Skip to main content

tv   BOS Rules Committee  SFGTV  December 6, 2021 6:00pm-12:01am PST

6:00 pm
>> good morning. welcome to the rules committee for today, monday, december 6, 2021. i am the chair of the committee supervisor aaron peskin joined by vice-chairman delman and committee member supervisor connie chan. our clerk is mr. young. >> committee members participate in this remote meeting through video as though physically present. we recognize that public access to city services is essential. public comment will be available on each item on the agenda.
6:01 pm
channel 26, 78 or 99 and --governor rick scott are streaming on the screen. available by (415)655-0001. call from a quiet location, speak cloly and turn down your television or radio. you may submit public comment in either way. e-mail to the rules committee clerk at vic.yo un g at sfgovtv.
6:02 pm
if you submit it will be forwarded and included as part of the file. written comments will be sent to city hall room 244. san francisco california 94102. that completes my initial comments. >> thank you. could you please read the first item. >> item 1. campaign and governmental conduct code. permit consultants and to prohibit elected officials, department heads commissioners and designated employees from soliciting behested payments from interested parties. >> thank you.
6:03 pm
colleagues, we are back for the sixth time with the behested legislation. my staff earlier circulated to each of you and your offices the latest round of amendments that reflect conversations that my office has had, particularly with nonprofit stakeholders as well as the ethics commission as well as with other supervisors who have weighed in on this. i spoke with the city attorney, who was present this morning and was informed that one of these proposed amendments is in fact substantive. what i would like to do this morning is to make all of the non substantive amendments and hopefully pass out of committee this morning. i will speak a little bit to why it is urgent that it be done sooner rather than later. i would like to duplicate the
6:04 pm
file and make the one substantive amendment and keep it in committee for consideration as trailing legislation. before i get into the specifics, let me just kind every mind us of where we have been and how we have gotten here and the basic principle in the legislation are. as you remember in the wake of the nuru scandal our controller did a report and recommended a number of changes and supervisor haney then followed up in september of last year with the introduction of this legislation with regard to behested payments particularly as related to department heads, and that was in the midst of covid. this has been around here for a
6:05 pm
year and six committee meetings. the basic principles are pretty simple. we should not be putting ourselves or our city officials in positions of raising money from the parties seeking financial benefit from us. this dynamic has been allowed to persist for too long, and per controller's recommendation this legislation addresses it squarely. the amendments i have made along the way i think do that even more. to put it another way, you are either in the business of making grants to the city or applying for contracts from the city. you can't be in the business of getting contracts with the city in exchange forgiving money to the city. that is the definition of quid pro quo. i also want to ground this in
6:06 pm
another principle which is in the realm of the practical. we, and that by i mean we as city officials, need to be able to comply with this. outside stakeholders also need to comply with this. we all need to understand our obligations and responsibilities. the amendments i made to get us to this point that i propose today are in furtherance of that latter practical consideration. in as much as we have tried to cast as broad net as possible, i want to be clear where the prohibition on behested payments need not apply. to that end i would like to make the following non substantive amendments which you are in receipt of at page 2. let me get my cheat sheet here.
6:07 pm
lines 19 through 21. at page 4 lines 1 and 2. i propose to define the term grant and provide that people or entities who provide grants to the city are not interested parties for the sake of prohibition on behested payments legislation. if all you do is grant money to the city, then you are not an interested party as defined. this takes care of what some of my colleagues were concerned with with regard to accept and suspend approves. page 3 lines 11 and 12. i would like to exempt from the definition of interested party individuals who attempt to influence city officials via public speech provided they don't have another financial interest in the matter. there are a number of ways people attempt to influence city
6:08 pm
officials that are entirely benign and things we should encourage like speaking on step of city hall or attending a rally. that should not make these individuals interested parties. page 3, lines 19-21. page 16, lines 14-16. i propose to limit so listing permits to those who they have made contacts within the last year. at page 4. lines 24 and 25. i propose to exempt uncompensated nonprofit board members from definition of interested party. at page 6 line 25, this is actually a clarification but i would like to limit the prohibition on indirect solicitations only to identifiable interested parties.
6:09 pm
one amendment which i propose at page 3 lines 4-6 and page 4 lines 3-4. i will make to the duplicated file. that would make sure if the contract is before the board of supervisors for approval under 9.118, the charter section that requires the board of supervisors to approve contracts over $10 million in cost 10 years in duration or $1 million income to the city that the parties too those contracts are defined as interested parties. the city attorney has said that is substantive. i will do that in the duplicated file. before i open up to public comment, let me circle around to what i said at the beginning which is to address why there is some urgency here.
6:10 pm
i note that in the context that this has been going on now since the scandal but over a year since this legislation was introduced and we really have a long overdue duty to cut this behavior out of our government. i always prefer to do things legislatively and not go to the ballot unless we have to go to the ballot. that said, i understand that the ethics commission which has no authority to put this legislation directly on the ballot is considering doing just that on or before the deadline early next year. i would like to show that this body is doing its job and can
6:11 pm
adopt this legislation in my conversations with the ethics commission staff, they find these amendments and the body of the legislation to be acceptable and supportable by them so i will prefer that we pass this and not dither into next year when they are poised to put this on the ballot. with that if you have any questions or comments you can state them now or wait until later in the meeting. if not, supervisor chan, i will open it up to public comment. >> thank you, chair peskin. i want to thank you. i know how hard it is to really and also thank your team for
6:12 pm
their hard work on this. i know it has been a lot of conversation with many different parties to make sure we get this right, and most importantly that is enforceable. thank you so much for your work on this. >> thank you, supervisor chan. i do want to thank and acknowledge my staff who has worked hard on this. debbie from the human services network who has been a real thought partner with my office in suggesting some clarifications and practical amendments. i would like to thank deputy city attorney and our council here this morning for their help along the way and patrick ford at the ethics commission for his council and collaboration. supervisor mandelman.
6:13 pm
>> thank you, chair peskin. thank you for all of your work on this legislation over these past many months. i have been happy to allow and to watch as this process has gone forward. one question that has been brought to my attention that i want to understand how the legislation would work. i get the notion that elected officials with particular issues before us for some reasonable period of time prior to the guest or some to us for some period of time after. i think that makes sense. i am also understanding as we thumb through right now and i don't think this has changed in any of the amendments the
6:14 pm
prohibition on soliciting payment from a contract lobbyist. what i have heard and i don't know if it is true. there are hundreds of contact lobbyists that, many of them may or may not have been working on something that appears before the board recently or likely to appear before the board shortly. is that right? is that a problem? is that something i should be concerned about? >> the notion is if someone is getting paid to influence a decision-maker that decision-maker should not be soliciting behested payments from that party that is paid to influence the decision-maker.
6:15 pm
>> regardless whether we are talking about a particular issue or contract or thing. in general this set of people if they work for non-profits or for profits who talk to us on a regular basis about stuff impacting the city we should not be calling those people to ask us to find money for non-profits we care about. >> that essential my hope that people who are because that again goes into the notion that there is a quid pro quo. they are carrying water. they get paid for that. we grant them what they desire and they in-turn, yes, are you proposing language to limit the contact lobbyist prohibition to
6:16 pm
actual contacts in the last year like we did for permit consultants? is that what you are saying? >> i am trying to understand what it would do and what the intent is. i can imagine there are contact lobbyists. i can imagine people register as contact lobbyists even though they ever really ask for anything but to maintain good relationship with the city. i can imagine on the nonprofit side there might be a similar situation and i guess, i mean, you and i privately discussed. my concern about the ethics rights i have never supported tightening. it is that we box ourselves in ever more tightly and create, you know, things for people to screw up without necessarily leading to better ethics in the
6:17 pm
sense of newer gate, for example. i don't know whether this is a concern of mine. it is something raised. thank you for engaging around it. >> if what you are saying, which is, and i hear you, which is if you go down the list of contact lobbyists on the website there are individuals registered as such that many of us have never heard from or have not heard from in years. the way, i think, to deal with that would be what we did for permit consultants to limit them to actual contacts in a period of time. if you haven't heard from making this up at&t in the last year, they would not be covered. that is an easy change to make.
6:18 pm
narrowing. i am not the city attorney. that would be nonsub tantive, i would imagine. >> thank you. >> why don't we open up for public comment. any members of the public to comment on this item number 1? >> yes, mr. chair. operations is checking to see if there are callers in the queue. please let us know the callers are ready dial star 3 to be added the queue. for those. on hold wait.we have six callere online to speak. first speaker, please. >> good morning, supervisors. this is is debbieler man at human services network. we appreciate our work with supervisor peskin's office which we feel has addressed our
6:19 pm
concerns to protect legitimate fund raising while addressing the ethics issues. we are still working on the piece around attempt to influence which is still vague and we believe overly broad. we think that that provision should be limited to those with a financial interest which is the primary driver in corruption cases. the attempt to influence language includes advocacy that may not involve direct contact with the public official. and that person may not be aware of the attempt to influence. rallies and public forums are one example. it could include things like sending a tweet or sending a letter to the editor. a big example is petitions. if somebody turned in a petition with a thousand signatures.
6:20 pm
the public official may not look at the names. >> thank you. i agree. in some sense this is what the ethics regulations, i think, should be revised to do. i will circle back to that. next speaker, please.
6:21 pm
>> good morning, chair peskin, supervisors. i am bruce wolf. i am the current chair of the sun shine northern passports. i wholeheartedly support this legislation to address non-profits that ethically do business and fund raise and benefit the people of our great city. i appreciate the work of hsn and your staff. i am tried being embarrassed over the progressive political let's liberal values in san francisco. we have no control of public officials. i do welcome this. i also believe in fairness and appropriate balance and
6:22 pm
regulations. to include such advisory bodies like the sunshine ordinance task force. somehow it feels a bit overreaching. compared to those who truly could or would have an effect of the declines we are experiencing today where they hold authority of the financial value which is ordinances to control. i am getting conflicting ethics commission who is charged with implementing and enforcing this legislation and our legal counsel at the sunshine task force. the ethics commission wrote in a written opinion the first initiation that the task force members are not subject to the current spending law. i am receiving communications the members are quote not commissioners. despite the task force legal
6:23 pm
counsel's opinion that we are commissioners, but then we don't hold administrative proceedings. it is not clear as to where bodies like the task force it is in regards to who the officers are. >> thank you. i appreciate that. next speaker, please. >> good morning, this is charles head, president of coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. i applaud your advancing this legislation. years ago i was on the civil grand jury that investigated the ethics commission and worked with larry bush to cut out the cancer quit pro ." larry is now on the ethics commission. he is doing so. i am glad that you are banding together with him.
6:24 pm
good luck to you all. thank you very much. good morning. >> next speaker, please. >> we can hear you now, mr. pill plow. >> as i said, last week and i will expand on that. i believe that ethics is critical to making the changes work regulations and training on page one line 16 i think there is an and that should come back. page 3, line 6, that should be indented. page 6, line 13. concept of public appeal the referenced in the legislation. the definition was struck out. i believe that public appeal should be defined on page 4 with the other terms. since i asked last week and didn't get an answer since
6:25 pm
ethics is the filing officer do these amendments apply to the san francisco unified school district and college district. i understand that the meet and confer process with employee organizations has been completed and, finally, importantly i support this ordinance and believe that any further needed fixes can be done with the trailing legislation of the duplicated file you referenced. thank you for all of your work and all of the work behind-the-scenes to make this happen. i appreciate it very much. >> thank you. any other members of the public for item 1, public comment. >> i believe that was our last public comment on this matter. >> public comment on item 1 is closed. colleagues. i would like to move the an for
6:26 pm
mentioned amendments with the exception of the one substantive amendment page 3 line 4-6 and page 4 lines 3 and 4. supervisor mandelman. >> i have two more questions. >> why don't we adopt those amendments then get to the questions. on the amendments a roll call, please. >> on the motion would you like to duplicate the file first? >> no. i would like to duplicate the file after. >> on that motion to amend. supervisor chan. >> aye. >> vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> chair peskin.
6:27 pm
>> aye. >> supervisor mandelman. >> two more things. apologies. trying to get myself caught up. the two other issues that i understand to have been noting around and i feel like you have dealt with at least one of those. an exception for accept and expend where the board of supervisors takes an action on it. i think that is in here. >> correct. these are the two the mayor's office brought to me. other is exception with organizations with m.o.u.s. i should not presume to know your questions. >> with regard -- first one yes. that is in there.
6:28 pm
with regard to the second one. the answer from at least my office is no. the reason i addressed earlier on which is an m.o.u. does not necessarily cure what we are fundamentally going after. you are either in the business of making grant in the city or applying for contracts from the city. you can't be in the business of getting contracts with the city in exchange forgiving money to the city. i am not okay with the m ou exception because there could be m.o.u.s with organizations that give money to the city and get contracts from the city. that is precisely the behavior that is quid pro quo behavior. corruptor not. respectfully to the mayoral
6:29 pm
administration yes number one and no number two. >> one example where i think an organization does both of these things. the situation here as i understand it would be a friends of group that sometimes does the work in which there might be an agreement or contract with some kind of work the city wants done. also raising money that the city thinks is valuable making payment to the city or somebody else to do what the city wants. that is the model that you feel is problematic. is that just the one obvious parks alliance or are there other friends of groups that are
6:30 pm
doing that, too? >> it is obvious in the instance that you just mentioned and it may be in other places, but it is the notion that there are inherently potential conflicts in that relationship. the fundamental point here is the point around whether or not the fact of an m.o.u. leads to an exemption. i say no to that. i think the body of what we are trying to get to is clearly set forth here. god only nos what else could be in m.o.u.s. the m ou between the department and third-party is not acceptable to this supervisor. >> the notion there has not been at least through the mayor's office an m.o.u. approved by the
6:31 pm
board of supervisors. >> it would be approved by the board of supervisors, right? >> it depends on what it is. no, they are approved all of the time by departments that don't come to the board of supervisors as supervisor chan well knows from her days at rec and park. >> before we vote on this with the full board i want to understand implications for any other friends of the group. >> understood. thank you supervisor mandelman. i do hope to prepare some additional amendments along the lines that ms.ler man spoke to. they are relatively easy as to categories of speech for interested party definitions.
6:32 pm
mr. chen is aware of those and they are straight forward. with that i would like to duplicate the file and continue the duplicated file to the call of the chair. duplication requires no vote. continuation does. mr. young, a roll call, please. >> on the motion to continue the duplicated file to the call of the chair. supervisor chan. >> aye. >> vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> the motion passes without objection. >> then, colleagues, before i make a motion to send this item
6:33 pm
to the full board as committee report with recommendation, let me state maybe the obvious. that is that it is never easy for elected officials to hamstring themselves. as a matter of fact i was reading a story about the creation of the fair political practices act when then i believe governor in his first time jerry brown explained to the parties that were interested in that that the legislature would never pass it because the legislature would never want to tie their own hands. in deed they had to go to the ballot. i in san francisco we are better than that and we are more
6:34 pm
courageous than that. if we are not inclined to tie our own hands given what has happened in san francisco and the shame and embarrassment that it has brought the city and county, we have no choice. it is long overdue. i appreciate supervisor mandelman's comments about the law of unintended consequences and the further narrowing of what an elected official can solicit and what the rules are around those solicitations. frankly, colleagues, we are in the business of regulating. we are in the business of making sure that our constituents needs are met. yes, fund-raising particularly around elections is one of the unfortunate things people in these positions have to do because even with public financing you still have to raise money.
6:35 pm
i actually on balance think getting us out of the third-party fund-raising business or putting some very bright lines around it is the right thing to do, healthy for our society and we, frankly, should focus as much as we can on regulating and not on fund-raising. we do a lot of fund-raising. they are called bond measures, property taxes. it always, you know, gets me when for instance in 2008 when we went to the voters and asked for $800 million to rebuild san francisco general hospital. the voters of san francisco with the support not only of the san francisco democratic party which i chaired at the time, but with the republican party anemic as
6:36 pm
though it may be in two-thirds majority voted to tax themselves for $800 million. then mark zuckerberg gave an additional under $100 million and got his name put on the hospital. it is the peoples hospital. we paid for it. we fund raise all of the time from our generous constituents. they are called property taxes, parcel taxes for the school district. why we are running around asking folks for $2,500 here and $5,000 there, i mean i can't say that i haven't done it. i have. the reality is that the big money comes from the voters of san francisco in any of that this legislation is about any
6:37 pm
city firm, department head or supervisor not raising money from interested parties. we have worked to craft and sculpt andnary wrote to definition of interested parties. i would like to make a motion to send to the full board with positive recommendation for consideration tomorrow. we will see what happens tomorrow. i know that the mayor's office has issues. i know that some of my colleagues are concerned this will hamper fund-raising abilities, but let's give it a whirl. i really appreciate the advocates along the way who made helpful right mature suggestions incorporated in the six meetings along the way. mr. clerk as roll call, please.
6:38 pm
>> supervisor chan, my apologies. >> thank you, chair peskin. i am not too sure this body is or the legislative branch of government was more korage us. years or decades in the making of this body including from the work you have been involved in limits political donations and establishing the public financing system that works including supervisor mar's increasing the dollar amount for the matching. also eliminates any interested
6:39 pm
parties, lobbyist donating to political campaign to elected candidates. all of those measures are in place to allow someone like me working immigrant background from working families with no connection to really big donors to be elected to office. those are the works to this point which frankly i think that is what i see is that again all of this is really back to who can pay? who can pay to influence decision-making process in city government? for elected officials and city department heads for them to make something happen in the city is that they need to be courting big donors, people with money so that we can make
6:40 pm
something happen. that fundamental approach creates some of the problems we are seeing, corruption charges we see for someone like mohammed nuru and others that they thought they needed to do that in order to make something happen within the city government. i will leave it like that. i do think this is not -- i look forward to seeing how this will be implemented. i do appreciate what chair peskin mentioned to show that we are committed to do this work and that we to do this work and to make sure that if we needed to tweak it we can because in the event the ethics commission decides to put this to the
6:41 pm
ballot, i think there is going to be more challenges to make sure this actually works. we should move forward. >> supervisor mandelman. i do have the duplicated file failed to make the amendment i wanted to make to the call of the chair. we can get to that from a minute. supervisor mandelman. >> thank you, chair peskin. one of the perhaps unfortunate effects of another well meaning piece is the inability of committee members to engage with each other outside of committee meeting around the legislation before us. i am grateful for the work with
6:42 pm
other supervisors and with departments and non profits over many, many months to make this legislation work. i remain as i said earlier and you acknowledged concerned about unexpected consequences. this is not a bright line rule. this is not a supervisor going out of business fund-raising from right parties but creating new rules how that works. it is possible and likely that you struck the right balance and that this is legislation i will support at the full board. i am not prepared right now to vote on it, particularly not to vote on it coming tomorrow. i am going to be a no today. maybe a yes tomorrow after i have gotten these questions addressed. thank you for your work on this.
6:43 pm
>> thank you, supervisor mandelman. with that we will -- we will go to housekeeping on the duplicated file at page 3 line was 4-6. page 4 lines 3 and 4 as a 9.118 provision that i spoke to that and you are in receipt of on that motion to the duplicated file which includes continuation to the call of the chair. the file as amended, duplicated file as amended a roll call, please. >> chair peskin. would you like to rescind the duplicated file and i will make the motion to add the one
6:44 pm
amendment and continue to the call of the chair. on that motion roll call, please. >> motion to amend and continue to the call of the chair. supervisor chan. >> aye. >> vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> motion passes without objection. >> motion to send the original file as amended with recommendations as a committee report. roll call, please. >> on that motion. supervisor chan. >> aye. >> vice chair mandelman. >> no. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> the motion passes with vice
6:45 pm
chair mandelman dissenting in committee. >> we will discuss this more with the rest of the board tomorrow. next item, please. >> item 2. hearing to consider three members to the food security task force. members of the husband lick who wish to comment -- public who wish to comment call 415-655-0001. 24837 is 554296-pound and pound again. dial star 3 to speak. system prompt will indicate you raised your hand. wait until you are unmuted. right now star 3 to speak.
6:46 pm
we will get to that part of it after discussions. >> thank you, victor. we have two applicants for three seats. why don't we hear in the order they appear for seat number 12. meredith terrel. >> good morning, supervisors. thank you for considering me for food security task force seat 12. i worked with community-based organizations in san francisco focused on food during emergencies for 17-years. i am excited to be nominated. i have served on the food security task force in 2010 as co-chair. i currently attend meetings and have engaged this year. i hear the message loud and clear the security task force is charged with re-thinking food security. i am looking forward to joining
6:47 pm
current members to seek participation throughout san francisco and change the way we approach the essential topic. we need many voices, strong partnerships to help address policy in san francisco around food security. i hope to bring security during emergency to the group. since 2010 i worked with american red cross focusing on community inclusion and food access. we can agree the covid-19 response laid to bear inequities across food access in san francisco. one size does not fit all to meet community needs. we need to do better. we have made food available with the view that culturally appropriate food is a luxury. it is imperative to allocate needed resources. i will seek to gather voices
6:48 pm
from the community to represent needs of seniors. having focused on senior population during my time with the meals on wheels san francisco it is essential to ensure their voices are present and needs are met. thank you. >> thank you. questions or comments? seeing none. we will move on. >> good morning. can you hear me. >> yes. i apologize nor not pronouncing your last name correctly. reece. i am with the san francisco african-american faith-based could amlition. i have been in this roll for three years. our mission and goal for 33
6:49 pm
churches in san francisco area, bayview, hunters point, tenderloin and pacific islanders and people of color city-wide. this coalition was launched in november 2016 to address the high priority health needs for service. the health issues in our congregations. [indiscernable] housing, mental health and hunger. at the time our pastors prioritize hunger as third most present need. thanks to the covid-19 all of our work has been shifted to emergency response to hunger. for the last two months we shifted our concentration to
6:50 pm
food security for our target population. donations an philanthropic organizations and partnering with dph with the new deal, the food bank and more to serve our most impacted target area. while doing so i learned there is still a need for long-term self-sufficient programs in our community. with technology and experience i can be a valuable asset for the food security task force. i have identified and established relationships with the black farmers who are interested in partnering with african-american cultural community organization in our neighborhood. after my retirement from the airline industry after 45 years
6:51 pm
of international experience i am excited to work with the task force when we thinking a broader approach to the community issues and needs. taking advantage of the trust relationship coalition has established with our faith-based clientele. innovated approaches are yet to be tried to this new normal society in which we serve. thank you in advance for your consideration in appointing me as a member of the task force. >> thank you. are there any members of the public to comment on item 2?
6:52 pm
>> there are no callers in the queue. >> if you have not done so dial star 3 to be added the queue. for those on hold, please continue to wait. if you would like to be added the queue press star 3 to be added at this time. i will give them a few moments. it does not appear to be anybody in the queue for public comment at this time. >> public comment is closed. colleagues, if there is no objection and no comment, i would like to make a motion to have meredith terrel serve in seat 12 and guille rmo reece in
6:53 pm
seat 19. anybody who represented the community-based organization to provide nutrition support and works to increase food security of san francisco residents is welcome to apply for seat 19. on the motion to forward with recommendation meredith terrel for seat 12 and reece for seat 14. roll call, please. >> supervisor chan. >> aye. >> vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> the motion passes without objection. >> thank you. can you please call the next item. >> item 3. hearing to consider appointing one member term ending april 30, 2025 to the police commission. members of the public to comment call 415-655-0001.
6:54 pm
id248371554296. pound pound. if you haven't done so press star 3 to line up to speak. >> thank you. colleagues as you will recall, patrick did not apply to continue and her term expired i wang to thank ms. dejesus. we have been waiting for applicants. we have some impressive applicants before us. first chattopadhyay has withdrawn. there are four applicants for
6:55 pm
the seat before us today. i want to thank them all for applying. thank and acknowledge the many letters of support and e-mails that we have receive. with that if there are no opening comments, i would like to open this up in the order that they appear on the agenda for opening statements. from the applicants for the police commission starting with david rizk. >> good morning. thank you for the opportunity. good morning, supervisors and mr. clerk. i want to talk to you this morning about why i am interested in this position why i would be a good fit. modernizing policing has been a
6:56 pm
passion of mine for a number of years. i have spent a lot of time working on it from many different ago gels which i think -- angles which qualify me for this position. when i first became a lawyer i worked for two federal judges. i worked on federal cases for them. i saw many different criminal cases and learned the way the judges view prosecutions. then i worked at a san francisco-based nonprofit called electronic frontier foundation that looks at civil liberties issues in emerging technology issues. i went into private practice as pro bono attorney handled civil rights and excessive force cases from police departments and innocence project matters exonerating folks who her the victim of bad police work.
6:57 pm
then i joined citizenry view which oversees citizen police. that operates much like the police commission. it hears misconduct cases and reviews policy changes for bart police. now, i work as an assistant public defender. i have seen hundreds of searches, arrests, investigations, good and bad, and i am very aware of the impact and benefits of law enforcement in the way they interact with community. finally, i am a member of the bar association of san francisco task force. lawyers, judges, prosecutors, law enforcement that weigh in on issues in the criminal justice system.
6:58 pm
through that organization i have built relationships with leadership in all of the major criminal justice agencies in san francisco. da office, public defender, police commission, d.p.a. i am fortunate to weigh in on most of the most important issues that have come through the police commission in recent years and written dozens of letters and white papers and research memos offering research, legal counsel and advice to decision-makers in hopes of improving the types of policy outcomes we have in san francisco. those are my basic call fixes. i want to say a little bit about my approach to this work. as you all know and is obvious for the last several years in the united states. police reform and oversight is hard work. it can be extremely challenging,
6:59 pm
involves competing interests with high stakes. i had a front row at bart. i have been on the receiving end on oversight committee of anganguish of family members. i heard anxiety of members of the public fearful of being caught alone at night on the platform by the trains or in the parking lots. i have essential heard from commander staff about their own safety concerns about desire to do their job and the difficulties of their job. with this experience and what it taught me is that in evidence-based experience-based pragmatic approach to negotiating reforms that honor first the community needs and
7:00 pm
build trust between the community and the department is important. it is essential to guaranteeing public safety. i also think de-escalating rhetoric in difficult situations and reaching compromises is incredibly important. it often brings the best result. a few more things of my guiding principals. a few years ago i wrote a brief supporting the polis commission challenging the use of force policy in san francisco. it is modern iced and we wrote to the court of appeals formulating policy that preserved life and promotes trust between police agencies and communities they serve.
7:01 pm
fundamental duty of local government. i think that is the mandate of the police commission. a lot more the police commission does. i personally look although several years old now to the obama white house's 21st century policing principles. there are six of them that form the basis for what us d.o.j. did when it came to san francisco to urge 272 recommendations that they ultimately made to the department. those are things like increasing community input to policy and oversight, leveraging new technology to improve transparency, building capital through community engagement, neighborhood problem solves. community polices is something san francisco made great strides
7:02 pm
in. training and education. the fact is that there are shortages of police officers state-wide. it needs to be a profession people continue to look up to. that involves training and honoring office of wellness and safety. these would guide my approach to working on the police commission. i want to say little bit about diversity. my father's family is arab. migrate grandfather came to the united states to sell pots and pans. my family remembers that. my family was fortunate to take the opportunities that this country provided to become professionals and to turn towards public service. my father was a doctor. i took that up myself. i followed it.
7:03 pm
i am assistant public federal defender in san francisco. i am dedicated to a diverse group of candidates. primarily people of color, spanish speakers, some new to the city. very diverse group. my job is to understand and emphasize and advocate for people who have a tremendous range of experiences and backgrounds. i represented everybody from immigrants to lifelong residents of filmore district and everybody in between. this is important. as long time citizen of the city, i was born here. i would be proud and i think i have experience with the city and communities here to serve the board of supervisors well as
7:04 pm
a police commissioner. thank you for your time and consideration of my application. >> thank you for your application. you appear to be eminently qualified. today or at some point in the future this appointing authority or another appointing authority that we can find a place for you on the police commission. with that we go to the next applicant. jesus gabriel yanez. >> good morning, chair peskin and mandelman and chan. i have been devoting myself to providing violence prevention and creating safety programs, mental health, clinical evidence
7:05 pm
informed programs in san francisco's community-based organizations since 1997. as a mental health specialist i have been involved in a wide range of partnerships and collaborations early in the 2004-2005. a group of community providers saw a need to better impact on systems involved young people involved with street activity. that led us to create a community response protocol to reach out though those individuals not receiving support services. through those effortings we created volunteer group of outreach workers, professionals
7:06 pm
that reestablished the program that was devoted to making sure those young adults were receiving the support and treatment needs and that treatment needs were met. the effort led to us establishing the community response network, a program to expand to impact on city-wide communities. we incorporated partners from filmore district, western addition, chinatown, bayview-hunters point and expanded efforts to ensure we were cultural responsive to the needs of the different communities in san francisco. for our efforts we receive a certificate of honor from the
7:07 pm
board of supervisors in 2005. in 2007, i was appointed to mayor newsom's leadership counsel and planning work group to establish the violence prevention plan for san francisco which was put into effect between 2008 and 2013 as advisory member with the community assessment and referral center. i work with the public defender's office and district attorney's office and leadership at san francisco police department to craft language and create protocols for the booking and detention of juveniles which the san francisco police department general order 7.01. in addition to my work collaborating with nonprofit organizations and juvenile probation department, public defender's office, i was
7:08 pm
selected as a groups fellow by the department of children youth and families in 2010. an opportunity that gave me access to working with a broad group of community leaders to determine what it is that this city can do differently to better impact those families and individuals that are over represented in our criminal justice systems. my whole career has been devoted to creating alternatives and ensuring that community voice is being included in the different processes that our city has in order to create public safety. one of the particular goals that i would have as a police commissioner is to ensure that we are utilizing trauma-informed
7:09 pm
care approaches. that we are ensuring when there areis departments that are -- incidents escalating as a result of street incidents that we have a police force trained in containment and deescalation, police force connected to the communities that they serve so that they can make the right decision as far as resourcing and making sure that those individuals that are often times coming into contact with the system solely because of their conditions, mental health conditions, be it their displacement situations, having to live in transitional housing or on the streets that we are working to make sure that each and every one of those
7:10 pm
individuals is also being respected, their rights are adhered to and we make every effort possible to make sure that we are not criminalizing situations that have more to do with social conditions as opposed to a criminal activity or a, you know, that they are not being criminalized solely for being individuals who do not necessarily have the resources to access housing, to access transportation. i think in particular my goal considering this, you know, the main issues that we have in this city with accountability, with ensuring the resources in place
7:11 pm
have an effective impact. i would love to see us move towards creating communication between the immigrant community and the san francisco police department. i believe our commission can play a role in facilitating that conversation. we know with improved communication, communities feel more comfortable reaching out to create a proactive approach to addressing incidents and containing situations before they escalate into issues that need to be dealt with by the criminal justice system. as immigrant i have been personally impacted by the manner in which the police department has interfaced with the laten x community. i believe that my experience working with the broad coalition of partners in every community
7:12 pm
in san francisco gives me insight to be able to understand the needs of different communities in san francisco and works to the cultural new answers of every subculture into account when makings disease decisions -- decisions about public safety. i live on 16th. i see a lot of interface between the police department and the folks that are coming to access services here at the native-american center or mental health program that is right down the block from here. i see the positive interaction that are an outcome of our
7:13 pm
efforts such as the compassionate alternative response teams and crisis intervention teams that receive the capacity building training that i believe every officer on our streets should meet provided within order for us to make sure that we are containing de-escalating and connecting people to the supports that will help them rehab it tail the need that they have in their life and connect to those services that will help them get out of the situations that put them in, you know, in the line of contact. lastly, i really believe that we have an opportunity. there are 400 plus pages of recommendations from the d.o.j.
7:14 pm
i know we are making progress in improving our department. i also know that we need to be very, very steady and proactive and we need to make sure that there is true communication and accountability, quantifiable and qualitative information that will inform the direction we are going to take this department. i appreciate the opportunity to presenting my call fixes. i -- i would love to involve myself in a greater level to develop a safer community for all. grateful to present before you today. >> thank you, sir. if there are no questions or comments from committee members
7:15 pm
we will go to the next applicant listed. stephen schwartz, lulula flame. please proceed. >> i know he was with us earlier. >> i am with you. prepared to make my statement. i want to say that i am known as lulu around the city as an activist. ll an flame. i haven't changed my name. it is an e-mail address that i
7:16 pm
had for many years. anyway, i believe my call fixes for the police commission are unique. people over use the word unique. i am a transgender female. i don't approach the supervisor as a token, novelty or representative of the transcommunity. in my quotemale unquote career i served 10 years as staff writer for the "san francisco chronicle." i served as member of another san francisco appointed body. simplification commission from 96-99. i lived most of my life in san francisco. in the last four years i have
7:17 pm
undergone physical attacks that trans women suffer in the city. i suppose all trans people do. i know about trans women. i have investigated a process for relief. i interacted twice with police account ability regarding transissues. supervisor peskin knows i can get low crisis. i will be as brief as i can. i am committed to support modern efficient just and socially enforcement law enforcements. i studied police operations around the world including mexico, central america, peru, eastern europe, other places where violence and lawen
7:18 pm
informationment and other issues are serious issues. i want to stress i am experienced as international human rights investigator. i worked for united, worked for the nether lands and royal dutch government. for the united states government. investigating cases that i would say most investigators will never have to deal with. mass murder, atrocities. very difficult things to see. i often talk about what i saw and how it affected me. piles of dead kids are pretty dead to deal with. worse is when you see dead children with eyes still open. i say that to indicate the kind of person i am. multi link gal. bilingual in spanish.
7:19 pm
speak other languages that are relevant. european languages. [indiscernable] i speak russian. law enforcement in the city. our city can provide a global model for the future of law enforcement. that is why i seek this appointment and intend to accomplish. i will add a couple more little things i said to others when i sent out an e-mail about my desire to serve in this capacity. i believe policing in america is obsolete. police institutions are 19th century. it needs modernized and changed in many, many ways. it may sound strange. barcelona showed us how to do this. they have police bodies rooted in the community.
7:20 pm
recruit from community. train people to work with the community. to respond to the community. i could give you a lecture. i won't. there was a time when the police were hated, hated, loathed in that part of spain. the police now are trusted there. it is extra ordinary to see in a city with as much of a revolutionary past as barcelona loves its police officers. i am for language diversity. i can tell stories when i was a reporter. we have to listen be to rank and file. reporters go and interview troops in war zones. it is times to interview the troops in war dozen. we need to hear what they think and how they live and what they feel about the issues they confront.
7:21 pm
i am for the model for women police. it has problems with honor killings and other issues. the decision was made that the police would include as many women as possible to make it as progressive police body to carry this society forward. i am for that. two other things. one thing is important. we have to deal with mass crime, mass looting. i will say something many, many people would find out rage us. i believe vigilante is worst than crime. i don't like it when i hear that the store owners have to arm themselves because they are frightened of mass crime. there are ways away from this. the main way is to prevent
7:22 pm
vigilante. there is a lot more to say. i am a talkative person. i will add one thing. i don't know if it is appropriate to say this. this wasn't originally my idea. this idea was brought to me by rang and file officers in company a who have interacted with sometimes typically positively, sometimes negatively. they trust me. i trust them. it was officers from company a that came to me to say did you know you can present yourself as an applicant. you don't have to run for election. they said i should do this. i went ahead and made my application. i hope you will consider the fact that i have been for social
7:23 pm
justice since i was born. i have had many different experiences. i will never cease fighting for social justice. one last thing. after january 6th, people who say they hate police have a problem with me. the police department was all of the problems we have in this country protect me, protect us all. on january 6th, they protected our democracy. i want us to have police that we all trust, we all respect, we all obey when they are correct. as i said we can make the city a model of modern policing for the world. thank you, members. >> thank you. last but not least we will go to veronica fimbres. >> good morning, supervisors.
7:24 pm
i am veronica fimbres. i applied for this position a little while ago, over a year, i believe. i was interested in serving on this particular commission because i think that there is a lot of work to be done. my experience as a nurse. i have been a nurse over 38 years. safety nurse at sanquenton and community associate for the department of public health where i work. i have experience with working with police and i have experience on both sides of the law. i have jailed before and i have experienced the law before. i remember that this office was created. it was originally called the office of citizens complaints.
7:25 pm
it was run by mary dunlap to regulate and oversight of police department. i worked with all police chiefs we have had up until greg with my last police chief i worked with. i changed a lot of laws and rule that happen in the jail working with the sheriff's department. for transgenders. i am the first transgender officer in the history of the city and county of san francisco and serve appointed by the board of supervisors in the late 1990s. i served at the pleasure of three mayors. mayor willie brown, newsom and ed lee. over 14 years and eight months. as a person that has experienced
7:26 pm
the policing, i think the mental health part of polices is the most important. i want to make sure the people, citizens of san francisco receive the best policing that is possible in our city and in our state. i think that as a black trans woman i am concerned about the things that other citizens are concerned about and mentioned by the other speakers who have presented their issues here. i think that ones we get the police force and proper oversight of police force a lot of issues citizens are having will stop the complaining and abuse that is done by the police to citizens. i would like to see the murders
7:27 pm
of trans people of color solved. my girlfriend mariah was murdered not too long ago. her murder is still not solved by the police department. i would like to see action taken be on that. i think that more important than anything we have to show and the reason i run is to show that transgenders can do more than just walk through the streets. we have viable important part to play in society. i want people to recognize that. that is why i seek to be on the police commission. >> thank you. thank you for that and your past service. with that, colleagues. why don't we go to public comment on item 3. are there any members of the public to testify on the appointment of a new police commissioner to seat number 3?
7:28 pm
>> please dial star 3 to speak. if you are on hold wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. i believe we have five online with three in line to speak. first caller, please. >> hello, supervisors. i am the vice chair of the health commission. i am also the former chair of the youth commission. i am here to speak as member of the democratic club, one of the vice presidents. i could-chair political action committee meeting with kevin ortiz. i am here to speak in support of
7:29 pm
jesus yamez for seat three. it is important to have representation of the latin x community on the police commission especially by people with experience at the behavioral health system. i work at a homeless shelter and i have seen some of the amazing work that the team has been able to accomplish so far with the behavioral health approach for the most vulnerable people on the streets who are coping with dire circumstances. i truly believe that jesus has that experience as well as from working within the community but having personal experiences coming up through the city as immigrant.
7:30 pm
i wanted to enforce that the democratic club has asked for continuing latino support. thank you for all of the amazing work that you have done. thank you. >> next caller, please. >> i am ron sickle, director of justice services. i am speaking on behalf of
7:31 pm
jesus. i have known him for 20 years in many capacities. i have worked alongside him when he was co-chair of juvenile justice providers association as well as on individual cases involved in the justice system. i have a tremendous respect for his thoughtfulness and intuition. i am involved in juvenile justice reform, transitioningal justice reform. one statement repeated is the first place of contact and reform is police. if we don't have them the rest of this will not be nearly as effective. consequently, one of the biggest communications gaps is between the agencies working on this and the police. i feel strongly we need someone on the commission to understand it deeply and who is part of the
7:32 pm
community greatly affected by the justice system. a commissioner connected to the multitude of people and agencies involved with people involved in and affected by the system. we need someone who is completely trusted by the community as well as who understands working with the systems affecting their lives with positive reforms for the future. jesus has the unique combination of intellectual and academic understanding of the issues. intuitive understanding due to intimate involvement and years of experience with all of the different departments and offices that are part of the justice system. i met him 20 years ago. >> year time has elapsed. if you can turn your camera off during or deliberations that would be very much appreciated.
7:33 pm
next speaker, please. >> good morning. director of road map initiative collaborative effort. i have submitted a letter of support on behalf of the appointment of jesus to the commission. i have had the pleasure of working with mr. yanez20 years. i have seen the work he has done for youth and violence prevention programs. it impacted nose we serve and i have seen the impacts on developing the next generation of leaders in the community. his legacy of leadership development speaks for i was.
7:34 pm
-- for itself. he has advocated for best practice intervention to address the issues. it is my belief that living in the urban environment poses unique challenges, to youth, young adults and families. he understands the needs of these individuals by facilitating connections. his work and experience have been unique and vital perspective. i support his selection. when polices is scrutinized more than ever these are needed for the department to improve community trust and being seen as vital partner in public safety in the city. thank you for your consideration. i am hopeful you will consider mr. yanez for this position. >> next speaker, please.
7:35 pm
>> good morning. i am the manager for the latino task force. it is agencies working on covid response and support for latino community. i am calling in support to jesus yanez as candidate for police commission. i have known him for 20 years. i want to echo what people said already in support of him. in the time that he has worked with so many young people, they have now become productive and responsive citizens in the community. also, the breadth of his work over the last years in ensuring we have healthy and productive citizens in our community. i am district 5 resident. i can speak to the copy of his
7:36 pm
impact city-wide not just one community and one neighborhood. i do support his candidacy. we would love to see him on the police commission. we look forward to him bringing all of the relevant experience that he has, in particular his on the ground experience where we move away from politics, move forward and actually realize the great ideas that city government can come up with. he has a proven track record of that and that is what we want to see in our community. someone who can it is in city government and realize policies and programs and initiatives on the ground. that is why i am calling to support jesus yanez. thank you. >> next speaker.
7:37 pm
[indiscernable] >> we can't hear you, speaker. >> hello. this is julie tron in support of david rizi. i have worked with the department for six years. i was named to the commission working group prior to any involvement from the department of justice. i was then named to negotiate the policy with the poa prior to vote by the commission. we did so for 20 hours over two days. we were unable to reach full agreement. unanimously supported the appeal. without david's amazing work as city attorney and his brief we may not have succeeded to uphold the use of force which is a
7:38 pm
model for the state. i sat on two working groups, two with david and the chief strategic plan with the traffic force 7.01 involvingoff -- juveniles. the volunteers doing this work are frustrated by commissioners who lack time to take this serious work. i have worked directly with david on a host of issues. as member of the bar association. he is our go to for complicated positions. i have worked closely with jesus who i trust you know by now who weighed in and supported david for her position. it is critical to have commissioners with expertise and time. this is important time and police response. he comes to you, david comes
7:39 pm
with expertise and eyes wide open what this takes to accomplish the job. i would ask any applicants for the commission seat about involvement with the working groups, commission hearings to determine if they are fully aware of the work involved going forward. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> that was the last public comment for this item. >> okay. public comment for item 3 is closed. is there one more speaker? >> one more speaker. >> all right. please proceed. >> hi. this is kevin ortiz with the democratic club speaking in my personal capacity. the san francisco club has for over 40 years advocated for latinos represented at
7:40 pm
government from supervisor to commissions as well. on april 22, 2021, we released a letter advocating for the seat of jesus to be represented and replaced by someone of latin x heritage to represent the values of jesus who had given time for the police commission. we ask today that we move forward and support the appoint mess of jesus yanez. it is important to take into account the latino community. we have heard from the task force and democratic club who did a letter on this issue. it is important the community continues to be heard and represented in these spaces as we know that police brutality and issues with over policing
7:41 pm
tends to happen to communities of color especially latino and black community. i ask today that you support jesus for this appointment moving forward. thank you for your time and consideration. >> thank you, mr. ortiz. no other members of the public. >> we have one more. >> go ahead. >> i am marion. i was the former policy director of the san francisco department of police accountability. it is a position i retired from in 2020 after working for over 20 years at the department of
7:42 pm
police accountable, formally office of citizen complaint. i continue to do police oversight into these throughout california, oregon and washington. my comments concern the police commission applicant david rizi who i met as the policy director in 2016. he was part of a collaborative working group to revise the police department use of force policy. this work took enormous research, discussion and absolutely end less collaborative with the police department, city represents, community advocates and police commission. david was an instrumental participant in these really relentless meetings. it ultimately resulted in use of force policy that if you look
7:43 pm
throughout the state. it set the standard. it was an amazing time and david was an instrumental part. not only was this use of force policy so important but afterwards the police union did everything to stop it from being put in place. david's work on the briefs was so significant because it was so important in solidifying the position the police commission could set policy. that work that he did was so vital. not only then did he do this work on san francisco police policy but he -- >> thank you very much. it is good to hear from you after a long time. any ore members of the public for public testimony on item 3? >> one additional. >> go ahead.
7:44 pm
>> hi, good morning. i amvaller re. here to speak on supporting jesus as police commissioner. i want to say that often times city commissions are for political appointties or those ready for a political career. jesus comes from the community, has worked for the community for many, many years. he does not have an alternative agenda except to be fair and bring a voice to the commission that would be super-helpful to the commission as you approach these issues at hand. i know that he had a current turmoil with defund the police. jesus will bring a community be voice to that debate and
7:45 pm
discussion. we highly recommend jesus as a police commissioner. thank you so much for taking his name into consideration. thank you. >> thank you. any last members of the public to speak on this item? >> we have pomore people that just called in. >> go ahead. >> this is rebecca young. i i have been a member of the criminal justice task force for two years. i have come to know and work closely with david rizi. there are competitive candidates. the community liaison would be important. only one of the candidates before the board today is a
7:46 pm
subject matter expert and that is david rizi. he know the meyer's act, understands m.o.u., understands and writes about it and educate others about what the issues are. it would be very added boost. we would lose him. i hope he is appointed here. it would be a necessary added boost to the police commission if san francisco is movingforward on police reform. >> next speaker.
7:47 pm
>> good morning. i am selina, executive director at horizon limited. i am here in support of jesus yanez for police commissioner. my colleagues have explained why he would be excellent for this position. he devoted his life to violence prevention initiative, part of community response, community referrel dinner. he has been positioned to have a unique perspective. i want to say he is a trusted member of the latino community. lifting our issues and our voice. he is currently working on the latin x safety plan as consultant for the vocational
7:48 pm
school which is in line with his experience in this work. i want to be brief. i know others will be talking. again, we in the latino community feel that he would represent us. thank you so much. >> thank you. that, i believe, concludes public comment. am i correct? >> yes, that was the last public comment for this item. >> public comment is closed on item 3. the matter is in the hands of the committee. i want to thank all four applicants that appeared before us today for applying and being willing to serve and credentials. i think, colleagues and i don't want to put words in your mouth on that two of them rise to the top. first two we heard from mr.
7:49 pm
rizk and mr. yanez and we received testimony on both of their behalves. i would like to think that both of them could and should become dated on this body for a while we did not have an embarrassment of riches now we do. there are seats expiring in a few short months. the mayor has an apment minute perhaps we can reach to see if the mayor is interested. i am chair of rules committee in 2022 we can consider one of those applicants for a seat that is coming up in april. with those opening comments i will turn it over to you two, supervisor chan.
7:50 pm
>> thank you, chair pass ken. chair -- chair peskin. i believe that it is great to have diverse school of thought. diversion background for the make up of any regulatory body for our city government in all level through all of the decision-making process. as far as i have been on the seat as member of the rules committee we have appointed mr. larry ee and jim burns and mr.mac. >> carter over stone. >> thank you so much. now three members to the police
7:51 pm
commission. very diverse. mr. yee is a union advocate for the chinese community. jim burnings is an immigrant lawyer and mr. carter. the new generation, again, the involvement for another attorney, i believe. i think that for me i am definitely looking for someone especially in the absence of commissioner petra. someone from the latino and latin x community and think about being a voice for that community. kind of a diverse school of thought.
7:52 pm
thinking about really a long time working community. very specific in the sense where on behalf of the community dealing with law enforcement and what can be an alternative solution to bring those alternative solutions to the table. not just in philosophy or ideology but to understand on the ground the purpose. it is time that, you know, giving a lot of concerns among public safety. i think it is time to really have an intellectual honest and pragmatic conversation. i am a firm believer at this point. i think that i have a lot of concerns worries about the optics that exist out there. i think all four condaydats that spoke on it. i do not believe that the public
7:53 pm
safety and social justice are mutually exclusive for our community. i doubt motives for anyone speaking otherwise. i look for someone who demands public safety for communities of color and with the mind of understanding social justice can be within that conversation as well. i am here and ready to make that decision today. i am ready to support the candidate that, you know, on this list that can represent the community here. i think that jesus yanez is a good option to consider today. i would urge your support. but i also think that there are
7:54 pm
opportunities. chair peskin we have opportunity in april to consider other candidates with the ability to serve in 2022. thank you. >> thank you for the directions or suggestions as to direction on a tough choice. supervisor mandelman. >> thank you, chair peskin. i think i would like to begin by expressing my gratitude for commissioner jesus and her long service to the commission. she took the job very seriously and worked very hard at it. as a bonus she was a three for. latino, woman, and queer. we have a number of excellent
7:55 pm
candidates in front of us. two are the top two. both of them are going to talk in terms of gender representation and in terms of sexual orientation representation as well. it is not a great thing for this commission not to have any queer people on it. that being said, both of the folks who seem to be the top contenders would be important additions. it is meaningful to me that commissioner recommended david rizk and the bar association recommended him. not queer or a woman, i think he
7:56 pm
would make important contributions. he also did address a concern i have. he don't have time for that. each of the folks. there is, i think, not a necessary tension but a challenge for the commission in addressing both the need to advance reforming in a way that enhances public safety. i did appreciate mr. rizk addressed that and suggested his experience overseeing the bart police gives him the background he needs not only to create more response i and just police department but one that does the job of preventing and involving crime objectively. i hope we can find away for both
7:57 pm
candidates to be on there. that is all i got to say right now. thanks. >> i think, supervisor mandelman, you touched on the struggle we have. thank you to all four applicants. we are circling around two. i would like to have the cake and eat it, too, to get both of them on there now or in is not too distant future. there are a number of ways to do that. yes, there is mr. rizk's knowledge as attorney in the field and experience there and mr. yanez's experience with law enforcement, police reform on community side. they both have things a lot of things going for them. i think supervisor chan suggested we go with mr. yanez today there. is another alternative which is
7:58 pm
that we can continue this a week and send whatever we decide as committee report next week before our last board meeting for the year. i note that our colleague supervisor ronan weighed in with a letter in support of mr. yanez. is also a big fan of mr. rizk. i don't think i know because i spoke with her this morning was also very supportive of a notion of figuring out a way to get everybody on. this could open up a little time to talk to the mayor as to whether she is interested in either one of those candidates or not totally within her prerogative. i think while everything is on the table we have a suggestion from supervisor chan that i am
7:59 pm
100% okay with. go with mr. yanez and send to the full board and vote on him next week and take up mr. rizk at future date or continue one week and decide next week to send a committee report so we would be voting at full board on the same day. what is your pleasure, colleagues? >> i am down with continuance. i think that -- i mean it is in a different topic and item. we are not really able to talk about things like this because of the brown act until we come into session in closed hearing. this is frankly, you know, the first time all three of us in the committee to have this conversation and thinking about
8:00 pm
it. i am happy to continue these items for conversation publicly. during our committee hearing to give us time knowing that both of you what your thoughts are allows me to give it some thought, too, not knowing, chair peskin you have the conversation with supervisor ronan but now that i know that perhaps there is opportunity for conversation with the mayor's office i am down for that so we have consensus. police commission is a critical body and requires us to be thoughtful and a body to work together. whenever i get a chance to talk to these candidates for the police commission candidates, i
8:01 pm
like to know what they think of the commission chair cohen's leadership. would they support the leadership and work together? i am down. >> okay. colleagues. how about we continue this item one week to our meeting next monday and then whatever we decide will go to the full board for the 14th of december. if there is no objection to that, mr. clerk, could you please call the roll. >> motion to continue to december 13th. supervisor chan. >> aye. >> vice chair mandelman.
8:02 pm
>> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> the motion passes without objection. >> next item, please. >> next item on the agenda item 4. hearing to consider appointing three members to terms ending july 1, 2022, and two members terms ending july 1, 2023 to the children youth and their families oversight and advisory committee. to comment call 415-655-0001. id24871554296. press pound pound. if you haven't done so dial star 3 to speak.
8:03 pm
>> we will hear from the three applicants for the five seats. >> thank you, supervisor peskin. one of the candidates is not able to attend. she has a conflict with class schedule. i will speak on her behalf. she is the first applicant for consideration. >> okay. i don't know that we need you to do that. i think that we have all looked at the written file and i think ms. c.u. rry is good to go for seat 7. we don't need you to speak on her behalf. why don't we go to jennifer salerno for seat 11. >> good morning. thank you for considering me seat 11 on children, youth families oversight committee. >> i worked at ymca for five years created and managed youth
8:04 pm
force development serving 150 to 200 young people between 14-24 every year. majority of youth we served were current or former sfufc students. i worked with sfusd and other agencies for work force education to former students. program manager for excel managing two after-school programs one at the high school and one at the academy. my primary focus while at ymca was on providing resources for participants and families. i place tremendous emphasis for healing from trauma. i believe in a trauma-informed approach to supporting young people and families and will work to advance these
8:05 pm
initiatives. i worked in higher education for six years at usf and sanford. i focused on financial aid support and creating and implementing diversities. i left ymca in october and now work as senior work force development specialist. my role isn't exclusively on youth i support families around retaining employment so they cannot only survive but thrive in san francisco. being first generation high school and college student raised by single mother i understand how crucial it is to support our children and families ensuring they have equitable access to resources and be opportunities. thank you very much for your consideration and time today. >> thank you and thank you for applying.
8:06 pm
last but not least julie roberts-ph un g. >> we can hear you. >> i want be to thank you for considering my application to oac and put in a good word for jayda curry. i have appreciated learning more about the ways dcyf supports families and working with team on the shared goal of deepening racial equity in san francisco. over the life of the pandemic i have seen how the grantees showed up for families of color. during this time i worked closely with communities in the tenderloin where my children go to school and western addition where my family lives. i have watched resources that
8:07 pm
leave gaps in tenderloin, treasure island, other neighborhoods where i am grant families live. food, testing, vaccine access, computers or community hubs they are left out and community leaders have had to do hard work to close gaps. during my time i have advocated for increased transparent for students and families spanish, chinese and seven languages they support. filipino, arabic and vietnam niece not through dcyf but tph and other systems. it is both important to help connect these systems and it has been challenges to see how we
8:08 pm
struggled to do that over the pandemic. i have appreciated dcyf staff providing child care and developed deep appreciation for the staff to support students and allow them to stay in san francisco. i have addvo kayed for communities in san francisco for too long. pacific islander, undocumented and transyouth and families. honor to be part of the efforts in these difficult years and given me a deep appreciation for staff, board and partners. i hope you will support my application to tip be to serve on this board and to continue to advocate for issues as we navigate beyond the covid-19 pandemic. where i served in seat six last term based on the age of my children i believe seat eight is the best fit for me at this time. thank you for everything you do
8:09 pm
for san francisco youth and families. >> thank you. are there any members of the public to testify on this item number 4? >> we are checking for callers. if you have not done so dial star 3 to be added the queue to speak. for those on hold continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. we have onelitionner but nobody in line to -- one listener with nobody in line be to speak. >> we will close public comment for item 4. we thank the applicants and the two reapplying for their seats for applying again. colleagues, i think we should a motion is in order to have jayda curry for seat 7, based on what
8:10 pm
julie just said to the age of her child move her from seat 9 to seat 8. and to have ms. salerno be seat number 11 as she applied for. if there are no objection to say that, i will say that is a motion and ask the clerk to call the roll. >> on that motion. supervisor chan. >> aye. >> vice chair mandelman. >> aye. >> chair peskin. >> aye. >> the motion passes without objection. >> we are adjourned.
8:11 pm
>> hello everybody. i'm san francisco mayor london breed. i'm here at the 911 center with a number of our public safety leaders in the city including director of the department of
8:12 pm
emergency management, mary ellen carol, dr. grant colfax, our fire chief jeanine nicholson. and chief deputy lizar and we're here just to talk with a number of our dispatchers here at the 911 center and i just want to thank the dispatchers and the people who are part of this center because i think what people don't realize is every single day, 24 hours a day, the people who work in this building, they are fielding calls on a regular basis of people that sometimes sadly are experiencing one of the worst times in their lives and they're looking for help. and these folks in this building who show up time and time again for us despite the pandemic, despite everything that's been going on in this
8:13 pm
city for the past year and a half. they've been here. they are wearing their mask and doing their jobs and they're showing up for san francisco. so i want to that our 911 dispatchers and their hard work and commitment to san francisco. we just heard back from a number of things they, of course, want to see change and they want the public to be aware that when they call and you call 911, they hear a lot of calls and they know what is available and what's important for everyone to know is i know folks are asking i want a paramedic or a want a police officer or i want the street crisis response team. well, ultimately, they need to understand what is going on in the scene to the best of their ability. and they are able to make decisions baseded on what they hear from you. ultimately, it's about public safety and they can't just send anyone into any situation without making sure that they
8:14 pm
understand what's going on and often times our police department are the first line of defense around issues that involve public safety and when you're able to dig a little bit deeper sometimes, they recommend the street crisis response team or a paramedic. ultimately, the men and women who work here every single day, they've heard a huge range of things and they as far as i'm concerned are the experts and the best judge of what is most appropriate to send when you call 911. so trust them. many of them have been working here for 10, over 20 years and have heard a number of calls from a number of people and so we are here to express our pre-for their hard work and ask the people of san francisco when you call 911, please respect and trust our dispatchers. today, we're also celebrating
8:15 pm
one year of our street crisis response team and so i know simon peng and others are here with us and the behavioral health teams from the department of public health, i mean this was what some considereded a crazy idea bringing all these city agencies together to respond to the crisis that sometimes people are having on our streets. and the fact is there's not a one-size-fits-all. there are people suffering from schizophrenia. there are people who suffer from behavioral health issues and substance use disorder and it's complicated and sometimes people are violent, sometimes they're not. i went on a ride with the street crisis response team and, you know, it took about an hour to even get to a point where we could actually get that person over to general hospital. we had to unfortunately do a
8:16 pm
72-hour hold, 51-50 that individual because of their behavior and even if they didn't have a weapon and weren't going to harm themselves, going in and out of traffic where a car could potentially hit them or that person in the car who hits them could be harmed themselves with a real problem and so they have to use their own expertise, their own judgment to decide what is best for the individual they are trying to serve. and this program came about in trying to find a nonpolice response to things that don't require a police response. we have a lot of challenges in san francisco and we truly appreciate and value our police department and the work that they do to serve and protect the people of this city. but we also understand that there are some calls that they are not necessarily needed and so my preference is that when the dispatchers get the call,
8:17 pm
they make the decision sometimes for there to be the street crisis response team or a police officer or a paramedic depending on the situation. and so this program has been in existence for years. they've answered thousands of calls. they helped divert people to some of our behavioral health beds which you all know. we have expanded significantly and there's a commitment from this past year's budget to increase the number of beds by an additional 400. we're already over 200 additional behavioral health beds and we plan to do more. the goal is to make sure that when we engage with members of the public who are struggling and having challenges, behavioral health related issues, we are able to have a place for them to go and sometimes that's not always the emergency room. so we know there are complex problems and complex solutions and other challenges that our city as a major, as a major
8:18 pm
city, that's a very dense city, we know there are problems and challenges we have to face, but i've got to say, i'm so very proud and grateful to all of our public safety officials who are doing the work on the ground to try and keep people safe. i'm grateful to them for showing up and despite dealing with some of the most challenging of circumstances every single day, they still show up. so when you see our firefighters, our police officers, our paramedics, anyone wearing a city uniform in any way, just give them a smile and thank them for their service because they are doing the hard work day in and day out to deal with the challenges that exist in this city. so thank you again everyone for being here. we celebrate and we're grateful to our street crisis response team. we're grateful to our police officers and our firefighters and our department of public health officials, our doctors, our nurses, our clinicians.
8:19 pm
all of the people who were extraordinary and helped us through this pandemic. we are so fortunate to have so many extraordinary public servants in this city. and now, with that i'd like to introduce the director of the department of emergency management mary ellen carol. >> thank you mayor breed. i really appreciate the fact that you took time to come in today. we got some feedback on the implementation of the skirt teams and some of the other teams and we're super grateful for that. i just want to thank my colleagues, dr. colfax, chief nicholson, of course, deputy chief lizar for your support
8:20 pm
and commitment to developing alternatives for people in crisis. the role of emergency management is to provide coordination and there is no significant crisis than what we see of the the tragedy happening on our streets. this includes overseeing multi-department operations. we need to unify all of these different groups to figure out are we doing this most efficiently. are we getting the results that we need and ultimately our goal is to improve the conditions on the streets and the sidewalks and our conditions. just to reiterate, we have increasingly more resources at our disposal to aid people
8:21 pm
working on the streets. again, to echo the mayor, we need to trust their expertise. please do not hesitate to call 911 or a nonemergency if there's an emergency and provide the information that these trained professionals are asking for. they care deeply about this city and they want to get the information out and the help out and their frustrations they indicated is they're going to have to get into these arguments to call in to get the information. we want to get the help to the persona needs it as quickly as possible. and so that starts with calling 911 and responding to the prompt so we can get that help out quickly. the emergency management side of d.m., we are drawing on our experiences. the development of all the
8:22 pm
relationships that we've had and the expertise that we developed to help our department partners here really effectively utilize the resources and work towards those common goals and outcomes. san francisco is a leader in developing and implementing ultimate response teams for people in crisis. and we at the department of emergency management are honoreded to be able to help coordinate these efforts and bring our best outcomes for the people of san francisco. right now, are i'd like to introduce my colleague, dr. colfax, the leader of the department of public health. >> good morning everybody. thank you director carol. hi, everyone. it's great to be with you here today and i want to thank mayor breed for her tremendous leadership. san francisco is fundamentally
8:23 pm
changing how we serve people in crisis and leading the nation on how we respond to health care needs with health care response. and thank you, mayor breed and partners for helping us do this. i want to thank director carol and the 911 dispatchers to ensure they apply the most appropriate and compassionate response is provided to people in need and this includes people experiencing nonviolent mental health or substance use disorders to the best response the street crisis response team. our community paramedics, mental health with lived experience together have a range of specialty skills to engage in crisis and address a person's immediate needs for care, treatment, and shelter. skirt is truly a collaboration. as you know, staffing comes from the department of public health and, of course, fire as
8:24 pm
well as our wonderful community partners health right 360 and rams. and the first year, skirt responded to over 5,000 calls. those 5,000 calls in emergency visits a decrease in ambulance rides and a decrease in law enforcement responding to nonviolent calls and most importantly, an opportunity to connect san franciscans with those most appropriate services. skirt is supported by a dedicated followup team within 24 hours of the initial encounter. nearly a third of all people are successfully reengaged with followup care such as being connected to a provider or treatment facility. this is really about meeting people where they are and tailoring our response. if you have a person on the street in a skriesz, even the skirt team to wrap around that person, that's an important step.
8:25 pm
you don't want to crowd that person. so the pier counselor will go out and engage that person one on one saying i've been here before. i have that lived experience. how do i share my experience and engage the broader team. they can transport that person to places like humming bird, our low barrier care. that low barrier care. getting that person off the street, linking them to care. skirt is part of our larger effort to bring our response to the community. our community based teams like skirt and overdose response team are removing access to care, treatment, and services. and i want to make one more plug, if you see someone in crisis, please call 911 to describe what you are seeing and somebody will be there. now, it's my pleasure to introduce a great leader, partner, and collaborator in this response, chief nicholson. thank you. >> thanks, dr. colfax. yes, i just want to say thank
8:26 pm
you, mayor breed for trusting us in the fire department to take on this critical role with the department of public health and others. as you may have heard, street crisis response team, we also call it "skirt." i want to give a shout out to some of the people here on the street crisis response team. we have a community paramedic that has more training than a regular paramedic. they're trained in de-escalation. they can redirect people to other services and a mental health professional from public health and as dr. colfax said, a peer support person. in terms of the 5,000 calls we
8:27 pm
have gone on and of the folks we have gone out to help, 40% of them have accepted help and transport to a psychiatric facility. that does not include people that we have had to 51-50. but this is an extremely successful program. we're working out all the creaks. but we look forward to it. chief simon peng, if you have any specific questions, he is here as well. thank you all for being here today and, again, a big shout out to our street crisis response team and i would like to introduce our partner of safety, deft chief lazar. >> thank you, chief nicholson. what else can be said?
8:28 pm
first on behalf of chief scott and the entire san francisco police department, i want to thank our mayor london breed who back in 2020 was looking at policing and looking at the role of police. and really, it was her vision that said, you know, we need to take this important issue of helping and assisting the mentally ill more away from the police and more towards professionals who are trained and go to school and are prepared to deal with the challenges on our streets and that's involved to what we see today. we have a lot to celebrate in one year and as you can hear, that's 5,300 calls to police who are sometimes there, but we're not there to do the intervention and to help people. and so that is a lot to be
8:29 pm
unlike other cities in america, the police and fire like each other and we're friends with each other and and maintains the building. and the last thing i want to say is i want to thank our san francisco police officers. just like mayor breed has shown tremendous support. i want to thank them as well on behalf of the chief and the department for what they do every day working to help and serve the public and provide public safety in the city. thank you very much. >> i want to thank paul miamoto, but the people who secure i want to thank them for their services as well.
8:30 pm
with that, i want to open it up to any questions. >> i believe this was a week before thanksgiving. i'm curious if there are plans to services and how they. >> well, i think what we've been doing around deescalation for the most part has been working and our police officers have a job to do when they're called to protect public safety. the chief last week showed the video and provided input. it's an ongoing investigation. there will be an independent investigation, but it appears that, you know, the training and what the officers learn to do around deescalation were implemented in this particular case. and so there's an ongoing
8:31 pm
investigation in this case but at the end of the day, i'm grateful for the work that we have done in san francisco around deescalation and around the ability to identify and work towards a solution in most of these situations and this was an unfortunate situation that occurred, but i think that our officers handling themselves appropriately. >> reporter: [inaudible] >> i think it's hard to say because people have struggled with mental illness since the beginning of time. and the fact is we as a society, as a city, as a state,
8:32 pm
as a country, we have not handled it very well. we are doing the best that we can within the laws that we have. but one very important law that is missing in order to really see and feel the difference has everything to do with force and that means forcing someone into treatment, forcing someone into some cases, you know, a locked or unlocked facility based on what their issues are. and so there's a huge push around we don't want to take away someone's rights and i totally understand it. i'm going to tell you right now. i see elderly people on the streets who have dementia. who have no family members. who have no one making decisions for them and then when we take them into our care and we try to get them help and support and make sure they're not outside doing things that they would not normally do if they didn't have dmen can. as soon as they say, i want to go. i don't want to be here we have
8:33 pm
to honor that and so the system is broken as a whole and needs to be changed. and so we don't necessarily unfortunately have the local jurisdiction to make those changes. we need a change in state law and we need a change in this country about how we address mental illness whether it's those suffering from substance use disorder or dementia, schizophrenia and all these other ailments that may impact the mind in a way. my hope is that what we are trying to do is we're trying to manage the situation as best that we can within the laws that we have. we can't force someone to stay in our care. we can't force someone to stay in a treatment bed. we cannot force someone to behave in a certain way. there's a number of layers that go into that and so we are still missing the most important layer to see in a real difference a lot faster in
8:34 pm
our city. you mean sheriff. >> reporter: [inaudible] >> work off duty in the private sector. i think at the end of the day, it's a sad state of what we're living in terms of what we are seeing with these mob style
8:35 pm
robberies and a number of other the burglaries, the car briek-ins, all of the things that and the people in this city want to change they're not coming back. so it's going to impact our bottom line and the ability to pay for all of these problems to help homeless and mentally ill. it's going to impact our city as a whole. so that line of defense with our police department, our sheriff's deputies is going to be critical. a critical piece to helping to maintain safety. that's just what it is. yes, we have our ambassadors. yes, we have different responses to calls that people make to 911. yes, we are trying to make the reforms and to ensure that the appropriate interactions take place with law enforcement in san francisco. but at the end of the day,
8:36 pm
people want police officers, they want to make sure that our streets are safe and we're going to do everything we can to make sure that they are. and that's part of it. and by expanding the ability for sheriff's deputies to work off duty at these various locations, that's only going to enhance public safety and i am fully in support of that. >> reporter: [inaudible] >> i'll let dr. colfax talk about that. we probably won't be able to relax right away. . it means that we don't know just like with covid when it first happened, we didn't know specifically the impacts. we don't know yet, we don't know when it will be in san francisco. but the likelihood it will be
8:37 pm
here is likely but we are paying for close attention to this. we are working with a number of health experts all over the country and ultimately what has been said time and time again, get your vaccine and do everything you can to make sure you are protected. even if we see this is worse than the delta variant, you do have a layer of protection with the existing vaccine, but there may be more needed as well. so we just don't know what we don't know, but as soon as we know, our plan is to make sure the public knows everything that we know. dr. colfax, did you want to add to that? last question.
8:38 pm
good. >> reporter: [inaudible] >> yes. first of all, let me just say i'm a big supporter of night life and going out in san francisco. and there are rules and number of regulations put in place in a number of establishments. number one, you have to have a mask. number three, when you go to the restroom, you have to have a mask and i was in a private area with my drinks, with the people i was with enjoying myself at a venue and i had a great time and i followed the appropriate protocols, and, yes, i was dancing, and, yes, i was drinking and having fun and at the end of the day, i am doing everything i can to follow the existing protocols and i think sadly sometimes these videos are taken out of
8:39 pm
perspective. i took pictures who wanted to take pictures with me. i am out there in the public not just supporting night life, but out there at our restaurants, shopping at various locations doing what i feel as mayor i should be doing but also as a human being who's been through a global pandemic who did everything i could to make sure that the people of this city were safe which is why it's no coincidence we not only have one of the lowest death rates in any major city in the country. so i'm doing my job and i am following these protocolonel colonels. what i've said to people time and time again that we need to do our very best. in a room full of vaccinated people. so that's what i have to say about it. i'm going to continue to support our night life and go out and enjoy myself as someone who is a single woman living in a major city who is having fun,
8:40 pm
but i want to be clear, i'm not out there making the rules and then not following them. so it is just not fair to try and take a snip of a video which i knew was done by somebody who was at my table and use that as a way to indicate it's something other than what it is doing exactly what i would expect anyone else to do when they're out at a night life venue drinking and dancing and partying and having a good time. thank you. san francisco, 911, what's the emergency? >> san francisco 911, police, fire and medical.
8:41 pm
>> the tenderloin. suspect with a six inch knife. >> he was trying to get into his car and was hit by a car. >> san francisco 911 what's the exact location of your emergency? >> welcome to the san francisco department of emergency management. my name is shannon bond and i'm the lead instructor for our dispatch add -- academy. i want to tell you about what we do here. >> this is san francisco 911. do you need police, fire or medical? >> san francisco police, dispatcher 82, how can i help you? >> you're helping people in their -- what may be their most vulnerable moment ever in life. so be able to provide them immediate help right then and there, it's really rewarding. >> our agency is a very combined agency. we answer emergency and non-emergency calls and we also do dispatching for fire, for medical and we also do dispatching for police. >> we staff multiple call
8:42 pm
taking positions. as well as positions for police and fire dispatch. >> we have a priority 221. >> i wanted to become a dispatcher so i could help people. i really like people. i enjoy talking to people. this is a way that i thought that i could be involved with people every day. >> as a 911 dispatcher i am the first first responder. even though i never go on seen -- scene i'm the first one answering the phone call to calm the victim down and give them instruction. the information allows us to coordinate a response. police officers, firefighters, ambulances or any other agency. it is a great feeling when everyone gets to go home safely at the end of the day knowing that you've also saved a citizen's life. >> our department operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. >> this is shift work. that means we work nights,
8:43 pm
weekends and holidays and can involve over time and sometimes that's mandatory. >> this is a high stress career so it's important to have a good balance between work and life. >> we have resources available like wellness and peer support groups. our dispatchers of the month are recognized for their outstanding performance and unique and ever changing circumstances. >> i received an accommodation and then i received dispatcher of the month, which was really nice because i was just released from the phones. so for them to, you know, recognize me for that i appreciated it. i was surprised to even get it. at the end of the day i was just doing my job. >> a typical dispatch shift includes call taking and dispatching. it takes a large dedicated group of first responders to make this department run and in turn keep the city safe. >> when you work here you don't work alone, you work as part of a team. you may start off as initial phone call or contact but
8:44 pm
everyone around you participating in the whole process. >> i was born and raised in san francisco so it's really rewarding to me to be able to help the community and know that i have a part in -- you know, even if it's behind the scenes kind of helping the city flow and helping people out that live here. >> the training program begins with our seven-week academy followed by on the job training. this means you're actually taking calls or dispatching responders. >> you can walk in with a high school diploma, you don't need to have a college degree. we will train you and we will teach you how to do this job. >> we just need you to come with an open mind that we can train you and make you a good dispatcher. >> if it's too dangerous to see and you think that you can get away and call us from somewhere safe. >> good. that's right. >> from the start of the academy to being released as a solo dispatcher can take nine months to a year.
8:45 pm
>> training is a little over a year and may change in time. the training is intense. very intense. >> what's the number one thing that kills people in this country? so we're going to assume that it's a heart attack, right? don't forget that. >> as a new hire we require you to be flexible. you will be required to work all shifts that include midnights, some call graveyard, days and swings. >> you have to be willing to work at different times, work during the holidays, you have to work during the weekends, midnight, 6:00 in the morning, 3:00 in the afternoon. that's like the toughest part of this job. >> we need every person that's in here and when it comes down to it, we can come together and we make a really great team and do our best to keep the city flowing and safe. >> this is a big job and an
8:46 pm
honorable career. we appreciate your interest in joining our team. >> we hope you decide to join us here as the first first responders to the city and county of san francisco. for more information on the job and how to apply follow the links bit. >> shop & dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges resident to do their shop & dine in the 49 within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services in the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique successful and vibrant so we're will you shop & dine in the 49 chinatown has to be one the best unique shopping areas in san francisco that is color fulfill and safe each vegetation and seafood and find everything in
8:47 pm
chinatown the walk shop in chinatown welcome to jason dessert i'm the fifth generation of candy in san francisco still that serves 2000 district in the chinatown in the past it was the tradition and my family was the royal chef in the pot pals that's why we learned this stuff and moved from here to have dragon candy i want people to know that is art we will explain a walk and they can't walk in and out it is different techniques from stir frying to smoking to steaming and they do show of. >> beer a royalty for the age berry up to now not people know
8:48 pm
that especially the toughest they think this is - i really appreciate they love this art. >> from the cantonese to the hypomania and we have hot pots we have all of the cuisines of china in our chinatown you don't have to go far. >> small business is important to our neighborhood because if we really make a lot of people lives better more people get a job here not just a big firm. >> you don't have to go anywhere else we have pocketed of great neighborhoods haul have all have their own uniqueness. >> san francisco has to all.
8:49 pm
8:50 pm
8:51 pm
8:52 pm
8:53 pm
>> i just feel like this is what i was born to do when i was a little kid i would make up performances and daydream it was always performing and doing something i feel if i can't do that than i can't be
8:54 pm
me. >> i just get excited and my nickname is x usher my mom calls me i stuck out like a sore thumb for sure hey everybody i'm susan kitten on the keys from there, i working in vintage clothing and chris in the 30's and fosz and aesthetic. >> i think part of the what i did i could have put on my poa he focus on a lot of different musical eras. >> shirley temple is created as
8:55 pm
ahsha safai the nation with happens and light heartenness shirley temple my biggest influence i love david boo and el john and may i west coast their flamboyant and show people (singing) can't be unhappy as a dr. murase and it is so fun it is a joyful instrument i learned more about music by playing the piano it was interesting the way i was brought up the youth taught me about music he picked up the a correspond that was so hard my first performing experience happened as 3-year-old an age i
8:56 pm
did executive services and also thanks to the lord and sank in youth groups people will be powering grave over their turk i'll be playing better and better back la i worked as places where men make more money than me i was in bands i was treated as other the next thing i know i'm in grants performing for a huge protection with a few of my friends berry elect and new berry elect and can be ray was then and we kept getting invited back you are shows got better we made it to paris in 2005 a famous arc we ended up getting a months residencey other than an island and he came to our show and
8:57 pm
started writing a script based on our troop of 6 american burr elect performs in france we were woman of all this angels and shapes and sizes and it was very exciting to be part of the a few lettering elect scene at the time he here he was bay area born and breed braces and with glossaries all of a sudden walking 9 red carpet in i walgreens pedestrian care. >> land for best director that was backpack in 2010 the french love this music i come back here and because of film was not released in the united states nobody gave a rats ass let's say
8:58 pm
the music and berry elect and performing doesn't pay very much i definitely feel into a huge depression especially, when it ended i didn't feel kemgd to france anymore he definitely didn't feel connected to the scene i almost feel like i have to beg for tips i hey i'm from the bay area and an artist you don't make a living it changed my represent tar to appeal and the folks that are coming into the wars these days people are not listening they love the idea of having a live musician but don't really nurture it like having a potted plant if you don't warrant it it dizzy sort of feel like a potted plant (laughter)
8:59 pm
i'm going to give san francisco one more year i've been here since 1981 born and raised in the bay area i know that is not for me i'll keep on trying and if the struggle becomes too hard i'll have to move on i don't know where that will be but i love here so so much i used to dab he will in substances i don't do that i'm sober and part of the being is an and sober and happy to be able to play music and perform and express myself if i make. >> few people happy of all ages i've gone my job so i have so stay is an i feel like the piano and music in general with my voice together i feel really powerful and strong
9:00 pm
>> good afternoon this. meeting will come to order. welcome to the december 6, 2021 regular meeting of the land use and transport committee. i am the chair. joined by vice chair preston and supervisor peskin. the committee clerk is erica major. i would like to acknowledge and thank the staff at sfgovtv for staffing this meeting. do we have any announcements? >> yes, thank you, madam chair. the minutes will reflect committee members participated through video. the board recognizes public
9:01 pm
access is essential and invite public participation in the following ways. public comment is available on each item 26, 78 or 99 everything the call-in number is on the screen. each speaker is allowed two minutes. comments to speak are available by calling 415-655-0001. the meeting id is 24922772587. press pound and pound again. when you are connected you will hear the meeting discussions. you will be muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up dial star 3 to be added to
9:02 pm
the speaker line. best practices call from quiet location, state clearly and slowly. turn down your television or radio. you may submit public comment by e-mail to the land use and transportation clerk at sfgovtv. if you submit public comment via e-mail will be made part of the official file. comments may be sent to city hall. items acted upon today will appear on the december 14th, 2021 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you very much, madam clerk. call item 1.
9:03 pm
ordinance amending the planning code to revise massage establishment zoning controls including among other things add sole practitioner massage establishments to the definition of health and services. call 415-655-0001. press pound twice. if you have not done so press star 3 to line up to speak. the system will indicate you have raised you're hand in confirmation. madam chair. >> thank you. colleagues we heard this item last week. there were substantive amendments. we are hearing it again today. we are not going to have a full presentation. i would give an opportunity to amy from supervisor ronan's office to make some remarks. welcome. >> thank you, chair melgar, for
9:04 pm
making time to hear this item today. legislative aid to supervisor sr ronen. the amended version was distributed via e-mail this morning. the change is on page 10 line 18 within version of not a residential hotel. on behalf of supervisor ronen i ask you accept the amendment and forward the file to the full board as committee report. we are also requesting that the file be duplicated, you consider additional amendments today, also that were distributed to you earlier. if you accept those as duplicated file continue to the call of the chair. it will be referred to the planning commission before returning to this committee.
9:05 pm
the amendments proposed today to duplicated file will add accessory to health services as an exception to the massage use in the current version as exception for accessory to personal services. personal service was added following a recommendation by planning staff and the commission. we believe allowing massage accessory to health services like chiropractic and acupuncture is practical and reasonable. i am available for questions. very on necan flores is also here from planning. >> thank you. we are going to do the non substantive amendment to what we have today to take public comment. we will duplicate the file and amend that duplicated file with substantive amendments and we will continue that to the call of the chair. >> that is perfect.
9:06 pm
>> colleagues do we have any questions or comments for either? okay. with that, madam clerk, public comment on this item, please. >> we are checking for callers in the queue. please press star 3 to be added the queue. you only need to press once. on hold please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. we have eight listeners, zero in the queue. >> public comment is closed. supervisor peskin did you want to make the amendment? >> i would be happy to make the amendment. subsequently to duplicate the file and continue the duplicated file to the call of the chair. i can make that all-in-one
9:07 pm
motion if it pleases you or two motions if you so desire. >> yes. >> we have to take motions separately because of the remote meeting. >> i move the amendment that we are in receipt of and that she just spoke to. thank you to supervisor ronen and the city attorney, ms. long, for accommodating my one suggestion from last week. >> the motion as stated supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. >> then i would duplicate the file and ask that the duplicated file be continued to the call of the chair. we have to amend the file. >> excuse me. i did that in rules committee
9:08 pm
this morning. i would like to amend the duplicated file as discussed buyer ms. fine heart. i will make that motion. i would like to continue to the call of the chair. >> supervisor peskin requested to duplicate the original file. on the motion to amend the duplicate. supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. on the motion to continue the duplicate as amended, requested by supervisor or moved by supervisor peskin. supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> sorry. so we are clear. this motion is to continue to call of the chair. we haven't moved it through the
9:09 pm
committee report. >> on the duplicate to continue as amended to the call of the chair supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. on the remaining balance for the original. the last motion was to amend. >> i will make a motion to send the amended file original file 210381 as amended with recommendation to the board of supervisors as a committee report. >> all right. what he said. supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. >> thank you so much. madam clerk, please call item 2.
9:10 pm
>> item 2. ordinance amending the public works code to limit administrative objections. to require plant replacement trees within 120 days every move. require tree protection plans include acknowledgment and findings. members who wish to comment on item 2 call the number on the screen. 415-655-0001. id24922772587. press pound pound. if you have not done so press star 3 to line up to speak. the system will indicate you have raised your hands in in confirmation. >> thank you very much, madam clerk. we are joined by supervisor safai who is a sponsor of this legislation. welcome, supervisor safai. >> this is lauren chong
9:11 pm
legislative aid to supervisor safai. he is having trouble getting on the call. would it be possible to move to a different item and come back in. >> it is possible, however, the next two items are together. it is a hearing. we are going to move to that. please let the supervisor know it is going to be awhile. >> thank you. >> let's do that. >> madam chair i was able to get on. i am sorry. >> welcome, supervisor. >> did you read the item? are we ready to go. >> we are ready for remarks. we have carla short here from staff on stand by for any questions. we wanted to hear about the
9:12 pm
legislation. >> essentially, what this legislation is and i appreciate supervisor peskin for working with me dealing with some of the advocates. essentially what we have done here is tried to ensure that the fine process that happens with regard to illegal tree removal has increased to a penalty more of a deterrent. what we have seen in the past has been people have just looked at this as something that they factor into the development process. they can factor in the cost of what damaging a tree can be. in the end they may being a decision to do that. something that we wanted to get right. the board of appels elevated this issue after they conducted numerous hearings for appeals of tree removal orders issued by
9:13 pm
public works department. what we tried to do is through two meetings through the board of appels, the conclusion was reached by the board of appels and bureau of for restree they would come up with edge regulatory framework. they didn't provide sufficient deterrents for illegal tree removal. as you all know and you have heard me say this and many of you agree trees are such an important part of our collective landscape here in san francisco our effort to combat climate change. personally we have focused a lot of energy on planting trees in district 11. we planted over 2000 trees in our city over the last few years. without that our urban canopy would have dropped. since the last time this legislation was heard in committee we met with advocates.
9:14 pm
thank you, supervisor peskin. we are going to ensure that there still would be the ability for people to weigh in because advocates felt like removing the appeals process under hazard trees would harm the public ability to participate. for those reasons we have a few amendments today. i propose the following amendment. page one line 3-4 eliminate objectives to removal of tree. page 2 line 8 and 9 strike or if win 15 days of giving notice for removal of hazard tree. on page 2 line 9-10 or within 15
9:15 pm
days after giving removal of hazard tree under subsection a4. page 7 line 10 strike tree on private property or a tree on property. at the end this legislation will include mandate for public works to replace street trees removed by department in the same location with the 120 days much removal. it will includes removed by private party without obtaining permit from department. would require in addition to add enough penalties responsible party plant replacement tree same or greater in diameter every moved tree. retrier protection plan includes arborist estimate. there are trees they are concerned would be impacted by development they have to hire a
9:16 pm
certified arborist for all trees covered by the plan and the applicanting acknowledgment if the tree is injured or destroyed. revise penalties for destroys o removing. the $10,000 replacement value whichever is greater. $20,000 or double replacement value for violations after the first. that is my opening statement. issues that i wanted to cover with you today, madam chair and rest of the committee members. if committee members have questions for chris from the public works as well as interim director carla short is here as you have stated. thank you. >> thank you very much, supervisor safai. any questions or concerns?
9:17 pm
for the supervisor or staff on this item? >> well then madam clerk go to public comment on this item, please. >> we have joe assisting the public comment line. checking on callers in the queue. if you would like to speak to item 2 press star 3. it will add you to our system. please waits until the system indicates you are unmuted we will unnatural you. joe says we have 15 listeners. if you can unmute the first caller, please. joe. >> hi. this is adam from district 6. i apologize for not having read through the suggested legislation. i didn't see anything in the supporting documents online. for supervisor safai i am
9:18 pm
curious if this legislation has any enforcement for city departments. i am asking specifically in regards to the issues on fourth street and soma where the central subway project has come in. the contractors removed almost all of the street trees on fourth street between where the line comes up and where it ends. as we know, lack of trees is a very poor thing to have in an urban environment especially around the freeway. trees generate clean air, shade. we do have navigation center around here, a lot of unhoused folks who definitely could benefit from trees in the shade as well as residents living in the area.
9:19 pm
attempts to replace local trees attorney out for convenience hit a brick will. this is a great idea. i would love to make sure there are provisions for enforcements against city departments and not just private contractors. we need trees. we don't want to live in a concrete jungle. thanks. >> thank you so much. next speaker, please.
9:20 pm
>> i lost contact. >> that was the last caller in the queue. >> public comment is now closed. colleagues. does somebody want to move the amendment as stated by supervisor safai. >> madam chair, there are more callers that popped up. is it okay to take those? >> yes, please. >> we will take the next caller, please. >> i am here for number three. >> where there is item 2. public works code ordinance about tree planting and removal. if you are on the public comment line for that item stay in the
9:21 pm
queue. if you are not calling for number 2 for tree planting. press star 3 and it will take you out of the queue. it looks like we have 20 listeners with four in queue. if you are on the line for item 2 stay in the queue. next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. catherine howard with sierra club. thank you very much for removing the clause eliminating the public right to file administrative objection to tree removal. also, thank you for taking out language in 809 on trees on private property as we requested. just to explain the reason we requested this deletion is that the legislation is titled public works code street tree planting and removal. adding a simple phrase tree on
9:22 pm
private property extending to autrys. this could results in unwelcome of invasion of public property. there was nothing in the legislative deep guest about extending d.p.w. jurisdiction to trees completely on private property and not threatening sidewalks or the right-of-way. therefore we appreciate very much the removal of this language from the legislation. i want to say to the supervisors thank you so much for your efforts on behalf of our urban forest. >> next speaker, please. >> thank you. josh clip. the city is planting less than half of the trees needed for
9:23 pm
urban forest. this means communities that are poor and people of color will continue to have less canopy. there needs to be planting requirement that requires equitable canopy planting until there is tree equity. there needs protection for healthy backyard trees which is an aspect of the san francisco urban forest not in street trees but that does need to happen. additionally all over california cities are required to post bond to ensure trees are not damaged or removed. san francisco there is no such requirement it is into the cost of business. the board of appeals sent a letter to the board of supervisors for this. we need more enforcement ability. our city should be able to do what is due to the city. one-to-one replacements not
9:24 pm
enough. we are looking down climate chair and ecosystem collapse. it is not enough. we need replacement to take the trees, climate and ecosystem values into account. thank you. >> next speaker, please. we have three in queue. >> i wondered if you receive my slides and if you could show them please. >> victor, we have mr. carnes on the line that submitted a powerpoint presentation. let's pull that up. >> one moment.
9:25 pm
my apologies, wrong one. >> that is the correct one. >> it was my host screen. you have two minutes beginning now. >> thank you. i am lance carnes. the matter before you. it is hard to hear this committee.
9:26 pm
the 16 rule regarding full notice for hazard tree removals. next slide please. there is a lesson on practice by d.p.w. f24 hour emergency removals. 24 hour emergency removals are not part of article 16. they were invented in the spring of 2019. on is slide you will see two 24 hour removals still standing after 15 to 17 months. this is an example of the 24 hour emergency remove notification. this notice cannot be protested. these are not shown online with other removal posting. you have to stand next to the tree to see the posting in violation of access rights for disabled people.
9:27 pm
no date on the notice. 24 hours from when? these postings make up two-thirds or more of all removal postings. in other words for every 100 trees for removal 67 are 24 hour emergency removal notification. the public has no knowledge of. >> supervisors please halt the notices a backdoor way of gets around the 30 and 15 day protest hearings. thank you. >> next speaker. >> i am john no -- nolte.
9:28 pm
d.p.w. are removing trees and not lay letting the public know this is happening. also not stating why they have been removed. also there is no way to protest them. also there is no way to know the date that the trees were posted. they cannot be repealed because they consider these as hazard trees. this is happening all across the city and specifically also in the civic center area. why are you taking out mature trees and there is no timeline to put back the trees that they have taken out. this legislation is good in the part to go backwards to help deal with trees they had taken out. next is the issue what is the issue of other city departments that are taking out trees or
9:29 pm
planting trees and are using article 16 but they are in this case two departments that i am concerned about. that is s.f.m.t.a. and sfpuc starting their own hearing process to circumvent this buf jurisdiction on street trees. i would think we should put something in motion for the change a little bit of this article 16 to help deal with these two other departments in the appeal process which there is clearly no appeal process. thank you very much for your time. >> madam chair, that was the last caller in the queue. >> thank you, madam clerk. public comment is now closed.
9:30 pm
colleagues. supervisor safai. do you have something to add? >> i just want to collect a few things for the record. one of the reasons why we put in the legislation mandating the city to replace any trees that it removed was exactly for the reason some of the callers stated because the city was involved in having these conversations. that is in the legislation. second thing to correct the record. we cannish leins when we put on pam penalties leins are issued. we are 100%, chair melgar and i had these conversations. we are concerned about equity in the distribution and planting of trees and protection of trees. it is one of the reasons i came into office with a mandate and made it a top priority to plant
9:31 pm
over 2000 trees in an area of the city that has the highest diversity of any other part of san francisco. to ensure that there is access to the wonderful canopy environment that is part of san francisco. we are trying our best to achieve some of that here. the other thing is unfortunately folks, and i have witnessed it myself. we have trees that are hazardous and can cause significant damage to the health and safety of our citizens. i can tell you, two winters ago there was a debate in the city about our ficus. we made the decision for every commercial corridor to plant ficus. what we didn't do is create enough of a base for the roots of the trees. what happens they become
9:32 pm
extremely top-heavy and if they don't have the proper space for roots to grow, they topple. i can tell you i witnessed myself a beautiful ficus. fully mature in supervisor peskin's district. topple on fillmore street and luckily damage a couple cars. luckily no one was killed or injured. we have to retain the ability to have an emergency removal process. we compromised here the prior to covid hazardous noticing was never put online. prior to that we did not see many appeals. now that they are online, they are literally appealed by the same person every single time. in some of those cases i think 7
9:33 pm
or 8, they compromised, fell, putting health and safety of public at risk. we believe this is the appropriate compromise. thank you, supervisor peskin, for working with me. we got many advocates in the room. thank you, department of public works, carla short and her team. thank you, josh. he is not happy with the outcome. thank you for your input, mr. cliff, and others. i believe supervisor mandelman has intention of duplicating the file. he has the intention of a further conversation about trees on private property. appreciate the time today. i know you have a full agenda. i wanted to thank everyone involved for working on this, spreadses of urban for -- friends of urban forestry gave
9:34 pm
us good input and advice. thank you. i think this is going to help our canopy expand and protect trees in the city we all care about. thank you, madam chair. >> thank you, supervisor safai. i understand that we have one more caller who wants to weigh in on this topic. i will re-open the public comment to let that person speak if they are still with us. madam clerk is that public commenter still with us. >> yes. this is the third call for public comment on number 2. street planting and removal ordinance. last caller. >> this is michael nolte,
9:35 pm
district 6. >> you spoke already for item 2. it is only two minutes per sunshine. thank you so much. >> thank you, madam clerk. supervisor safai. i have not receive a request from supervisor mandelman to duplicate the file. we will deal with that. supervisor peskin. >> you are muted. >> that is what happens. computer difficulties resolved for now. let me thank supervisor safai as well as supervisor mandelman for cosponsoring hearings, two of
9:36 pm
them that we had on the urban forest canopy, which i think resulted in a number of suggestions and i want to thank supervisor safai for holding off on this legislation until we have those hearings and appreciate the fact that he has worked with and listened to members of the public relative to the amendments that he has offered which i am happy to move. with those amendments adopt cosponsor this legislation. >> thank you very much, supervisor. >> add me as well as cosponsor. i want to take a moment to be grateful and hold up the work of carla short. i appreciate you. this last month when we had
9:37 pm
district 7 trees being a total mess, i was so grateful for your quick response to the threats of our residents who were really scared from our street trees that were leaning and branches broken and all of these things happening. i am grateful for supervisor safai's work to do that balancing. doing what we need to do at the same time as we provide transparency and communication with the public on the environment. an aye for equity. many of our residents who don't live in wealthy areas do not have a canopy but other districts do. mr. buck did you want to say something? >> you are muted.
9:38 pm
>> thank you, board members. a point of clarification. the previous caller is a brother of john nolte. if there is a chance to do that. >> wait. that is my mistake. >> we will pull it up. >> let's bring in mr. nolte, please, if he wants to weigh in. thank you. >> take that caller. i apologize. >> thank you. this is michael nolte. executive 6 executive director. one of the neighborhoods with one of the least district 6
9:39 pm
areas with one of the least set of trees. we are experiencing a lot of trees being cut down by various city departments. m.t.a. is trying to do stuff along market street. around the removal -- the shelters that are around bart. there the other departments doing various things. there needs to be more clear process about the trees removed. i think obviously more legislation has to be created. i was dismayed buyer the first caller talking about the central subway and how the contractor has removed many trees on fourth street. again, these are contractors that basically are not necessarily going by what we would assume as public members
9:40 pm
find acceptable. you know, the contractors sometimes they don't protect the trees during their construction and we lose trees right and left. sometimes there is really no consequence. there seems to be a lot of different issues at play. we do appreciate hearing this one step being talked about now but there seems to be further steps that advocates have been trying to address in the flawed system that is currently in play. along with permitting as well as the various other issues that we see that are not necessarily being done appropriately. thank you for your time. >> i apologize for my overzealousness with my notes there.
9:41 pm
i referred to them incorrectly. that confirms that is the last person in the queue. >> with that public comment is now closed. thank you so much, madam clerk for making sure everyone's voice is heard. supervisor peskin, did you make a motion? you did. >> to adopt the amendments. >> madam clerk. lets take roll for that motion. >> on the motion as stated by supervisor peskin. supervisor peskin. >> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. >> thank you. now can we have a motion to move this forward as amendment. >> so moved. >> on the motion as stated supervisor peskin.
9:42 pm
>> aye. >> supervisor preston. >> aye. >> supervisor melgar. >> aye. >> you have three ayes. thank you so much. that motion passes. >> please call item 3 and 4 together. >> 3. resolution urging permitties of san francisco bicycle share and powered scooter share program to implement mesh thursdaysures goes to advance rider compliance with existing terms and conditions of san francisco's bicycle share and powered scooter share program. 4. hearing to address noncompliance by shared mobility device permittees and riders of shared mobility devices with laws and regulations designed to protect the health and safety riders and pedestrians, including families,
9:43 pm
seniors and people with disabilities and requesting the municipal transportation agency and shared mobility device permittees to report. call 415-655-0001 to speak. >> thank you, supervisor peskin for introducing this item and your hard work on this issue. i have a special place in my heart for all issues regarding mobility and accessibility. so that we have a city where everyone can get around and everyone can contribute. i am grateful supervisor peskin that you are doing this. i appreciate you. the floor is yours. >> thank you, madam chair and thank you for scheduling this hearing as well as the related item. the resolution that is on the calendar. i am going to ask ms. bracket
9:44 pm
to please turn her camera off until we get to her in the presentation. i thought i would just start by taking this off with a walk down memory lane from not very long ago to explain how we got to this part of the micro mobility world and remind us of the bumps along the way and provide goals for what we would like to achieve with this hearing and colleagues, feel free to jump in. it wasn't that long ago back in 2017 when we actually introduced legislation for the regulation of untethered bike share mocromobility use as some of my longer term members of
9:45 pm
this board will remember. fast forward a year later, we proposed very similar legislation for a new emerging mocromobility devices electric scooters and actually we did that then with the enthusiastic support of the then director of the s.f.m.t.a. ed riskin. while that legislation to give the s.f.m.t.a. ability to enter into licensing of scooter companies and issuing of permits with conditions. scooter get on let lose. the number one but only offender dumped thousands of scooters knowing that that legislation was pending. that they would soon be
9:46 pm
regulated. one of the things i know we don't remember mamohammed nuru he drove around with d.p.w. trucks and confiscated dozens of scooters to put in the back of d.p.w. trucks. ultimately, we did pass that legislation. the m ta got into the business of permitting scooter share in san francisco, which was already becoming the standard in other jurisdictions. not only in california but across the country. there has been some evolution since then. i think kate from the m ta can tell us about that.
9:47 pm
bird did not get a license if my recollection is lights. lime turned around and sued the city because they did not win a permit. maybe we can get additional history on that. i think the hearing today should touch on a number of things. number one, what the permit conditions are, if they are add hearing to those conditions if these devices are equitably deployed around be the city relative to what supervisor melgar just brought up which is the issue of access for people throughout the city. then the thing that was impetus for this hearing which has to do with persistent safety concerns, particularly as it regards not
9:48 pm
only sidewalk riding but also sidewalk parking. it is not lost on me that we have regulated this emerging industry in ways we have been deprived of relative to shared automobile trips by companies like uber and lyft, both who are in the micro mobility outfit because both of those companies have managed to get preemption that prevents local governments from doing what is right for public health and safety concerns. we have also made collaborative strides in the industry. including when the m ta broadly required fix to the illegal parking. they met that regulation within novation. now the lock mechanisms on the devices is a standard. in the past months getting to
9:49 pm
the issue that i am particularly concerned about which is safety. there have been a number of injuries involving not only riders of scooters but pedestrians including high profile horrible injury to of all people the director of the mayor's office of disability who was actually in her wheelchair not far from city hall when a sidewalk scooter rider struck her and shattered her ankle and has left her hospitalized for a long time. i am sorry for her and her recovery is expected to take several more months of intense e care. we have asked for and received data from the san francisco department of public health tracks scooter injuries at san francisco general that suggest that these are not isolated
9:50 pm
incidents. i have that report here and would actually like to if i can find it read some words that i was not happy to read which is in 2018 san francisco general began tracking injuries associated with use of standing electric scooters following increased use of devices. these are presently included within the pedestrian category of injury surveillance. a detailed analysis from the scooter companies police reports and san francisco general tracking conducted during the scooter pilot is available. five severe requiring hospitalization admissions. scooter related injuries.
9:51 pm
four were critical. these do not include fails injuries for the first time in 2020 two riders died in san francisco taken together these indicate emerging mode may be particularly vulnerable to injury. no surprise there. getting on to my presentation. frankly, i want to talk about how people report and whether it is underreported. i have one individual in my district who is responsible probably for the lion's share of some 2000 complaints. colleagues we are all on his e-mails. i want to dig further into whether or not it is under reported. i believe that it is. it is actually quite challenging to report illegal riding
9:52 pm
barrier. i want to dig into that problem this afternoon. in the interest of expediting a solution to the issue of sidewalk riding which based on the demonstration i attended with the m ta last week. i thank kate and her team. i believe it is very possible to implement the scooter companies now have the technology and i would like to actually amend the subject resolution to urge the m ta not to issue new permits until or unless the scooter companies have implemented this technology on all of their devices. we will hear more about that demonstration that i personally attended. i want to thank my staff for bottom lining this in my office. before turning it over to the
9:53 pm
s.f.m.t.a. i will reiterate what i want out of this implement sidewalk detection as soon as possible. second better understand how to go about enforcement of violations. third i would like to explore an idea kicking around at the state level. a notion each of the companies include liability waivers in their contracts with the riders. i think that deserves some exploration. before as you know you can get on a scooter they have to waive any claim against the companies themselves. we are in receipt of a letter from the companies not surprisingly they don't like that idea. i think this is something that many if not most riders don't realize as they click through the various screens to obtain the device. i think if that dynamic were
9:54 pm
different we would see companies a lot more proactive about safety controls. with that summary, i will turn it over to s.f.m.t.a. and director and her staff for their presentation which i reviewed a draft of last week. i also want to remind m.t.a. and when we met last week originally it was not only then mayor lee's appreciation and embracing of all things tech but it was a representation by the m ta that all transportation was good transportation and this was a potentially very good first mile, last mile solution. i would like to definitely into it a little bit whether or not
9:55 pm
that is true, whether or not it these devices have helped de-congest san francisco, who uses them. in my district where at least pre-pandemic and now slowly as we emerge from the pandemic where we have a large amount of san francisco tourist industry, a lot of rides are joyrides. they are not a first-last mile solution. they are a fun device which i am down with as long as they are not on our sidewalks. those riders aren't getting traumatic brain injuries. we would love to hear about that from the m ta. thank you, colleagues for indulging me for that extremely
9:56 pm
long introduction to this hearing. >> welcome. >> thank you for the introduction. kate 2009 director of taxis, access and mobility services for s.f.m.t.a. thank you for inviting us today. i want to thank chair melgar, supervisor peskin for creating this opportunity for us to be held accountable to you and to the public. we share your concerns. we have a lengthy presentation. i am trying to answer and provide helpful information. i want to particularly thank supervisor peskin for his leadership in this area. we work with him monthly, weekly, sometimes daily. he is very accessible to us and helpful in providing consistent
9:57 pm
feedback. this is a team effort. it is not all about me. i represent a larger team. today we have with us phil cranna enforcement and legal affairs manager. sarah hellman, permits manager, bike share manager and jason hide, senior transportation manager. it is a team effort here. i will kickoff the presentation and discuss some of our scooter share data and my colleague will provide an update on bike share. my colleague sarah hellman will share her screen and share the presentation. i think we are working to get that set up. >> erica, my share screen is grayed out. not allowing me. do i need to sign off and on? >> i will sign you on the long
9:58 pm
long list. one moment. >> we essential have a lot today. i want to start with the desired outcomes or promises of these shared mobility services. there are a lot of exciting promises and opportunities that these services do signal. i will stick with desired outcomes. they can provide safe and equitable mobility option to serve the public interest. they can serve diverse riders, they can support transit by providing first mile-last mile
9:59 pm
solution. they can help reduce traffic congestion, parking, carbon emissions by offering an active transportation mode option. as we have seen on our next slide we will get into what some of the challenges are. while there are a lot of potential benefits. they haven't achieved full potential and there are many ongoing challenges which supervisor peskin laid out in great detail which we echo. our biggest concerns relate to illegal and unsafe riding behaviors in addition to sidewalk riding. we have seen double riding, riding the wrong way, improperly parked devices can impact the accessible right-of-way and particularly impact seniors and people with disabilities on the sidewalk. we have seen issues with rider
10:00 pm
account ability and issues with equitable service where our diverse riders. we don't see being served. particularly, we think about diversity. we think of race, gender, income, ability status and degraphic. shared mobility services we want to minimize challenges. we have developed a comprehensive regulatory framework to this end. we focus on public safety, consumer protection and equity as our core regulatory goals. on slide 4 and i think supervisor peskin laid this out for us. i will just quickly go through and for those who are interested in the deep history.
10:01 pm
this slide offers some context for scooter share in san francisco. they were dropped without permits in 2018 and in very short order the board of supervisors granted m.t.a. authority to permit -- provide permit program for scooter shares. m.t.a. board established the pilot program. we are two permittees in the pilot scoots and skip. we saw complaints we received during the unpermitted deployment or scooter get on. once we had the permit program in place we saw complaints decrease and we saw better more orderly service on the streets. you can see the pictures which show the scooters everywhere.
10:02 pm
requiring the locking device. maintain an accessible path of travel. we increased reporting requirements. we required a low income plan. as we moved from the pilot to the permanents program we learned lessons and applied those lessons to the next round of permit issuance. we did the same for this currents round of permits which began in july 2021. next slide. our current program which started on july 1st and goes through the fiscal year june 30, 2022 has three permittees. lines are currently authorized to operate 2000 devices.
10:03 pm
spin is authorized to operate 2000 devices. scoot authorized to operate 1500 devices. the total maximum allowable devices in the program is up to 10,000. it is a 10,000 maximum, but in order to achieve increase in the number of devices the permittee needs to first make a request. they can only request increments of 500 every two months. in order to be approved for this increase they have to meet permit terms and conditions. there is a thorough review. there is in this current permits term the option for permitties to be issued a second year under this current permit program if they meet permit terms and conditions. there is a one year option
10:04 pm
extension. we put some program snapshots to show trips thus far, parking citations, 311 complaints and moving violations for improper illegal sidewalk riding. those are issued by the sf police department. they have issued five. that represents 68 actual contacts so that there were 63 warnings. five moving violations. sfpd is very well aware of concerns about sidewalk riding and is focusing when they are out there on education and making sure that riders are warned about this behavior. next slide, please. >> if i may through the chair.
10:05 pm
touch on scoot. they got suspended for a while. can you tell us why. >> sure. under the trier permit terms scoot was operating subcontract ors. while that is allowable under the permit program they hadn't informed m.t.a. and receive approval. there was a thorough and lengthy investigation process. we issued a heavy fine that. the timing was all a little awkward because it happened to be the end of the last permit term that spanned into the timing for the new permit term or the permit evaluation process. we had to put a pause on making a decision on scoots application for the current permit term while we completed our investigation.
10:06 pm
we did complete the investigation. they did pay the fine. they were subsequent bely issued a permit under the new program. >> thank you. as i mentioned the current permit program builds on lessons learned in the pilot and 2019 permit program. m.t.a. has established some new requirements and in some cases updated existing permit requirements to address concerns that we have heard from the public and supervisors. this slide highlights a handful of key requirements. the actual permits have over 70 detailed requirements and six in depth appen diss. i have included the link in the presentation. this is a live link if you want
10:07 pm
to research any specific permit terms and conditions. the link is here. these are on the m.t.a. website. we have safety and rider account ability requirements, very detailed parking requirements. which we developed in conjunction with the mayor's office on disability that is a live an link as well. there is a lot of interest in what the parking requirements are. the requirements pertain to both scooter share and bike share. again, we mention that our team does issue citations for improperly parked devices in both scooter share and bike share. we have an equity focus in our requirements. we require an ad adaptive program. low income plans, requirements related to neighborhood distribution and community
10:08 pm
engagement. there are extensive reporting requirements. harmony is important. it is very important to the board of supervisors. in this last round of permit applications the relative weight of the labor harmony section was increased so that instead of working 10% of the score it was increased to 15% to reflect importance that the m ta holds this in. there is also a new authority for the director of transportation to suspend a permittee if there is a threat to public health or safety. m.t.a. has a strong and ongoing commitment to disability access and to ensuring that a broad
10:09 pm
range of users can access the scooter share program. in the last permit term we had an ad adaptive pilot requirement and in the current permit term that has been upgraded, if you will, to the permanent adaptive program. there is a requirement at least 5% of the permittees fleet is adaptive. the ad adaptive scooters must be available in the app for riders and their reporting requirements. there is also a complimentary program to continue to test and try out different models to see what may work best. this is a very new area, and the disability community is a key stakeholder in letting us know what is working and not working. if we go to the next slide we
10:10 pm
will see that m.t.a. recently held the demonstration of adaptive devices. the demonstration was held with access students in the sf unified district and staff. there were many first time scooter riders at the demonstration and it was held in golden gate park. i think it was an exciting time. a lot of first time users trying out the devices annual giving m.t.a. feedback what they liked and didn't like. clear feedback on baskets. people liked baskets. three and four wheel devices with more stability, wider floorboards, feedback related to the ability to change seat heights. that was very positive
10:11 pm
partnership. thank you. next slide. in addition to the 70 plus permit terms and conditions the m ta laid out for the permittees, each applicant when they submit their application they have provided us with promises or information on how they would address or would address certain aspects of the program and the applications are part of the permits. the application is actually part of the permit. when we think of the permit it includes m.t.a.'s requirements and promises the permittees made to us. they have all made promises regarding user education, safety messages that pop-up for riders,
10:12 pm
quizzes that first time riders have to take. they are all required to over a quarterly safety training class. they all have a progressive discipline model so that the discipline gets passed through to the rider. they have all committed to implementing technology to eliminate sidewalk riding. to that end as supervisor peskin mentioned. we held a sidewalk riding detection demonstration last week. we have been hearing about the technology for some time. we are excited to see the application. we wanted to see it in action. how does this workout in the field and to get the look and feel of what this technology does. we worked to get a permit to close a sidewalk down and had parking control officers posted
10:13 pm
to maintain a safe environment and we had a number of staff including we have testing the technology and each permittee uses a different type of technology. we got the range of the various types of technologies that can be used for this purpose. there were some -- while m.t.a. didn't specify specific technology in the application process and part of that is because this is so new. what we said is to the applicants you tell us how to solve this problem. we have these problems, challenges, and how will you solve them? they each proposed various types of solutions. again, we got to test and look
10:14 pm
and the feel of them. there were some best practices that the staff have coalesced around. there was an audible no sidewalk message. there were different audible messages or audible techniques used. one was like a beep or buzz. there was another one that said no sidewalk riding, no sidewalk riding. that was very effective. it was relent be less and it really drove the message home. there was a range when the device entered on to the sidewalk. how quickly it slowed down. there are a lot of safety considerations where the permittees don't want it to come to an abrupt stop. there is a gradual slowdown process. the slowdown speed of four miles
10:15 pm
per hour felt safer and as a rider signaled quickly that this was along with the audible message that you are not to be riding. you will not be able to ride on the sidewalk. some of the technology we saw was related to gps and mapping. comera -- camera technology and vibration that we tested out. on our next steps we are excited to have tested the technology to see that it is viable and we want to work with the permittees on implements in san francisco that aligns with one of the goals supervisor peskin laid out for us here for one of our outcomes. we want a timeline on when the
10:16 pm
sidewalk detection technology will be implemented in san francisco. for us we need an audit framework for enforcement to test out whether the technology is working as promised. m.t.a. will issue an updated policy directive which lays out any new guidance as it related to fleet expansion and permit term extension. specific to sidewalk riding detection technology. m.t.a. has a really top-notch enforcement team. i am proud of the work the team does. we have 8 enforcement staff. generally on the street 7 days per week. authorized to issue penalties for improperly parked devices. over the years we have improved how we do this. currently we have an app that
10:17 pm
the enforcement team has in the field so when they issue a citation there is an automatic message that goes to the permittee and requests device removal. the device is required to be removed within two hours. the enforcement app is integrated with 311. there is a lot of interconnection that takes time to builds. as we get more mature in the regulatory program, our tools are getting better. we continue to work to emprove our tools. we have a lot of in addition to on street enforcement there is a lot of compliance monitoring. we monitor various reports and databases and reports that are required to come in monthly and quarterly. we are using technology through sales force to improve how we
10:18 pm
track reports and are able to report out and so that i am happy to say is working well. we are improving our efficiencies and integrating with 311 is a new improvement. >> the 8 enforcement staff is not full-time is it? >> they are full-time f.t.e. they do a range of enforcement activities. they are not all dedicated to scooter and bike share enforcement. they enforce on taxi related items and commuter shuttle. this is a portion of their portfolio. with regard to the device removal within two hours. supervisor melgar and supervisor
10:19 pm
preston will say that my constituents e-mail say this is here day two, day three. a bunch of these things get thrown into the bay. as you can see the district that i happen to represent has the lion's share of the issuance. you will see them at low tide. sometimes it takes the scooter companies weeks to fish them out of the bay. as a bay swimmer i appreciate that battery acid is going to the bay. the fish i swim with don't like it either. what happens when these are not removed in two hours? >> we do go back to issue citations. we will send the team back out. i am on the e-mails as well.
10:20 pm
we track and follow and we work with the permittees. there can be additional communication to the permitty, additional citation. we have added as one of ourmetrics for permit term extension that the permittees need to be responding with in that two hour framework. we have added more teeth to that, if you will. we added a mechanism for us to track that. >> thank you. >> i mentioned transparency and community engagement. we work hard to share with the public what we do. you hardly ever see the enforcement staff. we want to share to the extent we can the good work the team is doing.
10:21 pm
we included dashboards on our website to show service statistics, number of trips, where the trips are happening, and then we show complaints and citations. you can map it. if you go to site a user can or somebody who is interested can work for bike share information or just scooter share information. you can select a certain company. you can select a certain timeframe. there is a lot of rich information online that is available. on the next slide. the trips. this is showing us trips happening in the city. they are happening mainly, the trip origin and destination by neighborhood. you can see they track closely
10:22 pm
where we get the most complaints where we write the most citations. scooters are heavily used in these neighborhoods in san francisco. trips are an increase over the past number of months. thank you. we also looked at trips by permittee. on the left we have shown each individual permittee. one with most trips 61 percent. spin at 37%. scoot's permit started later as we discussed because of investigation. there is some context there. scoot operates fewer devices than the other permittees.
10:23 pm
then we looked at the parking citations by permittee so we can track and see how the permittees are doing when we look at citations relative to trips they provide. lime and spin are closely tracking under .5% of citations as compared to the trips. scoot's number is higher. 1.6%. their denominator is lower. that may impact them. these are various ways to track what is happening with each permittee. i mentioned that the learned lessons from the pilot program, from the first round of permits. now as we are into our second round, the technology is improving, enforcement tools are improving. this is an ongoing conversation,
10:24 pm
and i would say as great as our enforcement team is and as proud of them as i am and the work they do. that really the solutions need to come from the permittees. the permittees need to work with their riders on accountability and on systematic solutions to solve the improper riding and parking issues we continue to see. we continue to hear from the community. we do have frequent flyers we hear from frequently and there are a number of very engaged citizens interested in scooters and scooter safety. we continue to engage with supervisor peskin's office and he continues to push us to do better, provide safer, more safety for pedestrians. we take it to heart.
10:25 pm
there is a lot of work and discussion happening internally. we are working on initiatives that we are considering. increasing the fine amount for i proper parking. currently $100. per citation. we look to increase to $150 per citation that will take for m.t.a. board approval that is not something at a staff level. we look at standardizing in app safety messages and device markings. some devices are clearly marked on the board or on the stem that say don't go on the sidewalk. some are harder to see. we think the permittees would benefit for guidance and requirements. we have discussed stencils? high complaint areas that would have messages on the walk about no riding on the sidewalk.
10:26 pm
that is an ongoing conversation. our engineering team has feedback on that. that is utility might not exceed the cost there. it is something we are looking at. we also have the ability to issue administrative citations if the riders fail to comply with the laws including sidewalk riding. that is something we will do. again, this list might grow. we are going to look at anything we can do to work with the permittees apwork internally to have the safe outcomes that we want. >> i actually have come to note but from my colleagues members of the public watching can you
10:27 pm
tell us what constitutes proper sidewalk parking versus what constitutes improper sidewalk parking? >> yes, that is a good question. we will go to the live link. i will summarize. keep going. >> these requirements were gyp rated with the mayor's office on disability. the main policy goal when we they about parking requirements. they can't block accessible path of travel. they can't be hanging over the
10:28 pm
furniture zone. they have to be locked. there is a locking requirement as you mentioned earlier. they have to be locked. out of the furniture zone. they have to be out of accessible path of travel. that is a very broad brush. if i missed anything phil can add to that. >> at a higher level. it sounds like you have minimal -- not minimal. one might argue that. minimum requirements and then in the permit process the companies can add additional things that you then incorporate to the terms and conditions of their permit. it sounds like it is not standard across. you set forth the minimal requirements and then if they want to exceed them they can do
10:29 pm
so. my question is relative to the way penalties are assessed. obviously the penalty that you assess for various violations is in your regulations. do you know are those paid by the scooter companies, passed through to the customers, users of the scooters? is that a requirement from the m ta or practice of the company. [please stand by]
10:30 pm
you you >> the way you described the permit application process is a combination of some very precipitationive requirements and then some policy goals and we ask the applicants to tell us how they would or what their solutions are. so i'll give you an example. under our plan for safe scooter riding and parking in the complication, we ask the applicant describe all education and training that you
10:31 pm
commit to implementing and then it goes on from there or describe your plan to limit speeds. so we're asking them, you know, we say we're concerned with safety, sidewalk riding. tell us how you would solve that so then we can look to see and we're learning as we go. we have a growth mind set here and so as we understand what best practices are in the next round, we might be more precipitationive and i talked about being more prescriptive with in-app marketing devices. please submit an escalating penalty structure you commit to implementing to hold riders
10:32 pm
accountable so that was the question asked. please describe your escalating penalty structure. so if that answer, i'm hoping that answers your question and so then we -- when the permits are issued, the actual application becomes part of the permit so that there's not a standard everybody is doing the same thing, but this permittee promised this and this is what we will hold them accountable to. >> supervisor peskin: yeah. no. it answers any question. it raises concerns and so to the extent that you have a level playing field and everybody's playing by the same rules, there is no temptation for a consumer to shop their platform. so if they know that bad behavior is dealt with more severely by one platform than another and they, you know, the
10:33 pm
good platform i'll pick on spin because everybody in your shop based on my experience with them last week, my shop thinks they are the most exemplary of the three they have a better enforcement call and they suspended rider and kick them off their platt foreman, but scoot which i'll pick on because of my aforementioned bird towards bird giving us the bird early on has a much lesser standard, the consumer will then just migrate to that. i mean i appreciate the process which is you go out and say here's the bare minimum and they go out and say we'll do more than the bare minimum, but at that point, it seems like you now, the regulator now knows what the industry is able
10:34 pm
and willing to do and then should apply that to all permittees so there's no incentive for less than responsible users to migrate to other platforms. >> yeah. well, i think those are points well taken and that we are learning as we get more experience and so you can see kind of the development of the regulatory framework has become more mature and they have all the current permittees do have progressive discipline and i would say that the there is room for improvement as we know. i mean that's the premise of this meeting. and so i'm making notes as you're speaking and so i would just say point taken and this is part of our iterative process. so thank you for the comments. >> supervisor peskin: by the way, i just want to say to my colleagues, it really has been
10:35 pm
a pleasure working with you and you have been very receptive and you are right in your observation that this is a maturing dynamic both on the city regulatory side and on the permittee side and on the user side. so and, i mean, look, obviously, i think i can speak for all of my colleagues and i usually hesitate to speak for them, but i think everybody here prefers education to enforcement and there are different users. users who actually are consistent users in san francisco whether it's a first mile, last mile solution or whatever and, remember, there are also people who don't use the permit companies, they have their own private ones will eventually hopefully be educatable. as compared to somebody who comes here for the weekend and
10:36 pm
wants to ride up the embarcadero promenade as people are diving in every direction as an irresponsible rider who's never going to come back again or for months and years and so i do want to have a system where very quickly, the platform says, yeah, we just noticed because of geo location or because of a camera that's -- spin clearly had the best technology i think we all agreeded on last week identifies that a user is using it and i acknowledge that there are sometimes an on-street condition that forces somebody onto a sidewalk, you know, construction in the bike lane and even though it's illegal to be on that sidewalk, it is a momentary thing as compared to somebody who does and i see it all the time two miles of the embarcadero promenade. by the time you finish your first 200 yards, they should have technology that says
10:37 pm
you're shut down, you're done, you can't come back. >> yes. >> supervisor peskin: anyway. thank you for the therapy. >> no. thank you. again, i'm making notes. so thank you. i want to introduce my colleague adrian neil who is the bike share manager and he's going to bring us to conclusion with a bike share piece of this. >> supervisor melgar: i had a few questions. would you prefer i ask them at the entire presentation? my questions are for you. >> yeah. sure. >> supervisor melgar: is that okay? i don't know how supervisor peskin wants to conduct the hearing. okay. thank you. i have lots of questions for you. so let me just start by saying that i am a firm supporter and believer in anything that's going to get us out of cars. and that being said, you know, you've said something in your comments that kind of pushed my
10:38 pm
buttons a little bit so i have to ask you about it and that is about how you are thinking that the next iter ration of, you know, just enforcement and challenges and addressing the challenges is up to the companies and i'm wondering, where you think it's appropriate for the city to, you know, build infrastructure or, you know, support all of this stuff. so let me just add that, you know, like i'm a bike rider, so i'm interested in seeing what the next face of this presentation, but, you know, thinking about the signs that are around our city for cars, you know, no turn signs, you know, like just guidance for drivers versus guidance for bicyclists or diversity and i
10:39 pm
realize this is the thing. i'm wondering is if our goal, if it gets people out of cars and to, you know, make sure that that last mile is not done in an uber or taxi, but rather something like this, wouldn't is behoove us to plan for that infrastructure so we can guide people in doing that. that's my first question. my second question is about siding. so, you know, a line has a bunch of scooters on ocean avenue in district 7. there's no rhyme or reason, so where they're parked. so i'm wondering just like what is sort of -- what are we thinking about that? i must say it does irk me a little bit that all of the public bike racks are taken up by these private scooters and it's been difficult for anyone
10:40 pm
riding a bike or a private, you know, mobility device to lock your bike because everything's taken up by them. so at what point do we think we will add to our infrastructure so we can have both the corporate devices and, you know, citizen devices that are able to be parked in public bike racks. so that's my other question. and then just last, you know, i'm wondering because i didn't see it in your list of, you know, enforcement about speed. so i often see, like i said because i'm a bike rider, and i do have both an electric bike and a regular bike, often times folks go on these, you know, mobility devices really fast, much faster than bicycles do. and i am wondering if speed
10:41 pm
limits just sort of, you know, coordinate the flow in bike lanes is something that we have considered as well? thank you. >> okay. thank you. those are a lot of great questions and i'll start with an apology. i did not mean to imply that the city had a role. i should have done a yes and. yes, m.t.a. has a very structured frame work and we have an enforcement on street colleague and we need to work with the permittees to work collaboratively on our safety goals and so i think you make a lot of good points about infrastructure and signage and orienting our built environment to mobility services that aren't necessarily the car. right, we've had the private
10:42 pm
vehicle, that's our mainframe work, that's how our cities are laid out. i think it's a big role for infrastructure, so thank you for making that point and giving me an opportunity to kind of refine what i was intending my message to be. so thank you. and, adrienne, my colleague adrian can speak to the infrastructure and the bike racks. but point well taken, while we are increasing the number of bike racks, device racks that we are implementing and as part of our scooter share permits, we require a pike rack c so that these permittees do pay into the infrastructure and that their devices are using and are required to be locked too. so that's a piece of what m.t.a. is doing as well and we've increased the number of bike racks that we've
10:43 pm
implemented, but you'll see on adrienne's slides, bike racks are both one of the successes because we've put in so many and still remain one of the challenges because we need more and speed limits. the speed limits for scooter share are set by the california vehicle code and the top speed is 15 miles an hour. i will say having tested the scooter in that controlled environment at the demonstration last week, it does feel very fast and kind of scary as a rider and i know as then a pedestrian experiencing that device and that level of speed and the bicyclists that could be jarring and but that's not -- so the speed again is regulated and so therefore required in our permits that they have to comply with
10:44 pm
california vehicle code and i think it points up why bike lanes are so important that there's this dedicated space that's safe and that as our riders mature that they are more attuned to the safety of others around them. does that answer your questions? >> supervisor melgar: yes. i appreciate all those answers and i would just make the plug for signage particularly in the places where we know a lot of folks are using these devices for the first time for fun to look at our beautiful city mainly in supervisor peskin's district, but also in district 6 along the embarcadero, that's where i see by far the more. and your data underscores that well, so maybe we can just pilot a couple signs, you know,
10:45 pm
for another ferry building, pier 29, just where we know lots of folks are starting or ending the trip so people can have some guidance as to what's allowed and what the rules are. >> okay. great. thank you. i made notes. so i'm not sure if there are other questions on scooter share or should we go to my colleague adrian on bike share now? >> supervisor peskin: before we go there, madam chair, just so that you know, colleagues, i didn't just call for this hearing. i've been talking as ms. torren said to the m.t.a. for quite some time and these initiatives that have been under consideration respectfully have been under consideration for quite some time. so what i'm most interested in is action items and which of these initiatives are going to be adopted, when they're going
10:46 pm
to be adopted. i mean, the thing about when we had the test last week about technology that by the way, some of these companies have implemented in other cities, every device in seattle has them for on sidewalk or sidewalk technology has been implemented, my question to all three companies was how fast can you do this? and it's been said immediately if we come to agreement and scoot said first quarter next year and lime said we don't know, but maybe second quarter next year which wasn't very convincing and didn't really give me any confidence, but i want dates by which these things are going to happen because the sum and substance of this resolution and the
10:47 pm
amendment i'm going to offer is that we urge the m.t.a. not to issue any new permits until or unless these things have been done and have been standardized across the board for all licensees or permittees. so i want dates. >> okay. >> through the chair, if we can have sarah take down the powerpoint if we're not referring to it anymore. >> supervisor peskin: we are. >> clerk: oh, okay. i see. >> supervisor peskin: this is the fourth bullets. the bullets i'm looking for is pass throughs to uniform pass throughs to customers, the bullets i'm looking for are uniformed provisions for suspension and taking somebody off a platform who is a
10:48 pm
offender or repeat offender depending on what those uniform -- i want to know what the best practices are and how those get codified across the board. >> okay. >> supervisor peskin: i think there's more to the power point that adrian's about to do. >> supervisor melgar: i did have one more thing that i wanted to add to your strengthening enforcement tools as an idea. as i mentioned, i'm a bike rider and i've had my share of clashes in san francisco like all bike riders have and, you know, after one particularly bad one where i ended up, you know, at kaiser, i was a little bit reluctant to get back on my bike and by far, one of the most effective or great things that i did was take a training from the san francisco bicycle coalition which really helped my confidence and sort of like knowing what to do and, you
10:49 pm
know, i was able to get back on my bike without that fear and, you know, because these micromobility devices are newer, i don't know if we've caught up in terms of the sort of support that there is for the riding community to do those kinds of trainings of users for how to get around the city safely and effectively. so i'm wondering if it's something that you would also consider adding to the strengthening tools, you know, from the -- from that perspective. it's not enforcement, but it's prevention to do that sort of public education at that level and i don't know if it would be the bicycle coalition or if they could, you know, also absorb these, but something like that. >> thank you. yes. thank you for that comment and it's -- sorry for the crashes you've experienced and the fear
10:50 pm
and it's helpful to hear the real world experience so that when we are developing these tools that we do it in a way that actually works. we do have a quarterly safety training requirement for each permittee and so that is happening quarterly and we can take a look at that to see if that's the right cadence for that type of training. maybe it could happen more frequently or maybe upon request. so i've made a note of that. and the permittees are here as well and they can help if there are questions for the permittees. i know that they're prepared to be responsive. and for supervisor peskin to go back to your question as well, yes, we have been looking at these strengthening these
10:51 pm
opportunities to strengthen our existing enforcement tools or what else do we need to do and i think that the permit term provides a good framing for us in that during this second half of the permit term that the permittees have an interest in achieving that additional option year and in order to do that, meeting all the permit terms and conditions and meeting what they promising in their applications will be part of that and so i think that gives us some time to work collaboratively with permittees on the implementation especially something like sidewalk riding technology which is very complex. that's the difference in adding some additional safety training requirements. so there's a range of treatments and probably a range of the time frame, but how i'm thinking about it big picture
10:52 pm
is as you have keyed it in the resolution to that permit extension, i mean, that doesn't mean these, you know, that we're not continuing to work on all of these and we're planning on bringing the increased fine amount, for example, before the m.t.a. board and early 2022. so there may be different time frames for the various aspects here. should we proceed with adrian's portion of the presentation? >> thank you. thanks for having me today and to follow i'm just going to break down. i'm just going to go and review some of the excesses but also some of the existing challenges and that will kind of dove tail
10:53 pm
into use and behavior. so overview of successes, we have 252 stations in the city right now. we're looking at implementing 35 more in the next quarter. it's useful to think about how stations impact usage unlike scooters, station based bike share has a dedicated place where these devices are supposed to end up. we also use a lot of racks because some of the bikes have a lot to the device just like the scooters and we've mostly maintained 100 racks per month although we did kind of slow down a little bit during parts of the pandemic, but i think we're back up to that number at this moment. and then in terms of summarizing the service, we have regular pedal bikes and we also have e bikes that are
10:54 pm
hybrid which can be parked at stations or bike racks. and supervisor melgar, you kind of mentioned wanting more, you know, worrying about the scarcity of space of bike racks just to be clear, we have a limit that people are supposed to honor when they park at bike racks, but additionally, we have a bike rack fee that they contribute to the city so that we build more racks in general and those racks can be used by both the permittees or private citizens. so that's a way that we're trying to kind of keep a number of racks growing. next slide, please. >> supervisor peskin: if i may, do you have any data on utization of the bike racks? actually, i often see that the
10:55 pm
utilization of that? >> that could be something we explore in the future. we're just kind of trying to focus on getting a lot more out there since we do know that without racks, people tend to parks where bikes traditionally park at posts and parking meters. when you're talking about a bike rack next to a parking meter and somebody's choosing the parking meter, that's something that does seem to warrant more investigation. i would be very curious as to why a bicyclist decided to do that i know from deployment
10:56 pm
from the vendors. >> supervisor peskin: i see it most with scooters than bikes. >> yeah. thanks for that. next slide. you see that spike there. that's probably about january, february, in 2020. and it was interesting because this was pre-e bike fees, like extra fees or usage and we saw more and more people using and march 2020 happened and both the pandemic happened at the same time. and we see it kind of lower travel demand overall and just recently in october, we had
10:57 pm
9,000 rides per day and i think that was kind of the combination of seasonal trades and combination of good feelings. we stis pate that finally, all progress as we know is not without struggle with the larger system. we are experiencing theft and more vandalism. that has effects on the service overall. we still need more bike racks as i mentioned and so we're continuing to try to install those across the city. we're also in the middle of some expansion options. without that, we do have all city service area right now. for example, you can ride e
10:58 pm
bike into d4 and so you have to find a bike rack to park at. so having stations more places will reduce the number of people in parking. >> supervisor peskin: you should show that picture of the one they torched the other day. did you see that one? >> yeah. that was a sandism one. there are people that, and you mentioned scooters are being thrown into the bay too, it's remarkable because when you step back and say why are these things happening and who's responsible? at some point, you have to question what is it that's driving people to do this? my last bulletin was about service modifications.
10:59 pm
we continue to make service modifications. so like i mentioned, we have all-city service center. we also had a recent e bike pricing increase and we do think having more stations in the outer areas will shift some parking related fees to incentivize trips in stations. for example, when you're using an e bike and you end your trip at a station, that reduces any parking fees you might have just to help incentivize keeping the streets organized. as i mentioned at the beginning, the station based pedal bikes can't be parked at the stations, so those are actually the most affordable service. and without stations, people don't have access to that option. into the summary, in terms of parking behavior and riding on sidewalks for example rpgs i do
11:00 pm
think bikes benefit from the established culture. just because that man has been around a lot longer and more than that when i was just learning to ride a bike, i was riding on the sidewalk and people were saying don't do that and that culture hasn't been established and some people don't know what the rules are bike share definitely has that established culture. >> supervisor melgar: so i have a couple questions. so i represent district 7 which is a little farther out. we share a very long border with district five of san mateo county, longer thn district five in san francisco county and we have a b.a.r.t. station in daily city which is in
11:01 pm
walking distance and i've been really struggling to try to guess a bike share dock at the daily city b.a.r.t. and everybody that seems to support it, we can't quite get it done, you know. but that sort of leads me to the larger if you think about how many trips and folks come into our city to cork starting in alameda county or marin. so i'm wondering if you talk about to us a little bit about that sort of regional transportation planning and how we are thinking about it because you know i am empathetic to supervisor mar also about people need to begin
11:02 pm
and end somewhere and how we're thinking about those connections. >> absolutely. thanks for raising that issue, supervisor melgar. one of the joys of my job is the bike share program is a regional program. it started with a different region and it started with the peninsula and san francisco and along the cal train corridor and it shifted around 2015 being east bay and south bay. so there's the bay, san francisco, berkeley and oakland. so we are in the system -- our sister cities across the bay also have bike share. not -- you know, san francisco ends up having 80% of all the trips, but this regional lens is really important and i appreciate that. and i think we've been in touch with megan imperial and you've also had discussions with our director on daily city bike share and it does make a lot of
11:03 pm
sense on basic transportation planning. >> supervisor melgar: it shouldn't be that hard. >> yeah. there's common sense to it. >> supervisor melgar: i'm just a supervisor, but from a user perspective, it should be like, you know -- some day living in a world where you can, you know, ride your bike from your apartment to cal train, take cal train and on the other end, use the same card or the same app to get a bike or micromobility to ride to work. that's the world we want people to live in rather to just think i'll get in a car. >> absolutely. i think i've been as the daily city station has been around the office, i've been talking about southwest gateway project because it's not just bike share. it's about having better facilities for biking and it's about the whole package and i think both c.c.s.f. and s.f. state being near there are huge trip generators so i think
11:04 pm
you're on to something there. we'll look into it. it is really complicated. as i mentioned, there's the m.t.c. account and then there's the city contract for the station list. i think you're right. we should be smart enough to be able to figure this out and i look forward to trying to pull that one out. >> supervisor melgar: yeah. i think we should maybe even provide incentives to think about it that way. you know, so maybe the way we contracted towards folks. yes to the performance measures anded quotas and maybe we can think about this too. anyway. thank you. >> supervisor melgar: colleagues, any other questions or comments?
11:05 pm
>> supervisor peskin: i do have questions for the permittees who are present, but i'll defer to you and express supervisor preston before i ask them supervisor melgar supervisor preston, did you with any questions or comments here. >> supervisor melgar: no questions right now. thank you. supervisor peskin, the floor is yours. >> supervisor peskin: okay. so i think maybe if we can hear from all three permittees separately and they can answer the exact same questions which is on the enforcement side. first, how they track the number of parking violations separate and apart from one they received a free one get a citation from the sfmta as well
11:06 pm
as how they track sidewalk riding violations. i want to know if they keep maps of violations that have occurred. i understand there are privaty issues here. i'm interested in whether they have aggregate data and then i would like each of the permittees to speak to how their sidewalk detection technology that they tested with m.t.a. and myself and my staff last week how it works and how effective they think it is and what happens when the device is detecteded on a sidewalk whether it does a speed reduction or makes an
11:07 pm
annoying and most importantly how quickly. so if we can hear from the permittees in any order you desire, madam chair, there are three of them. >> supervisor melgar: yes. why don't we start with largest to smallest? you know. >> supervisor peskin: 2,000 to 1500. >> supervisor melgar: shall we start with lines? i believe yvette bracket is here from lime. are you still with us? >> yes. i'm just trying to get my -- unmute myself and get my video on and i just wanted to
11:08 pm
reiterate the questions again to make sure i'm comprehensive in covering the answers. i'm also here today with our director of the government relations, she's also going to be here available to answer as many questions as possible. i just recently started with lime in late september, early october. so i'll be able to answer as many questions as i can and then i'll defer to her to things that may have been prior. i just want to go over quickly. >> supervisor peskin: i'll reiterate them and add one that i mentioned earlier that i neglected to mention before a couple of minutes ago. one is how you track parking violations, how you track sidewalk riding violations, whether it's double riding or just any riding on a sidewalk and what i did not mention a minute ago, but mentioned earlier is what the platform does.
11:09 pm
do you pass a citation through. if so when and why and do you do that uniform alley? when do you temporarily suspend? when do you take somebody off of your platform permanently? and whether or not you keep that aggregate data and very violations have occurred and as to the sidewalk detection technology where i got to see you last week, how the technology works, how effective it is, you know, have you tested it, do you use it in other areas. what happens when the device is detected on a sidewalk? does it slow down? how quickly does it make a sound and how quickly you can implement that technology? >> okay. >> supervisor peskin: and i can slow down and ask them as you answer along the way. >> yeah.
11:10 pm
that was a mouthful but i think i can try to get through most of it as soon as possible. in respect to sidewalk riding in terms of you were asking in terms of what do we do for enforcement? give me one second. sorry about that. >> supervisor peskin: how do you track them and enforce them? >> in term officer sidewalk riding, we probably should just preface first on how we're able to track sidewalk riding. so currently, we will get reports from sidewalk riding within 311 or someone may share a video with us. then we internally go through a process by which we try to identify the rider and then our policy is very strict in terms of sidewalk riding if we are able to identify the rider, that rider's actually kicked off of the app. if we're not able to identify the rider, what happens is then we send a message to all of the
11:11 pm
riders that were in or surrounding that location to remind them that of our safety tips that they're not allowed to ride on the sidewalk. that there's no drunk driving, to wear a helmet and make sure you park at a bike rack. so we kind of do education there. i'm going to get to your second question in the sense of you were saying how else do we track it behind. so in 2020, and this was talked about during the sidewalk tech detection meeting. prior, we were collecting data so that we could be able to notify people when they actually ride on the sidewalk and i'll have carla speak a little bit more to that because i was present and so that has also had some impact on our
11:12 pm
sidewalk riding. in order to ensure the accuracy of that in many of our regions where lime operates, we collect data about the varying sidewalk patterns and the materials for each city. as we mentioned to you and what came up in the slide with sfmta, there are three different forms of sidewalk detection and all of the different providers have been working with each other and to figure out the best model, there is accelerometer data as
11:13 pm
well as being able to also use kind of the grade of the sidewalk. so as you know, most of the sidewalks typically have a little break in the pattern whereas on the streets it's more of a smooth surface. they have created an a.i. version of technology that basically will take both of the data from both of that as well as geo fencing to be able to try to figure out if someone's riding on the sidewalk or not. the third availability is around having a camera. as we know, the sensitivities in san francisco around having any kind of surveillance model on vehicles tends to be kind of rile everyone up in the public and so we've kind of tried to stay away from using those models in our previous research and in terms of trying to come
11:14 pm
up with a better detection mode l that doesn't use cameras and so that's what you actually visibly saw. you saw our enhanced version of the sidewalk technology not in our current permit. you saw where we are continuing to improve on our sidewalk detection by offering the ability to make a sound when someone is riding on the sidewalk as well as to slow down the vehicle. as we stated before, that is still in testing model and -- it also requires us to be able to test that model on the sidewalk and i'll let carla step in now to kind of discuss that a little bit. >> sure thing. so as yvette mentioned, we previously talked about the traditional sidewalk riding which sends notifications so it's more of an educational tool. last week, that demo is our enhanced riding section.
11:15 pm
we recognize that the thing wants to work towards having real time notifications and so we continue to collect that data on our new generation of scooters which we deployed this summer. we wanted to make sure we increased the accuracy of that report. we're building that out onto the vehicle it is and we want to make sure it complies with all san francisco emergency operation given how it pairs with pattern detection and visible detection and so the enhanced version we demoed last week, we are working towards a 2022 timeline to be able to implement that. that is the goal currently with the previous traditional sidewalk technology which we can work with the city to
11:16 pm
implement, that's actually something we brought up to sfmta before early on in our permit term in 2020. at the time in order to turn on that type of technology, it did require that we mapped certain sf streets and unfortunately, m.t.a. felt strongly it couldn't sanction public sidewalk riding in any way, so it prevented us from testing to be able to fully roll that out. we are encouraged to be able to continue to work with m.t.a. to find a timeline when we can roll this out, but it will require ongoing testing to make sure that what we're rolling out is accurate and safe for our riders. >> and so to just kind of give an additional update in terms of sidewalk riding and what lime is also doing to ensure that we are educating our
11:17 pm
riders as well as making sure that we're putting additional efforts to keep our public safety, we currently take 10% of our parking photos are reviewed and if we find out that riders have violated any of our parking policies, they will be notified and then eventually they'll be fined. we have fined over 97 people in the month of july for sidewalk riding that went out to all of our riders to remind them not to ride. also not to drink and drive. we've also started increasing our cadence of digital ride safety training and so that is available as you know due to covid. there has been some challenges in terms of people being there in person. so i definitely respect and honor what myrna, supervisor
11:18 pm
peskin was saying in terms of having additional safety in the recent outdoor activations and community events provided free demo rides we also did that during electric vehicle weeks. we also shared with our riders scoot safe videos that went out to 17,000 of our riders and then in terms of 311 and sfmta complaints as as you saw from the slides, lime takes a large share of the ridership in san francisco, and so we had over 500,000 scoot rides since july and out of those, about 99% of
11:19 pm
those rides end in proper parking, not improper parking. so if you saw, we also had the lowest in terms of percentage of tickets to rides. so i just wanted to also notice that as well. and then i just want to make sure that i'm capturing the last two questions that you asked around enforcement. supervisor peskin, was there anything else that you also wanted to know about? i just want to make sure. >> supervisor peskin: i know this has been going for a long time. i want to hear from the other two permittees and have them answer. i will say and i mean it respectfully that the answers are less than satisfactory. what i'm looking for isn't we find 97 people for sidewalk
11:20 pm
riding in july. what i'm looking for is what our policy is and we can prove that after we this is how we this is our policy as to when we i think you said eventually find, when we find them. this is how much we find them this is when they cross the line and are suspended from the platform. and, frankly, more of this is on the mta for not having uniform standards that all of you have to as permittees adhere to. and, again, this is, you know, still relative infancy. >> i can go over that disciplinary policy. i thought you wanted to get the raw data of how many. >> i do. and, by the way, i suspect that in so far as this is an
11:21 pm
evolving field, we will continue to have these hearings overtime and the best thing to do would be just to share, the one relatively bright light in this is there is a lot of data on the mta's website and i greatly see what you did in those instances and whether they comply with your policy. it's a little bit of a black box for me. >> knowing exactly what would happen if someone rode on the
11:22 pm
sidewalk and we would be able to detect that. the answer for that is automatic suspension and that's what we have committed to and this is what we do. and we then follow that up by sending a notification and that in terms of the overview how we do which is basically the first step is and we do a monthly
11:23 pm
report on that as well. >> supervisor peskin: and how many customers have been deactivated? >> in total, there have been 20 nobody knows that they were deactivated by you. >> so currently, we're not able to and come to us. what we have to do is manage the bad behavior from our app and so we're looking for that. >> supervisor peskin: i appreciate it and why don't we go on to which ever one the chair wants to go next and i'm sorry that this is taken all
11:24 pm
your afternoon. >> supervisor melgar: that's okay. let's go to spin. >> good afternoon. i'm here with my colleague alex april who's head of government partnerships. >> supervisor melgar: i'm sorry, lauren. ms. bracket. if you can turn off your camera now. thank you. 0 e so, for spin, we're headquartered in san francisco. so we all work uniformly together to track the number of parking violations. we utilize the sales force platform that sfmta has put
11:25 pm
together to be able to have that background information and we track closely. actually, just looking over the permit terms on september 2020 to august 2021. our total citation share based on the monthly reports is in totality of the program is 22% while our competitors make up the 70% or 60%. as far as tracking sidewalk violations, similarly, we utilize the sales force platform and, of course, track 311 complaints that are sent to us as well as the videos that have been sent to us by individual members within sfmta or the board of supervisors. i will say though, it is a little bit complicated because when we get sidewalk riding violations sent to us and if it's a video, if we don't have
11:26 pm
identifying information like the q.r. code or vehicle license number, it can be -- it's like trying to identify a car on a highway without a license plate. so however i will say with sidewalk detection technology and through our ability to integrate within the m.d.s. platform, connect with a third party data aggregator like blue systems or ride reporter populus, we know instantaneously, we know when and where it happens and for how long and we can be proactive with users, but there are some limitations with the current tracking sidewalk riding and violations in real time. we do keep track as far as the back end goes, we do have a heat map as to where rides are happening. scooter trips start where they end, we see where the bulk of
11:27 pm
our rides are happening and we can definitely confirm there's a large amount of rides that are along the north and south embarcadero and generally, if those are where most of our trips are, that's where we see undesirable behavior like sidewalk reading. we have a four-part escalating system. so the first part of our citation and signs system is our customer support team issues a warning notification with a reminder about the specific rule that's broken. generally, this is around improper parking because we require all of our customers to end their trip with a photo and our customer support will review and fine those users that have violated their parking agreement and they parked it in an improper location. so we provide the user with information within the app about how they violated parking. the second step is the rider in addition to this warning, the rider receives a $10 fine.
11:28 pm
the third step is the rider receives a $20 fine, account suspension and then the third -- 24-hour account suspension and then a safety quiz and the fourth step is they're suspended indefinitely. and from october 2019, to october 2021, we've issued over $60010 fines. and over almost 170, $25 fines plus account suspensions. and we think it's really important to do the right thing, make good on our application promises with sfmta even though it does hurt our business and customers can jump from one service to the other. just reviewing the monthly report data that all the companies submit, we found that
11:29 pm
between september or october 2019 through june 2021, we found that the number of users who'd received a first safety offense, we'd make up 60% of the shares of those first safety offenses that have been issued. for second safety offenses, we've provided 90% of all second safety offenses issued and then for third safety offenses, as reported to sfmta, we make up 100% of those safety offenses that are issued. >> supervisor peskin: what do you mean you make up 100% of those -- i don't understand. >> we're the only company issuing a third safety offense according to the monthly report data submitted to sfmta. >> supervisor peskin: so, lauren, wait. so you have somebody who does -- has a i assume these are parking violations for a sidewalk riding, what do you
11:30 pm
do? >> if we are able to identify the user, we will suspend the user. >> supervisor peskin: and how many of those do you have? >> i believe over 60 direct suspensions. >> supervisor peskin: so 60 direct guilty as charged, we're on sidewalks, suspended indefinitely. >> yes. >> supervisor peskin: and then as to your own internal escalating progressive discipline first offense which i assume is a parking offense, $10, second offense for the same customer, $25 and what happens on the third offense. >> it's a little tricky. first defense is a warning. >> supervisor peskin: she froze. >> i can speak in the interim. >> and then you need a safety
11:31 pm
quiz to unlock your account. and then your account is suspended indefinitely. this includes your e-mail, phone number and payment method as well. >> supervisor peskin: it's really four steps. >> it's really four, yeah. >> supervisor peskin: 10, 25, with a 24-hour suspension and on your fourth parking violation, indefinite suspension. >> correct. >> supervisor peskin: and people need to have a driver's license to rent one of these, right? >> lauren, i'll let you take back over. >> correct. yes. it's sfmta requirements and california state law that you need to have a driver's license to be able to verify your driving education and to rent a scooter. >> supervisor peskin: and, as to your 60 permanent or indefinite suspensions for on sidewalk riding do you give that information data to the
11:32 pm
sfmta? >> yes. that is a required field in the monthly reporting data. >> supervisor peskin: got it. so you have 2,000 scooters deployed or you have the right to 2,000? and the previous folks that spin have the right to 2,000 and they say that and we should probably do an apples to apples comparison but i will leave this to the m.t.a. which they don't have to do today, but i would like them to do an apples to apples comparison on an indefinite permanent suspension year by year and granted scoot is different because they've only got 1,500 so we can adjust accordingly by percentage. but it sounds like if your information is correct and verified by the m.t.a. that you have suspended 300% more than
11:33 pm
the last permittee. all right. as to your sidewalk detection stuff, you want to touch on when you can implement that. >> sure. we can implement it as soon as february 2022. we'd be very interested in exploring a large scale pilot. our technology was trained in & developed in california and so it is really it's learned machine learning and a.i. algorithm has built it is on local bay area bike rack and so there's not a ton of training, actually minimal training to be done and it provides significant benefits in
11:34 pm
addition to detecting users on the sidewalk. it's able to inhibit the speed of the user and throttle the speed again. we agree with sfmta where we see this nice sweet spot, but, of course, it's adjustable down further and it also functions. it does have a camera on the front of the scooter. we did check with our legal council and it is in compliance with the sf privacy law especially the one that you issued, supervisor peskin. and on board camera picks up images every two seconds and we think this is one of the best tools for rider education because they are able to get the automatic feedback. it's consistent, it will throttle the speed and it has a
11:35 pm
customizable audio file that you can say on exit sidewalk really whatever you desire. so there's a lot of benefit there and it also has parking validation and could also allow the user to park if it's not in compliance parking space like a bike rack or parking corral. and i guess the last thing i just say is we think it's really important for the technology that provides sidewalk riding. it sounds like there's a lot of interest. so we think it's important for a trusted third party data aggregator to be able to adjust this from sidewalk riding and be able to share insights with the board of supervisors with the sfmta and so that's something that i think would also be critical and being able to not only require the
11:36 pm
technology but also educate. >> and i just want to follow up quickly with two things. number one, baseded off what laura had spoke to, i know we did the demo in somo but if we did the demo in any of your districts, we would have the same results rather than just that one testing area. additionally with the february 2022 timeline, that is when we would have it fully scaled up. we could start the scaling now, but it also is really important to note that yes, spin has capacity to bring up the technology now, but we would just want to make sure that whatever direction the board of supervisors and sfmta wants to go is that, you know, all companies that are present would have this technology, otherwise, you know, a company could think, you know, if our scooter is going at a slower speed on a sidewalk versus another one or something like that, then from a user
11:37 pm
experience, they could think that ours is broken or just not working properly. so i do want to note that with the timeline. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. i as i said last week after watching the getback movie, all seven or eight hours of it, i think spin passed the audition and while it doesn't necessarily have to do with sidewalk safety, i also note that you are the only permittee that has a contract with a bonafide and those are well-trained professional proud staff and i think that shows. so i just wanted to say that for the record it is noted and
11:38 pm
appreciated. shall we move on to the last. >> supervisor melgar: yes, supervisor peskin. let's bring up scoot. >> hello. my name's bob walsh and i am with scoot. thank you chair melgar, vice peskin and supervisor preston for your time. so i'm actually going to -- we've got two other folks from scoot here. our operations manager and brian bucell our vice president of consumer products to jump into these questions pretty thoroughly. i was going to haveryia come in and how we track our violations separate from the 311s. how do we track sidewalk riding and then also brian will jump
11:39 pm
in and talk about the sidewalk technology that we demoed on wednesday and specifically supervisor peskin, to your question about alerts and how the vehicle will behave on the sidewalk and that sort of thing. so without further adieu and we'll bring in real posada. >> good afternoon, supervisors. so i'll run through first-time parking violations and to where they have occurred in the past and then i'll pass it to brian. so looking at how we track parking violations, we review our ride end photos. we require our riders of how did they park and then we review them. on that screen where a rider takes a photo, it says if you do not park properly at a bike rack, we may pass on a fine to you. our approach is to start with a
11:40 pm
$5 fine that scales to $10 then $20 and then account suspension and we do include users on our community pricing program from any kind of fines. instead, they get a warning instead and the language that we send when someone receives the fine or a warning explains what happened, why are they receiving that fine and what's the expect answer issue here. now, i will say, to date, since the new permit, we have issued over a 1,000 fines and over 200 warnings. this is a new process for us where we're using a smaller fine amount instead of a larger fine amount. what we're doing here is two things. one, when we pass on only fines that are citations that we receive, the $100 citations, we're looking at a narrow user group and we believe that rider accountability needs to be felt
11:41 pm
quite broadly. so as we review our ride and photos to see who is and who is not parking appropriately, this approach allows us to scale rider fines and warnings appropriately to a broad group so that we can impact real change. and then the second thing, it's a little bit different about our approach is that we start at $5 and there's a reason for that. we previously would pass along $100 citations and what we regularly would find in that approach is that the citation would bounce. so a rider wouldn't actually feel the accountability of that $100 fine because their payment method wouldn't accept it and the smaller fine amounts are more likely to pass through so riders feel the accountability of having parked inappropriately and no one wants a fine in any amount. i'll say on behalf of scoot that we certainly support standardizing enforcement measures particularly in how
11:42 pm
broadly we are enforcing these fines. you know, it's certainly reassuring on our end to know that a user might not necessarily leave our platform if we're all held to the same standard of making sure these enforcement mechanisms occur each and every time. >> supervisor peskin: not to interrupt you, a couple of questions. you say you may pass on the fine in many if not most instances, the city doesn't actually find you and they don't issue you a citation. are you saying whether it's this nominal $5 or not that you only assess them when the city has cited you or you do them when you get that data of the photograph and you say, hey, you just sent us a photograph, that photograph's going to cost you $5. >> yes. that's exactly what i'm saying.
11:43 pm
we want to enforce this quite broadly as opposed to narrowly. we want rider accountability. >> supervisor peskin: yeah. i appreciate that. the thing that i think first pops into any person's head is $5 doesn't change consumer behavior, but let me ask you, do you have any data that shows that when you issue those $5 fines, you don't get repeat offenders and that was enough of a slap on the wrist that you find in your data that those people don't do it again? i'm less compelled about this notion. i actually find that -- i would imagine that you can hit somebody's credit card for their having thrown your scooter in the bay for a few hundred bucks. i'm not buying that one. that seems a little farfetched that the $100 fine that you
11:44 pm
pass through bounced and that's why you're only doing a $5 fine. that one did not pass the laugh test, but i am interested in whether or not you have data and you believe and for that matter whether the sfmta believes that a nominal fine of $5 changes rider behavior. >> yeah. so that's exactly what we are seeking to find out right now. this is a large number of fines in just two months, so over a 1,000. you know, we're testing and we're analyzing users who receive the fine do they reoffend. so this is a new process on our end in order to determine, did it have an impact? we need to wait long enough for the riders to potentially return. i would expect in the next three months we can have data either way. the way my team is approaching this is scientific clooe so
11:45 pm
that we will be able to share that data with you all with the sfmta as to whether or not there's impacts or not. >> supervisor peskin: and then as to the question i asked the other two permittees about sidewalk riding whashgs your protocols are and how many folks you've suspended in total? >> yes. so on the sidewalk riding, the way we are notified currently is the 311 or we receive a report from the city similar to what the operators shared where they might receive a video on our end. if we're given enough information time and place, we can generally figure out who the user was. we realize this happens more than is reported to us and that's why we have invested so much in sidewalk riding technology that you saw last week, supervisor peskin. and i'll turn to brian in a moment to talk about that.
11:46 pm
the idea here is don't just stop it when it's reported to us, stop it from happening in the first place. the accountability, the escalation we have outlined is $5 and $10 when the account is terminated. i will say there are instances and we have this outlined in our escalation plan. if a user is particularly unsafe, we have a video of what they're doing and it's extremely unsafe. we go first to banning the user and they cannot come back to the platform. we have looked at that in the past. i will say generally it follows ridership patterns. the sfmta provides online are pretty representative of what we have seen in the past. brian, i'll turn it to you. >> supervisor peskin: i don't
11:47 pm
think you answered respectfully my question which is how many people have you banned for erratic riding or sidewalk riding in total? >> i apologize. i omitted that. so historically looking back, it is three users. >> supervisor peskin: got it. >> and i would expect that number to increase with this new test that we are running now. so the fines that initial thousand is the first offense. so users will follow that flow and we should see a higher -- >> supervisor peskin: yeah. i will say and not to be mean spirited that this kind of comports with what the general sense by sfmta staff, this supervisor, and the word i hear on the streets from people who are concerned about scooters which is the numbers that we just heard, scoot's got the
11:48 pm
numbers, and bird's got the worst numbers. it's not surprising. go ahead, brian. >> thanks for your insights. appreciate the time today. so the question is really how does the tech work and what is scoot doing in terms of its development for sidewalk detection? what we've done is we've partnered with a company you locks which is the number one gps chip manufacturer in the world. essentially what this technology is it makes really accurate gps within 10 centimeters. so with regards to implementation, we've been able to map and implement this tech and we're very interested in implementing it in san francisco. effectively, we can map sidewalks, we can map bike lanes. we can effectively map the areas that like to operate in and what the tech does when you enter a sidewalk, it can give an audible alert currently it
11:49 pm
beeps. it also on the scooter shows a different zone and you'll notice that a display screen will show a sidewalk riding display. because of the beep in that, we give a push notification to the app so it does that. we also really just reduced the speed down to 4 miles per hour so the throttle and acceleration slows down quite a bit. so, again, with this gps, we can map within 10 centimeter distance where you set the zone on the map on the sidewalk. in terms of, you know, when we could deploy this, the one thing i really do like is our current fleet of bird three are operated by scoot, they have an mdm model built in and we call it a brain, so we can swap those brains out in scooters and bring them online.
11:50 pm
we've quoted during the demo we felt this in q1. we're a little ambiguous in terms of the timing, but effectively, it would be starting to pilot and roll out in the end of february, early march and then we would scale up. the one thing that we commented is it's best to pick a zone and expand and test that to make sure we're getting the parameters right and desired outcomes in terms of the deployment. we've tested this and done some pilots down in san diego, milwaukee, and a few other cities that have positive outcomes. but i'll pause there. i just wanted to make sure i explained that. i'm sure you have some questions. >> supervisor peskin: that's good. all i have left is stuff for the m.t.a. i appreciate all three of your presentations and i'll turn it back to the chair before we go to m.t.a. and, bob, i still like you. >> i still like you too.
11:51 pm
you're on mute, chair. >> chairman: thank you very much, supervisor peskin. so i have no other questions or comments. i don't know if supervisor preston does. sounds like he may not. >> supervisor peskin: madam chair, i would just like to as i said earlier, i do have some amendments to the resolution that is item number three on our calendar and i know we haven't had public comment yet. so maybe i will save my questions and comments for the sfmta until after public comment. >> chairman: okay. sounds good. madam clerk, let's go to public comment on this item. >> clerk: thank you, madam chair. if you would like to be part of the queue, please press star three to be added to the speaker line.
11:52 pm
for those already on hold, thank you for holding and please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. so it looks like we have 17 listeners with 12 in the queue. so if you can unmute the first caller, please. >> caller: good afternoon. absolutely nobody should be riding scooters on sidewalks and pedestrians and people with disabilities need safety. but the basic problem here is not permit conditions, but the city's lack of safe streets. i appreciate supervisor melgar's question about infrastructure. the best way to protect pedestrians is to provide safe infrastructure and address the reason people are riding on sidewalks in the first place. that's because the streets aren't safe. i just saw someone describe a scooter ride as i felt so naked riding among a sea of cars with
11:53 pm
no protective bike lane to protect me. people wouldn't be on the sidewalk in the first place if they weren't taking their life into their own hands scooting on the streets, we should fix that. i don't regularly see people riding scooters on sidewalks. give us safe streets and we'll use them. for example, sfmta's low stress network map shows a giant gaping hole. i will be honest, i will never come to d3 because the streets are so inhospitable. furthermore, i just did a quick map on the presentation, the city's permit fees and parking fines are now over $2.50 for every trip taken. promoting new forms of transportation is essential for the ambitious climate goals that this board has set and the cost to ride these scooters is a barrier to that and a barrier to equity in the scooting
11:54 pm
program. in the meantime, we need to continue to promote new forms of mobility. i ask that this resolution be amended to dress the root cause of the problem and ask sfmta to immediately install bike lanes and scooter parking. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> caller: good afternoon. i am walk san francisco's vision 0 organizer. walk sf is deeply concerned
11:55 pm
about riders continuing to ride on the sidewalk. people with disabilities shouldn't have to walk in fear. the fact that over three years after schooler companies rolled out their fleets we're heard some many older adults as a result feel less safe and independent on the sidewalk. we have heard supervisors here and we need more of this, but we also really need safety on the sidewalk as well to hold
11:56 pm
these scooter companies accountable. or another method in hopes that they work with supervisor peskin's office more on this. we really appreciate supervisor peskin's office taking attention to this issue. we really do need to ensure that sidewalks are a safe and protected space for everyone thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> caller: hi. good afternoon, supervisors. my name is felicia smith. i am a resident in district six and i'm calling in because i am 60 years old and in less than two years, i have been hit by two scooters.
11:57 pm
the scooter on the sidewalk came behind me and hit me from behind which pushed me out into the street and i fell and if it hasn't been for a guy on the other corner jumping out and waving his arms to get the traffic to stop, i would have been run over. number one, scooters shouldn't have been on the sidewalk. number two, he shouldn't have been going as fast as he was to push me at that much force out into the middle of the street. i don't know what can be done about it but something's got to be done about it. a lot of people are getting so something's got to give i
11:58 pm
appreciate supervisor peskin's work on this and i hope we get this solveded quickly. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> caller: hi. i agree the sidewalks need to be a safe place to but to be frank, it sounds like the city
11:59 pm
is the now. when a scooter rider is faced with going into the street and navigating cars and likely getting hit and dying or navigating the sidewalk, they're going to pick the safer action. it's not less responsible riders as supervisor peskin called them. it is riders who are worried the about their own life and safety the city can no longer allow cars to use bike lanes as free parking. as long as you do that, it is you to be clear, are not the scooter companies, it is the city who is encouraging scooter riders to ride on the sidewalk. it's no coincidence that the embarcadero is where you see
12:00 am
most of the scooter violations. district >> clerk: good afternoon and welcome to the san francisco historic preservation commission remote hearing for wednesday, december 1, 2021. remote hearings require everyone's attention and, most of all, your patience. if you are not speaking, please mute your microphone. to enable public participation, sfgov is streaming and airing this hearing live. comments to comment on the item are available by calling