to move on this today even though it will take 3 months to get people on board, at least we start by july 1st. if we wait for the budget. it will be december. i hope you move this and vote on this today. thank you. >> thank you, anybody else wishing to comment on this, please come forward. >> hi. my name is cynthia. i'm with the program collaborative. the main reason that i'm in the program is because of the hot team. when i first got after being gone for 12 years. i lost my car. it burned up on the parking lot on my way here. i had a tent, my boyfriend and two dogs and we set up a tenant under the freeway and the police came and told us you need to go to the project homeless connect. we went there and met with a hot team

and they put us in a stabilization room. now the stabilization room, it was great to have it but after my board -- boyfriend and i split up that was very tifg. it's very terrifying for women and lgbt community because they are drug ridden and dangerous and run by the worst slumlords in town and full of bedbugs and cockroaches. i understand there needs to be more stabilization rooms. for those that are homeless should be in dignified housing. >> good afternoon. i'm a community organizer and central city collaborative.

in response to many many hotel weekly where we come across hot team tenants. i can't tell you the importance to emphasize the importance of expanding hot team services because of course case management is a direct contact that these tenants have and we heard many compelling stories of how it could be. i definitely support that. i do want to emphasize what cynthia sad -- said and randy said that these rooms are not suitable special where they are surrounded by drugs and other issues is something that needs to be addressed before you think about expanding the whole program itself. one other thing is it's really important to hold the owners or the owners and management of these residents

accountable for the kind of spaces they are providing. i'm an outreach worker and i have been kicked out of so many hotels and potentially denied entry and i can't speak to these hot team tenants. i think it's important for us as outreach workers we are paid boo i the city to do these outreach and it's important to have a conversation with the hot team. i do support the expansion of the hot team services. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> hi. good afternoon, jennifer, coalition on homelessness. we sent each of you force about how we think the hot team could be approved. -- improved. i want to thank you to work on this issue of homelessness and

getting this issue address. we believe and what we did is we did as quickly as we could get a lot of input from providers for using hot team services to get ideas from them in terms of their feedback on this proposal. one of the things that came from everyone is that outreach doesn't work unless there is exits out of homelessness. there is a lot of concern around stabilization room because people don't have tenant rights and they are in the worst kind of hotels. our recommendations are moving forward is to make hot teams successful by using this money for exits out of homelessness creating a medical shelter, using the money instead of stabilization rooms for permanent housing and doing the things that need to be done to get people off the streets and that means access to tangible, touchable services that will get people

off the streets. we have a budget proposal that we are putting together that has a number of very immediate solution to get people off the streets. one of the proposals is the proposal for just under $3 million to open up the vacant housing authority units in public housing. they said that they can get units open within 3 months. they have them sitting there boarded up. these are disabled units and family units. we have about 109 units identified for just under $2 million. >> i have a follow up question if you don't mind. we got your 2 pages. as in the recommendations we would like

to -- because everyone thought about the homeless coalition being involved and hoping to craft this and i'm not clear that it exist. it says that what your recommendation says is we would like to see the supplemental for hot, homeless outreach team move forward the following changes and you have all of these changes here. i'm not clear from this if you want funding for hot. you have here that you want it to go forward and you have here that don't list hot as someone -- something you want to fund. i'm not clear under the guidance of the department of public health that is consulting with you and the homelessness whether there is a plan in place for me to feel comfortable to support. i would like there to be and i feel like i want to continue this item at least a week to get more information to see how we are going to fund

under a real clear agreement or understanding for coalition of homelessness and other groups for the department of public health so we can see the system as a whole and not looking at the front end of it. why can't we put the dollar amount here and your actually supporting hot? >> we didn't have the resources of going through the whole community process as we would. when we were putting a budget proposal we usually have 6 months on it and we didn't have the time to go forward with it with some general guidelines. we did put in there with relationship to hot team that we do support a modest increase in the medical enhancement of the hot team and that the ideas for the rest of the remainder of the

money is to have these exits connected to hot team using hot team resources for homelessness. i'm sorry it's not more define tive. for us it's a really intensive community process that takes a lot more time. >> i appreciate your helping and appreciate your work with supervisor farrell in working with this. i'm just not clear with it. supervisor breed? >>supervisor london breed: thank you, where did you get your number from for the rehabilitation for the public housing units? >> from barbara smith. >> how recent is that information? >> we just met with her yesterday. she gave us the information i think 2 weeks ago. >> okay. because i'm still waiting for that information as well. >> i will forward it to you. it has the breakdown of the units for the amounts per.

>> it's estimated about $20,000 per unit. >> most of it is $12,000 and some that are vacant that are higher and one was $24,000. but most of them appear to be paint and carpet. that's why it should be so quick. and according to the housing authority they don't have the resources the do that and that's why they are sitting empty so long. >> thank you. >> supervisor mar? >> we are still in public comment. >> i forgot we were in public comment. >> please, c'mon forward. >> members of the board my name is stuart and i serve on the board of the economic project. it doesn't take much walking around the neighborhood to see people in need and people in immediate

need who are going through various crisis and need help to being connected to services for which are not adequately funded but nonetheless. we support the hot team. they provide a valuable service to the neighborhood. they provide an alternative means to addressing immediate issues alternative to calling the police department which they have their backlog issues as well. we support the expansion of this program anden currently encourage you to support this as well. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> i just want to address some of the questions. colleagues, from my perspective, as we all know the amount of homelessness we all deal with in or neighborhoods, the numbers are undenial. i think

from when i learned that our homeless outreach team only enables two or four people to be on the street at any given time, is we have to change that. this is discussing one time the homes less operation in city hall and what we are doing as a city to address it. i appreciate supervisor avalos comments around that. this is one part of it. this doesn't negate a report for anyone around san francisco. but it's a start right now and something we believe that we could get implemented right away. you don't have a bigger support than me and continue to support those increase in capability if we are interested and serious about this. this is my perspective

again when we talk to citywide no one disagrees that this is under staffed right now and this can really help right way and as we enter budget season right now about additional things we can be doing in this area. colleagues, i hope to have your support. supervisor mar? >> yeah, i wanted to add that i'm very supportive of this. i feel there is a tremendous urgency in supporting a really strategic focus on helping people exit homelessness. i do want to say that supervisor avalos' point about clarity on the plan and i know you are working on that supervisor farrell and the clear plan for exits out of homelessness and i'm clear it's being formulated. i wonder if there

is harm in delaying this for a week so the coalition on homelessness and stakeholder group can have some dialogue and clarity out of exits on homelessness and they address transitional youth for population and other focuses and i know that's coming up with the children's amendment discussion. i know there is a lot of pieces for me that i don't have clarity on and i know there is urgency in funding this and supervisor avalos' as the controller and budget analyst as the impact for future years if we are going down this road in the in next 10 years to impact the general fund. i feel like supervisor avalos suggestion to continue the homeless can have input so we have more clarity, i would appreciate that. >> from my perspective two

things, no. 1, the comments made on the one page are that people are referring to, the vast majority of those are things that it's under the purview of the department of public health to implement. it's not for the board of supervisors to dictate. i think one comment was around the medical shelter when i very much support and there is a discussion or comment when we had our meeting with the coalition on homelessness and others to talk about a supplemental to put a down payment on that project. as we heard from my perspective this is a target of supplemental to work and use. this is a budget when it's ready. we hope there is right now and we think there will be but it not right to fund this right now

in terms of supplemental. there would be more advocates i believe yesterday to discuss these items during the entire budget process. but i think a lot of thighs items -- think a lot of these items require much more discussion and have further budget implications. i think the reality is at some time we have to make a decision and vote on do we believe as supervisors we work on homeless population or do we want to put it elsewhere. that's a discussion to have. i appreciation the suggestion that having to push this another week doesn't help at all. we are having a whole broad discussion around homeless discussions is the

right thing to have. but in terms of this supplemental today is about getting more outreach on the streets as soon as possible and a focus on that. >> supervisor avalos? >>supervisor john avalos: thank you, i'm not clear that this is the right approach to take. i don't know this is the real process where we have to make our enhancements. i do believe that we need to enhance homeless outreach teams. totally fine to do that but i'm not sure it's done with the extent that are being planned with the number of fte's and this makes a lot of sense especially when people are on the streets exiting behavior or health conditions that need help and support like mr. rashad talked about in the tenderloin that there

ought to be added enhancement around that. i'm happy to support that, but for me if we were to approve $1.3 million today we are setting in motion what we would expect to annual eyes -- in the budget. i would like to department to come back with a plan a and plan b. what does plan b look like? if it half the cost. if it's half the number of fte's for the homeless and we can talk about other aspect of homeless services that they want to be able to enhance. otherwise if we can't continue today i'm going to ask for another motion that we cut this in half amount to figure out how to annualize homeless

enhancement. i don't think i'm ready to discuss this. >> i appreciate the perspective without a doubt. what i would say this has obviously been introduced in the committee over a month 1/2 ago. from a time to speak with community meetings. i have had multiple meetings with a department that do such an amazing job with our homeless outreach team. from my perspective, i appreciate the comment and more time to have a more fully baked. from my perspective this is ripe to go and we have a pressing need on our streets to get this to

our neighborhoods. >> thank you. i support this supplemental appropriation. we have to move this today. we have an emergency situation on our streets. sometimes in san francisco we see so much day after day it becomes sometimes almost invisible. when we are actually looking at what's happening on our streets it's an emergency now. you don't have to go far to step right outside this building to center plaza and walk over to larson street and you see people sprawled out. these people, we need to get them off the streets. it's not enough just to rely on police officers to do that. we need homeless outreach workers and it is embarrassing how little homeless outreach capacity we have in the department of public health. i find the

most common arguments that when someone has a solution that we can't do that unless we do this at the same time because there are five other problems as well. so don't do this until we have solutions for the other five parts as well. we know that with any other complicated problems we know there are things we have to do. with homelessness we need more permanent affordable housing and psychiatric services and substance abuse services. we need job training and a lot of things we need to get people stabilized and into housing for their lives. step one is to get people off the streets when they particularly when they are in crisis and not just relying on police officers to do that. homeless outreach workers are a critical part of that

structure. we know it works and i think we should move forward to get this function not really fully staffed because it would take more than this but better staff today and we should of course keep working on these issues as well. >> supervisor breed? >>supervisor london breed: thank you. i'm fine with moving this forward especially if it's placed on budget reserve and will provide and opportunity for the department of public health and the homeless outreach or homeless advocates to maybe work on proposed if they have any changes because we don't expect to receive that information until i guess within the next 2-3 weeks, supervisor farrell. so i'm okay with that. but i also think it is important that we

look at our existing stock, housing authorities is not necessarily directly run by the city, but there are a huge number of vacant units and the fact that we now have a number potentially to rehabilitate those units and make homeless individuals a priority there, especially homeless families which there is a shelter in my district and these with no shower, with no ability for these families to get prepared for school or work or anything else. so i just think it's insane that we are looking at entities with hotels that have an stock that we can invest money in where we have those properties available and give individuals those priorities with properties. this is the first step in that direction but the next supplemental which i'm hoping to get support for is a supplemental

to rehabilitate the vacant public housing development all over our city and allow homeless individuals receive priority and access into those development. i'm ready to move forward with this. >> thank you for your comments and it's something that people are discussing without a doubt. i think you are being an advocate and i don't know that there is no one that would approve this. supervisor avalos? >>supervisor john avalos: i would like to make an a couple motions. to cut this in half. to keep the $1387500 but the

600,000 that would be homeless services, and we can get a report back from the department of public health about how we can spend those funds. i think permanent housing would be a great thing to cover with those funds, but that's my first motion. so keep the current supplemental as is and the other half would be generalized for services and hot team services and that will be later determined by the department of public health and working with community groups and our offices. that's my motion. farrell >>supervisor mark farrell:

thank you supervisor avalos. i'm not going to consider that motion. dividing the number of services to me if the critique is there has not been that much process which there has and to cut in half to allocate to unspecified other services to me makes it even worse. for me, if there is another additional supplemental or appropriation that you would like to see implemented, i think it's very worthy and we will take that in due course. but this is a specific program policy worked on with the department of public health in great detail. >>supervisor john avalos: if i may respond. that has been reported to me what's happened and there is a consensus around this supplemental appropriatation and it has not. my the recommendation by

the budget recommendation analyst that these funds go on budget committee reserve, i'm totally fine with that it goes to a pending plan and for the general hot team services and i would like there to be a plan. i believe what you brought forward in terms of how to city needs to respond to our homeless crisis is the right thing to do and i appreciate your efforts, but i don't think we've gotten the approach that will have full support of the board. if you don't want full support of the board, that's fine. i accept that. >> i appreciate that and the board can respond to that. this is a policy calling whether we should expand our outreach today. if there is not support for that, then there is not support for that. >> i don't want the board of supervisors to dictate what the homeless services should be. >> i take my position as city

government very seriously and we are the body that take from individuals and departments to make that happen. so with that, madam clerk can we do a roll call vote on the motion. >> mr. chairman, do we have a second on supervisor avalos? >> i will second it. mr. chairman i want to add that i'm supportive of your efforts to move forward on a new tenured plan on addressing the homeless crisis in our city. i feel like the stakeholder community based organization have to be working with all of us to do that and i appreciate the department of public health of expertise, but i feel that community based organizations have to be at the table and i'm not sure after listening to the discussion that there is consensus. i will respectfully disagree with you on how to move this forward and but say that i really appreciate your efforts. i did want to add that the budget and legislative analyst keeps reminding us how this general

fund is dwindling as we move towards these supplementals. i never want to pit vulnerable populations at one another but there is a children's fund and they have polling to show how strong the community support is. not only are we looking at $1.4 million but tripling of that and another impact on the general impact budget is making me understand how many groups are advocating. i know we have to focus on strategically addressing the homeless crisis. but i'm going to be supporting supervisor avalos' motion. >> i appreciate that. i have no intention there was going to be 100 percent agreement on anything. dialogue is dialogue and i think as legislators we

put forward what we think is best to put people. i think it would be worst if we are not talking to people advocating on this issue. i take that very seriously and we'll continue to prior ties that and as we are getting more people outreach today and getting people off the streets today should be a priority. supervisor wiener? i will not be supporting the motion and i want to talk about engaging stakeholders. of course we should be engaging stakeholders. the stakeholders here are not just organizations that are doing work around homelessness. the stakeholders are the 830,000 residents in san francisco and we have a responsibility to represent those stakeholders who are not down at city hall all the time and the people who see this on the street erd -- everyday and impacts them

everyday and want these people off the streets and to get services. i think it's completely appropriate for us as policy makers to make that determination on behalf of the city and we know there is not enough homeless outreach going on. we desperately need more. >> supervisor avalos? >> i will let mr. wiener have the last word and let have a vote. city clerk: on the motion supervisor mar, aye, avalos aye, supervisor breed? no, wiener no, farrell no. 2 aye's 3 no. >> okay if there is another motion or a motion to set this aside to another board. >>supervisor john avalos: i would like to make a motion to continue this item for two weeks2 weeks what