tv BOS Budget and Finance Committee SFGTV May 4, 2022 2:30am-5:01am PDT
>> supervisor ronen: good morning. the meeting will come to order. this is the april 27, 2022 budget and finance committee meeting. i am supervisor hillary ronen. i'm joined today by temporary appointment, supervisor myrna melgar. thank you for filling in, who is replacing supervisor gordon mar today, and vice chair
supervisor ahsha safai will be joining us shortly. our clerk today is brent jalipa, and i would like to thank matthew from sfgovtv for broadcasting this meeting. mr. clerk, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: the board of supervisors and its committees are now convening hybrid meetings that allow in-person attendance and public comment while still allowing public comment and access via telephone. the board realizes that public comment is essential. for those watching either channels 26, 78, or 99, and sfgovtv.org, the public call-in number is streaming across the
screen. that number is 415-655-0001. again, that's 415-655-0001, and then enter the meeting i.d. 2492-607-1682, then pound and pound again. when you join the meeting, you will hear the meeting, but your line will be muted, and you will be in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up, press star, three to lineup to speak. as previously mentioned, we will take public comment in person first and then go to the telephone public comment line. the board also accepts written comments. you may e-mail them to me
b-r-e-n-t firstname.lastname@example.org . you may also send written comments to our office in city hall, room 204, 1 carlton b. goodlett place, san francisco, california, 94102. finally, items acted upon today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda of may 3 unless otherwise stated. madam chair? >> chair ronen: we are going to have a long meeting, so public comment will be limited to one moment. can you read the first item,
please. >> clerk: would you like to make a motion to excuse supervisor mar? >> chair ronen: yes, i'd like to make a motion to excuse supervisor mar from this meeting. >> clerk: on the motion to excuse supervisor mar from this meeting -- [roll call] >> clerk: thank you. we have two ayes, with supervisor ahsha safai absent. >> chair ronen: thank you. now can you read item 1. >> clerk: yes. item 1 is a resolution approving and authorizing the director of property on behalf of the police department to enter into a lease for 2,242 square feet of meeting space at 1090 quintara street, with christ church lutheran, for behavioral science unit
programming, for an initial three year term commencing on may 1, 2022, through april 30, 2025, at a base rent of $45,000 with 3% annual adjustments and 20% of utilities upon landlord invoice, approving and authorizing two three-year options upon the city's request, authorizing the director of property to execute documents, make certain modifications, and take certain actions including adopting ceqa findings. members of the public who wish to make public comment should lineup behind the podium or call 415-655-0001, enter meeting i.d. 2492-607-1682,
then press pound and pound again. >> chair ronen: thank you. anyone for questions? >> thank you, chair ronen. my name is [indiscernible] and i am here to answer any questions. >> chair ronen: thank you. may we have public comment. >> clerk: thank you, madam chair. for those attending in person, please lineup to speak. for those listening remotely, dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2492-607-1682, then press pound and pound again. press star, three to speak, and wait until the system indicates your line has been unmuted.
we have no speakers in the chamber. operations, do we have any callers in the queue? >> operator: mr. clerk, there are no callers in the queue. >> chair ronen: thank you. public comment is closed. i'd like to make a motion to move this to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> clerk: thank you. on that motion to move this to the full board with a positive recommendation -- [roll call] >> clerk: we have three ayes. >> chair ronen: thank you. can you please read item 2? >> clerk: yes. item 2 is a resolution approving and authorizing the director of property, on behalf of the department of homelessness and supportive housing, to acquire certain property located at 681-687 ellis street for $19.9 million
plus closing costs, approving and authorizing h.s.h., on behalf of the city, to apply to the california department of housing and community development for its homekey grant program to purchase the property, approving and authorizing an agreement of purchase and sale for real estate for the acquisition of the property from 685 ellis, l.l.c., authorizing the director of property to execute the purchase agreement, make certain modifications, and take certain actions in furtherance of this resolution and the purchase agreement, affirming the ceqa determinations. members of the public who wish to make public comment, dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d.
2492-607-1682, then press pound and pound again. press star, three to lineup to speak, and wait until the system indicates you have been -- your line has been unmuted to begin your comments. >> chair ronen: thank you. i believe we have emily cohen for a presentation. >> thank you. my name is emily cohen, and i am the director of homelessness and public housing, and i want to start by thanking supervisor haney for his support of this acquisition in his district.
this property is currently functioning as a shelter in place hotel, and we are eager to acquire it as an on going part of our housing portfolio for adults. the resolution before you authorizing h.s.h. to acquire the building for $19.94 million, including the purchase cost, and $40,000 in typical closing costs. we're going to use prop c funding to acquire this property, and we may apply to the state's homekey grant for more dollars.
if if we do get a homekey grant for this, we would return to the board for the accept and expend for that grant. i will stop there and take any questions that you might have. thank you. >> chair ronen: and before we take questions, we will hear from the b.l.a. >> thank you, chair ronen. nick menard from the budget and legislative analyst's office. this would apply to 681-687 ellis street. this includes a purchase price of $19 million and closing costs estimates to be $40,000. in addition to that, the department estimates there will be $6 million in immediate improvement costs, though that is subject to change as they investigate the building after purchase. the purchase price was confirmed by a third party
appraiser and appraisal review. estimated costs to operate are expected to be $1.5 million a year. the expected costs and operating costs will be paid for by prop c, and we recommend approval. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. director cohen, do we have any idea who would operate this hotel? the report, the investigative report yesterday in the chronicle was very concerning, and this was the first acquisition since the report, and i wanted to hear your reaction to that report and how we can ensure that, with this acquisition, that we have oversight over whatever
property manages the building. if you could make some remarks about that, thank you so much. >> sure, supervisor ronen. [indiscernible] service provider organizations to select the site operations and a site provider for this building, and that process is not yet concluded, so that is to come, and that is how we will select the provider. i think the chronicle article yesterday highlighted some challenges that we face when it comes to permanent supportive
focused on having the amenities in these units that guests in our shelter system are asking for, right? private bathrooms, working elevators, high quality construction, location to transit, so these acquisitions are incredibly important to the stock and the resources that we have available. this is a different model, the
acquisition approach. we're eager to bring on high quality buildings that we can maintain in our community in order to provide housing to our most vulnerable residents. >> chair ronen: okay. that makes sense and is good to hear, but i'm wondering if you can just answer one more question, and i'll turn it over to my colleague, vice chair safai. what is the oversight that h.s.h. has over property managers of all of its buildings? how do we ensure that residents are living in habitable conditions and treated with the respect that they deserve? >> thank you, absolutely. so h.s.h., as the funding entity, enters into a
monitoring contract, and so we do monitoring functions. we visit the sites. there are meetings and other purposes to assess, and we really work with the property manager. as i mentioned previously, many of these buildings are previously owned. our goal is to manage and monitor the contracts, and we will work closely with the manager to make sure that happens. also, we work with d.b.i., and if there's a problem, d.b.i. will work to address the concerns or violations with the property owner.
>> chair ronen: okay. i'll just state for the record that it was a shame that the legislation that was put forward a couple years ago to create a public oversight body over h.s.h. wasn't moved out of committee. i did support it at the time, and i think it's time for us to consider it again. i know that supervisor safai is considering changing his position on that piece of legislation and potentially bringing it back, something i would very much support. clearly, the oversight isn't sufficient, and i know that h.s.h. and its directors are overwhelmed by the amount of work that you have and by the challenge that you are seeking to resolve in terms of the
level of homelessness in our community and the amount of housing that we have available for residents that need it. we just have to have a greater level of oversight and a public way for residents to complain if they're living in conditions that are uninhabitable, so i'll -- i'm very supportive of this item. in fact, mr. jalipa, can you add me as a cosponsor? this is definitely one of the solutions to the problem outlined in the article yesterday, but i do believe we need to do more.
vice chair safai? >> supervisor safai: thank you, chair ronen. is the city planning to transfer ownership at some point or to a partner provider? >> thank you, supervisor. i will ask my colleague, dan adams, to answer that. the owner will be the city, and we will contract with a service provider or manager to manage the site. >> yes, thank you. we're moving on the direct acquisition model so we can move quickly. we've been very efficacious in
bringing up permanent supportive housing. first, the city would secure the property, rehab the properties, and get them up and running, and then, evaluate the provider on the community capacity side as well as the need to transfer these properties out of direct city ownership. this would be similar to how we acquire properties, and in the end, these would be city-owned properties and managed as such. >> supervisor safai: yes. basically, similar to what we did with hotel purchases in the mission. >> yes, very much.
>> supervisor safai: i guess at this point, it comes in under the numbers that we've set consistently, so i like the private bathrooms, i like the additional space. this will continue to be operated as a s.i.p. hotel. one of the things that we saw in the story that was reported was there were a number of people that have seemed to have not had the right services or oversight or contact.
and i understand this is a very difficult to serve population, but is there thought going into diversifying the population of clients that will be served on-site, and then, what kind of discussion around how many case managers or services per client because that was one of the things that was identified? >> yes, thank you. so, vice chair safai, the tenants who will be selected for this property will go through a coordinated entry system, and we'll be placing people according to their need. given that there are so many folks staying at the hotel as part of the shelter in place program, we may be able to transition some people in place, but it's not a guarantee that if you're there now you'll stay there into the future
it's also staffing needs, so a really important budget investment that will come before you all as we go through the budget process later in the next couple of months. >> supervisor safai: great. that's what i was interested in. i am very excited about this purchase, i am 100% in support. mr. clerk, please add me as a cosponsor. i did have a conversation with chair ronen yesterday. i was reluctant not -- let me say it like this. we wanted to provide the time, and that's what i said back then, provide discussions about why there would not be oversight, an additional
oversight body for the department of homelessness and supportive housing, but it seems like those conversations need to be accelerated. we will definitely follow up with your office. feel like at this point it could really be helpful because when we're reviewing the contracts, i know that los angeles, for instance, has been pushed to put a dashboard together that has city of los angeles for all the nonprofit providers and services, so individuals can see the contracts that have been awarded, what the scope of work is, what the performance level is. we need that information and transparency because we're constantly being asked how much money is being put into homeless services in the city. what are we getting, where is it going? is the san francisco standard today talked about the top providers in -- that receive moneys from homeless services, but that just tells one piece
of the stories if it's just money that's allocated. what are the numbers reached, and what are the goals? we will work with your department to move forward, but just wanted to give you the opportunity to comment on that. i think it would be important to hear the department's perspective. >> i'm sorry. so the department's perspective on oversight? >> supervisor safai: yeah, how information and the dashboard being made public and how that's evaluated through the
public lens. >> i think that information is incredibly supported. we are putting more and more information on our dashboard. i defer to the board about the oversight committee. there are a lot of bodies involved in homelessness, and i think whatever direction the mayor and the board takes us, it's important that it be streamlined and it be clear, so
i do appreciate that. >> supervisor safai: thank you. thank you. >> chair ronen: thank you so much, and we will now open this item up for public comment. >> clerk: thank you, madam chair. members of the public who are joining us in person should lineup by the curtains if you want to speak. if you're joining us remotely, dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2492-607-1682, then press pound and pound again. press star, three to enter the queue and wait until the system indicates your line has been unmuted, and that will be your signal to begin your comments. seeing no persons in the
resolution. permanent supportive housing allows people to access services such as -- >> clerk: miss binder, your time has concluded. so sorry to cut you off, but as the chair indicated at the beginning of today's meeting, we are allowing one minute for public comment. operations, do we have any other callers in the queue? >> operator: there are no further callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you so much. >> chair ronen: thank you. public comment is closed.
i'd like to make a motion to forward this to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> clerk: on the motion to forward this to the full board with a positive recommendation -- [roll call] >> clerk: you have three ayes. >> chair ronen: thank you. mr. clerk, can you please read items 3 through 5 together. >> clerk: yes. items 3 and 4 are resolutions retroactively authorizing the police department to accept and expend a grant from the united states department of justice, office of community oriented
policing services. item 4 is a grant in the amount of $125,000 for the fiscal year 2021 community policing development microgrant program to support our community trust and legitimacy project for the project period of september is, 2021 through august 31, 2022. item 4 is an amount of $123,664.55 under the fiscal year 2021 patrick leahy bulletproof vest partnership to fund purchases of vests for law enforcement officers in the
police department, sheriff's department, adult probation department, and juvenile probation department purchased after april 1, 2021, through august 31, 2023. item 5 is a resolution retroactively authorizing the police department to accept and expend an in-kind gift of 900 units of in a lax own values at $66,600 through the naloxone distribution project. madam chair? >> chair ronen: thank you. i believe we have a representative from the police department. >> yes. good morning, chair ronen.
one of the grants is to help fund the purchases of bulletproof vests for the police department, sheriff's department, and adult and juvenile probation department, and the third resolution we are aa-asking for the community's recommendation is -- we are asking for the committee's recommendation is the acceptance of 900 units of naloxone used to prevent deaths from overdose. >> chair ronen: thank you. and we don't have a b.l.a. report on this item. i have a question on item 4. why do probation departments
work out in the community. >> chair ronen: okay. i know that's going into the opposite direction of less military-esque and more reform and rehabilitation based, so that just caught my eye and seems very strange, but it does not sound like you know exactly what type of probation officers wear bulletproof vests, but it's required by law and it's required in the field? >> each agency, they set their own metric, and we don't adjust
any of the figures that people submit. we take them as is. unfortunately, i can't speak on juvenile probation's behalf. >> chair ronen: okay. can we please open this up for public comment? >> clerk: yes, madam chair. members of the public who wish to speak in attendance should lineup by the curtains. if you're joining us remotely, dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d.
2492-607-1682. press pound and pound again, and press star, three to enter the queue. we have no one in the chamber, and are there any callers in the queue? >> operator: there are no callers in the queue. >> chair ronen: okay. public comment is closed. i would like to make a motion to send items 3, 4, and 5 to the board with a positive recommendation. can i have a roll call vote. >> clerk: on the motion to send items 3, 4, and 5 to the board with a positive recommendation -- [roll call] >> clerk: we have three ayes. >> chair ronen: thank you. mr. clerk, can you please read item 6? >> clerk: yes. item 6, resolution approving
the grant between the city and county and san francisco in-home supportive services public authority for the provision of administration, health, and dental benefits to in-home supportive services independent providers for the period of july 1, 2022 through june 30, 2026, in the amount not to compete $434.7 million. members of the public joining us remotely and wish to comment on this item, please call 415-655-0001, with a meeting i.d. of 2492-607-1682, then press pound and pound again. press star, three to enter the speaker line, and when you hear that your line has bun unmuted, that is your signal to begin your comments.
>> good morning. my name is jill neilson, director of programs with the department of disability and aging services. i'm pleased to bring before you for consideration one of the most important contracts that the department administers, the funding for the san francisco's ihss funding program. this is a critical state entitlement that provides critical and domestic care services for 45,000 low-income individuals with functional needs in san francisco every year. the assistance that ihss consumers receive from the independent providers that they select to provide them with daily care helps them living safely in community settings and avoids them being placed in long-term care settings.
the public authority acts as the employer of record for almost 24,000 independent providers. through today's resolution, the authority will be able to carry out a variety of services and functions for providers and consumers, offering enrollment services that are provided by the state, providing a mentorship program, and operating a home care registry that connects independent providers who are seeking employment to consumers who need care. you will see that we are providing to add additional staff. as you likely know, the
pandemic has fueled the shortage of home care workers, both in san francisco and across the state. as a result, the state is struggling to recruit public providers for their registry, and we are seeing the number of people not accessing services or without a public provider is is growing. as a result of several different factors, including the overall aging of the population, san francisco's ihss caseload is growing, and we're working hard to identify groups of consumers, including those who are exiting homelessness. now, more than ever before,
it's essential that the public authority have the resource does they need to maintain a relevant and robust registry so that all ihss consumers who need care can access it. it leverages significant state and vital funding to individuals with disabilities. here with me today is the ihss' public director and also representatives from the city's homeless division. we're happy to answer any questions you have. >> chair ronen: thank you. first, we'll hear from the b.l.a. >> this would approve a grant between the homeless services agency and the authority. the administration is adding
three positions to enhance recruitment efforts for provider staff. we show a budget for the contract on page 12 of our report. it's a four-year contract totaling $435 million. we recommend approval. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. any questions, colleagues? do you want to speak, supervisor safai? >> supervisor safai: i'll just say thank you for this important work. i know that we spent a lot of time, supervisor ronen and i -- supervisor melgar wasn't there yet -- and this impacts and supports many of the clients.
we're thankful for your work, and i don't know if i can be added on as a cosponsor, but thank you. >> chair ronen: and i just want to echo supervisor ronen. we had to hire a home care support worker in los angeles for my father, and finding the right person with the right personality was a challenge, so i completely -- i'm so glad you're hiring workers and doing recruitment. it's so important, and the job that these workers do, it's just tremendous, the amount of skill necessary, the love, the labor that goes into these jobs is truly extraordinary, and so i just want to give my public appreciation to all ihss workers. your labor taking care of our most important and cherished
relatives is just deeply appreciated, and the skill of the incredible woman blew my mind and gave me a whole new appreciation for the talent of this workforce. thank you for all your work, and thank you for treating the clients with so much respect and dignity. really, really appreciate everything you do. >> thank you so much for your comments, yeah. we're really lucky to have a wonderful partner at the public authority. always happy to work with us on our initiatives. as we're trying to expand initiatives in ihss, we're looking for new ways to stabilize them.
>> supervisor safai: thanks for underscoring that. thank you. >> chair ronen: and i was thinking about asking if i could be a cosponsor. >> thank you, supervisors. i've been here six years, and i'm proud of the work that ihss provides and the service providers that certify it. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. thank you. can we please open this item up for public comment. >> clerk: yes. for those joining us in person, please lineup along the curtains behind the podium.
for those joining us remotely, dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2492-607-1682, then press pound twice. press star, three to enter the queue, and when you hear your line has been unmuted, that is your indication to begin your comments. we have no callers in the chamber. are there any callers on the line? >> operator: mr. clerk, there are no callers in the queue. >> chair ronen: public comment is closed. supervisor safai, would you like to do the honors? >> supervisor safai: sure. i'd like to move to send this to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> clerk: supervisors, since this was initially introduced by ihss, with your cosponsorship, you're willing to take responsibility for that? >> supervisor safai: sure.
>> clerk: with that -- [roll call] >> clerk: we have three ayes. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. mr. clerk, can you please call items 7 through 9 together? >> clerk: yes. items 7 through 9 are resolutions between the city and the county. item 7 is a resolution retroactively approving amendment number one to increase the grant agreement amount by 9.3 million, increasing the grant amount by 3.1 million for a total not to
exceed amount of 14.4 million and extending the term agreement to june 30, 2024, for a total term of july 1, 2019 through june 30, 2024. item 8 is a resolution approving the first amendment for the japanese community youth council san francisco youth works program between the japanese community youth council and the city and county of san francisco, extending the term by one year from june 30, 2023, for a total term of july 1, 2018 through june 30, 2024, and increasing the grant tempt by 3.5 million for a total not to exceed amount of approximately 12.8 million. item 9 is a resolution
approving the third amendment for the japanese community youth council, opportunities for all intermediatary program between the japanese community youth council and the city and county of san francisco, to increase the grant agreement amount by 2.2 million for a total not to exceed amount of 10.3 million with no change to the length of term. >> chair ronen: thank you. and i believe that we've got two people here to present? >> yes. i'm [indiscernible] at the department of children, youth, and families, and we would like to request a continuation of items 7, 8, and 9 for one week to address the specific concerns raised by the budget and legislative analyst's
office. >> chair ronen: okay. that makes sense to me, but let's hear from the budget and legislative analyst's office first. >> thank you, chair ronen. the agreements all exceed $10 million, which is why they are now before you. two of them are retroactive because the agreements exceeded that $10 million threshold back in 2020, and i think the -- you know, we're committed to continuing to work with the department to obtain information on how the money over the next two years is going to be spent. we don't have that at this time. the agreements are through june 30, 2023. the agreements would all extend them by one year, but we don't
have visibility into the next two years of spending. in addition, one of the agreements with the japanese youth council with the opportunities for all program was sole sourced, and we're still working with the department to understand the agreement of that sole source. it does appear to duplicate an existing program with the japanese youth council, so we're working to obtain information about the differences between the programs and why there's two contracts. happy to answer any other questions. >> chair ronen: thank you. supervisor melgar? >> supervisor melgar: thank you, chair ronen. as you may remember, this was my world before i was elected to district 7 supervisor, and i think the pandemic really showed some cracks in our
system. on the one hand, i'm incredibly supportive on anything that supports our youth and young people, but it showed supports that are lacking, one of the things is this sole source contract that's been around for some time. they subcontract, but there's no r.f.p.s, there's no transparency, and that's something that folks have talked about for quite a while. i would encourage folks to take the opportunity, now that we've increased the funding to build those reporting systems if they're not already there, and i think they are, but to
enforce e-mail compliance and metrics so that everyone knows what is going on, what is being done, who is being served how, and also where the money's going, so thank you so much, chair ronen. >> chair ronen: thank you, and i believe the part of the reason why dcyf wasn't able to get all the information was because a staff member was sick. that's fine. more time is not a problem at all. we of course need this information before we approve these contracts, and so mr. newquist, just wondering, is one week enough time? just want to be sure. >> yes, one week should be enough time to pull together the requested information. >> chair ronen: okay. after we hear public comment, i will make a motion to continue items 7, 8, and 9 to the may 4
meeting, i believe -- perfect. the may 4 meeting. but before we do that, let's open this item up for public comment. >> clerk: thank you, madam chair. members of the public who are attending in person who wish to speak on these items should lineup by the curtains. if you're joining us remotely, dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2492-607-1682, then press pound and pound again. press star, three to enter the speaker line. wait until the system indicates your line has been unmuted before you begin your comments. there are no speakers in the chamber. mr. atkins, do we have any public speakers in the queue? >> operator: mr. clerk, there
are no speakers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you. chair ronen? >> chair ronen: thank you. mr. menard? >> if i could respectfully ask to continue this item until may 11. there's no urgency around any of these items. the items are all underspent. >> chair ronen: that makes sense to me. mr. newquist, how does that sound to you? >> that's perfect. >> chair ronen: okay. then i will make a motion to continue items 7, 8, and 9 to the meeting of may 11.
may i have a roll call vote. >> clerk: thank you. on the motion to continue items 7, 8, and 9 to the budget and finance meeting of may 11 -- [roll call] >> clerk: we have three ayes. >> chair ronen: thank you. and now can we please read item 10? >> clerk: yes. item 10 is a resolution retroactively approving the first amendment and second amendment for a contract for the instituto familiar de la raza, road map to peace program, between the instituto familiar de la raza and the city and county of san francisco, acting by and through its department of children, youth, and their families, retroactively approving the first amendment to extend the term by three years for a term of july 1, 2019 through june 30, 2023, and
increasing the amount by approximately $8.5 million for a not to exceed amount of approximately 10.7 million, and approving the second amendment to extend the term by one year for a total term of july 1, 2019 through june 30, 2024, and increasing the amount by approximately 1.9 million, for a total not to exceed amount of 12.7 million. members of the public joining us remotely wishing to make public comment, dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2492-607-1682, then press pound and pound again. press star, three to lineup to speak, and wait until the system indicates your line has been unmuted before you begin your comments.
this is a competitively bid grant, as is most of our contracts. as we show on page 32 of our report, we're [indiscernible] so it's really just adjusting the grant amount to align with the future budget of the grant and allowing the department to maintain a 10% contingency on those expenditures. in this case, we did get detailed expenditure information from the department for this year, and the budget and the grant isn't changing, so i feel assurance about what is happening here, and i can explain it, so for that reason, we're recommending approval as
amended. happy to answer any questions. >> chair ronen: mr. newquist, does the department agree with the budget and legislative analyst's proposed amendment? >> yes, we do. >> chair ronen: fantastic. colleagues, any questions or comments? i will just say that as the supervisor of the district, that the road map to peace initiative primarily serves, although not exclusively, this program has been a fundamental part of our violence prevention work in the district, and i've been so pleased with the work. the tragedy that launched the need for the program, we haven't had tragedies quite so similar since its existence, so the proof is in the pudding, and we -- this -- this program
and its lead sponsor, instituto familiar de la raza, are just leaders in the district, so i just want to thank them for their phenomenal work and with that, we'll open this item up for public comment. >> clerk: thank you, madam chair. members of the public who wish to speak on this item and are joining us in the chamber should lineup now. for those joining us remotely, dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2492-607-1682, then press pound and pound again. press star, three to enter the queue. we have no speakers in the chamber. mr. atkins, how about the caller line? >> operator: mr. clerk, there
are no callers on the line. >> clerk: thank you much. >> chair ronen: i would love to be a cosponsor for this item. secondly, i would like to reduce the not to exceed item from $12,711,687 to $11.6 million. >> clerk: thank you. on that motion -- [roll call] >> chair ronen: thank you, and i would like to forward this
resolution to the full board with a positive recommendation as amended. >> clerk: thank you. on that motion to forward this resolution to the full board with a positive recommendation -- [roll call] >> clerk: we have three ayes. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. thank you, mr. newquist. mr. clerk, can you please read item 11. >> clerk: yes. item 11 is a resolution receipt owe actively authorizing the department of public health to accept and expend a grant increase from the national institutes of health through heluna health for participation in a program entitles, pre -- entitled preexposure proprylaxis 3-d, an integrated pharmacy digital diary and
delivery strategy to increase preexposure prophylaxis use among men who have sex with men, in the amount of $95,985 for the period of april 1, 2020 through march 31, 2021, and in the amount of 166,602 for the period of april 1, 2021 # and march 31, 2022, for a total amount of 334,576 for the total grant period of april 8, 2019 through march 31, 2022. >> chair ronen: thank you. and i believe we have a presentation?
. >> there's still more than 35,000 hiv infections in the united states, and in san francisco, we still had 60 new infections, and we're still trying to get down to zero. we do now have two highly effective hiv medications that are more than 99% effective in preventing infections of men who have sex with men and changing the trajectory of the epidemic. insurance is required to cover all expenses for prep, but prep is not well advertised.
one of the challenges in getting and staying on prep is that you have to have visits every three months to test for hiv before refills are given, which often means separate providers to the providers and the laboratory, and providers have difficulty integrating prep into their practices and ensuring on-time refills, so we are looking at new models of delivery to address these challenges. pharmacists under a collaborative practice with a physician can track deliveries and refill of preps, so that shifts the burden off of providers. we added to that home collection of labs so that prep users can do everything from home, and our project is called prep 3-d. we partnered with a local
internet pharmacy that does hope delivery and provide testing for the pharmacies who need to monitor someone who's on prep. with n.y.u., we're testing the cost effectiveness of this approach. thank you very much. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> chair ronen: thank you. colleagues, any questions? sounds like a great program. very exciting. there's no b.l.a. report on this item, so i will open this item up for public comment. >> clerk: thank you, madam chair. members of the public who are joining us in person should lineup now. for those listening remotely, call 415-655-0001, enter the meeting i.d. of 2492-607-1682,
then press pound twice. press star, three to enter the queue and wait until the system indicates you have unmuted before you begin your comments. we have no public speakers in the chamber. mr. atkins, are there any callers on the telephone? >> operator: mr. clerk, there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you much. >> chair ronen: public comment is closed. i would like to make a motion to forward this resolution to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> clerk: on that motion to forward this resolution to the full board with a positive recommendation -- [roll call] >> clerk: we have three ayes. >> chair ronen: thank you. can you please read item 12? >> clerk: yes. item 12 is an ordinance amending the administrative
code and police code to prohibit the city from using or contracting for the use of gas powered landscaping equipment to perform a city function starting january 1, 2024, with temporary waivers for city departments that document to the satisfaction of the director of the department of the environment the unavailability of needed technology to replace such equipment, prohibit the use of gas powered landscaping equipment in the city starting january 1, 2026, and penalize property owners and business owners and managers that violate that prohibition, establish a buy-back program to assist owners of such equipment in transitioning away from its use, require that the department conduct a public education campaign regarding the gas powered landscaping equipment ban and the buy-back program, establish a fund to receive penalties collected for
violation of the ban and other moneys, to use for purchases of equipment for city departments to replace gas powers landscaping equipment, and designate the department to administer and enforce the ordinance. members of the public joining us remotely should dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2492-607-1682, then press pound and pound again. press star, three to enter the queue, and when the system indicates you have been unmuted, that is your time to begin your comments. >> chair ronen: thank you, and we'll turn this over to supervisor melgar. >> supervisor melgar: thank you, chair ronen. i have been working on this almost a year with advocates and folks in city departments, so i'm really excited where we are right now. this legislation is fairly
ground breaking. it is the most far reaching in california, possibly the nation. it is meant to transition us away from dirty, polluting gas equipment into more sustainable, cleaner, quieter electric equipment that protects the people that use it in the communities that are most impacted by climate change, but it also addresses some of the hardships that these lower income communities feel most acutely. i have had the pleasure of working with 350 bay area, the sierra club, the league of women voters, poder, the latino task force, and the san francisco conservation core, along with the wonderful staff
at the san francisco department of the environment, former director rafael and now director gee in all these things that we need to do to combat the climate crisis, but i've worked with the city administration because some of this has to do with purchasing. the laborer's union are most impacted by the use of this equipment. i would say, you know, is landscaping is something that makes our recreational environment, our outdoor environment more beautiful for our use, and the workers that
are tasked with that work are mostly immigrant men. in san francisco, it's mostly latino and chinese men, and the -- this equipment is dirty, and people are literally carrying it on their back, and it has a profound health effect on their lungs and hearts, and also, by extension, their families, who then have to deal with the chronic disease that that engenders. but then, it is also communities of color that suffer from the climate crisis and pollution and have borne the legacy of environmental racism, so i'm really glad that we were able to address some of those issues through this legislation. it is coming to the finance committee because it will have a cost. the way the legislation is structured is it phases in this transition for both the city and for the departments. not all equipment is available
today to transition to, from dirty gasoline, oil, two-stroke joins, but some of it is. and over the long run, through the life of that equipment, electric is actually cheaper than gas in terms of the output, you know, for the work. so i think that, over the long run, we will save the resources on this, not to mention save health and our planet, but i do think that it is the transition that we must make, and i think this legislation sets out a good model for this one little corner of all of the work that we have to do to get away from dirty, polluting sources and have a more stable, cleaner energy use for our equipment. so the legislation basically does two things.
it bans the use of dirty gas powered equipment by our city. i mentioned the two departments that are the biggest ones, but there are others. c.p.w., department of real estate that are higher or do work themselves. it tasks the department of the environment staff with, you know, figuring out is this equipment available now? do they have to make the transition? so if it's within 300% of the cost of the gas engines, and that takes into account, you know, the where do you plug it in and the stuff that you need to operationalize it, then, the department of the environment will be tasked, if it's not available, giving the department a waiver. if it is available, giving the department a transition because it's not going to happen all at once, it's going to be phased in over years, and thanks to the b.l.a. for doing the
to turn it over to our new director of the department of the environment who has a presentation. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor melgar. hello, chair ronen, vice chair safai. bring up the presentation. i have a few slides for context on the proposed legislation before you. as supervisor melgar mentioned, the reason why i am here before you today the department of environment insisted the implementation and enforcement for the legislation. first is problems why this is important. one hour of operation of lawnmower is equivalent of driving 300 miles. put that in context by the amount of pollution in the
lawnmower. leaf blowers is equal to driving 1100 miles. you could drive from here to vancouver, canada, put it on someone's back and that is what they breathe in. we know the health impacts of pollution in our low income communities and workers. asthma, cancer. they put burdens on the families already in need. the other impact relates to noise. the lawnmower outputs 94 decibels of sound equivalent of a fire alarm going out. stand next to a fire alarm. you know how loud that is that is what the lawnmower outputs, twice what the world health organization recommends in terms of maximum outputs of sound for outdoor use.
you have the pollution, environmental effect the sound this. is what the legislation is attempting to fall for. this legislation in terms of transitioning from gas to electric are two fold. you have basically zero emission on your back and quieter system. there are challenges as mentioned by supervisor melgar. right now this is still a maturing market in terms of electrification of gas powered landscaping equipment. there is a higher cost to that. in addition we have to do specific outreach to reach the communities most impacted. these are communities of color that have been working throughout the pandemic while everyone was safe at home.
they were still working out there in these conditions this. is what this legislation attempts to call for. the equipment as supervisor melgar mentioned that would be 25-horsepower or less spark engines emission. these are examples of the equipment that would be covered under the legislation. as supervisor melgar mentioned on the next slide we go over the limited waiver process existing for the city departments. currently the electric equipment does not exist the department will maintain a list of available equipment. that would qualify for waiver if the cost of replacement is four times greater than gas-powered that is consideration for the waiver. the reason why this is important for the city departments as you are aware of the challenges.
there might be situations where we have facilities that can't charge these units. they might have to upgrade electrical infrastructure to require pg&e to install large expensive gear to blow this cost efficiency out of the water. this accounts for that in those situations. this is the proposed budget and phasing of the program. as supervisor melgar mentioned, we would currently call for the hiring of one program manager. really that program manager is coordinator to work without community-based organizations. when you look at ramp-up time to public ban in 2026, the next couple years are bringing stakeholders together in year one. figuring out best way to
implement rebates incentives to get money to communities we want money to reach. then getting into that phase out period in 2026. by then we hope to have done significant outreach to reach all populations to get them resources they need to transition. in 2026 we have enforcement required to enforce legislation on any offenders of the rule. with that, that concludes my presentation. i am joined by my colleague jackson who is our manager for healthy ecosystems at the department of environment. we are happy to answer any questions. >> thank you, director. it is a pleasure working with you and your staff. it is a collaborative and problem solving. i appreciate that.
colleagues, i do have a number of amendments circulated. most of the amendments have to do with the operationalizing of this. as i mentioned, i worked closely with the department staff who will be tasked with enforcement and doing the rfd for the outreach and putting back together the buy back plan. as well with our city administrator carmen chu to make sure the contracting requirements work for all of the streamlining and efficiency she is trying to do. we work to incorporate suggestions, most of them, as long as the vision and mission for the legislation remains true. that is the bulk of my amendments that have been circulated.
it is about dates, changing dates for reporting so it works for the staff. making sure that the percentage for the waivers worked in terms of operations at the suggestion of the department of the environment. making sure that our definitions for equipment are consistent with our state regulations so that it is operation and it is the same thing. it provides for waivers so that we make sure the department of environment has leeway to do enforcement to consider people's situations. if folks are very low income so not to punitively approach especially low income property owners who have this equipment.
we also are accepting the budget and legislative analyst recommendation for reporting back to the board of supervisors, which is just good government. there is also some general clerical amendments i have submitted. some of these amendments are substantive. they have to it is for a while. i would appreciate your support to vote on it. i am looking forward to the discussion to making sure this is implemented and opens the door for more policy that will help us be more sustainable. thank you. >> thank you, chair ronen. this ordinance would ban the use of small engine gas powered
equipment. first in the city or by city users in 2024. then city-wide for everyone in 2026. we really focused -- with waivers under certain conditions. we focused on the costs. i will walk you through that. page 38 of the report this shows the cost to city departments, which is based on their asset inventories of equipment that would be subject to the ban. we consulted with icon mists at the california air resources board and the department staff to get a sense of what the cost of replacement would be. that is the basis of these numbers. you can see they are $16.5 million to transition to new equipment including buying
new zero mission equipment and batteries and chargers. then we show comparison of the current cost for gasoline powered equipment versus new ongoing cost of the zero emission equipment. it is cheaper. it is not driven by the fact that gasoline equipment requires more preventative maintenance. it is powered by gasoline which is cheaper than electricity. these costs do depend on the intensity of the use by the city departments. there are in some cases infrastructure costs necessary for departments to use electric equipment at the intensity they do. that could be up to $1 million per site. turning to page 39, we looked at the cost to landscaping industry based on various estimates of
number of workers in the industry. transition coasts 2.4 to $10.4 million. that is offset by lower ongoing costs between $400,000 per year and $1.9 million per year. next we show further down the page the department of environment costs summarized by the director. finally, on the waivers on page 40. the way the legislation is written it provides waiver for compliance by city department if the new equipment is 20% more than the existing equipment. we show here on this table unless that waiver is increased this legislation would have almost no impact on city departments. upfront costs are often much more than that, offset by lower ongoing costs. that needs to be changed to have
an impact. that is addressed in supervisor melgar's amendment. we do recommend reporting requirements. this is a big effort that the department of environment will undertake. obviously important for the board of supervisors to be aware of what is going on so we do include that recommendation and consider approval to be a policy matter for the board. thank you. >> thank you. supervisor safai. >> thank you, supervisor melgar. this is really important legislation. i appreciate the slides that were very simple but impactful. it is very shocking to see that, particularly the sound, and the pollution that one person would be exposed to. it is amazing to think so many
people start to go deaf at a certain age, a lot younger than they would normally. i see it in my own family. folks are not even exposed to something on that level. it is horrendous, not to mention repetitive stress of carrying something that is heavier. there are additional burdens on people based on the weight of the equipment. i am really excited about the legislation. thank you for putting it forward. on the technical side because i did something similar on zero waste. one of the questions that doesn't jump out unless it is under be administrative code 100 governing administrative fines on page 13. director, can you talk a little bit about the fine process for the private sector. what the appeal process is.
i know we had to incorporate in the ads enough appeal process. you can't administrator a fine without there being due process for appeals. i wanted you to talk about that and how that would be handled. i might have a couple other questions. >> good morning, supervisors. administrative code 100 does include appeals process. first issue a warning. then 30-days for somebody in the problem. if there isn't a remedy a violation then appeals process. the ordinance gives us a lot of latitude on how we would potentially enforce. if somebody has very few means we can also actually enforce against the property owner instead of the gardner. >> i figured that is where it was. you don't have to call it out.
you are referencing something there. that is important to highlight. most people reading this don't understand it is embedded in the administrative procedures. if you are going into a community that might be hard to reach because of not understanding the appeal process and those you are working with you want to do education first, but we were very strict on the zero waste when it came to large refuse generators. one notice and it was immediately defined. that was a different industry. 30-day warning, appeal, time to incorporate. i don't think the intent is to capture fines from a smaller scale business. i want to highlight that. a couple other questions. when i look at the cost estimate from the legislative analyst. upfront cost to rec and park,
not a department with a lot of money is $15 million, not including the site. if you are going to have many more things electric you have to have more stations to charge. that is probably lower. when we do m.t.a. work there are federal grants. is there a thought about phasing in the cost of this? $15 million to the department of recreation and parks is a significant cost. we can say we want this to happen. how are we paying for that? >> i might defer to the supervisors as far as the phasing. this is her legislation. >> i can't hear you. >> i will defer to supervisor melgar. >> maybe we can hear from mayor's budget office or on behalf of rec and park. >> upfront cost is not all at once.
there is a maintenance cost to this equipment to begin with. when you buy it it is not like you have it for a hundred years. it is used and there is some -- what is the term. depreciation. the assets do have to be replaced. the equipment is used every day at rec and park. the waiver provisions that the department of the environment will enforce presume not all of the equipment is going to have to be replaced at the same time because not all of it is available. right now we have leaf blowers commercially available replaced. in fact rec and park already has made commitment to do that before this legislation was introduced. the rest of it.
tree trimmers and the line trimmers, all of those things, some are available and some not that are comparable for commercial use that we have. as the market catches up. this was an idea from the mayor's office to allow us to do the waivers. if something is not available within 300%, the recommendation of the budget and legislative analyst. they don't have to replace it that year. wait until it is available to purchase. it is not an upfront cost in the budget year. it will be phased in overtime. we can't predict when it will happen. we are making the commitment that we will fund it to make it happen when it. >> point of clarification. bla report talks about type of
equipment, gasoline powered versus electric. these things are identified. are these items that already exist in the market based on your analysis? is this not a complete set of equipment, sample set? >> this is not my area of expertise. that would be somebody from department of environment. yes, there is electric equipment for those things already. it is not all comparable. horsepower output and not all of it is comparable. the department of environment is tasked with putting together a list. it requires investigation. we have to make sure not only is it cost-effective but it works in the same way as the stuff we have already. >> is that reflected in the amounts today?
>> yes. >> it talks about usable nature of the equipment? >> i think that the legislation is written flexibly enough to make sure the department of environment can use their expertise to put together the list waivers without telling them how to do it. they are the agency with the knowledge. >> we have a representative from rec and park. >> i am seeing this for the first time. on page 12 it talks about exempt gas power landscaping equipment list. it specifically talks about the
list shall be called exempt gas powered landscaping equipment list. replacement technology deemed to be unavailable. it does not exist or if it cannot be purchased for less than or equal to 300% of the gas equivalent gas powered equipment taking into account electrical infrastructure and operating costs over one year. it doesn't say anything about the usable nature. is there somewhere else you put that information? that makes sense. that is he conversation i was having with the laborers with a gas powered chainsaw it has more power. electric charge you have to go back and replace batteries. to your point is there somewhere
that you can point me to. i would like to look at this more carefully as we have time to it is on it. >> i would say those two words replacement technology do mean something to the state regulatory agency. we put that in there not an exhaustive list or definition. we wanted to standard it. >> california air resources board has a small off-road engine program. this is specifically to regulate 25-horsepower and less engines. that is the beginning. anything greater than 25-horsepower.
a large chainsaw you might use for big downed trees wouldn't be captured under this legislation. within that then if it costs 300% more to electrify and put in infra struck the, that would filter out more equipment. there is a lot of equipment not included. this is construction related. a lot of types of tractors wouldn't be affected. we are talking about smaller equipment bike push mowers. >> i am looking at gas power landscaping equipment. meaning in 21.1 of the police code and replacement technology. unless clearly denied it might be helpful to add clarifying language. that is my point.
you understand if there is someone on the receiving end in a violation you could get into some misunderstooding. i want to ask where did you come up at 320%. originally it was 120%. >> that was suggestion of state and the budget and legislative analyst. >> i just want to say i am excited about this. the idea of doing things on the small scale to have significant impact. they tease us about being san francisco. this is a good thing. it will have significant impact. thank you, supervisor melgar for working on this. >> as i understand the budget
and legislative analyst increased to 300%. 120%, everything would qualify for that. i am excited about this. i didn't realize when i first read it what a profound worker rights issue this is on top of environmental impacts. that shifted my thinking and urgency around this. i am wondering if we could hear from the mayor's budget director in terms of this question of how do we -- if the mayor's office are you as budget director thinking how to make up for the significant expense? how we would program it into future budgets as we move forward because it is such an important piece of the reality
of being able to achieve the important goals of the legislation? >> at this point this is not in the projections for the next four years. we would need to work with departments to understand their plan for implementing this legislation and the fiscal impact of it. based on the implementation date we would have the next fiscal year to incorporate to the financial projections. >> supervisor safai. >> it would be helpful to have representative rec and park to talk about the implementation, how it would be implemented. that could be helpful. >> we do have eric anderson from rec and park on the meeting.
>> i will ask more questions next time. you work with the department and had conversations about infrastructure and replacement technology. can you talk a little bit about that and the impact on your department. >> eric anderson superintendent of parks and open space. we have been working with the supervisors office on the amendments to the legislation. talking more specifically starting broadly this is very impactful for us. we are managing and maintaining
thousands of acres of playgrounds and all of the equipment that is under discussion is really key to how we maintain the land. >> a few key points. the bla report was balanced and covered the costs. i think the issues of the waiver is really critical for us because this is very much developing technology and there really aren't functional replacements for a lot of the tools in our fleet. the waiver process it is critical for us and i think the amendment regarding the supporting electrical infrastructure is very important. we totally agree on aligning the
equipment covered in the legislation to align with the state definition of small off-road equipment. if we are talking about this, one key piece i would mention is that the equipment under 25-horsepower does include significantly sized equipment. working with the bla we provided estimates on possible likely conversions that may come along in the future for utility vehicles. those are just a subset of a number of other pieces we have. we have generatessors and sod cutters and a vast array of medium sized equipment that will be effective over time.
there is a fair number of equipment that does not have replacement technology now but will in the future. the bla report mentioned $15 million. we think it would be important and helpful to be looking at some support funding support for the conversion as they come on line. as they come on line there will be a cost impact. as a waiver is no longer available. we don't see that. it is in a more immediate way an immediate impact to the department. with all of that being said we
support the goals of the legislation. we have been informally trialing where some great successes and this doesn't work there but it workings here. we are very supportive and have been working with doe and the supervisor's office. >> we talked about technology, cost, having to work with the mayor's office and department of environment to identify the funds. ly work with the sponsoring supervisor if i had more questions. >> i will add a state and federal regulatory reash this stuff.
federal clean air is exempting. on the local level we have to regulate it. one of the things regulated by the feds. that doesn't fall you this. now they are doing it for good or bad. as the technology becomes available it will be a dance we have to do to do our part and meet our emission goals and protect the health of workers and also deal with the state and federal regulations. it is evolving. everybody recognizesna we need to do something about the climate crisis. >> i was reading about the buyer
back program. i assume neighborhoods with higher exposure to particulate and higher reach of asthma. scoring 50 or highral on the san francisco neighborhood. don't fall for that. >> that is geared to works not necessarily the neighborhoods. i wanted to write the legislation in such a way that there was outreach and education that was being done in the neighborhoods most impacted. the definition is what you just read in terms of the outreach, marketing and education. the buy back program which is turning in the dirty equipment to get new ones is more towards the definition for our micro
businesses. >> i hope the department will enter into the cbo to have a established relationship with the community. >> i see that. accidents of two or more with gross receipts less than 2.5. priority will be given to businesses and individuals that are operating in these specific types of neighborhoods. i have never seen that definition before. what is the cal and biro screen tool. >> you have never introduced yourself. >> the screen is a statewide tool that uses a lot of
different criteria to grade by zip code different parts of the state. you can go to the website to see the pollution level, disease level and get a score. in san francisco we don't have very many. it is color coded. red is the worst with a lot of challenges with pollution and disease. we don't have a lot we have some. the 50 marker is sort of getting us to the point where we can try to address the folks with the most challenges and have been procuring the equipment themselves. we needlegibility criteria for free stuff and who won't. by using the screen it is one tool we could use that helps define that. that is something that is defined by the state as well. it makes it easier for us to manage.
>> when you come back next time can you bring a copy of the map 50 or higher to see the neighborhoods prioritized for buy back where the businesses live and work? it is exciting. >> thank you. coming in here today i wanted to learn more about it before signing on because when you are just thinking about the environmental benefits with old and new equipment you have to factor in the environmental impacts of creating new equipment does it work? realizing the worker rights and how it impacts, it just answers that question to me. this is urgent. it is the lowest wageworkers and immigrant workers facing the worst environmental and health
impacts. this is so thoughtfully crafted and put together. it is wonderful legislation. i want to thank you, supervisor melgar and ask to be added as cosponsor. >> could we please open this up for public comment. >> members of the public who wish to speak line up now along the curtains. remotely call 415-655-0001 id 24926017682. pound twice. when connected press star 3 to answer the speaker line. in the queue continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. that is the queue to begin your comments. we have a number of in person speaker in the chamber.
as the chair did declare that we will time for one minute. >> i will be brief. thank you for the opportunity. as the board members stated this is exciting. it is for the workers and environment. what a beautiful marriage you created. easy to support this. i am on the board of the san francisco of conservation workers and volunteer for mothers upfront this. is a human rights, climate and environmental issue. we are excited to support. i urge you to provide a lot of funding. this is something that is necessary to the workers. it is the right transition. we would love to help you through the process to make sure you have people power behind it. thank you again. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning.
miy. san francisco declared the emergency many years ago. we need bold action to make sure that we are cutting fossil-fuel emissions. this addressed the needs of labor social justice and small businesses and climate and air pollution. it is win-win for everyone involved. it protects the workers and our families. as the director mentioned they admit that the truck went be over a thousand miles. that blew my mind. we need to pass and fund this bill. thank you. >> next speaker. >> hello. thank you. i am friday. i am here as part of mothers upfront but long time constituent of san francisco and mother in the city.
these gas powered machines are poison to those who have to use them and surrounded by them. the people who use them are all someone's child and many of those people are also someone's parent. these machines shorten their lives. when you think about the cost of this piece of legislation, potential waivers. fund this very well and take those people's sides seriously. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good morning, i am richard harris. i attend concerts, watch my kids play soccer, i go to the games at big parks all over town.
we are concerned with the practicality of this. we like the aspiration. with eric and park such a huge factor in this. the issues spotted in the budget about how willing charging stations are needed and where is not mentioned. we ask your attention to footnote ifs 4 on 5 at page 34, 35, 37. that shows pieces of equipment not accounted for which are many involved in the parks. we have not -- >> sorry your time is up. >> we ask to see the amendments before it goes further. good luck. >> i apologize but we are
limiting speakers to one minute. that concludes in-person speakers. are there any on the phone? >> i am jennifer. i live in district 7. i want to mention i participate in the city golf cart program at city college. i am speaking in support of quieter community's act. i am calling on behalf of other men's that couldn't smalt. the city goal is reducing greenhouse gas emission and environmental justice. worst generators of pollution and greenhouse gases in the
city. that amount of pollution generated an hour of beef chilly is useful to health and climate goals. they have similar ordinances that limits small engines but not the buy back. the buy back program is a requirement in addition to the tools. >> your time is up. >> good morning. i am district 2 resident. i will say i was tremendously relieved one morning when the landscapers working on the neighbors property turned on
electric leaf blowers and there was not the roar of the leaf blower. i don't have much to add what others have said. thanks, supervisor melgar for outreach communication on this. i am pleased with the leadership role that communicates to the market this is the direction we need to move in. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> this is executive director of the superintendent association of california. we do support this measure. we think it has long-term positive impact to the environment, to the worker and
to the economics. we do not believe we are there yet. throughout the conversations this morning the technology is not caught up on a number of pieces of equipment. the very same community we are trying to protect immigrant communities with small landscaping business are going to be subjected to significant economic impacts and buy back will not offset. we request the city follow the rule making process on december 29, 2021 manufacturing and sale by january -- >> your time is up. next speaker, please. >> david pilpel. i support the idea.
this needs more work. funding is not clear. this is not appropriate. more staff is needed for program and outreach with department and language. there should be a general fund allocation or make legislation contingent for city departments phases outlined sounds good. public health, sheriff and others have property that is relevant not just big 6. another reason i think we should have the department working group by real estate for private use phasing out makes sense. 2026 seems reasonable. regional would be better. i would enact through the air district or state legislation. maybe for matt haney in the near future rather than administrative and police codes move to environment code. i understand you will intend to review legislation as amended
next time. we need more than one minute. >> your time is up. >> thank you for your comments. >> there are no further callers in the queue. >> public comment is closed. supervisor melgar. >> i wanted to say thank you, supervisor melgar for your hard work. these types of pieces of legislation with so many different stakeholders and strong goals and impact on the market, particularly those at the small level in terms of their gross receipts and businesses and often times startup and family run can be harder to impact in a way you are intending without hurting and putting out of business. i know you care deeply about that. you are thinking about that. that is what the buy back program is about.
you are very cog any sent of the fact -- cog any sent of the fact funding needs to be there. i would like to be added as cosponsor i am happy to work with you. based on the experience with similar types of legislation with the department of environment. this is very well detailed and thought out. >> thank you, supervisor. i appreciate it. i would like to make a motion to move the amendment and ask we continue this to next meeting. thank you. >> can we take a roll call vote on the motion to amend and continue the item to the may 4th meeting. >> yes. on that motion by melgar to amend the ordinance as stated earlier. vice chair safai.
>> aye. >> melgar. >> aye. >> ronen. >> aye. >> we have three ayes. on the motion to continue this ordinance to the may 4 meeting of the budget and finance committee as amended. vice chair. >> supervisor safai: fie. >> aye. >> reason nan aye. >> three ayes. thank you so much. any other item on the agenda today? >> that concludes the business. >> the meeting is adjourned.
valencia has been a constantly evolving roadway. the first bike lanes were striped in 1999, and today is the major north and south bike route from the mission neighborhood extending from market to mission street. >> it is difficult to navigate lindsay on a daily basis, and more specifically, during the morning and evening commute hours. >> from 2012 to 2016, there were 260 collisions on valencia and 46 of those were between vehicles and bikes. the mayor shows great leadership and she knew of the long history of collisions and the real necessity for safety improvements on the streets, so she actually directed m.t.a. to put a pilot of protected bike lanes from market to 15th on valencia street within four months time. [♪♪♪] >> valencia is one of the most
used north south bike routes in san francisco. it has over 2100 cyclists on an average weekday. we promote bicycles for everyday transportation of the coalition. valencia is our mission -- fits our mission perfectly. our members fall 20 years ago to get the first bike lane stripes. whether you are going there for restaurants, nightlife, you know , people are commuting up and down every single day. >> i have been biking down the valencia street corridor for about a decade. during that time, i have seen the emergence of ridesharing companies. >> we have people on bikes, we have people on bike share, scooters, we have people delivering food and we have uber taking folks to concerts at night. one of the main goals of the project was to improve the overall safety of the corridor, will also looking for opportunities to upgrade the bikeway. >> the most common collision
that happens on valencia is actually due to double parking in the bike lane, specifically during, which is where a driver opens the door unexpectedly. >> we kept all the passengers -- the passenger levels out, which is the white crib that we see, we double the amount of commercial curbs that you see out here. >> most people aren't actually perking on valencia, they just need to get dropped off or pick something up. >> half of the commercial loading zones are actually after 6:00 p.m., so could be used for five-minute loading later into the evening to provide more opportunities or passenger and commercial loading. >> the five minute loading zone may help in this situation, but they are not along the corridor where we need them to be. >> one of the most unique aspects of the valencia pilot is on the block between 14th street. >> we worked with a pretty big mix of people on valencia. >> on this lot, there are a few schools.
all these different groups had concerns about the safety of students crossing the protected bikeway whether they are being dropped off or picked up in the morning or afternoon. to address those concerns, we installed concrete loading islands with railings -- railings that channel -- channeled a designated crossing plane. >> we had a lot of conversations around how do you load and unload kids in the mornings and the afternoons? >> i do like the visibility of some of the design, the safety aspects of the boarding pilot for the school. >> we have painted continental crosswalks, as well as a yield piece which indicates a cyclist to give the right-of-way so they can cross the roadway. this is probably one of the most unique features. >> during the planning phase, the m.t.a. came out with three alternatives for the long term project. one is parking protected, which we see with the pilot, they also
imagined a valencia street where we have two bike lanes next to one another against one side of the street. a two-way bikeway. the third option is a center running two-way bikeway, c. would have the two bike lanes running down the center with protection on either side. >> earlier, there weren't any enter lane designs in san francisco, but i think it will be a great opportunity for san francisco to take the lead on that do so the innovative and different, something that doesn't exist already. >> with all three concepts for valencia's long-term improvement , there's a number of trade-offs ranging from parking, or what needs to be done at the intersection for signal infrastructure. when he think about extending this pilot or this still -- this design, there's a lot of different design challenges, as well as challenges when it comes to doing outreach and making sure that you are reaching out to everyone in the community. >> the pilot is great.
it is a no-brainer. it is also a teaser for us. once a pilot ends, we have thrown back into the chaos of valencia street. >> what we're trying to do is incremental improvement along the corridor door. the pilot project is one of our first major improvements. we will do an initial valuation in the spring just to get a glimpse of what is happening out here on the roadway, and to make any adjustments to the pilot as needed. this fall, we will do a more robust evaluation. by spring of 2020, we will have recommendations about long-term improvements. >> i appreciate the pilot and how quickly it went in and was built, especially with the community workshops associated with it, i really appreciated that opportunity to give input. >> we want to see valencia become a really welcoming and comfortable neighborhood street for everyone, all ages and abilities. there's a lot of benefits to protected bike lanes on valencia , it is not just for cyclists. we will see way more people biking, more people walking, we are just going to create a
gardens throughout the garden tour. all of the gardens are volunteers. the only requirement is you're willing to show your garden for a day. so we have gardens that vary from all stages of development and all gardens, family gardens, private gardens, some of them as small as postage stamps and others pretty expansive. it's a variety -- all of the world is represented in our gardens here in the portola. >> i have been coming to the portola garden tour for the past seven or eight years ever since i learned about it because it is the most important event of the neighborhood, and the reason it is so important is because it links this neighborhood back to its history. in the early 1800s the portola was farmland.
the region's flowers were grown in this neighborhood. if you wanted flowers anywhere future bay area, you would come to this area to get them. in the past decade, the area has tried to reclaim its roots as the garden district. one of the ways it has done that is through the portola garden tour, where neighbors open their gardens open their gardens to people of san francisco so they can share that history. >> when i started meeting with the neighbors and seeing their gardens, i came up with this idea that it would be a great idea to fundraise. we started doing this as a fund-raiser. since we established it, we awarded 23 scholarships and six work projects for the students.
>> the scholarship programs that we have developed in association with the portola is just a win-win-win situation all around. >> the scholarship program is important because it helps people to be able to tin in their situation and afford to take classes. >> i was not sure how i would stay in san francisco. it is so expensive here. i prayed so i would receive enough so i could stay in san francisco and finish my school, which is fantastic, because i don't know where else i would have gone to finish. >> the scholarships make the difference between students being able to stay here in the city and take classes and having to go somewhere else. [♪♪♪] [♪♪♪] >> you come into someone's home and it's they're private and personal space.
it's all about them and really their garden and in the city and urban environment, the garden is the extension of their indoor environment, their outdoor living room. >> why are you here at this garden core? it's amazing and i volunteer here every year. this is fantastic. it's a beautiful day. you walk around and look at gardens. you meet people that love gardens. it's fantastic. >> the portola garden tour is the last saturday in september every year. mark your calendars every year. you can see us on the website
the regular meetings of the commission of community investment and infrastructure for tuesday frequently 19, 2022. welcome the public who are strolling or listen to us live. the and the staff participating. following the guidelines by local officials the members of commission are meeting remote to ensure the safety of everyone including the public. thank you you will for joining us. madam contact.