tv Government Access Programming SFGTV April 22, 2019 6:00pm-7:01pm PDT
of recycled plastic bottles. i don't know how they do it. >> there is acres and acres of parkland throughout golden gate park, but not necessarily through golden community garden. we have it right in the middle of [gavel]. >> chair ronen: good morning. the meeting will come to order. welcome to the april 22, 2019 meeting of the rules committee. i am chair hillary ronen. seated to my right is
supervisor shamann walton, and seated to my left is supervisor gordon an mar. mr. clerk, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes. please make sure to silence all cell phones and electronic devices. documents to be included in the presentations should be submitted to the clerk. items considered in today's agenda will be considered on april 23 by the board of supervisors unless otherwise noted. >> chair ronen: would you like to read item one? >> clerk: yes. item one is appointing frank fung to the planning commit.
>> chair ronen: good morning, mr. fung. would you like to come up and tell us about yourself? >> president fung: yes. i'm an architect. and i sit on the planning commission. i won't tell you when i graduated from school, but the fact is i've been in that profession since i graduated from school. you have my resume on civic activities. i have extensive experience on issues that will be faced by the planning commission. in addition, i have issues faced by the neighborhoods and communities that we will be addressing. i seek your endorsement for my nomination, and i'll be relatively short. >> chair ronen: supervisor walton.
>> supervisor walton: thank you, mr. fung. just one question. mr. fung, what makes you want to serve on the planning commission? >> president fung: i served there once before, and i found it very challenging. i've recently been at the board of appeals, and on the board of appeals, we're really dealing on a reactive basis to the issues coming forth. i feel that the issues i could bring forth in terms of experience and training would then allow me to go toward more of policy driven issues, and i would welcome that challenge. >> supervisor walton: that means we have to replace you on the board of appeals. >> president fung: i think they'll need one, sir. >> supervisor walton: thank you. >> chair ronen: you and i have had the opportunity to speak
before, but i'd love to here about the city's most pressing issues to intersect on the planning commission. >> president fung: you know, i could probably spend the next eight hours discussing that. given the diversity and the fact that our citizens are so much into it, and the planning commission is really a lightning rod for so many different things. whether it's the questions of affordable housing, whether it's the question of i think greater communications between planning and other agencies on circulation deal with the m.t.a. issues, i think all those things are extremely important for the general concepts of planning. then, there is the specific one dealing with neighbor to neighbor issues. i think all those things, i
would offer to try to be comprehensive, rational, and also compassionate. so i think there's going to be a tremendous amount of work necessary. >> chair ronen: thank you for your willingness to serve. >> president fung: okay. thank you very much. >> chair ronen: now open this item up for public comment. if any member of the public would like to speak, you'll have two minutes each. >> do i give this to you? my name is michael garcia. i had the pleasure of serving with mr. fung -- not fong, mr. fung on the board of appeals, and he, in his usual, modest way, he kind of glossed over -- he's got an impressive resume. he served on the planning commission, 14 years on the board of appeals. i think john king in
yesterday's chronicle, had an article on a.d.u.s. he talked about it was such a vast challenge, vast and vexing, the issue of housing across the spectrum, affordable-to-family dwellings, and we have to do that in a way that we balance it with maintaining neighborhood character. well, it's hard for me to imagine -- i'm not saying this because i know this or i've had the pleasure of serving with him. but i can't imagine anyone more qualified and experienced in san francisco to deal with these issues. he would know how to deal with simple things like a deck and how to deal with a high-rise. he knows the zoning ordinances. he knows about the building codes, the planning codes.
he knows just about everything there is to know. i thank you for your time, and please select this gentleman for the planning commission. >> chair ronen: thank you. next speaker, please. and if there are additional speakers, if you could lineup to my left, your right, that would be appreciated. >> tonya peterson, director of the san francisco zoo, but i'm not here in that capacity. prior to being zoo director, i served with president fung on the board of appeals. i was hoping he would say that the zoo was the number one priority for planning commission, but no, guess not. but prior to being zoo director, i served on the board of appeals. it was just a pleasure to be with frank fung. he was the glue that sometime held a decisive and sometimes contentious board together. he is an amazing man, served three mayors. and then lastly, as a zoo
director, i have come across his work and his colleagues. he built the vet hospital for the san diego zoo, and that is one of the leading vet hospitals in the world. it's a great pleasure, and we're just grateful that this man wants to do this job. so thank you. >> chair ronen: thank you. next speaker. >> thank you, supervisors. i'm rick swig, and i have the pleasure and honor of serving with frank fung on the board of appeals. it's going to be a great loss for the board of appeals but a great gain for the planning commission. we serve three masters at the same time on the appeals. we have the appellants, the project sponsors, and the city, and we have to balance that without prejudice, and frank is that leader and that mentor who has guided all of us to keep the playing field level and make sure everybody is heard, and we reach the proper opinion
based on the laws of san francisco and the interests of the public. he never -- he never gets upset. i'm the opposite. always keeping it calm, always keeping everybody together and moving forward. his institutional ability is outstanding, and his contribution to planning will be equal to that institutional memory, and thank you for approving him today. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. next speaker. >> got a big discrepancy pertaining to our housing. one of the speakers talked about being fair and equal in housing. i'm going to give you an example. mission rock. that's 1,000 houses. you deliberately campaign and used the latino and spanish
descent person to be your spokesperson on a commercial to advertise affordable housing for mission rock. you further demonstrated false advertisement by means of using the female's daughter while carrying balloons saying that they would love to be a tenant in the mission rock apartment building complex. then, you even went a step further and had the mother of the daughter have her instructor in school say that she would love, too, to be a resident at the mission rock apartment complex. and the mother had the daughters living in a boarding home. but yet, when it comes down to the fine print, the amount of income requirement to be a tenant in that building, none of those people can afford to live down there in mission rock. you're not following the instructions on that big bank of information pertaining to mission rock, and i talked
about this several times already. when mayor breed was president of the board of supervisors, that redevelopment understanding instruction says on or about 33% of those apartment building complexes is supposed to be for low-income and very low-income bracket people. i believe about 250 of those apartments is supposed to be for low and very low bracket income people, and you've got the majority of those apartments for people in high income brackets making about $150,000 a year, and the people you had on the commercial can't afford to live there. >> chair ronen: thank you, micah. thank you, micah. hi. >> hi.
my name's randy knox. i wasn't born here, but i've been here about 37 years. and i've seen the changes that san francisco has gone through especially in the last 15 years. i served with frank fung on the board of appeals, after i was appointed by supervisor matt gonzales, and i've seen that frank has an understanding on the board of appeals between development, restoration, and he knows how to balance and reconcile those interests. if we want to preserve a middle class in this city, and it is dwindling every day, we need to be able to understand the tensions that exist between people who want to make money through real estate, people who want to live here, raise
families here. i moved here because san francisco had a lot to offer, and it was liveable then, and it was expensive, but it wasn't like it is now. frank understands it, and his decisions reflect that. his opinions are thoughtful and measured. and even when you don't agree with him in the outcome, you respect his process and his judgment. and he will bring the sort of knowledge and experience that the planning commission needs. thank you. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. is there any additional member of the public that would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. is there a motion? >> supervisor walton: motion approving the mayor nomination of frank fung to planning. >> chair ronen: without objection, that motion passes. congratulations, mr. fung. thank you so much. >> president fung: thank you, supervisors. >> chair ronen: thank you.
>> president fung: look forward to working with you. >> chair ronen: likewise. have a great day. mr. clerk, can you please call item number two. >> clerk: item number two is a resolution reappointing amanda eaken to the m.t.a. board of directors for a term ending march 1, 2023. >> good morning. i'm amanda eaken. i'm mayor breed's nomination for appointment to the m.t.a. board of directors. when i think about serving the people of san francisco in this role, a few key priorities come to mind. first, i think when people walk out of their front door every morning to start a trip, and whether that's a walking trip, talking transit, or riding a bike, they fundamentally assume
that their city government is going to make that a safe trip. and yet as of today, april 22, earth day, 2019, ten people have died on our streets just trying to make their way, whether it's to work, shopping, recreation, or other destination. i have experienced traffic fatalities before, as i think all of you have, but i have to tell you that these ten hit me particularly hard, and i couldn't stop thinking about them until of course it dawned on me why, and that is because i now sit on a board with a responsibility to make the streets safe in san francisco. so in my time on the board, i have pushed staff to accelerate near term safety improvements to make our streets safer and to layout a clear and specific delivery plan so we fix the entire problem. so on every single one of the 130 miles of the high injury
network, we are maeeting our goals of eliminating traffic fatalities by 2024. i think people think if they take a bus or a train, we are doing everything we can to make sure that's a safe, enjoyable, and reliable trip for them. the board has put significant effort into getting to the root causes of the delay in the system and the challenges we're facing and taking steps to tackle those barriers one by one. and then, finally, it's been a great honor and a privilege to collaborate with your offices on the priorities that you here from your constituents. and should i be fortunate to receive your support going forward, i would look forward to continuing a productive and open dialogue with each of your offices. serving these past six months on the board has been one of the greatest honors of my life, and i humbly request your support to be able to continue my service.
thank you. >> chair ronen: just i -- you know, i had an opportunity to speak with you on the phone, and we had talked about some of the challenges facing the agency. and i'm wondering if you could talk about what some of those biggest challenges are and, you know, some of your ideas for how we can be addressing those challenges. >> in my experience, the last six months, it's one of the great sort of mysteries and puzzles of the agency because when you get a chance to meet the staff, as i'm sure many of you have, you find nothing but talented, deeply capable staff. i think some of them tear up at the thought of the importance of san francisco transcript to the development and input. so you have this input of this incredibly challenging staff, but then, there's output
challenges, whether it's those ten fatalities, but it's been one of the fascinating challenges of my time on the board to really spend time with staff and asking the questions, what is getting in the way, what are we not seeing, that the output is not meeting our expectations? i think in some cases, it's a matter of really mapping out all the steps along the plan to meeting our goals. so one of the things i've been able to service in my time was bus service -- on time bus service, because that was one of the priorities of the mayor, making the bus operate on time. so now, we've got very specific metrics to target what is getting in the way to meet our service. it turns out we've got two factors to preventing on time bus service. one is operator availability, and the second is traffic
congestion. so then, we can start to really look at those challenges and understand what is getting in the way of our ability, and it turns out at least of january of this year -- and i apologize, i do not have the most current numbers. i've asked them of current staff, but we have 300 operator shortage. i know that the staff has been putting a lot of effort into recruitment of new operators but that has been for me very eye opening, missing a significant portion of the workforce. when it comes to congestion, we've talked about the red lanes and other traffic interventions, but to me, it's been incredibly satisfying to identify the factors, and then have incredibly robust
conversations about that. >> chair ronen: what are some of the factors? >> there are many, but one is affordable housing. we've all heard stories of drivers being forced to sleep in their cars overnight because there's a lock of affordable housing. this is something that i've been fortunate to delve into in the last six months. m.t.a. does own two properties. there's a geary and a potrero property, and we could potentially create 900 units for operators on those sites. >> chair ronen: and in those affordable housing projects, is there a thought that there
would be certain slots reserved for operators and m.t.a. employees? >> that's one that we would be willing to work with you and your colleagues on, would those be dedicated specifically for operators? i don't know if anything's -- any decision's been made in regards to that. >> chair ronen: okay. thank you so much for your service. thank you. thank you so much. >> thanks. >> chair ronen: so i'll open this up for public comment. any member of the public who would like to speak, please do lineup to my left, your right, and everyone will have two minutes. good morning, mr. wright. >> good morning, miss chair. i believe my demonstrations has got it pretty well narrowed down for affordable housing. i speak up for the most vulnerable, but other when they come, they're speaking about the middle-income and working
class, but no one is speaking about the lower class and very low class and people living out there on the street. i worked with your colleague to your right and demonstrated the true effect of affordable housing. you're being undermined by the developers. the developers are overcharging. he told me at a minimum, an apartment costs about $180,000. i demonstrated a building that's being built in mountain view. 144-unit apartment complex is being built for approximately $56 million. we did the calculations, and my way and technique of demonstrating how the developer is overcharging, you save $66 million a year using a nonprofit developer that's building that 144-unit apartment building complex that's located in mountain
view. now, we had a hearing where kate harley spoke and said that the developer that she uses is a nonprofit developer but yet, he's charging 300,000 per unit. she's really being misabused. the developers are the sole cause of this price fixing. and by the same response, you say it's low-income. and then, every time an apartment building accepts complex comes out of the mayor's building, you make the income about $86,000 a year, and all the people below that can't afford it. >> hello, chair ronen, supervisor mar, and supervisor walton. my name is janice lee. i'm excited to be here to support the reappointment of
mandy eaken on the sfmta board. i'm proud of my role on the bike coalition of which i'm director, we add our support. honestly as someone who is recently elected to be on the head of a transportations board, one that is not paid well -- i actually don't think that director eaken receives any kind of payment or even stipend, it is not an easy job. it is an incredibly thankless job, and in the time director eaken has been in that role, she's brought forward and pushed so many things in a short amount of time. i think the most you can ask in an appointment is someone who's accessible, someone who cares deeply about the role that they are charged with, and someone who has an amount of expertise who they bring in that role. i truly believe that amanda
eaken brings all of those things into this role. she has continued working in her current role. in terms of accessibility, the moment we heard about different fatalities, i was on phone calls with amanda eaken until late at night. i cannot say the same of other appointed commissioners and directors. the amount of care that she brings is felt and known, and i think we should all be happy to have someone like amanda eaken serving this role on the m.t.a. board. thank you. >> chair ronen: thank you. >> good morning, chair ronen, supervisor mar, and supervisor walton, i'm the director of the walk san francisco.
we're a group of 35 nonprofit organizations that are trying to get our city to vision zero. i'm also here to ask you to reappointment amanda eaken to the m.t.a. board. in a very short amount of time she has been instrumental to thinking strategically to vision zero. we know the city only has five more years to reduce our fatalities and severe injuries, and that's by 2024. she's been asking the right questions and showing the right kind of leadership. one example i heard from amanda -- and i definitely want to echo that's in terms of -- that in terms of how critical it was was asking the m.t.a. to imp wi implement a 90-day network. she's been asking the city what have you been doing exactly on these streets to get us to
zero. they do have a great strategic plan, but it's not that specific, so we really appreciate that. i do want to echo what janice just said in terms of accessible for the advocates? she definitely listens, she asks the right questions. she's very caring and compassionate about what we need to do, and i just think this is the right person and the right approach to have on our sfmta board, so thank you very much. >> good morning, madam chair, and members of the board. i am rachel deno, resident of the city and here to speak in support of amanda eaken, personally and professionally. since graduate school, amanda has dedicated her entire professional career to public transportation, sustainable land use and the betterment of our communities. i've had the privilege to work
with her on policy at the state level, and she, as you can tell just in her testimony, she intellectually goes deep on every issue. she brings together a very diverse, broad range of coalitions, and she respectfully helps negotiate for solutions that work for all. personally, as someone who is honored to spend some leisure time with her, i can also attest to her infectious dedication and use and her family of public transportation throughout the city, and i thoroughly support her nomination. thank you. >> good morning, supervisors, chair ronen. my name is rachel hyden. i'm the executive director of
the san francisco public transit coalition. we work for better public transportation. we need the leadership to envision, to push for it, to really support that vision. director eaken is that leader. she's -- you know, she's that person to really push for a transit first san francisco. she is the director that we can always count on, and jodi even mentioned this, to ask the right questions, and sometimes, they can be the tough questions, especially when it comes to how our current planning and construction projects tie into the vision of how we're going to get around this city in the future. sometimes that vision is looking at sfmta, and we really need the leadership that's going to be asking those types of questions and ensuring our staff and management at sfmta
think about how does this piece meal project focus on getting around easily around san francisco. we're thrilled so have amanda eaken on the sfmta board of directors and would encourage you to reappoint her. thank you so much. >> good morning, chair ronen, supervisor mar, supervisor shaman walton. nice to see you all. my name is melanie nutter. i am the owner of nutter consulting. i am the former director of the san francisco department of the environment, so i am here to also add my voice in support of the reappointment of amanda eaken to the sfmta board. i've had the pleasure of knowing amanda in her capacity at nrdc for a number of years and we have worked together very closely on a number of projects to help improve public transit as well as to improve
shared mobility services in the city and county of los angeles. but i really wanted to just come and add my support and let you know from the work that i've done with amanda, she is a bold leader, she is a compassionate leader. she is smart, she wants to provide people with a viable option to get out of their cars and really address climate change here in san francisco. so i think it's appropriate on earth day that you're considering her appointment, so i hope you approve that and thank you for your consideration. >> chair ronen: thank you. is there any other member of the public that would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel]. >> chair ronen: well, thank you so much, miss eaken. i have to echo your supporters, that your sort of brief time on the board has been incredible, and you know above and beyond, often keeping in contact with me to seek my input in a very
proactive way that very few commissioners do, so i just want really to thank you for your excitement. i'm excited to support you on earth day. it's a perfect day. with that, is there a motion? do you want to do the honors? >> supervisor mar: sure. yeah. i move that we recommend approval of amanda eaken to the m.t.a. board without -- as a committee report? >> chair ronen: without objection? >> clerk: would you like to send this out as a committee report? >> chair ronen: yes. and i think there's someone really hoping to speak in public comment. i'm going to reopen public
comment. >> my president is charles depani, president of the north of market association, and i'm here to ask for support on the behalf of the north of market association. i'm trying to catch my breath. so when we first started our vision zero subcommittee, amanda was the first person to apply and to join. and just the year ahead, the vision zero subcommittee has created -- a street improvement project which actually will probably be in the agenda for the land use committee. and also, we've been looking at the traffic circle in our neighborhood. but the main thing here that i want to project is amanda eaken was the first one to apply and assist in all of this creation. nod
in addition to that, amanda was -- before she heard the possible news of being part of the sfmta board, she was jumping in, even though she was happily accepting the position, she first came to each individual and asked for advice, which i thought was very humble -- humbling, and also the right mindset to go forward to being part of a board, to make sure you get a consensus of individuals around you, so on behalf of the north of market panhandle association, i ask for your support of amanda on the board. thank you. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. is there anymore public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. first, we need to take a motion to amend the motion before us to delete the word objection so that we will approve this nomination. so without objection, we will amend the motion.
[gavel]. >> chair ronen: and then, supervisor -- >> supervisor mar: yeah. so i move that we approve -- or we recommend to the full board approval of the mayor's nomination for amanda eaken to the municipal transportation agency board of directors. >> chair ronen: as a committee report. without objection, that motion passes. congratulations, and thank you so much. [applause] >> chair ronen: mr. clerk, can you please read item number three. >> clerk: item number three is a ordinance amending the finance and campaign code of individual expenditure ceilings for participating candidates. >> chair ronen: thank you. supervisor mar, this is your presentation. >> supervisor mar: thank you, chair ronen. you know, as the chief sponsor of this legislation, i just wanted to provide a brief overview and touch on the can
purpose, importance, and background to this legislation. elected officials are best able to serve the public interest when their campaigns are financed by public dollars, rather than relying on private donors and huge businesses. as the cost of campaigns sky rocket and dark money from super pacs flood our elections, we should prioritize the program to protect the effectiveness of public financing. to that end, the ethics commission initiated a process to review or public financing -- our public
financing process. i'm proud of the process that led us here with ethics conducting public outreach over many months to community stakeholders and advocates. proposals have already passed with super majority support from the ethics commission. many candidates in the last election cycle, including most of my fellow candidates in the district four supervisor race, were barred from participating in public financing due to confusion about the statement of participation being due the same day as the deadline to file to run for office. we feel the lack of clarity on this administrative hurdle was unfair to those candidates, and this ordinance will extend that deadline by three days to improve access to the program. initially, ethics raises candidates individual expenditure ceiling dozens of
times in a race, sometimes more than once a day. this is both an administrative burden and can be challenging for the candidates campaigns and ethics staff itself. the ordinance increases the increment -- this ordinance increases the increment the ceiling is raised to reduce the number of times it needs to be raised and make the increases more meaningful. it also changes the trigger that raises individual expenditure ceilings to a candidate's ceiling will be increased as soon as it is surpassed by another candidates supportive funds. together these will make the increases far more responsive to what's happening in a campaign and allow public finance candidates to respond to outside dark money spending through independent expenditure committees. i want to thank deputy tee attorney andrew shen, and the
advocates who worked with us to craft these proposals. and now, i want to recognize pat ford who's the policy director for ethics commission who's joined us today for a brief presentation on this item. >> thank you, chair ronen, supervisor mar, supervisor walton. i'd like to thank you, supervisor mar, for your leadership on this. it's been a pleasure working with your office, and i look forward to more in the future. i think the purpose is to make sure this program remains viable, impactful, and accessible, and that candidates, no matter what their level of experience is, if they are a first-time candidate, they should be able to access this program if they reach the required minimum level of community support, that as long as you meet that
community threshold, you should be able to join the program. there shouldn't be things that are counter intuitive or excessively burdensome. with this phase of the review, we were hoping to relieve those parts of the program that were affecting candidates but not turning around and giving solid policy benefit. we feel this is a targeted ordinance to go for those specific areas and hopefully create more value for candidates in this november's election. so i think with that, i would just note that june 11 is the deadline for the statement of participation right now, so it's a little tight right now time wise, but hopefully you will recommend this full ordinance to the board and the board would also approve it quickly and that would lead it to this affecting the deadline in june. i realize the timeline is tight, but we'd like to thank
you for recognizing this and calling it so quick. glad to answer any questions you may have. >> chair ronen: okay. thank you so much for being here, mr. ford. if there's no comments, then i'll open up this item for public comment. good morning, mr. wright. >> this campaign advertisement and him coming from the ethics committee, the way you campaigned about mission rock, how i talked about it earlier is unethical. it's false campaigning and false advertisement to get the voters to think that the female who's of latino hispanic mexican descent would be the perfect person to move into that and her instructor, when you know it's untrue. it's unethical, it's housing
discrimination. you misled the public with a campaign of running that commercial several times a day on every channel on the standard t.v. channels and cable t.v., too. and yet, when it comes to 40% of affordable housing, only 3% of the lowest income of that 40% pie is about $55,000 a year, and everybody's income who's below that point can't even put in an application to be a tenant in that building. and the book of instructions pertaining to that mission rock, pertaining to redevelopment says that about 30% of those apartment units are supposed to be for very low and low-income bracket people, and they're not even included in the housing opportunity. and the people who voted for the inclusionary rule for those people who are homeless out on the street for them to have the
opportunity to be a tenant in the building, that's called price fixing and price gouging because we have an emergency housing situation on our hand. this next item coming up pertaining to questions for the mayor, i want you to ask the mayor how did this get by and approved? and when i was talking about you get the giants card up in it, 'cause the giants is financing it. i've demonstrated this several times, and i'm not going to let it go. >> chair ronen: thank you. any other members of the public like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel]. >> chair ronen: any other comments? seeing none, i'd love to make a motion to send this item forward to -- with a positive recommendation. without objection, that motion passes. [gavel]. >> chair ronen: thank you. mr. clerk, can you please read item number four.
>> clerk: item four is an ordinance amending the code to authorize the board of supervisors for submission of question topics by supervisors in advance of the mayor's appearance at the board of supervisors for a question-and-answer session. >> chair ronen: great. supervisor mar? >> supervisor mar: thank you again, chair ronen. so again, as a chief sponsor of this legislation, i just wanted to offer some brief explanation and overview. pursuant we took advantage of an extension, and -- however, its validity was called into question as the administrative code language itself makes no mention of how or when the deadline could be extended. this led to uncertainty as to whether or not our question topic was legitimately submitted or would be included
on the agenda. both the mayor's office and clerk's office were gracious in working with us so our question would be asked in january yet the procedural uncertainty remained. to prevent this from happening in the future, madam clerk recommended we amend the administrative code to reconcile the difference between it. this ordinance does just that, to clarify the clerk of the board has the authority to grant question time deadline extensions under special circumstances, holiday periods, board extensions, and when new members are sworn in. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. is there any questions or -- i see two representatives from the clerk's office. do you want to make any comments? >> good morning, chair ronen, members of the rule committee. my name is john carroll. i'm an assistant clerk for the
office of the board of supervisors. the clerk welcomes the ordinance. as you know, the eligibility to ask a question rotates on a monthly basis. the proposed amendment would allow the deadline to be extended for 24 hours. if there is not a regularly scheduled board meeting the week of the deadline, when there is a city, state, or federal holiday during that week or during that time or when the board holds its inaugural meeting on january 8th in odd numbered years, which is what happened this year. this year, newly elected members had just been given their keys to their offices before questions were due the next day. at that meeting, the mayor graciously decided to respond to questions from the members of the board even though they were asked 24 hours before.
the mayor's office and clerk's office thank supervisor mar for introducing this ordinance and thank you for your support. >> chair ronen: i'll now open this up for public comment. if there's any member of the public that would like to speak on this item. seeing none, public comment is closed. would you like to make a motion? i can do it. i'm happy to do it. i'd like to make a motion to send this forward with a positive recommendation. without objection, that motion passes. thank you so much, elisa and john. mr. clerk, can you please read item number five. >> clerk: item number five is an ordinance amending the administrative code to make sure that city technologies submit a board approved surveillance technology policy ordinance and a surveillance impact report to the board in connection with any requests to appropriate funds for the purchase of such technology or
to accept and extend grants for such purposes or otherwise procure technology equipment or services. >> chair ronen: thank you. we are joined by supervisor peskin. good morning. >> supervisor peskin: good morning, chair ronen. thank you for hearing this again, and i think this is two of the three times that this will need to be in this committee. i can see deputy city attorney givner nodding his head. all of the amendments except for one i discussed in detail at the last meeting but had not yet been approved as to form by the city attorney. they are now approved as to form by the city attorney, and i'll give the clerk the signed original and a couple of copies. the only other change that has materialized in the intervening week is at page 16, lines 1 through 5 have been deleted,
and that was a provision that created a new crime, if you will, which was a misdemeanor for violation of this ordinance, and many departments expressed concern about this, and frankly, i don't want to be -- i don't think we want to be in the policy business of creating more crimes, and i think there are more recourses if violations occur. so other than that, everything else, i discussed in copious detail at the last meeting. and what i would hope is that you guys could take these amendments today, then, it would sit for another week. i also have copies for the public if there are individuals here who would like to see them, and that will give the public another week to look at them and then hopefully we can send it forward to the full board after next week's rules committee meeting. >> chair ronen: wonderful. so if -- i will now open this
item up for public comment. if there's any member of the public who would like to speak, you'll have two minutes. and please feel free to go ahead and lineup over here to your right. good morning. >> good morning. my name's alice vivier. i'm with stop crime s.f. in the fall of 2016, our neighborhood saw a sudden and sharp increase of car break-ins and home burglaries. the neighbors got together to discuss ways to stop this before things got worse and this became the new norm. this was the start of what was to become stop crime s.f. eight neighborhood groups, 500 members, all fed up with rampant unchecked crime. surveillance camera installations now support the police and the district attorney's office in the apprehension of these serial criminals. today's camera ordinance was put together without sitting down to consult with
stakeholders such as crime prevention groups, victim's rights groups, anticrime groups, and others first. why wouldn't we consult with stakeholders? we feel this must be done. san francisco has many big crowd events which requires the use of surveillance cameras. other major cities such as new york and boston use these as their large events. why would we not allow law enforcement the best technology we have to enable them to do their very best in the interest of public safety? the f.b.i. declared san francisco has the worst rate of auto break-ins in the nation with a 2% arrest rate. don't make it worse by restricting technology. you have the responsibility of doing everything possible for public safety. i also wanted to clarify, the e-mail campaign last week that was mentioned was initiated by stop crime. we've -- our members and their neighborhood groups then forwarded our e-mails to their
supporters, so thank you. >> chair ronen: next speaker, please. >> good morning, supervisors, chair ronen. susan guard with the department of human resources, i didn't fill out a speaker card, but i'll be happy to do that if needed. i just -- this legislation just came to my attention today rks are rk are, and i so i really apologize coming why after there have been many cushions about it. the department of human resources, we do labor investigations. so our concern is any limitation on surveillance equipment we might need in a labor investigation, e.e.o. investigation. we would be happy to work with
peskin. i think we could just probably just amendment the text on page 4 of my document where it says a department or city department does not meet the district attorney, the sheriff's office, and maybe we could include the language right there in d.h.r. conducting labor investigations. >> supervisor peskin: so i am happy to you can with a y-- tou through legislation. after this meeting, if you would like to come to my office, my staff and i can sit down with you. that actually came up in discussions, but if it needs to be fine-tuned, we're happy to work with you in the intervening week, but i think you'll be pleased to see we actually considered that. >> okay. great. thank you. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. next speaker, please.
>> my name is nathan sheer. the ordinance does not prevent or stop any department within the city from acquiring the surveillance equipment that they need. what the ordinance does do is make sure that there is a clear and transparent process and that the public has an opportunity to comment and to give their insight so that we do have as many impacted voices contributing to the decisions that we make as possible and so that the elected representatives of san francisco are the people responsible for making those choices. having use policies around the way that we balance the need for public safety with the need to maintain our important civil liberties is critical, so i'd like to ask that you support the staff secret surveillance ordinance. thank you. >> chair ronen: next speaker.
>> supervisor, my name is frank nodo. i'm with stop crime s.f. can i get this to show? thank you. okay. our group supports creating policies for security cameras and technologies. there are serious civil liberties concerns at stake, but the devil's in the details, and there are certain flaws in this ordinance. i'm not sure that we've seen all of supervisor peskin's amendments, and i'd like that, if possible. i'll pick that up. there very clearly are civil
liberties questions, and as the previous speaker said, there does need to be a balance. the problem is the ordinance has written -- you can't see it because my words are being blocked is the board has not approved a surveillance technology policy, then, the department must cease its use of department technology and the sharing of data until the board approves something. so that's putting the cart before the horse. what we ought to do is create policies and then enforce those policies. i would ask for more time since we were having problems with the -- >> chair ronen: keep going. >> -- with the overhead. don't ban the use of cameras unless and until the board gets its act together, and that's actually what that says, the board has to do it first. continue with the current policy, create a policy, and then enforce the policy.
that's something that's very easy to do, and that's something that's entirely in your hands. secondly, i would suggest -- [bell ringing] [inaudible] >> chair ronen: thank you. [inaudible] >> chair ronen: thank you. [inaudible] >> chair ronen: thank you. i did give you some extra time, but you need to wrap it up. >> okay. thank you. >> chair ronen: thank you so much. >> and then, i would suggest one last change -- >> chair ronen: oh, no, i'm sorry. your time is up. thank you so much. is there any member of the public who would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel].
>> chair ronen: do you have any additional comments? supervisor walton? >> supervisor walton: thank you, chair ronen. i would just like to thank supervisor peskin for bringing this surveillance ordinance, which is really important. did have a chance to speak with stop crime s.f. and frank nodo and one of his proposed amendments. i think his suggestions are actually addressed in the legislation but also talked to the effect of this is still very important in terms of making sure that we protect civil liberties while we protect all of our communities and keep them safe. [please stand by]