Silenced your cell phones, and your completed speaker cards should be submitted to the clerk. Items acted upon today will appear on the october 29thd of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. Id like to take item two first and then one and then three. So, mr. Clerk, could you please call item two. Item two is an ordinance amending the health and Business Code to replace the requirement that food preparations and Service Establishments post a symbol issued by the department of Public Health, and a placard indicating whether the establishment has conditionally passed or failed a health inspection. Clarifying some of the terminology pertaining to violations and penalties for same. And increasing permit fees for temporary permits and food vending machines. Thank you, mr. Clerk. This is supervisor peskins legislation, and we have calvin yang from his office to tell us about it. Thank you, chair mandelman. First i want to say my name is calvin, and im the legislative aide to to the supervisor. With an abundance of food options, whether delivered or eating inhouse, the health is up of utmost priorities. Im here to present to you and to seek your support for the proposed revision to the current Food Establishment scoring system. The Current System that San Francisco has been using is misleading and convoluted for the costumers and the Food Establishment operators. Currently local law authorizes d. P. H. To award them at the end of each inspection. And the score can range between 0 to 100. One restaurant can have a score of 95, and another 75, and regardless of the score, both restaurants can be operational, and may not pose any Immediate Health risks. For consumers, this means that it conveys Little Information if it would be safe to eat at a restaurant or not. For Small Businesses, the score misleads the consumer about the quality of food being served. In the Public Health perspective, we want to know if the establishment possess any immediate risk and whether or not anyone can eat there or not. The colorcoded placard uses a very simple red, yellow, green light system. The system is more dynamic, and our focus on enforcing the importance of compliance with the Critical Health risk factors. It focuses on two questions. One, whether a restaurant possess an Immediate Health risk. And two, whether that risk is abated during inspection. This system has been adopted and approved by a number of areas in the bay area. And has been supported by the Small Business commission. We went to the commission twice, and they have both approved it and support it. I do also want to add that this legislation, while working with the department, we have also added into categories of food facilities, and updated fee structures so the department is catch up to the innovative Business Ideas and everchanging landscape of the Food Industry in San Francisco. Before i bring up d. P. H. , i want to think pay tribute to lisa miley, who has retired after 38 years severinserving at d. P. H. She has been a respected and valued member, even as an inspector, and i want to thank lisa for bringing this forward. Right now i have the department of Public Health, patrick fosto, assistant director of environmental branch, terrence hong, and mary fronski from the department, Principal Environmental Health inspector. Thank you. Good morning, members, my name is patrick foson, the assistant director of the Environmental Health branch. We spent a lot of time working with supervisor peskins office, and organizations like the golden gate restaurant associations, to craft some changes, as was mentioned, primarily to the way Food Establishments are scored here in San Francisco. We presented before the Small Business commission, and they applauded the amendments and acknowledged the Health Departments responsiveness to community feedbacks. We believe the proposed changes represent a win win scenario for both Restaurant Owners and the health of the people here in San Francisco. With that, id like to introduce to you terrence hong, who is one of our food district managers, he will give you a brief overview of the changes that were proposing. Good morning, committee members. Ni nammy name is terrence hong, and im weren one of the food Program Managers in San Francisco. Current history in 2004, the Current System was adopted. This system, for the better part of two decades, had served its purpose. Iit has reported to the public a number based score, with both food safety, administrative violations and the structural violations. Unfortunately, the Current System, as mentioned, has outlived its usefulness. To share with you what all food inspectors know were not the most important person in term of food safety. The most important people are the operators. Were just the checkers of the checkers. It pales in comparison to the 365 days a year that the operator is there in his or her facility. Because this scoring system can be too heavily influenced by nonfood safety incidents, i already mentioned the administrative and structural, it doesnt necessarily reflect the current score of the conditions the patron might go into. As a result, too many of the partners, too many of the operators, have lost faith in the system. So the San Francisco department of Public Health is second to none in its commitment to protecting and promoting Public Health. But the danger of being the best is that there comes with it sometimes an overconfidence or stubbornness to change. Fortunately, we also adopt the commitment to staying humble, and humility allows us to disarm any illusions that selfcritique of the Current System or selfimprovement of the currents system cant be attained. We ask, honestly, is anyone doing it better than us . Will we gain to learn and mimic from the success of other counties so not to rein vebt threinvent the wheel. We are actually behind the other bay area counties mentioned, but i think visually for you, and hopefully in the package that you have in front of you and on the screen, youll see all of the other bay area counties use this infinitely more userfriendly and intuitive system. So that just shows you that San Francisco visually is behind the curve. Even though we the forerunners to introducing the system into the nine bay area counties. Okay association this is what we want to present to you, the placarding system, which has a proven track record in all of the bay area. Youre San Francisco inspectors can adopt any system. Were going to provide the exact same food safety inspections. We can adjust to any system. We do it better, in my estimation, than any other county, and we do it well. It is not so much the inspectors of the department that need reevaluation, it is the methodology we currently use to report it to the public that we serve. So this elegant approach gets out of the business of communicating anything other than the current food safety conditions of a restaurant. In short, what im trying to say, less is more. And this is how we win back our partners who many have lost faith in the Current System. So kind of to give you an overview of understanding how it works it is all based in science. So we take our cue from the cbc on the national level. They identified five risk factors that get people sick. Poor employee high jen, improper cooking temperatures, improper holding temperatures, contaminated equipment for food, and unapproved food sources. These are defined as major violations, and we miss any major violation or any condition that causes a major violation is something that would contribute to one of these five factors. So, for example, rodent droppings observed on a kitchen cutting board would obviously fall into a major violation. If you had a cracked tile on your floor, it obviously would not. So how does it work for the actual operator . It is pretty intuitive. In a nutshell, if you have one or fewer violations that can be corrected onsite, which is the vast, vast majority, i would say in the 98 or 99 percentile of places we inspect, you get a green placard. All facilities who have two or more major violations, and you couldnt correct it on site, you would receive the yellow placard. That being said, the department would make arrangements to come back at a time when they could make adjustments to that and potentially give the green placard again. Only if you couldnt abate the major violation on site that the red placard would be issued. The department has always had a good working relationship with the business community, meaning that if, unfortunately, a temporary suspension was made, we come back as quickly as the violation can be corrected. For example, if you had a waterheater that just needed the plumber to adjust it, we could be back that afternoon. If you needed more time to call your pest control operator because you have an infestation, well also accommodate that and we can be out there the next morning if your operator needs that afternoon or night to remedy the problem. Thats sort of the convoluted version of what i just described. So lastly, you see the placards again, which were proud to introduce to you today. I would close by saying it is not enough to maintain excellence, the mindset of complacency. As responsible stewards of special health for this special oneofakind city, we hope you will agree with us we can adopt the placarding system because it is a win win situation. I remain available for any questions, specifically to the clack car placard system, ad the mayor is here to answer any questions that you may have that addresses some of the introduction of different food category restaurants. Thank you. My colleagues appear to be delighted by what they have heard. So we can go to Public Comment. Speakers will have two minutes. You can state your first and last name clearly and speak directly into the microphone. Those with written statements are e encouraged to leave copies for the file. And we encourage speakers to avoid repetition of previous statements. So if there are any folks who would like to speak on item two, come on up. It looks like there are none. So Public Comment is now closed. And. If there are now comments or questions, i will move that we forward this to the full board with positive recommendation, and we can take that without objection. Great. Thank you. Mr. Clerk, please call item one. Agenda item one, a hearing to consider the premises to premises transfer of a type 21, offsawitwill serve its the puc convince or necessity of the city or county. Great, lets hear from the a. L. U. Good morning member, members of the board of supervisors. They have applied for a type 21 licence, and if approved, it will allow them to sale offsale beer and wine and spirits. There are no letters of offense or support. Theyre on census tract 177. The southern station has no opposition. The alcohol Liason Committee approves with the following conditions. Number one, sale and services will be permitted between 7 00 a. M. And 12 00 p. M. Midnight. And theyll prevent the loitering of persons on any property as depected depictd on abc 253. Great. It looks like we dont have any comments or questions. Well invite the applicant up. Good morning. Beth osalopia for target. This is an application for a determination of public convenience or necessity for a small format target store that will be operating on folsom. This store will be similar to the other small Format Target Stores in San Francisco. One in downtown San Francisco on bush, a similar store in oceanview, and one in the stones town galleria. All of those target stores also sell alcoholic beverages with a type 21license. We would like to be able to order those same products to targets of the costf the new target store. The alcohol sales will be incidental, and it will be for those who, along with groceries, would like to pick up alcoholic beverages. Because it is offered at other target stores, it is a product that costumers come to expect from target. So we would like to be able to offer that. We have reached out to some 200 residents, closest residents to the proposed location, with notification of our alcohol license, and there were no objections. We also did reach out to the soma west Community Benefits district, and, again, there were no objections to the alcohol license that weve applied for. As you heard, a. L. U. Is supportive of the request, and we would ask that the committee make a favorable recommendation. Id be happy to answer any questions. And there is also a representative of target here who would have a few comments. Does the representative for target want to come up . Good morning. John dues with target. Im the develop manager for this region. I just wanted to thank you all for this opportunity today. And also just to just reiterate targets commitment to the city of San Francisco the city and county of San Francisco. In terms of what weve done in terms of our Corporate Giving over the years, and what we intend to do here as well. Were working with a number of nonprofit groups, particularly at this store in terms of local hiring for underserved groups within the area, including the San Francisco lgbtq center, the youth services, and the positive resource center. Were working with a number of formally homeless transitional aids youth who identify as lgbtq as part of our hiring process for this store. This goes a along with just our more General Community giving of 5 of our annual profits. Were excited to be here. And we do appreciate a positive vote on this today. Thank you. Now, its my understanding that the District Supervisor has been in communication with you all, and is asking that we continue this to allow you additional time for outreach to the community. Is that your understanding as well . Im sorry, could you repeat that . It is my understanding that the District Supervisor has been in touch with you all and is encouraging you to do some additional outreach to the community, and has asked us to continue this to allow time for that. We feel like weve done all the outreach to the various groups that have been necessary for this, including, as i said, the local hiring that we will be working on. Okay. Anything you want to add to that . Not at this point, no. Great. Well, then, well open this up for Public Comment. Thank you. Are there any members of the public who would like to speak on this item . Seeing none, Public Comment is now closed. All right, it is my it has been communicated to my office that supervisor haney is requesting that we continue this. The challenge there is that we are up against the 90day deadline, but we are we generally understand that the abc, even if we dont make our determination by public convenience and necessity within the 90day period, it generally defense to our determination, but after that point they do not have to. Based on that and the supervisors request, im going to move that we continue this to our november 8 special meeting. To the november 8 special. Yeah. And we will seeing no objections, well take that without objection. All right. Mr. Clerk, could you please call item three. Item three is a hearing to discuss the closing of county jail number four at 850 bryant. I believe this is supervisor haneys, so we might just recess for a minute to allow him to get here. So well take a five minute recess. Well do a all right, everyone, were going to reconvene. Im going to ask folks to quiet down, sit down. Weve been joined by supervisor haney. And i believe we have already called item three, correct . We have not . We have. Im happy to do it again. No. Once is enough. But since we do have a number of few folks who entered the chamber, perhaps you can say how we work. Please dont stand in the chamber. We should have enough seats for everyone. Please also respect the board rule, 3. 1, prohibition against applause or any other kind of vocal interruption of the meaning today, and any displaying of any signage you have brought in here. And please no eating and drinking here. But can indicate their approval of things said or disapproval of things that have been said, but we ex ask that folks not boo or cheer because this is going to be a long hearing, and we would like to move it along. So with that, supervisor aan ne,haney, this is your item. Thank you, chair mandelman and committee members. I appreciate you all for having this hearing here and for your patience. Im going to provide some opening comments and then we have a number of presenters, and i want to thank them for being here. And ill announce them after my comments. We are holding this hearing, which i called, along with my colleagues president yee, supervisors ronan browning, for a very simple reason we have to close the jail at 850 bryant. It is far past the time for a time and plan to do so. The building has been marked for demolition since 1996, other than 20 years ago. The city administrator