families, they don't care about anything, you know. i see many, many things and it's very [inaudible]. >> thank you very much, ma'am. next speaker please. >> my name is [inaudible]. i'm with the homeless co/hreubgs and i'm also a resident at hamilton transitional. don't mess with something that's already fixed. i've been at hamilton transitional a year and if it wasn't for the stability i had there -- it can affect the child. i was overhearing when the guy was saying some people come from

different counties and stuff, but the bottom-line is -- we get these lists and most of them are for alameda county. it's not us wanting to stay here, you get the applications for housing, there's no place to go. now they want to put an allotment on 30 percent for shelter. there's families that need housing too.

>> some of us are formerly homeless and currently homeless on the committee. one thing we believe is that this will affect people to get emergency beds because you have to apply

on the connecting point wait list. so we are offering a letter of opposition an i am opposed to these changes. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> hi, i'm /tapl tammy. first of all, it's a safety issue. everybody has the right to be in a safe environment and when it comes to getting documentation, i've tried to get my own birth certificate and i think it'd be easier to get his than my own. having a

roof over your head, it's the most common, unimaginable thing. excuse me. my tongue and my brain can't get together right now. i take it you know what i'm trying to say. >> thank you very much. i have a couple more cards -- denny collins, lisa marie, daniel pena. come forward please. thank you. >> i'm a case manager at compass. i want to thank you for having this hearing to bring the community together to talk about this issue. i wanted to speak about the families that we surveyed. i know for myself on my case load

out of all the families i have on my case load i only have one family that wasn't currently residing in san francisco and that was a family fleeing from dv and that's a group of families i'm concerned about is families who do flee san francisco because of dv and go to other counties and establish there for a little while for their safety. a lot of times domestic violence shelters are full here and they have to access other shelters in other counties so it's important they have access to san francisco shelters. other families i'm concerned about are those with severe medical conditions, who are staying with families and may have children under 5 years of age. those families can't

access emergency center because they can't carry their things or leave the shelter everyday and if they're not eligible to have a child in school it'll be hard for them to establish residency. >> my name is ivory thompson and i'm a case manager at compass, also a former client about 18, 19 years ago. i've been working for compass almost 18 years in september and when i first started there it took about a week to move into shelter, now it's up to eight months. i have a case load of 31 right now and i'm really nervous. sorry. >> you're doing great. >> my concern is, i just came from working at a shelter about

nine months ago. a lot of those families that we served that were undocumented would not apply for cal works because they were afraid their status would be compromised when they are trying to apply for citizenship. so that's one of my biggest concerns with that being in place that we will have peep that are going to be outside and not get the services they need meaning families and children as well. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> hi. my name is [inaudible] and i represent the coalition on homelessness. we at the coalition don't look at this as a simple policy change. we look at this as an attack. an attack on poor families, undocumented families and all low income families that have to go in and out of shelters to

survive on the streets of san francisco. when i was out organizing on this issue, as soon as i approaching folks that is living in shelters and are homeless. as soon as i uttered the word shelter and that i had say i don't wanna hear this. i wanted them to come speak out about the proposed laws that are soon to come. they're like, no, we're already going through enough. folks are turned away. folks don't wanna be in the situation they're in so i guess the key is address. we came to /aeu address you guys by my ironny of address is mail in a box, a

mailing address, to get cal works you need an address. to get shelter they want an address or a homeless letter. so get your kid through school you need an address. so what we're proposing is you guys do not stand with this, stand against it. you know, if they want to have more ideas in terms of limited resource they should increase it and put families to work and build more shelters. thank you. >> thank you. couple more cards -- [inaudible]. >> jennifer, director of the

coalition on homelessness. i think it's important to take some steps back and figure out what our vision is for our emergency family system. the vision for our emergency system is one that very swiftly engages family, that gets them into shelter as quickly as possible, gets 'em safe, stable and tries to match them with as many services as possible to get them out of that shelter and into permanent housing and out of poverty all together. when we're analyzing this proposal we're seeing it's not going in the direction of our vision and actually in the opposite direction. we have a policy that is developed under a pretense that families are coming here from elsewhere. that is not the case. we're

talking about a handful of families. we're creating more barriers for san francisco families. all the families are already in the services. from our perspective this would do the opposite of prioritizing families most in need. this would deprioritize families in need -- the families with the most difficult time navigating

our systems. i think we need to go farther and rethink this entire thing. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon. [inaudible]

>> she's from the coalition of homelessness and she's opposed to these changes because it would be basically impossible for anyone to show proof that their children are in school when they're ages zero to 5, then being undocumented and applying for cal works. this is not a solution to lowering the wait list or a solution at all, it's more of a cover up of what the real issues are and

just covering the problem, not looking at the problem or solving an issue. so instead of covering the problem there's more of an issue of solving it and one way to resolve it is providing more housing, coming up with different ideas, making sure the families can gain access to all the resources and especially giving 'em a chance to be on a wait list for shelter. thank you.

>> thank you, next speaker. >> she says that my name is kenya and i'm here because this is really concerning to me that they're wanting people to apply for cal works. many of these families with little children will be worried more about deportation and the negative impacts on whether or not they'd ever be able to apply to be citizens. she also says she feels that this is against the

sanctuary here in san francisco in those policies. she says how is this possible that an agency -- how can i possibly confide in an agency that's going to be using my information to give to the housing authority or use it for other things that i haven't given permission for? i'm a volunteer at the coalition on homelessness and i know a lot

of families and sing people living in hotels right now and they're all on the list waiting for shelter and this new proposal will leave everyone basically blocked or outside. she said i have a child with disabilities and because we were undocumented we couldn't receive those services. now that i am documented i can receive those services. thank you. >> my name was called and i'm

representing [inaudible] families. a lot of us are from families how can they get into an sro because they see that as another affordable way of living. although i don't think a lot of parents want to put their children in a position to that affects their children's health because a lot of sro's that are available and affordable, that's what it does. it effects their health. there's a lot of issues so these are last options, shelter or hotel. i think it is important unlike what was mentioned earlier is san francisco does provide a safety net from homeless families. i don't think we should exclude anybody. i don't believe that

people are deliberately taking advantage of the system. i think it's that there's pieces over this that are broken that we need to look at instead of making it more difficult and putting barriers in front of families. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> [inaudible]. >> if you can speak into the mic please. >> i'm representing the coalition of homelessness [inaudible] classes on computer science. one of the disagreements [inaudible] one

of the problem [inaudible] specifically was [inaudible] paper 'cause i was careless in keeping [inaudible] including where my daughter was born and we was never provided with the birth certificate. we was on the waiting list. i been in san francisco all my life. this year we have to provide a proof of document /taugs if i have to [inaudible] couldn't provide it. i have to run between the [inaudible] go back to the city haul in oakland, berkley. i wasn't able not to provide those documents. i have to go back again to [inaudible] proposed changes in the [inaudible] will create hardship for the family because those proposed changes is not just simple and easy to obtain

for the family to get on the waiting /h*eus. i have a lot of friends who are on [inaudible] and willing to come forward and to speak up about applying for [inaudible] immigration status and i think [inaudible]. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hello, supervisors. i'm jenny collins, program director at the hospitality house. thank you for having us here today. i appreciate the questions and it sounds to me like we need more conversation and more data so we're not quite ready to move forward with implementing the proposed change. on the cal works

point -- i came out today as a matter of principal at hospitality house we have a single adult shelter and a residency requirement is not something we want to have in between people coming in the door to the shelter. i think we're lucky we don't have more families on the street, but for anybody that lacks stable housing that's still significant. in dph we have this principal that any door is the right door. i am a san francisco family residents taxpayer and i feel like i would hope that my taxpayer dollars are going to a system that welcomes anybody who wants to stay in a shelter in san francisco regardless of where they're coming from. also i feel like [inaudible] for

twitter. they don't require -- documentation issue -- we're waiting for somebody's berth certificate in detroit that we applied for in january. it's important for us to address the supply. we need more resources for people, not de/kroes decrease the number of people seeking those resources. >> like most of the folks here really feel like this new policy is not the direction we want to be taking and i believe it's unnecessary and is meant to target negatively impact some of the most at risk family

members. my concern is what i heard in terms about how this policy decision is moving forward. i heard him say we can't be 100 percent on policymaking when we're talking about human behavior. i don't think that making policy based on assumptions is the way to make sound policy decisions. i am really hopeful that we will be able to have a more robust process that engages true data, things that make us much more assured about what we're doing and that we're not just going off how man assumption or perception based on human behaviors. i feel that is dangerous. i'm /thra*pbg for you for asking hard question, ensuring a /soupd policy

process around this and i'm hopeful that we can continue to pry or prioritize that as we move forward. >> my name is phil, i'm a volunteer, i work with the homeless. my job is to help find permanent housing. i want to thank supervisor kim for asking the question, what is the problem? the director said we have limited resources and we need to have these stringent requirements to protect our rich resources. i'm not sure of that and i'm not sure if the director can determine what the problem is. after asking his staff what was the process, the

answer was the staff made the decision, is declaring it and is now asking questions. doesn't seem the appropriate process for an agency who has within its name the word service. i would suggest and hope that you folks would bring to a question how these policies are determined. clearly the voices of those who work in the monitoring committee, the homeless board and the commission itself have not been able to really weigh in on this except for this, and i thank you for it and hope that those folks can weigh in on answering the question, what is the problem? 'cause i feel like the problem will be different once that information is out there. using a shotgun approach to

residency, shotgun to kill a nigh, cal works to prove residency seems [inaudible] and i think there's ways to prove residency. >> i work for coalition of homelessness. my first first concern is for people that work, they base on cash, how they prove their income. the second one is sometime we got be displaced and they need to live with family in other county. and when they come back they sometimes leave on the cars, streets, bus. how

they prove they are leaving san francisco, how they prove they [inaudible]. >> that's my concern. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> good morning suturer visors, i'm so honored to be the executive director of the dv [inaudible] and the good folks at hsa are very well meaning. i think they're trying to do their best with a problem that will take a lot more work than this. the unintended consequences of this policy i think are huge. dv is the second leading cause among women and children. family violence is [inaudible] both of those populations come to san francisco because they can feel safe here. we did not wan them to get the message that they have to stay in violent

situations and not escape so we're concerned about this. i was happy to hear trent mention dv as a possible exception, but i think it speaks to the process that none of us knew that so more needs to be done. the immigration issue -- people are just scared to put their names on any kind of database. again, san francisco is very well meaning. i don't think we think we are turning names over to ice and people are being deported, but the reality is ice does find people that live in san francisco that are undocumented, they do consider being in this country without documentation a crime and they are being deported. it is an unintended consequence. i think with that our main concern is how would families

know that this is going to be safe for them? i loved the point that one case manage /-r made about how concerned we are that families may stay in violent relationships because they're afraid they might never be able to come back to san francisco. we need to to more. >> my name's juliet, i work at the coalition of homelessness. i've been through services through compass, been in a shelter with my daughter and i've heard most things brought up already. i don't wanna be repetitive, but i don't agree with the new requirements. already when i went through the system with my newborn daughter as a single mother, it was already did i have cull to get a