supervisor safai, you are correct. >>supervisor safai: okay. so through the chair, then, she reduced the tlaesh held fhreshl hire applicants from 50% to 30%. >>supervisor yee: the amendment we made during the rules committee was talking about local hiring. >>supervisor safai: from 30 to 50, yes. >>supervisor yee: from 30 to 50, and from what i'm reading here in her handout is section 13.04 c is this is local hiring requirement to 30% from 50%, so i was assuming this is the same numbers we talked about. >>supervisor safai: so through the chair, madam president, just to clarify, you were correct, we did -- on your amendment, what we support in the rules committee, we raised bar from 30 to 50% for the entire universe of new applicants, and supervisor cohen had the same number, at 50% for equity applicants, and she made a motion to reduce that number today from 30 to 50 applicants, as i understand it. >>supervisor cohen: that's corre correct. >>president breed: supervisor safai, did you have any other comments? >>supervisor safai: i just had any ow

>>president breed: supervisor safai. >>supervisor safai: i'm sorry. i have an amendment and a question. how would that affect the ones that are temporary permitted mcd's or have had their planning commission approval, how would that impact those that are about maybe about to be mcd authorized zm victoria wang deputy city attorney, so in the absence of any particular grandfathering language, the permit would be decided based on the law in effect at the time that the permit is issued, so if this amendment were in effect at the time that the final permit were -- one second, excuse me. >> okay. we do already have a current version in the ordinance, and that is at section 190 b, and so pursuant to that provision, a grandfathered mcd that was converting, this is actually converting to retail use permanently, would not be subject to locational restrictions, and temporary uses, as well -- i mean, as far as we're talking about if there is an amendment for a temporary conversion, that would be a separate issue. >>supervisor safai: just through the chair, point

supervisor safai? >> supervisor safai: that sounds fair. >> supervisor farrell: i feel -- i fully agree with supervisor tang with the onsite consumption, encouraging them to do so. >> supervisor breed: so supervisor tang made a motion and seconded, seeing no other names on the roster, madame clerk on the motion, please call the roll. farrell no. fewer aye. kim aye. peskin aye. ronen aye. safai -- >> supervisor safai: can i ask a point of clarification. >> no. >> no. sheehy no. tang aye. yee aye. breed no. there are six ayes and four nos, with supervisors farrell, safai, sheehy and breed in the dissent. >> supervisor breed: the motion passes. the second motion supervisor tang? >> supervisor tang: i believe it requires a two-thirds vote. >> the motion does not pass, there needs to be eight votes to add additional condition, because what you're doing is -- >> supervisor breed: thank you for that, the motion fails. supervisor tang, you want to make the next motion? >> supervisor tang: the next motion is to

and supervisor safai? >>supervisor safai: just a point of clarification on these particular amendments. are they amicable -- there's a reference in here that talks about equity plan and other -- is it for existing mcd's or all new mcd's, or what universe of people are we talking about through the chair to supervisor cohen, or maybe even the city attorneys? i know you didn't hear what i said, madam supervisor. >>supervisor cohen: i'm sorry. through the chair, could you please repeat it? >>supervisor safai: yeah. some of these requirement -- what universe are we talking about that they're applicable too? equitiable applicants, and then, it talks about existing mcd's would have to did some of these? are you talking about how they transition into temporary or in the permanent process? >>supervisor cohen: thank you, well, the handout specifically should break it out, but to answer your question on the fly, it's on the fly, as they transition from medical to recreational. >>supervisor safai: to permanent. >>supe

>>supervisor safai: right. in terms of w-2 employees, labor piece, we just don't have time to daeal with that right now. and then, the last thing we heard from a lot of folks is the concern, 20% amount of ownership, and we said this to a lot of you privately, and i've had conversation with my colleagues, and i know they have with you, addres well. we understand the industry, and we understand there's barriers, but we don't want these licenses to become a commodity. we need to revisit that conversation, so we're going to leave the threshold at 20%. that's why we split the legislative file. this file will remain here and here can continue do hato have conversa about this, but the goal is to be ready for january 1, so splitting the file and sending the file with full recommendation to the board from this body. without objection that's ordered. >> can i clarify that order? >>supervisor safai: yes. >> the matter is amended. the matter will be duplicated. one version of that duplicated file will be referred to the bo

supervisor safai. >>supervisor safai: no, i just wanted to clarify about going from a temporary operation to permanent -- whatever we're calling it at this point, but that was the reason for my good neighbor plan and having to be resubmitted, but every existing neighbor would have to submit this be good neighborhood plan and existing security plan, and so that way, there would be some level of review along with the amendments that were proposed by supervisor cohen today, in terms of equity plan and so forth, so that was my only comment, and then, the other stuff was clarified by the city attorney. thank you. >>president breed: thank you, madam clerk, on the amendment, was there a second for the amendment? >> clerk: not yet, madam president. >>president breed: okay. so supervisor peskin has made a motion to amend. is there a second? seconded by supervisor safai. madam clerk, on the amend, call the roll. >> clerk: [ roll call. ] >> clerk: there are 11 ayes. >>president breed: the amendment passed unanimo

>> councillor safai: it's valid. the clerk receives that information and is required to review that information to determine if the information provided, the address, was a san francisco address. it's not in the purview of the rules committee to determine that. we take that information on face value as it's submitted to the clerk. so i would ask the clerk maybe to respond to that. >> councillor breed: madam clerk? >> clerk: thank you, madam president to supervisor safai, the application has -- well, it is a san francisco address, as i look upon it on its face. >> councillor safai: thank you. >> councillor breed: supervisor peskin. >> councillor peskin: mr mr. elberling responded to that baseless account where he responded that he has 80% his time at the san francisco address. he had an explanation as to why he takes a homeowner's exemption with his wife and i believe it was sonoma county and it seemed plausible. but i'm standing to repudiate the politics of personal attack being levied in this case. this is a gentlem

supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: i have a couple questions for sponsor, through the chair, supervisor yee, what is the thinking behind keeping the tested limit to pdr space in the sense that this is something that eventually might become a usable service when you want to allow it to be tested in both non pedestrian and occupied less pedestrian-occupied spaces. in effect, if you want to see a work in a commercial corridor wouldn't it make sense to work in that manner. i just want to know your thoughts. >> supervisor yee: my thoughts are straightforward. it was outright not allowing robots on the sidewalk, period. that was the original thought. so part is when they're testing they're testing to see what it means to go up a hill, down a hill and there's a lot of things you can test and you can hire people. that's what we're supposed to be doing making shoe we can hire more people. i think the problem we saw was the first few robots that we did see were on commercial corridors and causing issues with people and that's where the complaints came from. i don't know about you but i can't imag

supervisor safai? >> councillor safai: thank you, mr. chair. one of the things that i wanted to ask maybe the planning department, because i heard in a couple of different public comments an idea -- we have a certain amount of funds set aside for aquisition in small-sites program and land. it would be good to know based on census data where some of the households are that you can look at and map and i'm sure that you have already done that where the missing middle or middle-income housing is beguning to target. one of the slides showed where small-site is being utilized and it was center to eastern part of the city. and i know that that is not necessarily where all of the -- it's based on the design of the program. and we started conversations with the mayor's office of housing on that. we started that the other day about how we can tailor the program. some of it is based on money, but i know the program's sweet spot is three, four units and above. thinking about knowing where the households are would be hopeful. the reason i asked about prop a

supervisor safai? >>supervisor safai: sir, if you could just come on up because i don't think you were able to yelucidate this board about what the treasurer's office was required to do in terms oflenes, monetary abrupt se -- bankruptcies and deeds of trust. >> yes, thank you supervisor. if you look at exhibit 7 to our brief, it is the c.c. and r.'s. they are from the treasurer's files. it shows that they are recorded against the property. they are recorded against lot 1, which is the common area property. page 33 of those c.c. and r.'s provides for the recorded easement that run in favor of all the homeowners. the reason the treasurer didn't come up with that is look at exhibit 14. the title search that you had done did not look for easements, it specifically relates to irslenes, bankruptcy sees, and deeds of trust. if anybody had been looking for easements they would have been found as you see the regular titles research that we did, which is exhibit 27, and then on item 9, comes up with the c.c. and

supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: put your name on the roster if you have opinion. i heard all the nos from the sidelines. you have the floor. >> supervisor safai: i'm sorry, i just wanted to say i appreciate you catching that. i didn't realize that in the draft that came out for next year. as somebody that has two school-aged children it's helpful to have the week, now that the schools are shut down in san francisco, it's really helpful to have that week off, so i appreciate you making that change. >> president breed: so you definitely wan the 20th off? >> supervisor safai: definitely the 20th off. >> president breed: and any preference as it relates to the other date? >> supervisor safai: i hear what you say for election date. can we have a half meeting -- a half day. >> president breed: supervisor kim. >> supervisor kim: i've never understood why the board meets on election day. we encourage people to engage civically. my preference, although i won't be having election, but instead meet on the week of veterans. i would be fearful of having only one board meeting

supervisor safai? >> councillor safai: thank you, madam president. yesterday we had an extensive conversation about the situation. i agree with supervisor ronen. there is no debate that this is an emergency situation. it's an ever-evolving, daily emergency. it's not a situation that we can take lightly. but i think we're dealing with two different things. i hear a couple of different things from supervisor kim and i would like to ask her to clarify them. one, there's a concern about community process and input and definition of how some of the space will be used. i think we've had extensive debate about where the office of department homelessness and supportive housing is going to be located. we had that debate about south of market. we've agreed with the budget and legislative analyst recommendations that over $21 million for a lease in that part of town when a building is currently owned, which this body before myself and supervisor ronen and a few others were on this body voted to purchase. we were in that purchase phase. so are we debating about

supervisor safai -- >> councillor safai: sorry. that was from before. >> clerk: that concludes new business. >> councillor breed: thank you, madam clerk. >> clerk: at this time, the public may address the board supervisors for up 2 minutes to include the minutes, which constituted a quorum of the board of supervisors. including item 63 and 66. public comment is not allowed when the item has been previously out for public comment. direct your remarks as a whole and not individuals. speakers using interpretation will be allowed twice the amount of time. if you would like to display a document, please do so. >> councillor breed: first speaker, please. >> thank you, president and acting mayor breed. ladies and gentlemen of the board, i ask for your resignations. you've violated your oath of office. you swore to defend the united states constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic and yet you have the citywide case management and community focus, a joint project with the san francisco campus of the university of california, whi

supervisor safai? >> supervisor safai: thank you, madam president. i just want to say that i know that supervisor kim and i tried to talk this through yesterday. it was in -- in all fairness, it was very last minute, and we were trying to make an as-informed decision as possible. what i have heard here based on the questions from supervisor kim, i walk away with more confusion, and there isn't really a strong argument that i've heard for the emergency declaration and then, the plan, and i tried to come up with a solution yesterday directing a department to come up with a formalized plan on the space. i didn't hear anything about a nonprofit operating the space as an access point yesterday. maybe i missed that in the presentation, and you might have said that. i very -- you very well might have, and there was a lot going on, but i would say that based on that information, what i was trying to do -- and again, just for your consideration, was that the department would -- we would allow this to move forward because i think that the -- what i've heard he