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 FranciscoHousing 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