tv Historic Preservation Commission SFGTV October 23, 2020 10:00pm-3:01am PDT
hearing. remote hearings require everyone's attention. most of all your patience. if you are not speaking mute and turn off your video camera. sfgov tv is streaming this hearing live. the building inspection commission hearing is running a little long. it is not live but it is streamed live. we will receive public comment for each item on today's agenda. communities or opportunities to speak during the public comment period are available by calling (415)655-0001. and turning access code (146)088-7048. when we reach the item you are interested in submitting public comment for, press star then 3 to be added to the cue.
each speaker is allowed three minutes. when you have 30 second remaining you will hear a chime. i will announce your time is up and take the next person to speak. best practices call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and please mute volume on your television or computer. we will take roll at this time. president hyland, vice president matsuda. >> here. >> commissioner black. >> yes, i am here.
commissioner foley. >> yes. >> commissioner johns. >> yes. >> commissioner pearlman. >> here. >> commissioner so. >> yes. >> thank you. first on your agenda is general public comment. at this time members of the public may address the commission within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. your opportunity to address the commission with respect to agenda your opportunity will be afforded when it is reached in the meeting. you may address the commission for up to three comments. this is your opportunity to get in the queue by pressing star 3. indicate you would like to submit under general public comment. i see no members of the public to speak at this time. we can speak to department matters. item 1.
director's announcements. >> i am here to note that we forwarded to all of you a one page document that we thought would be handy to have that outlined our preservation management duties and programs we have throughout the department in current planning, long-range planning, community equity as well as environmental planning with the key manager running on that. if you have any questions about those programs over the coming months, that should give you a one stop shop for the manager to reach out. before i turn it over to rich, i did want to introduce two planners you have not had before
you. first up we have melanie bishop. she is a planner on the designation team. she started as intern in 2019 working on city-wide survey. before joining the department she completed fellowships with the national park service in d.c. and chicago planning and department. the seconded is gg on the northwest quadrant. she is an intern with the city-wide survey team in june last year. she became a full-time planner joining current planning in june of this year. gg has a bachelor of arts in geography and san francisco native. i will turn it over to rick with a few legislative and policy up updates for you. >> good afternoon. i want to give you a quick
update on some items that occurred at the board of supervisors. lion martin house was passed recommending and initiating the landmark designation. within 90 days of tuesday the department staff will bring forward the nomination. the seconded item update is tomorrow. planning commission will be reviewing one of the first phases of the power station project. you will remember that you reviewed this through environmental review document last year. the developer is moving forward with an office allocation and rehab project for the station a building the large power plant structure. they have engaged with hertzog to create a new office piece for the project. if you are interested please stay tuned. that is all of our announcements.
thank you. >> thank you, rich. commissioners, if there are no questions of staff, we can move on to item 2. review of past events at the planning commission, staff report announcements. i believe those have been made. we will move to item 3. president's report and announcements. >> no report or announcement today. >> very good. item 4. commissionments and questions. >> seeing no requests from commissioners, we will move to consideration for items proposed for continuance. item 5. 2020-003248 m.c.a. state mandated accessory dwelling unit
controls to november 4, 2020. would anyone like to make a motion? >> shall we take public comment on this? >> i apologize. we should take public comment. members of the public this is your opportunity to speak to the item for continuance by pressing star and three. there is no public comment. it is closed. >> i move we continue to november 4th. >> second. >> thank you. on that motion to continue item 3 as proposed commissioner bla black. >> yes. >> foley. >> yes. >> johns. >> yes.
and 412 valencia street. these are all legacy. is staff prepared for presentations. >> yes. >> katie with planning staff. we have six legacy businesses to present today. three planners to present. each planner will present two and after the business representatives will have an opportunity to speak on their own behalf during public comment. is i will begin with secret studios. 38-year-old music recording in district 10. because of the san francisco dense housing stock, musicians are afforded the same grand band spaces. the bay area needed a space for artists to rehearse and record. they have filled this gap for 40 years. it has been used by many musicians from jerry garcia and
mac fleetwood. as important the studio served the local community from the bay area legends to enthusiastic hobbyists. they have been there to serve them all. the studio is active in the community provided space for neighborhood meetings, rehearsals and jazz and donated equipment to mission district festival for over 30 years. owner is committed to safeguarded the business use as music rehearsal so the bay area music community can continue to work on their craft and cultivate musical creativity. we recommend the business be added to the legacy business registry. next is for washington vegetable. wholesale produce founded in 1931 on washington street. after almost 90 years washington
vegetable is no longer located on washington street. it is now on jerrold avenue. the values and dedication are strong. four generations after founding the business is still family owned and operatedded. san francisco's close proximity to the most productive produce helped form identities of culinary capital of the world and cutting edge of healthy food trends. one of the oldest individuals of the produce market. it provides edible fuel to the cultural heritage. washington vegetables has a century worth of dedication to the high end culinary tradition of the food scene. it also voices food as a vital
resource that not everyone has access to. washington vegetable feels strongly about giving back to the community and donates to the variety of charities and food banks. staff is supportive of this application and the historical traditions. these are the name, location, operations, related to the business' history and philanthropic ventures. next planner. >> good afternoon, commissioners. melanie bishop, planning staff. next business for the association of northern california, lyengar yoga in district 5. originally founded in 1975. it was created to promote yoga
education in northern california in an accordance with techniques the recognized figure of yoga. the association has been located at the current building at 2201 sutter street since 2014 where they provide teacher training and community classes for all level including seniors class. they also offer scholarships each year to continue making yoga accessible to the community despite financial constraints. the association is committed to safeguarding the business use of the studio and mission to provide the range of yoga classes and opportunity for teacher education to the public. the staff supports this application and resolution recommending the business be added to the legacy business
registry. >> the next business application is for monroe motors incorporated, motorcycle sales and service in district 8. the business is operated in san francisco for 62 years and is located at 412 valencia street. it is the oldest motorcycle dealership in san francisco. the history is referred to as motor row due to the presence of several motorcycle related accidents there throughout history. it is an active member of the community supporting italian days. the patrons of the motors include daredevil evil kinneyval and jim marshall and actor nicholas cage. they are committed to safeguarding use as motorcycle sales and service establishment.
original triumph lighted flames, participation in community events and customer business model. staff supports the application and resolution recommending it be added. that concludes my recommendation. i will turn it over to gg. >> good afternoon, commissione commissioners. this legacy application for the 38-year-old mexican sit down restaurant and bar. popular with everyone from politicians to residents. it has been a gathering place for eating and getting together since 1982. they have been owned and operated by the family since it first opened serving traditional food from mexico including
tammalis,en which law does and salsa in the traditional dining room and interior designed by the family. not only have they remained a staple in the neighborhood but also a consistent employer of marginalized groups such at lbgq and latin x population. they were one of the trailblazers for the restaurant movement providing legal workshops for business owners and employees about legal rights. they have been a longstanding donortor dbgq plus and institutions and events in the soma neighborhood. staff supports this application and resolution recommending the business be added to legacy business registry. >> the final is in district 3 north beach.
the san francisco fifth oldest existing restaurant in is noter beach neighborhood for the 134 year history. it reflects the rescities of northern itally. pasta, soups, fruits and meats and cream-based dishes. they have occupied five locations in north beach since 1886. it is located in the sanramo hotel. it operated out of a tent in 1906 serving soup. they have been a culinary staple throughout the history. countless patrons of cultural significance bank of america founder, former president richard nixon. tony bennett and robin williams and other musics and
politicians. while fior italia served many it has given back to its neighborhood participating in events and hosting and donating food to local organizations. staff is supportive of this application and resolution recommending the business be added to the business registry. this concludes staff presentations. we are available to answer any questions. thank you. >> that concludes staff presentations. we should take public comment. members of the public call the 415 number and enter access code and press star and three. we have several callers.
>> i am karen woods, executive director of the yoda association of northern california. thank you for the opportunity to become included. we are part of the history and culture since 1975. during these challenging times we are working hard to remain so for another 45 years and beyond. we were the first yoga teacher training program in the country instrumental in spreading yoga. we are acknowledged for bringing yoga that we provide is focused on accessibility and therapeutics. he published over 30 books on the subject of yoga translated to many languages and was recognized by "time magazine" in 2004 as one of the most infromential in the world. we have a loyal community of
volunteers and donors within san francisco and those who travel from all over the bay area, country and world t to visit our center which is beautiful and welcoming. we offer classes, wok shops and free community programs. classes for the elderly or those with physical injuries. in response to the pandemic we went virtual with all classes. a community was grateful to stay together virtually during shelter-in-place. our classes for those who live alone provided a lifeline. we have been able to secure wages for teachers and staff with ppp loan and donor support tto to ensure yoga was availab. we created a hardship fund aphadded two $10 classes each week. we wanted to ensure members
would have the support of yoga to get through the difficult times. these are a blessing. we have a history in san francisco. we continuously operated since 1975 out of several locations throughout the city from marina, sunsets to the current location in lower pacific heights on the western addition. we are a member of the filmore merchants. we are adjacent to medical -- adjacent to medical centers and using yoga as an important tool in the treatment and recovery of ms, parkinson's, cancer, depression. hypertension and other conditions. it is our hope with the legacy designation we will distinguish ourselves as valuable asset of san francisco and give needed assurance to our donors regardless of future challenges we are committed to our mission and doing whatever we can to
compliance for egress purposes. next slide, please. this slide takes the proposed front railing detail and as an example that the project strives to maintain and preserve the architectural features of the building. at this point i'd like to introduce the property owners. thank you. >> here we go. hold on. i'll try this. does this work?
>> your five minutes is -- i've paused your time so you have 30 seconds. >> we will wave our time. >> great. thank you. appreciate that commissioners may have question for you. that concludes the sponsor's presentation, we should open up for public comment. members of the public, again, this is your opportunity to speak to this item by pressing star and 3 to get into the queue. commissioners, i see no members of the public requesting to speak at this time, so we will close public comment and let you take up the matter.
>> commissioners, anyone? commissioner pearlman. >> commissioner pearlman: sure, i'll take it on. i think this project is very well-developed. obviously an incredibly difficult problem to solve with a building that is so wedged in on three sides, but the changes to the building are almost invisible. certainly when this is done, there will be no visible change, so i think we should approve this project with conditions. i would move to approve this project with conditions. >> second? >> great, commissioners. thank you. if there are no other comments, there's a motion that has been seconded to approve this matter with conditions. on that motion, commissioner
black. >> commissioner black: yes. >> commissioner foley: yes. >> commissioner johns: yes. >> commissioner pearlman: yes. >> commissioner so: yes. >> vice president matsuda: yes. >> president hyland: yes. >> so move commissioners. that motion passes unanimously 7-0. if the administrator could opine on the variance? >> thank you. to close the public hearing and grant the requested variances noting non-compliance conditions justifying that variance. thank you. >> thank you, mr. sanchez. commissioners, that places us at item number 8. 2020-008,490des? commissioner, you'd like to be recused? >> yes, i'd like to be recused, please.
>> i move that the commissioner be recused? >> second. >> recuse commissioner matsuda. >> commissioner foley: yes. >> commissioner johns: yes. >> commissioner pearlman: yes. >> commissioner so: yes. >> vice president matsuda: yes. >> president hyland: yes. >> so moved, commissioners, and commissioner matsuda, you are hereby recused. i will take this opportunity to remind you and the other members of the commission that when you do need to recuse yourself, even if you are not present at the hearing, is the new law that's been in effect for almost two years now, you need to still submit written documentation to the ethics commission within 15 days, i believe it is. commissioners, we should hear from staff.
ms. mcmillen, are you prepared to make your presentation. >> yes. can you hear me? >> we can, yes. >> okay. and is my presentation up on the screen? >> not yet. >> not yet? okay. i'll try it again. how is it now? >> no. >> no? all right. >> there it is. >> there we go. apologies for the delay. good afternoon, commissioners. i'm with planning department staff. before you today is the department's recommendation regarding landmark of the ymca
located at 1830 sutter street in japantown. in 2030 the property was added to the landmark program as part of the endorsement of the japan cultural heritage and economic sustainability strategy. most recently, in 2019, the hpc reviewed. the nomination was prepared as part of a national park service underrepresented communities grant awarded to the department. the property was listed on the national register in january of this year. as noted in the executive summary and detailed in the national register nomination included in your packet, the japanese ywca/issei women's building was and with lgbtq history and with lgbtq civil rights movement. the building is significant as an excellent example of the architect julie morgan. in 1912, san francisco ywca was
the first independent japanese ywca in the united states. japanese women were barred by segregationist policies from the use of the facilities of the city's main ywca building. in response, issei established the ywca to address the needs of the community. completed in 1932, 1830 sutter was funded through donations from ywcas around the country and san francisco. according to the national register nomination, the property appears to be the only building purpose-built for issei women in the united states. during world war ii, people of japanese descent were incarcerated. the building was turned over to the ywca and leased from 1942 to 1959. during this period, the building was the location of the san francisco chapter of the committee on racial equality and the site of meetings, gatherings, and events to
advance african-american and lgbtq rights -- excuse me, lgbtq civil rights and other political and social causes. they were developing non-violent strategies in the seven-week course of the building and used the property as the center of its organizing activities while in the bay area. the building's association is what the nomination characterizes as two powerful connections to lgbtq history. it has been reclaimed as an important figure in lgbtq history and the apartment he lived in from 1962 until his death in 1987 is listed on the national register of historic places for his work on important campaigns and non-violence, activism, civil rights, human rights and lgbtq civil rights. the japanese ywca building is
further connected to lgbtq history through the building's ties to the pioneering lgbtq rights organizations. in 1954, the society's first convention was held at 1830 sutter. finally, the building is significant as an excellent example of the work of the architect. of the more than 700 buildings she designed during her prolific career, 30 were for the ywca and located throughout the country. the period of significance 1932 to 1959 encompasses the date of the building's construction through the american friends service committee's relocation to another site. the designation addresses one of the historic preservation's four priority areas for designation which includes the designation of properties associated with underrepresented racial, ethnic and social groups. currently landmark 288 is the only other city landmark specifically related to japanese american history. several properties associated with african american and lgbtq
history and culture and buildings associated with women's history are among the city's landmarks but they remain underrepresented among designated buildings and sites. the property owner has been notified and is supportive of the landmark. there is no opposition as an article 10 landmark. this concludes my presentation and i'm happy to answer any questions. we have a representative of the owner and would like to speak to the designation. >> are you prepared to make your presentation? >> yes. >> okay. you will have five minutes. >> thank you very much. my name is karen ky and i am here on behalf of the owner of 1830 sutter street, also known as the japanese ywca or issei
women's building. this has been a really long path. the owner became the owner of the building in 2002 after community effort to regain it, and actually i noticed from the designation report became added to the landmark program in december 2013. and i don't know if that's really long to you as the process, but for us, it seems like it's been a long time but it's been very fruitful and productive, one that has taught us a great deal about our building and our community and our ties to other communities, and it's also one that has been eventful, as ms. mcmillen noted, achieving national landmark status, or register status, i should say, before achieving
san francisco landmark status. and to us, though, this is very important and significant. being recognized in one's own hometown is always very meaningful, and i'm also very pleased to see that the commission included in the official title the issei women's building because the national register did not. and to us, this landmarking is truly a recognition of our issei women, the first generation who came, who faced incredible racism, who raised funds at the height of the great depression in order to build this building, and who then faced internment and diaspora, and on their
we've just come up with a proposal to reuse the building. and if the city landmark commission wants to be involved, fine, but you know, we want to move forward. i think it should be a city landmark. i'm puzzled why when i ask specific questions about the project, staff does not give me answers to this question. these questions. and i don't understand why. i'm happy to give the people the right to landmark report, but it's hard to do when you don't get answers from staff. so i hope they move this to the top of the list. thank you. >> sorry, i was on mute.
members of the public, last call for public comment. seeing no request to speak, commissioners, the matter is now before you. >> great. thank you. do you want to start? matter >> commissioner matsuda: i know this is not something that has been ignored by the planning department, but i -- and i think one of the reasons may be because this particular building involves a number of different city entities, is that correct? >> hi, marcel, can you hear me? >> yes. >> thanks, yes.
i want to acknowledge that we have received comment from richard rothman. so there were a lot of -- that 10 years ago the department gave us a letter to informing them that the building had been added. there are also other properties on the work program so that over the time, we have been working on moving through the work programs. so, the structure of the ownership is that recreation and parks and the zoo have oversight. the zoo is under jurisdiction of rec and park and the zoo is operating a lease. so there are two oversight bodies. the department has been in recent communication with rec
and park to some degree remind them there is interest, there is public interest. so although i don't have a response yet about moving forward with the landmark nomination, i can say that we are engaged in a conversation. i would also like to note that richard rothman, if he has additional information, it would be great if he could share. it's the first time i'm learning of that. i would be really appreciative. i had another thought but have forgotten. sorry. any more questions? >> commissioner matsuda: thank you. i was just going to say that i don't think this is the only property that is in the works, the landmark designation program, that we are dealing with other city agencies. and sometimes those city agencies may not -- i don't
know -- understand and appreciate the importance of why we would like to highlight a building. so maybe what we can do as the commission and as -- and me as liaison for the commission is to make contact with some of the city agencies to let them know or remind them that this project has been on the list. this one, as well as others for a long time. and that projects like this do take a priority because of what the property represents. so i'm happy to do that. i know that president and i have talked about this and the others can chime in, but i'm -- please feel free to use those services if you feel it's appropriate. >> i would say, as we talk about prioritizing the landmarks, this is definitely one property that continues to be on our landmark.
i would like to see some significant progress and to get it to be forwarded, loaded and forwarded to the board as soon as possible. and we can talk a little more today about the rest of the program. but this is definitely, i believe, the majority of the work has already been done. it's just more of a procedural thing in making sure that the property owners are in sync with us on doing that. so i would move that -- i would propose, not move, let's get you connected with rec and park and marcel, if you can facilitate that. let's see if -- what i'd like is by the march 2021 meeting to have this kind of behind us if that's possible. >> this is marcel. i'm happy to follow up on that. >> great, thank you.
commissioner pearlman, i have other comments, but i'll come back. >> commissioner pearlman: thank you. i did want to ask that you be proactive and get in touch with mr. rothman. because you know, he has been in front of our commission many times. and this building does, i think that two of our priorities with geography and women, you know, something related to women, and women history. [please stand by]
thank you. >> right. thank you. commissioner so. >> commissioner so: i am actually having a similar concern or actually appreciation from what commissioner pearlman mentioned. i really appreciate the report you have created and also giving me the overview of all the efforts that are happening or have been happening. but then i am concerned about the resources that we have and how do we prioritize and continue to keep all the relevant and necessary things to move forward -- not overly exhausting our staff and if we need some extra resources and how do we better position ourselves to identify them, i
see that you stated there was this new fact sheet and you anticipate this upcoming fiscal year we can take on 12 projects for landmark destinations, and i just wasn't clear -- i was really curious whether it is 12, 20% more than what we have been doing, or if it's half -- it looks like we will be able to do more. but then if we're able to do more in that particular element, what happens to the city-wide survey? what happens to other -- review. i just want to make sure we really are aware that we're all asked to cut our budgets and then our resources are limited and also with the racial and cultural equity lens that we definitely need to do something about and i want to make sure that maybe by march or somewhere between now and then, we have -- we know really clearly what are
the priorities and what our resources are to align them together, and then when some of them we wish we can do, unless we have a really good reason and methods of how to take care of them when we do have the resources. a quick answer, is 12 more than what we have been doing or is 12 projects increasing the number of landmark destinations we are able to do? >> can you hear me? great. twelve is slightly more than what has been done in the past. years have varied based on staffing assignments and ftes. i can say that at this point we do have dedicated staff for landmark designation within the department who don't -- who
primarily focus on landmark designations. we also will be utilizing other resources within current planning. there are staff who have background experience in landmark designation and other preservation planners who will be taking on a landmark designation as part of their professional development, benefiting the department as well as themselves, and they're able to balance that with their, as you note, other work or other current planning work, so it's part of their professional development plan. so we've been i think creative and finding fte in the staff to be able to work towards the goal of 12. >> commissioner so: thank you. i just don't want to overexhaust you guys. >> if i can add one thing very quickly. staff generally really enjoys doing these, so i think many of
them see it as a fun thing, an alternative to maybe some other tasks. so hopefully they don't get exhausted but they do find it very rewarding. >> great, thank you. commissioner johns? >> commissioner johns: thank you. i don't want to open a pandora's box, a can of worms,, but i've been listening to various people talking about prioritizing things, and it does occur to me that we have never, i don't believe, listed the potential landmarks that are already in the pipeline in order of priority. we like to prioritize this one or that one, but it does seem to me that sometimes what becomes the priority is what was mentioned by perhaps a member of
the public or a commissioner recently. now, how many landmarks are lined up in the pipeline? you're on mute. >> how many are lined up in the pipeline? i guess -- are you asking how many may have substantially complete reports and we're working through procedure, or those that we need to begin to research and begin the document drafting? >> commissioner johns: let's just focus on the former now, the ones where a lot of work has been done and they're pretty much ready to go? >> just one second. let's see.
so there are six that staff have been actively working on, engaged with the owner, and we have documentation, whether that be a landmark report that we have drafted, national register nomination, et cetera. so those six are listed, they're the second category -- third category listed in the memo. so that would include -- >> commissioner johns: you don't have to go through them. >> okay. >> commissioner johns: but my point is that -- i think it might be useful for us to have in that category as well as the other category you mentioned, those that were not a lot of work has been done. let's have a list of the priority of those, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven,
eight, nine, ten. i think that might -- if we had something like that and we had some reasons for selecting this one as number one and this one as number 18, then that might provide a guide. otherwise, i get the uneasy feeling that our analysis of what should go first is maybe a little hazy sometimes. that's my -- a suggestion. >> may i make a quick comment? >> commissioner johns: of course. >> thank you. with regards to that, maybe i could suggest -- i think we -- we agree that we should prioritize them. i think what staff has been having trouble doing is making the priority. so we were considering kind of reaching out to the community groups that speak to different topical areas or themes, such as
lgbtq-associated sites, african american associated sites, architecture, some around the new deal, and working with the community to help define the priorities. so that is something that we are actually in conversation with some of the lgbtq strategy working group, there's a subset that is focused on preservation and land use. and so we started that conversation with them to, number one, make sure we have the right sites on our work program, and then also public prioritize what we should move through, recognizing that we may only get to a handful each year. so if that would help, that's something that we're interested in doing. we haven't fully worked with all the communities yet. but that's something that we wanted to work through and bring back to the commission as a list of priorities. >> commissioner johns: well, i think that could be very
helpful, but the public's perception, while very, very important, is only one piece of the whole equation, as i see it. the staff certainly should have some insight on what, from its point of view, it sees as the big priorities, and finally i think that the commissioners definitely have a role in all of this in deciding what should be the priority. and i think if we get everybody involved, then we will probably come out with a pretty good result. >> thank you, commissioner johns. i do have several comments. i just wanted to make sure that all the commissioners have the opportunity to speak. i think that commissioner foley
is needing to depart, so thank you for letting us know. i do want to kind of go down my list. understanding that we have many, many legislative changes happening at the state level that may impact some of our eligible listed or non-listed but eligible properties and districts, understanding that, i think that we need to be very aware of where that legislation -- and we are aware. we've been following it now for several years. but there will be new legislation come january, and it's potential that that new legislation will only protect properties that are actually listed, and understanding that, i think it may help us focus on getting the properties that we need listed, either individual
properties or districts, listed asap. and so understanding where and so the minimal amount of effort to get that done is going to be very important. i think the community sponsored designations have been a priority for us because we want to encourage our community associations to take this and do the heavy lifting for us, and so getting those community sponsored designations processed asap and not spending -- i think when we had this a few years ago, we averaged 150 hours, i believe, of designation. so somehow spending 75 hours to process a community sponsored one, i think we need to figure
we should get those so they're not sitting on our desks. we need to get them and move them along. in your first memo, you outlined a cadence for our reviewing the various programs. we do have a lot of programs going on. and because of all the various programs, the cultural heritage, the city-wide survey, the context statement, you know, there's a lot of stuff going on. article 10 and 11 are adding properties and districts to article 10 or 11, seem to become the least priority because we do them as we can get to them. and as i said with this pending legislation, we may have to really re-think that. so on the cadence of the review
for the designation program, in your memo you said yearly. i'm glad we're going to get another update in march, so that's not going to be quite a year. i think we can kind of think about that cadence, so [indiscernible] seems to be a long time, but if in march we identify 12 properties that our staff is going to take on in the coming year, 12 is more than we have been doing, is my understanding, if we can identify those 12 properties and prioritize them, maybe we can have quarterly updates on those 12. and then whatever other community sponsored ones or board sponsored initiations that come along. i know that the mother's building -- i don't want to be flippant, but i'm actually tired of talking about it because
we've talked about every time we've reviewed in the last eight years i've been there. i want to get that behind us. i know the golden gate library is a new one, but that is one, the ball was dropped when the other six or five or seven carnegie libraries were landmarked. so that's another very important -- both those projects require interactions with other departments. so we really need to make sure that that happens, and diane and i are very willing to help participate and move that along. i think with our context statements, african american context, lgbtq+, and then of course our city-wide survey. so we're going to have a longer list and it's going to be, you know, 10 years' worth of work. so come march, hopefully we'll have a better picture, but i would like to see more than a
yearly annual review, so maybe in march if we identify what we're going to be working on, then we just focus on those designations and the notion is, let's get them done and behind us. our previous reporting, which i appreciate the staff letting us know how much effort goes in to creating those reports, the one piece of information that i found the most useful was the graphic progress diagram for each. just gives us a snapshot of where we are in the process. so at least on the 12 that we identify or the ones that are in process, if we can have that as a minimum for the reporting, i think that that's just a really helpful tool. and i think that covers pretty much all of what i meant to say. but we do appreciate all your effort. we know that we keep adding and
adding more and more requests with fewer and fewer budgets to accomplish them. so thank you. is there any -- so i see commissioner so, do you want to ask your question for the commission area benefit? -- commission's benefit? >> commissioner so: sure. i sent a private message to you, but i think we could make it -- if you don't mind if you would enlighten me a little bit? >> would you like to ask your question? >> commissioner so: i'd like to ask, if you don't mind, make a reference to what legislation you are referring to that is about to really drastically going to impact the -- >> yes, sure, sure. there are several -- marcel, you can add on if i forget them. but 330, which is already in law. there's another one, sb-25 or
something like that. i i believe those are actually in their laws now. there was sb-50, which didn't survive. there was the predecessor to sb-50. and then i think whatever incarnation that will take coming up in january, it'll come out again at the state level. i know just this past december, whichever version of that particular legislation, i think it was skinner and wiener were the sponsors of those, that was, i believe, passed but didn't quite make it into the legislative closure, so it wasn't actually enacted. but these are all in the context of building more housing around, you know, high density areas like transit corridors and whatnot, and working within that legislation, we've been very
involved, but working within that legislation to, as of right, approve these projects. and hidden in some of that there was language that said the properties need to be listed, and all historic properties are protected if they're eligible, and so that's where the challenge is going to be before us if we don't -- you know, with our city-wide survey, we can at least identify our districts and our contributors, and then get that listed and that will provide some level of protection. so that's what we just need to pay attention to. do you want to add on to that? okay. anything else, commissioners? i just want to thank staff for all the hard work they're doing on this as well as all the other programs.
>> my name is colleen chan, and i'm running for district 1 supervisor. that's including the richmond neighborhood and golden gate park. i was a a first generation immigrant. i was horn in honeg kong and - born in hong kong and i came here when i was 13 years old. san francisco has been a great home for me and my family. today, my partner, a firefighter, we are able to afford our home in the richmond, raising our child, a second greater, avenue lafayette elementary.
i've spent the last five years in my life working in city government the, starting out at a legislative aide on the san francisco board of supervisors. also advocating for more than $500 million grants and funding to improve our park system at rec and park. last, but not least, but also at the city college of san francisco, champion free city college that is a higher education program froee for al san franciscans. i'm proud of the things that i have accomplished, but also, at the same time i have seen the income divide significantly increase in san francisco, especially during this pandemic, it has disproportionately hurt something the working people in our communities. it's the reason why i'm running, that i want to bring my skills and experience to the table to help close that income divide gap and making sure that all working people can stay
housed, stay healthy and safe in our beloved city. thank you. >> hi. i'm sherman dasilva. we have problems that we face daily when we walk out or door to shop, work, and enjoy the precious neighborhood we call home. on homelessness, it means no camping or sleeping on streets. instead, we will use city-owned garages to provide a safe, clean, and private space where we can offer mental health and he diction offices. on crime and safety, we'll increase beat officers to deter theft and vandalism, but we will not defund, reduce or reappropriate the number of sworn officers. on pedestrian safety, we will install traffic lights on all
major corridors. for accessibility, we'll have a neighborhood department to serve you. for infrastructure, we're going to set aside money every year to replace sidewalks, roads, and public buildings. on police accountability, we'll increase transparency and randomly review officer actions. we want to be independent. it means we will not accept money from unions, corporations, or special interests. i've seen the decline of our neighborhood happening over time. refocusing these priorities will make our neighborhood cleaner, safer, and a more enjoyable place to work and live. i'm sherman da silva, and i'm looking forward to being your next richmond district supervisor. >> i'm a small business owner,
with my wife, we operate a small business on gary boulevard, and we have been serving the community over a decade. i'm running because i'm deeply troubled by the current state of our district. we now have more homenessen campmented, closed businesses, and increased crime. the richmond district has been neglected by city hall for too long. it's time for new city leadership at city hall. it's time for a supervisor who will put the richmond first. i'm the only candidate with extensive civil rights experience needed to effectively represent the richmond district. first, the richmond and san francisco more broadly must build more affordable housing. second, i will fight to expand healthy san francisco so that uninsured middle class residents will receive health care coverage. additionally, i am the only major candidate in this race to
oppose any tax increases swoosh the covid-19 -- during the covid-19 pandemic. we should not kick people when we're down. let's first look at our current spending and fight government waste before we increase teaks. we net better environmentally friendly options to help getting citizens to and from the richmond. that's why i'm for bringing b.a.r.t. to the richmond. lastly, our current homeless policies have been ineffective. i support caring for our homeless without turning our neighborhoods and our parks into homeless encampments. i believe my policies will help all residents and help put the richmond first. >> hi. my name is marlhausen, and i'm running for supervisor because
for too long, politicians have allowed the problems in our neighborhood to worsen without taking action. we can't afford four more years of this. the devastating effect of the covid-19 pandemic has increased the need for new leadership at the board of supervisors. to make a significant impact on homelessness, we have to recognize the different needs of our unhoused population. there is no single simple solution. we must prevent evictions by stabilizing tenants. we have to meet the immediate needs of our unhoused population by acquiring more safe sleeping places, shelters, and safe spaces. i have over 30 years experience
in government, business, and community advocacy. two years ago, my sister and i opened our family business on balboa street, and now, like so many other small businesses, on you future is uncertain -- our future is uncertain. many owners are stalled or defeated but our bureaucracy before they even had a chance to begin. i will support policies and legislation that make it easier to run a neighborhood business in san francisco. finally, we need to make our streets more friendly or residents and families. ill owe prioritizes more street cleanings in our business corridors. we must bring our neighborhood together to ensure that none of us is left behind in our recovery.
>> hi. my name is veronica cinzano. for far too long, our government has been out of touch with the problems of so many san franciscans and struggling families. i'm a 30-year richmond district. i'm your neighbor to make sure you have a voice at city hall. you need someone who understands your struggles who represents, and not the same old politics. i'm a working mom, and a small business owner. i'm working for all of san francisco, not just the privileged few. i'm running to offer concrete solutions. we have a 2 billion shortfall. make no mistake, we cannot tax our way out of this pandemic. my priorities, economic recovery for all. with historic unemployment and a pandemic with no end in
sight, budget cuts cannot be made on the bams working family he ands -- backs of the working families and middle class. resilience, identify additional sources of revenue to fund city projects and reevaluate government spending carefully. calibrate budget cuts without hurting those who are already feeling the brund of income inequality before the pandemic. as a community taxpayer advocate, if you're tired of politics as usual, then i'm your candidate. vote for veronica. i'm not backed by any political machine or special interests. whether you're a moderate, progressive, republican or
walton. mr. carroll, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes, i do, mr. president. thank you. the board of supervisors legislative chamber and committee room are closed. this is taken pursuant to all local orders, resolutions, and directives. public comment will be available for each item on this agenda. both cable channel 26 and sfgovtv.org are streaming a public call-in number at this time. your opportunity to speak and provide comments during the public comment period are available by phone by calling 415-655-0001. once prompted, enter the meeting i.d. for today's meeting. today's meeting i.d. is
146-044-5940. then press the pound symbol twice to be connected to the meeting. once connected, you'll hear the meeting discussions but be muted and in listening mode only. when you hear your item, dial star, three to enter the speaker line. please wait until the system indicates you've been unmuted and then begin your comments. best practices are to speak from a quiet location, speak slowly and clearly, and turn down your television or electronic device. alternatively, you may submit your public comments in either of the following ways. you may e-mail me. my name is john carroll, and i am clerk of the public safety and neighborhood services committee. my e-mail is
email@example.com. if you send an e-mail, it will be included in the legislative file as part of the matter. you may alternatively, submit your comments by united states postal service. finally, items acted upon today will appear on the board of supervisors agenda on november 3, 2020, unless otherwise stated. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you, mr. clerk. please call your first item. >> clerk: item 1 is a hearing to consider that the transfer of a type-48 on sale general public comments liquor license to electrocelt promotions ink,
doing business as swig at 553-561 geary street will serve the public convenience or necessarily of the city and county of san francisco. mr. chair? >> supervisor mandelman: do we have our representative from the a.l.u. here? >> clerk: i believe he's on the line. >> good morning, supervisors. officer maki here, representing a.l.u. i have a report for swig. they have applied for a type-48 and type-47 license, and if approved, this would allow them to sell on-line liquor sales
and spirits. they are located in zone 4, considered a high crime area. central station has no opposition to this license, and a.l.u. approves with the following recommended conditions. sales of liquor shall be permitted between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. each day of the week. petitioners shall actively monitor the area to prevent the loitering of any persons on the property adjacent to the licensed premised as depicted on the a.b.c. 253 form, and the consumption of alcohol off the premises are prohibited. these are the conditions signed by the applicant on october 10. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you. good morning, mr. sheehy. you are the applicant. >> good morning, supervisor. i'm glad that we have
supervisor peskin here, too. >> supervisor mandelman: supervisor ronen is here, also. >> we have been operating at swig with our full operating liquor license with a full operating bar. the request is to expand our swig unit to the adjacent unit, called the olympic cafe. the olympic cafe has been in business over 30 years. we took over operations of the olympic cafe in 2019. at that time, we added a beer and wine license, and we continued to operate, serving breakfast and lunch. we are now in the process of combining both businesses, where we will be able to offer breakfast, lunch, and dinner when the city opens back up to the many guests who come to us from the neighboring hotels, the neighboring residences. even theater events will be
happening, and most importantly, for the moscone convention center. there is a need for evening dinner service at this location as many restaurants no longer offer breakfast, lunch, and dinner service. we completed quite a bit of community outreach in 2019 when we applied for our beer and wine license. as part of this application, our community outreach was restricted to mailing and posters. we mailed all of our residents within a 1,000-foot radius. we meet with residents individually, and the result was that we upgraded some of our windows at the rear of the swig and the olympic cafe premises to ensure there's going to be zero opportunity for sound to emanate from our premises into the neighboring spaces. we've been in the location for 15 years and i was a member of
the tenderloin police advisory board until last year. we are very aware of our hot buttons in our neighborhood here. we've had no protests to the expansion, and we're hoping that you can approve this expansion today because it would serve the convenience for a drink after a great show in the theater district. >> supervisor mandelman: okay. i don't see any of my colleagues that have raised their hand, so let's open this up for public comment. >> clerk: mr. qiu, could you
please open up the link for public comment. if you wish to call in for public comment, follow the instructions that are streaming on your screen right now. that would be by calling 415-655-0001, then entering 146-044-5940, pressing pound twice, and then star, three to enter the line to speak. >> operator: we have one caller in the queue. >> supervisor mandelman: we ask that you state your first and last name clearly and that you speak slowly and clearly into the phone. in the interests of time, we encourage speakers to avoid repeating previous statements.
let let's hear from our first caller. >> my name is michael nolte, and i am a community organizer and also the director of a better district six. i did do a site visit on behalf of my organization to swig and i did talk with the organization sponsor, brian sheehy, and they plans for a type-48 license. and then, i did talk to my community partners as well as my organization and to follow up on what we wanted to do with this type-48, and we came up with a recommendation that the
alliance for district 6 supports better future bars. our organization was involved in the first bar that was on sixth street, and we collaborated on various issues in the past and current around improving transit lines, public safety, night life entertainment, permits on development plans -- permits as well as development plans. so the alliance for a better district six is in full support of swig's request for approval, their request by both a.b.c. and the san francisco board of supervisors. i'm speaking as a personal endorsement as well as a 45-year-old community organizer
and leader in affiliation of over 30 organizations and board of directors in san francisco. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you, mr. nolte. do we have any other callers? >> clerk: mr. qiu, could you connect us to the next caller, please? >> operator: mr. chair, that completes the queue. >> supervisor mandelman: great. public comment is now closed. i understand that supervisor haney is supporting this license transfer, so i think we can direct our clerk to find resolution that we approve and
that it meets public necessarily. >> clerk: on the motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: mr. chair, there are three ayes. >> supervisor mandelman: congratulations, mr. sheehy. mr. clerk, call the next item. >> clerk: item 2 is a hearing to consider that the trafr of a type-21 off-sale general beer, wine, and distilled spirits liquor license to suhal suhalla farhat, doing business as grab&eat, located at 3499 mission street, will serve the public convenience or necessarily of the city and
county of san francisco. mr. chair? >> supervisor mandelman: thank you, mr. clerk. officer mackey? >> all right. thank you. moving forward, you guys have the a.c.m. before for you for grab & eat. there are zero letters of support, zero letters of protest. they are located in plot 367, which is considered a low crime area. census tract 63, which is a high saturation area. a. a.l.u. recommends approval with the following conditions: monitoring the property so there are no loitering persons
on the adjacent property, and it should be noted that the applicant has agreed to the above listed conditions. >> supervisor mandelman: great. thank you, officer mackey. do we have the officer or representative here? >> clerk: mr. chair, i do not see that mr. farhat has connected to the call or anyone who has identified themselves as a representative of the applicant. >> supervisor mandelman: well, let's take some public comment. >> clerk: sounds good. mr. chair, operations is checking now to see if there are any callers in the queue. mr. qiu, please let us know if there are any callers ready. for those who have not done so already, please press star, three to enter the queue. for those who have done so
already, please wait until the system indicated you have been unmuted. if you have not already done so, you may call in by following the instructions streaming across your screen. calling 415-655-0001, and then meeting i.d. 146-044-5940. press pound twice, and star, three to enter the queue to speak. >> operator: mr. chair, there are no public commenters waiting to speak. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you. public comment is closed. i understand that supervisor ronen is supportive of the transfer of this license. supervisor ronen, if you're on, you're welcome to say anything, or i will go ahead and -- >> supervisor ronen: i'm supportive. thank you. >> supervisor mandelman: awesome.
thank you. so i will -- i think we can direct our clerk to find a resolution finding that this license transfer will serve public convenience and necessarily, and i will move that we forward that to the full board with a positive recommendation. mr. carroll, please call the roll. >> clerk: on that motion -- [roll call] [please stand by] .
area. the northern station has no opposition to this license and a.l.u. recommends approval with the following conditions. that the petitioner shall monitor the area in their control to prevent the loitering of persons as dpiblegted on the a5epicted on the a53 form. it should be noted that as of october 15, the applicant has agreed to and now signed the above recommended conditions. >> thank you, officer mackey. do we have the applicant here? >> i am here. thank you for having me. i will just give a quick overview of luke's local. we've been in business for about 10 years, a full-service grocery
sto store. we started making foods out of a kitchen and delivering to homes and offices with c.s.a. produce and local foods and breads and coffee back in the day. that expanded in 2016 to a brick-and-mortar grocery store in cole valley. we took over a bodega's that was there for about 30 years. we're excited to get our hands into the retail space. this has been a great way to integrate with the community. in the early days of doing work behind the scenes and connecting the community with good-quality food. we didn't have the opportunity to have that good connection on one picture on a website that people would order from. to us, that is an important piece. the cole valley space has become
a great hub of that community. we've been very fortunate to find a space on union street and want to offer that same kind of anchor tenant to that neighborhood. we're applying for a type-20 beer and wine license to go along with every other aspect that we consider full grocery. i did sign off on the conditions. i'm happy to sign off on that. they're reasonable and something we would want to pursue anyway. >> chair: vice chair stephanie, if you would like to make any remarks. >> i would like to. thank you for the opportunity. first, i would like to thank officer mackey for his work and
thank luke for all the work he's put into finally bringing a neighborhood health professional serving grocery store at this location. we've been trying to get luke's into cal hollow for over two years now. when i first met luke, i was so impressed, and i can't tell you how lucky we are to welcome him to our neighborhood. it is an incredible grocery store founded on equity and community service. luke's local sources source their inventory from local providers, including san francisco-based artisan s artis also source their produce from the same farms that we regularly see at our farmers' markets. it's great to be eight months
into the pandemic and celebrate the opening of a new small business. we need businesses like luke's local to lead the recovery and they will provide a full-service grocery to an area that one have one, draw foot traffic to the union street corridor, and provide many jobs. they have nearly 20 jobs on their website for their new cal hollow location alone. i would say luke's will serve the community. this is an exciting day, one step closer to serving this community. i can't wait until the doors are open. this is going to be great. >> thank you so much for saying that on my behalf too and on all that you've done.
>> thanks, luke. let's open this up for public comment. >> clerk: for those who have already connected to our meetings by phone, press star followed by 3 to be added to the queue. for those already on hold in the queue, please continue to wait until you begin. you will hear a prompt. for those watching our meeting on cable channel 26 or through the website. if you want to call in, follow the instructions on your screen, by dialling 415-655-0001, when pre-empted entering the meeting i.d. of 146 044 5940 and then by pushing the pound symbol twice, you will connect to the queue. mr. coo, could you connect us to
our first caller if there is one there. >> mr. chair, there are no callers in the queue. >> chair: public comment is now closed. i think we can direct our committee clerk to prepare a resolution that [indiscernibl [indiscernible] -- recommendations. >> yes. so moved, since you just said it all. [ roll call ]. >> chair: the motion is passed. congratulations. >> clerk: hearing to consider that the transfer of a type-48 on-sale
general public premises liquor license to sool partners, llc, doing business as sool bar as part of hotel 32one, located at 321-323 grant avenue (district 3), will serve the public convenience or necessity of the city and county of san francisco. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this hearing should call the public comment number. that number is still 415-655-0001, enter the meeting i.d. for today's meeting of 146 044 5940. press the pound symbol twice to connect to the meeting and then press star to enter the queue to speak. a system prompt will indicate that you have raised your hand. wait until you are prompted that you are unmuted. that will be your opportunity to speak. >> last but not least we have sool at 32. they have applied for a license to sell-off sales. they are located in plot 158,
which is considered a high-crime area. they are in census track 117 which is a high saturation area. a.l.u. approves with the following conditions. no noise audible near any residence. petitions shall monitor the area under their control to prevent the loitering of persons on any properties adjacent to their property. and the sale of alcohol and beverages for consumption off the premises is prohibited and the above list of conditions have been signed by the applicant. >> chair: do we have the applicant here? >> this is the representative of hotel 321. we have the applicant here on the line to give a brief introduction to hotel 321 and the proposed sool bar. her name is sandy chung, and
i'll let her go ahead and speak to you. >> good morning, supervisors. i'll be very quick. if approved, this will allow the hotel 32one, the attached business, to provide food and beverage business. it will provide staff pride and enhance tourism for the city. we hope you will approve this process. >> chair: thanks. let's go to public comment. >> clerk: operations is checking to see if we have any callers in the queue. please press star followed by 3 if you wish to be added to the queue. you will hear a prompt that will inform you that your line is unmuted. if you are watching on cable tv,
call in following the instructions on your screen, calling 415-655-0001, then by entering the meeting i.d for today's meeting of 146 044 5940. you will be connected. press the pound symbol twice and then press star followed by 3 to enter the queue to speak. mr. coo, could you let us know if we have any callers for agenda item 4. >> mr. chair, there are no callers in the queue. >> chair: public comment is now closed. i understand that supervisor peskin is supportive of this license transfer. >> i have no objections, mr. chairman. >> chair: no objections. given that, i think that we can direct our clerk to prepare a resolution finding that this transfer will serve public convenience and necessity.
i will move that we offer that. [ roll call ] >> clerk: mr. chair, there are three ayes. >> chair: mr. clerk, will you call the next item. >> thank you, supervisors. >> chair: congratulations. you're muted, mr. clerk. >> clerk: ordinance amending the police code to regulate third-party food delivery services ("delivery services") by 1) capping fees charged to restaurants at 15% of an order total
plus a 3% point-of-sale processing charge; 2) prohibiting delivery services from restricting restaurant pricing; 3) prohibiting delivery services from charging restaurants for telephone calls to the delivery service not resulting in any food or beverage order; 4) prohibiting delivery services from providing services to any restaurant without the restaurant's express written agreement to receive such services; 5) requiring third-party food delivery services to terminate a service contract within 72 hours of receiving a notice requesting termination from a restaurant; 6) requiring retention of and city access to records substantiating compliance with these restrictions; 7) authorizing the imposition of penalties for violations; and 8) authorizing the office of economic and workforce development to implement and enforce this ordinance. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this ordinance should call the public comment number now. that number is 415-655-0001,
enter the meeting i.d. of 146 044 5940, press the pound symbol twice to connect to the meeting, and then press the star key followed by the number 3 to enter the queue to speak. a system prompt will indicate that you have raised your hand. please wait until it's indicated you have been unmuted. that will be your cue to begin your comments. >> thank you, chair, for hearing this legislation yet again. thank you for signing on as co-sponsors. i want to thank mayor breed for the executive orders she has issued during the pandemic. i think it's time for the board to take over from here and move beyond the emergency order part of this piece of public
legislation and come in with the board's responsibility to create what i would call a semi-permanent piece of legislation. over the past two weeks since this was heard in committee, and i want to thank my staff lee hepner, my office and i personally have been engaged with all of the parties to discuss the best path forward, from lori thomas at the golden gate restaurant association to many of the different third party providers and their representatives. our key imperative remains unchanged as set forth in the mayor's executive order and this legislation which is at a time when these food delivery platfo platforms have really done quite well during the pandemic. san francisco's restaurants are
struggling to survive and have the flexibility to do so. that means capping food delivery fees for restaurants at 15%. it means allowing restaurants to set their own menu prices on food delivery platforms, which is really a common sense practice, which many contracts in this industry have restricted. it also means giving restaurants the right or flexibility to promptly remove themselves from these platforms with a modicum of notice, in this case 72 hours. i mean, these are basic und underlying principles that i believe all of the parties have now agreed to. and it means prohibiting food delivery apps from performing deliveries from restaurants which never signed up for the
service at all, which i call slamming, which was recently the practice of new state law. as i said earlier, i really want to thank all of the stakeholders, particularly the golden gate restaurant association and dozens of independent restauranteurs who have reached out to my office in support of this and explained all of the intricacies of this business model across different apps to me. i also really want to thank the almost 700 individuals who have signed on to achange.org petition in support of this legislation. i do have a few non-substantive amendments to make today which reflect our latest conversations with the industry and advocates. essentially, we've come to a place, i don't want to say of agreement, but at least a place
where we will stick with the mayor's emergency order 15% cap, take out the additional 20% point of sale fee, and instead of sunsetting in two years the changes that i'm proposing today would sunset 60 days following a chief health officer's order which allows for 100% indoor dining in san francisco. as we all know, we are thankfully well on our way there. these amendments are reflected in the deleted subsection (c) on page 3 of the legislation and section 5312 on page 10 of the legislation. based on the revised timeline, i'm also removing the language that describes the process for administrative revisions to this policy, because i don't think
that will occur before the revised sunset date. obviously we can always come back in the future and revisit that. that deletion is reflected in section 5308 in section 8. i'm happy to walk you through those changes. you are in receipt of them in yellow highlight. thank you to my staff lee hepner who has seen this through to this point. with that, mr. chair, i turn it back to you. >> chair: thank you. if my colleagues do not have any questions or comments, we will open this up to public comment. >> clerk: thank you, mr. chair. operations is checking to see if we have any callers in the queue. mr. coo, please let us know if we have any callers. if you are already on the line, please press star 3 to be added to the queue. you will hear a prompt informing
you that your line is unmuted. for those watching this on cable tv or online, if you wish to speak on this item, call in now by following the instructions displayed on your screen, which is by dialling 415-655-0001. then when prompted, enter the meeting i.d. of 146 044 5940. afterward you'll press the pound symbol twice, then press star followed by 3 to enter the queue to speak. mr. coo, do we have any callers? >> clerk: yes, i have two callers in the queue. >> chair: great. and i will remind folks that they have two minutes. we ask that you say your first and your last name clearly and speak directly into the phone. if you prepared a written statement, you are invited to send that to our clerk for inclusion in the file. we ask callers to avoid
repetition of statements. let's hear from the first caller. >> good morning, i'm the director of public policy and partnership at the golden gate restaurant association. i'm calling on behalf of the community we represent. thank you for hearing this item and listen to the restaurant community association that supports san francisco's small businesses. we want to thank supervisor peskin for helping all stakeholders on this ordinance and helps the industry survive until we get back to 100% indoor dining. we want to get back to helping all restaurants thrive and survive in san francisco. thank you. >> chair: thank you. next caller. >> my name is michael nolte.
i'm the coordinate of the north market business association. this association is in full support of this legislation. there are many small mom-and-pop restaurants in the north market area. a lot of them are being a hard time thriving because of covid. we need as many legislations that can help keep the neighborhood businesses open. so we hear about this all the time from our members, that we need to have more supportive resolutions that could keep our businesses open. also, i personally have had experience with the different amounts on pricing between a website and with -- actually at
the restaurant. so it becomes confusing for the customers. i think the thing is the customers need to be able to understand which amount do you p pay. there is confusion when a customer comes in and tries to look at the menu and there's one price and online there's another price. so i think this might clarify this on the customers' side. all right. thank you. >> chair: thank you. next caller. >> clerk: mr. chair, that completes the queue. >> chair: public comment on this item is now closed. if supervisor peskin doesn't have any closing comments, i will move to adopt the
amendments that have been outlined for us today. >> clerk: on the motion offered by the chair to accept the amendments offered by supervisor peskin. [ roll call ] >> clerk: on the motion that this be offered with positive recommendations. [ roll call ] >> clerk: mr. chair, there are three ayes. >> chair: that passes and thank you for your work on this
legislation. mr. clerk, please call the next item. >> clerk: item 6. hearing on the public health response to covid-19 in the latinx community; resource allocation; testing, tracking, and treatment; performance standards; current and future strategies; and requesting the department of public health to report. members of the public comment who wish to provide public comment on this number should call the number, which is 415-655-0001. enter the meeting i.d. which is 146 044 5940. press the pound symbol twice and then press star 3 to enter the queue to speak. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. that will be your opportunity to begin your comments. >> chair: supervisor ronen, this is your hearing. >> thank you so much, chair, for holding this hearing or scheduling it. i want to thank d.p.h. for being
here. i wanted to set the tone or the reason for the hearing. in late april about a month after the shelter-in-place order was issued by mayor breed, there was a study begun to study covid infection rates in the mission. we had little information about where the virus was concentrated and which communities were hit. unfortunately this population had contracted the virus disproportionately to their numbers in the city. the city's response should have been swift to contain the virus and to mitigating the physical and emotional toll that covid has inflicted on this community. today, nearly seven months after the study, the situation has not
improved in significant ways in the latinx community. while the latinx community makes up 15% of the population of san francisco, it has consistently made up over 50% of the people testing positive for covid in this city. the latinx community deserves to know that d.p.h. has been doing to respond with solutions to this disproportionate amount of positivity within the latinx community and have many questions about how they've been -- the department has been focused on this community and what they plan to do to address the stubborn inequities. with that, i believe we have a fellow from d.p.h. who is going to start us off and perhaps do a presentation, if i'm correct.
>> yes, that's correct. >> thank you so much. please begin. >> thank you. i'll wait for the slides to be shared. good morning, chair, vice chair, and member walton. thank you, supervisor hillary, for calling the meeting. my name is lisa la ford. i grew up in san francisco and i served san francisco communities for over 20 years as an employee of the health department. prior to covid-19, i worked in population [indiscernible] coordinating special projects for the department. since the start of the pandemic, i have served as a disaster worker in various roles. as of april, 100% of my time has
been dedicated to the covid command center and to lead the d.p.h. covid response focused on the latinx community in san francisco. it is my honor and a privilege to serve my community during this difficult time. i am sharing this presentation this morning with the deputy director of the department of heal health. as you can see in the slide, we're sharing national data compared to our local data here in san francisco. overall, we've done a good job with keeping infection rates down in san francisco. as you can see, there is a current trend of a significant decrease in new cases. san francisco has been
successful in responding to the covid-19 pandemic. we've had one of the lowest death rates in the united states and we have the highest testing rate in the bay area compared to other major cities. early on, the focus in the deputy of public health was really to respond to cases that we were finding in congregate living settings. there was a higher rate of transmission in that setting that significantly impacted the latinx communities. with increased availability of testing and greater reopening, we learned that covid-19 has disproportionately continued to impact the latinx community in san francisco and across the united states. as you shared with us the current data, 49.6% of covid-19 cases in san francisco are among the latinx community and very disheartening to see that 25% of the deaths in san francisco are
in the latinx community. currently, we are partnering with the latinx community to develop a covid-led covid-19 response strategy. the department of public health has been meeting on a regular basis with our community partners and we hope to complete this by september 2020. in this slide, we just wanted to kind of highlight that in san francisco we've seen the disparities impacting the latinx community. as you can see and you've shared before, although we're 15% of the population, 49 or almost 50% of the cases are in our community. this is in comparison to the bay area, for example. there are also 15% of the population and 60% of the cases.
this is not unique to san francisco or state-wide. as we also know state-wide, 61.6% of those cases are in the latinx community. so they're something that's going on in the whole state. we know that there are disparities and we suspect that we are seeing these disparities because people are living together in congregate settings and latinx folks are essential workers and so many folks have not been able to work from home. we know where you live and work can contribute to high transmission rates. this slide highlights what we've identified as drivers of the epidemic, what we're calling the three c's, crowded places, close
contact settings, and confined and closed spaces. this slide gives some examples of our efforts focused on serving the latinx community. i wanted to highlight that 36% of covid-19 spending is directed to serve latinx individuals. this is a d.p.h. effort. we're ensuring that our covid-19 response addresses linguistic and cultural needs of the community. we are serving spanish of speaking communities and undocumented individuals. we are focusing on testing for low-income individuals and famili
families in connection with our community partners, to make sure this is accessible and linguistically and culturally appropriate. we are also in partnership with the latino task force and the equity and parity coalition to make sure we're responding to the needs and what they're seeing on the ground. we've also provided staffing and testing for both days of carnival. this is an important event that was held in community, to provide access to information on health services. we know that currently [indiscernible] mental health needs, people shared with us that they're experiencing anxiety for many reasons and maybe also for the first time feeling depression. we felt it was really important to support this event and raise awareness around services that are offered by the department of
public health [indiscernible] making sure they were aware on how to access these services. in terms of our covid response, we have prioritized increasing our efforts to provide spanish-speaking contact tracing so that we can respond to those high rates that you mentioned of positivity in the community. >> quick question. after your presentation, i'll have a lot of questions about testing. but specifically when you say 36% of covid-19 spending went directly to serve latinx individuals. can you be more specific? >> yes, 36% -- my understanding is that 36% of the current fiscal year 2020-21 budget. i will defer to dr. laguina baba
if she can expand on that. >> sure. and i think greg ragnar is on the phone and can talk to that as well. when you look at the budget and how much of it is allocated to respond to the latino community, when you went line by line item, it amounted to about 36%. greg, did you want to weigh in? >> greg wagner, chief operating officer of d.p.h. we did an estimate as the doctor said, as we were kind of looking at this issue as we went through the major categories of the d.p.h. budget -- sorry. >> greg, i'm so sorry. i'm home schooling. >> i hear you. i've got some of that going on too. >> i'm like, please, can someone else deal with this. i missed what you said.
could you repeat what you just said. i apologize. >> no worries. i got that in my house too. we went through the d.p.h. budget where we went through categories of spending, major categories of your $204.6 million allocation to d.p.h., so p.p.e., testing, i.n.q. hotels, case investigation, and contact tracing. we tried to estimate what the various populations are that are using those services or benefitting from those services. and we tried to come up with an estimate of how much of that effort is directed at serving individuals in the latinx population. an example of that would be we take the contact tracing budget and look at what proportion of the population that's receiving contact tracing services [indiscernible] and then we use
that to estimate a portion of the budget that is allocated. then obviously this will change. this is kind of what we did as we went into the year. this will change as we modify our strategies. i think that's part of the conversation that you'll be getting into. for example, as we shift our testing strategy, the estimated -- and we try to increase the level of testing in the latinx population, that will change that allocation, but this was our starting point estimate based on the data. >> okay. because when the mayor sent out a press release saying that $28 million was being directed to the latinx community to community to address covid, i had requested -- it was strange to me because it was after the budget process. we hadn't done that during the
budget process. so i was curious where that money was going and where it was coming from. i had requested several times a line-by-line accounting for where is that money coming from and where is it going and still have yet to receive it. i've asked a number of times. hearing from the community, the latino task force and many of the non-profits that are directly serving the latino community, they are overwhelmed, have not received additional funds for housing stipends, testing, food, et cetera, et cetera. so it just -- there's these claims out there, but they don't seem to be matching the reality of what's happening on the ground. >> yeah, sure, supervisor. and i think there's a lot of
pieces in this. so there is this number which is an estimate of all of our services, and that includes staff that is working on it, it includes purchasing of p.p.e. but there's another i think more targeted conversation, which is resources directly to our community partners on the ground. that is a lot of work that we're doing through the process that was described by my colleague. that is related to the $28.5 million or $28.6 million, i forget the exact amount. where we are trying to take pieces from within this larger city-wide covid budget and also piecing together funds from elsewhere on top of that and get those directly into the hands of
these organizations that are doing the work on the ground. so that is kind of a subset of this larger covid budget, but one of the areas that we've been really kind of actively working on and focusing on for the last several months. >> i'm happy to go on and ask more questions, but at least how it feels -- i represent a district with the highest number of latino residents. and i work with the non-profits on the ground serving the latino community. it's felt like it's really the community taking care of its own and constantly begging for help and resources. in the beginning there was very little testing happening in the
latino community outside of what ucsf put together. finally there's 250 tests happening a week in the heart of the mission district at the latino hub. but i just -- there's these big proclamations made serving individuals. like, $28 million is going to the latino community. but when i ask for the details it's very vague and it sure doesn't feel like that amount of attention is being given to this community on the ground at all. that's what i'm hearing from community members who are volunteers spending all of their time at the hub. they created the hub. they're staffing the hub. they advocated for the hub.
their work is, simply stated, extraordinary. but it hasn't felt like d.p.h. has supported their heroic efforts nearly enough. i will stop there because i know you want to get through the rest of your presentation. but when there's these big claims, i've asked for details and have yet to receive them i will put that request officially on record again that $28 million that was allocated to the latino community by the mayor, if i can get an accounting of where that money came from and where that is going, i'm asking for the third or fourth time. it's been months since that press release went out. if i could get that information. and perhaps that's not your
responsibility. i spoke to people directly in the mayor's office asking for that. my legislative aide followed up. we have yet to see that. that would be helpful. if someone can communicate that up the line, that would be great. i'll be reaching out to the mayor's office again. it's been months and we have yet to see the details. when i hear 36% of d.p.h. spending is on the latinx community, it certainly does not feel that way in the community. again, i would like to see -- if it's an estimate, i would like to see all the factors that are considered in that 36% that you're estimating to feel -- to see why it doesn't compute in the neighborhoods, that that percentage of funding is being spent on this community. thank you. you can move on.
>> okay. great. hopefully this slide will answer some of the questions. it's a broad, general slide -- >> here we go, yeah. >> in this slide we are highlighting our current investments and our strategy in ponce to the latinx community needs. in late september the city announced over $28 million in expanded testing to support san francisco's latinx community and the funding is going to provide support for testing, tracing, behavioral health, housing subsidies, food access and support. as well as support -- >> the latino hub has not received the money and they are doing the vast majority of the
work in the latino community. so when are they going to get the money they were promised? >> i will defer to malina or greg on that one. >> supervisor, on the -- so there's the category on the top $3 million, that is split between mission, excelsior, and bay view. the vehicle of funding that is an existing office of economic and workforce development, r.s.p., contract. the source of funding coming for that is partially from the board of supervisors. and that's about $1.15 million. so we're grateful for that. the balance being d.p.h. funds. the oewd contract folks are in
the process of awarding that contract. they're going through the city requirements, city administrative requirements to get that funding out the door, but it is a stream lined process. since that's not within d.p.h., i don't know exactly what the timeline on it is, but i understand that it is very close to the contract in order to get those dollars out the door. >> all i know is that they are running a full-time, massive operation at the hub and i -- they needed this money yesterday. we've done our normal processes understanding that this is a pandemic and a crisis. i can't speak for the excelsior
and the bay view. supervisor walton, maybe he can speak for the bay view, but there's no other operation in town doing what the hub is doing in the mission. so i don't know what there is to decide there. >> supervisor, we certainly feel the urgency and it can't be fast enough, on all of these between the department of public health and o.e.w., we've been focusing on trying to get this money out the door in the fastest way possible and it's a little bit of a different strategy on each one. we are accessing emergency provisions. we are accessing the areas where we have existing contracts so that we don't have to start that lengthy process and it's not fast enough for any of us, including me, including the community.
but we are pushing very, very hard to try to get this money out the door as fast as we can. i understand that that's not fast enough. >> okay. and i didn't realize that that money was being put out through oewd, so i will be following up with director torez. they just can't wait any longer. they're operating on pure passion at this point and love for their community and they have been for months on end, but they need resources. they just need the resources. so anything you can do can to -- can do to speed up that process, we can't wait any longer.
>> understood. >> chair: supervisor walton is in the queue. >> thank you so much, chair. i want to thank the supervisor for all of her statements. if it wasn't for the latino task force and the work they started doing 100% on their own, there would not have been any testing prioritized for our latino community, which spread to the black community. in fact, ucsf had to step up and take care of the public. it's disheartening to see d.p.h. drag their feet when they're responsible for the public health of everyone here in this city. to supervisor ronan's point, now we are working hard and there's going to be hubs in bay view. i'm not sure what the work of excelsior is, but the motto of the latino task force and what's happening at the hub and in the
mission is what we're duplicating in bay view right now. we brought so many issues of concern to the department of public health. we know the highest rates of the folks contracting the virus are in the latino community and in district 10. we have an entire monolingual group that have not been connected to the services that they need. not only that, d.p.h. has been dragging their feet and not unleashing the resources. we have only asked for a measly $240,000 to fund a year's worth of testing. this billion-dollar department says they don't have $240,000 for testing in our communities. so this is just -- this is ridiculous. i don't understand --
mr. wagner, i don't get the answers to the questions that are being asked. if there is money dedicated, it should have been out in the community right away. this is an emergency. we've had emergency orders. some of the bureaucratic games being played with the resources to the communities that are doing the work without the support from the various city resources that are supposed to take care of the work is a problem. we have emergency orders and we need to get resources to communities like yesterday and that hasn't happened. but yet the sheer will of the people and the work of the community is why -- there are things getting done to address the pandemic. but it's not coming from the department that is supposed to be taking care of our community and the health of our community. it makes no sense to me.
>> okay. i wasn't sure if someone was going to comment on that. the next slide -- the remainder of the presentation will be -- >> i'm sorry, can i just ask one more question about this slide. is the $7.3 million, if i'm facing the screen on the left of the slide, the sum of the three $1.5, $1.25, and $1.15 million on the right side of the screen? >> yes, supervisor, that's correct. >> but not all of the money on the right side of the screen is going to serve directly the latino community. correct? i mean, the central service hub, for example, in all three neighborhoods, while they -- in the mission they're primarily
serving the latino community, but not exclusively, i would imagine that the population in the bay view and the excelsior, while there is a large portion of the latinos in those neighborhoods, that they're still not exclusively serving those communities. i'm just wondering if that's a fair estimate. >> others who are -- these are the funds who are allocated -- these are those who are clutched to these facilities. we will defer to you on that. >> these funds are to go to the latino community directly. for the hubs we would need [indiscernible] and how their process is created.
but it is meant to go to, i believe the latino community. we created that in excelsior and in bay view because there is an overrepresentation in all of these communities of latinos testing positive and wanting to make sure there is a way to meet the needs of those individuals as positive. the community care and contact tracing and community retaliate are all meant to go to community organizations. >> first of all , i want to mak clear i'm not trying to pit communities against each other because every community deserves the utmost of resources to fight this horrible pandemic. in a way this hearing is conducted to focus in on one of
the communities that is hardest hit by this epidemic, but that's why i want to make sure these are fair representations. i'm thrilled that the bay view and excelsior are getting an essential service hub. they should absolutely be getting that. but then to say that $2 million is focused on the latino community, i don't think that's fair. i think there are many communities in those neighborhoo neighborhoods, just like in the missions, it is mainly the latinos benefitting, but not exclusively. to say that d.p.h. is investing this money in the latinx community, i think that's not accura
accurate. >> maybe we need to think about the language that we're using. this set of d.p.h. programs on the right, the four categories, came directly from the conversations with the help group. these are the community asks that we're funding. so that was the process for it. so we are really trying to align the dollars with exactly what the requests for the community with. but i understand your point that there is a larger system. >> okay. thank you. >> so malina will now do the remainder of the presentation. >> you know what, sorry, for my benefit. i am not as steeped in this as supervisor ronan, who has been
trying to unlock this money. how long has that $3 million been trying to work its way out of the city to the hub? >> that's a fair question. i'm trying to kind of think back into memory, but i would guess that it is -- i don't want to hold myself to it. i would have to look back how we were talking about this. six weeks since we were working on this process. >> is it $3 million for essential services that the decision was made six weeks ago? >> i believe so. i know these conversations have been going on longer than that, trying to pin down when we started the process of actually allocating these funds through the contract.
but i know there have been conversations about this since before that time. >> i mean, if someone could run and grab whoever is overseeing this process and maybe before the end of this hearing and get us an indication of where it is. it seems like our volunteers are trying to pull it together and hold it down and wait for the cavalry to arrive. >> we can get this off line about the finalization of that contract and get it to you.
>> let's move on to the next slide. >> can we go back to that slide? if mayor breed invested $28.5 million in supporting the city's latinx community, why can't you itemize, like you did on the right side, where the $28.5 million is going. >> of that, 7.3 is from d.p.h. we would have a larger question of where the rest is coming from. >> so it's really not $7.3 million to supervisor ronan's
point because all of this is not going to the latino community. >> supervisor, we can show the rest of the breakdown and what categories these are. this is all driven by the ask from the latino community. we'll get you the breakdown of the other pieces, but it's rental support, which is through h.s.a., i believe, its food programs, food support through h.s.a. there are children and families program through dcyf. i don't know that we have that in this presentation itemized, but we can certainly do that. we can certainly show you the rest of the pieces of that 28.5. >> supervisor walton, i've been asking for that information since the press release came out
and have yet to receive it [indiscernible] -- >> [all talking at once] -- >> i appreciate that that's forthcoming because it's definitely something we should have had already. i would just love to know also what is in the plan to take care of these unhoused families that we've identified to h.s.h., to d.p.h. that are living in vehicles, that have no supportive services. i would love to see what amount of resources is going there and what the plan is for services there as well. i hope that's part of what we're going to see. >> were there any other questions or should we -- okay. we can move on. so i wanted to talk a little bit
about our continuum of care and what that entails and set the framework. supervisor ronan, as you pointed out, the social determinants of health are laying bare why certain communities are suffering from covid compared to others. underlying this is just the general health and health inequities. how we looked at this is really through the lens of individuals living in the community with their family, how do we reach them through prevention and education so they can prevent or hopefully never get covid and keep their family safe. as has been pointed out, there are many determinants that are in those communities. essential workers and congregate living situations, those people are not always able to take those actions to socially distance and shelter in place.
if somebody does develop symptoms or if they have an exposure or if they're being asked to perform an essential service and they require some screening, that turns out positive. the next thing we want to ensure is that they can get tested. hopefully they get tested and they're able to recover. some of that is they get enough symptoms that they have to go to the hospital. there's a couple of diversions here in terms of the continuum. testing, as you all have heard in the past, really a punch point for our resources. we have built up testing over time and have gotten to a better model which i'll talk about later. testing is only one part of the continuum. you can get tested, but if there's no resources there to do the results to do the case and contact tracing to make sure you
have quarantine and wrap-around services, that by itself is not going to make a difference. additionally with the hospitalization, the same thing, if someone is in for a couple of days and then gets discharged, do they have a place to go to. do they have the wrap-around supports needed. and then eventually we want to get the entire population to recovery that gets tested and tests positive. to both of these ends, we want to ensure that people have medical and healthcare access. that includes baseline medical care. we are in flu season. we want to make sure people have flu vaccines so they are not exposed to flu and confusing that with covid. all of that is really important. all of this requires our
community and the community and community members to make this a successful model. i wanted to say from the beginning that we wouldn't be here today without all the work the community has done. we are meeting regularly with the latino task force and a number of other associations. what can we take from the people on the ground to support that work and also to make it city-wide. for the prevention and education, we've been working with a number of the community members. the slide that is on my right talks about -- or has been done with the latino task force as well as their joint information
center and is talking about families united against covid. these announcements have gone out in public transportation. there's been digital and traditional platforms to go out. we also did a labor day campaign because we know during three-day holidays there is a worry that people wanted to gather. how can you do that safely and still ensure that you're meeting your family and community members, but doing it in a safe way so the disease doesn't spread. we are working with our provider who we have existing contracts with. they were gracious enough to change what they were doing to really meet the need and we allowed that in the contract. they have been going out to businesses in the mission to
really provide that educational foundation, to pass out masks and do all that prevention work. i want to move to testing. we are moving to a respond and adapt strategy. we have been able to do that as we have more resources. to go through this slide quickly, part of the model is that we have capacity in neighborhoods that have been hard hit by covid. it has been alluded to. mission health was one of the first places sending out a request for testing at that site. it has been very successful because the task force has done such a wonderful job engaging with the community and getting people tested. you can see at this point in
time 78% of people who test there are latinx. it's been a huge success. additionally, a excelsior strong, there has been a significant amount of testing in the latinx community and it represents 63%. we've had pop-ups in bay view, the tenderloin, in sunnydale and ocean view and ingleside. you can see [indiscernible] are doing a lot less testing. in embarcadero, even though it has a high volume, on 17% are latinx. based on that information, we have decided to move this south
of market so that we can definitely reach the southeast quarter in a much more robust way. that is part of the testing strategy. we know the data that our latinx community is impacted. through our sites, we are trying to get low-barrier testing to these populations. hopefully we can be faster with this process as we move forward. any questions? >> thank you, doctor. will the testing all week be
available to anyone? will that be similar to the embarcadero site? >> so it will be five days a week because of the food market that happens. >> right, of course. >> it will be monday through friday. i think they're still offering that. >> fridays will be in the morning and end in the day so they can prepare for the farmers' market on saturday. we plan to have a drop-in as well as a drive-through at the location. we're trying to coordinate with the provider of the service to be able to have some
preregistration appointments as well as drop-ins. we're trying to catch essential workers and other community members. >> that's a great development and i'm excited about it. i'm hoping that that will reach the communities that are most impacted by the pandemic. i understand that this is all very complicated and the onus
and the work on d.p.h. right now is massive. i really truly understand that. but i am frustrated that the vast majority of the testing has been in -- testing people that are not testing positive for covid at high rates, whereas very little testing has gone on where people are testing positive at low rates. it's taken long to shift the testing rates or to do something differently. i want to talk about that a little bit because i want to make sure that it changes and changes fast.
i remember talking to the mission neighborhood health center who was having a 28% positivity rate in the mission for a very long period of time. it just blew me away. 28%. because they were testing only latino folks. i'm just wondering in the embarcadero what over time has been the positivity rate. my guess is it will be around 1% to 3%. right. i mean, why didn't that lead to a massive change in the use of resources to test the population that was testing 27% high er hin the areas that you are testing? why did this take so long?
just talk to us a little bit about that, because it seems to me to be a failure. >> [indiscernible] -- >> i appreciate both of those points. we agree, the ability to remove testing has been difficult. we've tried to meet the communi communities where needed. this is acknowledgement that we do need a fixed site. we're starting with moving the
market. potentially there is -- part of this is the resource needs and we've been contracting this out through a contract that was mentioned. this new resource and the new contract, there is resources for more pop-up testing as well as another site that we could plan to hopefully have in the southeast sector. we can have more ability to, for example, potentially go to transportation hubs and do some pop-up testing at those sites. so as we get more resources, we plan to utilize them to really focus on where we're seeing the positives. as i said right now, and it has been for the last many months in the southeast sector to
concentrate our efforts with this partner to do that work. if i go to the next slide, i can show what the city clinics have been doing which is tremendous in terms of the amount of people they're seeing and the amount of positivity rates there. >> just quickly before you do that, doctor. just to make sure that that alamini site is successful and sort of reverses the trend of doing the vast majority of our testing in communityies that ar not hardest hit and doing so little testing, if we're trying to do that, and right or wrong, what community members are we
working with in alamini to make sure we're getting the right communities there and run it in a way that folks feel comfortable to get tested. >> part of this selection process has involved community membe membe members. within the covid command we have an equity and neighborhood branch that has worked closely with the community. as we get more details of the site, it will be engaging with our community partners to ensure that we get the right people to get tested. part of that is looking at ours,
but also looking at the materials going out and that people know the site is available and accessible. >> supervisor walton, you were in the queue. did you get your question asked or a comment made? >> i was just going to ask about the testing site for alamini and why it takes so long. >> part of it is the operations. we have to close down selma. they book two weeks out for testing. and closing that down and all the logistics of setting up in alamini. so that takes a couple of weeks. as noted, getting the community
inp input. so that's why it takes a little bit longer than we like. >> kelly can also share a little bit information on the testing and focus on different populations. did you want to share some more information, kelly? >> yeah. 30% of the testing has been in eight neighborhoods that have the highest positivity and of those neighborhoods, they have 30% of the populations. so we are trying to fine-tune how we do our pop-ups. the other thing on the mobile sites is because of the landscape of how san francisco is, in certain neighborhoods it
is challenging to find a right-sized site that can be responsive to a community that is also something that the community is open to having stand up in their neighborhood. so those are some of the challenges about trying to make sure we get a right site. >> i do just want to say that ucsf was able to set up testing in a week's time in our direct. i do want to be clear that i don't know how that can continue to be an excuse. we had testing set up in less than a week working with other entities. >> and we're going to be consulting with ucsf to understand how they're setting up very quickly. for us, we're there for -- we try to be in a location for at least three weeks, usually longer. that means we need to be able to
stand up and take down a site every day and network out into the neighborhood. we're trying to be better and more collaborative. and working closely with the equity team to make sure that the communities are included in the discussions, but also that there is a lot of outreach to make sure that the sites are successful. >> okay. maybe we can go on to the testing in -- >> so we talked a little bit already that in july the latino task force requested testing at the hub and has been very successful through their work. in august we launched the community pop-ups and [indiscernible].
these are our d.p.h. fall centers. right now we have alternate sites at five places. overall, we have tested over 21,900 within the d.p.h. health centers, including 45% who have been latinx. over 13% have tested positive in the latinx community. supervisor, as you noted, it's been 25%, a much higher rate. so we are seeing a much higher rate at our alternate testing site in terms of what what's coming out positive. that is potentially due to
people who are accessing it. there might be more people coming to the site to get tested. we are ensuring that our sites are well utilized pm i'm. i'm going to turn to the contact tracing. some of the findings that we've had from the population when we've done these case investigations is that the majority prefer to speak span h spanish. the latino population tends to be younger than the general population and they tend to live in crowded environments. our goal is because of the high case rates in the community, we
are working towards having a much more robust capacity for case investigation and contact tracing. right now 50% of our case investigators speak spanish and the contact tracing workers it's 36%. we want people in the community to take on this work because they know the community. the i.c.t. group is working with contact tracing groups. there's been several partnerships. part of it is building out more of those partnerships so more can go to the community.
being able to contact appropriately, this is a snapshot of our hotels and 45% of people who choose to go into a hotel for isolation of quarantine are latino. a lot of people want to stay home and determine how they can stay home safely. there is a whole wrap-around service for that to happen. it's not just delivery, but checking up and making sure the rest of the household has the appropriate cleaning supplies, that if they need medical care, that will be on site. there's a lot of different parts that go into this. we have this in covid commands,
but the latino task force has shown that part of the funding needed will go to these teams that are able to really contact people once they're identified with the wrap-around services. this slides shows the essential program for people to isolate and quarantine at home. we should say that people should isolate and quarantine and provide the services. if they need the financial support to go get a job, they wi will. this program with the next round
of funding will have a much more streamlined process. within 24 hours, once we get the results, we ask if they need financial help to isolate, that this help would happen faster than in the past. >> doctor, having worked with the latino task force to create this program, which is widely hailed as one of the most successful interventions to get people who are positive with covid to have the possibility of quarantining and not spreading the virus in the workplace more, we had to help the programs for
about a month because we ran out of months. we were able to get a second philanthropic donation to keep it going. i'm hustling right now, as director torez, to get that next $2 million philanthropic donation to help. but if we don't, when is it time for the city to get the next wider spread to help with this effort against covid and are there discussions in d.p.h. on that? >> it's an issue of where to
allocate. we are moving through the community, so that would be a difficult determination. we're happy to talk through it further to think what are the different mechanisms that we can try to figure out for recovery. it does seem like philanthropy is the right way because it doesn't have all the strings attached to it that potentially a program like this would if it went through a city department. also, as you're saying, the funding is going to be important to figure out how to do the funding. i don't have a good answer for you right now, but we can talk more about it. >> this is partially why i wanted -- you know, the mayor's office did not involve my
office, despite the fact that i work very, very closely with the latino community and represent the neighborhood with the stroke center of the latino community to create the proposal with the $28 million, which i still don't know where the money is coming from or where it's going. but the fact that this program isn't included as part of that is again frustrating to me because it is so important and so crucial to protecting this community, who are disproportionately suffering the brunt of this illness because they are essential workers. they are essential workers in many minimum wage jobs, where legally or illegally, there is no opportunity to miss work without getting evicted and
putting food on the table. so when faced with those choices and a family who is depending on you, the only way people can stay home and isolate is if they have that income coming in. the fact that we've stopped this program for a month because there were no funds. both director torez and i have been chasing this. this program is a real and effective guard against the spreading of this disease in the community, which is the number
one task we have right now. we need to allocate funds to make sure this program does not die off again until we have a vaccine because it's really that important. >> thank you for that, yeah. >> next slide. the critical community efforts that we went over in this slide and we are creating with the community a strategy around response and recovery that we will help to set the framework that we're all working together
on the same goals and outcomes, which includes creating performance metrics which focuses on the care that is being provided and how we're doing as a community. there have been so many people who have been essential to the work we're doing. this slide is a snapshot. there's been so many others, but specifically we've worked very closely with the latino task force, with the mission neighborhood, with the san francisco aid foundation, and excelsior strong. i could go on and on. they have all been supporting their community and have made a real difference in the pandemic. we want to acknowledge all of their work as well.
>> thanks so much. i do hope that what we can get out of this hearing is the following, we need to get the money promised to the community into their hands yesterday. whatever this -- of this you can do to make that happen is essential. we have volunteer workers who are waiting for their stipend and salary who have been working full time for a month, really putting their health on the line, being front-line workers who have not gotten paid. we have the program that has been for free instituted by the community in their spare time to
make sure the people are staying home. i just really hope that after this hearing we can get those funds to the community, we can re-designate testing resources so they are hitting the communities most impacted by the virus. and last, but not least, we can really have a conversation with the city investing resources in the right to recover program. and, very sadly, i have to leave for another engagement. so i know there's folks waiting for public comment. i hope at least i can hear the first couple of public commenters. i ask supervisor walton is he
could lead this when i leave because i know he works with his community like i do. if you're willing, supervisor walton. >> of course. >> thank you so much. if we could now open this up for public comment, that would be good. >> while we still have you, are you going to want to file this or continue? >> can we continue it in case we need to come back. thank you so much. appreciate it. >> clerk: we are checking if there are any callers in the queue. please press star followed by 3 if you wish to speak on this item. for those already on hold in the queue, please wait until you're prompted to begin. you'll hear a prompt that will
inform you that your line has been unmuted. for those watching on cable tv or online, if you wish to speak on this item, please call in now by following the instructions which should be displayed on your screen, by dialling 415-655-0001, enter today's i.d. the i.d. is 146 044 5940. press the pound symbol twice and then star followed by 3 to speak. mr. coo, could you let us know if we have any callers. >> we have one caller in the queue. >> chair: i will explain that speakers have two minutes. we ask you to state your first and last name clearly and speak into the phone. if you prepared a written statement, you're encouraged to send that to our committee clerk for that to be included in the official file and we ask
speakers to not repeat prior comment. let's hear our first speaker. >> my name is peter cory. i'm a data scientist and i live in the mission district. i created at the start of this pandemic a website called phoenix data project. i've been trying to provide good local information to mission local. i thought everything in this pandemic was going great by the start of june and was really disappointed with the huge spikes that i saw into july and august. that's when i started looking around at communities that were really affected and saw the latino task force. i had volunteered to help them out. i see these as force multifullies. s.f. d.p.h. doesn't need to be doing this on their own, but
partnering with other organizations like the l.p.h. the metrics really are not that great. they should be using a model like ucsf has where there were effective dates of isolation. i spoke to one member at the hub one day and he said they didn't have enough resources to pursue that. now the cases are down. they should have enough resources and especially if you start partnering with community-based organizations, i think i really see that partnership as key in this pandemic, especially to keep cases down while there's so many cases raging across the u.s., to keep them from spreading here. partnership, partnership, partnership. thank you. bye. >> chair: thank you. next speaker.
>> my name is john jacobo, and i am the health committee chair for the latino task force. one of the instrumental partners in this fight against covid-19. there's been a lot that's been stated. i've written a ton of notes. my first point is i'm a little disappointed that dr. grant colfax is not here to take questions. i understand that people are busy and things come up, but at the end of the day the latino community has been hit hard and this should be top priority. i want to put that out. i want to give major kudos and love to isela ford, who did a great job of presenting and oscar masias who is here at the
testing facility. i want to be clear. the city and county of san francisco has failed the latino communities in the city. follow the data and test where it leads. partner with community every step of the way and you will be able to get the high turnout that we need. 170,000 tests done at embarcadero and in selma 6,000, where the data is much more disparaging. this is obviously not doing the right think. we need low barrier, walk up same day, weekend testing. that's not happening. i know people are happy we have moved to tier yellow for the reopening chart, but the pandemic has not gone away.
>> hello? >> clerk: you have a few seconds left. >> last point. we need funding. we've known about these disparities since april. the latino task force has yet to receive a dollar of public health in terms of our resources. we need those resources now if you expect us to continue -->> clerk: thank you. >> chair: next speaker. >> my name is michael nolte, and i'm a former employee of the san francisco health department so i understand some of these conflicts that happened. it seems to me -- i'm not speaking on behalf of the health department, i'm speaking on behalf of the community. it seems to me that these are the kinds of problems that exist when there's a bunch of bureaucracy and the bureaucracy is not meeting the needs of the
community. it's great that somebody comes up and says, well, we got funding, but where's the funding. who loses here is the latinx community maybe because they don't have as much political pull. i'm grateful that we have a supervisor that's -- actually, several supervisors who are at least at this meeting advocating for the needs of their constituents. if we didn't have district-wide supervisors, this would then again amass because when we had city-wide supervisors they would not let things really happen for every part of the city. i think it's also important that we respond and recover our community and this is just one of the many issues that need to
be addressed. i don't want to speak on behalf of the latinx community, but my family did grow up in the missi mission. i do understand that each community has its own issues. i'll speak for the tenderloin. the tenderloin has problems with the barriers. you can't have barriers -- >> chair: thank you. next speaker. >> thank you, chair.
i appreciate the work of these organizations. i am the director of excelsior works. we are part of the excelsior strong. i need to highlight, we are not city departments that are staffed with medical and public health care professionals. but what we are, what our organizations are, we are an army of volunteers who approach our service with a sense that we are our brothers' and our sisters' keepers. we have been doing this work without any extra funding to hire and build this team and to sustain this work. i believe there is a sense that organizations have shifted their work to covid-19 response, and in some cases it's true, but some have added this to core services. this is the time we need to come together to address this pandemic, which will continue to
linger long after there is a vaccine. we need our city departments to have a long-term plan and not a plan that goes from budget cycle to budget cycle. the social determinants that have been exacerbated for the latinx community community and a vaccine is not going to fix that. we need our city departments to join us to think through plans, and to think through social determinants starting with covid-19 at this time. >> i would like to make some remarks, chair. obviously we have a long way to
go to make sure the needs of the latinx community are met in this period of crisis. this community has been impacted the most in terms of the number of cases in terms of contracting covid-19. we need low-barrier testing, we need contact tracing, we need full provisions, we need resources for the individuals in case they have to currant. those resources and dollars should be in place and should have hit the community. the latino community and their resiliency and stepping up and providing and creating a hub for their community is one that we should, one, try to take note and duplicate across the city, but two, measure the volunteer effort and look at this community looking after its own without the support of the city, which is really is supposed to
take place and look out for our folks in the community. d.p.h. has provided consistent daily testing in areas where it's difficult for people to get to, particularly for people from communities of color and areas where concentration of cases is nowhere near the other levels in the city. d.p.h. has to step up, one, get the resources for the community. two, make sure the provisions are being provided where the data says we are needed the most. that has to happen and that has to happen yesterday. the funding that has been set aside for the latinx community needs to get to services right away.
we talk about commitment to the community and making sure that people understand that communities are a priority. it would seem to me that we would have that level of leadership be here to present or answer questions and let the community know this is a priority. so i do want to thank the d.p.h. staff that did attend today for presenting and answering questions. we will have more conversations about this. the dollars need to be released as of yesterday. this is not a time for the bureaucracy to move slow. we are in a pandemic. we have emergency orders and should be able to take care of our communities, particularly with the resources carved out and dedicated for this community. i do want to move that we continue this to the call of the chair. thank you, supervisor.
[ roll call ]>> clerk: there are three ayes. >> clerk: hearing to review the city's protocols for covid-19 testing, including third party testing contracts and current request for proposal processes, as well as the city's proposals for ensuring the practical application and implementation of the department of public health's internal testing priorities for vulnerable communities; and requesting the department of public health and the office of the controller to present. people wanting to comment should call the number, 415-655-0001, enter the i.d. number 146 044 5940, press the pound key twice
and then press star 3. please wait in the queue until you are unmuted. >> i just wanted to make a comment. let me start by saying while much of this board's focus has been around ensuring that the department of public health has, as just talked about, been prioritizing testing for the highest-need populations, i really want to thank supervisor ronan and walton with the last
item and a focus on the latinx community. i think as many of you are aware, last month an r.f.p. was posted on the city contract partner site. given the overlap with our delay fiscal year 2020-2021 budget approval, i wanted to drill down and understand what we've been doing with contracting around testing up to this particular point. what we've learned and to contextualize that as to how the department of public health will impact the delivery of this profoundly important function of testing during the pandemic as well as accounting for protocols on how the city and d.p.h. is
using its funds as we roll that out, how that's geographically distributed, what the numbers are. this is a high-level look into that, and particularly around how the city uses third party vendors, how they're vetted, how we're using the funds to support the wrap-around services, as we've heard, are essential to supporting equitable testing, contact tracing, and follow up. with that, i will turn it over to dr. baba. and i want to thank your colleagues for sending over a slide deck. i've made a bunch of comments on that and that has gotten expanded. with that, i'll turn it over to d.p.h.
>> okay. well, i have them printed off in front of me, so i will go through them that way. thank you, supervisor peskin, for calling this. i wanted to talk a little bit about covid-19 but mostly focus on testing and the strategy around testing as well as how we prioritize what our sites and assets are that we've described a little bit in the last presentati presentation. i wanted to go to the next sl e slide. so this is our key health indicators and this is something that is on the s.f. data tracker -- >> we're on a slide that says presentation outline. is that where you want us? >> no, the next one. >> now we're on key health indicators. >> so this is information that's
on our s.f. data tracker. we wanted to just review with you where we are in terms of the pandemic. most of our indicators are in green, so the biggest ones that we focus on is the healthcare system, does it have the capacity to take on covid patients? if there was a surge, what's the rate of hospitalization? do we have enough i.c.u. beds and acute care hospital beds. we've been in green for a while. part of the pandemic has been an evolution. i know we were working very closely with the hospital and healthcare partners to ensure we did have that capacity. we've been it at one of the
lowest hospitalization rates. in terms of the disease situation westbound lane that has also greatly improved. i want to take a second on testing. with testing early on there was issues around it. we didn't have enough swabs or reagent. when we did get swabs and reagents it wasn't all immediately accessible. there was a buildup. we had to prioritize where testing would go. we've prioritized congregate settings like nursing homes.
that's where we've seen and continue to see the most deaths. and the contact tracing and p.p.e., p.p.e. has been in green for a long time, but early on that was a point that caused a lot of concern. moving to the next slide -- >> dr. baba, can i ask a question about the 3.5 that we're at and sort of coming out of that prior hearing. we're not necessarily doing as much testing as we would like to be doing in the neighborhood and in the areas that have the highest positivity. is that 3.5 real or is that a number that could be a lot higher if we were going more testing in bayview, mission,
excelsior? >> it's a great question. you know, we have more assets towards testing, but if we had more cases, would we catch more cases. to piggyback on that, we follow the positivity rates in the latinx community and those rates have come down as well. so because most of our cases were driven by the latino community, they would be 50% of the cases. we expected, even though we weren't catching -- some of the people that aren't accessing testing, those accessing testing and continuing to, we would expect them to drive the numbers. we are seeing an increase in all of our communityies.
we are looking at the southeast quadrant of the city. >> why do we think those numbers are coming down? >> there are a lot of hypotheses. i don't think that we have a complete picture. it could be that we've done a lot more testing. our community partners are doing a great job with testing and getting wrap-around services. the case rates are going down around california. it could also be that there is a certain percentage of vulnerable populations that got it initially and it made its way through the likely people it could transmit to. it's gone through that. obviously there's a huge part of the population that still hasn't gotten covid, but they might be in that early transmission
phase. >> thank you. >> moving to the covid comparisons, this just -- this slide shows that san francisco, compared to other major cities, has one of the lowest case rates, at 13.4%. we have a significantly lower death rate. again, one of the reasons we believe we have a significantly lower death rate is we've prioritized our congregate settings, such as nursing homes, as a place we want to get testing to first and we ensure that surveillance testing happens there as well. because of that -- and not just nursing homes. we've prioritized h.r.l. early on. we were looking at shelters as well. places where we knew there could be a lot of transmission and that could quickly cause
morbidity and morality. with that, we've been able to keep our death rates fairly low compared to other cities. next slide, please. slide five. so in terms of successes, we've had -- san francisco has consistently had more testing than the rest of the bay area. we have 31 testing sites and together they performed 610 tests total. the city has provided about 50% -- 60 to 50% of those tests. so, you know, really that has been a success. as has been discussed, we need to do an adaptive strategy of leading those tests to the right populations. we plan to continue to do that. we have exceeded our goal and initially our goal was going to be 1,800 tests per day and now
we collect 5,000 tests per day. and i mentioned the leading to low death rates from this. i wanted to talk a little bit -- delve a little bit more into our high impact response strategy. this is our strategy really about how do we prioritize hot spots and where do we find populations that are testing positive. the first thing i want to point to is a foundation of prevention. so we would like eventually that nobody does test positive. so that prevention aspect is really foundational, with the face coverings, the physical distancing, ensuring people have access to disinfection,
providing physical distance is all critical to success. if someone wants to get tested, we want to make sure they are able in a low-barrier way and we want to make sure it happens in places where it's been stated there's a higher risk of transmission. those higher risks of transmission include places where there's crowded or congregate living, places that are congregate centers. and utilizing the data we get from the test positivity to be able to pivot so that our test tracers can follow the disease and stop the disease. testing is one component of that. if you get tested and don't have the ability to isolate and quarantine or if we're not able to get to your contacts, it really won't make a difference. so that rapid response of being able to wrap around with food support, with income support, with any other type of support
is important. and then educating households and community members around wearing masks and investing in these community models and investing in capacity. so even though it hasn't been as rapid as they want to, we are pushing this model and really want to take this model to ensure that the communities that are most impacted, that we have a much more rapid response to prevent disease in those communities. next slide, please. >> so this is our testing prior tos. this is based on the state recommendations. basically, if we were ever to get to a place where testing ended up being very limited again, we would have to tier the categories of testing. tier one, obviously, people who are hospitalized should get
tested. anybody with a public health outbreak needs to get tested. tier two, people who are symptomatic. if you're a close contact, whether you're symptomatic or not, you need to access the tests in a fairly rapid manner. and people who are asymptomatic who are high risk based on their status, the nursing homes, correctional facilities, or their work status, if you have to work with the public like healthcare or work with the public that has covid. so people in healthcare, e.m.s., or if for one reason you need it for your own status. if you need to get a test before a major operation, we would want you to have access to that. we have added tier 2 a. we are saying those with barriers to health are a high priority. those populations in
high-density living situations, homeless individuals, they all have priority in testing. and the next tier are asymptomatic workers. tier four is everybody else. that's our testing prioritization. the next slide shows where the testing is. we have multiple testing sites throughout the city. the green sites are just the general sites and then the blue sites are sites that you don't have to be insured to go there. so in terms of the city sites that have been talked about, those are the highest-volume sites. right now embarcadero is not only testing the general public,
>> just to categorize, we have our fixed site and our mobile testing. we have two contracted city test mobile assets and those are utilized for our pop-up testing and then we have a mobile team, our public nursing team that goes out to outbreaks and then our final mobile asset is dedicated to our nursing homes. then we do have a state asset, it's controlled -- it allows san francisco to have an asset. it does about 150 tests a day and it's located in the southeast quadrant. next slide please. so, just wanted to talk a little bit about the health order that has been -- or i should say i
wanted to talk a little bit about what other systems are doing. so, we talked a lot about what the city is doing and i think i mentioned that we do anywhere from 50% to 60% of the testing. that means all the healthcare systems are doing about 40%. the biggest healthcare system, they are doing about 20% of testing. so, in july, we put out a help order, mandating that the healthcare system test certain groups of people. so it requires them to prioritize symptomatic people, as well as close contacts that they must test those populations. we haven't really seen that much movement in terms of an increase
in the numbers of testing, so we're still looking at this and seeing ways that the healthcare system can do better and engage more, especially as more businesses and schools come online. so that continues to be an ongoing conversation. next slide please. so, this is a map of -- the green map shows the test positivity in september and the purple map shows where our tests have occurred. it has been mentioned that it is really a market in the dark purple, that means it's been tested the most. if you look at the green map, the test positivity is the southeast quadrant of the city. there is a mismatch and we are trying to correct that mismatch by having more testing assets go to the southeast sector.
then, one of the things we know -- next slide please. one of the things we know is that there are multiple vulnerable communities that could -- that if covid could spread. we seen it spread in the latino community and in the bay area, as well as across california. other, you know, the economic issues could also lead the african american community, the p.i. community also had a high rate and the chinese community, because of the dense living quarters, are vulnerable. we have been working with chinese hospitals to partner around testing and they have
been a great partner in working with s.r.o. buildings as needed there. we are also starting to do mobile testing and the first of that will happen at the end of october. >> sorry to interrupt you, but that's similar to the previous question in the previous hearing. it's been a while since the screaming and crying, but has chinese hospitals gotten paid yet? there was a huge delay. they were advancing money and staff resources and they are a tiny hospital and there was a huge lag in them receiving funds from the city. do you know the current status of that or maybe mr. wagner can respond to that. that was a source of a lot of angst pretty recently.
>> craig, do you have the answer? either of you? >> i'm sorry. >> greg, sorry. >> go ahead if you have an answer. i thought there were some grant funding that had been made available for that purpose. >> i can say there was a commitment to support some testing through the end of june and the processing of that payment happened some time a week or two ago. i can check and confirm and make sure that actually happened. then this reference here to the bullet point is we're still working through the contracting process, so that's an upcoming commitment. >> all right. >> well, time is of the essence my friends.
paying our bills promptly is of the essence as well. >> that segues nicely into the next slide. so do you want to talk about the testing budget? >> sure. good afternoon supervisors. >> go ahead. >> sorry. i'm the deputy finance for d.p.h. here to talk about two slides. basically summarizing our contracting and our fee experience with testing and then i can give a brief update on the cause. for testing since the start of the pandemic really around april 6th, we contracted to support the city s.f. program and have run through a series of amendments up to the point where we are now. we have been supporting both
programs. on september 1st, we released in partnership with the controllers office and r.s.p. to continue testing services in a competitively sourced contract through the end of the fiscal year and perhaps beyond. you see on the slide here, the services will include the full component of city test s.f., plus additional support around billing or additional work around billing, which i can get into in the next slide to show why. you'll see there that the testing budget for 2021 is 58.9 million, of which we incurred about 17 million in expenses since july. i expect to have that awarded around the end of october. there is some pressure on that date. we had significantly bigger response to the r.f.p. than
expected and we're still waiting on the scoring results from that. next slide. so on your screen here is the summary of both where we are for budget and protected spend in 2021. then in the table below, a little bit more detail on the actual, including a portion that is attributable to color and one medical. the one medical was doing swabbing and operations for us at the selma site. when we come to a transition, the selma site or demission it to alemany, we're projecting the best cost savings. here the important point or the point that the narrow financial sense is important, the overspending and as you can imagine, we spent a lot of time thinking about how we might
bring this closer, spending closer to budget in a variety of ways without reducing -- and honoring the barrier for testing throughout the city. with this said, if there is a constant effort to engage healthcare systems for additional testing for their members, as well as really support for enhanced billing for when people absolutely need to come through, how do we bill their insurers for those costs? there's a real point of focus in the r.f.p. to increase the services around billing. then in addition, there are recently awarded grants from the state that will bolster and support our own lab capacity that we hope to take some of the pressure away from the additional testing through this contract, these contracts that come and will be coming through
the r.f.p. so with that said, i'm happy to take questions. >> chair mandelman, i don't have questions and given the previous hearing, i wanted to compress and truncate this hearing. many of the questions were asked and answer in the previous hearing, so i have no questions. >> then let's go to public comment. >> thank you mr. chairman. please let us know if we have any callers that are ready. for those who connected to our meeting via phone, please press star 3 to talk about this item. you will hear a prompt that indicates your line has been unmuted. for those watching our meeting
or watching a streaming link through sfgov.org or elsewhere, please call in by following the instructions which are displayed on your screen by dialing 415-655-0001, access code: 146-044-5940. the meeting i.d. is 146-044-5940. then press the pound symbol twice to connect to the meeting and star 3 to enter the queue to speak. could you let us know if we have any callers. >> yes, we have two callers in the queue. >> okay, and i will remind everyone that our speakers have two minutes. we ask that you speak your first and last name clearly and speak directly into the phone. you are encouraged to send a statement to our committee clerk for inclusion in the official
file. >> yes, my name is mark and i'm with mission local. i have a question about the number of test. in the last hearing, at the end of september, showing less than 185,000 tests have been taken by the city. although now they are claiming 611 thousand -- excuse me. again they said it was 500,000. that's substantially less than half that had been done by the city. then i'm wondering about the discrepancy and also whether the rest of the tests are being done by providers and who those private providers are that are doing the majority of the
testing. >> if you mr. reporter would like to ask those questions to the department of public health directly, this is not a question and answer period. >> that would be true. if there are no more comment from that caller, let's go to the next caller. >> good morning public safety committee, actually good afternoon now. i am concerned about your testing protocols in the city. i have seen and notice many contracts go around and no supervision for the process. it seems like the city is allowing this by not having the board of supervisors approve. many seem to be breaking the rules or having some insight beforehand. i am just so frustrated and i'm
no longer sure on how they're making these decisions and if they're equal. we're proud to be in the yellow here, but it's not acceptable to bypass the contracting laws. thank you very much for your time. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hi, my name is dominic wilson. it's clear to me that there have been a number of hasty decisions regarding these contracts. they weren't vetted towards testing and there wasn't a proper r.s.p. process in place. so they broke the rules in securing contracts. are we able to see the deals that were made? if these contracts were authorized by the board of
supervisors, then who did authorize them? i'm just -- the lack of transparency is ludicrous and testing was messed up and it began when the single occupancy cards were allowed. that's all i have to say about that. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker. >> mr. chair, that complete it is queue. >> all right, public comment is now closed. supervisor peskin, any final thoughts? >> thank you all for your time and indulgence and to supervisors walton for the previous hearing. if one of you would like to file this item, and if it needs to be reintroduced, i will do so in the future. >> i will move that we file this item. >> on the motion offered by chair mandelman that this hearing be filed. chair stefani. >> aye. >> member walton.
>> aye. >> chair mandelman. >> aye. >> mr. chair, there are three ayes. >> the motion passes. mr. clerk, do we have anymore items before us today. >> there is no further business. >> then we are adjourned. thanks everybody. >> hi. my name is supervisor aaron peskin, and it's been an honor to represent the people of the northeast corner of san
francisco, known as district 3, the oldest and most iconic collection of our neighborhoods for 13 of the last 20 years. this has not been a political career for me or about running for higher office. that is totally true, and i take my role as a public servant and a policy maker for the entire region and city extremely seriously. and i do it because of the diverse communities that we live in, that we work for, and that love this part of san francisco. and ultimately, i decided to run for one final term because we're at a remarkable cross roads in our city and our country at large, and this is a moment where we all have to come together. and i actually have the tested governance experience to help us weather the storm and hopefully come out stronger, and i have a track record for fighting for everything from public housing to public transit to a publicly owned
clean power system. i don't recall a time in this city where we've been so unified, whether it's getting covid testing in chinatown, revitalizing north beaches business corridors or securing the first youth navigation center in north polk. i've been working he have beef because of you, because of all of us. when we see the damage caused by this federal administration, it's a reminder that we're all in this together. we can do better, and we have to. from the pandemic, wildfires, unemployment, police officers, and the looming shortfall in our budget. these are the battles that i am 100% prepared to take on, and these are the reasons that i am running. thank you. >> hi. my name is danny sauter, and
i'm running because i love san francisco. we have to be honest and face the reality that our city is at risk. i believe when you love something, you fight for it. we can't continue to vote for the same leadership and expect it to bring the same results. since 2015, homelessness is up 40% in our district. our police department has not taken the steps needed to be reformed, and our streets continue to be dirtily, unsanitary, and an -- dirty, unsanitary, and an embarrassment on the national stage. but we have a chance, where we charge forward, and fix broken bureaucracy and corrupt city departments. as the president of north beach neighbors, i brought our community together to hold officials accountable. that's what i'll do as your
next district three supervisors. address your concerns and driver real progress for our neighborhoods. were covid-19 threatening our communities i'll add covid-19 testing sites, and i'll create more open space, especially foreseen i don't remembers, s-r-o residents, and families. i know that going back to normal wasn't good enough. it wasn't working for most of us. i want our neighborhoods to be liveable, safe, vibrant neighborhoods. we are proud to be backed by dozens of community leaders including the chinese american democratic club, san francisco renters alliance, and the san francisco democratic club. thank you, and i look forward to your support.
>> my solutions have always put outcomes for our city and its residents first. this outcome driven philosophy will govern my work as your supervisor. as a san francisco small business owner, i started a company to provide thousands of low-income individuals access to the justice system and worked with some of our incredible local legal aide nonprofits. today, i help provide seniors transportation, meals, and groceries, enable them to stay safe and maintain their independence. the programs that i've helped start have delivered hundreds of thousands of free meals to seniors impacted by covid. my proven track record that shows as your supervisor, i can get our city back on track. these are my reports to you to help our district thrive post covid.
i'll push to update our city sewning laws to create housing everyone can aafford. i'll build housing, auditing city funds, addressing conservatorship laws and supporting our local service providers. i'll support small business by streamlining permitting a, reducing fees, and getting rid of red tape. i believe we must overcome the rigid policies that have delayed meaningful progress in our district for decades. now is the time we can either choose to make a change with new leadership or continue down the path that we've taken the last 20 years. learn more at votesimonsen.com, and i'd be honored to have your vote this november. [♪]
>> i'm kevin duffy, and i'm proud to have represented district 9 in san francisco on the b.a.r.t. board of directors, when i first took office, i was really concerned about the filthy conditions at some of our stations, and you may have read when b.a.r.t. management wouldn't add any custodians, i started sweeping with supervisor hit re-ronen, and we swept the stations for four months -- hillary ronen. we swept the stations for four months. now, there are two cleaning certifications with quadruple the amount of cleaning staff. despite being in this pandemic, i think we can say that the b.a.r.t. trains and stations are much, much cleaner. i've worked to make civic center a better station, and i think you can visit that station and feel safe much more than previously. i'm proud to have stood up for
a youth fair. with leticia simon, i pushed to get it through. we have elevators in our system, and we needed to have attendance on there, and the homeless outreach team, so i've been a very nuts and bolts b.a.r.t. director, with a vision how to bring our facility back, and i'd be grateful to have your support for four more years on the b.a.r.t. board. thank you so much. >> hi. i'm vallie brown, and i'm running for supervisor in district 5. i have fought tirelessly to better my community and solve the challenges we face.
improving quality of life in district 5 is personal. after losing my parents before age 14, i was raised by the community, so fighting for affordable housing, environmental protection, and homelessness has been my principle goal as an activist, as a legislative aide for ten years, and as a supervisor. i've served two previous district five supervisors, and i've served the city and our neighborhoods in previous times of crisis. as your former supervisor, i've passed over 30 pieces of legislation, to build new housing, protect a woman's right to choose, and create a more equitable and just san francisco. our neighborhoods face huge challenges. on homelessness, we need a real plan to get people off the streets and into housing and supportive services.
we can't just handout tents and call our work done. we can't let this moment for change pass, with black lives matter remaining just a slogan. we'll move more funding from our police department to the black community, funding nonprofits in the fillmore and western addition, creatiempowe jobs and creating more opportunities. this time calls for a supervisor who listens to neighbors and finds common ground to solve our challenges. i believe i'm that leader. you can learn more about my vision for district five and join my campaign. thank you. >> greetings, beloved citizens of san francisco. my name is daniel lander, and i'm proud to announce my candidacy for driekt five seat. i was born here in san
francisco in 1968. my mother and father both moved here to san francisco in the late 1940's and 1950s. growing up in the 1970s, in low-income housing and being displaced by the san francisco redevelopment agency, i personally experienced the pain of living in a city that destroyed my community in the name of saving it from blight and unliveable conditions. fortunately, i've been able to give back to my community and city i so dearly love and have been working as a volunteer activist now for 27 years. i'm currently the founder and director of the san francisco cats academy, and i have also cofounded many grassroots nonprofit organizations fighting for police reform, housing, and environmental
rights. i'm running for supervisor d 5 because i'm tired of not getting results from our leaders at city hall. my priorities, if elected, is to reform our police department, create real affordable housing, mandate a d-5 covid-19 small businesses task force, and tackle the homeless mental health issues head on. i respectfully ask for your vote this november, and for more information you can go to my website, daniellandry.com. >> hi. i'm supervisor dean preston, and it's been my honor to being your district supervisor for the last 23 years.
i've lived in district 5 for the last 24 hours. i won a special election last year, and just weeks after i took office, the pandemic hit. businesses were closed, and thousands of people were forced out onto the streets. i personally raised over $100,000 to put district five homeless women and families into a hotel at no cost to taxpayers. i authored legislation to do this across the city for 8,000 homeless people, and when our city wasn't moving fast enough to house homeless individuals, we organized the next homeless village in san francisco. my office led efforts to stop evictions during the pandemic. i wrote and passed a law
prohibiting evictions of tenants who could not pay rent due to covid-19. i worked with the m.t.a. and neighbors to create slow streets in district five where pedestrians and cyclists could travel safely. on critical racial justice issues, i've been advocating for police reform and been marching with the black lives matter movement for years. this has been a time when neighbors, small business owners, and residents have come together. i'm honored to have their support, along with the sierra club, california nurses, san francisco teachers, the labor council, democratic party, and so many more. i'd be honored to have your support, as well. thank you.
>> and the city of san francisco would like your assistance, the board meeting is now called to order. due to covid-19 health emergency and given the public health recommendations issued by the city and county of the san francisco public health, and governor newsome, and the restrictions on the teleconference. we will be virtually with all members and staff participating today via teleconference. and to ensure the safety of the board, the staff, and the members of the public. now public notice for this meeting and on the web page we ask the public to participate remotely by writing to the board or leaving a voicemail message. for all comments received in advance of the meeting we have
IN COLLECTIONSSFGTV: San Francisco Government Television Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on