tv Government Access Programming SFGTV March 23, 2019 11:00pm-12:01am PDT
we talk about the yellow pages. >> yeah, the book standards. >> there's a way to do audits specifically that is very technical regardless of what the subject matter is if it's budget if it's whistle blowing, if it's police data if it's use of force. and so i believe that's what voters were expecting, a full analysis of an audit and so that's what we built and we took those standards from the controller's office those exacting standards, and are applying them to the use of force. so that's -- >> vice president swig: okay. and so the conclusions and the recommendations out of this -- >> okay. and so the conclusions and the recommendations are going to come from d.p.a.? >> yes. >> commissioner dejesus? >> commissioner dejesus: the audits you're using are the
government audit and that's the government standard? >> correct. >> commissioner dejesus: and then you said you were doing interviews -- have you started doing the interviews -- the methodology with the officers and stuff like that? >> yets. we've conducted a number of interviews with police stations as well as nonuniformed staff that are responsible for processing the data, as well as other necessary individuals. >> commissioner dejesus: so i'm just curious. is there a method to that madness? how do you select which officers is this random or they're selected to you or are they selected from the department for you? how do you work that out? >> that depends. on the nature of the objective that they're trying to accomplish when it comes to understanding the nature and methodology of what happens at the police station those officers were randomly selected. >> commissioner dejesus: and then going back to commissioner
rirch hirsch when you're going back to the finals -- i'm just wondering if you're working with any scientists or specialists to come to any conclusions or is it just going to be like, raw numbers? >> it will not be raw numbers. all the findings that we come to will be provided with context as well as evidence what led us to those conclusions. the findings might not be number based. they might be qualitative and recommendations, as well. >> commissioner brookter? >> commissioner brookter: just a couple questions. timeline, that's a very simple one. >> our goal is spring 2019. >> commissioner brookter: 2019. and then what are the conversations that we stream line things to get it out in spring 2019? >> today. >> today is
report. this goes to commissioner dejesus's questions. can you talk about any examples that you're going to be doing with the department that's just not going to be raw numbers. can you give us an example of anything that you've done in the controller's office? >> yeah. i think the overall work of the controller's outdoorsity unit speaks of our ability to come into any situation obtain an understanding of the operation and reach a conclusion hopefully that benefits the unit that we audit. the yellow book standards that i reached earlier indicate that we can't reach conclusions in a vacuum. we work with subject matter experts as appropriate to make sure that we're not coming to any conclusions erroneously. and then lastly there's an opportunity when the report is in draft form you know we'll close out with the police department. they'll have the opportunity to review the conclusions that
we've reached, and if they think that we've reached anything or erred in our conclusion they would bring it up and we'd review that evidence. >> commissioner brookter: no other examples. >> president hirsch: commissioner hamasaki. >> commissioner hamasaki: just a couple of questions. in section number two, is data complete and accurate. does reported data align with incident reports. and so the reported data that you're referring to there is the 96-a reports, or -- >> we've been looking at a variety of the publications that san francisco police department has published including the e.i.s. reports to determine is everything that's reported publicly cannot be reconciles to source documentation with the police department. >> commissioner hamasaki: okay. so from a variety of sources --
or -- >> if it helps, i am in the field doing this testing quite frequently. we're looking at two forms and the use of force log, and also early intervention system has a database where they collect that information, so we're reconciling all those different data points in addition to any publications that they've released to see if the data collected. so for instance, let's say a particular person is estimated to be 5-11. we could see that maybe another collection of that data points that person was 5 foot so little data points like that are all over the form. >> commissioner hamasaki: so -- following up on the bullet point though are you also -- because, you know one of the big new things that we've discussed is the rollout of body worn cameras. obviously, anybody can write
whatever in an incident report. are you also looking at body worn cameras to look at or review the incidents? >> yeah. great question. we are. >> commissioner hamasaki: okay. and then finally, i think you said you had pretty broad access to either officers reports, body worn camera -- are there any restrictions in place that are in any way impeding your ability to do your work? sounds like a yes. >> commissioner dejesus: let us have it. >> yeah. like i said hindsight being 20/20, i think we probably would have it more conversation about what exactly needs to be redacted what exactly -- some of the restrictions on us accessing or reviewing the incident reports are. some things, i think, are pretty obviously. for example, there's a small subset of our population that
involves juvenile identifying information so kind of working through some of those challenges how much do we really need when reviewing these, what's kind of the minimum amount that we need moving forward? >> commissioner hamasaki: are you -- if -- do you feel that in the position you're in with the work you've done so far that the final reports -- are you going to be able to overcome the hurdles you've at least identified thus far? >> yeah. i don't see there being any scope limitation that would exceed us from weighing in on the objectives when it comes time to issuing the final report. >> commissioner hamasaki: okay. thank you. >> president hirsch: okay. thank you both very much. oh -- >> i was just going to respond to commissioner brookter's question that the work that the
department has done. they do have a good track history. >> can i just say, too because i think that will help clarify. a lot of you were asking that because there were so many different data points, and the standardized operation in terms of how the reports get created that has also been part of why these reports don't come quick, fast, and easy. it's a lot of stuff, including interviews body worn cameras. all of this is sent out and analyzed. but i would point out, that's one of the things that makes this stand out compared to all of the other reports brought to you, it's a big deal and it's going to be relevant to i think a lot of the things that we've been discussing for a long
period of time, so -- >> so you're still saying spring? >> he's still saying spring and i'm supporting him and the work. we're saying spring. >> commissioner elias: is there anything we can do to ensure that we're on track for getting this report and that there aren't any road blocks that are going to come up to delay any further. >> i can't think of anything off the top of my head but if something comes up can i let the commission know? hirsch >> president hirsch: okay. next item. [agenda item read]. >> president hirsch: i don't have a report. do any commissioners give a report to give? >> commissioner dejesus: i attended today a presentation
by this new system -- i forgot what it was -- whatface he -- what it's called. benchmark. however, they are affiliated with the university of chicago. >> president hirsch: are they really? >> commissioner dejesus: two universities. chicago was one of them. and then paul and i attended -- they were elected officials throughout the state, it was lgbt equal conference. we represented the -- it was an all day event. >> sacramento. >> commissioner dejesus: it was all day event, and i was really glad to be there and i was glad paul was there, as well. >> president hirsch: okay. thank you. commissioner brookter? >> commissioner brookter: yeah just really quick.
had the opportunity to run into superintendent of san francisco schools, dr. matthews, and had a conversation with him about the topic with san francisco unified school district. got the opportunity to meet with director henderson and his chief of staff, sarah henderson, where we talked about the julius turman fellowship, which i'm extremely, extremely excited about. and i'm sure that director henderson will talk about that. i talked about all the great files that they had pulled apart in the office, and talked about 96-a so i just wanted to report we are meeting at scheduled scheduled. >> president hirsch: okay. next item. [agenda item read]. >> president hirsch: any items? okay. seeing one next item.
>> i think we've spoken about this before but i would like to agendaize -- i would like to get a deep dive into what the department's doing in terms of making sure that its members are accounted for with mental health support and issues. you know, from what i know the suicide rate in america is you know really really high historically high and it's a continuance problem for us as a nation and i know particularly in law enforcement and so i would like to know what kind of support and services the department is providing to its members in making sure that we really support the people who protect and serve us. and so i don't know a proper meeting to agendaize that for,
but maybe -- >> president hirsch: we'll figure it out. we'll figure it out. >> commissioner elias: yeah. >> president hirsch: okay. thank you. >> clerk: i'd also like to announce the next police commission meeting will be held wednesday, april 3 here at 5:30 p.m. the public is now invited to comment on-line items 1-a through 1-d. >> president hirsch: is there any public comment on the items we've addressed today so far? good evening. >> good evening. my name is john jones and i want you all to know that i'm deplorable. i understood chief scott in his report to basically say to cyclists, pedestrians, drivers that everyone should make nice in terms of cutting down on the
carnage in san francisco. from a law enforcement point of view that's not very strong, and i don't think the commission should stand for it. i used to drive a cab sometime ago, and it was my observation that most people were temperamentally unfit to drive. what chief scott is struggling with is the fact that there are too many unfit drivers on the road, which is a licensing problem, not a police problem. i would suggest that this commission get up on its hind legs and say that to the state of california, that it's putting too many of the wrong people on the road. we in san francisco suffer enormously because of the incompetence of people who get
behind these machines and drive them recklessly and carelessly, most of them that cause injury that isn't compencible. thank you. >> president hirsch: thank you. any other comments on what we've discussed? >> my name is daniel paiz. i've been coming to these meetings since 1985. about 34, 35 years. first of all i would like to say a few words will jeff ad -- about jeff adachi. >> president hirsch: i just want to stop you for a second. we're not at general public comment. we're just asking for comment on the items that we've already discussed. >> i didn't realize this was a public based on that either.
>> president hirsch: we'll invite you back up. any other comment on items already discussed? hearing none next item. >> clerk: line item 2, discussion to issuance of butt tin, sfpd members expectation of privacy, use of equipment and peripheral facilities modifying department general order 10.08 use of computers and peripheral equipment. this bulletin is a reissue of bulletin 10-032 which expired on february 2 2019. discussion and possible action. >> president hirsch: good evening, commander. >> good evening, president hirsch commissioners, director henderson and chief scott. commander peter walsh from the staff's office. so before you, it's listed at department bull 19.051. this bulletin was in place back
in 2017, and it governs that we can go into the cell phones, department cell phones computer systems, etc., that the officers and other members -- civilian members do not have a right to privacy in those items. that helps us in our bias audit. since this really moves into 10.08, the current general order which does not necessarily state that, we are working on 10.08. i believe it's at d.p.h.r., so they're going to make a decision whether it goes to meet and confer. so this is a patch request to carry us over from our expiration of our last department bulletin which was good for only two years, keeping us through the adoption of the d.g.o. in order to continue our bias audit letting our members know that they do not have a right to privacy. this is just to put the underlying language, the no expectation of privacy which touches on the current 10.08 so
we can continue to monitor our communication devices. >> president hirsch: okay. thank you. vice president taylor? >> vice president taylor: is there any difference between what you've given us today and the last bulletin that it would replace the one that's expiring? >> there's no -- i think it just delineates a little bit more on what we're looking at, but the overall context is the same. >> i move to adopt. >> commissioner dejesus: i have a commission a question. hirsch >> president hirsch: commissioner dejesus? >> commissioner dejesus: this is to go with the other bulletin? >> they haven't decided, does it meet and confer or come state back for adoption. whether it goes to meet and confer or comes back for us to do this. we have a timeline where the
department bulletin will not be in effect to the time you adopt a new 10.08. >> commissioner dejesus: but don't we have a city policy in place that you can't use city equipment for personal use? if this is all city department stuff, this is the computers, city issued electronic devices, smart phones all this is controlled by the city so i'm just a little confused why it's subject to meet and confer. it's been a policy throughout all the policies, i think. i could be wrong. >> i'm not saying there's going to be a meet and confer. i'm saying that d.h.r. will go through that. it could come straight back to you. this is the stopgap measure to make sure -- >> president hirsch: all the updated general orders are going to the city attorney and d.h.r. as to whether there's any responsibility. >> commissioner dejesus: if it's part of the meet and
confer we'll get a notification of that? >> yes we'll be notified. >> president hirsch: there was a motion to approve. is there a second? >> second. >> second. >> president hirsch: on the question we need public comment, is that right on this motion? okay. is there any public comment on the motion to approve this department bulletin? seeing none public comment is closed. we'll -- we're ready for a vote. all in favor? any opposed? okay. it carries unanimously. >> thank you. >> president hirsch: next line item. >> clerk: line item three, general public comment. the public is now welcome to address the commission regarding items that do not appear on tonight's agenda but are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission. speakers shall address their remarks to the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners or department or d.p.a. personnel. under police commission rules of order during public comment, neither police nor d.p.a. personnel nor
commissioners are required to respond to questions presented by the public but may provide a brief response. individual commissioners and police and d.p.a. personnel should refrain from entering into any debates or discussion with speakers during public comment. >> president hirsch: the floor is yours sir. >> okay. thank you. excuse me again for my mistake. my name is daniel paiz. i've been coming here since '85, so about 34 35 years. i wanted to say something about jeff adachi, who as the head of the public defender's office he was a tireless and fierce defender of the rights of the accused and to ensure that they have a fair trial. checks and balances, that is what it's all about. but obviously people like gary delanis don't understand the
concept. these people see people like the public defender as the enemy. they see criticism as the press to be feared. when he gained his job, he confiscated copies of the press because it ran articles of chief dick conquisto in the police department. degette did he get fired? no he kept his job and eventually became head of the police officer's association for many years. gary delanis was a dirty cop. now he's a retired dirty cop. he may be alive on the outside, but on the inside he is diseased with his putrid hate. i wonder what people will say about him after he's dead. >> president hirsch: okay. thank you. any other public comment?
>> my name is john jones, and may my comments please the commission there's a message that you get on the municipal railway. it reads as follows: get where you're going safely. keep your eyes up and your hands down while riding on muni. no now, i don't have a car. i get around on muni and a bicycle. but this is san francisco, the queen city of the west. people would die to live here. why is it that we have this kind of message on the muni? i know my answer.
my question is rhetorical. but the people who ride the muni are by and large the most vulnerable among us. i call this to the attention of the commission. i have no magic bullet recommendation but the muni is incredibly important. i take it all the time, and when i heard that message, is tells me i got to look at the person next to me and the person across the aisle, maybe the person at the back of the bus and i've got to make nasty faces at them so they don't mug me. but the truth of the matter is that it's unfortunate that this message -- we have to hear this maes message on the municipal railway. thank you. >> president hirsch: thank you. is there any other public comment? public comment is closed. next item.
>> clerk: line item four, public comment on all matters pertaining to item six below closed session including public comment on item five vote whether to hold item six in closed session. >> so moved hirsch. >> president hirsch: well, we need public comment. >> i was like, did you have some public comment? >> president hirsch: any public comment on our going into closed session? all right. seeing none public comment is closed. now we're ready for the motion. >> so moved. >> commissioner hamasaki: get it done during spring. >> president hirsch: all in favor? any opposed? all right. the motion carries. we're going into closed session. >> clerk: actually we have line item five which leads you into your motion. >> president hirsch: oh what is that? [inaudible] >> clerk: line item five vote on whether to hold item six in closed session including whether to hold in regards the
attorney-client privilege, section 67.10 action. >> president hirsch: yeah. i think we did that. >> i did not hear the attorney-client privilege invoked and that's the most important piece. >> president hirsch: okay. can we go into closed session with the attorney-client privilege? >> no, no you have to do it. >> i'll second it. >> president hirsch: we don't need public comment on this again do . >> clerk: all right. commissioner hirsch we are back on the record for open session, and you still have a quorum. >> president hirsch: okay. we are looking for a motion -- let's see, vote to elect to disclose. >> clerk: line item seven, vote to whether or not to disclose all items discussed in
good morning. thank you all for being here and i'm happy to be join bid supervisor from district ten and our new director of the department of public health. also here are the people from my office working tirelessly to help protect another generation of san francisco youth from becoming addicted to ecigarettes. that has been lead my chief
deputy and chief of strategic advocacy sarah eeisneburg. in december, the u.s. surgeon general, jerome adams, issued a warning of the epidemic of e ecigarette use and called this a cause of great concern. know the risks, take action protect our kids. he was absolutely correct and we're heeding that warning. today we are taking action to protect our young people. the steps we are taking are necessary and all the more urgent because another arm of the federal government has failed to do its job. the food and drug administration is the entity responsible for revealing new tobacco products to determine whether they are appropriate for the protection of public health. by law before a new tobacco product goes to market, the fda is supposed to conduct a review
to evaluate risks and benefits of the product on the population as a whole. that's common sense. if the fda determines this poses a threat to public health it should never hit the shelves. inexplicably, in the case of ecigarettes,s that has not happened. despite the fact in 2016 the fda deemed this a product subject to the jurisdiction. these products were on the street even though the premarket reviews have never been done. in fact, fda has given the ecigarette industry a pass. for no clear reason they have given the nicotine companies until 2022 to apply for a premarket review. the result is that millions of children are already addicted to ecigarettes and millions more will follow if we don't act. until recently we had made great strides in reducing youth
tobacco use. the percentage of youth was an all-time low in 2017. there had been a generation of success, kid were kids were getting off of nicotine. but last year, according to the centre for disease control and prevention tobacco use among youth rose for the first time since the 1990s. this dramatic reversal is directly attributable to the nation-wide surge in ecigarette use by talents. adolescentses. the use in 2016 increased 14% and 4.9 million america students reported they were using tobacco products up from 3.6 million students in 2016. use of ecigarettes increased by 27% for high school students and 48% for middle school
students. nearly five million american students were using tobacco products. that's a generation of kids addicted kids facing lung cancer and heart disease and thousands will likely die of preventible diseases if we don't act and that's not high person hyperbole. tobacco kills more than 480,000 people a year. that's more than aids alcohol car accidents, illegal drugs, murders and suicides combined. that is why we're acting now to reverse the tide of ecigarettes. let's be clear they're product is addiction. they're in the business of getting people addicted or keeping them addicted. a relatively small number of adults may switch switch from and
it's not useful to turn another generation of kids into addicts and it's up to a government like san francisco to protect our children and today we are announcing we're taking four concrete step. first, san francisco along with the city of chicago and the city of new york sent a letter to the fda that demands that the fda do it's job. we are jointly telling fda to immediately conduct the required public health review of ecigarettes that by law was supposed to happen before these products were on the market. a companion letter includes a rey for the fda to turn over records to my service office so that san francisco can determine if we need to take legal action if they don't take the public required health review. second we can't wait on the fda to act. so in coordination and partnership with supervisor walton and i want to thank him for his leadership and vision on
this issue we are introducing today ground-breaking legislation at the board of supervisors to prohibit the sale in san francisco of any ecigarettes that has not undergone pre-fda market review. my ecigarette that has not received fda premarket review cannot be sold at a store in san francisco or bought online and shipped to a san francisco address. this is not an outright ban on ecigarettes. it's a prohibition against any ecigarettes. so far none have been through the review process required by law. this is a prudent step to know the health and safety implications of products sold here. if the fda has an not approved it and reviewed it, it shouldn't
be sold in san francisco. third, on a more local level, we're introducing a separate piece of legislation today, again in card nation in coordination with supervisor walton. this would protect the sale and manufacture of all products including in sanfrancisco, including port property. fourth my office as part of our review of juuls operations sent notice to juul seeking an explanation for why juul holds a license when it maintains it does not engage in sale or cigarette products on the premises. san francisco has never been afraid to leave and we're not afraid to do so when the health and lives of our children are on the line. with that, i would like to turn
it over to supervisor walton who has been a fearless partner and visionary leader both on the school board and now on protecting our city's youth. >> first, i want to thank the city attorney for his fierce leadership on this. i am really sick and tired of the predatory practices for our young people where people are tryingtrying to set them up for bad habits for a lifetime. this has to stop and ecigarettes are contributing that. when we passed prop 10 in 19198 which was1998go out and educate people about preventing tobacco use preventing nicotine addiction and we showed record numbers that we were able to do that and accomplish that. and now we have more predatory practices going after our young people and this again has to stop. so i want to thank the city attorney for his leadership on this.
as you know we're going to be announcing legislation at this afternoon's meeting. you've heard a lot of the data in terms of the change and shifts from winning people off tobacco to having more and more young people using tobacco and nicotine products. i want to say this, that ecigarettes have been targeting our young people with their colours and their flavours and enticing adolescentses and this is pulling them forked nicotine addiction. we have people addicted to nicotine who would never have smoked a cigarette had it not been for the attractive products that target our young people. so we can see and understand why it's so important to make sure that if things are not approved by the fda if products have not been given the stamp of approval by the government, then we know they're not safe and until the fda does that we have to make sure that these products are not sold in our stores here in san francisco.
the city has already enacted ordinance 140-117 prohibiting retail establishments from selling flavoured tobacco products. ecigarettes are flavoured nicotine products. nicotine is what addicts all of our young people and addicts everybody. it is the addictive chemical in tobacco and nicotine and the effect of nicotine is what we have to combat as well. until the fda rules on approval of ecigarettes we need to prohibit all sales for anyone under the age of 21 and anyone here in the city and we need to make sure that we have a ban on selling products, vaping products on any city property here in san francisco. what juul is doing is irresponsible and claimed to not be a part of the tobacco industry.
i meant with them and they swore up and down they were not connected to the tobacco industry and a week and a half later they merged with a tobacco company. therefore, not only are they not truthful but irresponsibly focused and working to addict young people on nicotine products so they will be long-time users of nicotine products to make a profit and harm their health. we won't stand for that and that's why we'll fight har in san francisco to avoid predatory products to our young people. i want to thank you all for coming out and we will combat this towards our young people. thank you. >> thank you supervisor walton. i would like to ask our new director of the department of public health, dr. grant kofax to say a few words as well. >> well, thank you. i just want to reiterate this is a major step forward for public health in san francisco, continuing the leadership that san francisco has historically
shown in addressing major public health issues. i want to offer my gratitude to city attorney herarra and we know this has been reiterated in the remarks today that mechanic teenthat nicotineaddiction is damaging, has damaging affectdamaging effects on youth's brain and it's attracting a whole different generation the youth to nicotine. we know that tobacco is the greatest cause of preventible deaths in this country. ecigarettes are responsible for the increasing levels of tobacco use that we're seeing in youth. we know that we need to do better. we need to turn this epidemic around. ecigarettes are a gateway drug to tobacco use and that has been
shown in numerous studies. so we're here not only addressing the numerous affects being addicted to a substance the direct effects on nicotine but taking a major step in that gateway from ecigarettes addiction. this is going to save hundreds, if not thousands of lives in san francisco and is a major step forward in breaking this epidemic. again i'm grateful from the health department's perspective. this is a move in the right direction and major policy advance and the health department is very supportive of that. thank you. >> thank you dr. kolfax and with that, we're happy to take any questions anybody has. >> is won't happens to the establishments that has the products on the shelves? do they take them down? >> we have to go through the
legislative process and i have every confidence that supervisor walton will sheppard this legislation through as quickly as possible. once that legislation passes and works with the final product then yeah until such time as the fda gave its premarket review and approval there would not be allowed in either a hard brick and mortar store the sale of distribution manufacturer of ecigarettes and you wouldn't send it online until one or the other products had received the premarket review by the fda. >> so would this be two months six months? >> it will be introduced today and we'll be working hard with colleagues to make sure this becomes law. when it does become law, it will
take affect 30 days after this is complete. with that said, we'll be working hard to move as fast as possible. i can give you a better answer and response in a couple of weeks. >> why do you all think that the federal government has given a pass to ecigarettes so far and what is the power in strength in numbers? san francisco and chicago all pleading with the ftada to crack down on this. >> i can't answer for the fda but it's pretty darn expoliticcable they have failed to act. the tobacco control act was passed in 2009 and in 2016 the fda said that these products were subject to fda jurisdiction. yet, they said that they didn't have to first file their premarket review until 2018. and then they extended that to 2022. in the meantime we've known
that ecigarettes, we're talking about 15 years with no premarket review for a product that we know is addicting our kids a whole other generation of kids to a deleterious drug threatening public health and safety. it is inexplicable and inexcusable to me that the fda has failed to act. the fact that we got chicago and new york to sign this letter in no time should be a message to the federal government that municipalities and localities are not going to tolerate this and we're going to act as quickly as we can to protect our young people. i have no doubt that as a result of today as action both that letter and legislation, you will see other jurisdictions step up to demand action from the federal government. if we can't expect that the fda will protect the health and
safety of our young people then i don't know what the function of the fda really is. so hopefully they'll get the message. >> in terms of targeting juuls, would this grandfather them in? will they continue do what they do there. >> good question. under the terms of their -- they have a sublease down at the port and they have said that they are not manufacturing distributing, doing anything through that facility. at this point, we don't have any evidence that they are in violation of the terms of their lease agreement. but that's why i sent the insmith demandtheinspection demand because it's areas they haveit's curious when they're not
doing any sale on property. if i find they're in violation i would take action of breaking the terms of their lease. but the legislation that supervisor walton is championing with respect to what is occurring on port property will enshire we will never have a similar circumstance that we have a company like this operatingoperating on similar property. >> this should be a message to juul or any other corporation that thinks they can come into san francisco and operate in accordance that is against our values here as a city and so this legislation is going to be focused, of course and making sure this never happens again on any city property but it's also a warning to juul. it's also a statement to juul that we don't want them here. we don't want them in our city and so we're going to be fighting to make sure that we figure out and learn if there's anything that they're doing that is not in accordance with san francisco laws and regulations. >> would you eventually want to
see juul leave the city? >> i would like for them to have been gone yesterday. we have been clear about that and our neighbors have been clear about that and we definitely would like for them to conduct business somewhere else. >> so excuse me when the city signed a contract with juul did they not know what the company did or why did they enter into a contract with the company? >> the city didn't enter into a contract. there's a massive lease developer at pier 70 that had a lease with another tenant and as part of that, there was a sublease between juul and that tenant and under the terms of the agreement that we had with master developer there were certain rights that were given up by the city unless there was certain milestones and square footage. so we didn't know about it and weren't aware about it but it has been a lesson learned about how it is that the city engages
>> my name is sofy constantineo and a documentary film maker and cinema togfer, producer and director. it is inevable you want your movie to get out and realize yoi need to be a commune tee organizer to get people together to see the story you will tell [inaudible] pretty rich and interesting. in what we do as film makers is try to tell the best story possible so i think that is where i [inaudible] learn everything. lighting and cinematography. i got jobs of stage manger at some place and projectionist. i kind of mixed and matched as i went and kept refining i feel like it isn't just about making things that are beautiful and appealing and rich and [inaudible] the way that
the films [inaudible] it has to tell a story. >> my name is sumell [inaudible] free lance multimedia produce. my project is [inaudible] mostly oof street photographry with a few portraits. i'm going arounds san francisco and capturing the [inaudible] as we started to do this project i was reading about the decline of african american population in san francisco and i wondered where the remaining population was and what they were doing and how life was for them. >> i wasn't very inspired by school, i wasn't very inspired by continuing to read and write and go to class. i watched a lot of movies and saw a lot of [inaudible] i said that is what i want to do. i had this very
feminist [inaudible] and i felt like there was not enough of a womans vision on the stuff that we see, the movies that we make and the beginning of the [inaudible] the way we look at women and the roles women take in the stories being tolds. they felt [inaudible] they did want feel complex. i was like, i have a different frame i like to see the world shaped by. >> my grandsmother was a teacher and taught special education for 40 years in los angeles and when i was growing up she inspired me to record everything. we recorded our conversations, we recorded the [inaudible] we recorded everything to cassette players. learning
multimedia skills, from the other crossover employment opportunities for young people. someone who grew up in la rks san francisco feels like a small town. i lived in western addition and i was looking for someone to cut my hair, i found [inaudible] he seemed like a very interesting guy and grew up in the neighborhood and had a lot to say about something that was foreign to me. that local perspective and so important to me because i think as someone who isn't from here, knowing that history allows me to be more engaging in the community i live in and want the same for others. i want people to move into a new neighborhood to know who was there before and businesses and what cultural and [inaudible] shape what we see today. >> my guiding principles have been, if you stick to something long enough and
know what it is and go for it you will get there. [inaudible] where i want to go, what i want to do and it is totally possible so, the impossible is you know, is not something to listen to. >> when i open up the paper every day, i'm just amazed at how many different environmental issues keep popping up. when i think about what planet i want to leave for my children
and other generations, i think about what kind of contribution i can make on a personal level to the environment. >> it was really easy to sign up for the program. i just went online to cleanpowersf.org i signed up and then started getting pieces in the mail letting me know i was going switch over and poof it happened. now when i want to pay my bill i go to pg&e and i don't see any difference in paying now. if you're a family on the budget, if you sign up for the regular green program, it's not going to change your bill at all. you can sign up online or call. you'll have the peace of mind knowing you're doing your part in your household to help the environment.