Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    June 18, 2013 2:00pm-2:31pm PDT

2:00 pm
2:01 pm
2:02 pm
2:03 pm
2:04 pm
2:05 pm
2:06 pm
2:07 pm
2:08 pm
2:09 pm
2:10 pm
[gavel] >> good afternoon. welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors meeting of tuesday, june the 18th, 2013. madam clerk, could you please call the roll? >> supervisor avalos? avalos present. supervisor breed? breed present. supervisor campos? campos present. supervisor chiu? chiu present. supervisor cohen? cohen aye -- cohen present.
2:11 pm
supervisor farrell? farrell present. supervisor kim? kim present. supervisor mar? mar present. supervisor tang? tang present. supervisor wiener? wiener present. supervisor yee 1234 yee present. mr. president, all members are present. >> thank you. ladies and gentlemen, could you please join us in the pledge of allegiance? i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands; one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> colleagues, we have our march 27th, april 24th, may 8th, and may 14th board meeting minutes, as well as minutes for the special meeting of budget and finance committee on may 8th. could i have a motion to approve those minutes? motion by supervisor mar, seconded by supervisor campos. without objection, those meeting minutes are approved. [gavel] >> madam clerk, are tali there
2:12 pm
any communications it are >> there are no communications today, mr. president. >> can you read the consent agenda? >> items 1 through 8 are the consent calendar. these items are considered routine unless a member objects and they can be removed separately. >> colleagues, anyone like to sever any items? roll call vote. >> couldn't consent agenda, supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor tang? tang aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye. supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor campos? >> present, aye. >> aye. supervisor chiu? chiu aye. supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim? kim aye. there are 11 ayes. >> the ordinances are finally passed and resolutions adopted. [gavel] >> next item. >> item 9 is an ordinance amending the adopted fiscal year 2013-14 appropriation ordinance and other adopted biennial capital appropriation ordinanceses for the public utilities commission by de
2:13 pm
appropriating and re-appropriating operating budget of approximately 5 million and capital improvement projects of approximately 42 million. >> same house same call? without objection, this ordinance is passed on the first read. [gavel] >> item 10. >> item 10 is an ordinance amending the subdivision code to adopt a condominium conversion fee applicable to certain buildings that would be permitted to convert during a seven-year period and subject to specified requirements, sub spending the annual condominium conversion lottery until 20 24, and resuming under specified circumstances, and restricting future condominium lotteries to buildings of no more than four units with specified number of owner occupied units for three years prior to the lottery and to provide for an exception for five -- for certain five and six-unit buildings to participate in the lottery. >> roll call vote. >> on item 10, supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor tang? tang no. supervisor wiener? wiener no. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye.
2:14 pm
supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor campos? campos aye. supervisor chiu? chiu aye. supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell no. supervisor kim? kim aye. there are 8 ayes and three no's. >> this ordinance is finally passed. [gavel] >> colleagues, why don't we take up the recommendations from the budget and finance committee related to the interim proposed budget, items 11 through 14. >> item 11 is the interim proposed budget and annual appropriation ordinance appropriating all estimated receipts and expenditures for city departments as of may 31st, 2013 for the fiscal years ending june 30th, 2014 and 2015. item 12 is the interim annual salary ordinance enumerating positions in the annual budget and appropriation ordinance for fish dale years ending june 3030th 2014 and 2015. item 14, interim budget for the treasure island development authoritiv for fiscal years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 and 15
2:15 pm
is office of community investment and infrastructure operating as the successor agency to the san francisco redevelopment agency for fiscal years 2013 through 14. >> roll call vote. >> on items 11 through 14. ~ supervisor mar. mar aye. supervisor tang. tang aye. supervisor wiener. wiener aye. supervisor yee. yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye. supervisor breed. breed aye. supervisor campos. campos aye. supervisor chiu. chiu aye. supervisor cohen. cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim. kim aye. there are 11 ayes. >> those ordinances are passed on the first reading and resolutions adopted. [gavel] >> items 15 and 16 related to the airport. >> item 15 is the ordinance appropriating amended estimated receipts and expenditures of approximately 1.3 million for the san francisco airport commission for the fiscal year ending june 30th, 2014.
2:16 pm
item 16 is the ordinance amending the annual salary ordinance for fiscal years 2012 through 13 and 13 through 14 to reflect the addition of 32 positions and deleting 11 position and various job classes for fiscal year 2013 through 14 in the san francisco airport commission. >> colleagues, same house same call? these ordinances are passed on the first read. [gavel] >> madam clerk, why don't we take items 17 through 19 related to the port. >> item 17 is the ordinance appropriating amended estimated receipts and expenditures of approximately 3.8 million for the port of san francisco for the fiscal year ending june 30th, 2014. item 18 is the ordinance amending the annual salary ordinance for fiscal years 2012 through 13 and 13 through 14. to reflect the addition of 7 positions at the port of san francisco in fiscal year 2013 through 14. and item 19 is the resolution authorizing the port to accept and expend approximately 1.3
2:17 pm
million in 2011 port security grant program funds for port-wide cctv and for pier 80 security improvements for the period of june 1st through 30th, 2013. >> colleagues, can we take these items same house same call? without objection, these ordinances are passed on first read and resolutions adopted. [gavel] >> item 20. >> item 20 is a resolution retroactively authorizing the department of public health, community, behavioral services to enter into an amended agreement with the state of california department of alcohol drug programs through the period of july 1st, 2010 through june 30th, 2014. in the amount of approximately 69 million implementing a contingency assignment of agreement in the fiscal year 2013-14 if the 2013-14 budget act is entitle acted [speaker not understood] and transfer nonmedvedevical [speaker not understood]. >> same house same call. this resolution is adopted. gov >> can you call 21 through 23
2:18 pm
having to do with mobile food trucks. >> item 21 [speaker not understood]. item 23 is the ordinance amending the public works code to address various locational and noticing requirements concerning mobile food facilities and making environmental findings and item 23 is the ordinance amending the transportation code to prohibit any person to park a mobile food facility, facility vehicle in either a business district or residential area and from that vehicle offer food or beverages for sale unless displaying a valid permit issued by the department of public works. >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you, mr. president. today, colleagues, before us is a legislative package that will modernize how san francisco regulates the food truck industry with the goal of encouraging a flourishing food truck scene as well as a flourishing brick and mortar restaurant scene, giving consumers a choice and triking
2:19 pm
a good regulatory balance. colleagues, this legislation results from almost exactly two years of work of negotiation, of compromise, and i have been happy to play i think a mediating role in trying to bring all the different views and sides together to try to come up with a compromise package of legislation that while perhaps not everyone is in love with every single aspect of it, represents a good accommodation that will move us in the right direction in terms of our food scene. this legislative package has been before the planning commission, small business commission, and the youth commission and all three commissions have endorsed it. colleagues, as you know, our food scene in san francisco is vibrant, interesting, and cutting edge, and we need to encourage this cutting edge food scene. food trucks are a key part of this aspect of our city.
2:20 pm
they bring new and interesting kinds of food. they are flexible in terms of changing the kinds of food that they offer. it's a good way for new entrepreneurs, particularly we see a lot of women we see a lot of immigrants entering entrepreneurship in the food industry. one example is la cocina where immigrant women learn how to turn their cooking skills into a business and be able to learn a living from those skills. food trucks activate public spaces. the food truck is important -- the food truck movement is important and it has broad popular support as we can see from the long lines that tend to forma round them. two years ago i got involved on this issue for several reasons. first, we saw a significant conflict between food trucks and brick and mortar restaurants, and this was really due to insufficient permitting standards. it was a chaotic situation
2:21 pm
where almost every food truck permit was being appealed to the board of appeals. that is not the right way to make public policy and to have a permitting process. so, both the food truck folks and brick and mortar and the commercial building owners came to me and asked me to try to broker a compromise. so, we worked to rationalize our permitting process for food trucks which is overly restrictive in some areas and insufficiently restrictive in others. over the last two years our working group has worked on this. we've conducted significant outreach, and today before us is the result of that two-year process. the legislation does a few things. first, it will implement a more detailed regulatory scheme doing a few things. first, requiring that food trucks be at least 75 feet from
2:22 pm
the nearest entrance to a brick and mortar restaurant, improving noticing to surrounding neighborhoods, requiring that the permit of the food truck be periodically renewed, and placing a maximum three days per location for food truck. the legislation will create formula retail controls so we can hopefully avoid having what new york city experienced with its burger king food truck. legislation in general will bring clarity and predictability to the process. legislation will also improve enforcement. right now the department of public works does not have adequate enforcement staffing and when it issues a notice of violation against a food truck that does not have a permit, it's very hard to enforce that notice of violation. the legislation will allow parking control officers to enforce on behalf of dpw and those tickets, of course, are
2:23 pm
enforceable through the dmv. in addition, we are updating some controls that have made it very difficult to put food trucks in some parts of the city, which has been one reason why we see so many food trucks wanting to go downtown and union square. we learned early in the process that our planning code effectively bans food trucks on many hospital and college campuses. if they are not zoned commercial ~. so, this legislation will allow college campuses and hospital campuses to allow food trucks on their -- to allow food trucks if they so choose. in addition, a number of years ago this board of supervisors passed legislation banning food trucks on our streets within 1500 feet or approximately three blocks of any public middle school or public high school. at the time the desire and -- the desire that i share was it
2:24 pm
protect our school lunch program and also to avoid situations where food trucks were pulling up directly in front of schools. and i think that's something we all share. we learned over time that the 1500 feet overshot. it imposes a three-block buffer in all directions from these schools and for some neighborhoods, for example, the mission, it eliminates the bulk of the neighborhood from the ability to have food trucks on its streets. so, we worked extensively with the school district as well as with the parents school lunch advocates food and fitness committee, on modifications of this aspect of our food truck controls. i initially proposed a 500 foot or one-block radius, so reducing the 1500 feet to 500 feet. after further discussions with the school district and the food and fitness committee, we
2:25 pm
increased that as a compromise to stay at 500 feet for middle schools since all middle school campuses are closed campuses. and to put high school -- the high schoolschool buffer at 1,000 feet with an exception for a few high schools that are embedded in commercial areas and to make that 750 feet. so, colleagues, this legislation, as i noted, results from extensive negotiation, dialogue, and compromise. i believe that it provides a very, very solid regulatory foundation to ensure a great food need and also take into account the other values of our city. and, colleagues, i ask for your support. >> supervisor mar. >> yeah, i wanted to say that i'm supportive of the amendments and really appreciate supervisor wiener's two years of work on this. and the tough job of balancing
2:26 pm
support for entrepreneurs and small businesses that are creating mobile food operation, but also balancing that with the needs of children, especially low-income students and their right to healthy affordable food. i wanted to say also that when i was on the school board -- and i know that there's a couple other former school board presidents here -- many of us were very active and our former legal counsel as well, supervisor campos, in promoting healthy reform in the schools. i think there have been major efforts to improve it. in addition to the 2007 legislation that supervisor wiener referred to that created that, that distance of -- from schools of food carts, and i think that's been about six years since parents and advocates pushed for that. but i think times have changed and many of the current food trucks are really selling great options and healthy food.
2:27 pm
not all of them, but i think many of them, and i've been a big fan of off-the-grid efforts and food trucks in our neighborhoods. but i think we have to balance careful regulation of that industry with the brick and mortar small businesses as well. i was also going to say that part of the equation i think is still removing unhealthy food options, and i think there are equity concerns also of who can and who can't afford campus lunch and on-campus lunch as well. the san francisco school district in january started to implement the revolution food system which is providing healthier options and i think it's increased the number of students purchasing the school lunches in the double digits. so, it's not increase that's been improved, but it's also costing the school district more than they anticipated. so, i think really maximizing the students that are purchasing the school lunches that are healthier is really critical. and if there's anyway to limit the purchasing of lunches by
2:28 pm
students off campus, and i know there's three more schools that there is an exception to what supervisor wiener created. my hope is we can still work with the food and fitness committee. it's formerly called the student nutrition task force to look at o'connell, mission, and galileo high schools. i also wanted to say with many parent activists in the school district that fought to get rid of junk food and sodases from the schools, they still are very active ~. and i think one good website is called peach, and [speaker not understood] and others have really done wonders for i believe the school district. but i think this is one of those issues where hopefully there can be continued work with the school district on those three campuses. but i appreciate supervisor wiener's effort to make his regulations more sensitive to the student nutrition and now the food and knitness task force and other advocates. but i'll be supportive of this, but hope that there is continued efforts in the school district with his office and
2:29 pm
other in the city to make sure that we protect our students' nutrition and as we help to regulate the food truck industry as well. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you, president chiu. i also remember when supervisor wiener began working on this legislation two years ago and he approached our office with a map of what the restrictions currently allow food trucks around our city. and knowing that we do have a lot of food trucks throughout the south of market and downtown area because there are just simply not a lot of other parts of the city, i appreciate this work so that we can allow them into other parts of the city that may want them, but also so they don't concentrate in one part. you know, several years ago i was on the school board when this board first banned food trucks with the 1500 feet from schools, and actually at that time i didn't support that ordinance. there were kind of two different examples of food truck we had at that point. one was a truck i think many of us did not want and it was one that sat right in the entrance
2:30 pm
of galileo high school and just served candy bars and potato chips. that was the type of activity we wanted to discourage. on the other hand we had the taco truck that had been next to o'connell high school, but that food truck had been there way before the school had even been constructed. ~ so, we are pushing off a food truck that had been there historically a long time in the community and had a graced not to sell to the students at o'connell. ~ agreed so, i had really mixed feelings around the food truck legislation. that being said, i was hoping we would come to some sort of resolution as i mentioned in land use committee. i think it is complicated to set two different standards for high schools, 750 feet or a thousand feet. i actually don't have strong feelings about it because it's about half a block, but my preference would have been that we could have come to an agreement with the schools and make all high schools a thousand feet or all high schools 750. just knowing from small business owners that contact our office and asked them to help them