working and putting together a policy. i realize that we have not been moving fast enough for some people. i appreciate that because i understand the frustration. it's a frustration i share. but it's a frustration that i have to work with the reality of working with people and making sure we have all the t's crossed and all the i dr. guy conflict policy on people without making sure we're doing everything we can to make sure there's going to be a smooth transition. that's where i'm headed. >> my question was specifically the timeline. now that you've identify the challenges i actually don't-understand is a need for training a lot of people about. what is this the challenges him and after you've identified them with that, today? what you expect for implementation? >> i hate to give a timeline and not be able to stick to it. that's one of those things that is movable. i bet with chorizo spots a number of times you are met with other speak on the transgender community. i now have the support of theresa

sparks and her new role. i've gotten out the budget where i'm going to be doing gender awareness training grant the money behind it to do the train. >> when will the training be taking place? >> it will probably would begin at the end of july beginning of august. given that i just got the money and hopefully in this budget by budget passes completely >> is the main barrier then awareness training for your staff to ensure that when it's fully implement it that everyone >> is also making sure every also our policy are gender identity frontage at this is not one pause. this policy affects a number of positive effects housing policy surgeon policy good effexor number policies along the way. it affects transportation policy for people. it affects making sure we're doing what we need to do to make sure our staff knows- >> tenuously met because if you added additional women to the women zero, 90 women came

and you would have specific housing policies and just notation policies for those new nine women. so, i guess i'm trying to understand why there needs to be a rewriting of policy when you're simply, dating the preference identified by the innate >> because the policies need to be changed or were basing anything were doing our gender identity instead of actual biological sex. >> to me that sounds-i know i so naïve i apologize for that because i'm not in your position and i'm not trying to simplify this, but for me, if the rewriting of policy simply the windows were based on gender preference, and not based on physical, then i don't understand what the delay has been. is it simply that then >> i did my two over some of like a lead on letter i did tell you >> for the sake of the public i think it's important for this to be on the record. >> that's fine supervisor. i

will say when the main policies we have to do we have to do a preference through gender identity through who searches people. that's union issued working with a union on that actively. that means somebody who expresses a gender identity as a woman can has to be searched by a female deputy. that is something we need to work through and make sure people are trained as well. i'm very optimistic that were going to get past this and were going to get through it. it's going to be something that's groundbreaking for san francisco and for the san francisco sheriff's department. but i have to say that i have the obligation to keep people safe and orderly sure that the kept safe and make sure the deputies are trained properly as well as the non-sworn staff as well are the women are educated so there's not a problem with mixing population. so part of that is started with the education of our transgender women being allowed to go to education with--once

again, you understand it's a transient population did so some of the transgender women started to go to education may not be there any long. some of the women who may be working with that are not there. were going to get the. >> in response to that, does that union in agreement? is that one looks? >> i think the union is in agreement but they're so concerned and they're very concerned about the training. they're very concerned about making sure that union members are not held accountable for things that they don't know or maybe have not been trained on. so that's part of the training issue. >> the training, which will take place this summer? >> we will begin this summer naturally, mena tried to target and spotted to county to jail to specifically because that's where the people are, but the women inmates as well as the transgender women inmates are housed there. >> my next question is, you said that currently, if you identify transgender it is available to you to send any

of the classes opportunities available to the female >> i do not say any of the krasnodar classes specifically they are being offered at this time to them in the transgender area. they are available >> without being able to then everything, the housing i understand it was a holdup with not being able to attend- >> some of those trainings take place in the actual vase with the women are living and that's the train they haven't been to yet and that forward as the sleepy jensen. >> so we do have inmates currently in county that are being denied access to programming. if they choose not to attend those that are open to men then they are denied access to those [inaudible] >> i would say that's not exactly true. but getting this training separately but they're getting education and training separately. >> they get all the training available to any every other inmate in county jail currently? >> demands.

>> they either are or aren't >> no, that's not to supervise. there's lots of training that fit specific populations based on their other classifications. so, trans women, if we and we are going to be treating them just like other women, but all the women have it to go to all the training that's available to women because certain classifications. >> if there's concerted concerns, of course but i mean other than those concerns, are they able to access all of the programs that we offer female inmate? that they would like to and they are eligible to be for mexican 00 >> one third housing away with directors like assistance program in the meantime they are receiving programs and they are allowed to go to the five keys charter school with the women inmates which is in the education we may not. >> okay. i know there are concerns that that was one once i heard is that they are denied

services could there are not able to access all the services of able to other female inmates. so, again we just want to make sure that are doing everything we can to support you to expedite the process. do you believe that we will be able to full implementation by the end of this calendar year? >> yes, i do. >> okay that is good looking for. do you think there'll be any type of agreement anytime soon. i know that again we have an inmate that's on hunger strike today inside your county prison. i know she is unwilling to eat until there's some form of agreement. do you believe will get an agreement? in the coming two weeks? >> i can't say we can do that in the coming two weeks because the union part is a big part of this. i don't want to over promise and under deliver. toronto: to do on ghana to save. she's in jail medical record i can't discuss her hippa interpersonal issues in front of you weren't public because those are >> i'm not asking about that. i'm very concerned about her

health >> as i might. >> i understand her reasoning for protest like to see this move forward as quickly as possible because i understand that. believe me, want to see you it move it forward as possible as fast as well >> thank you very much >> any other question >> >> colleagues from any further questions. mr. rose your report? >> yes that members of the committee cup on page 50 report recommend reductions to those budget totals $700,000 and 16-7. which of one-time savings reduction would still out and increase of $50 million 7.3% upon 1600s of the budget we also recommend closing out prior year unexpected, dissolve $52,000 for total general fund savings of 754.77. we recommend placing $135,000 on budget and finance committee reserve for

the purchase of 90 body worn cameras to be used in the jails. pending commission report to the board of supervisors regarding approval of final plan for the use of the body worn cameras. the mayor's office is requesting approval of 38.5 ftes and 16-7 budget as interim exceptions to the opening of san francisco general hospital security and public utilities commission headquarters, and fingerprint technicians. we do recommend approval of those 38.5 ftes as interim exceptions in 1718, recommended reductions to the proposed budget totals $75,000. of that amount, nine ongoing savings. there'll one-time savings. these reductions would allow increased $11 million or 551% in the department 17-18 birds. as i understand the department does concur with the recommended reductions it on

pages 51-54 of our report >> thank you mr. rose. colleagues from any questions for budget analyst on her just apartment budget? seeing none,, can i entertain a motion to accept the budget analyst liquidations of shares, and budget pending public comment on monday? moved and seconded. can we take that without objection? >> >>[gavel] >> thank you. two departments leftward drifting planning first. because of the hearing live to homelessness. so director raymond thank you event mdm. clerk can you call item 4, please >> item number four, >>[reading code] >> thank you. good afternoon supervise. i will go the presentation it was a given how quickly this hearing is moving along wish you give lessons to the planning commission we talk about that in my budget as well? base of the budget office. for the work today. we are as you know experiencing

continued to experience substantial growth in our budget. we had double-digit growth for the last three years. we are projecting a bit of a slowdown in that growth but still more growth next year. to the tune of about 4%. we are proposing a number of new positions. there's about 90 new positions, 14 next year annualized 19 the following year. we are largely in agreement the budget analyst with one exception. which is a position that planner three position, that would be used to implement the worker doing in the mission district of omission action plan 2020. his work we've been doing for the community for quite some time and were moving into the implementation phase about work. he very much would like to have additional bodies to actually implement that were. in the next couple of years. there's also a piece of legislation related to the

admin and planning code that would simply take a fee schedule out of the code itself. refer to it by reference in the code because it does change every year. the respective cpi. that is a piece of trailing legislation with a budget as well. >> thank you director. colleagues from any questions before we go to mr. rose? i think we do have i'm inclined to awfully take action today since there's only one disagreement here but we can have that discussion and a second mr. rose, can we go to report for planning department? >> mr. chairman, numbers of the committee, on planning, page 30 of our report, recommended reductions to the proposed budget total 713 .596. of that amount 313.244 ongoing and 4000 one-time savings. these reductions would still allow an increase of $9 million or 23.3% in the

department 16-17 budget. i want to make sure that, yes, that's all general fund. the mayor's office is proposing interim exceptions to authorize the department for a planned 3.58 and 16-17 and 17-19 we recommend approving the interim exceptions and incident-18 recommend reductions of the proposed budget total six and $35,000 in 17-18 all of which are ongoing. as i understand it, the except for one position the department concurs with the recommended reductions which are shown on page 31 and 33 of our the board. let me comment that the apartments requesting 19 new positions. we are recommending approval of 18 must 17 of the 19 and the disagreement is the position we

are recommending against on page 32, that's in the bottom of the page. this approved a new 9774 committee senior development special. one, that apartment has existed up working on the project in a foreign 50,000 are consulting contract requested in the budget year citywide planning currently has four existing to majordomo specialists a total of 31 positions in the program. existing resources are sufficient in our judgment to complete the final phase of the project. again, i would emphasize were recommending 17 of 19 new positions. >> right. my inner cynic the debate is over planner on the bottom of page 31 >> i think i misspoke i gave the committee developing specialist >> so that the one not the planning code >> yes. >> supervisor treat tang >> i think i budget chair into the avenue be there to take

action today. i think given all that's occurring in the mission district never think we been talking about policy wise making sure preserving the heritage and culture there despite all the growing change in san francisco, i would want to keep this position. also, based on our briefing prior to this hearing by understanding is also that i've only would this person be working on issues in the mission district, but in the future there will be other opportunities to look at other corridor as well. again, be supportive of keeping that position in the budget. >> with happy emotion? >> yes, i would make a motion to reject that the deletion of the senior community development specialist one positions at >> but except budget analyst clinicians otherwise >> but except budget analyst reparations of life >> pending comments on monday, moved and seconded. colleagues any questions? can we take that without objection? >>[gavel] >> thank you. item number four

can we have public comments. anybody wish to publicly comment on item for? seeing none, public comment is closed. >>[gavel] >> can i entertain a motion to move item number four for a positive recommendation for july 12? moved and seconded. can we take that without objection? >>[gavel] >> okay. last but not least, and our new department, what will bob jeff-kaczynski the mr. director on the permit of homelessness and supportive services. >> supportive housing, sorry. >>i'm not seen the powerpoint

on the screen, but i believe that the supervisors are the copy of the powerpoint presentation. so i would just walk through it what were trying to figure this out technically. thank you very much for giving us opportunity to speak about the new department of homelessness and supportive housing. i want to give a brief overview of the department and its goals and structure. as of sure you're all curious as how this new department is going to be world out. as you'll see in the first slide, our goals are to house 8000 people during the next four years to reduce the number of people become homeless,, to reduce the month of time that people spend homeless, and certainly, to focus on reducing street homelessness particularly being cameras are we are seeing growing throughout the city. as far as our priorities, the department

will certainly continue to take a housing first approach to addressing homelessness ensuring that we are solving the problem. were not very focused on solving the problems where people sleep. we are really going to be focus on solving the problem homelessness which means helping folks exit into housing whether permanent housing, supportive housing, affordable housing, rapid rehousing, the home workout program, etc. we want to focus on building a culture of customer service within the new department to ensure that not only individuals who answer is expensing homelessness is a high level of customer service but also the general public to address any concerns they need to bring forward a long run homelessness and cameras or other related issues. i think the biggest charge for us during the first year besides

just getting department up off the ground is moving towards coordinated entry and assessment system, where individuals experiencing homelessness be assessed once but that assessment will be shared across all city workers and providers who work with homeless individuals should it will allow us to track movement through the system. it will allow us to where individuals based on acuity to understand what's the best resource for them and will allow us to drive resources more efficiently better more expensive interventions by permanent supportive housing are guaranteed to go to individuals who have the highest and greatest need. we also are going to focus on people who been homeless along. i would amend this a bit. to actually say we need to focus on people at the highest level of acuity, length of homelessness is certainly an aspect of acuity and when we want to look at very carefully but we also need to look at making sure that individuals who are suffering from mental illness were struggling with substance abuse don't have eight path toward

self-sufficiency without some real intervention from us, that those are the individuals get priority. i would also add to that people who are high users of our public health system and individuals were we've invested resources into including people who have a graduating from substance abuse treatment programs. so, it's a little more complicated than just length of homelessness. we also need to engage in a strategic planning process which is not going to be a long drawn out process. i believe that we already know what needs to be done over point to spend the next five months really look at data and understand with the gaps in the system are and figuring out a plan b fix that. on the next slide, you'll see an overview of a budget. you'll see the proposed budget of $220.5 million. because the vast majority 175 no dollars going to direct contracts and grants to nonprofit organizations. the department will have 110 staff. there's approximately 10 new positions

and some of them are those are new positions from our department, they are positions that are being transferred over from ages they were dph. so were not adding a large number of positions. i believe the total investment of new positions and infrastructures about $1.5 million. the repeat some of what i just said. again, to sort of keep in and over you with the services of burnaby provided to this department, we street outreach, including a hot team. emergency shelter, navigation centers, rapid rehousing programs, transitional housing, permanent supportive housing, adding to this is also the homeward bound program. as well as, were working to create an acumen response team which beat part of the hot team but will work separately in stronger partnership with other city departments to address the issue of and cameras. also want to be clear in this department, homeless people like all citizens in san francisco have needs for a variety of

services. our department are not going to provide every one of those services to homeless individuals were going to stay in one of three lanes. we are working on preventing homelessness, we are working on providing services to people were living on the streets, and we are working to get folks into permanent supportive housing or some other type of housing exits did were working in close partnership with many other departments, and of course the department of public health will be a critical part of good will serve in many ways is our clinical arm. with continue work with ages eight, dph, the police department, dpw excuse me, police department and others. our mission and charges very clear. we really want to stick in those three lanes. lastly, one of the new initiatives were pretty rolling out and 16-17 odyssey the main one is starting a new department from scratch, which

is quite a left. we will be working on the strategic planning and capacity building project. will be working on building the coordinated entry system. developing a navigation centers. as will be demanded by the legislation of these were passed by the board of supervisors. and expanding both housing and rental subsidy opportunities for variety of populations are currently experiencing homelessness. that is the overview of the department. if you have any questions, will be happy to take them. >> thank you. colleagues from any questions right now? maybe will wait to hear about the budget analyst recommendations and then you can respond to them after. mr. rose when we go to your report for homeless and supportive housing department >> resident breed on page 87 of the report recommended reductions to the proposed budget total 593.6 and in

16-17. of that amount [inaudible] 432 are one-time savings. we consider approval of 9 million to the purchase of foreign foray took street to be a policy matter for the board of supervisors is the board of supervisors approves that 9 million we recommend placing 4 million on tenant approved and pennington mission budget details. the also recommend placing 11 nine dollars on budget and finance committee reserve pending approval by the voters of an increase in the sales tax oh .75% and submission of expenditure details of the budget and finance committee for the $11.5 million. the mayor's office has requested approval of six new positions in the 16-17 budget as interim exceptions including one department head when deputy

director three, two manager-21 personnel clerk and one management assistant. we do recommend approval of all six positions as interim exceptions. recommend reductions to the proposed budget total 484 in 17-18. all which ongoing savings. we recommend placing $31 million on budget and finance committee reserve pending approval by the voters of an increase to the sales tax .75 cents and submission of expenditure details and budget and finance committee. on that recommendation, supervisors on the comments. as i understand it the department disagrees and wants a controllers resort. it would seem to me that the board of supervisors would want to know how 30 women dollars is going to be expended after the voters approved it and that is why we recommend a budget and finance committee reserve. on page-let me comment also, the department has various agreements and disagreements

which i will briefly describe on pages 88-92. page 88, we say the department disagrees with the first recommendation and 16-17. were recommending a downward subsidy. when deputy director, three position with a salary of $180,000 to a manager five position with a salary of $168,000. the mayor's office has requested three deputy director positions in the new department of homelessness and supportive services. we are recommending two of those three new positions. of which one of those positions is a new position or substitution from existing positions. the proposed downward substitutions consistent with the functions of the proposed position which oversees the communications and external affairs unit and supervisors seven staff. on the

recommendation 416-17, they agree-on 17-18, they agree with that get on the bottom of page 80. as i understand. my understanding is that they disagree with our recommendation for attrition savings excuse me, for the administrative analyst position on the top of page 89. that's a total savings of $100,000. however, the department is proposing attrition savings instead of recommended deleting deposition. so our recommendation to you is delete the position. if you disagree with us then you should take with the department has suggested dollar for dollar or specifically, $100,000 in savings from attrition savings. that's on the top of page 89.

>> mr. rose real quick, high level here, before we go into detail, you say were close were massive disagreement out it for massive disagreement that's fine. it is what it is. i suggest we come back wednesday and spent some time working on it. not work on it right now but i just want to get a quick check >> we are in disagreement for fiscal year 17 of two and $48,000. and in year two, $188,000. >> one to keep going to >> i don't think. >> keep going, sorry >> that's totally okay, mr. chairman. on the bottom of page 89 they agree with the attrition savings of 281 .618. on the top of page 90, we are

as we are recommending on the professionals specialized services, a reduction of 163.326, they are suggesting that you only cut $63,000. so, our recommendation is $163,000. they want $100,000 more than that would make the reduction $63,000 if you except that. on the balance i would also note the mayor's office is proposed three and $13,000-i think that covers what i just stated about the $163,000 purchase the $63,000. then on the latter half of that scene recommendation, additionally the mayor's office has proposed one new 0923 manager to position as a technical adjustment to strategic

planning needs. assessment process. we consider managing that assessment process to be responsibility of a manager five position for which the budget and legislative analyst is recommending approval to support this or teach it planning process. we recommend downward substitution of one new 923 manager thomas to position, to one new 9029 programs support analyst and provide technical in elliptical and which is to go support to the strategy plan needs assessment process. they does agree with that part of the recommendation again to summarize they disagree with that. did you agree with $63,000 of the 163 on page 91, this which i've already referred to as this office building we are we are recommending a reserve if we consider this to be a policy matter to purchase this facility

on turk street. but we do recommend that you reserve the tenant approves portion taken to the budget details. then, the last on page 92, of cover that. that is the-that refers to the reserve on the sales tax which we think the board of supervisors should have the budgetary details before releasing 30+ million dollars worth of funds >> okay. thank you mr. is much appreciated. first of all, mdm. clerk would you call items 12-14 >> item number 12 >>[reading code] item number 13 >>[reading code]. item number 14, >>[reading code].

>> thank you. before you go week of the department has been waiting here due to my error, colleagues, the amendment for item 10 they were technical amendment. i would requested so can i entered in a motion to accept the minutes for item 10 at five and 10, 11 and 15 to the full board on july 12? moved and seconded. can we take that without objection? >>[gavel] >> sorry, if you would you want to respond to mr. roses comments? >> yes, thank you very much for the opportunity. i would just talk through some of the things that we've agreed upon there were some disagreements a lot. we've agreed to reduce in your to staff training by $15,000 could have agreed also to increase the budget for attrition by 280,000 hours to

approximately this go your 17 and 18 and a partial reduction in professional services 2 x 60 $3000. where we disagree, and deleting the 1822 policy analyst position, we feel that it is important that the new department has planning staff who are available to look at the data that were generating to help make good decisions on how we want to use our resources to learn about invest practices in the organization. we are essentially losing that planning capacity by creating a new department. hsa planning division did a really excellent job on some of these areas and we need to have that capacity in the new department if we are going to be a true data-driven smart department that's using our resources in the best possible manner. the

downgrading of the deputy position, we also feel like this is-will be harmful to their comments in order to we believe having deputy for external affairs is very very important. they will be the face vista, to the general public many of whom have great concerns about this issue. this is not just about educating the public. on the issue it's also about working to address concerns the public may have truly serving the front door of this department to the general public. we feel it requires a highly skilled position and we believe it once deputy director level. the reduction to professional services, were also very concerned about. we

are hoping to engage in nationally recognized nonprofit organization who has helped develop department like this in great core dated entry systems around the country that work in places like houston, salt lake city, and around the country 12 cities and counties improve the way they do this work. i feel this is impregnable incredibly critical component and really it's a one-time investment that you not that we should not get exactly the services we need as were try to figure out the direction for the department. finally, moving from a 0923282917, that is a communications position. who will really be working closely with not only the media with the general public. there are a number of highly skilled individuals with think would be wonderful in his position that as you know, it's challenging to attract talent in the city at times and i think it's important that we really put this position at the level where it should be so we can attract individuals who can help advance the organizations goals. and as far as 440 turk goes, were strongly believe

that's an important having a one building's very important part of creating this new department. if we are spread throughout the city, it really is going to be difficult to achieve the goals laid out of that is of having one unified system will end up with multiple systems. i fear it will take much longer to bring the various departments together and lastly, if i could comment on the reserve for the first year, you have the details of how the funding is going to be sent. i agree the second year make sense for that to be held in reserve adding further details. >> thank you. we will direct a few people. i just want to say to building on turk, i think it's will be important that this upon hat gets off to its inaugural year. the often right foot. working in separate

buildings never produces good results and i think is a critical department for cities with some government supported mr. rose, one question i've have read before we go to supervisor kim. total your one report i have 838, is that right? >> mr. chairman, we handed out a revised reports today. it's dated today we just handed out just before the committee started. i believe the clerk passed it out. i should've referenced that. >> thanks. can you repeat the new numbers? >> yes. this is on page 87 is a recommended reductions is 593.610. let's see. that would be the bottom line. >> your to? >> year two, it would be for 84.873. >> 484

>> 44.873. >> sorry, supervisor kim >> thank you. my question is in reference to the six navigation sites that referred to but the board passed. this is the second time our office has learned navigation center locations via the press before we heard it from your office immediate speakers are not going to be navigation centers sites but we read yesterday at three locations, to which the district i represent. the national hotel site in the tenderloin meta-site on valencia street. i want to confirm whether this is the case or not? >> i have not read that article and the only decision that is been made around the navigation center is the civic center hotel. early operate like community housing partnership and of course the

existing navigation or and 1950 mission at no other decisions have been made as to the exact locations >> do you have proposed sites? >> were looking at a number of different sites. we are thinking about the site in the dogpatch area that's sam dodge is been working closely with the community on and with supervisor as well. we are have budgeted for the-allowed for in the legislation, the conversion of an existing shelter into a navigation center. that would need to be rfp out about the location will be determined by the results of that rfp. as far as other sites, we don't have any particular sights in mind at this time. >> thank you for that. just to reiterate, it would be great for us to be able to work with you in advance. in this case it looks like the press just put that location out there. without confirming with your office which is in the future we love people to work with your office on proposals proposed sites. >> okay. mr. rosen

>> one but me make one other comments. the designers in the department concurs with our recommendation in 17-18 but that apartment is stating the $11 million is already included , spelled out in the budget in the first year. we could not figure it out. there are funds in there but we cannot link specific positions to specific dollars, so we see no harm in having that apartment just come back to the board and tell us specifically how new funding $11 million in new funding is going to be precisely expanded. i mean that's what you're doing right now in the budget and we think the budget analyst could not figure it out. it should be some further details coming back to the board. >> okay. so, to be clear, director, [inaudible] because

you're objecting to. do you have a dollar amount on that? >> yes. it's two and $48,000 in the first fiscal year 16-17 could 181 in fiscal year 18. >> okay, because there's a lot of recommendations you. objecting to the 11 nine dollars in reserve? >> correct. >> we will amend that to accepting the la recommendation all that into reserve until we can provide more detailed and connect sources. >> okay. you're okay with everything except those,, the reserve amount, odyssey were putting forward the swim objections to the turk amendment. can we get

clarity-if we ask our make sure were very articulate about what we are doing. >> you want specific-. so, were not agreeing to the 095320933 at $14,000. the additional reduction to professional services of $100,000 and the 0923 to the 2917 $32,000. we agree to the

1822, as long as we maintain a position of authority and the savings will come through attrition. >> okay. i tell you what i think there's a lot of complexity of it when we have you come back next wednesday. continue to work with our budget analyst. my office as well as certainly all the committee members here and everyone on the board of lubricant to give them get what will do is lobby back next wednesday. i look for to seeing you at that point. >> thank you >> then, colleagues, one of that is the just as well as it relates to narrow the remaining legislative items, i think we should hold them until next wednesday as well. i'm trying to think here. actually, i don't think there's any-does anyone have any questions on turk? that's one of the items. comments? mr. city attorney >> on item 12, following public comment, you are probably forwarded back to the full board is a committee report said department can be formally formed this group is possible.

>> do we have a amendment two item 12? >> yes. the clerk's office got an error in the table contents on page 2. it doesn't matter for the section titles on page 4. so we provided a corrective copy to the clerk and would ask after public comment you make a motion to amend >> after public comment >> following public comment yes. >> we can to an out? >> right >> let's open this up to public comment. does anyone wish to comment on items 12-14? items 12-14, sir? >> bill quick my name is--i can solve the homeless problem with storage lockers in less than a year. know the way you do that is you fabricate storage lockers like they do in

japan all over the world and you start stacking them up and you can solve the homeless problem in less than a good i promise you. all they need to be is fabricated with a little work you can have a [inaudible] i was either going and you can seconds up to the moon. people use them for offices already. that's the way get started now and you don't even have to build a building. i'm serious as a heart attack. you can take oh storage lockers and make unique homes and you don't have to build a single golding. all you have to do is get property from the city, get permission from the city to let you use that property and you don't does a single thing. all you do is start stacking up these incredible little homes made out of beautiful little storage

lockers. i was in the navy. we lived in submarines much like that. but all you do is build a nice little beginning fabricate them, and you don't have to spend a penny on building a single mother building in san francisco and by the way, some places wailed by the beach need homes also. that's way out by the beach. anyway you have a great weekend supervisors. i think we can solve it. go for it. have a great weekend. my name is read and you have a good we can get. thank you. anybody wish to comment on items 12, 13 and 14 seeing none, public comment is closed. speedo >> collects bits take these one way on item 12, this accretion of their prominent subject can have a motion to accept the amendment as administered by gibner and four to our board of supervisors next week? >> you don't need public

comment on items well becau just took it for you can afford it out >> just forwarded out as a committee report. cannot a motion? moved and seconded. can we take that without objection? speedo >> items 13 and 14, mr. rose, do you have a potential amendment on 13 >> yes only go to the recommendation. our suggestion recommendation to the board of supervisors, on page 4, item 13, we recommend human the proposed resolution to require the director of property to provide the clerk of the board of supervisors the copy of the executed purchase and sale agreement the results of a complete appraisal within five days of the execution and notify the board of supervisors immediately upon the close of the escrow with the san francisco housing authority. we consider approval of the proposed resolution as amended be a policy matter for the board of supervisors because the board of supervisors night approved the creation of the new department of homelessness and supportive housing in the 16-7 budget for the new bond which is now before judge

>> thank you. this update if that's reasonable ask i think it seems that weight >> chairman farrell it is. >> thanks. so colleagues, if there's no discussion or comment i like to entertain a motion to accept mr. rose's recommendation on item number 13 and then at the same motion for item 13 as amended and item 14 to the full board on july 12. moved and seconded. can we take that without objection? >>[gavel] >> with that, mdm. clerk >> item number 14 is still open. that was included in the previous-that was 13 importantly for that out. >> thanks. >> with that, colleagues,

could i entered in a motion to continue items number two and three to our next budget and finance committee meeting? moved and seconded. can we take that without objection? speedo >> mdm. clerk would you please call item 16 >> item 16 >>[reading code] >> thank you mdm. clerk. this is our last item city. it's a hearing called by supervisor for president breed good i want to thank her for doing so. critically important lower look at here so we'll turn it over to president breed >> thank you chairman farrell. thank you to the budget and finance committee for hosting this hearing today. this very important hearing. we all know that the homeless situation in

the city and county is san francisco is out of control. please see it every day when we walk on the streets. it's heartbreaking to witness and frustrating to feel it's not getting six. san francisco spends anywhere between 240-2 and her $50 million on homeless services each year. yet, we are not seeing significant improvements. but animals homeless individuals on the street or in the feeling that things are getting better for them and for the city. that is why in december i requested this report, a full performance audits of all homeless services in san francisco. we asked the hard questions that people often don't want to answer. what are we spending this money on? what is working and what is not?, think supervisor farrell for joining me in the request and my colleagues for supporting it. specifically, we asked for an inventory of all homeless services offered in

san francisco with provider level precision, a review of the city's homeless population data and needs assessment, and evaluation of the contracting procedures for homeless services, including how contracted services are meeting the community needs no contractors are monitored for quality performance. an assessment of the existing service mix and funds to support the homeless, and a best practices survey to identify strategies for homeless services that are succeeding in other cities. after months of diligent work, the budget and legislative analyst has put together a detailed report. thank you to amanda-for all of your work and two-campbell and of course mr. harvey rose. for me, the biggest takeaways from your report that we need a comprehensive citywide needs assessment to specifically

identify what types of services each homeless individual needs, connect him or her with those services, and to track the outcomes of those connections. and, to hold everyone involved accountable to actually improve those outcomes among both for the homeless and the city. i plan to take this opportunity to follow through on the recommendations in this audit and work with colleagues to legislate improvements where they are needed. we are spending nearly a quarter of $1 billion each year, yet still, over 6500 people remain homeless in san francisco and thousands are forced to sleep on our streets every day. i met with the incoming director, jeff--i'm going get that name right one

ticket yesterday, not to speak for jeff, but he clearly seems fully aware and supportive of these efforts. so i look for to working with jeff in the new department to make it happen could similarly, the report points out we are not maximizing wraparound services for those who need them, nor using our homeless dollars as efficiently as we should. having police officers serve as the first line of outreach is not a cost-effective were particularly helpful for the folks they connect with. for many individuals short-term rental assistance is often both more effective and far cheaper than permanent supportive housing. using rental assistance for those individuals opens up more supporting-supportive housing for those who truly need it. we have an opportunity with this new list apartment to bring our

efforts under one roof, to compress a fully assess the needs we face and to allocate our resources more efficiently. ultimately, as i said, our goal is to hold everyone accountable to providing the kinds of services that we know this population needs. now, we know there are a lot of service providers. we know there's a lot of programs but ultimately, we have to do a better job at not only connecting the dots between all of these different programs and services we provide, but making sure that their outcomes and that we are tracking those outcomes and were doing everything we can to not only help get folks off of our streets and into housing, but to keep them house. it takes a lot of work, we know. we do and already spending a lot of money and it's definitely time that we look at this and address this in a more conference of way. before i

open it up for review of the report, i just want to say, i'm really proud of a lot of the things that the city and county does to address this particular issue. but i often times see kind of the gujarat receipt of the city gets in the way of real progress. i think one of the frustrating things i continue to experience is how we build more affordable housing but the reality is there's no connection from sometimes to the homeless population in the world for the housing with oh. there's very little connection but we think that i mean, we basically need to make better connections again, to the folks that need this housing the most and more specifically in this report them i really appreciate the fact that we want to make sure that we prevent individuals from becoming homeless in the first place through many of our

great assistance programs. we know there are some things working. more recently, about two years ago, the city and county of san francisco for the first time gave the housing authority $2 million to rehabilitate-andrew a coalition of homelessness made this recommendation to me early on in office,-that we rehabilitate nt public housing units. units that were empty for several years. we have so far rehabilitated and now have 179 families because of that effort over two years ago. those are the kinds of things that we need to do. these families are housed. they are getting support. hamilton family services, which jeff used to work for along with homeless prenatal and other services provided the necessary support around some of the sick needs of these families, we have

programs that cannot work. we need to make sure those programs have the resources they need to be affected. we need to make a hard decisions to cut the programs that are not changing and saving the lives expect them to safe with the money they are getting. so this is a hard conversation to have, but i think that we are in a good place to begin the process of having it. yes, these are good economic times for the city and county of san francisco. but some of us when we work when i worked in nonprofit world, remember, when the cuts continue to happen when the layoffs were happening , and we have to be prepared for that. that's where the value of any dollar we spend is so critical because it makes a difference between someone sleeping in a home or sleeping on our streets. this is why

this pulling together this report understanding it, and working with jeff and his department to try and move towards the direction of doing something that's going to make a difference is so important to me. i want to think again my colleagues for being here today and with that, i think of data turn it over to i think seven campbell is going to do the presentation on the budget and legislative analyst reports on this particular issue. i'm looking forward to a really good dialogue about this and hopefully outcomes that will definitely make a noticeable difference in our city. thank you. >> good afternoon pres. breed and members of the budget and finance committee. from the budget and windows lives within us. will give a presentation. i do want to introduce the team who worked on this is jennifer millman and jd-would to the analyst on this. also we have

here today,--who walked those that report that came out a few weeks ago and helps inform this audits. as was julian metcalfe who worked on the cost of quality of life report which also informed this audit. the other thing i would like to say is that the department the director of the new department, homelessness and supportive housing is not yet on board to review not have an opportunity to talk to him about the audit. we did work with the agc eight and dph but repetitions are directed to his new department and i think he will be addressing some of those recommendations. >> thank you and thank you pres. breed and members of the committee. i am amanda-the budget analyst office and we appreciate the opportunity to present on our audits of homeless services in the city. supervisor breed, you actually gave a really great summary of

the reports so i will probably skip through some of these slides for the sake of time. to reiterate, when we were directed to conduct this audit, it was prior to the announcement of the new department. so, just generally, the city's homeless services at the time of our fieldwork, primarily administered by two agencies, the human services agency and dph. hsa primarily runs the shelter system. the city supportive housing master lease program, homeward bound, and manages the resource centers. dph runs permanent supportive housing, the hero healthcare outreach and case management the city's homeless population. major policy document that in guiding city policy, most specifically, the city's 10 year plan to end

chronic homelessness which was created in 2004. the homeless population of supervisor breed mentioned, is currently about 7539 according to the most recent biennial point in time count, which is the major count that the city uses for the homeless population. as the chart on the bottom of the slide shows, over time since 2011, the number of sheltered -on sheltered homeless in the city has exceeded the number of -let me say that again the number on sheltered homeless has exceeded the number of sheltered living in san francisco. to summarize the cities expenditures on homeless services, we categorize the

services according to the eight categories shown on this slide. to chart them over time and we looked at programs serving 50% or more of homeless population. so, you can see that total expenditures over the past three fiscal years have grown and that the major expenditure areas are in permanent supportive housing and substance abuse and mental health care. to break those numbers down, were explicitly for you, the chart on this table shows the budgeted amount for all those programs. those highlighted in yellow are the largest publication by the city. again, for permanent and supportive housing, substance abuse and mental health, and also outreach and case management. our report produced

five major findings of the first finding is on needs assessment. the supervisor breed tension, that was one of the areas that we were directed to look at in the scope of the audit. we couldn't really look at it because the city actually doesn't conduct currently a formal needs assessment could the value of a needs assessment is to identify gaps in services and help target city spending concludes that the city has been relying on outdated policy document to identify homeless service needs. in conjunction with a point in time count. the major policy document again being the 2004 10 year plan to end chronic homelessness. we also found that the city actually has existing data systems that would be quite useful in assessing the needs

of the homeless population, but those systems are currently underutilized. her second finding bookkeeper at this issue of data management. as mentioned, there is an existing system in the city was created by the department of public health. his color-coordinated care management system and it actually offers data on homeless population that has not been fully utilized to track the homeless. instead, dph and hsa are operating multiple decentralized data systems across programs for service tracking and porting reporting. we also find as we looked at data as mentioned by

jeff and his presentation, the city is going to be expanding its coordinated entry program that will require better integration particularly data management. we looked at the cities rfp was just released for the new system that will run that. which is called a homeless management information system. we found that it actually did not capture some of the key functionalities that score the really necessary for sexual coordinated entry program. our third finding is on outreach and access. supervisor breed also mention this. in her remarks. the city is currently spending $37.7 million annually on homeless outreach and response. about half of that amount little over that i think, is spent through the police department and they are providing the most response to 911 calls in calendar year 2015 they responded to about 57,000 quality-of-life violations related to the homeless population, but they're not able to offer services were connect the

homeless with any assistance. our fourth finding is on the city's emergency and transitional shelter system. we have some charts on here to just kind of run through some of the numbers for you that we found the existing shelters are near full occupancy could it's a very low vacancy rate in them. the shelter waitlist request have been increasing over the years and in 2015 the monthly average for shelters was on the waitlist 706. the average number of days the people wait on the waitlist is 26. in general, despite the city's policy, which is actually to phase out shelters, as related to the city's housing first policy, the city is moving forward to expand

shoulder capacity including the navigation center, including other emergency shelters like pier 80. we break out some numbers of the capacity of the chart at the bottom of that slide. the final section in our audit is related to housing placement options and the process. as you all know, given the affordable housing crisis, facing the city, there's a limited number of placement options available for the homeless population. currently, the process for placing people is uncoordinated across programs. not made with regard to vulnerability and there's a heavy focus in the housing options for the homeless population on permanent supportive housing. which is the most expensive way to house the population. other alternatives like rapid rehousing and rental assistance

would offer more cost-effective than for some populations more appropriate solutions to move them from homelessness. our report included i think a total of 12 recommendations. major themes of those recommendations are that the city should take immediate steps to update its policy on homelessness and define it. the city should make better use of existing data and ensure greater data centralization. we should conduct a needs assessment to determine proper alignment of services and programs for the population. the city should expand housing placement options to include cost-effective short-term solutions like rental assistance. in general, the city should really bring a sense of urgency to the issue to introduce more solutions quickly. we understand that the-some of these issues have

been identified, but have been identified in our report are being considered by the leadership of the new department and we hope that the recommendations that we have put forward can provide some guidance as they move forward in their effort and we would like to thank the staff and management at hsa and dph for all their assistance throughout this process. we are able to answer any questions that you might have. >> thank you. i just want to ask a few brief questions and mature just wanted to make some comments about the reports, but just quickly, do you think that there are cost savings toward --if we were to move towards a rapid rehousing first model, would be potentially any cost savings?

>> as a relates to what we spend on all these departments in our region all the money that's going towards all these measures, would that be the better approach? >> i think will be more cost-effective per person for sure good in the short term, there would not be cost savings to expand those programs. it would be an additional cost to the city because were not recommending in our report that we reduce funding for permanent supportive housing. but, probably in the long-term, the city would realize savings from expanding things like rapid rehousing and rental assistance. those programs are designed to promote self

sustainability, so the idea is to help people with short-term financial assistance so that they can sport themselves in the long-term. >> okay, thanks. i'll have some other questions later but i want to get the director an opportunity to respond to the report and make comments. mr. kaczynski. >> thank you president breed and supervisors. first, i like to begin by offering praise and congratulations to the team who worked on this report. i don't disagree with any of the recommendations and for those of you who know me know that's a pretty rare occurrence. i think they captured perfectly what the new department needs to focus on. i think they also did a good job at the end of the report listing the questions that we should all be very proud of and before i go into my comments in the report i just want to knowledge that whereas these are important recommendations, we don't they build upon the amazing work that is been done by trent-at ages eight and barbara garcia at the heart of public health to make us really one of the

premier i think one of the best cities in the country that's addressing homelessness. i know that sometimes hard to believe in people look around the streets. i would argue with you they will were seen on the streets has much more to do with the prevalence of and an increase in issues on heroin addiction and the strength of street drugs that's been increasing at an alarming rate for the past few years if not the past decade. but it's important to note group san francisco has .8% of our population is almost, la is 2.2% and many other major cities in the united states over 1%. as many cities that double-digit increases in homelessness, in the past two years event has had a 3.9 percent increase i don't think that's good enough and i'm not saying we should say, we've not got too bad, but i think it's important to note some amazing work has been done and it's a great platform for the

department to build off of. i do want to comment on a few issues that came up in the reports just to clarify some viewpoints. but one thing is amazing to been able to capture so well, the homeless services ecosystem. however, there are some gaps in the information that's available it's very confusing and difficult to understand. even for those of us who work in the field for 20 years i think a point in time count in the data collection we currently do is very flawed. i think there's no clear network map that shows all the services that actually exist in the city because i think if you are missing and it is hard to understand the funding and actually i think we overstate how much funding is actually going towards homeless services in the city and overinflated especially in the areas of mental services and substance abuse. although these things need to get worked out by the new department but i think

given the information that they had available to them was really a great report and one of the best i've seen have seen many. a couple just random points that are in the work when is the issue that's come up and also in the report requested by supervisor mar run the police spending $20 million on quality of life crimes have inherent folks speaking about the new department should be the first responder on issues of homelessness on the street. i want to say while i agree that a lot of qualifications around that. i think that there is a strong difference between people are living on the street and engage in criminal behavior that i should do not want the assistance or need the assistance of our department that is a very small small percentage of the population but it's very visible and i don't want to give the public the impression that our department sort of the first responder run criminal activity that's occurring. that would be both wise and unsafe and either

be very counterproductive. we need our outreach seems to be in the fields not enforcing quality of life crimes but actually building relationships with people were on the streets and working with them to get them into services. this a very very challenging task in our hot team deserves all kinds of praise from everybody in the city for the difficult work they do but there has to go out and say you need to move along or no, you can't do that here is going to be very difficult for them to build these relationships wonders individuals who are due to mental health or other reasons are resistant to initially resistant to services. having it's also they make a recommendation around a 10 year plan. i believe that a five-year plan is more appropriate. i think we need a

agile plan is based on data. the music teacher trained not a book that nobody ever reads. i believe that there's been legislation introduced around a five-year plan and i strongly support that over a 10 year plan. those recommendations over improving the chances and i think we should get rid of the changes the subject is the shelter reservation system and it should be part of a single data system that coordinates also mrs. for homeless individuals and families in the city. i agree it's broken but don't believe it should be improved. it should really be scrapped. as far as-the rp that's out around the age of minus system, i cannot agree more with you around that did not capture the full needs of the system and in fact a meeting with esther steve, and the mayor before taking the position, one of the things we discussed was that i was going to need to be involved in the process and to have a say in what gets developed and we will be negotiating with the vendor that is selected in order to make sure that the full functionality that you've identified as being so important is included in the system. the last thing i want to just talk about was the shelter versus on sheltered in the city and the growth of

shelters versus growth of housing. the reason why we have many more on sheltered homeless individuals than other cities is because we made a decision to invest in housing as opposed to investing in shelters and worse i think that's an important and we should continue with that policy of housing first policy, it's clear our shelter system is close to capacity and needs to be expanded in or to address the issues of encampment did i think the navigation centers and some of the work were considering right now going to be responses but shouldn't minimize both the capital and long-term investments and anything that's temporary only solves-and will find creative ways that we hope to share with you in the future. i also want to point out that yes, shelters have been growing in the city but permit housing and housing subsidies have been growing at a much much faster pace. if you were still firmly rooted in the housing first approach. however, having some these recent changes reflect the growing problem was street

homelessness and encampment spirit we need to try to solve those but minimize our costs to not invest in a lot more board shelters are challenging to manage an ineffective in terms of producing outcomes were hoping for. i thank you very much and happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you very much. all right. i think i'm good with questions for now if you don't want. so, supervisor-in my leaving this hearing? >> you are >> supervisor farrell >> thank you president breed and no one at my real quick thanks to mr. kaczynski particulars position not going to entail going for. i know it's not an easy task. but mr. kaczynski has been when the most i think thoughtful and amazing people on this topic that worked with over the last few years and certainly look

forward to the future ahead and working together but thanks for being here and i know it's a long road but were all in it together so thank you. >> thank you. my question would be i know that were talked about your budget. i know that there are some disagreements on the budget. i look forward to seeing a very robust discussion next week between you and the budget and legislative analyst, what do you think the cost savings will be moving many of the services from hsa and dph from those specific departments to your department under your management? >> i don't believe there's actually going to be significant cost savings. i think what we are going to see his improved outcomes for the money that were currently spending as i mentioned before, i'm frustrated well in my

position as a former director of two different nonprofits that the system doesn't necessarily drive people towards the resources that they need the most. so we may be spending a lot of money putting somebody in a permanent supportive housing really does not need it and that's really $20,000 a year investment that is forever essentially. i think by making sure that we aligned our peoples needs up with a proper investment that were going to make were going to have a real increase in outcomes and a reduction in the street population. >> okay. can you tell me and i know again, there's a lot that's expected. you just started. i definitely appreciate the fact that you have dug in, feet first to try and get this issue resolved quickly so that it's managed well, that there's a system so that is effective, and one of the things that i hear often times from folks who talk about

this issue is who are these people. we are are they coming from? i know from my experience of spending some time in the haight and talking to people but yet to meet one person who's actually was from san francisco. this is just specific to the haight pursue the tenderloin which i've run into a lot of people that i know who are unfortunately now homeless and i guess i'm trying to understand the population and the challenges with a population, and how we can make sure that we do a better job of making it clear, especially to members of the public, who may not understand that a diversity of the population what the population is, who we have been able to help our homeward bound program and rejecting people with their families, i guess what i'm trying to understand is, how do you think your department is going to be able to communicate to the public

what this population is and how there are different levels of services clearly needed the different kinds of people? >> i think that's really important question because i think that the public discourse and erika brown homelessness is often based on misinformation or sensationalism were voices from extreme with extreme viewpoints on the position. but i think it honestly is going to take at least a year for us to really have a strong understanding of the population. the data that exists now is very very difficult to understand. for example, the point in time counter tells us there's 587 people and families currently homeless, but the school district tells us that there are over 2000 students in the san francisco unified school

district better homeless. we really need to get a better understanding of this to do exactly what you recommended and we spoke about >> families have had several kids visit but the numbers in the point in time counters 596 people my families. >> got it. dick there's a difference. something is wrong. we need to figure out who is and get the data correct and really break out by population type single-dose, people are chronically homeless youth and really understand the numbers, the demographics, what their needs are and where the gaps are. i believe gore calls for gas analysis, which are already beginning the process of doing, but it's important we not conflate all these issues together and we speak about homelessness, really understand is a complex problem that affects different populations very differently the resources needed to address those

populations are very different that figure will go a long way towards helping answer and expensive public some of the questions you have but honestly, given the state of our data systems is good to take some time. >> okay. the other thing i know you and i talked yesterday a little bit about this and this is where my biggest concerns,. for me, as a supervisor, when i first became supervisor, was a big issue around jobs and individuals needing jobs. for me, it was important that we not only got people employment opportunities, we make sure they held onto those opportunities. the same with housing. our goal is to make sure that we transition individuals, of cod hopefully i'll them to hold onto that housing and help them to hopefully become self-sufficient and oftentimes we know support is needed and you're going to be working on some issues to try and make sure there were connecting people the right services but ultimately, realistically, once we house people what can we do

to make sure that they don't lose their housing?'s then, and how can we continue to track that in order to make sure that we don't disconnect from that particular individual? >> with tracking piece i think is incredibly important again will be the major one of the major pushes during our first years. this department is to create a system that will allow us to do this because the reports that we get often have different metrics nonprofits report them differently what's in affection and what's a negative move out with a positive move out. we need to set standards as a city and come to a decision around what is a positive move out when is a negative move out make sure everybody reports on it the same way. as far as how do we prevent people from becoming ejected from city programs or and then the other question was

around let me address that one first. well, i think we need to look at the different types of supportive housing have available because there's very different. roughly right now broken into pier tears. there are people in supportive housing that their path toward self-sufficiency is going to be a very long one if not impossible to achieve its helping those folks thinking that housing to live a healthy and safe life i think is an excellent goal for those individuals that we need to accept that and understand that's really the case. but i think we also need to understand that some people living in supportive housing the need to be connected to jobs that need to be encouraged to become self sufficient than he to think about their economic lives baby in a different way so they can plan somewhere whether not relying on publicly subsidized units so that unit can be made available for the next person, but it's really not black and white. there's many different variations of this and i think we need to again break this down into understanding the population well i will tell you from my experience, and the

acuity of the individuals were coming into committee housing partnership in hamilton family center's got worse and worse. over the years. people often homeless longer. their substance abuse problems are more challenging. we need to really address that issue and understand the depth housing that's available for people who have pretty complex needs. because having them on the street is certainly not going to work but for those who do have a pathway towards economic social efficiency, our department is can work closely with hsa and with emily wg on making sure we can find pathways for people i've not will help him get up homelessness we also want them to get a poverty and its partnerships with the other departments that help make that happen >> i appreciate you saying that because i think oftentimes i see department operate on their own and even operate their own job placement and training programs. when, in

fact, for example the western addition deferred axis point, which is doing an incredible job not only helping people gain the skills they need to get employed but to stay employed, they keep a watchful eye over individuals who they know may be in their 20s or 30s and they've never worked a job and this is the first opportunity, they need someone to help facilitate that process and were to make sure they're able to keep that job could i want to make sure that there are other services that were somehow connecting the dots with the different services and were making sure that people are able to eventually maybe. her own rent and the challenge we have of course, is san francisco rent and if we have a situation where there is supportive housing, and someone become self-sufficient, what happens then? there off drugs.

they're back on their feet. they are working or what have you and then they are wondering, wait a minute what's my next move because i can't find a place to stay, plus i'm not making a decent amount of money to pay what is market rate in san francisco. so, i think part of what i'm saying i don't want to him to get discouraged the more poorly, i don't want us to shut them out the door actually rehabilitated only to put them right back on the street. so, i just see that happening as well which is why am really excited about taking it to the streets really organic program that started and they pay for housing and they hopefully there's two individuals we know that have got permanent jobs and are now paying their own way and still a part of the program, still have to keep the streets clean and do with graffiti abatement to be part of the community but i think we have to really look at look at long-term and not just the immediate see of

getting someone house and that's a goal and we walk away. we need to do a little bit more to expand on that and i'm hoping this department will take that approach won't necessarily probably require additional dollars as much as it will require partnerships with other departments that already possess the resources necessary to open this positive >> we are currently working with already the mayor's office of housing in the san francisco housing authority on this idea of separate housing or housing ladders so folks in permanent supportive housing, which is quite expensive to operate, have opportunities to housing they can afford it may be due payable over more of their income to rent,, but will be in a place where they can be more so sufficient, not be bound by the rules that exist in permanent supportive housing be able to have a be on the path

from homelessness to true self-sufficiency and independence. >> thank you. thank you very much. >> i bring up one more point that i forgot, we spoke about but i want to go on the record as saying, this is very relevant given currently budget season. one of the things i think it's going to be important to do is look at the

nonprofit contracts should is the best the jury of funding that exists in my budget, $175 million. i just wanted to general comments about this. one is that were oftentimes not paying those organizations were they really need to be able to do their jobs effectively. we don't give them a escalator's in their contracts so they can predict what's going to happen from year-to-year. they can get people raises. it makes it harder to retain and recruit staff. i think it's very important that we look at improving the way we conduct with these nonprofits because they're the ones out on the front lines doing the work but the flip side to that is, and i think it's very important particularly now, when we find nonprofits to do things we need to make sure that lines up with the city strategy. too often, the funding programs that don't necessary line up with a clear strategy around addressing homelessness and how were they to save money over going to more wisely invest money is not just related to have it corrugated interests entry system is also having a single strategy and making sure that the contractors are doing what needs to get done, that was not what they feel need to be done i feel they should be part of the process of deciding what the strategy is what the city locked in on a strategy that funny needs to be directed only towards that strategy and not towards an organization and would've insane to nonprofits

is, you should have to do fundraising for work that were contacting you to do. you should be able to have a should we be she paying you a failed price for the work you do just liquidate palmers or electricians or any other vendor does work for the city, but you should not ask us to do things that are not within our strategic mission. that's what you should be fundraising for. getting that kind of alignment this can be critically important and as you hear from members of the nonprofit community, by former colleagues, run the budget, i hope that your discussions with them are within that frame around the sponsor we spending money towards a clear vision that the city has decided upon. that they should use their opportunities as 501(c)(3) organizations to raise money to do the things that the filter mission to fund the secret sauce that makes them special and different but we need to make sure our funding is spent on the city strategy >> rates. thank you i look forward to. i see barbara garcia is here. would you like to make any comments about the report as well? excuse me supervisor yee had a question. >> no, come on up. i just want

to say to jeff, that was very refreshing what i just heard. i just don't hear that from our city department heads often enough that the work that people do on the ground and the support they need so thank you very much for making that statement. >> thank you >> thank you >> they do supervisor barbara garcia director of health. i just want to also thank the report. i think did you read a good job. also, the fact that i'll be working very closely to the new director to ensure that the wraparound services, including clear about what our job is what their job is. also, really working closely to ensure summary comes to residential treatment summary comes out of hospital somebody comes out of our jail, conversations they also i would to get stabilizing services that the homeless department will have. so, we'll be working closely both sides i think this

will be the piece is currently really important as of the last several weeks we've been working on a really important schedule federal grant that will allow us to spend some those dollars on a data collection and so i just want to make sure that you understood we are very committed to this department and making sure that you have the required services they need to ensure the supportive housing and people are stabilized in their homes. >> thank you for being here. with that, i would like to open it up to public comment. if there's any members of the public-supervisor kim i apologize >> thank you president breed. this is a question for director garcia will be talked about this. i want to understand better our budget request samir haddad were included last year at this time for expanded medical respite shelter in the

south of market which am very excited for because we know there's many people live on our streets but incredibly sick and not currently served by her existing single dull day shoulders and so i want to get a better understanding of the timeline the opening, work on the scope of the services will look like and how this will fit in my car the overall strategy run your addressing homelessness over the next year? >> thank you. barbara garcia director of health. the medical respite was set up originally to individuals were homeless even hospital to continue the healing process. as you have worked together with the shelter system defenders also people in the shelter system that i believe to sit to be in the shelter system. so, this new respite extension which will open in january, one of things we had to do is-it's owned by st. anthony's we have several lease and that we had to work out the contractor will be coming on in the next few weeks to start construction. they'll be completed in january i know you have great concerns

to make sure we work on that as fast as possible and we will. we watching a very close. better be additional 33 beds and be working with the shelter system and as you know we both worked on ensuring that nurses in the shelter to identify clients were being transferred there were who are there for me to be transferred into the medical respite. so, those services include nursing, medical oversight, as well as if they do need ongoing support of the hospital and clinics are transported there as well. so that's the update supervisor and a work closely with your office to make sure you get monthly updates on where we are in the construction and the hiring of the staff. >> thank you, director. tommy nurses and health professionals do we have now in our shelter system since last february when i first visited? >> i believe we have three nurses an additional three

health workers but i will finalize out with you and give you those numbers. >> i did get an opportunity to visit with the camera separate at we want to thank you for supporting that within your budget. they are just doing tremendous, as you know, tremendous amount of work and it's great to talk to the shelter staff who two weeks after that come forward so they could not imagine the shelter without him that even though they've only been there for brief period attempted just on the data went which was a random day, was extraordinary the line waiting to see your staff members and how acute the care needs are for folks that live on our streets on a daily basis that also want to thank your staff for the work because it's very very difficult work out really really appreciate that commitment. >> i have the same thoughts for my staff and their so excited about the work they're doing you really want to work closely with our new director to ensure that what we did an

assessment of the health status of those are shelter system very chronically ill and so i really believed in the program. i finished extended to others and so medical respite will help because will be putting those individuals who are the sickest into the medical respite. people get better and they come back into the shelter system hopefully to supportive housing. so thank you and we will keep you updated on the program >> thank you. now, i like to open this up to public comment. there's any members of the public comment like to comment on this item, please come forward to. >> i am calling the work of st. anthony's foundation. i just want to make a comment. i was excited to see the reports. i've been poring over it for

the past i guess since monday. i think that one of the things that struck me in reading the report was the repeated reference to housing the first and that being used as reasoning for why during the previous 10 year plan shelters and resource centers were phased-were thought of as being phased out and in fact we did lose beds and reduce resource centers. this sort of idea of housing first i think is something that we as a city need to figure out what the definition of it is because it's different in every city and locality, but what we see now is that if you look at the definition nationally of what housing first means, it means you don't have to go to a shelter system or temporary housing program if you're

homeless and on the street. you go right into housing. in san francisco don't have housing first right now. we don't you have shelter first. there's 800 people on the waiting list for shelter and are waiting on the streets. so i think this concept of housing first and the reality of what it would take to actually implement that according to the standard definition are different and perhaps the city needs to come up with its own definition of housing first so we can understand what that really means and what you would need to take to actually enact that. thanks >> thank you. next speaker, please. are public defender mr. jeff-well, >> i want to come and listen to the >> on down, calm down >> i want to listen to the presentation i support for the housing first policy and for the report. approximate 10-15% of the clients we represent and individuals in the county jail are homeless. many times were

not released simply because they don't have an address. we do have a specific program for homeless individuals in that program is very limited. so, respecting the directors focus on ensuring housing first, we hope that includes individuals who are in the county jail. it's very expensive to house people in the county jail and what i would like to see is a reallocation of the tens of millions of dollars that were spending particularly citing individuals. i spoke to the federal homeless czar was visiting russia. one thing he would suggest is to stop arrestin and citing people for crimes where there's really no action that occurs as a result of that. so, that certainly is something where i would like to

see the city we allocate its focus on housing. thank you >> thank you. either any other members of the public there would like to provide public comment on this item at this time? seeing none, public comment is closed. >>[gavel] >> i just want to thank i colleagues for sitting through this hearing. we all on this board of supervisors, have stepped forward and tried to make changes, try to allocate resources, tried to work with different city departments to address this issue over the years and as i said earlier in my remarks, the frustrating part is we still see that there is an issue and we want to make sure that with all the money that were spending, with all the resources were allocating, were actually effective. part

of being effective is having data and understanding what we are doing right, what we are doing wrong and how we can make it better and move in the right direction. i think one of the things that probably most frustrates me sometimes about the city is how we build affordable housing and how that of former housing often times does not make the connection between the people we know we need to house and that is something i hope will change with the neighborhood legislation, but the situation involving the 179 units were not formally homeless families living in these public housing units, there was a real challenge. it's a challenge because the san francisco housing authority is managed under certain federal guidelines, which makes it almost impossible to try and provide housing for individuals

on the street without making sure when the waitlist is opened may apply to get on the waitlist and get into this housing. so, i think the system is broken. the system to access housing in general is broken because were still stuck to a number of federal laws that make it difficult for us to transition people from our streets into this housing is a priority because of waitlist and other kinds of things that impede our ability to make these individuals a priority for that affordable housing. i think, as i said the neighborhood preference legislation, we pass that legislation is no guarantee that the federal government on occasion will let us actually use neighborhood preference in some of the new affordable housing we build. we are continuing to fight to make that a reality, but i would like the city to make more connections between folks who are living in our shelters into the former housing we build. figuring out better ways to give them priorities so that

they don't get stock in the lottery without thousands of other people and end up not getting the housing that we know we want them to have because they so desperately need it. there's just a lot to do and i think this is a step in the right direction in am committed to continuing to work on this issue and to also hold our different agencies and nonprofit organizations especially accountable for the dollars that are being invested in trying to help address this particular issue. again, thank you to the budget and legislative analyst office for all of your work. even working i know tirelessly for months on this report and i was getting excited out every time i got an update on where we were. it basically the report says what we all know is the case in the city and i definitely want to work with jeff to dig deeper into some of the nonprofit agencies in the work they're doing to have a clearer

understanding of what they're providing and whether or not it's effective and how we can basically shift resources in order to make sure it's going to be most effective agencies that are helping to address this issue. i also want to make sure if there is a need to provide some sort of preference for our homeless families, for homeless individuals, sweeping on our streets, we can do it. we've done it with richardson. the property that's located on across the street from the boys and girls club, unfolds and an golf i think, a place where we have a large number of unfortunately, chronically homeless individuals costing the city millions of dollars, we were able to creatively working with kenny housing partnerships provide permanent housing and support services for those individuals regardless of the challenges

with federal laws and federal tax credits and other things that make it difficult to do so. so am looking forward to us developing more creative policies that help us to get to where we want to be and that is to serve the population that we know needs services and homes the most in the city and county of san francisco. again, thank you to my colleagues. thank you to the budget and legislative analyst. thank you to barbara garcia and to jeff kosinski. do i get right? yes. trent at hsa. coalition on homelessness, together i know we will try, and we will continue to work towards addressing this issue is sitting county of the san francisco. thank you. >> thank you president breed good colleagues any questions or comments? with that, colleagues can enter their motion to file item number 16? moved and seconded. can we take that without objection? >>[gavel] >> mdm. clerk any other business in front of us today.

no further business >> see everybody on monday for public comment is closed. date. we are adjourned. >>[gavel] >>[adjournment] the

commission regular hearing for tuesday, june 21, tuesday, june 21, any kind. proceedings. and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. i'd like to call roll at this time. commissioner president fong commissioner vice president richards commissioner antonini commissioner moore commissioner wu commissioner hillis stepped out we expect commissioner johnson to arrive shortly commissioners at times of issuance no items proposed for continuance we received a late request