Before going through the amendments, i want to thanks my cosponsor, supervisor ronen and the advocates for sending and continuing to send hundreds of letters of support. I want to thank neighbor emerging association, parent voices and Richmond Senior center. And dozens of other people that came and testified in support of this legislation two weeks ago. And truly thankful and humbled by their commitment to fight to protect public space. I also want to thank the city attorneys office, namely andrew sims and my staff, erica mayborn and jen to actually craft some of the amendments that we will be introducing today. I probably should go for the amendments before Public Comments. And i think you have a copy of the summary of amendments. But i will Read Everything into the record. I will just summarize. It provides a streamlining process that strengthens the frameworks so the department of public works can have flexibility to enforce as we learn more about the new technology. The permitting process gives opportunity for public process and appeal if there are concerns. We have clarified a process which will come to the board of supervisors. Permits will be at the department of public works and requires 20 days noticing to inform the public of a permit application. Due to the length of the permitting approval process, im suggesting that the permit durations go from 60 days, which is in the original legislation to 180 days with extensions should Companies Follow the permitting guidelines and prove to be good stewards in the public space. This provides companies up to a year of testing if there is no incidents. I hate that we live in a time where there are regular occurrences of terrorism. I would not risk someone creating a fake robot with explosives because the permitting process is overly permissive. Therefore, im requiring that upon renewal, permits must submit a report or data or any useful information for the public. The other change i am proposing today is to ensure that we allow more innovation among different companies. The new permits would allow up to three automated delivery devices to be tested instead of two. Companies are limited to applying for one permit at a time and this should not be more than nine devices permitted at any given time. I also want there to be discretion from dbw on the distance between devices to ensure we are not obstructing any one sidewalk. I feel very strongly that if operating on sidewalks, these devices should not be faster than a human, especially given that the companies are in the research and development phase. Due to the fact that we have persons using asis tifr devices and assistive devices and children can be unpredictable in their paths. I have allowed for some flexibility in the speed, but only up to three Miles Per Hour from the two Miles Per Hour that is on the legislation. The other changes are substantive, but provide guidance and clarifies penalties for violations. I believe this legislation strikes a balance for our needs today and in the year that dbw will return to the board having analyzed the effectiveness of the permitting process and its impact on our public infrastructure. I hope you can adopt these amendments today. Im happy to take any questions to clarify any of these amendments. I just want to make sure that i want to put some emphasis that after companies have spoken to me, that we wanted to allow for the research and development so that at least for companies that want to prove themselves and especially those that might be operating in the city, that they have an opportunity to finetune that machines and eventually for those places they want to allow these machines to operate on sidewalks, then they have the opportunity to also grow their company here. At the same time, i want to make sure that whatever i did in the permit process that no one company monopolizes all the permits. This is so that we can encourage in the future maybe other companies that may want to test their devices here or actually start a company here. So, those are my statements for now and maybe unless we have questions, i would like to open up to Public Comment. Require that sounds great. So, we are opening up this item now for Public Comment. Each member of the public will have two minutes to speak. Supervisor yee, do you want to read the name . Dennis. Laurie, roger, joan. Come up in the order i called your name. Roger hoffman. Software developer for 30 years. It has been my privilege to work with medical researchers in the battle against aids. Will delivery robots interfere with First Responders . Will they cross picket lines . How will they cope with parades, protests . Robots will be hacked. Everybody in this room has had their information hacked. Equifax, yahoo, twitter, gmail, hbo, cnn, disney, all hacked. Consider ro botd hacking could cause fizz robot hacking can cause physical harm. If robots can learn, will they learn to play nicely . Microsoft developed a chat bot named shea. A company with thousands of computer scientists. Shea was designed to chat with 18 to 24yearolds. Within 24 hours of release it was a nazi. Heres a question for you. So, what did you expect the robot to learn at the folsom street fair . Consider robots impact on tourism and sales tax revenue. Why do people visit San Francisco . Why do they shop at union square . For the same reason they go to a sporting event they can see on tv. They want to be there, feel the energy and excitement. Now we will ask tourists and shoppers to dodge robots. Are we reducing the attractions of our city . Is there a potential to kill the geese that lay our golden eggs . [bell]. Public the legislation doesnt appear to cover what thirty parties might do if they obtain information collected from robots. That i believe this is something this legislation should consider. Thank you very much. Thank you. Public thank you for this opportunity. I intended to come here to support the legislation until i read the amendments. And i have a great deal of respect for all of you, including specifically supervisor yee in our recent relations around housing stuff. But i notice that the amendments do not permit arming of these machines. But it prohibits them from carrying ammunition. It doesnt require taillights and side lights. Just points. But i want to make a different point. I came here thinking, well, these robots are really a camels nose under the tent. And now i think with these amendments, with all due respect, the camel is eating your lunch. And i really liked this measure as it was originally intended. In order to actually deal with getting ahead of the tech crunch disrupt world that is obviously disrupting our world in negative ways. Smart is not always appropriate. Smart and innovative doesnt mean needed, good or appropriate and i dont think these robots are needed in these circumstances on our sidewalks to deliver sandwiches. They will never deliver medicines upstairs. Thats nonsense. And the public is more important than the robot. So, i like down and i say well, what about the other industries . [bell]. Public well, tesla is laying off hundreds. Amazon is going to hire more and more robots and lay off more and more people and google wants Driverless Cars that will wipe out millions of drivers including truck drives. I want to say this. Drivers. I know that drones want to operate in a public space [bell]. [microphone cut off] public i live in district five. The evidence is everywhere that San Francisco has consistently failed to protect the public and our infrastructure from the ravages of tech run wild. Uber clogs our street and a culture that infected our policy. Robots should only be used to do jobs hazardous for humans. As someone who spent the last 25 years of my working life representing union workers, i urge you to consider the effect on jobs, on the workers and their families and the larger community. What about Privacy Protection . Look at the invasions of privacy made in the interest of profit. In order to function on our sidewalks, robot must be outfitted with cameras. What is stopping their masters from collecting data about people on those same sidewalks . Will they be recording speech . Will these really be only used for deliveries . Will they deliver a bogus pitch about delivering medication to shutin seniors . We have an opoid crisis because of the complete failures of regulators to say no to big pharma. [bell]. Public are uber and lift giving usda that . If these machines are permitted to occupy human space, it is your responsibility to make sure they do no harm. Disrupting Public Safety are not San Francisco values. Unfortunately, these last minute amendments appear to promote the eventual proliferation of robots on our sidewalks. Public good afternoon. My name is john. Im a resident of the Richmond District and an operator at marble. I want to start out by thanking supervisor yee for the collaborative approach we have had over the last few weeks working on crafting these regulations. My background is in city planning. During my stulddyes my focus studies my focus was on pedestrian and bicycle safety. I joined marble because of the mission that they instill in their company and employees and their proactive approach to regulation. We want to be regulated. I have a role to craft safety and to protect the public and make sure those safety requirements are enforced throughout the company. As an operator, im with the robot on the streets. I walk the sidewalks. I interact with the public and i educate them about what we are doing. Im excited about the civic applications that marble has to the city of San Francisco. We are interested in data sharing, working with nonprofits and improving accessibility throughout the city. Marble is committed to being a San Francisco company. I both live and work in San Francisco and i hope that can continue. I want to also say that i appreciate the frameworks we are setting up and i hope that we can continue to move forward and find a solution that works everyone and protects Public Safety. Thank you. Public my name is fran taylor. Im cochair and retired member of the Typographical Union which i mention. I want to remind you that the people will be attacking are also workers. I support the original total ban. I have long suggested folk who is lack a home should get a tent in the shape of a car and no one would blame them for blocking the sidewalk. I have never heard an elected official complain when a car forces a pedestrian to walk in the street. We can never get by. Nobody cared. Similarly, if you are tired with nowhere to go but the sidewalk, officials aiming for Higher Office have an answer for you. Let machines run amuck in the same space and watch those same officials fawn over them. New technology, innovation. My second suggestion is the tired humans should dress themselves as robots if they want to be left alone. What does this say about San Francisco . If you are a human in public space, you are swept away, ticketed or even in the case of luis pat, shot to death by police. If you are a machine obstructing our sidewalks, we will praise you to the sky and find excuses for the harm you do. If you are elected officials supporting machines over people, giving priority to robots over pedestrians, i have one final suggestion. Lets just cut out the Human Element all together and go straight to robot supervisors. Not a bad idea. [laughter] public hello. I own two pizza places in San Francisco. One in marina district. I work a lot with delivery and deliveries is really important to my business. I want to tell you why i support this real quick and first of all, i am the president of merchant association. Im also on the board of the merchant association. Im active for business and measure chants and i really merchants and i really support any business and especially a beautiful new idea like this in the city of San Francisco. I recently in my place in the marina, replaced at least ten delivery drivers in the last year and it is all because i cant compete with what they make with uber and lift. I ended up not delivering anymore. Im just relying on the Delivery Companies to take my food to the people. This innovation or this New Invention will help a business like mine big time. And it will help me stay in business because i cannot afford anymore to hire people to deliver the food. I cannot compete with whats going on in the city. [bell]. Public when they first brought the idea to me, from my daughter, i just jumped. I am like one of those people drowning and someone like a boat came over to help me. It is really helpful and i would really like to support it and hopefully it will go on. All they are asking for right now is just to test it. Thank you. Thank you. Julie. 170599, jim, david. Public good afternoon chair ronen and supervisors. My name is josie and im is Senior Community organizer and walk San Francisco. As you will recall from the previous meeting on this item, the community had great concerns about the impact of autonomous delivery vehicles on the safety and mobility of pedestrians. We would like to thank supervisor yee for starting this important conversation and forgetting forgetting ahead of the problem. We ask you to support this legislation today. At the same time, we ask you to ensure that those limits are robust and truly ensure that pedestrian use of the sidewalk takes precedence above all other consideration. Once we let these vehicles on the sidewalks, it will be hard to get them off. Getting this right and being cautious is imperative. We will be asking you to very seriously consider the following things in your discussion today. One, how this will Pilot Program be enforced . If we allow some vehicles on the sidewalks who will enforce the location of the vehicle as being ahered to. And the maximum number of vehicles will be nine. We ask you to be consecutive in the number of conservative on the number of vehicles allowed. Thank you to providers for your thoughtful consideration on this topic. Thank you. Public good afternoon. San francisco chamber of commissioners. Supervisor yee, thank you for taking a second look at this and working out what i think we were seeking from day one, and that is reasonable regulation in a test stage. I know what is pending is a broader Civic Working Group on technology as a whole. And i think the Chamber Small business resident civic organizations are more than willing to sit down with the supervisors and city departments on looking at about appropriate regulation across the Technology Spectrum as new industries get nurtured in San Francisco. But we appreciate you recognizing supervisors and your colleagues that have cosponsored the legislation that theres a role for a limited amount of testing, properly regulated by the department of public works to allow this industry to continue to model as it has to on sidewalks to assure that we are part of the development of this. Whether it is rolled out in the future, how it is rolled out, thats an issue for residents, businesses, elected officials to deal with in to coming years. But thank you very much for the direction you are going today. Public thank you. My name is david and i represent star ship technologies. I was here last month and i want to once again thank the board and the staff for their willingness to engage us on this matter. As i mention before, starship technologies are an International Robotics company. We are operating in five countries. We have had about 11 million human interactions. About 66 thousand miles operations and we deliver thousands and nows of projects. Supervisor yee, i want to extend a personal thanks on behalf of the company. When we came to you and asked to come up with a framework that would work for the city of San Francisco and for the company. We were delighted with the reception we received. By way of background, starship is active in five states here in the u. S. And we have never once operated without having obtained local permission and authority. In fact, i have been personally involved in the legislation that has moved through these states and we have insisted that the state actually permit local governments to make exceptions and to have local control. Even when we were offered to have that exempted, we insist on that because we believe each jurisdiction is different. What we have here is a process of reasoning. Elected officials of San Francisco believe that this is the best framework to allow this new technology to be introduced and we support it. I will say that as a former elected official, i spent five terms as at large member of the city council in washington, d. C. I appreciate the challenges of wrestling with constituent concerns and embracing new. I chaired the committee on health and saw firsthand how this technology i believe will be helpful to our underserved by lowering the cost of delivery of necessary items that help people, especially lowincome people stay in their ohm and produce a better quality of life. This is new and we very much appreciate the ability to reason with one another and come up with a framework. We are supportive of this framework and want to thank you for your time today. Thank you. Thank you. Public members of the board, thank you for taking the time. Im with the company post mates. I actually just moved to San Francisco recently last working in the Obama Administration and i didnt anticipate spending this much of my life talking about robotics but we are here. If we walk away with this with nothing everything, i discovered supervisor yee and i share a mutual admiration for sofa. We are