[♪♪♪] >> good morning. >> good morning. >> thank you so much. this is certainly a good morning. it is june 6, and welcome to our homeless oversight commission meeting. as custom, i'll start off with our acknowledgment. the ramaytush land acknowledgment. we acknowledge that we are on the unceded ancestral homeland of the ramaytush ohlone who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. as the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the ramaytush ohlone have never ceded, lost nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. as guests, we recognize that we benefit from living and working on their

traditional homeland. we wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors and relatives of the ramaytush community and by affirming their sovereign rights as first peoples. i'll turn it over to commission secretary to advice the public on public comment policy. call the roll and read a sound producing statement. >> thank you chair. good morning and thank you for joining us. this meeting is being held both in hybrid format and in person at city hall in room 416 and broadcast on sfgovtv. members of the public will have a opportunity to provide public comment specific to each presentation as well as general public comment. members of the public who wish to provide public comment remotely will be heard in the order commenters are added to the queue. up to three minutes to comment after each presentation. to comment remotely, the number

to use is, 415-655-0001 access code 26623920896. 26623920896. press pound twice to enter the queue. when your item is called, press star 3 to raise your hand, please wait until the host calls to speak. speak clearly and insure you are in a quite location. best practice is turn off tv or computers around you. thank you for your cooperation. commissioners, this places on item 2, roll call. chair butler, present. vice chair evans, present. commissioner al bright is excused. commissioner aslanian-williams, present. commissioner dufty, here. commissioner guerrero is excused.

commissioner laguana, present. the san francisco department of homelessness supportive housing shireen mcfadden is present and adam radke. this places on item 3. the ringing of and use of cell phones and sound producing devices are prohibited. the chair may order removal from the meeting room of any persons responsible for the ringing or use of cell phone or similar sound producing electronic device. thank you for your cooperation. this places on item 4 announcement by the chair. y thank you commission secretary. i like to say belated birthday to commissioner evans celebrating her birthday may 29. in my church we would sing happy birthday, but won't ask to do that today but wish you well in the new year. i want to highlight the fact it is the month of juneteenth and pride month. juneteenth as we whether know

is june the 19th, pride month is celebrated all month. both of those groups are considered marginalized so i want to take the time to highlight the fact in a lot of those we serve, homeless individuals represent those groups as well so i want to center ourselves on the fact there are two groups that are on the margins and bringing them to the center and recognizing them and thinking about them as we do the work. >> [indiscernible] >> d day is on friday. no, the 14th? there is so much going on. it is d day i believe is next week. >> it is this month. >> yes, this month as well. also, want to mention couple months ago-- >> [indiscernible] >> no worries. we still honor and sort of give

highlights to our veterans and those who serve our country. i also want to make mention that a couple months ago lauren hall came to present about some of the deaths going on in some of the housing and it was something that i took responsibility in trying to see what we can do together, and so i just want to update the community and let you know that, as a safe leader, one thing we could do is as faith leaders in the city, provide some support for homeless individuals whether on the street in housing so lauren and i had conversations how best to include the faith community and i wanted to let you know. it is very important for me to make sure that those that we do serve are whole and part that wholeness, especially as our homeless

individuals are older, faith and spiritality is important to them so that is something we are taking very seriously and i talked to lauren hall how to move that forward. this places on item 5, which is adoption of may 2, 2024 meeting minutes. any comments regarding the may 2, 2024 meeting minutes? commissioners? no comments, questions? we'll open up the public for those who wish to make comment about may 2, 2024 meeting minutes. if there are no members of the public- >> motion to approve. >> second. >> before we approve the minutes, there is no persons of the public we'll go to remote. >> there is no callers in the queue. >> it is motion to approve the meeting minutes and seconded. all those in favor indicate by saying aye.

the ayes have it. thank you, they are approved. now we'll go to item 6, which is communications. any communications from the commission? vice chair, any communications? okay. since there are no communications from the commission, we'll proceed to item 7, which is certainly the highlight of our meetings and so i call miguel, teresa, arianna, vincent and tiffani and john as we recognize you as employees of the month. >> good morning everyone. so, today i am really excited, because this is i think the first time

that we have had a whole team honored as the employees of the month and so we got --sorry. so, everybody up here? john, everybody up here? okay. so, we got a whole group here that is being honored today and it is really exciting. the housing placement team is here today and they are being honored for all the wonderful work they've done over a number of months. the person who nominated them is john patton, so john is right here, and he nominated them thinking like, well just my team should be nominated, but we think john should be nominated as well, so we got john and his team here. so, i just want to go through and talk about a little bit about what each one of these team members brings to the table.

the team is the lead housing support team and they have really done a ton of work to pivot from moving people out of shelter in place hotels and really getting them into housing. they have been responsible for the speeding up of the process and partly why we were so thrilled they got nominated today is how well they work together and how each member of this team brings a piece of work and expertise that leads to the team really working together in a way that teams should work together. so, i think the first person i want to mention today is miguel perdices. shines as a beacon of leadership in his role as colead during the hope house rehousing project. miguel constantly exemplifiesability foster teamwork with housing needs. his role as the coforce lead provided the team with the support to help the team stay on track to meet

their project goal to rehouse 84 clients who were at risk of losing housing. when you-we talked a lot commissioners about hope house and all of the work that had to happen, this is the team that worked on this project. miguel unwavering commitment to exceeding expectations going above and beyond to insure clients are housed and ending homelessness is constantly acknowledged by colleagues and community service providers. teresa lee, aka t lisa. the team staff technician. remarkableuble to analyze and overcome housing barriers improved working relationship with the provider and teresa, portfolio assisting client placement process by identifying and rectifying programmatic--sorry--obstacles

and collaboration with housing providers, worked with the housing providers--sorry-- her unwavering support for her team exemplifies her exceptional team work. arianna, impactful presence within just 6 months has been transformative. dedication working with community housing providers to address systemic issues and reduce vacancy rates significantly enhanced our client placement success. arianna positive work ethic and willingness to asest colleagues on rehousing projects reflects invaluable contribution to team performance, vincent invaluable contribution to, particularly inhabsic reasonable accommodation process under guidance of his supervisor peter, showcase dedication and diligence. collaborative efforts and commitment to

assisting clients and working with housing providers highlights his role within the team. tiffani bagget, spearpheads data analysis efforts. her expertise refining data analytic methods bring clarity to the housing placement strategy. tiffani collaborative approach seeking input from the team insured tools identify trends for continuous improvement in client housing efforts. and then john patton, began his career at the city in 1981 as a food serbs worker at laguna honda. served the most vuliable people in san francisco and many different capacities from eligibility worker, supervisor and head of the unit to supervisor homeward bound and the hat team.

john played a integral role during covid and instrumental setting up mos connie. a passionate leader and builds teamed radically committed to putting the people we serve at scepter of our work. each of the staff mentioned possess strong leadership skills and they will be the future leaders of hsh. knowledge and experience is invaluable. the workers are making a huge contribution in housing clients faster and reducing the vacancies the housing program sites. insuring we are utilizing all services and resources to end the plight of homelessness for the clients we serve. so, i am honored to work with each of you and have you on our teams at hsh, and it is privilege for all of us to be a part of the work you do, and

i just want to thank you personally for the incredible work. this is not been easy and trying to figure what each person needs and what the right program fit is for them and then how to coach them through the process and continue as they come back with problems because i know that has been a ongoing issue all you worked together to make it as seemless as possible, so thank you and congratulations on being our employees for the month of june. [applause] >> we are very honored to be here today and acknowledged by the commission. my time working for the city, i work would a number of teams and this is by far one of the most phenomenal teams i worked with. each of them are leaders in their own right, and if you are a manager, that's what you want.

you want leaders. this is what this team is. i also want to acknowledge the fact that these are the people on the front line. a lot of times we read the headlines but it never speaks to the people on the front line doing the work. this work requires a great deal of commitment and passion. each day each of these people step in and give 200 percent of their time. this work is done in respect of, we have leaders from hsh who allow us to do our jobs. they give us the autonomy to use the knowledge and experience we have to best serve the community, so i want to thank each of the commissioners. i want to thank our leader here, mrs. mcfadden. she does an amazing job with our organization and again, thank you very much. [applause] >> quickly i forgot to mention john just got married. found out yesterday.

congratulations john. [applause] do we have-we have certificates for each of you and i believe the plaque said a later date so sorry we don't have them today. go ahead. [applause]

>> congratulations on job well done and certainly, we are thankful for the all the work you do especially on the front lines and teamwork makes the dream work, so appreciative of the effort. this places on item 8, director's report. capable executive director shireen mcspadden will provide a report for us. >> thank you commissioners and while shannon is pulling up the presentation, i want to say happy juneteenth and happy pride to everyone. and also just to say that, the hsh is having our juneteenth celebration next wednesday. the 12th and in the afternoon at the george davis senior center and i'm grateful that chair butler will be one of the speakers at our event. >> thank you. >> thanks chair butler. >> [indiscernible] >> thank you all.

okay, before i get to the bulk of my report today, there are a few topics i want to touch on briefly. the first is, on the budget. last friday mayor breed released her proposed city budget for fiscal years 2024-25 and 25-26. the annual $15.9 billions for fy2024-25 and $15.5 billion for 25-26 continues to prioritize and deliver investments for san francisco residents workers and visitors, while closing a significant deficit. while the two year proposed budget has increase caused by large enterprise departments and capital projects, the city general fund remains generally flat.

despite post-pandemic challenges, san francisco made significant progress to deliver a clean and safe city. move people off the street and into shelter and housing, advance economic revitalization, support workers and families and create opportunities to further san francisco as a global destination and leader in invasion. the mayor proposed budget build on the progress while making the tough budget decisions to deliver a balanced budget in the face of $789 million two year deficit. key priorities funded in the mayor proposal including, building improvement on public safety expanding law enforcement, investing in economic revitalization, helping people off the street and into shelter with focus on recent rise in family homelessness. delivering treatment options for those struggling with substance use disorders, expanding landmark early education and child care policy to support more families,

maintaining a rainy day reserve for future needs, and building on government operations reform work to increase accountability. gigi whitley will present on the budget included on the mayor budget proposed. this is a extremely tight budget year and every department received general fupd cuts to help balance the budget. while hsh has general fund cuts gigi will get into we have exciting new investments proposed especially for young adults and families. the budget is far complete at this point. the budget is now with the board of supervisors and hsh will have two budget hearings in june before deliberations and decisions are made by july 1. i encourage everyone to stay engaged in the process as the budget makes its way through the board phase. just wanted to give a update on the bipoc equity fund. as you know, we have been working on

grant opportunities to support serving marginalized communities in san francisco. due to legal limitations in state law, hsh required to revise and reissue the solicitation of interest and cancel the preliminary funding notification. we are working diligently the city attorney office to revise the language in the solicitation of interest, to comply with all state and federal laws, including prop 209 and determine elgation to prioritize the organizations. once the solicitation of interest is approved weual relaunch the fund and allow previous applicants to resubmit applications and alignment with the new solicitation requirements. we acknowledge and apologize for the unfortunate impact the change will have on your organizations, but we insure we are working to remedy the situation and relaunch the fund to insure all

our providers are able to continue their work. hsh remains deeply committed to city home by the bay values of equity, justice, quality and invasion and we are eagerly moving ahead with reforms and opportunities to advance these values. i want to make sure to let people know that, that's happening and we are on it and get back out with new solicitation and really want to support the organizations we know need this funding. and housing exit data. last month commissioner evans requested we include information related to exit from housing including numbers, reasons and destination in my report. this data was not ready for today's meeting, but we are committed to providing this data in the august report and quarterly going forward. >> thank you. >> moving on, 2024 point in time count, which took place january 30,

2024. that night teams of skilled outreach workers and volunteers walked or drove routes covering the entire city of san francisco to count the number of people experiencing homelessness. we counted the number of people staying in shelters and transitional housing. in february we administered a survey to get more information about people experiencing homelessness in san francisco, including demographic information. i will present on the preliminary data gathered during the 2024 count. the full report will be released august 2024 and i believe we'll have our i think sarah will be presenting to you in august once we got the full information. so, the 2024 pit count found 13 percent fewer people sleeping on the streets or in tents then in 2022. the lowest it had been in 10

years. so, for unsheltered homelessness, 4355 unsheltered people. 1 percent decrease since 2022 and 16 percent decrease since 2019. the number of people living in vehicles increased 37 percent from 2022, but decreased 20 percent since 2019. and total homelessness, which combines sheltered and unsheltered people increased by 7 percent since 2022 from 7754 to 8323. 3969 people were living in shelters the night of the pit count. this is 39 percent increase since 2019. this correspondence with the 28

percent increase in available shelter beds since 2019. more people experiencing homelessness in san francisco are in shelter then ever before and that of course is because of the increase in shelter beds. and the unsheltered homeless youth miner and young adults 24 and younger population, decreased 9 percent between 2022 and 2024. the number of sheltered homeless youth increased-- the number of sheltered homeless youth increased 7 percent between 2022 and 2024.

and for family homelessness, new targeted efforts to identify homeless families introduced in 2024. 437 homeless families counted, a significant increase from prior years. 143 families experiencing unsheltered homelessness in vehicles. 90 percent found to be sleeping in vehicles. 143 families experiencing unsheltered homelessness, 90 percent found to be sleeping in vehicles. the total number of homeless veterans decreased by 3 percent, with 605 homeless veterans in 2022, and 587 homeless veterans in 2024. and between 2022 and 24, chronic homelessness increased by 9 percent with 2928 people experiencing chronic homelessness in 2024, and that

is something that our team is digging into to really understand why that increase is taking place. the 2024 point in time results show a modest increase since 2022 in homelessness in san francisco. this increase is better then national trends and overall homelessness. between 2019 and 2023 [audio cutting in and out] and i'll move into updates on data related to each component of homelessness response system and updates.

[no audio] and the homeless outreach team made 56 direct placement from street to home program. coordinated entry assessment increased 1210 assessments conducted in april. this increase was mostly at the adult access points. as you may know, the local homeless coordinating board host a coordinated entry subcommittee meeting the second tuesday of each month. this is forum redesign work is done and reported on. we are also starting a new

partnership with department of public health shelter health program which will be access partners and will now be able to bring coordinated entry to the guests who use their services in our shelters. this team plans to serve 120people with coordinated entry enrollment and assessment in shelter and a excellent complement to the work shelter case managers are providing. i also have a update on people at risk of homelessness served through homelessness prevention plan. july -1266 houses served with total $8.4 million with assistance to prevent episode of homelessness. approximately 50 percent of the financial assistance paid for back rent so tenants can remain in current housing. we had 80 problem solving resolutions in april, so far this fiscal

year, we assisted 856 households with over $2.7 million in flexible financial assistance to end their homelessness. and as i mentioned last month, h sh and human service agency partnered on a public dashboard focused on relocation assistance. this dashboard reflects all the relocation assistance provided by both agencies across three programs. you can see on the dashboard, so far this fiscal year, the program helped 357 people or 32 people per month reunit with family or friends and relocate outside san francisco. hsh problem solving prab problem solving program is most significant source. we have dashboard tracking

inventory for housing programs. funds over 13.300 units of housing across our system of care, including site based supportive housing, scattered site supportive housing, rap idrehousing and housing ladder program. housing placements dropped slightly in april with 171 placements. 67 percent of tenants placed where adults, 17 percent transitional age youth and 16 percent, families with children. scattered site uzhoing program updates, the flexible housing subsidy pool grant agreements with community forward sf and tgi justice project were executed and referrals began in may. hsh tentatively awarded grant agreements in mission neighborhood centers for shallow subsidy housing program for adults. this is 60 slots and families

also 60 subsidy slots respectively. hsh alsoitantatively awarded the housing pool for women, 50 subsidy slots. and tentatively awarded the contract to community forward sf. the agreements will be before you today for review and approval. we are excited to announce last week we closed on the property at otis street that provide 24 studio units permanent supportive housing for young adults. we will be back in the fall for operation and service agreement for this program. the 2023-24 budget included $10 million in general fund to support capital improvement in older psh buildings which allow hsh to issue second round of funding to address capital needs in permanent supportive housing buildings. the purpose is support improvement in

older supportive housing sites, enhance the quality of the sites for supportive housing tenants. the awards range from 50 thousand to 500 thousand per site. non profit owned and non profit or city master lease buildings are eligible for this funding opportunity. hsh received 54 requests for $14.8 million, 65 percent requests for master lease properties and 35 percent for non profit owned buildings. hsh awarded $10.4 million to 38 projeths in the capal it improvement grants. funding notices for these new grants were announced in may and we will begin distributing them in july new or modified agreements. this $10.4 million investment will impact nearly 3,000 formally

homeless households and 38 permanent supportive housing sites. across the shelter system on may 23, hsh had 3266 units of shelter capacity and 94 percent occupancy rate. the compass urgent accommodation program for families and pregnant persons is in process of expanding program capacity by adding 35 vouchers this fiscal year. this brings from 15 voucher lots to 50 voucher slots. they reached capacity of 40 voucher slots by the end of may and will reach 50 in june. we also approved an additional 80 vouchers for next fiscal year funded for 18 months that brings up to 130 voucher slots. new urgent accommodation voucher program for transidentified adults experiencing homelessness launched in may.

these will offer short-term hotel stays with priority on adults recovering from gender affirming surgery or unsheltered or sheltered in a congregate setting. san francisco community health center is the provider operating the voucher program. the msc south shelter will undergo significant capital rehab beginning this august. we are working to do the needed improvements minimizing the disruption to guests and our bed capacity. hsh in partnership with human services agency and department of public health initiated two pilot programs at the adante hotel. the adante is a former sip hotel serving as a non congregate shelter in the lower nob hill neighborhood. at this time we dedicate 5 rooms to clients utilizing the journey home partnership.

the pilot provides short shelter stays in travel assistance to people looking to reunit with family or friend outside the city. we are also piloting the restore program at the adante. a partnership between hsh, department of public health and tenderloin. dedicated 9 rooms for people placed by cotenderloin overnight. those are people interested accessing recovery and treatment programs but need a immediate safe place to stay. this pilot has been featured in few news article, which we linked on the slide. hsh also implementing a new case management training series for shelter providers that focused on supporting shelter guest to access housing helping provider meet the service objectives in the contracts. if your case management team are not engaged in the training series, please let us know, because we want

everybody to be engaged in this. and then now we'll present on both the adult and family shelter wait list monthly. so, for families as of late may, there were 390 families on the shelter waiting list. of these 54 families are currently staying in hsh supportive family emergency shelter or hotels, why they wait for placement into family shelter with individual rooms. sorry, i'm missing the adult piece on my notes here. so, currently 128 people are on the wait list, 577 people joined the wait list in april and average time

on the wait list is about 13 days and that is for people who accepted placement offers. in april, 158 people placed into shelter from the reservation system. as you know, san francisco is experiencing a rapid spike in families with children experiencing homelessness. to address this growing need, the mayor budget proposal inhadcludes a significant new investment in family homelessness. san francisco has seen doubling of the family homelessness wait list beginning fall compared to the prior year. data show covid effect on family homelessness with job loss. the main driver of increases in sheltered among families. as of end of may, 390 families on the wait list for emergency shelter and hsh shelter capacity maxed out. about 140 families waited for

rapid rehousing subsidies but hsh had to close the housing queue due to lack of new slots. hsh expects to add 113 families to the shelter wait list each month totaling approximately 2030 families over the next 18 months. we already made several reforms in the family shelter system to improve efficiency, bs including endingonious verification of unsheltered homelessness and implementing same day shelter referrals and no longer holding beds for 72 hours for families. lash month the mayor announced immediate 35 additional hotel vouchers for emergency shelter that will serve approximately 150 more families in a year. based on hsh advocacy, the mayor proposed a $37.6 million investment to address family homelessness, including for shelter adding 80 emergency shelter hotel rooms to the system, increasing hotel vouchers for emergency

shelter to serve 480 families over the next year and a half, which will reduce the shelter wait list by 25 percent. the cost that is $8.7 million. for housing, additional rapid rehousing, increasing rehousing by 165 slots, new slots, plus estimated turnever in existing rehousing provides 405 slots over two years. the impact here is we expect to rehouse 45 percent of families enthe housing queue or 405 of 910 families. the cost here is $28.9 million and then in addition to that, 50 now slots of tay family rapid rehousing for young parents. funding the safer families plan. $20 million is already appropriated for family housing and our city our

home. $17.6 million additional accrued prop c interest is requires legislation to lift the rapid rehousing cap of 12 percent and allocate interest in the prop c fund to be allocated exclusively to family housing and shelter. it does not impact other our city our home funding priorities such as tay housing. just other additional updates, on the legislative front, we have 9 pieces of legislation for grant agreements in the legislative process. 6 of the grant agreement amendments before you in march and april are anticipated to be heard by the board of supervisors in may. urban alchemy, 711 post and 33 gough compass family housing ladder and flexible subsidy pool, [indiscernible] hamilton family housing solution. three of the agreements before you today are in the introduction

process calendared for may. ecs flexible subsidy pool program and housing navigation and the new agreement with meals on wheels. additionally, hsh presented at three hearings. pre-budget hearing on homelessness and supportive housing, elevator modernization and family homelessness response system. upcoming legislation this summer, authorization for hsh to enter into grant agreement with san francisco health plan for the housing homelessness incentive program funding accept and expand for home key award for 685 ellis and in may had a hearing called by supervisor safai on implementation of implementation of homelessness oversight commission. the homelessness housing assistance and prevention grant is critical source of

state funding san francisco relies on to make needed investments. since 2020, the san francisco receive more then $143 million in grant funds supporting a number of initiatives, including shelter in place hotels during covid, which provided temporary housing to vulnerable individuals experiencing homelessness. there were total of 1691 rooms or beds available through funded sip hotels during covid. san francisco navigation center including transition age youth or tay navigation, provide 973 shelter beds. the development of the department on homeless and supportive housing strategic framework, home by the bay. so, this is a really important source of funding for us. despite many years of advocacy at the state level, there is still no ongoing commitment of funding dead dicated.

given uncertainty of funding year to year, san francisco practiced good fiscal management and implementing multiyear to sustain investment made with one time funding. if there were a reliable consistent state funding source, san francisco could spend grant funds differently. a cut to funding would be extremely problematic for san francisco, and could rut in cut to shelter beds. reduced the the number of people living on the by expanding shelter capacity. the number of people staying in shelter the night of the 2024 pit count increased 39 percent since 2019. this correspond with the 28 percent increase in available shelter beds since 2019. more people experiencing homelessness in san francisco are staying

indoors, in part due to funding from [indiscernible] last year we requested that the governor commit $2 billion in ongoing investment in the h hap program on annual basis to insure sustained investment to end homelessinous. the governor revised budget released early may did not include future hhap funding but thrilled the legislature budget agreement includes $1 billion for hhap6. we will continue to advocate for substantial and ongoing state funding to address the homelessness crisis and encourage all of you to join that advocacy. we have updates from advisory body. there are two open seats on the homeless coordinating board the commission must consider appointing soon. focused on approval of continuum of care and emergency [indiscernible] approval of the 24 notice of

funding opportunity scoring tool. the shelter monitoring committee met may 15, there was no quorum. one of smc12 seats which is seat 1 remains unfilled. the next meeting is scheduled for june 19, 2024. you will hear from the shelter and monitoring committee staff and chair who will present on their annual report. the shelter grievanceed advisory committee has 3 vacant seats and will hold the next meeting june 18. equity office updates. the tay youth convening workshops, the equity office supported the recent strategy planning and performance teams workshop with tay providers to support the home by the bay strategic plan equity work. we presented intersectional data concerning the tay population and are discussed strategies to readdress racial and gender bias disparities among the tay population. coordinated entry

prioritization work group, the chief equity officer is supporting the reprioratorization strategy to consider equitable and responsive factors in the scoring process to insure we serve the most vulnerable populations experiencing homelessness in san francisco. our chief equity officer anthony bush will partner to provide providers and hsh staff with guides to the process so we are on the same page in this work. and then as always, we are hiring. we have 247 fte and 49 vacancies with 62 active recruitments including positions that are filled exempt positions and recruiting for permanent role. we appreciate your support in directing any good candidates to hsh. our positions are posted on the department of human resources website. thank you. now we'll take questions and as usual, i got my many members of our

executive team to herer answering those question. >> thank you director mcspadden. ypt to first open to public comment and i want to first recommend you all complete the speaker cards, the green speaker cards with your name. optional, highly recommended so we can make sure we capture your name in our meeting minutes. this is for the public to make comments regarding drether mcspadden's director's report.

thank you. currently we have three members of the pub lic who wish to comment on this director's report. is that correct? and one caller in the queue. we'll go ahead and take our comments. thank you, sir. you may proceed. >> is everyone ready? >> good morning and thank you for allowing me to speak. christopher cline, and on one of the slides and saw training with one system so this is relevant. this is a draft copy that we've given to the city attorney and the board of supervisors and the mayor to sign off on and we request this is part

of training go forward. for all politicians public health and safety departments insure providing information and collaboration with sfpd the sheriff and department of justice on recommending indictment on anyone givingic a ses access using public health and safety system such as one cystic, sure lock and others to alterate person mental health, situational awareness, ptsd and or using ultrasound to cause pain, swelling, false injury, false illness and death for forced compliance to illegally influence votes, donations, pay to play schemes, alter social outcomes and alter for personal political and religious reasons. high level. this is happening in city county of san francisco. people are using these systems illegally and you are not the only we areprinting to. print to.

we are going to presenting to department of justice, health and human service and commerce, this is high level and will be happening soon. i ask each of you to take ownership of this and are make this part of training go forward. two other things, homeward bound is illegal under federal law. carpenter versus united states is a training issue. 250 kearney, there are a lot of deaths. that is a training issue, but you already spoke about that and i'll leave you with that. thank you. >> thank you for your comment. yes, next commenterto extend these benefits throughout the full period from this year pit count and the director's report, the number of unhoused families doubled since last year.

the reality highlight the needs for effective and timely intervention. the 5 year subsidies are crucial part of response and imperative they are released immediately to insure families receive assist nsh without delay. additionally, i do want to emphasize that these subsidies designed to be a long-term support mechanisms so the families have the right to extend subsidies up to full 5 years t. is important everyone understand this opportunity as it allows time for families to become more stable and usual we are committed to making this process as clear and accessible as possible so families can confidently use this provision. let reaffirm commit supporting families advoitcaing for timely release of the 5 year subsidies and insuring everyone is informed about their right to extend these benefits. thank you. >> thank you so much for your comment. next. >> good morning everyone. my name is jessica hernandez and i also came here to speakt the 5 year

subsidies. i like to ask if the 5 year subsidies could be released and they could-if hsh could also implement the language that is clear and understanding about the fact that this is available, because families need that option once you land into homelessness it is impossible to bounce back in 1 or 2 year s and if those families are people need this extension, making sure that it's available for them. thank you. >> thank you so much. one caller remotely. >> go ahead caller, we hear you. >> hi. good morning. homelessness oversight commission. my name is jessica middleton and this is forth time in a row i issue public comment since march 2024. in regards how hsh and felton institute failed to close the loop

retailed to hotel program. there are still 3 landlords who have been ignored and not [indiscernible] with 5 to 6 tenant who are unwillsing to relocate. the landlords are judy maxwell and me. today shireen mcspadden honored miguel [indiscernible] 84 hope house landlords. who is helping the landlord under 84 clients? who is helping the landlered? lord. i have been asking hsh to provide support and suggested resolutions since march 18 [indiscernible] april 4, april 28, may 9 and may 13 and hsh declined to engage with me in a resolution as of april 1, 2024. i want to add that also felton institute strung me along over three months communicating they wanted to renegotiate lease for my other units and [indiscernible] provide the

reasonable rate. on may 10, felton finally gave me the rate. 5-15 they gave me a deadline of 5 page create a master lease, however it has been over 2 months. i had to move on and trying to work with another program, however that fell through the cracks. i reached back out to felton and felton on june 3, told me that they are putting a hold on new leases because they have a inventory of vacant homes that are still need to fill before adding more leases. i'm confused bah shireen reported funding february 2024 to 4355 homeless people. she also said there was 856 problem solving [indiscernible] why can't they help the 3 hope house landlords with a back grant? next month hsh budgeted to receive $15.9 billion.

i don't understand hearing all these numbers the are thousands unhoused families and individuals and there is disconnect with felton. lastly, asking the board, what is the purpose of providing oversight if hsh is unwilling to resolve this issue with the 3 remaining landlords and the public providing this housing? had if you can help, i would greatly appreciate it. i really can't come to these hearings every single month. i is a job i need to do as well. >> thank you. >> any comment, please? >> thank you caller for your comment. commissioners, any comments, questions? commissioner--are we going to use the system? >> we are, waiting to see-i didn't necessarily want to go first, but i'll go first. >> alright.

commissioner aghana. ch >> so, director mcspadden, i just wanted to call out a couple of positive notes here and thank all hsh staff. the point in time counts, it is kind of easy to lose the signal through the noise. what i took note of is tent encampment down 13 percent. sheltered people up 18 percent. the proportion of the homeless population that is currently sheltered has seen 33 percent increase from 2019 at 36 percent, 2024, nearly half at 48 percent. youth unsheltered is down. coordinated entry assessment is at 2 year high, and for the entire year it is out-performed 2022. our shelters are at 94 percent occupancy rate. i think there is a awful lot to be

proud of there and i think you and your staff have done an admirable job and i just want to thank you and i want to thank all your staff. these are significant improvements and yes we still have enormous amount of work in front of us, but it is also important to recognize when we are making forward positive progress and i think that is real forward positive progress. thank you. couple quick questions. the family or the chronic homeless is up 9 percent. i know you mentioned that your staff is trying to wrap your heads around why. wondering if you can give this commission any early insights or observations that we may have, even oen a preliminary level so we can start to organize our heads around what direction we might want to be thinking about in terms of allocating

strategy and resources. >> i don't know we are ready for that yet. i think we were surprised by that honesty and i think we got to dig into the data and get more information. but we'll make sure to make a point that you ask that question and when we do the full point in time count presentation in august, we'll try to have insights. >> yeah. >> sorry we are not ready for that today. >> that's fine, but i want to point out, it seems critical, sothat and the families which i'll get to here in a second. the other question i have, it is really more a request. when we talk about expenditures and data, can i make a request that we make a point to articulate this on a per capita basis? let me give you a example. we talked about families, the family

slide, i didn't get a paper copy, so i wasn't able to copy all the numbers down, but the one i did grab was that we were helping 480 families, $8.7 million cost, the per capita cost is $18.125 per family for that shelter. the reason this is important, in the prevention bucket, i didn't write the total cost, but did write down the per capita cost. we helped 1266 people at 6466-d so prevention was 1/3 cheaper then providing shelter. there is a question that is buried in this, which is what is-how much of-when we are doing that prevention intervention, how many of these people

was that intervention an effective intervention, versus people that would self-resolve? the question for your department is, i would imagine that when we are looking at the not able to make that intervention with, would it be possible to track them as a control group so that we could--or perhaps set up some kind of control group so we could assess the effectiveness of our prevention programs, because one thing i think about when i think about prevention, it feels a lot like when i buy advertising for my business. there is a old thought about this. i know half money is wasted. the problem i dont know which half. not saying half the money is

wasted, but it would be helpful to understand how effective prevention is at stopping the next step, which is shelter, which is obviously significantly more expensive, and every step in the process, as somebody makes a journey through this terrain, it gets progressively more and more expensive. we know this and so it seems to me that the prevention bucket if we can get really good at this, that's a way that we can stem the bleeding and get ourselves in a better position to be more effective with this population that is chronic, and that's so much more difficult to treat. i see everybody nodding their heads. hopefully we can-- >> it also gives better context. to looks at the comparative costs and understand prevention is way less expensive and mostly what people want if they are at the place to

accept it. we hear you. >> yeah. so, the two asks there are one, can we do per capita. you see $800 million, $200 million, $20 million and it is all a blur. if we can frame in terms of per capita cost it gives a better sense of context. the second is trying to figure a way to set up a control group so we can get better sense of what is effective from prevention standpoint. last thing, last question, do we have any preliminary sense--it is okay if the answer to this is the same as the first question, but what do we think at this point in time is driving that increase in family homelessness? >> also, i think as i said in the report, what we are hearing from families is that, the covid

pretections have gone away and there is increase in unemployment. that is certainly-our team was out this week listening to some families, thanks to the coalition on homelessness who hosted the meeting, we have done a lot of those conversations over the past few months and that is one of the biggest drivers. while we know that we have like an increase in migrants coming to san francisco, that's not the whole story and i think it is really not the whole story. it gets a lot of news, but we got a lot of people here a long time who are not able to make it work after some of the protections went away. we are seeing increase because that. >> i notice that in the data, it is not migrant driven, and so i guess --if the early analysis suggests

employment is driving this, i wonder to what degree can we implement a tighter coordination with either oewd or-- >> right. that is a piece of our strategic work in our strategic plan to really coordinate on that and we do coordinate with them with oewd on that and yeah, i think we need to really take a look at how we could have tighter coordination and what that means, because clearly we are all working with the same population and we need to make sure that people are getting the supports when they need them. >> again, guys, like, it is such hard work. it so difficult, but like, this is real progress and i think that you know, the positive feedback is sometimes hard to hear and isn't communicated as perhaps often as it should, but from

where i sit, i saw a lot of progress here and i want to thank you and your team for everything you are doing. it is like, really just impressive, especially when compared gaens the other cities and the national data, it is a lot of good forward progress. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you commissioner. commissioner dufty. >> thank you. commissioner laguana thank you for outlining the many positives and hopeful elements of the pit count and i think you really speak for the commission and so i want to thank you for those comments. i have a few questions. on the subject of veteran housing, i wonder-we have been part of this homes for hero effort. the numbers seem high, and so i just dont know is there dimension of federal support or what are reasons

that- >> that we continue to see--even though we see decrease we continue to see the number be 500 plus? >> we could maybe have a presentation at a future board meeting. i don't want to put on the spot. we worked hard over time. many cities achieved-[indiscernible] [multiple speakers] we made good progress so i wonder if we can come back to that. >> we could do that. >> i was pleased to see under the equity office updates the transitional aged youth convening, the homes by the bay report did not focus specifically on youth and families and so i think this looks to me like a expansion and developing sort of the elements that would go into the strategic plan. >> right. we were trying not to focus on specific populations in that plan

because it was dense as it was, but what we have been meaning to do is develop plans for specific populations we serve and that is a very important one so we will see that flushed out and you will see the family plan getting flushed out and the other populations, including veterans we serve. >> if it is possible, specifically my seat is one that focuses on youth and also families, if there are other opportunities to come to conveneings around tay, i would just be interested just to come and listen and gain that perspective. i was really happy to see that, because i think it will uplift the strategic plan. >> great. we'll make sure bridget gets the information and can get it to you. kbrrks r >> could you cc as me? that is area of personal interest. >> sure. >> we did have public comment

speakers talking about 5 year subsidies and when they are released and wonder if someone can speak to that issue and topic? if that is possible. >> emily. thank you. >> i feel bad. i see everybody- [laughter] >> good morning. emily cohen. the mayor budget proposal includes funding for this safer families initiative that includes rapid rehousing for families. we want to move some that as quickly as possible, so i pleev it is the first 40 slots we are able to move within existing contracts, and get those out. funding to the providers by july 1. so, that will start i think it is 160 slots. the 60 shallow subsidies are also be before you today in the contract, so once you review those they will probably be out by july 1, and

then the remaining about hundred vouchers for families we need to go through a process to determine which providers have capacity to administer, so those will come in the coming months but the first 40 will happen roget away. we are trying to get in the contracts where we have capacity to hit the streets faster, but we want to distribute to the providers with capacity to administer this rapid increase so those will start over time. >> great. thank you. and then, i don't know-mrs. middleton who called in about her situation with hope house. is someone engaging with her around those issues? just want to make sure that- >> yes our program staff are aware. >> great. i think i'm good.

>> thank you. commissioner aslanian-williams. okay. you are one on my queue. if you want to-- >> [indiscernible] i just have-i don't know how that happened but i have very quick questions. one is, when you talk about vehicles, people in vehicles, does that include the motor homes or is that- >> yes. commissioner, that includes rv and cars. >> okay. great. thank you. thank you first of commissioner laguana for your commendation. i think that the staff does an amazing job. it is just really nice to hear, especially i know what is going on in other cities right now and i think we are so much better, so thank you. quick question, the people that you help with prevention, how do

they access you? had how do they-they are behind on rent, they don't know what will happen, how do they get a hold of you? this is probably where i can be any help with people reaching out. >> hi, commissioner. our folks are able to access prevention through our access points and so they are able to call and gain access that way. >> okay. but they have to know to basically go on your website and find those access points? >> uh-huh. >> and they are multi-lingual? >> if they are not, we do have language access lines that folks are able to access to be able to translate. >> thank you. and then, i are had the same question that commissioner dufty brought up with the caller. it would be great if we can get

a understanding that, what she was asking. she seemed quite frustrated. >> we can't talk about individual situations in this case, but the program staff are aware. >> understood. thank you very much. that's it for me. >> thank you commissioner aslanian-williams. vice chair evans. >> thank you. i also appreciated the presentation on the point in time count data. i know that there are-it is imperfect count by definition, you are not going to always get precise number of people that are experiencing homelessness, but it is helpful tool for us to see trends, especially over time, and i wanted to make the comment that, we saw increase in homelessness in a same period we were making significant investments and we actually housed thousands of people, and i was

on a radio show with dr. margot cushal and she was saying, it could have been so much worse if we didn't have those interventions and she said, it could have been as high as 34 percent homelessness rate if we didn't have those intervention. i thought it was remarkable. i think it really points to the core issue of the inflow and how when people become first homeless they often do live in their vehicle and so these are not people moving from the street to vehicles, these are people that are newly homeless, and we are seeing that in the family and we also i think this is the first time since there was a tay count has been conducted,b the first time there is increase in tay in that count, the tay count. so, i know we are going to have a presentation in august that goes deeper into chronic and family homelessness and try to understand why tay homeless went up. the root cause issues are

really important for us to get our hands around and to commissioner laguana point, how effective can eviction prevention be and thwarting the inflow. >> your point is really good commissioner, the inflow continues regardless of or not regardless of, but in addition to all the investments made and we are really fortunate that we haven't seen bigger inflow because we have been able to be in front of it, so when we see 7 percent increase here, and we know the national in the last few years is 12 percent because of investments san francisco has made and i talked with a few of you about how we can actually talk about the inflow as something that is systemic obviously and there are a number of factors that feed into that so we want to get that information out there

eventually maybe on a dash bode because we can say what are the root causes and who do we need to coordinate with and maybe it isn't just hsh it is systemic and deeply embedded in the system jz need to figure how to coordinate best we can to you know, mitigate some of the factors causing this new wave of homelessness. >> absolutely. the other interesting point dr. cushal reminded of, if we reduce the amount of time that people spend in shelter from 2 years to 6 months, you need a quarter of the beds, shelter beds, right for the same time period. i think really understanding that inflow and understanding the flow through the system and how we really make sure we are addressing getting people to stable housing is what this body really could be valuable

effecting. thank you. i know we'll talk about the hot outreach and budget report, but i did see one recommendation from the mayor was to cut the 18 fte. what would that reduce the total outreach team to? >> i'll wait and let deputy director whitley--it isn't your title. wrong. who gigi our chief of admin and finance, when she talks about it we have time for discussion. >> grate. i wanted to know-usually director's report includes the number of outreach encounters and what we expect to see if that happened. >> yeah. >> what would reduction be in outreach. >> that is a important question so we'll have a discussion around it when she is up. >> sounds great. i appreciated your suggestion we work on state advocacy and that we participate in that.

i saw that again, the state funds not being predictable that you have a big gap in the second year because of the unpredict ability of state funds. the idea of having a--like the hud funds are steady stable source of ongoing funds to help with operations, the state funds seem to be so ad hoc you use primarily for one time year and where you can put towards operation but when they go away you need general fund or local dollars to make up the gap, so i do want to talk more how to advocate for more stability oen the state funds? . >> sure-you want to talk about that now or just-- >> yeah. >> thank you. >> thank you commissioner. we are working very closely with our state delegation on advocacy.

our primary state priority has been ongoing funding source for as long as i can remember, and we are thrilled to have hap, it made a huge difference in the community but not predictable as you said. the state has till june 15 to reach a balanced budget, and a budget agreement. the legislature is very supportive including hap so phone calls from the community to the san francisco delegation, the governor's office advacating for $1 billion in hap funding and bit of pipe dream, making that permanent source would be hugely helpful and those calls do need to be made in the next week or so. >> is there any particular legislators those calls should be directed to? >> i recommend calling your own representative. our representatives are supportive, but the more support they feel, the harder they push.

the governor's office has-would be a great place to direct your advocacy as well. jrkss >> understood. >> can we ask to get bullet snoints >> happy to give you a template letter. >> we can send it out to community as well. >> yes are, thank you. >> we love that. >> one last question. quickly. page 25 and 26 you mentioned the capital $10 million that outlayed. i wanted to put on the record, the amount of need that was solicited through the application process, it was something like 15, $16 million? $14 million. >> yeah. >> we had a $4 million gap, is that accurate? >> she is also going to address that-

>> perfect. thank you. thank you so much. >> i love the efficiency. any other commissioners have final thoughts? great. i just wanted to echo job well done hsh staff. i know you all work very hard and i think it is certainly important to highlight the success so far, but as i said, one room never filled, the room for improvement. i would like and would appreciate when we come to the point of sort of understanding the root causes and think holistically how to plevent homelessness, so that is something i know i had conversations about and would love to delve into that. for the sake of time, let's move to item 10. we have had public comment. we do have an opportunity for you to make a public comment during general public comment and so i will

make sure you have the opportunity to- >> i want to make a public comment about the director's report. >> you may make your public comment during general public comment, because we had-i will give you time and let you know when to come. thank you. this places on item 9. old business and since there is no old business we we will go to item 10, mayor proposed budget for fy24-25, 25-26 and this is discussion only and happy to bring up chief of finance and administration gigi whitley. >> good morning commissioners. gigi whitley, chief of administration and finance and pleased to be before you presenting the mayor proposed fiscal year 24-25, 25-26 budget. i like to start by thanking our budget ifinance team.

i'm joined by kristen roland, relatively new, going on 2 years budget director and also give a big thanks to our analyst, rana, crista, emily and also our finance director, lisa agusten who stepped in to provide budget analysis because we have a couple vacancies on the team in addition to her other duties as well as all the staff, all the program staff, hr, the executive team that work so hard to get us to this milestone. next slide. i will go over some top level summaries of the budget by service and expenditure level and then some of the new sources as well as structural gaps in the budget and dive into details. next slide, please. this gives you a overview of

the department proposed $846.8 million budget. 530, all most half billion dollar is revenue and then another $316 million is general fund support. the second year of the budget does go down to $677.1 million with 370 $370 million in revenue and small hair cut in general fund support. the top level view is maybe a bit confusing because the budget is going up and then down. it is two factors. we got a lot of one time money that was deappropriated in the current year and reappropriated to be reallocated to certain interventions as well as one time hhap funding we talk about being budget and first year budget and dropping in the second year. so, i think hopefully some of

the follow-up slides will give you a better sense of where the reductions, where there is growth and because this feels i think a little confusing in terms of trying to interpret at top line level. next slide. so, overall looking at all funds, these are the expenditure categories that are in hsh budget, salary benefits, grants to community based non profits, that is biggest part of the budget that goes to service providers and housing support and housing subsidies, professional service. we don't have a lot of departmental professional services. most of the services are contract to service providers like the sf hot contract and some contracts where we operate permanent supports housing. materials and supplies and interdepartment servicess. so, the budget is increasing in salaries. that is due to some shifts in

our salary savings, annualization of new positions as well as salary and wage changes. the biggest change in our budget is to our community based contracts. again, you see that one time money coming in and dropping out in the second year of the budget. some reductions to professional services which i'll go into. steady state for small materials and supplies budget, and then changes in our interdepartmental work order that accounts for the sober living project money we are receiving through work order with department of public health that will continue in our budget next year. next slide. so, this shows the two year budget rolled up by service delivery as in past slides you have seen the majority of our budget is invested in new housing, ongoing housing, housing support, housing subsidies

about 60 percent. 20 percent of the budget is shelter and crisis intervention. the budget has grown over the years and so we do have at least 9 percent of the budget going towards prevention, 1 percent for outreach, 1 percent coordinated entry. 1 percent for administrative cost including the work orders and 7 percent of the budget is personnel. i like to mention that about a percentage that are direct service workers that sit in hsh department and so when you think about administrative costs we are 5 to 6 percent of the total budget. the other change in the budget is that, the mix between adults, families and youth is changed a bit in the budget. so, adults and programs that serve all populations particularly

families is 72 percent of the budget investments. family dedicated investment make up about 12 percent of the budget, but in past years, the youth investment flux waited from 6 to 8 percent. i'm pleased to be able to announce that there are 15 percent of the budget is dedicated to youth and so, i think that is a exciting to your point commissioner dufty, seeing a trend to address our unsheltered and unhoused youth. so, since i was before you in february, we have gone through the negotiation process with the mayor budget office and as the director mentioned, all departments were required to make general fund reductions. there is a reduction in what the department proposed versus what the mayor office proposed, so

you'll see about 1.1 to $1.1 to $1.3 million reduction in salaries. that is really because last year adopted budget, we got a very large cut from the board of supervisors that wouldn't have enabled to maintain staffing level. the mayor office did restore some that. not all of it, so there is about a 4 fte attrition reduction and decreased new positions that were supposed to come online in the general fund and increased positions for new initiatives so good news and bad news in terms of staffing level. i think we don't yet know until we are through the board process how the salary budget will shake out and effect our hiring plan next year. there was also reduction in the cost of doing business increase for community based non profits as well as a

$2.3 million cut to our grant line in the second year of the budget. we have not yet allocated that out to services. we have about 8 to 9 months if this cut sticks to figure out where we need to allocate that cut. and then, professional services were decreased by the mayor office. there is a-the department proposed a million dollar ongoing cut in our outreach services to account for some stabilization room that we needed to close. on top that the mayor office cut $1 million for sf hot contract year one of the budget and that becomes ongoing reduction of $2.5 million so i'll talk about that later. we also shifted around security funds and made hair cut in the security contract so you see that included. next slide. so, i think you are familiar with this

slide. we work hard at hsh to leverage as many different resources as we can and when i started with the department, we were all most exclusively a general fund department. we had some federal funds, but with the unlocking of the our city our home homelessness gross receipts tax, the new state dollars and really this department taking a leadership role in trying to leverage community support and medi-cal waver dollars that are beginning to flow from the state. you'll see that there's a lot more variability over the two years in our budget. in the second year of the budget as mentioned, that hhap funding goes away. you heard how imperative it is that that funding be maintained both on one time basis and on ongoing basis. i also want to mention, there is a lot of conversation since prop 1

passed. the state--this is new wind fall dollars for san francisco for thingz like behavioral health transitional housing. we are excited that there may be new capital dollars, but we are not expecting the level of operational dollars coming from prop 1 that we would need to operate any new sites or even expand behavioral health services, so i don't see prop 1 as being a solution for what you are seeing here and so, i wanted to show you the next slide to really make this stark for all of you, that our two year budget, particularly the shelter budget really relies on some one time funding, so over the two year budget we are all most balanced and able to maintain funding for more then a thousand shelter slots. as we move into fiscal year

26-27 and 27-28, without those hhap dollars or another funding source we are able to identify, we will-that will leave a significant gap. $63 million gap and that isn't something the city and department can solve on its own so wanted to impress upon all you how critical these dollars are and how much of the budget is balanced with one time general fund savings identified as you think through your advocacy. okay, diving into budget details. so, just a deeper dive on some of the general fund reductions i mentioned. when i was before you in february, the department had identified about $6 million in general fund reductions and i think $4 million in the second year of the budget. the mayor office accepted most

of those reductions so those are reflected in the top line. i mentioned $1 million for stabilization rooms and homeless outreach team and as we have been talking about another $1 million cut to outreach growing to $2.5 million. this cut has not been implemented yes, this is just proposal by the mayor. we have not started planning to reduce outreach workers, but we did want to share, this is equivalent to about our district team. i looked at the heluna budget before you a couple months ago, and all our general fund outreach workers it is 31 outreach workers cost about $2.7 million annually, so $2.5 million cut that is going to take significant bite out of our homeless outreach team and as you can see, we are launching new initiatives with that team,

including the street to home work, so we would like to keep the momentum there. to commissioner evans question, there are 38 roughly just outreach workers, not including supervisors budgeted, so 18-20 fte cut is certainly significant. there are other funds in that contract. one time state funds, but this is a real critical piece of the department's strategy so just wanted to mention that. the other thing that is a little hard to explain, but i think something we are concerned about going into the budget process is, over the last two years the city has made significant investments in increasing wages for front line workers who work in the homelessness response system, as well as trying to keep pace with record

inflation and cost of doing business increases. not quite getting there, but chipping away at that. because of the overall budget pressure, the mayor's office proposed a reduction in cost of doing business next year. it is about .5 percent, so we budgeted 3 percent, and the budget includes 2.5 percent cost of doing business, but actually you'll see on the screen that, .5 percent doesn't equal $6.9 million. the other thing going on is that we also got a hair cut to the cost of doing business funding that we already implemented this year, so that is larger cut for us and tocontinue the cost of business increases we already provided our community based non profit. in the second year of the budget, there is flat funding. really what you are looking at here is sort flat funding for cbo at a

time we know it is hard to recruit and continue these services and we are still seeing inflation and high cost to operate programs. the second year oof the budget i mentioned the $2.3 million grant line item reduction. we have some time to figure that out if that's fixed and then the hair cut we took in the salary savings and elimination of four positions in our budget. switching to the more positives in the budget. i wanted to highlight the investments in shelter over the two year period. funded with predominantly our city our home prop c funds as well as one time general fund money, so there is a one time $5 million investment to begin to construct and launch a new vehicle triage center on the west side. i know many of you have heard members from the community asking for these

services and we are excited that we now have funding to continue to move forward with that project. the one time hh apfunds budgeted as well as general fund money give us all most 2 years of funding to maintain those three non congregate shelter beds we kept open, 288 beds we maintain in the budget. we are hopeful to move forward with gerald common, a new safe parking site in the bayview community. the budget assumes we are successful getting a encampment resolution award but haven't yet received that grant funding so without the grant funding we need another solution to operate and construct that site. as the director mentioned, the mayor's budget included funding for 115 new emergency hotel vouchers for families, and this is expected to serve

600 families over an 18 month process and funded with combination of general fund and prop c dollars. finally, there is money to add 11 additional shelter beds at over night program, which is located at buena vista horace man school to provide shelter capacity for those families awaiting shelter as possible. next slide. so, in order to make these proposals come to fruition there is trailing legislation with the budget that pertains to the our city our home fund, and so the mayor's budget overall invests $47 million in prop c dollars for the safer families proposal which wile polk discuss in a bit. the fund-to fund this proposal is partially funded with one time accrued

interest earned on the fund, and are there is interest in the fund because of the time that the proposition was delayed due to court proceedings so it has taken a while to spend down the funds between hsh, dph and other departments and interest continued to accrue. the legislation is required to do two things. to allocate $13.6 million of the identified $17.6 million in interest to family housing and shelter for families so that requires a legislative change on one time basis. and to suspend the 12 percent cap on short-term rental subdies. the ordinance requires only 12 percent of the housing fund be spent on subsidies that are 5 years or lower so we needed some relief from the cap to get additional rapid rehousing dollars out the door.

also includes $32.5 million in tay funding towards expansion of rapid rehousing, additional flex pool as well as new site for justice involved young adults which is partnership with just home, themic arthur foundation, urban institute and our criminal justice partners in the city. the budget continues all the current investments in the programs, at least for the two year budget and are supports recommendations and investments recommended by the oversight committee. just moving forward to the investments in family homeless ness. 130 rapid rehousing subsidies for families and investment level of $23.8 million. all families receiving those subsidies will receive at least a two year subsidy and then there is funding for families who may need a larger

extension, including up to 5 years. family rapid rehousing forte families, there is 50 slots costing roughly $9.9 million. 35 shallow rental subsidies for families for up to 5 years that cost $4.8 million and then the hotel vouchers that i mentioned earlier. to highlight the next slide, the investments in youth homelessness, $24.5 million investment in rapid rehousing for youth. 160 new 2 to 3 your subsidies for young adults. 60 subsidies lasting up to 3 years for adults exiting transitional housing trying to stabilize in the private rental market, and then 15 subsidies for young adults impacted by violence. this is taking the feedback of the ocoh oversight committee and advocates to try to roll out subsidies that

meet the various needs of the youth population. there are 50 new flex pool housing ladder subsidies as well as the new acquisition site that is leveraging other money for that new site for justice involved adults. and then i wanted to end on before i talk about staffing, more a positive note. again, we talked extensively about the happ funds. i did want to highlight some innovative work i think the department has taken a leadership role on, the medi-cal waver pilot from the federal government. there are a lot of acronyms at the state has implemented to parse out funding sources and now the funds are going through the san francisco managed healthcare plan so san francisco health plan as well as partnership

with anthem it is excited for homelessness to be in the mix recognition housing is healthcare, and to be a prayer in that regard. we included $4.3 million in the budget for a variety of partnerships for hhip program and this is where we have a little of money to continue psh accessibility investments, not the $10 million last year, but about half million dollar focused on ada assessment, ramps, entry ways, restrooms as well as some work for coordinated entry and then to continue the pilot at kelly cohen you all approved several months ago for skilled nursing intensive service site at psh so folks can age in place and get the care they need. and finally, some

ongoing-hoping this is more in future years, cal aim money to continue implementing that money, which is focused on community housing support for people who are medi-cal eligible enrolled in the health plan and getting the services. the other exciting thing is, dph has reached out to us and we are participating in their global payment program, and it sort of marrys what we are doing with cal aim but for uninsured. really able to draw down funds to provide housing nav igation and housing support for uninsured is really excited and really glad we got funds in the budget and grateful for public health partnership there. finally, i'll end with a overview of our staffing. so, our staffing is growing by 13.7 fte and then relatively flat in the

second year of the budget. i want to break it down because it isn't all new positions. there is a net increase of 7 head count, about 5.74 fte funded in the prop c budget and focus on launching massive $80 plus million initiative for homeless ness and youth and getting those dollars out as soon as possible. change in attrition level equates to increase of 4 fte. we moved two commissioner positions, cost neutral from off budget to on budget, so two of those positions and then annualizing some new positions that were partially funded that we got this year. we are still fighting against that 18, 20 percent vacancy rate, so i think as we go into the budget process with the board, we'll need to articulate our hiring plan and how we are able to fill our vacancies and maintain this

growth. last slide is just a little bit more detail about those positions and what was added and what was reduced, and i'll end there in interest of time. i have one more slide. just budget timeline. the first budget hearing is next week june 13. i will be before the ocoh oversight committee tomorrow presenting more detailed deep dive into the changes in the prop c budget and then we have another budget hearing on june 20, public comment is june 24 and then the final hearing at the end of june. thank you so much for your attention and happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you. i want toopen to public first to provide any public comment and as it relates to the mayor proposed budget presentation, and just reminder to please fill those speaker cards.

do we have some members. >> we have [indiscernible] hope kramer and cheryl adams. >> any other members of the public who wish to comment on this who haven't completed a speaker card? if you can raise your hand. we have three members who have completed speaker card. any remote callers? >> there is no callers in the queue. >> thank you. thank you. >> good morning commissioners. marty regen from larkin street and cochair of hes pu. on behalf of 30 homeless response providers, we remain hopeful and strongly urge that the mayor fully fund the intervention we know work and that guide hsh home by the bay strategic plan. we are very concerned about the pit count indicating increase in overall homelessness and increase in chronic homelessness and increase in tay and family homelessness. the increase in sheltered homelessness may be seen as positive, but

people are not getting remaining housed as indicated by chronic homelessness increase. lots of folks are libing in cars, sure, but that's not housing. the increase in overall tay homeless, the first since doing the youth count is really distressing as increase in clonic homelessness. we got to get the prop c general fund housing dollars out in the contract so providers can house folks and insure shelter and vehicle stays are brief and only a step towards stable housing. finally, the city has to coordinate investment in housing with workforce, mental health so people remain house and never return to homelessness, which is not only the goal of home by it bay but the mayor and all san franciscans top priority. thank you. >> thank you for your comment. next. >> good morning. hope, family service, cochair

of hes pu. i wanted to note that it is pretty rare to feel hopeful when you are in family homelessness and for the first time feeling the mayor and department are taking call for urgency seriously so excited to see the dollars in the safer family plan get out into contract. i also add, thank you to the folks at hs had rks who run the pit count and who were willing to iterate with us to insure that families are counted so we acknowledge the very real scale of suffering. it is a under count by a lot but think moving in the right direction. finally, i ask we hold prevention in a holl istic way. the two family resource centers in san francisco are facing cuts of $700 thousand in the next fiscal year, so if you can't get diapers and can't get groceries, that is the difference for a lot of families going into

homelessness trauma wise and financially that is bad investment so if we can work with colleagues to fiend those dollars i would be excited. thank you. >> thank you for your comment. >> good morning. cheryl adams larkin street. i want to acknowledge and appreciate the department work and everybody's work to increase the investments in tay that you see in the report, the budget report gigi just presented. we are beyond excited to see the work we really appreciate the department moving forward with the tay strategic planning process highlighted in the director's report, and we just super hope we are able to get investments out quickly so we can start to house more young people. as noted there was increase in youth experiencing homelessness so we need to get the folks housed quickly. also want to thank gigi and department for highlighting importance of cost of doing business.

we have seen sky rocketing cost in insurance and trying to pay staff, i have unionize said staff and an agreement how much we raise their pay every year as we should. we should do more and the cost of doing business as it is structured just won't cover all that and so that will be a cut in the out-years if it is not fully addressed so continued advocacy for cost of doing business and great appreciation to all you and the department for the new investments in tay. thank you. >> thank you. >> good morning commissioners. wasn't prepared to speak, but i want to acknowledge the hard work of the staff and also remind you that there are pretty amazing providers in the community too that are doing some significant work. put that on the record. thank you very much. i will be here all week.

[laughter] an earlier comment about the value of prevention is a important one and i'll remind all of us in this room that one of the things we need to pay attention to with implementation of prop 1 is the significant reduction in prevention dollars. we can speculate why the governor-we don't have the speculate. he cut the money of prevention to pay the debt service of general obligation bond. addition through subtraction so we need to pay close attention because prevention works. we all know that. it is better to prevent a problem then have to solve it after it is a problem. the other piece too is, the hole continues to get deeper, because among other things, the tech sector is still firing people and they always

entertain elon musk as 5, 6 thousand people since he bought twitter. just remind you that this problem continues to be before us and one point we made several times is that, the depth of the covid crisis, more then 350 thousand san franciscans experienced at least one instance of unemployment, so that means for all in the homelessness response system that our pool of potentially homeless people is 350 thousand people. everything we do has to be guided by that sense of scale. thank you for your time. >> thank you for your comment. >> hi, dolores street community service. thank you. i wanted to thank hsh for supporting us with [indiscernible] family

shelter over there. it was mentioned in the meeting last month, there is increase in latinx population in the system. especially in the family shelters and i appreciate the efforts hsh put into the mission district and the time i worked with the city and non profit and living in the neighborhood, i am very thankful to see the support in the youth programs. the access points and both adult and family access points in the mission because we didn't have that prior to covid. i have seen the success with my community there and my folks there in being able to have people who speak our language giving us the support services is huge and able to have people who can relate with us culturally is huge and appreciate the efforts that have gone into salary increases as well, because again, one of the hardest things is hiring people in the community

to work in the community. just because work and living is less expensive outside the community, so i appreciate those efforts because it brings culture back to the neighborhoods as well and it's providing more trauma centered services for our folks too, which is providing more success rates in housing. folks actually successful in their housing referrals i think is a huge thing. but, i do want to be transparent when i see cuts it is super scary because it is like who will it effect. then we built the traction in non profit that is super positive and when cuts happen, we lose that traction and then rebuilding that trust with clients is hard, because they are on a wait list forever. and then it is like what advocacy are you doing for us and we are, but there is no place right now. just kind of want to be mindful of those things. also with our unhoused

population aging, thinking about future funding as well. how are we going to really support folks in permanent supportive housing, because the transitions from shelter to sro's as smooth and as easy going as we want to make it for the guest, it is difficult because there isn't as robust supportive housing services in those places for folks to have one on one sessions. people need one on one case management and someone to help triage, travel to doctor appointment or remember you have a doctor appointment. those are huge things we also have to think about and what we consider success. thank you for your time. >> thank you for your comment. commission dufty. >>-you can hand it to our

secretary. >> we need some money for accountability regarding these service providers. i mean, the service provider i'm dealing with being discriminated against and retaliated against. yes, it is directly along race lines for me. it seems like the system, it seems it has excessive flaws in the investigation mechanisms. we need to hear from the homeless as to what type of housing and services that they have. some of these rooms, the conditions in their van or car are better then these sro's. yeah, you got to pee outside, but dang

you don't got to deal with roaches and black mold and rodents and profanity. you could park your van in the most picture part of town instead of waking up and dealing with drug dealers and narcotics and stuff. so, it is like, i think there is this dilution that homeless don't have any rights or voice to voice their opinion and the other dilution is that, whatever blighted slumlord condition you want to dump the homeless in, it is somehow acceptable. and no, it is not acceptable. i chose to sleep outside for 8 years because i didn't want to live with the nars istic abusive case management i'm dealing with now.

that is part of my main problem. our voice is continuously silenced, we are continuously being opressed and government has inferior accountability measures. what i would like to see is, a hearing regarding the forensic hearing regarding the mechanics of how city and county of san francisco handles problems. one of the things i'm experiencing right now is my neighbor, she can't advocate for herself, so the housing provider is stealing from her. she lost a tv, dvd, diamond bracelet, but because city government refuses to take my complaint regarding what she's experiencing, they are just going to steal from her indefinitely and

government will sweep it under the rug. of course, we never get a response onse from the government abusing us. >> thank you sir. >> cj ross, a member of the homeless community and i serve on the shelter monitoring committee as well. i like to second his comments. i think that is really appropriate. i also would like to see some budget for accountability. that was very well stated. it is a challenge i think for those at the bottom of the bottom to not just be heard, but to have our problems solved and the problems he mentioned are absolutely absolutely true and pervasive in our shelters, and our accommodations. black mold, roaches. this is a very common issue for

us to find. i lived in many shelters sadly in san francisco before i got my housing referral status and still in the shelter system and dealing with black mold and roaches and basically there is really a challenge for those who do want to help solve problems to connect with an accountability process. while we can complain to the shelter monitoring committee, and they can address standard of care complaints, there is a real challenge for that committee to see those complaints resolved in a way that eliminates the problem and that would be a really really beneficial budget allotment. i really feel this would address the human rights people at the bottom, which is where we are, and also

it would help solve the crisis in general, because i think there are people exiting shelter systems routinely, because of these problems just as the gentleman stated. i just thank you for your time. appreciate it. >> thank you. i want to say the message is heard, at least from me, and certainly going to try hardest to do everything that we can, because i have visited some of the shelters and i do think that there is a human element we really need to pay attention to and so appreciative of those who come experiencing homelessness and speaking up and i want to make sure we have every opportunity to hear you. thank you. i want to open up to commissioners. >> thank you. so, this is going to sound light-hearted gigi, but i want to thank you for a presentation about the budget. it is your command of so many

different elements is just unbelievable and i know you have a great group working with you and so i just want to thank you. i think it is important to understand and as someone who has been a city supervisor, part of the way that department heads are evaluated is your ability to get what you get and you dont get upset. it the kids book my kid loved and i enjoyed reading it, but the point is, that i guess i'm not speaking to the director right now, because it is not reasonable to expect that on some of the issues that really need to be revisited and some of the schooling gigi gave us today, that i think that this is at a time when it is incumbent upon us as commissioners to

support hespa and other said before the board of supervisors, so what i like to suggest is we as commissioners divvy up who likes us, who we get along with. people are afraid of you and want to stay on your good side, so--but i think the time right now and it is so pivotally important this month that i just want to say, i think the time has come and i am intrigued because i think this commission has sought to really understand the complexities of the issues, some how important and how responsive the departmental leadership has been around youth issues from standpoint of investment and family issues particularly, and i think that having us go and talk to the supervisors from the vantage point of, we learned a lot. i think about you commissioner williams

very much and how much i appreciated when you came on this body and you said you know, i'm here to learn, i'm here to listen and learn and the board did create this commission. our chief executive was not supportive of it, and so i do want to say that i think that we will be heard and so i just want to say to marny and others involved with hespa, we would like to go with you in solidarity and in community to talk about some of the nuances in the budget and at times we probably will come and ask questions so we are better prepared, but i do think that this is high season for us to show that we have been here, we have been listening and we do support a number of the recommendations that are coming from the community, coming from organizations that serve this community and this population, and take guidance from staff. i would like to say that i

think that it would be useful in terms of the grant we are waiting to hear about from the state how we could perhaps get involved in that if that's possible or any advice we could get. >> we did receive the letters already. >> great. >> thank you. >> today we- >> yes. >> commissioner bridget just sent the talking points to you. >> okay. great. thank you. >> i was going to say, on that point as a body i just know as a former chair, our ability as a body to interact on state issues is heavily curtailed so we can act as individuals, but not as a body on state issues. just pointing that out. >> i'm good with that. >> thank you for the question. gigi whitley. our encampment resolution grant

application has been submitted. there was one round of funding hoping to be part of the second round off the top of my head i don't know if there is additional advocacy. i think it is with the administrative process within the state bureaucracy but around happ6 and certainly and ongoing funding level it has to be partnership with the state. they want us to collaborate regionally and use these investments with our regional partner, but it is very hard to balance a budget and plan for the future and implement the home by the bay plan with a $63 million fiscal cliff looming, so thank you so much for your consideration. >> thank you. >> thank you commissioner dufty. i second that. whatever it is that we need to do in terms of advocacy, send a letter, calling someone i think it is

helpful if the department gives guidance how to do that so thank you for the talking points and we'll-i'll make sure we are updated what we should do as a chair. commissioner laguana. >> yes. i want to second commissioner dufty. deputy director whitley? >> chief of admin and finance. >> that is a mouthful. okay if i say gigi? [laughter] okay, i just want to second commissioner dufty and say, we need to check and make sure your home is fully stocked with smoke detectors. we need to protect you, because we are very dependent on your understanding and thank you for that presentation. i wanted to ask chair butler, do you think it is possible or is it

part of this commission's regular process that we get a report of some kind from the shelter monitoring committee? maybe that could be a input for us. >> we have it on the agenda today, so we'll have a report. >> today, okay. that was a quick solution. >> yes. >> yes. and, i wanted to say to the gentleman speaking on behalf of the providers, yes, absolutely, point well taken t. is not just exclusively the work of hsh and also the work of the providers leading to the progress we are having. i regret not including you all in that-in my remarks about being pleased at some of the forward progress we have been having. gigi, quick question. i just wanted my head around a

small miner thing. the shelter investments, you had three shelters cova, monarc and adante, 288 beds i believe you said over 2 years? when i ran the math on that, that was $4759 per bed, which seems unreasonably low. it can't be that cheap, so what am i looking at when i look at these numbers? is this a supplemental funding, or--help me understand. >> thank you and thank you for the kind wordsment it is reflection of the incredible team and i'm grateful to have such a incredible team and the team just told me that this is only a portion of the investment for these beds so the overall cost over the two year s is roughly $54 million,

this is the amount appropriated in the budget. >> okay. understood. >> thank you for that note. >> and then, is it possible when we are looking at these budgets that we could-one thing i notice and i think is a struggle for people that work in the space is, the public sees a big number, and they divide by the number of homeless and they say, we are spending a million dollars per person, why are we not just buying them all mansions or something like that? is it possible do you think to get a break-out of service versus administrative cost? even the shelters i was talking about. we hear these numbers and we think my goodness we are spending a lot of money per person, but what is lost,

there is difference between what we spend on the individual or on the bed, versus the services that we provide or the administrative cost. yeah. >> thank you. that is a helpful note. in home by the bay plan, we have that sort of per person per cost, but that also includes the administrative cost, provider, staffing cost, our staffing cost, everyone wants data and outcomes that require managing multimillion it system putting data in and having analyst to read the data. i think we can come up with something that would be more of those palatable easy to digest talking points and really have been so grateful to the commission's feedback since you have been seated, because it is nice to get the feedback, because as you say, you can get in the weeds and miss

the fors through the trees when you communicate these things. >> i don't want to create more work for the department or it workload, but there is some way to articulate some clean simple way to articulate so the public understand the difference between gross cost versus a per item cost and what is actually finding its way to the individual versus the cost of providing that. a quick question, you mentioned fewer fte's. i know i asked you this question in the past, but i wanted to i guess ask it again. the department currently has shortage vacant number of vacant positions. what happens to the money allocated for the increase in staff if--i guess i'm thinking about the shortage on had one hand we have, the vacant positions and increase in the number of positions on

the other hand. since i have been on the commission the past year, we have not been able to fill all the vacant positions, so it doesn't seem likely that we are going to in the next fiscal year fill all those vacant positions. how does that-does that money get absorbed into other parts of our budget? does it get reallocated to hsh at the end of it or is it just disappear in a puff of smoke? >> great question. when we are building our annual salary budget, we look at hiring plan, we try to be conservative, but also thoughtful that hey, this is dph recruitment and have to hire off the list 11 positions and realistically will take more time then if recruitment within our control and build the salary savings in what we propose to the mayor.

so, it is baked into the numbers. what then happens and happened in this department due to a variety of factors that we are well aware of, including the rapid expansion of funds, changes in leadership roles, sort of instability and pressure of working during covid that we have seen that high level of turnover that out-paces what a typical city department outside of maybe public health sees. i am confident that we asked for what we need. if we can meet our hiring plan. i think that is the question we will be asked in front of the board and need to defend. do you really need this additional salary budget and what i have said is that, please at least give us the position authority, because if you cut our salary budget, we can manage within that knowing who may retire and

vacancies that may come up and doing a better job projecting that, but if you reduce the fte and certain job classes that limits where we can plug and play within our budget and so, that's what i hope we land. at least salary budget we can manage around and enough fte that we can-you heard the speakers get the money out the door and that takes human beings to do the contract, the scope of work to monitor the program and so, we share that goal, we just want the staff to be able to do that. >> thank you so much. >> thank you. commissioner evans. >> thank you so much. i sent a couple questions in yesterday afternoon. >> thank you. >> one was around the e rap and january, february proposal that went to the mayor's office. it had some substantial cuts in

the erap funding and i didn't see those mentioned on the slides. >> thank you for the question and happy to misrecommending, but i dont recall us presenting erap reductions in our budget. you may referring to there are some one time money in the mayor office of housing community development funding resources that are winding down, both i think general fund and federal funds. the erap sources and hsh budget are steady state as the work order from mohcd so we are not expecting cuts in homeless prevention. i think the question is what is the impact happening on the mohcd side of the ledger and how does that impact the system as a whole. >> the mohcd ledger isn't from the hsh budget as workorder? >> it is but not the piece

getting cut. it is about 12.6 million to mohcd. and think there is escalator built in to increases to little over $13 million. my understanding from talking to their department is it is really the one time federal and prop i and other general fund resources that they have been spending down that are not get replinshed in the budget so it compressing to what the ocoh work order is. >> i see. we had convarsation about the psh back rent issue. can you clarify of the erap funds, how much you are thinking and earmarking for helping the providers with back rent owed? >> yeah . we needed to take action this year and not wait for the budget to start supporting providers best we could, midbudget sime r cycle on rent arrears issues, so we have done a couple things. the first thing is, we have set

aside $2 million and mohcd set aside $2 million of current year prop c funding for psh tenant behind in their budget and we are trying to streamline the process so that those tenants are served more quickly. we have referrals going to two prevention partners, checks are funneled through a fiscal agent. we are not go ing to require typical documentation you started making payment or you need to show income certification. that's one immediate strategy with that $4 million. there isn't new money to expand that in the budget. there is the erap funds we have, but we are in close communication. our director has been meeting with director adams from the mayor

office of housing on really long-term strategies in how we can work together with mohcd to address this issue. i don't know if you want to say more. >> i think we realize a lot of issues go beyond the rent arrear issue so we want to think about the stability of our provider community and really figure ways we can help and get in front of some of the issues we see coming down the pike. we know the rent arrears issue is surfacing now, but there are other issues we are dealing with. somebody earlier mentioned the rising cost of insurance. there is a lot of expenses that the providers are dealing with that some of which are new and some of which increased, so we need to work together to figure how the city can support this system as we move into the next

few years. >> just going back to the overall erap funds made available, do we have gap analysis of the demand for that program and how many people will be turning away if we don't have adequate funds? >> i don't have that. i can ask the team. >> the order of magnitude, this is our providers and mohcd is on the order of 15 million. $4 million isn't going to solve that, so in addition to these funds for tenants, each agency is trying to triage individual issues with providers. we are meeting with our providers with immediate gaps, mohcd is providing flexibility to their permanent supportive housing operators to

mitigate short-term issues but try toog work on the long-term problem to stabilize households to provide more intensive case-not just on the money management, but making sure house holds with little to no income get enrolled in benefits they are able to qualify for that there is closer partnership between case management and psh property management and we are getting ahead of what has been an issue that has come to for as we round down and came out of covid and eviction moratorium elapsed so all those things hit at once unfortunately. >> i saw that the-some investments are being made and there is reductions being made and you labeled highlights in the budget. i was going to ask, again, is it possible to get the programmatic level details so we can see all the

changes? >> yes. we request commissioners so send something today. i will say, the budget is not intuitive, but you can certainly see the ins and outs and i think the mayor budget book as well as the a a ao online are helpful just if you want to dig into details. >> that is great. i think at some point we talked about trying to also identify people served by each of the line items. i know the dream state of showing the return on investment for each line item. >> that is an extraordinarily difficult task. i think because of the service versus administration and how our budget is in terms of what funds are on budget, what funds are off budget, but i think we can do a better job getting high level talking points about what does

it cost to put someone in a shelter versus prevention. it is certainly cheaper to prevent homelessness then pay for the nightly shelter bed and rehouse folks, so the prevention is one thing that is notable. i don't know if i can get you a roi on every line item in the budget. >> i understand. i appreciate that. i sent a tweet to the chair and the director that had 15 million views on twitter about our budget for this department, which when you have the guy in charge, he command attention. i think i am conscious of the fact the public is asking for that level of transparency, and so i think it

goes a long way when you are able to then point to that resource that illuminates very clearly the amount of money spent from the taxes being collected and who they are going to and what resolutions it created. and so, at some point i think we need to talk and i think the chair had committed to doing a conversation a little more in depth how we accomplish that goal. >> yes. i think obviously gigi said, it is a hard task and i think we will have conversation to see how we can be more transparent to community about details. >> yeah. absolutely. thank you. >> we x do is come up with some proposals about what we think will work for our staff and then we can discuss- >> exactly. not looking for a lot of extra

work, just looking for something that can shine more transparency. >> sure. >> i don't have any additional questions, but i think there is maybe a caller that wanted-- >> is there remote caller? commission secretary. >> there is no callers in the queue. >> no callers in the queue. any other comments, questions for--? so, i believe-i will have you make a comment, just as a president i want to make a precedent having public comment afterwards, but i want to honor those who have lived experience on that and invite you to make comment. >> can you double check the queue? >> thank you for the time. i wanted to just speak to commissioner laguana questions and i think it is really important to address a possible gap in what is budgeted per bed

and what is delivered per bed. what is expected per bed as a member of the homeless community and shelter client, i would bet everything i have which isn't a lot, that the deliverables are not what is budgeted for. it is pretty shocking to see on the ground how little we do receive. i think there are changes that happen, between the time a contract is signed,ic and as the contract goes on, i think that the deliverable's change and i think that is really tough for the shelter clients to even know. they dont know what is expected and i think it is shocking sometimes to see for example, food. our meals. so, what is expected by the budget and by the contract is not--i would

bet is not usually what is delivered on the ground so it is really important, thank you commissioner laguana for bringing that up. i like to also to gigi whitley, please engage the shelter monitoring committee in that process of evaluation, because i think that's a important function of the shelter monitoring committee. we can help bridge the gaps of information and also of services like we would like to help you know more about what's going on the ground and that is why we are here so thank you so much. appreciate it. >> thank you for your comment. just wanted to- >> there is a caller. >> thank you. >> go ahead caller, we hear you. >> hi. this is jennifer friedenbalk coalition of homelessness and thank you for the discussion, super helpful. also to thank the department and commission on all their very

diligence work and of course all the providers who are carrying all this work out. i just are want to note in the budget a couple things. first of all, we do have a continued investment in the city in a operation under [indiscernible] that is highly traumatizing harmful and is getting worse and worse with very very low success rates, and at the same time, hsh is proposing cuts to outreach and stabilization rooms that is for hot team approaching to try to get people off the streets rather then just moving people a block. we had several sweeps in the last couple weeks that people were trying to comply and had their belongings taken and thrown away. a woman assaulted by city staff. it is really horrific what is

happening out there and what we are seeing and especially in light of the scotus decision. very nervous. be need to turn around the street response so leads people off the street and engage people in service want i want to mention, really appreciative of a lot of stuff we hear about today is prop c. the stuff from the mayor office is dependents on prop c and prop c interest and that is fantastic that we have that and it is leading to so many successes. i just want to note that, all of the investments on new investments on the family side are short-term and most of the investments on the tay side. what we are really needing is expansion of permanent subsidies. that also allows more families to be housed in san francisco.

the short-term subsidies are helpful, but as reported recently, there is a lot of disparities among african americans, a lot of folks sent out of town, and of course many people after leaving the subsidy return to homelessness sometimes right away and sometimes down the line, because folks live in poverty, the short-term subsidies do not change the fundamental disparity we are facing. that is a significant difference between the amount of income coming in, and the high rent and so, we really need the structural investments that really correct that gap between income and rent. really encourage you all to make a motion or to encourage the mayor and board of supervisors to address that doubling of family homelessness-- >> thank you caller. i just wanted to shout out

again, gigi whitely for making the budget plain and understandable. as a guy that isn't a numbers guy, i can certainly understand what is happening and so i appreciate that and hope that the public is also able to regurgitate information she shared. and, also wanted to highlight that there is opportunity for us, the commissioners and public as mentioned june 13, 20 and 24 to advocate for this budget, so hopefully through social media or website that department can provide those-that information to the public so they can show up. okay. before we move forward i like to take a 5 minute break. if possible. we will reconvene at 1139. [5 minute recess]

[meeting reconvened] seems we needed that. i would like to continue in our meeting as we pr pressed for time and we do have a lot or to cover on the agenda, so we are moving along to consent calendar, items-- >> would you like me to read them? >> just one second, i got to find my place on the agenda here. item 11, concept calendar. i had a conversation with commissioners who would like to call out the following items, 1 and 2 together. item 3, 9 and 10 together and item 12.

again 1 and 2, 3, 9 and 10, and 12. any other items on the consent calendar commissioners wish to call out? i would like to take vote to approve 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15 and 16. >> so move. >> i have to do public comment. open up to members of the public who wish to comment on those items just named on consent calendar. any remote callers? wonderful. let s move to the vote. >> please respond with aye or nay.

[roll call] motion pass. >> thank you so much. i also want to highlight again, call out items 1 and 2, 3, 9 and 10 and 12 and so, i open up the floor to commissioners to provide any comments or questions on items 1 and 2, calling them together. >> do we want to do public comment? >> i want the commissioners. >> thank you. so, i requested items 1 and 2 be called together. they are both supportive service contracts for episcopal community service for permanent supportive housing and one thing i was trying to do in the contract assessment is try to look at the outcomes and what

is it that we are achieving through each of those contracts. i appreciate that we have in there the details about the capacity, but i have a request that we have the actuals presented alongside capacity, otherwise i will send those questions in advance on a regular basis, if that's possible. that would be great. so, on the hotel diva and the tuhannah apartments, these are both properties that are new to the city permanent supportive housing portfolio, hotel diva acquired with the home key state funds and the tuhanen apartments is mercy property that was done with the interesting construction technique, so both of these are relatively new to the portfolio, and i wanted to

remark that, the dollar per participant seemed to be a delta between the two and i received staff response that seemed to indicate it had to do with how many doubled in the units was the reason for the delta per participant cost. i want further slungz explanation how we budget. is it on a fte basis? >> thanks elizabeth. >> good morning. elizabeth houston. you are referring to the 2 site based support service agreement.

for new support servicess agreements we have services funding amounts based on the target population to be served, so whether an adult, an adult with serious mental illness, which is special carve-out, family or tay and then we do budgeting based on per unit basis. sometimes based on a specific project there might be other nuances that might impact or the service package that might imfact the per unit services funding amount. >> got it. so there is rhyme to reason in terms of differentials you might see between contracts and not like one contract is getting arbitrarily higher allocation for support service then the other? >> correct. in the budget presentation, gigi referred to some investments the city made a couple years ago and so at that

point is when we-there were some support services agreements long-term support services agreements that bebeen initiated under the human service agency or department of public health at lower service funding amounts so webrought all the service agreements up to minimum threshold amount per unit and moving forward we are doing new agreements based on this service system. >> for these two contracts it was between 6 and 7 and a half thousand per participant. i was using participant count instead of unit count. does that sound like the approximate number for adults? >> yes. annual. >> yes, exactly. i appreciate that. i just wanted to make sure i understood how we are managing that. somebody who is in a permanent supportive housing service unit in addition to the rent we are

paying we are providing a service equivalent to 6 to avenue 7 and a half thousand on annual basis to provide additional supportive services? >> yes. that is correct. >> thank you. i wanted to make sure i understood what was happening here. i want to ask the question about the higher vacancy rate to tahannan. i believe said 145 units at the tahanan with [indiscernible] do you know why there is a high vacancy rate? >> the hsh agreement is for support urfb iss agreement. we do also partner with mercy housing which is owner and property management entities. there were units that had significant damage and so it took offline a longer period of time then typical,

and that's the main reason that there is a higher vacancy rateism . >> was damage from people that lived in the units and vacated the units? >> yes. >> i believe it also said there hadn't been a high eviction rate there so couldn't account for all the units from the eviction data. >> yes. but it took a long time to bring the units were off' line a longer period of time then typical due to the extensive work that needed to happen before they were ready for occupancy again. >> do we expect those units will be online soon? >> yes. >> sounds great. just for the record, i think the current occupancy rate was 84 percent. there are 145 units on the site. 122 occupied and 23 vacant, so that was what i assume on the ist all of the high vacancy list of-remember we had a

list of-there was a number of buildings the department focused on insuring we get the occupancy rates up and that particular case i was surprised because it was a new property, and i had heard the vacancies tended to be in older properties with smaller rooms so this was surprise to me we had such a high vacancy rate at this property. >> we do have chris from ecs. >> wonderful. thank you so much. >> i'm chris, the chief program officer at ecs. part of the difference elizabeth laid out was, we are not responsible for evictions or the filling of the units. it is mercy housing that owns the building and property manager. we are there to help people not get evected.

>> i saw that that identify are part of the housing retention prauz. >> what elizabeth said about the reason for the vacancy is accurate. the reason for the vacancy is accurate. >> brand new, they were damaged and they are offline and been offline a long time? >> when we first rented up the building, it was hundred percent occupied. >> okay. >> we rented to hundred percent and this happened. >> just one point to clarify. gigi whitley, she her. so, for the tahanan this is hundred percent psh, some of the highest aqueuety clients. we have nursing services so it is a bit unique enour portfolio. this is part of the pilot with housing accelerator fund. we are getting ready to do another project with the housing

accelerator fund and mercy housing and have a lot of lessen learned and will use capital dollars to feed a more robust stabilization reserve so there is funds at the ready knowing uety and things turn over, there was slight damage to the property so those can be addressed more quickly. i did want to mention we are taking lessens learned from the tahanan and try to apply to new sites. >> that's great. i love to hear that. that's all my questions. >> thank you. any other commissioners have questions on item 1 and 2? i like to open to the public. any members who wish to make comment on item 1 and 2 of consent. any remote callers? >> there are no callers. >> we have a comment for items 1 and 2 on consent calendar? >> they are mentioning about homelessness and homeless

prevention. again, we go back to what i design as helping people. basically extreme mental health issues are continuously ignored. your case management system doesn't have the knowledge base or expertise how to deal with some of these issues, soso-[indiscernible] paranoid schizophrenia, different things like that, it is like there is no conversation about it and somebody is [indiscernible] of course they will get kicked out, because they have these issues. but, is there any way that we ever get to these conversations to help people get the services they need within the systems?

that's one of my main points is, do we move forward or do we get ignored? and also, the other thing, if you think the homeless are a problem, then how do you bring us in for a solution? you are talking buildings off-line, those are building trades. those are trades that somebody can once they learn they can go out and make a hundred dollars a hour. so you ain't flipping burgers at that point and i just feel, how do i get a opportunity to learn the building trades by getting the housing units back online? how or where or when do we have any of these conversations? it is certain amount of despair. during slaverly blacks picked cotton, now today we are the cotton.

you just-we are just a object you exploit to make money off of. >> thanks for your comment. any remote callers? >> there are none, chair. >> can we vote on item 1 and 2? >> so move. >> seconded. >> moved and properly seconded. roll call , please. [roll call] >> motion pass. >> thank you. item 3. >> commissioner dufty would like to go first. >> thank you, i appreciate vice chair evans drawing my attention to this. deeply concerned with the funding recommendation for this item

and i will provide a little history and context to it. back in 2000 in the castro, then supervisors mark [indiscernible] leslie katz thought to respond to increase in homelessness for young people, young adults in and around the castro area. consequences is young people exploited subjected to survival sex to maintain and eat and have some coverage and i was elected to the board in 2002, and a year after that had worked with larkin street youth service on the notion of having housing in the castro, and i can't over emphasize how important this

is that lgbtq young adults come to san francisco to be in the castro, to be some place they can be safe and express themselves and there was nothing really in the community that met that need. you think about the times of harvey milk and you read first person accounts of all these young people and young adults who came to san francisco and they would be room mates 5 and 6, 7, 8 in a apartment building that they shared. that is a very different castro then what exists right now. it is very expensive community in a lot of ways and working with larkin street we identified there was a residential hotel, the paramount and the owner was willing to work with us and the

community was very happy. when i talked about 2000, then supervisors leno and katz started a program that puts mats on the basketball court at night and turned folks out at 7:30 in the morning, it really wasn't humane, it wasn't particularly effective and it wasn't sustainable, so i can remember the first day that cheryl adams and i went to look at the rooms in the paramount and the beat police officer, lisa frazier asked if she could tag along and i looked and realized she was mother goose. she had young african american man and young caucasian man following her because they were so excited she could recommend to those living on the street

and have hope about their circumstances. as i understand, it funds that are being recommended would only provide for 30 of the 38 rooms that are available and i just can't accept this, because we know the problem that exists for young people, and we know that a lot of young people who are queer have difficulties in congregate settings and this building for me and for many in our community has been a beacon of hopefulness and so, i just want to express that, i do think it is important that we have options for individuals that are around the city. there has been a concentration of services because certain communities

have been more willing to accept or have not had the where with all to oppose it like we find in many areas of san francisco. there are not many options like the paramount t. is a really unique property in district 8, and i just want to express how important i think it is that we run a program like this. there are so many great new initiatives that are being discussed and hopefully will take place, but we also need to protect those programs and those facilities that have been now for 20 years addressing a very strong need and i met and gotten to know many of the young people that stayed at the paramount and know how important it is to be in a community you feel you can see yourself and see the possibilities. i don't know what options are there. i would like to think there are

other resources we can take the full complement of 38 rooms rather then 30 rooms to the director. i dont know if you could comment and see what is possible. >> so, we worked with larkin street to move it from 38 to 30 beds. particularly because the 38 beds were not utilized and understand-no. okay. sorry lisa. go ahead and talk. >> if mrs. adams could also be--yes. >> hi. >> good morning. afternoon. >> hi, commissioners. lisa, the interim director of outreach and temporary shelter and this program we worked with larkin to make changes on the number of units.

cheryl can speak to the specifics, but over time my understanding the units they a lot were related to sr o and they had success in the model utilizing shared apartments, it really with additional amenities and sort enhanced spaces for people to live and the cost that is more expensive to operate so we made changes within the agreement to be able to accommodate and provide those enhanced accommodations to the guests in the program. >> thanks. yes, we opened that program april 1, 2004 at the paramount with 6 young people and over the years expanded to 3 ath and we am some units at the paramount and started to expand to have more scattered sites and during the pandemic, we moved most of the young people out of the paramount because they really didn't want to have

shared bathrooms. that model at the time the rental costs were slightly less in the market for the units. cost increased, rental costs increased, so we know longer-we have been subsidizes $300 thousand that contract so all city contracts don't cover all the cost associated with provision of services so we went to it department to say we need additional funding if we sustain 38 units, or we need to go to 30. the department did work with us. i think unhappily. nobody wants to lose housing units, but we also have to be able to work within the framework of funding we have. we somewhere the 30 units. we want more but also to work within it budget. we are still subsidizing that contract. i don't love the word but still using private funds to support the contract and will going forward and the

gap for additional units-if we bring additional units it is another $175 thousand we need in the contract. we just heard about the constraints of the budget. >> i certainly would work with larkin street to help raise some of the monies you would need to match had the city whether 38 or 30. i want to advocate again that, the impact of lgbtq homelessness is very significant, and i do think that for many young adults, shared bathrooms are not people's preference, but it is something i don't want to see us lose. >> yeah. we are full. there is a question about occupancy, we are at 30. thank you for your support. >> how much are we talking that it would take to go back to 38?

>> i just did the-if we readd it is about assuming $3500 for a unit that house 3 to 4 young people it is about $175 thousand to add three more units to house 8 or 9 more youth. >> i like to make a motion to that effect to amend this item . >> we don't have a funding source. we have to shelve this and take it-i think we-i don't know the right process, but we have to shelve and go back and find the money which we do not have. commissioner, if that is what you like we can hold off on this item. >> i was going to suggest approval to extend the contract and we are hoping that we can move forward with base level services. there is a contingency in what you are approving and i think the

director we can go back and look for how to fill that gap, but we have enough contract authority if you were to approve this budget at least in the near term to move forward. >> but we dont have money long-term so we have to come back with another proposal for how to do that. >> beyond this fiscal year or when? >> i think what we are asking for just to extend it now and why don't we come up with solutions with larkin street and go back and look at the budget because now what we want to make sure is they have a contract moving forward into the new year. and you approving if you were to approve your recommendation for this contract, you approve enough contingency to cover the next two years if we needed to add $175

thousand a year, there is $705 thousand of contract contingency, so if we are able to identify the funds, then we can do a budget modification without coming back if you don't recommend approval today, we wont be in contract by july 1 so that's the tension for us. >> it is up to us to find the funds if that's desire, but now we need to move forward with the contract. >> okay. i move approval of the item. >> open up to commissioners who like to comment and then afterwards we ask any members of the public who wish to comment. thank you. it has been moved. second? >> seconded. >> moved and properly seconded. roll call vote. [roll call]

motion pass. >> thank you. commissioner dufty i certainly would be happy to work with you and engaging with the department how we can- >> i'll take you up on that offer. >> absolutely. move up to and see what we can do. our next items to pull are items, >> 9 and 10. >> 9 andtony. 10. thank you so much. 9 and 10. commissioner evans. >> so, this is episcopal community service for rapid rehousing and the main stream bow voucher and rapid rehousing contracts. i saw that in the current budget proposal from the mayor's

office, we are increasingly relying on rapid rehousing as a mechanism to provide housing that may not have a long-term solution for individuals that might be a hire aqueuety. i want to make sure i really understood the-because i think rapid rehousing, the expansion of rapid rehousing began in ernest after the prop c funds were released and we have been able to add significant number of slots through the rapid rehousing program, but i have pretty-heard pretty strong concerns about this not being adequate solution, because it puts people in a position where they are only being provided support for a short period of time and

it--there is a high level of predictable return to homelessness, or destabilization if it had person cannot live up to the terms. i want to make sure i understood that, on items 9 and 10, of the current population, what the outcomes have been in terms of have they met objectives of housing retention for the people that started at the beginning? >> hi, commissioners. vice chair and chair of the homeless oversight commission. my name is cricket miller, she, her pronouns and the manager of scattered site housing programs which includes rapid rehousing and the main stream voucher program. i do want to just quickly add, main stream vouch er is a permanent ongoing program.

i will kind of set that one aside. it is in partnership with the housing authority, so it is slightly separate then the questions vice chair evans has brought before us today. to your point, i did look up because i figured this is where you were going with your previous questions, currently there haven't been a large number of exit from the rapid rehousing programs since they were funded in 2020and 2021. they are 12 to 24 month time limited subsidy. there is some flexibility within the programs we can extend it and what we are seeing now of the 35 exits, 14 percent of those have returned to homelessness situations. a large number, 60 to 75 percent are either permanent housing exit or other which includes deceased or moving to other communities.

things like that. so, right now we do see what the national average is usually seeing with the rap idrehousing time limit. the other objectives at question were placement timelines. our goal is see program enrollment to housing placement in private scattered site unit in the rental market is 75 days, so that is from the time you do program intake to move-in date. not just when you sign the lease. esc of the overall program is 105 days, however, i want to recognize that for fiscal year 23-24, we have seen a significant decrease in that number, which is really exciting and that decreases to 68 days, so anyone who is referred in fiscal year 23-24, the placement date has been from placement timeline has been 68 days. i think that contributes to a lot.

there were the rehousing efforts, we were batching referrals to esc sometimes 20 people at a time and so i really want to just kudos ecs and their team and all the rapid rehousing providers and sip providers that were in those batching efforts and those mass housing efforts and demobilization, because we were pushing out as many placements as possible at one time, and so we were also flooding the housing market. since the sip rehousing demobilization happened i think we haven't flooded the housing market quite as much. also, referrals don'ts want to say decreased but not as hefty at one time so sheer staff capacity has been able to really work closely with the referrals and decrease that placement timeline. i think other things that the department is doing to really insure that rapid rehousing is working for the individuals and households we

are serving, we expanded homelessness response system so the system works both ways. we are not just referring one way, but it can go through-you are not stuck with one housing intervention you are referred to. we started piloting in the fall of last year the housing program type transfer process with the family system where if the household is unable to exit the program to rent stability and independently, then they can along with the provider request a transfer to ongoing permanent subsidy, and also if they need on-site intensive support servicess. scattered site model is different. they are in a independent unit, there are not support services there with them all the time, so if that is needed this gives them the opportunity to be able to access the ongoing support services and permanent housing options. those are just a couple things that we

are really trying to work. i also want to bring to light, recently in gigi's presentation she mentioned the 2 to 5 year subsidies that were implementing for the families in tay. providing that flexibility really allows us to meet the households where they are at, reassess after two years. it is very cost effective to be able to do that. we want to be able to offer the subsidy for the minimum time necessary, or needed, and then if they need it longer, we have the ability and flexibility to offer that. i think that it take s a lot more planning to operationalize that type model, but i think we can do it and if we are able to do it, we will be able to serve our families better and have more positive outcomes. >> thank you. you did anticipate the direction i was going. in terms of the expansion in the proposed budget, would we be

expanding rapid rehousing under these contracts or new contracts? different contracts? >> they would be different, so in the expansion recently discussed today was for family and transitional aged youth. the adult programs- >> jus adults. >> these are just service dultss. adults. there is small 8 person program tied into the program as well, but that is also adults. i do want to recognize we can sever 18 and up. there are some tay served through these programs, but there is no expansion now to the adult rapid rehousing program. >> brief comment. >> chris, good morning commissioners. we believe strongly people need to increase income through work to

be successful and exit. we have been able to leverage oewd funding for workforce development and dph funding embedded in the scattered site team so there are dedicated staff on the team to help folks. >> for a person referred to rapid rehousing, particular person i have in mind that i have been following left a safe camp site and referred to the ecs program and i think she is in the category of the longer time she has been housed yet. when you recognize the person is not able to meet the criteria to increase income, what is option to refer back for permanent? >> usually the provider will reach out to hsh and discuss the situation. there is a transfer request

process where you submit the request and we review it and it is approved. >> what is the provider doing to assess? >> currently now because the program is so new i say smaller percentage . our providers try to get somebody in housing before they are making that decision. as we all know, being in stable housing can really change a person's life and mental health, all those things combined and so, i think the ultimate goal for our providers is get them into stable housing, situate them, see how they do and then really assess the situation from there. chris mentioned that we do work on workforce development, increasing income, but increasing income

doesn't necessarily only mean earned income. it could be connecting them to government benefits or other resources as well and so ultimately the goal of rap idrehousing is place them in a stable housing environment and provide support services and wrap around service. >> thank you. last comment on this. i think my perception of people that have come through this program is there is a bit of confusion about what they're eligible for in terms of the benefit, so when somebody is told that the subsidy could be used for one bedroom up to $2400, but then 2, 3 appointments later they are told now, theyed sh only look at apartments $1600 a month because of their particular circumstance and situation, do you feel there is enough clarity for the participants about setting expectations

of a realistic unit they could afford? >> just thinking about that on person by person basis. i think that is different for everyone and what affordability is. we do allow house holds to go up to 100 percent fmr, which one bedroom fmr unit is $2600. and studo is $2300 and increased all most $150 from last year. just takes that into account, i think really looking at how a house might be able to stabilize and increase income is really taken into account when looking for housing. it is similar to you and i when we look at what we can afford and can't afford and looking for a unit in a private rental market as well. one thing i add is, it is a two year subsidy.

many households will get housed in a unit and then potentially move to more affordable unit or unit they stabilized and increased income and like a different unit so that option is able in the housing services will support that. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you commissioner evans. i want to open to members of any commissioners have comments? any members of the public who wish to comment on this item? please. >> thank you. tj ross and regarding the scattered site program i think it would be awesome to have more clarity for participants. i was speaking with somebody at ecs recently about my own housing and i was told that i do not qualify for scattered site and she couldn't

tell why and couldn't tell who to speak to about why and i would like to know because my doctor was saying you seem like a great candidate for this and i like to write somebody about that. i think that it would be great to have more clarity for participants and perspective participants about eligibility and also the terms of the program. thank you. >> thank you. any members in the queue? >> no callers in the queue, chair. >> like to take a motion to approve items 9 and 10. >> i move to approve items 9 and 10. >> second. >> moved and popularly seconded and ready to call the vote. [roll call] >> motion pass. >> thank you. we are moving to consent item

12. >> yes, security. so, i was telling some folks during the break that in our neighborhood in the haight ashbury during the pandemic, we had a security service that was contracted to guard a empty parking lot 24 by 7 for several years and this is a huge amount of expense that was associated with that in this contract fte cost is about 83, $84 thousand and so if you were looking commissioner dufty for your missing $150 thousand if you cut 2 fte out of the contract you would have your money. i really just on principal can't support putting funds towards such a expensive service that i think we don't get return on value from. i think that program staff

should be able to man jage dif difficult and challenging situations whether at access points or entrance to the staff office for hsh. i would love to see us have a non-security guard approach to being the gateway to our programs and so, i will not be supporting this item today. thanks. >> thank you. any other commissioners with comments? any members of the public who wish to make-- >> i would like to know more about it before making any kind of-i like to know what the challenges are at the security port. anybody feel in danger? just would like to understand what the situation is. >> thank you. >> sure. i can give background. so, when the department was

formed in 2016, we inherented a relatively sizable security contract from the human services agency, and this was a procurement done through the office of contract administration like you would for other government security firms. it covered all of our shelters. we were really empowered to take a different look at that approach and probably 2018 convened our shelter providers because we were hearing not only concerns about that particular security firm, but just the point you are raising commissioner evans, just is this the right approach and do we have more a de-escalation model, especially around our clients. what we did instead, we actually cut our security contract. we put those funds in each individual

provider contract and that is how it has been operating today. this we use really for as-needed service in a couple key areas that supports the security we have at our offices, at 440, we use it as a as-needed security, so when we rapidly open a site and don't yet have a provider on, often we have to secure the site between the time that construction is running down before the service operator is there, and we are able to use these services. we also get calls from either psh providers or occasionally drop-in centers or security provider because of a incident and they need us to send over security. so, i would say just in terms of context commissioners, we have greatly reduced this contract over the years. it is helpful to have a as-needed security contract, but our approach to security with contracts is left up to

the individual provider and to prioritize a de-escalation model. >> thank you for that explanation. >> eel polk just make the comment that in the case--i know of at least one case where the provider didn't think security was necessary, but it was still required for the neighbors and so, i don't feel like this is a appropriate use of money. >> thank you. open to members of the public who wish to comment on this item. >> good afternoon. my name is [indiscernible] here representing a1 service. we were awarded the contract. we provided proivt security to all the city shelters i believe total of 14. as the director mentioned, they have changed their strategy. i am going to give input how that happened.

so, i think it is clear private security and de-escalation are needed at the shelter. i think there was a internal conflict and be straight for ward and honest, there was conflict between the shelter staff and i think some of the private security as they compared wages, pay rates, things that nature. at that time the security--the service providers saw as a opportunity to more or less take that money and keep it in-house. in my opinion it was a money grab, but that's okay. if that is the direction they wanted to go, that was fine. today what we provide is services at your executive offices and emergency shelters different locations as

needed. for instance, when you are decommissioning a site, you have a need for security to be there. there is still i believe we are down to maybe one or two facilities that we actually provide security services for. one would be mother brown's kitchen in bay view hunters point. pier 94 was a lot with trailers and been decommissioned. staff is moved out of there so protecting the property and just added another service. sometimes the department calls and says can you provide security. 2, 3, 4 weeks period of time so more or less short-term. that is more or less what we are doing with the department now and hopefully we are meeting the standards and the expectations of the clients when we provide the services. >> thank you. thank you. any other members of it public who wish to comment on this item?

>> i like to move approval. >> basically we still go back to accountability. basically who is from the city will monitor them and make sure they are doing stuff, because if they are working at a shelter and they are supposed to be under the standard of care and you know, the way they carry the id, the training they had, other things like that and we need to see if there are complaints regarding the staff behavior and like, so if the security guard acts out of line, where do they go to complain? it is basically the system has a bunch of holes regarding monitoring and accountability. while we are talking about security, do you all remember urban alchemy

running around pulling out machetes on people? that is who you work with. where is accountability? it is like, so, if a urban alchemy works at a shelter and dont like what is going on, they pull out a machete. where is accountability and de-escalation and the mechanisms and infrastructure to hold anybody accountable? now they can hire a subcontractor to do their assassinations or dirty work? what is intended outcome here? and then you talk why we are homeless resistant. maybe we don't like to be treated abusively and violently. you hire subcontractors with little accountability measures and we

can't trust you anymore. >> thank you, sir. thank you. motion to move item number 12. >> second. >> moved and second. ready for the vote. [roll call] >> motion pass. >> thank you. we are moving along. we certainly are pushed for time. we have agenda item 12. item 12a through e are action items to be voted on by commission. i ask those who are set to present to please come up and provide a very brief overview and discussion to keep in mind we are at 1235. like to get through this item. we have very brief reports from

our nomination committee and may or may not have time for the report from the data officer so keep in mind the time, please. >> all these items are new programs and there isn't any track record or data to really analyze the performance of the contract. i didn't have any concerns or questions about them, so i'm happy foregoing the staff presentation on it. >> that would move along. >> thank you for that commissioner, vice chair evans. we are going to for ego staff presentations and seems it is on consensus of commissioners to do that. is there a motion? >> i make a motion. >> secsd. second. moved and second. open to members of the public who wish to comment on these items. if there are none, i like to ask those if there is anyone who is remote would like to comment remotely?

>> there are no callers in the queue. >> been moved and properly second. ready for the vote. [roll call] motion pass. >> amen commissioners. i really appreciate that. move this right along. we are on pace now. moves us to agenda item 13, general public. these are items not on the agenda members of the public wish to comment on. any members of it public who wish to make general public comment please do so at this time. >> hi, commissioners. tab ath allentener loin housing clinic and supportive housing provider network. speaking on [indiscernible] i want to respond to comments that came up

earlier when talking about the bumgt. budget. questions about erap. we are grateful for $4 million and changes made to the funds but want to make clear that, there is a budget issue this current fiscal year for many providers that is ending in 20-the current fiscal year ending in 25 days and that 4 million dr. and those changes don't go in place until july 1 next fiscal year. there are meetings proposed to be happening with current providers. those meetings haven't happened yet so it is important as we get really close to the end of the fiscal year some providers have deficit they don't know how to reach and the meetings happen urgently. thank you. >> thank you. >> no callers in the queue. >> okay.

>> i got a video. [indiscernible] i am trying to-should i use my own computer? >> not sure what is happening. >> he wants to play a video. >> okay. play a video? how long is the video, sir? >> i think two minutes. >> okay. that will be the time for your public comment just to let you know. you have 1 minute after that. three minutes for public comment. if we can play it. i haven't reviewed the video in advance, so if you can describe the video itself. >> i don't have to do that. i just play the video. >> sorry. >> i don't have to do that at board of supervisors video, i just play the video. >> okay. i just want to make sure it is appropriate for the audience

and so- >> it is porn graphic i have to be accountable for that. >> if is discretion of the chair if you want to. the other option is they may provide if on the internet or a link, they can provide it after wrz to the commission secretary who can forward on to commissioners. >> thank you. if you can provide a description of the video. >> a video of the case management that i receive. >> okay. do we have-are you able to play the video? if we are not able to play it, you can send a link through the commission secretary.

>> the video counts towards his three minutes. >> is there volume? >> i'm actually not comfortable with playing this because it does show someone a public space and not sure if we have permission to do that. >> should i take it to sunshine commission? i don't think you are acting appropriate at all. [indiscernible] i don't think it is appropriate. what section of the law you think- >> sir, this is what i'm asking. if you could send it to the secretary so the commissioners can see. that is the first thing.

the reason i'm asking that, if you would do that because i see someone's face and not sure if they gave permission for you--sir, this is not a law. this is what i'm asking you to do. i'm not obstructing. i would like to see-i'm not saying that. listen to what i--can you listen to what i'm saying to you? >> [indiscernible] >> i would like to see the video. i would like for you to send through the secretary so i can see and hear it appropriately and then i'll respond. i will directly respond to you. i am not the gatekeeper. the commissioners will see the video as well, okay? i'm sorry you feel that way, but i would like to- >> [unable to hear speaker] >> again sir, hear me out, hear me out, i would like to see the video. i like to hear the video. i like to share with the commissioners

so they can review the video and we'll get back with you. i look forward seeing the video, sir. any other members who wish to make general public comment? thank you so much. we will move on in our agenda. this places on item 14, we like to hear from our shelter monitoring committee quarterly report. we like to invite the vice chair to provide the report. >> good afternoon commissioners. i'm afraid vice chair creech was not able to make it and the chair sends apologies. she is going to try to make sure to get her next time. probably go quickly through these slides.

i think the first one shows our members. i note that seat 1 has yet to be filled. members are trying to recruit for that one. when we meet every third wednesday and minutes and other meeting materials can be found on our website. this material here is on fliers that we have in the shelters and we also have our contact information there. just to make sure people know what we do and do not do. next. the standards of care, there is fragment showing here. these are in the administrative code, but a easier to read version is on the website. complaints can be made by phone or e-mail or online or in person. we got a second staffer. i'm very happy to say.

we have office hours monday wednesday and friday and we want to make it easy for the clients to make a complaint if they so desire. next. and this is a look at our portal. that's some statistics from the portal but you have seen that before. there is a online portal that we have and i'll just note, we had a lot of complaints submitted through this, but unfortunately the data is not really all that statistically significant and the spike on the one site is because one particular individual can file as many complaints as they want and many of these complaints may be unactionable. next. there is-couple days ago 162 come in

through this path and we get similar numbers from phone calls, walk-ins and e-mail. next. well, i had a lengthier number of pictures and so forth. is that from my e-mail link i sent? this is the slides we have here are what was printed and these are key elements. i included photographs from shelters. i will say our members go out to the shelters and they look for cleanliness of course and new thing that we didn't mention last time is, they are looking at grievance boxes making sure the shelters have a way for guests to submit grievances in-house and we also want them to place our fliers in close proximity so if they don't get

response how know how to escalate their concern to us to the shelter monitoring committee. members look to see if beds are too close together. these are from the standards of care. they look to see if storage is available. i shared a image of a-or intended to-of a trash receptacle where someone had their property disposed of after the shelter reached their limit and they did not retrieve it. it was kind of a harsh consequence that does happen. we asked the shelters to at least try to call the person up. they have a limit, certain number of days, but the shelter where this happened agreed to call-make one last attempt to get the individual so they could come and retrieve their property

before it was disposed of after they were denied service at that site. >> could we advance the slide to the standards of care? it looked 2 or 3 slides later. it was on there for a second. >> i think they are behind this back a couple slides. there are 32 standards- >> she had it on there. i think that was it. >> that one. >> that is a good one. >> okay. sorry, this is a list of the standards that were raised by complainants over the course of the first 11 months this fiscal year. you see a lot of-40 percent, 97 out of 253 were the first standard, which is respect and equal treatment. that and standard 2, which is safety are the highest number of

complaints we get. you can see there that people also raise issues that have to do with training and making the space available for sleeping. 8 hours of a night to provide adequate storage, clean the restrooms. not all the standards of care have been raised this fiscal year. those interest are the ones that come up most often. next slide. these are client complaints for the fiscal year, and it isn't exactly statistically significant, but the volume certainly is a indicator where there may be concern where a shelter management may want to focus more on their training or make other changes to serve their guests.

hard to see, i don't know if you can see it, but we started to flag late responses. the shelters not really responded late in the past, but we saw some beginning towards the end of last year, and we wanted to encourage them to not do that and to ask for extension if there are unusual circumstance warrants late response. see what the next slide you have is. that's-hf-is that the last slide? i had wanted to just show you quickly, you have seen it before and we can always provide copies if you like. i wanted to show what members used as a check list when they look at sites. they are basically correlating with

standards of care and surveys, we will survey the clients when we do a announced visit and also when we do an investigation, so sometimes our clients will complain of something that is subjective, rudeness or something we can't just go out and observe, so we will try to get 20 percent of the guests surveyed and if a good proportion of them agree with the complaint, then that is considered a finding. i wanted to mention, show pictures, the gough cabins. we saw those. we added them to our list. we have total of 24 shelters and 8 navigation centers we take complaints for and we don't visit the navigation centers regularly, but we hope to begin doing that next fiscal year. the gough cabins were quite nice. i wanted to point out some

things there. the efforts to make the site more livable and they had lots of storage and clean bathrooms and the staff were quite impressive on conversation their attitude, especially the manager there. the compass shelter had pictures showing their wonderful kitchen facilities with storage for guests to keep their dishes and kitchen supplies. >> thank you if you could send those to us through the secretary. >> okay. it is easier digitally. there were 44 images. >> i appreciate that but we want to see them. e-mail will gladly take a look at them. >> alright. and then just the final item here was the things the committee is working on

now are focused on the internal grievances insuring those are not left unaddressed. training for shelter staff. need periodically check to insure video recording systems work so that isn't discovered only after a client asks or complains and there is no documentation available. that happened a couple times we hopefully that won't happen again. and then there are some standards of care that need to update and couple other things the board of supervisors need to approve so we are still-the come committee is hoping that will happen this year. we notice need for spanish speaking staff. my new coworker and i both speak spanish, but there are issues that come up when staff cant understand in a

pinch what's happening in front of them. lastly, we noticed more complaints related to number of families that are living in congregate settings. >> thank you. we are certainly pressed for time. we have commissioner evans who would like to make a brief questions response comments and then certainly want to open up for us to send an e-mail et cetera so we can exchange questions and comments. commissioners evans. >> thank you so much for the presentation. i had the pleasure going on a shelter visit and seeing the evaluation and action and highly recommend that others take that opportunity to try to understand the work being done by the shelter monitoring committee. i also discovered that the standard of care were codified a long time

ago and there is opportunity for updates, including things like insuring those complaints are making their way to the commission. the site often has a complaint box on site and not all those complaints make to this commission. a lot of those complaints end at the provider and i think it is really important we at some point do have complete transparency to all complaints. things around pet policy and things related to like, safety transfers and requesting transfers and how to escalate when you are not getting the response from staff you are looking for. those are the type of things i think could be added to the standards of care. thank you so much for the presentation. >> thank you. commissioner luguba. laguana. >> yes, real quick recognizing the data is fuzzy because as you mentioned one

individual can make a number of different complaints, i just wanted your general sense as a member of this body, are you-can you give me a sense trend wise how would you assess the quality of our shelters overall and would you say it's relatively stable and similar to past years or it is improving or declining in some measurable? >> thanks for asking. i see a strain on the shelters when there is the reinflation. the ratio of guests to staff has gone up, and the crowding, so there is more friction between guests, so a lot of complaints are, my neighbor is doing such and such and staff are not preventing it. so, that is something that i noticed. there was a little of increase

in complaints about storage maybe at some point. bunkbeds changed. those are couple things that come to mind; but those shelters are working with us and listen when we approach them with suggestions and so that's very encouraging. i think the real challenge is on the front line. it is the front line staff, it is a very hard job. >> yeah. that's extremely helpful and thank you and thank the commission for all the work helping monitoring these shelters. when you come back to us next, i think it would be helpful to get include in your report some general trends that you are noticing so we can have a high level picture of how the health of our shelter system is over pp all. >> thank you. thank you for the presentation.

i wanted to open to general public to comment on this item. please. >> cj ross, a member of the shelter monitoring committee and applaud robert. robert is head lead along with mary ann. the two of them work so incredibly hard. they are the boots on the ground who handle all the complaints. basically they do just about everything supportive of what we need and what you need from us. so, i want to thank him compiling the report and i wanted to address a couple questions additionally. commissioner evans, with regards to complaints not making out of the shelters, we are right now about-the policy subcommittee is about to approve a pre-dos grievance policy

designed by me to make it possible for those complaints to get to our committee and a lot of the providers have individual grievance policies, so a client won't know if they are handed a grievance form. they think they are handed a complaint to us but they are making internal complaint which never reaches committee and this happened and it is very confusing, so what we plan to do is put our own complaint boxes, our own forms in the system in every shelter, so the clients can say, this is the complaint form i want. i want to make a complaint to the shelter monitoring committee, and so they have the option of doing that and they have awareness how to do that, so we are about to approve the process and

working on visibility inside the shelters so that is really exciting and really cool for us. and then regarding the standard of care, if you want to pull it up it is article 13 of san francisco administrative code if you want to look at them. looking just regarding the data, complaints largely are around the first standard of care to treat all clients equally with respect and dignity and one of the top complaints we get is around training and so, our policy subcommittee is also working on designing a standard of care training, so a specific training for shelters on the standard of care. i think one of the concerns we have is definitely around cultural sensitivity and i think that is where the violations come in and i believe there is really a need for the providers to have a cultural sensitivity

training specific to standard of care. our policy subcommittee is working on that as well. and then let's see, i made a couple notes. the other complaint that is really high that we get is the storage. one standard of care, we have to provide the providers have to give us storage. it isn't happening. we really need that and there are other security measures that need to be taken that i would love to address and sure robert and are committee would love to address and sorry we wouldn't all be here today. >> thank you. we have reached our hour. we are at 1 o'clock. [indiscernible] >> [indiscernible] shutting you off, right? >> shirr. >> you don't care. >> we have reached our hour.

thank you so much. commissioners, we have to forego our additional agenda items. nominations committee and also the data officer report, and we will pick up on that and in terms of communication matters, you can e-mail me directly and i'll make sure we have discussion with the executive director. motion to adjourn? >> no meeting in july. >> no meeting in july. >> i make a motion to adjourn. >> second? >> second. >> meeting adjourned. thank you so much. >> hearing no objection. >> hearing no objection. [meeting adjourned]

[music] san francisco developing programs specific low to increase the amount of affordable housing throughout the city. >> the affordable housing bonus program provides developers to include more housing for i have low, low, moderate and middle income households. this program does not rely on public subsidies but private developers who include it part

of their project. under california density bonus law. housing prejudices that include affordable on site may be request a density bonus. it is an increase in the number of housing units allowed under zoning laws and based on affordable units being provided. >> however, the state law does not address all of san francisco needs does not incentivize middle income housing. associating the city is proposing an affordable housing bonus program for higher levels of development including middle income u firsts providing a stream lined application review and approval process. >> how does the program work in it applies to mixed use corridors in san francisco. and offers incentives to developers who provide 30% of affordable in projects. to reach 30%, 12% of the units

must be affordable to low income household and 18% per minute nap to middle income households. >> in exchange developers will will build more and up to additional 2 stories beyond current zoning regulations. >> 1 huh human % affordable will be offered up to 3 additional stories beyond current regulations. each building will be required conform to guidelines ensuring meets with the character of the area and commercial corridors. this program is an opportunity to double the amount of affordable housing and directly address the goals established by twenty 14 hosing element and prospect k paddled by voters last year. pacificly, prop circumstance established a goal that 33% of all new housing permanent to low

and moderate incomes this program will be the first to prosecute void permanent affordable projects that include middle income households. to learn more about the program visit >> this neighborhood was lived for approximately 22 years. >> yeah, like 21 years. >> 21 years in this neighborhood. >> in the same house. >> we moved into this neighborhood six months after we got married, actually. just about our whole entire married life has been here in excel. >> the owner came to the house and we wanted to sell the house and we were like, what? we were scared at first. what are we going to do? where are we going to move into? the kids' school? our jobs?

>> my name is maria. i'm a preschool teacher for the san francisco unified school district. >> my name is ronnie and i work in san francisco and i'm a driver from a local electrical company. >> we went through meta first and meta helped us to apply and be ready to get the down payment assistant loan program. that's the program that we used to secure the purchase of our home. it took us a year to get our credit ready to get ready to apply for the loan. >> the whole year we had to wait and wait through the process and then when we got the notice, it's like, we were like thinking that. >> when we found out that we were settling down and we were going to get approved and we were going to go forward, it was just a really -- we felt like we

could breathe. we have four kids and so to find a place even just to rent for a family of six. and two dogs. >> we were going to actually pay more for rent and to own a house. >> it feels good now to have to move. it feels for our children to stay in the neighborhood that they have grown in. they grew up here and they were born here. they know this neighborhood. they don't know anything outside san francisco. >> we really have it. >> we'd love to say thank you to the mayor's office. they opened a door that we thought was not possible to be opened for us. they allowed us to continue to live here. we're raising our family in san francisco and just to be able to continue to be here is the great lesson.

>> our san francisco housing authority commission at city hall on thursday, may 23, 2024, at 4:11 p.m. >> bennett we're zooming - i thought we were on - >> oh, exactly yeah. >> may we please take the roll. >> president torres present. >> commissioner lindo present and commissioner kim present and commissioner pikes present and item item item unceded ancestral homeland of the ramaytush (rah-my-toosh) ohlone (o-lon-ee) who are the original inhabit