Remarks by Fiona Hinze
13 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 1 of 1
I'll move the item to approve the items in 10.2.
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Okay, great. then I'm ready to make a motion to approve.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Sort of doubling down on Director Heminger's line of thought here, Lieutenant Flores, do you have like a specific plan to deal with the overflow folks that are now being displaced? Do you have like a plan for the displacement? So, yeah.
And your current level of staffing, are you able to do the level of enforcement in those displaced, affected areas that is you consider sufficient, or do you feel like you need to step that up?
You'll continue at the at that current enforcement level you think I'm going to keep trying to keep trying you're going to keep trying okay I I think colleagues I think the the where I'm at is I think the the testimony in favor of keeping the current barricades was compelling we've heard from several residents And I think that their testimony regarding their own quality of life issues and how these barriers helped to address those are compelling. I am, like the rest of my colleagues, particularly Director Kikina, very sympathetic to the sort Displacement issues, this is one of the chronic…
Thank you, Madam Chair. Just a couple questions. So if there's a patient safety zone existing already anywhere in the city, is it eligible for this program? Or can you clarify that? I was a little confused.
And then sort of on the vehicular requirements and such, are those just to be viewed as guidelines? Should communities apply if they think they have a painted safety zone or area to be painted? Are we going to be enforcing those guidelines pretty strictly?
Excuse me. The guidelines as put in the staff report does seem to include the neighborhood, so it's good to hear that those are just guidelines. Could you talk a little bit about the community agreement that will be signed, not necessarily the insurance part particularly, but just keeping these in good order and what they might be asked to do.
And then enforcement. I know for like shared spaces, for example, sometimes people snap photos and sort of that requirement. And I know a photo is going to be required for at least additional submission for this program. But are we going to require, what sort of enforcement, if any, are we going to have here?
And then if there is a complaint, are there staff that are gonna be able to go out there and look, or how's that gonna go?
Okay and then just to weigh in on me for me personally on the insurance requirement I do think it's important to have an insurance requirement just to protect the city and we never know when things will happen in the right of way etc so just be like looking out as you know responsible board members to the city it's something that I think would begin to have a weakness test, as my colleagues are saying, as we move forward in the pilot. But yeah, I hope that this is a successful program. I'm not going to hold it up in any way. I appreciate the community worked on it, but I am interested to see…
Sure thank you madam chair and I'll be quick since Victoria covered the bulk of it I do think that in order to be in alignment with both mayor lori's current executive directive that is called as Victoria said the street safety initiative and We can't forget also about Supervisor Maldonado's Street Safety Act. I do think for the sake of alignment in our work as an agency and to promote sort of a one city approach here, I do hope that when the name change comes to us, I do hope that you do approve it. I think it shows, like I said, a one city approach. And again, the committee did approve it…