sfusd and uesf to answer the allegations and both have refused. the uesf president stated they don't know how the data is gathered, stored, or reported. i made a public reports request regarding the storage and reporting of par data and sfusd told me that they diligently searched, but don't know how they store the data. par is siphoning a million dollars a year from proposition a funding. there is much about propsation a and appendix x that warrants additional review. >> your time has passed. >> okay. thank you for your time. thank you. >> then i do have two speakers on this item gill. >> he had to leave. >> and steve. >> hi. >> thank you. >> again, i'm with defend public

education now. i think we're not talking about san francisco. we're talking about a program that's been implemented all over the state in lausd, thousands much teachers have been put in teachers jails. in berkeley it was challenged by a steward of berkeley federation of teachers because it was -- he found it was being targeted senior teachers and african-american and latino teachers. and after he began to defend those teachers, he himself was put in this program. so there's a -- i think it's becoming apparent and clear this program is used in a discriminatory way with a lack of transparency and also that there's also some other things that are going on here in this district. that is, teachers are being requested to have nondisclosure agreements when they go into the par program. secret nondisclosure agreements to they can't talk about what's going on. i think it's illegal and n. a public body to require

nondisclosure agreements. why with you do that? why would you do that for a teacher? the reason is, there's a lot of bullying -- workplace bullying and discrimination going on against the teachers and staff in san francisco. we have examples with the martin luther king middle school where teachers were being bullied by the principal and the assistant principal, harassed out of the school. there was a frame up against a staff member to fire him and one of the problems is there's not transparency. i think there needs to be an investigation of this program, and i think it should be terminated or at least moratorium should be put on the program and action against teachers until there's a full investigation. i found it -- we found it outrageous that $1 million is being spent on this program when that money should be going to the teachers, should be going to the staff. it's coming from parcel a. it was teachers were unaware this was going to be happening. the public is unaware. if it's going to go places should go to the teachers and

staff and not consultants and programs that bully and intimidate the teachers. we say enough is enough. it's time to stop harassing and bullying the teachers out of their jobs. >> okay. thank you. the next item is 2, posted in the agenda a listing of cash donations. also, of supplies and equipment items donated to the district item n is the memorial adjournment. this is in memory of ann austin, a retired district administrator. educator ann austin served in an exemplary manner for more than 30 years as a teacher, counselorrer, assistant principal, program director, and principal of the san francisco unified school district. she was known for wearing eye-catching african attire. educator ann austin started her career as a teacher at polytechnic al high school and retired as the principal of ida

b. wells. a learner, she was reared in alabama, graduating from the local high school during the segregated south and learned a degree from a and m, a distinguished school where she spent her life as a supporter and active member of the san francisco bay area alumni chapter. she earned an ma from an educational administration from san francisco state university. educator ann austin worked with african-american and latino students. she wanted to help students from single family households and students raised by grandparents. in order to help her students in the business courses that she taught at gallileo and the former school of business and commerce, educator austin was a visionary and called her

students -- and taught her students the king's english using rap. educator austin would go around the city sharing her poetic talents, released a cd and became known as the education rapper. she was an active member of the san francisco alliance of black school educators and a sorority. she served as the alliance isn't with a passion for serving on the oratorical festival and raising funds for student scholarships, many were the first generation to attend college. on monday april 16th, when she arrived at ida b. wells, the school was like a ship turned on its side in turbulent waters at sea. educator austin urned it the school around. she implemented the 3as, which the school uses today, first is for attendance. second is for attitude.

third is for achievement. she coined the terms i rise for the exemplary saturday school program held at dr. martin luther king middle school in partnership with the sfusd and the san francisco alliance of black school educators. ann austin passed away on march 13th, 2018, and the board of education, the superintendent of schools extend our deepest sympathy to her husband of 52 years, dr. therman austin. she now takes her rest. however, she will never be forgotten by her students, colleagues, parents, and family who make up the sfusd. thank you to virginia and emily for providing us this beautiful tribute to educator ann austin. thank you. [ applause ] >> so at this time, we would like to take any public comment for those who have submitted

speaker cards for closed session items. i do not have any cards at this time. so section o is closed. the board will go into close the session. i call this regular meeting into recess, and we'll be coming back . ess, and we'll be coming back >> section p is following the closed session. we're going to resume the regular board meeting and i'm going to report on the closed session action items. a vote on approval -- i move approval of a stipulate expulsion agreement where the parties agreed to waive the expulsion hearing of one high school student case number 2018-13 and stipulated to the expulsion of the student from the district for one year from the date of the board's approval of the stipulated expulsion agreement. i move approval of the

expulsion pursuant to the recommendation of the administrative hearing panel of one high school student case number 2018-14, from the district for the remainder of the spring 2018 semester through the fall 2018 semester. this is the readout of the april 24th, 2018 closed session. the board by a vote of five ayes, two absent, cook and norton approved the -- of two principals in. the board by a vote of five ayes and two absent cooke and no, sirton giand -- no, sir -- ton -- --

[ inaudible ] >> -- give direction to general counsel in the matters of 123d usd in the matters of hl versus sfusd and dc versus sfusd. the board authorized the general counsel to initiate litigation. so those are the closed action items this even. item p is adjournment. this hearing is adjourned. thank you.

>> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. i want to welcome you back to the budget and finance committee. it's 10:02 a.m. i want to thank the broadcast of sf governor tv.

the clerk is linda wong. thank you for being here. i have supervisor stefani on my right and supervisor fewer on my left. call items 7 and 8 together, please. >> yes. [ agenda item read ] i pledge allegiance to the flag

>> thank you. just procedurely, we have to take public comment on this item. >> correct. >> is there anyone would like to comment on items seven and eight? items seven and eight? all right. seeing none, public comment is closed. i would like to make a motion to continue the call to the chair. without objection, the motion passes unanimously. thank you. all right. madam clerk, call one, two, and three. >> clerk: [ agenda item read ]

resolution retroactively authorizing the office of the district attorney to accept and expend a grant in the amount of $306,666 from the california governor's office of emergency services for the innovative response to marginalized victims program for the grant period january 1, 2018, through december 31, 2019. 4/3/18; >> thank you. supervisor chang, we have two ladies from the office that are here to present on this item. these resolutions are three grants for the district attorney from the governor's office for emergency services. would you like to make the presentation? >> good morning. my name is jackie ortiz. i'm the deputy chief of victim

services. yes, i have my powerpoint here. i have packets for each of you, if you would like a copy. >> sure. we'll take a copy for the record, and sfgov has your slides ready to go. >> thank you. i would like to start off with item number one, which is our victim witness grant. we have 10 positions in that grant that covers the cost. we also provide direct services to victims and witnesses. when i started here 31 years ago, we only had three advocates back then, and our grants have definitely increased and improved the quality of services we're able to provide victims and witnesses. in this grant, we were able to acquire two courthouse facility dogs. the courthouse dogs have gone out to meet with victims of crime. they comfort them. they soothe them.

they help them through court preparation, through trials. and they were recently deployed out to las vegas to assist. each dog assisted over 300 victims and helped them through the process. we are able to also provide training with this grant. last year, in 2017, we served 8,626 victims, and we provided 85,821 services. and that means crisis intervention follow-up services, navigating victims through the criminal justice system, emergency assistance, relocation assistance, and a plethora of services we're able to provide victims. also with me is dr. castro-rodriguez. i will let her continue with the powerpoint. >> thank you very much for having us. >> good morning. >> good morning. the second grant that we are

asking for approval of is the elder abuse grant, the xe grant from the california office of emergency services. we work with anyone 65 and older or a disabled or dependent adult, but it also allows us to do a lot of prevention work in the two areas that are critical to elders. financial fraud abuse and pedestrian safety. we were able to the a rebust campaign on each of those issues, reaching thousands in san francisco. we're currently in the middle with campaign vision zero where we're putting up banners all over the city to remind people to slow down for seniors in the crosswalk. we have a high raid of pedestrian fatality. the other thing we were done is able to create a program with

the crisis intervention team and friends so we can meet the victims and work with their families when there is a pedestrian fatality right way so we can support those survivors after the loss of their family member. we provided 4,653 services. the big focus is on the prevention. these are the signs that will go up all over san francisco. drive slowly. give seniors a break. the seniors tend to miss the light because it takes them longer to go through and we want people to slow down. then the ki grant. it was an innovative grant. it was to respond to victims who usually don't come forward for

services. we have placed two full-time advocates out in the community. one is in the bayview and serve the visitation valley and the mission. the outer mission district will be served. we have a lot of crime, but we don't have a lot of people coming forward to receive services. so we were able to place culturally appropriate, linguistically appropriate advocates to be more responsive to crimes, to go door to door, to meet neighbors, to collaborate with service providers. in the last years, we've seen an increase in the members we've been able to serve in the bay district, including a drastic increase in the amount of money we were able to give. we don't have any numbers since it's the first year in implementation, but we'll have new numbers after this year. thank you. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. i have a few.

so i'm glad to see these three grants coinciding with the public information hearing. as you know, we'll be hearing with a member of our street violence prevention program later this afternoon. i was wondering if you could tell me about the victims' services advocate program, particularly whether or not this has been successful in other cities. >> so every jury instructions in california and many across the united states have victim advocacy programs. we're one of the largest in california. los angeles, san diego, a lot don't serve as many as we do. the goal is to go out into the community and meet victims where they are and engage with them in prevention and intervention. a lot of counties do do that. as a result, the number we served last year, half of those are uncharged cases.

so 4,250 victims are uncharged cases. those are people that are victims of a crime. [overlapping speakers] >> how do we determine whether or not the program is successful? what are the benchmarks we're using to determine if the program is serviceable. i understand we're the largest. that doesn't mean we're the best. >> some of the things we use is the amount of money we give out. last year, $6.5 million to the victims in san francisco. and for the community, we have a rubric we use to show where people are. everyone who comes to have has been a victim of a crime. we move them to thriving. i have data that shows 60% improvement for outcome of the bare people we everybodied and now we're using that to determine what we're doing in the community. we do short-term intervention, connecting to services and

supporting the criminal justice system, so these are the only measures we have right now. >> okay. thank you. i'm also interested in your hiring and training process. you mentioned one primary difference between the advocates and the victim services is that these positions will try to gain the trust of the community that doesn't trust law enforcement, particularly through attending community and stakeholder meetings and having competent services in the community. i was wondering if there was more you would like to share with us that you didn't touch on in the presentation. >> yes, one of the last several years, we've been trying to hire people from the community, from the community agencies in san francisco. we've been very successful at that. [overlapping speakers] >> hold on. you say you've been very successful. why do you say that? >> we have a diverse staff. in the bayview grant, we were able to hire someone who has a

lot of connections in the bayview. she's come from the mission. good connections. 85% of staff are people of color. our staff speak eight different languages. we provide a lot of opportunities for people to move up in our organization. >> okay. is the grant expected to recur? it's three years right now. we're hoping to be able to improve it. we don't know until the state knows how much money they have. >> is it reasonable for this body to expect incoming budget cycles, that you will be back? >> yes, it could be. if we're able to apply again, we will. if not, we'll try to implement into existing services. my goal is to have advocates in the community in san francisco. we're trying to figure out how

to fund that. our advocates carry 6 to 700 cases a year. trying to maneuver that and move those around is a challenge for us. that's why we go for outside funding all the time. >> i understand that. thank you very much. i appreciate you answering my questions. supervisor fewer? >> yes, thank you very much. i'm wondering if any of these services go to people -- chinese people who have been victims of the scamming. so we do a lot of prevention work in asian communities around financial fraud. two years ago, we did a lot of work on the blessings scam. we continue to do a lot of prevention and outreach in the community. all of our materials are translated into four languages.

we have people going out to bayview and other areas where we have chinese-speaking individuals at a lot of risk. we do a lot of prevention. the state does not allow us to provide financial compensation for financial fraud. so our goal is to prevent it. >> do you work with the families after an elder has been the victim of this fraud? >> we do. some of the things we can do is make sure they're on to do not call list. we stop the mailings coming from their home. sometimes we change their phone numbers, help them change their phone numbers. we help them file their complaints. some seniors require mental health assistance following those events. we help with all those services. >> does any of these money go to victims of sex abuse? >> the vw grant, the general grant supports those victims, but we have a grant for vulnerable victims that we

applied to, so we have two only working on sexual assaults. it's charged and uncharged. a very few number of those will be charged, but we work with hundreds of victims, even if the cases are not charged. >> i guess my question is this is not a lot of money. i mean, it is money, but it didn't a huge amount of money. it seems as though it's spread in a lot of different ways. so i think i have the same question as supervisor cohen. it's really about impact. so when you're trying to accomplish so many things with this amount of money, it seems as though it's spread all over. are we really having the impact on individuals because we're doing prevention, and then we're also after their victims. we're working with families and the victims themselves, and then

this vision zero. it's a different thing. did we write these grants. >> these are supplemental to the budget. we have general fund we work under. i have a staff of 42 people working with these victims of crime. so these are just grants that were opportunities to expand our work, but we have a pretty robust foundation for the work we're doing. like i said, our staff works very hard. they carry six to 700 cases. we work very collaboratively with people in the community. our work should be an intervention at the point of being a victim of crime. then we work with the community partners to be the long-time support for those survivors. >> okay. thank you very much. >> all right. thank you very much. we'll take public comment. i appreciate both of your presentations. if there's any member of the public that would like to comment on items one, two, or three. you have two minutes. seeing none, public comment is

closed. thank you. i will make a motion to approve this with a positive recommendation. ladies, all right. we'll take that without objection. madam clerk, please call item four, please. >> clerk: yes. item number four. apply for, accept, and expend grant - metropolitan transportation commission - onebayarea grant - $19,346,000 resolution authorizing the filing of an application for funding assigned to the metropolitan transportation commission (mtc); committing any necessary matching funds; stating assurance to complete the projects; and authorizing san francisco public works to accept and expend $19,346,000 in onebayarea grant funds awarded through the mtc. (public works) >> we have rachel alonzo. >> good morning supervisors. rachel alonzo, transportation finance analyst at public works.

this resolution authorizes public works to accept and expend just over $19 million in feder federal funds for two projects. these federal transportation funds are a part of mtc's one bay area program. they're responsible for soliciting the applications and awarding projects in san francisco. the project was approved last july and september by the ta board, which is made up of the same members of the board of supervisors. they're here because of the expand process and mtc requires it to be passed by the legislative body. i'm joined today by the project

managers of these projects. we would be happy to answer any questions you may have. i also understand there's interest in the overall cost and funding plans for better market street. syme happy to speak to that now, if you would like. >> we would like that. >> okay. so since we approved for obag funds for better market street in april of '17, we've updated our costs to reflect the current state of the project. as we reported to the ta board last summer, a power substation has been removed from the scope which has reduced the cost by $100 million. so the total cost is 503 million. together, the plans, environmental, and design phases are estimated to cost 57 million. the remaining 446 million will include construction, necessary underground utility, core capacity to make the transportation system more

efficient. like many projects of this size and scale, better market street will be funded with a variety of local, state, and federal sources. to date, we have secured $234 million for the project of which 97 million is proposition a transportation go bond funds, and other committed funds include federal fta, state of good repair money. general fund, impact fees, and local sales tax. now that the city has developed a proposed consensus design for the first time, the team is aggressively seeking more. we did not received a $39 million state fund grant for the local program. we have other sources we can seek in the coming years, the active transportation program, build as well as spa capital investment grants.

public works and mca are committed to filling and completely funding the entire project. as expected, we've also segmented the project for delivery, and we'll advance the stretch between sixth and eight streets for the first segment of construction. this allows us to deliver an independent portion of the project and also allowing us to use the funds we've already secured in a timely manner. again, happy to answer any questions you may have. >> all right. supervisor stefani? >> thank you for your presentation. just a couple of questions. how much has been spent so far planning this project? >> as reported to the board in july, it was 13 million across all agencies. i would expect in the time since then, it could be up to 14 million now. we're advancing design now that we have the consensus, so spending will be ramping up. >> okay. and so you said without the power substation included, we're

at a price tag of $503 million. >> correct. >> seems very high. very high. i'm just wondering why is it so high. what will it cover? we're talking about market street -- that's half a billion dollars. >> right. it is a lot. i think because it covers such a comprehensive and wide variety of scopes. typically we're used to seeing a project with costs that are not as extreme. at market street, we categorize the scope elements in three different categories. one are major state of good repair investments. it's not the sexy or news making elements, but the things we have to do underground and above ground, so sewer and water will be a part of the project and updating the mta rails on market street, that's a part of the project. and then the second bundle of scope items we talked about are

core capacity improvements. that includes boarding islands, muni overhead fixed wires, the path of gold lights -- what else is included in that? the bicycle facility, the other traction power plants and the s-line loop. rather than have it run all the way down to octavia, it will turn around earlier at mcallister and charles benemann street. and the third scope of times we talk about are enhancements or pedestrian realm items. so trees, sidewalks, updated pavers, curve ramps, site furnishings, the nice-to-have place makeing items. >> is any of the funding coming from sb-1 at the state? >> a local program is part of sb-1. we applied in january. we just found out yet that better market street did not

receive that grant. to the extent that upcoming calls for project or grant funds are made available as a result of sb-1, we'll be seeking that funding, but so far, nothing from sb-1 is funding better market street. >> and the time line for the start of the project? >> so we're starting environmental, and we're shifting from planning to design, and we expect to have design and environmental complete by the spring of 2019 for environmental, and the end of 2020. so december 2020 for design. for construction, as i mentioned, we've split up the project. we always intended to do this for delivery and construction. it maybe it more palatable to bid out and get a wider variety of contractors on board. the segment one construction,

which is six to eight that, schedule is june 2020 to june 2022. currently i imagine the rest of the project will be separated out into additional segments, but right now, we just have two construction schedules. one for segment one and one for the rest of the project. so for the first, it's june 2021 through june of 2023. >> i have one other question. with the costs and impediments they're running into -- now we know they're digging by hand, i asked a question at ta about how to prevent that going forward in the future. is that project and all the delays on that project informed how this project is being carried out? >> not that i'm aware of, but i will look to the project managers to see if they're able to speak to that question. [off microphone] >> i'm sorry. it doesn't work that way. you need to come to the microphone and identify yourself. either one. >> so amy from mta.

i'm more managing the engineering team for better market street to minimize the lessons learned, i understand the when the project picked up, they slow down the construction, but for the better market street, currently, we sent the whole team to do the potholing. first of all, we'll get all the information, utility joined from all the agency, and also we'll base on the current information to really identify a multiple location to really do some potholing. after that, we'll reach out with all the other utility agencies to see how we can coordinate the effort before the construction. so this effort will be working during the phases. >> potholing? >> potholing means we'll have a a contractor identify a small

area, like maybe some area that we can pick a little bit small area, so we can identify the underlying utility. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you. >> all right. i think that's it. we're going to take public comment. thank you for your presentation. >> thank you. >> any member of the public that would like to comment on four? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleague, i would like to make a motion to approve with a positive recommendation. without objection. approved. >> item 5. accept and expend grant - federal highway administration - emergency relief program - addressing severe erosion along o'shaugnessy boulevard - $2,789,354 resolution retroactively authorizing the director of public works to act as the agent of the city and county of san francisco, as a non-state agency, to accept and expend federal financial assistance

under public law 93-288, as amended by the robert t. stafford disaster relief and emergency assistance act of 1988, from the united states department of transportation federal highway administration, and/or state financial assistance under the california disaster assistance act, for an amount not to exceed $2,789,354, to reimburse the local funds used to cover the 2017 emergency response costs and pay for the federal share of the permanent restoration to address the emergency condition of the severe erosion along o'shaughnessy boulevard. 6. 180327 accept and expend grant - state of california department of housing and community development - housing-related parks program grant - $3,276,582 resolution retroactivelin janua system brought high winds, flooding, causing severe damage and eroding along ah shawn psi. it resulted in dropped boulders and debris onto the boulevard, blocking the southbound lane. due to the extensive statewide damage, governor jerry brown

requested that california department of transportation. that includes 419,000 to reimburse us for the emergency opening work that already occurred as well as 2.37 million for future permanent restoration work, which is expected to be completed by may 2019. approving this resolution means public works will have 85.3% for the costs of the permanent restoration work. we'll be using the program funds for it. i'm joined by the project manager of this project, and we would be happy pa answer any questions you might have. >> thank you. i will go to the budget

legislative analyst at this point. thank you. >> do you want me to be put on both items? >> you know, i just realize -- let's do item five, and then i will have to open up and go back to item four. >> so on item five, this is a grant that is retroactive. as said, some of the funds have been spent to date. we do have a budget on here on page 6. it commits $307,000 in city funds to match the grant, so we do have one amendment that there is an incorrect number in the matching grant and the resolution, so we recommend amounting it to say that the actual grant matches $307.40, so it's correctly stated. otherwise, recommended approval. >> all right. i appreciate that. thank you very much. i will go to public comment and we'll take up those amendments.

all right. ladies and gentlemen, this is a grant to repair the erosion issues. is there anyone that would like to comment on it? >> seeing no public comment, public comment is closed. i will make a motion to accept the amendments and then i would like to approve and send with a positive recommendation, if we can do that without objection. thank you. without objection. thank you. madam clerk, what i would like to do is make a motion to rescind the vote for item four, and i would like you to call item four, and we'll hear from the bla, and we'll take public comment and then well au take action. so i make a motion to rescind item four. without objection. thank you. recall item four. >> clerk: [agenda item read].

>> all right. i appreciate that. now, the floor is yours. please tell us your thoughts. >> just very briefly, this approves the 19.3 million from mtc, but it commits the city to 19.4 million in matching funds. we show budgets on page five and six of our report in terms of the grant allocation, 16 million goes to the better market street design. our understanding is which would complete the costs for about $34 million. then on page six, the other is the school roots project budget. this commits about $400,000 in proposition case sales tax money as a matching funds, and we do

recommend approval. >> thank you. i appreciate that recommendation. let's get to public comment. seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you. now i would like to make a motion to approve with a positive recommendation, accepting the blas recommendations. and we'll take that without objection. thank you. >> recommend it to the full board? >> yes. moving on. that leaves us with item six. >> item six. resolution retroactively authorizing the recreation and park department to accept and expend a grant in the amount of $3,276,582 from the state of california department of housing and community development to fund four park and community center projects identified in exhibit a of the grant standard agreement, and delegating authority to the general manager of the recreation and park department to reallocate funds among approved projects as appropriate to maximize city recovery from grant for the period of november 22, 2017, through june 30, 2019. >> this is a resolution to

extend a grant. we have the margaret heyward playground and the vietnamese youth development center. today we have tony miranda presenting. >> good morning, community members. thank you for the introduction. that pretty much covers it. those are the projects we'll be funding with the housing related parks program grant. this grant program is a formula grant based on the number of low-income housing units that were permitted for construction between 2015 and 2016 calendar year. grant funds must be extended on capital improvement projects that last more than five years. dollars are also granted through the program if all of the parks that received the funding are located in a disadvantaged community and a park district community. to maximize the award, all the

parks had to meet all criterias. all the grant funds must also be expended between november 22nd, 2017, and june 30th, 2019. this is a very short grant performance period for a capital project, so that was one of the aspects that was considered when selecting the projects that would be funded through this program. as stated by supervisor cohen, 2.1 million will be awarded to margaret hayward, and another 1.61 million will be awarded to the boys and girls club at columbia park and the youth development center. i'm happy to answer any questions you may have, and i have staff from the mayor's office of housing and community development here also that can bring information just in case.

>> got it. i don't think we have any questions. this is pretty straightforward. it's great. exciting. let's continue to move it forward. i would like to take public comment for item six. seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you. colleagues, is there a motion for item six. >> yes. i would like to make a motion to move this to the board with a positive recommendation. >> all right. we'll do that without objection. thank you. >> all right. madam clerk, any other business before this body? >> no other business. >> all right. we're adjourned. bayview. >> a lot discussion how residents in san francisco are

displaced how businesses are displaced and there's not as much discussion how many nonprofits are displaced i think a general concern in the arts community is the testimony loss of performance spaces and venues no renderings for establishes when our lease is up you have to deal with what the market bears in terms of of rent. >> nonprofits can't afford to operate here. >> my name is bill henry the executive director of aids passage l lp provides services for people with hispanics and aids and 9 advertising that fight for the clients in housing insurance and migration in the last two years we negotiated a lease that saw 0 rent more than doubled. >> my name is ross the

executive directors of current pulls for the last 10 years at 9 and mission we were known for the projection of sfwrath with taking art and moving both a experiment art our lease expired our rent went from 5 thousand dollars to $10,000 a most. >> and chad of the arts project pursue. >> the evolution of the orientation the focus on art education between children and patrol officer artist we offer a full range of rhythms and dance and theatre music theatre about in the last few years it is more and more difficult to find space for the program that we run. >> i'm the nonprofit manager for the mayor's office of economic workforce development one of the reasons why the mayor has invested in nonprofit

displacement is because of the challenge and because nonprofits often commute technical assistance to understand the negotiate for a commercial lease. >> snooechlz is rob the executive director and co-founder of at the crossroads we want to reach the disconnected young people not streets of san francisco for young adults are kicked out of the services our building was sold no 2015 they let us know they'll not renew our lease the last year's the city with the nonprofit displacement litigation program held over 75 nonprofits financial sanction and technical assistance. >> fortunate the city hesitate set aside funds for businesses

facing increased rent we believable to get some relief in the form of a grant that helped us to cover the increase in rent our rent had been around $40,000 a year now $87,000 taylor's dollars a year we got a grant that covered 22 thousands of that but and came to the minnesota street project in two people that development in the better streets plan project they saved us space for a nonprofit organization national anthem and turned out the northern california fund they accepted us into the real estate program to see if we could withstand the stress and after the program was in full swinging skinning they brought up the litigation fund and the grants were made we applied for that we received a

one thousand dollars granted and that grant allowed us to move in to the space to finish the space as we needed it to furniture is for classes the building opened on schedule on march 18, 2016 and by july we were teaching classed here. >> which we found out we were going to have to leave it was overwhelm didn't know anything about commercial real estate we suggested to a bunch of people to look at the nonprofits displacement mitigation program you have access to commercial real estate either city owned or city leased and a city lease space become available there is a $946,000 grant that is provided through the mayor's office of economic workforce development and that's going to go towards boulder the space

covers a little bit less than half the cost it is critical. >> the purpose of the organization trust to stabilize the arts in san francisco working with local agency i go like the northern california platoon fund that helped to establish documents of our long track record of stvent and working to find the right partner with the organization of our size and budget the opportunity with the purchase of property we're sitting in the former disposal house theatre that expired 5 to 10 years ago we get to operate under the old lease and not receive a rent increase for the next 5 to 7 years we'll renting $10,000 square feet for the next 5 to seven years we pay off the balance of the purpose of this and the cost of the renovation. >> the loophole will that is

unfortunate fortunate we have buy out a reserve our organization not reduce the services found a way to send some of the reserves to be able to continue the serves we know our clients need them we were able to get relief when was needed the most as we were fortunate to arrive that he location at the time, we did in that regard the city has been - we've had tremendous support from the mayor's office of economic workforce development and apg and helped to roommate the facade of the building and complete the renovation inside of the building without the sport support. >> our lease is for 5 years with a 5 year onyx by the city has an 86 year lease that made

that clear as long as we're doing the work we've been we should be able to stay there for decades and decades. >> the single most important thing we know that is that meaningful. >> it has been here 5 months and even better than that we could image. >> with the economic development have announced an initiative if ours is a nonprofit or know of a nonprofit looking for more resources they can go to the office of economic workforce development oewd.com slashing nonprofit and found out about the mayors nonprofit mitigation program and the sustainability initiative and find their information through technical assistance as much as how to get started with more fundraising or the real estate

assistance and they can find my contact and reach out to me through the circles of the city through the