tv BOS Budget and Finance Committee SFGTV January 5, 2022 10:30am-2:31pm PST
the minutes will reflect that committee members participated in this remote meeting through video conference to the same extent as though physically present. the city services are essential and invite public participation in the following ways. public health measure will be available on either channels 76, 68 or 99 and the call-in number is streamed across the screen. each speaker will be allowed to two minutes unless otherwise stated. you can call 415-655-0001, meeting i.d., 2490 1080 5064 then press # #. when connected, you will hear the meeting discussions, but muted and in listening mode only. please press star 3 to be unmuted. make sure to turn down your
television or radio or streaming device. alternatively, you may submit public comment by e-mailing myself, the budget and finance clerk at firstname.lastname@example.org. if you e-mail, it will be included as part of the official file you can also send mail. items acted upon today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda of january 11 unless otherwise stated. mr. chair. >> chair: all right. thank you. we have a very full budget and finance committee today, so thanks, everyone, for your brief participation and your patience. thank you to the public who may be joining us for public on the
items. mr. clerk, can you call item 1. >> clerk: this is a resolution approving amendment no. 2 to the agreement between the san francisco public health foundation and the department of public health to provide program administration and support services to the community health engagement program, to increase the contract amount by $10,668,262 for a total amount not to exceed $20,027,567 for a total agreement term of january 1, 2020, through december 31, 2024, to commence following approval by the board of supervisors, and to authorize dph to enter into amendments or modifications to the contract prior to its final execution by all parties that do not materially increase the obligations or liabilities to the city and are necessary to effectuate the purposes of the contract. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001 meeting i.d., 2490 1080 5064, then press # #.
if you haven't done so press star 3. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. wait to be unmuted and you may begin your comments. mr. chair. >> chair: thank you, mr. clerk. we have michelle ruggels from d. pvmed h. to present on this item. >> good morning, superiors. this contract with the san francisco health association is a contracted fund to provide project-based support services for community and health engagement programs which are designed to focus on capacity building for community engagement to improve well-being. this contract goes to december 2024 and the term isn't changing but we are here today because we added funding which is continuing this year for covid response, so essentially that is
what bumped the contract up to you. that's why we're here today. so the covid-19 capacity was increased to working priority neighborhoods with populations most impacted by health disparities. with this additional funding, we are able to directly support residents with access to testing, vaccines, covid-19 prevention and linkages. so this has been a really helpful contract to be able to have for that purpose specifically. so just to -- what the vendor does is they issue r.f.p.s and subcontracts for subcontractors of which we have 23 community-based organizations providing a variety of services in the rubric of community
health engagement, violence prevention, et cetera. the public health foundation receives a 10% fee for the services that they provide. they were generous and kind enough for the covid additional funding. they're only charging a 5% fee. so anyway, if you have questions, i have the staff here from the department of public health that are in support of this contract. >> chair: i would imagine so. thank you. can we hear from the b.l.a. on this? >> chair, thank you. good morning, superiors. nick bernard from the budget and analysis office. this proposed resolution would approve the second amendment to the department of public health contract with the public health foundation. as noted by ms. ruggles, the foundation administers 23
subcontracts that provide programs to mitigate disease transmission such as covid, hepatitis c, h.i.v., and other programs. as we show on page 4, this amendment is increasing the not to exceed amount of $10 million for a total of $20 million. as noted, the foundation receives a 5% administrative fee for covid programs and 10% for managing and monitoring the progress on the various scopes of work. we do recommend approval of the resolution and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> chair: thank you. supervisor mar. >> thank you. this all sounds like really important work, the covid response work as well as the other important programs,
community health engagement, and violence prevention that are supported through this contract. i guess i just had a question about why this is being done through s.f. public health foundation and kind of an intermediary to do the r.f.p. and the contracts versus d.p.h. doing it directly. it seems like an extra layer of bureaucracy. so if you could just elaborate on that. >> yeah, sometimes we do this and we have an initiative. what we are trying to attract are small agencies that may not have the infrastructure to contact directly with the department of public health but are at the community level and have a strong connection to the various communities with which they work. so this has been a successful way to attract those vendors
that really are at the ground level who can't barely accommodate all of the work we can do and follow the requirements to contract directly. so i think it's just helpful to us. you can see it's got a big spread. we have 23 community-based contractors that are being managed by this program administrator contract. we did go out to bid for program administration services and we developed an r.f.q. -- we developed an eligible list. and then when and if we need this service, which is actually super helpful when we're trying to do something very community-based across the board, that then we'll issue a mini r.f.p. and select the vendor. so that's why we do that.
>> yeah, thanks, that's really helpful to understand and makes sense. i'm in support of this. >> chair: can we go to public comment, please. >> clerk: thank you, chair. operations is checking to see if there are any callers in the queue. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item, press star 3 to be added to the queue to speak. for those waiting, please wait until you are unmuted and then you can begin your comments. mr. akins, do we have any callers?
looks like this is an unattended line. we can go to the next caller. >> operator: mr. clerk, both callers appear to be unattended lines. >> clerk: thank you, mr. akins. are there anymore in the queue or was that just the two? >> operator: the only two callers in the queue are unattended lines. >> clerk: thank you, mr. akins. mr. chair. >> chair: great. public comment is closed. i'm not seeing any further questions or comments from colleagues. i want to make a motion to move item 1 to the full board with a positive recommendation. mr. clerk, can we have a roll call vote, please.
[ roll call ] >> chair: this will go to the full board without recommendation. thank you so much. can you please call item 2. >> clerk: item 2 is resolution approving amendment no. 2 to the agreement between helios healthcare, llc and the department of public health (dph), for behavioral health services, to increase the agreement by $18,239,925 for an amount not to exceed $27,904,325; to extend the term by six years and six months from december 31, 2021, through june 30, 2028, for a total agreement term of july 1, 2018, through june 30, 2028; and to authorize dph to enter into amendments or modifications to the contract prior to its final execution by all parties that do not materially increase the obligations or liabilities to the city and are necessary to effectuate the purposes of the contract. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001 meeting i.d. 2490
1080 5064 then press # # if you haven't done so. please press star 3 to speak. a system prompt will indicate you may speak and you will have been unmuted to begin your comments. >> chair: ms. ruggles. >> thank you. good morning. the purpose of this resolution, as was mentioned, is to seek your approval to extend the contract to june 30, 2028, and to increase the funding. as you'll note, though, the current contract extension begins on january 1, so we're asking to amend the resolution for your retroactive approval. we were okay, but we submitted this item on november 8, but due to the holidays and your
incredibly busy business for the city, today was the first available date to have this calendar set. so this contract is with a long-term vendor to d.p.h. to provide residential psychiatric care in a locked facility. this is the level of care for the most mentally ill clients who require this level of care to be stabilized. as noted in the report, the facility accepts patients from our jails as well as another unit which will free up space in the in-patient unit. the programs here are clients with medical and psychiatric issues. we have a stable flow of clients that need this level of care which is why we're proposing this length of the extension.
we only pay for beds that are filled so we're not going to -- anyway. that's why we requested the full extension that we have. if you have questions, i have representatives from the program that can speak to -- not the program, our department that can speak to any of the details you might have questions about. >> chair: thank you. superior safai. >> thank you, chair. ms. ruggles, who is here from d.p.h.? >> kelly karamoto is here from d.p.h. >> okay, great. kelly. >> hi, how are you? >> good morning, supervisor. thank you. >> happy new year. thank you for joining us.
i have a question, just a general overall. i mean, when we did our mental health kind of our bed audit from a couple of years ago, i know you all did an extensive response. how many of these types of beds do we have in the entire universe that serve san francisco? is this the only facility that we work with that does locked skilled care, psychiatric care? >> no, it is not, but the only one that does co-occurring medical. when someone has a complex medical condition accompanying their mental health diagnosis and needs skilled nursing and management for the behavioral health needs, this is the only facility that we -- i shouldn't say only, but it is the primary -- i'm sorry, i missed that last part.
you said the only facility that serves both what? >> complex medical in addition to behavioral health. >> got it. so -- and is it the only locked facility that we work with? >> for this level of care it is -- i'm going to say yes. it's for people who have -- so if they have very complex, very advanced wound care needs and they also have mental health, individuals who are having many co-occurring medical conditions like severe diabetes with wound care issues and vision issues in addition to their mental health issues is that client. this facility is the only facility that is willing to take that level of client at this time. >> so my understanding is they have more capacity than 29 beds at this facility, but we only
contract with them for 29 beds. >> these contracts run that we buy beds when they're available and when we have a need. so it is possible to get more beds if we have a new referral. so the -- this is a very movable number. >> so my understanding was based on the recommendations we were supposed to have an additional 13 beds available to us. to have 29 beds for the entire city and county of san francisco that serves this type of need, it seems grossly under the amount that's necessary. that -- but i just want to understand why we have so few. and then my understanding was we were supposed to have an
additional 13 added at least to the universe that we would work with. >> correct. so the level of care we need, the 29 more beds, is skilled nursing facility co-occurring behavioral health, but not to the medical acuity that this h elios contract serves. we have behavioral health and also at medical hill and garfield. crestwood has two facilities, one that serves predominantly brain injury co-occurring with mental health and then crestwood stevenson which is probably where we have the majority of our beds, i want to say over 60 at this point for serving that level of client. so it's continuing care. the helios is for the most ill
of those populations. >> so how many beds do we have in our universe for san francisco? >> for total beds or skilled nursing co-occurring? >> no, total beds that would be a locked facility for all different kinds of care. >> michelle, do you have that number handy? >> no, i don't have that number, but i have one more item and after that i can definitely get it or i can try e-mailing someone quickly. >> okay. and just going back to the original, what about the additional 13 that we were supposed to have access to or under contract when available? >> i think the request is in at crestwood to try to find beds in their system to allocate to san francisco. most of these facilities are shared across local counties
using the beds. so it's a little bit of a negotiation in order to get access to the beds. but in general, crestwood offers us beds as first vacant bed comes to us first. so they're offered for pickup. there aren't any facilities in this level of care that are empty. >> so do you think we have enough of these types of beds serving san francisco? >> i think we're finding an increasing need for this level of care as people are aging into this system. as the cohort is getting older and having more co-occurring illness, the need for beds is moving from mental health rehab facility beds and an increasing number of a need for skilled nursing. >> so this is an older population? >> they are a combination of
older and i would say the sad thing is i think the longer you are on psychotropic medications, the impact to your system is higher. we have younger individuals who if they weren't having behavioral health issues on long-term psychotropics, their physical condition is similar to those in their 80s. it's 376 locked beds and 167 are in the skilled nursing locked. >> say the last part again. >> 167 skilled nursing locks. >> 167 skilled nursing locks and then how many -- that's how many we have in our universe for san francisco? >> yes. >> and then how many are not
skilled nursing? >> 367. >> that's on top of the 167? >> yes. so 367 are mental health rehabilitation center beds and then 167 are skilled nursing locked sites. >> so do you think the 360-plus is the right number for san francisco right now? not the skilled nursing, the mental health rehabilitation. >> i think that right number of locked beds is a dependency on the approach to care. so i think if the preference is to bring people into high levels of care and move them to wellness, it would be better for us to have more beds. i think when dr. lan did a bed study, that was the recommendation of that report as well, that there was a shortfall
of beds in that category. i think the goal would be to actually have a proactive system of care that actually intervenes sooner and keeps people on their wellness journey so there wasn't as much of a dependence on locked beds. to proactively keep people out of that level of care. >> what was the recommendation of the blan report? how many are we falling short overall? >> i don't remember the exact number. i want to say in the 30s, that they wanted us to add 30 more beds -- >> mental health rehabilitation? >> right. >> and then an additional 13 in the skilled nursing locked category? >> right. and my understanding is the 30 beds that were shortfall in the mental health rehab were obtained at crestwood santa barbara. >> say that last part again. >> the beds shortfall and mental health rehab were obtained at
crestwood santa barbara. >> and that was the additional 30? >> yes. >> okay. okay. i guess we can talk about the referral process. how do people end up in these facilities? what's the process that they end up in a locked facility? what's the process they go through in san francisco? >> in san francisco it is usually -- you get referred to a locked set of cubes most frequently from the hospital. you have an acute episode. you get hospitalized. they are unable to stabilize you quickly. so if you're already not l.p.s. conservatorship, then [indiscernible] and from there you will be referred to a lock set of cubes to continue on your recovery and wellness journey.
>> and l.p.s. is after 5150 or the same? >> it's after. >> how how long after an episode? >> the progression of a conservatorship -- a 5150 is up to a three-day hold, 72 hours, and then it moves to a 52/50, which is 14 days or a 52/70, which lets you hold on a 30-day hold and then they file for the temporary conservatorship. and then a public defender or defense attorney gets appointed to the client and the office will file and do an evaluation for an l.p.s. conservatorship. if it gets granted, lowest conservatorship will be for an initial year. >> so that's who we're dealing with, people who have done
51/50, then 52/50, then they go back -- >> and conservatorship and then the permanent ones. >> um-hum. okay. those are all my questions. so it sounds like the 30 additional beds were -- that were in santa barbara and then these 13 are still not -- we have not delivered those yet. >> right. we are in the process of acquiring them. >> and how far away are we from acquiring those additional 13? >> it's one of those difficult-to-determine times because as i noted, you're waiting for a bed to become available for it to be allocated to san francisco. length of stay is not something we have control over so it's hard to guesstimate. >> so you don't really have a timeline that you could provide us on the additional 13? >> we can try and guesstimate,
but we would have to work with the facilities to figure out what their flow is trending and then we would be able to give you a rough number. >> i guess what i'm asking is we have 29 beds. we're asking for an additional funding support today and the recommendations were for an additional 13. so my question is: have we put in the request? where are we in line with the request? that's what i'm trying to get a handle on. >> the 13 extra beds are for general skilled nursing co-occurring mental health. the beds at helios are for tip-of-the-iceberg individuals who are challenged in addition to their behavioral health. that number has been fairly
static which is kind of good news that we don't wait for people to get incredibly ill where their needs are unmanaged and they need this level of care. those who need more general care is the ones we contract with freemont and crestwood and garfield. that's where the gap is and where we're trying to work with those entities and facilities to increase that level of care. on the helios side, the flow has been fairly stable and there recently hasn't been a high demand for that level of care beds. >> so one of the things that we're dealing with right now, ms. hiromoto, and i know you're aware of this, is we're dealing with this emergency order in the tenderloin to deal with the public health crisis that's there.
i'm -- i was there this morning. i see people lying on the ground. this is supervisor haney's district. he's talked extensively about this over the last couple of years. since we have this order and we're all engaged in this order now, one of the things that i know they're trying to do is to help people in so many different ways. i see people laid out on the streets walking and talking and stuff, all of this stuff that you know. but is there a plan to expand the number of these needed for folks that might be in need of these types of facilities as part of the emergency plan that d.p.h. is working on with d.e.m.
for that community? there is a high concentration of people with severe psychiatric needs in the tenderloin area. have you thought of that or engaged on that in this emergency order? >> absolutely. we are collaborating closely on making sure that the plan gets developed to meet the needs of the individuals. >> so my question is one of the things we're trying to do in this emergency order is not do them the same way as we've done them in the past. if there is an opportunity here to shift resources and have additional support if we're not -- if we do have the number of skilled nursing locked beds, med-psych beds, if we don't have the mental health rehabilitation beds, we should be looking to
expand that opportunity now under this emergency order. have y'all thought about that? >> it is -- [indiscernible] is what is being worked on actively as emergency responses are getting worked out. your point is absolutely well taken. >> so one of the things that i think would be important -- and again, i'm happy to work with supervisor haney and your team, but i think this is a real opportunity here to really take another analysis, this conversation about hiring 200 mental health clinicians as part of mental health s.f., but i also think we're falling short based on the audit that we did and the work that we've done and the reports that you're referring to for offering some of these opportunities for people to really get the type of rehabilitation that they need and the types of facilities that we don't have in san francisco.
so it's something that i definitely would like to and will be following up with d.p.h. on, hopefully that that will be part of this 90-day plan, not just hiring 200 mental health clinicians, which i think is extremely important for mental health s.f. in doing the mental health work up front where people don't get to the point of being in a locked facility, but also dealing with the reality that we probably need more beds available in these types of facilities. so i really think that that should be a part of this conversation that's happening. >> understood. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chair. >> thank you for the questions. can we go to b.l.a. >> this proposed resolution would [indiscernible] and extend
the term by six and a half years through june 2028. now, as we show on page 9 of our report, the amendment increases the not to exceed amount by $18.2 million to $27.9 million. this is based on a building rate for about 37 mental health beds in that facility and continues the existing capacity for the existing contract. the facility, as previously mentioned, is the [indiscernible] in sunnyvale. we do recommend approval of the resolution and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> chair: thank you. i note that there was potentially an amendment.
is there anything that you wanted to say about that, ms. ruggles. i think it is retroactive language. >> i think in the final resolution after this meeting we would add the term or the word retroactive, requesting retroactive approval because the current contract technically has ended. the term december 31 so it's now january. so what you're approving would be retroactive extension. >> chair: okay. all right. let's open this to public comment first. >> clerk: thank you, chair haney. operator, i'm checking to see if there are any members in the queue. members of the public press star 3 now to speak. others on hold wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and that is your indication to begin your
comments. mr. at kins, are there any callers who wish to comment? mr. atkins, is that a -- another silent caller. >> operator: mr. clerk, the only caller in the queue appears to be an unattended line. >> clerk: thank you, mr. atkins. mr. chair. >> chair: all right. public comment is closed. thank you again for your work and thanks vice-chair safai, for your questions. can we move to amend the resolution as offered by d.p.h. that this is a retroactive
approval. >> clerk: on the motion to amend the resolution and add the retroactive language. [ roll call ]. >> clerk: we have three ayes. >> chair: now i want to make a motion to move item 2 to the full board with a positive recommendation as amended. >> clerk: on the motion to forward the item as amended. [ roll call ]. >> clerk: we have three ayes. >> chair: great. thank you. this will go to the full board with a positive recommendation as amended. all right. more d.p.h. can we please call item 3. >> clerk: item 3 is a
resolution approving amendment no. 2 to the agreement between health advocates, llc and the department of public health for uncompensated care reimbursement recovery services, to increase the agreement amount by $3,304,915, for an amount not to exceed $21,319,461; and to extend the term by two years, from december 31, 2021, through december 31, 2023, for a total agreement term of january 1, 2014, through december 31, 2023; and to authorize dph to enter into amendments or modifications to the contract prior to its final execution by all parties that do not materially increase the obligations or liabilities to the city and are necessary to effectuate the purposes of the contract. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this line should call 415-655-0001 meeting i.d. 2490 1080 5064 then press # #. if you haven't already done so, please press star 3 to speak. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand and
you will remain muted until unmuted and you may begin your comments. mr. chair. >> chair: thank you. ms. ruggles. >> good morning, supervisor. i'm joined by a manager of patient financial services to answer questions. essentially this is very straightforward. what we are requesting is to extend the contract for the final two years authorized under the current r.f.p. with really no changes to the scope of services. the scope of services is assisting with medical assistance. representing patients if there is an appeal. this contract is similar to the last one in that the contract ended december 31. the new contract begins or the extension begins on january 1. so we would like to request that
the resolution is amended for retroactive approval. and also the budget and legislative analyst has a recommendation to reduce the amount of the contract to current actual and the department is in concurrence with that recommendation. if you have any questions, we are here to answer. >> chair: thank you. appreciate it. could we have the b.l.a. report, please. >> yes. this resolution approves the second amendment with the d.p.h. contract with health advocate extending the term through december 2023 and increasing the not to exceed amount by $3.3 million for a total of $21.3 million. as noted by ms. ruggle s, this
assists people with their health services and health advocates are paid a fixed fee for which it seeks reimbursement. the fees increase approximately 3% a year. as we show on page 13 of our report, based on an analysis of the actual spending on the contract, we do recommend amending the resolution to reduce the not to exceed amount of the contract by approximately $1.2 million so the total not to exceed would be $20.1 million and we recommend approval as amended. i'm happy to answer questions. >> chair: thank you. colleagues, questions about that or to the d.p.h.? ms. ruggles, are you amenable to
that amendment? >> yes, we are. >> chair: could we open this for public comment, please. >> clerk: thank you, chair haney. operations is opening this to see if there are any callers in the queue. members of the public who wish to provide public comment, press star 3 to speak. for those on hold, continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you can begin your comments. mr. atkins, are there any callers? >> operator: mr. clerk, there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you very much. chair. >> chair: thank you. appreciate that. public comment is now closed. i want to make a motion to accept the b.l.a.'s recommendation and to amend the item. can we please have a roll call vote on that amendment. >> clerk: on the motion to accept the amendments offered by the b.l.a. [ roll call ].
>> clerk: we have three ayes. >> chair: great. thank you. now can we have a roll call on sending this item to the full board with a positive recommendation as amended. >> clerk: on the motion. [ roll call ]. >> clerk: we have three ayes. >> chair: thank you. appreciate that. thank you again, ms. ruggles and smith and thank you for your leadership. mr. clerk, can you please call item 4. >> clerk: item 4 is a resolution authorizing the department of public health to submit an application to continue to receive funding for the ryan white act hiv/aids emergency relief grant
program grant from the health resources services administration; and requesting $15,590,728 in hiv emergency relief program funding for the san francisco eligible metropolitan area for the period of march 1, 2022, through february 28, 2023. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2490 1080 5064 and press # #. if you haven't already done so, please dial star 3 to line up to speak. assistant prompts will indicate you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. mr. chair. >> chair: thank you. and we have d.p.h. to present on
this item. are you on mute? >> sorry. thank you, commissioners. also, bill bloom, the director of d.p.h. services is giving the presentation today. we have a short powerpoint to help show this information and bill bloom is going to start with the first half of that presentation. if someone could pull that up for us and that would be greatly appreciated. thank you. >> i'll start if that's okay. good morning, supervisors. i'm bill bloom, director of h.i.v. health services in d.p.h. it's an honor and thank you for your consideration regarding the
accept and extend authorization for this funding. dean and i will be giving a very brief presentation. our plan is to cover ryan white funding at large and a little bit about our h.h.s. program and what we do and finally with the h.i.v. community planning council, what their role is with this funding. this funding is named after ryan white. i'm sure you remember he was a young man in middle school, diagnosed with aids. he had a short life, but burned brightly in terms of h.i.v. advocacy and discrimination. his mother, mary, actually continues to do this work advocating for h.i.v. funding and acceptance. so you can see on your right-hand side of the screen, these are the different parts of the funding.
i won't go so much into depth. part a is what we're here discussing as well and at the bottom part e is additional funding ending the h.i.v. epidemic. we at h.i.v. health services d.p.h., we receive parts a, b, c, and ehe and in the past received f. our colleagues at the clinic consortium also receive part c and our colleagues at ucsf are funded for part d. next slide, please. so this is kind of an overview of who we serve. on your left-hand side, the double circle there at the end of 2019, beginning of 2020, that's our most complete data provided by our section. almost 16,000 people living with h.i.v., the residents of san francisco. and h.i.v. health services
d.p.h. we have provided some level of service indirectly to a little bit less than half, 7,000. i'd next like to draw your attention to the top right of the screen. we have moved from a one-year funding cycle to a three-year funding cycle. we submitted our competitive application this year that will carry it for the next three years. we don't yet have clarity if we're flat funded for each of these three years. we hope to get it at the middle of the year. in the middle of the slide in the yellow, our annual budget is $39 million and at this point 31% of it is funded through ryan white park. i'll talk about that in the next slide. in terms of who we serve on the bottom right, anyone below 500% of federal poverty level, is a resident of san francisco, is
h.i.v. positive, a little bit of an exception for out of county which i can talk about a little bit, mostly children. so on this slide, san francisco is the grand key the way the feds have structured the ryan white grants. there are metropolitan areas which can be a single county or a city up to actually a state and in some cases multiple states. in san francisco our ema consists of the three counties along the coast. we are the grant administrator for all three counties. the percentage is based on living h.i.v. cases. so san francisco is currently 85% of those cases of the three counties and hence the work coming directly to san francisco. on the right-hand slide this is sad news and a thank you to you
board of supervisors as well, your colleagues in the past. this is a 20-year look back and you can see in the yellow circle there, it's been a 60% reduction in the last years and in red our current funding level in 2020 and we were at one point $37.5 million. largely these cuts have been restored with local fund, general fund restoration. in the past couple of years due to the very difficult projections over the economy, we were actually able to use some of the funding that came in additional for ending the h.i.v. epidemic and the reductions in the ryan white part a. next slide, please.
now i'll turn it over to my colleague. >> good morning, everyone. the next couple of slides are going to be to present a bit of background for you all for our section at h.i.v. health services. we've serviced the grant for the federal and state grants as well as the local and federal donors. we don't provide any direct fund services, but we do manage, as you can see here about 40 contracts with 26 community-based organizations. about 10 contracts and five different divisions in ucsf and about 15 m.o.u.s within 11 different units and clinics in the san francisco department of public health for a total of 65 contracts with m.o.u.s working with 42 different organizations or sections or d.p.h. as bill said earlier, we serve as the grantee for the part a, including the ending the h.i.v. epidemic money, which is a
different funding grant application which was brought here in the past. pennsylvania b, pennsylvania c and the local general fund dollars, this funding is prioritized for people who are low income and meet our severe need definitions. and we provide the performance objectives, about 29 of which are standardized across the major service categories, nearly 130 unique different to service categories -- for service provision. a little bit of background. as you know, with [indiscernible] with the u equals u means that they are unable to pass on the h.i.v. virus if they are suppressed
which is a great point of our h.i.v. prevention efforts. 10 years ago it was 73.5%. as of 2020 we're at 85.5% which is a great achievement considering particularly the populations we work with. on this slide a little bit more what we are charged with in the grantee office. -- a little bit more of that on the last slide, we execute that with the r.f.p.s and the grant contract requirements and contract development and technical assistance, reviewing 70 contractor m.o.u.s throughout the year. we oversee general provision of
funding services and ensure our funders have local and grantor policy requirements. we [indiscernible] throughout the year for all of our grant funders and provide a large amount of level data and demographics to use in the departments as well and additionally we provide performance objectives and [indiscernible] other measures of care. here on the right is a map of the agencies and programs that are funded throughout the city. as you can see, the qulooints for the knowledgeable meeting b of 500% of f.p.l. and being of severe needs are indicated for those clients this last slide is
to present more about our locally mandated planning council called the h.i.v. community planning council, was established in 1992. was merged with the h.i.v. prevention council in 2016. there are 50 chair city slots available on this council, not all of which are filled at once. it's led by two government co-chairs and three community co-chairs. here is a little bit of the mission -- >> [indiscernible] -- >> i'm sorry? >> supervisor safai was just off mute. >> okay. thank you for that. a bit about the mission and vision of the h.i.v. community planning council and their role as a regional planning body. largely their largest task is prioritization of service categories of which there are 27
different service categories. we fund services for and allocation for funding by service category. a little bit of the graph of the structure of the council, there is a full council meeting that meets the fourth monday of the month of all council members and four separate committees that meet monthly as well which do a large chair of the work of that body and form the larger board. that's our last slide and we're happy to answer any questions you all may have. >> chair: thank you. appreciate that update and your work. as always, we're committed to the long-standing work that you are doing to support those living with h.i.v., aids, and as a committee and as a board and a
city, we of course stepped-up and will continue to as we've seen. unfortunately we've seen some reductions in funding at the federal level and i know we have to step up this year and we really want to make sure we are clear about this commitment and our city's overall goals and leadership around serving those who are living with h.i.v. and ensuring they have access to care and getting to zero as well. is there a b.l.a. report on this item? >> clerk: no, chair, we did not report on this item. >> chair: thank you. can we open this for public comment, please. >> clerk: thank you, chair haney. operations is checking to see if there are any callers in the queue. members of the public who may wish to provide comment press star 3 to speak. those on hold, continue to wait until the system indicates you
have been unmuted and that is your queue to begin your comments. mr. atkins, do we have any callers? >> operator: mr. clerk, there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you very much. mr. chair. >> chair: public health measure is closed. before we move this forward, again, i'm going to thank you for your work and your leadership. i would like to have my name added as well as a co-sponsor. with that i want to make a motion to move item 4 to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> chair, sorry, i wanted to say something real quick. i wanted to appreciate all the work that's gone into this and the consistent commitment dealing with this. there are so many ways people get distracted. we believe we are addressing the problem and this is continuing to impact communities
disproportionately and those caught by surprise. i want to appreciate the hard work the team has done and the leadership san francisco continues to provide and i too would like to be added as a co-sponsor on this item. >> thank you, supervisors. >> chair: can we move item 4 to the full board with a positive recommendation and for roll call vote, please. >> clerk: on the motion to forward the item with a positive recommendation. [ roll call ]. >> clerk: we have three ayes. >> chair: this will go to the full board with a positive recommendation. mr. clerk, would you please call item 5. >> clerk: item 5 is a resolution retroactively authorizing the department of public health to accept and
expend a grant in the amount of $3,000,000 from the substance abuse and mental health services administration for participation in a program, entitled “the care coordination and transitions management project,” for the period of september 30, 2021, through september 29, 2023. members of the public who wish to provide public comment should call 415-655-0001 meeting i.d. 2490 1080 5064 and press # #. if you haven't already done so, please dial star 3 to speak. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. please wait until a system prompt indicates you are unmuted and you may begin your comments. mr. chair. >> chair: thank you, appreciate that. we have margo simmons from d.p.h. to present this item.
you are on mute. >> i'm talking about an accept and extend grant for $3 million to strengthen the work we're already doing under mental health s.f., specifically the office of coordinated care which is really focused on access and flow through our system. so doing a lot of triage, assessment, linkage work and being the actual temporary help phone if someone takes a little more time to engage and connect with services. it is a mix of staffing dollars and some operating costs which will include some mobile equipment, enhancing telehealth, but it is really very aligned, bringing in more revenue into the office of coordinated care
and i'm happy to answer questions. >> chair: that is good to hear. we are excited to see the commitments and the investments in the office of coordinated care and it is such a critical part of our behavioral health and mental health system. can we hear the b.l.a. report on this item, please. >> we did not report on this item, chair haney. >> chair: thank you. i do not see any questions or comments from colleagues. can we open this up to public comment, please. >> clerk: yes, chair haney. operations is checking to see if there are members in the queue. members of the public who wish to provide public comment, please press star 3 to speak. for those on hold, continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. mr. atkins do we have any
callers? >> operator: mr. clerk, there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you. mr. chair. >> chair: public comment is closed. all right. i want to make a motion to move item 5 to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> clerk: on the motion to recommend to the full board with a positive recommendation. [ roll call ] >> chair: it will go to the full board with a positive recommendation. thank you so much. can we now hear item number 6. >> clerk: yes, item 6 is resolution authorizing the office of contract administration to enter into a fourth amendment to the contract between the city and county of san francisco and language line services, inc. for the purchase of telephonic interpretation services for city departments, increasing the contract amount by $3,279,000 for a total contract
amount not to exceed $13,179,000 and extending the term by six months from january 30, 2022, for a total contract duration of four years from august 1, 2018, through july 31, 2022. members of the public who wish to provide public comment should call 415-655-0001 meeting i.d. 2490 1080 5064 then press # #. if you haven't already done so, please dial star 3 to speak. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. the system prompt will indicate you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. mr. chair. >> chair: we have daniel sanchez from the office of contract administration to present on this item. >> good morning.
i am accompanied by two colleagues. i'm going to share with you a brief presentation. so basically we are here before you requesting to expand our contract with language alliance for telephonic interpretation services by six months in order to buy us time in order to get a new contract in place. because of the current usage of our contract, that will take up over the $10 million threshold. a little bit of a background on these contracts. in 2018, our office in partnership with ocia issued the r.f.p. for these services. in august of that year, we were able to award that contract to language line services.
it was an initial term of two years not to exceed $4 million. it is an as-needed contract available to all departments meaning it's there in case anyone needs it. we have amended this contract three times. currently the not to exceed amount is at $9.9 million and the expiration date is january 31 of this month. the services available under this are strictly telephonic interpretation, over the phone interpretation, in numerous languages. it is used across all city departments. the primary user is the department of public health, but used by all departments. here we have listed some other ones that are consistent users. m.t.a., h.s.a., p.u.c., d.a.t., p.o.l., f.i.r., a lot of city departments use this contract.
basically the reason we want this contract amendment is because our current contract balance is insufficient for the current usage. we cannot go without these services to the city departments. the reason for that is because the contract usage has been substantially higher than originally expected. in large part it is due to the covid-19 pandemic and the health orders issued. it has forced departments to go towards telephonic interpretation more than was anticipated prior to the pandemic. the prior reason for this extension is we are actually working with our partner agency oceia for new language services contract that will replace this one that we have available to the city departments. our r.f.p. process has been
delayed. we are close but need the months to complete that process and award the contracts. we want to increase the not to exceed amount to a total of $11,694,000. an amount consistent with what was recommended by the budget legislative analyst report which is an amendment to what we originally requested. that changes due to a correction of the way we calculated a 15% continuance fee amount. we are totally in agreement with their recommendation from the analyst. we would like that n.t.e. amount to a new end date of july 31, 2022. that's it in a nutshell and we are open to any questions that you have. thank you.
>> chair: thank you. we certainly understand the demand increasing over covid for all the supervisors needed. supervisor mar. >> thank you and thank you, mr. sanchez, for the presentation and all of your work on this important contract, both the extension that we're considering right now and the r.f.p. that o.c.a. and oceia are working on for new contract for this really important service to ensure that non-english speakers or limited english speakers are fully able to access city services. i did have a question -- actually, it's more around -- i know that this contract with the language line is really focused on telephone interpretation and that's extremely important. it's been convenient to access by the city department staff in
many situations. i guess i have a question about the non-telephone interpretation. i know there's -- that's being considered maybe being an r.f.p. developed. i was just wondering if in-person interpretation has been a part of the current contract up until now. and then how is that being incorporated into the new r.f.p. i'm just raising this because i know from conversations with the director about this, that this is somewhat of a new area of the language access that we're really looking at on expanding for emergency situations.
i'm also interested if we can expand in-person interpretation services for crime victims. we've heard of the rise of hate incidents directed at the a.f.i. community in the city that the telephone interpretation is really not sufficient in -- for victims of crime, especially involving hate and violence and trauma. so i'm just interested in knowing how much of the non-telephone interpretation has been included until now in this contract and how we're thinking of incorporating it into the new r.f.p. and the new contract looking ahead. >> i can start and can ask director pun if she can fill in. in terms of the new agreement, it will be inclusive of many
different language access services, telephonic and non-telephonic including in-person and video and document translation. it will definitely be a part of it and that is something we are working closely with oceia who are the subject matter expert and are the ones working closely with the departments on this and have a good pulse on what is needed out there. we are definitely including that into our new r.f.p. adrienne, would you like to add to that? >> supervisors, high, i would like to add that this is one of five current contracts that the city has and these vendors provide options for city departments as needed. the other four contracts are handled by oceia right now and they do cover all of the no
one-telephonic needs. the language contract is the largest and this is used by most departments and why o.c.a. is handling it. >> thank you, director pun. you're saying there are four other contracts that o.c.a. administers for language access that are for non -- for in-person -- or actually, what's the scope of those other four contracts? >> the other four contracts, supervisors, cover translation, document translation, as well as on-site, in-person, and remote or video interpretation. >> got it. and for the on-site, in-person, and video interpretation
contract, so that's separate from the language line contract? >> yes. those are five separate contracts. so this is based on the previous r.f.p. that i think was issued about four years ago and the new r.f.p. will be updated with other services and other needs that we have researched since the last r.f.p. was issued and this includes added needs that came up during the pandemic and continue to be needs we think departments will need support on. >> thank you and thanks for that information. i would be interested in getting more information about the other contract it is, particularly the one or ones around on-site, in-person interpretation, video interpretation. also, director pun, just continuing the conversations
with you and the city administrator how we can strengthen language access for victims of crime, particularly involving hate and violence and trauma. >> absolutely, thank you. >> thanks. >> chair: supervisor safai, anything you want to add here? >> no. just that i think this is such an important service. i know my staff uses this -- these services provided by this company. i think this is an important resource for this city, looking at the numbers of the different departments that utilize the services on a regular basis shows how valuable it is and they are accessible and able to work with people. i'm supportive of this and thank you, director pun, and your team and all the hard work you do on
this. >> chair: great. thank you. i know there is, these were referenced, some b.l.a. amendments. let's go to the b.l.a. to hear the report and we'll also take those amendments. >> this is with language line, a telephone translation service. this amendment is not to exceed $3.3 million up to a total not to exceed of $15.2 million and extends the end date of the contract by six months through july 2022. now, the purpose of this short extension is to allow for a new competitive procurement process to take place to identify additional translation providers. as we show on page 17 of our report, based on a review of actual spending, we do recommend amending the resolution to reduce the not to exceed amount
to $11.694 million as noted by mr. sanchez and then we recommend approval of the resolution as amended. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> chair: great. thank you. and i think these are substantive amendments, but before we do, let's open up to public comment. >> clerk: thank you, chair haney. operations, let's see if there are any members in the queue. members of the public wish to provide public comment please press star 3 to speak. those on hold continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and then begin your comments. mr. atkins, are there any callers? i think i hear somebody's background. >> hello?
>> clerk: yes, please begin. so, supervisors, our city [indiscernible] everybody and we do a good job, but one of the things we need to do is in this digital world is to have the reports of what you really do district by district or however you break it down so that we, the advocates, can gauge for ourselves the type of work that is done by the division or the department that is handled by mrs. pun. i've known her for a very, very, very long time.
she is very diligent in what she does, but advocates, we kind of do the work on our own because this is something new and incoming with our department and we are dealing with immigrants, violence and organizations like the street violence intervention programs. we've been there. i've been doing this for 40 years and for the longest time ever, we got no support from the city. with the changes and so on and so forth, but i'm interested in
transparency like we can go to that site and see who is being served so that we can incorporate a huge segment of the population that needs this service -- >> clerk: sorry to cut anybody off, but thank you for your comments but we are timing each speaker to two minutes unless otherwise stated. mr. atkins, do we have any other callers in the queue? >> operator: mr. clerk, there are no further callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you very much. mr. chair. >> chair: public comment is closed. so with that, we do want to move the recommendations or the amendments that were offered by the b.l.a. if i can move to amend the resolution to accept the b.l.a.'s recommendation first and take a roll call on that. >> clerk: on the motion to accept the amendments. [ roll call ]
>> clerk: we have three ayes. >> chair: all right. now, if i can make a motion to continue this item since it is a substantive amendment and we will continue it to the next budget and finance committee meeting. can we have a roll call vote on that, please. >> clerk: on the motion to continue the item as amended to the budget and finance meeting of january 12. [ roll call ]. >> clerk: we have three ayes. >> chair: all right. thank you so much. we will have this back next
week. mr. clerk, can you please call item 7. >> clerk: yes. item number 7 is a resolution authorizing the recreation and park department to accept and expend grant funding from the state coastal conservancy priority conservation area grant program in the amount of $500,000 to support the twin peaks improvement project; approving the grant agreement which is on file with the clerk of the board which requires the recreation and park department to maintain the project for a 20-year period commencing upon project completion; and to authorize the recreation and park department to enter into amendments or modifications to the grant agreement and to execute further agreements that do not materially increase the obligations or liabilities of the city and are necessary to effectuate the purposes of this resolution. members of the public wish to provide public comment should call 415-655-0001 meeting i.d. 2490 1080 5064 then press # #.
a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. mr. chair. >> chair: thank you. all right. can we hear from tony moran from the rec and parks department. welcome. >> hi, good morning, committee members. i'm here to present the legislation to accept and extend the priority conservation grant in the amount of $500,000 and will be used to improve two key trails in the trail system. the legislation is requesting the board of supervisors approve a grant agreement commencing june 1 and continue for 20 years on project completion. i ask the legislation retroactively accept the grant
and retroactively approve the grant agreement because the grant agreement has a start date of june 1, 2021, and the contract was executed december 17, 2021, a couple of weeks ago. twin peaks is 43 acres of open space under the various jurisdictions of city agencies, including the recollection and parks department. within that open space are many sensitive species and habitat, including the endangered mission blue butterfly. also the trail system in the open space and twin peaks being one of the most visited sites in the city has heavy, heavy use on our trails. so we've applied for this grant and were awarded $500,000 to complete two trails, including the east trail and a trail just
below it. our intention with these trail improvements is to reduce the amount of encroachment on the sensitive species that has been happening on and around our trails. as a condition of this granted, we are going to enter into a grant agreement. this requires that we maintain the site for public use for 20 years after completion. as stated earlier, i am requesting an amendment to the legislation so we can add retroactive language to accept the grant and to approve the grant agreement as well as change a little language around the contract because now we have a final executed contract instead of a substantially to form contract. i think that's -- i do want to say that regarding the retroactive nature of the grant, we have not spent any grant
funds, but the start date of june 1, 2021, does allow us to bill work we've already completed as part of the grant match. that concludes my presentation. >> chair: thank you so much, ms. moran. and this is exciting and i appreciate that update. is there a b.l.a. report on this item? >> yes, there is. this resolution would authorize the recreation and parks department to accept and extend a $500,000 grant from the state coastal conservancy and also approve a grant agreement. the grant agreement requires the city to provide $1 million in matching funds for which the department intends to use 2020 general obligation funds. this requires the city to do the improvements for 20 years. the grant would fund
improvements to trails on top of twin peaks. we also noted the retroactive nature of the approval in our report and recommend that the resolution be amended to clarify that. i think the version of the legislation that was circulated by the department accomplishes our recommendation. so we recommend approval of that amended version. i'm happy to answer any questions. any questions or comments from colleagues? can we go to public comment, please. >> clerk: yes, chair haney. operations is checking to see if there are any callers in the queue. members of the public who wish to provide comment on this item please press star 3 now to speak. for those on hold, continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted. mr. atkins, do we have any
numerical traction units. with an estimated market value of 100,000. from the bay area water management supports this limitation of wildfire quality response program for the project august 1, 2021 through july 1 2024. members who wish to provide public commentshould call 415-655-0001 . themeeting id , 2490 080 5064.
then press pound twice. if you haven't done so dial á3 to line up to speak. wait until thesystem indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments . mister chair >> chair: we have to miss bicetti to presenta site . >> hello, deputy director department of emergency management presenting on agenda item 8. as you heard this item represents a gift from the bay area air quality water management district. they are seeking to provide air filters and equipment to the county of san francisco through the dm to support their regional wildfire quality response program. and although they are not part
of this committee i want to recognize some things to supervisor melgar who serves on the board of the district. edm is seeking concrete steps to help the city getprepared for risks associated with wildfire . including poor air quality and smoke in san francisco and as the donor the purchase and deliver of approximately 100,000 dollars worth of heavy duty air filtration equipment to d.e.m., the units will be given as a gift . it does not apply for the grant opportunity and the air district isdonating similar to other jurisdictions through the area . , d.e.m. would receive these units on half of the city and distributed in accordance with the guidelines outlined in the agreement. while these units would be purchased for the purpose of being used during wildfire that's, these units do not have
restrictions on the types or circumstances fortheir use . d.e.m. has started internal equity analysis based on their engagement with unity based organizations and humidity services to distribute this . we've drawn up some preliminary recommendations and will provide this equipment equitably across all districts of the city and we're looking forward to working with all of you to provide those to identify specific locations throughout the city to deploy the equipment. although the item notes retroactivity, no equipment has yet been purchased or delivered. the air district d.e.m. has agreed to wait until full board approval to make any purchases of this equipment but we did enter into an agreement to show the commitment of the term of process agreement and the potential gift so the
negotiations of the agreement started between our two parties in august which is why the term of the agreement is reflective of the retroactive date of august 1 of last year and the agreement spans through july 2024 after which d.e.m. would retain ownership of the unit without restriction. that i'm respectfully requesting the committee will this item to the full board with a positive recommendation and and to answer anyquestions . >> chair: thank you. can we have a report? >> we did not report on this item. >> chair: all right. this is pretty simple and straightforward . can we open this to public commentsplease ? >> let's check and see if there are any callers. members was to provide comment rest part 3 to beadded to the line to see . for those on hold until the system indicates you have been
a muted and that willbe your key tobegin comments . mister actions . >> there are no colors in the queue. >> thank you mister chair. >> thank you. public comment is closed. i want to make a motion to move item 8 to the full board with a positive recommendation. can we have aalthough please ? >> on the motion to recommend this item to the full board, vice chair safai. [roll call vote] we have 3 aye's. >> chair: all right, this will goto the full board with a positive recommendation . very much. now we will go to item 9. >> item 9 is a resolution
approving the grant agreement between urban alchemy for emergency shelter operations and support services serving approximately 250 adults experiencing homelessness at the property located at 711 post street for a total term of every first 2022 through june 30, 2024 for a total amount not toexceed approximately 18.7 million . affirming the planning department's determination for the general plan . members of the public who wish to provide she calls 415-655-0001. meeting id 249-0080 5064 then press pound twice. if you haven't done so press part three to line up to speed. a system prompts will indicate you have raise yourhand . wait until the system indicates you havebeen a muted . mister chair. >> all right. so welcome supervisor testing.
i know we have emily from the department of homelessness and supportive housing here but i'm going to first turn it over to president asking as this is in hisdistrict . welcomesupervisor . >> that you chair me. good morningmembers of the budget committee or actually good afternoon members of the budget committee . supervisor safai in mar and thank you for allowing me to speak this morning to this item. i wanted to start by saying something that is true and that i have worked hard to advocate on i've been back in office. starting late 2015. where in the i have undertaken and championed a wide breadth of policy efforts to locate more supportive housing,
shelter beds and affordable housing in the northeast corner of san francisco commonly known as district 3 north of gary and closed streets all the way to fisherman's wharf. starting with a campaign promise that i made when i was running after a seven year hiatus on the board of supervisors to locate a navigation center in the northeast corner of the city that theretofore had not had one. i believe it had long been a proponent of geographic equity in all things and so the supervisor mar for working to do the same and sunset and supervisor safai for doing the same in the omi and excelsior. and first with supervisor haney and i live and work we had a
concentration of these facilitiesbut to that end , and as i said at the time, the fourth time was a charm and we were able to locate a navigation center in district 3 and i'm very proud that during the pandemic we not only finished that project but we were able to populate it albeit not at its full complement givencdc guidance . and also, in and around the pandemic with the ability to access key funds i was not only a champion of the acquisition of the granada hotel, 232 permits, supportive housing beds and luckily actually knew the owner of that facility and
was able to play a role in bringing him to the table with the department of real estate and we ended up taking through our good work in real estate title to that facility that is now owned by distal community services. we were able to do that again in the case of the post hotel and the diva and i want to salute the community in lower nobhill, the upper tenderloin with an actively engaged and indeed supportive and i want to salute the process in the case of the navigation center, we had multiple in person very well dependent meetings. members of the community voice support, they voiced opposition and most importantly , many of them foist the standards that they wanted the city to adhere to. and that's been artwork.
that has been hard work as we transitioned into those new facilities. forthe residents and surrounding neighborhoods . ithas worked out my office does every day . we were solid complaints and home dcs and their property management company accountable. we worked with the department of homelessness and supporting housing to do same. we tried to solve problems big andsmall but the community came along and at this point , as it relates to this particular project it has really for i think any number of reasons and a departure. one from as you will hear getting the level of unity support that was achieved in other instances but to the process frankly candidly has been abysmal. that the involvement, the meaningful and real involvement with community has been all but
absent. it is i don't mean to hurt anybody's feelings but it has been boxed checking government at its worst. and it has been insulting not only to this district supervisor but to a community that as i said has really been more than accommodating and has worked to hold us accountable. click frankly, the city still has a ways to go in meeting the promises that it has made around the addition of over 500 beds in this immediate facility in recent times. 451 units in supportive housing in the granada, the post and diva. 75 beds of homeless shelter beds at thenavigation center at 888 post street . frankly colleagues, as we heard yesterday at theboard of supervisors , thereis a need .
that need is going to fail if we don't get it right. ifwe don't work with the community , if we do not hold ourselves to the highest standards. it is going to reverberate from the sunset to the excelsior to thesouth of market we have an imperative not to check the box but to do it right and to do the hard work . and to that end you have received a plethora of comments from the community and again i remind you this is the community that heretofore has been at a minimum acquiescence. at a maximum supported. you've heard from not only business interests in indian square and the hotel next door but you have heard from local to who has any number of members that live in this working-class neighborhood and
are deeply concerned that this process is not one that the city has undertaken in a proper manner. your going to hear more from other individuals but i want to take a timeout. i would like to get this done right. i think that there are an array of options. i think we have to have real and meaningfuldialogue into medication and it's got to be a two-way street . with a sophisticated and increasingly well organized community . tothat end , rather than doing this in a rushed version between thanksgiving and new year's in the middle of the pandemic i wouldlike to take a one-month timeout .i pledge to use my good offices to work with the administration and with the community to see what we can hook up with in that
time. thank you for your indulgence chair any and your understanding and i will turn itback over to you . >> thank you supervisor for your comments and for your willingness to step in and provide leadership and convening on this important decision we are making as a city. i will turn it over now to emily cohen from the department of homeless systems supportive housing and then we will move on with thediscussion . miss colin. >> good afternoon chair haney and supervisor asking. my name is emily cohen, deputy director of the department of homelessness and supportive housing and i'm here today to talk about the incredible opportunity that we have two shelter at least 250 people who
are currently living outside at the proposed shelter at 7-eleven post street. i will walk through a very brief slide presentation then take any questions that the committee may have. so the resolution before you is a proposed grant amended or excuse me, proposed grant agreements between hs h and urban alchemy for operations and services to the 250 person adult homeless proposed noncognitive shelter, semi concrete shelter at 711 post street.the not to exceed amount is just over 18.5 million. and the contract would run through june 30, 2024. in addition, to operations or urban alchemy would also provide 24 in support and ambassador services along the southern post street and the release folder for the project.
one of the things that makes us at the gsh and many of our provided partners excited about 711 post street is it is a very unique configuration that does not a building type or opportunity that we often have. this is a former or current vacant youth hostel which 123 rooms that range from single to plot. which are estimated capacity of about 250 people. some of these rooms have private bathrooms. every floor has bathrooms and showers on it . there's ample community space. both in terms oflounges as well as the lobby and front desk area . for community kitchens and dining area. and as we come or are struggling through this, we have learned so much about the importance of shelter being
offered in alternative settings. movies while hundred and shelter will always important role, we know that having nonhybrid options is incredibly important from a safety perspective and also for the health and well-being of our guests. we have learned so much for this hotel process and this 11 post offers a very unique opportunity to bring something similar to that model. into our ongoing portfolio. we are really excited about working with urban alchemy for this project. they have a greattrack record with us . opening new and creative program models and of providin , they operated six hotels. they have operated state parking programs and supervisor district which has been incredibly successful. they've worked with us on three activation which is really been
a pretty colorful program intervention and we're really looking forward to working with them on this new shelter model. supervisor asking did bring up the community engagement process.during his opening remarks and we are eager to continue working with the community.we have experience with this community from the housing projects that have been recently opened in the area . we are very committed to an ongoingcollaborative and productive community process . we believe that can be done simultaneous with moving forward theproject open. and we have , we did our standard and identification which includes a mailing signposted.we also walked around, talk to business owners, opt out flyers at the residentialbuildings, hotels and small businesses in the
area . we help to committee meetings. we have responded via email phone zoom with numerous community members and we are absolutely committed to continuing to be a good partner. we know to our experience at the vehicle center and our experience to the embarcadero navigation center, community engagement is critical for the success of our program and we have demonstratedthrough those two programs that also through many others we can work closely and well with thecommunity by establishing a community working group , maintaining open dialogue. working with the supervisor's office . we very much like to and we can do this while operating a high quality neighborhood positive shelterprogram just as we have in district 11 and district 6 . i will stop there to iterate what an incredibleopportunity , how unique the physical property is but also an
opportunity to quickly 250 people who are currently sleeping outside could be moved inside and the next month and a half or so to bring this project forward. having been on the hearing yesterday and heard so much about the urgency and need for more shelter to accompany the tenderloin work but also our work across the city, we know thatadding capacity right now is critical . especially a time when we cannot increase the density in our conjugate shelters back to their original levels. we are in the middle of a covid search. we need to be careful about how we add more beds and this project offers an ability to do that and it can be done quite quickly which is one of the exciting components of this project. thank you very muchand i am available for questions .
>> chair: thank you. is there a bla report on this item? >> yes chair haney is. this would approve and agreement to operate a concrete shelter at 711 post running february 31st through june 2024 and the total not to exceed amount of that agreement is $18.7 million . as we show on page 26 of our report the contingency for this project is relatively high at 23 percent. thegrant funding assumes 250 beds at this site . the contingency allows for 218 people to be at that site and the final year of the agreement is 12 percent contingency. we also know that urban alchemy will hold the lease for this site which is funded by the grant agreement.
cost for this year would be funded by proposition c but the cost for theouter years have not yet been determined and will be established in the upcoming budget process according to the department . this 250 beds that would be provided at the site is part of the additional thousand beds that the department is intending to open by june of this year. based on the above we do recommend approval of the resolution and i'm happy to answer questions about our report. >> supervisor. >> i wanted to i think supervisor's fia was on the line. >> i never know how he raises his hand.there he goes. >> i'm following the rules. thenwhen i don't raise my hand and interrupt i get skipped .
it's okay. i'm sure supervisor mark and i will say similar things. thank you ms. colin. i know you and your team director mcfadden and yourself and the entire team are working really hard on a crisis that changes on a daily basis. so i first want to say thankyou for all your hard work . it's been a pleasure working with you on our safe parking along with the purchase of the mission in the hotel in our district . i think we did that right. and i think each time we did that, and i've spoken with supervisor peskin about this. we put together a working group. we put together a group of stakeholders that would be involved in the process that would be involved in the decision-making. they're the ones that had the most .they were either in proximity or were directly
involved in the success of this center. because i think it's one thing to secure a site. it's another thing to actually make a site successful and i think that's what supervisor peskin was referring to and you're absolutely correct.i drove through the tenderloin on the way over to this meeting this morning. spend some time and went and looked atthe a2 to gary site again . i went andlooked at the 711 post site . there are literally two blocks from oneanother . so i could understand how the community would feel okay, we're getting this new building. hearing it might be easy injection site. now we're hearing that there's going to be an additional. a lot of it is listen, i don't know any neighborhood in the city that is going tojump for joy. right after that for a homeless shelter. let's be honest about that . but i can say from the process that we went through on the safe parking andthe process we
went through with purchasing the mission in hotel , i'm relatively new work are partner is relatively new to the game compared to supervisor any supervisor peskin and i think a lot of that is a lot of these services are concentrated in their district but quite frankly a lot of the available property is concentrated in their district. i have beenconsistent since i've been on the board of supervisors . i think anyone . supervisor peskin came to me about 30 van nest. he said supervisor, i had that fight before you got on here. and you're not going to win this one today. i said i don't think we should be tellingthis property. i think the city should be in the business of owning property. so just on its face , and $18 million deal for long-term whatever they use may be,
shelter, supportivehousing, cognitive or whatever the uses are , my immediate reaction to this is my question to you is ms. colin, did we aggressively pursue the opportunity to purchase the site? that's what i think and i care about most often because if we get four years into this contract we spent $18 million and then we come back and say now we areinterested to buy it . the property value would have gone up. we would have spent money on rent. so it is kind of a philosophical position. i personally called the owner. the owner is willing to sell thebuilding . and i'm happy to be involved in those conversations but my first question is did we aggressively pursue that? secondly the question is no
improviser peskin has said this in the affirmative are they willing to put together a group of stakeholders? we did the perfunctorynecessary notice online , held a community meeting but there is an urgency. we want to get people off the street. as quickly as we can. but at the same time, like we did with the state parking at the mission hotel put together a group of stakeholders that we had high-end and when i get an email, when i get a call from the union square alliance,hotel tonsil, local two, all business owners over 100 emails , i literally and i'm not exaggerating. i literally have not gotten one call, letter of support. not to mention thedistrict supervisorwhere i know you have had conversations but again,
the district supervisor is saying here , he's willing to continue working with you it just feels like this is a little bit rushed but i understand why. i understand the urgency . so first is as as a working group been put together, second question is as the city aggressively pursued kissing the property? >> in terms of the working group we are very interested in putting together a working group. very happy to work with supervisor peskin and his staff to do that . that has been a very successful approachin the past . >>. [please stand by]
about that. i think we want to see how this semi-congregate shelter approach works. we're very optimistic about it, but we are starting with a two and a half year contract with urban alchemy and gives us a chance to test the waters. >> regardless of the politics and regardless of everything i have heard, my immediate response would be on the approach whether it's -- and again, as i understand it, 50% of the units have access to a private bath. so you are 50% of the way there. there could be adaptive reuse and expansion. i know in the mission hotel we're going to put an additional $6 million. it seems that adding these baths in would give us the flexibility to negotiate.
the work that urban alchemy has done, we're very, very confident in the work they did providing services in our district. i feel confident about that. you've provided more information to me when i talked about the work they've done operating hotels in both this county and others. so i feel better about that. but i'm stuck on the process part and i'm also stuck on the ownership part. i also think that when we're approaching this property, we could be approaching it from a multi-use position. if you put together this working group and work with the district stakeholder, it could begin with one type of use transitioning to another. having a first right of refusal is very different from negotiating up front. there are over $100 million
sitting in prop c for building purposes. there is an international student market not coming back any time soon. and the building owner is willing to sit down and engage with us. i think we would be remiss to miss that opportunity. i think it then would provide some more space for the district supervisor and your team to work collaboratively to put together a process. i think we can get to consensus. i don't think this is a japan town situation where you have 6,000 members in opposition and this is an absolute no. i think we need to do something with this building and i think that i am committed to working with the district supervisor and anyone in any way that i can.
but i think that it seems to me that there's room here to purchase this building which i feel really strongly about. >> supervisor, i think we remain open-minded on that item. there's nothing here to preclude us fr fr from doing that. >> the difference is how the dollars are utilized and how quickly the dollars are utilized. there is a difference saying you spend the next short amount of time negotiating a purchase and then you're moving forward that, you're using a different pool of dollars and saving where you can. i think that's super important.
supervisor peskin. >> this is a grant agreement. i don't see a lease. >> this is a grant agreement to fund urban alchemy who has negotiated a lease with the property owner. >> right, but there is no lease before this committee or board of supervisors. the city and county of san francisco is not a party to that lease. that is a third party lease. that lease is not in the package. there is nothing in the package that talks about first right of refusal or an option to purchase. by the way, there is a world of difference between a first right of refusal and an ability to purchase, as supervisor safai said. that is not before us. it may or may not be true. i have no evidence of its truth. that is not before this board of supervisors. >> correct. >> sorry, mr. chair, i didn't
mean to usurp your power there. i apologize. >> were you done? >> no, i had one more point. again, i apologize. i know you're running this meeting. so we've clarified this is a grant agreement between the city and urban alchemy. we don't have the information of a purchase option. there are two different pots of money in part c. one is, chair, i would like to hear about the working group -- i don't want to speak for the supervisor, but i would like and then i have one more question. i mean, i can end with that because i think that's an important part of the
conversation. >> chair: do you want to hear from ms. cohen? >> supervisor peskin. >> i'm sorry, repeat that. i was just looking at something. >> the idea of putting together the working group of stakeholders. i want to give you an opportunity to respond to that. >> absolutely. i think i said that were articulated that which is that there is an increasingly organized group of local stakeholders who i think would be a good starting point. complying with prop i is not building community relations. it's checking a box. i think between some of the institutions that you spoke to, supervisor safai, through the chair, ranging from the hotel and restaurant workers who have quite a number of members who live in that neighborhood to the lower knot hill alliance that
has the recently formed, the hotel council, the union square, formerly business improvement district. i think there are a number of mature constructive representatives in the community that i would be happy to convene with h.s.h. to continue this conversation. i also want to add to the frankly unfortunate comments that ms. cohen made that we have required any number of s.r.o.s. the notion that each bedroom and unit does not have a bathroom does not preclude permanent supportive housing. that is a conversation for another day and not relevant to the decision today that's before this body. >> last couple comments, chair, and i'll hand it back to you. i did want to end on that point because i feel like the approach
on this building and, ms. cohen, i've heard you say this is a unique opportunity for congregate shelter which i agree with from the way you've laid it out. but i also think there could be other uses this building could provide. i wanted to hear further from you some of the uses potentially as supervisor peskin just said and my approach was similar. i think you could use this as permanent, supportive housing. you could use it potentially as some congregate -- like, there's multiple uses that you all had -- did you investigate or i want to give you the opportunity to respond to that. >> thank you, supervisor, through the chair. yes, i mean, we are open to a variety of uses here. so the need for shelter beds is one of our most pressing needs
that we see, a place where people can move immediately from the street. the intensity behind this is to respond to the crisis that we have in the community and on the streets and to provide something low barrier that is effective and welcoming to people coming in off the streets. we are not closing the door on future uses with this building, but the most pressing need as we grow our system, we're adding a significant amount of permanent housing which is the solution to homelessness and we need to grow the emergency response so we can slow people through the system. if we overinvest or grow one without the other, people get stuck in the system. as we move forward all of these acquisitions and so much investment on the permanent housing side also really need that emergency housing capacity, like the navigation center that
the supervisor referenced before and the other navigation center referenced. to have this would be a first and an incredible opportunity there. so it is not that we don't need the housing or that we're closing the door on other future opportunities, but one of the urgent needs our community has is for a low-barrier community access shelter that we can provide with this building while building and looking at the future and the needs of our system and having a building that is flexible enough for the changing needs of the community will be an incredible asset. >> my last question is -- and this is another point of confusion that i've gotten that i haven't gotten 100% clarity on. how would people be referred there and what would the population of people be that would be in this site?
>> thank you for the question, supervisor. the population would be adults experiencing homelessness. so it is a broad and diverse community, similar to those served at the embarcadero center. similar to those served next door. a really diverse group of adults with varying needs. the placement would be coordinated through the centralized process. and we are also in conversation with some of the local hospitals because we know that this has been a problem so we want to offer access to this facility to alleviate the challenges on the neighborhood as a whole. so we are in a process of exploring that, but this would generally operate similar to our other navigation centers. people would not be able to walk up and self refer.
there won't be a line outside. it will serve the adult population, which of course as you know is incredibly diverse. >> say that last part again. people would not be able to walk up and have services. they would be there. how long would they be residing there? they would have to be referred and checked in. it's almost like they're a permanent resident to a certain extent and assigned a room. how long would they be there and staying in this facility? what is the maximum? >> right now our adult system does not have a length of stay limit. previous to covid we had a 90-day stay standard. we changed with covid. this would operate consistent with the rest of the shelter system. the emphasis when people move in is to get them connected with housing, but we don't have a 60
days and you're out policy. people can stay while we work with them on housing. >> thank you, mr. chair. thank you, emily. thank you, ms. cohen. >> i also want to thank ms. cohen and h.s.h. for your work on this. i think a unique and compelling proposal to quickly add new shelter beds in an area of high need. it would be a significant step towards meeting our important and aggressive goal of adding the 2,100 new shelter beds by the end of june of this year. we're all, as stated by my colleagues, we're all well aware of the urgency of this work and expanding permanent supportive housing and affordable housing in our city. i also would echo the comments
of my colleagues. we can't use that urgency to sort of go through a bad process and just -- and especially with neighborhood engagement, just check the boxes on that. it is very important that we meaningfully engage with neighbors for these projects, given that we know that they're contentious and whether that's in assunta district or other districts as well. so i guess i am concerned that the public notification and engagement process so far on this project had not been adequate. i'm supportive of supervisor peskin's proposal to put a pause on it and more meaningfully
engage with the neighbors on this so it can move forward with neighborhood support as so many projects have been able to do. i just have a question. if we pause approval of the grant agreement say for a month, does that put this in jeopardy at all? there is the urgency and every day or week we wait is a problem. would it put this grant agreement and proposal in jeopardy? >> i have not talked to the property owner specifically about their willingness to wait. i would hate to lose this lease
opportunity because the city dragged its feet for valid reasons. the most pressing reason is the 250 people who live outside while we go through this process. i think we can have a robust community process. we went through the requirements and are happy to do so. i do not think we need to pause. i think it will take time to staff up. there is though no reason not to do both. >> chair: supervisor peskin, is there anything you wanted to add or questions? okay. i know there are folks who are waiting to give comment on this and i'm going to make sure we
get to them as well. we have also residents from the surrounding area. with that i'm going to open this to public comment. i'm going to limit public comment to one minute each. mr. clerk, if you can please open this to comment. we can't hear you, you're muted. >> clerk: weird. again, operations is checking to see if there are any members in the queue. those wishing to make public comment, press star 3 to speak. those on hold, wait to speak until the system indicates you have been unmuted.
mr. atkins, do we have any callers in the queue? >> good afternoon, supervisors. my neck is sore from snapping it back and forth because i can't believe this dialog. when you talk about an advancement in people, if you talk about waiting another 30 days, if you were on the street tonight? could you wait in this cold weather? this is the best time to be humanitarians and best for people. i know you invest in brick and mortar, but this gives us the opportunity to invest in people. you won't even know that the shelter we're building is opening. h.s.h. is doing a wonderful and the best job they've ever done. i've been sharing their advisory committee. this is the best opportunity to
acquire decent programs. where you don't have to walk out and be confronted with by 16 dope dealers or four or five liquor stores. let's leave the politics out -- >> clerk: thank you for your time. >> i do apologize, but as the chair indicated, we are limiting comment to one minute. >> i'm in agreement with pausing this process as the hotel manager in the immediate area, i would like the people who work in my hotel to be engaged in this process, the ones who come and walk into the hotel from this immediate area, they need to be engaged. they may not live in that immediate neighborhood, but they
deal with things in and around the building and i would agree with the pause to do this right. >> clerk: thank you so much for your comments. mr. atkins, next speaker, please. >> thank you for this opportunity to speak. i lived in the knot hill area for 30 years and i cannot express to you the horrific situation we're in right now. i understand we offered and welcomed numerous hotel shelter beds. the previous speaker talked about walking out in the street with drug abusers or drug dealers. i see them now every day. i've never seen them before. i see people defecating and urinating on my street. i am disabled and use a walker.
i cannot walk the streets because if i pass people with my walker and all of the other debris. i am understanding of this and very sympathetic of the situation going on and i am very supportive of the over 450 beds we have already included in this small neighborhood, but now we're going to throw in another 250 beds -- >> clerk: the speaker's time is up. i can apologize for cutting anyone off. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. cory smith on behalf of the housing action coalition. i just put it back up to the top of your inboxes. there was something wrong with our e-mail tool. you should have received about 200 e-mails, i believe h.s.h. did as well in support of the
proposal. we absolutely believe that keeping people on the street for another month is an awful decision. this project should move forward today. we should get people housed as soon as possible. the situation will not get better. there are people opposed here and everywhere to homelessness we need to move forward with support. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> yes, i am a neighbor in the neighborhood. i don't think the neighbors were included in the process whether or not this facility should be used. so i'd like to pause so the neighbors that live near this
facility can be included in the process. >> clerk: thank you so much for your comments. next speaker please. >> hello. i live across the street from the proposed site. i can tell you a resounding no on this. we have done our fair share in this neighborhood. we have seen an increase in drug dealers, crime, addicts, and mental illness. our businesses are attacked. i can tell you i went all the way across the county and only five people said they wanted this. door to door, that whole entire stretch everyone said no. we have people who are trying and finding out about the petition that we have. we have almost 1,700 people right now and there will be plenty more, but i ask for a pause because we have not been
included in any dialog whatsoever. >> clerk: thank you so much for your comments. mr. atkins, next speaker, please. >> hello, i am a member of the lower knot hill neighborhood alliance that has just been formed. i am also in opposition to the implementation of the 711 post. i would just take a moment to discuss ms. cohen's description of the interaction between the community and h.s.h. i did not experience it in the way she describes it at all. we got the information that this was coming in under the cover of darkness on thanksgiving. there is going to be an actual vote in 45 days. all through christmas i actually
tried to speak with ms. cohen several times, wrote her often. i got an e-mail monday saying, i'm sorry, i've been out of the office, i'm unable to respond. we got that over and over and over again. there has not been enough community engagement at all. i feel like we've been disrespected and the boxes not checked. one of the things that i would make -- supervisor peskin brought up the lease agreement but i've been trying -- >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hello, committee members. i am calling as a first-time public commenter. if you feel like i was included in this process, above all it's deeply unfair that my neighbors automatically demonize the occupants as drug users.
i'm disappointed that a lot of my neighbors and some at city hall have shown hateful behaviors. these are often the same folks who [indiscernible] in our neighborhood, but i do feel like my voice as a resident in this neighborhood helps to those with better lines of access. through here i have been able to walk my dog or find other routes. i am deeply confused by these comments, whereas on the other hand i feel like we need to move more quickly to add more beds. which is it? i support this acquisition. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> as we know, there are
thousands of people experiencing homelessness and who are unhoused. we heard from some neighbors today who talk about the terrible conditions on the street. this project is a part of the solutions not the cause. the solution to homelessness is homes, both permanent and emergency shelters. this is a great location, a great operator. let's just get on with it. look at the facts and do not delay. there is a crisis on the streets today. a 30-day delay is simply a euphemism for disapproval. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> after renting in san francisco since 2006, my husband and i decided to invest and work and live in this area.
based on these metrics >> next speaker please. >> caller: and afternoon supervisors. i want you as our elected leaders to recognize the fact that our elected majority had a process in serving the on house. this proposal reeks of how they do not want the shelters in their neighborhood and are shovingeveryone in our neighborhood but we had enough . we need a more equitable plan to read san francisco's biggest problem, something it to other parts of thecity. if you need help finding other locations , i already have a large list. we do not want another one in the center of the neighborhood. our neighborhood has become
unsafe with with shelters that attract violent offenders is a terrible edition . a friend was chased by a mentally unstable person screaming at her from behind. running from it makes it worse. this would be aneighborhood that's already on the edge of a breakdown . we're losing businesses and property managers are having a hard time managing their properties. i don't leave my house anymore. please stop this madness. it's affecting the city, treat thehomeless population with compassion andunderstanding but you forgot about the actual residence . >> next speaker please . >> caller: this is emily rain, a locaresident speaking in support of the grant for this emergency shelter .without shelter , people cannot have the ability and their physical or mental. not housing peopleresults in substance abuse disorder or a degree of mentalhealth
disorders . rather exacerbates it and makes it even worse . this order as a result of coping with trauma and long-term circumstances. delaying or disapproving best friends will only make things worse and further the crisis that the san francisco and bay area already hasbeen dealing with and struggling with . people are not a homogeneous group. the unhoused, substance abuse is not inherent to themand many actually have jobs or were elderly and priced out due to the housing crisis we must notcriminalize people who need resources and support . please approve and support this threat today . thank you.>> thank you for your comments mister atkins, next speaker please . >> caller: good afternoon supervisors, i'm with caltech
san francisco and i want to thank chair safai and chair haney and supervisor mar and also want doctorcohen and hs page for all your work .i'm calling toexpress my concerns about this proposed site . we absolutely support and accept the vision to have them. the council has always worked closely with the city and have supported many other programs that benefit the unhoused. we pulled together a pandemic to have hotels learn more about becoming set hotels which resulted in many of them entering into contract to help the unhoused during the pandemic. we're asking for a postponement due to the number of services already being added into this neighborhood including the navigation enter less than two blocks away. we ask this be postponed to really study the impact on what this would have to the neighborhood and also to make sure there's an equitable
approachto where shelters are being placed . thank you for your time. >> misteratkins, next speaker please . >> caller: yes, good afternoon supervisors. my name is podesta. i'm a san franciscan of 50+ years and i live in dogpatch. i'm in support of this project because we have a homeless navigation center here as well. and at first it was like we don't want that but you know, you have to have a heart to open your mindto help these people that are unable to support themselves . we also have more encampments coming back here indogpatch . so having a housing right now for them is critical and it's
important.i mean, it's long overdue. it's unacceptable for them to be on the street so i'm in support of thisproject and thank you for your time >> thank youvanessa for your comments . next speaker please . >> caller: hello? this is shelley bradford bell and i live 4 blocks, 4 doors from this project. we need this to be continued, we had less than zero communication with this community despite what miss open had said no one's talked to us. they're watchingthis project . we have for homeless shelters in our community as we do believe in housing people. however are the heart of san francisco's tourism and
restaurant industry and impact is not being calculated. the fiscal impact is not being calculated. you run out our hotels because you do too much in one district as i just her, let's do it in dogpatch . we need to make sure that we don't make anybody else unemployed. it has to be compassionate and it has to be karen and it has to be well done. we have a working homeless population would benefit from this center but we are not putting any options on the table . we are rushing to count numbers and try to have a success record inthe mayor's office . we need to make sure that we d right by the homeless , not set them up for future failure but make sure they are homes and they can grow and that's what we do in this community and we really need the time to make sure this project is done right
happy new year and thank you . >> thank you shelley bradford bell for yourcomments . next speaker please . >> caller: i am living in post street and the comments comes as an extreme surprise . they do not reflectmembers of the community and we were told the residents would include individuals being discharged from mental health services an incarceration in the community . after checking with neighbors, a number of residents would not include anyletters a number of small businesses were taken by surprise . letters were sent to dated november 12 did not get postmarked until the 19 and did not arrive until thanksgiving week . secondarily why are we not engaging this middle class later?i don't understand why we are watching out for our
families in the middle-class . youtalked about the legal counsel or 87? we are talking about a population also is in need of serious support . concerned about the level of a christian agenda item to discussion are extremely valid based on the information shared by this: herself in the meeting december 1. thank you for all the hard work that you put in watching out for us . we had zero medication them and need better planning class thank you foryour comments . next speaker please. >> good afternoon supervisors. this is jimmy marceau calling, a sanfrancisco resident in strong support .i feel like the goalposts are beingmoved on this . we're talking about the process not being followed but the process have been followed and this working group is just a change to the process . so when people keep asking why do things in the city take too
long to get done, it's because the process is a mess. and i believe just last week we heard a lot of impassioned speeches about the need to fix the tenderloin. give more services. this is it, this isyour chance to fix the tenderloin anddo more services . the process is killing our ability to address problems in our city . and you are absolutely towering to the loudest voices and i respect the folks that live there. they are dealing with serious issues but this is the way to make it better and honestly you all are being cowards by doing this. >> thank youfor your comments, david . mister atkins, next speaker. >> i'm calling from a war zone.
there's no way you could know thehorror show our neighborhood has become in a year . this neighborhood is working-class and vibrant and strategic to a healthy downtown. where a vital artery to downtown and we're barely holding on. we can't go outanymore after dark and 711 wilson also saw . i also now carry a weapon. your plans don't include driving medical treatment so that's not magical thinking. close to 318 and nine buildings with one kitchen with norules , no full-time medical care staff and a weapons locker. no courtyard and no law enforcement is not an experiment. a crime we will watch unfold i real time on our sidewalks . not only to the plan to house at 711 post but to this neighborhood and to union square just to walks walks awa . not hill is in the cities.
we don't live in a neighborhood of diversity and its cost burdenon the company and their staff . [inaudible] >> mister atkins, next speaker please. that may be asecond line. perhaps we can go back to that one . >> caller: good afternoon. my name is ... >> we did loseyou there. okay, we got back . >> caller: thank you. my name is edward and i live under the the 600 block since 2011 and i've been sitting here
listening to these comments and a number ofpeople in support have not identified themselves as members of this neighborhood . from other neighborhoods and they are excitedabout having another shelter on our block but i want to emphasize the notion of geographic equity . we have added 4 shelters to this 2 block radius in the last year and to add another shelter geographic equity cannot mean threehomeless shelters with a combined 482 people on a three block stretch of 12th street . that is not geographic equity . i urge the supervisors to allow us to have a continuing conversation about what the best use of this facility would be . >> thank you for your comments next speaker please . >> caller: caneveryone hear me
okay? my name is ian . i'm the president of the newly formedlower not hill neighborhood alliance. i lived in lower nobhill for 12 years and worked at offices on post street forover 22 years . i do not own a car i am intimately acquainted with the streets of lower nobhill . i understand how this residential neighborhood serves students andlandlords . the word fragile prior to 2021 would notbe a word i would use to describe lower nobhill at all . i felt safe, never a problem . in 2021 in june we had a lady who was randomly sat on the hundred block of post street. november a man was stabbed and killed and in december 2 people were shockedat the corner of heidi and gary. i've been assaulted and threatened with a baseball bat . never before in my 12 years have i hadanything like this happened so what has changed ?
fiveshelters in a three block radius of 711 post street . i received not one notice about any of those shelters opening and now slated for 2022 wehave 711 post a 22 gary, 505, 312 grant avenue something . >> thank you again for your comments. i apologize for cutting anybody all we are coming each speaker at one minute. next speaker please. >> caller: my name is off the auto and i'm a resident but i'm not actually in nobhill but we had to shelters nearby and i wish we did have more shelters here. there seem to be a lot of not understanding of cause and effect here . shelters don't cause crime. what has changed, what has created the crime is during the
pandemic this timewe're in where people don't have what they need . if there's not investment from our government we need investment and it sounds like the people doing this are willing to do this right. and to take the time while they're implementing this to your concernsand push us forward . if you see stuff on the street putpeople in homes . it's as simple as that. it's really hard to hear a lot of things people have had to say and i would literally jump for joy to have 2 shelters two blocks out from the as i know that the crime isn't being caused by people being bad. it's people struggling and people who are desperate. >> thank you for your comments mister atkins, next speaker please . >> caller: my name is evelyn and first i want to say that
the people at sunset and dogpatch, they reopened homeless shelters and take people. we have a huge number of homeless shelters in our neighborhood now and when mrs. coons says sheenthusiastically found the right building , it's in the wrong neighborhood and there's got to beother buildings . this is an experiment. my other comment, no one said this but why isn't the candidate sixmonths. run it for six months and see if it takes people off the street . in the meanwhile, opening yet another homeless shelter will doom our wonderful neighborhood and we want you to lay back. thank you. >> mister atkins, nextspeaker please . >> i am the general manager of
the facility at 171 close which is two miles from the proposed shelter i want to express my opposition to the shelter for several reasons . our neighborhood has already done its fair share in combating homelessness by supporting the recent addition of451 units of community housing .and while we support , i support housing the homeless weneed to tell people that we have to do it right . secondly this homeless shelter is the wrong type of shelter and each hs h as not given us an adequate plan on how they are going to run this shelter. and you can't open up something without a plan unless you plan to fail. and they have offered to
control the streets five hours a day. this is a plea or a problem. and the community outreach has been horrible. i was not there. >> apologies for cutting you off. but we do appreciate your comments. operations, next speaker pleas . >> thank you, can you hear me? great. my name is audrey smith. i lived in this neighborhood for 20 years and i actually saw the use of this building before they decided to take it over. and you know, even when it was just there for the students to come in their and use as a hotel, people fell on the steps
because this facility does not have any space and if you put 250 people in that building you're going to have people standing on sidewalks, there's no real way to avoid that because they don't want to do anything afterwards. and in this facility. and my last comment is please, not in our neighborhood again. we've already done our fair share. iq. >> thank you for your comments. currently we have the five members of the public listening to this item with 11 still left in the queue. if you have not already done s please dial start 3 and if you haven't provided your comments yet and you wish to , otherwise we might take this to theend. so operations, next speaker please .
>> i live on the 600 block. absolutely not. our neighborhood has already done more than our fair share in combating homelessness. i had another 250 bed a shelter is wrong. please, number urban alchemy wants to say they have experience. they have no experience as a landlord. i haven't seen anything good fromurban alchemy . where is that money going? why are there otherexpenses? look at the cost. where is it coming from ? what happened to the extensive experience in the baby area? absolutely not everybody in the community says no .please say no pause and look at what's going on.
>> thank you for your comments. mister atkins, next speaker please. >> gloria very elected member of the identification purchases. i would just like to chime in that i support this grant agreement. i'm very pleased at urban alchemy and the hiring they've done in the community. and i also speak from someone who's been homeless for three years and used half a felony until i got that business. we do not get the civility until we are moved in and have shelter overour heads . so if we want morestability out on the streets , we should house people and casemanagement is the key . i've got moved into my buildin . the owner took a chance on me and because of my success people were allowed to move into the building and the case managers keep their finger on
the pulse of these problems and we need to house people. move in and in thefuture purchase properties ahead of time so this is notan issue . >> thank you for your comments . mister atkins, next speaker please. >> i'm so yeah, i'm a neighbor of the property about a block away and i've been living here for 30 years. i agree with my neighbors . i agree with shelley bradford bell that this proposal is not well thought out. i'm concerned about the provision of daytime and nighttime programs and services for the unhoused. i'm concerned about covid. trying to push 315 people into
a 250 bed facility is going to be very difficult under these circumstances we are living in now with the omicron variant and i'm concerned there hasn't been any analysis on covid and the unhoused residence as well as theneighbors . i'm concerned about neighborhood light and crime and activities for the residents of the shelter as well as with urban alchemy's credentials regarding case management. i also agree with supervisor peskin about this being not an acquisition but what they're investing in for a long-term and not having the community interest. >> thank you sent you for your comments. operations, next speaker pleas . >> caller:francisca decosta.
i want you to listen to me carefully . they are giving us just one minute to discuss an issue that needs a lot of equity and consideration forthe homeless . you are not paying attention to the people from the neighborhood. don't create a situation where there isalready a competent situation . what about cqua? you a democratic nation, not autocratic . we are discussing this issue trying to shutthings down our throat . i've been an advocate for 40 years. in 1989 i was in the catalog there was an earthquake for which i got acommanders award . so don't try tohoodwink us . the people in the tenderloin
know this too well. don't kid them with this. shame on you, supervisors for not knowing how to ... >> thank you for your comments. operations, next speaker please. do we have a caller on the line? >> caller: hello? >> we do. >> caller: is at clifton in district 6 in full responseto this emergency response . i'm appalled at the idea that there would be another pause here or that another month of communityengagement would serve except putting our neighbors
through a month of cold and rain . i live around the cornerfrom a supportive housing site myself and we need lesshousing now in neighborhoods across the city . the board concurred in declaring a state of emergency . when your house is on fire we spent a month or do we put the fire out? we need an emergency response now. i heard some of you yesterday asking where we're going to link the people do when we get out of the linkage center. this isthe answer. pleasemove forward with this emergency response without delay . >> thank you for your comments. operations, next speaker please . >> caller: good afternoon supervisors. i live in district 5. i want to say i'm in support of the proposal . i'd like to remind the board that the united nations has declared san francisco's homelessness crisis is a human rights violation so i'd just like to say this explicitly if you vote to delay a solution or
hope to delay fixing our homelessness crisis you are going to extend our human rights crisis by a full month. i'd just like to leave you wit that. iq . >> iq robert for your comments. mister atkins, next speaker please. >> my name is patricia del grande, can you hear me western mark sorry, i'm a longtime resident of san francisco and sf past member. i have dozens of people living on the street each day and evening when i leave my office near the union square neighborhood. keeping people on the street longer will not help them .
those that are sleeping on the street right now, i recommend you support this project as without housing the people, this facility could provide housing for address the physical andmental needs and return to being a productive member of our community thank you for your time at all of your prospective . i stronglyrecommend that you move forward with this project . >> thank you for your comments. next speaker please. >> my name is gwendolyn right, do you hear me? >> we can. >> caller: very good i've been a resident of lower nobhill district 3 and assembly district 17 for 25 years . i strongly oppose the 7-eleven post proposal merely because of geographic inequity. when i requested a list of the homeless shelters in all of the
districtsthroughout san francisco, i have not received a response from hfh .their bulldozer was rough roughtactic is deplorable and very disrespectful . we know that this has the week of thanksgiving. a meeting set during hanukkah. no small businesses have not been contacted ornotified because we have spoken to them ourselves . ask sent several emails to sherry mcfadden with questions and concerns and have yet to receive a response. phone calls have not gone returned. it's been a total lack of communityengagement. this is shameful and unacceptable. our neighborhood has this past 22 months provided 600 beds to shelters on house at 500 post street , 606 88 post street read at 443, 10,000 southern etc. we have done much with this. >> apologize for cutting you off but thank you for your comments. operations, next speaker.
>> good afternoon. my name is jason and i'm a residentnearby on post street . i'm calling in to express my like oppositionto immediately moving forward with this . i am calling about the lack of issues mainly regarding the lack of outreach towards the community. i'm very appreciative for the work that urban alchemy and you guys do on a daily basis to house homeless people and to light, yeah. help support them but it's clear that there's been close to zero notification fromurban alchemy or community involvement . despite that we've seen 1700 signatures from residents arein opposition to this . i expect that to grow quickly. the issues of geographic equity and the number of events of
homeless shelters in this neighborhood is just a parent every day walking aroundthe streets . it's the neighborhood has become less safe. and the services available are important. >> thank you jason for your comments operations, next speaker please . hello, do we have a caller? >> as a resident of houston street, first of all ithink change in the comments suggest one minute. it's terrible, we were told to
minutes and we have one . this is just another wayto minimize the public comments . it seems like the city's push for treating the homeless population with compassion and understanding we've forgotten about the actual residents concerns. the ones who pay for the taxes that fund all these initiative . the proposal that talks about how lucky it is to find such a fantastic propertythat just happened to be vacant. they fail to mention the city had enteredinto a lease with the hotel . very squeaky practices here. secure the property then shoehorn it in . rapidly before anyone notices. this proposal includes a six and the urban alchemy which on the surface sounds great but blog posts that i've read from actual urban alchemy members talk about how they're not allowed to do things right outside of their zone so the talk of over going to be doing convening and patrolling the streets, it's not that. they can literally do it right outside the street. the proposals provide 12 hours,
not 24. we have a weapons blogger that require them to be clean so whatdoes that mean? it means they will be walking three doors down to use their jobs before they return . it's unacceptable thateither allow them to do drugs in their room or to get clean site . don't force them outside in front of the neighbors apartments to do it and then walked back into their rooms. it's pathetic. do one or the other but don't do this approach because it doesn't work for the residents around you that's it. >> thank you for your comments. operations, next speaker. >> thisis cindy . i'm in opposition of this and i've been in this neighborhood for the last nine years and i can say the last 12 years the neighborhood has become more shady. it's been in broad daylight trying to sneak into buildings.
there's lots of broken glass doors. i mean, i grew up in india and i can safely say the neighborhood this last 10 year have been worse than some of the darkest slums i saw in india . it's almost like you want to shove your homes in the heart of union square which is as a tourist or anyone coming tothe city in the future , it's that close. i'm also making some low income housing in support of this. there's kids who really want to make it simple. i would rather have them. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. operations, nextspeaker please . >> my name is joe blake and i liveacross the street from the proposed shelter . i moved to the neighborhood
because i stayed in one when it was a youth hospital and it was converted toa shelter and me and my family will be leaving theneighborhood . the reasons are urban alchemy on their website they say that shelter policy is a low barrier of entry , and they allow pets to come.i was questioning urban alchemy's leader about the intake process and theysaid they will allow them to store weapons on site and have any for access to withdrawing them . it's unconscionable toallow that to be stored in the neighborhood across the street from me. i can't continue to live here. crime has been up .the feeling has been bad amongst all the neighborsand no one i've spoken to has been in support of this and we're going to remember who votes for this . don't put this agenda forward without more review. that is my time.
>> thank you for your comments. operations, next speaker please. >> my name is johnanderson and i'm general manager of the jw marriott in san francisco two blocks east of the proposed site . i want to thank the supervisors for your leadership. obviously a pandemic has been hard on all of us and your job is never going to and with the unhoused situation so i don't envy the decisions you have to make these calls. i want to acknowledge the lower knob hill community for organizing around this opportunitysupervisor peskin for your leadership and i encourage further discussion . a hasty decision to move forward with this encourages more discussion among the communityand businesses . thank you for the your leadership and the time to talk today. >> thank you for your comments operations, next speaker please .
>> caller: can you hear me? the family is outside right now. i want to say i live in district 11 san francisco and i am in support of this project. hopefully we can have our unhoused neighbors that we see visibly outside the street three house so that we can have a safer sfwith others . we have opportunities now to provide equity and just making sure people fit in their homes. instead of being out in the streets which we hate to see. everyone have a good day and happy new year.
>> thank you. operations, next speaker pleas . >> can you hear me?>> i strongly oppose this post three proposal. i've lived in the 600 block for 13 years and i love it a couple of years ago. i think everyone is in agreement homelessness is ahuge issue i see it every day but our neighborhood is frustrated . businesses cannot absorb any more shelters and what comes with it. i also want to invest in people that are just not here. the people from other districts that are calling in, i suggest you hang out at the corner of post and jones around 10 tonight and you can actually see what happens if you want that in your neighborhoods i suggest you suggest a couple of
spaces that would work in your neighborhood because it's not working here . i understand urban alchemy is operating the facility but don't tell me that this will not increase the additional 30 people living in a noble shelter . other uses could be for the hastings or a portable housing for low income families. and again, thank you. >> mister athens, could you confirm if we have any more speakers on this line. >> there are no further colors in the queue. >> thank you very much, mister chair. >> thank you to everyone who called in. i appreciate your comments and input. colleagues, any further questions orcomments . miss:, anything you want to add?
>> thank you for the opportunity to present. >> supervisor, do you want to clarify what you're asking for and what the next budget would be? i know this is in your district and there's additional work that you'd like to see done on it for this moves forward. supervisor weston mark. >> as i said at the outset i like to work with the department of homelessness and administration and the community for the next month to see what we can come up with. and with respect to the request to continueto your first meeting next month february 2 . >> so with that, i think that the other supervisors have spoken on their view on that. this is obviously something that impacts district 6 as well so i will be in touch with you
supervisor about it. i do believe it that these type of facilities are ones that we absolutelyneed . and also i understand the need to effectively consult with the neighborhood and that the absolute need to consider geographic equity roles. supervisor, misconduct, >> i like the promotion but you know, to the committee move forward with supervisor haskins request, i do ask that we make the continuances as brief as possible. i think we can do this work well and i'm eager to work with the supervisor and neighbors but i do think 30 days is a
long time to delay this when we had the opportunity to open this right away. i obviously defer to the community actions here and will take whateverdirections are given that we do request that we make any continuances as soon as possible so we can continue this critical directive . >> for not getting off to a good start . >> any comment onthat? supervisor mar . >> again, i do feel like it's important for us to really move forward with this project in a good way with the neighborhood. and so i am supportive of continuing this to february 2 as supervisor peskin has requested and i'd be happy to make the motion . >> chair: before we do that, supervisor safai. >> thank youchair haney. i want to end on a couple of
comments . i think it'sfair to put together this working group . i think that the continuance for it to happen it has to be targeted.i think we have a commitment from thesupervisor to put together a workinggroup of stakeholders . as i've said , i've heard directly from local 2. i've heard from the union square alliance andfrom the hotel council . i've heard from adjacent neighbors and small business owners . and i'm sure supervisor haney and peskin, some of them straddle both your districts. this is one block into district 3 but on the periphery of district 6 oh i'm sure it's a shared constituent issue but it is certainlya citywide concern . and so i'm very committed to having a shelter and the amount of shelters that we need to
achieve , to get people off the streets. if they are run the way we want run our shelter in place hotels i think a lot of the concerns and fears from a lot of the callers would be put at ease. so i think the amount of time that supervisor peskin is asking for is fair. that gets a commitmentthen for a couple of things . it gives a commitment to the working group and a commitment to reengage with the property owner to have a robust conversation about purchasing the property. and i think then that allows us the opportunity to have a real robustconversation about multiple uses . maybe there's transition use in this space starts off as one use as oneof the callers said. maybe it's temporary for a certain amount of time . one use then it transitions into another use and i think that's what this next month
will provide.so i appreciate the commitment from the supervisor and all the different stakeholders committed to working on this. so i will be supporting the continuance as well. thank you mister chair. >> chair: thank you supervisor mar, was that emotion weston mark. >> i recommend we continue to thefebruary 2 meeting . >> apologies chair haney. we have yet to close public comment and we do have one more thatjumped into the queue if we could take that foreboding . again, operations. if you could call her through and taller, you dohave one minute .
>> lynn lookout also in the 600 block. i thought i was in the queue but obviously i wasn't. on a 32 year resident and owner in the area. i think what we've heard today is those of us who live close by the 7-eleven post are completely in support of housing the unhoused. there's no question. there's a simpler issue is that we're at asaturation point. we feel we've done more than our fair share . also missed kellen's idea of doing something in tandemjust isn't realistic . i'm a professional in the area of planning and community building and moving forward with something like this without the full engagement not just the transactional engagement of engagements where a lot of smart people in this neighborhood can help stay true possibilities for the use of 711 post.
so i'm, i'm in support of the continuance. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. i believe that does, i believe that is the last caller. mister akins, can you confirm? >> no further colors in the queue? >> mister chair. >> should public comment is close, can we takea vote on supervisor? in . and thank you again to everyone called in on or provided their comments. weappreciate your patience . >> to clarify we did have a datecertain to continue next week . >> i said february 2 budget and finance committee meetings.>> on the motion offered by number are, that this item be continued to the february 2
meeting. vice chair safai. [roll call vote] >> chair: thank you colleagues. we have 3 aye's. thank you miss: and we will see you again andwe really do appreciate your work and your commitment and that of your staff . we wish you and supervisor peskin the best in coming together with what should be an important community process that will i hope lead to a solution for both the neighborhood and for this critical challenge of homelessness that we are facing. mister clerk, can you please call item can.
>> item number10 is a hearing to consider the review and approval of the budget guidelines for board of supervisors . the board annual budget for fiscal year 2022 to 2023 and 2023 to 2024. members of the public who wish toprovide public comments shouldcall 415-655-0001 , meeting id 2490 080 5064 . then press pound twice. if you have not already done so please dial á3. the system prompts will indicate you haveraised your hand wait till the system indicates you have been an muted . >> antimatter clerk. >>. >> angela calvino, and we
exited apartments financial data. today's hearing takes off the budget discussion to gain the committees but instructions. your guideline as set forth in the board's rules of order. for today's hearing i'll briefly highlight a few of the departments current projects and then highlight the departments request that we feel will better draw residents to the board public space. your policydiscussions and helpful information . we will learn of any additional committee suggested initiatives not already covered in this presentation and we will continue afterwards to meet with each member of the committee and allother members of the board to capture additional suggested initiatives . so we've we've built out of today's hearing we will create the fiscal year 2022 through 23 and fiscal year 2023 through 24 post budget for your consideration and finalization
in early february . once again, once we gain your permission, we will submit the departments budget to the city controller. the mayor for review in late february that finally the budgetary process will continue for the committee and the board by reviewing the changes or updates to the placeholder items which i'll discuss in a moment offebruary submission for your review in june . so just moving to the second slide on the current year budget. the committee and board authorized approximately 20.5 million for the budgetary needs for the department to accomplish its mission which is to serve the residents of the city and ask department number one offices, achieved what other city departments and other whole counties do not do in the same timeframe. through great uncertainty period and that possible risk
to your legislative staff and to yourself. if you continue to serve through the dark days over the last two years and if you and your great staff are in the city and the clerk's office constitutes the servants of the servants. so we and the clerk's office and all of our division are grateful for the resources that you provided to our department and wealways commit to the public to utilize judgment when spending thetaxpayers dollars . i thanked the clerk staff and its division for their correct , they're not going through the last few yearsand for their burden , sharing the burdens that they all taken on to fulfill ourmission . i draw your attention members to the table which shows the largest cost share at 77 percent of the total budget being the salaries and benefits for each department physician as established by the hr's and ou.
we have been full-time employeesand 61 board appointed commissioners . the next largest category is nonpersonnel services at 20 percent or 4.3 million . and you can see on this slide the budget and legislative analyst services contracted largest in the category at 2.4 million burials and supplies remain small and these percentages remain the same relatively the same year-to-year. onslide three for the current year projects , some of the things that our office hadbeen working on are listed on this slide but i will only mention one or two of them . this typically the redistricting task force. 10 years ago if you recall our office did provideclerking support for the task force . this time around the director of elections sean arch requested the clerk's office t run the competitive process for the reach consultants .our
office is also providing technical operational support remote meetings. you are placingbiweekly advertisements on the outreach newspapers , contract with coordinating language access and identifying potential facilities for in person hybrid meetings in all 11 districts. our offices in the process of hiring temporary it staff to assist with weekend and evening meetings. in the communities as well. we estimate that we at the department will be spending approximately half $1 million in our existing budget including staff time, outreach consultants and advertising. cost of sf gop tv purchasing equipment and subscriptions needed for the taskforce . the election has alsoprovided 100,000 for the outreach consultants . if you have other questions about what's listed there, the board and committee meetings
will continue to be hybrid. the assessment appeals board updates tothe system will continue . the legislative management system. i do think it's important to provide you an update on this that i've already provided you all an update on this item but it's the public i would like to update. in 2018 eight 390 pounds of coin for a new legislative management system project . our office finds a five-year contract to bring additional new innovations such as a new boardand commissions management system legislative drafting tool . mobile access, to medications for constituent engagement. ecomments capability and a gaf mapping tool . unfortunately atticus was not able to meet their contractual obligations and ouroffice continues to work with the city attorney to unwind that contract . we are however an exciting part
of all this is working to work with the department of technology and various other employees in the city who have been a part of large major contract purchasing and software and hardware implementation who will assist us with our major projects so we willkeep you updated in the future . on how that projectis going . but we expect that to go out to market in the spring of this year. so to slide 4. this specifically identifies our budget request. for the budget year and the help here. for the last 23years, the administrative function has stayed relatively flat . in our department. we been purposely prudent not to grow at the same pace as otherdepartments or even as the city budget . but i ambringing a budget request to the committee .
this particular year i will have, i will need to bring more resources to be able to provide sufficient resources to support our employees. at better draw the residents to the board of public space. i'd like to highlight just a few position requests specifically. i'm mindful of the chance that our department to contribute t . i want to be able to contribute to a healthy workplace for them.in terms of maintaining our employees physical and mental wellness. to retain top employee talent that we have currently. to increase our productivity andthe ever important to maintain healthy relationships with the public . i'mrequesting two new positions and one upgrade . these extra positions will help i think nurture our capacity and strategic support not only for the whole person but tobe able to assist the public more . with moreinformation .
simply put i'm asking for a 1492 assistant clerk. you see the cost in the first year is 142 and it would be 14 , 145 ongoing with the need to double up a hybrid system going forward . increase work because of the animal mandate we been working with supervisor peskin on a six-month update so we expect to do it again in june and we've just released it in december. this new legislative management system will far exceed our current capacity to run 2 systems at the same time while we are migrating to a new system and testing to make sure that it's operational. i'd love to be able to allow my staff to take their vacations or any personal leave and to stave off illness. but this is a very important request for us.
we are also requesting a 1222 senior personnel payroll clerk. typically the standard is one payroll clerk for every 50 employees. as you saw previously we have 88 full-time staff and 61 commissioners . so we really do need the assistance and 75 percent of the departments full-time positions are exempt positions so the turnover rate in our department is very high. so we are requesting that 1222 personal payroll clerk. a substitution i'm requesting is a 1454 executive secretary to and 0922 manager 1. the duties of this position at the ball over the last few years . the position has been functioning as a floor manager for operations division and often steps in between abuse of
public and employees. exercise independent judgment and makes decisions that impact day-to-day operations on the department's behalfso we are requesting the upgrade in this position . the appeals board will be going through an interesting time as we did in the 08 downturn with the economy. now that the pandemic , we currently have 20 percent more applications this year at this time than we did in over the last 2 years. so right now aab hearings are being conducted virtually which require additional time for the clerks but i understand soon the appeals board will be able to take hybrid scenario and offer a hybrid scenario to those taxpayers who are demanding to meet in person. so we're requesting assistance. that position would end in three years so that is not a position where expecting to keep. and then i have three requested placeholders for you members
that we will not have the requested amounts for at this time but will be placeholders in june and i will give you a little bit of informationwhy . for the legislativemanagement system we are currently scoping out the resources . we've worked with marco to route dp. they've done an amazing job getting all the services down but we are setting up 2 pilot programs, one with all the other boards andcommission clerks to see what their needs would be because we would like to offer them a license to use the system . in addition to all the departments want to utilize the drafting tool we want to work with the high functioning through the legislative policy process on a regular basis and try to stress test drafting tool that could work for all departments. wewon't know the cost of that told you . changes to the ordinance, i know the president of the board
president walton is working with other members on upgrades to the language access ordinance and we are in conversation about a placeholder. as far as what type of changes will affect the current language access policy and what the cost would be in the general fund support in the current year $341,240, we typically use that as a placeholder for the next year because laptop does not approve theirbudget until the month of may . so those are the adjustments i'm recommending. and we will get to the cost of that of the commendation of those items to the extent that we know that there are two other items i just want to let you know. as is continuingto meet with committee members and other board members , we are talking to members about restoring the
staff position upgrade. the use commission for the two staff positions. if you recall this committee and board approved staff upgrades. i believe it was in the past year or the year before that but it was removed from the mayor's budget . for the two individuals but not the director so we're working with board members to determine if they would like us to include that amount of 45,000 in the budget in the out year. then the task force is requesting a new fce for paralegal position. as they are requesting this paralegal to write the executive summaries research applicable codes for the sunshine ordinance task force and they asked for i guess it' 129,000 in the first year and 170 ongoing . so pending on the outcome of the conversation you'll see
this perhaps in the proposed budget that i will bring to you in february. so to the summary of budget request if you're looking at the total onslide five , it is hundred 53 in fiscal year 2022, 23 that iwould be requesting that you add to our department's budget and in the outyears 955,000 . so if the committee supports the recommended adjustments , we would bring that to you in february. so then on the final slide it is just requested that if you do have any other further instructions you can provide them to me here or at the february meeting and i'm certainly available off-line as well and as stated earlier we will return to the committee in february after speaking with all the numbers on the proposed budget to share with you all
that proposed budget and the outcome of those conversations . ithink thatconcludes my presentation . unless you have questions for me. thank you . >> thank you madame clerk for your work. let's see, supervisors any questions or comments ? is there a blareport on this item ? >> there is not. >> and there's noaction that we need to take . >> if the committeeapproves the items to be included in a proposed budget , that's really the instruction. we may combine themat a later time .
>> chair: okay, got it. that makes sense. let's see. i think you have our approval. with no other comments, i would give that approval and we will see this council at alater date . thankyou so much madame clerk . >> operations is checking to see if there are colors in the queue. members who wish to provide public comment please press dark 3 and for those already on holdplease continue to wait until the system indicates you have been onmuted . that isyour cue to begin your comments . mister atkins, do we have anybody online ? >> caller: can you hear me now? >> i'm starting your time.
>> caller: if you could give me a 32nd warning, i don't expect to take the full two or three minutes. i continue to support the great work by the clerkof the board and her incredible staff during this continuing difficult time . i had thought that three new positions were needed in the clerk of the board's budget either in this next year or in thefuture . there were slightly different from those opposed by the clerk . i would add and 953 deputy clerk of the board function as a deputy department head and provide additional oversight with regard to aav, bla, sunshine use commission and lascaux and to assist in other ways that are directly related to daily legislative operation . i absolutely agree that at least one new 1492 committee
clerk is needed and i also believe that an 1822 or 23 contract specialist and finance generalist would be useful in the finance and administration section. upon reflection agree with the suggestion to add a 1224 1222 payroll and personnel clerk and i am probably supportive of upgrading the 1454. there could also be a few minor substitutions as well those changes are not offset the new positions i've shared my thoughts with the clerk of the board and will continue to have productive budget discussions with her and once again the entire clerk of the board staff continues to go above and beyond through daily operation support for the redistricting task force and everything else
that they do and iwant to continue to thank andappreciate them . >> do we have any more speakers and that you ? >> there are nofurther colors inthe queue . >> mister chair . >> chair: public comment isnow closed . not seeing any questions or comments, thank you so much madame clerk and i want to make a motion to filethis hearing . >> on that motion to file the hearing vice chair safai. [roll call vote] we have 3 aye's. all right, thank you madame clerk. we have an item six issue so if you can call again item 6.
>> item 6 was the item authorizing contracted ministration to enter into a fourth amendment due to the contract between the city and county and language services to purchase telephonic interpretation services for city departments. increasing the amount by 3.2 million. for a total contract amount not to exceed 13.1 million and extending the term by six months from january 30 2022. for a total contract direction of four years from august 1 through july 31 2022 . >> chair: we actually have to verify the bla's recommendation. >> we do need to put a vote to continue conversation onthis . >> chair: can i make a motion to rescind the vote. [roll call vote] we have 3
aye's so we will rescind the vote . >> and can we assume mister branches here. cani turn it over to the la to verify the recommendation ? >> thank you chairhaney, budget analyst office . our intention of our recommendation is to increase the contract amount from the current amount of about 9.9 million two about 11.7 million but that is less than the amount in the exposed resolution which is about 13.2 million so what's proposed is 13,179,000. we are recommending that it be increased from 9.9 but not up
to that 13.2 to 11,694,000. >> chair: was there questions on that? ms. pearson. >> hello chair haney. i wanted to ask for clarification because there was confusion about whether the bla recommendation was to increase or decrease the amount and that was relevant to determination as to whether theamendment is substantive . their recommendation isto reduce the amount from the amount that is in the resolution which means this isa non-substantive amendment . if the community approves the bla recommendation this item could be sent directly to the board next week . >> chair: okay.
we've got a twofer here. i want to make amotion to accept that amendment which reduces the amount of . >> on the motion to accept the bla recommendation fight for the contract amount. vice chair safai. [roll call vote] we have 3 aye's. >> chair: tank you and then i want to make a motion to move this to the full board with a positiverecommendation as amended . >> on the motion to forward with a positive recommendation as amended, vice chair safai. [roll call vote] we have 3 aye's. >> chair: this will go to the full board with apositive
>> once i got the hang of it a little bit, you know, like the first time, i never left the court. i just fell in love with it and any opportunity i had to get out there, you know, they didn't have to ask twice. you can always find me on the court. [♪♪♪] >> we have been able to participate in 12 athletics wheelchairs. they provide what is an expensive tool to facilitate basketball specifically. behind me are the amazing golden state road warriors, which are one of the most competitive
adaptive basketball teams in the state led by its captain, chuck hill, who was a national paralympic and, and is now an assistant coach on the national big team. >> it is great to have this opportunity here in san francisco. we are the main hub of the bay area, which, you know, we should definitely have resources here. now that that is happening, you know, i i'm looking forward to that growing and spreading and helping spread the word that needs -- that these people are here for everyone. i think it is important for people with disabilities, as well as able-bodied, to be able to see and to try different sports, and to appreciate trying different things. >> people can come and check out this chairs and use them. but then also friday evening, from 6:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m., it will be wheelchair basketball we will make sure it is available, and that way people
can no that people will be coming to play at the same time. >> we offer a wide variety of adaptive and inclusion programming, but this is the first time we have had our own equipment. [♪♪♪] shop and dine on the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do shopping and dining within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services within neighborhood.
we help san francisco remain unique, successful and vibrant. where will you shop and dine in the 49? san francisco owes the charm to the unique character of the neighborhood comer hall district. each corridor has its own personality. our neighborhoods are the engine of the city. >> you are putting money and support back to the community you live in and you are helping small businesses grow. >> it is more environmentally friendly. >> shopping local is very important. i have had relationships with my local growers for 30 years. by shopping here and supporting us locally, you are also supporting the growers of the flowers, they are fresh and they
have a price point that is not imported. it is really good for everybody. >> shopping locally is crucial. without that support, small business can't survive, and if we lose small business, that diversity goes away, and, you know, it would be a shame to see that become a thing of the past. >> it is important to dine and shop locally. it allows us to maintain traditions. it makes the neighborhood. >> i think san francisco should shop local as much as they can. the retail marketplace is changes. we are trying to have people on the floor who can talk to you and help you with products you are interested in buying, and help you with exploration to try
things you have never had before. >> the fish business, you think it is a piece of fish and fisherman. there are a lot of people working in the fish business, between wholesalers and fishermen and bait and tackle. at the retail end, we about a lot of people and it is good for everybody. >> shopping and dining locally is so important to the community because it brings a tighter fabric to the community and allows the business owners to thrive in the community. we see more small businesses going away. we need to shop locally to keep the small business alive in san francisco. >> shop and dine in the 49 is a cool initiative.
>> working with kids, they keep you young. they keep you on your tones -- on your toes. >> teaching them, at the same time, us learning from them, everything is fulfilling. >> ready? go. [♪♪♪] >> we really wanted to find a way to support women entrepreneurs in particular in san francisco. it was very important for the mayor, as well as the safety support the dreams that people want to realize, and provide them with an opportunity to receive funding to support
improvements for their business so they could grow and thrive in their neighborhoods and in their industry. >> three, two, one! >> because i am one of the consultants for two nonprofits here for entrepreneurship, i knew about the grand through the renaissance entrepreneur center, and through the small business development center. i thought they were going to be perfect candidate because of their strong values in the community. they really give back to the neighborhood. they are from this neighborhood, and they care about the kids in the community here. >> when molly -- molly first told us about the grant because she works with small businesses. she has been a tremendous help for us here. she brought us to the attention of the grand just because a lot of things here were outdated, and need to be up-to-date and redone totally. >> hands in front. recite the creed. >> my oldest is jt, he is seven,
and my youngest is ryan, he is almost six. it instills discipline and the boys, but they show a lot of care. we think it is great. the moves are fantastic. the women both are great teachers. >> what is the next one? >> my son goes to fd k. he has been attending for about two years now. they also have a summer program, and last summer was our first year participating in it. they took the kids everywhere around san francisco. this year, owner talking about placing them in summer camps, all he wanted to do was spend the entire summer with them. >> he has strong women in his life, so he really appreciates it. i think that carries through and i appreciate the fact that there are more strong women in the world like that.
>> i met d'andrea 25 years ago, and we met through our interest in karate. our professor started on cortland years ago, so we grew up here at this location, we out -- he outgrew the space and he moved ten years later. he decided to reopen this location after he moved. initially, i came back to say, hey, because it might have been 15 years since i even put on a uniform. my business partner was here basically by herself, and the person she was supposed to run the studio with said great, you are here, i started new -- nursing school so you can take over. and she said wait, that is not what i am here for i was by myself before -- for a month before she came through. she was technically here as a secretary, but we insisted, just put on the uniform, and help her teach. i was struggling a little bit. and she has been here. one thing led to another and now we are co-owners.
you think a lot more about safety after having children and i wanted to not live in fear so much, and so i just took advantage of the opportunity, and i found it very powerful to hit something, to get some relief, but also having the knowledge one you might be in a situation of how to take care of yourself. >> the self-defence class is a new thing that we are doing. we started with a group of women last year as a trial run to see how it felt. there's a difference between self-defence and doing a karate class. we didn't want them to do an actual karate class. we wanted to learn the fundamentals of how to defend yourself versus, you know, going through all the forms and techniques that we teaching a karate class and how to break that down. then i was approached by my old high school. one -- once a semester, the kids
get to pick an extra curricular activity to take outside of the school walls. my old biology teacher is now the principle. she approached us into doing a self-defence class. the girls have been really proactive and really sweet. they step out of of the comfort zone, but they have been willing to step out and that hasn't been any pushback. it is really great. >> it is respect. you have to learn it. when we first came in, they knew us as those girls. they didn't know who we were. finally, we came enough for them to realize, okay, they are in the business now. it took a while for us to gain that respect from our peers, our male peers. >> since receiving the grant, it has ignited us even more, and put a fire underneath our butts even more. >> we were doing our summer camp and we are in a movie theatre, and we just finished watching a film and she stepped out to receive a phone call. she came in and she screamed,
hey, we got the grant. and i said what? >> martial arts is a passion for us. it is passion driven. there are days where we are dead tired and the kids come and they have the biggest smiles on their faces and it is contagious. >> we have been operating this program for a little over a year all women entrepreneurs. it is an extraordinary benefit for us. we have had the mayor's office investing in our program so we can continue doing this work. it has been so impactful across a diversity of communities throughout the city. >> we hope that we are making some type of impact in these kids' lives outside of just learning karate. having self-confidence, having discipline, learning to know when it's okay to stand up for yourself versus you just being a bully in school. these are the values we want the kids to take away from this. not just, i learned how to kick and i learned how to punch. we want the kids to have more
values when they walk outside of these doors. [♪♪♪] >> hi, everybody. i'm greg perloff, and what a pleasure it is to be involved in this celebration of metallica, and a metallica takeover of san francisco. >> that's right. that's right. that's right. >> you know, it all starts with the music, and the thing about metallica that makes them unique is their fan base and their fan club, and