>> i definitely recommend it to people. it's a fun afternoon and you learn so many things. >> this is so much fun. i go to parts of the city that i don't come to. this will make the city a more susta . >> okay, let's get started. welcome to our special rules committee meeting for monday, june 23rd, 2014. i

am supervisor norman yee and will be chairing this meeting. i am joined by supervisor katy tang and supervisor campos will be in shortly. clerk today is lisa miller. the committee would also like to acknowledge the staff of sfgtv, nona menkonian and charles kriminet who record each of our meetings and make transcripts available to the public online. >> please make sure to silence all cell phones and electronic devices. speaker cards and items to be included in the file should be submitted to the clerk. >> can we please call item no. 1? >> mr. chair, we'd also like to announce that this is the special rules meeting. if you are here for

land use, it's in rule 416. item no. 1 is a notion approving or rejeblgting the mayor's nomination of rodney fong to the planning commission for a term ending june 30, 2018. >> mr. fong, please come up to the microphone, maybe you'd like to make a brief statement. >> good morning, i hope you had a nice weekend and got a chance to see a little bit of soccer. i hope you support my renomination for the planning commission. it's been my pleasure to serve san francisco in this great change of time for the city and really, not speaking just about the growth of the city but really keeping san francisco, san francisco, which i think is important to have that balance. so i appreciate your support for my renomination. >> any questions? >> i guess we're very familiar with your work, commissioner fong, so thank you for wanting to seek reappointment

to this as well. i guess with the changing economic times, i know we're in better times now so things are moving along very quickly in san francisco. i wonder if you could speak a little bit about some of the things you've observed in san francisco in terms of the planning word, what may we expect coming up, some of the challenges we'll be dealing with. >> seeing you every thursday for 4 years, we have such a diverse city, every project by project needs to be looked at and what works in one place doesn't necessarily work in others. i think the planning commissioner as a whole really takes the time to look at the impacts and frankly hear from the neighbors and the neighborhood groups. i've enjoyed spending the time to getting to know san francisco even better and getting to know those folks who don't have representation

on the city and speaking on their behalf. >> thank you. commissioner. any other questions? all right, well, with that i'll open it up for public comment for item no. 1. are you here for public comment? >> yes. >> i just want to say, again, every morning i would plan my (inaudible) terminal 1, same thing every morning, but different this morning. i escape myself from county jail, terminal 1, from my home. i would say direct financial benefit for the people require lots of governmental cooperation and family support to make life easier for everybody, everybody. >> any other comments?

>> good morning, chair yee, supervisors fong and campos. i've been working with rodney and he is always fair, always looks at all sides of the issue, he's taken a lot of leadership at the planning commission, joint hearings with the small business commission, coming up with a small program to prioritize small businesses in the city, he's looked at the department's communications, he's looked at the permit tracking system which everyone is really excited about, so it's without hesitation that i support his reappointment. >> thank you. >> i believe we're probably a little overcrowded in this room and there's an overflow room at the north light court, so for those that have no seat

i am sure we will be asking you to go to the overflow room. okay, any other public comments on this item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. supervisor tang. >> great, i again have the great pleasure of really observing commissioner fong's work on the planning commission and thank him for his service and with that i am thrilled to be able to move him forward to the full board full board pars3 with recommendation . >> thank you, i am happy to be aibld to support commissioner fong. supervisor campos. >> i do want to thank

commissioner fong for his service and i think along the lines of what's said, i appreciate the fact he takes this very seriously, that he tries to be as fair as possible. he does his homework and ultimately calls it as he sees it and i think that's all you can ask for when it comes to a member of the planning commission, so i'm happy to support his reapointment. >> okay, there's been a motion. with no objection. >> we have to make a motion to amend the motion first to accept it rather than reject. motion to amend the motion. >> approve. >> so approved. >> and now recommend it as amended. >> recommend it as amended. motion passes. congratulations. okay, i will be calling the items out of order. all the children's

fund item is not ready right now, the city attorney is crossing the t's and dotting the i's right now, so let's go to no. 7. >> would you like me to call 7 8 together? >> yes. >> item no. 8 is an ordinance amending the health code assisting individuals with mental illness. >> we're going to just take a brief moment to allow for the author, supervisor farrell, to come if

he's coming. we're now joined by supervisor farrell, thank you, supervisor farrell,

for making it in here and we're calling your item out of order so when you're ready you can go ahead and take it over. >> sure, thank you, supervisor yee and i want to thank my other colleagues on the board, supervisor tang and supervisor campos for being here. so, colleagues, i want to thank you and thank the members of the public for having me here today to discuss the importance of implementing laura's law here in san francisco. as many are aware i introduced two identical pieces of legislation about a month ago that we're discussing today to implement laura's law here in san francisco, one ordinance which we're discussing in particular to work its way through the board process and one that's already been placed on the november ballot. i have been working to ensure the board ordinance is able to pass through the board and through our legislative process. i think that is a stronger option if we're able to do it, but introduce the ballot initiative and i want to thank

supervisor tang for her support on that to ensure if we couldn't pass it here at the board the voters of san francisco will have a chance to decide on it. each year millions of individuals slip through the cracks 6 our mental health system, many right here in san francisco. they make up part of our homeless population and cause pain and suffering for their family members who care so deeply and i believe we need more effective tools locally to help those individuals and in my mind laura's law is one of those options. similar laws enacted across this country have enacted dramatic results and it's time san francisco moves forward as well. we know we have a national health crisis on our hands. there are many who do not receive the proper care and treatment to put themselves on the path to recovery. a recent usa report found more than half americans are falling through the cracks. 40 million

americans experience mental illness, skits freepb ra, bipolar disorder and many are not having their symptoms met. we believe and know people are falling through the cracks here in san francisco and i view laura's law as another tool in the toolbox to help those suffering from clinically defined mental illness. this is no panacea but an important tool we should have as a tool but we also view it as a strong tool for families who sometimes feel helpless with current options available when their family members decline to seek treatment. i have heard countless stories, none more important or significant than the story of laura wilcox and i want to thank her family for being here today. families can feel helpless when their loved ones decide not to seek

treatment. it does not and should not feel this way. families should not feel helpless when they are in a time of need, they should feel helped by the city and that the mental health laws meet their needs. if laura's law were passed here in san francisco, families would have the tools they need. it is the compassionate family option. in terms of why it's necessary, there are individuals that are not having nr needs met. laura's law focuses on those vulnerable individuals that need the help the most. according to numerous research articles, including the american research sky try, over half individuals with mental illness

suffer with agnodia, which is the inability to recognize symptoms of mental illness in themselves. it results in poor clinical outcomes, relapse, incarceration and other outcomes. 44 out of 50 states have similar treatment laws on the books, including california. under similar law in new york, called kendra's law, 74 percent fewer individuals experience homelessness, very much fewer individuals experience hospitalization, 88 fewer individuals experience arrest. laura's law will also help our city realize cost savings. we will see a reduction in hospitalization incarceration costs. in other counties than san francisco that previously adopted san francisco and have some data behind it, nevada county saw a $1.81 return for

every dollar spent. it will relieve burdens on our police department, fire department and sheriff's personnel, the county jail and with our ambulance and other emergency infrastructure services. i look forward to this discussion and the opportunity to hear from members of the public. one note today, i am going to be offering a set of friendly amendments around the implementation of laura's law in an attempt and in further discussions with a number of my colleagues around this policy. i want to thank a number of colleagues, in particular supervisor campos, for leading the charge in discussing some of the, some concerns that i think we are able to discuss and hopefully introduce these amendments that will ensure passage at the board of supervisors here today. since the intro duex of laura's law a month ago, the majority of concerns that i heard were around the implementation of laura's law and i do want to take a moment to thank

a number of people, including our department of public month from colleen to director garcia, who has done an amazing job. i want to thank all the other members of the community that have come out to talk to this. the amendments today i'm introducing will do a few things. it will create a care team under dph that will oversee implementation if it is passed. these will oversee evaluation of the implementation of laura's law. it will be a specialist who can provide live experience to help the family members and a liaison who will be a person with a family member with mepbltion illness to counsel the referring source. it will also maximize opportunities for

voluntary commitment before the order for oat is implemented. additionally patients who do not meet laura's law criteria will have a pathway to be evaluated for and connected to the appropriate level of mental health treatment and i want to stress that the intention, of course, is to make these potential voluntary services and treatment options before laura's law in addition to what exists today in terms of our voluntary treatment that exists within our department of health and the city and county of san francisco. lastly it will provide for further training and education among staff that will be implementing laura's law. the training and education will be in consultation with the state department of public services and other stake holders. all the training and education will be provided to all the individuals involved in making treatment and involuntary commitment decisions.

again i do believe these amendments are healthy, i believe they are the product of great discussions that we have had over the last month and why exactly we try to do things through the legislative process if we can. again i want to thank our department of public health for really shepherding this through, director garcia for her help, i want to thank supervisor campos and others who have worked to reflect these concerns and the product of these amendments are where we are today. the legislation is currently drafted to allow these to occur and from my perspective these are great additions and that will allow us to enact laura's law here in san francisco and again the hope is by enumerating these amendments we can ensure full passage at the board of supervisors. colleagues, i will turn the microphone over to you. there are a number of speakers i will introduce but want to open the floor up about of

before we get going with our speakers. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i want to thank supervisor farrell for his comments. i know we have a number of people that are here to speak on both sides of this issue and let me begin by saying that i think that i have consistently been very clear that i have concerns about laura's law. i do question if the answer to dealing with the issue, the very serious issue of mental health, is to talk about the kind of mandatory treatment that is embedded in the legislation. i have consistently been skeptical of the efficacy of any kind of no one-voluntary treatment because i personally have always had a hard time believing that involuntary treatment can actually change someone's path, especially because of the issue

of what services are actually provided to the individual. and the reality is that most people that fit the criteria as laid out in laura's law suffer from psychotic disorders that require strict and regular use of medication and i don't know that voluntary treatment is really -- involuntary treatment is the answer. but the reality is this: that as much as those of us who have fought against this law over the years have tried to keep it from coming forward, i do believe that laura's law is going to be the reality. it's going to pass in san francisco and the question is whether or not it's going to pass through an ordinance at the board of supervisors or whether or not it's going to pass through a ballot measure. i think that something as sensitive and as complicated as this would be

better addressed through an ordinance because i think when you have an ordinance passed through the board of supervisors it's a lot less complicated to tweak that ordinance and to make modifications. so even though my preference would not be to proceed is along these lines, i do believe that we have a responsibility to make sure that the outcome, which i think ultimately will involve passage of laura's law, that the outcome as much as possible tries to address some of the very real concerns that those of us who have questions about laura's law have. and so with that in mind, we have been working with supervisor farrell and a number of advocates and i want to thank the number of people that have provided input on this and even though i don't think either side is ultimately happy with what we're talking about, the nature of compromise is such

that there are people on each side of the issue that perhaps would have approached it differently. but from my perspective i think the responsible thing to do is for us to pass a version of laura's law, given that it will pass, that as much as possible tries to address some of the concerns, the legitimate concerns, that have been raised and will be raised by advocates today. so my office and i have sat down with supervisor farrell after consulting with the department of public health for the purpose of crafting amendments to laura's law that we believe will result in at least a net positive outcome for our local mental health system here in san francisco. again, this is a very sensitive issue and it's very complicated and i was motivated to work with supervisor farrell because i know that even though there are differences of opinion on this issue he

is trying to do the right thing and not only on this issue but a number of other issues. i know he has demonstrated a willingness and an ability to work with different sides and i appreciate his openness to understanding our concerns here. and i specifically am happy about two amendments that supervisor farrell, the department of public health and my office have developed. the first would require the department of public health to create a team of advocates to work with an individual to attempt to convince him or her to accept voluntary services every time a petition for assisted outpatient treatment is requested. this team would consist of a forensic psychologist, a family member, and a peer advocate, and the law would actually prescribe the specificity of what the department of public health would be required to do. this

team would work with the individual to attempt to convince him or her to engage in voluntary treatment at 3 stages: during the department of public health's investigation to determine whether the individual fits the criteria for court-ordered treatment, when the court petition is filed and after the petition is filed but before the court hearing actually takes place. again, three different stages where this team would try to work with this individual. if at any point the individual agrees to engage in treatment, the department of public health will provide that individual with services through the full service partnership, fsb fsp allows for not only traditional treatment for mental health disorders but provides wrap around services to assist an individual face any challenge in his or her life that is contributing to that individual's vulnerable mental health state. currently those of you who do

this work on a daily basis know that it is very difficult, in fact if not impossible to access fsp voluntarily and that's why this change is so important and so useful. the other change is if a petition for aot, for assisted outpatient treatment is sought and the county mental health director does not find the individual meets the criteria for court-ordered aot, then the department of public health will still be required to offer voluntary services to that individual using this very team of three advocates as the department would if the person actually met the criteria. i believe that this infusion of resources into our mental health system, togethering with the team advocate approach to engaging individuals in voluntary treatment is extremely positive and it's a

very important development. it is also something that is essentially new. many families that currently want fsp services cannot access the services because there is a long waiting list and this ensures that those services are actually accessed by these families. another amendment which is also very important to me and very important to the advocates is to prohibit the transfer of individuals to court by police officers unless there is probable cause to believe that the individual actually meets the 5150 standard and the amendment requires also that all services be given in the least restrictive setting, which is something that we believe is really important. so again the legislative process is such that often times you find yourself faced with things that you would not want to see but you do have to figure out what the best outcome is

and we believe that we have done our best to make that happen. so with those amendments not withstanding my concerns in the past, i am ready to support this. again, i want to thank supervisor farrell for his willingness to have a conversation. i want to thank the advocates who have provided a lot of insight. this is not a perfect piece of legislation, nothing really is, but i am confident that we have done everything we can to address at least the fundamental concerns and my hope is that as we move forward with this piece of legislation, one, we will ensure that the policy is a policy that is crafted through the board of supervisors so that we have the ability as the implementation proceeds to look back and figure out if the approach is working. that's a lot easier to amend when it's done through the board of

supervisors rather than the ballot box. so thank you very much and i look forward to the conversation and to hearing from everyone who came here to speak on this issue. thank you. and i also want to thank hillary rownan from my office who has been working with supervisor farrell and his staff. >> supervisor farrell, if you'll go ahead and call people up for public comment. >> i have a number of public comment cards here. first of all there are a number of speakers we have here. first of all we have dr. mark leery, deputy chief of the san francisco department of psychiatry, we also have then district attorney george gascon, police chief and fire chief so dr. leery, please come on up and thank you for being here and colleagues dr.

leery is acting as representative of the department of public health here today who has been really involved in these discussions. i want to thank you for being here. >> thank you. i'm very happy to be able to talk today about this laura's law legislation. another term for it that i think covers it well is assisted outpatient treatment, or aot, and aot provides an additional option for families to engage their loved ones in treatment for serious mental illness when other efforts haven't been successful. it will help some patients but as we've heard, it's not a panacea and it's not designed to help everyone. it was created to help a small but important group of individuals whose serious mental illness prevents them from accessing and accepting crucial, sometimes life-saving treatment. like every treatment, it has its limitations and its benefits.

the benefits include being able to engage individuals in a voluntary way while they are in the community without the necessity of hospitalization. as you've heard there are a number of efforts contained within the legislation to engage the person in voluntary treatment prior to any court order. it allows family members to be able to engage the individual in treatment and it allows individuals who multiple efforts have been made to engage in treatment and not been able to succeed to get into important treatment. it's important to recognize our limitations. aot does not compel medication, individuals can't be required to take medication through this mechanism. there's no mechanis