Remarks. Im sorry you want me to announce item one. An ordinances amending the police code Entertainment Commission procedures. All right. Thank you, thank you very much and thank you for calendaring this item colleagues this legislation updates certain entertainment procedures thank you for supervisor president london breed and this legislation first codifies the criteria and procedures for waving the filing fee for loudspeaker permits amplification permits currently the criteria are not codified the legislation will allow for the waiver by the Entertainment Commission of the fee for loudspeaker permits for mroontsdz planted when declare a hardship for nonprofits and neighborhood associations the cost of permit is more than 25 percent of the cost of the overall events in addition pubically funded events the legislation clarifies how the neighborhood notice should our and replaces an antiquated requirement with be reminded to post notice at the proposed location in addition to send written notification to all neighborhood associations and merchant associations in the area legislation strikes a balance continue covering the administrative and enforcement costs making sure the waivers exist where amplification permit represents a true Financial Hardship that will have a positive activation of the public spaces and allow the neighborhood to have Great Outdoor events madam clerk you dont say listen cane is here and if no, i see supervisor peskin is on the roster. Yes. Supervisor peskin thank you through the chair i appreciate the updating of this ordinance i was around and one of the sponsors or cosponsors of the proposition f with the Entertainment Commission back in the day i had a number of small questions and because were not allowed to communicate with each other we constitute a quorum i had to call you and read the file i get to do it in public the 43. 1 a provision that says no filing fee shall be required in the permit application for angle event that receives funding and that raised questions in my mind Many Organizations that receive the city funding organizations that get the funding actually events that receive the funding and raise the question in my mind you shouldnt regardless of the source of revenue or income is why would we treat them definitely so that was my first question. So ms. Kane is at the lectern ill ask her to respond we worlt with the Entertainment Commission. Supervisor thank you ms. Kane i got our email but didnt read it until saturday. No problem we were doing our best to define a group of possible things that could come forward there is implementation we might refine a little bit trying to sort of engage all of the possible scenarios as you may know we done this informally and waved the fees internal but trying to come up with a sitdown we looked at what is making people ask for a waiver and where are those kinds of finks that make it fair across the board thats what were aiming at. So through the chair to ms. Kane i i dont mind you having the discretion to waive but the notion that we are waving just because there are city fund doesnt seem to make policy sense i mean nor do i understand the actual terms in the legislation which is events that receive city funding organizations that can debt events lets make up an example range contribute to the chamber of commerce to hold the chinese nuru parade that is an event from the city to an organization not to an event per say and starts to get us into the scenario our organization got 10 from the city now we want an event on grant avenue and you dont have to pay the fee the way it is written is i see that it maybe better said defined as event in particular even though wears city funding the organization or that again, it was an attempt by the City Attorney to get get our arms around in total the issue i dont have much of an explanation other than i think you understand the language i think supervisor wiener has some insight. I want to make sure i understand the concern supervisor peskin through the chair youre referring to the 43. 1 a filing fee. Correct. I read that as no fee shall be required unless a city events. Thats what it said city events do receive the funding that the organization. The intent if this is city funding connected to the event when a yes organizations that receive the generic fees but frequently organizations would receive city funding specific to an event heres the grant of 10 theorizing to help you put on whatever the event might, so yeah. I feel. It should be could be i mean, we could quibble with that. It needs a little bit of work but the intention is clear supervisor you understood that as the example indicates as such to make it more clear. Yeah. I mean, if we can define the word event and also is i mean is an organization my worry an organization gets a dollar the city funding and hold an event oh, we comply with that provision oh, you dont thats not the intent the way it is written you can think between a rock and a hard place. If i may make this is not some sort of broad waiver of fees for an event this is for one specific permit that is 200 or three or four hundreds. I just want to and should have gone over this in my opening remarks every office gets this with you Small Community event that not the mega Events Community events that are trying to do something for the neighborhood low budget volunteers and all of a sudden a 5 housing unit dollars fee they want to have a microphone or play you know whatever the case might be theyre hit with a fee and the Entertainment Commission has put in a spot do we wave it not wave it do they meet the criteria the criteria can be further defined if theres a way to define is better i dont have is a problem with that but this is you know really about trying to provide some better guidance to the commission when they should wave the fees. Through the chair to supervisor wiener im 100 percent supportive of the language that you proposed in 43. 1 subsection Building Inspection Commission 2 makes a lot of sense the provision that gives the director of the Entertainment Commission the authority to exempt various organizations from fees i just worry that the lunge in 43. 1 a i think just not to put two fine a point but number it is everything you need done and if youre amenable ill make a friendly provision to strike the 43. 1 language from provided, however, and just stick with the very broad ability it is being granted to the director of commission in 43. 1b sub two. So what ill suggest because you know, i think that was carefully crafted i dont know it was random we put it out of committee after Public Comment and that maybe over the next week we can talk with work with the Entertainment Commission to see if theres a moifrtd version to the full board that will satisfy the concerns raised id rather not stick is out or if i may through the chair to director kane do you feel that 43. 1b sub two to the provision that gives us the ability for exemptions those organizations set forth in the is enough. Well from where we are anywhere will be great i think we included it for a purpose if someway to move this along and satisfy our requests ill appreciate that. Relevant to staff time dont have to make a determination and understanding they receive city funds or make a detector or finding theyre not the proper organizations or Community Group i think everything in that money language in sub a is going to be in sub b two so i dont really see the differences for staff time in fact it modesty take more time to figure out in we get the city fees if theyre a nonprofit or Community Association and that way we wont end up in a situation people say we get a buck for a city and you have to wave the fee. Through the chair if you look at the b two, that doesnt fully encompasses what is in subsection a could could have a situation people get 75,000 or 3,000 for an event or yeah 3,000 on an event and 5 hundred loudspeaker fee is less than 25 percent therefore not waved therefore i think happy if you want to over the next week after we pass this out of committee to see if there is a way that can clarify that satisfy supervisor peskin concern without stripping it out i think that is the better way to precede. Im amenable to that. Parking garage madam chair, i have a second question. Okay. I certain agree that the language been there since the last time i was supervisor outdated and out mooted i agree that the language that supervisor wiener is suggesting by enrevoking the code section d make sense but im not sure why that will have the historic noticing regime for residents whether commercial are residential a notice for those things within wrfd and 50 feet may not be members of an association we did that in the planning code im not sure why were taking that out you if i might we wanted to update because the language in the code raw right now was very much like the best effort and we wanted the come compliance with that so we thought that is a better way again not only require the notice on the building itself but we also have our own guidelines for what we call meaningful outreach and those do include door to door not a leaflet but trash on the ground. It was out mooted and out dated but as far as supervisor wieners legislation is relying think planning code definition relative to outreach is not relying on the and for those of you in the public were not dealing with loudspeaker permits but applications for place of entertainment and it seems to me it seems to me it is unfair for the city to say that a Neighborhood Organization that is on the Planning Department list an individual residents or individual commercial tenant may or may not a member i understand there is signage but if were going to rely 0 on Planning Department definitions they require mailed notice to individuals ndz Area Services that provide that function so i will respectfully ask the sponsor that we include the planning Code Provisions that any commercial or residential occupant within one hundred and 50 feet receive notice. Can we include electronic as well. Electronic. I thought the electronic in the legislation seems to make great policy sense. So through the chair supervisor peskin can articulate the exact amendment since the Entertainment Commission has to administer those responses i would suggest that the noticing provisions set for under section 311 of planning code be invoked the three hundred feet radius be reduced to one hundred and 50 feet. Can you articulate our rational outlet. Im going with the rad as the Entertainment Commission has used for the last dozen years so i thought i would stay with the one hundred and 50 feats that are provisions in the Planning Department that used one hundred and 50 and i this one hundred 50 feet for a place of entertainment is appropriate and thats been the historic radius i thought we would use the 317 four the three hundreds feet radius and reduce it 200 and 50 feet. Supervisor wiener. So ms. Kane you mentioned electronic notice im not sure how you do that but im curious to know. Well, i mean again, we dont know exactly this is a little bit tougher if we require the mailing the way the Planning Department does it to try to not pile on an applicant we use next door that works well and we are the ones that have to 10 establish this is done so were upcoming the low standard to a higher standard to confirm what is accomplished if were going to go to something where well require mailing notice the way that planning side we have to do this through the service and labels and the way the Planning Department does it well have to mail. The way the Planning Department does it and the Planning Department staff are here for another item they took that bonus only the applicant and through that applicant can file an affidavit. I think. Sorry so it sounds like were putting undue financial burden on people that are going to do small neighborhood events. This is the place of entertainment not loudspeakers. This is micro are and the application process is expensive so our hopes not. What is the cost. Close to 16 hundreds for a place of entertainment permit. Supervisor wiener. Im not prepared to sort of thank this on the fly over the next days several an opportunity for conversation perhaps when emission cain as access to her staff and were able to approach this in an amendment to the 90s that make sense ill be happy to support that but not on the fly this is the first im hearing of this the brown act supervisor peskin youve noted not allowed to communicate outside of the hearing and events of the hearing but perhaps the next 8 days supervisor peskin and you can talk about had is possible. Absolutely. You know i want to make sure that will be going to be doable. Yes. Supervisor wiener. Is there how do you want to handle it. I know i would my motion ill make after Public Comment to i move we send it to the full board with a positive recommendation understanding over the next 8 days we are formulate some amendment. Thank you, very much for the comment. Thank you, madam chair im sure theres a good answer that same session sub h that says that gives the commission the ability to extend the 9 months deadline up to 3 years my question ms. Kane the supervisor wiener the maker of the ordinance what brought that about my life example or statistics why that 9 month timeline is two short and years to 2 years or 3 months an additional year thats a pretty long extension time. It does and anticipating that question i have a couple of examples you might be familiar primarily with things under heavy construction where in the past easy to get contractors to come or the Entertainment Commission turned over without a lot of physical change but as we see whole places like such as paradise lounge taking long time they strip. You all about the walls eats Entertainment Commission can precede with the plan it they will get a conditional grant but taken a a long time and not that close and we had to very informally give her extensions thats one e example and another one with a build out a bunch of those kinds of things in all parts it is primarily when people tear something down and redo it it takes longer the City Department tells them what they need to fix and go out and get bids it takes more time than 9 months. Through the chair to supervisor wiener how would you feel about better defining good costs. What. More specifically defining what means a showing of good cause. I actually have a lot of confidence in the Entertainment Commission in terms of the work they do with the permittees and i dont need to add additional definitions i think we the Entertainment Commission is the person responsible a thousands of variations and im comfort with the way the language is now. Subject to Public Comment make seminaries no pressing deadlines 0 on this particular matter im respectfull suggest rather than sending to the full committee but keep it in committee for an additional week and discuss those items that were previously discussed at the committee and continue the item one week subject to Public Comment. All right. Well go ahead and take Public Comment. Time for Public Comment a reminder youll have two minutes a soft chime indicates your time is almost up thank you supervisor cowen im speaking in support of supervisor peskin call for mailed noticed. From my prospective an Entertainment Firm is as much in business to make money then our retail establishments in my neighborhood i routinely get u. S. Mail noticed not flyers e. R. Handout in my mailbox notifying me of one hundred and 50 to three hundred radius from my residence to the extent somebody will be in the entertainment business to generate revenue anticipate hire employees at the, afford the notices any other speakers on this item. Okay Public Comment is closed. At this time thank you supervisor wiener to your name. Thank you. I know supervisor peskin indicated to make a motion to continue i dont see a reason to continue this is not Rocket Science and you know obviously this conversation with the Entertainment Commission could have happened at any time and plenty of time over the next 8 days for supervisor peskin to sit down with ms. Kane and talk about potential tweaks to the legislation im not opposed to making an additional amendment but dont see a need given this committee how it gets to hold this in committee so my motion to forward with a positive recommendation. I see dont see a reason to continue but move it forward. Ms. Kane you and supervisor wiener will work out the details in the next 8 days and id like commissioner peskin to sit down to see ill endeavor to do that with you ms. Kane a roll call vote on that item. Okay a motion to send with a positive recommendation has been accepted and unanimously passes thank you. All right. Could you call items two and three together. Item 2 a hearing on assigning from the bio report and item number two and three. Item for a bio annual housing balance. Okay supervisor kim is going to be speaking and moving the discussion on this. Well wait a couple of minutes for her to arrive. Okay. The clerk has notified me cpmc is not in here office and not on the way down so well take a recess at this time than all right. We will reinvite item 4 call back items tw