with ab 1421 is being focused on as laura's law is not that it doesn't provide good services. the model for services is one we all would support, i think most of us in this room would support, positive engagement, the ability for families to be involved. i am also a family member. the court order process is the linchpin and the problem is regardless of the findings to the contrary about services and programs based on the laura's law format, the court order in itself has never been shown in several studies to have a positive effect on treatment. so do we want to do good things for our community? yes. do we want to waste public resources and time and energy fighting with each other about an unproven bureaucratic process to um pell people to services that are not working for them now? no, i say no, we do not need this, we've turned it back twice already in san francisco

and you need to hear the community, not just the powerful speakers. >> thank you very much, next speaker please. >> greetings, supervisors, david elliot lewis. i am a cochair of the mental health board of san francisco and i was also appointed to the mayor's care advisory task force. interestingly, both groups, both the commission and the task force, could not agree on laura's law. it was very devicible for both groups. it's been very devicible for my own community. i'm a consumer as well. it's been like a fault line in the recovery community, dividing people. supervisor campos, i want to thank you for your amendments. i think they actually improve the law as is stated. however, i would state what you are supporting is still ultimately a coercive process. well, no one

is going to be necessarily thrown in jail for not taking their medications. you are talking about appointing an oversight group that will basically pressure somebody to receive treatment under the threat if you don't receive treatment, you will then be put under an involuntary court ordered process. that is coercion and coercion doesn't work. none. research shows coercion works yet all groups, all sides, agree we need better services, better treatment. our city has lost 70 acute beds, we have lost over half our board and care facilities. we do need more treatment but we don't need coercion and when we do see coercion in the system, such as in new york with kendra's law, we see a disproportionate application to minorities, three times more likely in new york's population. i would ask you to put all the

good elements of laura's law forward. if you don't comply with treatment you could be 5150 and if you are 5150 you are put in handcuffs and brought to psychiatric emergency services and that process is coercive and it's humiliating. >> thank you, next speaker please. >> good mornings supervisors, my name is tim snarr, i am here to urge you to send the recommendation for implementation of laura's law to the full board of supervisors. on may 20 i was at supervisor farrell's press conference at which mayor lee and dph director endorsed laura's law. among the speakers were the parents of laura wilcox. i was spoke by the eloquence and the commitment at turning this effect in their lives into a positive for other

individuals. my stepson is almost 40 years old and has suffered from schizophrenia and bipolar disorder for over 20 years. he has never been able to stick to a treatment plan. after 70-plus hospitalizations, most at his own request, and too many psychiatric breaks, we believe it is probably too late for this law to help him. however, for others who may still have a chance at leading productive lives those who are severely mentally ill without the insight to seek treatment or in the criminal justice system, laura's law may be a life saver. the status quo should no longer be acceptable. laura's law equals the right to treatment instead of the right to wander on the streets while their families pray for sudden insight. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker please. >> hello, my name is dave fariello,

case management director, city-wide case management programs. we have been providing services to severely mentally ill adults in a voluntary way since 1980. but since 2002 we have been the primary provider for the san francisco behavioral health court, providing assisted outreach for those who are court ordered to do so. the carther foundation funded research which demonstrated effectiveness through the behavioral health court. if you come to our facility you cannot tell the difference between the two groups of clients. voluntary versus involuntary is a continuum, it's not an either/or situation. by the way, because we are part of a larger clinic we can provide services in the primary language of any client that walks through our door.

so by supporting the assisted outpatient treatment for those who have not yet been criminalized, we will offer the same kind of effective services that will prevent rehospitalization and incarceration. so i think we ought to extend that to those who have not yet broken the law and also to avoid people getting in law. thank you. >> thank you very much, next speaker, please. >> good afternoon again, my name is maureen decass and i am here to oppose ab 1421. i have heard a lot of language going on that says this is not a panacea, this will not solve all of the problems which is absolutely true. yet what i do hear coming up over and over again is that somehow this will correct the homelessness problem in this city. it will not. there is a cognitive dissonance going on

here of saying this law will take care of homelessness, yet it does not express how it will take care of that problem. what we've got is a law that will still have law enforcement coming in and still having to deal with people. it does not pull law enforcement out of them doing their job. it does not prevent homelessness. if anything, what it does is it puts people going through a court system but if trs no beds, if there is no help for these people, if there is no funding for these people, how do you expect these people to get the help and move off of the street? if you want to address the issue of homelessness then let's focus on laws that will work with people who are homeless, that will help get them off the street, and come back into society. but ab 1421 does not do that. i oppose this law and i hope you do not move forward with it. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker,

please. >> hello, my name is kelly cutler and i am a voluntary at coalition of homelessness, a social worker, and i have been working with the homeless population in our city for a number of years, especially homeless youths and young adults. and i am opposed to laura's law. as a case manager i was consistently tasked with the challenge of connecting youth with social services to meet their needs. they wanted treatment, there were so many time and time again that wanted treatment, and it was an impossible task. i was constantly told that they were, you know, too ill, that they didn't have the services available. laura's law is to implement mandatory outpatient treatment. you see the problem with this when speaking about the homeless population. outpatient, housing is an important part of

that. you are tasking social workers and service providers with an impossible task because we don't have the services available. look at the research. it shows that the housing first model with supportive services works. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi, jennifer friedmont, director of the coalition of homelessness. this is a painful hearing. it's painful for the family members who have been going through it and are *urpb unable to get their adult children services. it's painful for the service providers and it's most people for the people who have been experiencing mental illness and can't get responsive treatment. we have a mental health system that is in crisis. we have reduced

services dramatically. in the public health system between 2007 and 2012, behavioral health services were reduced by $40 million. this has had a dramatic impact. it's had a dramatic impact on everyone in san francisco. we can look around and see it. what our response should be to this crisis for everybody in this room is to rapidly rebuild our system so it actually has the capacity to respond to the diverse needs of san franciscoans with mental illnesses. ab 1421 creates, from our perspective, a new bureaucratic court process that certainly is not the same as a solution. we also believe that most family members who support this, support it because they see it as a means of getting their kids into services. that if the court orders it, the city has, the city has to provide it. they don't have a choice. so there's -- and in truth as has been

mentioned, the data shows there's been no difference, the court order makes no difference in outcomes. there's a simple solution here. let's take out the court process and move forward with this. you know, the last thing we would like to see is this go to the ballot, we think it would be irresponsible, we think it would be really hateful towards people with mental illness so we want to challenge everyone, especially supervisor farrell, to do the right thing. >> next speaker please. >> hello, i am virginia lewis, i am a licensed clinical social worker in private practice for 25 years, and i have worked with bipolar and depressed clients. i am a member of the san francisco health board, i am a member of nami and was chair of the san francisco night ministry. i presently conduct a parent support group for nami and i am in contact with many

parents and relatives of persons with serious chronic mental illness. i am also the mother of a bipolar child and i am speaking today primarily as a parent in support of laura's law. i want to make it clear that my daughter has given me permission to speak about her. i believe this is important because one reason so few of us parents are willing to speak publicly is because we are protecting our children and families from stigma. presently my daughter is stable on her medications for a year and doing well. however, there are no guarantees going forward that this will continue. we have discussed laura's law and she told me that she wishes that the laura's law option had been available to us in the past when as a family we dealt

with tragic and horrific situations due to her serious mental illness. during these times there were almost no effective services available to her in san francisco in either the public or the private sector. the laura's law program provides a pathway for parents to obtain help before events spiral downward and it becomes necessary to avoid violence to avoid law enforcement. it would be the only such real option available to families and friends of seriously mentally ill people in san francisco. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. let me call a few more speaker cards (calling names). . >> good mornings, supervisors,

my name is kevin carroll, president of the hotel association of san francisco. a recent report featured in usa today found more than half a million americans are falling through the cracks of mental health service systems. we see many of these individuals daily, struggling. laura's law is an effective tool that provides community-based outpatient treatment. it also helps empower families to help their loved ones get treated. it would improve safety for our residents and visitors by treating patients with a history of violence. it will also reduce costs by reducing hospitalization and incarceration costs that are incurred now. you have already heard testimony from nevada county that it helped save

money and that money could be used for resources as well. we encourage you to move this forward to the full board of supervisors. thank you for your time. >> next speaker, please. >> committee, margie english from st. vincent de paul society here today. here to speak in support of laura's law. under our roof we do many things and i'm in partnership with many of the people in this room and i feel the emotion. one of the programs we run is the largest homeless shelter in northern california and within that shelter, though, is a drop-in resource center and that is the eye of the storm here in san francisco for some critical incidents that all your first responders talk about. at the society we make anest to treat everyone with compassion, dignity and social justice. my employees

would never be here to speak up. they meet people where they are. we also run a recovery program which mimics what the fsa and bob bennett was saying earlier. it's complicated, the fact that i'm here. the amendments that were brought out really improve the implementation. i do see violence and safety a critical component of why this should move forward. reading our incidents reports it is very -- they are very difficult to read and that's why i chose to speak up about this. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good morning, supervisors, thank you for taking up this important law. laura's law fills the cracks to get treatment for those who are severely mentally ill, not able to ask for help themselves, but do not meet

criteria for conservatorship. it will help people before they fall into the criminal justice system and i urge you to pass this law before it becomes more complicated by going on the ballot. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker please. >> good afternoon, each and every one of you. my name is michelle moncrief and i'm also a consumer. and my biggest fears about laura's law, ab 1421, is stigma, discrimination and forced treatment. i don't want to get down and tell you all of my story, but i am a consumer

and today and the last 15 years i've been a provider in mental health. we do get better. i was not forced into treatment, i voluntarily went into treatment and i'm doing a lot better today. i would hate to see this law come in to form because one of the things that still goes on in the united states is stigma and profiling. and i'd like to read this before i go, really briefly. african americans are almost 5 times as likely to be recipients of forced treatment orders. hispanic people are too and twice as likely as white people to be the recipient of forced treatment.

people with no history of hurting people are the primary recipients of this order. please do not let this pass. thank you for allowing me to share. >> thank you, next speaker please (calling names). >> supervisors, thank you so much for allowing me to speak. my name is thea cruz. i sat in another room watching this hearing waiting for my item to be closed and was outraged. 11 years ago you would not know me as the high functioning activist i am today because i sat hospitalized, drooling, unable to find the clothes that i wanted when i finally got released from

hospitalization. there is a reason why people with bipolar disorder are not sent to treatment to be tied down and medicated. it's because we have rights as individuals to choose what happens to our to our own bodies had i been forced to take the drugs they wanted me to work, i would not have been released and i would not be here today. i had an opportunity to seek treatment on my own terms and get my self straight. this is disgusting. to see white man after white man telling people of color what they are supposed to do with their lives, court mandated is

outrageous. i tell you to please do not let this pass. please protect the people that are here that have no voice, people that are stigmatized day in and day out. please do not. (applause). >> next speaker please. >> good morning, is it still morning? members of the board of supervisors, my name is steven marks and i am a family member , four generations of people with mental health challenges, disorders and so on. i have sympathy for family members here, parents who want to save their children. however i want to urge everyone in this room to consider not just the trauma of having a mental health challenge and being on the street but the challenge of being placed involuntarily in a

treatment situation, i have seen it happen to members of my family, i have experienced it myself and it is very traumatic. so often people, the recidivism that i have seen in my life from those around me anecdotally and also professionally has been caused not by the lack of treatment but by mistreatment, treatments that, well-meaning treatment that was not geared toward the actual need. so i am opposed, as you can tell, to ab 1421 and i urge the board to not pass on this legislation. cost savings was mentioned. now, peer services, services of people like myself to have had lived experiences, who can use this peer experience, lived experience, in the service that they provide certified services, people who will be trained in the same kind of work that we're talking about being done here, the cost savings

would be tremendous if this burden were not placed on clinicians. and i really value the frustration, my heart goes out to the clinicians, providers who have experienced this frustration. my father was a clinician, i have a doctorate in psychology myself. but i find that peers, peers providing services, working in conjunction with clinicians provide a much more holistic and a much more valuable service than it would be to implement this law. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker please. i have two more cards, richard springwater and michael gauss >> good morning, supervisors, my name is gillian crowan, i am a mental health specialist. forced treatment does not work. 8 years ago my family gave me

an ultimatum that was as close to involuntary commitment as you can come. one week later i made a decision on my own that i was ready for recovery and to participate in treatment. i participated in intensive treatment for one year. today i still live with bipolar disorder, i work and lead a healthy and fulfilling life. i urge the committee to oppose ab 1421. >> thank you, i'm going to read a couple more names (calling names) next speaker please. >> good morning, supervisors, my name is girford boyd smith, i am the head of

nami, practicing physician and family member. we've got to keep in mind this is for a very small subset of mentally ill. neither the folks that are cycling through the er's, lock edwards and sometimes cycling in and out of the jails. you've heard the frustration from police chief sur, of a police officer on the street picking someone up because they are a danger to themselves or others, finally delivering them to a treatment regimen perhaps at san francisco general, only to find them back on the street in the same condition the following week. we've got an obligation to take care of these folks. this is a city with hopefully strong social values and we really need to come up with a better treatment system than what is currently in place. when court mandate of a treatment plan comes out of a laura's law hearing, the onus is on the providers, this is a completely different shift to

have a case management program to actively go after someone who fails an appointment or skips a medication date and that's the key transfer of responsibility that's happening to otherwise folks who have no naubl (inaudible) and who don't have the ability to keep their medications going. it's absolutely cost effective. case management is certainly a whole lot cheaper of revolving door of time in jail or time in a locked ward. so i think we want to do the right thing here and help these folked who are otherwise at risk. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker. >> hello, my name is anna

baker guiterrez, thank you for being here. i'd like you to see this and i'd like you to see this here. patient treatment, we want patient friendly treatment and local providers and effective services. the most effective treatment is the one given in partnership with peer support with the person knowledge of what they are having and taking and what they are choosing. say yes to self-controlled treatment medication psychotherapy and respite choices. think physical illness versus mental illness, why incarcerate the mentally ill? it's a great tool. laura's

law is a great tool for discriminating and criminalizing of the most vulnerable. it is not funny. i wish you would really think about it and support self-treatment and noncriminalization of the most vulnerable. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker please. >> good morning, supervisors, my name is randell hager and i represent the california psychiatric association, i am their director of government affairs and i am here on behalf of psychiatrists who work and live in san francisco. i am also a person who during a 6 week period sat down with the assembly health committee staff and drafted this bill and i can tell you there's two things i would like

to know if i were you about this bill. there is no program that exists that has more due process protections. what has not been mentioned today is the judges, they are not to commit someone necessarily but to protect them. all those many pages of legal requirements are there as protections and there are more protections more protective than those in laura's law. also we chose a model that was most effective that we could find after about two years of research, so the assisted outpatient concept is a proven concept, there is data to support it, it can do wonderful things. it is for a limited population and i guess i'd just like to leave you with the fact that psychiatrists often find people when they are the sickest. they often work in hospital setings and they see people at the very end of a long road of unfortunate events and laura's law can help intervene and stop

people from traveling that road and we commend this to you and hope that you can refer this to the full board of supervisors. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning, supervisors, my name is michael gos s, director of the mental health association of san francisco. i'd like to ask people to rise with me in dignity, rise with me in opposition of laura's law. i am a man, a single father, the manager, i have also dealt with serious depression and recovered. this law scapegoats those of us who have dealt with mental illness and mental health conditions. there are many other avenues, over 36 of them in the mayor's mental health task force, that we could have gone the route of. we can still come to consensus and the family members as well. i am asking you all to stan