targets and chemicals of interest manganese, hexavalent chromium and nitrate. >> thank you. go to public. [calling of speakers]

and anyone that follows that, be ready. and the overflow room, we will be readily in about 10 minutes. >> good morning. i am here on behalf of spur to once again support the sfpuc's groundwater blending pron ining. thank you, steven, for the updates. this is an important part of diversifying our city's water supplies which improves reliability, sustainability, and resilience for the whole regional water system. as we have heard, it's been in the works for more than 10 years as part of the city's commit tonight the water system's improvement project. this is something that spur has also supported for more than 10 years. so testing and monitoring of groundwater quality has repeatedly shown that this water source is safe to blend with our hetch hetchy and other local supplies. together this blend will exceed state and federal water quality standards. both the sfpuc and the department of public health have

attested that that plan will not create any adverse health consequences. the groundwater program is part of a larger diversification effort with recycled water and adds local watter to the portfolio which will be reliable as we heard even during a drought or afteran earthquake. groundwater is part of water supply all over the world. 80% of the californians drink groundwater, and the same groundwater basin that the sfpuc will be using under the program was used for drinking water in san francisco in the past. and as we heard, it has been used by other bay area cities include san bruno and daly city for decades. spur urges you to allow continued implementation of the well vetted and long-standing

plan. by closing this hearing without further action, and by -- >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. next speaker. i have richard. >> good morning. i am the president of the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. and the first i want to start with definition. i am tired of hearing about blended water. i think what we really need to

do is have a new definition of taking the best water hetch hetchy and blending it with the lowest quality water available to the city. so that's my definition of what we're doing. and as to neighborhood outreach, a day and a half ago many of the people that saw you a year ago were contacted by supervisor yee's office. there would be many, many more people here had they known that you were even having a committee meeting today, and they will not have a chance to talk or say anything. i would like to say many of the wells that were going to be started were not start ed. the amounts that have been used have been so minuscule most of the time to be tested and is an

average of an average of an average, and so you basically are not looking at the real impact of what is happening here with the water. i think this has been done poorly and not done well and the outreach has been done poorly and not done well. or we would have this room packed right now. i wish i could talk longer. >> thank you.

>> i would have appreciated going 36 hours and they did not generate that report yesterday, so this is unfair. also, i would like you to take a look t a the fault line here. we are building the emergency fault line on top of two major faults. that is really a smart thing to do. so if the fault, if we have a major earthquake, which we will, what happens? what happens if it breaches the aquifer? now, that isn't going to happen? well, fukushima didn't happen

either. and we have a plan based on hope and luck, and hope and luck is not a good long-term plan for the city. the groundwater is legal. that doesn't mean it's safe. lead was once legal. put lead in gasoline and breathed it up until the 70s. d. d.t. was legal and safe. most of the time the e.p.a. changes the standards and they lower and lower them. and the comments that nitrates and chromium are safe is a comment made at our level of ignorance. nothing else. why do we claim it's healthy? i doubt it. and we consume our drinking water around once you consume a billion gallons every summer, there is a billion gallons less if you ever need it. new technologies is doing not a

lot. in phoenix, arizona, there is a company that's generated zero mass to generate the drinking watter from the entire family from the air in the desert. i heard nothing about technology. groundwater is not new technology and there are huge events. >> good morning. i serve on the san francisco public utilities commission and citizens advisory committee and chair the water subcommittee and an original member and i worked on prop e in 2002 and helped write the legislation with the advisory committee. and public engagement and public notification is really important to me. and it is something that i have been trying to push the p.u.c. on for about the last 20 years. and i agree 36 hours notice of a hear i hearing # isn't really good and

we should try to figure out how to more broadly notify people. what i would also say is i work as at whatter policy expert. i work for clean water action and the specialties are drinking water quality and groundwater. and honestly, i think the groundwater is pretty good comparatively speaking. and i think that you're blending -- the way you are blending is much better than a lot of areas do it. generally you pump the groundwater and deliver it to the area close ye to the well. and the amounts right now are very small. what i think is appropriate for you to consider is are the maximum contaminant levels the reference levels for blending. and you might want to look at the public health goal which is the level at which the office has determined that no adverse health effects of cur. it is the same as the

contaminant level 45 per million. manganese doesn't have a health level because it is actually regulated because it tastes bad and is kree yating particulates. -- and is creating particulates. and the level is about 50, so that is a text taste and o dar issue. and the public health level for that -- >> supervisors, i am chris boman on the steering committee of the san francisco clean water coalition. eng, if we had had -- again, if we had had earlier notice of

this, lisa brommel would have been able to attend, but she simply couldn't do it, so i have to serve double duty here. the maximum contamination level per a lot of con tam nanlts has been made -- of contaminants has been made more strict over the years. if you look at arsenic, for instance, it's basically 1/5 of what it was previously. so it's five times more stringent. there was a professor at the texas a&m university who did a study of birth defects of 3,000 women in texas and in iowa. she found that at 1/10 of the m.c.l. per nitrate injegs, the chances -- of ingegs, the chances were twice the rate of the m.c.l..

when we get a 15% blend, which is what's being proposed, which is basically four million gallons to about 24 million gallons of hetch hetchy regional water system. and that we could have nitrate levels at double the level that creates birth defects. so the other thing is you have to look to talk about using this for emergency purposes and the north lake and the latest groundwater quality report that you put out. and the north lake well, which will be use d at 94% of the m.c.l. and were nitrates. and the ones we were talking about like we said, 54 to 60%. and once you run out in the emergency, we have a nine-day supply. are there additional speaks?

people in the overflow room, they are welcome to come to the chamber. >> good morning. i am the secretary on the san francisco public utilities commission and i sit on the water and waste water subcommittee. i am here to provide support for the supply water project. i think it's important in terms of diversification of our supply water sources to insure longevity for future generations to have reliable, high qualitying a sesz to water. -- high quality access to water. i am thinking about cape town currently when they are nearing the day zero coming up and they have focused on conservation and didn't invest as much into other alternative sources such as groundwater and such as recycled water. so i support our diversification efforts. i did have a look at the recent data that was published by the

sfpuc and i actually looked at the higher levels and they provide the average, but had low and high levels as well. and specifically since everything seems to be interested in nitrates, i looked at that one in particular. and so in terms of the data that was just provided, those levels were 93% and 99% respectively for sunset and sutro reservoirs for their high levels of nitrates. so in conclusion, i am here to support the groundwater project and i ask that you do the same. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> i wanted to show you a number of things. the project was originally started on the assumption that we were going to lose jobs because there was not going to be enough water.

instead, we gained 125,000. and this is the chart from the amount of water we used in 2016 which is what we used in 1972. >> groundwater has nitrogen in it and that is considered an carcinogen. from the working group the following quote can be found. unlike virtually all other con tam nanlts, the -- like all other con tam nanlts, the drinking water for nitrates contains no margin of safety. nearly every chemical standard enforced today incorporates that safety factor to insure that sensitive members of the population are adequately protected. when there is evidence of

possible human cars motion carro genics, there is another to tenfold factor. the nitrate standard contains no safety factors even though it is targeted to the especially sensitive population subgroup, infant, and even though nitrates is a precursor compound to the formation of cancer. in europe the safe level of nitrogen is considered to be 4.4 parts per million. i'm sorry. 5.6. and in south africa, the amount is considered to be safe at 4.4 parts per million. this discrepancy -- >> thank you. next speaker please.

>> hello, supervisors. eric brooks. i started as a consumer watchdog activist with ralph nader's public interest research groups and grew up in the sierra mountains in bishop, california, where we were battling my entire life and los angeles stealing the watter from the mountains all that time. i am a strong supporter of cities using their groundwater, but i do not support this project because it is not safe. i want to conduct through some of the satellilight of hand and major is saying, oh, groundwater is okay. look, in this other reservoir and the other areas of the watershed, groundwater goes into the water supply all the time. the difference is the groundwater is filtered before it's sent into the drinking

water supply. what the sfpuc is about to do is blend water into the water supply which could at any point in the future become contaminated by an emergency or by something we do not notice is happening to the groundwater without filtering it. they're just going to do minor biological controls. this water either needs to be used in golf courses or parks and irrigation or filtered with reverse osmosis and u.v. light to make sure that it's the same quality of the water that we've got now. blended and this argument that is okay because we are going to blend it is not how san francisco approaches environmental and safety issues and if we start now, we will end up like flint, michigan, and the other california cities. this is a mistake.

>> thank you. do we have additional speakers? >> if there are no mr. speakers for puck lick comment, public comment is closed. i did want to ask about the contaminant identified for which we have no value currently. i think it was hexavalent -- and i forget what the other half was. >> that is the state water resources control board proposed and adopted a drinking water standard for hexavalent chromium of 10 parts per billion three years ago. they were sued by i believe the up to of vacaville because that

standard and there is hexavalent chromium that appears naturally in groundwater in many cases. we have some in our groundwater that occurs naturally. and so the vacaville case basically challenged the process for adoption of the standard. and so the corps found that, yes, they did not properly adopt the standard and they are going back now and starting the process over to consider what the drinking water standard should be. so currently there is no standard for hexavalent chromium. >> so what are our values for that contaminant? unless that was under chromium. >> and chromium 6 is hexavalent chromium is the standard term for it. and the maximum shows .01 milligrams per liter which is the same as 10 parts per

billion, but that standard doesn't exist, but it is there for informational purposes in this slide. but what we have seen in the blended water and sunset reservoir is .00017 milligrams per liter. and far less than that standard if it were in effect. >> great. thank you. >> i'm sorry. can i ask a question? do we have the numbers for the other reservoirs or sources of ground water supply? >> we have data on all the sources of the water supply and sources of water supply. >> from this other supply, are they similar concentrations? or different -- we have one example here. but it would be interesting to see the other sources of ground water and happy to see substantially below the maximum contaminant level as set by the state. and i would love to know that -- >> the targets that we have set

which are lower than those. and nowhere near the maximum contaminant level. we can provide all the data that we have for the sources of supply and hetch hetchy and the bay area reservoirs and the groundwater recovery project as well as for this project. we will be reporting those out now new future and ongoing and that is the obligation and commit tonight the public. >> an i have one last question which is the last speaker brought up that other places they have a filtering system for the drinking water and we are pumping groundwater directly into our reservoirs. so do you have an answer for that? >> yes, i do. and i am biting my tongue in response to many of the comments made because i think they impugn my professional integrity.

i am not going to sit by and let that happen. in the case of groundwater, groundwater is typically not filtered at all because of the natural filtering that occurs in the aquifer. you filter out to proi primarily remove disease-causing agents, bacteria, protozoa, things like that. that is what comes out through the natural filtering process going through the hundreds of feet of groundwater. so from that bacteria logical perspective, groundwater is far superior to surface water which has animals, critters, humans in them all the time. those waters absolutely have to be filtered because we would be definitely be facing disease. we don't filter the hetch hetchy supply because it is so pure and you felt disinfection for that, but -- and we use ultraviolet disinfection, and the sand filtration occurs in the hundreds of feet of the aquifer. >> i appreciate that this is

challenging for you, but the public, we always need to be respectful of. that is part of our job as public servants and i think people expressing -- and i didn't really feel like they were impuning your integrity, but really raising questions and maybe their knowledge base is not the same as theirs and looking at different data sets, but i just feel like we should always respect the public when they come before us because they are the ones who are paying our salaries and van the right to ask tough questions even if we don't think they are coming from it with the appropriate knowledge base. >> and i totally agree with that. but to the gentleman in particular we met with for hours and hours and hours last year covering a lot of the same topics, and i thought we had provided satisfactory answers. it was difficult as if it never happened. that is frustrating for me. >> that's the job. >> yes, it is. >> so can i recommend that we continue this item to the call

of the chair? and what i am interested in is not to close this because i think there are questions that could be answered. with the questions that may come up and what i would like to do is wait. as you mentioned, mr. richie, and that you are not quite there in terms of fully activating. >> correct. >> t a that point when you are ready and before you are fully activated, that is when i would like to have another hearing to again give us an opportunity to understand this even better. >> again, i wasn't trying to be critical, but i do know so i greatly appreciate the work that the p.u.c. has put out to the community and allay their fears, but this is san francisco. this comes with the territory.

>> can i make closing comments? i am happy to continue the item to the call of the chair and continue to have this conversation at least once a year. as i said last year, i think partially we are a victim of our own branding around how pure hetch hetchy water is. and any sort of threat to that purity is not something that anyone welcomes, but it sound like a necessity to prepare for that disaster planning. and to your credit and the p.u.c. even though we can always do better outreach -- >> absolutely. >> and certainly respect our constituents that in comparison to some of the tragedies and the complete negligence happening in other parts of the country whether it's flint, michigan, or whether it's a contamination of the water supply because of the

fracking, some of the real, intense abuses that are happening, i appreciate the constant transparency that we have here in san francisco where we as a regulatory and watchdog body on the board of supervisors can constantly together with the public be monitoring the quality of our water supply and decisions that are made that impact that quality. i want to recognize and appreciate that because it's not the same in other places in the country. it is not something to take for granted. >> never. i wanted to close with that, but i am glad to make a motion to continue to the call of the chair to play that role. >> p.u.c. as an organization really does take this water supply and the dependency on

what we have now to reduce the usage with a few months ago with the ribbon cutting at the beach to build another facility to recycle water to be used for the parks and that will save so much water. i want to make sure that the public understands that we appreciate that effort. >> without objection, we will continue this to the call of the chair. and thank you, mr. richie. so mr. clerk, item three is what we are on now. >> the hearing on the city's current employment opportunities, needs, and gaps for older adults and adults with disabilities. >> i turn it over to supervisor yee. >> supervisor: thank you very much. thank you for your patience for

people that are here for this item. colleagues, today i am holding a hearing on employment situations looking at older adults and adults with disabilities. and really looking at the opportunities there are and what needs there are and what gaps there are. older adults an adults with disabilities face significant age and disability discrimination in our work force. while each group faces certain unique challenges, both groups are among the economically insecure groups in our city and country. i might give you some facts and the cost of living and many of the facts are well known to the public, but for some that don't know, the cost of living in san francisco continues to increase. most older adults are living longer which is a good thing, but they must often survive and

to work longer and retire later in life due to decreasing social security benefits and dismissing employee retirement benefits. the older adults and adults with disability population continues to grow. currently we compose of 25% of our city's population. by 2030 they will be grow to 30% of the city's population. and older adults over the age of 65 are the poorest in the city. and adults with disabilities have five times higher rates of unemployment than able-bodied individuals. over 25,000 of our city's seniors live below the poverty line on a monthly income of less than $981 a month. so older adults and adults with

disabilities provide diverse perspectives in the work force and many of them serve as mentors to young professionals and bring rich life experiences, knowledge, and skills to the team teams. and the subgroups and contribute greatly to our society and are willing to work, connecting them to the employers that are struggling to find good workers, make common sense representative of the city's values of caring for each other. we must fine a way to make sure our older adults and adults with disabilities have safety nets. that they have equal opportunity to job opportunities and a sustainable source of income. otherwise they are at greater risk of becoming homeless, more food insecur and falling deeper into poverty. so you would like to thank marie

and her team at the community living campaign for bringing this issue to my office's attention. i also want to thank the representatives today and look forward to the discussion and how the city can provide a more coordinated, robust, and targeted approach to provide greater workforce opportunities for our city's older adults and adults with disabilities. these are the people that will be presenting today, and i will name them all right now, and this will be the order they will be coming up. serena, the executive director of aging and adult services. portia from the department of human resources. catherine daniel from the office of economic and workforce development. and teresa wu from the california department of rehabilitation. so without anything further, serene, would you like to come up and start presenting?

nicole is going to start. okay. sorry, nicole. >> good morning. thank you so much for having us and this topic on the agenda today. i am nicole bond, the director of the mayor's office on disability. and i am going to just briefly introduce our topic, and a little bit about our framework. and then i will be coming back at the end of the presentation to talk about solutions and next accepts and to spend the bulk of the time focused on questions and public comment. i know there are many people interested in this today. and serene is going to be supplementing some of the data and statistics that supervisor yee mentioned in the introduction. and then we will be talking briefly about some of the city

programs and the public feedback we have received and the next steps we will be taking. >> thank you, nicole. >> good morning, supervisors. supervisor yee, thank you for calling this hearing. you stole a little built of my thunder as identifying yourself as one of the 25% and since 2000, the older adult population has grown by 26%. and citywide it was 9% and half the population growth and the

city's population has grown by 70,000 people and half of the that growth is in the adult population over 60. employment status of older adults and adults with disabilities in san francisco, drawing on the census status. is that the right chart? these charts represent the employment status of older ad t adults and adults with disability. om almost 3/4 of older adults are off the labor force. most who are in the labor force are embassy employed. and among adults with abilities under age 60, we see higher levels of workforce participation with the higher rate of unemployment. what is important to member is when we are looking at this

information, it does not capture discouraged workers which is individuals who may have left the labor force because they were unable to find employment. these are people who would like to find work, but are unable due to many factors. it is difficult to gauge the full extent of hidden unemployment or those marginally attached to the labor force. at a national level, the unemployment rate is about 4%. however, an alternative measure by the u.s. bureau of labor statistics suggests the unemployment rate is closer to 8% with the hidden unemployment and involuntary employment. >> quick question. the difference between unemployed an not in the labor force is? >> so people who are unemployed are in the labor force but waiting to be employed. people not in the labor force are people who might be retired or discouraged from seeking

work. or could be other reasons, but that is the difference generally. next slide, the u.s. department of labor tracks and projects employment trends by age. this chart presents -- represents the national data. for example, in 1994 about 1-10 seniors in the early 70s remained in the workforce. by 2024, department of labor projects almost 1/4 of the senior wills remain working. and there are many factors that drive this trend. and i think probably my colleagues will be talking a little bit about this as well with the trends are and in the factors driving it. and partover it is likely that people are generally healthier now. and so you hear 60s and -- well, you hear a lot of things. but one of the things is the 60s is the new middle age. people are generally healthier. medicine is advanced to better treat chronic health conditions, and we are living longer and healthier lives. some of it is likely economic necessity, and i have talked to you all about that about how social security doesn't go as

far as it used to go. and people have to -- and san francisco is so expensive to live and the issues you know about already, but work is meaningful for a lot of people, and that is what they prefer to do. i want to talk real quickly about the aging and adult services and at the end the department of human services as part of the h.s.a. one of the things i want to say to preface this is the department of aging and adult services has fairly nascent programs that are focused on unemployment. this isn't an area that we have traditionally worked in, but there is not a lot of focus on older adult employment and we thought because we already work with older adults and with

people with disabilities, we thought maybe it's time to try some new and innovative programming. and i think part of the reason we were able to do has to do with the dignity fund, too. so within our department, there are a handful of programs that support obtaining employment and are directly employ older people. and people with disabilities. and so the first program is reserve. that program is based on a national model is re-serve and is managed by the local campaign and job line. in this program, seniors and people with disabilities are connected to a part-time pay work opportunity at a local nonprofit or public sath agency. they are subsidized at a decreasing scale with the goal of the host agency eventually taking on the full cost of the re-service employment. in 17-18, we expect 100 clients will be served through this program. so far we have about 82 clients, so we're close to 100. and this program is really small. the funding is only $250,000 per year, but it's able to serve 100

people. and senior companion, this program provides volunteer service opportunity and a small stipend for a limited number of low to moderate older persons to provide peer support and expand the capacity of local community-based sites to support higher need older adults. the volunteers provide support to other older adults such as assistance with chores and transportation to appointments. in 17-18, there will be 15 companions supporting up to 45 other seniors. the program within -- this program was funded at $85,000 per year. there is community liaisons, and these positions access seniors and people with disabilities and help them access a variety of services administered and currently they are placed at the dos benefit and resource hub. we spend about 52,000 on this program. and then we have the support

program which is janitorial and supplemental recycling. we contract with the arc of san francisco to provide janitorial recycling services to create employment opportunities for people with developmental and intellectual disabilities. this is funded about $100,000 per year. and i want to make sure to talk a little bit about the in home support services program and the independent providers that are employed by that program. most people are familiar with this program in home support services. we talk a lot about the need for home care. for client who is need help in their home. but a really important aspect of the program is the caregiver side. in total about 20,000 people working as independent providers or caregivers and ishss and this is essentially the third biggest employer in san francisco behind the city and ucfs. and right now we have about 5200, approximately 5200 people

who vieding services who are 60 or older. that is 26% of the provider pool. and we have about -- of those, 2,200 people are age 65 or older which is about 11% of the pool. so it's not unsubstantial this amount of older adults working in this program. and then just briefly, because i am not super knowledgeable about the department of human services side, but i do want to mention they have several workforce programs as well. and these are primarily tied to and funded in connection with other benefit programs and specifically calworks and the welfare to work. and given this connection, these workforce programs send to serve younger and more able bodies populations or what they call able-bodied populations. we are exploring opportunities to collaborate and we had a meeting last week and agency wide meeting last week and will be meeting with supervisor yee to talk about maybe explore some

of the ideas. and we do know that there are about 1,100 new job placements through the jobs now program. of those, only a small, small percentage, one%, were older adults. however, something that is notable is that the programs are potentially helping people in the later working years to obtain or regain employment. about 14% have jobs with new job placements were in their 50s. i think that conclude my portion. unless you have questions right now of me. >> no. that was a lot of good information. i will save questions for later. but certainly this is highlighting how little support the city gives to this population. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> i will turn it over to portia. >> good morning.

i am portia benton, the access to city employment recruiter for the department of human resources. today i'll be talking about one of the programs that we have as well for persons with disabilities which is called the access to city employment program also known as ace. ace is the city's alternative pathway program for people with disabilities. it allows for them to enter into city service without taking the civil service examination. and so how it works is d.h.r. has worked very hard in the past two years since i came on board as the designated recruiter to market the program and not only to the department but also to the community-based organizations as well. we have launched as of last year website for the program which is very detailed for the community listings and the process as well as how to apply for our positions. positions through the aid program and because of the city's wide variety of positions, we actually define

that as the first classification in a series or in a stand-alone so that includes the district nurses, recruiters, and anything that has no promotional ladder to consider entry level as well. and because of that we have over 200 entry level classifications and posted over 80 of them on the website. and they are on the continuous basis. and so job seeker cans apply at any time. the process is very simple. we have big support from the department of rehabilitation and they are the agency that provides our certification and goes through qualifying individuals who identify with the disability. we also have some -- we also have a description of the program again, as i already discussed. but within the past two year, we have really ramped up the program a lot more than how it was before. and we had below not 10

appointments and within 2016 and with over 24 job seekers and that were eligible and many different classifications and admin, security, recreation, park, library page, so a large variety of different classifications. we also piloted a program in december. we noticed within the past two years we had a large applicant pool interested in the ace program. we see a need of opening up more classification and having positions that were part time. a lot of job seekers were only interested in part time and the ace positions focused and full time. because of that, we have a partnership and how we have made that commitment as the departments reach out to me to

provide a talented pool of candidates that have already been reviewed and directly find interviews and fill the vacancies. this gives job seekers a way for them to enter city service and get a feel of the position before they try it out and if they are interest and the department has permanent positions, they can choose move forward if they do so later on down the road. that is something very beneficial as well. and we have done a lot of marketing to the community-based organizations. we have some here today. to support the department of reh rehab, with the positive resource and we have 675 community-based organizations that are aware of the program and provide me with candidates

and we have grown that now to 14 departments and those do not include the police department, sfmta, and also our community and director of human resources in calling departments on a biweekly basis to introduce them to the program and find ways to collaborate and work together a lot more to fill vacancievacanc. >> can i ask a question? >> of course. >> more recently you had about 1200 ap i will plicants and now 24 appointments. evidently there is a lot of interest. >> yes, there is. >> is there some -- what do you

recommend to move forward to increase the number of appointments at this point with your program? >> i think that is a great question. what can we do a lot more of? i think a lot of it is the departments are limited because for the ace program when we first launched it, ace is only for entry level classification. many departments don't have permanent entry level classifications. we have launched a pilot program to serve that high talent pool that we have of candidates who are interested in only part time or only on call. we have been able to use the pilot to place them successfully in permanent positions to align them with the work they are able and want to do. because of that, more departments are opening out to be participating in the program because they are not limited for hiring in the pilot practices. we hope it will grow over time and with the six placements that we have so far in the pilot.

and many departments have reached out to me to fill positions, and the department of public health is meeting with me very soon to talk about ways to make this on a continuous basis. >> and the application form you ask the question whether or not you want full time, part time. >> yes. great question. and on the application process, applicants have supplemental questions and the first one is what appointment type are you interested in. that helps me filter applications out. and then we have a one on one conversation before i provide the department with the application. >> and you don't have to give it to me today, but next week, i guess, and can you just break down the 1200 and see who is looking for what. >> of course. >> of course. >> so here we wanted to really support. >> i'm sorry. >> so do you actually have formal job share programs that would accommodate people who are

looking for part-time work? >> i'm sorry. >> job share? >> one job is -- i see nicky coming. that's been a technique that people have used to come from and i come from the h.i.v. world and that is a technique to utilize and it can be difficult for someone with disability to work full time, and frankly, also far senior. i check both buckets, by the way. >> and to supplement what portia is doing an excellent job of describing, but to the point of job share, there is not a lot of job share for an economic reason and that is because our health benefits program requires full benefits at 20 hours per week. and so departments have an economic disincentive for having a 50/50 split because they pay double benefits. some departments have maybe

three and two, three days a week and two days a week option, but not 50/50. we don't have a lot of job sharing if that are reason. and the exempt program where people who, for example, that are front counter and pool and deal with staffing needs and then they come in and that is the kind of place where it's more part-time and probably a good choice for people who don't want to have full-time employment. and we are not experts in this, but i know that the department of rehab and other agencies are helping people deal with the fact that if you have full too much employment, you might lose benefits that you are entitled to from the federal government. i hope that touches the answer to the question. >> and benefit losses if you work over 900 hours as a senior. and maybe -- i don't want to take up this committee with this, but maybe it's possible to

have a longer discussion to look at how we might be able to be more flexible and to i allow more people part-time work. i have been talking about this for 20 years almost. the need for part-time work for people with disabilities and job sharing wi sharing with the best way to do that. >> we anticipated we want to move forward and we are meeting next week. those are the types of things we want to discuss and that would be a great idea to explore. >> thank you. go ahead please. >> thank you. this slide is something that we want to really congratulate the departments and also thank them because the departments have put a lot of effort into not only

working on what vacancies they have available, but making sure that we are providing the job takers that come in on board with the right materials and reasonable accommodations if they need it. again t big support is the san francisco library. we have department of public health and in the past year and a half that we have implemented. and rec and park and airport has done a lot of hiring through the pilot program which is amazing. and department of public works and d.h.r. has been amazing as well with hiring. and we have also had new departments such as the police department and sfmta as well, and as stated before, we contact on a biweekly basis to contact the departments and make sure they are aware. as stated before, there is a lot more that we can do. and we are always, always willing to increase awareness

and utilization of the program. so we plan to update and continue to make sure that the website is updated on a regular basis and the employment that we have available. we also are going to launch a testimonial webpage for the new employees who want to discuss how the program and the pilot has helped and assisted them. we want to continue our outreach with the community-based organization as well as the city departments. and in addition to that, we want to also explore other avenues for employment such as our pilot program and making sure there is anything else we can do to assist the community based organizations and the job seekers. d.h.r. will be happy to do so. with that, i will turn it to kathrin who will discuss other services. thank you. >> good morning, supervisors.

thank you for letting us present today. the office of economic and workforce development, the workforce system that we have structured is attempting to create an entire workforce specific system in the city that meets any job seeker where they are and moves them along this continuum towards economic vitality, and towards that we have programming that is focused on barrier mitigation and general job readiness as well as access points that are targeting either geographic areas or specific communities that have barriers and unique barriers to employment. so that we can really target our services to unemployment, underemployment, and poverty. those services are really focused and career exploration

and on connecting people to whatever job opportunity might be appropriate to them according to their individualized needs, and giving them resume and interview assistance, soft skills, and then finally, we move towards sector employment. we target the biggest industries in san francisco, and offer programming that allowing people to connect to technical skills that will allow them to committee in what is a very competitive city. as well as we're piloting this year transitional employment within our young adult portfolio to really put people's mind at career opportunities. and so that is just to give you an opportunity to whoa they are structured. >> we don't have specific programming and all of the providers are generally trying to reach out who is unclear and

underemployed. we did do a data pool and last year 7% of our participants were 60 and older. this year through march 31, it's ticked up to 8.5%. i have also included most of the providers if not all the providers do serve participants within this demographic and what we have listed is the providers that are sort of with the biggest concentration and the top five with the wiggest with the biggest concentration from last year and this year. we spoke with the providers and the gaps they are seeing and the services they need specific to this community, and what we really have seen is there is -- as far as what our providers are seeing, there is a confidence

issue and there is also just really moving into a work econo economy, brushing up skills and making sure that you can compete and are familiar with the workforce in today's economy. so understanding and being able to connect to contract employment to really make sure they have robust marketing experience and skills development because of a whole lifetime where they have been creating careers for themselves, and making sure that they as they are seeking employment are confident and able to talk about that experience. and that we have workforce services that are focused on connecting people to mid and higher level opportunities where they can build off of what they have already developed through their lifetime within the older worker community.

as far as our -- we do have specific programming that is focused on adults with disabilities because this is a community and a demographic that faces specific and unique challenges to connecting to employment. again, all of our providers serve people with disabilities. what i have listed here are the three providers who make up the disability portfolio. [please stand by]