>> hello, i'm shanna with the league of women voters of san francisco. along with the league and sfgov tv, i'm here to discuss prove significance e a ballot measure that will be before the voters tuesday, november 8th. currently, under city law, various city boards, commissions and officials generally must review and make decisions to approve or deny the development of new housing. development of new housing must comply with the city's planning and building code. state law generally requires the project to be evaluated for impacts on the environment. the city has affordable housing programs that offer housing for sale or rent at below market rate. affordable housing has restrictions on eligibility for households such

as maximum household income. proposition e would streamline the approval process by exempting affordable housing developments from a number of approvals by the city if those developments comply with the planning and building code. when the city leases its property or provides financing for these housing projects, approval by the board of supervisors may be necessary. under the measure, the city would have six months to approve these developments. in addition to the time required for any board of supervisors approval if necessary. this measure may allow these developments to proceed without environmental review under state law. this measure requires the mayor to provide annual affordable housing reports with the mayor's proposed budget. under this proposition, the board of supervisors couldn't

amend city law to streamline these to additional types of housing projects. contractors who build projects under this measure must pay their employee prevailing wages and contractors who build projects for educator of 25 or more and they must use a skilled workforce that has a certain percentage of worker who's graj waited from apprenticeship program. if proposition e passes with more votes than proposition d, then proposition d would have no legal effect. if you vote yes, you want to streamline approval of affordable housing projects that provide multifamily housing where all units are for households with incomes up 120 miles-per-hour of jeremy january income and the average household income for all residential units can be no more than 80% of area

median income. it equals to 8% of the total number of units in the entire project. or that all residential unit was for households that include at least one san francisco unified school district or city college employee with certain household income restrictions. projects that use city property or city financing would continue to require board of supervisors approval. the board of supervisors could not amend city law to apply these streamlined approvals to additional types of housing projects. and in certain projects, contractors must use a skilled and trained workforce that includes workers who have graduated from apprenticeship programs. if you vote no, you do not want to make these changes. i'm here with charlie thomas with the council of community housing organizations and

proponent of proposition e. thank you. >> thank you for having me. >> we're joined by corey smith from the housing action coalition and an opponent of the measure. >> good morning. >> thank you both for being here. i would like to start with charlie. why do you believe this proposition is so important? >> proposition e housing our families and workers is an opportunity for san francisco really to set on the right path to achieve the affordability we need to serve our workforce and house working families. all of us are touched by the afford ability crisis where we're working family in the sunset or fillmore or china town, bay view, we all experienced that pressure and that's happening because over the last number of years, san francisco has far exceeded the production of high and luxury housing. we've built more than 51% of our state

mandated goals but when it comes to affordable housing, we're short and reached less than 50% of our affordable housing goals so san franciscans are priced out. it means the next generation coming up in the city can't imagine a future in their hometown, it means many of our aging population on fixed incomes are trying to stretch those incomes to meet their housing needs, our educator can't live in the same communities where they teach, our first responders and essential workers are unable to live in the cities they serve, so many of our local workers are unable to find rents affordable based on the wages they earn. so this proposition would accelerate our housing production to keep our city diverse to house our local workforce. it would help us achieve affordable housing balance to make housing more accessible to those who are currently priced out. >> thank you. you on this corey.

>> thank you shannon and the league for hosting this and sfgov tv for being here. i does agree and don't believe san francisco built more housing, i think we need more housing at all income levels for everybody who wants to live here and i think proposition e is an extra hearing, it's the wrong path forward compared to proposition d which we're supportive of the affordable homes measure. key things about proposition e, it was put on the ballot by the san francisco board of supervisors and this is the exact same board of supervisors that rejected a project with 24 percent affordable housing union labor on the -- it's the same san francisco board of supervisors that killed a 316 affordable by design project from being built on a church lot. and it's same san francisco board of supervisors that rejected the opportunity to acquire a hotel for homeless in supportive housing at 1800 sutter street.

when you have these series of events happening and you have a board of supervisors that regularly reject housing, why did they put this measure on the ballot? the answer is simple. because pro housing advocates and labor union collected signatures and worked with the people of san francisco to put proposition d definitely going to be building housing on the ballot. this was a response and the intent is to confuse voters and think both measures, voters should reject proposition e, no more extra hearing and vote yes on proposition d, definitely more housing. >> thank you. we're going to move into some questions and the first question is going to go to you, corey. so, proposition e aims to streamline the construction of affordable housing but has cav yeses that may actually impede count instruction such as restrictions on project overview, the type of housing that can be built and the qualification of construction workers. how do you envision that proposition e will or will not be actually result in the expedited construction of

truly affordable housing? >> really good question. and when we look at these competing measures and they are side-by-side, based on the requirements there, there's absolutely no doubt that proposition d, affordable holes is going to result in more house and affordable housing. affordable house is what we need and we need housing of all types here in san francisco. and then one of the key pieces and the key differences between these two measures is the fact that the competing measure from the board of supervisors actually allows them to maintain the ability to have hearings and continue to reject one hundred percent affordable housing projects that are code compliant. we're talking beginning projects that follow all of the local rules, all of the guidelines. those are not the projects we need to have and endless hearings which could result in unnecessary lawsuits that make it take longer and increases the overall cost of construction by really significant amount. >> thank you. same question to

you, charlie. on you do you feel these caveats will impact the proposition and how do you envision it will actually result in the expedited construction of truly affordable housing? >> this housing for workers and families initiative will accelerate not only the permitting of new housing but also the actual development and construction of new housing. so we're talking about three different housing types, one hundred percent affordable homes and educator and teacher housing and mixed income and multigenerational housing development. these developments would be required to provide at least 30% onsite affordable units serving a range of incomes from low to moderate-income. all of these new affordable units would be family size, at least two and three bedrooms to serve family households in san francisco. and this would also be a boost to workers because it

would follow prevailing wage guidelines and requires skilled and trade previsions. san francisco is a uniontown. in the spirit of that, really providing a pathway for more workers in order to participate in state sponsored apprenticeship programs. >> thank you. that's a good lead into my next question which is that proposition e requires prevailing wage for construction workers on affordable housing. some training or qualifications for some workers, can you clarify how proposition e will help protect workers and how those requirements will be enforced? >> proposition e would provide an opportunity to grow our union workforce. it would provide a pathway for more workers to participate in state sponsored apprenticeship programs and skilled workers and the prevailing wage previsions will

encourage high-quality wages and this prevision is endorsed by the san francisco building trades council as well as the san francisco labor council that are also equally committed to supporting high level worker protections and in san francisco, we have an affordable housing delivery system that has a high leave of oversight and this prevision will have greater oversight into the development of these projects in order to protect those worker rights. >> thank you. same question to you, corey. >> thank you, so the labor previsions are really one of the interesting pieces to this, looking at the two competing measures and i'm happy the board of supervisors did recognize skilled ask training for housing. it doesn't make sense because the labor force is not there. i look at it two circles. we have one circle inside of a larger circle. we want union pools to built the housing and

it's not going to be possible understand extra hearing board of supervisors measure. the other side to that is prop six d, the affordable homes requires prevailing wage and health care ask apprenticeship. that strikes the right balance of state of the art top-of-the-line labor protection but at the same time making sure we utilize that larger labor pool so people actually get and get to work, are making the money that's needed to live in the housing they are building which is crucial and that's why we should an supporting affordable housing now. >> thank you. closing statements, anymore thoughts on proposition e, charlie? >> thank you so much for the opportunity. housing for families and workers really prioritizes real affordability to close the affordability gap, in order to address between the difference between developers and buildings and what san franciscans need. it is supported by many people and organizations across the city, i mentioned the building trades

council and the san francisco labor council, the service workers union and teachers union and the firefighters union and san francisco democratic party, many community organizations, the san francisco (indiscernible) coalition. if we want to keep families in san francisco, we want to keep vulnerable residents in their homes, we also want to jump start economic growth, we urge you to support proposition e, e for everyone. it will create the tools for san francisco to follow through on its prop this to deliver real affordable housing. >> thank you. corey, your thoughts. >> san francisco has a fannating choice ahead of us with two competing measures that sounds similar but at the end of the day, there's one key difference. affordable homes is going result in affordable house nothing san francisco. it's going to do that because it eliminating unnecessary hears and eliminating the board of supervisors to slowdown or

blockhousing projects which they have done on numerous occasions and 469 stephenson, 450 official and 1800 sutter street which is a supportive housing proposal. the fact that these hearing exist in law suits could still exist if the competing anti-housing board of supervisors measure passes and the wrong path forward. we need more housing and more affordable housing across our policy in san francisco and that's why the affordable home measure supported by scott wiener and london breed and the carpenters union and habitat for humanity and mission housing mission corporation and people build affordable house, no, the affordable homes measure will result in more affordable housing in san francisco. and if building more housing and more affordable housing is the goal, voters should vote yes on affordable homes now, proposition d, definitely going to build more houses and no on

proposition e, the competing of the board of supervisors. >> thank you both for your time and your willingness to inform the public on these measures. >> thank you. >> we hope this discussion has been informative. for more information about this and other ballot measures in the november election, please visit the department of elections website at sf elections dot org. remember, early voting is available at city hall starting on october 11th from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and if you don't vote early, be sure to vote on tuesday, november 8th.

>> hello, i'm shanna with the league of women's voters of san francisco. along with the league and sfgov tv, i'm here to discuss proposition j, a ballot measure which will be before the voters on tuesday, november 8th. currently, the city has closed certain public streets to private motor vehicles, reserving the streets as open space for recreational purposes. these closures were enacted in response to the covid-19 pandemic. in may, 2022, the board of supervisors adopted an ordinance called the golden gate park access and safety program that closed portions of john f kennedy drive and certain connective streets in golden gate park to private motor vehicles. the closures are 7 days a week, reserving the streets as open space for recreational uses. these closures do not apply to

emergency vehicles, official government vehicles, inter park transit shuttle buss and similar vehicles to transport people and vehicles making delivers to the young museum. proposition j will affirm the ordinance the board adopted in may of 2022. if proposition j passes, the board may later amend the ordinance by a majority vote. if proposition j passes with more votes than proposition i, proposition i would have no legal effect. if you vote yes, you want to affirm the ordinance the board adopted in may of 2022, reserving portions of john f kennedy drive and certain connective streets in golden gate park as open spaces and closing those streets seven days a week to private motor vehicles with limited exceptions. if you vote no, you do not want to affirm the boards

may 2022 ordinance. i'm here with justin with the san francisco bicycle coalition and a proponent of proposition j, welcome. >> thank you for having me today. >> we're also joined by esther from the art san francisco and an opponent of the measure. >> thank you. >> thank you both for being here. i like to start with esther, why do you believe this proposition is so important? >> well, thank you so much for including us. that's the first thing i want to say and we're the largest organization serving a dull was develop mental abilities in san francisco and it's important to say that this is really not about cars, it's about people. all people no matter where they live in the city and no matter how they need to get around, having access to the best parts of san francisco, so this discussion needs to include the input of people with disabilities and seniors since it has an impact on them. nobody

reached out to our community, in fact we collaborated with activist to reach out to the mayor's office and the board of supervisors but we have gotten no traction. so, one piece of this conversation that has been missing is access to employment not just recreation between the cal academy and the d. young, art participants make up 35 people working and interning at these institutions so this impedes them making a live. whether you think about getting to work, maybe it's public transit and juna is the closest they can get to the museums so they are going to need to walk 11 minutes from the end juda at ninth avenue. the shuttle isn't great for everyone either, erratic schedule. et cetera. even para transit, we had our para transit van heckled when we were dropping people off, so it's a challenge. it has been a challenge.

>> thank you. justin? >> prop j reaffirmed the community agreement that the one -- they may jfk car free which is the closure of jfk cars and community agreement in expanding access for communities which included addition of 29ada spots including dedicated lot behind the -- between the ban shell and also conversations with the music concourse garage which is eight hundred spots which is affordable but we want to make it affordable for people with disabilities and family and anyone who needs to get to the park because that's important. like, the reason this closure is important because jfk has been a part of the corridor network since 2017 which makes -- it puts in the top 13% of the streets that contribute to 75% of traffic deaths so you know, access is also about making people safe. reopening,

by making this car-free is creating a safe space for all road users and in fact, access expanded by the addition of 88 spots and the addition of a shuttle every 15 minutes and has shown to the fact that daily attendance to the park is 36%. so it's important that jfk has been safe and a very accessible park for all. >> thank you. and that helps me lead into my first question is to you justin. we're talking about safety and having jfk drive closed ask the safety of cyclists and pedestrian and i'm hoping you can talk about how you feel proposition j addresses the safety concerns that folks have around cyclists and pedestrians in the park? >> i mean, the biggest conversation we've always heard is accomplishing between the people who drive, people who bike and people who drive and making it attainable for years and jfk (indiscernible) and by

separating it, it allows walkers and bikers or people who can't necessarily afford to drive to be able to walk easily to the academy but increased by having a shuttle come every 15 minutes for the park. by having other options and the addition to 80 spots and conversation with the garage, we really hope that our park is accessible and equity option for all communities. >> thank you. esther, similar question to you. how do you address the concerns about safety, often we're talking about cyclists and pedestrians on jfk drive, from your perspective, what is the issues you have around safety? >> one of the concerns we have for people who move a little slower out and about on the closed jfk drive is whether bicyclists going by, whether there's safety for pedestrians

crossing and whether bicyclists have a speed limb so that's an issue for us -- speed limit so that's an issue for. regarding the shuttle, i think it's wonderful there are one but there's no shuttle shelters and the buses are not kneeling buses and the schedule has been erratic and the pathways from the shuttle station, shuttle stops to the nearby attractions are not paved. so, we would be excited to see the parking price come down and the parking garage, i will say that would be wonderful. >> thank you. our second question is going back to you, as you noted the facilities and cultural institutions in golden gate park is a popular destination for residents and tourists and a source of employment in san francisco, so how is access to these facilities addressed in proposition j and how do you feel, like, it needs to be addressed? >> well, there's an attempt at address going. i think the

intention is fine. i think there's probably a great compromise that could be worked out but currently, by ada access requirements, it is not accessible to people with disabilities, so and that's the whole reason we're opposing this measure. and you know, golden gate park should be accessible to all. i think we both agree with that but that requires car access for some people, period. >> same question to you justin. >> it's important that we can preserve the access, which is why there's net increase around ada around music concourse. so you have the ban slel shell and it's closer than stopping juda. this is because prop -- the jfk was an agreement and working with disability advocates and working with the mayor's office

to make sure that we're really looping as many interest and concerns and needs as part of making it more accessible. this isn't about being car free but access and this measure reaffirmed the golden gate park access which is conversations about adding more recesses for ada access and lowering the garage prices and creating better wifi and it can help organize the traffic and the busyness of jfk whether there's bikers and walkers. >> thank you. we're at closing statements, so we will start with you, esther. any last thoughts? >> sure. the closure of jfk for use during the height of the pandemic made absolute sense and people with disabilities were among the hardest hit by the pandemic. now, that it's becoming safer to get out and about, the needs of people with disabilities must be considered equally to non-disabled folks and people with disabilities should be included in this conversation and not dealt with as an afterthought or dismissed

as a bunch complainers and the broader disability in san francisco should be surveyed to determine their access needs. so, there's many ways to compromise but it doesn't seem like the proposers of in prop j is in agreement with that. we see when it's inclusive, we'll get behind it but this isn't it for us yet. >> thank you. closing thoughts, justin. >> i want to mention that prop, jfk closure has been popular in san francisco. (indiscernible) and rec. and park, so 17% of san franciscans approve the road closure at jfk and this includes the measures to make park more accessible and safe including the shuttle with net increase of ada spots and (indiscernible). there's five thousand parking spots within golden gate spots and having access to the spots and making a first class spot for bikers and walkers and we

want to be a leader in community spaces in san francisco. >> thank you. and thank you both for your time and you're willingness to educate the public about this measure. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> we hope this discussion has been informative. for more information about this and other ballot measures in the november election, please visit the department of elections website at sf elections dot org. remember, early voting is available at city hall starting on october 11th from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and if you don't vote early, be sure to vote on tuesday, november 8th.