tv [untitled] December 28, 2013 11:00am-11:31am PST
legal abuse, it's guilty until proven [inaudible]. that's my second one? >> it is. thank you. thank you for listening. >> thank you. next speaker. good afternoon. i have two comments, right. the first one is about the jail phones. i don't know if you guys are aware of it, but exploitation is not even adequately describe that. but when you put money on the phone, they charge you $5 to put the money on there. but when you make your call -- >> excuse me, sir, you are giving public comment on an agenda that we have already had public comment on and that we have already voted on and under our board rules you are not allow today do that. but if you have other issues, if you want to talk about other
thing more broadly, you're welcome to do that. you guys can look into that, though, but i'm really here about the [speaker not understood] education i prepared a statement and i request that you give me an extra minute so i can finish my statement. the hardest thing to do is to accept the truth, especially when you've been living a lie your whole life. the majority of our african-american people that know nothing of our own culture, heritage, and history and the myth of perfection. our universe is perfect and that all things are the result of universal order. so, we are right where we should be in this moment of our history. we cannot wait another monday for what is truth and correct for african-american people. if you don't know where you came from, it's no way to know where you're going. and it's why the lacy t. edward
commission is necessary and very critical at this stage of our development and growth. nature dictates that everything that affects me will adversely affect you as well. trust me. it's far cheaper to teach african history or continue to [speaker not understood] this or that until one day we stop killing one another. realize, nothing from nothing leaves nothing. unequivocally, i was born with an obligation to the african community with the full force of the universe at the helm of my spirit, which is my bright shining light. vision is my gift [inaudible]. >> thank you very much. that's your two minutes, sir. that's my two minutes? thank you very much. >> thank you very much. anyway, i would like to say deputy gang worked for the sheriff's department 20 years. she lost her only son to youth violence. you know what i mean?
you should seriously -- i submitted it -- >> thank you, sir. in 2011. and no one got back to me. so, i mean, that's really sad. i think you guys should address -- >> thank you very much, sir. next speaker. thank you. have a wonderful day. i'll come back. dear board of supervisors, my name is shannon bryant. i am here on behalf of many parents who are concerned about the possibility of having wi-fi installed in our parks in san francisco. as residents of san francisco and parents of young children, we do not want wi-fi in our children's parks and we ask you to refrain from accepting google's monetary gift, a gift that would fund the implementation of wi-fi in our city's parks. [speaker not understood] san francisco, our sanctuary of clean air, nature, beautiful space for our residents, visitors, and particularly our children.
the parks need to remain in its preserved state. even the smallest amount of unnecessary radiation emissions from wi-fi is unacceptable for our grown children and peg inapt women who fill our parks every day. industry standards have often been misguided and collected once time gives an accurate picture of the impact on our housing and environment. our children cannot afford to [speaker not understood] for such correction. and we also ask this question. do we really want to create an environment where the general public, parents, caregivers are sitting at their computers connecting to the internet instead of connecting with nature and children? our parks are for going online and consuming products instead of playing in the grass and climbing a tree. we don't. i chose a quote from paul graham, founder -- i'll wrap it up then. i won't say his quote. you can look it up.
>> you have 24 seconds left. dear supervisors, it is not a gift to the children and people of san francisco to have wi-fi in our parks. please [speaker not understood] when you are making decisions that impact the emotional and physical well-being of our children and community of san francisco. thank you so much for listening. >> thank you. next speaker. thank you for hearing my perspective on a proposal to install wi-fi connectivity in our city parks. i am a san francisco city resident and parent and i represent parents who do not want this. please let me paint through possible scenarios for you if wi-fi is indeed installed in our parks. ten years from now, long-term studies conclude that the increase in rf emissions in our family environment adversely
affects developing fetuses. number two, a man who was at the playground with charges, while she was watching a dvd, her toddler under her care falls off the high [speaker not understood] and is permanently brain damaged. number three, a parent regularly takes his child to the playground and despite the child's [speaker not understood] to play with her, he keeps working on his laptop. without consistent and frequent eye to eye development, the [speaker not understood]. these scenarios seem extreme however they are well within the realm of possibility. please let our parks remain a sanctuary for renewal, connection, and safe care for us and for our children. thank you very much. >> thanks. next speaker.
hello, good evening. my name is [speaker not understood]. in my opinion, nelson mandela, harvey milk and martin luther king are standing right now holding the hand of joseph [speaker not understood]. they cry out, where is the justice for a dead gay man who used to work for the city and county of san francisco? mandela suffered 27 years in prison. it's 13 years and counting for joseph [speaker not understood]. from my way of looking at it, we have mandela, king, and milk on one side. we have the board of supervisors and the mayor's office on the other side. let's see what happens in future history and see who wins. sooner or later, [speaker not understood]'s death will be developed and it will be utter
shame for those who have made it wait 13 years and counting. so, if you want a legacy, you go do what you think is right. in regards to what i just witnessed, the man standing in front of me had to leave because he couldn't stand waiting for all this discussion. you have deprived his right of democracy. shame on you. what i saw happening was an extreme example of bad manners and rudeness. the people standing here are your bosses and you just basically [speaker not understood] the finger to them. so, i'm putting that on the record. and secondly, thursday's cancellation of that meeting is a real joke. you tell me you have nothing to do? what about america's cup, 5.5 million, what about gm sale
stock, 10-1/2 billion lost by obama? and why don't you help the poor people everywhere by having a [speaker not understood] hearing on obamacare? [inaudible]. >> thank you very much. next speaker. good afternoon, members of the board of supervisors. my name is [speaker not understood]. i'm the director of parent [speaker not understood] with the children's council of san francisco and i'm speaking on item 32, the resolution sponsored by supervisors yee, mar and kim supporting the current child care development resource and referral program service area in san francisco. the children's council of san francisco supports this resolution and thanks to sponsoring supervisors for [speaker not understood] the resolution. children [speaker not understood] [speaker not understood] child care providers around children's needs for almost 40 years in
this city without the need of dividing our service area into zip codes. as she stated, the last thing we want to do is turn a family away telling them to have to go to woo yee or telling them to have to go to children's council to get any services. we hope the california department of education child development division reconsiders this to divide san francisco into zip code areas and we ask that you adopt the resolution today in support of keeping the current system. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. good afternoon. mr. president, members of the board, my name is supervisor chris daly orv doll. ~ christopher doll. i rise to continue my comment of being flooded out of my apartment. remember green land will melt in 50 years yielding 50 feet of sea level rise. i did offer a plan to fix this involving a carbon accounting
regime of water use and replenishment regime and the new research regime. remember, the key phrase, free energy for freshwater growing new trees. california can do it alone. why would california even be interested? because of the water. if i asked central california farmer or a southern california housing developer how much more water can you use, there would be no limit. the answers would always be more, more water. we simply require new development of any kind to use only dee sail nated water and then provide this new industry with a tax incentive to find it ~ -- to fund it like any other public utility. and i do want to wish madam clerk the best of health and
tea always helps. >> thank you. next speaker. tom gilberti [speaker not understood] apartments. two aprils ago, april 17th exactly, [speaker not understood] an anniversary of my april 17th speaking at the planning commission at the eastern neighborhoods about 55 and 45 noyes. i said i wanted to have a conversation with the board and the next time i came to city hawley talked about how toxic the market rate apartments in this city are because i wanted to express that 10% rent increases each year, it's a difficult situation. they do not breed a healthy community. they do not breed healthy homes. they are first and foremost a
vehicle for investors to make money. at the same time what the viewers at home didn't know is i was leaving messages on the staff of the supervisors about noise episodes that we were having. [speaker not understood] unit on top of a warehouse and one was a emergency generator from across the street. it's hard to bring noise into chambers. i do leave a message on a machine hoping that maybe a staff member can listen to it and hear it instead of seeing the weird noise on a piece of paper. this weekend we had another event where i left messages. this was a construction site across the street that was going on with four, six weeks of noise and i started leaving noise on your machines. i got a quick education about noise.
they can go from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. seven days a week including holidays. i think it's a bit too generous. and there's more, but that would be for another time. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. yes it is. thank you. evidently [speaker not understood] co-chair health board of san francisco. interesting, we had our retreat last weekend where all the board members came together to look at what are the issues, mental health mental issues we should consider for the next year for our monthly meeting. and one of the issues that came up was the issue of evictions, affordability, the housing crisis. it really is a crisis. why is that a mental health issue? well, if you can't afford housing, it certainly does damage your mental health and damages your sense of mental
wellness. but it's bigger than that. it's also all the nonprofits that provide services to those who need mental health services. these nonprofits are losing their leases. they're being evicted. it's not just tenants that are being evicted. it's the providers of human services, of mental health services. these people, these organizations are losing their agency, their ability to operate in the city. this is a big problem. i want to applaud supervisor avalos for his legislation. i want to applaud supervisor kim and others for mentioning this issue, for mentioning it is a crisis. we need a broad-based solution. we need -- i agree we need to remove the incentive for ellis act evictions. we need to remove the incentive to to merge units together. ~ all that helps. i think we need something even bigger. we need to even look at what's called -- what they call the inclusionary requirement when
you build new property. there is something wrong with that. the formula is wrong. money is paid into a trust -- a housing trust fund instead of providing on-site affordable units. that housing trust fund, the money paid in is not enough to provide the replacement [speaker not understood] that would cost between 5 to $600,000 to actually build a unit in a high-rise. what's paid into the trust fund doesn't come close to replacing those units. so, that has to be looked at. [speaker not understood] should be revised. [inaudible]. >> thank you very much. next speaker. the crisis the same. yesterday, today, and forever. i remember when [speaker not understood] leon salve a tore was installed here not too long ago and many of the supervisors ~ came out and said it wasn't right for him, he didn't have the authority to deny them
communion because of them being homosexuals. i'm a protestant. without getting into the real differences we have with the roman catholic church, let me say this, all right. sunday we took the lord's supper and the bible talks about how a wife should obey and submit to her husband, and my wife was not in perfect obedience to me. so, i didn't allow her to take the lord's supper. and in our church, the husband or the church itself can deny communion to a congregant if they believe it's the will of god. now, you're laughing david campos. you think this is funny? god doesn't. but there is really -- listen, the bible is the word of god. and i'm going to say something shocking. when i preach on the street, this really gets a rise out of them and i don't do it to do that. i do it to explain what god means. see, jesus hates hypocracy and
there is really no essential difference between two lesbians that go to church and even go to a bible study every week and yet don't want to hear what the word of god says about lesbianism and a professing christian that goes to church every sunday and a bible study every week and doesn't want to hear what the word of god says about a semis i have and obedient wife. submissive and obedient wife ~. the bible says sarah obeyed abraham and called him lord. on the day of judgment, folk, i'm telling you the word of god says everything you've done and said and thought will be weighed in the balances. >> thank you very much. are there any other members of the public that wish to speak in general public comment? seeing none, general public comment is now closed. [gavel] >> colleagues, why don't we go back to the items at number 34
and 35 around conversion demolition merger and conformity of residential uses as well as nonconforming uses. supervisor avalos. >> okay, colleagues, thank you for hearing this item and indulging me some doubts with the different moving parts we've made today. i do want to thank colleagues for weighing in and actually providing some amendments rather than just coming out and voting no. i think that the amendments will help make it supportable. i also feel that this legislation will have dramatic impact on preserving rent control data and affordable housing in the city. it will protect tenants. it also allows property owners to make improvements on property as well and keep housing stock affordable and rent controlled as well. there have been, you know, a
couple people who have e-mailed me recently about this legislation. [speaker not understood] the record explains really well why this legislation makes some sense. this is from a constituent in -- i'm not sure what district she's in. i have a building with four units which was built 34 years ago before the new planning code went into effect. all units were permitted and inspected as installed. it is zoned r2h meaning it can have two units with two secondary units, two granny units. a month after the new planning code was adopted in 1979, the planning department inspected and found four units. they said okay as long as it is two families we don't care how many units it has. today 34 years later the property is rent controlled and has still the same four affordable units. however, beginning in 2004 the building and planning
department decided that i as a new owner and not the original builder who purchased the four unit building had installed a new kitchen. they filed an abatement against the building, billed me for a fine which i paid and then have continued to harass me, telling me i must remove two affordable rent controlled units. i have repeatedly pointed out this is in violation of their own stated principles of not removing affordable housing installed on improved -- on approved permits. they have posted a lien against my property. i cannot sell it or refinance since i could not refinance when the loans were 1 and 2% during the downturn. the harassment has cost me 24,000 a year in additional interest. the inspector said i had to replace the decks which were rotten and deteriorating after 34 years, but when i went to get permits to do so they refused to issue the permits because i had not removed the two affordable units. when i went to replace the deteriorating siding on the side of the building, the same
thing. finally after threatening lawsuits, they allowed the two permits, but this has held up construction for over a year. luckily the decks did not collapse. passage of ordinance will stop this insanity. so what we're trying to do is build flexibility on two ways. landlords, property owners who want to preserve housing and make improvements in housing where there are nonconforming units, where the zoning has changed from the original zoning that had occurred when the building was first created. and we also want to preserve housing and prevent mergers and demolition of housing where they are currently rent controlled units and affordable housing stock. this legislation will help keep families in san francisco. i know of many, many people including family members with children who no longer live in san francisco because of
evictions, because of the high cost of living and this is rent -- these are two tools, these two ordinances are two tools that will help prevent evictions from occurring. and these are buildings that exist all across san francisco and we have been called upon by score, hundreds, not thousands of people in the city to help preserve this housing stock. so, colleagues, i hope to have your support. i do so appreciate your flexibility and hope we can move forward on this today. thank you. >> supervisor yee. >> thank you. again, i want to thank supervisor avalos for bringing this forward, this tough issue. and i also appreciate the amendments that have been made by several supervisors today. and i'm glad i had the opportunity to get some of the
questions i needed to answer during this break of discussion. and i was -- that was the biggest issue for me was the omi piece. and i was looking at it from the lenz of how do we keep kids, families in the city. and the example i would use, it may not be a big percentage of examples, but it was my example. what if you're a married couple that bought a four-unit place and all of a sudden you have two kids and your one bedroom isn't going to make it any more. and the opportunity to merge or put two units together so that you stay there is a possibility. and if it's not a possibility, would you move out of the city or not. so, then, we would lose -- if that's not a possibility, then
you might lose that family. but on the other hand, it was explained to me that you could also lose families by asking tenants to leave. so, it's a trade-off of which family you're going to lose. and, so, i think with the amendment of having the years reduced from ten years to five years is a compromise to me that maybe you would keep the tenants with kids for five years and hopefully you don't lose the family that [speaker not understood] and stay in our schools and they'll think five years is a worthwhile wait to stay in san francisco. so, because of all these explanations, i will be
supporting the ordinance. >> supervisor breed. >> thank you. i'll be brief. i do also plan to support both items today. i do know we will have the item brought back to us for a second reading and at that time have clarity around the amendments that were proposed here today would make it easier for us to understand it. but it took awhile to get me to a point where i actually under exactly what is going on in the legislation. i think this is a real complicated piece of legislation where clearly a lot of time is necessary to ensure that the outcome of the legislation doesn't negatively impact the folk that we intend to positively impact, and specifically part of my concern
had been situations where supervisor avalos and i talked about in terms of those who are temporary displaced as it relates to a fire and what does that mean in term of mergers and other things. and i think that ultimately based on my understanding of the legislation that it will positively impact a number of nonconforming units that tend to have significant problems with the planning department and permitting and codes and violations in my district. many of those situations that i have to personally deal with as supervisor. i also hope this is a disincentive to those who continue to move folks out of these units and the desire to renovate and make them what they want them to be. i understand it's their property, but this also sadly takes much needed rental housing units off the market which are just a very low
supply of our units that are rent controlled units. and i just also lastly want to say, because i think people get sometimes confused with rent control. rent control is not necessarily meaning the units are affordable. rent control means that you don't get the significant increase in your rent. your landlord is only able to raise your rent by a small percentage compared to those that don't have rent controlled units. but sadly it is a problem in our city, and why these rent control units are so incredibly valuable. so, i agree with supervisor cohen's comments earlier that, yes, this is something great that we're doing, but we have to look at the larger picture here as well and how we try and deal with rentals and what this
means in terms of affordable housing in the city in order to not be forced into a situation where we have to continuously push emergency legislation that is a gray if i can, a temporary fix, but there's a larger problem here. we have some great minds in this chamber. i know if we continue to work together and put our heads together, we can come up with something even better that is more of a long-term solution for folks. so, i will be supporting the legislation today. look forward to hearing or seeing the revised language and thank you. >> okay. unless there are any further comments, madam clerk, why don't we take a roll call vote on items 34 and 35. >> supervisor campos? campos aye. supervisor chiu? chiu aye. supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor tang? tang aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee? yee aye.
supervisor avalos? avalos aye. supervisor breed? breed aye. there are 11 ayes. >> the ordinance passed on the first reading with the various amendments. [gavel] >> madam clerk, can you go to our adoption calendar? >> items 32 through 47 are being considered for immediate adoption without committee reference. a matter can be removed and considered separately [speaker not understood]. >> colleagues, would anyone like to sever any of these items? roll call vote on items 42 through 47. >> supervisor campos? campos aye. supervisor chiu? chiu aye. supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor tang? tang aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye. supervisor breed? breed aye. there are 11 ayes. >> the resolution are adopted and motions approved.