tv Government Access Programming SFGTV June 17, 2019 2:00am-3:01am PDT
on behalf of the san francisco board of supervisors, i want to thank george for your tremendous service to pride and the lgbt in san francisco. george ridgely, everyone. give him some applause. and now if you'd like to say a few words. >> thank you, supervisor. it's an honor to be here today. it's a privilege to do the job i do, so to get a thank you from the board of supervisors is pretty spectacular. i could never believe when i was a little kid in maryland that i would be running the biggest pride event in san francisco if not the world. i'm gradef i'm grateful to the community
and to the city to be able to lead the organizations that i lead and the millions of people that they touch. as diverse as they are, the street fair and beta breakers and pride, they are so reflective of what san francisco is. i pretty much pinch myself everyone morning that you get to do this, and hey, that's pretty cool. i'm really excited to take the next step and work with the city and work on the other side of the aisle. thank you for this today. it means a lot. [applause]
>> president yee: thank you. that concludes our special commendations for today, so madam clerk, i believe, let's go back to item 15. >> clerk: item 15 is a resolution authorizing the mayor's office of housing and community development to stablize t stablize -- yo yee i see that there's a few missing people, so please take the roll on this. >> clerk: on item 15 -- [roll call]
>> clerk: there are nine ayes. >> president yee: okay. this resolution is adopted with nine votes. [gavel]. >> president yee: madam clerk, please call the next item. >> clerk: item 16 is not aordinance to amend the planning -- an ordinance to amend the planning code to designate paper doll as a historic site and to make the appropriate findings. >> president yee: thank you. supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: thank you, president yee. because i own property within 500 feet, i need to excuse myself and i will do so
forthwith. >> president yee: okay. can we have a motion -- supervisor stefani and seconded by supervisor mandelman. madam clerk, please call the roll. >> clerk: on item 16 -- [roll call] >> clerk: there are nine ayes. >> president yee: okay. this ordinance is passed with a 9-0 vote on first reading. [gavel]. >> president yee: madam clerk, please call the next item. >> clerk: item 17, ordinance to allow arts activities as a principlely permitted use in the r.c.d. to conditionally
permit night time entertainment uses in the r.c.d. in historic buildings and buildings that contribute to a historic district and to principlely permit such uses in landmark building 120, the st. joseph church at 1401 howard street to exempt night time entertainment from the 200 foot buffer and affirm the ceqa determination. >> president yee: okay. madam clerk, i think we need to call the roll on this one. >> clerk: on item 17 -- [roll call]
>> clerk: there are 10 ayes. >> president yee: ordinary. this ordinance is passed on first reading with 10-0 vote. [gavel]. >> president yee: madam clerk, please call the next item. [agenda item read]. >> president yee: supervisor peskin -- or -- >> supervisor peskin: i'll defer to the maker. >> supervisor safai: so
colleagues, this is a resolution related to a.d.u.s. we have had discussions for months in land use and transportation committee. i'd like to thank supervisor peskin as well as members of the community that have waited patiently. this is a two phase program. one is a ministerial program, and one is ensuring that we have a local waiver program. it is making sure we have what is required at the state level. it is state law. essentially, how the process works is if you want to put an a.d.u. in r.h.-1 through r.h.-3, you have to do it after the construction is done. this mirrors who at is allowedt the state level. we did this to look at new construction and ensuring that we would maximize a.d.u.s and
new construction. we also were aware in some cases if there were demolitions or expansions that we would have to take into account the noticing of existing tenants, and that were some of the amendments that supervisor peskin and the tenants advocates worked with us on, and so essentially, we would notice the existing tenants that construction was going to happen, when it was going to happen, and how it was going to happen. we also fixed the zoning tables to ensure that it conformed with state law. we had this go through the planning commission and as i said multiple conversations at the land use and transportation committee. this will be a step forward in ensuring that we get more housing and more density in areas that have been low, to get more additional density. and then, we tried to take some
additional steps where if we were allowing variances, and some of those variances were allowed to be captured under rent control. essentially, this piece has had a lot of legislation, a lot of input, and a lot of support from the community and others that have waited patiently for it. before i hand it over to supervisor peskin, we do have one piece of cleanup. we strike out the word "off-street parking" on page 22. you all have a copy of that. that's just to conform to the copies. i'd like to thank staff for all of this and supervisor peskin's office. and i will hand it over to
supervisor peskin. >> president yee: supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: thank you, president yee. i want to thank supervisor safai for bringing this forward and be clear what this means for the city and county of san francisco. as supervisor safai mentioned, i was an early supporter of a.d.u. over a decade and a half ago. and then, in 2016, when i first got back on the board after being gone for seven years, i was proud to coauthor the expand of the city's a.d.u. citywide. but in all of those iterations, the work that was done by my predecessor, as well as supervisor wiener, all were
predicated on a.d.u.s being subject to rent control, and earlier today, supervisor mandelman and supervisor stefani talked about the ongoing trend in the state legislature about our preemption to do what's right for our constituents. the needs of san francisco are very different, and the history of legislation in san francisco is very different than in other places, whether it's scooter legislation in a highly congested, crowded, dense city or whether it's a.d.u. legislation as it relates to rent control.
so unfortunately, yet again, we're being preempted. let's talk about what this is. this is legislation, for all intents and purposes, means that single-family legislation in san francisco no longer exists. and i absolutely support legislation that would densify single-family homes if that wou predicate them an a.d.u. here, supervisor safai was more than willing, and in the coming weeks, i will continue to work with the state lemgislature an continue to try to recapture
some of the that flexibility that we once enjoyed. so while i support the legislation, my support, unfortunately, because of that is qualified, but i will vote for it today. >> supervisor safai: through the president, supervisor peskin, can you just explain a little more for the listeners what happened because it would be interesting to hear so everyone understands exactly this has nothing to do with what we did why our legislation. this has something to do with the vote we took this past week. >> supervisor peskin: as the state legislature is trying to, over the past couple of sessions, carve out -- and they have not -- while we continue to be able to do it in
multifamily, multiunit buildings, we are preempted. there is a bill in the state legislature. i have spoken as recently as a couple of hours ago to assembly man ting. office is in conversation with the mayor's office to some amendments that were made to assembly bill 68. i don't want to get down in the weeds with it, but i'm hoping we'll be able to come up with something. and by the way, i don't want to go down this path, but it is entirely possible if we're not able to iron those out, i will ask president yee and supervisor stefani to oppose assembly bill 68 unless properly presented to this body. but i hope that we don't have to go down that path and can figure something out that our legislators will carry and will not be killed by the
legislators in sacramento. >> president yee: recognizing supervisor safai, supervisor mandelman? >> supervisor mandelman: thank you. what is this amendment? >> supervisor safai: this is to amend the tables -- we voted last year to remove the requirement for off-street parking, so we're just bringing it into conformity, through the chair. >> president yee: okay. so -- >> supervisor safai: i just want to add, did you want to say something? >> president yee: no, no. >> supervisor safai: i'm just going to close with all that being said by supervisor peskin, i think this was a good and thoughtful process. i think there were a lot of people involved in this process. i think we have the ability now to continue to add density, to add more housing and more a.d.u.s in multiple categories. i think this encourages new construction to think about adding a.d.u.s rather than coming back later and doing
what we know actually happens in the construction process where they build the space in, and then, they do it without the requirement -- without the approval, without the proper documentation, and then, it comes after the fact and puts people in harm's way. this allows for, in new construction, again, also for the spaces to be sprinklered. it allows for spaces to be thought of, both ingress and egress. so we're thinking about the health and safety of the people that will be living in this property. the last thing i did not highlight is we talk about a minimum size of the a.d.u.s, so it's not an afterthought, it's a good balance of the people that would be living there. so all that said, colleagues, i ask for your support, and i think this would be a big step forward for the city of san
francisco, and as supervisor peskin said, he's been working on this for two decades, and i know there's other pieces of legislation -- in fact, we split the file, and supervisor peskin has some additional work that he is doing that will go back to the planning commission, so i ask for your support. thank you. >> president yee: so i have a question on this legislation, and i may -- supervisor safai, you may have the question or if i need to ask deputy city attorney givner. many of these legislations have a different impact in my district because we have so many associations in district 7, because they have their own bylaws, what we call cc&rs.
and when this was coming up, many individuals would contact my office asking what right do we have under the cc&rs, and they could never get a straight answer. i'm just wondering how this legislation if passed affects the cc&rs today. >> supervisor safai: i'll defer to city attorney givner. >> mr. givner: deputy city attorney jon givner. the homeowners can agree to add additional restrictions in cc&rs. the ordinance itself does not change the cc&rs or allow uses that the homeowners agree to
restrict in their private agreements. so in other words, the city proposes a zoning overlay, and homeowners associations can agree to restrict themselves more closely than city law restricts them. >> president yee: supervisor safai? >> supervisor safai: just a clarification. if the cc&r didn't contemplate something of that nature, then how is that dealt with? i think that's more the point of supervisor yee's question. if they didn't contemplate the -- i don't know, whatever it may be that then comes down from the state as part of state law, and it then comes down as a local ordinance, if it didn't contemplate higher levels of density, how is that dealt with? >> mr. givner: i'm -- i'm not entire leisure how to answer.
i think it depends on the particular cc&rs of the particular h.o.a. we're not regulating the content of the cc&rs, so it sounds like a question the h.o.a. would have to resolve among its own members. >> president yee: i haven't seen my h.o.a. cc&rs in 30 years. i think they allow an inlaw apartment, so if they sign on to the cc&r if they bought the home, does this legislation give them the right to break
the agreement? >> mr. givner: this legislation does not change the terms of any private agreement, so it -- it changes the city's zoning rules but doesn't impact a private agreement between homeowners. >> president yee: okay. i think that's helpful. thank you very much. i believe we have to take -- there's -- there's a motion to make an amendment. is there a second on that? seconded by supervisor peskin. if there's no objection, then, the amendment is passed. [gavel]. >> president yee: can we take roll on this item as amended. >> clerk: on item 18 as amended -- [roll call]
>> clerk: there are 11 ayes. >> president yee: okay. thank you. madam clerk, please call the next item. >> clerk: item 19 is an ordinance to amend the administrative code to advise the controller to submit reports concerning the safe overnight pilot program and amending the police coded for participants to participating in the pilot program as a vehicle for principal habitation.
>> president yee: supervisor brown? >> supervisor brown: thank you, president yee. my office has worked collaboratively with h.s.h. and san francisco police department to create a simple carveout. with this legislation, our triage center and overnight safe parking program can operate and safely and securely. program participants who have to resort to live in their vehicles while receiving services on-site will be protected. we will also have clarity with our police department. we learned from the 2019 point-in-time count san francisco homeless population increased by 17%. much of that was driven by individuals and families living in cars and r.v.s, and i'm asking my colleagues to support this so we can have a solid start on this program as soon as possible. this is a growing issue, and it needs to be addressed. thank you. >> president yee: okay.
thank you. colleagues, can we take this item same house, same call? without objection, this ordinance is passed on first reading unanimously. madam clerk, please call next item. >> clerk: item 20 is to appoint ike kwon to the treasure island board of directors to a determine ending april 30, 2022. >> president yee: colleagues, can we take this same house, same call? colleagues, this item is approved unanimously. madam clerk, call the next item. [agenda item read]. >> president yee: colleagues, can we take this same house, same call? without objection, this item is approved unanimously. [gavel]. >> president yee: madam clerk, can we go to committee reports?
>> clerk: yes. items 22 and 23 were considered by the budget and finance committee at a special meeting may 26. item 22 is an item to declare that the public necessity require the seismic retrofitting of various safety emergency response centers in an amount not to exceed $628.5 million and to adopt the appropriate findings. >> president yee: colleagues, can we take this same house, same call? without objection, this item is adopted unanimously. madam clerk, please call the next item. >> clerk: item 23 was not forwarded and is not before the board. the next item is introductions. supervisor safai. okay. refer. supervise stefani? >> supervisor stefani: may i please rerefer, as well.
>> clerk: supervisor call walton. >> supervisor walton: rerefer. >> clerk: okay. supervisor yee? >> president yee: colleagues, i am proposing legislation to assist our ageing population in san francisco. by 2030, 26% of our preponderates will be seniors. -- of our population will be seniors, and we need to invest and give thoughtful attention to places that seniors can age in with dignity. seniors 60 and older makeup almost a quarter of the persons in san francisco who are under the poverty line. the city has not planned for or built sufficient housing suitable for seniors today.
in our city's pipeline of affordable housing units, only 12% are being proposed for affordable senior housing. not only are we not building enough housing for seniors, when we do build them, they are clearly not affordable for seniors. many seniors are surviving off of fixed income such as social security. not even the most affordable housing units are fixed at 50% a.m.i. for one person, that income is roughly $41,000. seniors makeup to three times less than that on their fixed incomes. this situation is untenable as more of our residents are retiring and relying on fixed incomes. seniors who are housing insecure can be spending up to 150%, 150% of their income on
rent. this is not a burden anyone should have to bear, especially those who have no safety nets. this is a life or death situation for many of our elders. the problem is clear, but with you need to start focusing on solutions. the affordable housing bond work group on senior housing provided recommendations that we can start and act upon it now to help provide a measure of stability. for the first time ever, they will propose dedicated funds to building new affordable senior housing. this is a start, but this only solves one part. the question is how can we make sure these units actually are affordable so that the seniors
aren't shut out of qualifying? this is why we are introducing s.o.s., or senior operating subsidies program fund to meet the demand for truly affordable senior housing. this program will lower the cost of a unit to meet seniors where they are at. instead of 50% of a.m.i. units, units will be set at 15% and 20% a.m.i. so that seniors can actually qualify to enroll in these affordable housing units. this is hopefully the start to a more thoughtful strategy of how we can support our ageing population before it is too late. we will also be working through the budget process to ensure that this fund is able to support a demonstration program
to start getting seniors into truly affordable housing units. i want to thank the seniors and advocates who have come out time and time again courageously sharing their stories and struggles. colleagues, i hope i can count on your support when it comes up. the other thing i want to introduce is i want to urge the university of california san francisco to introduce labor harmony as part of their negotiations with resident physicians at ucsf. in medicine, this is a doctor hierarchy that everyone who has had a visit at a hospital can be confused by. in a large teaching hospital such as ucsf, you can see
medical students who are not licensed physicians, physicians in training, and then others who are fully trained and then supervising other physicians. a resident is somewhere in the middle of this doctor hierarchy. they are typically a physician who has graduated from medical school and is now pursuing 2 to 7 years of specialized training in an area such as internal medicine. reside now resident physicians can be disciplined for different reasons, including not meeting the so-called professionalism standards. this can be very subjective determination and asking for a
process by which a resident physician can appeal to a neutral party is a reasonable request, so right now, they don't have that. especially given the consequences can be very serious, residents who are disciplined are up for termination in a residency program, which can result in the end of a medical career for an individual. the resolution that i am cosponsoring today urges ucsf to demonstrate a commitment to -- to labor harmony in their contract negotiations by including language that would allow resident physicians an opportunity to appeal discipline imposed on them that is alleged to meet
professionalism standards. it does not mandate any outcome or overturn any decisions made, but it would afford dual process protection to resident physicians, provide thousands of hours of vital medical care to many of our san francisco residents, visitors, and workers each day. so i want to thank my colleagues for their support, especially my cosponsors, supervisor mar, brown, peskin, safai, and haney, and ronen. so i appreciate your sponsorship. the rest i submit. >> clerk: thank you, president yee. supervisor brown? >> supervisor brown: thank you, today i'm introducing amendments to the legislative code that affects our first responders when they suffer
from heart trouble or pneumonia. this will bring our ordinance into line with the state labor code. state municipalities in the bay area and our administrative code governing these types of benefits for sheriff's department. due to the inherent nature of the condition, the conditions they work under and exposure to harsh chemicals, our firefighters and police officers are more susceptible to developing heart disease and suffering heart attacks than the general public. under the state labor code, those disabilities are presumed to be a result of the condition that the first responders work under. the board of supervisors made this change that i'm proposing. they made the change for our sheriff's deputies in 2015, and it's time we do it for others
that work in public safety. the ordinance that i'm proposing today will bring san francisco into alignment with state administrative codes and labor codes we have for other officers in the city. in 2015, the city did not have the data we have today which clearly demonstrates that heart trouble and heart attacks are serious hazards for firefighters and police officers and are more often than not a direct result of their condition under their -- that they work under. i want to thank my colleagues, safai, stefani, walton, and yee. i also have an inmemory -- in
memoriam for wayne woods, or as we called him, speedy. wayne was a long-term community activist in the western addition. he loved his community, and he was well loved in return. speedy got his name because of his outstanding track skills. speedy was a viet nam war veteran, and during his time in viet nam, he experienced tragedies that profoundly changed him. when he returned to san francisco, he worked on organizing and strategizing for the betterment of black life. he helped organized a strike at san francisco state university. this strike aimed to address racist policies and procedures and the pay of faculty on
campus. because of speedy's activism, it led to the first pay equality program in the country. he also oversaw community efforts to develop low-income housing and preserve black home ownership during the time of redevelopment. he guided the development of the 100% owned and operated victoria square complex located at sutter and fillmore streets. he also helped save many victorian homes owned by african americans, and because of this, many of the african americans were able to stay in their homes. at the bright young age of 24, he ran for a position on the board of supervisors. speedy had a huge heart and a great sense of humor, and he
really loved his family and community. he leaves behind many loved ones. speedy, we will miss you, and thank you for your amazing service to the western addition-fillmore communities. and there's two events that are happening this week in the western edition fillmore that speedy was always there and involved. one is the san francisco black film festival that starts on wednesday, june 12, and goes through sunday, the 16. and the 16th year of june tetee juneteenth, and it's on sunday
at 6:00 p.m. i hope everybody goes. the rest i submit. >> clerk: thank you. supervisor fewer? thank you. supervisor haney? >> supervisor haney: thank you. i want to thank my colleagues, supervisors ronen, walton, mar, brown, and yee for supporting our efforts and vision to provide universal mental health care for all. i also want to thank all of the community members, experts, and leaders in the substance use and mental health field that have assisted us with this legislation. there would be a surtax on
c.e.o.s, and tax on the company's gross receipts is estimated to generate $100 million annually to fund the overhaul of san francisco's mental health and substance use treatment systems, estimated at $70 million in new annual costs. this is based on a similar program that has been implemented in portland, oregon. similar resolutions have been considered in several states. there's also a history of funding mental health services through progressive taxation. prop 63, the mental health services act of 2004, was funded through a 1% income tax on personal income tax in excess of $1 million. corporations recently received a massive windfall under the trump administration's tax reforms which slashed the tax bracket from 34% to 21%.
large corporations in california were able to keep an extra estimated $13 billion to $17 billion a year. this is a fair measure tax, asking companies that are making some of the highest profits to give a little bit more to get people with mental illness off the streets and into care. the rest i submit. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor. supervisor mandelman? >> supervisor mandelman: thank you. it has been nearly a quarter century since the city of san francisco to demand treatment on policy.
[please stand by]. >> supervisor mandelman: more than a decade later, in 2008, voters passed proposition t, reiterating the city's commitment to the policy and requiring the department of health to submit an annual report to this board assessing demand for substance use treatment and requiring that the city budget include follow-upping to -- funding to
fund the plan. for years, a hardy and irrepressible group of experts have pushed the city to make investments in behavioral health services and treatment, and finally with this mayor and this board, the city may finally be hearing the call. last year's d.p.h. budget finally increased funding for substance use treatment to $81.5 million, and the mayor's proposed budget for 2019-20 increases that to $89.6 million, which amounts to a 20% increase over twoers i can't. earlier this year, the mayor and this board added 100 new treatment beds, and the mayor's budget includes 100 more, the most significant increase in a generation. many of us on this board have done deep work on where and how to improve our treatment
system. i i believe we all bear a deep commitment to fix mental health systems and the community in which they live. as we move forward with new initiatives, it's important to understand where we've been. if you want to deliver on the treatment of efficacy on demand, support the sobriety of those successfully completing treatment and reduce harm to those who do not in the communities in which they live, there are no easy shortcuts, we need to come to the table together, do the work, understand why and how we haven't been successful, and identify opportunities for
success. with a new director of public health and a new director of public health reform, a meth task force taking a deep dive on the particular challenges of meth addiction, and a mayor and board singularly focused on mental health and substance abuse, this moment presents a unique opportunity to do that work. i want to extend a sincere thank you to the incredible folks on the treatment on demand coalition who have been working tirelessly on this issue for many years and who have been partnering with my office and supervisor stefani's office for bringing this forward. i want to thank my legislature aide -- legislative aide for her work on this, and i believe that supervisor stefani wants to say a few words on this. >> clerk: supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: thank you, madam clerk. colleagues, i am pleased to join supervisor mandelman on this. these are issues that i am personally connected to in many different ways.
i've seen firsthand how they impact individuals and families, and i am personally committed to working to create policy that helps those with addiction who need our help. san francisco first passed a resolution to address the desperate need of substance abuse treatment almost 25 years ago. treatment on demand was followed by a dramatic increase in funding and still the program fell short of its goal. as we continue to grasp the ongoing mental health and substance abuse crisis in our city, i think it's important that we take stock of all of our resources and all that we are currently doing, including what we are doing well and what we are doing not so well. we need a better understanding of why, despite our best efforts, overdose deaths are at historic highs. this is why i'm pleased that mayor breed introduced dr. bland as the city's first
advocate and as we continue to work to improve our city's response to the mental health and substance abuse crisis we face, i believe it is incredibly important to bring everyone to the table on what services we are offering and how we can improve. we must not just bring together the mental health community and working in those departments, but those if recovery and what worked for them. i want to thank again the treatment on demand coalition for their thoughtfulness on this subject. too often, we talk about what is happening on the streets and what we are doing wrong, but we don't look at what is working. we so often hear about the addicts on the streets that are taxing our systems, but rarely do we hear about the people who are in recovery, leading productive lives, and staying
sober. addiction is a mysterious disease. some people don't understand that it's a disease and can't understand why a person can't just have one glass of wine or it happen just using heroin. when i was thinking about these talking points, lady gaga came to my mind, and i thought, am i really going to say lady gaga at the board of supervisors. she said something about the oscars, and she was talking about the movie, "a star is born" where bradley cooper was obviously someone suffering from substance abuse. she said, you know, we've got to take care of each other. if you see somebody that's hurting, don't look away. and if you're hurting, even though it might be hard, try to find that bravery within yourself to dive deep and tell somebody.
i say that because when people are ready, they need someplace to go. if you don't understand addiction, you don't realize that it takes a long time for people to get ready, if they ever do. it is so extremely difficult for people to admit that a life without alcohol would be okay, that a life without drugs would be okay. people don't think they can live without their drug of choice, and we have to be able to provide a place where they know, when they are ready, that we will provide that for them. so i am pleased with supervisor mandelman to call for a hearing for treatment on demand, understanding the current resources and what is working, and what is critical in reaching the populations we haven't yet been able to serve. thank you. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor mandelman. that concludes your introduction. >> supervisor mandelman: the rest i submit.
>> clerk: thank you. supervisor mar? >> supervisor mar: thank you, colleagues. today i'm introducing senate bill 343. thank you to supervisors peskin, brown, and haney for cosponsoring the resolution. s.b. 343 would require health care rate and data disclosure across the financial industry in the expectation that this will fully inform health care purchasing decisions by businesses, companies, and consumers. s.b. 343 eliminates provision in health insurance rate filing requirements that permit kaiser to report medical trend in a different form than other health plans. currently, kaiser's plans is 40% of the california insurance market, and not having that data means that other
institutions, employers, workers, and consumers are disadvantaged in this data held by kaiser. s.b. 343 is currently backed by many groups, and i look forward to adding our city's support. the rest i submit. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor mar. supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: madam clerk, colleagues, i rise not to introduce a piece of legislation. i'll submit my legislation, and i do want to do an in memoriam, but i wanted to address an issue that's been percolating in various conversations around the board, something that we all and the mayor genuinely care about, which is providing
the path to affordable housing. and there are many ways to reach that goal, but i am most concerned in doing something that is in thoughtful collaboration where we can adjust over time and fix mistakes and perfect programs and legislations and will ultimately be good for the best public policy that we can collectively come up with. without undermining the checks and balances that are enshrined in our constitution which i think we should be very careful with -- i am concerned -- and i say that with all due respect to our mayor -- in tinkering with the charter. we've before through this before, and i think in 2012, our colleagues made a mistake by putting that in the charter
where it could not be increased in good times and decreased in bad times. in 2018, i teamed up with supervisor kim, and we went to the ballot, and we removed that. but by the time the voters voted to remove over 1,000 sites of on-site inclusionary housing, and a lot of -- we all voted or many of us who were on the board voted to stream line
100 -- [inaudible] >> supervisor peskin: -- was declared to be infeasible because the mayor's office of housing, with the best of intents, doesn't want to invest in that small a site, and because what we all hear relative to the projects that we bring along, which is that there's no money. and i think that is why we're having a conversation about a $600 million affordable housing bond. resources do matter, funding d does matter, and i think we all hear that funding is one of the
primary if not the primary issue. as i said, we're not only committed to an affordable housing bond, but i think many of us are committed to including a special category for educator housing. and i differentiate that from teacher housing because when i say educator housing, that includes paraprofessional housing, and actually a huge part of the san francisco workforce that makes significantly less money. when you look at the money that former school board member, our colleague, sandra fewer, reminded me of today, 50% of new teachers leave the sfusd within five years because they can't afford to live here. so affordability levels do matter, and who we're building
for does matter. there's a reason the proposed charter separates 100% affordable housing from teacher housing, and i want to come up with a definition that has a broader a.m.i. span and includes the paraprofessionals. the mayor said she would like the government to be flexible and effective, which i think is counter to locking these things in the charter. then, there's no ability to fix things. i think i've been clear about that, and i don't want to do ballot box fixing. it generally comes back to bite us. it is the season, it is the official ordinance season, it is the charter season, and it is the season of intrigue, and next friday is the last day for four members of this body or the mayor, with her signature,
to put something on the ballot. when i was a supervisor, that was crazy intrigue. nobody knew who was going to drop in what into the hopper at 4:59. i worked to create the system that we have now, where you have to have at least some public hearings, and i think it's made the process a lot better. but what i fundamentally believe, whether we're the board or the mayor is to get the job done in these chambers as collaboratively as possible. i think the ballot is the court of last resort. yeah, if you want to change the charter, that's where you have to go, but i prefer to get the job done here by ordinance, having said that, the discussions that i've heard recently is that mayor breed is
considering putting something on the ballot. maybe some of you know what it is. i have not been consulted. i don't know what it is, but if it is around streamlining educator housing, i think we can do that here at the board. having said that, i've been to this rodeo before. as a matter of fact, when we got into the intricate details of getting out of the charter -- in the ensuing weeks and months, we were actually able to withdraw our initiatives so that neither one of them went on the ballot, and we all got together, supervisor safai, supervisor kim, then-board president london breed, and we actually worked it out, and we came up with an ordinance that passed 11-0 and
is the law of the land now. so to that end, i am publicly suggesting that the big-tent collaborative approach is better. having said that, i am working on a ballot measure that i think will enjoy the support of not less than three and not more than four of my colleagues in the coming week if for no other reason than to create a place holder so that we can have that negotiation and hopefully end up with neither initiative ordinance on the ballot, without the charter amendment on the ballot, and with us doing the best public policy at this board, hopefully by unanimous vote. finally, i would like to adjourn this meeting in the memory of hope wiseman eisenberg, who was a lifelong
teacher in the san francisco unified school district and my neighbor and a lovely person that i had coffee with at the same cafe for the last 30 years. she retired only to pass away way too soon, and my condolences to her husband, who many of us know, neil eisenberg, who once ran for city attorney, and the rest, i will submit. >> clerk: thank you, supervisor peskin. sorry for your loss. supervisor ronen? >> supervisor ronen: thank you. today, i'm proposing a resolution to honor virginia ramos, fondly known as the tamale lady. her legacy lives on, and ensures that she is forever held