Transcripts For SFGTV Government Access Programming 20240713

And a half or two hours for work. We easily found so many workers in our coalition who were super commuters. There was one woman who traveled three hours three hours one way from stockton so she could have a good job in San Francisco but had to travel three hours. This jobs housing mismatch has a real cost and its the cost to people like bernadette. So this is why im here, our coalition is in full support, because we need this report. We need this datadriven approach to really fixing our housing crisis. Thank you. Good afternoon, supervisors. Cynthia gomez, our union represents the dishwashers and Food Service Workers at the airport as well as people who are able to after much struggle and fight are able to afford to earn a living wage and to be able to afford something a sustainable lifestyle in this expensive city, which is no small feat. And we applaud the leadership of supervisor mar and cosponsors in asking for this kind of data. As a Research Analyst i appreciate the extended use of data in making decisions and really asking the hard questions. How do we fix the problem where housing is being overproduced for people who are in the least need of it and being drastically underproduced for people who are in the greatest need of it . We have numbers who come from sacramento to work at s. F. O. And we had a worker who testified in this chamber about living in watsonville and coming in every day to work in San Francisco. And it is that burden that is overwhelmingly falling on the people who are already struggling to be able to afford it. The super commuter burden is not just born by wealthy and higherearning individuals, its born by the lowest wage individuals. And this kind of data is going to be tremendously useful decisionbydecision, yearbyyear, projectbyproject in evaluating the fit of the needs generated by this project and how will the city be positioned or not positioned to meet those need whens it comes to housing. So i support this legislation this afternoon. Thank you. Thank you, miss gomez. Miss ford . Hi, im miss ford. [laughter] im here actually with jobs for justice. And even though the Labor Council that i work with has not taken an official position i talk to most labor leaders and they support this. So i just want to say data im getting to be a bit of a geek in my old age and i love data. Data, data, data. People are always speaking of working families and working people and they think they know. They think they know what we want when they say nurses or teachers. But they dont know, because we are having to find that out ourselves. This will begin the discussion that will actually show us who is living here, who is working here and what what we can expect in terms of housing production. I just want to mention that the Labor Council itself is doing an internal study of labor unions and members. And the relevant data that together with the Labor Council and this report we will absolutely be able to effectively decide on what kind of housing that we need. So id like to thank supervisor gordon for this leadership. When i first heard about it i thought how boring, its a study, what is it going to build . But it will give us the tools that we need in order to push the kind of housing for all of us. In this initial study that were beginning to do and we have study bodstudied about 25 of tn members already, 91 of the union members, high and low wage, are all eligible for certain Affordable Housing subsidies. So thats the truth and thats the need. And we would all like to stay and live in this city. Thank you so much. Thank you, miss ford. And supervisor gordon appreciates that. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon again, supervisors, corey smith on behalf of San Francisco Housing Action coalition. Always enthusiastic when we have additional facts and Additional Data to be fueling and informing our decisionmaking. You know, this isnt something that we are were very aware this is not something that is a San Francisco problem, this is a bay area regional problem. So when you have cities that are creating a massive number of jobs, knowing that, to be honest, that San Francisco is one, if not the coolest place to live in the bay area, well, those people will want to work and live here. So understanding how this works on a regional scale i think is really important. We also want to really reiterate that we fundamentally believe that the solutions to our affordability and displacement crisis is not to reduce the number of jobs. It is to create a number of homes that we need in order for people to live here. We know that the significant majority, more than 70 of the lowincome residents live in marketrate housing. And producing more marketrate housing decreases the number of evictions of lowincome californians. And we have data that tells us our answer is more housing and improving our infrastructure to make sure that we can accommodate that growth that we need. And it is continuing to create good jobs. Again, at varying income levels. To make sure that we can have the socioeconomically diverse and culturally diverse city that we all want. So Something Like this we feel that we have a little bit more of the target and im sure that well have details and policy differences on how to get there, but more information is always good. And so we appreciate the supervisors leadership on bringing that information to light. Thank you. Thank you, sir. And while i disagree with your contention, i appreciate your support. Are there any questions for mr. Brosseau . Not really are there any questions for the sponsors some supervisor haney. Thank you, chair peskin and thank you supervisor mar for your leadership on this. As you know this was the the report that you had done was a huge you know, a benefit for our understanding of the crisis that were facing and also some of the steps that we needed to take from a policy perspective. In terms of what the report would or what this would require in terms of reporting, would there be any piece of this that is actually recommending certain actions or responses or policy changes to address what i assume would most cases be a gap that we want to address . Is that also a piece of this . Or is it more kind of the information that we would then use and determine ourselves what needs to be done . Supervisor mar . Yeah, thanks for the question. Right now the way that the legislation is drafted, the report would mainly be data, and analysis sort of objective objectively provided. Kind of like similar to the other other reports that the Planning Department already produces. The housing balance report, and also the housing pipeline report. So right now its not going to include any policy recommendations. We as a board, you know, are actively engaged in thinking about and acting on. Mmm, got it. One thing that i did want to flag around the the housing balance report that we received is as a part of that legislation or supposed to also be recommendations or a plan thats put forward as to how were going to actually meet our goals and address some of the, you know, the goals that we have set around Affordable Housing and the gaps there. And often when we receive that report we dont receive that plan or those recommendations. So also just want to flag that as something that maybe should be tied to this in some way, that is one place where, you know, from the Mayors Office of housing and from the Planning Department, i would hope that we would receive on a more regular basis sort of highwa how were o address the gaps of meeting our overall housing needs. Especially as it relates to Affordable Housing and goals there. With all due respect to my colleague from district six, thats what we get the big bucks for. We know what the solutions are. They may be politically unpalatable, but with that Public Comment is closed. Supervisor mar, thank you for bringing this to us. Can we send this to the full board as a Committee Report with recommendation . Seeing no objection that is the motion and the order. Madam clerk, read items 5 and 6 together. Thank you, fred. Clerk item 5 is an ordnan amending the environment code to require new construction and major renovations of Municipal Buildings to exclude natural gas and include exclusively allelectric Energy Sources and affirming the appropriate findings. And item number 6 is an ordinance amending the Green Building code to establish Energy Performance requirements for certain new building construction, adopting environmental findings, and directing the clerk of the board to forward the ordinance to state agencies as required. Supervisor mandelman, thank you for continuing to be here. The floor is yours. Thank you, chair peskin. Today im asking for your support for these two ordinances that will help to achieve our Emission Reductions and Climate Action goals. The first ordinance will ban the use of natural gas in the construction of new Municipal Buildings. You may recall that supervisor brown has been the has been the lead on this and is passing it off to supervisor stefani, but the supervisor is not able to be here today, unfortunately. And the second item to incentivize all Electric Buildings and disincentivize natural gas in new construction. The electric preferred the second of those items, the electric preferred legislation, which i have offered, will update the Building Code to favor the design and construction of all zeroemission buildings by having higher requirements for buildings with natural gas. Debbie rafael, i keep doing that, the director of the department of the environment, will provide a presentation on both ordinances but i want to apply a bit of context first. This past july, there was a report on our citys Carbon Emissions focus 2030, a pathway to net zero emissions, that showed that our building stock is the biggest contributor to the carbon footprint. And this legislation is well, two pieces of legislation are part of a threestep effort where were envisioning to rein in emissions. And the first is the Municipal Building natural gas ban. And the second is the ordinance which i have offered. And, third, we hope that coming early next year will be a ban on these natural gas and allnew construction. In january, the department of the environment and we are looking to convene a series of meetings over probably several months with labor leaders and environment advocates and developers and city agencies to craft a natural gas ban to work for San Francisco. And our shared goal is to introduce legislation to ban natural gas some time in the spring of 2020. Of course we cant stop there. There will be a further step which will be addressing the retrofitting of existing buildings. What we do here in San Francisco could be a model for cities throughout the world, we can address our Climate Crisis. And i ask for your support on these two ordinances so that we can continue that work. I do have a very minor amendment on the electric preferred legislation on page 3, line 45, the p. U. C. , i believe, has asked that we strike sewer system and replace it with its infrastructure, recognizing the reality that Climate Change will have wide ranging impacts and the updates line that is going to reflect that reality. In addition, i am asking that this committee duplicate this file. There are many in the or some in the Advocacy Community who would like to make is this file or files . Were doing electric preferred . There may be additional changes that folks are interested in making to this soon. That said, we think that its imperative to get what we have passed as soon as possible to align with our 2020 Building Code, so wed like to move that forward and then have conversations with the Advocacy Community. But in the context of the ban, how we want to handle some of the other issues that have come up. In closing, i want to thank the department of the environment, including director rafal, and charles sheahan, and cindy comerford, and tyrone from the Mayors Office and kyle feely in my office and i want to thank our climate advocates for consistently and persistently demanding action, Holding Us Accountable and making sure that we rein in our emissions and pull in our carbon footprint. Thank you, supervisor. Miss rafael, is it the department of the environment or s. F. Environment . That is the hardest question that ill ever have to answer. Its your choice. I will go with the department. I would too. I prefer that. Actually, i have always preferred that. Okay. So if i could have the slides. I want to start by thanking the supervisor for his leadership on moving us forward through the 2030 report. And now this first of a set of policies that will be coming before the board to take action on Climate Change. I want to also thank supervisor brown for her work on the municipal side and the supervisor stefani for willing to step up and get us over the finish line. I would like as you did supervisor mandelman, to thank my staff for their perseverance and their tenacity. And i also want to really thank the Building Inspection Commission and the staff at the department of building inspection. Every three years they go through this trauma of updating our Building Code. And were always there asking them to go further. And this is an example of that kind of partnership. And they were with us all the way. And, finally, i do want to thank the Community Members who showed up today and who have been showing up for us for months working on this. And, debbie, i do not in any way want to be disrespectful but less is more. Got it. And i have nine slides and i will go as fast as i can. You know the context. Heres the slide that keeps me up at night that tells me where our emissions are coming from. And you can see that the built environment has 44 of them, and the lions share of that is natural gas. And natural gas impacts this is really important to remember as we are taking on the natural gas industry, its threefold. We have climate impacts, methane is 86 times more potent than co2. And we have explosions happening not only in san bruno but in the streets of San Francisco as well. And Health Impacts because its not just the extraction of natural gas, but its also every time that you turn on your stove, nitrogen dioxide is coming out and that is a potent toxic element that has respiratory impacts. please stand by commission that it is cost effective. We do not have the same restrictions on ourselves in chapter 7 of the environment code. So before you is, in blue, that is what we are calling the reach code, which is for private sector construction, commercial, multifamily and single family. There you may build, you may put in natural gas if you really want to, but if you do you are going toff more efficient buildings to going to have to have more efficient buildings. All new construction as well as major renovations will be all electric. We are not alone. This image is important because it is showing the complexity of the landscape in cities across california. You see a range of choices that cities are making. What becomes important for the San Francisco context is the cities that are generally banning natural gas today are doing so because their primary building type is low risees residential. 97 percent of our building is highrise residential and commercial so we need to figure out how we do it. Its not a whether conversation, its a how. Local examples respectfully, if you can too much . Yeah, too much. Heres great examples in haneys district and others for the supervisors and our next steps are to look at what we need to do so go further to work with communities and make sure that labor is involved to make sure that equity and affordability are always at the forefront. Thank you. Are there members of the public who would like to speak on items 5 or 6 . If you would like to come forward. I have a number of speaker cards starting with tom, dr. Margin, elaina. Thank you for your patience. Ill continue with more speaker cards. Thank you. Im here on behalf of livable city to express our support for these amendments to the Green Building code and the city administrative code. We think these are going to be great ways to make sure that as New Buildings are built, there is energy efficient, as green as we can make them. There are some things we would love to see this board go further on and look at. One is i think in all of these discussions about climate, we dont really look at embodied energy. We are just looking at the energy that takes to operate things, our Transportation System or buildings. But the Environmental Impact of retrofitting an existing building to a Green Building standard versus building a new building to that identical standard, those are different impacts. The new construction is much more impactful. Similarly, running a tesla with solar panels, you can see its a green way but the impacts are much higher than walking or cycling because youve got all the energy, the carbon, all those impacts that go into building the car, building the garage, et cetera. So we hope that as we are looking at ways to make greener buildings, we will look at incentives to where existing buildings are found to retain those. The other thing we hope you will look at is some policies that will get buildings retrofitted. Im a renter. Our economic interests run counter to our landlords. Our landlords own the infrastructure, our gas heater, gas stove, and we pay the utility bills. If we need to find ways to get all of these buildings retrofitted, because the economic incentive that exists to go more efficient doesnt exist in the landlord tenant relationships so either a grants and loans program where there are requirements like weve done with seismic, we need to figure out to get the huge number of existing buildings retrofitted so they are energy efficient. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. If i have not called your name, you are already lined up so you wont bother. Hi. Im a member of 350 San Francisco, 350 bay area and the San Francisco Climate Emergency coalition. Ive lived in the mission for 45 plus years. For 25 years, i worked on Municipal Building projects in San Francisco and berkeley. And i worked on what we used to call the new main library and Branch Libraries project. So i dont know if any of you know. I know Debra Raphael wipes up in the middle of the night and worries about our near future and will we be able to act fast enough to save ourselves and our planet but you supervisors are in a position to help to avert our Climate Emergency. And i applaud you and particularly supervisor mandelman for the proposed ban on natural gas in new Municipal Buildings. This is a good, although its a small first step. And we must follow this up with a ban on natural gas in all New Buildings in San Francisco as soon as possible. We are looking forward to working with you on this immediately. In the meantime, until that legislation is presented and passed, we would like to see an electric ready reach code so that the projects that are online, ready to go before the ban comes up, well have some way of quickly switching fuels to electric instead of gas, once they are built, rather than going through the rather ugly retrofit project. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, supervisors. Casey from the demonstration gardens and the climate reality action group. We are attuned in deficits to access to affordable house. As we move to build housing for our needs, these two proposed sets of legislation to the land use code to incentivize electrification versus natural gas in public buildings is a good step toward a more accurate cost model that takes into account the actual expenses to climate, Public Health and equity that every new natural Gas Construction project represents. I support these amendments and encourage that they be applied and early next year, lets get going with more the more affirmative ban on natural gas in New Buildings to realize our citys aspirations to be the greenest possible. Thank you. Next speaker. Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is jeff. Ive been a registered mechanical professional engineer in california for the last 34 years. I have a consultant firm. We have offices in San Francisco, sacramento and santa rosa. And im here to represent the views of many leading Architectural Engineering firms in the bay area. Im here to support the electrification issue. We need to do it as soon as you can. Theres no waiting and being cautious, we need to jump into it right away. Industry is ready for this. There are proven products available, heat pumps, induction cook tops, heat pump water heaters. The technology is there, its reliable, affordable, and weve done many successful projects over the last few years, if not more, even starting with geothermal projects which are typically all electric anyway such as highrise residential, is not the problem at all. Were going a 240,000 square foot facility in sacramento that is all electric. All our projects are all electric. Weve been helping some cities and accounts with their reach codes such as santa rosa and san jose. We think its an important issue. Its really a safety issue. Its an Indoor Air Quality issue. Its also about reducing Carbon Emissions. We support this. Thank you. Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is melissa, and i am a resident in supervisor peskins district and im here representing the sierra club. We have collected a total of 101 signatures and petitions expressing support of this reach code which you should have received as they came in. And this is a timely and necessary ordinance, and we are excited that San Francisco will be a leader and join the other 22 city and counties that have passed reach codes or gas bans, although some have expressed here today, we are disappointed this ordinance is not all electric or at minimum have a electric ready component. Electric new construction will be a key component to help us reach our Climate Action goals. And these invisible should have no place in our homes, especially in newly constructed buildings. We need to at least be electric ready to later on make the switch easily. We dont want to be a city left behind on gas or have to put more resources into making the switch when we can do that now. We know the demand from gas to electric will be increasing so lets stay ahead of the trend. We hope this ordinance can be amended in a timely manner to include the strongest electric ready language. We look forward to working with you all on this. Thank you. Thank you. Im coming to you as a member of the sierra club but also because i qualify under section 3b3 as an elder. And i do want to emphasize that my husband and i really suffered during 2017 especially, we were basically trapped in our house, because of the fires. And then we had to buy an air purifier. So im very on board with the issue of addressing Climate Emergency as soon as possible. I also understand that it is cheaper to build all electric. I think thats a very strong argument in addition to the health argument. Thank you. I speak on behalf of the Climate Emergency coalition when we say we support passing items 5 and 6 and to thank mandelman for duplicating the reach code so that an electric ready requirement can be added quickly. We appreciate the department of the environments work to make the Building Code have the greatest efficiency enhancements requirements possible for buildings, but we also know other municipalities in the bay area demonstrated an electric ready reach code can be done without reassessing the ordinance through title 24. And we know that efficiency enhancements alone are not enough to meet either mayor breeds commitment made at the global Climate Action summit to ensure that all buildings citywide be zero carbon by 2050 or make sure frontline Environmental Justice communities are prioritized in this Climate Mitigation policy as required by San Franciscos declaration of Climate Emergency. There are over 70,000 units of housing in the pipeline right now and the Planning Commission expects 75 percent of the citys growth over the next 30 years will take place in the southeast sector. Not only is bayview Hunters Point identified under california ab617 as one of california communitys already most impacted by air pollution, the southeast part of the city is also the warmest which puts the residents at risk for extreme heat events. Building sufficient Heat Pump Technology would provide not only safer air and reduce risks of explosions but provide access to lifesaving act airconditioning for residents of New Buildings. We need to meet the goals of the 2030 report to do our part to avert the Climate Emergency or at least mitigate it. And this can only be done by going for all Electric Buildings or as close to that as possible now. Thank you. Climate advocate with the Climate Emergency coalition, sf tomorrow and citizens climate lobby. Having lived on the lowest east side since the 70s up the hill from dog patch, i have witnessed a multitude of massive developments sprouting up all around me with more starting all the time. The Planning Department say the city will build 72,000 new Housing Units. The vast majority will be in the eastern neighborhoods. If all these Pipeline Projects are not required to be at least electric ready, we are missing a huge opportunity to reach our climate goals while protecting peoples health. The electric infrastructure will protect consumers from higher bills and expensive retrofitting. Thank you supervisor mandelman for this ordinance incentivizing builders to build electric. Thank you for agreeing to duplicate the file so it can be amended to require electric readiness and thank you for your commitment to drafting a natural gas ban in new construction next year. While it is moving through the channels, too many buildings already approved could use fossil fuel. [please stand by]. Its a byproduct of burning. And in the home, that means gas ranges, gas generators, gas heating, every year people are killed by Carbon Monoxide buildup. So, this is your chance to get that toxic fuel out of our homes. Lets do it fairly, equitably and thoroughly. Thank you. Thank you, next speaker. Im a sof asoftwear engineera coalition of environmental groups includin including 350 an go on for a lot longer. Id like to thank both of department of the environment, the Mayors Office and supervisor mandelman for their work on todays ordinance. We notice a huge lift over many, many months and we also appreciate your commitment to introducing a full natural gas band in the spring. As annie efficiency code, the coalition supportive of the ordinance today due to the urgency of the Climate Crisis the work thats gone in as well as the need to pass this bit end of the year for it to take effect at the beginning of 2020. However, if theres one thing i learned in my job, efficiency alone will not solve the Climate Crisis. My companys work focuses on promising Energy Efficiency and guaranteeing our work over 10 years. Its wellknown that promises Energy Savings degrade within a few years. This is no give than a code ma measures at time of design. The efficiency will degrade and the natural Gas Infrastructure will need to be retro fitted. We think that it will be ready and a strong code and we asked to add to to the duplicated file. And as other municipalities have demonstrated, this will be done introduce title 24 and i have some sample code language from the California Energy code and Standards Program and it would give language for such a electric readiness requirement. Thank you, very much. Thank you, next speaker. Good afternoon, supervisors, my name is paul wormer and im a climate reality project representative to the Climate Emergency coalition. So everything they have said. First, i have here two handouts or two statements from members from the physicians for social responsibility and California Climate Health now who had to leave early. So i would please like to submit those. And then in an effort to introduce a new approach to dealing with natural gas, lets think of consumer protection. We know that by 2045 or 2050, we will see a need to have retro fitted all existing buildings given the states and cities objectives to go carbon neutral. That means that people who invest in gas now, given the 20year lifespan, at least, of gas appliances, will be left with sunk capital stranded assets over the next if they start, over the next two or three years. One of the big opportunities for government to take a strong stand is to send a strong policy signal about where we are going. I urge you to look at drafting language to mandate disclosure in property transactions and in building contracts and appliance sales that make it clear that if people buy something with gas or decide to install gas instead of electricity, they will be wasting their money because they will have to change before too much longer. Thank you. Thank you. I am delighted that news of your demise turned out to be someone else. Next speaker, please. Chris, again. Im a constituent of supervisor peskin. I want to thank specifically supervisor mandelman and the committee to be duplicate including ready provisions while look forward to the introduction of a full gas ban as soon as possible i want to stress the importance of implementing strong electric ready stop gap measures through the reach code. There are tens of thousands of gas units already in the pipeline. Electric ready is the perfect opportunity to do right by residents living in the eastern corridor. Who are the most impacted by pollution and who will reside in the areas where mat jor tee of new construction will be built. Owe efficiency insen it was will noin we cantmake our retro fr climate goals if we build New Buildings with gas. I encourage you to expeditiously pursue the electric ready standards adopted by citieses like berkeley, san jose and make the Requirements Applicable to all New Buildings including industrial buildings, labs, and buildings in hazard zones. Finally consult with the Environmental Community as you draft these amendments, thank you so much. I want to submit the document thats daniel submitted for the record. Thank you, chris. Next speaker, please. Hi, my name is susan grown im a resident of know noy valld id like to thank you for letting me speak today. 18 years ago my husband and i up greated our electric service and installed gas, water and space heaters and kitchen and laundry alliances. We didnt understand the urgency of the Climate Crisis we face. Now we do. My family started the process of retro fitting our house so it will be all electric to learn that to do so, we have to upgrade our electric service again and obtain various waivers to do so. The whole process including the Electrical Service upgrade rewiring and new appliances will cost over 10,000. Perhaps closer to 20,000. And our house is probablys year to retro fit than many because its detached on one side making it easier to do the rewiring. Were moving ahead by dipping into our Retirement Savings because we know the crisis we face is urgent. With nearly 400,000 Housing Units in San Francisco, most with gas appliances, the cost to receipt toe fit them will easily run into the billions of dollars, with that future in mind, it seems unconscionable to construct a single new unit of housing thats not all electric ready. I understand there are tens of thousands of approved new Housing Units in San Francisco that have yet to begin construction. If a majority of those musting retro fitted in the future, it could add billions of dollars to our retro fit challenge. Dont add to the challenges and costs we face by slow walking the needed changes. Id like to ask you that all new construct be electric ready as soon as possible. Thank you. Thank you, next speaker, please. Eileen, coalition for San Francisco neighborhood. Here on my own behalf. Here in strong support for all electric construction and all sectors. Besides reducing Greenhouse Gas emissions it reduces the risk of gas related fires like the one at gary and parker. Based on the push back for similar legislation in towns like brooke line massachusetts, a sub you are of boston, the following may happen here. The American Gas Association came out in opposition stating that to see a city eliminate not only Customer Choice but also broader economic benefits and undeniable environmental benefits is short sided to say the least. The Massachusetts Coalition for sustainability, also came out in opposition stating that the ban would have negative impact on safety, our environment and Economic Development alike. However, the Massachusetts Coalition for sustainability is actually a friend for natural gas interests including canadian pipelines, giant enbridge and Energy Providers resource and national bridge. The massachusetts chapter of the National Association for industrial and office parks came out in opposition. This is a trade group for the commercial real estate industry. The association stated that the ban would further exacerbate the existing housing crisis and passed along high costs to residents who call brooke line home. All the push back was because brooke line was the first east coast town to ban natural gas in new construction and major conversions. Although san would not be the First West Coast city to begin banning natural gas and new construction would be the largest city. Los angeles is seeing push backs in its efforts to ban national gas next speaker, please. If there are any other members of the public who like to testify on items 5, 6, please lineup to my right my name is kathy and im with core Climate Group as well as mothers have prime. I want to say that we support this legislation and were glad to see it moving quickly because reports indicate all the time that we are behind schedule. First it was 11 years and 10 and now were not making progress fast. So thank you for moving on this. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public would would like to testify on either of these two items . Seeing none. Public comment is closed. I would like to thank director rafael and supervisor mandelman and the co sponsors for bringing this forward. Item number 5 actually has fiscal impact. So, unfortunately, its my duty pursuant to our rules to refer item number 5 and yes, mandelman you may ask erika major why this is true but im been informed just clarifying that is the municipal ban not the private Electric Building . Yes, item number 5. So item number 5, will need to be referred to a Fiscal Committee of the board. There are two Fiscal Committees of the board. The government audit and Oversight Committee and the budget is finance committee. I will leave it to the chair or the president of the board of supervisors to determine which Committee President yee would like to assign those to. Item number 6 is a subject of a. An amendment and b a request to duplicate. Supervisor mandelman, i assume you would like the amendment to apply to the duplicated file . Colleagues, i will make a motion to accept the amendment thats have previously been described. We will take that without objection. And then, supervisor mandelman, who is not a member of this committee requested we duplicate the file as amended and we will send the one, we will keep here and continue to the share and the other we will send to the full board with recommendation. Item 5, will be rereferred by the president of the board to a Fiscal Committee. So, those are the two measures that are pending. Motions that are pending before this body. Well take them both without object sex. Thanobjection. Thank you for your testimony. Madam clerk, can you call item 11, out of order. Clerk yes, item number 11 is ordinance health code to authorizes the district offer publichealth to allow a medical cannabis dispensary permit to operate under that permit at a new location. Provided that the permity has been verified by the office of campus as an equity applicant under the police code. They have been evicted from the location associated with the permit or been notified by the landlord that the lease would be terminated or renewed. The new location has an existing authorization for medical cannabis dispensary use. And the permit has complied with all requirements under article 33 of the health code are there any members of the public who would like to testify on item 11, the sponsor of this, supervisor haney, has asked me continue this to the call of the chair. Are there any members of the public who would like to testify on this item . Seeing none. Public comment is closed. And without objection, this item has been continued to the call of the chair. Madam clerk, could you please read item 12 out of order clerk item number 12 is an ordinance approving a Development Agreement between the city and county of San Francisco and the Stephens Institute doing business as a university and its affiliated entities as the properties which agreement provides for various public benefits. So, i have just been informed by my colleagues safai that apparently all of the deputy City Attorneys here on this major piece of work thats been going on for 10 years, have vacated the chambers. Is that true or untrue . Is liz here from planning . They all just walked up stairs. Are there any city staff from the Planning Department or from the City Attorneys Office here on item number 12 . All right. Madam clerk, call item number 10 clerk housekeeping for item number 5, we would need to either send it to jao or budget and finance committee. I believe the recommendation is gao. Because its technically been heard in committee and we cant continue it for the president madam clerk, i did not request that be continued to the call of the chair. I requested that it be rereferred to the president of the board for the president of the board to assign it either to the budget and finance committee or the government audit and Oversight Committee. Our deputy just walked in. Far be it for a chair of the committee to tell the president or hwhere he would like to assin this thing. I dont assign legislation. I used to but i dont do that. Im reassign particular ting ie president. Were talking about item number 5. It has fiscal impact. Its not properly before this body and i want to rerefer it to the president. The president can decide which Fiscal Committee we have that he would like to assign it to i would recommend in this situation that the Committee Vote to refer it to a particular committee with the understanding that the president may refer it to another committee. In my experience, that has been how committees have handled items in cor dinnances and these times of situations. It may be permissable to refer it to the president but the protocol in recent years has been to refer it to a committee. It can change the committee thank you deputy City Attorney gib ner. I would like to make a motion to refer it to the budget and i can finance committee and we can do that without objection. And, after 10 years, well maybe 20, it depends on how you count it, we have item number 12 before us which has already been called. I would like this is a banner day for the land use and Transportation Committee of San Francisco board of supervisors. Before us, in item number 12, is another Development Agreement and conditional use requirements for what we call the academy of Art University that effects a number of provisions in our laws. I want to start by first thanking our City Attorney, Dennis Herrera, who stopped goofing around and brought suit against the academy of art quite a number of years ago. I believe that this is not a belief. This is a fact. I served on this board of supervisors from the eighth day of january of 2001 to the eighth day of january of 2009 and the academy of art and their perennial violations was stuff of legend. I came back to this board of supervisors and was sitting in this chamber next to a gentleman who was my colleague at the time, named scott wiener, who was holding a hearing about stabilization. A woman revealed to us our number of stabilization rooms, in those days, they were around 350 rooms, had been reduce today somewhere around 65 rooms mostly because the academy of art had cannibalized those rooms. That got my attention. I think i was surfing the internet at the time. I called up Dennis Herrera and said its time to litigate and it has been going on for years and the Senate Committee and the measures that are in this Development Agreement are before us. I want to thank the Planning Department and john ram and our former Zoning Administrator Scott Sanchez who have done i rarely say things like this, gods work on this issue. I would like to acknowledge the successuck success ofsuccessiont least one, i believe that would be jim abrams who had exerted what i call client control which i am profoundly grateful for. With that y. Dont we have a presentation. I dont know if were going to start with mr. Sanchez, former or deputy or whatever you are Zoning Administrator, mr. Sanchez, the floor is yours thank you, good afternoon, chair peskin, members of the committee Scott Sanchez. Were pleased to bring to you this d. A. And associated code a investmentments to absolve the longstanding and they date back to 2006 and 2007 our earliest eastbounenforcement efforts. I would like to thank the City Attorneys Office, they brought litigation that bring you the package that you have today. This was heard by the Planning Commission last month and supported and i request the committee pass this on to the full board for adoption. Im here with a number of staff who will be available to answer any questions. Id like to note andrew perry of our staff will give a brief presentation on the d. A. And the tremendous work that he has done to wrangle these 40 properties and get them before the committee today and also the Planning Commission. Kristen jensen of the city office we have the best City Attorneys Office of any municipalities in california if not the united states. Theyre tremendous. We had wonderful support with them through the settlement discussions and the process. We couldnt have done it without them. Kristen here is help to answer any questions that come up with that i will turn it over to mr. Perry, thank you. Thank you mr. Sanchez. Before mr. Perry comes out, let me thank ms. Jenson, mr. Jesse smith, Michelle Sexton for your incredible work on this thing. I know that there may be members of the public who dont feel like theyve seen enough of this settlement and d. A. But i just want to thank you from the bottom of my heart for all the work youve done. Its been tremendous. I rarely pay compliments but im looking at you, thank you from the bottom of my heart. Mr. Perry. Thank you, chair peskin. Supervisors, i am prepared to take you to the specifics of the today and the minutes and i do want to acknowledge that you have a very full agenda we have one more issue having to deal with a am arization rats and its very important that my colleagues and the public know all of the contours of what is going to be before the board of supervisors. So take as much time as you need. Understood. I will still try to be concise. So, before you today is the ordinance for the academy of art of the project. The ordinance helping facilitate the resolution which has in some form or another been in process with the city for a decade. And it effectively consists of two main component. First approva approval of the development doing business as the academy of Art University and its affiliated llcs. Secondly, amending the planing and administrative codes in order to implement the project. As was discussed, the City Attorneys Office filed a lawsuit against the Stephens Institute and the llc back in may of 2016 over violations of the planning code and the states unfair competition law. The academy expressed interest in bringing the planning code compensating the city for passed violations, reversing alterations to bring its building nooss into compliance. In november of 2016, the academy and city entered into a term sheet for global resolution which led to the settlement package being considered. It consists of first the Settlement Agreement which includes obligations of the academy to make payments to the city including Affordable Housing and second, a stipulate lated injunction for judicial enforcement and third, a Development Agreement which provides the mechanism for city approvals consistent with the settlement and fourth, the guarantee for the financial obligations. Focusing on the Development Agreement itself, the basic basc elements include legalization of academy uses at 34 properties throughout the city. Since 2016, the academy as operated at 40 properties, many of which had not gone through the necessary change of use procedures and so to a arrive at the 34 properties contemplated under the settlement and Development Agreements they will withdrawal their use from Nine Properties and add three properties along van ness foray cad moforacademy. They encloud the legalization or corrective modification of past building alteration thats have been made without permit. This is a especially true for Historic Properties that have been occupied by the academy. Third, payment to the city by the academy and its llcs of 58 million. Included in this amount is an Affordable Housing benefit of 37. 6 million to be used sole for Affordable Housing and priority with this districts where the academy had removed housing without benefit of permit. Remaining money goes to the citys small sites fund. 8. 2 to 8. 4 million. Civil penalties, reimbursement for enforcement costs, payment of impact fees. Fourth, the Development Agreement includes a Student Housing metering agreement by which the academy agrees to provide Student Housing based on specific percentages of their fulltime on Campus Student body. With those percentages then being subject to increase overtime. In this way, student enrollment is tied to housing availability and importantly when providing additional Housing Resources in the future, the academy may not do this through the conversion of existing Residential Housing stock. This through the permit to convert process, the Development Agreement calls for a proposed swap of Residential Hotel rooms subject to chapter 41 of the administrative code. In short, the proposed swap involves three properties at 1080 and 1153 bush street. There are 31 total Residential Hotel rooms existing between those properties. A third building at 860 sutter street has been existing mix of 50 Residential Hotel rooms and 39 Tourist Hotel rooms. Thats part of the Academy Project and Development Agreement, those 39 Tourist Hotel rooms at 86 860 sutter st would be converted to housing and they would take on the chapper 41 designation as a swap for the 41 rooms from the bush street properties. The net result is that city gains sate new Residential Hotel rooms subject to chapter 41 at 860 sutter street. Lastly, the d. A. Includes various timing and enforcement provisions setting dead lines for when aspects of the d. A. Must occur and the citys resource should they not occur. So as menti