Good afternoon, everyone.

Welcome to the March 17th, 2026 regular meeting of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.

Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Supervisor Chan.

Chan present, Supervisor Chen.

Chen present, Supervisor Dorsey.

Dorsey present, Supervisor Fielder, Fielder not present, Supervisor Mahmoud.

Mahmoud not Mahmoud present, Supervisor Mandelman.

Present.

Mandelman present, Supervisor Melgar.

Melgar not present, Supervisor Sauter.

Sauter not present, Supervisor Cheryl.

Sheryl present, Supervisor Walton.

Walton present, and Supervisor Wong.

Wong present.

Mr.

President, you have a quorum.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors acknowledges that we are on the unceded ancestral homeland of the Ramatushaloni, who are the original inhabitants of the San Francisco Peninsula.

As the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the Ramatushalone have never ceded, lost, nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory.

As guests, we recognize that we benefit from living and working on their traditional homeland.

We wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors, elders, and relatives of the Ramatush Alone community and by affirming their sovereign rights as First Peoples.

Colleagues, will you join me in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

On behalf of our board, I want to acknowledge the staff at SFGov TV.

Today that today that is especially James Kawana.

They record each of our meetings and make the transcripts available to the public online.

Madam Clerk, do you have any communications?

Yes, Mr.

President.

Today the clerk's office is in receipt of three memos requesting excusal from today's board meeting from Supervisors Fielder, Sauter, and Melgar.

Mr.

President, and I'll just say to Supervisor Mahmoud, that means you are first on the introduction of new business and roll call for votes.

Okay.

Additionally, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors welcomes attendance from all of you who are here today in the board's legislative chamber.

And when you're not able to be here, you can catch the live proceeding on SFGOV TV's Channel 26, or you can catch the live streaming at WWW.sfgovtv.org.

If you have public comment you'd like to submit in writing, you can send an email to BOS at SFgov.org or use the postal service.

Address the envelope to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, the number one, Dr.

Carlton B.

Goodlitt Place, City Hall, Room 244, San Francisco, California 94102.

If you need to make a reasonable accommodation for a future meeting under the Americans with Disability Act, or to request language assistance, contact the clerk's office at least two business days in advance.

Here's the telephone number, 415-554-5184.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

So we have uh three requests for excusal from Supervisors Fielder, Melgar, and Sauter.

Can I have a motion to excuse them from today's meeting?

Moved by Mahmoud and seconded by Chen.

Thank you.

Madam Clerk, uh, can we take that without objection?

Yes, Mr.

President.

Without objection, Supervisors Fielder, Melgar, and Soder are excused.

I would also just note, colleagues, so you will you will see that we are starting this meeting down three members, uh, which has us at eight.

We need for the meeting to continue to keep six people in this chamber at all times.

So we're gonna have to be a little careful about uh you know making sure and the clerk's uh staff will keep us on track with that as well.

Um Madam Clerk, let's go to approval or meeting minutes.

Yes, approval of the February 10th, 2026 board meeting minutes.

All right.

Uh can I have a motion to approve the minutes as presented, moved by Chen, seconded by Mahmoud.

Um Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll?

On the minutes as presented, Supervisor Mahmoud.

Mahmoud I, Supervisor Mandelman, I.

Mandelman I, Supervisor Cheryl, Cheryl I, Supervisor Walton, Walton I, Supervisor Wong, Supervisor.

Wong I, Supervisor Chan.

Super uh Chan I, Supervisor Chen.

Chen I, and Supervisor Dorsey.

Dorsey I.

There are eight ayes.

Without objection, the minutes will be approved after public comment as presented.

Madam Clerk, let's go to our consent agenda.

Please call items one through three together.

Items one through three are on consent.

These items are considered to be routine.

If a member objects, an item can be removed and considered separately.

Please call the roll.

On items one through three, Supervisor Mahmoud.

Mahmoud I.

Supervisor Mandelman.

I.

Mandelman I, Supervisor Cheryl.

Cheryl I, Supervisor Walton.

Wilton I, Supervisor Wong.

Wong I, Supervisor Chan.

Chan I, Supervisor Chen.

Chen I, and Supervisor Dorsey.

Dorsey I.

There are eight ayes.

Without objection, these ordinances are finally passed.

Madam Clerk, let's go to new business.

Please call item number four.

Item four, this is a resolution to approve the fifth contract amendment to a contract between the city, the Office of Contract Administration, and the Universal Protection Service, LP, doing business as Allied Universal Security Services for Unarmed Security Guard Services at the San Francisco General Hospital.

To extend the contract by six months for a total term, February 15, 2023 through December 14, 2026, and to increase the contract amount by 3.2 million for a new total amount of 15.38 million.

I think we can take this item, same house, same call.

Without objection, the resolution is adopted.

Madam Clerk, please call item five.

Item five, this is a resolution.

To retroactively authorize the city and county to accept and expend an approximate 1.4 million dollar grant from the DHCS.

The California Department of Health Care Services for participation in a program entitled to Capacity and Infrastructure Transition Expansion and Development Round 4 program, intergovernmental transfer to approve the grant agreement and to authorize the city to release all claims against against the DHCS and its third party administrator arising out of or relating to the receipt of grant funds and or activities associated with the grant program for a term of one year, January 1st, 2026, through December 31st, 2026, and for a total amount of approximately 1.4 million.

And we can take this item, same house, same call.

Without objection, the resolution is adopted.

Madam Clerk, please call it number six.

Item six resolution to authorize the MOHCD, the Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development to execute the standard agreements with the California Department of Housing and Community Development under the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program for an award of approximately 47.6 million for a 100 percent affordable housing project and public transportation grant for improvements near 1939 Market Street through December 10th, 2080, and to authorize the MOHCD to accept and expend the 12 million, let's say 12.57 million for transportation, streetscape and pedestrian improvements and other transit-oriented programming and improvements.

And again, same house, same call, without objection, the resolution is adopted.

Madam Clerk, please call item number seven.

Item seven.

This is a resolution that retroactively authorizes the Office of Treasurer and Tax Collector to accept and expend a $3 million grant from J.P.

Morgan Chase Bank for implementing the Stop Scams SF program, December 15, 2025 through December 14, 2028.

Same house, same call.

Without objection, the resolution is adopted.

Madam Clerk, please call item number eight.

Item eight ordinance to amend the police code to require that individuals who notarize or assist people in completing immigration documents offer a document prepared by the city that identifies free or low-cost immigration legal services providers and consulates, and to authorize the Human Rights Commission to provide assistance to members of the public who wish to file a complaint with a state licensing or enforcement entity against a notary or immigration consultant who allegedly violated legal requirements applicable to their activities.

Same house, same call, without objection, the ordinance is passed on first reading.

Madam Clerk, please call item number nine.

Item nine, resolution to approve the police commission's statement of purpose pursuant to Charter Section 4.102 sub two.

Same house, same call.

Without objection, the resolution is adopted.

Madam Clerk, please call it number 10.

Item 10, resolution to approve the Department of Emergency Management's annual surveillance report for gunshot detection technology.

Same house, same call.

Without objection, the resolution is adopted.

Madam Clerk, please call item 11.

Item 11, ordinance to amend the planning code and the zoning map to establish the 2245 Post Street Special Use District and to make the appropriate findings.

Same house, same call.

Without objection, the ordinance is passed on first reading.

Madam Clerk, please call item number 12.

Item 12.

This is a resolution to initiate the landmark designation for engine company number 33, located at 117 Broad Street under Article 10 of the Planning Code.

Same house, same call, without objection.

The resolution is adopted.

And Madam Clerk, let's go to our committee reports.

Please call it number 16.

Yes.

Item 16.

I will first say that this item was considered by the land use and transportation committee at a regular meeting on Monday, March 16th, and was recommended as a committee report.

Item 16, this is an ordinance to readopt the former planning code section and zoning map designations, creating the mission in 9th Street Special Use District at 1270 Mission Street in the area generally bounded by Mission Street on the South Lasky Street on the East Assessors Parcel Block.

On the west and on the north with the various blot and lock number lot numbers, changing the height limit on assessors parcel block number 3701 lot numbers 20 and 21 for projects that comply with the requirements of the SUD from 120X to 200X and to affirm the CEQA determination and to make the appropriate findings.

Same house, same call, without objection, the ordinance is passed on first reading.

Madam Clerk, please call it number 17.

Yes, item 17.

This ordinance amends the public works code to enhance and modify the sidewalk flower stand permit program and to affirm the CEQA determination.

This item was recommended as amended but with the same title.

Same house, same call, without objection.

The ordinance is passed on first reading.

Madam Clerk, please call item number 18.

Item 18 was considered by the Rules Committee at a regular meeting on Monday, March 16th, and was recommended as a committee report.

Item 18 is an ordinance to amend the administrative code to modify the Jesse Alley's downtown activation location to include the northern side of Mission Street to exclude the public street portion of Mission Street between Jesse Street East and Jesse Street West, and to make clarifying revisions.

The Minna Alley Downtown Activation Location to include Minneset between Shaw Alley and New Montgomery Street, the Natoma Downtown Activation Lation, to include Natoma Street between New Montgomery Street and 180 feet northeast of 2nd Street, the second street downtown activation location, to include Jesse Street between 2nd Street and New Montgomery Street and the Yerba Buena Lane downtown activation location, to include the southern side of Market Street between Yerba Buena Lane and 250 feet northeast of Yerba Buena Lane to exclude the public street portion of Market Street and to affirm the CEQA determinations.

Same house, same call.

Without objection, the ordinance is passed on first reading.

Madam Clerk, let's go to roll call for introductions.

Supervisor Mahmoud, you're up first to introduce new business.

Colleagues, I have two resolutions to introduce today.

The first is a resolution supporting Assembly Bill 2017 by Seminumember Matt Haney and sponsored by the Commission on Asian Pacific Islander American Affairs, the Muslim Impact Council, and the Council on American Islamic Relations, California.

This legislation would recognize Edil Fitr and Edil Adha in California law and ensure students and state employees can observe these important religious holidays without penalty.

For Muslim communities in San Francisco and across California, Eve is one of the most meaningful times of the year.

It's a time for prayer, family gatherings, charity, and celebration.

But for many Muslim students and workers, observing ETH has meant choosing between their faith and their school or work responsibilities.

AB 2017 helps ensure that people can celebrate these holidays with dignity and without consequence.

In a city as diverse as San Francisco, recognizing and respecting the traditions of our communities is this important step towards equity and belonging.

I want to thank Supervisor Chen for co-sponsoring, as well as Assemblymember Matt Haney for authoring AB 2017 and recognizing Hala Hijjazi for bringing forward the idea for this legislation and for her continued leadership and advocacy for Muslim communities across California.

My second resolution urges the governor and legislature to continue funding Market Match, a program that doubles CalFresh dollars when families buy fruits and vegetables at farmers' markets.

It's a simple program that makes a real difference, helping families stretch their food budgets while supporting California farmers.

Here in San Francisco, thousands of residents rely on this program at markets across the city, including the heart of the city's farmers' market and the tenderloin and civic center, which distributes millions of dollars each year in food assistance.

I also want to thank Tetorloin Food Policy Council housed at TNDC for their continued advocacy around food access and programs like Market Match.

At a time when we're seeing grocery store closures and persistent food access challenges in neighborhoods like the tenderloin, Fillmore, and Western Edition, programs like this are more important than ever.

This resolution simply urges the state to continue investing in a program that supports families, farmers, and healthy food access.

And I want to thank Supervisor Chen again for co-sponsoring this resolution.

The rest I submit.

Thank you, Supervisor Mahmood.

Supervisor Mandelman.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Colleagues, today I'm introducing an ordinance to allow cannabis cafes in the city and county of San Francisco.

Specifically, this ordinance will allow cannabis businesses to prepare and serve food and non-alcoholic beverages for on-site consumption.

Frankly, it's odd to me that this activity is currently prohibited, and so this legislation strikes me as pretty common sense.

We've talked many times at this board about the unique regulatory and tax burdens carried by legal cannabis retailers, even as they compete against a larger, unregulated and untaxed illicit market.

If we want to shrink that illicit market, I believe we should be doing what we reasonably can to support the legal cannabis industry.

And cannabis cafes are a real economic opportunity for these businesses to go from surviving to thriving.

In 2024, the state legislature passed and the governor signed Assemblymember Matt Haney's AB 1775 to allow cannabis cafes in California.

This legislation would this ordinance would implement that legislation here in San Francisco.

Now, one might expect that after the passage of AB 1775, allowing on-site consumption of food and non-alcoholic beverages at a cannabis business would be a simple project.

It was not.

Ben Van Houten of OEWD deserves a lot of credit for all the hard work he put into figuring out how to make cannabis cafes a possibility in the real world, not just on paper.

And the result is an ordinance that amends our health, planning, police, and business and tax codes.

I want to give special thanks to Sarah Crowley in the City Attorney's Office and Nikesh Patel, Raylaw, and Jeremy Schwartz in the Office of Cannabis for their help along the way.

Um for uh working with all these stakeholders and getting this ordinance ready for introduction.

Um hope to have your support colleagues and the rest I submit.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Supervisor Sherrill.

Colleagues, today I'm introducing a resolution alongside Supervisor Makhmood introduce urging the SaveMark companies to reconsider its recent decision to close the lucky supermarket at 1750 Fulton Street.

Since the closure of the Fillmore Safeway in 2025, residents across NOPA, Alamo Square, Fillmore, Western Edition, have relied on Lucky Supermarket at Fulton to get their groceries.

These neighborhoods are home to communities of color, seniors, students, young families, working class San Franciscans, communities who have been historically overlooked, who do not often have reliable access to a car and who need nearby, easily accessible markets.

And with this lucky supermarket now preparing to close in September, these residents will once again be forced to shop further and farther away from their homes, limiting their access to quick grocery needs and hurting their quality of life.

This resolution calls on SaveMart companies, the corporate operator of Lucky, to reconsider its plans to close and to work with the surrounding communities to develop a plan to preserve grocery access in the neighborhood.

But at the same time, we must also recognize that we can't just force companies to stay open when they are losing money.

That would be ignoring reality.

So I'm committed to also doing the work to better understand exactly why.

By data and not just vibes, certain grocery stores are closing in certain neighborhoods across the city.

What do we as a city, we as a Board of Supervisors need to do to encourage grocery stores not just to open where they are needed, but also to stay open and serve the communities who desperately need these services.

I'm thankful for the support from the mayor's office, who is working alongside Supervisor Mahmood and me to encourage SafeMark companies to reconsider the closure of this specific site and also to increase grocery store access across the entire city.

I look forward to continuing this work on behalf of our constituents alongside all of you.

Thank you, colleagues, and the rest I submit.

Thank you, Supervisor Sherrill.

Supervisor Machmood, did you want to comment?

Yes.

I just want to thank Supervisor Sherrill for introducing this resolution and for working with our office on the issue affecting residents across the Western Edition and surrounding neighborhoods.

The lucky supermarket, as Supervisor Cheryl noted, has been a critical grocery option for residents in the Western Edition, Fillmore, Alamo Square, and north of Panhandle in District 5 for many years, and the necessity for it has only increased since the Safeways closure on Fillmore last year.

It announced its closure for September 11th of this year, which is raising serious concerns for affordable groceries in this part of the city and the loss of another grocery store in addition to the Fillmore Safeway in such a short period of time creates a serious gap in food access for seniors, families, and residents who rely on nearby nearby grocery stores in public transit.

This resolution, which I'm excited to support with Supervisor Sherrill, urges the Safemark companies to reconsider this closure and engage directly with the community to explore options to maintain grocery access in the neighborhood.

We look forward to working with Supervisor Sherrill, the community, and SaveMart to find solutions that support the neighborhood.

Thank you, Supervisor Mahmoud.

Supervisor Walton.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Colleagues, today I have an introduction for a resolution urging this body to keep the independent civilian oversight powers of our police commission.

The San Francisco Police Commission exists because our community demanded it.

After the deaths of Alex Nieto, Almakar Perez Lopez, Mario Woods, and Luis Gangora Patt, to name a few, San Franciscans spoke up, spoke out, and won real structural reforms, de-escalation standards, use of force policy, crisis intervention training, body camera implementation.

None of that happened by accident.

It happened because the Commission had the independence to act without political interference.

That independence is also what made our Department of Justice reform process work.

In 2016, following those same high-profile shootings, San Francisco invited the U.S.

Department of Justice to conduct a top-to-bottom review of the San Francisco Police Department.

The result was 272 recommendations across use of force, bias, accountability, community policing, and hiring practices.

When the Trump administration pulled out of the process in 2017, San Francisco did not walk away.

The city continued to work voluntarily with the California Department of Justice.

Eight years later, in January 2025, SFPD was found to be in substantial compliance, use of force down, officer involved shootings cut in half.

That is what real reform and real oversight looks like.

The streamlining task force proposal to change exactly the structure that made that possible is unjust, inequitable, and racist.

This decision to strip down the independent police oversight was made strictly by people in the majority.

Ask yourself, who is harmed and who makes the decisions?

Stripping the Commission of its disciplinary authority is not a technical fix.

It is a fundamental shift in who holds power over police accountability in this city.

The police commission was a central stakeholder in the entire Department of Justice reform process.

When you weaken it now, in the name of streamlining, you put everything that was built at risk.

Independent civilian oversight is not a bureaucratic checkbox.

Nationally recognized principles are clear.

Independence, transparency, and insulation from political interference are not optional features.

They are the whole point.

The moment oversight becomes subject to political pressure, it stops being oversight.

The Board of Supervisors is on record.

Even streamlining task force member Ed Harrington stated, the committee did not have the knowledge to step into something that involved.

Efficiency is a legitimate goal.

Dismantling civilian accountability to achieve it is not a trade-off.

This city is to accept.

The rest I submit.

Thank you, Supervisor Wilton.

Supervisor Wong.

Submit, thank you, Supervisor Chan.

Submit, thank you, Supervisor Chen.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Kirk.

Colleague, today I am introducing a resolution urging the San Francisco MTA to honor the commitments it made to deliver 465 units of affordable housing during the Potero Yard Modernization projects.

The Pottero Ya Modernization Project, located at 17 and Bryant Streets, was decided as a one in our generation joint development project to combine a modern transit facility with 465 units of 100% affordable housing, meeting the city's priorities of providing reliable public transit and meeting our regional housing needs allocation goals under the housing element to build over 46,000 affordable homes.

For over eight years, and through more than 55 public meetings, the Potero Yar Neighborhood Working Group dedicated thousands of hours to shaping the project's affordable housing components in partnership with the San Francisco MTA.

Earlier this month, the San Francisco MTA Board of Directors approved it a massive reduction in housing scope for the Potero Ya modernization projects, reducing the number of affordable homes from 465 to 100 units, a net loss of 365 affordable housing units, or 80% of the affordable homes previously approved it by the MTA board and this board of supervisors in 2024.

This is a tremendous, tremendous, tremendous policy failures for the agency and for our city.

The San Francisco MTA has significant inventory of public lands, including 34 sites that it has identified for future joint development that compromise parking lots, parking garages, and facilities, which provide a significant opportunity to leverage new 100% affordable development.

And this board of supervisors and our mayor considered the affordability crisis that has been facing our city for years.

We cannot continue to shine away from investment that helped us fight against displacement and keep working families housed it.

I want to make sure that our public agencies restore the trust that has been lost and make good on their commitments to deliver the additional 365 units of affordable housings.

I also have a memorial.

Mr.

Zhao was born in February 10, 1934 in China and passed peacefully in San Francisco on February 15, 2026, at the age of 92.

Mr.

Zhao faced many challenges as a young person, and like many others during that time, did not have access to education.

He lost his parents at age of 10, leaving him and his two sisters to rely on each other.

At age 15, he left home to find work.

His heart and perseverance lead to immigrating to the United States with his family in their 90s.

Mr.

Tao was a beloved member of our community, fostering deep friendships with those around him.

He instituted in his children that the value of community services.

His daughter Chi Hua Zhao is a leader of a home care worker movement for the last 20 years.

He was a devoted husband and father of four and is and it's survived by his children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren.

May his memory be a blessing for those who were fortunate to cross path with him and the rest I submit.

Thank you, Supervisor Chen.

Supervisor Dorsey.

Submit, thank you.

And Supervisor Chen has to be reperferred.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Um, colleagues, um, today I'm offering an immorium for Mrs.

Um Bazao Wong, a longtime San Franciscan and pillar of the Chinese American community who passed away March 13, 2026 at the age of 96.

She immigrated from China and was married to Harlan Wong, a World War II veteran.

They began their family in San Francisco in 1947 with their first home in the Richmond.

Mrs.

Wong became the operator of the 27 Avenue Market, a corner grocery store in the Richmond district in 1959, while her husband served as an agent with the U.S.

Treasury Department.

Eventually became the first U.S.

customs inspector of Chinese descent in the U.S.

Mingland.

Despite limited formal education in the U.S., Mrs.

Swong launched a career as one of the first Chinese American woman realtors in San Francisco in 1965.

And through her keen business acumen, social and bilingual skills, she became a legendary real estate agent and enabling many Chinese Americans to realize their dream as first-time homeowners.

Beyond the trailblazing career path, Mrs.

Wong was also dedicated to service.

She was past president of the Chinese American Real Estate Association and a founding member of the Gateway Savings and Lone Bank.

She was one of the founders of the Chinese Grace Baptist Church in San Francisco's Richmond District, providing faith-based bilingual services, serving multiple generations.

She balanced all of this while raising four children, proud products of the San Francisco public school system, and graduates of UC Berkeley, who later went on to establish a great career in law, medicine, and real estate, respectively.

She was also the grandmother of 10 and the great grandmother of seven.

Mrs.

Wong, who never retired, always preferred a good hard day's work to unstructured leisurely days and continue her uninterrupted career through age 96.

And for that, it was my privilege and is my privilege to be able to offer this e-memorium for her and her family and may she rest in power.

Thank you.

Thank you, Supervisor Chan.

Mr.

President, that concludes the introduction of new business.

There we go.

Let's go to our 230 special order recognition of commendations.

Yes, this is a special order at 230.

It's the recognition of commendations from meritorious service to the city and county of San Francisco.

All right.

And today I'm going to start.

Colleagues, today we are honoring Patrick O'Reardin, director of the Department of Building Inspection, who will be retiring at the end of the week.

By ensuring that uh our buildings are constructed, maintained, and used in accordance with our codes, the Department of Building Inspection plays a critical role in ensuring San Francisco's safety and habitability.

For more than a quarter century, first as an inspector and later as director, Patrick O'Reardin has shaped the way DBI carries out its mission.

He was born in County Cork, Ireland.

He relocated to San Francisco in 1985 and began working as a carpenter.

He spent time in Australia before returning to the Bay Area and was eventually hired by the Department of Building Inspection as a field inspector in 2000.

The early 2000s saw a boom in San Francisco construction, and Patrick led inspections on many of San Francisco's most iconic projects, including Salesforce Tower, one Rincon Hill, the Warriors Arena, the Shriner's Townhomes, and the expansion of the Conservatory of Music.

Patrick earned a promotion to senior building inspector in 2008 and then chief building inspector in 2013.

As chief, he led all building inspections citywide and oversaw dozens of inspectors.

In 2020, Patrick was appointed as interim and then permanent DBI director.

Under his leadership, the department made progress in a number of areas, including data-driven process improvements and operations, implementing new oversight measures to improve transparency, and streamlining the permitting and inspection process.

Six years ago, when Patrick started as director, it took a median of 272 days to issue an in-house permit.

Today issuance times are down more than 70%.

Patrick, we are grateful for your many contributions to DBI and the city and county of San Francisco.

You were the right person for the job at a time when the department needed a steady, experienced and trustworthy hand at the helm.

We wish you well on your retirement, and we congratulate your wife, two daughters, and granddaughter, who I am sure will find ways to keep you quite occupied in the years ahead.

And before I invite you to say a few words, I see that my colleagues are putting getting themselves into the queue.

Thank you, President.

Patrick, when I learned more about your story, I was very moved by the fact that you have conducted over 23,700 inspections on the structural of every shape and size in the city.

And it's inspiring to see your story of moving up direct from field inspector to a department directors.

I am very grateful to you for your stewardship of DBI during a very turbulent period in the department's history.

I'm also very grateful to you for the critical life-saving work that DBI provided in San Francisco.

We often think of DBI's functions such as enforcing pumping, electrical, and also mechanical codes, but DBI also pays a very critical social equity role from housing habitability to disability access.

And I want to thank you for all your services, your leadership, and I wish you all the best in your next chapter.

Thank you.

Supervisor Walton.

Thank you, President Mandelman.

Director Rudin, I just want to one, obviously thank you so much for your service.

You transition is hard in general, and you came on board at a time that was tumultuous for us here in the city, particularly with the department, and you didn't miss a beat, and everything went as smooth as possible in your role, and I want to thank you for that.

Uh DBI doesn't always not always the most love department here in San Francisco.

Um, but you most certainly worked hard to be able to provide the service to the public that was necessary.

And I just want to appreciate you for that and appreciate you for your leadership and say congratulations and and thank you.

Supervisor Chan.

Thank you, President Mendelman, Director.

You know, I want to say that you have done a lot of work, great work.

Um, you know, uh during my time as supervisor.

Uh really we're grateful for.

I remember calling you on the weekend during the storm.

Um that was for the Alexandria Theaters, Blaze signed.

Um, and then there was the collapse of the roof of the goodwill uh in our district uh when it was actually MD out.

Um LDs are like off hours times, and yet you not only pick up my call, you make sure that your team is on on site.

Um there were fires that broke out uh in the Richmond district that we needed inspector to be able to come and clear the sites.

You you make sure that you send them uh on time and arrive uh to really help us and help the firefighters and everybody on site.

You have done so much that I think that many people didn't know other than what they have go through through the DBI uh process.

But you really um offline and often time, not normal office hours.

You actually done a lot uh in especially in emergency situation.

And for that, I really want to commend you and let people know it actually took a lot uh to do what you do, and let alone for the years that you have put in uh for the city and for the department, and we're very grateful.

Um it is it's gonna be a tremendous loss for the city uh without your knowledge, but I have a feeling that you're gonna stick around and we're gonna be able to tap you uh, you know, to to for some help.

Actually, I just volunteer you.

I know that.

Um but I I just really uh and for a supervisor like me, you know, looking at the Richmond district oftentimes just really needed as someone who loved the district, love the city uh like the way we do, and you do that.

And so thank you.

Thank you so much for your service.

Supervisor Dorsey.

Uh thank you, President Mandelman.

I just want to add my voice to the chorus of praise for your work.

I know that you uh took the helm at a challenging time.

You know, over the years I've had the opportunity to work with many and and know many um department heads, and I know on behalf of my staff and everybody that um I I many people that I represent.

We just appreciate your responsiveness and professionalism.

Congratulations on a well-earned retirement.

Thank you.

And now, Director Reardon, the floor is yours.

Thank you, President Mandelman and uh supervisors.

Um I can't believe that I'm deserving of all those kind words.

Um I can't believe that I'm deserving of all those kind words, but I just want to say it's truly been an honor and a privilege to do the work I've been doing for the past 26 years, especially in the past six years.

And I I've thought about it, and I think that if I got to rewind, I would just do it all again the same way, the same work.

And I want to say that I am very appreciative of your trust and your support over the years.

It's it's been incredible how we all managed to work as a team for the betterment of the city and the people who live in this city.

Um I'd also like to say that my staff have been amazing.

I have a great team, many of whom are here today.

Um, and I'm leaving the department in good hands with David Cain.

He will he will continue to do good work in service of our city, and I will miss you all and all the good friends I have made in city government over the years.

And I'm not going to the moon, I'll be in San Carlos, and I'm happy to share my information with all of you.

Supervisor Chan, do tap in.

Yes, it's it's okay.

And uh just like to finish by saying happy St.

Patrick's Day to everyone, and I just want to say thank you all.

Director, why don't you come into the well?

All right.

Uh District 10, Supervisor Walton.

Thank you so much, President Mandelman.

Colleagues, today it is my great honor to recognize and celebrate Miss Tracy Taper.

Today, we honor Miss Tracy Taper for her 25 years of service to the youth and families of District 10.

Tracy's journey began in the classroom, where she spent a decade as a preschool teacher with Oakland Unified School District, nurturing and shaping young minds at the earliest stages.

But her calling to serve extended far beyond the classroom.

In 2001, through her work with the San Francisco Brown Bombers football team, she witnessed a heartbreaking pattern.

Young men thriving during the season, only to struggle afterward.

Too often facing incarceration or even losing their lives.

Instead of turning away, Ms.

Taper leaned in.

She began volunteering with Brothers Against Guns, offering after-school tutoring and mentorship, and quickly became a trusted and transformative presence, eventually serving as director of programs for 10 years.

In that role, she helped guide countless young people towards stability, opportunity, and hope.

In 2012, Tracy brought her vision and leadership to young community developers, where she continues to serve as director of special initiatives.

There, she has been instrumental in designing and implementing a wide range of impactful programs from violence prevention and crisis response to job readiness and healing centered support for transitional age youth and families.

Her work has helped shape initiatives like the Baby Community Response Network, the Phoenix Project, the School Crisis Support Initiative, and the District 10 Safety Plan, each rooted in the belief that our communities deserve coordinated, compassionate, and culturally responsive systems of care.

What sets Ms.

Taper apart is not just the breadth of her work, but the depth of her commitment.

She understands that real change happens through collaboration, and she has built bridges across organizations, systems, and communities to ensure no young person falls through the cracks.

One of the collaborations she is most proud of is her partnership with the Golden State Warriors, will begin in 2013 as an opportunity to provide temporary employment during the playoff season, grew into a powerful workforce pipeline, employing over 250 community members, and in true Miss Tracy fashion, her proudest moment wasn't just the program's success, but passing it on.

Recognizing the importance of sustainability and leadership development, she entrusted the program to one of her mentees who has since expanded it to include major events like the Super Bowl and FIFA.

That full circle moment, watching a young man she once mentored grow into a leader, is the very embodiment of her life's work.

Ms.

Tracy's legacy is one of love, resilience, and unwavering belief in the potential of our people.

She has not only changed lives, she has changed trajectories, strengthened communities, and helped to build a future where the next generation is empowered to lead.

Today we honor Miss Taper, not for what she has done, but for the countless lives she has touched, the systems she has helped transform, and the legacy she continues to build.

San Francisco is stronger, safer, and more compassionate because of you.

Thank you, Tracy, for your service, your leadership, and for your heart.

Thank you.

First of all, thank you so much, and I am so honored to be accepting this from you, Supervisor Walton and from the city I love.

I didn't um I wasn't born here, and to those who are natives, I flew here, but I grew here.

So I need to make that known.

Mr.

Walton, something I've never shared with you is that when you offered me a job at YCD, I had just prayed to God, if you cannot open a door, please open a window, because I was going through some things and I needed a break to continue.

And you are offering me this opportunity.

So to receive this from to from you today is beyond what I can say in words.

However, I can say I appreciate you and I thank you.

And if you know me, you know I do not play when it comes to Supervisor Walty.

Um, I began my community work after witnessing the senseless death and incarceration of our young people, especially our our black young men, and as a mother of a black son, my goal has always been and will continue to be to keep you youth in the words of Dr.

Joe Marshall alive and free.

This is the core of everything I do.

So when I bump heads with people, which I often do, just know that that's what I'm thinking when I'm talking to you.

My intent is to serve.

That is my ministry, who I am, how does my ministry show up?

I'm that mom to a black son.

I'm that friend that stays later to clean up.

I'm the teacher that supports your lesson plans with book books and activities to bring your lesson to life.

I'm that fun auntie that lets them put the mattress on the floor and wrestle.

I'm the room line, that room mom that plans, purchases, sets up, and cleans up for all the class parties, the team mom who makes sandwiches for the whole team.

I'm the community advocate who will always fight to ensure that all the partners at the table have resources.

This is the my resume, and this is why I stand before you today.

But enough about me, as this is Women's History Month.

I keep seeing this quote get in the room with women who remind you of your power when you forget.

This resonated with me because being a woman in leadership and community and just being a woman is not easy, and we do need support and to empower each other.

So that so today I would like to recognize the women that empower me as well.

Umola Maxwell, who I met at Petrole Hill Neighborhood House when I was in middle school, was a woman who always spoke her mind.

And I'm hoping I'm doing her proud.

And I watched her with her strong leadership skills.

Miss Tanish Hollins, who brought the community together to start Third Street Youth Clinic, and now serves as ED of California's for Safety and Justice.

Dr.

Saidau, I cannot say your name.

Dr.

Sai, I'm sorry.

Who I want to be when I grow up because she reminds us that the master's tools will never dismantle the master's house.

Chief Katie Miller, who taught me how to write work plans when I started in nonprofit.

Miss Linique Weathersby and Miss Eileen Young, who are masters of youth development and program delivery.

Ms.

Sharice Dorsey, who I met as the senior program specialist of DCYF.

And when her and Lenny got together, the vision started flowing and was incredible to watch, and she now serves as ED of DCYF.

Our children are in good hands.

Okay, sorry.

Miss Jasmine Dawson, who has served with me on two different initiatives and has managed to always be graceful under fire while getting the job done.

And I would like to add Miss Simone Combs to that as well.

Miss Carol Tatum, who is one of the most gracious community leaders.

I hope I can live up to her example.

Miss Tracy Brown, who is Tracy from the Mission, I'm Tracy from the Bayview.

Together it's TNT and is a fierce partner and extraordinary visionary for the community.

She also serves as part of the women of D10 office with Miss Natalie G and Lindsay Lopez to support Supervisor Walton and D10.

Really appreciate you all.

Miss Melody Daniels, ED Hunter's Point Family, who works tirelessly to oversee programs for young people.

My sister friend, Diane Gray, whose vision for young people has implemented several successful programs that serve SF youth and who agreed to let me share her mind with me today.

Thank you, mom, for coming.

She is the most dedicated community worker I have ever worked with, and it is an honor to sit next to her every day and do this work and just know I don't play about her too, because they know I'll show up at that JPD meeting if y'all mess with her.

Shout out to the women of YCD, my leadership, Rashida Jordan, Devali Ramcalawan, and especially my team, Denise, Amanda, Anita, Stephanie, Destiny, Kiara, Tiffany, Natia, Ruth, Corvette, Ms.

Kim, Ms.

Song, and of course, my daughter, my Nilla Manila.

To all the community women I work with, Dr.

Patsy Tito, Gloria Romero, Ruth Barajas, I see Don Stuckle here, I'm sorry, Sarah Wan, Joanna Hernandez, who are thought partners in the work, my posse, my homegirls, Don, Robin, Robin S, Cheryl, Banisha, Lonya, and especially retired captain Nikki Griffey who trained over 300 men and women at the SF Fire Department of Training, who opened the doors to the firehouse so I could take my girls from West Point to learn about careers in the fire department, and of course, Miss Renee from Hertz Playground, longtime friend.

Lastly, to my mom and grandma, my grandma who taught me the power of prayer and my faith in Jesus Christ.

And my mom who went back to school to earn her nursing degree after she graduated.

She put two kids in a car and drove from New Jersey to San Francisco and spent over 20 years working with youth who had cancer and needed a transplant.

This year marks the 30th year of my mom's passing.

So for me, this is a fitting tribute to her legacy.

If I missed anyone, please accept my apologies and know that I see you.

And if a little of the light of these awesome women shone on me and I reflected it back to others, I feel I would have done what I came here to do.

This mommy is for you.

Thank you.

Okay.

District one, Supervisor Chan.

Thank you, President Mendelman.

This today, the special commendation is very special to me personally, because this is a friend, a longtime colleague of mine, and I'm very grateful that I have the honor and the privilege to recognize him today.

And this is on the occasion of really honoring his career with our city and with the San Francisco Recreation and Park Department.

He said he's retiring.

And spent much of his youth at Fulton Playground.

Those early experiences planted the sea for a lifelong connection to parks, pools, and people.

Oscar worked as a locker attendant, then part-time lifeguard, and a part-time permanent lifeguard in nineteen eighty-nine.

Through dedication and a deep love for public service, he became a permanent recreation director in two thousand and nine.

He also served at Meanie Lovey War and Richmond Recreation Center before joining the Golden Gate Park Senior Center as the facility coordinator.

Oscar proudly taught the learn to swim classes for youth, always always emphasizing safety, preparation, and self-confidence.

A true lover of the water.

And many, many at the senior center also experienced Oscar's great energy, where he brought laughter, creativity, and connection to the program.

Whether performing music on short notice, singing, or unexpectedly speaking like a pirate to match the week's theme, Oscar has a gift for bringing people together and making everyone feel welcome.

Mentorship and friendship has been central to Oscar's journey.

He often speaks with gratitude about his best friend and mentor and really our mutual friend, the late Shaw McGrew, whom he describes as a father faker who taught him the value of true friendship and providing outstanding customer service and public service.

As Oscar looks ahead to retirement, he is excited, as he had mentioned, to focus on his wellness and return to painting, his lifelong passion.

And so, on behalf of the city and county of San Francisco and the Board of Supervisor Oscar, we thank you.

We thank you for your lifetime of service, your heart and your commitment to building our community and we're so so grateful for your service and your love for our community.

Thank you.

Thank you, Supervisor Chan.

Thank you, supervisors.

I'm overwhelmed.

Thank you.

We love you, Oscar.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Hello.

Hey, today I'm proud to recognize two incredible members of our Sunset community, Pat and Buffy McGuire on St.

Patrick's Day.

Pat and Buffy are longtime community leaders whose impact on the Sunset District can be felt in both big and small ways.

As owners of Java Beach Cafe, they have created more than just a local business.

They have built spaces where neighbors connect, families gather, and community happens every single day.

In a district like the sunset, those spaces are essential.

They're part of what makes our neighborhood feel welcoming, connected and strong.

And in honor of Women's History Month, I also want to recognize Buffy McGuire for her leadership, her contributions to Sunset District and the role she plays in strengthening our community every day.

And on a personal note the sandwiches there are so good that when I graduated from Lincoln High School, I asked my family and my parents to go to Java Beach Cafe to eat their sandwiches with me.

Beyond Pat and Buffy's work as small business owners, they have been deeply involved in the cultural and civic life of our city.

They have helped uplift and celebrate Irish heritage in San Francisco while ensuring that those traditions remain open, inclusive and accessible to everyone who wants to be a part of it.

They have also consistently shown up for the sunset, supporting local events, strengthening our commercial corridors, and contributing to the overall vitality of our neighborhood.

Their work reflects the values that define District 4, which are community resilience and a deep commitment to one another.

On a day like today St.

Patrick's Day it is especially meaningful to recognize leaders who not only celebrate culture but also bring people together across backgrounds and generations.

Pat and Buffy truly represent the very best of the Sunset District and I'm grateful for their continued dedication to your community.

On behalf of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors it is my honor to present this proclamation to Pat and Buffy McGuire in recognition of their leadership service and lasting contributions to the Sunset District.

And so I am the granddaughter the great granddaughter and the daughter in law of Irish immigrants who came to San Francisco directly and settled on the West Side and settled in the Sunset district and made a home before it was quite as sexy as it is now growing up in going to high school from the sunset to Pacific Heights was quite a trek through many microclimates and through many different cultures shall we say but it's been a wonderful ride and we're grateful to have this opportunity to represent um our community and shout out to the Irish American community that always shows up for us in good times and bad.

So thank you so much and happy St.

Patrick's Day

Colleagues, today, as we wrap up Ramadan this year, it is my honor to recognize Pacquan restaurant.

The owners of Pacquan come to the podium.

We are celebrating Pakwan for over two decades, that it has been nourishing our communities with incredible food, as well as providing service that is steeped in generosity and hospitality.

Pakwan's story begins in 1999, when two best friends, Haled Amin and Mohammed Shabazz opened the first location in the tenderloin at the corner of O'Farrell and Jones.

Like so many immigrants who arrive in this country seeking opportunity, they came with determination and faith, carrying with them the traditions and flavors that reminded them of home.

With long hours, perseverance and a deep belief in their community, they built something special.

From the beginning, Pakwan focused on serving authentic halal food that felt familiar to many South Asian immigrants while remaining welcoming and affordable to everyone in the neighborhood.

The tenderloin community quickly embraced Pakwan.

Families gathered there, students stopped in late night after studying, workers came by after long shifts.

Over time, the restaurant became more than a place to eat.

It became a place where neighbors connected and where many people felt a sense of home in the middle of a busy city.

Thanks to that community support, what started as a small restaurant has grown into multiple locations across the Bay Area.

And yet, even with that growth, Pacquan has remained rooted in the tenderloin community, the same community that first welcomed it.

Giving back has always been central to Pakwan's story.

Each year during the holy month of Ramadan, the restaurant donates meals and resources to nonprofit partners across the Bay Area at no cost to them.

Through these efforts, Pakwan helps serve more than 2,000 individuals each month during Ramadan, reflecting a deep commitment to faith and caring for neighborhoods, neighbors in need.

Those values are exactly what Pakwan has practiced year after year through its service to San Francisco.

Today, the next generation continues the legacy that Khalid and Mohammed began.

Family members include Ira Amin, Ali Amin, and Daniel Shabazz have are helping guide the restaurant forward as part of the next generation while staying deeply committed to the same principles that built the restaurant from the beginning.

Daniel is here with us today and will be accepting this commendation on behalf of the entire Pakwan family, whose hard work in the kitchen and in the community has made this restaurant such an important part of San Francisco.

Pakwan reminds us that a beloved family-owned restaurant often serves as the heart for our neighborhoods.

They persevere cul they preserve culture, celebrate traditions, and create gathering spaces and demonstrate what it means to care for the community that supports them.

On behalf of the city and county of San Francisco and the residents of District Five, I want to thank Bakuan for their years of service, generosity, and their continued commitment to feeding and supporting our city, and for serving the best non in San Francisco.

Thank you.

And Supervisor Chan.

Hold up.

Thank you.

I am only speaking and adding this to just want you to know that I uh have always been a fan of Pacquan.

And uh and this is how you know that in my twenties, that kilowatt and Pakwan were my go-tos.

Like I order at Pacquan, and then I go to Kilowatt to wait for my order and take it uh wherever I go to have that dinner.

So you have a fan, not just uh in me, but I I know that there are many, many San Franciscans.

You are uh part of the fabric of what San Francisco is about, your food and uh just who you've been to the community, you make San Francisco a better place.

Uh so we are very, very grateful to you.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, Supervisor Mahmood.

Uh and thank you all the supervisors.

We appreciate uh the recognition.

You know, we don't like to advocate for ourselves, so we don't like to display what we do.

And it's all because of what we've what we've been taught, the newer generation.

Um Mohammed's son.

So I know my dad and uh my uncle right here, Khalid.

They've been they work many years, very uh very, very tough years, but they wanted to give back to the community that gave to them, and this is one way for them to be recognized.

I appreciate the honor that's given to them to for them to be recognized.

It's more of an honor for them.

So we really appreciate appreciate the support of the community.

We hope to be here for many, many years.

But we really appreciate all the support from the community and we look forward to giving back as much as we can.

Thank you.

Uh hi.

Uh my dad and myself, we were partners, and we worked so hard.

Uh I came 20 years old.

I never thought you're gonna have this much success we're gonna have one day.

Thanks to San Francisco to give us all the support, you know.

We're still working, we still be making chicken think of Masal and Birani until you guys get tired of it.

So thank you.

Thank you for all the support, and I'm really glad I'm here.

District six, Supervisor Dorsey.

Thank you, President Mandelman.

Colleagues, I today have the distinct privilege of recognizing and honoring Alice Rogers and Rick Dickerson.

Would you please approach the podium?

Um two exceptional community leaders from District Six whose steady leadership has helped to foster ongoing partnership, accountability, and dialogue between the embarcadero community and the city.

Alice and Rick have served in a volunteer capacity as co-chairs of the embarcadero community advisory committee since its creation in 2019.

The committee was established to help provide community leaders leadership and input around the opening and ongoing operations of the Embarcadero Navigation Center.

Since that time, Alice and Rick have helped to guide this body with consistency, integrity, and deep care for the neighborhood they serve.

Under their leadership, the committee has met regularly to discuss developments related to the program, to elevate neighborhood concerns, and to create a forum for inclusive communication and collaboration among advisory committee members, city departments, and service providers, and also the broader public.

What makes their leadership so meaningful is that it has never been passive.

Alice and Rick have helped build community understanding and support for the navigation center while also holding the city and the site operator it hired accountable to the commitments made to the neighborhood.

They have understood that successful shelter operations require not just vision, but trust, responsiveness, and sustained partnership.

They have helped facilitate difficult conversations with thoughtfulness and resolve.

They have made sure that the voices of residents, stakeholders, and neighbors are heard, and they have remained deeply engaged in supporting a program that provides critical shelter and services to as many as 200 vulnerable individuals in need every night.

Alice and Rick represent the very best of civic leadership.

They are knowledgeable, unflappable, and deeply committed to their neighborhood as well as to the larger city it's a part of.

They are admired for always participating with civility and class, even on occasions when they have every right to be angry and outraged.

After years of conscientious service to San Francisco, they continue to show up with humor, grace, and heart for the city we all love.

Alice and Rick San Francisco has been made inestimably better for your contributions to civic involvement, and I'm proud to recognize you both today for your service and dedication.

Congratulations.

Thank you very much.

Are you sure you're talking about the right people here?

I'm not one for for speeches, so I'm not going to be anywhere near as eloquent as Matt was.

But it's been uh it's it's been an honor to be able to help a worthy um cause um like homeless homelessness and the the homeless shelters, um, to be able to have have it in our neighborhood.

And I think there were a lot of people in our neighborhood who believed it was important to try and accommodate um that in the South Beach Um Rincompoint and Mission Bay uh overall area.

Um it wasn't always easy.

Um and it didn't, you know, we hit the ground rather than hit the ground running, it all hit the ground with COVID.

So it it it um kind of uh morphed it for a few years.

But um I uh I will say that that it's been I've I've worked with a lot of people in city staff over the years um for things in the South Beach area, including the Giants Ballpark when it was built.

Um I want to shout out uh do a shout out for Emily and Emily, you were you were involved from the very beginning.

Um it wasn't always easy times, it wasn't always uh um just good things that we were all talking about.

But um you always you always were very straightforward.

And and I think that's very important in how we we come together with the with city staff and neighborhoods is is to be forthright and and to be straightforward about things.

And if you can't do something, say it can't be done.

And um, you know, be willing to continue to plug away at it and work at it.

And she she brought that from the city side um with a uh and and I think it was very very instrumental in in making Alice and myself be able to help integrate this into the neighborhood a little bit more.

But I'm gonna leave it to Alice.

She's she's a little bit more eloquent than I am.

Thank you, Rick.

Um, Supervisor Darcy, thank you so much for this recognition.

Um and thank you for um Emily and Dylan and Dominica Um for nudging it along.

It's quite an honor to be here after following all of these other citizens who have just been honored for lifetime achievement and so on and so forth and feeding people and making people feel whole.

Um it's nice to sort of slip stream after that.

Um I I just want to say from the outset, I personally had two goals for the Navigation Center, that it be well integrated into the neighborhood with no ill impacts, and um also that we establish really a management and oversight model so that all neighborhoods in San Francisco could know that they could um have shelters in their neighborhoods to no ill effect, and that these communities could be uplifted and brought back to life.

I have about a hundred and twenty SRO neighbors, so I know that the continuum works.

So thank you so much for this honor.

All right.

I want to invite Joe Shuver to come on up.

I think there might be a little team of Glenn Parkers that might want to come stand next to him or behind him or somewhere, or can stay in the audience if they want to.

Folks, today it is my great, great honor uh to present a special commendation to the very, very, very wonderful Joe Shuver, who founded Destination Making Company at the corner of Chennery and Castro a quarter century ago.

And operated it there until he officially laid down his rolling pin and retired in December.

Joe's Danishes, cookies, cinnamon rolls, croissants, and other pastries were wildly popular among Glen Park neighbors and visitors.

His business was always a great and tasty spot for supervisor office hours.

Joe began each day in his bakery at 4:30 a.m.

baking for several hours before taking a quick lunch break, then returning in the afternoon to continue working until four or five.

Despite the early mornings and long days, he never lost his enthusiasm for his work, and even after decades of experience, committed himself to improving his recipes or learning new ones every day.

Joe grew up in Granville, a small rural town in the state of Iowa.

He came from a household of bakers and remembers helping his mother with baking when he was little.

After moving to Dubuque, Iowa to attain Lawrence, Loras College.

After graduating, he taught English he taught high school English for four years, then attended the University of Iowa to earn his master's degree in library science.

In Iowa City, Joe began working part-time at a small French bakery.

When a freeze on state jobs made a career in libraries uncertain, Joe decided to follow his passion for baking full-time.

Although he founded Destination Baking Company 25 years ago, he has actually been baking at that corner of Glen Park.

When the owners of Creightons retired, they passed the keys to the place to Joe, who opened Destination Baking Company the Tuesday after Labor Day in 2000.

Destination Baking Company was a cornerstone of Glen Park for so many years.

Since the announcement of the bakery's closing, neighbors have stopped by to express their appreciation to Joe and share what which of the pastries they will miss the most.

Thank you, Joe, for your contributions to the city and county of San Francisco, and especially to Glen Park.

We thank you and wish you all the best things in your well-earned retirement.

Thank you.

And the floor, sir, is yours.

Thank you very much, uh, President Mantelbaum and the whole board.

I'd like to thank you for this commendation.

It's been such a great honor to serve a community of Glen Park and uh all these years, 25 years.

And I've been very lucky to have a few loyal custom uh excuse me, employees who saw me through for many, many years and stuck by me even when things got rough, i.e.

COVID and et cetera.

And I've been very blessed to have uh some of them are here today, the best group of uh fellow merchants in the neighborhood.

We Glenn Park is very tight, and we've all we all have each other's back, and I'm very appreciative of that.

Um our customers supported us for many, many years.

A lot of them became friends and sometimes extended family, and I miss them all very much.

But uh I grew up in a as you said, in a very small town, and it really felt like a like a small town community over there.

And I'd like to thank my husband of many, many years who supported me through all of this and was very patient through the good times and the bad times, and I wouldn't be standing here without him.

And my hope for the future is that all these empty storefronts that are the city is littered with will be filled up with interesting and vibrant and colorful small businesses that make San Francisco what San Francisco is.

So thank you very much for everything.

Yes, Mr.

President.

That would be items item thirteen and fourteen.

Yes, please call them.

Okay.

So the Board of Supervisors agreed to convene as a committee of the whole pursuant to a resolution number zero four five-26 contained in file number two five one two one eight, approved on February thirteenth, twenty twenty-six for a public hearing of the board to convene as a committee, as I stated, for a public hearing to order the conditional vacation of the designation of portions of Christmas Tree Point Road and Eastern Alignment of Twin Peaks Boulevard as a public right-of-way for roadway and sidewalk purposes, and to order the redesignation of Eastern Twin Peaks Boulevard as a public right-of-way for recreation and park purposes, to approve the interdepartmental transfer of Eastern Twin Peaks Boulevard and a anticessors parcel block number 2643 lot number zero fourteen from public works to the recreation and park department to apply the park code and regulations and the excavation and backfill requirements of the Public Works Code and associated orders, regulations, standards, and procedures to Eastern Twin Peaks Boulevard to enable the recreation and park department to issue excavation permits for Eastern Twin Peaks Boulevard to clarify that the city has approved a grant restriction requiring that the Twin Peaks Promenade be operated as public open space in perpetuity to uh all of that to facilitate the development of the Twin Peaks Promenade project to affirm the secret determination and to make the appropriate findings.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

So colleagues, we are now sitting as a committee of the whole to consider the street vacation for the Twin Peaks Promenade project, and I believe we're gonna hear from Rec, the Rec Park Department now.

Please take it away.

SFGov TV, please, thank you.

Um with already approved grant funding.

So with that, I'll um I'll open with the Twin Peaks open space overview.

Uh Twin Peaks itself is a 31-acre um wreck and park department open space in the Twin Peaks neighborhood, featuring two distinct peaks surrounded by grassy hillside expanses.

Uh Twin Peaks is one of the San Francisco's most iconic open spaces.

Um its unique geographic feature uh is located, you know, distinct but two distinct peaks.

Um located in the center of the city is an internationally recognized open space and offers panoramic views of the city and broader Bay Area.

Uh Twin Peaks is also a natural area uh per recpark's natural resource management plan uh due to its importance as a uh natural hillside habitat for plants and animals.

For a brief overview of the various phases of work that have already taken place at Twin Peaks over the past uh nearly decade.

I'd like to highlight that from 2013 to 2014.

Um a new multi-use trail adjacent to the southern Twin Peaks Boulevard was established.

Um in 2015 there was addition of three crosswalks towards the north middle and southern end of uh Twin Peaks Boulevard.

Um uh from 2016 to 2020 was when the figure eight redesigned planning study was conducted by SFMTA.

Uh this was a four-year pilot project study to study vehicular road closure to allow pedestrian and bicyclist use of the eastern half of Twin Peaks Boulevard, uh resulting in permanent closure of the roadway to vehicular traffic in 2020.

Um in 2017, the Twin Peaks uh trail improvement project phase one for two trail segments was completed.

Um in 2025, uh phase two for three additional trail segments was completed.

And at this time, uh Rec Park is pursuing the uh street vacation to facilitate the Twin Peaks Promenade project, um, which would implement comprehensive surface improvements uh to transform the decommissioned roadway into a linear park or promenade uh with construction slated to begin in summer of 2026 and open to the public in early 2027.

The uh the requested street vacation as depicted in dark green on the map occupies the eastern half of the figure eight roadway atop Twin Peaks Boulevard and with this uh would facilitate the development of the Twin Peaks Promenade project since it corresponds to the project footprint.

Um the requested street vacation is essentially the legislative means by which the existing decommissioned roadway, uh public right-of-way under public works jurisdiction uh would be jurisdictionally transferred from public works to rec park, um, allowing the a conditional vacation in which the roadway would change from a public right-of-way for roadway and sidewalk purposes to a roadway, uh a public right-of-way rather for recreation and park purposes.

Uh this would allow Rec Park to manage and maintain the promenade as a recreational open space uh while retaining a public right-of-way designation that would accommodate an existing utility franchise agreement.

Uh the street vacation is a required premise for the promenade project since it's uh permission for recreational use under rec park jurisdiction is needed uh in order to the needed establishment uh in order to commence construction.

A supplemental aspect of the legislation includes the interdepartmental transfer of block 2643014 from public works to rec park, as depicted on the jurisdictional map on the right.

Um the lot highlighted in yellow parallels the street vacation project area along the eastern hillside and is uh surrounded by a cluster of already um RPD-owned properties.

Benefits of this transfer include uh consolidation of clustered lots already under RPD jurisdiction, thereby simplifying our jurisdictional boundary, uh maintenance efficiencies, and increases the amount of property preserved as public open space to help ensure its natural value is protected.

Uh the Rec Park Commission previously recommended that the Board of Supervisors approve the interdepartmental transfer of uh the promenade as well as the lot 14.

So the board's approval of this action would uh bring closure to this transaction.

And lastly, the uh transfer is supported by public works as indicated in the public works order as part of your packet.

Uh for shared visual reference, I just want to close with um some images of the promenade project that the street vacation would facilitate.

As you can see, the promenade plan is relatively simple.

Um it's composed of a uh sort of central asphalt pathway with aggregate pathway along the uh hillside edge, flanked by uh native landscaping on both sides.

And that concludes my presentation.

Staff is available for any questions.

Thank you.

Thank you for the presentation.

I do not see any questions.

So uh Madam Clerk, let's call for public comment on this matter.

At this time, if you are here in the chamber and you would like to provide your public comment specific to this public hearing for the street vacation order for the interdepartmental property transfer for the Twin Peaks Promenade Project, items 13 and 14.

Now is your chance.

Step over to the right-hand side of the chamber and use the public podium.

We are setting the timer for two minutes.

All right, Mr.

President.

All right.

Seeing no speakers, public comment is now closed.

And seeing no other names on the roster, this matter has been heard and is now filed.

Madam Clerk, uh please call item 14.

So item 14 was referred without recommendation from the land use and transportation committee.

It uh was a part of the call that I just made pursuant to items 13 and 14 for the street vacation order, Mr.

President.

Got it.

Um can you please call the roll?

On item 14, Supervisor Machmud.

Machmood I, Supervisor Mandelman.

I.

Mandelman I, Supervisor Cheryl.

Cheryl I, Supervisor Walton.

Walton I, Supervisor Wong.

Aye.

Wong I, Supervisor Chan.

Aye.

Chan I, Supervisor Chen.

Chen I, and Supervisor Dorsey.

Dorsey I.

There are eight ayes.

Without objection, the ordinance is passed on first reading.

Madam Clerk, let's call our next 3 p.m.

special order.

Please call item number 15.

Yes, the Board of Supervisors is convening a committee of the whole, calling a matter from the Rules Committee to a committee of the whole.

Pursuant to a motion M26-023 contained in file number 260225 for item 15.

This is a public hearing to discuss the findings and recommendations of the proposition E Commission streamlining task force's final report and the draft charter amendment entitled Boards, Commissions, and Advisory Bodies, which proposes to implement the task force's recommendations pursuant to Charter Section 4.100.1 sub-E, and to request the City Administrator's Office to report.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Today we're going to hear from City Staff and Prop E uh Task Force members on the recommendations of the Commission Streamlining Task Force.

Proposition E, which was approved by San Francisco voters in November 2024, established the task force and charged it with reviewing and recommending potential changes to the city's more than 150 boards and commissions.

Proppy provided that Task Force members would be appointed by the mayor, the President of the Board of Supervisors.

Hello, Mr.

Harrington, and thank you for being our first Supervise President Puskins and then my appointment.

The City Administrator, the City Attorney, and the controller.

The task force's mandate was to identify opportunities to modify, consolidate, or eliminate public bodies to improve the administration of city government while preserving meaningful opportunities for public engagement.

Over the course of 2025, the task force, with extensive support from staff in the city administrators' office, conducted a detailed review of each public body one by one.

To date, they have held 23 public meetings and considered more than 1,200 pieces of written and verbal comment.

The work product of the task force has been a report, an extensive report, which is available for all of us to review, and two pieces of legislation also available for all of all of us to review.

The first is an ordinance that reflects the task force's remain recommended changes to the administrative code.

That ordinance was introduced on March 30 on March 3rd and is currently being held under the 30-day rule.

The recommendation that that ordinance will take effect after 90 days unless uh rejected by a supermajority of the Board of Supervisors.

And just to be clear, there is no action being taken on that ordinance today.

The second piece of legislation is a proposed charter amendment.

Now that charter amendment exists.

It is on websites, as I said, or it is on at least a website.

It is available for review and consideration by this body and the public.

And I hope that the Chair will not take offense and that the members of the task force will not take offense if I say from the outset that it is highly unlikely that this that I or any other member of the Board of Supervisors will introduce that particular charter amendment, or that this board would send that particular charter amendment on to the voters in November.

Now like that.

Members of the clerk does not want you clapping.

It's against our rules.

Now I have asked the City Attorney's Office to begin working with us on drafting a charter amendment to implement some of the recommendations.

And there are in that report and in that charter amendment a host of recommendations that are noncontroversial.

Um I think that um although you never know in San Francisco.

But but I think uh there is consensus support for a whole bunch of the work that was proposed.

I think you know what is going to be interesting over the basically the next six weeks that we have to think about introducing something before our May deadline is you know, which of the things that um there may be a diversity of perspectives on.

In which of those cases is the juice worth the squeeze.

I have heard a lot, and my colleagues have heard a lot about a number of commissions of long-standing that have been in our charter for a very long time and whose existence in our charter in the view of um a lot of folks uh is important as an expression of our values and our commitment to those particular things.

I believe that that was a position that may have been taken by the chair of the task force.

Um the task force, again, I want to thank all of the members, and I think their charge was to sort of think through what was the most, in their view, reasonable, rational.

It was sort of the Dr.

Spock isation of our charter, but that's not what politics is.

That's not what we're going to do in this chamber, and it's not what the voters are going to be asked to do in November.

So we do want to hear about the work you've done.

Uh we do want to hear the reasons for um the recommendations that you made.

Um, but uh I as I said, I think this board is very likely to depart from the task force recommendations in a number of areas.

Um before I begin, um, before we begin, I've been going on for a while, I apologize.

Um, but before we begin, I do want to thank City Administrator Chu and your staff, especially Rachel Alonzo for all the work that has gone in to um this long process of implementing Prophy.

It has been a lot of work.

I do want to thank the members of the task force, uh the chair at Harrington, um Andrea Bruss, Sophie Hayward, Natasha Mihal, and so and Sophia Kittler.

I would be remiss if I did not thank Melanie Mathewson in my office who has been um following uh this closely and trying to make sense of uh all the various debates around all the various issues that have been touched on by the task force's work.

And of course, I want to thank the many members of the public, commissioners and advocates who attended public meetings, gave public comment, sat down with me or my staff to discuss specific aspects of the process, or uh and/or have shown up today.

We're gonna hear from Chair Harrington.

I think we're gonna hear from City Administrator Chu, or maybe not, maybe not, shaking the head.

Okay, we're gonna hear from City Administrator from Chair Harrington, and then I think we're gonna hear from Rachel Alonzo.

And that might be it, but I can be corrected.

Um then there will be an opportunity if supervisors want to say things or ask questions, we can do that.

And then we'll be the opportunity for a lot of folks who care about a lot of different things that have been touched on by this task force to uh make their voices heard here in the chamber.

Um so with that, we will start with Chair Harrington.

And thank you, uh Mr.

President.

Thank you for organizing this today and welcome and welcoming us to the room.

And we take no offense.

Um we were there to serve.

We are giving you products that you have an option to deal with the way you choose to.

Um you've made many of the comments I was going to make introducing the folks, and I appreciate that.

Um I do want to add the thanks to uh the city administrator and the city controller for providing our staff because without that the job would not have been done.

Um in a moment I will be introducing Rachel Alonzo, who was our project director, and she'll be walking you through a very brief kind of summary of what was going on and what happened with the with the organizational process.

Um just a couple quick comments before that.

Questions that have come up as we've gone around and talked to people.

The the first question I think is did we exceed our mandate?

Um Proposition E said we should be convened to advise the mayor and the board on way on quote, ways to eliminate, consolidate, or limit the power and duties of appointed boards and commissions for the more effective, efficient, and uh economical administration of city and county government, unquote.

I believe we stayed within that mandate, but I also concede that what the task force did went much further than many of the advocates for Proppy had ever envisioned.

And so I do understand the disconnect that's there.

But that is why our work is being given to you to choose to do with what you asked you will.

The other question is did we engage enough?

And and is there ever enough in San Francisco?

Um we did hear from over a thousand people.

Our staff spent multiple, multiple hours talking to staff and advocates as we went through this process.

And I also realized that sometimes listening to is not the equivalent of agreeing with.

And people may not have felt listened to if we didn't agree with them, but we tried.

We made a number of changes to what's there, and it is before you in the next few months to deal with as you want to.

And with that, I will turn it over to Rachel to be giving you that brief presentation, and then we are all here for any questions or comments you might have.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

My name is Rachel Alonso.

I'm a project director in the city administrator's office.

As others have mentioned, I'm here to provide an overview of the Commission streamlining task force and its recommendations, which are based on over a year of work and informed by extensive public input.

There are people who agree and disagree with the recommendations, and I imagine many of you have heard from constituents with suggested improvements.

So my goal today is to explain the process and rationale for recommendations so we can hand it off to you to decide what should move forward.

And again, no offense taken if you want to make changes.

I have been expecting that the whole time.

Next slide, please, Liam.

Thank you.

So today's presentation will cover four areas.

I'm gonna try to keep it quick.

Next slide.

Quick orientation.

Next slide.

So voters passed Prop E in November 2024, which created a commission streamlining task force and gave it a very clear, three-fold mandate per the bolded green text on the top of the slide.

So the first thing is to focus on changing public meeting bodies, which can include the elimination and merger of bodies or changes to their powers and duties.

The second part of the mandate is about that any changes should be for the goal to meet the goal of improving the administration of city government.

And then third, the mayor and the board have the final say.

The task force made recommendations to the mayor and the board.

It is now up to you.

Today is the handoff.

So because of the mandate, recommendations are only about public meeting bodies.

I do want to note that up front.

We intentionally made sure not to touch anything specific to departments, although in some cases it is hard to delineate between the two, but the task force was very cautious about that.

Then at the bottom of the slide, we just have information about the five task force members, and they were supported by staff from the city administrator and controllers' offices.

Next slide, please.

So Prop E itself set out a series of deadlines, and the first was to convene in January 2025.

And I know that a year may sound like a lot of time, but it was actually a really fast-paced project.

Over the last month or so, we submitted our final report and nearly 500 pieces of legislation to the clerk of the board's office.

Today's meeting fulfills the mandate of Prop E to have a hearing about the task force's report, recommendations, and charter amendment.

And I'll come back at the end of this presentation to talk about next steps for each piece of legislation, but again, no decisions are being made today.

This is just informational and discussion.

Next slide.

So this one provides a quick orientation to the universe of the 152 public meeting bodies under discussion today.

Some of those bodies are in the charter, but most are in code.

And some are decision-making or oversee departments, but most are advisory.

And regardless of their role or the establishing authority, we know that public bodies can help our government stay transparent and accountable.

However, many of them have existed for decades without meaningful evaluation and may be duplicative or have outlived their useful purpose.

Meanwhile, different characteristics of the bodies make the commission system as a whole confusing and difficult to engage with.

Best practices have been cons uh uh have been applied inconsistently.

Next slide.

So now we'll review the task force's primary goals and the public process that led us here today.

Next slide.

So again, Prop E charged the task force with making recommendations about changing, eliminating, or combining public bodies to improve the administration of city government.

The work this work was guided by four key principles for the task force.

So first was about increasing accountability, and that means clarifying who's responsible for key city decisions so that San Franciscans can more easily hold their elected officials accountable.

The second key principle is about creating greater consistency in the commission system so that it's more accessible and understandable to the public.

Third key principle is responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars.

In one fiscal year alone, city staff supported over 1,500 commission meetings, often repeating the same presentations across overlapping bodies.

By consolidating where appropriate, we can reduce duplication and focus staff time where it matters most.

And then last but not least is elevating and coordinating public input.

And that's not about reducing participation, but it's about strengthening it actually.

So right now, voices are spread across 152 bodies, and that can lead to fragmented conversations.

So by creating clearer, better structured forums, public input input can be more strategic and more influential.

And that leads me to my next slide, which is about the importance of public input and stakeholder engagement for the task force's effort.

So we did work hard to cast as wide a net as possible within Prop use time constraints.

As the chair said, you can never do enough outreach in San Francisco.

But I do want to thank each supervisor for meeting with us and staying engaged throughout the process.

We stayed in touch with your offices and asked your aides to help spread the word about our meetings and recommendations.

We also sent a survey to all departments to help supplement our understanding of the city's commissions, hosted a workshop with commission secretaries who work directly with these bodies, and notified department heads and key staff about upcoming meetings so that they could help us spread the word to their commissions and other stakeholders.

We maintained a website to ensure that there was a single source of truth and transparency about the task force's work.

And at the height of our work, that website received over 1,200 monthly views.

And knowing that the public deserved advanced notice about our recommendations because of how impactful they might be, we shared those recommendations one and a half weeks before each meeting.

And that strategy did seem to work because people really showed up prepared to speak about details.

They have shown up again today, you see them here.

We had over 26 meetings, and one of those was hosted off site in the Bayview.

We heard from over 300 people, provide over 600 public comments, in addition to receiving more than 700 pieces of written feedback.

And I do want to stress that today's hearing is the culmination of a long process that was fully in the public view.

Of course, there are people who agree and disagree about the task force's recommendations, and that means that they're paying attention, and it's to be expected given the breadth of complexity of this work.

Next slide.

So public engagement occurred throughout a structured year-long review process.

And again, a year may sound like a long time, but it really wasn't given how much there was to tackle.

It took time to thoughtfully analyze 152 bodies and meeting at least every two weeks, sometimes into the evening, was a significant time commitment for task force members who balanced this work alongside their other responsibilities.

First, we compiled a comprehensive list of this of the city's public bodies, which actually didn't exist before.

After that, the task force developed common standards for different types of bodies to help guide staff's analysis.

We started reviewing each body one by one in the fall, and those were grouped by policy area so that similar bodies could be discussed together.

And at the end of the year, the task force reviewed its preliminary decisions and buttoned up loose ends so the report and legislation could be submitted in early 2026.

Next slide.

So how was each body analyzed?

By using objective criteria, and those covered whether bodies were legally required, meeting often, duplicative or narrowly focused.

And this evaluation was simply one piece of a larger process.

We wanted to apply the same thinking to each body.

As I said before, the task force knew better than to rely on one five one size fits all solutions.

So the final decisions were nuanced and tailored to the needs of individual bodies after much deliberation and public input.

Next slide.

So using a deliberate public process and objective analysis as an anchor for the work, the task force developed its recommendations, which I'll dive into now.

The recs fall into four key areas, and the first, next slide.

The first is to reduce the number of commissions from 152 to 87.

We did not approach this with a set number in mind.

We knew that each body deserved individual thought and analysis.

And again, Prop E did contemplate this type of change, even mentioning that some commissions have fulfilled their original mandates, outlived their useful purposes, or are duplicative of each other.

Most of the bodies identified for elimination are inactive and in code rather than charter, or they're groups comprised of city staff.

These decisions were made for three primary reasons.

So, first, the perspective that fragmented and duplicative public meeting bodies dilute each other's impact.

Having a smaller universe of bodies can actually strengthen the commission system by allowing those that are kept to be more visible and robust venues for public participation.

Second, some bodies have already achieved their stated purpose, such as the post-earthquake rebuild City Hall Preservation Advisory Committee.

Then finally, some bodies, such as IPIC and the Dignity Fund Service Providers Working Group, could continue meeting informally via passive meeting bodies, don't need to be codified.

Next slide.

The second recommendation is the moving approximately 20 bodies from the charter to the administrative code.

And this maintains the existence of those bodies while placing any future changes within the city's regular legislative process, which still requires public hearings like these, public input, and a vote of the board, instead of requiring costly and time-consuming citywide ballot campaigns to make changes.

Next slide.

The third recommendation is to clarify and update commission responsibilities, including allowing the mayor to hire and fire most department heads and changing commissioner appointment and removal processes.

These changes were made for two primary reasons.

So first, voters expect to be able to hold the mayor accountable for departmental performance.

And second, commission should be seen as an extension of the executive branch.

Most commissions are not intended to serve as a check and balance over the mayor's authority, although there are certainly exceptions for bodies like civil service, ethics, elections, and retirement.

Next slide.

The task force also categorized most bodies as either decision making or advisory, and both of those provide a crucial public forum.

The task force wanted to treat them differently.

Next slide.

So the fourth and final recommendation is about aligning most bodies to specific standards.

That includes making many seat qualifications desirable instead of required, since it has been challenging to find candidates and to allow good, effective people to serve their city.

Second is adding three-year sunset dates to most advisory bodies, and that does not mean that bodies must automatically disband, just that their workload and purpose will be regularly evaluated.

Generally, the task force also recommends that members serve for no more than 12 years on any single body in order to allow for broader participation and fresh perspectives.

The task force also addressed how commissioners are removed.

Since no one has been successfully removed for cause in at least 40 years, most appointments are recommended to be at will with four cause protections limited to bodies that need more insulation, like civil service, ethics, and the board of appeals.

The task force also proposes simplifying the four cause removal process by removing the ethics commission hearing and reducing the board vote threshold from nine to six.

Next slide.

Next slide, almost done here.

So final recommendations include some miscellaneous items, uh, leaving compensation and benefits decisions to your discretion, proposing some naming conventions.

The final report also identifies ways for the city to better manage public meeting bodies, including faster appointments, more training, and better information management about meeting rooms and commission details.

Next slide.

It is up to you if you want to introduce a modified version of the charter amendment.

It would go through the normal legislative process in May and June.

You have until July to decide to place it on the ballot for the November election.

Next slide.

And next slide.

So the task force was able to directly introduce an ordinance regarding code changes.

That happened earlier this month.

It's currently on a 30-day hold, and I imagine there will be another hearing about it sometime in April.

And again, that will take effect in early June, unless eight of you vote to reject it.

And you could also amend it, but that would also require eight votes to pass.

Next slide.

And that is the end.

And thank you for the to the task force members for their dedication and Chief Assistant City Attorney John Givner for agreeing to take on this effort.

I'm joined today by the board appointed chair Ed Harrington, you already heard from him, as well as other task force members.

We'd be happy to take your questions and thank you again for your time and attention.

Thank you, uh Ms.

Lonzo.

I'm gonna start with with a question and then hand it over to Supervisor Walton.

I wonder if maybe Chair Harrington could come back up.

Um not all of your decisions were unanimous.

Right.

In some cases, you were in the minority.

Um I wonder if you could talk a little bit about the areas where there was not unanimity and if you could sort of capture the flavor of kind of the issues where the um task force might not have been united.

Certainly, and if I can take advantage of the time to also kind of walk through a bit about who we've heard from and where people are unhappy with the results that we can merge the two together.

Yes.

Um I would group them in a variety of ways, but the most concerned, starting with that.

There's four groups that are currently in the charter that the task force recommended move to the administrative code.

That's the Commission on Status of Women, Human Rights Commission, Environment Commission, and Youth Commission.

Those commissions have all expressed an interest in staying in the charter.

They do not want to be taken out of the charter.

Um those were ones that I think both substantively and symbolically that was a terms of opinion in terms of our group.

There was a sense that the flexibility was needed for some of these, and they could that flexibility could be given in the administrative code.

And going to the administrative code was not a demotion.

Clearly, people felt differently about that point of view.

The next grouping are three areas: homelessness, children, youth and families, and aging and disability, where there have been an accumulation of charter and administrative code and other code groups built up over the years.

Some by initiative, some by board action, and some before departments even existed that that are now handling those kind of things.

We made an attempt to go ahead and group those bodies together and try to rearrange them into a way that we thought at least would be more appropriate and would take advantage of all the knowledge of the people that were involved.

Clearly there's people who don't believe in that, and I'm hoping that the board will take advantage of that and talk to folks about what's the right grouping.

I am hoping that we don't just say the right grouping already exists.

I'm not sure that's true.

I think that there's a better way to do it, but I'm not sure it's necessarily the way that we chose to do it.

So I'm hoping the board can work on that.

Um there are some general view issues at will commissioners hiring firing authority department heads.

Um a lot of discussion has happened about that.

I don't need to repeat the feelings on that.

There are a couple of issues specific in terms of public safety, the police employ discipline, employee discipline and police department, and the Sheriff's Department Oversight, subpoena power, split appointment breakdown being in the charter, those kind of things.

Those are the largest ones that I've heard the most about.

The next grouping are ones that people clearly have concerns about, but it's a smaller group of people who have expressed those concerns.

Um that would be the Arts Commission, restoring its we left the Art Commission in the Charter, but we took its duties and made them in go into the administrative code for flexibility.

Some members of the Art Commission community would like that restored back to the Charter.

The Ethice Commission, we had a lot of discussion about the ethics commission's access to the ballot.

Not the general aspects of the Ashes Commission, but just the access to the ballot.

I'm sure that will come up.

The Building Inspection Commission, we heard from several some some people, but not a big outcry in terms of leaving that in the charter.

And the same with the Small Business Commission.

The areas that I've heard little or no concern about until maybe I mentioned them today, and we'll see what happens.

But um the vast majority of the changes we made to city codes in terms of eliminating the groups that are in the city code, we have heard very little comment about most of those.

You could put on one hand the comments that people have directed about those kinds of things.

You know, outside those three groupings of children, homeless, and um aging.

Um but most of what we did in the in the in the code was inactive staff groups, those kind of things.

We did vote to eliminate the public works commission and the sanitation and streets commissions.

We heard only one comment that I recall, and that was from the chair of the public works commission, encouraging us to dissolve her commission.

Um we heard we heard very little about moving some bodies from charter to code, uh, surprisingly in some cases, but that would be the Human Services Commission, the Entertainment Commission, the MTA Citizens Advisory Council, Park and Recreation Open Space Advisory Council, Citizens General Obligation Bond Oversight, PUC Rate Fairness Board, the Department of Children, Youth and Their Families, Service Providers, Working Groups.

If you look at the total, when we say there's 1,500 people doing this, 295 are in this one group.

You can't have a Brown Act group with 295 people in it.

So that was changed to seven people, and I think there's some general agreement on that.

The abatement appeals board and the access appeals board moving around a bit but keeping their authority.

Um the final one was that we've heard very little about is dropping seat-specific experience requirements.

There are a number of um commissions and committees in the city.

Someone raised the issue about the ballot simplification committee, and why would we make those generic kind of requirements as opposed to specific?

I looked at the board's website the last couple of days.

Four of the five members are officially inact inactive.

They're not even officially in the positions they happen to keep coming because they want to be good people.

So there's a there's a reason to change that so that we can actually have these things staffed up.

And I think those are the those are the things that we've heard.

Those are the kind of comments that we've been hearing from people, and again, happy to answer any further questions you might have.

Thank you, Chair Harrington.

Supervisor Walton.

Thank you, President Mandelman.

I just have one question and some very brief comments.

Well, at least I consider them brief.

Um But I I there was a statement about having another hearing at some point.

And I want to know, is that a mandate or is that just something that the task force is suggesting?

You do not have to have any hearing on the ordinance.

That can go through, or you can have a hearing on that, and you don't have to have any hearing on a charter amendment unless someone here introduces one.

Okay, because the statement was made.

So I would just happen, but there is no requirement.

Got it.

Well, I think that's a lot to speak towards, you know, part of my feelings about the task force.

One, I want to thank the task force for your dedication and your commitment to the work.

I I truly believe that you took the work very seriously.

I also truly believe that you involved the public.

So I do want to I do want to state that because I I feel that I should say something positive about the work that you did.

Um I do also 100 percent think that you exceeded the mandate and inserted opinions and politics into the process, for sure.

Um I also want to say that the task force was about as diverse as a stack of one dollar bills.

Um it wasn't diverse at all.

And it's almost disheartening for sure in San Francisco, but very hurtful to have seen all the work that we have all done for so many years to have diverse voices at the table in this city, and to see that task force lack any diversity was was very harmful.

Um it's not your fault.

It's not members of the task force fault, but it's a lot of people's fault that this task force was so devoid of any type of diversity.

Uh I know San Francisco is changing.

I know the welcome diversity is not the same as it used to be, but that should be completely unacceptable in a city like San Francisco, and I have to say that.

And proposing to change bodies that communities voted on, um, that are in the charter, proposing to eliminate independent oversight of law enforcement bodies, all those things are just mind-boggling to me, that that is something that could come from a body of folks that I consider to be highly intelligent.

You know, working to decrease the diversity on commissions and committees, even as unintended consequences, is downright scary for a person who looks like me in San Francisco.

Um could somebody be more efficient?

Could somebody's operate operate different?

Of course.

But achieving efficiency at the expense of diversity, at the expense of community voice, at the expense of coordination, at the expense of respect for various incomes, that is not what anybody intended to be from this process.

And so I just want to say that some of what I see, um, not all, but some of what I see is not only acceptable but almost criminal to what the consequences will be to communities in this city.

And I hope that people are aware of that.

Um this is not attack on the task force, but it's certainly attack on people who want to attack the very fabric of this city.

And I think I know some people are gonna say that, you know, I may be going too far with my comments, I may be going too far, but what I see, but but I can read very well.

Um and I also know this city very well.

And I also know what change looks like very well.

And I also know what the lack of inclusion looks like.

And in 2026, we have to do better in in San Francisco.

And if the leadership of this city is okay with what took place with this task force, that's a problem for me, and I have to make sure that I say that on the record.

Thank you, President Mendelman.

There is a lot of work to get through for this hearing.

So we just asked, pursuant to the board's rules of order, no sounds of a uh something you can associate with and you're proud of, and it were no sounds of something that you are not happy with.

Just wave your hands if you'd like to show support.

Thank you.

Supervisor Cheryl.

Thank you, President Mendelman.

Um mean to make you stand there.

Someone else can answer this also.

Um but uh you know, there are obviously um a huge number of individual bodies that this report touches, and so we'll have to make individual decisions on those.

But as we go through those, how should um how should we think about using this report as a general framework as we go through decision-making processes?

Well, clearly you can read the entire thing and wing it, but I would think that you would be getting more from your constituents saying those are the things we're happy about and unhappy about.

There's the listing in the front that's alphabetical, and you can go to those, and that gives you a link to the actual reasoning behind our decisions and what that might be.

So in some cases you'll see this group has not met in four years.

There's some groups that have never met.

They were they were approved, but never no one was ever appointed.

There are other ones where there are, as I said, those groupings, and we've tried to group those together, but we also have some handouts or worksheets that we can give you to help you kind of say, why did you take these five groups and make it into these four?

And we can go through that with you and our staff and we will be happy to do that.

Um but since it is so involved, I would expect that you would you would concentrate on things where you will hear from people today and your constituents will say this is something that I don't like or this is something I do like, and then again, we would be happy to kind of give you more information about why we we made the the proposal we made, if that makes sense.

Yeah, that does.

Thank you.

Um my last question on page eight, you had guiding principles of the streamlining effort.

There were four guiding principles you listed here.

I won't read them.

But of those, are are there any that you would specifically say, hey, really keep in mind that you know this is something that we really thought was especially important as a guiding principle of the report.

There was a couple of things.

Other recommendations, right?

And again, this is not one I think we have universal agreement on.

But the idea of accountability and checks and balances in the city.

Um we very early on made a decision that we had a conversation about what is the reason for commissions to exist.

And clearly public engagement was one of the clear ones.

But the other choice was our commission set up to be a check and balance on the mayor.

And what we came up with was we've we decided that some are ethics, civil service, elections, some of those kind.

But the real checks and balances are the Board of Supervisors, the controller, the city attorney, all the city administrator, all those kinds of things.

And we did not believe that every other commission set up in the city was automatically set up to say no to the mayor, that there was a reason that the mayor was in charge of the city and elected, and that most commissions should be appointed by the mayor and or the board, and the board had the right to veto those appointments, but that when all is said and done, you should offer the advice to the mayor because he obviously or she expects that from you.

But at the end of the day, the mayor should win that argument if if there is an argument about what should happen.

So that was one of the key ones.

And as Rachel said, public engagement, this may not sound like a deal, but there are there are some organizational structures in the city where you have to go to so many different groups to be heard that having one important and official group as opposed to five random groups actually we thought would improve the ability of the city to hear from people and take action.

Great, thank you.

And to all the members of the commission, thank you for your hard work and also to the staff to Rachel.

Uh, thank you for working so hard on this.

Thank you.

Supervisor Dorsey.

Thank you, President Mandelman.

And I just want to say thank you to everybody for their work on this.

I will confess that um of the ballot measures that contemplated changes to um streamlining commissions.

This isn't the one that uh that I supported.

And largely that that was because there was an argument that this was there was no guarantee that passing this would accomplish anything, and I actually uh I feel that uh the people who have worked on it have proved me wrong, and I'm happy to be proven wrong.

I think you've done some really great work on this.

So I think I think we can probably all agree that uh we're not happy with all of it, but I think I don't think there was ever an expect uh an expectation that you were going to achieve that.

There's a couple things I want to just um tease out, because I you mentioned, I believe, uh Mr.

Harrington, the um arts commission was kept in the charter as there shall be an arts commission.

Um but some of the responsibilities, prescriptive elements were moved to the administrative code.

And I'm I'm wondering if that's a model to address some of the other um commissions as well.

I uh I spent much of my career just for colleagues uh in the city attorney's office, so I just have a lot of access to grind about things that we have put into charter or chart the charter or otherwise enacted um at the ballot box that we can't change now because we have to go back to voters every time there's just a minor change.

It felt to me like the arts commission solution was an elegant one that assures the commission that this is reflects our values that we're going to have this, but we're not gonna tie our hands if we want to make changes to better serve the arts in San Francisco.

Is that something we should be thinking about for the youth commission, department or environment, department on the state or commission on the status of women?

Thank you for the question, Supervisor.

The um we did have a lot of discussion about that, and we could only adjust commissions, we could not adjust departments, so that was part of the issue.

So in some cases, we recommended that a commission be brought to the city to the code, but the department's still in the charter.

And if you're talking about flexibility and managing the city, it's really the departments and the and the inflexibility of having departments in the charter that makes that so difficult.

It also can be difficult because of the number and the just amount of just stuff related to the commissions.

I bring it to two things.

One is power and the other is trust.

If you have power and you trust people, you would like less in the charter and more in the code to give you flexibility.

If you don't have power and historically have not had power, or you have real trust issues in terms of what the city is doing, you would like the relative certainty of being in the charter.

And that's not just for your commission, but it's for all the duties of that commission.

And I think that's the that's the two sides of one coin that we were dealing with the entire time.

We thought for the Arts Commission, that would be a possible model that leaving the Art Commission in the Charter to recognize that we value the whole idea of arts in San Francisco, but putting the details into the administrative code, which would allow the board and the mayor over time to change those things as were required and not having to go back to the board was a more elegant solution.

I I don't know how much agreement there is on that, but that was in theory a model.

And we did we got to it late in the process.

Okay.

The other I just wanted to tease out also just the process.

On some of the the on the police commission and discipline.

Um my reaction to it when I saw it, it felt to me like this was a solution in search of a problem.

I I haven't over the years going back.

I mean, I worked in the SFPD for a couple of years, but have been familiar with the police commission going back to my former boss, Dennis Herrero, when he was uh on the police commission.

I my sense is that um the disciplinary process that the police commission has run over the years has been a good one that's fair.

Um other than you know, I guess it was just what I'm reading here is that this was just to sort of align it with the practice of the fire commission.

Is there more to that?

I'm just trying to unpack what was the move to to take it away from the police commission.

There's a couple of parts to that.

Um you may have felt it ran very, very well.

We have not heard that universally.

So there have been criticisms of the police discipline process for taking way too long.

There are some cases that take years and years.

There have been criticisms of having a police commissioner with minimal training to the evidentiary hearings, and then having an administrative law judge at the very end of the process.

And so one of the changes was maybe the administrative law judge should do the evidentiary hearing and not a somewhat trained commissioner doing that.

It is absolutely the case in every place else, every other department in the city except police and fire, that the department head has a critical role in discipline.

So why shouldn't the police chief have a critical role in discipline with an appeal to the to this commission?

So we tried to rearrange it to make sense of that.

Um this was one of those that I did vote against, not so much because I didn't think our process made more sense than the current one, but because we were the wrong people making the decision.

That this we were we it's a p it's uh innately a political decision, and we were adding a technical response to it.

And I would hope that the police commission, the police chief, the POA, the ACLU, and others would look at it themselves and say, is this is this the best we could do?

We had a proposal.

I do not expect that will be in the Charter Amendment.

Um but I do I don't think we should just say what we have right now works.

I don't believe it does.

I don't do believe that it works as well as it could.

Okay.

Great.

That's it.

Thanks.

Thank you, Supervisor Dorsey.

With that, Madam Clerk, I think we can open this item to public comment.

Yes, Mr.

President.

Uh at this time, the board welcomes your public comment.

You can line up on your right-hand side of the chamber.

Before we go to the speakers who are present in the chamber, we do have through a prior arrangement, uh, first speaker who will be a caller requesting an ADA accommodation to my staff.

If you're ready, please send the caller through.

We are setting the timer for two minutes.

Welcome, caller.

Can you hear me to the open?

Yes, we can.

All right, here we go.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

Uh Patrick Lynette Shaw.

It is widely thought that the streamlining task force has become first bully.

As I indicated a written testimony submitted for today's meeting.

The Board of Supervisors should ignore incorrect information in the streamlining task force is powerful presentation today.

That proposition allows the board of supervisors.

That proposition allows the Board of Supervisors maybe duplicate or amend the charter amendment or proposed ordinance by date votes, meaning a two-thirds supermajority.

That is not what the proposition states.

The task force was pulling the Board of Supervisors.

Proposition he stated an ordinance would go into effect 90 days after the date of introduction.

Unless two-thirds of all members of the Board of Supervisors vote to disapprove the ordinance.

That's a property.

He was totally silent on duplication of any legislation.

Duplication of file in the board's rules of order states at the request of any supervisor.

Prior to the roll call for action on a matter, the president or the chair of a committee shall order a file duplicate.

The task force clearly didn't know duplication of a final or matter is the sole privilege of a single supervisor.

And it doesn't require a vote at all.

So much for the bullies.

Rather than pro style reforms voters expected the prop.

Task force developed and submitted prompt.

A style recommendation in its final report to this board.

The Board of Supervisors should carefully duplicate both the proposed charter amendment and the initial proposed ordinance submitted.

The board should schedule a full round of hearings to reconsider recommendations in the duplicated files made by this five-member task force of appointed members who aren't accountable to San Francisco voters.

During a town hall event on March 11th, 2026, sponsored by real reformists.

And the San Francisco League of Women Voters.

Failure by the Board of Supervisors to reject many of the streamlining task forces' recommendations will be sufficient ground to oppose this proposed charter amendment.

Voters expect robust Board of Supervisors revisions to the streamlining task force's recommendation.

He heard a detailed rules committee public hearings.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

All right.

Welcome to our first person who is in the chamber.

Is that you, Margaret Brodkin?

Welcome.

Welcome.

Thank you.

I'm Margaret Brodkin, and I have bragged that I am the only person in the city who's been a department head, DCYF, a member of two commissions.

I'm currently president of juvenile probation, and a leader of several groundbreaking campaigns to create bodies in the charter.

In 1991, the Children, Youth and Families Commission was passed and created, and it has become a model for the country.

I have spent the last decade working with cities and counties throughout the state and country to replicate what we've done in San Francisco because it's considered a model.

Cities literally take the language in our charter, which is a model for planning and oversight and put it in their own charters.

Our charter is a declaration of our values.

Taking commissions out does not create efficiencies.

It doesn't mean less work.

It only makes our commitment to issues subject to political whims.

Let's not join the anti-woke movement by taking a chainsaw to the values embedded in our charter.

I urge you to put the two children and youth commissions that have been taken out back in the charter.

Nothing reflects our values more than our commitment to our children and the future.

Thank you, Commissioner Brocken, for your comments.

Let's welcome our next speaker.

No applause, please.

If you'd like to show your support as such.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Good afternoon.

My name is Hope Williams and Ms.

Williams.

Can you speak directly into that?

Sorry.

It's been a long time.

We really want to hear you.

Thank you.

My name is Hope Williams.

I am a resident of Treasure Island.

I am also a third generation resident of San Francisco.

And I want to thank you, Supervisor Walton.

You brought tears to my eyes because that is the truth.

To hear that you would put the human rights under a blanket that you would eliminate community advisory boards.

Efficiency does not mean that it actually does work.

And my role and my advocacy on the island was stripped away.

All I got was an email and said, thank you for your time.

You're no longer, you're no longer your service and time is no longer needed.

That is not how we should engage community.

That is not.

If we're talking about bringing back a strong city, we need to value the voices in the people that are here.

We need to give them.

We are trying to survive.

So that is not that you can see we're trying to just make it on a daily basis.

So when you look at this, really what we're asking for community, it's for more engagement, more opportunity.

And to leave a place that my young ones will be able to take value.

I brought them because I wanted to see what side of history you were going to stand on.

Were you really going to stand on the value of community first?

Thank you, Hope Williams.

Both your charter and administrative code is a situation enjoyed by people in high income brackets.

I demonstrated years ago.

Administration after administration.

50% of all housing opportunities that comes out of the mayor's office on housing is supposed to be for very low and low-income bracket people.

I explained that to you, Walton, when I got you elected and had Jane Keys to the United States.

Can you address your comments to the board as a whole?

It is a whole.

You let everybody ride the Muni Transportation System for free.

You can't get no dumber than that.

You got the St.

Patrick's Day parade.

People who will use the Muni Transportation are paying their fare, and as a result, it's been predicted that this day pertaining to St.

Patrick's Day Parade will bring in $7.5 billion.

If not correcting the negative cash flow debt that Muni has, you could have put a bit in that.

And women's month.

I'm the one that got rid of the statute of limitations on rape.

How come none of you standing up about men playing in female sports?

This is about the streamlining task force's report.

Yeah, the streamlined task force, those are the issues that I want you to handle, and that's why I'm speaking the way I'm doing.

Okay?

Is that clear?

All this is derivative on what I'm talking about, and that task force needs to focus in on does some on that set of the code.

Thank you, Mr.

Wright.

Mr.

Wright, you know the rules here.

You're always welcome, but within two minutes, sir.

Thank you.

And I will just give information to everyone when I say please combine your remarks to the board as a whole.

That means you are not speaking to supervisors directly.

That means you're talking to all members of the board.

Thank you.

Everybody and the other thing.

Thank you, Mr.

Wright.

Let's hear from our next speaker.

Welcome, sir.

Come on up to the podium.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

My name is Douglas Engman.

As some of you know, I was president of the Planning Commission and President of the Board of Appeals many years ago.

I was also a member of the real reform committee, which defeated the disastrous Property and created Prop E.

Prop E and the task force worked very, very hard, but they took an academic approach to looking at, and it was basically the easiest way to take a look at 154 commissions and try and categorize them.

But as been noted here, that's an academic issue.

We are in the middle of a political issue.

And when you have the president of this country attacking DEI, attacking services for families and children, attacking uh climate change as a hoax.

How can we as a city and you as commissioners demote the Human Rights Commission, the Human Services Commission, the Disability and Agency Services Commission, the Children's and Families Commission, the Youth Commission, the Department of the Commission on the Environment.

It's the wrong message.

As a member of the group that supported Prophe, what we hope would happen is yes, there are things in the Charter that these voters approved that need to be changed.

But you ought to do it on a commission by commission basis, looking at what's in the the code, I mean what's in the charter and decide what to transfer it out and make those changes.

And that's what we had hoped happened.

The task force didn't have the time to do that.

The charter is our constitution.

Cities around the country are looking at us.

Are we going to uphold our constitution or not?

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments, Douglas Angman.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Hello, my name is Laura Stein, and I'm speaking on behalf of the League of Women Voters.

The League members urge you to vote no on the proposed changes suggested by the communication stream or commission streamlining task force.

The one size fits most, or we might say two sizes fit most templates approach utilized by the task force would remove power from historically marginalized and unrepresented underrepresented groups whose voices should be amplified and uplifted, especially in today's troubling times.

Specifically, we urge you to protect women's voices on the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force.

Removing the League's nominated seat on this task force would not only undercut vital representation, but broadcast that the San Francisco government leaders are abandoning their support for long-fought and continually defended rights for women to participate meaningfully in our local government.

The League of Women Voters has been among the most committed organizations to the Sunshine Task Force and has ensured that its seat is consistently filled with high caliber members who demonstrate diligence and commitment to implementing the Sunshine Ordinance.

We also ask that you keep nonpartisan, the nonpartisan and trusted voice of the League of Women Voters on the ballot simplification committee.

League members bring experience with plain language and effective engagement as well as knowledge of voter empowerment to the BSC.

Their nominees have added much diversity to the committee.

The League has appointed thoughtful, qualified, and dedicated members to the BSC for decades, sourcing nominees who are truly independent.

We also urge that you retain the independence of the Commission on the status of women.

Despite its small size, it is one of the most diverse bodies in city government.

And we ask that you not remove their chartered independence or weaken their governance authority, which would compromise their ability to meaningfully provide oversight and accountability.

We also ask that you uphold checks and balances with the Ethics Commission, compromising their ability to place ballot measures before voters would undercut their independence and authority.

San Francisco needs strong independent institutions that ensure women, girls, and non-binary people are represented and heard in city decision making.

We urge you to reject the proposed changes put forth by the task.

Thank you, Laura Stein.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Hi, I'm Flo Kelly, and I work with a coalition on homelessness.

I live in uh District 9.

And I know we just had a lot of people recognized here.

And um I just want to recognize the people who are considered unhoused in this city and are working hard to keep themselves alive and supporting each other so that as a community they can stay alive.

I recognize their spirit, their community building, and their humanity.

San Francisco struggles to be a small D democratic city.

Citizen oversight through citizens sitting on boards and commissions is significant so that people can have a significant say about their own lives and the lives of their neighbors.

The thought of removing citizen participation is a step in the wrong direction.

San Francisco already has a strong mayoral run government.

If the mayor is concerned not to have his way, or he's concerned that it get to get something done, it just takes too long and has to be approved by so many people and commissions, that is just too bad.

That's just the way democracy works.

I work with the coalition on homelessness, as I said, and we need all five of our committees and commissions.

I I understand that one of the proposals is to make all of them just one commission.

That does not that would not work at all.

I worked to gather signatures for propsy in 2018 explaining how large business tax resipts from large businesses would be taxed, and that tax money would go to homeless services, 50 percent for permanent supportive housing, 25 percent for mental health service, 15 percent for homeless prevention, and 10 percent for short-term shelters.

And a lot of people were wondering why should I sign that?

Because there's no guarantee that that's gonna happen.

And I said, yes, there it is a guarantee.

It's part of the legislation.

It's gonna be a commission that would be called Our City, our home, and they would make sure that uh that the money would go the way it was supposed to go.

And that's one of the commissions that's being considered not to exist anymore.

Good grief.

So we have we were thrilled when we finally had the homeless oversight commission that actually had teeth and had to um approve HSH budgets, setting up performance standards, auditing service delivery, hold public hearings, formulate long-term policy goals.

It's it's really important that we keep things the way they are.

Thank you.

Thank you, Flo Kelly, for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

My name is Lucia Oregon.

I get the privilege to serve in the Immigrant Rights Commission, and I'm also the director of the San Francisco Latino Parity and Equity Coalition.

Today I also speak to you as an artist, a woman, and an immigrant that lives in San Francisco.

I want to share several equity concerns as you review the recommendations of this task force.

Efficiency in government is important, but it cannot come at the cost of community voice and civic engagement.

Many commissions in San Francisco were created through the years of community organizer organizing so communities can have a real seat at the table when decisions affect their lives and livelihoods.

I am very alarmed about the potential changes affecting the San Francisco Commission of the status of women.

Women in San Francisco continue to face disparities in economic opportunity and representation.

Structural changes should strengthen, not weaken the city's commitment to gender equity.

Their proposal to move small business commission from the charter to the administrative code raises serious concerns.

Many small businesses are immigrant owned and women owned.

That commission provides one of the few formal spaces where the entrepreneurs can influence policy around permitting commercial corridors and economic development.

Moving it out of the charter removes an important level of voter protection and it makes it easier for its structure and authority to change over time.

Proposed shifts in the arts commission is already affecting the arts ecosystem.

It has already impact how artists, musicians, small venues, and cultural organizations make their voices heard and access resources.

Finally, I want to raise two structural concerns.

First, the proposed change of appointment structures to make commissions more desirable should not come at the expense of expertise and lived experience.

These bodies work best when commissioners bring deep knowledge of the communities and issues they represent.

Second, the proposed three-year sunset reviews are simply too short.

Most commissioners, like myself, are volunteers.

We are not career politicians, and it often takes one to two years just to fully understand the policy landscape and departments involved.

A three-year cycle risk evaluating commissions before they have time to be effective.

Thank you, Commissioner Obregone, for your comments.

Welcome.

Hello, my name is Asia Nicole Duncan.

I was the campaign director for Prop E.

This was a very difficult task for the task force.

I know that all my advocates came to you all and wanted to have their opinions, and it was a long, long year for all of us and for you.

And I believe that balance was lost.

The recommendations undervalues the role of commissions that protect our communities, especially those focused on arts, children, youth, women, and our civil rights.

All of those that Chair Harrington has also mentioned, these bodies ensure accountability and community voice, regardless of who is in power.

I'm asking this board to correct the overreach.

San Franciscans did not want power concentrated in one office.

Our system is built on checks and balances for a reason.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Welcome to the next speaker.

Good afternoon.

My name is Steven Torres.

I'm the program manager for the Castro LGBTQ Cultural District, and I'm here to convey our strong support to preserving core oversight and equity commissions in the charter, along with keeping bodies as independent structures.

The Castro LGBTQ cultural district is dedicated to centering and uplifting queer people, places, and culture.

As such, we are invested in the role of commissions to provide important checks and balances that ensure racial, gender, and class equity from voices of the people in San Francisco City governmental conversations that affect our lives on a daily basis.

Queer communities all across the United States are under attack at the federal, state, and local levels, which makes community ability to advocate in policy discussions at the city level even more crucial than ever.

We are especially interested in supporting the preservation of the following commissions: the Entertainment Commission, the Human Rights Commission, the Youth Commission, Children, Youth, and their Families Oversight Advisory Committee, Commissions on the Commission on the Status of Women, Commission on the Environment, Disability and Aging Services Commission, Homelessness Oversight Commission, Small Business Commission, Building Inspection Commission, Sheriff's Department Oversight Board, Police Commission, Historic Preservation Commission, San Francisco Arts Commission.

On a personal note, I just want to add as a former commissioner that I echo the concern about special skills and knowledge not being important to these roles.

It's incredibly crucial and important.

And anything that would take that away or targeting targeting anything in the administrative code to remove power in that regard is just setting these bodies to be up to be sycophantic and not actually representing our people at all.

Thank you, Stephen Torres, for your comments.

Former San Selmo mayor, Paul Chignel, welcome.

Well, thank you, Ms.

Caville.

Um good afternoon, uh President Mandelman and members of the Board of Supervisors.

My name is Paul Chignel.

I'm a retired San Francisco police department captain who previously commanded Bayview Station, Ingleside Station, Terravell Station, managing hundreds of police officers, and also worked for many years in the tenderloin as a police officer and at Northern Station.

In the past few years, I have been the legal defense administrator for the San Francisco Police Officers Association.

In that capacity, I work closely with the police commission on discipline cases and supervise as well as assign our attorneys in discipline cases, and also work with our attorneys and the commission and the police chief in terms of changing policies in the police department.

The report from the Commission Streamlining Task Force on Charter Revision will seriously alter an effective and workable charter mandated discipline system for the SFPD.

And we urge the board to reject those proposed changes.

There are other changes that the streamlining task force has suggested that I know that we will probably embrace.

However, handing sole power to the chief of police for administrative discipline, including termination of employment, would be a severe impediment to due process for police officers.

The current system ensures accountability to discipline errant officers, fairness and civilian control.

I note that uh Commissioner Olias was here.

She had to depart, but I believe she'll come back to speak.

The weakening of police commission jurisdiction, which is proposed would dismantle the most important component of police reforms, which have occurred over the past ten years.

They've reduced the use of force, police shootings, and the progressive policies that we have supported, the defense bars supported, uh, and most importantly, the community support uh would be at risk if the commission power was taken away.

There is a nexus, lastly, between the comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Hi, I'm Officer McKernan.

I am currently president of the San Francisco Police Officers Pride Alliance, which advocates for queer trans and non-binary members.

I'm also a patrol officer in the Tenderland district.

I want to thank the Board of Supervisors for allowing me to speak on this proposal.

I and my fellow members are familiar with the current discipline process, and we do not support the proposed change to the current system.

I believe this proposal gives the chief total control over the discipline process, subjecting officers to one person's sole discretion and biases.

The discipline process is fair when there are multiple perspectives.

This also lessens civilian control and oversight.

Though San Francisco has been spared, I think we all have seen around the country what can happen when law enforcement does not have civilian oversight and accountability when it comes to discipline and uses of force.

Thank you.

Thank you, Officer McKiernan, for your comments.

Welcome.

Good afternoon.

President Amendment and the members of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.

My name is Mario Molina.

I'm a retired San Francisco police lieutenant and the president of the San Francisco Latino Peace Office Association, Metro Chapter.

I want to emphasize that everyone here supports accountability and appropriate appropriate discipline when miscunder occurs.

That is not the issue here.

The concern is ensuring that our disciplinary system remains fair, balanced, and consistent.

This change will also significant significantly diminish the role of the police commission as a civilian oversight body.

The Commission has long served as a representative voice for the communities of San Francisco in Madison policy and serious discipline.

I was police officer for 31 years, and I experienced that firsthand.

Independent review has long been important part of maintaining confidence in the disciplinary assistance, both for officers and for the public.

When a discipline is perceived as a fair, transparent and impartial strengths the trust in the system.

Our goal should be to maintain a strong accountability while also ensuring that the process remains balanced, consistent, and grounded in due process.

Thank you for your time and consideration on this.

Thank you for your comments.

Welcome to the next speaker.

Good evening to everybody.

I am currently homeless.

But unfortunately, at this time, some situations have happened, and you guys will be wondering why she's talking about shelter in this case, because unfortunately, last week somebody uh had the audacity to put uh pesticide in my room, which I wasn't notified.

And then I'm like, okay, let me call nine uh uh the officers I call and then they're like, okay, Miss Ms.

Alinas, we can all file a police report for pesticide, but we can follow I'm pausing your time for a moment.

And also so pausing your time for a moment.

All right.

Are you speaking about the shelter monitoring committee in that capacity?

Yes, okay.

That's what I'm about to go.

Okay.

I will be able to do that.

Sorry, I apologize, but this is my situation, my current situation right now.

So when I start asking everybody like whether I need the best way to go with this, because I mean there was pestis, I I have a burning eyes and uh, you know, symptoms that uh is unfortunately in my children too.

So they're like, there is a comedy, and I'm like, okay, I'm gonna go.

And I find out that that comedy is in this situation right now, and I am here to ask is a poor uh resident.

You know, they're gonna need this services.

That's my situation right now, and I would like to let you guys know that how important it is for us as a community to have these services.

And I cannot believe that it's it's gonna be the only chance I have is gonna be removed.

And to my understanding, the shelters are unique um institutions.

They house vulnerable populations but have no state data licensing requirements that makes oversight essentials, unlikely hospitals, nursing homes.

On a day, certain shelters in California do not require state licensing.

So we need committees like this once to really advocate for our uh children's and ourselves.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Kristen Evans.

Uh, the recommendations of the bureaucrat bureaucratic laden commission streamlining task force need to be considered in light of Mayor Laurie's proposal called strengthening executive branch accountability, which he's proposed to take the ballot in November.

The parallels between Washington, D.C.

and San Francisco are frighteningly similar.

In what brave new world do we think that billionaires are entitled to dictate the organization and resources of our government?

Our own billionaire mayor has proposed a sea change of charter reform after a hasty working group process that had public comment ignored and fully baked legislation posted online less than 24 hours from the last public comment submitted.

Cherry picking from this commission streamlining task force recommendations.

The mayor is staging an executive power grab, upending checks and balances, asking the Board of Supervisors and our city commissions to give up their oversight responsibilities.

And he would change our more than 100 year tradition of government oversight where commissions designed to thwart corruption and competence by shining in a light and creating transparency to departmental spending.

This mayor's initiative will not be heard by the Board of Supervisors, and it changes commission appointments to be at will instead of for cause, meaning that commissioners will be required to full-throatedly support executive positions or face removal.

This renders our commission's simple rubber stamps and removes accountability and is a slap in the face to community expertise.

This billionaire mayor is telling you he knows what's good for the women's commission, for the small business commission, for the human rights commission, and for the police commission.

Yet he has no experience being a woman or a small business owner or fighting for human rights and criminal justice reform.

Yet he thinks he is a king that knows best and should dictate us for all.

This ham fisted so-called charter reform process has been such a mess that has blatantly ignored ours of public comment because it had predetermined and politically motivated outcomes in mind.

That's why we should oppose all charter reform.

No kings in San Francisco.

For your comments.

Hold your applause, please.

We appreciate your enthusiasm.

Just hold your applause, please.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Good afternoon, members of the Board of Supervisors, Cynthia Gomez, Unite Here Local 2, the Hotel Workers Union.

The following unions have also asked to sign on to my comments.

The National Union of Healthcare Workers, IBEW Locals 6, and Local 1245.

We remain in firm opposition to the proposed requirements and the restriction to placing initiatives on the ballot.

In addition, we have real concern over proposals that impose term limits on commissioners and allow commissioners to be removed on an at-will basis.

These proposed amendments, which concentrate power away from the Board of Supervisors and toward the executive branch, would not only erode the political independence of those bodies, but they would remove the ability for commissioners to develop or exercise the institutional knowledge that's crucial to serving the interests of the city.

These changes would apply to a whole swath of commissions that allow for working people to have a voice and influence in city decisions, and it is working people who would most be affected.

The amendments are being characterized as anti-corruption and good government.

But in reality, they would do little more than allow the wealthy to vote away the power of working people.

Thank you for your comments.

Welcome to the next speaker.

Good afternoon and happy St.

Patrick's Day.

I'm Dennis Hendricks, a queer BIPOC community organizer.

Thank you, the task force and Chair Harrington in particular.

He did a really good public service here.

Sadly, my concern is that this was politically hijacked.

There were two issues.

One is that several SF services are handicapped by these changes.

And the other is that undemocratic engagement is at risk by how this process was managed.

Naturally, that's an oversimplification.

Cleanup is needed, and there's a strong start.

But decisions may be tough or unpopular.

But these cross over the mandate given to the task force and put the efficacy of the commissions at risk.

Transparency is not the same as listening.

And it's a dangerously undemocratic process.

Women, unhoused folks, and children need to be heard and not ignored.

Removing these groups from the charter is a dangerous change for vulnerable people and scares folks from empowering them in the way that of political engagement.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker.

Good afternoon, Board President Mandelman and members of the board.

My name is Gudrit Kantillis, Vice Chair of the San Francisco Immigrant Rights Commission, and I'm speaking in my personal capacity regarding the Commission Streamlining Task Force's recommendations.

I've already emailed each of you a detailed written comment with my research and archived documents about the Commission on the Status of Women, but I would like to share a brief sniffet snippet here as well.

The task force has recommended stripping the Commission on the status of women from a governance body to an advisory one, which is reflected in the proposed Charter Amendment revising Section 4.19 to state that the Commission shall be an advisory body and transferring it from the Charter to the Administrative Code.

The Commission on the Status of Women was created in 1975 to assess the status of women in San Francisco and investigate the systemic barriers preventing women from achieving equality due to discrimination and injustice.

Nearly 50 years later, those inequities have not disappeared.

Women, particularly immigrant women, women of color, single women, single mothers continue to face disparities in economic security, safety, health concerns, health outcomes, and representation in leadership.

So we need the Commission on Status of Women to be untouched.

I want to be clear.

Why are we weakening civilian oversight from commissions that serve marginalized communities and commissions that are actually working?

The Commission on the Status of Women, the Police Commission, the Youth Commission existing because the communities they represent deserve a voice within the city government.

San Francisco has long been a national leader on gender equity.

We were the first in the United States to sign to implement actually CDO.

So as the Board of Supervisors considers these recommendations and amendments, please take this moment to ask a broader question.

Will we weaken the structures that were created to protect us?

Or will we choose the right side?

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Chaudry, for your comments.

Welcome to the next speaker.

Hi.

Having been born and raised in Dallas, Texas, I understand how important community oversight is in government and the consequences when we strip it away for the sake of efficiency.

Independent commissions are a part of the fabric of San Francisco's democracy.

They were embedded into the city government and charter in the late 1800s when San Francisco was becoming a city and strengthened after Harvey Milk was killed for the crime of being gay.

When government prioritizes efficiency over democracy, they leave our most vulnerable behind.

We all deserve a government that supports citizens, not efficiency.

Stop the toxification of San Francisco government.

Thank you.

Thank you, Samantha Chavez, for your comments.

Welcome to the next speaker.

Good afternoon.

My name is Sophia Andari, and I'm a commissioner on the Commission on the Status of Women, speaking in my personal capacity.

So I joined the Commission to ensure that underrepresented communities have a real seat at the table.

The Commission on the Status of Women must remain a government's commit a governance commission in the charter with all of its current authority.

Converting it to an advisory committee would strip its authority, weaken community voices, and undermine its purpose.

The recommendations from the Commission Streamlining Task Force ignored the many community members who gave public comment.

And sadly, the task force lacked diversity and representation.

Commissions must retain their hiring and firing authority.

The mayor already hires the department heads.

We just get involved in the process.

And it also ensures transparent and community-centered leadership.

And giving the mayor's sole authority to remove commissioners without cause would undermine independence, and it sets a dangerous precedent.

Strong oversight, checks and balances, community representation are essential to a healthy democracy.

Please do not be short-sighted or allow authoritarianism to take root in our city.

You have the power.

Now please have the courage to do what is right for our communities.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Andari, for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Hello, my name is Olivia Hoffman, and I'm here representing Community Forward San Francisco, who also co-chairs the San Francisco Women's Housing Coalition, which recently produced one of the largest data sets on women experiencing homelessness and violence in San Francisco.

I want to start by saying that today is the 70th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women.

It's happening right now at the United Nations headquarters in New York City, and the 2026 priority is ensuring and strengthening access to justice for all women and girls, focusing on removing legal barriers and enhancing equality.

And yet, in this room right now, we're considering reducing the power of our very body, tasked with the same thing the Commission on the Status of Women.

That is not streamlining.

We cannot weaken gender oversight when we are in a gendered crisis.

The data in our citywide survey that I mentioned before showed us that 74% of women reported experiencing violence while unhoused in our city.

It also showed us that domestic violence is the number one driver of homelessness in this city.

San Francisco is facing a gendered public safety crisis.

Weakening the Commission on the Status of Women sends the message that gender-based violence and inequity are not core governance priorities in this city.

If 74% of women are experiencing violence while unhoused, the answer is more accountability, not less.

Thank you.

Thank you, Olivia Hoffman, for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Good afternoon, Commissioners.

I mean, sorry, supervisors.

My name is Annie Rivera.

I am a commissioner on the Department on the Status of Women.

And I'm here in a personal capacity to urge you not to accept the recommendation put forth by the streamlining commission task force.

I urge you to meet with constituents to further understand the impacts and destabilization that will happen should you proceed to accept the recommendations as presented.

These recommendations mirror are harmful.

Extremely harmful rhetoric happening at a national scale, and I am quite frankly shocked that we have to be here.

While I'm here in solidarity with other folks, as a queer Latina, a cultural worker, I urge you to keep the Commission on the Status of Women and keep the San Francisco Arts Commission in the charter.

To reduce them to an advisory body leaves little authority or incentive for the community to offer public testimony on issues that concern and affect them.

Commissioners will lack the ability to make decisions based on their needs.

This means the public will have less access to decision makers undermining the democratic process.

We live in a moment where reproductive bodies are under attack, where women's voices are being silenced.

And in this moment, we need leadership that deeply understands the role that art and culture plays in our society by healing it and advancing advancing joy in civic life.

Our public buildings, public art grant making processes receive national and international attention awards.

We are a model of best practices.

This is a huge driver of cultural tourism, which fills a general fund and the hotel tax fund.

I urge you to keep the commissions on the status of women in the San Francisco Arts Commission in the charter and to do better to stand up and use your voice and lived experience.

I know many of you know it, and I'm not sure why we're still fighting to have visibility.

Where San Francisco goes, the country follows.

Remember that.

Thank you, Commissioner Rivera, for your comments.

Hi, Jennifer Friedenbach of Coalition on Homelessness.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

How do you think social change happens?

It is realized out of movement.

Many of the independent oversight bodies grew out of movement and continue to ensure the vision of those movements continue to move.

The long tradition of participatory democracy in San Francisco, the realization of people power, is in our very DNA.

These recommendations, they bury all of that.

The homelessness body specifically, there are three very hyper-focused bodies focused on very important issues would be eliminated.

And the homeless oversight commission would, which doesn't have time to do what they need to do now, would be taking on those tasks and would be moved would have their chartered authority removed and would only be advisory.

I was around before we had a homeless oversight commission.

It was only a little bit ago.

And we had an advisory body and it was a joke.

There was no oversight, no transparency, and I think you think we still need oversight on this issue.

Propsy has been wildly successful because it was built on the concept that the smartest person in the room is the room, and that homeless people themselves know the best solutions.

These recommendations would halt that movement towards ending homelessness and instead cement homeless policy in political whim.

Homeless people rose up to pass propsy, but they also demanded standards in our shelter.

Did you know we have 50 unlicensed institutions in San Francisco?

Yeah, they're called shelters.

We fought for standards of care, but without the shelter monitoring committee, that's like the Trump gutting the civil rights at the Department of Justice.

It means you have rights on paper and paper only without enforcement, they're meaningless.

Staff cannot replace that work.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jennifer Friedenbach.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

I'm Alice Rogers.

I'm president of the South Beach Rincon Mission Bay Neighborhood Association, but I'm speaking really just personal comments.

I actually am here to commend the process and the work that the task force has done.

I think Supervisor Cheryl asked an important question.

How can we best utilize this report?

And uh Chair Harrington's suggestion that you go and listen to the dialogue around each issue is it is an important byproduct of this process.

Um I the commission, the task force were very accessible.

Um we invited them to our neighborhood association.

They came explained the process.

Um they were meticulous in uh setting up a framework in um in inviting discussion and inviting um inviting people to come back and rebut a decision if they felt it was inappropriate, as they did in a case with a CAC that I was engaged with.

So I I think they really um the bulk of the decisions held separately.

I think they have really encouraged um uh an uh an important um dialogue to happen, and they've invited this to continue.

So thank you, Task Force.

Thank you for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Good afternoon.

My name is Randy Blaustein.

So I was at the Human Rights Commission budgetary hearing.

I went to support the Office of Transgender Initiatives.

Before I got a chance to speak, I sat there for two and a half hours listening to one person after another plea for their nonprofit that served the most marginalized people that live in this city to continue to be able to exist.

They were tasked with a very large budget cut, cutting across.

They put up a slide of the mayor's priorities, and it the way it read to me was we have a mayor who is more concerned with making the city look pretty again than serving the needs of the most marginalized people who live here.

And the majority of people who spoke were people of color.

So I'm here today to talk about the Human Rights Commission remaining in the charter along with all of the other commissions.

Because if they're reduced to advisory committees, where are people gonna go?

Where are people gonna go to be able to voice?

Please, please support us.

Please let us continue to do the work we do.

Let us continue to serve the most marginalized people who live here.

Where are people gonna go if it's just they're just reduced to advisor advisors?

And I'm not comfortable with this present mayor having more power to make decisions like this, quite honestly.

After seeing a list of what his priorities are.

So I implore you to leave the charter as it is.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

You're right.

Thank you, Supervisors.

I'm Ramolin Schmaltz, longtime North Beach artist and recipient of multiple grants from the San Francisco Arts Commission to amplify and direct North Beach First Friday's Art Walk.

It would be criminal to streamline the SFAC and reduce it to an advisory board.

Of course, this problem extends far beyond art.

This white wealthy Yimby task force works task force's work too unconcannily resembles last year's national purges in the arts and humanities, sciences, immigration, health, and education, all in the name of efficiency.

The city is being doged, and its non-diverse task force stinks of musk.

This charter reform has often been compared to Project 2025 with its wild reduction of powers to you, our legislative body, its massive right reappropriation of voter-approved funds without voter consent, and its extreme gift of more unilateral power to the mayor and his executive team.

Reducing commissions to advisory bodies strips them of any muscle.

For example, SFAC decisions made by former commissions would instead be made by the mayor and you, even though none of you or the task force is an artist.

That's just more unqualified authoritarian authoritarianism, replacing public input and oversight.

It's too close to the hell we are living at the national level, and experience matters.

It's theft.

In 2018, voters approved propositions allocating over 25 million dollars for the arts and 40 for housing.

These set asides are ours.

Reappropriating funds that voters approve seems to be calling a calling card not only of the Trump administration, but also of Lurries.

And as San Francisco starts um starts to behave more and more like Washington, D.C., artists and activists are waking up and paying attention to who is voting how this year.

So as an artist, I promise to make it my 2026 magnum opus to make sure everybody knows who votes here and against strong independent arts leadership and essential public commission oversight.

Everybody's gonna find out where you stand.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Hold your applause, please.

Thank you.

Welcome to the next speaker.

Good afternoon.

My name is Vernalisa Caba, executive director from 2015 to 2019 of the Friends of the Commission on the Status of Women.

I'm here in support of keeping the Commission on the status of women in the city charter and preserving this city's uh eligible um ability to act and focus and follow through on issues that affect real people's safety and lives.

Over time, San Francisco has uh built stronger, more connected responses to domestic violence, making it easier for survivors to find help and harder for cases to fall through the cracks.

The city has also taken meaningful steps to confront human trafficking, not just by uh raising awareness, but by improving coordination and protection.

More importantly, women's safety has remained a visible uh public responsibility and something that's um not something that's handled in isolation.

That kind of progress didn't happen on its own.

It required the Commission on the Status of Women to sit across departments and uh ask hard questions and make sure commitments move from promises to practice.

When that role is reduced advisory only, the work becomes easier to overlook and harder to sustain.

San Francisco has been uh has made a name for itself by taking uh gender equity seriously in how decisions are made, not just in what it's said, but in uh what it gets measured and uh improves through the lens of CEDA, the commission, the convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women.

That commitment has translated into policies and practices that move our city into uh where equity is not aspirational but operational.

Uh keeping uh we know that what works we know what works.

Women, girls, and gender uh expansive youth are safer and have real access to opportunity.

They're benef uh the benefit thank you, Vernalisa Kava, for your comments.

Welcome to the next speaker.

Hi, my name's Karin.

Woo, a little nervous.

Uh Karen Adams, I'm the director of programs with homeless youth alliance.

We're a small nonprofit in the Haight Ashbury serving youth and young adults experiencing homelessness.

I'm here today speaking directly in regards to ensuring the preservation of the Shelter Monitoring Committee, the Shelter Grievance Advisory Committee, our City Air Home Oversight Committee, and the local homeless coordinating board.

People experiencing homelessness are too often spoken about, managed, and moved rather than heard, respected, and included.

The consolidation of these committees reflects a similar effort to disempower our most vulnerable community members.

Efforts to end the diversity of strategies necessary to address the diversity of needs of this population is unacceptable.

Transparency in city government is not optional.

It is the foundation of trust and democracy.

Policies, funding decisions, and enforcement practices must be clear, accessible, and accountable to the very people they impact most.

Without transparency, systems become barriers instead of bridges.

Autonomy is a basic human right.

No communities should be stripped of the ability to access appropriate spaces and make decisions about their lives simply because they lack housing.

True support and democracy empowers choice.

It does not impose control.

And access to self-advocacy is essential.

People experiencing homelessness must have real opportunities to speak for themselves, shape policies and hold institutions accountable.

And I'll say that again.

People experiencing homelessness must have real opportunities to speak for themselves, shape policies and hold institutions accountable.

If we are serious about equity and justice, then our city must commit to transparency, autonomy, dignity, and the power of self-advocacy for all, including people who experience homelessness.

At a time of rising authoritarianism and the normalization of punitive approaches to poverty, these principles are more urgent than ever.

Thank you.

Thank you, Karen Adams, for your comments.

Let's hear from our next speaker, please.

Welcome.

Good evening, Board of Supervisors.

My name is Carlotta Jackson Lane.

I am a former commissioner on the Commission on the Status of Women.

I was under Feinstein's administration when the Commission was founded in 1975.

I am also currently a commissioner on the Behavioral Health Commission.

And I just returned from New York from CDOT in terms of the NGO and Commission on the Status of Women, CSW 70.

What I want to say to you is that it is imperative that we actually stand by all the work that has been done by the Commission on the Status of Women.

Originally we fought for sexual harassment on the job.

So we had situations where there were actual cases that were being involved within the departments, multiple departments of the city and county.

And the Commission of Status of Women fought to set up an actual process, and then later on was actually part of the process that did the codification for people now.

Actually, you know, they get their punitive damages.

And so I want to give a direct plea for the fact that we need to keep the charter for both the Human Rights Commission as well as the Commission on Status of Women.

I wanted to say that in terms of the city and county of San Francisco, I've been a residence since 1960.

My father, James L.

Jackson Sr.

was 35 years in the San Francisco Police Department.

And there was always been issues with the consent decree of moving forward where we needed the Aspra Police Commission.

And I think that as supervisors and all of the love and care that you have for this city, that you will stand up and take.

Thank you for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Is this on?

Yes, welcome.

Supervisors.

I asked each one of you to look within your own self.

To look within your own body.

You are made of so many different tissues.

A lot of your tissues are disgusting.

I'll give you an example.

The liver.

It purifies all of the what?

Waste material in your blood system.

I asked you this question.

Would you optimize your liver?

Which part of your body will you optimize?

Which part of your body will you do away with?

Your feet.

Support you.

I asked you.

Will you cut off your feet so it doesn't have to touch the nasty ground that we walk on?

How dare you even consider?

How dare you consider not unless you're from Mars.

Not unless you're from some other entity from out of space.

How dare you?

How dare you?

How dare you?

Hell dare you.

Thank you.

Let's hear from our next speaker, please.

Hello, my name is Jason Wyman.

I am an artist and small business owner here in San Francisco, uh living in Dine.

Um I want to come back to two words that I heard earlier in the night during the presentation, or earlier in the day during the presentation.

And those two words were power and trust.

We're being asked to have a whole lot of trust and a process that only took a year versus generations of fighting for oversight and accountability.

That seems like lopsided power, especially when we're told that we need to trust those in power.

There was rightful outrage over that overreach of the executive branch.

And that exact same thing is happening here today.

And that exact same outrage, outrage, is being experienced here in this audience today, and I hope all of the supervisors hear that.

I'm reminded of a photo of Harvey Melk that I saw in the hallways here, where he has a sign that says an injury to one is an injury to all.

It is injuring many communities that have been left out historically and systemically from public power and public process.

And it is in search of a solution that is consolidating power in the executive branch.

That's not San Francisco.

That's not what we should be doing.

That's not my introduction to this city and civic engagement, which was way back at the beginning of the first children's amendment movement.

And it's sad to be here today to fight for what we fought for for generations.

Thank you for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

My name is Jill Manton.

I was a longtime staff member of the Arts Commission managing the public art program and uh overseeing the Civic Design Committee.

I'm here to save and preserve two important functions and services provided by the San Francisco Arts Commission.

Leaving San Francisco Arts Commission in the charter is a perfunctory gesture, which means little if all of the Arts Commission functions are moved to the admin code.

This change will negatively impact at least two arts commission programs, two of which I'll talk about the Civic Design Review and the Public Art Program.

These two programs are well coordinated and have an integral relationship to one another.

The 1932 Charter mandates that the Arts Commission shall review the design of any structure placed on public property to ensure the quality of San Francisco's built environment.

Review is performed by highly qualified architects and landscape architects appointed to the Arts Commission to serve us as commissioners on the Civic Design Committee.

Civic design approval is required for a building to even get a building permit in the city.

And just for your information, annually civic design reviews capital projects totaling in the billions of dollars.

It's a very important responsibility.

An unintended consequence of making civic design advisory if it's moved to the admin code, is that it could harm or even disable the implementation of the city's art enrichment ordinance, which was established in 1969.

This requires two percent of the construction cost of the city's capital improvement projects to be allocated for public art.

However, as an ordinance, there was no penalty nor a fine for non-compliance and no way to ensure compliance until this arts commission established an internal policy that architectural projects could not be calendared for civic design review until they allocated their two percent.

Thus early access allows the arts commission to plan public art as a thank you, Jill Manton, for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

I oppose the mayor and the commission streamlining task force eliminating or weakening the commissions that give critically necessary oversights to the police and sheriffs.

I oppose the same thing being done to commissions that give a voice and influence from ignored marginalized or discriminated folks like the homeless, disabled people of color, LGBTQ plus folks, youth and women.

The mayor has been unapologetic and is spreading a lie about how his SFPD bodyguard came into physical contact with the black homeless man in the tenorloin.

And now, due to the mayor's instigatory interactions, the two victims face charges.

Drop the charges, Brooke Jenkins.

The mayor has expressed no regrets, and even in a March 11th interview with the SF Chronicles states that he plans to continue his spontaneous street check-ins.

I did it again this morning, he said.

Sounds like it's the mayor that has an insatiable appetite for intimidating unprotected homeless folks without offering real solutions like real housing or a basic income.

The mayor also said he needs to see, quote, what our small business owners, our families, and our children are going through.

What about what our homeless people are going through?

People without a home.

Did you know that black people are only two per six percent of the city's population but account for 38% of homeless people?

Or that trans people, an even smaller percent of San Francisco accounts for 9% of homeless people, that immigrants can't find fucking housing anywhere, and the mayor uses a two-hour parking limit to terrorize those fortunate enough to have RVs to live in.

I asked the Board of Supervisors to not enact unapologetically racist, classist, queer phobic, and sexist changes to our commissions.

Thank you, Liam McGeeber, for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Hello, everyone.

My name is Brandy.

I'm from Coleman Advocates.

I want to check what they said.

And I also want to express my support for the Youth Commission and all the commissions that I think have the interests of our city's young people, and I know that that includes the independent oversight of our police commission.

And I just know that a vote for Prop E was not a vote against independent civilian oversight.

Especially in the case of the police commission, this is not a redundant commission, and it does not have redundant power as it stands.

This is actually an obligatory commission.

It's the least that we could be doing, and it is your obligation to protect and preserve this commission, especially knowing that civilians have lost their lives at the hands of law enforcement.

So why would we be putting at risk the independence of civilian oversight right now?

Proposals coming out of the commission about a streamlining process would take the authority away from the community and hand it to the mayor.

That is not streamlining, that is a transference of power.

And the task force said in their presentation earlier that accountability was a guiding principle for their dis for their recommendations, but their final recommendations that they talked about today are contradictory and antithetical to those guidelines.

So what is the real motivation behind these recommendations?

Thank you.

Thank you, Brandy, for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Hello, everyone.

My name is Rachel Jones.

I am a youth justice director at Coleman, but more so I am a San Francisco-born Briton raised native.

I have multiple generations, as well as six daughters that enjoy the luxuries of living in San Francisco.

And when I look around my city, I don't see my city.

And I don't want to repeat what my counterpart has said.

So I'm going to ask you to look within yourself and look within these charter papers and see who exactly is targeted, who exactly we're speaking about.

Because when we're in a room and we're speaking about women, children, and homelessness.

We're talking about the most vulnerable populations of our city.

And when we dismantle the guardrails and the safety issues that we have in place that we've been fighting for for decades, there's a real problem in the room.

And I'll just end it with a very small quote that my home girl Angela Davis loves to say.

And these are from my people behind me, more so than you guys in front of me.

The powerful don't give up power because we ask nicely.

Let me say that again.

The powerful don't give up power because we ask nicely.

The change is when resistance becomes too costly to ignore.

And right now, the resistance is keeping tabs.

So I just want you to know the resistance will be costly.

Thank you.

Thank you, Rachel Jones, for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

President Mandelman, uh supervisors.

My name is Tom Horn.

I'm vice president of the Board of Trustees of the War Memorial.

I'm here with the president of my board, uh Diane Willsey, as well as trustee Joyce Newstead.

There are three charitable trust departments in San Francisco.

Fine Arts Commission, the Asian Art Museum, and the War Memorial and Performing Arts Center.

All of them come out of a love by people who supported the various organizations to want the arts to be important in San Francisco.

And it dates back to the gold rush.

And if you look at uh at the charter proposals and the uh streamlined task force proposals, the war memorial has been cut out from uh the other two charitable trust departments.

And it's not unclear exactly why.

Um because we all support, we all support the arts and we all are charitable trusts.

The logic has been that we are a property management company, but that's really not the case.

Uh the war memorial welcomes about a million people a year.

We put on over 900 performances.

We have seven performing arts venues, and we make an economic contribution impact to the city of some 350 million dollars annually.

Uh the idea of losing the autonomy of the war memorial would make us like the Kennedy Center in New York.

And I dread to see someone else's name above the War Memorial Opera House.

So we just ask that the uh War Memorial be treated in the same way that the other two charitable trust departments are.

Thank you.

Thank you, Trustee Tom Horn.

Our next speaker, come on up.

My name is Sheryl Jackson.

People of the nation.

We're at a critical juncture when the people of this nation can't uphold civil democracy.

When it doesn't have checks and balances.

The over sight is to ensure justice and to ensure that we have an additional set of eyes when systems in place are not showing us justice, and I can tell you from a lived experience.

Disheartening to see how many police reports does it take to see justice.

We sit here in a room full of people advocating day in and day out for the people they represent.

That's black women, that's women, that's LGBTQ, IA plus, I'll say them all because I do remember trans.

The most important thing you will hear today is how important it is to uphold justice in commission systems.

Shame on you for having a conversation and contemplating it.

Shame on you for wasting these people's time when they should be serving the people.

Falling through the cracks.

Some of you sitting here in our faces saying that you uphold a system that's supposed to be working for us.

You have failed.

But rethink about how you uplift and empower people here in this city.

Do not let them down.

You know I only come when there's something wrong.

The one thing I'm going to leave you with today.

You're standing up without a commission.

So are you still a city that's still upholding justice?

Thank you, Cheryl Jackson, for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

My name is Michael Kyle.

I'm coming as a field representative from SCU 1021.

I just want to start with pointing out in terms of the word efficiency.

We've seen this upplay with Doge and D.C.

We've seen that play with Trump.

It is a false flag.

This is not a conversation about efficiency.

It's a conversation about consolidating power for the mayor, the mayor who bought his way into this position to begin with.

So as SU 1021, we are opposing this adjusted recommendations, their streamlining commission.

Uh term limits harm institutional knowledge of volunteer experts in important committees.

Changing commissioners from our um to from cause to at will greatly expands the power of the mayor is an anti-labour practice.

Many of our commissions dictate how workers are treated and our rights protected, and these changes erode the power and rights of our members.

So as the largest public sector union in San Francisco, we urge you to vote no and protect our workers.

Thank you.

Thank you, Michael Kyle, for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Good afternoon, Board of Supervisors.

My name is Blanca Catalan, and I'm here with Coleman Advocates, and I'm here today in support of keeping the San Francisco Police Commission.

Our black and brown communities need a system that ensures real accountability, where community voices truly matter, and where decisions are not made behind closed doors.

Our families deserve transparency, especially because the data shows disparities still exist.

Reports from the San Francisco Police Department and the Public Defender's Office shows that black and brown drivers has been far more likely to be stopped, search and subject to use of force compared to other communities.

While recent policies like the Protect Stops ban have started to reduce some of these disparities, this progress is still fragile.

The San Francisco Police Commission exceeds because of years of community advocacy, demanding accountability and an end of these inequities.

We can these commissions now risk on on doing that progress and silencing the communities most impacted but by overpolicing.

We cannot go backwards.

I urge you to protect the police commission's independence and authority to ensure safety we respect for every for everyone in San Francisco.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker.

Hi, my name is Zach.

I'm a community volunteer and organizer.

Um this all these cuts have been made on the guise of efficiency, and really what's inefficient is the fact that we have meetings like this every week, twice a week in the middle of the working day, so we don't have very much democratic participation on the convenience of your work schedules and not on the masses' work schedules.

So they're not able to participate.

What's inefficient is the fact that you guys have jobs here that you could have liked 175,000 a year of taxpayer money to rubber stamp the uh whatever the mayor's policies want to be.

Maybe we should just eliminate the board of supervisors entirely.

Anyhow, I'm here to protest any sort of elimination of uh homeless oversight committees, not just the homeless oversight committee, but the specifically the shelter grievance advisory council and the shelter monitoring board.

Um I don't know a whole lot about how all these things work and the nuts and bolts, but I do know people.

I have met one woman, her name is she's an elderly disabled woman, her name is Melody.

I had to help her move out of a closed shelter uh from the monarch, and they would not let her retrieve her last few belongings out of here.

We had to talk to four people to do this.

We had to talk to her case manager, we had to talk to uh somebody from Coalition on Homelessness.

We had to talk to the supervisor at that shelter, and we had to talk to the Bay Area Legal Fund in order to finally get her two boxes out of that shelter so she can move it to our new shelter.

Another person I met lives in an RV now who is now at risk for being towed for that two-hour parking ban that you guys passed last year.

She moved out of a shelter where she had been stolen from, assaulted, and raped there multiple times, and she is now living in an RV.

So we need to protect these oversight committees, and we need to protect these advisory councils.

Thanks.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker.

Hi, um, my name is Zoe Kelman.

Uh my comments reflect my desire for San Francisco to become the model of democracy our country so desperately needs.

I'm here to strongly object to removing the environmental commission from the charter and make making the case that we need this to strengthen this commission.

As a former chemical engineer, chemical environmental engineer in the chemical industry, and then at EPA New Jersey DEP.

I speak with experience on how elected officials threaten government scientists and engineers to prioritize the interest of the politically well connected, you know, your corporate CEOs and billionaires over public health.

I wish New Jersey had had an environmental commission.

Instead, I became a whistleblower and worked with the community to sue the government and the corporations.

Honeywell took the case to the U.S.

Supreme Court where we prevailed.

Over a billion dollars to remediate chromium sites in Jersey City.

Downgrading the Environmental Commission to an advisory role is contrary to the needs we are witnessing today.

Although my comments are focused primarily on the environmental commission, I'm afraid that downgrading other commissions will have painful consequences in the future.

San Francisco prides itself as a leader in promoting environmental protection and public health.

Fortunately, that reputation has been severely damaged with national consequences.

In 2025, the San Francisco City Attorney sued EPA's enforcement of the Clean Water Act.

The 9th district throughout the case, yet San Francisco appealed to the U.S.

Supreme Court, where the Supreme Court decided in San Francisco's favor of permanently weakening EPA to enforce the Clean Water Act.

That has national consequences for the President.

Thank you for your comments.

Yes.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker.

Am I able to use this?

Yes.

Yes?

Okay.

Don't start my time yet, okay.

So you can start my time now.

All right.

Happy Sam Patrick's Day, everybody.

My name is Jessica Pasico.

Um, I'm running for district 10 supervisor.

All right.

I've talked to how many people in this line and asked them for what their perspectives were on Prop E.

And a majority of them wanted they were against streamlining the task force.

In fact, most of them stated, if not all, stated that they wanted it to be stronger.

Um they were particularly concerned about the um uh monitoring the homelessness, right?

And a couple other task force related to helping the unhoused.

Okay.

Um I will give you particular names.

But um here's my main concern is that when I try to reach out to Daniel Laurie and ask him to come to these meetings, like for example, the Department of Public Health meeting that's scheduled, or that has been scheduled, the last one, he doesn't answer.

Um, if people are this upset about reforming the charter, I think could we ask him to be here so that he can hear these people's voices.

I want it would be great if you guys um I know you guys can do your jobs.

You guys do a great job as supervisors, and you guys can persuade him to uh not re to go against streamlining uh the task force.

Okay, for Prop C for POP E.

All right.

Thanks.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker.

Um hello, my name is Gwen McLaughlin.

I'm a born and raised San Franciscan, and I wanted to say happy women's history month and St.

Patrick's Day to everyone.

Um I think there's so much in this proposed charter amendment that causes a lot of concern for me.

It's really troubling.

Um it's really troubling that the working group process was rushed through with little opportunity for public comment, and when there was an opportunity for public comment, it seemed as if no one in the working group was truly listening, as the mayor's proposed amendments to the charter were then released less than 24 hours after that public comment with none of the suggestions raised in that meeting incorporated into the proposal.

I'm sure many of you here are aware of the absolute horrific acts of sexual violence and abuse that took place in our city jails when city officers filmed and taunted while strip searching 19 women in our city jails just this last fall.

Weakening the commission on the status of women while also trying to take away power from the city's police commission tasked with police oversight is egregious.

Allowing the mayor to fire any commissioner at wit at will is even more deeply concerning.

Like some people have already remarked on today, the changes happening in the government here are eerily doge-like.

Not a complete surprise coming from an administration that used an AI chatbot to respond to our city's RV residents who were trying to reach out for the correct permits and city services so they could relocate when effectively being evicted by the mayor and the board's new policy.

Communities need a real seat at the table in our government, and our city commissions enable that democratic participation in our local government.

Most commissioners are volunteers and real members of our communities, not just billionaire trust fund kids or wealthy tech executives taking their first stab at supposedly trying to create more efficiency within our government.

What's that tech phrase?

Move fast and break things.

Please don't make break our democracy.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Next speaker.

Good afternoon.

My name is Sunny Angulo, and I'm here as a board member, uh board steward of Arts for a Better Bay Area, and also as someone that tried to help steer Proppy into being more tailored, more surgical.

That was the intent anyway.

The city's charter is our guiding document, a constitution that is intended to stand the test of changing political whims and electeds that come and go.

Of course, it's still a living document that can be amended by a majority of the electorate, but at a time when we're all living through egregious doge attacks on jobs, public programs, and basic democratic principles of transparency, accountability, and equity.

A wholesale amendment of the charter is unwise.

Any changes should be taken very seriously and with significant community input.

And so I want to say broadly that I think it's a shame and a disappointment that public you know input is really only being solicited right now on the Prop E taskforce recommendations per a voter mandate, um, given the sweeping charter changes that are being proposed by the mayor.

I urge the Board of Supervisors to engage with the public on charter reform and own the work that some of you have been doing on this topic at City Hall.

As of right now, it's confusing and overwhelming, and the board is really abdicating its duty to provide government checks and balances without gutting our city constitution.

With all due respect to my friend Ed Harrington, I wanted to correct his assertion that the public did not weigh in strongly on the SF Arts Commission.

It was a very confusing discussion, actually.

Uh and it necessitated not just one but two hearings where numerous advocates came out to voice concerns with removing the duties and powers of the arts commission from the charter.

So while I appreciate his advocacy to keep the base values of the FACCAC in the charter, Prop E was specifically drafted to surgically improve the structure of commissions and help them work better.

It was not intended to be a wholesale axing of key functions.

It is a horrible idea to restructure entire departments via the ballot box, and that wasn't Prop E's intent.

ABBA has proposed a slight change to the seat makeup of the SFAC, and I'm including this.

Thank you, Senny Angulo for your comments.

Next speaker.

Hi, my name is Jude Dybold, and I am an SCIU shop steward at the Human Rights Commission, and I'm speaking in my personal capacity today.

Taking HRC out of the charter would make it possible for whoever happens to be sitting in office to slash and burn our budget and make it impossible for teams like my own to continue to fight discrimination and housing, employment, and public access in this city.

At a time of rising homelessness and poverty, our work helps prevent discriminatory evictions, terminations, and holds accountable the stewards of public spaces.

Please side with the people of San Francisco and democracy.

This is not the time politically to disempower work that fights racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and the work that supports all vulnerable communities under attack at the federal level.

Frankly, I am tired of having to come here every year and beg those in power not to take more and more resources that go to San Franciscans who already have less and less.

When will enough be a luff?

Vote no.

Thank you for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Hello, supervisors.

My name is Jeggy.

I am from SEA 1021 and uh delegate to the San Francisco Labor Council.

I'm Jackie, can you speak directly into that microphone?

Um I want to hear you best.

There you go.

Thank you.

Uh I'm speaking of my personal capacity and as a labor organizer.

Um our supervisors should uh protect the independence of our commissions from political interference and the transparency of the city's governance.

I urge the Board of Supervisors to vote no on the streamlining task force recommendations and commit to protecting public services.

Uh you know, uh to uh, you know, and city workers uh providing these services.

Uh supervisors and mayors come and go, right?

But the expertise and the knowledge of our civil service employees keeps the services of the city running.

Uh these commissioners have a say on how city uh city workers are treated.

These changes erode the power of workers and their unions.

Uh and finally uh turning these commissioners into at-will positions greatly increases executive overreach and it's an anti-labor practice.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Good afternoon, uh Board of Supervisors.

My name is Andy Gillis.

I'm a resident of D8.

Uh I suspect the all the supervisors who support these measures call themselves moderates, but there's nothing moderate about what is being proposed here.

Uh reducing public input and protections over the city's business and decision making uh and increasing the power of an already powerful mayor is not moderation but our classic platforms of a conservative agenda.

This is uh in fact the very thing we're fighting in the Trump administration.

On a larger scale, yes, but San Francisco is experiencing the very same attempts by conservative tech billionaires to erode the voice of voters and increase their own influence.

Uh the the task force did not take into account the minimal public input it was provided, outlining concerns around the importance of our commissions.

But effectiveness, not efficiency, should be our goals.

Democracy can be slow and cumbersome, but that's better than the opposite.

I I'm sure you'll say I'm engaging in hyperbole and that there is no comparison between what you're doing and what Trump is doing.

But you are both proceeding with permanent changes.

Excuse me.

You're both proceeding with permanent changes in our system of government, which will provide significantly fewer opportunities for San Franciscans to have a say in how the city is governed, and so our democracy will be weakened on yet another front.

If ever there was uh if ever we needed more checks and balances on power, it is now.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Thank you for still being here.

I know it's supper time for all of us.

I'm Julie Fisher.

I have been working and living in San Francisco for 40 years, and all of that work has been union work.

I think many of the speakers here today have made more than adequate points about the change in the charter and commissions.

So I'm going to just jump ahead to tell a few quick stories that all of us have our own version of.

When I used to work at Macy's downtown in Union Square and go home late at night after the store closed, I would see people, and this was 30 years ago or longer, people sleeping in the doorways of all the open businesses.

As might be the case, many of the saleswomen would pick somebody to kind of take care of, offer them a sandwich, cash, and one gentleman that was my gentleman to take care of would never take cash because he was afraid of being robbed either while he was at a shelter or just sleeping on the street, a fragile old man.

So here we are 30 plus years later, and we still have that problem and more.

So I ask that you look at this as an opportunity to fix some of those problems.

Why this city, with all its resources, has people still sleeping on the street, suffering from drug abuse and more.

And I'd also like to say that like a lot of people, I am the granddaughter of immigrants from Lithuania in my case.

And I am able to live successfully in this country because they made the journey over here on votes and set up housekeeping.

And also want to mention people that are not here today.

I'm a member of SCIU 2015, so many of my colleagues who are caregivers and the people they take care of could not be here, but they are also largely numbers of women, largely people of color, and many, many immigrants.

So please keep all of us in mind and thank you for your attention.

Thank you, Julie Fisher, for your comments.

Welcome.

Next speaker.

Thank you.

My name's Art Persico, and I've had the pleasure of meeting and talking to many of you on the Board of Supervisors.

So thank you for keeping your doors open and the channels of communication open to things like this as well.

You know, San Francisco, as you know, has a strong mayor form of government.

And I don't think we need to strengthen an already strong mayor form of government.

The commissions were created in San Francisco in 1898 to ensure civilian oversight, promote transparency, and act as a check and balance against the mayor's power in a strong mayor system.

So I think we have to keep that in mind.

I don't think efficiency is the sine qua non.

That's one of the few Latin phrases I know.

It's not the highest value for a democracy.

I think the problem may have been the initial mandate for the work of this body on if uh stream streamlining.

So that may have been at the root of the problem.

San Francisco is a proud has a proud history of progressivism and human rights.

We celebrate human rights on the city hall steps every every year on December 10th.

Human rights are part of many of the motivations for some of these uh commissions that you have.

So let's not weaken that.

Let's not weaken public input.

Let's not stifle the creativity and knowledge of San Franciscans in a rush toward efficiency.

Thank you.

Thank you, Art Persico, for your comments.

Welcome, next speaker.

Good evening, supervisors and my fellow clerks.

My name is Joshua Rodio Choa, and I serve as the Youth Commission's uh community partnership specialists.

I was speaking today to urge you to protect our youth voices and representation in our local government by protecting and keeping the youth commission in our city's charter.

It's been a privilege and an honor to see our incredible commissioners become more powerful leaders, powerful speakers, and change makers in their communities as they learn the ins and outs of City Hall and its many departments.

Our city's youth commission can you continues to be an example that youth councils and advisory boards across the state and the nation look up to as they support their youth to become more powerful leaders in their communities.

Additionally, I want to shout out the DCYF Oversight Advisory Committee and the Service Providers Working Group to remain in the city charter as well, as they have been incredible partners in our advocacy towards creating a San Francisco that where youth don't just survive, but they thrive enough to become their community's strongest advocates, leaders, and future supervisors.

Thank you so much for your time, and thank you to the public commenters who support our efforts to remain in the city's Charter Commission.

Sorry, in the city's charter.

Thank you.

Thank you, Joshua Ochoa, for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

My name is Gabby Lostana, and I'm the chair and District Six Youth Commissioner of the San Francisco Youth Commission.

When Proposition F won 60% on the November November 1995 ballot and the youth commission was created, San Franciscans made it clear what they valued and still value.

Youth voices at the center of how we govern decisions affecting children and families.

Today, that structure is at risk.

The youth commission was intentionally placed in the city charter to ensure transparency, accountability, and shared governance.

Since then, we have launched successful initiatives such as Free Meeting for Youth and expanded wellness centers, along with activating youth through movements such as Vote 16.

The work the Youth Commission has done has and will continue to positively impact young people in the city for generations to come.

In my personal experience, I have been on the youth commission for six years, and I don't think I would have learned anywhere else just how important governance and youth civic engagement is if I wasn't on the commission.

Additionally, I personally have been able to work on important initiatives such as language access and immigrant protections in our city.

Proposed changes would move us out of the charter group, weakening the structural protections voters put in place.

When young people have a formal seat at the table, decisions are stronger, more transparent, and better aligned with community needs.

San Francisco's youth deserve stable systems that elevate their voices and safeguard public investments.

I urge you to keep the youth commission in the charter and protect shared governance for San Francisco's youth.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Vice Chair Listana, for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Good afternoon.

I'm Peter Warfield, co-founder and head of Library Users Association.

Our library in San Francisco is a tremendous asset.

And in general, libraries, public libraries in particular, have a very important role and a valuable role in helping to educate and entertain the folks that are funding them and to uh provide a broad range of materials so that they can function in a democracy for one thing.

We're opposed to any weakening of commissions and especially their independence.

Uh in that respect, I would say that the law library uh shouldn't be dependent for its existence on a state law.

There might be better, it might be better to have redundancy rather than depend on a state law, and that commissioners, if anything, ought to have some level of security with respect to their positions so that their role in advising and in determining policies has some strength and resistance to the potential of uh what we've seen already and actually happened at the Library Commission, where there was a broad sweep uh of uh the mayor getting rid of a whole group of commissioners whose policies he didn't like.

Uh we've worked to improve a great deal of things uh that we learned about through coming to the commission, and some of which the commission actually agreed with and adopted itself.

Uh we worked on privacy issues with Electronic Frontier Foundation and ACLU to prevent the imposition in installation of RFID tags.

We've worked against excessive fines and fees.

We worked on uh creating a post-occupancy evaluation for the flawed design of the new main library and improvements in signage and so on.

Those would not be as easily or at all possible had it not been for the existence of the commission system.

Thanks very much.

Thank you for your comments.

Let's welcome our next speaker.

Good afternoon, supervisors and clerk's office.

My name is Joy Zann, and I have the honor of serving as the acting director for the San Francisco Youth Commission.

And I would like to let everyone know that the Youth Commission is officially 30 years old this year.

And over the past 30 years, the youth commission has ensured that young people were at the table for many issues that the adults in the room often forget to invite them to.

I urge the Board of Supervisors to reject the recommendation to move the Youth Commission to the administrative code.

We hope to stay in the city charter to ensure that the Commission retains its independence for young people to be public servants to the youth of San Francisco because there will always be young people in San Francisco.

Thank you.

Thank you, Director Zane, for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

Hello.

Good evening, Board of Supervisors.

Um my name is Ovava Fumango.

I'm born and raised in the city.

I was a commissioner on the Sheriff's Oversight Board from 2022 up until recently of this year.

Um I'm just adding my voice to the course of voices, rightfully upset with the proposed lasting changes by the task force.

Um I also want to echo Supervisor Walton's earlier statement regarding the task force board not being reflective of the city's diversity, especially the community that I come from.

Um my experience in physically attending these task force meetings.

I don't believe they took into considerations our call-outs and concerns with changing the nature of the Sheriff's Oversight Board and Police Commission.

Um, these civilian-run boards are the very least that we can do to help address the systemic inequities that we say we care about.

Um just like my last point is just like my biggest concern is you know, the task force did not have the right to make these sweeping power changes to the voter-approved boards, um, such as the Sheriff's Oversight Board that was voter-approved as recently as 2020.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Welcome to our next speaker.

And before you begin, Ms.

Chakata, if there are other speakers in the public gallery who'd like to address the board on the Proppy Commission streamlining task force recommendations.

Please line up on your right hand side.

Otherwise, Brittany may be our last speaker.

Welcome.

Thank you, Clark Calvillo.

Good evening.

My name is Britney Chiquat.

I serve as a director at the San Francisco Human Rights Commission, but I'm here in my personal capacity.

And I wanted to give my opposition to moving the Human Rights Commission from the Charter to the Admin Code, as well as the specific recommendation to remove our charter, our contract enforcement authority.

And I just wanted to remind folks that the Human Rights Commission was established in the 60s during a time that we associated with the segregated South.

The Human Rights Commission was established in 1964 because of sit-ins at Mel's Diner, the Sheridan Palace Hotel, the Cadillac dealership that's right on the NSN market that wouldn't hire black people.

So anti-black racism and fighting that, and a mayor who saw that fighting that was necessary is what created the HRC.

And to weaken our civil rights authority and our human rights advocacy in this moment is really dangerous.

And I remember when I first left the Board of Supervisors and went to the HRC, people said, Well, what do they even do?

We keep people in housing.

We're ground zero for the demography of San Francisco.

At one point, when we were fighting source of income discrimination, we were mainly seeing black mothers who had Section 8 vouchers and were being told that they couldn't get housing in San Francisco.

So as a mother, are you going to go to five different places?

Are you going to start moving out to Richmond, to Antioch, to the far stretches of the Bay Area while you're still commuting into San Francisco because this is where your network is, where your kids go to school, where your doctors are.

San Francisco, you know, we the Human Rights Commission, that is, we I think give a lot of credence to what you all can stand on to say you're a liberal democracy that you're fighting for the people in San Francisco because we're an agency that is furthering human rights and should be fortified in this moment, not weakened.

And I think that if you do weaken us, then the public will have no aspersions about your priorities.

Thank you.

Thank you, Director Chakwata, for your comments.

All right.

Other members of the public?

All right, Mr.

President.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Public comment is now closed.

Well, uh Supervisor Walton.

Thank you, President Meldelman.

First, I just want to say thank you, of course, to all of the public who came in to speak today.

We appreciate your input.

I do want to thank the task force again for their work.

And I I think what we have to ask ourselves here really is this the San Francisco that we want to see moving forward.

If we're okay with more police deaths, if we're okay with the elimination of youth voice, if we're okay with no diversity, if we're okay with losing resources for children and youth, and if we're okay with the really the attacks on our arts, then I think that these recommendations or some of them may be something we should support.

But I but I have to say that I really don't think people truly understand what's at stake here and the magnitude of harm of some of these recommendations that have been proposed.

Um it is a major problem to have a group with no diversity assembling to push change that affects everyone.

I mean, I was sitting here laughing to myself because I have probably seen more diversity at a Trump rally.

Um I say this not to be funny, but I say this because it's scary as a black man that after we've seen all of the deaths, after we've seen all of the shootings, after we've seen all of the harms of law enforcement on black people and people of color, that we can have recommendations that give unilateral power almost to one person to make decisions about discipline.

After all of that history here, we have people in this city who can make those types of recommendations.

And then tell me they value and respect diversity.

So we have decision to make, obviously, as a board, but fundamentally from onset.

Decisions should not be made about the masses of San Franciscans by the majority and by a very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very small group that lacks any type of diversity.

Thank you, President Melman.

Thank you, Supervisor Walton.

I want to thank all the folks who have come out to those uh 23 task force meetings who came out today.

Uh want to thank again the city administrator and her staff for the work and the controller's office for the work they've done to support the task force.

I want to thank the chair and vice chair of the task force and the members for the work they have done over that year.

Um we do uh, as Supervisor Walton said, have work ahead of us.

We have, you know, less than two months, a lot less actually, you know, more like a month to six weeks to see what in the task force recommendations and uh the rest of the conversation about um charter reform that we have seen in the city can be put forward uh as a Board of Supervisors contribution to the conversation.

I look forward to working with you all on this board.

Um I think there is even if we only did the non-controversial elements of what the uh task force has recommended, that would be a big chunk of charter reform, and it would be a positive contribution.

We may do a little bit more than that.

I don't think we're gonna touch many of the um live wires that uh folks have expressed the greatest concerns about.

Um but we'll see.

We're a body of 11 people, six of us have to decide what to do.

Um and with that uh this matter has been heard and is now filed.

Um poor Supervisor Chen, she was struggling with illness through the first part of this meeting, but she has succumbed and had to leave.

Um and so uh I would like a motion to excuse Supervisor Chan from the remainder of the meeting, moved uh by Cheryl, seconded by Walton.

Um Madam Clerk, can we take that without objection?

Yes, I can take that without objection.

Supervisor Chen is excused.

Okay.

So then I think that takes us to regular j regular public comment.

Is that right, Madam Clerk?

That takes us to regular public comment or general public comment.

Or if you are in the chamber and you'd like to provide the board with general public comment, you may speak to the minutes as presented.

Items 21 through 24 are eligible for your comment.

Those are the items up for adoption without committee reference and other general matters not on the published agenda, but must be within the board subject matter jurisdiction.

All other agenda content has already been reported out to the board by an appropriate committee where public comment occurred.

And let's hear from our first speaker, Mr.

Wright.

We are setting the timer for two minutes.

Task force.

Everything that this task force is proposing to do is the job your time.

The streamlining task force has already been heard and was disposed of.

That is not a topic for you to have comment on at this point.

So please continue, sir.

Yeah, look, you demonstrate in the habit of interrupting me before I make my point.

Okay?

You jump in the gun.

Mr.

Wright, you jump and pause your time.

Okay.

No, you start my time back up, please.

Mr.

Wright, continue.

You got me at 141.

It's supposed to be two minutes.

Mr.

Wright, please continue.

Okay.

The task the responsibility pertaining to the task force is the responsibility of your Board of Supervisors.

You talk about saving money and take care of business the way it's supposed to be taken care of, is the jurisdiction of your Board of Supervisors.

If you take care of business the way it's supposed to be taken care of, we wouldn't need no damn task force.

Understand me.

Now, about uh supervision and management of funds.

I've already demonstrated what you missed out on the opportunity to take care of the minimum of uh hundred million five hundred thousand negative dollar cash flow of me railway by having people who will use the muni transportation on Chinese New Year's and the parade.

You turn around and put all that wear and tear on the Muni subway system and above ground subway system by letting people ride for free.

You actually increase the debt that you're complaining about where you want to put it on a ballot and have people vote to tax us to pay for the negative cash flow that you developed with the MUNY Railway system.

Doesn't make any sense.

I went to go rent a U-Haul van this weekend to move some of my property.

Add it up the numbers, come to find out the numbers don't match with the charging me.

Come to find out I'm paying for San Francisco health care.

I didn't come down here to pay for your damn health care.

I came to rent a U-Haul van to move my property.

You're always making other people who don't have a damn thing to do to problem pay for a problem that's been by Mr.

Wright.

Mr.

Wright, you know how the procedures work here.

Not debatable.

It's a board rule.

Board rule.

You got another people speaking and you interrupt them and you pause their time.

Mr.

Wright, why don't we talk about this after the board meeting?

Okay, we got we gotta keep moving.

Yeah, you gotta keep moving.

Ms.

McGeever.

We're ready for you.

It's not like you, Angela, it's not fair.

You did that to other people.

I watched three people come up there when they had controversy.

Ms.

McGeever, please begin.

Okay, um, so I'm just uh would like to put this on the public record.

My name is Leah McGeever.

I live in District 6, San Francisco, and this is an article that was published in The Guardian, which is an international um newspaper.

Um family, including Deaf Boy who wasn't given his assistance devices.

California's superintendent is calling for the return of a hearing impaired six-year-old after he, his mother, and his five-year-old sibling were detained on Tuesday while reporting for their check-in at an ICE office in San Francisco and deported to Colombia.

That ICE office is on uh Tahama Street.

It is in the district that I live in.

Leslie Rodriguez Gutierrez and her sons were arrested during their visit to ICE's intensive supervision appearance program, ISAP said uh Alameda County Immigration Legal and Education Partnership.

A relative who was waiting outside for Gutierrez and her sons was unable to hand off the assistive devices necessary for the six-year-old who is deaf and had a cochlear implant.

No child should be ripped from their home community and hidden in a detention center, especially not a deaf child who is being deprived of their ability to communicate and understand what is happening to him.

Uh, what did my supervisor say about this since this happened in our district?

Um I do feel this is serious.

I feel that San Francisco and the people in power here should be trying to help right this wrong that was allowed to be done in our city to this family.

And um I just gotta say that I don't understand, I don't I don't understand why the silence.

There's so much silence around this.

There's not silence around parties and parades, but there's silence about these abductions.

We know what happens at these detention centers, concentration camps, people are deprived of food, their their water is dirty, they don't get medical attention, they're being forced to labor for like hardly anything, and they're dying and being killed.

So, like we should care, right?

Thank you, Leah McGeever for your comments.

Welcome.

Good afternoon.

Uh I have three recommendations.

One 24th emission and 16th emission that they be turned over to a vendor, uh a Hispanic vendors association.

Because what you have down there now is just a cancer.

And I'm tired of getting contacted by dope people addicted on dope selling articles out of the Walgreens across the street.

The 24th, 16th emission.

Turn it over to the to the vendors association.

Number two, I would like to turn BART, which is 50 stations into the world or the United States' largest student museum.

I would like artworks, cultural artworks from every school system in the Bay Area that impinges on BART to be displayed in our art in as artworks, sculptures, art, poetry, whatever, in our stations.

I would like cooperation.

I would like some kind of uh pilot program that would focus on the city of San Francisco first to see how it would work, and then I would like it to go to all 50 stations, which is five counties.

The third thing is the bodies that you're dumping off of the Golden Gate, unclaimed bodies.

I would like you to stop that practice and honor human life and designate a building for the dead.

A building.

Dedicate a building for the unknown dead.

At least New York City has an island with one million people, unclaimed bodies.

The least you could do is dedicate a building.

Put their ashes in a building.

Dedicate that to human life.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Any other members of the public who would like to address the board during general public comment?

Excuse me.

Mr.

President.

All right.

Public comment is now closed.

Madam Clerk, let's go to our for adoption without committee reference agenda agenda.

Please call items 21 through 24.

Items 21 through 24 were introduced for adoption without committee reference.

A unanimous vote is required for adoption of a resolution on first reading today.

Any member may require a resolution on first reading to go to committee.

Supervisor Wong.

Okay.

24 is getting severed.

I don't see anybody else in the queue.

So, Madam Clerk, could you call the roll on the remaining balance of the items?

On items 21, 22, and 23.

Mandelman, I, Supervisor Cheryl.

Cheryl I, Supervisor Walton.

Walton, I, Supervisor Wong.

Wong I, Supervisor Chan.

Chan I, and Supervisor Dorsey.

Dorsey I.

There are seven eyes.

Without objection, the resolutions are adopted.

And then Madam Clerk, please call item 24.

Item 24.

This is a resolution to express the intent of the city and county of San Francisco to establish the Sunset Irish Cultural District to re to recognize and preserve the history, legacy, and living cultural traditions of the Irish and the Irish American community in San Francisco's Sunset District.

Supervisor Wong.

Thank you.

Today I'm proud to have us consider this resolution to express support for an Irish cultural district in the sunset.

We've received over 600 letters in one day from a committee members urging us to support this.

When people think about the history of San Francisco, they often think about the gold rush, the earthquake.

They don't always think about the Irish, but they should.

Irish immigrants were here from the very beginning, arriving in the 1840s and 1850s, many of them fleeing starvation and building life in a city that wasn't always welcoming.

By 1870, one in eight San Franciscans was Irish.

They dug the roads, organized the unions, staffed the firehouses and police stations.

They didn't just live here, they built here.

What I want my colleagues to understand is that uh this resolution is isn't just an act of nostalgia.

The traditions that we are talking about, the music, the dance, the language, the sporting clubs are not preserved behind glass.

They are alive.

They're being passed down right now in the Sunset District to next generation.

A cultural district designation would give that living community the same institutional support and recognition that other cultural communities in this city already have access to.

I want to thank the Irish United Irish Cultural Center, the St.

Patrick's Day Parade, the United Irish Societies of San Francisco for their partnership in bringing this forward.

And I want to thank the residents of the Sunset District, Irish and non-Irish alike who have supported this effort.

This is the beginning of the process, and I look forward to doing what doing that work alongside this community.

Thank you.

Thank you, Supervisor Wong.

With that, I think we can take this item, same house, same call without objection.

The resolution is adopted.

And uh Madam Clerk, do we have any imperative agenda items?

None to report, Mr.

President.

Would you please read the in-memoriums?

Today's meeting will be adjourned in memory of the following beloved individuals on behalf of Supervisor Chan for the late Miss Bazal Wong.

On behalf of Supervisor Chen for the late Mr.

Jiu G.

Y.

And I believe that brings us to the end of our agenda.

Madam Clerk, do we have any further business before us today?

That concludes our business for today.

Well, then we are adjourned.

San Francisco Government Television.