in the sidewalk, there is a couple of methods that can be used to install the fiber into the ground. one that most like to use is micro trenching where a circular saw is used to cut a 1.5-inch wide depth and that little slot is used to place the fiber and then after it is installed it's covered with cement material or epoxy. there are challenges with using micro trenching in san francis francisco, one being that there are a lot of utilities in the street and in the sidewalk.

if you can think about a sewer main or electric line or water line down the middle of the street and the laterals that services the buildings and properties off to the side, the micro trench would run perpendicular to those lines but because of the mess of micro trenching, it cuts that little trench and whatever is below it, if there happens to be an existing utility there, tight would hit that utility, so that is one of the challenge. that would be in the sidewalk and the trench would run through the intersection as it goes from one side to the other side, it would run through the roadway and you still have the utilities in the roadway, and there would be potential tol hit those existing utilities currently in the ground. >> how much does that usually

cost? it can i don't know how much it cost. >> varies on the size and scope of the project. >> i have heard that it's cheaper than the open cut trench, so i think it is cheaper but there are challenges within a built city like san francisco. >> does it make sense for our city for this particular project related to fiber? >>speaker: i do not think it does because of the challenges that i explained and that is just the initial challenge of the initial construction. because it would be installed at a shallow depth and later on another utility company would be to come in and trench for their utility because the fiber is at a shallow depth, there is

potential to hit the fiber as well. >> supervisor fewer: i was going to ask about we have electrical lines underground already, so are those the lines that you are talking about utility lines that could be underground thad the micro trenches could interrupt? >>speaker: yes. >> for those districts that don't have wires underground could that be an option? >>speaker: it could but you have the sewer, the gas and the water that are also in the ground that pretty much run the same path as the electrical line. >>speaker: they are all at the same depth? >>speaker: in a sidewalk supposed to be installed the 18 inches below the top of the sidewalk and in the roadway 21 inches minimum cover.

>> would they contract this work out or complete work orders to get this done? >>speaker: depends on the rfp. my understanding is that the rfp winner would be responsible for the actually construction. it wouldn't be performed by public works or i don't think we have a contractor to do it. i think that would be part and linda is nodding her head in agreement. >> have you read the rfp draft language? >>speaker: i have not. >> wondering because it's this mythical language that's out there. >> supervisor fewer: , so you are saying with the rfp process we would contract out this work with a private company? >>speaker: oh hmm, okay thank.

>>speaker: don't you hate it when people go hmm. makes you wonder what they are thinking. thank you, i know you have been here probably since 1:00. i appreciate you being with us here today. i don't have any other questions, i'm going to move on. let's go to budget legislative analyst. fred, are you with us? good to see you sir. this is fred ruoso. he is the bla that conducted the study of the municipal fiber a few years ago that had slightly different cost estimates than this most recent report. why don't you share your thoughts with us. >>speaker: our report was issued in march of 2016 and prior to that in 2014 we

prepared a report for supervisor marr but the 2016 report the focus of that was on the different approaches that could be used for building a municipal fiber network, a ubiquitous municipal fiber network including fully public municipal network, the private sector approach and then the public/private partnership. our conclusion was that every approach had advantages and disadvantages and risks but the public private partnership reduced some of the costs it might incu.we obtained cost infn

from a consultant to dt. this was before the ctc work had been done. the cost estimates were lower. the highest was about $867 million to build the network and that was completed in to 15 and the ctc report came out two years later and had higher numbers as you have seen today. as explained largely be the passage of time and they did a much more detailed analysis of utility polls and what is available and what would need to be done to make the polls accessiblable which ends up to be more costly than the original consultants assumed. they concluded that the street resurfacing standards were higher than the original dt consultants had so those proved

to increase the cost. much of what we covered in our report has been discussed today. in terms of the payment mechanisms and how the costs are covered, they are subscribers to the services, so if the network is built and internet service providers are leasing it and providing a service to customers that is generating revenue. the reason the utility fee has been discussed and proposed is because the assumptions made to date assume that the customer revenue would not be sufficient to cover the cost. there is ongoing operating costs and the assumptions that we work with at least with dt consultant there would be 30% take rate or

30% of the customer base would subscribe that. could increase over time and that may be conservative o but that affects the revenues available to meet the debt service and cover the operating cost. there has been a lot of discussion of the digital divide and that is a piece of the project. some of the goals we were including in our assessment were economic vitality and ensuring that san francisco is ready for the future in terms of business interest and household interest as well and the use of the internet is likely to increase substantially the number of devices per household will be increase canning anincreasing ae greater than we anticipate now in terms of bandwidth needs for

houses and individual. also on the utility fee you asked about that and that was based on the total costs that we had obtained from the consultant in 2015, so the fee, the utility fee average if it were a public model is about $43 a month and utility fee if using the public/private partnership where more of the costs are shifted to the private partners was about $25 average. that could be tiered as you had mentioned so residents could pay less and commercial could pay more. i would be happy to respond to any question. is acces>>speaker: thank you, . have you had a chance to read the ctc report that came out in 2017 and familiar with what is

going on here? >>speaker: i have read exerts of the report. >> fair enough. what are your thoughts around the cost estimates for this 3p project? >>speaker: i think i have great respect for ctc and work they have done. we had a number of conversations with them when we were doing our work and i know they did much more detailed analysis of factors that i mentioned like the actually state of utility poles and what it takes to access them and put more devices on them. i should add on that, i think it's about 45% of the network would actually be on poles and wired instead of underground wires, so significant piece of the network and if there is a cost differential that they identified associated with the

poles, it has substantial impact. >> so what i'm interested in is precedent, exposure, and risk. what are we dealing with here? >>speaker: i think it's been stated already today there is no city the size of san francisco in the u.s. at least that has constructed anything like this. there are other public/private networks around the country like north kansas city, missouri has but a much smaller city. chattanooga also but their population is about 177,000. >> is there any chance of a lawsuit? >>speaker: i am sure there is

many in a project like this, it's a big expensive capital project so those kinds of projects are fraught with risk. i think the most important thing if the public/private partnership is pursued the protections that are built into the project to ensure that the city doesn't end up with some unforeseen cost. there could be delay. the private partners could go bankrupt and not be able to complete the project and unforeseen expenses can pop up in any capital project. i am sure the attorneys working on the project swel as well as e project team would work through those issues. >>speaker: in your opinion, what other questions should i be asking? what are the details that i

should be paying attention to? what have i missed? >>speaker: i think you have asked a lot of good questions and what has come up today are a lot of important topic. if this network is built, here is a risk, what if no one wanted to lease from it, i think that is highly unlikely personally, but how many would there be and is there a lot of interest from from private sector in getting on this network and paying fees for it and accessing customers that way. >>speaker: are you familiar with the rfq and rfp process process. >> familiar with rfq, our office is not involved with it. i know there are bidder who is

have bid and they now have a short list and they are interviewing them but we are not involved in the rfp process process. i thought the rfq was extremely well constructed and identified many of the issues that were important and digital divide. another point i want to make is that the rfq was explains it abouexplicit aboutthis. there is still going to be a cost and a lot of houses don't have the hardware, so subsidies are going to need to be provided for equipment, computer equipment for low-income households and training and the rfq includes that and asks every responder to identify how they are going to meet the subsidy

requirement. >>speaker: i don't have any other question. any final last words. >> on the unit issue, the broadband utility council, this was a presidential appoint counsel during obama administration. there have been official federal statements and the former fcc director also believes that. i think that is not true with the current one. >> all right, i really appreciate your expertise and advice. thank you very much. i have a capital planning question for you kelly kirkpatrick. oh, she not here.

>>speaker: ashley -- i will try my best to answer you question. >> since this process was approved in capital planning for $3 million would we expect additional ten year capital plan to go with this? ben do you want a stab at it? >>speaker: so the capital planning committee has approved capital budget for the upcoming fiscal year and comes in the mayor's budget to you at the board of supervisors and that included $3.3 million allocation in the coming fiscal year for official work to proceed with rfp process and rfq that linda has talked through today. i think what you are eluding to

is the biggest project is not specifically programmed in the city's 10 year capital plan and that is scheduled to be updated next win der. winter.i would assume if it movs through, it should absolutely be part of the capital plan in front of this board next spring. >> what money for the municipal fiber system is planned for fiscal year '18-'20 budget? >>speaker: there is the 3.3 that's approved as part of capital planning and as i think kelly talked about earlier, there is 1.3 remaining in the project funds allocated in '16-'17 and '17-'18.

>> she didn't mention that. thank you for reiterating. do you know to total tol lar dor figure for a city-wide system? ben says no. >> we have this information from the ctc study, so i think it was 1.2-1.9 billion. >> okay, thank you very much for your presentation. let's go to public comment. i see a couple members of the public still here. thank you for staying here. you have two minutes. >> chris wideman. i have spend 35 years dealing with telecommunications law and policy and half of that time across the street at utilities commission.

in 2016 the commission by unanimous vote issued a study on telecommunications competition and to the surprise of very few people found that high-speed wired broadband was not competitive. most people in california have one provider, strain i san frans lucky we have two, maybe 2.5. sonic can't get into the underground so that is the half. you have your folks out in the district and out in the city and i was riding through the lenor development the other day. from what i understand their requiring for internet. the internet itself is not the utility, it's the access.

the wires all terminate to at&t. the genius of a city wholesale only network is those folks would have the opportunity not just to pick at&t and comcast, but to pick any isp out there and there are a number here in the city that would be able to serve them and we have seen in other places in britain, amsterdam, stok stockholm wherey have separates the whol wholesae from the retail network and that drives prices down and solves the digital divide. i am happy to prorid provide wit decision of the puc. >> tell me what is your name? >>speaker: witteman.

>> maybe before you leave city hall you could stop by my office anand leave your card. >> thank you for holding this hearing to have more transparency to the public. my name is jolie and i'm with the chinatown community. i am sure chinatown community and pe merchants would appreciae this but before we make this a potentially costly and risky decision perhaps we would reconsider the visibility of cost and the impacts that we will have to face when the project the launched. small businesses always want to bear the burden of their construction projects from water and sewer it improvements the

street and sewer repairs and the subway sen tral project going on, the small businesses have been suffering. we are afraid this project would tear up streets all over the city and hurt our small businesses. we ask the supervisors to proceed slowly with input from the community before moving forward on such a large undertaking. >> supervisor cohen, i am going to tell you what you are missing. the calculations all you have to do is listen to them. they are making calculations on year 2015, 2016. the president of the united states issued a tax cut that relates that resulted in billions and trillions of dollars being brought back to

the united states from foreign country us and companies that exist here in the quite the economic status of everybody is booming. two days before mayor -- said all departments are to cut spending because if you keep going you will have $282 million deficit. these are not included in the tax breaks given by the president of the united states. you need to do an audit on every department that's benefited from the tax cuts from the president of the united states and about you asking earlier are you getting salary increase, you probably don't have time but every corporation in the united states has been given $1,000 bonus to their employees that's working full-time and employees working part-time is getting

$5,000 bonus. families are paying less taxes to support themselves. [bell ringing] the tax cuts went in effect on 2017 and expleaseth 2018. these tax effects they are giving you are impeached. economic impact on tax is negative. this is one from earlier demonstration says only one business uber would benefit from tax revenue. [bell ringing] >>speaker: thank you. your time is up. >> good afternoon dee dee workman from the san francisco chamber of commerce. the chamber is interested in

this discussion about creating a government-owned network in san francisco. we don't have a position on it at this time but does strongly support ensuring internet access to all neighborhoods across the city. the question from our standpoint is what is the best way to achieve that. based on the experiences of other municipalities we urge caution in pursuing a government-owned system here. federal and state financing as well as utility and property tax levels on consumers are necessary to cover the cost. there are dozens of examples where the cost of implementing the system was so high and the number of subscribers so low that there were serious financial consequences. in the city of alme ta it was

$25 million and that ballooned to $85 million and it was sold to a private provider and the city ultimately lost $60 million on a project. here in san francisco there is talk of putting a utility tax on the november ballot. we should think carefully aboutathaboutputting consumers k for something that doesn't have a good track record. by the time we build out the system the technology could be obsolete. we think there are other pressing priorities like affordable housing and affordable transportation. >> thank you. >>speaker: thank you for giving this opportunity for all of us to learn about this topic. my name is yuke.

i say every day about 30 or 40 people trying to sleep on the street. i am a granddaughter to someone who worked for the governor of tokyo at the most difficult time in the city of japan. the whole capital liked like ground zero. the first vision is you give -- i think this whole point is great. if i get free wi-fi where i live, great, but what is going to happen to the people living right underneath me. i look at this budget and i think there are priorities of what the city is known for. i think it needs to have a orderly fashion in which we spend our money. thank you. >> thank you for your comment.

next speaker please. >>speaker: thank you for the opportunity to speak about this subject. brief note of my background in 1990 co-founded san francisco's first iep. cofounded first commercial anti-spam company. i'm a network consultant for internet service providers as doing public privateer city wide fiber networks as well as as built out internet service for events like burning man. indiscernible. i also do volunteer work for the department of technologies community broadband network providing broadband for low-income resident.

in 2005, i submitted a comment outlines how the city should not be pursuing -- but looking at fiber deployment. many of my concerns then are the same back then but with network neutrality also making fiber more compelling. it greatly increases competition for broadband providers that the city can choose from. rolling out fiber network is expensive and the ria can take decades to discover. [bell ringing] most don't have the deep pockets to do their own network. by having a city provide the last mile back to the data centers any isp can through a couple fiber jumpers to the

equipment and provide to the network. [please stand by]

>> that is that we need to do this right now. because the wolf is at the door, and the wolf at the door is donald trump and his fcc. and donald trump may not get more than one term and office. so they will try to force communities like ours to accept a continued situation where companies like comcast and at&t give us our internet service instead of us having a true public network that those companies, and other companies, to pay to get on too. i think we are focusing on cost, when really what we should focus

on is not the cost but who will pay for it. and as a supervisor if you are indicated, facebook, and amazon and the heads of those companies and microsoft and apple, the ones who deliver us our internet, these companies are run by the richest billionaires on the planet. the idea we can't charge them enough money to pay for a real public internet system like the one and chattanooga, is silly. we can do this and we need to do it soon. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker. >> think you chair cohen. my name is mike mccarthy. for the past years i've worked on project technology and expanding broadband internet -- broadband internet and san francisco. i'd like to talk briefly at s.f. city opening up, and my opinion, turning to a sales pitch with

its board members. at&t and comcast. they are great companies and do a lot for the community. that is completely true. but and san francisco, they are like bud and bud light. those are our choices. it is important for us to be aware of that. for those of us who remember dsl way back when, and the late nineties, you can choose from ten or 12 different dsl providers. a whole long list of providers. that was an open access network. it was an open access network over at&t's copper wires. and 2,004, some telecom combat happened and that was cut off. what we are seeing here is the exact same thing. but instead of at&t's copper wire, the city and our families, we own that fibrin perpetuity. we can choose, as tim talked about, from 10-15 isps through our internet. it is bud and bud light and we

are san francisco. there is microbrew. lots of choices. just a quick question about supervisor cohen. >> overhead, please? >> this right here is a picture of a closet. and that new closet, and all those housing units, there is fiber-optic cable that can provide your constituents with internet access, over five or. >> that is not going to work. >> that is a picture of phase i by west point, middle point. that fibrin goes into every unit at hunter's view. >> your time is up. sorry. >> thank you for your presentation. is there anyone who would like to comment and public comment. public comment is closed at this time. thank you, mike, i appreciate

that. certainly that could have been brought up and the department of technology if that were the case about the fiver connectivity. before we close and go into closing remarks, i want to call up a representative from d.p.w. that i overlooked. i want to call him up. i did not have a chance to ask questions to him. hey,, jeremy, how are you? it is okay. you can talk from there. turn on the mic. >> its okay. my name is jeremy. i'm a public works legislative affairs member. >> supervisor cohen: i am glad they sent you over because some information came to my attention that micro trenching is actually illegal. >> right. there is, we currently do not issue permits for micro trenching -- micro trenching.

there is legislation pending. the file would make it legal, but at this point it is not legal. >> supervisor cohen: who introduce that legislation? >> i believe then supervisor farrell. >> supervisor cohen: do you remember what day? >> i-- >> supervisor cohen: of course you do, you have that legislation. tell us when that legislation was introduced. >> it looks like march 14th, 2017. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. do you know why it has taken so long and white hasn't been hurt or why it hasn't been assigned? usually you introduce something it sits for a three days and and a week you take action on it. >> i'm not sure. i was not into small and legislative affairs when it came up last. i do know that our department has historically had concerns. as patrick mentioned before with the process of retrenching. >> supervisor cohen: i would imagine that the concerns with

micro trenching is a little bit like the speaker before you said. prop it -- possibly jeopardizing any of the utility wires, infrastructure. >> exactly, yeah. existing infrastructure and also the micro trenched fiver utilities would be at risk of being damaged themselves given the density of our utilities. >> supervisor cohen: on the legislation that was introduced, what will it do? it was trying to make it legal? >> right it was trying to give the public works the authority to issue permits for micro trenching i believe and the sidewalk. >> supervisor cohen: i see. all right. i appreciate that. that is actually really interesting. thank you for sharing. colleagues you have any other questions? we should close out. it's been a really long day. for those of you who don't know, we have been doing this for tenant -- since 10:00 this morning. an incredible shout out to the staff. thank you for being here and to the ladies to my right and to my left, you have been with me

since 10:00 am. the only thing that is comforting as knowing we are doing good work and asking good thoughtful questions. on behalf of good hard earning taxpayers. what i see here today is a fairly costly and massive infrastructure project being proposed throughout our city. our public right away and neighbourhoods that i don't know if it is really ready for plant -- prime time. the cost for the endeavour we do not know. the number is swishy but i heard $1.9 billion. it is not going to be finalized until after rfp which will be issued and june and hopefully completed by the end of the year. once we have the rfp results, we will begin to negotiate cost sharing. we would negotiate and begin risksharing rates, connection costs, impact fees for the trenching or it micro trenching and an this case, not to micro tension. because it is illegal unless mayor farrell's legislation can move forward and legalize it,

which is unethical if you think about it. figuring out you will pay for the utility poles. these are questions we do not have answers to. we do not know what the responsibilities of the rfp would be. and that actually generally concerns me. we may have a utility tax measure coming before us. you keep your eyes peeled for that. that deadline is going to be june 19th. if there's going to be a tax measure on the november 2018 ballot, which is, quite frankly, rumoured to be the case. again this is a tax revenue. a tax measure rather than a geo- bond for which we've already missed the deadline on. but that tax, whatever the language is would be determined by the cost estimate and the term, terms of the rfp. there are more questions than answers here and it seems pretty premature to make this capital, or spending, i priority. you heard it reflected and the

public comment, is this really a priority? i love the goal of this project, though. and i appreciate mike for pointing out to me the utility boxes that are predisposed already to fit themselves for a fiber. i would love to see the digital divide close but i don't think it necessarily has to do with access, but also with the costs associated with people logging on and being able to acquire access to internet. but is not clear to me that we've looked at all the options for achieving that. i do like the concept of a subsidy but again that is only half baked, it is not fully discussed. i would like to see us look at a potential revenue or grant sources that citizens and businesses can tap into the access of their internet service provider of their choice. supervisor stefani said she understood that analogy -- the

beer analogy. >> supervisor cohen: not just bud light, but bud and what? but we like microbrews, we liked the finer things. we do like variety. that is an excellent point. when i hear about the enormous cost and risk associated with p3 endeavours, and also acknowledging the fact that it has never been done and a city like ours, that is not something we can turn a blind eye to. this could potentially be abject failure for government's only system, and i think, if i'm not mistaken, only the state of kentucky is considering--is considering bankruptcy from a government fiber system. i'd don't know if it is wise and the direction we should be going and. there has to be a better bang for the buck and i think that is what this whole conversation is about. making sure all of our citizens have access to the internet and we are also an a very

cost-effective and thoughtful manner. i want to thank everyone who participated today. i would like to continue this to the chair. maybe when the rfp has been released and we can come back and revisit this conversation. madame clerk? supervisor fewer, absolutely. >> supervisor fewer: i just wanted to thank supervisor cohen for bringing this hearing forward. we all learned a lot today. i want to commend our city -- commend our city for having the goal of bridging the digital divide, and i also want to let people know that at san francisco unified, we did a survey that shows that, you know, a lot of people don't have internet access and their home, meeting that, or a laptop or computer, but 98 % of our students and parents had cell phones. i just don't know, i mean i think that this is so expensive and i think that it is s.f. city, if they care about the

digital divide, then a suggestion would be to have free internet stations all over san francisco where people get access, have computers there, have devices they are, instead of just at your public library. but have it really, really accessible to a lot of people where people can just go and use it. it doesn't have to be and your home, but you can have access to it everywhere. and i think if they want to be a part of this solution, then that is, considering we have so many billionaires that are living here now, that i think it would be of really generous and great thing to be part of san francisco, and to put that money into actually giving service to neighbourhoods that don't have access to this, and also when supervisor cohen talks about her housing project, they can be putting and computer access rooms as they do at hotels for all the residents there and i think that would be a great

suggestion and not on the backs of working folks and san francisco to pay for this. anyway, exciting news, i think but also daunting. i want to really thank supervisor cohen for bringing this forward. >> supervisor cohen: thank you very much. is there any other business before us? >> clerk: there is no further business. >> supervisor cohen: thank you ladies and gentlemen. we are adjourned. [♪] >> good morning everyone and thank you for joining us. my name is beth stokes and i

want to welcome you here. the supportive housing home to 134 single adults. i'm the executive director of the pittsburgh -- episcopal nudity services of san francisco. one of the leading providers of supportive housing. we are committed to finding solutions to end homelessness by helping individuals and families with the tools necessary to exit homelessness. including pathways to housing, workforce development, and permanent supportive housing. of the formerly homeless residents who access our services, 98 % remain permanently housed. ninety-eight %. so we are very proud of that. here we are you currently are, we have the highest risk and most vulnerable san franciscans. this five-story property was completed in 2,009 with development funds from the city and county of san francisco. it is one of the best examples

of solutions to ending homelessness in our community. we are proud to partner with the city of san francisco to end homelessness and i'm very, very pleased this morning to introduce you to the honourable mayor, mark farrell. thank you. [applause] >> mayor farrell: thank you best. i think the house for hosting us this morning here in san francisco. you know, we do not have to remind anyone why we are here this morning. why we are here today for this announcement. homelessness is a crisis in the city of san francisco. our city government needs to step up. our city, our region, our state, our country is dealing with this tragedy every single day on the streets. the roots of the epidemic are complex. there is no single solution to solve the issue. we need to pursue a wide variety of initiatives. we need to fund programs that have been proven to work. we need to be flexible to fund

programs that will work. we need to measure ourselves by the success of the individuals living on our streets today. and when they get off a street and get into shelters and onto their own 2 feet and onto better lives. today, i am announcing approximately $30,000 in funding to address the homeless crisis in san francisco. first of all, i'm doubling down on the homeward bound -- bound program. this initiative helps struggling individuals with family members and loved ones. i know elements of this program may seem controversial, but we have to acknowledge the fact that it is here in san francisco where we have had a very effective program. as mayor of the city i'm connected to programs that are working and making a difference in their lives with getting people off the streets of san francisco.

last year, 900 individuals used project homeward bound and of that total, lesson from four % turn to the city of san francisco. this program works and is having a dramatic effect and we are doubling the funding for this program. of those individuals that have been helped by project homeward bound, a man is here today from his home in reno. at one point he was unsheltered and struggling with mental health here on the streets of san francisco. after he spent time at the general hospital, we were able to connect contacts, and connect them back home with his family. he arrived last month and sergio and the rest of his family are thrilled to have him back and he is making progress daily. that is what compassion looks like to me. without programs that we are

funding to make a difference in individual lives. for are resilient individuals who have overcome great hardship, this budget package will fund projects to help to make sure they will never be on the streets of san francisco. we are adding $2 million to fund 150 new supportive housing units across the city of san francisco. and $2 million for the opening and operations of a building, a site with 50 supportive housing units in san francisco. with those new units brought online, san francisco will boast more than 7,000 permanent supportive housing units and here just right here in our city. the most per capita of the city in our entire country. along with adding new units, i will be investing one and a half million dollars to provide additional services to these units. it will provide assistance for our communities and provide the resources necessary to help individuals who are coming off the streets.

most importantly, and most substantially connect this budget package will include $50 million for new navigation centres. helping support our new facilities here. we will provide a million dollars for programs for transitional eyes use. a population that has been dramatically affected with homelessness in san francisco. we are specifically wanting to address this. we are providing new access points to provide resources, supports and services for families and residents juggling with homelessness on the streets. this is a comprehensive package. this is about making sure we create new exits off the streets through temporary shelters and permanent supportive housing. it's also making sure we provide the resources necessary to stem the tide of new people becoming homeless in san francisco. we will not solve homelessness overnight in our city. but in san francisco we are

investing for the future click as mayor, it has been one of my biggest priority since week one in office and i am incredibly proud of the policies that we have moved forward with in the city. we are going to continue to put a foot on the gas pedal until my last day in office. this funding package will ensure the city of san francisco, for years to come will have the resources necessary to continue to address the issue on the streets of san francisco. we are not going to do this alone. takes the help of community leaders, of organizations and individuals willing to come off the street, but we are making progress and we are making life better for those that are on our streets and we are making life better for san francisco residents. with that i want to thank you all for being here today i don't want to bring up to the podium the person who is really leading the charge here and has been doing great work for our city of san francisco and will be doing so for years to come. our director for homelessness and supportive housing. [applause]

>> thank you mr mayor. i'm here with the department of homelessness and supportive housing. first i want to thank san francisco community services for hosting this event and for all the amazing work that they do. we are very lucky to have an organization like ecs and san francisco and we are also very lucky to have them at the helm of the ecs. they are doing an amazing job leading this organization as the backbone provider and homelessness response system. i also want to thank our staff who are here with a few folks are here from the homeward bound program to, every day, are out hoping to reunite family and people who are homeless with family and friends who are able to take them back into their lives. the chair of the local homeless correlating board, and then other hs h. staff. thank you for being here and think all of you for joining us but mostly i want to thank mayor farrell for this budget proposal

that he is putting forward. we are very excited about the fact that this budget represents and really reflects the work that we laid out in our strategic plan when our department was created by mayor lee. we spent a year figuring out what can we do to best address homelessness and san francisco? we laid out a clear plan with specific goals. this budget practice really reflects what we see as the priorities that were developed not only by staff members and also in consultation with our nonprofit providers and advocates and people expressing homelessness themselves. we are very grateful to see this expansion that focuses on three important areas that will help us, number 1 reduce unsheltered homelessness and opening up more navigation centres. to end homelessness by providing rent subsidies and supportive housing sights.

we really appreciate mayor if there -- farrell. supporting 50 people every week exit homelessness through a variety of programs. but every week hundreds of people replace those folks get off the streets. we need to figure out how can we use programs like homeward bound, eviction prevention, flexible housing grants for people so we can help folks get back to the last safe place where they were staying and reduce the number of newly homeless people in the city. this does all o is all of thosed we are very excited. i'm looking forward to being able to dig in and start doing this work once the budget is approved by the board of supervisors and signed off by the mayor. thank you very much. is now my pleasure, we have two hs h. clients in the house with us as well. one in the house and one on the tv screen. first i would like to introduce mr williams, first of all, and i want to thank him for our service to the country.

he served in the navy for eight years. helping defend our country and ended up homelessness -- homeless but we are very pleased it is now he is living in the operant residence which is by this property which is housing that we put together for people who are veterans and to have also served the country and military and are experiencing homelessness and needed a hand up to get off the streets. mr williams moved in recently and joined me i join me in welco the podium. [applause] >> hello. i am a san francisco native. i am a u.s. navy vet and i live in the bay area predominantly most of my life. i stay at supportive housing for the past few months and i am just happy, you know, to have a

place to stay. i am benefiting from trying to get being put in a situation where i can get my life back together. it's looking good. i wish it was more programs like this to help people, you know, change their lives. thank you. >> thank you mr williams and fortunately, with this budget we will have more housing like the auburn, it is very close to the auburn and what it we are excited it will be opening up very shortly. also we talked about the homeward bound program and the mayor made reference to mr bravo who is over there on the tv screen. he is one of the many, many individuals whose families participate in the homeward bound program over 850 people a year and all of those

experiences are unique and i will tell you that that although this program sometimes may appear controversial to some, we get so many lanter is on a regular basis of people thanking us for reuniting them with their family members and people who are homeless themselves whose lives have really turned around by getting reconnected to family and friends. we're very proud of the work of this program and very excited mr bravo was here and it's going to be able to share some of his thoughts. mr bravo was there, and was able to share some thoughts. we will try to reconnect quickly. but while we are doing that, i want to share some of the homeward bound stories in addition to mr bravo's. one gentleman that we have been made aware of was homeless in san francisco and reunited with his family in north carolina and is getting his master's degree at yale. we have another individual just

recently, maybe four or five months ago, he was a senior citizen who ended off -- ended on the streets and was not really sure where she was exactly. and we were able to bring these guys over here and find her family member and return her to her family. escorted her back to where she was and she is suffering from dementia and we were able to reconnect her with her family. we also have so many stories of people going back to tennessee in chicagand chicago and peoplee bay area and folks were able to reconnect with their people. i think it is an incredibly important part of it recovering from homelessness. like a not everybody has family or friends they can return to that when they can, one of the processes and healing and recovery from the trauma of being homeless is having people around you who care about you. i think there's no better medicine than that. we are really proud of the homeward bound program.

i think we are going to end up having to conclude. let's get a last-minute technical failure. the mayor spoke briefly about mr bravo's story but his son was on the streets of san francisco suffering from severe mental health issues, we were able to make a connection with him and get him reunited with his father in reno and is now receiving intensive mental health support in order to help the sun get back on his feet again and be the best person that he can possibly be and this would not have happened without the homeward bound program. i think at this point we will go ahead and conclude the program. thank you very much for being here today. [applause] [♪]