Skip to main content

tv   BOS Public Safety and Neighborhood Services Committee 4716  SFGTV  April 11, 2016 8:00pm-10:31pm PDT

8:00 pm
employees joy excessive salaries but working for the city and county of san francisco give us employees the unities to contribute their ideas and energy and commitment to shape the city's future but for considering a career with the city and county of san francisc >> good afternoon, everyone the meeting will come to order this is the regular meeting of luvengs i'm supervisor malia cowen chair and to my right is supervisor wiener the vice chair and commissioner peskin our clerk is ms. andrea thank you. the folks jim smith and leo for
8:01 pm
helping us broadcaster this meeting completed speaker cards and documents to be included should be submitted to the clerk. items acted upon today will appear on the april 19, 2016, oikdz thank you call item one. >> ordinance for the human did care in the tobacco sales ordinance. >> supervisor peskin you're up the sposh of this piece of - this item. >> thank you, madam chair and supervisor wiener this origin about have one long term business in district 3 from the aufrsz piece of legislation give you a little bit of background a couple years ago the board of supervisors passed an ordinance that limited the number of tobacco sales permits per district to 45 per district
8:02 pm
district 3 as most supervisorial district has in excess of that number of what the legislation was developed no ability for an individual with a valid existing permit to move to another location in this particular instance the individual who is hsa had this long-term institution is actually the victim of rent increases and found another location interesting enough in a property he was ones previously located in and i think actually as i look back on code section 19 h1 thing that occurred which is that district 3 is significantly different than the rest of the city in one go profound way i know that supervisor wiener is about to hear which is that by night we
8:03 pm
have the same number of residents as every other district in the city again day by virtue of downtown and virtue of the remarkable number of tourist that come to the northeast corner of city we have hundreds of thousands for people by day and had i been around representing district 3 in those days, i might have made an amendment it district 3 should have gun allowed a more significant number but the business is nominated for inclusion in the legacy business registry the binding is in operation i'd like to take the opportunity with no breaks in excess of two years for over a quarter of a century it is a family business run by the box family and employees a number of individuals i think
8:04 pm
this measure is in the public interest we should go forward that concludes my presentation. >> tell you why not move to public comment at this time i've got some cards in front of me by that (calling names) welcome just a reminder you have 2 minutes. >> i'm benefit the owner of the business in san francisco thank you for giving me this opportunity i'm a little bit nervous and allowed to - do my best this is a small business it is a family business i've been in san francisco for over 20 years almost 26 years i would gratefully appreciate if
8:05 pm
you consider allowing me to move into this new- to it location i've occupied in the past back in 199 - 1990s early 1990s in the embarcadero and this would allow will continue to flourish my business and allow me to support my family and like i said, i'm married i've got two kids and have to put my kids through college this is really my livelihood and hoping i'll able to move to my original location as i was displaced by the new owner of
8:06 pm
the building i was in they jacked the rents so much i couldn't afford and had to give up the space i would gratefully appreciate you're considering this and move up permit thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon my name is fernando thank you for having me. i work with benefit since i was in my mid 20s and he's taught me how to run a small business owner if you guys give him the chance to move into a location literally across the street that would be great he's taught me everything in running a business i feel like anything he's done i owe to be there for him in this
8:07 pm
regard i hope you guys let him move into the location to continue to grow his small business thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello, i'm stanley kohlman that customer of benefits i commute from fremont and do construction in the city when i'm downtown i like to stop by on the way out of town to get a cigar to enjoy in going down beetle it is convenient in moving just a couple hundred feet away is more i'll appreciate not to drive out of my way to find a cigar i've joined. >> his employees they've courteous and professional
8:08 pm
and i appreciate that much thank you very much >> thank you. next speaker. >> hi i am ann marie i'm with cul-de-sack jars central here on behalf of the boston properties he was and tenants on embarcadero in the early 90s we'll to welcome him back to the embarcadero center he adds to our current tenant mix and we countering have regional and national and other tenants we want in support of locals we have seeing a influx of national tenants to the district but want to support the local they're a local business where a relationship with boston properties a complimentary and
8:09 pm
have interesting base in the financial district their locate across the street from the where they want to locate thank you for considering this and letting them come back to market street square. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi, i'm peter a real estate broker and known benefit and his broth and his broth passed away i know they came as immigrant and been working hard and entrepreneurial particularly how the cigar is going and i've stopped by there for a cigar and hope you grant the use permit they're looking for thank you anyone wish to comment 0 on item one seeing none,
8:10 pm
public comment is closed supervisor peskin anything any last remarks. >> thank you, madam chair for scheduling this and be willing to sends it as a committee reports at the full board of supervisors if there's no objection pending supervisor wiener's comments i move we send it to the full board with a positive recommendation as a committee report inform april 12th. >> we'll take that under consideration. >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you, madam chair i'm happy to support this i think very limited expectation i was a co-sponsor of i think you madam chair of the legislation that was really designed to reduce the number of tobacco outlets that a very, very important piece of legislation we need to reduce in certain neighborhoods the number of
8:11 pm
tobacco outlets about there are times exceptions to consider i think this one of them i'm told this not an outlet it sells cigarettes or seeing none, public comment is closed r e e cigarettes this is an existing family owned business the kind of business to support in san francisco o san francisco and not adding to the number of tobacco outlets it is simply allowing a long time existing use to move a few hundred feet away from something outside of their control in terms of landlord i think whether it was raising represented or bring in a higher paying tenants that so often happens into our neighborhood businesses those days unfortunately, this is a good opportunity for us to support a small family owned
8:12 pm
neighborhood business without undermining our goals in the legislation around reducing but number of tobacco outlets i'm happy to support this and send it out with a positive recommendation. >> thank you seeking a seeing no other public comment public comment is closed. there is a motion made to send this to the full board did you want to - let's do that unanimously. >> that motion passes unanimously this item will be going to the full board madam clerk item 2. >> amending the green building for the requirements of for energy. >> thank you supervisor wiener is the author of this item item 2 we'll speak and lead the discussion going forward. >> okay. thank you very much madam chair this legislation will help us to meet our goal in california
8:13 pm
aggressive goal to move towards a new and renewable future in a way from fossil fuels the increase of solar energy in san francisco the legislation is simple and straightforward in any construction projects between one and 10 stories in height will be required to install solar lemons on the projects rooftops either solar panels for electrical or heating the legislation was considered and supported unanimously by both the building inspection commission and the commission on the environment today california's existing state building codes on title 24 requires month new construction to designate 15 percent of rooftop area quote/unquote solar
8:14 pm
ready free of obstacles and enbunts a future owner felt building is consider to place solar panels on the roof the legislation before us today takes us to the next step by saying that in san francisco instead of the roof 15 percent of roof being solar ready that rather 15 percent needs to be solar installed meaningless the solar panels for electricity will be placed as part of the project colleagues in an era we're remind daily and how are you or by the minute of a rapidly changing wliement it is critical important we do the best we can locally and ultimately at a state level internationally and nationally to make our environment more
8:15 pm
sustainable reducing energy accumulations and carbon emissions is a result of more sustainable city this legislation which focuses on solar is the first part of what will be a two part effort to promote san francisco rooftops added to the city the next expands the provision to promote greener roofs in general i'd like to thank the staff of the department of the environment their support on the legislation and also thank andrea for his work colleagues no initial questions or comments i'd like to invite up barry from the investment & infrastructure to make a brief presentation.
8:16 pm
>> i'm may we have on behalf of our decoration to recommend our approval for this ordinance the goal of the city encap sludz in the zero waste 50 percent of trips by sustainable modes of transportation and 100 percent renewal energy and carbon back into our trees and soil 0 so it 100 percent renewable energy for the resources and continued improvement in terms of efficiency san francisco has lead the way and adopted the standards more consistent nanny other city in california and bring the recommended to you in the future we're talking about the office how to develop the generation resources and san francisco, of course, is a leader there for the city's a facility for the 100 percent
8:17 pm
electricity and confusing sf for the electricity option for a wide variety of constituents this ordinance represents. >> pleases speak into the mike thank you. >> excuse me - >> the ordinance represents one more straightforward and pragmatic step towards that goal it's been demonstrated highly cost fiscal the ordinance is a product of considerable throughout the key question have been cost and benefits since 2008 the cost to install is gown 50 percent and the analysis that was conducted by the department of the environment in part of the light recognizes that's cost fiscal on all buildings we've analyzed with an san francisco climate zone conducted 1984 meetings with a way variety of sfrrld with the department of
8:18 pm
building inspection and the building department's commission and held numberable meetings particularly with the affordable housing be developers that indicated in many cases ahead of the ordinance in terms of of the new properties and the result is reasonable and practical it building on a state coat and cost effective and therefore the department of the environment recommends your approval thank you. >> thank you very much. >> thank you why not go to public comment. >> oh, supervisor peskin do you want to q ask a question. >> on to supervisor wiener on page of a provision a new provision that says any new building of group occupancy with electric data progressing will be the exempt from the energy
8:19 pm
exemptions by the sections mentioned can you explain why that is in there. >> i think i'll ask mr. hooper to explain that provision. >> sure that was inserted at the request of the stakeholder that was responsible for city agency that is developed some data centers and the main issue is practicality the data center is served by a network of individual rooftop units across the rooftop it is changing to reserve a space for the solar. >> so if it was just for one public agency presumably and not heard from the rest of the stakeholder community why did we write such a broad exemption. >> to facilities today that are stand alone data centers one
8:20 pm
under construction it is they're used type in general to be constructed i think the impact is small but - >> so if if i may respect through the charge to supervisor wiener i think we should probably better define electronic data processing because clearly the way staff is presenting it, it is a very narrow definition but the way it is written it seems like it could apply to a broad swap of building types we need to look at language i mean electronic data processing could be a lot of people do everyday and but i think there is a section between data progressing and a processing central we have to define is it so this is not end up being an unat the end broader
8:21 pm
will that - >> so supervisor thank you for bringing that up why not over the next week weigh take a look at appropriate clarifying language it is fairly intend to an narrow category and to be a valid point you raised so we'll work on the language i don't think that it would be a substantive amendment. >> the comment it is good it staff is here we're requiring that installation of solar which i'm absolutely supportive of - should we consider the impact of on buildings that will be required to install that when other buildings will ultimate shadow those installations is it fair for us to say you
8:22 pm
have to install those and next to a 10 story building we permit a 80 story building that shadows that roof is that a fair thing to do i don't think expect to answer that but a conversation 3 is had at department of the environment and start having at the board of supervisors as we start mauntd the installation. >> if you have a comment on that. >> sure two parts it is an insightful question we've thought about a little bit this is part of the reason the trailing legislation we're working with the planning department on will provide living roofs as a compliance option so the developer will have more fleblthd how a taller building in the solar system to be constructed between the 15 or
8:23 pm
20 years after construction the other factor we looked at was that the given the economic imperative to build to whatever the height to build to at a give time it is going to be less frequent that somewhere comes to past we need first a new building subject to the ordinance and then a new building after that to be built the first building so we're depending on second building being permitted construction and delivered within the first 15 or 20 years after the initial building a of story was completed given the construction timeline will be relatively aware but a living - >> we are as i to build on
8:24 pm
what i mentioned briefly any opening remarks we're working on trailing legislation that will provide an opening statements instead of instead of the 15 percent solar could choose thirty percent for green roof and so if you're building a building is already shadow that might not might be a good choice to give you that flexibility. >> if i may if you're building a building that is shadowed under this version the ordinance will not apply. >> all right. thank you very much 3 cards in front of me (calling names). >> good afternoon. my name is a jeanine carter the co-founder of a solar building firm and i'm
8:25 pm
also a member of the board of directors our state trade organizations for solar installer and rooftop solar state of california and i'm here in support of this legislation san francisco has always been a leader in he and continues to be a leader with groundbreaking legislation this is where we need to go as a planets i'm pleased to be here in supportive and lancaster, california both have mandate and there's no reason why san francisco shouldn't lead the way for the large city and state rooftop solar is eloquent and efficient way to deal with greening and decategorization of the supply when the panels are generating 2rb89 they serve the trouble load of the building so when i plug my electrical car in
8:26 pm
when the sun is shining my car is driving on sunshine there is no better way to drive the clean green energy in san francisco than providing four generation and rooftop solar it is the democracy of our electricity supply thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon delaney from bright like that in support of this ordinance a very simple way to encourage the solar jobs in san francisco as well as increases our captain for this generation thank you, thank you. >> next speaker >> good afternoon my name is brendon the director of the u.s. green policy of northern california office here to express mire organizations sport
8:27 pm
for the proposed ordinance for better roof requirements the council has over 12 though organizational members and credentialed professionals since the inception of our system both green roofs and energy have been a design of green building in the public and private segments san francisco is an early lead san francisco is closing on 6 millions square feet of report by the range as san francisco the second best market for the green market where 40 percent of the buildings have a certification cal green raise the professional buildings in the sate and yet with climatic change adding global risk everyday with the
8:28 pm
california zero waste we're a global leader it is clear we need to raise the bar again, the solar provides clean energy and reducing the green house gas emissions and costs have dropped in the recently years as technology is moving into a different scale they help with the san francisco entertainment commission run offices the requirement makes the sustainable use in an area where the state has scarce resources in an industry investing the math with the estimating- given the risks that is important that government policies to improve the performance are crafted the staff proposals that meaningful and a step in moving forward awhile having better perform of the building. >> thank you. any other speakers seeing none, public comment is
8:29 pm
closed on this item. >> supervisor peskin your name was on the. >> oh, no. >> supervisor wiener colleagues thank you for hearing this and for the members of the public that came out and all the people that will been doing amazing work for solar incur here in san francisco but around the state and country a stricken been many fights and but it is an industry that is moving in a good direction and one that will make our city and state for sustainable as we continue to combat climatic change i ask we i move we send it to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> correct me if i am wrong does this item need to no, that's item 3. >> a motion has been made
8:30 pm
without objection so moved i move we send it to the full board with a positive recommendation madam clerk item 3. >> the general plan for the downtown area plan blocks one and two of the transbay plan. >> so colleagues this is an item that we continued from our meeting last week we had a planning department and representatives from ocii to present. >> madam chair, i want to indicate that the board of supervisors and this committee is no in receipt of the jean plan amendment regards to the affordable housing bonus plan. >> thank you very much for that update please take it away. >> good afternoon. i'm jewish with the planning department so the item before you today is the amendment this is relate to
8:31 pm
an item before the full board as the community as a whole with the transbay change to block one before i go into the details for the general plan mainstreamed we are not to put it into context i'll i'm going to turn it over to for the ocii manager that will give you an overview of the block one and i'll be back to explain how this general amendment fits into the context. >> thank you. >> thank you josh chair cohen and supervisor peskin and supervisor wiener i'm shawn i work with ocii the project manager for transbay and like to introduce jose campos and jim morales with the general
8:32 pm
council of ocii as josh mentioned today, you'll be taking action on is general plan amendment tomorrow the redevelopment for transbay block one will be coming before the board the purpose to increase the height if two to four hundred feet an block one i that would be helpful to provide background and the block one project 1994 the board of supervisors established the transbay area in 2002, the draft eir was published in 2003 the redevelopments agency published a development and in 2004, it
8:33 pm
was certified and the 2005 it was adopted also in 2005 the rincon hill plan was adopted and in 2012, the transit center plan was adopted the gray area in the middle of the slide is the transbay plan area it is boundary is following blighted conditions within the area at the heart of redevelopment is the transbay transit center it is gifted into 3 zones one by the controls and design guidelines to the plan and zone one ocii has the land use jurisdiction two is by the planning code and the - the larger rectangle area in red is the transit center adopted in
8:34 pm
2012 which unsustainable increased the heights of the buildings in the area the affordability within transbay assembly bill 812 and the transbay required 25 percent b be affordable the redevelopment plan requires the individual projects within zone one and two 15 percent affordability on site within zone one are 12 blocks of various stages of development block 64 hundred and 79 affordable units and blocks 7, 8 and 912 affordable unit and about to begin construction and bloke 5 is office space under construction and the from the sales of the 11 to 12 is the
8:35 pm
construction of transit center. >> bloke one is located on fulsome street between main and spear streets this slide shows block one proposed development program on the parcels the top 2/3rd's owned by ocii consists of 35 thousand square feet purchased by ocii in 20031/3rd or four parcels owned by tishman duo to the zone little sites have to be zoned together regarding the proposed block one project the developers is proposing a health from three to four hundred feet a mixed use owner consisting of three
8:36 pm
hundred plus units the benefits are increases the total housing units and three to four more units in the tower, 40 percent will be affordable didn't consists of 4 hundred plus units for households between one and 20 percent ami the units will be dispersed in the tower a separate homeowners sfoeshgs the bmr residents we found insignificant shadow impacts on the parks the purposes of the slide to show the benefits of the 4 hundred height verse the three hundred height limit the far right hand is 73 more units with the 44 more units will be bmr which represents translates into one and 20 more residents
8:37 pm
this view is of the proposed project looking west from embarcadero and fulsome and this is a view from the bay bridge and it shows what the skyline about look like with the proposed project along with the projects currently in planning and with that, i thank you and i am sorry to josh. >> thank you shawn so, now do e you have the context for block one in the veerments area and i'll focus on the general plan before you on the screen is map 5 the height map in the downtown plan when the transbay redevelopment area was adopted in 2005 some amendments were adopted as part of this effort and this included adjusting the
8:38 pm
height on the height mass and as you can see zone one of the redevelopment in red and were there previously heights on the downtown plan indicated p d x the amendments made at the time removed that to reference the downtown transbay nfl an oversight and not lablgd about that indication as neither of the sites in her t 2 b x were the height and once the development plan was adopted again, here's the block noted on the left out of that amendment with the block one and a small piece of going block two as you can see this for the transbay r50er789 the height currently of block one is 3 and block 2 one
8:39 pm
of 5 they're out of sync with the general plan and discovered that oversight when we did the consistency finding for the proposal for block one and revised by the office to make it consistent for block one we needed to correct this oversight to reference the plan and erase the other non-applicable of the height that's what is proposed and an additional notion to the map removing the label from the assessors oversees block from the following lots 37 and lot 4 replace that with see the tribute plans it is as simple as that and the planning commission needs to make the amendment to adjust the consistency finding for the
8:40 pm
changes to block one so this is a precondition of making that finding for block one height amendment not determine the outcome of the amendment only brings the general plan in conformity with the general plan so that that concludes my presentation. and i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> good thank you very much i appreciate your prediction e presentation and thank you for being flexible see if any questions from the colleagues supervisor wiener none supervisor peskin none let's go ahead and take public comment anyone wish to comment feel free i have (calling names) please come on up and speak at this time. >> good afternoon madam chair and supervisors my name is adrian representing carpenters local 22
8:41 pm
about 3200 xarpdz here in san francisco normally i come up and speak about jobs i'll get to that in a minute this provides housing it is below-market-rate housing affordable housing for san francisco and that's really what is more and more most important in san francisco today we hope you would forward this amendment to the board of supervisors it is going to provide jobs, benefits, health, welfare for young san franciscans carpenters at a local 22 and other locals and a place to work and much needed housing for san francisco to add to that market-rate housing we need the housing thank you. >> good afternoon supervisors
8:42 pm
supervisor cowen and supervisor peskin and supervisor wiener i'm a resident of rincon hill and here to represent the neighborhoods and communities groups in opposition to increasing the height from three to four feet i'll talk about the compliance the district plan with the environmental impact reports and the financial deal compliance the triplet is not enacted after review to make sure all the buildings conform to the principles of the plan most importantly building heights tripling to the waterfront with a view from the northern prospective as the highest point with the tower block one was designated to be three hundred feet it didn't conform to the stepping down that will required to conform to the height limits specifically
8:43 pm
the gap at 200 and 14 feet eat plaza 200 plus and infinity at three hundred plus allowing a one hundred feet from the prospective of the waterfront it is illicit one block away the out liar is a mr. sartipi the developer of block 4 across the street on howard at main and beal will come before planning to approve the additional one hundred feet makes it urban liken the block 4 will request from 4 to 5 hundred feet the city has failed to ask for a revised eir the 2006 eir is out dictated and not assess the impact on traffic and noise to say true for a three hundred foot not true for a 4 hundred foot on the does the city has -
8:44 pm
>> that's it thank you very much is there any additional public comment on item number 3 nope okay. is there a motion we need to send this specifically to the committee as a whole on the redevelopment plan amendment. >> do we know yet what the district supervisors position is on this project or any of the issues raised for - we've heard comment and received a letter i've not every gotten a sense of what supervisor kim's position is on this. >> supervisor kim has not indicated here position my office reached out to her last week and today, we don't have a firmer conformation on this issue. >> was it they said she didn't have a position or sending out a
8:45 pm
response. >> we got no response i know as i mentioned she announced she gotten a commitment of 40 percent and others vertical is doing 20 percent the taxpayers are pagan for the other 20 percent that's the last i heard i know that supervisor peskin in terms of. >> supervisor peskin has indicated he's reserve his remark forces tonight with supervisor kim at the full board meeting this is a reminder we'll be sitting as a committee as a whole. >> so tomorrow. >> we'll hear it. >> tomorrow hear the full merits fsd project. >> that's correct i'll have a few questions to ask staff specifically about the concerns i have about the shadow additional shadows i have
8:46 pm
questions about the evaluation of the parcels versus the transbay plan area but i will wait until tomorrow. >> so madam clerk i think we need to have a motion; is that correct? >> yes. >> for committee report we have a motion to go forward to the full board as a committee report i need a motion. >> all right. by supervisor peskin and the decision was unanimous call item 4. >> an ordinance commiserating in honor of the childhood home of andy garcia the wonderful district of district 11 has joined us supervisor avalos. >> thank you chair cohen and, yes it's been a long time in working and strange trip here we are with legislation before us
8:47 pm
to authorize the installation of sidewalk plaques at two locations in the combhoir close to the home of jerry garcia born and raised in san francisco on august 1st, 1942, is with greens and the grateful dead are associated with the hate ashbury garcia grew up in the conspiring district the first 5 years on amazon avenue and after hesitate fathers death jerry and his brother moved in with their grandparents think harrington street it was an important part of his child the garcia wrote a childhood story called harrington street the 3 by 3 blonde plaques will be on mission street they'll get the most foot traffic and encourage the businesses to be with two
8:48 pm
the two plaques on mission cord and working with the garcia family with the plaques and we have mr. murphy had will be here during junior embarrassing in the amphitheater was part of theatre part two a lot of work people have been doing to honor the legacy of jerry garcia in san francisco in the excelsior beth volunteered her time and corps the herb classic picture with the heritage house by the affirmative mike guzman the civic design committee is scheduled to review the design we're working with the engineering garcia family with the sign of the second plaque on
8:49 pm
the corner of amazon but have herb green photo as well we're working with artworks to forge the plaques they'll be uber's the same process with the plaques for the rainbow walk in the castro this waves the permit and inspection fees and added to the location one on mission and harrington and one on amazon for the sites and last year, we set aside funding in the budget to be able to have for construction for the first plaque be using if you have any questions, we'll be happy to answer theming for the second plaque we hope to go in later this year commemorating the homes of jerry garcia for the unique contributions to the social and cultural life and
8:50 pm
helped to promote the k30ir district in how it is in his form actually years of san franciscan best known throughout the years colleagues admit my presentation if you're interested i'll pass out maps of the first location and have andy put-down it on the overhead and pass those to you and open up for public comment. >> supervisor avalos congratulations this is existing news from district 11 congratulations i grew up in the season part of neighborhood and frequented the mclaren park with the jerry garage amphitheater that is an existing time to have one of the natives commemorated this is excellent i know there are community organizations and more will take place to come to
8:51 pm
fruition i want to applaud the neighbors in the chamber and i know others are possibly watching open up for public comment come to the podium you'll have 2 minutes to speak whether your in favor or opposed of this legislation and come on to the microphone of the podium over here. >> well. >> hi my name is jackie harbor i flew in from san diego california for this meeting i will be underlying out this evening jerry garcia is a ripple effect in any lives we're here to represent him when we passed away i couldn't come where i was living to be at the field to represent him, i thought that was important to be here i
8:52 pm
brought a copy of the book i don't know how to get this on the overhead. >> you can too the thing on our right. >> the overhead projector. >> sfgovtv there we go. >> i brought a copy of jerry garcia harrington bingo during my travels the reason i came to support in idea that has been and thank you for your time and i appreciate all that you're here to do there is a lot of people in the world that couldn't be here today to tell you how important jerry and his life taught us to be kind and loving to mother earth and representing many thank you. >> thank you for being here welcome and i'd like to welcome the next speaker. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors my name is linda i live in
8:53 pm
district 11 i'm very much in support of this project and the chair of a group calls friends and advocates of the amazon mentioned in the legislation a group that took on a role of the custodian we'll monitor the care and upkeep and work with the dpw to do actually repair other needs if this should arise we're very excited about this this is a project that we talked about and advocated for since 2003 we hope that the engineering plaque will be part of eventually come on excelsior walk of familiar simple other walk of fame and the boasting trail we have much to celebrate and we're proud of the work that
8:54 pm
supervisor avalos has done to support our efforts to support that history our neighborhood has had very many people in this - over the past years and many more to come to be deferring for plaques like this this is particularly cbos close to our hearts because of the work in the community to support jerseys legacy and community what with the meaningless of the amphitheater and many projects we are grateful to supervisor avalos in 4e7 us get historic street names like china and india are part of that walk of fame so thank you and hope this passes. >> thank you. i also want to thank you for working so many years as well as our volunteering for the friends and advocates of the excelsior to do
8:55 pm
the everyday maintenance upkeep that is great you're continuing that work thank you. >> hello my name is wayne at first when i saw the white rablts i thought that was doing o something for fall canning in her my wife karen at the time knew couldn't come today knew jerry garcia in elementary school and middle school and high school by meeting him in the excelsior she said that jerry father owned the grocery stores in mission san juan and ray ramos would meet jerome embarrassing on mission and harrington street to walk to the middle school and smokey how did she know that she's good
8:56 pm
friends with ramos wished him a birthday i think that is appropriate to have 3 plaques honoring the memory of jerry garcia in the excelsior thank you. >> >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> my mind's a rachel and i just wanted to say thank you to the communities i'm new to san francisco and the way you guys preserved the history and legacy of the values and just this is the most amazing place i'll grateful to people like tom and people that keep the music and community alive those plaques will be a nice addition so people can be curious the history and learn about the legacy and not question but be desired i appreciate anyone you to do to expire love and other legacies. >> thank you. i think i said
8:57 pm
mike murphy but tom murphy. >> thank you, supervisors this is been a like john said a long strange trip but all good things and all good times it has been to the jerry garcia and the statistic and jeremy pollack for helping that and supervisor avalos and malia cohen for scheduling that and jackie from traveling from san diego thank you this is an important project that embraced the city we have been blessed over the 50 plus years to have this a great deal of dead oriented from san francisco hopefully we can embrace more and protect them in the long haul this is truly a san francisco moment spent a lot of years in
8:58 pm
the making and appreciate you guys supporting this thank you. >> also that to thank you for your hayward with the general annual jerry garcia day. >> i want to show what the current the first design and jerry any pollack will bring this up. >> public comment is closed. jeremy all yours. >> okay i poet by green and in the background jerry garcia made for this house or it was a festivity. >> it is a photo of house from that was in the examiner article that mike allowed us to use the public commenter showed the coffer of the book on harrington street that was also a quote if jerry
8:59 pm
garcia himself and the jerry garcia family approved the design it is modest by beth burn we sent when she was leaving her job we gave her an accommodation she's proud of working on that and in support of family and it is very famous photograph of jerry garcia with kissing his fingers. >> mr. pollack. >> it does it justice thank you. >> a motion colleagues to move with a positive recommendation made by commissioner peskin and we'll take that without objection. that item passes unanimously congratulations to all the folks that work hard we're almost there. >> thank you for your co-sponsorship chair cohen. >> thank you madam clerk, is there any other business before this body? there's no further business. >> almost this meeting is
9:00 pm
9:01 pm
>> hi everybody, we down here at the /ep is a center which is our pop up space down here in san francisco where we operate a store front to educate the policy from the home owner who has center which is our pop up space down here in san francisco where we operate a store front to educate the policy from the home owner who has never done anything in the house to the most advanced structure engineers we have working around here. we we're going to here from kelly to talk a little bit about san francisco. how are you doing kelly? >> very well, thank you for having us here. >> in front of us, we have a typical soft story building. when i see this, i think this is some of the most beautiful architecture our city has. a lot of people don't know these are problematic buildings. why don't you tell us about some of the risks he we have in these buildings? >> soft stories are vulnerable in past earthquakes and the
9:02 pm
northridge earthquake to this type of building and character of building. when we talk about the soft story, what we're talking about is generally a ground story that has less wall or other /pwraeugs to resist the lateral forces that might be imposed by the earthquake. so we're looking for something that is particularly weak or soft in this ground story. now, this is a wonderful example of what some of the residential buildings that are soft stories in san francisco look like. and the 1 thing that i would point out here is that the upper force of this building have residential units. they have not only a fair amount of wall around the exterior of the building but they also have very extensive walls in the interior and bathrooms and bedrooms and corridors and everything that has a certificate amount of brazing yea it's
9:03 pm
significantly less country /srabl in those stories. now very often, we get even a garage or storage or sometimes commercial occupancy in this ground story. that very often not only has a whole lot less perimeter wall but it often has little or no wall on the interior. that wall is the earthquake bracing and so he see very significant bracing in the top floor and very little on the bottom. when the earthquake comes and hits, it tries to push that ground floor over and there's very little that keeps it from moving and degrading and eventually /paoerblly keeping it from a collapse occurring. so we know they're vulnerable because of this ground story collapsing >> is this only a problem we see in sentence france? san francisco? >> no, this is certainly a
9:04 pm
national problem. more acute in western but more up to california, washington, moving out into other states. this kind of building exist and this kind of building is vulnerable. >> when you're involved with the community safety, this is a different way of thinking about these types of things. we had a community group of over 100 people involved and upper 1 of them. tell us about * how that conversation went. why did we decide as a city or a community to start fixing these types of buildings? >> there were a lot of aspects that were considered well beyond just the engineering answer that these are vulnerable. and that effort brought in a lot of people from different aspects of the community that looked at the importance of these buildings to the housing stock and the possible ramifications of losing this /houbgs in the case of an earthquake. the financial implications, the historic preserve vacation s implication
9:05 pm
as you mentioned, these are very handsome looking buildings that are importance to the tourist city ask which make san francisco something that people are interested from outside in coming and visiting. >> it's such animation story when you think about the 10 years that the community spent talking about this /seurb but we actually did something about it. now we have an order unanimouses put in place to protect 100,000 residents in san francisco and retrospective in 2020. so on behalf of residents and employees in san francisco, we want to say thank you for the work you've done in pushing this forward and making people more aware of these issues. >> and it was a fantastic community effort. >> so in an earth quake, what happens in these kinds of buildings? >> what happens when an earthquake comes along is it moves the ground both horizontally and vertically.
9:06 pm
it's mostly the horizontal that we're worried about. it starts moving the building back and forth and pushing on it. when you see i'm pushing on it, the upper stiff of the wall stay straight up but the lower floors, they actually collapse just like i did there. >> luckily, we can put this building right back up where it came from so it's a lot easier. now kelly, obviously these aren't real frame walls here but when you talk about buildings, what makes the property for stiff? >> the easiest and most cost-effective type of bracing you can put in is either put in a brand new wall or to potentially go in and strengthen a wall that's already there where you don't need to have an opening is where you maybe have a garage door or access to commercial space, you might go to a steel frame or
9:07 pm
other types of bracing systems that provides the strength and stiff if necessary but at the same time, allows continued use of that area. but some combination of walls or frames or other tools that are in the tool kit that can bring the building up to the strength that's required in order to remove the vulnerability from the building so that when ground shaking comes, it in fact is a whole lot more resistant and less vulnerable. ideally, this story down here would be made as strong and stiff as the floors above. >> if i'm a property owner, what is the first thing i should do? >> the first thing you should do is find professional that can come in and help you evaluate your building in order to, 1, figure out that indeed it does need to be retro fitted and 2, give you some idea of what that
9:08 pm
retro fit might look like. and third, evaluation and design to help you determine the retro fit requirement. >> well kelly, i can't thank you enough for being here today. thank you so much for your wealth of information on how we can take care of our soft story problem in san francisco. and you the viewer, if you have any questions, please feel free to visit our website >> [gavel] good afternoon. the commission meeting will please come to order and the secretary will call the roll. >> commissioner pating. >> present. >> commssioner singer. >> here. >> commissioner chow. >> present. >> commissioner chung. >> present. >> the second item on the agenda is approval of the minutes is for the minutes. >> there is a motion. >> second. >> are there any corrections
9:09 pm
for the minutes? if not we're prepare for the vote. all in favor of the minutes please say aye. >> aye. >> all those opposed? the minutes have been approved unanimously. we will provide to the next item. >> item 3 is the director's report. >> hello commissioners. i want to let you know that national public health week is from the fourth to the tenth this week. the department is active on social media participating in a twitter chat and highlighting different programs for the san francisco department of public health and social justice, healthy communities, and healthy youth and healthy food and we have a twitter identification if you would like to follow us on that. i wanted to talk about several things today. one was that the zsfg was called a part of the vital infrastructure and the
9:10 pm
new trauma center was one of the best real estate deals in 2016 and was given by the san francisco business times. we also had a homeless council award given to dr. michelle snyderman and the recipient of the medical respite award by success for the homeless council and this award recognizes those that delivered outstanding medical respite services in the communities and evidenced by the in tact and improved quality of life for home experiencing homelessness and this will be presented in portland oregon in the end of may. mayor lee announced the new navigation center march 23 and the city will open the navigation center at least additional 200 units for homeless individuals. this center will be begin accepting clients in two months. the
9:11 pm
department provides the roving medical team for the navigation center and the navigation center is located at the civic hotel right off of market street. and just the last we heard a lot about this at our contract meeting previous to this meeting is the expansion of the exposure of the prophylaxis from the health net work and provided trainings to hundreds of providers to make sure they're given guidance for prep evaluation and monitoring the prep services for patients and their own medical so we wanted to acknowledge that as well. that's the end of my report and there other reported items and i am happy to answer any questions that you have commissioners. >> thank you. commissioners, any questions to the director on the director's report or other items to the director? thank you director. seeing none we will proceed to the next item
9:12 pm
please. >> yes item 4 is general public comment and there is a request. >> yes. we have one general public comment, ronnie robinson please. >> i believe he's outside speaking to mr. pictins. yes. >> mr. robinson. >> i will put three minutes on the timer and when it beeps -- >> thank you very much. my name is ronnie robinson and i just spoke with rolan regarding my letter they know you're all aware of and he made -- he
9:13 pm
responds and he's going to reply to it immediately. thank you. >> thank you. >> that is the only request i received. >> okay. thank you very much. >> so we move on to item 5 which is the report back from the finance and planning committee. >> okay. commissioner. >> good afternoon commissioners. the finance and planning committee met earlier today to approve quite a few contracts and also the contract reports that's been added to the consent calendar. out of that i want to point the commissioners' attention to one of the contracts that was awarded to dr. kennedy for --
9:14 pm
>> ken harding. >> yeah. ken harding for the cultural humility training and the actual amount of the two year contract should be $500,000 but because we had just listed that as $250,000 we decided that we would still go ahead and add that to the consent calendar, and later on staff will actually adjust the amount to $500,000 for two years, so you know at least we know this way we won't be stalling, you know, the contract from being executed and implemented, and we also have a great presentations about our structures and process of accessing -- like community based organizations'
9:15 pm
performance including how contracts were being written, planned and how our rfps and rfqs are going out so this is the beginning of a multi-sessions presentation to help us understand how, you know, like contract monitoring, and quality improvement are being made to these organizations, so there's also the discussions because today's presentations will focus on the non-profit agencies and because we also do business with for profit agencies we want to be able to -- like if there's any difference in terms of how we -- how we develop contracts and also you know how we manage those contracts, so if people are interested in that subject i
9:16 pm
think we will have another presentation in the finance and planning committee meeting. any questions commissioners? >> no. i just want to add that i think it's impressive how the team at the department has begun to attack the contract -- inefficiencies in contracts in a rigorous careful step wise function and i think you never get results quickly on things like this, but over time i think we're going to see a lot of it, so i appreciate your leadership on that. >> thank you. any further comments on the finance committee report? if not then we will move on to our next item please. >> yes, item 6 is the consent calendar. if i can summarize what commissioner chung just said. the last item is a contract with ken harding. if you approve the consent
9:17 pm
calendar you're approving a contract for $250,000 and dph staff will come back with a contract revision later this year to change the term and the amount but today you're approving if you do so the contract for $250,000. >> okay. thank you. so it's before us as a consent calendar if any member wishes to take any item off of the consent calendar otherwise we're prepared for the vote. all those in favor of the consent calendar please say aye. >> aye. >> all those opposed? the consent calendar has been adopted unanimously. >> thank you commissioners. item 7 is a resolution recommending that the board of supervisors accept the shares of common shock of vizient inc. corporated distributed by university health consortium with uhc mergerace with vha
9:18 pm
incorporated. . >> good afternoon commissioners. greg whiter chief financial officer. so the resolution before you is a step that we're are requesting to enter into related to our use of a group purchasing organization. as you know the department has under the administrative code and has historically used the university health consortium as its group purchasing organization that allows us to join with other providers to leverage purchasing power for medical equipment and supplies. we use that heavily at both of our hospitals. we're notified about a year ago that uhc had merged with another organization and that the merged entity will be named vizient and that will
9:19 pm
continue to operate as the group purchasing organization for the former uhc members. under that merger the corporate structure that will be in place has changed. in the past under uhc we were members of the organization and we received rebates based on the volume of purchases that we made through the uhc contracts. under the new corporate structure that will be changed, and it will actually go to on owned organization where shares in vizient, the new organization, will be distributed to former uhc members based on the volume of purchasing that they had made through the former organization. so these are not shares that are tradeable on the market. it's a closely held corporation. that
9:20 pm
could change at some point in the future. if the board were to -- take an action to change the corporate structure but it's essentially a way to accept the shares in vizient. they would be held in trust by the treasurer's office. the benefit of it it would give as a shareholder the ability to weigh in on certain actions or changes to the operating policies of the vizient organization. there really is no down side to doing it. it's a relatively unusual structure for the city to participate in, but we vetted it, the process with the treasurer-tax-collector and the city attorney's office so we think it's just something that we have to do without down side. it's coming on a little bit of a rush because vizient gave uhc
9:21 pm
members a deadline to accept these shares so we're trying to move it forward through the board of supervisors. we learned late that we needed commission approval to do this so we made it a last minute addition to the agenda today planning take it to the board of supervisors tomorrow. i am happy to answer questions to the extent i can if you have them and the city attorney's office is here as well. >> any sense of how much value there is here? >> i can ask arnoldo if he has a sense of the value in terms of achievable value. there really is none because they're not tradeable. there is no way to cash in on that value. it's simply an ownership stake unless the board of vizient makes a change in how they want to redeem the value of the shares.
9:22 pm
it's just something that we hold that gives us an ownership stake and doesn't have a liquid value to it. >> so how do you write the letter that says for tax purposes, what is the value of this? do you know the answer? i will ask the city attorney to try that one. >> i am from the city attorney's office. commssioner singer so the par value is basically a dollar per share. there is no actual cash value to the city unless the board of vizient decides to -- votes to redeem. the current estimated value per share is about $320 per share. because there is no actual cash value there's really -- >> how many shares do we have?
9:23 pm
>> so san francisco general is receiving around 1700 shares. laguna honda is receiving around 1100 shares. the final number hasn't been determined but it will be added to the joinder and agreement. >> could be a lot of money. i mean we will have to wait. >> right. the current estimated value -- at whatever point and time vizient -- the board of vizient decides to redeem any of these shares for the reasons that are available the value could be more, could be less, depending on -- since this is a private corporation this is just an estimated value based on their assets and all. >> while you're here you know you have a recitation of us accepting all of these including
9:24 pm
all these attachments and exhibits and everything which i am assuming that the city attorney has actually looked at are just part of the doing business and doesn't put any of us into a liability position. >> correct. actually it's recommending that the board of supervisors accept, so the resolution in front of you today is recommending -- >> i understand that. but it's recommending all of these things here are being approved by the board, and we need to be assured by you that it really is okay because -- >> correct. >> -- all of these things are in legal language. >> exactly. >> doesn't exactly tell us what it does. >> right, yes. that is correct. >> traditionally as common stockholders you have no liability so i think we're probably -- >> right. as a common stock -- we're not getting any preferred stock. it's all common stock
9:25 pm
and it's a private corporation, so it's a corporation. there isn't a liability to the shareholders and the part of the structure. >> so maybe you could explain that the shares don't really reflect -- we're currently using them as a discount process; right? we purchase our things through there so the shares don't really matter. the same discounts apply. it all works the way it did before. >> actually it's going to change and that's another issue that we're need to discuss with the appropriate individuals. right now there is no membership fee paid up front. the structure allows for whatever rebates the department or the hospitals were eligible for. the amount, the fee amounts
9:26 pm
were basically deducted from the rebates received on the back end of the new corporate structure which we would have to get into a new agreement once the process changes with vizient. my understanding that vizient will require a payment up front as a membership fee, and the rebates in the back end would be slightly higher, so because you're not deducting those fees from those rebates. >> [inaudible] >> go ahead. >> and just on that point what that would -- excuse me. what that would require is that we would simply in the budget we would just need appropriation authority to actually pay the membership fee so we would have a neutral swat in the budget that is a modification to appropriation. that's our expectation so that the net would be the same for us, but
9:27 pm
it would be just a difference in how the payments flow from us to vizient versus them getting applied as a rebate to the purchase price of the equipment that we're -- or the materials that we're buying from vizient. >> water is on the way. >> thank you. [laughter] >> thank you. sorry. any further questions? >> i move we accept this. >> okay. >> (inaudible). >> staff recommendation to recommend it to the board of supervisors. >> right. second please. any further discussion or questions at this point? >> i will note there has been no request for public comment. >> okay. thank you. then we're prepared for the vote. all those in favor of the resolution to recommend to the board to approve this please say aye. >> aye. >> all those opposed? and it has been passed unanimously. thank you. >> thank you commissioners. >> item 8 is a vision zero
9:28 pm
update and you have a resolution that will be introduced today in support of vision zero and automated speed enforement that you will vote on at the next meeting. >> thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. i am anna vislick with the population health division, and i am in the community health equity branch and copresent with my colleague in environmental health leanna schwartz and the municipal transportation agency katie van gody and here to give you an update -- sorry. thank you. thank you. give you an update on vision zero in san francisco just as a refresher the goal is
9:29 pm
to reduce -- to eliminate traffic, fatalities in san francisco by 2024. vision started in february 2014 and gave yourself a ten year timeline because it's an ambitious goal with a lot of city agencies and community based organizations at the table. we wanted to highlight where vision zero lives in the health department. it is in the population health division both the lead is out of environmental health, and community health equity and promotion plays a large role. vision zero is the way we manage vision zero is through what we call the five e's and the p. i'm not going to read the entire slide but want to highlight some of the efforts that dph contributes so we co-chair the task task
9:30 pm
force. megan wier is on maternity leave and we have staff from the municipal transportation agency and can answer any questions that you have but we address vision zero through the 5e's but the one we want to highlight today is the policy initiative because we have a specific request for your support and a resolution to ask for some supporting state change in legislation for automated speed enforement which you will hear about later today. just a summary of progress and just year in 2015 mta completed 30 projects to improve our streets and sidewalks in two years. that is no small feat and we have staff in the audience to answer questions that you have, and also we worked closely with mta on a campaign called "it stops here." you can see a picture here on the side of the
9:31 pm
bus, and it was a campaign specifically focusing on having drivers yield the right-of-way to pedestrians while crossing the street, and our team in environmental health did an evaluation of that campaign, which you may remember was in the chronicle. there was a 3% increase in driver's behavior yielding to pedestrians and that's a positive change in vision zero that we want to see and our team played a significant role in that but on the policy front the city unified around the idea making automated speed enforement the top policy goal for 2015 and adopted by the mta board and it was adopted by the mayor's office as one of the top policy initiatives and we're here before you today to bring that also forward. lastly our team in environmental health developed this tool called the vision zero zero injury
9:32 pm
network. this may look familiar. we presented this before, and this is a our road map if you will on how we address vision zero. this is 12% of the street miles in san francisco but well over 70% of all of the fatals and severs and this is the prioritization tool that we use here in this city to address vision zero, so the majority of the streets and sidewalk improvements and enforcement and education would be on these corridors and key intersections where we have a documented problem and i will bring up ms. schwartz and will talk about the data pieces and vision zero. >> thank you anna. another dph lead project for vision zero that we wanted to highlight is the development of a transportation or comprehensive transportation related injury
9:33 pm
surveillance system so currently san francisco relies solely on police reported injury collision data to make all of our traffic safety decisions, all of the vision zero efforts, but we know that police reported injury collision data is incomplete. not all injury collision data is reported to the police, and so what we have prioritized is linking with police data hospital level data, so as represented in this visual police data would represent this pink circle and hospital record level data would represent the green circle so really the power and strength of merging these two data sources together, which would include trauma registry data from san francisco general hospital, emergency service data and ems data that we increase our capacity to detect traffic
9:34 pm
injury and it means better decision making from the data and take the data and update our injury network which was shown in the previous slide and make sure we're targeting and allocating our resources to the most dangerous intersections and corridors in the city. as you all know traffic fatalities are the primary metric for measuring progress with vision zero. this chart shows annual fatalities dating back to 2005. you see in san francisco on average we have 30 traffic fatalities every year. as oona mentioned we launched vision zero as a city policy in 2014. we had 31 traffic fatalities. in 2015 we also had 31 traffic fatalities and so far in 2016 we've had seven traffic fatalities. this is through february which is our most current data. while
9:35 pm
engineering infrastructure changes, streetscape, redesigns and transformations are a key input vision we need to utilize other tools and we haven't seen a reduction in traffic fatalities and why we're seeking your support for automated speed enforement. speed is a huge factor whether victims survive a collision with a motor vehicle. also to note represented by the blue bar is the proportion of pedestrian fatalities and in san francisco about 2/3 of traffic fatalities are suffered by pedestrians, and half of those pedestrians are senior citizens especially vulnerable population and growing population in san francisco. so another key
9:36 pm
metric for evaluating progress of vision zero is severe traffic injuries and i quickly want to acknowledge our partners the san francisco general hospital the level one trauma center. we have a long standing relationship with the hospital and the trauma team there. we work closely with two trauma surgeons dr. michelle [inaudible] and dr. julian and their team to get the data and prioritize the surveillance system and in an analysis we looked at one year trauma data we found that 515 patients had severe traffic injuries so that means an injury that landed the victim into the hospital for admission 24 hours stay or longer, so that's more than one or two incidents everyday. that is one person suffering a
9:37 pm
severe injury every 17 hours. among the 515 patients one in five were senior citizens, 28 were children and the average length of hospital stay was six days. this is the number one reason people are visiting our trauma center in san francisco. continuing on among these 515 patients there were 16 that died. half of the patients were pedestrians. as you can see in the pie chart to the right the transportation mode of the patients is shown. over half of these patients were either pedestrians or cyclists who are most vulnerable road users and not only is there a high human cost to the traffic fatalities and injuries there's also an economic cost. over half of
9:38 pm
these severe traffic injuries or these medical charges were billed to public funds. another important issue that is addressed to vision zero is the issue of equity. among the 515 severely injured patients 70% were male and the chart to the right shows some racial disparities found in the data so as represented with the red bar which is the racial distribution of san francisco using census data you can contrast that with the blue bar which is the racial distribution of the severely injured patients and you see that blacks and historics are disproportionately impacted by traffic injuries in our city. while we accomplished a lot in 2015 we have a lot of work to do. i want to highlight some of
9:39 pm
these activities that we have coming in 2016. one of these programs is safe streets for seniors which just kicked off two weeks ago. anna is leading that program but why we're here today is seek your endorsement for automated speed enforement. this is a tool that we need to advance vision zero. as you saw with our traffic fatalities slide we haven't had a reduction in traffic fatalities and we need to be utilizing all of the tools available, and that have been proven to be effective, so with that i would like to pass the presentation on to our partner katie from the san francisco municipal transportation agency who will speak more about automated speed enforement. >> thank you. thank you commissioners for having me. my name is katie and with the government affairs division at
9:40 pm
sfmta. as you noticed from some of our commitments for 2016 there's a common thread which is reducing excessive speeding so we're using the three e's, education and enforcement and engineering to reduce and manage excessive speeding but we're pursuing the tools that we currently don't have, and the tools that i am here to talk about today is automated speed enforement. it's currently not legal in the state of california and we're pursuing legislative changes to state law to authorize its use which is why we're here today. so why are we focusing on speed? speed is the strongest predictor whether a pedestrian or bicyclists hit by a vehicle will walk away from the collision alive. from the graphic the faster the vehicle is going the more likely that
9:41 pm
collision will result in a severe injury or a fatality, so a pedestrian struck by a vehicle traveling 20 miles an hour has a 90% of surviving while a pedestrian only has a 20% of surviving if that vehicle is going 40 miles per hour and the chances of survival are even worse if you're a senior citizen over the age of 60. the chances of surviving goes down to 8% so fro tekting our vulnerable users such as seniors or small children or you know construction workers is one of our top priorities with this initiative, and so the legislation that we are proposing which restrict automated speed enforement units to areas to senior centers, to school zones, construction zones and then areas along the high
9:42 pm
injury network. and so speed is an issue in san francisco. looking at fatal traffic collisions in san francisco over five years you can see the leading cause of fatal collisions account for about 25%, and about 20% of all severe injury collisions, so it's more than any other collision factor and we also know it's not captured in this chart, but through some research conducted by our partners at dph that speed is also largely a secondary collision factor in many fatal and severe injury collisions but officers can only check one box in a collision report which is a primary collision factor so it may say you know "violation of a pedestrian right-of-way" but a loolt of spiem times speed is a factor
9:43 pm
as well so prior to pursuing this policy we looked to see what other cities were doing to manage their speeding problems, and we found that over 140 communities in 14 states across the nation had automated speed enforement programs and these communities realized reductions in speeding including reductions in excessive speeds so vehicles traveling over 10 miles per hour over the speed limit, reductions in average speed, reduction in injury collisions and faitdal collisions, and also interestingly reductions in the amount of violations that were being given over time showing that these drivers were responding to this mechanism and changing their behavior. so just a lot bit about the technology. automated speed enforement can be fixed so on a
9:44 pm
traffic signal similar to the red light cameras or they can be mobile in a van, and the technology uses two radar beams to measure the speed of the vehicle and if the vehicle is traveling above a predetermined threshold then that unit is triggered and a image of the license plate is taken so we're proposing that threshold be 10 miles an hour over the speed limit so again we're trying to target excessive speeding so if you're going 26 in a 25-mile an hour -- and the speed limit is 25 miles an hour we're not targeting you. we want to reduce excessive speeding because that is what is most dangerous. and we understand that with any new technology or program that there's going to be concerns which is why we're here today to talk about this. we worked with the controller's
9:45 pm
office last year and they conducted best practice survey at six cities across the united states to learn more about their implementation practices and you know what obstacles they faced when implementing their programs so just learn more about it and make sure that we have all information that we can get to make sure that our program is successful, and so these were just some of the top concerns that we found through our partner cities was you know there's public concern that that automated speed enforement wouldn't have much of an impact but we found from studies, study after study and many studies are required by other authorizing state legislatures to report back on the effectiveness of automated speed enforement and so time after time proven to reduce speeds and severe collisions. also issues
9:46 pm
related to privacy. you know we're proposing that our system set up to only photograph the license plate so the picture of the face is not seen. also that these photos would only -- or images would be only used for automated speed enforement and for no other reason and then they would be destroyed after a certain amount of time. also revenue -- so this is not about -- it's not about money and so we are proposing that any revenue that we receive from this program would be used to cover the cost of the program and then any additional would be used for traffic safety projects, and you know it would be great if we get this passed through the legislature and then we set up the program and we don't have to issue a single ticket. that would be great because it would show that people aren't speeding on our streets which is our
9:47 pm
ultimate goal. people have also raised concerns about the technology, and we have proposed certain controls in place including routine calibrations as well as as fairness. you know why people -- why are you targeting me? these cameras aren't targeting anybody. they're targeting vehicles going over a predetermined speed threshold and more objective way to enforce current speed laws, and also i just wanted to touch on some of the warning signs so there would be signs posted before entering a corridor that's enforced by radar and also at main entry points around the jurisdiction so if you're a tourist or visiting from outside city you will be made aware
9:48 pm
that we use automated speed enforement in the city and not to speed here, and so as i mentioned before it is currently not legal and prohibited in the california vehicle code so we're asking for your support today for a pilot program in san francisco, and it's just really important to show our support to our state delegation. they expressed to us they would like to hear from the local community for support of this program, and we have received about two dozens letters of support and resolutions from local community groups, from the general hospital trauma center as well as government bodies including the board of supervisors and so it's really important for us to have the public health community behind this because it truly is a public health issue as you've seen from the presentation, and we thank you for considering
9:49 pm
this, and i invite my colleagues up if you have any other questions? >> and again just a reminder commissioners the vote is on the may 3rd meeting not today for the resolution. >> we actually have one public speaker first before we take questions. cathy deluka from walk san francisco. >> i will put three minutes on the timer and then your time is up. >> okay. thank you. i am the policy manager with walk san francisco and first and foremost i am here here today to thank the department of public health and the commissioners for the strong support of vision zero and your work. san francisco department of public health is really leading the nation in terms of getting data that helps push vision zero. i was recently at the vision cities conference in new york city talking to advocates from lots of different cities and they kept talking about how hard it was to get good data on what is
9:50 pm
happening in the city in terms of traffic crashes and injurieses and i would look at them and i am new to walk san francisco. well, just ask your department of public health. they have all the data that's what they do. "no they don't do that here" so they're scrounging to get the data but we're leading the nation because of your efforts and staff's efforts over the last ten years to find out where collisions are happening and maps of the high injury corridors. the work that lay lanny is doing with this and finding out big the epidemic is of traffic injuries in the city and i want to thank you for leading the way and growing your efforts. i know the staff expanded on the work on vision zero. we urge you continue the expansion into the vision zero work and finally -- i don't
9:51 pm
know how much time i have left but i urge you to support this res for automated speed enforement and it's a logical idea to go with this and the data and seed is the number one collision factor and we could use the data to precedent injuries and traffic injuries and i urge you to support that and thanks again for your leadership. >> thank you. commissioners questions at this point now to the presenters? commissioner chung. >> first i want to really thank your presentations and also the effort of like looking at how we can tackle this issue. my sister actually almost got hit by a car years ago, and you know -- you know, on the alemany
9:52 pm
boulevard so that's actually my question and those high injury corridors, a lot of time it's also in residential area, so what would it be like to set up all these automated -- like speed enforcing? >> so the legislation would you know create certain or restrict the use of the technology to certain areas. as i mentioned school zones and senior centers and construction zones and areas that have a high propensity of sever and fatal injury collisions so using the great data from the department of public health and probably based on the high injury network it would be data driven so we would see what corridors had high instances of severe injury and fatal collisions and that alemany -- is alemany on the
9:53 pm
high injury? >> [inaudible] >> commissioner chung are you asking what the cameras look like in residential areas? >> you know because the area -- >> exactly -- >> input whether they want these cameras. like that's another process. >> [inaudible] >> yeah. i think yeah -- they look pretty similar to the red like camera, running cameras. it's kind of a box on top of the connected to the traffic signals. i don't -- >> instead of a traffic signals because -- >> oh, oh. >> you're going to have these in different -- like different points. >> yeah. >> [inaudible] (off mic). >> do you want to use the microphone so that the audience can hear you? >> i imagine the cameras are
9:54 pm
attached to a pole and the residents would be supportive of that in their community if they do have a high frequency of speeders the. it's in a residential area where children or family members are using the street. i would imagine they would be able to work with the community. i just have seen models of what they look like and i am sure that if esthetics are an issue we would be able to work with the community. >> yeah, i think that's the point because a lot of times it's really not the functionalities of these -- like you know like resources. it's more about how they look in the neighborhood these days, and so i am curious about that. also what is the process? so we have to go to the state legislature for them to pass legislation and do we have to come back to our
9:55 pm
own legislators to pass something here also? >> yeah. so we would secure an authorror which could be one of the members of our delegation so member chiu, ting, the next senator or it could be someone from a different delegation so we were working closely with the city of san jose who is also interested in doing a pilot program so it could be any one of those member and they would propose it to the state to their state -- to the assembly or the senate depending who introduces it and has to be approved by the governor and we already got the go ahead from the board of supervisors to pass a resolution and this is one of the mayor's top legislative priorities as well, so we're all approved. >> okay. >> it's a state issue at this
9:56 pm
point. >> i just want that cleared up and know what the process looks like. yeah, thanks. >> yeah. >> i was just going to follow up to ask where has been the opposition? why is it that california and new york have not actually gone into this in terms of legislation already at the state level if it seems so obvious that this is a way to stop pedestrian -- well, just stop any injurys? >> well new york does have automated speed enforement. it took them about ten years to get it, so our opposition is at the state level. the state level unions. one of our biggest opposing organizations right now is the teamsters and the triple a and then there's also large
9:57 pm
organizations that are concerned about privacy, so it's mostly the state organizations. on the local level everyone has been very supportive. it's more you know getting a bill introduced and then getting it squashed in the first hearing because the teamsters make a phone call, so we're working with the teamsters right now actually. it's been really productive and so we have been hearing what their concerns are and trying to incorporate those. >> my question was similar to yours. what is the substantive reason the unions are against this? >> so with the teamsters they -- so they're concerned about their drivers getting more tickets. >> so the teamsters going
9:58 pm
10 miles an hour after the speed limit they're concerned they would get then get more tickets? >> it doesn't make sense to me. >> i'm not saying it makes sense but i am curious. >> yeah. >> if there's something to do with the data where someone was involved with the teamsters got injured that would be useful too. >> yeah. we asked sfpd for information to see if the commercial drivers get speeding tickets and they weren't allowed -- they weren't able to provide that information. >> right. >> yeah. >> well, keep up the good work. >> did you say that the automobile -- the triple a was against it also whereas they're out there trying to promote safety? i mean do they have logic -- what i am looking also within our resolution we could help address some of the issues if we have the data to back up
9:59 pm
what it is, so unless you can give us something substantial. i mean why would the triple a then say in appropriate places we should be able to slow down the speed when they seem to have a campaign to have safe driving? >> [inaudible] >> and insurance companies , right. >> yeah, yeah. you would think they want their drivers to not get in collisions so we have -- it boggled my mind as well why they're opposed to it. it doesn't make sense intuitively but i think they're trying to represent the driver. the same thing with the teamsters and represent the members of the unions and not get more tickets for the drivers, and so i can think about some other language that we might be able to put in the resolution. >> that's what i am thinking because at least address that
10:00 pm
as a -- you know, more strongly as a safety issue. >> we can certainly work with you on language to incorporate that at the next reading. one point we would like to make that we didn't say in the presentation these tickets would be decriminalized. if it's issued by the cameras so it's not a point on the license. this is the equivalent of a parking ticket and that -- >> that helps with the teamsters because they're commercial and professional drivers so if they get a point on the record it's not one point and it's 1.5 and puts them at a higher risk of losing their commercial license so that's another reason and we addressed that with no points on the record and also one of the requests was not allowing these cameras on freeways and so we're fine with that because it doesn't really impact us and also they wanted to ensure that employees were running the system, and not vendors, and so
10:01 pm
that's what our plan was anyways, so just kind of working with them on those issues. >> they only should be on holidays and evening too. >> uh-huh. >> perhaps one of the things you have been saying and whereas we may be should have it within the whereases and think of it and one of the first questions in my mind too is there another way to get another point on our tickets and just like sometimes the stop light cameras are not functioning correctly and so forth. i could understand some of that. maybe we could put something to help in indicate what the camera is used for is to discourage speeding for that reason that we're not -- that it is not -- you know, it's not a criminal offense or anything. you're decriminalizing it, something like that, so those
10:02 pm
arguments fair people would look like and okay that takes away my problem. i think there is the issue and a ttputting up these big things on the sidewalks and picturing in front of my house and sidewalk and even though it's the intersection and i don't want it blocking my sidewalk. i think that was part of -- the summary action in the neighborhoods about that, but i do think looking at how we could strength know our whereas's to help argue the point. i mean it's clear from at least the four of us -- well, i haven't heard from the other commissioner yet. >> one thing that is incumbent upon us at the health department like in the fourth whereas i think that data is not significant and if it is we need to say that and if not we need
10:03 pm
to say that and we assert certain things that are data driven but the end are small in the data that you presented to us. >> and the fourth whereas and the department of public health of public injuries -- that one or the fifth? >> that one, the fourth. i think whenever you assert data our case gets stronger and significant and i know everything thomas does when he shows us studies relies on that kind of rigor. >> but that would be some of the specifics that would help i think as people are reading this and reading it as a support document that we would like to insert as much as possible what is actually going to help answer in the public's mind what they may questioning about this.
10:04 pm
commissioner. >> yeah, what was relevant for me is san francisco general and the number of cases and motor vehicle related. i think it's a significant number and from our county or not i don't think it matters. in regards to the specific resolution i feel this is very supportable from a health perspective. as a driver you have different thoughts but from a health perspective anything that improves lives and reducing trauma i think this is supportable. i actually have another question i would like to ask if you can give me a larger framework and based on my observation and some of the drivers that i know to come and love. it's gotten harder to drive in san francisco. some people feel it's more dangerous to drive in san francisco because of different notations on the streets and the signage and things. it's also probably not at the threshold yet that i feel necessarily feel safe
10:05 pm
about riding a bike as well and we're still trying to gethe bike safety and we know that walk safety is difficult so getting places is hard so where does this fit into the larger picture moving towards safety? i see this as one effort. i don't know if this will reduce us to zero and i don't know if you expect that as well but a significant move forward. what would be the next step after that that we need to be thinking about? i am going to support this but thinking in terms of the larger picture to have real solutions in making our cities feel safe both for drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists. what's the collective impact strategy that you think we will need next? >> [inaudible] (off mic) as we talked about earlier we have the five es and the p and we focus on the "p" today, the policy. we have a large scale education
10:06 pm
campaign that we're working very closely with mta to achieve a sort of a culture change around traffic safety and vision zero. this isn't about teaching people how to look left, right and left again. this is talking about this is the problem in san francisco. we all play a part in this solution, and these are all the different things that need to happen together to do that. there are some really large scale construction projects coming up and i will let mary talk about in a second but we have a real exciting police department. they are working on a -- you will see the new technology and instead of hand written tickets they're doing a pilot how to issue citations electronically to reduce error and be more efficient and that is going to
10:07 pm
be launched this year as well, and then we have all of our wonderful work with our team in environmental health who is doing all of the evaluations, so there's a lot of pieces to the pie that we're working on in vision zero and i will let maury talk. >> just quickly as anna described it is a multi-pronged approach to a very significant issue here in san francisco, so among engineering and evaluation and education and enforcement we know we can't engineer our way out of something and educate ourselves out of something and looking at these efforts and in the engineering efforts they too if necessary have the enforcement component, have the education component and then we can evaluate, so we're in the second year of a two year action strategy which includes tests for all of these items, and we
10:08 pm
already know that some things have to change. as you've heard the numbers haven't gone down. it's an iterative process. we set a goal of ten years and we will continue to work towards that, and ase is one of the tools to reach that but with respect to engineering coming from the sfmta using the high injury network map we are developing our capital improvement program, all of the capital projects to prioritize those corridors, but in addition we want to of course make the streets safer city-wide and regardless if someone is from the city or coming to visit or from a nearby you know east bay, north bay, south bay we want everyone to have a safe
10:09 pm
experience traveling through whether walking, biking or driving and it's about bringing all of the things together. it's relatively new here in the states so we have great examples internationally and we're borrowing best practices from both them and partner agencies across the nation, so -- >> i am feeling i am missing from this or some of the efforts i am interested in branding our city in a way that transportation makes sense, so for example los angeles is a driving town. regardless how you look at you have to drive to get somewhere in l.a. portland and seattle are those kinds of town and new york -- i'm not sure it's a vision zero town or a safe town. how am i supposed to get across town and how does it translate into the policy that we just had a resolution? again the resolution from a
10:10 pm
health perspective makes sense, but a coherent transportation strategy and a vision of that really translates into everybody feeling this is the way to get around. i think it's around having a green vision, a healthy vision. i think that certainly is very much in line with san francisco's ethos, but it would be nice for me to begin seeing some of that as part of the branding of this because i think that's what is going to keep me as a citizen thinking how i drive and how i should be moving about, so otherwise i am looking at a lot of stop signs and flashing things and lights telling me what not to do but i am looking for things what to do well and be a safe transporter. >> sure, sure. and that has come with new safety treatments. you know the green bike line -- some people have never seen
10:11 pm
them before and yay another half lane for me to drive in. they don't understand how to use those necessarily and that is part of the education process and teaching them what they are and with respect to what you should be doing and how to get across town. another vision zero is the priority for the sfmta but mode shift. we provide transit and biking infrastructure and other infrastructure and we want people moving towards those so those priorities go hand and hand and we want to make sure we're building the safest network for people to choose those modes of transportation. >> have we thought about a healthy transportation campaign, be healthy when you're moving around, as part of the healthy -- part of the obesity campaign. >> [inaudible] commissioner pating. that is in the pre-planning stages right now. mta is leading that. there is a large scale campaign. i'm on
10:12 pm
the committee for that effort and you should begin seeing some branding and communication collateral and materials coming out by the summer or the end of the year and i am happy to come back with the team and give an update on vision zero and include that messaging particularly, but that is on the docket for this year. mta got a significant add back from the mayor's office and the supervisors to develop the exact materials you're talking about. >> good. because i bought a new pedal scooter and looking to try it out downtown and i need a place to be safe. >> [inaudible] >> my only reflection on this is in discussion kind of the pragmatic politics of this that you face in the state legislature is that -- i can't believe i'm doing this. but my dad gave me advice "don't be so open minded that your brain
10:13 pm
falls out" and by that we shouldn't be embarrassed that we give tickets and be shy and points for speeding because of the injuries it causes. i mean the data are compelling. the thought that you guys have put into this in the other cities has been detailed and care, and you know we got a good point so let's not water it down so much so it doesn't matter. you know these kinds of injuries change peoples' lives. forget how expensive they are. they really change peoples' lives for the worse so i think we ought to go for it. like we shouldn't be embarrassed about it. >> yeah, i appreciate your comments. i think the only -- the reason we're watering it down because we were trying to find something that would pass-through the legislature, and -- >> i don't have to worry about
10:14 pm
that sitting up here. >> yeah. >> you continue to do this the next thing they're going to say "well, we don't want electricity in the cameras because then they will work." i just think we're trying to do good things for our city, and we awtd not to let forces talk us from the logic. >> and correct me -- >> [inaudible] (off mic) be more acceptable to some of the delegation and the opposition. >> right. commissioner chung. >> i appreciate you mentioning that this is a multi-prong approach, and you know like so far we have heard about the pedestrian safety and how we are trying to make it safer for pedestrians. we've changed
10:15 pm
like cyclists like safety by implementing it is green bike lanes and this seems like a harm reduction model for trying to reduce. the fatalities but the data shows that 30% of the fatalities was a result of like speeding so what are the other 70%? what are we going to do with the other 70%? >> is this the slide you're talking about? >> [inaudible] (off mic).
10:16 pm
>> so commissioners i think it's quite clear from the discussion that we are looking at accepting this resolution resolves but looking at strengthening it, and i think as commssioner singer says you can also use real data here. i mean you've got data showing 38% including the pedestrian right of way right there is a cause of these traffic accidents, you
10:17 pm
know. there's just a number of things that i think can strengthen it so we can have a stronger resolution for you in terms of moving our endorsement of the agenda. >> absolutely and we will work on that in the next couple of weeks and get that to you in time for the may 3 meeting, absolutely. thank you. >> are there any further comments at this point? >> thank you. >> i have not -- we haven't done public comment on this. >> you have another meeting but let's look at a new resolution to be more specific and help you move this at the legislative level. >> thank you. i appreciate it. >> thank you very much. >> next item please. >> so we move on to item 9 which is the 2016 community health assessment and this is a resolution in support of the community health assessment that will be introduced today and voted on the may 3, 2016
10:18 pm
meeting. >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is michelle currian and i am happy to be presenting today on the 2016 community health assessment. i am with the community health assessment impact unit of the department of public health population health division. first off what is a community health assessment? so the community health assessment provides a foundation for improving and protecting health by systematically identifying and describing health status of the community as well facts that impact health. the 2016 community health assessment collected information on healthy san franciscans via three methods, population health data
10:19 pm
-- sorry, population health data analysis, assessment of prior assessments, and community engagement. at the conclusion of these three elements health needs were then identified by committee. while the 2016 community health assessment is the city second it's the first that the health department completed in collaboration with our partners entirely internally. as you're aware in 2011 the health department embarked on a journey to obtain public health accreditation. community health -- sorry, completion of a community health assessment is a requirement of accreditation at least once every five years. accreditation however is not the only driver of the community health assessment. many city agencies, institutions and organizations are required to assess the health status of their groups.
10:20 pm
with a shared vision to promote and improve the health of our san franciscans we partnered with the non-profit hospitals via the san francisco health improvement partnership to create a unified health assessment and therefore reducing redundancy of efforts and better alignments of efforts to improve health. the community health assessment provides a foundation for each of the non-profit hospitals, required community health needs assessments as well as inform the san francisco health care services master plan. the department of public health will work with the hospitals and the community partners to develop a community improvement community plan which addresses some of the needs identified in this assessment. alignment to the this requirements necessitates that we complete a health assessment every three years
10:21 pm
instead of five. the first element of the 2016 community health assessment was examination of secondary quantitative population health data recognizing the essential role that social determinants of health play we examined data describing the conditions which san franciscans are born, grow, live, work and age, and individual risk and protective factors as well as disease and death rates. the modified bar high framework shown here was used to guide the breath of variables to be included. specific variables were then identified by cross referencing data with national and state and indicator projects such as healthy people 2020, the cdc's community status indicators and community health rankings. potential variables were ranked on results based management
10:22 pm
criteria of data power, proxy power and communication power as well as the ability to examine health inequities and current use by our stakeholders. in all 177 variables were analyzed. the results of those are included in 28 data sheets. where appropriate analysis include information on race, age, sex and place and ethnicity. the second element of the community health assessment was an assessment of existing assessments. as we designed the community engagement process we heard from community representatives that many residents felt over assessed and under served. we were afraid to offend and disrespect these residents as well as we recognize this being an excellent data source so we did this assessment of a prior community health assessments. the goals were to see which communities were
10:23 pm
prior assessed what analysis were done and the findings from the assessments. in total we collected 46 assessments and screened them. of the 21 are inclusion criteria and included in the analysis. this criteria included having data collection after 2010. the third collection method was community engagement had three principle goals. the first was to identify san franciscans health priorities especially those with vulnerable populations. a second was to obtain information on those populations for which we're lacking information, and the third was to build relations with the community. using information garnered from the assessment of prior assessments and the population health analysis we identified target populations which we knew had health disparities or had little data and not included in the
10:24 pm
recent assessment and which we could actually reach through existing community organizations. overall community engagement was small. it included a total of 127 participants in 11 meetings. however, our approach did allow us to meet with residents from varying backgrounds who might not have been likely civically engaged. the data collected through the 2016 community health assessments and the health priorities identified in the 2012 community health improvement plan were reviewed by the san francisco health improvement partnership members who determined the health needs. the san francisco health improvement partnership includes representatives from the health department, the non-profit hospitals, the clinical and translational science institutes community engagement and policy
10:25 pm
program at ucsf, the san francisco unified school district, the office of the mayor, the community clinic consortium, face base and philanthropic partners as well as community representatives from the asian and pacific islander parity coalition, human services network, the chicana [inaudible] and the african-american community health council. participants identified health needs through a multi-step process. the first was review of data via presentation, data sheets and a data summary. if it is that we had small group discussions and had a workshop. for the entire process it was defined as a health outcome of morbidity or mortality or behavioral health services,
10:26 pm
clinical care and factors that impact well being. to be a healthy outcome or contributing factor needs to be -- [inaudible] (low audio) and for the defined benchmarks were pulled from national or city estimates or healthy 2020 targets where available. the assessments itself served as benchmarks for examining population data. overall the 2016 community health assessment found that health is improved in many ways in san francisco. for example, more than 97,000 residents gained health insurance under the affordable care act in 2014 and had steady declines in
10:27 pm
hiv diagnosis and the rates of death due to complete speaker cards and documents to be part of the file should be submitted to the clerk disease, cerebral diseases and decreased in cancer has decreased want however, the assessment did identify two foundational issues, economic barriers to health and racial health inequities as well as seven health needs. the seven health needs are psycho-social health, healthy eating violence prevention, access to coordinated and lings qiftally services across the continuum, housing stability homelessness and substance abuse and physical activity. the foundational issues which can be viewed as cross cutting health needs were highlighted by the committee as these broad topics affect health at every level. the committee noted that improved health for all in san francisco requires
10:28 pm
planning which integrates consideration of these issues. data described in each of the foundational issues and health needs are provided in the assessment as well as the data sheets in the appendixes. the 2016 county health rankings released last month corobbate our findings and the overall ranking increased from 2015 to 2016. san francisco performed poorly relative to other california counties on a number of issues including excessive drinking, income inequality, high school education and violent crime and injury deaths. our final steps for the 2016 community health assessment are to address any remaining typos and errors and incorporate any changes you suggest. over the next weeks we will make edits
10:29 pm
but i do not expect major changes. as an example one that was brought to my attention in table 11 in the demographics appendix. here a word omission and a title lead us to say we projected population of 294,000 instead of population change of that amount. we don't expect any catastrophic changes in population. the next major step for the department of public health is to update the community health improvement plan, identify the assessment will be prioritized and objectives and strategies to adopt the health needs and this work is ongoing and expected to be complete mid-2016. again i want to thank you for having me present today and i want to ask if you have any questions.
10:30 pm
>> [inaudible] (off mic). >> thank you. >> [inaudible] (off mic).