hinge, and also allow for a slight few inches of lateral motion of the float. both the access ramps, which there is two, and the utility's only flexible connection connecting from the float to the back of the building. so electrical power, water, sewage, it all has flexible connection to the boat. >> high boat station number 35 will provide mooring for three fire boats and one rescue boat. >> currently we're staffed with seven members per day, but the fire department would like to establish a new dedicated marine unit that would be
3:17 am
able to respond to multiple incidences. looking into the future, we have not only at&t park, where we have a lot of kayakers, but we have a lot of developments in the southeast side, including the stadium, and we want to have the ability to respond to any marine or maritime incident along these new developments. >> there are very few designs for people sleeping on the water. we're looking at cruiseships, which are larger structures, several times the size of harbor station 35, but they're the only good reference point. we look to the cruiseship industry who has kind of an index for how much acceleration they were accommodate. >> it is very unique. i don't know that any other fire station built on the water is in the united states. >> the fire boat is a
3:18 am
regional asset that can be used for water rescue, but we also do environmental cleanup. we have special rigging that we carry that will contain oil spills until an environmental unit can come out. this is a job for us, but it is also a way of life and a lifestyle. we're proud to serve our community. and we're willing to help people in any way we can. >> shop and dine in the 49 promotes local businesses, and challenges residents to do their shopping within the 49 square
3:19 am
miles of san francisco. by supporting local services in our neighborhood, we help san francisco remain unique, successful, and vibrant. so where will you shop and dine in the 49? >> i am the owner of this restaurant. we have been here in north beach over 100 years. [speaking foreign language] [♪♪♪] [speaking foreign language] [♪♪♪]
3:20 am
[speaking foreign language] [speaking foreign language] [♪♪♪]
3:21 am
[♪♪♪]streets.
3:22 am
>> (speaking foreign language.)
3:23 am
>> i wanted to wish you a best wishes and congratulations the community has shifted a lot of when i was growing up in the 60s and 50's a good portion of chicano-american chinese-american lived in north beach a nob hill community. >> as part the immigrant family is some of the recreation centers are making people have the ability to get together and meet 0 other people if communities in the 60s a 70s and 80s and 90s saw a move to the richmond the sunset district and more recently out to the excelsior the avenue community as well as the ensuring u bayview so
3:24 am
chinese family living all over the city and when he grape it was in this area. >> we're united. >> and growing up in the area that was a big part of the my leave you know playing basketball and mycy took band lessons and grew up. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> allergies welcome to the community fair it kicks off
3:25 am
three weeks of celebrations for the year and let's keep everybody safe and celebrate the biggest parade outside of china on february 11th go best wishes and congratulations and 3, 2, 1 happy enough is enough. >> i grew up volley ball education and in media professional contrary as an educator he work with all skids whether or not caucasian hispanic and i african-american cumber a lot of arrest binge kids my philosophy to work with all kids but being here and griping in the chinese community being a chinese-american is important going to american school during the day but went to chinese
3:26 am
school that is community is important working with all the kids and having them exposed to all culture it is important to me. >> it is a mask evening. >> i'd like to thank you a you all to celebrate an installation of the days here in the asian art museum. >> one time has become so many things in the past two centuries because of the different did i licks the immigration officer didn't understand it became no standard chinese marine or cantonese sproupgs it became so many different sounds this is convenient for the immigration officer this okay your family name so
3:27 am
this tells the generations of immigrants where they come from and also many stories behind it too. >> and what a better way to celebrate the enough is enough nuru with the light nothing is more important at an the hope the energy we. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> relative to the current administration it is, it is touching very worrisome for our immigrant frames you know and some of the stability in the country and i know how this new president is doing you know immigration as well as immigrants
3:28 am
(fireworks) later than you think new year the largest holiday no asia and china those of us when my grandparents came over in the 19 hundreds and celebrated in the united states chinese nuru is traditional with a lot of meaning. >> good afternoon my name is carmen chu assessor-recorder i want to wish everything a happy new year thank you for joining us i want to say. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> (speaking foreign language.)
3:29 am
>> i'm proud to be a native san franciscan i grew up in the chinatown, north beach community port commission important to come back and work with those that live in the community that i grew up in and that that very, very important to give back to continue to work with the community and hope e help those who may not be as capable in under serving come back and give
3:30 am
good morning and welcome to the rules committee of the san francisco board of supervisors for today, monday, july 12th, 2021. i am the chair of the committee aaron peskin joining by supervisor mandelman and committee member supervisor chan. our clerk is mr. victor young. mr. young, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes. due to the covid-19 health emergency and to protect board members, city employees, and the public, the committee rooms are closed. however, members will be participating in the meetings remotely. committee members will attend the meetings through video conference and participate in the meeting to the same extent as if they were physically present. public comment will be available on each item of the
3:31 am
agenda. both channel 26 and sfgovtv.org are scrolling the public comment number across the screen. the meeting i.d. is 146 014 4426 then press pound and pound again. you will hear the meeting discussion but you will be muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up, please dial star three to be added to the speaker line. best practices are to call from a quiet location and speak clearly and slowly and turn down your tv or radio. you can submit public comment to myself at victoryoung@sfgov.org. that concludes my initial comments. >> chairman: thank you, mr. young, could you please
3:32 am
read the first item. >> clerk: yes. item number one is an ordinance amending the administrative code by codifying a grant award. two, require an advertisement of solicitation. three, reserve the city's right to cancel or reject to readvertise. four list required grant terms. six authorizing the purchaser to promulgate rules and regulations for effectively carrying out and requiring, carrying out the requirements of the ordinance. seven, set forth grant requirements based on grant's funding source. eight set forth administrative debarment procedures. and nine advertisement and rebate incentive programs. >> chairman: thank you, mr. young.
3:33 am
colleagues, we heard this five weeks ago as you'll rule. it was brought by supervisor stefani and has since been sponsored by supervisor chan and then the rules committee had to go dark during the budget process. so it is back before us today. i want to thank supervisor stefani and her staff for their work on this matter in large part after the unfortunate if not tragic revelations after the muhammad nuru dpw scandal amongst others and i have reviewed the amendments that supervisor stefani will make. some of which we suggested in committee and would like to fix my name, mr. clerk and supervisor stefani as a proud cosponsor of this legislation which had people not abuse the
3:34 am
process, would not be necessary but is now clearly long overdue and with that, supervisor stefani, good morning and welcome. >> supervisor stefani: good morning, chair peskin and thank you for those remarks and thank you for your cosponsorship. i truly appreciate it. i will be exceptionally brief because we did hear this in june. i am happy to read those into the record. but the most significant change is to make the operative data january 21st, 2022, and the purpose of that is to give the city purchaser enough time to draft the rules and regulations that this ordinance requires her to complete and as a result, most of the reporting dates have been pushed back to reflect the new operative dates. i won't repeat my remarks from from the last hearing and, chair peskin, you just stated the reasons why this is so necessary. i do believe this legislation
3:35 am
is important in preventing the kind of corruption we've seen. we know nearly $2 billion is awarded in grants by city departments without any required competitions. open solicitation transparency, fairness or even documentation. so i really do believe with this legislation, that will end. so, chair peskin, i don't know if you'd like me to read the amendments into the record? >> chairman: why don't you actually you or your staff actually sent a summary of those. i have read them yesterday and again this morning. but if you want to do a high level summary of them, that would be great for the public to be able to hear them. >> supervisor stefani: great. okay. so starting on page line 11, we're adding the phrase "set forth the requirements" to the long title. also "notice of availability" on title. line 6, changing the word
3:36 am
effective date to "operative date." and changing the annual due date report to june 21st, 2023. page 6, line 22 through 23, we're then changing the date accordingly reportedly so that it begins from 2021 to 2022 because we're already more than halfway through 2021. page 8, line 21, we're adding the phrase "rules and" to the sentence reading in accordance rules and regulations to be consistent with the other parts of the admin code.' this is your recommendation from if last hearing, chair peskin, on page 9 line 5 through 6. we're adding the phrase "grant recommendation be awarded as a sole source." page 9, line 12, changing requirements for grants to rules and regulations to make the phrase consistent with other sections of
3:37 am
ordinance. page 9, lines 14 through 18, adding these rules and regulations shall among other things permit sole source grants when competitive process is impracticable. or when may be accomplished by one particular grantee. they may update these rules from time to time as needed. this language makes the ordinance more consistent with other parts of the admin code and, again, thank you, supervisor peskin for those recommendations. and then, page 10, line 23, and page 11, lines 3 and 4, make the operative date january 21st, 2022, instead of 30 days from enactment which would allow the city purchaser to draft the rules and regulations to implement the
3:38 am
ordinance or subscribe by the ordinance. those are all of the amendments today and they are non substantive. i want to thank supervisor peskin and supervisor chan for your cosponsorship and andy mullen for all of his help on this. >> chairman: thank you, supervisor stefani. are there any questions or comments from committee members? if not -- supervisor mandelman. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you, chair peskin. i want to thank you and would like to be added as a cosponsor. >> chairman: it's unanimous. before we move those, why don't we open this up to public comment. are there any members of the public who would like to comment on item number one. >> clerk: yes. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call (415) 655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 146 014
3:39 am
4426 and press pound and pound again. if you haven't already done so, please press star three to line up to speak. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. at this time, it appears we do not have any members of the public in line to speak. >> chairman: okay. public comment is closed and i will make a motion to move the aamendments. on that motion, mr. clerk, a roll call please. >> clerk: on the motion to approve the amendments, [roll call] the motion passes without objection. >> chairman: and i will make a motion to send it with recommendation to the full
3:40 am
board of supervisors. >> clerk: yes, on that motion, [roll call] the motion passes without objection. >> chairman: thank you, mr. clerk. can you read items two through four together. >> clerk: to establish and operate food empowerment markets and designate the human services agency to administer and establish rules for the program. item number three is a ordinance amending the administrative code to direct the department of public health to report by annually on food security and equity with input from other departments. and item number four is an
3:41 am
ordinance amending the code the sunset date of the food security task force assisting with the department of public health, food security and equity report. i believe there's a request for a committee report on all three of these items. >> chairman: that is correct. these three items have been brought to us by supervisor safai. supervisor safai, welcome, and good morning. >> supervisor safai: hi everyone. good morning. so, colleagues, as the supervisor said and chair peskin said. i'm bringing three ordinances
3:42 am
all in one. in our efforts to reimagine how we distribute food and food related services to our most vulnerable residents here in san francisco. these three ordinances build off one another. the food security task force was first created by former supervisor sophie maxwell in 2005. for 16 years, the department of health under the fundamental leadership of ms. paula jones and susie smith community based organization silos. as our city begins to recover from the covid-19 pandemic, the role of security passport has become even more important. and more certain in covid in
3:43 am
what we're all experiencing. agenda item number four seeks to reauthorize the food security task force for another three years. while tasking the body to provide a more expensive report. the new report and data that we seek for nearly the last 18 months of the covid pandemic, our city has seen first-hand of bankrupt undocumented community members and long time residents and seniors. many residents in my district did not have the option to work from home.
3:44 am
they were in the and many of them were in the food restaurant and retail industry and lower level government jobs and had this and were not able to stay home during the pandemic. as a result, my district was hit harder by covid-19 and food insecurity than many parts of san francisco. at the beginning of the pandemic, there were over 1,000 people seeking food at balboa high school in many locations. my district had well over ten differential food pantries. just believing we as a city could do better to meet the needs of our most vulnerable residents, my office started attending the food security task force and talking to community stakeholders. after witnesses some of the incredible work the mission hub was doing with their food pantry and seeing them employ community members in the commercial kitchen and some of
3:45 am
the work that was also happening by the excelsior strong, we began to reimagine food security within food sovereignty lands. agenda item number two, the food empowerment market in my mind is the city's first step toward assist engine the most vulnerable communities in the information of food sovereignty and food justice. to cook should be a basic right to all of us. having culturally specific food that's readily available to our most vulnerable residents for eight to ten hours in the market located in the commercial corridor is the goal and should be the city's plan long-term. i have met with the san francisco marin food bank new leadership dennis crosby and they are on board with a larger distribution of food in san
3:46 am
francisco. we have also gotten the support and principle from the mayor and as you heard during question time about a month and a half ago, the mayor spoke of her own experience of having to wait in line and how these three ordinances codify our commitment to end food insecurity in our city and county of san francisco. today, i have several speakers from the department of human agency and the department of public health. first, we'll be calling on the department of public health and the director of food insecurity in the population health division. ms. jones, can you talk about the food security task force and by annual security and equity report that would replace the former report and lastly, can you speak about other departments having more active role in this new report
3:47 am
defining data in the new report. unless colleagues want to jump in, i'd like to go to ms. jones, mr. chair. >> chairman: absolutely. i don't see any hands raised by committee members. i do have some questions, but it can certainly wait until after the presentations. ms. jones, good morning. >> supervisor safai: thank you. >> good morning. good morning chair peskin, supervisor safai, supervisor chan, supervisor mandelman. my name, again, is paula jones. i'm the director of security for population health. i'm also vice chair to the food security task force and i also provide staffing to the task force as well. and as supervisor safai has talked about and you all know food is integral to health, equity and justice, and assets to adequate food is both an individual right and collective responsibility. we as a city can solve this
3:48 am
complex and persistent problem and we have the ability and we have the resources to make sure all san franciscans have the food that they need. as you all know, prior to covid-nineteen, food insecurity was a crisis with one in four residents at risk as not always having enough food because they lack income with the pandemic and food closure programs, it became reliable to everyone. and i want to thank again supervisor safai for introducing these three pieces of food security legislation that all work together to reimagine food security in san francisco and to jafria morrow and to work to advance this legislation which really provides this incredible scaffolding for san francisco to collectively work to make sure all san franciscans have
3:49 am
this basic need. so for the talking about the by annual food security and equity report, this really builds and advances our food security work through building on our past food security assessments conducted by the food security task force. adding more departments that will be apart of this report that will provide data and that will work with us to make sure that we're all doing everything that we can to make sure that everyone has the food that they need. it will build on the lessons and opportunities from covid-19 and also, by adding the section on economic development, it really looks at this economic development potential of community food systems and food initiatives and that part to be led by the office of economic and work force development and it leverages the food security task force in reviewing the data sets and reaching out to
3:50 am
the community for additional data and the development of recommendations for policy programs and funding and also presenting this information back to you all at the board of. >> supervisor: s and one of the things i think that is key is that this will allow a more in-depth analysis and presensitive analysis as it applies to food security programs. we're really going to be looking closely at our city investments and what we and all do collectively to make sure that everyone has food and i also want to say supervisor safai, we're very appreciative of your support to reauthorize the food security task force and for the partnership and leadership of your office and especially jafria morris to just really work with us to advance this issue and to make sure we as a city are doing everything we can to support
3:51 am
the community. so we're very supportive. thank you. >> chairman: thank you. >> supervisor safai: chair, i do have some amendments i'm happy to do them whenever you want. i don't know susie, ms. smith, if you had anything you wanted to add, but absolutely, i'd just say really quickly, ms. jones and her team and, susie, ms. smith and her team have worked really well with our office. i really appreciate all the partnership. we've spent a lot of time to implement a vision that the community will support. it's come from the community and as you said, ms. jones appreciate the hard work from my team and the city attorney for the great work they did to put this together. ms. smith, did you have something you wangted to add? >> yeah, supervisor, i would love to take this moment to introduce cindy lynn from our
3:52 am
food coordination here. and a few words about the legislation. >> hi, good morning. can everyone hear me okay? >> yes. >> great. good morning supervisors. thank you to supervisor safai for inviting us today. my name is cindy lynn. i'm the manager for the covid, well, for the food coordination team at h.s.a. within d.a.s.. we are excited to see the model of student empowerment imposed and we're looking forward to seeing it once passed. we are a newly formed team first from the covid command center. we're currently a team of four and we have all had experience working in the food security space. i myself grew up in chinatown and was raised on food stamps, so this work is incredibly meaningful to me. in the last 16 months, we have worked to administer over $80 million. we look fat to continuing the support of some of the
3:53 am
innovative programs which addressed the heightened needs of the community and to contribute towards ending food insecurity in san francisco. in order to learn and draw from the expertise of the d.a.s. team which has long supported a network of meal services for seniors and adults support thousands of seniors many low income throughout san francisco. d.a.s. supports congregate meals and groceries. we know that two of these models are apart of the foundation of food support for many low income san franciscans facing hunger. by allowing them to shelter in place. we will continue to learn from this success of the d.a. and programming in order to offer impactful programming that worked towards ending food
3:54 am
insecurity. as we continue to support the community with their needs, we have held listening sessions with over 40 organizations that work in the food insecurity space and have committed to holding the following as ouring principle for our work moving forward. number one, we seek to provide dignity for our community members include choice, quality, and culturally appropriate food options. second, we commit to an equity lens to offer the appropriate resources. these two principles are aligned with the food empowerment market that is proposed and we look forward to implementing the markets with these principles as our foundation. i'd like to turn it back over to susie to discuss a little more about the markets. >> thanks so much, cindy, and thanks, supervisor safai for your steadfast leadership on food security, empowerment and
3:55 am
sovereignty. we've seen the unbelievable numbers as a result of covid don't seem to be. we are really excited by this concept. it aligns with our principles of choice, dignity, and equity and really importantly, the importance of destigmatizing access. currently, there's no organization operating models like this in san francisco creating a market where you can not only choose culturally appropriate food but adding linkages and job component in the culinary sector. in the coming months, we need to do the hard work in taking this concept and building frame work and undering what the costs are and food sources. the staffing, eligibility, availability of space in all of that. so we're really excited to do that. our hope is that. our goal is to issue an rfp by the end of the fiscal year to
3:56 am
be able to launch this model as a pilot and learn from it and hopefully be able to scale it in a more spread way next fiscal year and, of course, we're going to be mindful of how this fits into the existing network. so, again, just wanted to thank supervisor for bringing this issue and vision for sympathying about another way we can distribute food in a way that respects peoples' dignity in san francisco. >> supervisor safai: thank you. it's great to see all this work coming together. yes, we're excited to have a pilot. we believe that pilot will naturally grow out of district 11 and hopefully will spread to other parts of the city. we look forward to working in partnership with you. and, i'll just say i think for the longest time, we've done a tremendous job of getting food
3:57 am
into peoples' homes that really need it in the city. i think just like our conversation around shared spaces or slow streets or so many of the different things that we're doing differently after covid, i think just giving us the opportunity to really think about how we get food to people and i know each and every one of us on this board was involved in delivering food to peoples homes and seeing people that we had never seen before need food and have food insecurity and i think our city, this is another example of the way our city really stepped up in a tremendous way incorporating in restaurants, getting food to seniors and families that english is not their first language. just doing so many different things to ensure that no one went hungry. but now we have the opportunity
3:58 am
to truly reimagine this and we appreciate your partnership and willingness to work with us as well as the marin food bank and other entities that have been doing this for years. the idea of having to stand in line outside often times in front of residential homes or in whatever the weather or whatever the elements are to stand there and get a prepackaged box, i is an older model that now this allows us the opportunity to reimagine. so, thank you very much. chair, i have a number of amendments some of it is readjusting. some of it is inserting new language. >> chairman: and this is item number two file number 21067 right? >> supervisor safai: yes.
3:59 am
>> chairman: i have read those amendments but please feel free to describe them. i do have some little questions and a couple of larger questions. the floor is yours. >> supervisor safai: okay. i'll just go through them for the members of the committee if they have any questions. the first one, as you said for file number two hundred ten thousand five hundred sixty-seven excuse me. item number two. and then i do have a little one in the constitutal for agenda item number four. on page two, we're adding a section c. so it would. >> chairman: you mean you're adding a section c2. >> supervisor safai: we're adding a section c2 and that would be adding has free
4:00 am
delivery for reasons of their age or other underlying health problems and then the remaining numbers change to three, four, five, and six. >> chairman: so on that one, and i might have a small clarification. i assumed that the definition of food empowerment market is meant to include all six of these criteria and it might because there's no word after each one of those items. so would it make sense to in the original two lines of section c say for purposes of this section, having insert all of the following
4:01 am
characteristics? >> supervisor safai: yes. >> chairman: unless. i don't want to impose anything on the h.s.a.. i think it's either all of or we start putting oregon one or all of these characteristics. >> i don't know. let's ask h.s.a. >> yeah. i think that would be helpful to have one or more. we have the space to has the ability as well as an organization that can do the training. so i think to have a little bit of flexibility would be helpful for us at least. >> then i would. >> supervisor safai: well just to make it clear. >> supervisor safai: yes.
4:02 am
i think if you want to make it even more clear. i would add the word all and we'd give a time frame on when some of these that might be harder to achieve are achievable i think we can work without it at that point. >> supervisor safai: we'll insert the word online 2 having all of the characters and then i read the first amendment and the second amendment was now under section 6 which is the
4:03 am
old section 5 would read a new section c an occupant of a residential hotel unit as defined in administrative code 41.4 and says the word "or". >> chairman: yeah. i have one question it seems like in which seems like you're receiving public assistance or you're a member of the undocumented community or a resident of the hotel. so i think we should put "or" after a after b. it is in c. anyway. anybody can feel free. >> supervisor safai: i think you're right. i don't think you're going to be all of those. you know, you could be, but it
4:04 am
doesn't mean you have to be all of them. so i agree with that. i think that's a good amendment. >> chairman: thank you. >> supervisor safai: okay. and then on page 3, we're adding under the administration of the fund, we're adding a subsection that will say subject to the budget of the provisions of the charter. hsa made contract with the grocery store to consult hsa with developing the rules for the grant program with setting up the food empowerment markets and the cost of such contract may be charged to the fund
4:05 am
4:06 am
about the facility and its op rooms and that's the last amendment that i have for that other than remaining numbers now go up to six, seven, and eight. >> chairman: got it. and thank you i'm fine with all those amendments and thank you for humoring my additional little changes. >> supervisor safai: no. those were great. >> chairman: originally, i was interested in but i think in the presentation, it became clear why the first ordinance is h.s.a. and the second ordinance is d.p.h. but it sounds like d.p.h. and h.s.a.
4:07 am
are really well coordinated and my first thought was they should all be in the hands of one agency or another. but i think the presentation got me over that question. excuse my ignorance, but my next question is what is the category 4 found. i should have called the controller and ask, but i didn't have time. >> supervisor safai: i would defer to the city attorney on that. i don't know that off the top of my head. unless ms. smith or ms. jones can answer that question. >> chairman: and i apologize for not having the time to answer that myself. >> deputy city attorney ann pierson. i know it's very defund on how interest is managed and whether appropriations are automatically authorized for expenditure. but i'll have the detail officer category 4 and let you
4:08 am
know. >> chairman: if they are automatically confirmed for expenditure and don't need an accept and expend resolution, then we can remove that clause for it is redundant in that lines 21 and 22 of page 1, but we can research that as i go with my other questions. so that was a question: i assume this one is for third party grants. is that true? is that the way -- what's the source of funds?
4:09 am
>> supervisor safai: wells, initially, i believe it will be general fund and then it also says there might be some additional cost that could be assumed by grocery stores or supermarket businesses, but essentially, i believe it is general fund. ms. smith, did you want to jump in there? >> sure. so to answer your prior question, supervisor peskin, my understanding is this category of funding is similar to the fire victims funds where if fires are dedicated and they can be public or private. that's my understanding, but obviously, city attorney will do more research with the controller and get back to you on that issue. in terms of the source of funds, we are looking to identify funding from the general fund on h.s.a.'s budget
4:10 am
to launch a pilot this coming fiscal year. so we. >> supervisor safai: so a general fund. >> yes. >> chairman: general fund h.s.a. and relative to the budget that's pending before the board of supervisors, is that in there? is that continue plated? you're looking? it's coming when we vote on this next week? >> a combination of we're trying to see if there's any savings from last fiscal year that we were carrying over for this purpose and looking at our current food budget to see if there's any savings that we can project to pull from it. i guess i just want to emphasize we do have a food budget that's focused mostly on continuing operations under covid and that we started under covid to support efforts and we want to sustain so there's not a gap in funding between last fiscal year and this year for those uppers. having said that, we all believe in this concept and so
4:11 am
we're looking to see where we might find savings. so that may be a source. so we're looking to identify some funding to get this going this fiscal year. but since we all agree we want to make this happen as did the mayor. you know, we're looking for funding from general fund. >> chairman: yeah. i suspect we all belief in it, all want to support it and want to make sure that we are voting for something that actually will be implemented in so far as the legislation calls it out in no particular order and says it can expand from there and insofaras. i thought it would be
4:12 am
appropriate for this committee to ask how much does this cost and where's the money. >> so i'll just jump in on that, chair. i think those are great questions. the intent of this was to create the fund. also, the intent in the budget negotiations was to continue a lot of the food distribution that was currently happening and rfp is about to go out as we speak and the idea is to launch a department and we're working with the department and ms. smith and ms. jones is nodding her head so that we can get a cost structure and then have further conversations about expanding this into those other districts initially and potentially others city wide
4:13 am
with a better analysis. so we can't give you a final number right now. that process is ongoing and we'll obviously continue the conversations with the budget committee and the mayor's office and these departments. >> do we have a ball park about what one is worth? >> ms. smith, we've been in those conversations with h.s.a. and ms. jones. i think it's probably in the $4 million to $5 million a year range. we're going to do this on a more condensed basis so we're probably going to be doing the initial from half the year. >> chairman: it sounds like
4:14 am
somehow you're going to boot strap this money together and not ask for appropriates. i think those were the magic words. >> we've got a very savvy finance director. >> chairman: great. and just relative to the fact that the use of the fund is to fund nonprofit organizations. you mentioned great plates. are there any nonprofits in this arena but what's the universe out there look like relative to service providers? >>. >> is that directed to me, supervisor? >> sure. why not. so one of the things we wanted to do was to find out or talk to current providers but to see
4:15 am
what would it take from a current model to this model and we don't have answers to that we to seek more information so we need a little time. you're asking all the right questions. right now, this is a piece of legislation that is a great concept and we want to take it to the next level to get a better understanding and plan for something larger next fiscal year when we have an answer to all of these questions. >> chairman: understood, i might suggest, supervisor safai, a three-word amendment given the ever evolving and unknown in each of this
4:16 am
wonderful under taking which would be in subsection d which would be the new number eight. funding for the empowerment market. so i think it might be prudent to add the word subject to the funding. >> i debris with that amendment. and that's so you don't go beat up on them when he wthey don't have money for one or two. >> that was my nefarious plan and you swarted it. and i know dr. jones has her hand up. >> yes. thank you. i'd just like to say how incredibly inspaegsal and supportive i know the task
4:17 am
force is and the community is around this idea. once it gets piloted, once it gets launched, there's incredible support in this community for this idea of having a place where people can go every day, not dependent on a pop-up hour, but can go every day to get the food that they need. i think we should also look at the cost savings on this type of a model. to our health care. to all sectors of society is very high and can be quantified. possibly some changes that might support some of the food cost of this so i think we have to work together as a city and city agency to really launch this and learn from it, but i
4:18 am
believe it is the right way to go. we need to people to not have food insecurities this is something that i think is just the right way to go. so i'm excited to see it here and hear the support for this. >>. >> chairman: thank you. then a couple other questions. this one you might laugh at. >> supervisor safai: mr. chair? did we verbally say subject to funding for line 24. that's enough to say that? >> yes. subject founding award grants or yeah. >> chairman: and then on the next item, item three on the
4:19 am
agenda and this is i'm sure my ignorance, but on page two on the reporting departments. there's a department of family and benefit support. i'm familiar with all 53 or so agents in this government, but i've never heard such a department. did i miss something? >> supervisor peskin, agents say recently went through a name change for one of its departments. so we have a human services agency and previously, we have the department of human services so we renamed the department of human services the department of benefits and family support. >> chairman: okay. well, that was a teaching moment. i just wanted supervisor safai to know i was reading every single line. >> and then in the fourth and final item in this package.
4:20 am
>> supervisor safai: yeah. item number four i have a shortened change for the long title. >> chairman: yeah. go ahead and address those. so for the short title. it will read, let me make sure i'm on the right page, administrative code food security task force sunset reauthorization and date extension. so that's the short title. the long title will read ordinance amending the administrative code to reauthorize food security task force and extend the sunset date to july 20, 2021. and the task force duties assisting with the department of public health, food security and equity report. >> chairman: so, supervisor safai, i would like to raise some questions for our discussion relative to the 2024
4:21 am
date that i was on this board a long time ago when my then colleague paula maxwell. i was wondering why have a sunset date so relatively short for an issue that's going to be so relatively unfortunately long? >> i think as i understand i'll defer to dr. jones, but i understood it as something that's reauthorized every three years. is there a need to do that consistently, dr. jones? >> i agree with you chair peskin that this is an issue that unfortunately has persisted. it's very complex. the task force had suggested
4:22 am
reauthorizing for five years. it has been reauthorized at times three years, at times two years. it is quite a lot of work when it comes to reauthorizing. so i do believe additional years would be fine to add to the reauthorizations. >> chairman: if on item number pouchlt, we were to move the reauthorization date from 24 to 2026, will that be substantive or not? >> no, that would not be substantive, but if i may, i would like to like to add on why that sunset date is there. and that's because under the board's rules, there are rules about regular meetings of subordinate bodies and the rules say the ellening
4:23 am
legislation shall also include the qualifications of each member, the length of terms of appointments and the sunset clause not to exceed three years. so that is in the bortd's rules of order. of course, the board may be ordinance exceed that limit, but it is really what we use as a default and where the board seeks to establish a body that will extend for more than three years. this body shall exist for a longer period than three years. so that is a policy choice, but i wanted to give that background for why that default deadline exists. >> so supervisor safai, based on the recommendations of the task force, i would so that
4:24 am
everybody can concentrate on the work at hand and not have to go before the board two years earlier. the good thing is it forces a conversation, but i don't think that given all of the focus that that we need to focus the conversation. i think the conversation's focused and it's going to stay focused and appreciate your leadership on it. i think that would be a discussion as the chief's sponsor. >> supervisor safai: no. i think in the past, having shorter dates, but with this new concept and the work that it will take to implement that
4:25 am
and oversee that and expand that throughout the city, i think that will naturally continue a conversation and collaborative work between h.s.a., the food security task force, and the department of public health and all the other parties involved. we've also incorporated in to the previous legislation a report that will come annually to the board of supervisors and the mayor about the implementation of the grand program for empowerment markets. so i think all that together allows us to extended date of the reauthorization. so i agree with that. i think that's a good suggestion and i would move to make that july 1, 2026. >> chairman: and add the language suggested by deputy city attorney. >> supervisor safai: yes. i was looking for that and i didn't see 2.21 reference at all. but, yes, we should call that
4:26 am
up. okay. >> chairman: okay. >> one more thing if i may. the amendments to the short and long constitute l were recommended by the clerk's office and i think there was a little bit of a version control problem. and so if i can read the amendments. >> chairman: and that would be to item number four. >> yes. it would read food security task force reauthorization and the long title would read ordinance amending and now we will change that end date from 2024 to 2026 as you so moved. >> chairman: excellent. is that acceptable to you, supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: yeah. i think that's what i read.
4:27 am
>> chairman: yeah. i think what ms. pierson was saying is that the actual document had slightly different language from what you he'd. it sounds like we're all on the same page with that. >> yes. i had a chance to look into that and a category four. one is that it does allow for the automatic accumulation of interest and it does not involve automatic appropriations. >> does not. so then having that line on 21 to 22 is good.
4:28 am
>> chairman: how do those interact? >> yes. i think it would. >> chairman: okay. let's keep category 4 and let's keep. so, but let me understand this for just a second. the donations deemed approved would not apply to a general fund appropriation. they would only apply to third party donations or the donations could be put into it separately. >> right, but what i'm saying is inso farce ms. smith is scratching around for 2021 money for an appropriation that's part of the 20212022
4:29 am
budget those would not be in any event would not be deemed, would not require an accept and expend resolution because they're general fund dollars. is that correct? >> right. it would not be required for city dollars. >> right and so here's the policy. i generally like to see where our donations come from and i think it's important. and insofar as it seems to me the bulk of the money i would lean on the side of the donations for the fund because it doesn't sound like we have
4:30 am
anybody lined up who's about to donate and it sounds like this is all going to go to the budget. >> well, i mean, the bulk of the money, yes, right. so the donations. the money from the general fund is there, but i think the idea of that, supervisor peskin was to reference section c or grocery stores or the markets, anyone's coming in it's to facilitate the ease of flow of that. >> all right. supervisor chan. >> supervisor chan: i don't know i think i'm kind of i'm glad that we're diving deeper in this conversation. you know, i think kind of given the fact that just some of the
4:31 am
around public kitchen and food delivery and some of the questions around it in and around this donation always is good to be more transparent. but i too on the side of more transparency is better. i'm trying to connect the dots. i'm also trying to be careful of not to associate this great legislation into any other possible commercial use or other purposes by possible potential donors, and how this would fund but i understand. i think that i do understand the concern around this.
4:32 am
>> chairman: why don't we leave that as an open issue. and supervisor mandelman, any comments? why don't we move item two through four up for public comment. are there any who would like to speak to any of these sets of ordinances. >> clerk: yes, members of the public should call (415) 655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 146 014 4426 then press pound and pound again. if you haven't already done so, please press star 3 to line up to speak. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. and you may begin your comments. at this time, we have approximately five listeners and one person in line for public comment. >> chairman: first speaker, please. >> supervisors, first and foremost, i would like to know
4:33 am
if ya'll have done a needs assessment in all of the districts. stop choosing four centers or four districts and then point to the general fund. as far as i understand, the other population of 840,000 and a budget of $13.7 billion and for a long time and i've been monitoring this for 40 years that a lot of people who have been feeding the poor without any help from the city. i've been one of those. so now, in these times of the pandemic, taking into account all the restaurants that have been closed, the churches that
4:34 am
can fulfill some of the obligations who are you empowering or you want to get people to go into a place and eat the food. do you have the ability to provide in the city and county of san francisco that has the community and cultures and different types of food. you haven't done your study well. i've been involved with it and i know that people like to eat what they like to and they say beggars can't be choosers, but there has to be some balance in that and we are provided that balance. now, in the middle of the
4:35 am
pandemic $400,000. you should mention that. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hey everybody. my name is patricia. i work in excelsior. i want to thank all the work that has been done to make this possible. we've been working with families in the excelsior through our six pick up program and we have seen that families are in need which may clarify more under the working pour that don't have time or feel like standing in a line or being part of a resource where they have to pick up. they decided to opt out of the
4:36 am
program. so that tells me we need to do more research about how we need our families and how we support our families and i look forward to having those conversationings, coming up with that concept specifically for district 11. thank you. >> chairman: thank you, next speaker. >> hello, supervisors. i'm the executive director of eat sf. a san francisco resident concerned about food security and the current chair of the san francisco food security task force. i want to mention the food security task force has been addressing providing essential food security recommendations. it highlights new interventions, lived experiences and lifts community voices of those impacted by
4:37 am
food incurt. and the need for equitable access. more than ever, the food security task force is essential to gaps, and needs and affordability issues in san francisco. i respectively urge the and to also the by annual food security and equity report. i encourage the adoption of food empowerment markets as an example of innovations and food security solutions for san franciscans. thank you. >> chairman: thank you. next speaker. >> clerk: i believe that was the last speaker. mr. enial, can you confirm if that was the last speaker. that was the last speaker. thank you. >> chairman: okay.
4:38 am
public comment is closed. and supervisor safai, thank you to you and h.s.a. and d.p.h. and your staff, ms. morris for all of your work on this. i would like to be added as a cosponsor to all three items and in so far as you are not a member of the committee, would like to move the aforementioned amendments to file number 210567 which were those that you read into the record plus the little changes that i suggested that you accepted the all of before the following characteristics of page two relative to the definition of empowerment market with the inclusion of or 6 avmgd and 6b
4:39 am
subject to funding in d sub 8 after "shall" and then in item four, the amendments that the city attorney and clerk agreed to that you read into the record with the change to have the date be five years to july 1, 2026, with the language over riding 2.21 in the board of supervisors rules. are there -- so i'll move that. are there any comments or questions from committee members? seeing none. a roll call please. >> clerk: yes. on the proposed amendments to item two and item four, [roll call]
4:40 am
the motion passes without objection. >> chairman: and we'll let the accept and extend matter go. good luck on getting grocery stores to contribute. with that, i'll make a motion to send item two as amended item four item get you to in a second amended to the full board of supervisors for a hearing tomorrow, supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: i just wanted to end by saying i know dr. jones has committed the last six teen years and i just really wanted to appreciate that work and call that out and rensz that what we're building on is that part of her career and dedicating that time. so i just wanted to
4:41 am
specifically call her out and if any other colleagues want to sign on as a cosponsor, it would be greatly appreciated. >> thank you, supervisor safai. >> chairman: thank you for your work, dr. jones. all right. we've got a motion on the floor. >> yes, on the motion for recognition for item number two and item number four recommended as a committee report, [roll call] the motion passes without objection. >> thank you, colleagues. >> chairman: thank you, supervisor safai. mr. young, can you read the fifth and final item. >> clerk: yes.
4:42 am
item number five is a motion for approving the mayor's nomination of jason wright december 31st, 2024. >> chairman: thank yous, mr. young, colleagues, i was not able to discuss this with either one of you, but let me just start by thanking both of you for the actions that we previously under took and thank mayor breed for finding the nominee that we were seeking. i had the chance to meet with mr. jason wright in person yesterday set forth in his resume, he is indeed qualified for this this was proposition
4:43 am
jay. when i offered that i believe that he will be an experienced qualified independent spouse and if there are any comments from committee members, feel free to make them now. thank you again to the administration for finding the nominee that i think we were seeking. supervisor mandelman. >> supervisor mandelman: i would concur with all of that, chair pes kin. i think that we've or i think the mayor has landed on someone really good for the spot who addresses some concerns that i had around prior options so i'm glad and grateful the mayor has
4:44 am
nominated. we just recently got an e-mail from shane watson who cannot be on the historic preservation, but if there's anyone who cares about lgbtq heritage and preservation and has done a lot around that in san francisco it is shane watson and so that recommendation means a lot to me. so i'll get out of the way. i'm happy about this nomination. >> there you go, and we've also received letters from city historical society who served on the then landmark's advisory board from good words from san
4:45 am
francisco architectural heritage. so, mr. wright. the floor is yours, don't blow it. >> thank you. good morning to the rules committee and to everyone on the call. my name is jason wright and i'm really excited and humbled to be nominated for san francisco's historic preservation commission. a little background, i grew up in ohio and studied historic preservation at the university of cincinnati. it really was the reason for my attendance of architecture school. at the time when i was coming out of high school, i had no idea there was a whole sector of the field devoted to historic preservation and thought i would get to work on a preservation project once in awhile and almost 17 o. those
4:46 am
years living in san francisco. over those years, i have volunteered for various organizations in san francisco including san francisco heritage, young preservation groups and have extensive involvement within the lgbtq communicate dedicated to historic places working groups and the arts and culture group. i've recently been involving in supporting the effort to landmark in mille valley. through the presidio historical association, i also have experience working within the
4:47 am
federal section and have gained an in depth to understanding our historic resources. the lgbtq preservation work has shed light on the shifting national and international perspectives on interpreting and preserving our intangible heritage. having grown up gay in small town ohio and now living the lgbtq's reality in san francisco has given me great appreciation for its value not only for the city but to the nation and the world. in practice, i work on many project types and my niche tends to focus on assessments. i have worked on historic
4:48 am
structure reports and building maintenance plan projects and have been involved in building projects through design and construction includes preservation, rehabilitation. and i understand the article 10 and landmarks. i've been involved in sustainable preservation for the last 15 years or so. i've learned that press observation is inherently this substantiates historic preservation and that we're not
4:49 am
going to build ourselves out of climate change but that existing buildings are also key to the fight. i hope that my strong technical background and my interest in cultural preservation will aid me to the past current and future residents of san francisco. a couple goals i have would be to push for the city wide surrender way and to further recognition and preservation of san francisco's cultural districts and legacy businesses. completion of the citywide survey will aid in the addition of important landmarks and historic districts. in project review and having a good sense of when materials can be preserving and hoping that through preservation to
4:50 am
further the city's goals and further the fight against climate change. i believe in my experience and the support letters i have will vouch for my qualifications and as supervisor mandelman noted for the other supervisors, there was a late letter that came from shane watson this morning and i very much appreciate and thank you very much. >> chairman: yeah. we all got it. >> great. that's all i have, but thank you for your time. >> thank you, mr. wright. are there any members of the public who would like to comment on this item? yes, members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item, should call (415) 655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 146 014
4:51 am
4426 then press pound and pound again. if you haven't already done so, please press star three to line up to speak. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comment. at this time, we have two listeners but nobody in line to speak. one moment. we do have one person. >> chairman: please speak. >> good morning, chair peskin, and supervisor chan and supervisor mandelman. i'm calling to support jason. i think he'd be a great addition to the commission. i'm aaron highland and as you know, i had the great pleasure of serving on this commission for 18 years. i guess i got to know jason. in turn at a.r.g.. we thought highly enough of jason for a permanent position.
4:52 am
and his work with san francisco heritage. most notably and he was a little hill more humble in this, he was one of the key people who started the preservation group at san francisco heritage. they did this knowing they could have joined the already existing group of young architects. that group was critical in executing the preservation pub crawls which are aimed visited to legacy bars and restaurants. and this is starting before our own legacy business industry and fund program. he definitely has the expertise and the years of experience here in san francisco. i would like to thank you, supervisor mandelman for insisting be held by a member of the lgbtq community. it is more impactful for us to
4:53 am
have a seat at the table and definitely more so than having an ally. although, we always appreciate allies. jason has been engaged and will continue to be engaged as he so well put in furthering the lgbtqq landmarks. i would like to impose to each of you four of the commissioners are new and we have a new planning director. we continue to make progress on and i was glad to hear jason wanted to continue that. the citywide survey. the lgbtq context. the draft was in 2016. >> chairman: thank you, commissioner high land and thank you for your service of
4:54 am
almost a decade. yesterday, when my staff and i met with mr. wright. to continue our work of the city wide survey and hope that commissioner wright will be that person. i know from personal experience that supervisor mandelman is equally committed to that effort from the board of supervisors side and mr. high larnd, do not hesitate to continue your engagement and involving historic preservation in san francisco. mr. clerk, are there any other members of the public who are in line for public comment. >> clerk: that completes the list for public commentors. >> chairman: okay. public comment is closed. supervisor mandelman, would you like to do the honors of amending the short title by removing the word "rejecting" and amending the body of
4:55 am
resolution by removing the word "rejects". >> supervisor mandelman: i would like to do those honors and make that motion and also just to say thank you to commissioner highland for his service and thank you colleagues for sticking be this and supporting the lgbtq community and thank you to the mayor for this appointment and thank you, mr. wright for your willingness to step into this role. >> chairman: and before we call the roll on supervisor mandelman's motion, mr. wright, this will go before the full board next week on the 20th and if the mayor swears you in, you can attend your first h.p.c. meeting on wednesday, the 21st. with that, mr. clerk, a roll call please. >> clerk: on the motion to amend delete "rejecting" throughout the motion, [roll call]
4:56 am
the motion passes without objection. >> next motion please. >> supervisor mandelman: i would like to move forward this item to the full board of recommendation. >> clerk: on the motion to recommend as amended, supervisor mandelman, [roll call] the motion passes without objection. >> chairman: congratulations, mr. wright. colleagues, we are adjourned.
4:57 am
>> candlestick park known also as the stick was an outdoor stadium for sports and entertainment. built between 1958 to 1960, it was located in the bayview hunters point where it was home to the san francisco giants and 49ers. the last event held was a concert in late 2014. it was demolished in 2015. mlb team the san francisco giants played at candlestick from 1960-1999. fans came to see players such a
4:58 am
willie mays and barry bonds, over 38 seasons in the open ballpark. an upper deck expansion was added in the 1970s. there are two world series played at the stick in 1962 and in 198 9. during the 1989 world series against the oakland as they were shook by an earthquake. candlestick's enclosure had minor damages from the quake but its design saved thousands of lives. nfl team the san francisco 49ers played at candlestick from feign 71-2013. it was home to five-time super bowl champion teams and hall of fame players by joe montana, jerry rice and steve jones. in 1982, the game-winning touchdown pass from joe montana to dwight clark was known as "the catch." leading the niners to their first super bowl.
4:59 am
the 49ers hosted eight n.f.c. championship games including the 2001 season that ended with a loss to the new york giants. in 201, the last event held at candlestick park was a concert by paul mccartney who played with the beatles in 1966, the stadium's first concert. demolition of the stick began in late 2014 and it was completed in september 2015. the giants had moved to pacific rail park in 2000 while the 49ers moved to santa clara in 2014. with structural claims and numerous name changes, many have passed through and will remember candlestick park as home to the legendary athletes and entertainment. these memorable moments will live on in a place called the stick. (♪♪♪)
5:00 am