Skip to main content

tv   Government Access Programming  SFGTV  July 7, 2018 10:00pm-11:01pm PDT

10:00 pm
agreement with the salvation army church street for operating subsidies for formerly homeless adult households. for the 15 year and six month term, through december 31st for 5.5 million parikh and item 42, to enter into an agreement with the housing services affiliate at the neighborhood centre to provide operating subsidies for formerly homeless adult households. for approximately 1.6 million. >> colleagues, can we take those items? same house, same colloquy without objection, those items are adopted unanimously. >> item 43 is resolution to approve the fourth amendment to the contract to the tied centre to provide supportive housing property management under the delivering innovation and supportive housing program, to
10:01 pm
extend the contract term by one year through june 30th 2019, and to increase the contract amount by 5.8 million for a total of 46.3 million. >> same house, same colloquy without objection and the resolution is adopted drink don't unanimously. next item. >> it is a resolution to approve amendment number 4 to a contract with new flyer of america had to change 68 coaches from parallel propulsion to steering propulsion and demand the additional equipment added during the production phase of the contract into them and the schedule of prices to reflect the changes for a total contract amount not to exceed 428.6 million. >> same house, same colloquy without objection, your resolution is adopted unanimously. next item? >> item 45 is a resolution to have the use and space and communication services within an additional data center located at 3101 golden centre drive in
10:02 pm
california. farm the state of california processing technology agency, the off ethic technology services for a three-year term through june 30th, 2021 for an annual rate of approximately 757,000. >> same house, same colloquy without objection the resolution is adopted unanimously. adam clark, please call item 36 and 47 together. >> their two resolutions that retroactively approve amendment number 6 and 1 respectively. for item 46, to the contract for architectural and engineering services for the final design and construction of the central subway project with h. and tb --dash bnc jay-z to increase the contract amount by 1.26 million to redesign the truck way alignment and analyse impacts to ventilation systems and provided design and construction support for total contract amount not to
10:03 pm
exceed 34.94 million item 47, approving the amendment to the architectural and engineering services for the final design on the construction of the central subway project with central subway design group, and to increase the contract amount by 1 million, for total not to exceed 47.9 million. >> can we take those items, same house, same colloquy. >> without objections, they are adopted unanimously. >> it is a resolution to authorize the mayor, or the mayor's designee to cast an assessment ballot in the fort -- in the affirmative on behalf of the city at the owner of one parcel break -- real property over which the board of supervisors has jurisdiction that we subject to assessment in a proposed property and business improvement district to be named the discover community district. >> same house, same colloquy. >> is adopted unanimously. next item? >> it is an ordinance to amend the administrative and house codes to change the composition
10:04 pm
of the new food security task force and to extend the date by three years to july 1st, 2021. >> same house, same colloquy without objection, it passes unanimously on the first reading. alright, let's go back to item number 26. >> see why i know supervisor peskin is running around passing amendments. i wanted to share that i finally got a better understanding of what all these different amendments did and, actually may be i could defer to supervisor peskin to confirm his changes and i will jump in afterwards. >> besides the amendment on the floor for the particular item, are they going to be additional amendments, or will we start all over? supervisor peskin? >> thank you madam president. thank you for thoroughly leading the legislation. in addition to the amendments
10:05 pm
that were appropriately discussed, the page 41 amendment is now before each and every one of you on lines 21 and 22 that said, rather than including the amendments, except features in sections 136 c., 13 usd 24 and in and see 26. in addition to that, i would like to thank supervisors, on page 47 backed line 19, you will see, in yellow, the addition are sections a.-d. and section 311 and subsection d. which is to clarify that the plans that do not have to be in multiple languages. discuss the project description. and there are other conforming small changes on page 48, and i
10:06 pm
would like to move those. i also want to say on a higher level -- and i'm thankful to supervisors that these appear to be acceptable, i don't think our job is done. i think, and i'm saying respectfully the planning department of the mayor's office product the hurry to get this thing done before mayor farrell left office did not really create the space to have the kind of inclusive conversation with neighbours and neighborhood that this deserved. i am totally open to having that conversation. i think that if we do it right and we proven debts again and again, you know, from different factions on the board, we did it in inclusionary housing top and
10:07 pm
we get it in other things, when we bring people along and show them that we are actually making improvements, it socializes it. we should do further exploration around pop outs as it relates to preapplication meetings. i'm open to doing that. i think we have been used to do that. i think if we want to get the most important part done, which is the streamlining around 100% affordable, while maintaining the kind of level of neighborhood "-right-double-quote and inclusion, we've got the right formula for today. >> locate. for the points our clarity, it was my understanding the amendment that you provided two arsenals are equal to your original amendment. so i thought we had done that. >> we did. i put it in writing because it was verbalized by deputy city attorney. the addition, which is on page 47, which i handed up earlier and handed out again in this clipped copy, the clarifications around language access, and no caps, would be an
10:08 pm
additional amendment. >> so you're making at a motion to amend that particular porti portion, and that would amend your current amendment? is there a second? colleagues, can we take that without objection? without objection, the motion passes. >> to buy. several, although override -- overall i would say i was sad to see this legislation getting rolled back, i do here supervisor peskin's concern as well as other supervisors are bound time and effort around neighborhood outreach on this topic. i know a lot of ne constituents care a lot about its. i do want to point out something significant. in the second version supervisor peskin's amendment on page 48, is reverting the discretionary review back to section 333 which means that where it go and return to new -- apologized park
10:09 pm
let me just -- originally, his amendment would have changed the notification to 30 days instead of ten. now we go to 20 days instead. i thought that was a very important change that he made work thank you for that. and then clarifying on page 41, it was originally a mistake. and encompassed too much in terms of notification. while it is just saying that basically pop outs will be noticed but not all of those other things in the planning code under section 136. and ben, i appreciate the change made to language access and making sure that the translations will be done just the top kind of the basic notice. not every single day until other projects. i think with those changes, overall, it is better than what we have now.
10:10 pm
i look forward to working with our colleagues and the planning department staff in the mayor's office on figuring out other ways we can make our planning approval process easier for people. >> thank you. >> thank you madam chair. supervisor peskin, i appreciate the forthrightness and the willingness to work with us going forward. i think we accomplished pretty much where we have consent of 80% of what we are trying to do in this. i think there is an agreement now that they're still more work to be done. we can have a conversation very similar to what we've done when he rolled up our sleeves on other issues. the idea of having conversation about a mandatory preapplication hearing, as it pertains to the seamless -- famous or infamous pop outs. we can continue to have the conversation because the idea of streamlining and notification can be compatible. i appreciate your commitment to
10:11 pm
work with us on that. we will continue to work this and work with the planning department. thank you for your time that the planning department staff is put in on this along with the city attorney. this process that's been very aggressive. we will continue to do this and i think in the end, we will be able to achieve 100% consensus, and accomplish the goal of the streamlining, as well as appropriate level of notification, which will result in better projects overall. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. i just want to thank supervisor peskin and supervisor tanning for walking me through these amendments. they weren't as difficult as i thought they would be when we first started this discussion. and knowing that what we had agreed to you and what we were looking at on the part of the neighborhood is in here. it gives me -- i will be able to
10:12 pm
support it today knowing the things we discussed are actually in here. i'm happy -- i agree more needs to be done and we need to continue these conversations, fudge based on the fact that what we discussed with the neighbors, i see that in this legislation, and therefore i will be supporting it today. >> seeing no other names on our roster, and on the motion to amend the house has -- ok. can we take the same house, same call? without objection, it passes unanimously and on the item as amended, colleagues, can we take that item, same house same call? without objection, it passes unanimously. madam clerk, let's go to committee reports. >> item 56 through 59, were considered by the land use and
10:13 pm
transportation committee on a regular meeting on monday, june 25th, 2018. they were forwarded as committee reports. this is an ordinance to remand the permanent -- permit codes where the parcel is located in both the glen park commercial transit area. residential housing districts and the zoning districts affirming the determination and to make the appropriate findings. [please standby]
10:14 pm
-- that actually the city sold to the owner as a parking lot. that lot has never -- they've never charged for parking. it's been posted that if you park here, you'd be towed, but everybody in the neighborhood knows you won't be towed. and the person who owned it, it's a san francisco family. the father died. now the revenue from that building goes to support the mother who's in her 90s. talking to the owners, it is their long-term goal to develop that entire property as housing. but at this time, they need to do something with that parking lot because it represents significant liability.
10:15 pm
so what they are seeking to do is to pave the lot, charge for parking. part of the revenue that they will get from parking will be used to conduct planning towards development. one of the things -- and this is in an amendment -- is that we are setting a hard time limit of six years for the use's parking. so if you look at this -- and this is clearly one of those local deals where, you know, we discuss with the landowner, nothing compels the landowner to develop. it is my belief -- and i say this in full confidence of the owners, and having created the appropriate set of incentives, it is my belief that by allowing the parking, allowing an additional revenue stream, that they can use to, again, start to look into developing what it
10:16 pm
would take to actually develop the property for desperately needed housing which we know we need as a city. i mean, it's cattycorner from b.a.r.t. we could go up a number of stories and really create some nice housing there. but knowing that the likelihood of this taking place without this adjustment is virtually nil. they would fence it off, and at some point in the future, they may or may not sell it for development. they may or may not take steps towards development. six kids. you know, and these are all older folks. at some point, they would proceed with this. but at this point in time, they're faced with the dilemma of we have a parking lot. if we can't continue to use it as a parking lot, we're just going to fence it off because we're not getting any revenue there anyway. what becomes catastrophic for businesses in the neighborhood in the commercial district, because that source of parking would disappear overnight. most catastrophically affected
10:17 pm
would be the restaurants which rely on that parking for people to go to their restaurants. so what this does, what the goal of this is, which i think because of the time limit is what will be achieved is that it starts the clock ticking on that property to have it developed for housing, which is the long-term goal for everyone impacted by that. so in terms of amendments, they start on page 2, and they really focus on general plan consistency findings which goes on for several pages. and so would like to have those and the other amendments adopted. and then the key amendment is on page -- the other key amendment is on page -- let's see where that is -- the provision on page
10:18 pm
8, on page 8, at the top of page 8, which clearly describes that the -- this ability to park there will expire in 72 months, which is 6 years. the parking lot will be removed. and the -- upon the expiration of this, the city attorney is authorized to take steps to eliminate the parking lot. we've got really strong binding elimination of the parking lot after this time. so i think it is -- again, it's one of those hyper local things where we take out the parking lot tomorrow, people will freak out. especially the merchants. and this allows us to really work in a win-win situation with the property owners in order to
10:19 pm
get the ball rolling on what we all want to see accomplished, which is the development of that property as housing. >> thank you. supervisor sheehy, i think you had comments about the amendments? >> yes, deputy city attorney john gibner again. following the committee meeting, we've prepared additional amendments at the committee's direction. i think the document that was just circulated that you read from, supervisor sheehy, is the older version. that was considered in committee. but following on, on your suggestions and supervisor kim's suggestions, we have a different version. i don't think the hard copy is here. i'm happy to read that language in. also on pages 6 and 8, as you said. the sunset language. the general plan consistency language is the same in both documents.
10:20 pm
but the sunset would read, "unless reenacted, in note shall expire 72 months after the effective date of the ordinance in this board file. upon its expiration, any approved public parking lot shall be removed. and the current zoning control shall apply. any approval of a public parking lot used pursuant to this note shall be conditioned upon the recordation of a notice of special ee strikzs reflecting these conditions subject to approval as to form by the planning department and the city attorney. upon expiration of this note, the city attorney is authorized to take steps to remove this note from the planning code." i believe that covers the discussion in committee. >> thank you. >> okay. supervisor sheehy has made a motion, which has been read into the record. is there a second? seconded by supervisor ronan. supervisor kim. >> supervisor kim: thank you. i was on the roster because i wanted to ensure that the notice was included in the amendment, but our city attorney has read that into the record. and i just want to clarify for
10:21 pm
members of the board that we're not at land use committee today. the reason why i had asked for this additional amendment, it's because even if the use expires 72 months after the affected date of the ordinance, they could continue to use the lot as a parking lot, even after the expiration. and so this is to ensure that the landowner explores other adjacent to one park b.a.r.t. station and does not remain a parking lot in perpetuity. i think that given the density and the nature of the transit corridor, it's really important that we ask the landowners to pursue other uses including housing. however, i acknowledge, as supervisor sheehy has stated, that it takes a number of years, especially for a family trust to go down that path.
10:22 pm
they're not developers, as was mentioned. and so providing them six years to begin this work and to explore planning on other types of uses that are a much better fit for this block, this ordinance would allow them to do that while still providing a time constriction and ensuring that this does not remain a parking lot by one of the richest transit corridors in our city. and i just wanted to clarify with planning staff that that amendment -- that this amendment will do that. >> okay. carbon monoxide >> supervisor kim: is that nod of the head -- >> yes, that's correct. the amendments that the city attorney made this morning and this afternoon would serve the purpose that you requested. >> supervisor kim: great. thank you so much. and thank you, supervisor sheehy, for accepting that friendly amendment. >> thank you, supervisor kim. supervisor safai.
10:23 pm
>> supervisor safai: thank you, president breed. i actually have a question for the planning department because the owners of this land are not developers. the owners of this land are not people that actually can, i think, actualize the development on this site. so in six years, if we get to this spot where they have not been able to do something, what happens with this deed restriction? it sounds like they're no longer able to use it as a parking lot. the commercial corridor would obviously be impacted. but what would happen if they cannot? are they either forced to sell and/or forced to just fence off the property? >> planning department staff. that's correct. after the 72-month period, the property would no longer be permitted as public parking. so the planning commission has recommended that if the land is still not ready to be developed to housing, there be a rezoning. it's a very unique parcel. it straddles two zoning
10:24 pm
districts. right now about two-thirds of the parcel is rh2. and the other third is glen park nct. glen park nct allows for much more dense housing, the kind of housing that the planning department usually likes to see located near transit corridors. so the very first recommendation after the use is discontinued for parking would be to rezone the entire parcel of glen park nct. at that point the property owners would have the option to sell the land, to continue to try to find funding or loans to develop land into housing or to do any one of the uses that is currently permitted under glen park nct or allowed with conditional use. >> president breed: all right. supervisor kim. >> supervisor kim: under the glen park nct, a parking lot is permitted with a conditional use authorization. so if in six years, for whatever reason the landowner wants to
10:25 pm
continue this use, they would just go through the normal planning process where they would get a conditional use authorization. now, it's clear that the planning commission does not want that to be the particular use. and so we'll keep pushing the landowner. but it doesn't mean they have to sell the land. they could also leave it as is. they just won't be able to generate revenue as a parking lot which i think is not the type of use that this board -- at least i've heard -- wants to continue to encourage. but i think as supervisor sheehy said, because this is a family trust, we want to give them this opportunity to develop this site and at least explore options. this will allow them to generate some revenue to fill a need within the neighborhood. and then in the meantime explore these other options. >> president breed: okay. seeing no other names on the roster, colleagues on the motion to amend. can we take that same house,
10:26 pm
same call. without objection, the motion passes unanimously. and on the item as amended, can we take that same house, same call? without objection, the ordinance as amended passes unanimously. madam clerk, let's go to items 57 through 59, please. >> item 57 is an ordinance amending the general plan in connection with revisions to the candlestick point phase 2 project in order to facilitate redevelopment and to make the appropriate findings. item 58 is to remove the assess assessor's lot number 276 from the candlestick point activity node special use district and the cp height and bulk district. and to make the appropriate findings. for item 59, the resolution of the board of supervisors acting in its capacity, as the successor agency to the former redevelopment agency of the city to approve an amendment to the
10:27 pm
below-market rate housing plan for the candlestick ship yard phase 2 project in the hunter's point ship yard redevelopment area and the bayview redevelopment project area subject to oversight to the oversight board and the california department of finance approvals and to make the appropriate findings. >> president breed: colleagues, can we take those same items, same house, same call? without objection, the items are adopted unanimously. madam clerk, let's go to roll call for introductions. >> madam president, you are first up to present new business. >> submit. >> thank you. supervisor fewer. thank you. supervisor kim. thank you. supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin: already submitted. >> supervisor ronan. >> supervisor ronen: yes, thank you. two weeks ago, i held a hearing to look into pg&e's practices that have been blocking city projects' access to clean green city power.
10:28 pm
i was appalled to hear reports about outrageous delays and stretch budgets and pg&e's responses were thin, at best. we heard from rec and park about pg&e's demands and an extra expense. we heard from the sfusd that they were doing duplicate contingency engineering on renovation projects just to protect the school calendar against unpredictable pg&e demands. we heard from mohcd that pg&e was insisting that they install equipment, that would mean losing a two-bedroom apartment. the list of affected projects includes life-or-death essential public resources like our ambulance deployment facility, navigation centers and the police academy, and just about every city department has been affected. i'm introducing a resolution today that calls upon pg&e to change their obstructionist practices and work in good faith with the san francisco public utilities commission. i want them to understand that we are watching them, and we
10:29 pm
will be tracking every project to be sure that they don't stand in our way. san francisco and pg&e have a long, complicated history, stretching back from the 1913 federal act that signaled the start of san francisco's efforts to create a public power system. over the years, the negotiated agreements and hard-fought court decisions, san francisco and pg&e settled into an uneasy truce. but since our interconnection agreement expired in 2015, and frankly, as we have taken steps towards a broader use of public power via clean power sf, pg&e has thought up new roadblocks designing requirements on a project-by-project basis with no consistency, no accountability, no engineering or safety justification, and no ability for departments to predict or prepare for impacts to their projects. while mayor farrell reached a loose agreement in may with pg&e on a short list of projects under way, we have a much larger or longer pipeline of city
10:30 pm
projects that extends well beyond this year. we can't let this go. we have to keep the pressure on pg&e. and the rest i submit. >> thank you, supervisor ronen. supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: thank you, madam clerk. i want to take just one moment to say that, you know, today is a day that my heart is filled with sadness because of the supreme court ruling. our democracy is under assault by so many different -- in so many different angles. we had a rally today, press conference, led by supervisor fewer at 12:30 to talk about the families that have been ripped apart again by our nation's policies and executive orders by what i am calling dictator in chief. and the idea with rulings to
10:31 pm
allow members from certain countries based on their religion, based on a country that i personally was born in, my father hails from, i would not be standing here today if that ban had been in place. and it is a sad day in our history, but i will say in many ways, it's also a day -- it's a call to action and it's a call for each and every one of us in this chamber, as many of us had and all of us had to stand up and say that we will fight for our democracy, and we will fight for what we believe in. so this ruling today is a temporary setback. many of the people are emboldened to continue legal challenges, as they are with continue fighting for those mothers and children and families that are being ripped apart for many actions. i just wanted to bring that to light. i wanted to say a few words about that and thank every member of this board that has stood in solle latidarity with s of the countries that are on this ban as well as countries of
10:32 pm
origin and undocumented individuals and families that are being torn apart because of ridiculous, ridiculous anti-democratic policies. and in many opinion, unlawful. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor. supervisor sheehy. okay. thank you. supervisor stefani. >> supervisor stefani: thank you. i have a few things. i failed to thank chang who also helped me on item 26, and i just wanted to make sure that i show gratitude when gratitude is due. and i just wanted to thank her for working with my neighborhood associations and helping me with that ordinance. and also i want to echo what supervisor safai said and thank supervisor fewer for starting the rally on the steps. it's to stand in solidarity with everyone. to fight back i think is something that we can be proud of here in san francisco. and lastly, i wanted to say a happy ninth birthday to my daughter who's in my office right now. she shares a birthday with our
10:33 pm
clerk. so that's wonderful. she's 9 years old today, and she's in my office right now. so i wanted to say happy birthday, gigi. thank you. >> thank you. happy birthday, gigi. supervisor tang. >> supervisor tang: i submit. happy birthday. >> thank you. and supervisor yee. >> supervisor yee: submit. >> that concludes the introduction of new business. >> president breed: thank you. i've already said happy birthday to our clerk but i want to say happy birthday to gigi as well. so with that, madam clerk, please go to public comment. >> thank you, madam president. at this time the public may address the entire board of supervisors for up to two minutes on items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the board to include the may 22nd board meeting minutes and items 62 through 64 on the without reference to committee calendar. public comment is not allowed when an item has been previously subject to public comment
10:34 pm
pursuant to the board's rules, please direct your remarks to the board as a whole and not to individual supervisors and nor to the audience. speakers using interpretation assistance will be allowed twice the amount of time to testify. and if you would like to display your document on the overhead projector, please clearly state such to sfgtv and then remove the document when you'd like the screen to return to live coverage of the meeting. first speaker, please. [ speaking foreign language ] >> what i said, happy birthday and god bless you. [ speaking foreign language ]
10:35 pm
ladies and gentlemen, i would like to tell you, i watch and i see the supervisor a couple days ago and she said we want to clean our city. i have an idea. very simple. guess what? you have 11 supervisors in the city of san francisco. if each one of them make 25
10:36 pm
person for saturday and 25 for sunday, guess what? we're going to have 550 volunteers. madam, i love you like anyone else. and i worry about your position sooner or later. i would like to see someone over our supervisor to be vice mayor, someone to help you to take care for the homeless, the people
10:37 pm
working in the shelter. take care and god bless all of you. i hope you like to make it something else with every one of our supervisors to protect their own district. thank you. god bless all of you. i've known you for 21 years. god bless you and happy birthday today again. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, members of the board. ten girls were held at the san francisco juvenile hall in february. there was a black history month celebration. now, i must state, i'm not a fan of black history month. but still, there was the celebration for these ten girls. 19 women from outside the
10:38 pm
facility participated. 18 of them were white. what's wrong with that picture? now, i was taught the gospel of jesus christ by a white woman who i really appreciate. so i'm not against white people teaching black kids anything. but something's wrong with that. and in san francisco, i'm saying that there is a racist spirit to where white people think that they have all the answers, and they don't. i direct your attention to tomorrow's report. it's about the fact that there's no kids up at the ranch. did you know that? find out why. and don't go along with what's
10:39 pm
in the paper. find out why. there's a racist element behind it. that's not being told. and when the chief probation officer told his side of the story, he's hiding something. because i know what he did not say. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> he's true and correct in his statements. and even though i'm upset with the way business is being taken care of in the area that's predominantly black people and people of color is taking place and you're ethically cleansing and reducing our numbers in populations, i must admit that i agree with the presentation that was made by supervisor cohen pertaining to juneteenth and
10:40 pm
explaining somewhat of the history of black people. we're not immigrants. we came over here as slaves. fast forward to 1964. dr. martin luther king made a speech that was called "i have a dream." it's a real important speech and had a lot to do with the civil rights act of 1964. but it's also the start of the discriminatory practices, tricking devices that was handed down to black people and the neighborhood where i grew up. that discriminatory practice proceeds today. fast forward to the ethnic cleansing of the fillmore area, 60 jair blocks of us being eliminated and ruining our reproduction of our own nationality. and as a result, we've got 2.5% and 3% population growth in the city.
10:41 pm
fast forward to the bayview area that used to be predominantly black, too. you've got soil contaminations and numerous blacks have died behind it. as a result, we continue to build, and you go on with additional construction as if nothing takes place. and you act like you're going to test the area. tell that to the people of relatives who have died. that's disgusting. you've got two females from muslim descent filing a lawsuit because of being contaminated from the shipyard. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hello. how is everybody today? my name is shawn strickler. say hello to my friends. this is sarah.
10:42 pm
she's a white republican. and this is mad max. and she is a very angry democrat. hi. i'm sarah palin. excuse me. you know what? you two are fighting each other and i don't like to see that. that makes my heart very sad to watch you two not get along. it makes my heart extremely sad. and it makes ms. rogers, my friend, very sad that you two can't get along. and no one's actually telling each other the truth. and people airport really caring about the kids because the kids are what matter. no, they don't. yes, they do. no, they don't. yes, they do. no, they don't. take a look at my red nose and i want you to see something. i want to you sing a song with me. i want you to sing a song to someone very special, okay? her name is angela. happy birthday, angela.
10:43 pm
♪ happy birthday to you ♪ happy birthday to you >> yeah! ♪ happy birthday dear angela ♪ happy birthday >> have a, have a, have a happy birthday. ♪ to you. >> maybe you can come over to my house later for some pecan pie, maybe. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> you're famous, angela. happy birthday. tom gilberti. i mentioned eleanor roosevelt a while back about how it would be appropriate to put a statue of her out on civic center, the plaza there.
10:44 pm
and it turned out that if you want to understand exactly why it would be very, very appropriate, turn to ken burns, the roosevelts, episode 7. it was basically all about her. and what this one woman was able to do. the united nations still is probably our best ideal. america probably needs to join it. instead what we're doing, we're fighting it. just the other day, the united nations has started listing where we -- the united states of america is in health and in poverty. the degradation of equal opportunity, levels approaching third world. and so it's at times like this i agree with the supervisor safai that our whole planning, our whole society is at risk.
10:45 pm
one of the problems i had with our late mayor was a lack of leadership, a void. the whole bay area needs to come together and develop a plan for what we need to do, coming here, looking out over the bay area. it was just brown. we are turning, by commuting, a sales force building, whatever, putting stresses on everything that we are -- our qualities of life. we need to turn that around. we need to come home. bring our government home again. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hi, my name is yolanda jones. i come before you today in
10:46 pm
response -- >> ms. jones, can you speak directly into the microphone and i'll start your time over? >> okay. perfect. i come today before you in response and concerns that i have as a result of most recently issued and executed city of san francisco vehicle contract. i have a more detailed letter outlining my concerns in greater detail. but for this purpose of public comment period today, i am summarizing my concerns very briefly. please see the more complete written documentation for a more detailed review. i am a local business owner. i represent auto detailing. after more than a decade of patronizing the same car wash vendor, a new bid for services was finally introduced.
10:47 pm
when i read the new bid requirements, it became clear that this would be a different process than what was previously done. however, my business is certainly located in the quadrant with sufficient resources to maintain profit for my business. i decided to respond to the bid and request. in securing and reviewing hundreds of documents and e-mails related to this bid through the freedom of information act, i found a number of things peculiar. the things i discovered led me to believe members of the purchasing department including mark farley and members of the police department rick yik were working together to serve the goal of undermining and showing my business, boosting those vendors of personal choice.
10:48 pm
so i'm going to just go to the questions i have because i don't have very much time. let's see. what did farley -- >> you could submit those questions to us as well. thank you. thank you so much for your comments. the sergeant at arms will come get that piece of paper from you. next speaker, please. >> thank you, madam. and happy birthday. good evening, president breed, ladies and gentlemen of the board. my name is winship hillyer, involuntary psychiatric o outpatient in the city for ten years without a court order, i might add. 45 years ago, the supreme court decided o'connor versus donaldson, this was a landmark decision. it basically took the decision of who to involuntarily detain
10:49 pm
due to mental illness out of the hands of psychiatrists. before that, it was basically whoever they wanted to, they could shove into a hospital where the person might stay for decades. and rot. as a result, there was massive deinstitutionalization. people were turned onto the streets and became homeless because institutionization harms people. because psychiatric treatment disable them, make them unable to compete in the workplace and the other marketplaces on which our society runs. 15 years later, those psychiatrists i read to you about two meetings back said, well, we've got our own power grab. you've taken away from us the ability to send people into the hospital. we're just going to treat people as outpatients. and we're going to treat whoever we want! because as you know, it is
10:50 pm
highly -- it is highly -- oh, god. i'm sorry. my mind is just not -- my memory is just not working. madam. >> thank you for your comments. and before the next speaker speaks, is there anyone else from the public who would like to address the board during general public comment? next speaker, please. >> hi, i'm just basically going to attempt to show a video through this process. it's district attorney gascon. i want to show how he treats the public, particularly a protester, by moving the protester using his car.
10:51 pm
>> lift it up just slightly. >> thank you.
10:52 pm
>> thank you for your video and your comments. madam president. >> president breed: are there any other members of the public who would like to provide public comment at this time? seeing none, public comment is now closed. all right, madam clerk, let's go to items for adoption without reference to committee. >> items 62 through 64 are being considered for adoption. a single roll call vote may enact these items. otherwise an item may be severed and considered separately. >> president breed: okay. seeing no names on the roster, colleagues, can we take these items same house, same call? without objection, those items are adopted unanimously. all right. let's go to our second committee as a whole. colleagues, we will now enter into the city of the hall to take nominations and elect a new board president. in order to focus on transitioning to the duties of
10:53 pm
mayor and ensure there's not a gap in office of board president, i have submitted my resignation to become effective at the end of today's meetings. giving the board an opportunity to elect a new board president today. madam clerk, please call items 53 through 55. >> thank you, madam president. item 53 is a public hearing before the board of supervisors convening as a committee as a whole on june 26th, today, to receive public comment on possible nominations for the office of board president in anticipation of the vacancy that will occur at the end of today's meetings to fill the unexpired term ending january 28th, at 12:00 p.m. by london breed. item 54 is the nominations and item 55 is the election for board president. if the president opened the committee as a whole, public comment, members of the public are able to address the board for up to two minutes on the
10:54 pm
nomination of any member of the board of supervisors to fill the anticipated vacancy. public speakers using interpretive assistance will be allowed twice the amount of time to testify. and if there are any members of the public in the hallway, please enter the chamber now so that you can be a part of this process. >> okay. this hearing is now open and we will take public comment. first speaker, please. >> good evening. my name is brandon harami, i'm an officer with the san francisco, the local chapter of our revolution. and i really wanted to come up here to recommend a member of the board of supervisors who i think would be the best president of the board of supervisors which would be supervisor jane kim. jane kim has had a long history of passing bold legislation that affects the entire city, of having a bold vision for our city. i'm going to city college for free, which as a low-income californian, really, really resonates with me. my mom was a preschool worker.
10:55 pm
so prop c, the passage of prop c and thank you, supervisor, for that as well, was substantial to a lot of preschool workers as well. i know the current makeup of the board makes my request kind of shooting for the stars, but i really hope that you consider supervisor kim. if we are going to be looking at what the ideological makeup of the board is now. my recommendation from that ideological makeup would be supervisor cohen. supervisor cohen, thank you for your hard work on accountability. i am very pleased with the recent budget work that was done. i think we have a long way to go before we're able to have a police force that we can have faith in, and your work has been great on that. so jane kim, that's my number one choice, but my second choice would be supervisor cohen. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. jordan davis. i'd just like to say that my number one choice for board
10:56 pm
president would also be jane kim. she has been a very prolific legislator, even while swimming upstream. and she would be fitting if she spent her final six months as such. hillary ronen and sandra fewer, you would also be good choices. cohen would be a good choice as well as she's done a lot of work around cannabis equity and making sure mod squad doesn't go too far. however, how difficult it is for me to say this out of fear of retaliation, but i am extremely opposed to the nomination of h ahsha safai. his eventually lonely fight. i've twice been at the committee when supervisor ronen had legislation heard. and twice he asked a line of question that was designed to
10:57 pm
troll rather than clarify pieces of legislation. imagine being a sexual assault and harassment survivor in that room and having to hear all sorts of questioning designed to provoke and prolong an already emotional item. on a personal note, it's one thing that supervisor safai misgendered me during a hearing on historic trans rights led legislati legislation, but several times even at mayor elect breed's campaign kickoff, mr. safai has unwelcomely touched me, even when i asked him to stuff. other women have told me things as well and i'll leave them to tell their stories when they feel comfortable. but i absolutely cannot trust someone who has serious boundary issues for any form of leadership position, especially when they talk about people being able to take on leadership roles. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> i made many demonstrations before you. in fact, i'm the only one to come through and show you how to
10:58 pm
take care of a billion-dollar problem in two minutes. my examples on twitter clearly stipulate that. but i must admit, when i came through here during women's month, i wanted to find out which one of your supervisors, which one of you supervisors, i would demonstrate and bring a lot of heat based on my considerations. and i shocked all of you when i talked about those rape kits sitting at the hall of justice for 20 or 30 years. and out of all of you supervisors, the only one that got up and stopped me and did a further set of hearings to take care of the problem was ronen. so i recommend her to be the president. a combination of my moves and my dmop stra demonstrations, that's the most hysterical chamber in city hall because i made my demonstrations in there.
10:59 pm
continual injury of rape can be applied and the statute of limitations cannot be applied to females. and as a result, within the same hearing in that same roosevelt room chamber, i also demonstrated that my demonstration should be incorporated on the grounds that mr. deangelo, who admitted rape and murder has been getting away with it for 40 years. and there should be no statute of limitations on rape. and as a result, no more than a week and two days later, the legislators in sacramento saw that nodemonstration and got ri of the statute of limitations because of me and ronen. we did it. not you, not you, not you, not you. is that clear? is there anybody out there object to that? so i recommend her to be the president. and we'll get affordable housing, too. >> thank you. next speaker, please.
11:00 pm
>> madam president, district 6 community planners, i nominate angela and/or gigi. [ laughter ] i would also nominate supervisor stefani because she has the seat that's closest to the public comment. it has actually been kind of a pleasant, more inclusive board since you've been president. i want to compliment you on that. whoever you pick, i will they will continue that. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> so i'm going to quote from the republican national convention of 2016 when donald trump was nominated. and don king was speaking and introducing him. this is a direct quote.