kgo-tv, san francisco government television.

good morning. the meeting will come to order. welcome to the may 22nd, 2024 meeting of the budget and finance committee. i'm supervisor connie chan, chair of the committee. i'm joined by vice chair raphael mandelman and hopefully shortly by supervisor myrna melgar.

there she is. our clerk is brant halpa. i would like to thank eugene. labbadia. and for from sfgovtv for broadcasting this meeting. mr. clerk, do you have any announcement? thank you, madam chair. just a friendly reminder for those in attendance to please silence your cell phones so as to not interrupt our proceedings, public comment will be taken on each item on this agenda, when your item of interest comes up and public comment is called, please line up to speak along the curtains to your, to your right, my left and, yeah, right along those curtains. and while not necessary to provide public comment, we do invite you to fill out a comment card and leave them on the tray by the television to your left, by the doors, if you wish to be accurately recorded for the minutes. should you have any documents to be included as part of the file, this should be submitted to myself, the clerk, alternatively, you may submit public comment in writing in either of the following ways. he mailed them to myself, the budget and finance committee clerk at birx entj a l i p a at

sf gov. org if you submit public comment via email, it will be forwarded to the supervisors and also included as part of the official file. you may also send your written comments via us postal service to our office on city hall at one. doctor carlton, be good to place room 244, san francisco, california 94 102. and finally, madam chair, due to the due to the memorial day holiday, items acted upon today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda of june 4th unless otherwise stated. madam chair. thank you, mr. clerk. and before i call the items, to on today's agenda, a reminder that for items that have budget and legislative analyst report, we will go to the department presentation and the then the budget legislative analyst report and then questions and then public comment. so with that mr. clerk, please call item number one and two together. yes, madam chair items. item

numbers one and two are resolutions approving and authorizing the director of property to execute a, to execute lease agreements with the trinity center, llc, located at 1145 market street, the leases will be effective upon approval of the respective resolutions and authorizing the director of property to execute any amendments, made certain modifications, and take certain actions that do not materially increase the obligations or liabilities to the city, and also do not materially decrease the benefits to the city in our necessary or advisable to effectuate the purposes of the leases or resolutions. item number one is on behalf of the law library for the term of 15 years, with one five year option at a base rent of 599,000 per year, with 3% annual rent increases and a partial market reset in year 11. item number two is on behalf of the health service system, to lease a portion, to lease of a portion of the real property, for an initial term of ten years with one five year auction, extension option to renew at an initial

annual base rent of approximately 589,000, with 3% annual increases. madam chair. thank you, mr. clerk. colleagues, we have heard this these two items, last week and it was continued due to amendments that, in effect, adding the dollar amount corrected on the actual legislation as well as, the term, the years of and option, on these leases. so, i don't know if it requires extensive discussion today. i don't see any name on the roster. would it be okay if i just go to public comments on these two items i see nodding? let's go to public comments on these items. yes, madam chair, we now invite members of the public have joined us today who wish to speak on these items. one and two, to line up, to speak now along those windows, when you come forward to the lectern, all speakers will have two minutes to speak. madam chair, we have no speakers. thank you. seeing no public comments, public comment is now closed. and with

that, i would like to move these two items to full board with recommendation, a roll call, please. and on that motion to forward, both resolutions to the full board with a positive recommendation, vice chair mandelman mandelman i. member. melgar. melgar i chair chan i chan i we have three eyes. thank you. and the motion passes. and with that, mr. clark, please call item number three. yes. item number three is a resolution approving the harvey milk terminal one museum store lease, between love from usa group, inc. and the city and county acting buying through its airport commission for a term of seven years with two one year options and a minimum annual guarantee of 205,000 for the first year of the lease to commence upon approval by the board of supervisors. madam chair, thank you. today we have sfo, our san francisco airport here. good morning, supervisors. the airport is seeking your approval for a new concession lease in harvey milk terminal one with love from usa group inc. for a lease term of seven years, with two one year options to extend this lease results

from a competitive request for proposals. process love from usa group inc. was the sole proposer and their proposal was found to be both responsive and responsible. love from usa group is a women owned, established 100% airport concession, decent managed business enterprise with more than 45 years of retail experience. the store will feature merchandise from local bay area museums, including the asian art museum, contemporary jewish museum, museum of the african diaspora, and the california academy of sciences. there is no bla report as it did not reach the threshold requirement, and i'm happy to answer any questions. thank you, we don't have any questions. we appreciate this work. we understand, we appreciate the guarantees always. and with that, let's go to public comment on this item. yes. members of the public who wish to address

this committee regarding this item number three, now's your opportunity to step up to the lectern. madam chair, we have no speakers seeing no public comments. public comment is now closed. i would like to make the motion. i make the motion to move this item to full board with recommendation and a roll call, please. and on that motion to forward to the full board with a positive recommendation, vice chair mandelman mandelman i member melgar melgar i. chair chan i chan i we have three eyes. thank you and the motion passes. and with that, mr. clerk, please call item number four. yes. item number four is a resolution approving amendment number three to the terminal three. coffee and quick serve concession lease between elevate gourmet brands inc and aim high esg, llc. a joint venture doing business as elevate gourmet brands, sfo group and the stanton county. acting by and through its airport commission for the removal of the sf mac and cheese kitchen facility from the lease reimbursement of

approximately 279,000 to the tenant for unamortized construction costs relating to the sf mac and cheese kitchen facility and reduction of the minimum annual guarantee from 375,000 to 185,000, and the annual promotion charge from approximately 2000 to 405 to reflect the reduction in the square footage of the remaining premises of the lease, effective upon approval of this resolution, with no change to the term of march 11th, 2019 through september 30th, 2031. madam chair, thank you. and again, this is for san francisco airport. and this one actually has a bla report. yes good morning, deanna bullock again with sfo. the airport is seeking your approval for the third amendment to the concession lease with elevate gourmet brands sfo group. the proposed amendment would remove san francisco mac and cheese kitchen from the lease, reimbursed 279,627 to the tenant for unamortized construction costs

and reduce the minimum annual guarantee from 375,000 to 185,000, and the annual promotion charge from 1991 to 405. the original lease was approved by the board of supervisors in february 2019 for two facilities and a term of eight years, with two one year options to extend the first location opened on march 12th, 2020. unfortunately, construction on the second location, sf mac and cheese kitchen, had just started when the pandemic began and has been suspended since. the airport would like to recapture the location for use in connection with the terminal three west modernization project, specifically for use by united airlines. the airport anticipates receiving approximately $90,850 per year in increased rent from united airlines for the premises. the budget analyst has reviewed the proposed amendment and recommends approval, and i'm also happy to answer questions.

good morning, supervisors. nick menard from the budget legislative analyst office. item four is a resolution that amends an airport concession lease to remove one of the tenants in a restaurant premises and terminal two. the restaurant never opened, and so the amendment removes them from the premises, reduces the minimum guaranteed rent from 375 to $185,000 a year, and also has the airport paying $279,000 of tenant improvement work that was undertaken in by the tenant that benefited the airport, but that was never able to be able to be recuperated because that restaurant never opened. we detailed the changes on page eight of our report, and we note that this is a revenue loss of $1.3 million to the airport over the remaining term of the lease that is partially offset by the increased rent from united airlines. we recommend approval of item four. thank you, thank

you. and we understand this change, and i'm glad that we can capture with united airlines in this space and be able to even out with the, rent. and so i don't see any name on the roster . we'll go to public comment on this item. yes. members of the public who wish to address this committee regarding this item number four, please step up to the lectern and you'll be given two minutes. madam chair, we have no speakers. thank you. seeing no public comments. public comment is now closed. colleagues i would like to move this item to full board with recommendation and a roll call, please. and on that motion to forward this resolution to the full board with a positive recommendation, vice chair mandelman mandelman i member melgar melgar i chair chan chan i. we have three eyes. thank you. and the motion passes. thank you. and i just wanted to say we hope you will be able to enjoy the wag brigade today, as they are here from 10 a.m. to 230. in case you need any doggy cuddles. so thank you so much.

room 278. room 278. thank you. forward to it, and with that, mr. clerk, please call item number five. yes. item number five is a resolution authorizing adoption of the san francisco mental health services act. three year program and expenditure, or integrated plan for fiscal years 2023 through 2026. madam chair, thank you. and today we have our department of public health. it's quite a long title. the office of justice, equity, diversity and inclusion, behavioral health services. yes. thank you. thank you. supervisors, hello. my name is jessica brown. as i stated, i'm the director of the office of justice, equity, diversity and inclusion and the behavioral health services act. i am here today to present to you the three year integrated plan for fiscal year 2324 through fiscal year 24, 2526. i just want to advise that this plan was developed prior to prop one passing. and so during this presentation, we'll do an

overview of the mental health services act. you'll hear me interchangeably say that name. and then we'll also get into some details about how prop one is going to impact and what our plan is. so thank you. so again overview of mental health services act going over our 2122 selected outcomes as well as our plans for the next fiscal or for this fiscal year, as well as just our integrated plan overall. and then again, reviewing prop one. so the mental health services act, now known as the behavioral health services act, was enacted into law in 2005. it is a 1% tax on personal income, over $1 million to allow counties to transform mental health services to really address the unmet needs of our vulnerable populations. it's a way to also provide culturally responsive care and also support peers with lived experiences to be able to be into our system of behavioral health and it's based off a set of core principles. those principles have to deal with not only providing

wraparound services for families, but also cultural competency. prior to prop one, we have five funding components of the mental health services act. those funding components are allocated and mandated by the state, where the state will allocate funding into each of those. those buckets that you're seeing. the first is community services and supports, which really focuses on, mental health and substance use services for co-occurring conditions. it looks at full service partnerships and also to it provides support for peers with vocational training, peer support services and housing. the second category is innovations. and this this category allows us to, pilot and test innovative mental health programs that are culturally responsive to the unmet needs of our clients. the third category is prevention and early intervention, which focuses on population focused programs as well as prevention and early interventions for mental health support. and the last two categories are workforce

education and training, and also capital facilities and technology needs, although we have five mandated funding categories, san francisco actually divides up those funding categories into service categories to allow us to be better, to serve and provide a wide variety of programing to our clients. and i'll get a little bit more into that. i wanted to go over the funding components because they have changed what, prop one. but just to give you a landscape of where we're at now, prior to prop one, we had five into prop one. we're going down from 5 to 3. and i'll explain a little bit more about that in a minute, so here are some of our, outcomes, what we did in the fiscal year 2122 is sustain a lot of our current programs and services that really support population focused programs. we expanded our funding to include pilot programs such as our culturally congruent program with our civil service clinics that focus on black african american clients, as well as providing culturally

affirming patient navigation support at our chinatown north north beach clinic, we also developed a request for proposal to provide, mental health services for, post, post and pre, pre and postpartum birthing people. and so we're working with four of our community based organizations to start within the next fiscal year. those services for birthing people. we also partnered with the human rights commission to provide talk therapy services for black african american clients throughout san francisco, and then we also to ensure that we were continuing, as i mentioned, our population focused programs, in addition, we have our peer specialists certification program, where we created with rams, our one of our cbos, to be able to provide our peers with training to, support medi-cal billing as well in our peer programs. and so that was

another program that was launched. so far, we have funded 258 peers in fiscal year 21, 20, 2122, throughout our behavioral health systems, just wanted to go over real quickly about how we evaluate our programs. we are mandated by the state to provide an annual update and also a three year plan. that three year plan does. and the annual update does consist of demographics and narratives on how our programs are doing. we have mid-year and year end reports that we require all of our cbos to provide to us so that we can evaluate the programs also to we provide technical assistance through our contract negotiation process, to better support our programs as they're implementing their their , their interventions. these are just some of our outcomes, giving you all some percentages for how our full service partnerships, outcomes were. we had 86% decrease in arrests for, older adults that had participated in the full service

partnership. we also had an 87% decrease in mental health and substance use disorder emergencies for adults. our population focus programs, we saw a significant impact in 90% of our 97% of our client s, increased their quality of life as feeling better, also to participating in more therapeutic services. 80% of our older adult clients also attending some of our senior, drop in in center activities in which reported an increase in socialization. and then we also had 100% of our, our peers that graduated from our vocational programs with our ability. again, each year we are required and this again, prior to prop one, we were required to present a three year plan to you all to for board approval to submit to the department of health care services, this three year plan again just looks into everything that we've done over the last

three years and also includes the community feedback we've conducted nine, 16, community engagement meetings across the city with over 165 individuals, to understand the needs and also to get community participation in how we were implementing some of our mental health programs. so some of the spotlight of our program, would be, as, as our community faces a variety of crisis and mental health and overdose and homelessness concerns, images say has been very committed to being a part of san francisco's mental health system to really transform and provide mental health needs to all san francisco, san franciscan, who lack insurance and also are experiencing homelessness. we provide 51% of our funding to address serious mental health and co-occurring substance use. we also provide comprehensive housing to meet the better needs of unhoused individuals and also we again,

as i mentioned earlier, have a lot of population focused programs that address racism and equity issues as well, so this is, again, looking forward into 2000 to fiscal year 2526, some of our programs, again, include improving the mental health needs for pre and postpartum clients, working with homeless children's network. then continuing our kumba peer fellowship and also again launching our culturally responsive programs within our civil service clinics. we have, innovation programs that are launched at four of our civil service clinics south of market omi, our tech clinic, and also to our mission mental health alternatives program. and so we're going to continue to will be continuing to really expand on our full service partnerships, especially with the new proposition one requirements. so this just gives you an overview of our budget

and our proposed budget that's going to be in our three year plan, i just want to just iterate to you all that we are 13% of the overall behavioral health service budget, and our funding is very volatile because we rely on the taxpayers. our funding can fluctuate from year to year, so this gives you a breakdown of all the different funding categories. the five that i mentioned earlier and how much funding we did put into it, what our expenditures were for actual fiscal year 2324, and then what our estimated expenditures will be for the following years. again, this was created prior to prop one. so that is going to change a bit with the new requirement points, and again i wanted to just give you an overview of our revenue. we did see a significant increase in our revenue in fiscal year 2324. but as the years are going, we are seeing a significant fall in the budget. again, that is because of the

funding being volatile. we do get a state projection from our state financial forecaster, mike geis, that let's all counties know how our budget is going to do. we're going to be meeting with him and believe in july to get more insight of where our budget will be at. but these are the these are the projections as of now. this gives you all an overview of our unspent balance and where we're at, again, our funding, we do project out three years with the three year plan. some of this funding will show an unspent balance, that we are accounting for as we allocated for our prudent reserve that's mandated by the state. we also do an internal reserve just to be able to have a little bit of cushion for any economic downfall or downturn. and we also keep that internal reserve in the event that we are not getting as much funding as we thought the previous year due to the volatility of our budget. we also have an unspent balance that includes money that's

allocated for positions, money that's allocated for some of our new programs that we're launching, and that we're still waiting for those programs to start. okay. so proposition one, so what we'll be seeing with proposition one is not it's not just necessarily the change to the behavioral health us or the mental health program, but it's also including things such as the care act. also our bond to build, also some other components of prop one and the reform of the mental health services act. so the next three year plan will reflect the adjustment to programing in alignment with the new design of behavioral health services. our for under proposition one, our funding components will now go down from 5 to 3. and those funding components will consist of full service partnership housing. and also the new funding category which is called behavioral health services and support. so we'll have to be making adjustments over the next

24 months to align our programs within those three buckets of funding, we are currently not aligned with the new with new. the new spending requirements for proposition one, we need to make some adjustments as it pertains to putting more funding into housing. but again, we have we'll be waiting for state guidance over the next 24 months on how we'll be implementing that. and just to give you all a timeline real quickly, this is this is from the department of health care services. right now, they're conducting a robust session of public, listening sessions for communities to get more feedback and really to provide any secondary guidance on the statutes and how we're going to implement, beginning this summer. i believe what you all may be aware of is that they are going to start having the applications for the bond for housing, beginning early to 2025. we'll start having more guidance on how on the integrated plan. and then by summer of 2026, we'll be

responsible for integrating the new proposition one requirements into behavioral health services act. okay. and that concludes the presentation. i'm here for questions. thank you. vice chair mandelman. thank you, chair chan, thank you for the presentation. thank you for your work. i don't think i have a question, but i, i do, you know, i've i've now voted on, i think, two of these mhsa plans and, they always give me a little bit of heartburn in that i look back at the high ambitions that prop 63 set, the desire, you know, that my chair, then senator steinberg had for that to be,

you know, game changing. and it really was in terms of the amount of money that was generated for behavioral health services in california. now, we spend a lot in san francisco. and this is, you know, as your presentation points out, only 13% of our behavioral health expenditures is. but they've all these plans have always seemed to me radically disconnected from the behavioral health needs that i think most san francisco ans are most acutely concerned about. and it may be that the plan actually accounts for a lot of expenditures that are going to address, severe mental illness and addiction among unhoused and marginally housed folks. but it doesn't it doesn't come crystal clear through with that. and i will say that i and my office and i think some reporters have had a lot of trouble getting information out of dph about how we and this is

particularly relevant during the prop one conversation, getting information about how san francisco spends our mhsa dollars, because because we were the politicians, some of the politicians in this town, including myself, were big proponents of prop one, and prop one had two component s, one being a very large, amount of capital dollars for placements for people with severe mental illness. but the other piece was an implicit rebuke, i guess, to the counties in how they were spending their, prop $63 in a sense that those funds were really not getting used to tackle that really acute california wide need to make good on our commitments that we made when we started dismantling the mental institutions. and i don't feel like this plan that

we have here rises to the challenge, and i understand that it is paperwork and that we have to get it done and that we're, you know, it's retrospective, but i don't quite understand why we weren't thinking about it in these terms. i mean, it's not like the world has changed dramatically over the past four years. i mean, it has in some ways, but in a lot of ways, the concerns around behavioral health, street conditions, overdose, it's all gotten. a lot of it has gotten worse. not all of it. a lot of it has gotten worse. but i think, this is not a description of all the work that behavioral health is doing. it's again, i understand a relatively small piece, but it gives me concern and, you know, we're talking about this stuff in other contexts. and working groups and hearings and in lots of different ways. but i continue to have concern about these. i'm going to vote for it, but i just continue to be worried about what i see as a

lack of focus on the things that i think, san franciscans and california's more broadly are most concerned about in the behavioral health context. thank you. would you like to respond? oh, okay. well well, we do appreciate your your comments. and i do think with proposition one, the benefit of it is there are going to be conversations around making sure that the funding is not volatile. i think because the funding goes up and down, we've had to make quick adjustments to that, right? we also have to plan out in the future based off of projections that could be delayed. so in covid, we use a lot of state dollars to really help with cip hotels. a lot of our cbos went to do virtual case management. also being able to continue to really serve our clients during one of the most terrible times of our, of our lives. and so i do think, though, because there is a standard and what we have

to report to you all in the state, it does not reflect the tremendous work, to your point, that our, our cbos have done, given the small amount of our budget and the volatility of it, a lot of our cbos have been able to do tremendous work with the with the mental health services act. and i do think it is an opportunity with the reporting requirements that they are going to change. we are going to have to report on all of behavioral health. it will give you all a clearer picture on how we work collaboratively with other systems of care to address those unmet needs. right now, it's more focusing on you know, trying to spotlight how we're spending. again, we have these requirements that we have to adhere to the state to get approved, to keep our funding. and it could be it could help to, you know, we have 200 pages in that document. it's not nearly enough to really present to you all on the work that we are doing behind the scenes and what we've been doing with some of the with with some of our community based stakeholders.

absolutely so thank thank you for your your feedback on this. it is helpful. thank you. thank you for that. i mean, two, two thoughts in response to your thoughts. but, in terms of the volatility of the of the funding source, i think, you know, that is that is a concern that was raised by a lot of the counties, in the prop one, context, as you know, the state is pushing for counties to spend more of these dollars on addressing. i think these longer term, needs and the county's reluctance to, like, go all in on something when the money, you know, may dry up the next year or two years down. now, i do think we it looks like there is a way to address that, which is to, you know, build up reserves and plan, you know, to spend money over time and hedge against what will be inevitable downturn. so i do think that concern can be accommodated. but the other the larger concern i

have, which you you and dpi cannot answer, we're going to have to have a conversation with the state about this is the implication in prop one is that the mhsa dollars are supposed to be the operating support to sustain the additional facilities that get opened. using the capital dollars and the scale of the funds in san francisco. i mean, i think even if we radically even if your next plan for us, which i would encourage you to bring sooner than 2026, but, even if the next, plan radically shifts our funding towards, you know, the ongoing costs of, say, facilities for people with severe mental illness, that's not enough money to come close to meeting the need. and so i do think, you know, again, i'm glad the state passed prop one. i

think we should use prop one. and i think we also are going to need to be having an ongoing conversation on urgently with the state and federal government about getting the resources to, to, make sure that these facilities are operable in a way that we, we can be proud of and that our, you know, actually good, the options, you know, the ways to do this badly are, it's it would be easy to do this badly. it would be easy to open up underfunded facilities that are beautiful when they open and don't have the dollars to take care of. the people in them are horrible for the people who get placed there and are horrible for the communities in which they're located, and that would be bad. yeah. so thank you. thank you, thank you, so today we're we're approving an expenditure plan for the next three fiscal years, but meanwhile, we're also now have received the new prop one mandates, you know, changing

five different categories into three different three different categories, which actually make sense. yeah. and just so that it helps us to be, less specific but more on track in terms of especially it makes a lot of sense to me when it comes to housing piece, which i think is what vice chair mandelman was talking about in, in terms of conditions. and then, of course, in combination with the behavioral, behavioral health services and programing now. so if we're going to approve this, expenditure plan today, you, during this next three fiscal years, you're also going to have to rework the actual plan to reflect the mandate coming from part one, and i think that's also where the part where when will you be back before. before us? or are we, by the time you come back, you're already are working the new plan. and for new approval. or will you be coming back mid-year to be able to or mid of this cycle? thank you, to be able to let us to

understand at least where we're heading and how things really, truly have changed from what we're seeing today and from your presentation and what now, prop one is requiring and i think that definitely for most, at least for me, it's, most of my interest will be understanding you know, giving the fact that really, right now the existing funding source for, for this program is volatile, as you indicated, prop one will then be able to really provide a stable, at least i think i assume it's a stable funding for us, but we won't know until you adjust the plan and apply for it and make sure that we really meet the mandate. help me understand what do we do between now until 2026? yes. thank you. that's a great question, so for now, while we are waiting on state guidance, we are putting together, we're hoping to also be working with you all on some of the implementations, especially with the bond we're looking for more guidance from the state, though,

on actually the statute for housing. so what the plan will be is to continue to partner with you all, maybe doing some briefings, not coming to you all when the plan is due, but ahead of time in order to get your feedback and also to bring you in on what's happening for the actual program. part of the behavioral health services act, and, you know, there is going to be a lot of changes, changes that the state kind of prepared us for in the prior years, especially including substance use. that's going to be a not a big change for us, but that's going to be an expansion of our full service partnership. so our plan would be to come to you and be able to do briefings before the next plan is due in 2026. so again, that we can keep you updated on what our plan is. we're developing a preliminary plan with behavioral health system. and then also to the biggest concern is trying to manage the timeline with the state. so for the program we have until 2026. but for the bond we have until this summer. and so i think it's going to be a collaborative effort working

with you all and some of our colleagues within dph to end the mayor's office of housing on really looking at that bond, while also to planning for the next 24 months with the actual program at behavioral health. so the plan would be to continue to work with you all. thank you. and i think that one one concern that i have with this, i shouldn't say concern. i want to learn more and i want to understand better. and i want to thank vice chair mandelman for like, really a one stat that he mentioned at one meeting. we have too many of them. but like in discussion, like the stat statistic that really stuck with me is that, you know, for all the population that the state can serve, san francisco alone really housed 14% of that population. and i think that that's if we think about it, that's fairly significant. in san francisco, seven by seven alone, i am in support of and i was to, you know, in support of and thanks to vice chair mandelman bringing us to have a more better understanding of sb

43 by aikman. and then now came the prop one, which is really a funding mechanism to really meet that programing needs. and so all that is to say specifically, how does san francisco, how will san francisco compare to the rest of the state specifically in this components of housing or conservatorship? and in combination of all of that and plus the care act or the care corp and so i just kind of want to make sure that when we do, when you do come back about the expenditure plan, that is a piece that i really want to understand because conservatorship is interesting in a sense where how long and what does that mean and what are the living conditions. and i think that, again, reflect back to vice chair mandelman about the concern about the actual condition of living overall and is that really going to be able to significantly improve, mental health for the individuals that

end up in those, conditions and, and status? so thank you. it's not easy work. i am very grateful for your for your work. i don't see any other name on the roster. and so with that, we're going to public comments on this item. thank you. yes, we now invite members of the public who joined us who wish to speak on this. item number five, please approach the lectern and i will start your time as soon as you start speaking. hi, my name is tracy helton. i just wanted to speak on my previous experience of homeless and being homeless, substance abuse and mental health issues, and how i rehabilitated myself and now i am in the unique position of being a person who runs a program through the mental health services act that works with other people, and those are peer programs. and so today, we've brought a coalition, many of whom are your constituents and also people who have benefited from mental health services act programs, who have prepared comments to talk about either their experience of being

a client or being a service provider who've done things like respond to crisis, respond to overdoses, worked with people in different various facilities within san francisco to talk about the specific impact of the mental health services act. so thank you, mr. tracy helton. next speaker, please. hi. my name is mark. i'm with, rams higher ability, which the funding of which under the current plan would be cut. so rams higher ability differs from other programs provided by rams including i ability which was mentioned earlier in that higher ability provides job skills training but does not require competitive admission. and i think this is a huge component of why it was successful for me. i have struggled with self-confidence for a long time, and programs like this, the

ability to provide supportive job skills training is just extremely important for anyone struggling with a mental illness. i think, especially if it's depression. and so i, i just think that my path forward without higher ability would have been a lot more difficult and uncertain and so certainly i can't speak to the broader implications of the plan. but what i can say for certain is that program rams that provide mental health services without also providing job skills training. the city needs more of them, not less. and this is one such program, and i think that cutting the funding under the

current plan would be a grave mistake. thank you. thank you much, mark, for addressing this committee. next speaker, please. hi. good morning. my name is maria jimenez. i'm a postdoctoral fellow at ucsf, and i'm here representing 40 doctor martinez wasn't able to be here this morning. he sends his regards and wishes he could be here. immigrant children are one of the fastest growing populations within public schools. joining a new community, learning a new language and navigating the immigration system all compound stress and newcomer youth prevention programs that focus on shared experiences, regulating skills, regulation skills and setting goals for the future. promote children's well-being after migration. i'm here today to highlight how mhsa funding has made possible the delivery of the program to latina youth across middle schools and high schools in san francisco. i'll start by briefly summarizing what the program is about and what it endeavors is.

then i will ask you to consider the critical need for allocating dollars towards prevention and early intervention programing. fuerte is a mental health prevention program for newcomers students for it brings together mental health providers and school staff to co-lead a time limited group intervention for this primary aims are to link at risk newcomers, students with care to increase youth's knowledge of mental health and to promote students sense of connectedness. since receiving mhsa funding through an innovation grant in 2019, fuerte has reached hundreds of newcomers, students, all students who participate in fuerte are screened for mental health difficulties so that program staff can link students with providers across wellness centers and community based organizations. over 20% of students we served screened high for high risk of mental health concerns, and all were connected with behavioral health services.

mhsa funding has supported ongoing program evaluation to help us keep improving. 40. as part of this evaluation, students are invited to participate in focus groups so that we may hear their feedback to refine the program. speakers time has expired. sure, i urge you to consider the critical need of the first. yeah, sorry to cut anybody off, but we are timing each speaker at two minutes. but thank you much. maria jimenez, next speaker. good morning everyone. my name is nancy and i am working with mission mental health, mission mental health. i'm working with drums, and i'm here to advocate and be grateful for the funding and in fact, trying to understand with the presentation of the where the money goes and in like the limitations that we have. and also being here to let you know how delivered we are,

we are delivering the services, myself, i am living in san francisco for 34 years. i've been working with, nonprofits in different settings and of course, being the recipient of the secondary trauma of living in san francisco and being, in a limited budget for my family and people. and i am grateful that i came to join rams, which is an organization funded with mhsa also. and. i am so grateful and happy to be a witness of how we deliver services and the need that is there on the streets. when i walk on the streets on tenderloin and i see the lack of, opportunities and the need from people to be be seen, i, i

am here to advocate and to present what is the need there and how we are using and how we need to have an allocated funding to continue working with the population that is in need and also, homelessness, drug abuse and everything is related to, lack of opportunities and funding and we have to and in regards when people are talking about thank you. thank you much, nancy, for addressing this committee. next speaker. good morning. my name is aaron rubin. this is toki. i'm a client of rams higher ability. i'm here to advocate for myself and my peers, i've been a client since october 23, and, rams high ability has helped me not just stay home and collect a paycheck from ssi, ssdi. they helped me,

go into work every day doing a task or working with my peers, making me feel better about myself. doing all the things that i can do to be a productive member of society and, cutting funding for something mental health like this would be devastating to me and my peers. thank you for your time. thank you much, aaron. next speaker, please. good afternoon, everyone. my name is courtney ewing. pronouns. she her, i am a peer counselor, for rams on the wellness and the streets team. and i'm just up here today to thank df for everything that it does for san francisco. and i also wanted to, just tell a little bit about my story. i was

unhoused for two years in san francisco, and with the help of, peer counselors from the wits organization and also, the lovely people from the street medicine team, i was able to, accomplish some great, some great goals. and i am now a peer counselor, able to go out into the streets and help those in need, i just would like to say that mental health and housing are absolutely interconnected, and one cannot be healthy mentally if one does not have appropriate housing. and for me, i basically consider myself to be a co advocate, just giving people who feel like they've been forgotten or like they have no hope, the, the opportunities and access to resources that they might need to, to dust

themselves off, and get, get back on their feet. and so these funds are absolutely crucial to the well-being and health of, of the communities and people of san francisco. thank you very much. and thank you for addressing this committee. next speaker, please. hi, i'm ann marie barlow. i was a former client of rams vocational rehabilitation services. i know this great program that helped me obtain transferable skills in my new job with abode services. i was in nine month internship beginning in may of 2022 and ended in february of 2023. and it is a lot of the reason why i wanted to become a peer counselor, i currently work as a peer advocate, first on bart, on

for abode services, also for nine months, that pilot program dissolved and i'm still with abode services as a wellness specialist slash peer advocate at city gardens. and, i had written a speech, but what i really wanted to say is it's had a profound impact on my life. the skills that i obtained help me document and do a lot of my current skills. and my position today. and i don't know what i do without rams and the mental health services act. thank you. thank you much. ann marie beller , next speaker, please. hi. my name is kim nolan, and i am what you call a success story for rams. i now work in the private sector working with rams higher ability, helping people bridge that gap between being, you know, help them get work muscle

basically. and rams took this depressed wretch and gave me. the ability to prove myself. and now i am giving back by working with the company called piper, which i get to. i get the best job in the world. i get to help little children. provide children with, tools to learn coding and computers. and i also get to work with people that were in the same situation. i was in to get their self-confidence up to work. so now i am because of rams, the operations manager for piper learning. and without rams higher ability, i probably still be out on the streets. thank you. thank you much, kim nolan, next speaker, please. my name is frank johnson. i work for rams. i came to rams in 21. i've been

a drug addict probably all my life. i'm 69 years old. when i first went to my first day, i told him i was thinking about killing myself. we went out for a break and the police came. i said, they coming for somebody. they came for me. i went back home because i told them, you know, about my that i was thinking about killing myself. i said then i was never going back and i meant that. but they kept calling me. i couldn't understand why these people calling me. but then i realized, because i said that i was going to kill myself. that's why they call it. so i went back, i worked there, now i've been there. i worked there, i've been working there for about two years. it's been great. but recently about eight months ago, they told me i had cancer and they throw. and that was very devastating. but they work with me there. i just want to say, you know, the most important thing to me was to do the treatment was that i could still go to work and get my dog. i went to work, i got my dog and i'm i'm cured now, so everything's fine. thank you

very much. thank you. frank johnson. next speaker, please. good morning, my name is angela tang. i'm the ceo of rams. you've heard from some of us around the profound impact that mental health services act dollars have really made in terms of innovating and strengthening the mental health services within san francisco. i feel lucky that i've been with rams since the early days of advocating for prop 63. i've seen the positive impact that it's had in terms of innovating and advancing and really strengthening our our services, at at rams, it has allowed and enabled us to have peer to peer support services, vocational services, culturally responsive prevention and early intervention and serving the birthing community, so i wanted to just really underscore the impact that it has, that and how it continues to have profound impact on so many of us in the

community. thank you. and thank you much. angela tang, next speaker. hello. my name is danielle marshall. i'm the deputy director for justice, equity, diversity and inclusion office. and before that, i had the distinct opportunity to work for street crisis response team in san francisco under dph. and so a lot of what has been said, i have firsthand knowledge of how impactful mhsa has been to the citizens that i work with in san francisco. i agree, housing is an issue. we need more housing. i agree mental health is an issue. i have found that with me being able to get my clients housed, i was then able to help them with the mental health services. and as you've heard about all the, programs that are here in san francisco, to be able to tap into these programs, to be able to help our citizens of san francisco, i

will end with saying that the collaboration is much needed from you all. supervisors from different parts of city and county of san francisco to really make the impact meaningful as a behavioral health clinician, i have seen the value in all of the programs that we have worked with in san francisco, and how much mhsa has done can i say that we are anywhere close to where we need to be? no. can i say we need more? yes. but these people are dedicated to the work that they're doing, and they are making a significant impact. and i just want you all to understand that these services are much needed. thank you so much, and thank you for addressing this committee. next speaker. good morning everyone. my name is carmen castro o'keefe. i'm rams director of vocational services. higher ability. you've heard from some of our participants, graduates and now staff. i'm here to

really talk about the value of vocational services and how a job is so much more than just a paycheck. a job helps individuals with their self esteem. it provides hope and meaning in their life, and helps them, you know, put a roof over their head and so much more than just a paycheck. so i'm here to really advocate for vocational services and maintaining these meaningful, parts of people's lives are we provide everything from training to employment services, where, our job developers work with city and county of san francisco employers and help them diversify their workforce by hiring our participants, our graduates from our programing, from our training. so we're really doing a lot for the community and for, individuals with mental health disabilities

by providing meaningful activities in their lives. thank you. and thank you. so this is our final call. if you wish to address this committee regarding this item number five, madam chair, that completes our queue. thank you. and seeing no more public comments, public comment is now closed, i look forward to seeing an updated, to have the briefing and potentially an updated expenditure plan, corresponding to the new mandates from proposition one. and so with that, colleagues, i would like to move this item to full board with recommendation and a roll call, please. and on that motion, to forward this resolution to the full board, to the positive recommendation, vice chair mandelman mandelman i member melgar. melgar i chair chan i chan i we have three eyes. thank you. the motion passes. and with that, mr. clerk, please call item number six. yes item number six is a resolution approving amendment number two to a grant between

the office of economic and workforce development and sf new deal for management of a small business grant payment support program to increase the grant amount by approximately 2.5 million, for a total not to exceed amount of approximately 11.4 million for the period of april 1st, 2023 through june 30th, 2025. effective upon approval of this resolution and to authorize the executive director of food 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. madam chair, thank you. and just a reminder that we this item has a budget and legislative analyst report. so we'll have to department, presentation and we'll go to the bla. but here i want to acknowledge our colleagues. supervisor matt dorsey, is in the chamber and joining us, today. and we'll have some opening remarks and the floor is yours. great. thank you so much, chair chan, i want to start by thanking you, chair chan, and

your staff on all your work on this over the last few months, we have had a lot of discussions around apec and the fund. this fund for at several budget and finance committee meetings. so i want to keep my remarks brief, apec was an opportunity for san francisco to showcase what a vibrant and world class destination we remain. and that negative headlines notwithstanding, we are as worthy of tourism convention, convention and investment dollars as ever before. but this was no garden variety event. it was a national special security event deemed by the us secret service and department of homeland security to be of international significance, and there were unprecedented security measures that went along with that. i think it also bears noting that there were uncertainties around those security measures, measures, and in many ways, that's by the design of federal authorities, at our first hearing on this matter, we heard from several businesses that were negatively

impacted by those measures during the week of apec, after that hearing, supervisor chan and i quickly got to work to ensure that a portion of the remaining city reserves went to small businesses that were harmed. now, i want to emphasize that these small businesses made an investment in our city by staying open to be good partners with san francisco. as we played host to 21 heads of state. despite the uncertainties and problems that they might face for doing so, now, now san francisco is showing that it's a good partner back by doing what we can to make sure that they are made whole for their harms and investing in a success that benefits all of us, both the pre and post apec outreach also strengthened in my office's relationships with the businesses in the neighborhood. not all of the businesses in the perimeter even knew about the kind of support we can provide. and hopefully these new connections will pay dividends for years to come. so i want to

say thank you to sarah dennis phillips and katie tang from d and the office of small business, respectively, together with their respective staffs, thank you to the neighborhood stakeholders and advocates who have been patient but persistent in their advocacy. we especially scott rowett's, executive director for the yerba buena community benefit district. raquel diaz, executive director of soma pilipinas. and manuel rodriguez, a noted purveyor of deliciousness at bonchon and more recently, izzy and wicks, which i would encourage everyone to visit at 155 fourth street, once again, chair chan, i can't thank you enough for your leadership on this and the work that your staff has done. this is it really is appreciated. your your commitment to our downtown core and the challenges that the yerba buena community is facing. so thanks so much. thank you, supervisor dorsey. and with that, today we have, office of economic and workforce development here making the presentation. thank you. thank you. supervisor dorsey. and good

morning to you all, thank you for the opportunity to present on the proposed resolution to approve amendment number two for the grant agreement between the office of economic and workforce development and sf new deal. my name is jose cruzata. i'm the small business programs administrator, and with the help of my team, i help design and implement grant programs that help strengthen businesses and particularly our commercial corridors. in san francisco. and so today, we are seeking approval to, again, approve the amendment number two, for the, for the agreement between wd and sf new deal. so currently under rfp 219 program area small business grants, payment administrative support. we have an existing agreement of 8,000,969, $960,000, with about 1,000,950 and $47 remaining on the grant agreement to be expended. that grant agreement has $8,070,000. that's gone

directly to small business owners. so a direct investment in businesses, part of that, the grant agreement is, in essence, for administrative costs and program costs, which you see there for $890,000. and we've been able to support about five different grant programs with the current agreement. our proposed additional amount is to not exceed $2,455,000. for this second amendment, and the new total will be $11,415,000. this is, as supervisor dorsey mentioned, is going towards, two grant programs. one is for the businesses impacted by apec and also some tenderloin based businesses where we're taking a, you know, deeper focus to create an impact that grant amount, will be $2,235,000 with the program and admin costs again being 2000 and, $220,000, just to give a bit of a synopsis of

some of the grant programs that we've been able to support under this current grant agreement. and then the proposed grant, grant programs that will be coming forth. so we have some active grant programs as afshin's, which is some of our bread and butter from our department, and as well as the fillmore pitch, which is dedicated to businesses that are operating in the fillmore or are residents of the fillmore, no longer active. grant programs are these storefront opportunity grant program, which we were pretty successful, over the year that it that it ran as well as the small business training grant that provided training as well as dollars for businesses that went through an approved technical assistance provider. and so with the proposed amendment, we will be able to disperse funding to, again, the businesses that were impacted by the apec summit, we will be able to have a like a set of focus in the tenderloin where the storefront opportunity grant program there, as well as the entertainment and nightlife revitalization grant program that was just announced in the last month, so with that, if you

have any questions, let me know. thank you. item six. this is a resolution that approves an amendment to an existing grant agreement between the office of economic and workforce development and sf new deal, this agreement is in place through 2025. and the amendment doesn't change the term of the agreement. it does add $2.45 million to the agreement and some additional deliverables related to, administering new grant programs. so this $2.4 million will fund, the grants to businesses and organizations impacted by apec that are in soma that $2 million appropriation was approved by the board earlier this year, as well as $360,000 in grants for small businesses in the tenderloin and then addition and $220,000 in administrative costs

for sf new deal. we detailed those budget items on page 13 of our report, and we recommend approval of item six. thank you. i, supervisor dorsey, i appreciate everybody's presentation. i just also left someone out and that i want to make sure that i express my gratitude to doctor carol chang of the children's creativity museum for her leadership on this as well. thanks so much. thank you, i don't have any questions. i really appreciate in terms of today, like i don't have additional questions about the proposed program. i think at the end of the day, it's really once it's administered. how do we really like work with the community that it's in need and that the funds eventually really distributed to the people that as supervisor dorsey had mentioned, has really contributed to really the during the apac and be a partner and yet suffer losses during that time. financial losses at that time. i think that i want to

circle back, not today, but at some point also circle back about it because, now that i'm seeing the apac funding allocated, for this purpose and use, and eventually i want to circle back about taraval and to see if taraval is going to be with a similar model, also with new deal, if you can answer today, great. if not, i'm happy to circle back another time. yeah, definitely happy. i'm happy to circle back. so at this time, the proposed amendment is only for the apec summit. businesses that were impacted by apec. we are working with another technical assistance provider for the taraval grant program that has additional capacity to provide on the ground support for those businesses disrupted by the sfmta. l taraval project. great. wonderful. just wanted to make sure that and then so we'll circle back for more information on that. and i don't see any other names on the roster. let's go to public comments on this item. thank you so much for your presentation. thank you. yes. if

you have any members of the public here in the chamber who wish to address this committee regarding this item number six, now's your opportunity to approach. hello. thank you. i'm doctor carol tang, executive director of the children's creativity museum. i want to thank supervisor dorsey and chair chan for taking this project on unexpectedly, after the success of apec and the challenges as well. so i am here on behalf of many of the dozens of small businesses and cultural nonprofits who have been part of this. and again, we're just really pleased that this is moving forward. as some of you heard from the last hearing, this could potentially be make or break this year. there are organizations that are companies that are waiting for these funds in order to actually pay bills that have still been accumulating since aipac and to make the improvements. so i do want to emphasize that these grants are not just about individual organizations. it's a true investment in this neighborhood that still needs

support with the with just a pro long recovery for retail, for convention, and really the exodus of many families here in san francisco. so all of us are impacted. we also hope that this really provides a deeper conversation and partnership between the neighborhood, small businesses and new san francisco new deal as well. to think about the kind of ongoing support they're going to need in this neighborhood. so we look forward to having transparency and community engagement and also then future conversations about what to do. so just finally, we do want to say that, you know, this attention in these grants will help us not just survive till 25, which is the slogan, but we really want to be thriving through 25. thank you. thank you, miss doctor. next speaker, good morning, supervisors. raquel redondo is director of soma pilipinas and,

i want to i'm happy to say that since we were here last on this item, there are two new filipino owned eateries that opened up in the south of market in the cultural district, easy and wilkes at the metreon, supervisor was there for the opening, as well as mestiza, which used, closed during the pandemic but reopened a new location, so both places just made sf eater's list of hottest new restaurants in may, and we're really proud of them. but at the same time, we also know firsthand how it's still a daily struggle for not just a small businesses in soma, but, you know, throughout the city. so we really want to thank and all of you here for really championing this new fund. and we just request that, as this goes forward, that and sf new deal continue to work with our community to design and to roll out this fund. so that we can

ensure the greatest impact and support to our small businesses. thank you. thank you, mr. diaz. next speaker, please. good morning, supervisors. i'm scott, rohit's, executive director for the yerba buena community benefit district. good to see you all. and just i want to echo the comments that have been made, by the supervisor and by other public comments and supervisor chan, we appreciate all the support and the process that this has gone through, through complicated times for all. and we're just beginning collectively and we have a lot of work to do in south of market to really make a strong, vibrant neighborhood. we have a lot of diversity and a lot of strong assets, from small businesses to cultural organizations to the convention center to tourism. and so we look forward to continuing to work with you all, cd, sf, new deal on this project and others to really make it strong and vibrant for everybody and to echo what raquel said, we look forward to continuing on

this one specifically and sort of finalizing all the details and supporting our small business. and thank you for all your support. take care and thank you. scott rhodes. and if we have no further speakers, madam chair, that completes our q thank you. seeing no more public comments, public comment is now closed and so, colleagues, i would like to make this move this item to full board with recommendation and a roll call please. and on that motion to forward this resolution to the full board with a positive recommendation to vice chair mandelman mandelman i. member melgar. melgar i chair chan i chan i we have three eyes. thank you. and the motion passes. thank you. supervisor dorsey, and with that, mr. clerk, please call item seven and eight together. yes. item number seven. and eight are resolutions approving the second amendment to the grant agreements between the episcopal community services and the department of homelessness and supportive housing for administration of the following programs. and authorizing hscps to enter into any amendments or

other modifications to the agreement that do not materially increase the obligations or liabilities or materially decrease the benefits to the city, and are necessary or advisable to effectuate the purposes of the agreements. item number seven is for a flexible housing subsidy pool program, extending the grant term by 36 months from june 30th, 2024, for a total term of february 15th, 2021 through june 30th, 2027, increasing the agreement amount by approximately 19.6 million for a total amount not to exceed approximately 29.5 million. and item number eight is for continued administration of the housing navigation program, extending the grant term by 24 months from june 30th, 2024, for a total term of july 1st, 2021 through june 30th, 2026, increasing the agreement amount by approximately 6.7 million, for a total amount not to exceed approximately 16.7 million. madam chair, thank you. i think

what we're going to do is that we're going to do one item at a time with presentation bla report, and then we'll open for comments and questions and then go to the next item for a presentation by report and questions. so let's with that we will we have our department of homelessness and supportive housing. thank you. good morning chair chan. good morning members emily cohen from the department of homelessness and supportive housing. and i'm here with you for this first item to seek the second amendment to an agreement between the department of homelessness and supportive housing and episcopal community service forces. the second amendment would extend the term of the agreement by three years through june 30th, 2026, and include the total not to exceed amount of 29.5 million. like the flexible housing subsidy pool contract that you approved, i believe it was last week for families. this program for

individuals is, is really about providing people experiencing homelessness with an ongoing rental subsidy in the private market and wrap around social services to help ensure long term tenant stability and success. as i mentioned, this is a form of scattered site permanent supportive housing. we have a portfolio of approximately 950 slots, a flexible housing subsidy pool as part of our larger 2100 unit. scattered site portfolio. and x through this contract provides subsidy, administration and supportive services like case management, housing coordination, landlord liaison services for 130 adults annually, 79% of the adults served in this program are over

the age of 55, 30% are women and 30% are african american. reflecting largely what we see in the homeless population, particularly speaking to the vulnerability of older adults. and in the last fiscal year, x served 109 clients in 99 households. in this program, it is and is on track to serve the full 130 by the end of the fiscal year. as i mentioned last week as well, this is always a great opportunity and a great program for local landlords to get engaged with. so if you have units available, we're always interested in partnering with you. and i am joined today by chris callandrillo from episcopal community services, in case you all have questions for him. thank you. item seven is a resolution that approves an amendment to the department of homelessness and supportive

housing grant with episcopal community services. this grant funds, the flexible housing subsidy pool. it's one of several providers that hsh contracts with to deliver that program. this amendment extends the agreement by june 2027 and increases the spending authority to $29.5 million. we detailed the budget on page 17 and 18 of our report, this spending is funded entirely by prop c homelessness. gross receipts tax, we also detail in our report that under the agreement, the provider is contracted to serve 130 clients a year. they didn't quite meet that threshold, in 22, 23, but they are on track to meet it this year, we also detail other, performance reporting that the department compiled, in our report on page 16. and we recommend approval of item six,

item seven. excuse me. thank you . thank you. chair. i'll move on to item eight. good morning again, emily cohen, department of homelessness and supportive housing. and i'm here today to request your approval for a resolution authorizing the department to enter into an to a second amendment to our agreement with the episcopal community services, to continue to administer housing navigation services. this program began in 2021 to support the goal of moving at least 2000 guests out of the shelter in place hotels. as we began to wind them down and