Green party, local Grassroots Organization in our city. So, i want to scare you a little bit and reassure you a lot. The scare you part is that commissioner arce, youre absolutely right. They could set the not to exceed rate next week. They could move forward with a Shell Program and no other program, which as i said is only less than 4 of what we envision. So, but with that said, the reason that advocates have recently voted and said to the sfpuc and to lafco we would like them to proceed with these not to exceed rates is because they are now competitive with pg e. Especially if you compare it to a pg e green rate. And what ms. Malcolm proposed to us tonight are rates that will probably be even more competitive, even competitive with pg es brown power rate. The issue with the shell contract is that whether we like it or not, the local buildout that we all want is no longer tied to the small phase 1 part of the program. Its no longer tied to the shell contract. So, the reality is now t
The scare you part is that commissioner arce, youre absolutely right. They could set the not to exceed rate next week. They could move forward with a Shell Program and no other program, which as i said is only less than 4 of what we envision. So, but with that said, the reason that advocates have recently voted and said to the sfpuc and to lafco we would like them to proceed with these not to exceed rates is because they are now competitive with pg e. Especially if you compare it to a pg e green rate. And what ms. Malcolm proposed to us tonight are rates that will probably be even more competitive, even competitive with pg es brown power rate. The issue with the shell contract is that whether we like it or not, the local buildout that we all want is no longer tied to the small phase 1 part of the program. Its no longer tied to the shell contract. So, the reality is now that the shell contract is going to have competitive rates if the sfpuc sets competitive rates next week, now that its
Community and sdi. The Mental Health offered by the city to meet their unique needs and situations. If laurens law werent in place here in San Francisco, San Francisco would have the Community Based treatment they need and deserve to put you them on the the path to successful healthy recovery. Thats why about a month and a half ago i introduced two identical pieces of legislation with my three other cosponsors and i want to thank supervisor wiener, supervisor breed, and supervisor tang, that were discussing today to fully implement lauras law here in San Francisco. I said it from the beginning and i mean it, that i do believe that passing it here at the board of supervisors is the preferred option, but i was prepared to take it to the ballot if necessary. I want to thank all the members of the public and all the members of our city, staff that have worked to get this where we are today and in particular, a number of community advocates, our department of Public Health, and their entire
California state senate, police and fire chiefs, numerous doctors and Public Health professionals from the California Hospital Association to the california psychiatric association, and the numerous Mental Health advocacy organizations. Namis. F. And Treatment Advocacy Center and Suicide Prevention network. And a number of Homeless Services providers such as Saint Vincent de paul society and other labor and business organizations. Lastly i do want to thank jeff from my staff who spent countless hours on this issue and my entire staff, but jeff in particular for his tireless work on this issue. Colleagues, i know there will be lots of comments on this issue. I want to thank my colleagues for their support, and supervisor campos to find what i believe will be a great solution in terms of implementing lauras law here in San Francisco. Supervisor campos . Thank you, mr. President. I know that a lot of my colleagues want to speak on this issue so ill try to be as brief a possible. I know th
Colleagues, can we go to the items having to do with the schlage lock project, items 48 and 49 . Item 48 is ordinance amending the general plan to amend maps 1, 2, 4, and 5 of the Commerce Industry element, map 6 of the transportation element, maps 4 and 5 of the urban design element, and the land use index to implement the visitation valley schlage lock special use district, which generally includes the properties bounded by bayshore, blanken and tunnel avenue to the San Francisco San Mateo County line to the south, including the properties fronting bayshore boulevard from arleta avenue to the San Francisco San Mateo County line to the south, and including the properties fronting leland avenue from cora street to bayshore boulevard; and making environmental findings, and findings of consistency with the general plan, and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101. 1. 48 and 49 . Item 48 is ordinance amending the general plan to amend maps 1, 2, 4, and 5 of the Commerce