Those top yellow ones dont meet your dormer exception. Thats not in the profile of the original thing. That should have triggered 311 notice and all of these smart, caring people who care about our Historic Resources when the system is failing whether its dbi, whether its planning, whether its the ceqa function that saturday categorically exempt, no it wasnt. But that should have triggered 311 notice. The problem is we all acknowledge and planning acknowledges and my colleagues acknowledge that serial permitting when youve got slick lawyers and a culture that wants to say, yes to all permits, serial permitting is a problem. But instead of thwarting it, all we do is reward it. So our system is broken. I grant that the vast majority of these permits should have been referred from the department of building inspection to planning and were not. And mr. Huey and his staff are not here today, but i think its time, with all due respect, the department is going down the wrong road on residential expansion thresholds. And, colleagues, this is not about creating more housing. There was no more housing created here. There was just a 4 million property that became a 30 million property. This is not about adding housing. And the same thing is true at the 49 hopkins case. Its not additional units. This is not a developer saying i want to take the underutilized site and build more units. Its not a conversation about housing, its about a culture, a pattern and practice and series of codes that need to be fixed. I would like to work with both departments to see if we can come up with something, because this has been going on for years. As we heard from the appellant, this is the most egregious manifestation of it in modern times. I want to say to the City Attorney, i realize this was not your case, this comes out of Code Enforcement team, but when you have Something Like this, and that District Supervisor and a supervisor long interested in preservation of the pattry moan of the city and i realize this does not come to the rules government audit and Oversight Committee i sit on, but we can change the thresholds for approval and there is, i think, a duty that you have in an extraordinary case like this, so see whether or not youre settling in appropriate way that really does what we want to it do, which is to discourage, if not eliminate this kind of behavior that we saw in this case. Having said all of that, i want to thank the appellants who did this on their own time, this is a huge pain in their behind to do this. I want to thank ms. Courtney, and all the folks who testified for putting in the amount of time to tell the city we blew it, coming and going and thank you for that discharging that responsibility as citizens. But having said all of that, i wanted to use this case today to make these comments, to say this is really important. As the city is growing and changing there are really neat things that we need to hang onto. And this is one of those neat things. And so is that house and examples that you saw on the sheet of paper. This is why organizations like San Francisco heritage came to be, because justin herman, the Redevelopment Agency were knocking down buildings like this in the fillmore and the Western Addition and thats how heritage came to be. Thats how books were created in the 1960s. But having said all of that, i wanted to use this as a teachable, learning moment. My staff and i will endeavor to do that. Colleagues, i hope when we perfect that legislation and conform the definitions in the planning and building code, or merge the Building Department with the Planning Department so they stop doing this number, you know, he said, he said, but having said that, i will move item 18 moving the conditional use authorization because i think this hearing served its purpose and again i want to thank you who signed to bring in before the body. Thank you to supervisor farrell for allowing this to go forward and the appellant and those who spoke and to competent counsel for the property owner, also known in this lawsuit as the defendant, and other competent counsel. If you guys played by the rules and you dont teach people how to do serial permitting, it would be better for everybody in the Development Community and all the communities, about they on russian hill, in the sunset, around the city, i beseech you to do that and dont get too cute. Supervisor breed thank you, supervisor peskin, well said. So you have made a motion to approve item 18, what would you like to do with 19 and 20 . Supervisor peskin table them. Supervisor breed a motion to approve 18 and table 19 and 20, seconded by supervisor farrell. Madame clerk, call the roll . Supervisor cohen . Aye. Farrell aye. Fewer no. Kim aye. Peskin aye. Ronen aye. Safai aye. Sheehy aye. Tang aye. Yee aye. Breed aye. There are 10 ayes and one no, with fewer in the dissent supervisor breed the motion is approved. Supervisor cohen youre up to introduce new business. Supervisor cohen i do have business, first im introducing two hearings, the first on the Navigation Centers. The Mayors Office, hsh and the department of public works continue to introduce more Navigation Centers, hopefully across the entire city. I want to understand what their efficacy and impacts on the neighborhood. We have three navigation centres up and running right now, the other with several proposed in the pipeline. So i have a couple of questions of Navigation Centers, residents, backed transitioned into house and what rate. The wraparound successful with substance abuse, mental health. How many people are we pushing out of the Navigation Center and back out onto the street, because theyre temporary. How can we impact the navigation centres. Is there encampment increases in neighborhood . Where do they go after the day . During the day, are there impact to traffic or congestion . So there are some serious questions that i have, that id like to get answered. I do believe that having more data will better inform our Decision Making about our homeless strategy and whether were on the right track. This in particular comes in the wake of the mayors announcement about Navigation Centers and his plan to move a thousand people off the street. I support that man, however, i want to make sure were being thoughtful and diligent and paying attention to our successes and not duplicating shortcomings. So these are a series of questions and i have a host more that i look forward to having the answer to. I also want to recognize my constituents, there was an article in the paper this morning, that talks about the mayors enthusiasm for opening Navigation Center and i want to reserve my support for such an endeavor until i have the information. And this answer to the particular questions. I understand that may slow down the Mayors Office and their efforts to open up navigation centres, at least in district 10. And i am not saying no, just that i have question. Keeping in mind that they opened in the dog patch neighborhood and were being asked to consider another and then opening up another shelter in a residential neighborhood. I have more questions than answers. And i look forward to working with the stakeholders, the office of homeless services, department of public works and the Mayors Office. Secondly, colleagues, im calling for hearing on the Business Tax Reform which had its annual report published about a month ago. I want to call attention to this report. As you all remember, prop e of 2012 approved a phase in approach to a gross receipt tax Business Registration free that was to begin in 2014. This works hand in hand with the phaseout of the city payroll tax. Over the last fiveyear period, ending in january of 2019. So, you may or may not know this, but San Francisco was expected to transition all business from payroll tax to gross receipts and registration, but ensuring no loss of revenue to the city. It hasnt been as smooth as we thought. I want to revisit the discussion to set a stage for a better for a number of revenue discussions that are going to be coming in the months moving forward. So specifically im interested in learning about how the different tax types serve the city. I want to look at the revenue forecast for each type of tax. I want to examine the schedule of the reform transition, particularly are we meeting our transition goals . And what type of businesses pay more or less tax under each specific each type of tax . I hope that this hearing will inform our collective discussion around revenues and Small Business burdens going on during the school year. The rest i submit. Colleagues, i have one more and that is to close the board out in memoriam, she lost her mother early this morning, her mothers name was lorraine taylor. She leaves a husband, a wonderful man named cliff behind to grieve. They just celebrated 40 years of marriage. Lia and her brother are pulling together the arrangements to honor their mothers memory. Their mother lorraine spent a little over 40 years working for kaiser here in San Francisco. She is a resident of the Bay View Community and overall want to make a motion to close the entire Board Meeting out in honor of ms. Lorraine taylor, thank you. Supervisor breed can we do that without objection . Without objection the Board Meeting will be closed in her honor, thank you, supervisor cohen. Before supervisor farrell left, he told me he submitted. Supervisor fewer colleagues, i will be calling for a hearing to look at the challenges our families of children, particularly ages 0 through 5 are experiencing in San Francisco, that our Family Service agencies, including hsa and our families, our children our families counsel, have in response to challenges. Unfortunately, housing and the cost of living in the city are significant hardships many families are facing and have adverse impact on Childrens Development and their academic and social readiness. With only 13 of the population that is children, San Francisco has the lowest population in the largest cities. The survey found that 31 of San Francisco residents said they were likely to move out of San Francisco in the next five years, but for families birth to 5, the percentage of families leaving is 43 . Raising children is a tough job. Which is why so many parents depend on others to persevere. But in San Francisco, parents are struggling. In 2015, only 21 of families received help from family neighbors and friends. Percentages of families who can find someone to talk to for advice about child rearing or get help with problems and their families have fallen substantially. Parents social support and coping are critical to Childrens School readiness. I hope this hearing will address what the city is doing to reduce the social isolation of families and give them support they need and want. Since 2009, San Francisco has been home to the Family Resource center initiative. A system of Family Resources funded by the San Francisco, the department of children youth and families and social services agency. These centers provide a respectful place for families to connect with one another, build parenting skills and knowledge of Child Development and receive concrete supports that they need. Our network of 25 Family Resource centers grounded in neighborhoods can be of a great help to the communities, but the need for the services far outstrip our city funding. This will be an opportunity to look and reflect back on where we are with the first five initiatives, discuss challenges, including a longterm funding strategy and accomplishments of the first five and help guide a road map for where we go from here to coordinate efforts and support Young Children and family. The rest i submit. Supervisor breed supervisor kim. Supervisor kim i also want to speak about Early Childhood education and infant childcare in california. As i mentioned, supervisor yee and i have launched initiative to make childcare more affordable for all families. We know childcare can cost as much as a mortgage. The annual cost to put and i fantastic in a Daycare Center fulltime is over 13,000. In San Francisco, the cost is nearly 18,000 to 22,000 a year. The tuition that at uc berkley, 12, 972. In 30 out of 50 states across the country, childcare now costs more than tuition at a public fouryear university. For the families and yearning to be parents in San Francisco, the lack of accessible and affordable childcare in our city often means theyre faced with the choice of either leaving San Francisco due to the additional high cost of childcare on top of their skyrocketing housing costs and for those who say they must consider a number of different choices. One is having a parent stay at home and become the primary caregiver. And increasingly hard choice while most of the households in the bay area needs two bread winners in order to get by and live in the homes that they live in. In 2017, it is still women who overwhelmingly are the ones who have to make that choice to become the primary caregiver. That is not to say it is a poor choice to care for your child, but it should be a true choice, not outcome due to the lack of other options. Or many families make the choice of spending inordinate amount of their income up to childcare for a family of four, who makes 100 of the area mean income, 78,000 a year, that means the childcare can eat up 20 of their annual Household Income before taxes. For many women in San Francisco, access to childcare can be a choice to having a meaningful career or even the option to leave an abusive situation in order to become independent. These are not the only options that should be possible in a city like San Francisco. We can do better by our families and by our children. In fact, Research Shows that Early Childhood education is not a luxury, it is a solution. Both in helping to keep our workers productive and continue a thriving economy, but it also helps prepare our children for kindergarten, helping to close the achievement gap and the opportunity gap while supporting our beleaguered middle class families here in San Francisco. We know without financial selfsufficiency, women will never be able to achieve true equality and affordable, accessible childcare is the key to opening that door. But the measure is not to raise commercial rent to generate enough revenue to create more slots for childcare. It is important we lift the wages of the childcare workers. Our workforce is almost exclusively female, women of color, recent immigrants and First Generation College students and mothers. Nearly half of all educators in california rely on some form of public assistance just in order to make ends meet. Over the last few months with supervisor norman yee, i have met many of the childcare workers that the supervisor has been working decades with. I heard heartbreaking stories of how many of these women often cant afford childcare for their own children and commute hours just to come to the job they love because they cannot afford to live in San Francisco or any city close to San Francisco. This is about creating affordable childcare for all families in San Francisco. We want to make sure this is a subsidy that can go not just to lowincome families, but middle of course families as well and were raising the wages of the childcare workers, so they can do the jobs they love and fill the teacher vacancies were seeing in the preschools today, even though there is room available for them. I want to take a moment to thank mr. Jarrett, department of youth and families, the office of early childcare and education, the controller office, City Attorney general, who are working with supervisor yee and i to craft an ordinance that would raise the gross receipts on commercial rent of our Property Owners. We think there is an appropriate nexus to asking employers to pay more that ensure we can continue to have a productive workforce and in many cases, free women to continue to be in their careers and provide for their families while providing quality education to our children. Finally, i know supervisor yee will speak after me, i want to thank him who has dedicated his career to fight for Early Childhood education and for childcare workers throughout San Francisco. This am