thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you jonathan. i'm just here to thank the community of visitacion valley for driving this process to this point and for redefining what i know to be the definition of tenacity these people and their dedication to making their community a better place is extraordinary and we're proud to be part of it and want to thank the city staff at many many different agencies for taking time, nights and weekends and vacation time to help to bring us to this point and look forward after 15 years to get to the starting line of construction to bring much needed revital ization to this

part of long forgotten part of san francisco. >> thank you. >> first i want to thank supervisor cohen for helping to move this along. my name is fran martin. we won that battle and over the years our group advocated to bring affordable housing improve public transit to our under served community. we started the entire process that brought us here today. schlage lock has been a toxic site. it is essential with this proximity

to the bayshore this sight will be a transportation and our community has been in the forefront of advocating for affordable housing. most of the neighborhoods do not want high density housing of any sort. in spite of everything over the years we've worked with various city departments and received a planner's award. what is being asked of the city in terms of of public financing is a drop in the bucket to what is owed to our neighborhood and it's time the

city fulfilled its duty. this is a matter of social justice. after a long process of planning schlage lock development should be allowed to move forward. thank you. >> all right thank you. if there's anymore public comment, please come up. >> good afternoon. the city at the mountain top, it's shining like a silver plain -- singing -- and schlage lock was its name. you got it. the city you got it. you got the schlage lock, thank you. and it's going to be shining like a

schlage lock plain some of the beauty in government and schlage lock was its name you got the schlage lock government audit, you're the city pride and joy -- singing. thank you. >> all right thank you very much. are there any members of the public -- all right. [applause]. >> good morning supervisors, madam clerk my name is thomas pickerilo you will be making a finding that it is in the best interest of the city not just district 10 so i'd preferred to have seen 20 percent. 20

percent. this should be one of them and secondly the community benefits agreement ought to be specified more clearly in the agreement rather than leaving it to the developer and the mayors office as to what those benefits would be so more specificity in the community benefit agreement in this package as well as 20 percent housing instead of 15. thank you. >> are there any other members of the public that would like to comment on this item? okay seeing none public comment is now closed. is there a motion on this ordinance? all right so a motion to move out item number 1 to the full board with recommendation with a positive recommendation. all right without objection. >> great thank you. [applause].

>> thank you everyone. congratulations. >> now madam clerk if you wouldn't mind calling items 2 through 7 together please. >> plaza apartments associates and mercy housing and ocean avenue associates to provide operations subsubsidies for formerly -- >> sorry if i can ask that people can exit quiet ly thank you very much. >> okay great so for items 2 through 7 i believe we have sophie hayward here. >> good morning supervisor tang

and president chiu. i'm from the office of housing and community development. the program is an intregal part of the program. ann ramiro is with me today to present an overview of the 6 contracts together and she and i as well as our cfo are certainly happy to answer any questions you have. i have a handout here and i'll put some out for the public as well. thank you. >> so good morning supervisors

i am a project manager. first i will give a brief background on the program and then i will describe the projects so the local operating subsubsidy program was created in response to the ambitious schools to create 3000 new units of housing and the lack of federal or state operating subsubsidies would keep us so i'm sorry the program is structured as an operating subsubsidy. the department of public health and human services agencies are our partners and fund the support services currently there are 20

contracts in place. so supportive housing in san francisco has been constructing a variety of models in family, senior and single buildings. these are structured as 15-year grant agreements so the contracts before you today would bring the total contracts to 26 and units to 1475 added 238 new units in 2014 and 15 so typically range from 6 to 10 thousand per unit per year. by 2018-19 will grow. the other

units in the 10-year plan are supported through other state and federal subsubsidies so now i will briefly describe the project. they are located throughout the city and they target homeless singles seniors and families and transition age youth. this building is actually transitioning to the program from the job program which predated. vera haile will be 90 units of affordable senior housing. 3 units will be supported by hud 11 hundred ocean will provide 25 units for homeless. 19 will be supported

by the loss program. and one third will be targeted to homeless families and one more on scott and lombard street will transform a former bed and breakfast for homeless transitional age youth. i'll just conclude by saying studies have is shown it's far it's far less costly than the cost of emergency rooms if these homeless populations remain on the street and our program seems to be bearing that out so i am happy to answer any questions. thank you. >> thank you for your presentation. any questions from the committee? seeing none.

>> good morning. the 6 contracts was 9.3 million expected to grow with the addition of these contracts. but this is an essential form of funding to be able to get these programs going. on the table 4 page 19 we actually show the 15-year amount for each contract over the 15-year term the 6 contracts will be general fund costs and in the human services budget subject to board approval and note the variation in costs has more to do with the size of the project

itself and the economies smaller housing development. we do recommend approval of these 6 resolutions these 6 agreements however we do based on our audit from 2012 at that time we found it was very hard for the board of supervisors to actually get good information on supportive housing. at that point in time these agreements were not being brought forward to to the to the board they weren't subject to board approval. they are now providing verbal information to the board but also through these approvals of the local operating supportive agreements but our recommendation is to

request the mayors office of housing to provide a written update and annual report to the board. thank you. >> all right thank you any questions for the budget's analysts office and i was wondering if the mayors office might want to speak of some of the recommendations in terms of annual reporting. i appreciate some of the changes you have already made as well. >> thank you supervisor. sophie hayward. we're committed to providing an annual report annually from now on and we're proud of the program; we're happy to report on it. >> thank you very much. i want to thank you very much. with that a motion to forward out with a positive recommendation to the full board all right without objection thank you very much. and now we'd like

to call up item number 8. >> madam chair we didn't take public comment. >> oh i'm sorry. we'd like to take public comment on items 2 through 7. >> without objection. vote has been rescinded. all right seeing none public comment is now closed. >> actually i'll make the motion to move these items forward. >> all right so there's been a motion to forward out again items 2 through 7 to the full board without objection. thank you. item 8. >> language access ordinance compliance report to receive a status update. >> our sponsor is supervisor chiu. >> thank you madam chair and members of the public. i

called today's hearing on our cities compliance with our language access laws which is required under our ordinance and also this hearing is in conjunction with the office of civic engagement and civic affairs. 40 percent of our residents were born in a place outside of the united states. we're a city that is proud and has been continually committed to equal and full access to services and timely information regardless of whether or not english is one's first language. i passed legislation that officially refer to what we do in our city as language access by establishing language access ordinance and requiring departments to provide translation services as well as to establish an agency to

monitor our cities compliance with that. departments are required to create annual plans to document the work that they do to establish training and employee development strategies and to make sure that we are fully complying. i also want to take a moment and mention that this year our city acknowledged the third official language of san francisco to be tagalic after chinese and spanish given the growing populations that we have from our filipino community. we've asked 5-tier one departments to attend today's hearing and present their progress and compliance and we've established a number of city departments that have frontline interactions with the public to have higher standards on what

they need to do to interact with diverse residents. i want to thank you for your participation in taking part in this hearing and part of the reason we do an annual report is to think as a city what should we be doing better. are there ways for us to interact with the community in ways to help further our goals around language access so with that this is to continue the important collaboration with community on this. i want to invite up adrian and the roll out of what we've been waiting for for a long time here at city hall with that i'd like to ask miss pawn if you want to make that presentation. >> thank you good morning

president chiu. adrian, pawn from the office of civic engagement and civic affairs it is for this opportunity and thank you for your leadership on this issue too. so our goals and mandates have been clear from the start in a city as president chiu mentioned we're over one in every 3 residents is immigrant and nearly one in five speaks a language other than english at home it's clear why access is essentially to civic participation and engagement and we're just waiting for -- okay -- our slide here. so with such diversity in san francisco bay area, it's no surprise that there are more than 112 different languages spoken in this area. in january 2014 the planning

department analyzed data from the american community survey and it was the 5-year population estimates and they did this at our request. 3 of the top 5 languages spoken in the city reached or exceeded the threshold that is that over 10 thousand residents who are limited english speaking that speak a specific language either chinese spanish or filipino have reached a threshold there are over 340 thousand limited english proficient residents 42 percent of these residents are chinese speaking and of the chinese speakers 65 percent are lep and 44 percent of that population is lep and although the filipino numbers are a little smaller point 06 in the city 42

percent of the population that speaks tagalo is limited english speaking. in the 2014 report tier one departments reported their lep client interactions and it pretty much mirrors the numbers from the acs population estimates again 87 percent of the client served by tier one departments are chinese and spanish speaking with the majority 48 percent chinese and point 02 percent speak tagalo there's a slight difference in the numbers reported by tier one departments having russian slightly higher at point 03 percent but that could be because of the services provided or the requests that are made. and as you know our leo is a very robust ordinance

with tier 1, 26 main departments and tier 2 which are all the rest of the departments that service the public and in general all departments are supposed to comply with the ordinance and 26 departments have to submit an annual report over 18 data points every year which include data tracking budget policies and procedures in general and other items. the leo compliance methodology is year round and it's an activity that's year round for ocf. in general want to share with you some trends. we have a hundred percent compliance by tier one in terms of report submittal and interest among departments to move this forward and also seen a good

and noticeable difference in community advocates mainly due to language access networks they have quarterly meetings with invited departments and i want to share with you some of the findings of our report. the findings have been generally consistent for the past 3 years as you can see there are still a lot of inconsistent cies and gaps. the quality of translation and interpretations are still inconsistent and the cost for conducting business in multiple languages is a burden for the departments. as you can see for the fiscal year 14-15 the

proposed budget include on-site interpretation and bilingual pay make up the majority of the cost and i want to point out over 80 percent of of the $8.9 million budget reported here is comprised by 3 departments. and lastly this is a 3-year comparison of the budget that has been submitted to us. again on-site interpretation has continued on an upward trajector y. >> supervisors in may 2014 the immigrant rights commission adopted rules and regulations

that have met the threshold and there's 3 main steps to the process. determination of substantial number of thresholds by obtaining evidence from reliable data sources such as the american community survey or anything else that we can get our hands on that is being validated information and validate this information having it analyzed by by the san francisco planning department and compare with previously published data studies. the step may include a baseline study if there is no information available or the margin of error places the threshold in question as in the case of filipino where there was a difference in the threshold and certification after we validate the data we

issue written notification to all city departments as with the original amendment in 2009, 18 months to implement citywide. we're very pleased this year to to be able to certify filipino as a language. now the margin of error is plus or minus 930 and this is the specific reason why ocea wanted to do a baseline study. and at that time the 2000 census provided a lot more detailed information there were a hundred questions on the long form and changed the process of

collection collecting data in 2010 with only 10 short questions on the census form so it didn't give us any information and this is why we felt in order for city departments to properly provide language services to the filipino population the study was necessary. >> just to share with you quickly the methodology for the study is 3 fold. we had interviews with the community and other experts. we also had a survey of city departments and community organizations and residents from april through may and we also had several focus group discussions primarily with bilingual and filipino staff in the city and we're still finalizing the study as we speak but would

like to share with you some of the highlights that we've seen in writing the report. in response to the survey of all departments of tier 1 and 2, 65.5 percent, 69 currently have bilingual staff available to interpret or translate in filipino and departments reported that the average time frame that it will require for them to translate vital documents are as follows -- 62 percent indicated a year and 17 percent indicated about 3 months. we also conducted a street level survey of over 75 city residents conducted with the assistance of our community ambassadors during april and

may. 60 percent of the respondents reported that they prefer information in filipino and 28 percent indicated that they want both english and filipino and just 11 percent prefer just english. we also conducted a survey and we found that 60 percent of their clients served prefer to read in filipino and 40 percent prefer both filipino and english and supervisors i might add that the surveys conducted the written surveys with information collected were distributed to over a hundred cbo's and city departments and end use ers so we tried to do the best we could in a 2-month period so since the language access oversight was assigned

to ocea in 2009 i think we made a number of improvements and i have to say without our community partners none of this would happen they challenge and push us and we work together to hopefully better serve our residents in san francisco for whom english is not a first language but some of these improvements have range from everything to standardized reporting and a language summit in which the community participates and our language access network who is here today and the advisory group meeting quarterly with the departments and identified the departments they want to meet with and do joint problem solving and this is a nationally recognized program and then of co