Working her behind off, they spent in 20204 things that will help enhance her Job Performance missed chang, we are delighted to have you. We hold you in the highest of esteem. Colleagues, are there any questions or comments . Are there any members of the public would like to comment on items 12 or 14 in so far as we are not reading in closed session . Public comment is closed. Is there a motion to move the personnel committees recommendations . Made by commissioner mar and seconded by commissioner yee. We have the same house, same call. Those items are adopted. Is there any general Public Comment . Thank you, supervisors. I would like to talk about the five m. Building. The reason i am addressing you is that i have contacted multiple people throughout these five years. I want to ensure that there are no encroachments for the width of the street, which is the width of 30 feet. The reason im requesting this, i know some of you have been briefed. There is another alignment with the lying, it is on the alignment it has been on the table for eight years and as we discussed during the first personnel committee, the same individual that was responsible what happened and by the way, the procurement as the caltrain railcar. If they are also responsible for ignoring that alignment. I want to give you some updates on this. I have worked walked this alignment with engineers who have done something similar the last few years. And they basically agreed that it works. However, what you are trying to do is the equivalent of climbing Mount Everest with bare feet. I will make you another offer. I will not take my shoes and my socks off. I am willing to volunteer my time between now and the appointment of the new rail manager pro bono to the city and the county. Im not asking for a salary, im not asking for benefits. The only thing i would ask for his assistance with housing because [indiscernible] it is out there on the table. I will leave it up to you. Thank you for your consideration Merry Christmas and happy new year. Thank you for that generous offer which you are welcome to take up with staff. Do want you to know that they went up part of Mount Everest, barefoot. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. I like to provide a commuter bus update, especially at 24th and church. We now have 100 authorized private commuter buses, plus several other buses that have been going on since before thanksgiving that i have been recording on a daily basis. Part of the real problem is with 100 buses in four hours, there is a peak period between 7 00 a. M. And 8 30 a. M. And the consequence is you have simultaneous arrivals. There is only two dedicated flight zones that have been set aside for the commuter buses. The problem is you then have buses three, four, and five that are backing up in the street between church and sanchez. That causes all kinds of congestion. So as a consequence, you know, it is just getting to the point where 24th street is a neighborhood street that has been designated as a minor arterial. It is accommodating innercity over the highway. You put that into the mix with an occasional fire truck or an ambulance or police car, whatever, and all the congestion that you have a 24th and church. I think it really boils down to we need to reevaluate the whole commuter bus program and consider revisiting the hub study because if you work 50 miles from where you work, you will be inconvenienced one way or another. And the detriment is now on the neighborhood. It is something i think that needs to be revisited because having 100 buses coming down your neighborhood, that means theres 100 buses in the evening so theres over 200 buses, plus you have buses that are idling at 205th and castro to initiate a run. It needs consideration. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for the data that you constantly procure for the city and county of San Francisco and we have thank you for that before and i think we all get your emails. I very much would encourage you to speak with ramos after this meeting. If we have to revisit the commuter shuttle battles, both old because you have that many buses backing up, the system, it sounds it may not be working as intended, so i encourage you to get with the sfmta so we dont have to fix it, but if the sfmta doesnt, we can. With that, are there any other members of the public for this item . Seeing none, general Public Comment is closed. I will wish everybody a very happy, healthy, prosperous new year and we are adjourned. Good afternoon. The meeting will come to order. Welcome to the thursday, december 11th special meeting of government audit and oversight committee. I am the chair. I am joined by Committee Members supervisor peskin. Thank you to the committees clerk. I would also like to thank jim smith and matt at sfgovtv for staffing this meeting. Do you have any announcements . Thank you. Please ensure you have silenced your cell phones. Your speaker cards should be submitted to the clerk. Items today will appear on the december 17th agenda unless otherwise stated. Do i have a motion to excuse supervisor brown. So moved. Thank you. Mr. Clerk please call item two. Resolution authorizing the Planning Department to confirm existing and create new and resized designtions of Priority Production areas by the association of bay area governments and the metropolitan Transportation Commission as part of the planned bay area 50 update. Thank you. I am proud to expand this citywide alongside supervisor fewer. It is important for San Francisco to plan for our own future to pro actively say where we want more housing and to plan for increased housing density alongside improvements to Public Transit and important in. Structure. We must do this with the input and support of the community. We continued from last week for further clarifications about the implications for pdas. Since the last Committee Meeting i met with the principal planner at the association of bay area governments leading the pda program. One issue the public brought up was how pda boundaries would be misused as a target for private development. He relayed to me pdas only make cities eligible for Additional Resources and funding and are not tied to production goals. If a pda receives planning funds, the Community Gets to decide the specific boundaries of the plan area and not bound by the pda maimed. Cities can remove pdas. The reason the public raised was how they could inflate goals for housing development. He described how there are statutory requirements for the method and pdas are not among the requirements. That said, there are underlying factors such as proximity to transit that are related to both pda and the goals. They are not directly linked nor are influenced by each other. As the sitting member of the executive board i help oversee the committee and nominated the council of Committee Housing organizations to serve on the committee. By another meeting with the staff reaffirmed my believe pdas will play a positive rolls to expand Affordable Housing throughout our city. This past year we laid the groundwork for this work in my district by securing new funding for the west side planner and Needs Assessment and plan to build a Nonprofit Organization focused on developing Affordable Housing on the west side. I am meeting with Planning Department staff biweekly, and i am excited to launch the Planning Initiative next year. We are proactive and arecious about planning and development. We need resources. As i advocate for city funds, regional and state funding will be able to access through the expanded pda designation to expedite the planning goals. Pdas unlocked tens of millions of dollars in planning, capital and transportation funds for the city. I look forward to making this available citywide to all districts. I hoped to pass this out of Committee Last week. We continued it to today to allow for additional input and feedback from the public. Given the very limited outreach by the Planning Department and plaque of Community Process there continues to be misinformation and rumors about Priority Development areas. With sb50 on the horizon my constituents are rightfully concerned. I want to address those. I will make a motion to pass this resolution out of committee today to be scheduled at the full board for january 14th rather than next week. In the period between now and january 14th, i would urge the Planning Department to work with the offices of the supervisors whose districts include the new proposed pdas, that is districts, 1, 2, 4, 7 to provide clear information to the public about pdas and solicit feedback before a vote at the full board. Joshua is here today to answer questions. Mr. Switsky. Is this something the Planning Department can commit to to engage in more Community Outreach before the january 14th board vote . Good afternoon, yes, supervisor, mar, i would be happy to engage with the supervisors you mentioned and those interested and attends meetings and engage with any constituents that have questions to discuss this further. Great. Thank you. Supervisor peskin, do you have anything . I have no comments i did not make last week. Why dont we go to Public Comment on this item. I do have speaker cards. Are these the only cards or were there others . I have cards for agenda item one and two. These are for agenda item two. You can just come up. Speakers have two minutes please state your first and last name clearly. I will read the names of the cards i have. If you you could line up on your right side of the room. Anyone who hasnt turned in a card is welcome to speak. Please get in line. Eileen boken and californiarin e howard. Eileen boken here on my own behalf. On the overhead is the distribution of modified and proposed pdas for the bay area. It shows a high concentration in San Francisco. From the same meeting, there is a slide showing 44 of the land area within existing pdas is at risk of gentrification or displace meant by the uc berkeley displacement project. This is consistent with what is happening in the mission. According to the documents the pda process began with letters of interest for designation which were submitted in september. The time to begin Community Process should have been before the letter of interest was submitted. Who submitted the letter of interest and what was the content . A letter of confirmation may have been submitted in september. If so, this would be a commitment to complete the pda plans by 2025. There would no locker be the option for longer be the option for the symbolic pda. Was the letter submitted . What was the content. When it was under taken by the gang of four, did anything of these four agencies have the Community Process during this phase . Not that im aware of. Presentations were made by planning after the facto a few community organizations. Planning was out of the loop through most of the process. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. Thank you for postponing any vote until we have had the opportunity to learn about and give input during the robust public process. After all of this is for planned bay area 2050. What is the rush . How can weeks or months matter. We are deciding the future of the city. At the meetings i hope the public can ask questions directly to the Planning Department. Why should San Francisco establish more pdas . How are they arrived at . What are the im li the implications e state legislation that is supporting market rate development. Although these areas for for planning purposes, the outcome has been very different. According to m. T. C. , the planning documents the Program ProvidesFinancial Support for planning processes seeking to intensify land uses and supports plans for the greatest potential for land use zoning and policy changes leading to new development. In na San Francisco there is moe intensification of development. I have watched neighborhoods riverich in diversity and charar crushed. I am very concerned that pdas are furthering this process and finishing off the neighborhoods left. Planning can be done without signing to the process. Lets find out what is in the pill before swallowing it. Next speaker. I am erica. I am a long term resident of the sun set. I have two worries about the pdas. One is that they were designated with no Community Input and by the Planning Department. I dont know. That worries me. More importantly, i also engaged a number of years ago now supervisor peskin in the waterfront campaign. I think it is dangerous. I wonder if there is a way with the short comings or the unknowns about the pdas if they could step back from the ocean on both the richmond and the have their say on the waterfront. As the chair said the voters continue to rule. Next speaker. Georgia. I live in d8. I look at at the map to try to understand. The thing that disturbed me was the example from my neighborhood. The pdas expanding up from church to noe. A lot of those blocks are up on the hill, a lot of those blocks have seen very expensive Single Family homes put in, no demolition control because people are alltering homes to make monster roams. It looked like sb50. It was expanding from Church Street past sanchez, then up to noe. I think that is a concerning thing. I hope that d8 supervisor mandelman will look at that and d8 people will be on top of it. It is one piece of it. I think it is indicative of the issues that make people very concerned about the new pda expansion. Thank you. Next speaker. Thank you, chairman mar. I am Caroline Kennedy, chair of the improvement club. Like other speakers, i worry about the impact of sb350 and 50 on the proposed pdas. I was delighted to hear you are delaying the vote to january 14th. What we need to know is what will seentor wieners next senator wieners next version impose and how might that impact communitybased planning . How will the pdas work . Will they enable them as you outlined . That is my hope, too, or will they be hamstrung by requirements that bar the most effective elements of communitybased planning. San francisco planning Impact Analysis will be out soon. I am hoping we can see that as well when you make these decisions. My read of the law it blows up the current planning processes and mandates some steps that specifically sb330 limits local Agency Approvals to objective standards which appears to eliminate discretionary processes Like Community planning or input or discretionary review. It imposes limit of five public hearings on any housing development. This could curtail planning. It allows demolition with replacement units at market rate rents. Please wait to finalize both the pdas and the San Francisco proposed amendments to sb50 until we get more information on these elements. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker. Good afternoon. I guess i agree with most of the speakers so far. I just want to add the element of money that you actually mentioned. Money. Where is it coming from . Pdas getting more money from taxpayers. Taxpayers already have problems dealing with living in a very expensive city. You have bonds you want people to pass and where is this money coming from . It seems like we are raising public debt, public expectations of more, more, more and asking a lot of the public that basically has less and less money to spend on what they need. Right now we have an affordability crisis, affordability gap. How is raising more taxes and raising more expectations of spending more money that we dont have a good idea in todays economic climate . And todays Political Climate . Thank you. Next speaker. I am lower rain petty from district 5. I am a member of senior and disability action, also a member of the San Francisco te tenants union. I am concerned about the public process, about i have been to many town halls and Public Forums run by the Planning Department. A lot of other people, and i find there is only a limited circle of residents that actually end up knowing the meeting is even going on. I would suggest as a public process for the pdas that the town hall be run in each of the districts jointly organized and run by the District Supervisor in conjunction with neighborhood organizations. That will spread the word a lot faster and get more people there. This is a big concern of mine that we do these planning and zoning things with very little public input and very little understanding on the part of the public. I ask you to give serious consideration to how these Public Meetings might be held and who is going to help. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else that would like to speak on this item . Public comment is closed. Thanks to everyone that has shared your perspectives on this resolution to expand pdas in San Francisco. I want to ask