>> i want everyone here to stop and think about where you are now. you probably working from home. we should be very happy that housing that ucsf is building. i want to see us work together like ucsf. please support ucsf without delay. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> i was born and raised in san francisco. i live in district 8. i'm calling mostly because of

the e.i.r. elements of this hearing. i believe that there needs to be more time for not just the board but to review such things. also the transportation aspect of this. the transportation aspect, $20 million is a drop in the bucket compared to the impact that it's going to be had by this development. unless the housing to jobs ratio is one to one, you can expect that people will be coming from relative distance other parts of the city and bay area to this location. i believe that the plan should include a mailbox underneath the structure that will be used for future underground whether it's bart or muni metro station.

$20 million is less than a tenth of what a b.r.t. project would cost. less than 1% central subway. i'm doing my math. but still it's a drop in the bucket. it's not nearly enough of a commitment long-term impact that transportation has in that area. there should be more time to review the e.i.r. and to have input on that element of the plan. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker. >> hello, my name is miguel. i'm a native born and raised san sanfranciscan i'm appalled we're having this conversation. it's ridiculous that a group of

people who live nearby think that this hospital is only for them. this is a regional resource for not our community in san francisco but all over the place. the fact that we're hearing who never heard before talk about affordable housing. let me get this straight. we've been in the mission fighting for affordable housing and other parts of the city, most of the people have been speaking up has been against that. i think it's wrong that all of a-- when we hear earlier about promises broken, i was on the committee for the city of san francisco on the rebuild of san francisco general. i was involved in the mission bay expansion there. ucsf kept all its promises and some. by being a place of emergency especially people of color, low income and homeless people that need it the most. imagine if we have an earthquake. it's not when or if, it's when

we're going to have it. this hospital will not be ready. in less than a week, we're hearing talk about let's delay. delay what? let's just get this going. everyday we delay, it's a hospital that's not being built. it's a service that's not being provided to community people, people who need it. i'm sorry for the folks that all of a sudden are now woke about affordable housing, i hope you stay woke when we really need you to begin to build housing on the west side. we would appreciate your support then. i ask that we don't delay this and good paying new jobs are at stake. we don't need a delay. let's just get it over with and start the construction. get this hospital rebuilt and provide some world-class service. thank you.

>> next speaker. >> good evening, this is tamara allison calling in opposition to this resolution and in strong support of the parnassus plan with no delay. i written and reviewed the work and enjoyed the playground. i experienced the other rights of passage trying to define affordable housing and child care. that is exactly why i'm such a strong advocate of cchp. it's a win-win for san francisco. i'm excited about the community benefit package that maintains future reserves, builds new housing.

i'm happy about the community benefits and generally relieved about the approval of this plan. i want to talk about the consequences of delay or doing nothing which will threaten the viability of the parnassus campus to scientific discovery. for example, we have grants to do research to find new drugs to prevent arthritis. we can't do this work because parnassus research facility is outdated. we're so passionate to do this work. the only option is a patchwork effort that's so expensive that it's impossible. this issue is directly responsible for my colleagues to conduct research. many are waiting on them to make

choices to conduct their work. every delay pushes progress down the road, cost more money and discourages investigators who are giving it their all to find cures. thank you. >> for those on hold, please continue to hold until the system indicates you have been unmuted. >> this is doug anderson. i'm a 20-year neighbor at e.i.r. my children were born on parnassus. we look upon the campus everyday. i'm calling in strong support of delaying or terminating any resolution that would delay this project in full support of accelerating this project at every corner. as this project has been in

planning for years, i appreciate community engagement, thoughtfulness and investment. at least one of the committee members is a neighbor and should not be surprised that the direction being pursued. m.o.u. has been negotiated in good faith and even more than adequate time line. any frame that it's being rushed and marginalizing the months by community members and ucsf. this project is a lifeline. nobody can assume health or economy will rebound for many years. i have more housing units than any other project currently being proposed.

it will boost local economy spending with many neighborhood businesses closed. it will boost transit use when commutes are not even known to come back. last but not least, improve access to healthcare in the community, the broader region and advance it globally. optics of this project is being skewed for political gain. if we want to move forward of this project, ucsf, they've come to the take of table with solution. it's up to the supervisor to come up with solutions. they should move forward as fast as possible. thank you. >> thank you for calling. next speaker please. you'll have two minutes. >> hi, this is kristen veronese.

i'm a resident of the -- i'm also a small business owner an hade street. i'm calling in today as the president of the haddish merchant association to support today's resolution. it was only this past week that the m.o.u. was shared with us by a neighbor that -- we were surprised to learn that there is included in this m.o.u. program for local business partnership and collaboration. it's specifically calls out

merchants. i know that when we last two years, the merchant has worked with supervisor to open it as a temporary parking lot while many of the parking spaces along the street were businesses with construction. it was an observation that half of the parking lots were used by ucsf, by students and faculty and employees. you know there's a direct impact by the ucsf campus on the commercial corridor. i was surprised to learn that there has been two-year long process. i never received any contact or outreach for anyone to participate in the meetings and

would have been happy to provide input and feedback from the merchant perspective. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> i want to say that i've been living in san francisco for 25 years. i was forced to move out under threat and eviction. that was two years ago. it was very hard for us to find housing on the west side of san francisco. we ended up in the richmond district which is great. i want to add that i'm very fond of the team at ucsf. i think they do great work.

my son was born at ucsf. throughout all of that, it's one thing to go to a hospital and get treatment but it's another to go to a teaching hospital and have scores of residents helping with the process and procedure to get you through those difficult medical treatments. we can't do more to make the teaching facility and people who live there or need to find places to live to support them and where they're going to be living and working and walking to work. it will be a big mistake. i support the m.o.u. i oppose the resolution to delay this project further. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker.

>> hello everybody. good evening to the supervisors. i'm a resident of district 8. i'm calling in support of ucsf parnassus campus plan and m.o.u. i want to provide different perspective and faculty at ucsf. i lead a research program at the parnassus campus. we study biology and treatment of pancreatic cancer. in california there's 6000 cases new cases of pancreatic cancer. this is a deadly disease that claims the lives of our love ones. our neighbors calling family and friends and during this past year, ruth bader ginsburg, congressman john lewis and alex

trebek. to do the research must work in close collaboration with surgeons who see patients to exchange knowledge with our latest findings and breakthroughs. this is made possible about the the unique close collaboration at the parnassus campus that is developed over decade. that cannot be easy replicated elsewhere. we still have to continue to overcome. we lack critical infrastructure, equipment, facilities, lab spaces are outdated and crumbling. these are the conditions you are asking us to continue to work in. these conditions prevent us from doing our best work and our ability to translate our newest places in lab. in order to continue to serve our community, and conduct cutting edge research, we need to modernize obsolete facilities

and labs to current standards. please consider the thousands of patients diverted into the hospital beds and the patients currently in the hospital who stand to benefit from future breakthroughs. >> clerk: next speaker please. hello caller, you are on the line. >> hello.

you are unmuted now and you are on the line for public comment. >> okay. i'm at cathedral hill. i was on the house floor, community coalition for the eight years to create the community agreement for the five hospital institution master plan. i want to say that, the plan that we ended up with at the end was so much better than the one that was originally proposed. instead of building one hospital, we built two hospitals.

i really want to support supervisor peskin's resolution to take more time to get real true community engagement on this and get a chance to come up with a plan for both the community and ucsf and the patient and residents of san francisco can support. thank you very much. >> next speaker please. >> good evening supervisors and welcome. my name sarah ogilvy. [indiscernible] >> clerk: caller, we have seem to have lost your audio.

[indiscernible] >> please, supervisors, consider ucsf need to expand and revitalize its hospital, its campus and its future with the same urgency that ucsf considered my husband's heart diagnosed with afib a condition that affects millions of people in the u.s. many of come can benefit from the world-class care that ucsf

provides. let's give ucsf more chance to treat my husband and not turn them away. please, don't let them turn away parents any longer than they have to. please approve this project and let it move forward without delay. thank you for your urgent consideration. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> hi. i'm calling from district 1. although, i am definitely all in favor of the hospital expansion, i'm calling in support of peskin's wants to delay the m.o.u. the reason being, i think the $19 million proposed is really

not in substantial enough at all. also, there's nothing that says anything about the additional -- [indiscernible] anything like this is going to have such an impact. i urge more community involvement collaboration. >> next speaker please. >> welcome to the board supervisor melgar. i'm here to represent the affordable housing alliance. since 1981, we have been fighting to protect renters and

build and preserve affordable housing in san francisco. last year we passed proposition e. we need toe create a balance between jobs and housing. any developer provided enough affordable housing to the new jobs, they would automatically be approved under prop m. my concern about the ucsf expansion plan, there's an adequate jobs housing balance. ucsf studies indicate their expansion will bring up to 5000 new jobs to san francisco but that's great if there's a place for thome live. at this point, not only is there not enough housing for those new workers but the timing of the housing will become decades after the jobs will be created. it will put more pressure on existing housing, create more housing shortages and inevitably cause evictions. we like to see minimum jobs

housing balance plan with ucsf building enough employee housing for new employees and students -- and building it in a timely manner. thank you. >> good evening supervisors. this is peter cohen. i wanted to pick up from my colleague's comments earlier. what we really want to emphasize is the need to thoroughly understand the housing need for the workforce group from this project. i think mr. marte explained why that's essential. next step doing that will be for the city to use the methodology

to drill down into those number and analyze what that job is and come up with the housing program that mirrors that need. the methodology is at the department fingertips. we want to remind you and all your colleagues on the board about this time last year, the board adopted legislation requiring the planning department to do a job analysis on an annual basis as well as an analysis on a case by case basis. the methodology has not been developed. it will be useful now to help establish how the city goes about doing these analysis. not just the ucsf development but to make sure we're housing our workforce growth. i wanted to encourage you folks to look at this both from the specific level but at the policy level. this is and should be a new standard practice of how we can

get through some of the unknowns what housing do we need and for whom. this is an opportunity to have not just a world-class project but getting good howing policy. thank you. >> next speaker please. hello caller. next caller please. >> hi. i'm evan. i live in district 1. i'm here in support of ucsf parnassus plan. please don't delay this further.

>> thank you so much. next speaker please. we have 14 in the queue. >> good evening. my name is lisa audrey. i am a long time resident of district 5. i think it's really unfair and ridiculous that there are people commenting here saying that anyone who supports supervisor peskin's resolution to slow down this process with so many unresolved, really critical issues, that's just a false argument. it's really does.

what this is about, ucsf, are trying to rush this through and they have a history of breaking the rules. they've done it. anyone who read up on this knows. here they go again. another really interesting number, when you talk the component of this and anyone so excited that ucsf offered to contribute $20 million. it's unfortunate.

there's too many unsolved really critical issues in the m.o.u. they need to deal with affordable housing, to the workforce. to deal with the impact that will have on our environment and on our local transit. none of these questions have been answered. thank you. i support supervisor peskin. >> good evening supervisors. this is steve, district 7 resident. i like to welcome myrna melgar. you should all support the project and reject the resolution being propose to

delay this project. i'm a district 7 resident. i think that really not the best project. we need to think of the power structures that are opposing. do we want to either hold them to the homeowners of the city or do we want to change and break that structure. i fully support building more housing. to propose it in the bayview -- [indiscernible]. i like to comment on a previous caller who was saying that we should think about the jobs and

housing balance. i totally agree. let's approve. we need to approve the projects that's coming out. or any -- these are all great. i would love to see it approved. please support this project and many mores like it. >> next speaker please. >> hello. my name is joel. i'm a resident of district 5. i think that we need more housing and we need to support the ucsf community. i think because the few homeowner who live in the area who does not want this, to go

around the surrounding area is ridiculous. first of all, -- [indiscernible]. i oppose it. >> thank you. >> good evening. i'm emily shell i live in district 5. i'm a direct neighbor of the parnassus project. i oppose the resolution to delay the parnassus project. i like so many others, it's important for us to be good neighbor to ucsf. especially now when ucsf has been working tirelessly to keep the san francisco community alive all while doing community outreach which i have seen many times. i believe this could be extended even when the pandemic is no

longer a threat. my former neighbor works as a nurse at ucsf. she allowed her to work, walk to work everyday. now she faces two hour compute by car where she has to put in long hours to look out for covid patients. housing close to one workplace should not be a luxury reserve and those with a six-figure salary to afford it.

it will improve our struggling infrastructure and provide new jobs our city so desperately need now in the post pandemic era. thank you. >> next speaker please. we have 55 listeners and 14 in the queue. >> i believe the ucsf campus need to be updated and expanded. i believe that some of the prohousing proponents have been blind that the majority of ucsf workers make $50,000 to $60,000 a year. which is currently out of reach in the current housing plan. they seem not to understand this 30-year housing proposal can be

improved. i don't see this resolution as a resolution to delay the 30-year project. i i think this is a call for further negotiations. i agree with supervisor preston and supervisor melgar, that agree with their calls to continue negotiating the m.o.u. i feel a golden opportunity obring in expertise from labor and affordable housing to understand what the housing income mix. understand the break even constraints. this is a 30-year plan. let's work through this instead of either enabling racist on it's or in cases some of the opponents overlooking industrial process. let's have a resource that we can work with for the next 30

years. >> clerk: next speaker. >> i live in district 7. i'm calling to strongly support ucsf's expansion. my wife is pregnant with our first child. she lives close to ucsf. i'm worried ucsf won't be around for our kids.

thank you so much for your time. >> clerk: next speaker please. you'll have two minutes. >> sorry. i'm a resident of district 2. two of my cousins were born at ucsf. i think it's ridiculous parking over human lives and how this over pandemic.

i ask that you please move forward with this project and look towards building more housing on the west side of san francisco. thank you. >> we have 53 listeners with 11 in the queue. next speaker. >> good evening supervisors, cory smith on behalf of the housing action coalition. we are in support of the ucsf proposal. we think it's a win-win-win with new jobs, new homes and improve transit. transitions have sent in a --

85% of residents live in san francisco, 32% of the signers indicated that they live in either -- we all think that our healthcare workers in the middle of this health pandemic are heroes and building homes for them seem absolutely appropriate.

>> the second reason that i'm calling, i support further negotiations that could result in additional affordable housing and additional transit investment. the m.o.u. isn't quite there yet and therefore more negotiations. i do think as a city, can take an opportunity to get more affordable housing and better

transit project and we should take it. for 10,000 workers making $70,000 a year or under. this is public data. i support the earlier caller calling on behalf of workers asking for additional affordable housing. the affordability level of the project, 120%, making $107,000 a year will leave out lot of ucsf workers. it will take decades to make. thank you.

>> clerk: next speaker please. we have 61 listeners and 9 in the queue. >> hello. i'm a resident of san francisco for ten years. i'm calling because i would like to support the resolution to continue negotiating the m.o.u. i want to address couple of previous commenters on this comment. if the other commenters on this call support building more housing, why aren't they support the more condo units. there's plenty of housing that house all homeless and house many low income units. with regards to this specific project, calling everybody who's opposed to the project is wealthy incomes i oppose moved

this project to the bayview neighborhood. this project shouldn't move forward at the ucsf parnassus campus. 44% is pitiful. major of staff at ucsf makes far less than that. only 40% affordable housing is pitiful. this plan much more deeply affordable. ucsf is a rich institution that should give back to its community. i support preston's resolution to continue negotiating. the plan must be improved before it is approved.

>> next speaker please. >> hi thank you supervisor peskin and preston for the opportunity to comment on this. i've been -- i live in -- beyond the benefits of this project, i'm really want to see ucsf expand itself. >> i think the party gone above and beyond what they should be responsible for.

particularly with regards to investing in transit, invest in new trails and more than that and issues. i think it will be unreasonable to ask both of them. i would encourage the supervisors to really push forward and allow ucsf to continue to move on all the good work they have done for the broader community. thank you. >> next speaker please. >> hello. i'm a resident of district 3. i want to support supervisor peskin resolution to delay.

[indiscernible]

>> clerk: we have 60 listeners and 7 in the queue. >> good evening supervisors. this is john. what's so disappointing about this ucsf proposal in front of you and the m.o.u. that goes with it, there's such a failure. we need so much now more than ever as we have to recover from the impacts of the covid epidemic. as we look now up and down

section of the city, 70 projects and shipyard projects. we see projects that have been approved and would provide 20,000 units of housing all with no early prospect of building that today. ucsf would be the catalyst as it

was in mission bay and deliver thousands and thousands affordable market rate housing that's been approved by everybody supported by the community. >> clerk: next speaker please. you'll have two minutes. >> hello supervisors. i live near by the parnassus campus. the housing aspect of this plan -- [indiscernible].

we look no further than ucsf housing development. why is it vacant? charges over 3 thousands a year for workers making $40,000 a year.

>> hello. >> can you hear me? >> am i on? >> yes, you can start your comment. >> thank you. i grew up right across the street from the ucsf parnassus housing development. i'm in support of the expansion. i think the concern is really on transit.

also, parking is like a big issue. the entire life there's been major issue with parking in the neighborhood. i can imagine what will be like. transit in general is my biggest concern. this is a 30-year project. i'm definitely in favor of it generally. thank you. >> next speaker please. >> good evening supervisors. i'm mike chen i'm a resident of district 2, i oppose the resolution and support the ucsf plan. i live two blocks away from ucsf

van ness. being at the hospital is not annoying. it's busy. you have to recognize that hospital suspect like a really good public good. it's great that we have great hospitals. i think san francisco has been a big leader in healthcare.

i do believe that we have of housing crises. we do need to bill for lower affordability. i recognize supervisor peskin's action to rezone the area around ucsf parnassus to revitalize low income housing thank you very much. >> clerk: next speaker please. you'll have two minutes. >> my name is nathan. i live in district 1. i'm just calling to voice my opposition to the resolution to

delay. i think we need to take a step back for a second and realize that really this is a seismic upgrade project. the existing hospital will not be useable in 2030. god forbid if something happens before that. the arguments around the community good that are bonuses that we should be thankful for. i agree that we need more affordable housing on the west side, badly needed. the idea of cramming this into a single project on the ucsf campus is not reasonable. we knee to get this project done. the people that called in ask for delay after delay, do not understand how hospital is built. it is a lengthy process. it is a highly technical and complicated building.

thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. you'll have two minutes. >> hi, i'm a tenant and resident of district 5. i live near the hospital. i'm really disturbed by the comments today. i definitely support supervisor trying to negotiate more affordable housing, lower a.m.i. if you been doing this for a while, you know who's who. we all hear the same voices and the same name. i wondering all the people who are against this, because of the expanding nature of the hospital

where are they? tough to look at so much housing. there's going to be need for more housing from ucsf that ucsf itself cannot fulfill. what i haven't seen is calls to have affordable housing built on the west side. proposition legalized affordable housing. this is not going to be successful. what we're talking about s making ucsf victim of culture war. it's absolutely ridiculous. especially neighborhood groups

that have coyed, should be ashamed themselves. i support finding ways to find more affordability to this project. >> hi. i have been a resident district 7 years, currently district 6 resident. i'm strongly in system of the ucsf. during the fire season and taking care of patients with covid during overnight cold,

there was no ventilation. another issue that has come up throughout my time as a medical student and a resident at ucsf is the issue of the community. we travel from mission bay, parnassus and the county hospital as well as the v.a. over near ocean beach and to think about adding another sight to that is extremely disruptive to patient care.

>> san francisco mayor london n. breed. for persons who wish to ask questions, include your name, outlet and up to two clearly stated questions in webex chat. and now we welcome mayor london breed. >> thank you so much. and good morning, everyone. i am excited to be here today because we know that most recently we have a vacancy in the city administrator's office, and i am so proud to announce that i am nominating carmen chu to serve as san francisco's city administrator. many of us know carmen over the years. she has served the city and county of san francisco since 2005. she currently serves as our assessor recorder and in that role she is responsible for managing a team of over 200 people. under her leadership, the

aassessor's office has reversed a decades old backlog of assessment cases and generating $3.6 billion in property tax revenue annually to support public services in san francisco. had it not been for carmen's leader snip that role, we would have a budget that was deficient in the amount of $3.6 billion. that gives you an indication of how amazing and how valuable she is to san francisco. such achievements have earned her office the prestigious 2020 good government award, an honor recognizing excellence in public sector management and stewardship. she currently serves on the san francisco employees retirement system board where she oversees the investments and policies of a $26 billion public pension system in san francisco. assessor chu has really stepped up during covid to lead our economic recovery task force as one of the co-chairs. this was not in her job

description, nor was it her responsibility, but when i called carmen to ask for her help because we needed all hand on deck to address the challenges that none of us thought we would be dealing with with covid, she immediately said yes. and with her leadership the task force developed 41 recommendations and policy ideas to make the city's economy stronger, more resilient, and more attainable. prior to the career as assessor, she was an elected representative of the board of supervisor. when she served as budget chair of the board of supervisors, there was no one who was more fiscally conservative and focused on equity and serving the public's best interest and made sure we understood the value of every single dollar we spent. there was no one more of an advocate in that role than

carmen chu when he served as the budget chair of the san francisco board of supervisors. she also served as the deputy director of public policy and finance for gavin newsom when he was mayor. she's been actively engaged in really changing bureaucracy in san francisco on so many levels. and just to go back to some information about the assessor recorder's office which was experiencing a lot of challenges, a lot of uncertainty, a lot of confusion, the work that she did to put everyone for the most part on an electronic system and to re-organize the files in that system was pretty amazing. now, i know it's very bureaucratic and very technical, but to make san francisco work in a more efficient way that provides information to the public in a way that people can understand so that they can pay their taxes and they can do whatever business they do with

the city t work she has done has really been about making sure that the average, everyday citizen in san francisco who is not connected to city hall, who is not involved in city hall in any way, that they have a voice. and they have some level of understanding and access to the resources we provide. she is the only asian american woman elected as assessor in the state of california, and she is the daughter of immigrants. her family worked hard to make sure she had some amazing opportunities to succeed in life, and boy, has she made them proud. the city administrator's office consist of more than 25 departments and programs that provide a broad range of services to other city departments and the public. and ladies and gentlemen, i am so honored to introduce the next city administrator for the city and county of san francisco, assessor recorder carmen chu.

>> good morning, everybody. first off, i just want to say thank you so much, mayor breed, for your confidence in me. i am humbled and i'm honored by your nomination, so thank you so much for this opportunity. >> thank you. >> if confirmed by the board, of course, i look forward to working not only with you but also with the board to make sure that we continue to move san francisco forward. i want to speak a little bit about my parents as i start off with the this. my parents were immigrants. mayor breed spoke about this a little bit ago, and my parents had a small restaurant and we all grew up, my sisters and i, working in that restaurant. i tell you this and i share this with you because so much of our service and so much of what we do in life is grounded by our life experiences. how we were raised. the people who loved us. those who supported us. those were part of our lives.

and what they taught me was the importance of making sure that we provide honest day of hard work, and making sure you do everything you can in every single role that you play is important. but they also taught me the importance of helping those who are in need. mike like my parents, not everybody starts off with resources. not everybody starts off with money, with support, and not everybody starts off with even the ability to communicate or speak english. and i think it's recognizing that so many people start off from different places that it's a privilege when any of us have the ability to serve in the public capacity. it is this grounding, this belief that government can serve and the belief that government can help to support people, especially in their greatest times of need that gives me the privilege and honor of working as a public servant for the city

and county of san francisco. first off, i want to recognize the people of the city administrator's office. your responsibility is a big one. the span of your responsibilities serve as a backbone for all of the city's operations. and i really want to thank you, a heartfelt thank you, especially during this time this, time when we're asking you to not only carry on with that work that you do, but also to do double duty especially as we continue to respond to an active global pandemic. this is something that is not easy. and i know that san francisco is better off for all the work that you are doing not only in your existing roles but also in the extra work that you are doing to make sure that we respond to with the best way possible to serve is city well. to the people of the assessor's office, and i simply put and i want to tell you that i will miss you. we built a really great team in the assessor's office and we have accomplished so much.

and things that seemed insurmountable to do and reversing a decades backlog and exceeding revenue expectations in half a billion during my time. and making sure we are completely overhauling outdated tools and systems that we have in our office. these may sound boring to many people, but honestly, it is this kind of attention and this kind of work that really drives change and excellent public service. i want to thank each and every person in the assessor's office. i enjoy working with you on the professional growth and challenges that you took on and i hope you will carry on the accomplishments and legacy with you as you go forward. and finally, i want to close by recognizing and thanking the contributions as city administrator naomi kelly. i understand your decision was a

difficult one. and thank you for helping meet the needs of the city during the global pandemic when we needed the support to lift up so many things that we have done. the accomplishments are not to be diminished, and icismly want to say thank you. with, that i am available, of course, for any questions. and i am really honored for this responsibility coming forward. >> thank you, assessor chiu and we are honored that you are willing to take on this responsibility. i want to provide member of the public with information about the city administrator's office. they are responsible for overseeing animal care and control, the office of cannabis, the medical examiner's office, and the real estate division. the technology division. our community challenge grant, our grants for the arts program, the mayor's office on disability, risk management, and all of the things, many of the

things that make the city run and often times we may have an interaction with any of the departments and not necessarily fully aware that they are all within the scope of the city administrator's office. it is a major responsibility, one that i know you are up for the task. and i am excited and grateful that you are willing to put your hat in the ring and allow yourself to be nominated for such a position. so thank you so much again, aseser to -- thank you, assessor chu, and with that we can open it up to any questions. >> thank you, mayor breed. before we start the question and answer portion, we are going to take a moment to allow reporters to submit questions on webex.

. >> okay. no questions, leo? >> thank you. okay. when mayor breed, the first question comes to you from joe with kqed. mayor breed k you ask ms. kelly to resign? if so, or if not, why? >> well, many of you know better than to ask about personnel issues. the fact is we cannot discuss them. so we will not be discussing anything regarding anything that is personnel related. >> thank you, mayor breed. and should she be confirmed, are

you tasks carmen chu with any specific tasks to address the allegations of corruption within the city that would be in her purview? what are those tasks? >> so just to be clear, last year when many of these allegations first began to surface, i immediately sent out an executive directive asking our city attorney and our controller's office as well as all city departments to not only investigate many of the allegations but to also look at ways in which to strengthen our policies so that we can make sure that the things that we saw happen or that people were being accused of are not easy to be able to happen moving forward. so what we did was to make sure that people are on alert when they are making recommendations and changes to the policies for the department. and there is not a doubt in my

mind that carmen chu will manage her department and make the appropriate changes necessary to address many of the challenges that we have heard over the past year as it relates to some of the department. >> thank you. and if i could just add to, that i think in any person who is assuming a role whether you are leading an organization as the assessor or city administrator, one of the things all of us will be doing is looking very, very closely to make sure we have the systems in place to ensure that there is transparency and how we're delivering the public service and how it is that we run our organization. these are all things that i am absolutely committed to. it is a fundamental piece to make sure that we have public trust. >> and there is no public servant more respected, who has more integrity, who just basically is one of the most incredible, admirable persons that we have serving the city

and county of san francisco than carmen chu. >> thank you, both. there are no additional questions for mayor breed. the next question is for assessor chu from ktfs. as the first chinese female administrator, what does this mean to you? >> i think this is -- this is always a heavy responsibility. i recall back when i served on the board of supervisors. at that time when i was nominated to the role, i was the only elected, only chinese american supervisor serving in the entire san francisco board of supervisors. and since that time much has changed in the city, but i think any of us, any of us who fill these roles understand that we play a very important spot in making sure that not only do we lead the way but we also create opportunities and how people see no matter where you come from, no matter where you start from, there is an opportunity for you and a seat in government that no

matter whether you had resources coming in or whether you were immigrants, that you have the opportunity to serve. and so i think serving as the first chinese woman as a city administrator, i hope to be able to to put my mark on creating a san francisco government that works well, that earns your trust, that is delivering services that you can be proud of in san francisco. >> okay. one moment. >> an i thought someone was going to ask me about taxes. >> the only questions about taxes is why is my bill so high? >> indeed. >> and the next question is what's carmen's first responsibility after the

nomination? and that comes from sky link. >> i think immediately especially during this time when so much of the city's response to covid is important, it is very important to make sure we continue to deliver on what is necessary and respond not only from a public health perspective, but also to support the city in the economic recovery. first and foremost, that has an impact on the lives of residents and operations. a big focus right away will be starting to take a look t a making sure we continue to support the efforts. that we do that in an excellent way and we also look forward to the future means. in addition to that, we're going to continue to look for more efficiencies. what's going to happen is we're going to go through a very tough time. i think the city is understanding that not only are we going to be coming to recovery, but that will mean we have fewer resources at exactly the time when san franciscans need us the most. and that will really require that we do more, that we work

harder, and that we're creative in terms of how we deliver the best services possible to the city. so in my role we're going to be taking very much a close look at this recovery effort, how we support that recovery for the city as well going forward. >> there are no additional questions. this concludes today's press conference. thank you, mayor breed and aseser to chu for your time. if you have questions, email the mayor's press office at sfgov.org. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you again. . . . >> available for each item on this agenda, via telephone by calling 1-(415)-655-0001. and when prompted entering code 1468720758 and then pound and pound again. once you join you will be able

to listen to the meeting as a participant. to make public comment on an item, when the item is called, dial star, 3, and you will hear that your line is unmuted and the operator will advise that you are allowed two minutes to speak. when your two minutes are up we move to the next caller taken in the order in which they are received. best practices are to speak slowly, clearly, and to turn down any televisions or radios around you. allow for audio and visual delays during the course of the meeting. >> thank you, miss milton. why don't we open up for public comment, any comments on the incredibly thorough minutes from our meeting last year about this time, december 17th, 2019. are there any minutes of the public who would like to comment on this item? >> there's no public comment. >> okay. public comment is closed. and can we have a motion to approve the minutes from december 17, 2019?

>> moved by mandelman. >> and amber, remind me -- last year you made me get a second? >> clerk: you should get a second. >> okay. see, we don't do that in three-person committees at the board of supervisors but i had a nagging suspicion that you wanted that last year. commissioner ronen, would you like to second? >> yes, please. >> and on that motion made and seconded, a roll call, please. >> clerk: on approval of minutes [roll call] you have three ayes. it is approved. >> thank you. and, madam clerk, please read the next item. >> clerk: yes, item going into closed session, evaluation of the public employee performance and recommend approval of the executive director's performance objectives for 2021. this is an action item. >> thank you.

and, madam council, do we need a motion to go into closed session? >> clerk: you do not need a motion to go into closed session. >> okay. should i take public comment prior to going therein? >> clerk: yes. >> are there any members of the public who would like to comment on this item number 3? >> no public comment. >> okay, public comment is closed. and now we will leave the open session and reconvene in the closed session momentarily. >> clerk: committee members -- i am waiting for everyone to get back with sfgov-tv and council. >> ah, okay. if you would let us know when sfgov-tv is good to go, we are good to go. >> clerk: okay, sfgov-tv is back. don't see council -- >> it's already, we won't mess this up. >> clerk: all righty.

let's do roll. [roll call] we have quorum. >> supervisor peskin: so first as to item number 3, our closed session item i would like to make a motion to not disclose. a second for that motion? >> second. >> supervisor peskin: seconded and on that a roll call please. >> clerk: motion not to disclose [roll call vote] motion passes. >> supervisor peskin: could you read the next item? >> clerk: i can. item 4, recommend setting the annual compensation for the executive director for 2021, this is an action item. and then also, chair, before we do continue, i would like to make an announcement about public comment for those on the line. >> please. >> clerk: thank you. the public comment line is 1-(415)-655-0001.

and when prompted enter code 1468720758. to make public comment on an item when the item is called dial star 3 to be added to the queue to speak. you will hear a message saying that your line is unmuted and you are allowed two minutes to speak. calls are taken in the order in which they are received. >> thank you, madam clerk. i first want to start by thanking the chief financial officer of the transportation authority miss cynthia fong, for helping us in closed session and then i want to thank our executive director and miss fong for really taking care of the 43 member staff of this small but mighty agency. and then to -- without divulging what transpired in closed session, to thank my colleagues, commissioners ronen and

mandelman, not only to their commitment to the transportation authority and its staff and to its mission, but for making our closed session deliberations very, very smooth. we are all very cognizant of the fact that this is a remarkably tough time financially, emotionally, psychologically. and that sales tax are down and other funding sources that the p.a. relies on are down. but we also acknowledge the staff and their hard work and note that on average that the staff have received -- within the agency about a 4% increase to their salary. and to that end, we met in closed session to discuss the performance evaluation of our executive director whose work we

found to be superlative in 2021 and recommend approval of the executive director's performance directives for 2021, and found that the work of the executive director, like i said, was outstanding. and in closed session the personnel committee took action to set the annual compensation for the executive director for 2021 in the amount of $278,113.68, which is a 4% increase. so i just would like to take an open session vote on that and i would like to make a motion to set the salary as just stated. is there a second for that motion? >> second. >> and is there any public comment on item number 4? >> i'm double checking right now.

ah, yes, hold on just a moment and i'm going to put the caller on the line. >> first speake >> hello, caller, your two minutes begins now. >> caller: yes. while i'm sure that the executive director has done a fine job, the computation seems already extremely high. and i don't see why there's any need to increase it at this time when, you know, other department budgets have been having their funding cut. and so, you know, this is a time of austerity and $278,000, that's already exorbitant, so why -- why is the executive director having his funding increased? i don't understand it. and so i think that in san

francisco, they really deserve answers, especially insulting after you had this closed session that i understand is permissible under the brown act for a performance evaluation, but you chose to not disclose the contents of the closed session. is the director -- doing such a wonderful job, it would be -- it would be prudent to disclose what -- you know, tell us why the director is doing such a wonderful job. in fact, i believe that you're supposed to take public comment before voting to not disclose. so i'm very concerned about this situation and how the director is doing so wonderfully. and, quite honestly, san francisco is not doing really well right now and i understand

with the pandemic, but, you know, we're having a hard time -- and maybe the director needed to not have a raise too. >> clerk: thank you, caller. >> yeah, and so are there any other members of the public for public comment? >> clerk: there are no more public comments. >> so i'll start by closing public comment. while public comment is not a period for discourse, let me do say a couple of things. number one, our executive director is a she, not a he. not that matters relative to what is before us. number two, this is not a sub-division of the city and county of san francisco. this is actually a separate agency under state law. and, number three, if one compares our executive director's salary to other similar positions in northern california and the bay area, this is not only in line with

those salaries but it is arguably low. as to the assessment of the meeting of goals that were set forth last year that we evaluated for 2020, that information will be publicly disclosed. and with that, on the motion a roll call, please. >> clerk: on item 4 [roll call] there are three ayes. the motion passes. >> thank you, miss mitton. is there any druks introduction of new items? seeing none, any general public comment? >> clerk: let me double check before i move on. there are no public comments.

>> public comment is closed. and we are adjourned. >> thank you, chair. >> thank you, commissioners. >> goodbye, everybody.

>> san francisco entertainmentce commission president due to the covid-19 health emergency, and to protect the entertainment commission members, city, employees and the book meeting rooms are closed however members and employees this precaution and the vary us local state and federal orders declarations and directives and commission members, public comment will be available on each agenda item.

both channel 26 and sfgovtv.org are streaming across the screen and each speaker will be allowed two minutes to speak. opportunities to speak during the public comment period are available during the zoom platform using the meeting i.d. number. or call 46699006833 and if using zoom platform to seek select raised hand option when it's time for public comment. if calling in by phone dial star 9 to be added to the speaker line when your item of interest comes up and you will be unmuted when it is your time to speak. speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television or alternatively, you may submit a written public comment through that chat function on zoom and thank you sfgovtv and media services for sharing this

meeting with the public. we'll start with our roll call. >> clerk: [roll call] the first order of business is public comment. these are for not listed on tonight's agenda and i'll ask senior annalist rice if we have anyone. >> good evening, president and commissioners. i'm checking the queue and there's no one calling in or their hand raised and there are no chats or comments either. >> all right. excellent. all right. the next agenda item is number two which is approval of our minutes for the december 15th, 2020 meeting and i'll ask if we have a motion to approve the

minutes. >> so moved. >> second. >> is there any public comments on our meeting minutes. >> there's no one with their hand raised and no chat comments. >> we can have a vote. >> clerk: [roll call vote] >> all right. the meeting minutes have been approved. the next agenda is number three which is a report from executive director. >> good to see you all, happy new year and you are all looking

refreshed and ready to tackle this new year. so, when you all took action to send a letter to mayor breed and the board of supervisors indicating recommendations for the economic recovery of the night life and entertainment industry in san francisco. so, that letter was finalized and sent to all of our policymakers. i did receive some we were invite today speak at the hearing on small business that supervisor haney had called the tuesday prior to the christmas holiday and to essentially share

all of your recommendations with them. so, got in a little bit more detail and went through them all pretty quickly and it was very interesting and good to get that before the public prior to the year-end so you should all be very proud of the work that you did in push tag forward and i'll keep you a surprise of any of your recommendations that get traction or that can be further engage with the commission. i'm not going to go into more details on the federal stimulus and update as it relates to stages in our independent venues because they will get into that during the presentation shortly. i'll just flag in the last couple of moments i did add his powerpoint to follow on zoom or

your own computer screen which should be interesting and that will help us stay further engage and just a note to all of you, there's a new agenda item on the agenda tonight that allows for you to add and if there are certain things you want to see, especially during quiet times like this, that we're more sheltered in place than the shelter in place essentially

extended with no new end date in place as of now. we are still experiencing as you all know from reading the news and being an active participant in your communities that we are still surging here in san francisco and we have no new reopening announcements to make at this time. further, i just want to give you an update on new year's eve. last week went creating this agenda, we were anticipating some potential new year's eve parties. we did some great work. our staff, along with certs, in first rounding up a lot of research on what was going on, potentially in san francisco, communicating with business owners that might be confused and we also had our folks out that evening so we had both of our inspectors. it wound up being a quiet night, which is great.

one thing of note is that there was one party that was -- we received a tip about that was an illegal party so it won't have been anything that we would have permitted in regular times having at like a warehouse in the bayview. what was great is that sfpd was able to stop that party from happening so it didn't even occur. which is fantastic. i think it would have been one of those covid spreaders. so glad that did not happen. that is all that i have for you all this evening. and happy new year. let me know if you have any questions. >> anybody have any questions here? i'm trying to put in gallery review. there we are. >> not seeing any. why have any questions. thank you for everything you guys are doing. what a strange time we're in

right now. we'll just keep at it and keep us informed and i just do want to mention it's a really good idea to have this extra agenda item on our stand ago again da and i applaud your efforts to put it on there and to all the commissioners, we have a chance to actually state things that we would like to have a future meetings and action items so this is a chance to consider that. >> is there any public comment on this agenda item. >> there are no hands raised and no comments in the chatbox. >> you want to just pull up the powerpoint in between each item to make sure? >> absolutely. i assume we still have none.

>> there's no change. >> all right. >> we'll close public comment then and we'll move honed. on. the next agenda item is an update on night life -- i'm sorry. it's number four, which is an update of the night life business assistance in response to covid-19 and i believe we'll have business development manager with oewd also known as the beard ben van howton presenting. >> there he is. >> thank you, president and nice to be with you again. as director had mentioned -- i think the idea of having a stand in place holder for updates on all the various things that are going on makes a lot of sense. there's always new information to share with the industry on new programs, new developments,

and even just earlier today i saw an article about new state-level programs and small business relief that the governor is going to be rolling out so things are always changing in this environment and it's really helpful to be able to have the opportunity to share information with all of you and with the industry. i have a short powerpoint that i'm going to run through today. just to highlight some existing and new -- and then i'm happy to answer any questions. let me share this. here we go. is that showing on the --

wonderful. ok. the first program i wanted to highlight, i'm highlighting it first because of the upcoming deadline coming up. the california small business -- state level grant up to $25,000 for small businesses impacted by covid-19. businesses with less than $2.5 million in gross revenue and there's a sliding scale of grant amounts and the maximum is $25,000. it is a grant application window is open right now and the first round closes on january 8th at 11:59:00 p.m. so we're encouraging businesses to apply for that grant right now. my understanding is it's not a first come first serve program so there's no appliance -- supplying it now won't make a difference but we're encouraging

business to apply for that relief before the close of that application. i'm running through and the best place to get up to date information on all at oewd.org/covid-19 where we're updating with new information. in the recent federal relief bill, we were very excited to see the inclusion of what was known as the save our stages legislation. this is ultimately a 15 billion-dollar funding program of grants to support live entertainment, theatrical, businesses, museums, movie theaters, and live entertainment promoters as well. these grants are going to be made available through the small business administration and again unlike a lot of other sba programs these are not loans but they're grants tied too gross

revenue these businesses earned during 2019. really just i can't over sate the -- i can't emphasize enough the advocacy of our venue community, of venues across the -- to make live entertainment a center piece of that federal relief legislation. the eligibility requirements that they're on the powerpoint, you have to demonstrate loss of 25% gross receipts and the program is specifically excluding large operators which is defined in the number of ways you see there and also, a business can't take a p.p.p. loan in the new round of p.p.p. and also get a save our stages grant. there's a lot in terms of the details. they're still being figured out on save our stages. the s.b.a. is currently developing rulemaking and guidance around the program and so there's not an application

live yet. i think it's our hope the s.b.a. will announce more or providing more guidance in the next few weeks about this and i know there's a lot of interest from the industry and making sure that all of our music venues are at the front of the line in receiving these funds and getting their applications in and there's actually a really important time clock to the program that really makes it important for folks to get in early. the days of the program, the grants are only going to be awarded to business that's have experienced a 90% decline in revenues compared 2020 to 2019 and the second 14 days of the program, grants will be awarded to business that's have experienced at least a 740% 70% decline in revenue. over the first 60 days of the program there are $2 billion of relief that is allocated specifically for smaller businesses, so businesses with fewer than 50 full-time

employees so really there's the emphasis will be the venues and other business that's have been most impacted by the pandemic and we knee it won't be challenging it's just the grim reality of it and so we want to make sure our folks are applying at the beginning of this and they're eligible and that think getting that relief money and there's the possibility at some point of supplemental if there's money leftover after the initial allocations so a lot of the details are still being worked out and the lincoln this i have this slide is to the information about the save our stages act that is helpful of what the legislation does and i know they and others have been involved in pushing forward the rulemaking process. and just to add to that, the

director and i are talk on an ongoing basis about outreach and how we can make sure that all of our venues and promoters know about this program and a lot of details that still need to be worked out in terms of implementation but we want and and know the details about who can apply and when they can apply. >> the federal legislation did not include the restaurants act, which would have been a grant program for restaurants and bars that a number of advocates supported and i know that was something that we had supported when it was part of the heroes act and the how's side of things earlier in the year.

instead of grants through the restaurants act, the federal relief bill includes more forgivable loans through the paycheck protection program and i fully appreciate that p.p.p. is not a solution for everyone. just to recap, p.p.p., these are forgivable loans as long as 60% of the loan is spent on payroll so the federal bill, added $284 billion to p.p.p. it also does a number of adjustments to the p.p.p. process with the goal of making it easier for smaller businesses to apply and also to make loan forgiveness easier. in terms of restaurants, bars, night life, businesses and the notable thing about the recent p.p.p. extension is while most business types take a loan at about 2.5 times their pre covid monthly bay roll that the

business that's have the industry classification and accommodations and good service by includes restaurants, bars and other hospitality night life businesses they can borrow up to 3.5 times the pre covid monthly payroll. as with the save our stages, the application are not open and the p.p.p. has stuff to figure out there in terms of some of the implementation guidance and rules around access to second p.p.p. loans and with respect to p.p.p. and the eidl loans that i'll talk about in just a second, it's important to note that president-elect joe biden described this relief package that passed at the end of december is a down payment and there's a need for further federal relief because we know that had this is just continuing not to be enough for businesses that are continuing to be challenged by this incredible

pandemic. and just briefly on the idle loans, which have been open on a first come first serve basis, it's extended through the end of 2021 pending available funds and there's also a replenishing of the idle at advance grant funding which was advance of o $10,000 for business and idle loans and this is been one of the constant throughout the federal resources from the so i'm not going to spend too much time on it. final note, here that i just wanted to highlight is the local fee and tax waivers that were announced by the mayor and treasury in late october.

i received a fee increases from businesses about how to get refunds for already paid fees and i wanted share information about that and the legislation to adopt these fee and tax waivers to make these accessible and that legislation was just approved by the board earlier today and on first reeding which means there's another reading next week and that legislation will be off to the mayor for her signature and so out of that legislation the tax collectors office will develop a form in order for businesses to receive refunds so it's possible this is february and earlier for businesses to be able to receive those refunds on those local fee and tax waivers but it's an important piece of local support for our night life and entertainment industry. request that, happy to answer

any questions again for really for all of the current or up-to-date information. our website is the place to go. there's a lot happening and a lot changing all the time and we're not challenging businesses especially businesses that have to stay closed and many of whom have not been able to operate since march. i think that the save our stages legislation it's really a sign for some optimism for businesses to can access these funds. i'll close there and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> i had a question that i just through in the chat but i'll ask you it. do we have a sense of how many venues in san francisco are eligible for the sos federal funding? >> that's a really good question. i think part of it -- part of the answer to that question will

depend on how the sba flushes out the guidelines around the definitions and that there are some particulars to what a live entertainment venues is and potentially, i think the focus really is on businesses that offer ticketed performances and announced at least 60 days in advance that have a clear live music employee, they're employees who are focused on live music related tasks like sound or bookings or security and so i think it stands to reason that there's probably going to be some question around the margins in terms of businesses that offer some entertainment and they're not just purely live entertainment venues. whether they will qualify or what extent, i also think that

in terms of in addition to venues, live entertainment promoters, it's one of the other businesses and they can qualify under s.o.s. and i think getting more var tee from the s.b.a. on what promoters have to show in the terms they're qualified to receive access to those funds and so i think it's tough to know, it's tough to know at this point exactly how many businesses. we want to make sure they're who can qualify knows and starts those conversations with local technical assistance providers when there's clarity. >> yeah, i'm wondering is there any advocacy that the sit and county could be doing with in terms of trying to ensure as many of our permit holders as pos would be he will age able for the -- i mean, it's not it's

not a total overlap between who we permit and who would be eligible for the but trying to get as many eligible would be great. >> absolutely. that's a really good question and i think we should discuss that a little bit more. i know that our venues some of our venues, through the local members championship in the national alliance have been involved in advocating and even working with s.b.a. to a certain extent to try and make that process as sim pom as possible but in terms of being expensive it's a point well taken. >> yes, so, for example, if s.b.a. would say, if you know, if a locality has a system such as san francisco to permit entertainment venues that should

be accepted as proof that they are an entertainment venue and they should be eligible for this or something like that and i wouldn't want to be excluding anyone anywhere else but certainly just trying to maximize how much relief we can get for our venues here. >> absolutely. >> >> thank you. >> sure. >> i have a comment. >> thinking about lawrence statement, and you know, going back to restaurants and things, who have been applying for these sba loans, ok, i explain about transparency and it seems like or a neutral third party who actually knows that this is --

what's the difference between a live music venue or ticketed, you know, there are so many variables. rather than giving it to someone that maybe have no clue on how to distribute these loans or even approve them, because we're going to go through this just in the restaurant stages that you know, it's going to take forever to figure this out and s.b.a. it will take a while and these guys can barely make it every month. i'm hoping there's going to be a clearing house that is -- they know how to screen these applications. and i like to have your -- can you e-mail me your power points so i can post it? >> absolutely. >> we're looking for this. there's so much material right now. yours is so focused on what we need, it will help us save a lot of time. so if you can send it to me, i

would appreciate that. >> if i could interject, it's in your google folder so you can grab it from out of there. just a note for you, we're doing a -- we're planning to do our due diligence in communicating as often and as thoroughly as possible to our permit holders about this opportunity. [please stand by] windchill

>> it's tied to the early implementation of the ppe of last year. we don't want especially given the early windows of time where the first 14 days, it's people

who have been 90% impacted or more. billions allocated for small businesses. we want to make sure those opportunities don't pass us by. making sure that everybody is as informed as possible including our small business development center and all of our technical assistance providers and using the commission as a place to amplify, and filler back if things aren't working. we want to hear from businesses, if things are broken in the early stages of this, we want to know as soon as possible. >> the problem by the time they find found and they -- the reason i brought it up is the

news media is telling everybody the loans are extended. there's confusion between the federal and state. they are saying you have to get it in by the eighth. we only have four more days to apply for these particular loans. we want to get the information out now. >> just to be clear the state program rk the deadlines on the state program, apologize -- it's been extended. >> it's what i'm talking about. i'm not blaming you. >> that's great. good news everyone. per an update from commissioner lee. january 13th. that was current as i want to tell you less than 48 hours ago.

>> it gives us more time to apply. perfect. thank you. >> i have a question. happy new year. thanks for being here. i have a clarification question. as long as a venue is qualified, they are guaranteed to give us another layer. >> as long as the money is available, if a venue checks all the boxes and meets all the qualifies of live entertainment venue. it's not disqualified by any

prohibited factors. the goal is to get these loans out as grants to all the businesses that check the boxes. >> they are able to get the flat amount. >> it's linked to your revenues from the previous year. it's up to 45% of gross revenue earned capped at -- there's supplemental grants. if there's enough money left over starting in april, the fda can start issuing a second round of grants. 50% of the initial grants that ten million dollar cap overall. maybe that's getting ahead of ourselves. if that's possible, we're talking about an unpes unpreced

level of federal aid for live entertainment. for all and every grant that's available. if they qualify are they able to get multiple grants or are they going to be told okay, you already got that grant. >> i think it really depends on the options that they are looking at. as i mentioned before, you can't get a stages grant and apply for a new round of ppe or apply for this new round of ppe and get a save our stages grant. i would say that people should definitely aggressively pursue as many options as possible while looking at all the conditions. looking at small business development center.

this stuff is complicated. it changes in very realtime. we don't want people to feel trapped by this. our role is supposed to support getting resources out to people. we don't want people to feel trapped or have a lack of information here. >> overwhelmed. >> yeah. >> okay. thank you so much. >> thank you. are there other questions? >> i just want to recap. i know commissioner lee touched on this. in your humble opinion, what steps or options or advocacy can be done by this specific group here to help either on the sos

stuff. are there anythings you can imagine that you would do that would concretely help or potentially help. >> yes. i think that the -- in terms of the save our stages, you know, once we get a little bit more clarity on when applications are going to open and what steps there are for people to qualify. i think the commissions role for amplifying that information, sharing that information, fielding questions about that information to get -- we want people to be as clear as possible before the clock starts running on applications. all of those are really critical. and continuing to hear feedback from the state -- from the entertainment stake holiers hols about how is this working. there is concern.

it's great the money is out there but how long will it take to arrive. that's a fair concern that many business owners have. beyond that, i think continuing to do the work of identifying, save our stages seems like a very promising encouraging financial package for folks to qualify. there are going to be constituents and permit ees that do not qualify. while it is a really important step to support the night life ecosystem, we certainly need additional steps to support the ecosystem. that initial federal package was a down payment. to continue to advocate for strategy it deepen that support and relief i think are really

valuable as well. >> thank you. anymore questions? >> one more question. is there a website where we can track who received or qualified and received grants and versus who did not? is that public? >> you know. i know that at some point, the paycheck protection program recipients became public information, i would assume that the save our stages grants would similarly ultimately become public information. i don't know that there will be realtime tracking. the ppe recipients that information on a granular level and aggregate level, looking at ppe by industry.

a lot of that data ultimately became available. i don't know what plans there are to share that in any capacity. i would expect that information to become public. thinking about if your question is leading in terms of how to look at that data in terms of effectiveness and who it reached and didn't reach, those seem like very important considerations to look back on this program with some good data. >> all right. i don't think there's anymore questions. thank you very much for coming. i'm going to open this for public comment. do we have any public comment. it would be on the phone, i think. i'm going to flash the information on the screen to be sure people see it again. at this moment there's nobody

waiting to speak. in the chat as well as in the participant's list. >> all right. a remarkably uncontroversial presentation. that's great. let's move onto the next agenda item. thanks, ben. i look forward to hearing from you shortly about this. thanks for everything you do. thank you. >> thank you. >> the next agenda item is number five which is a report from our deputy director. >> good evening. hi, commissioners. happy new year. this report is exactly the same

as at our last hearing. we haven't received a single complaint. it's a true testament of the times right now. there's no entertainment happening in san francisco. i'm happy to answer any questions about the enforcement report. i want to echo what was said about new years eve. to further elaborate on that a little bit. we received three complaints on new years eve none of which were sound related rather people congregating. they were not able to validate any of the complaints. there was no activity they were able to see. it came in through certificate

and not our e c q. nothing major to report out but happy to answer any questions if you have any. >> any questions? none? there's no questions. literally no sound compliance. >> amazing. >> end of times. with that. i'm going to open everything up to public comment. >> i'm going to flash it on the screen again as a courtesy. checking and there is nobody in the queue waiting to speak. >> all right. we'll close public comment. thank you very much deputy director.

happy new year. the next agenda item is number six which is new business requests for future agenda items. this is the newest standing agenda we have where we have a place for commissioner comments and questions but a specific place to flag or note things that we would like the staff to work on and come up with future meetings. i know this is surprise to many of you but i want to open up the floor here and see if anybody has any thoughts or wants to add anything they think should be on future agenda items. >> not right now but i wanted to say i appreciate having this as

an agenda item. now that i know i'll come back with some things for the docket. thank you for having this space. >> all right. any public comment on this? >> i can show off my cat if you want. >> it would have to be for a future agenda item. >> he can wait. he just left the room. >> there's nobody waiting to speak. >> close public comment again. i think this is great. it's a relic of the past that our team uncovered and padded back in. it's really great. i think we should put our thoughts in what we can do for the future. we are at the final agenda item

if i'm not incorrect. it's commissioner comments and questions. i don't want to be the first to say happy new year. i'm going to. happy new year, everybody. anyone else, comments and questions? >> are we due for an election for our commission, chair, and vice chair? oh, goodness, i think you might be right. let me check into it, commissioner. we may have to add it for january 19th. >> thank you. >> commissioner, we couldn't

hear you when you were just talking. >> i was just saying that she introduced her cat. i would like to introduce our family. the agenda was riveting. he is a lab mix. you can spot us in the park on a daily basis. >> happy new year, everybody. >> the only last thing i want to say is right before the christmas holiday there was a board meeting that was called after when they should have left for recess to specifically focus

on the effects that the outdoor dining ban had on restaurants and bars in san francisco. it was a very significant board meeting, i think. over two hundred small business owners participated and there was hours and hours of public comment. i think there was my personal opinion is there was an awakening in the small business community that the taking for granted that things would work out for the community. those days have passed and the small business community needs to organize and advocate for themselves and do everything that all the other groups do. make sure they are not an af afterthought for the leaders in

the city. i think we're going to see more and more of this going forward. i just want to flag it for everybody. small business issues are night life issues overwhelming. unless you're talking about at&t park. almost all of our entertainment venues are one form of small business. i'm hoping to see momentum build and change that will help the small business and entertainment community going forward. i'll get off my soap box now. i'm weirdly excited for the future even though we know how horrible it's going to be in the short term. any public comment on this agenda item? >> there's nobody waiting in the queue to speak.

there's no chat. >> all right. we'll close public comment and adjourn this meeting at 6:20 p.m. thank you everybody for attending and we'll see you in two weeks. >> thank you. >> happy new year, everybody.