we'll see anti-social behavior, substance use, a lack of family support, a lack of support of community. things when people are more vulnerable, they can get taken advantage of or put into situations where they're not fairly treated and end up coming to us that way. we cannot address these risk factors without treating the mental illness. what we have here is a circle that lists mental illness in the middle and the other eight factors all around it. the lack of education, anti-social attitudes, anti-social personality patterns, peers, substance use, family and marital factors, leisure, activity. if we pick any single one of those out, poor employment history, and we only focus on that and not the mental illness, we're doing a disservice to the individual because we're not addressing something significant that lies at the core of why

there is a poor employment history. same with all eight of these. substance use. we can put them in treatment, but if they have bipolar disorder, and we're not treating that, we're not being as helpful as we should be. we address the risk factors. individual risk factors for recidivism. if the risk factor is anti-social behavior, the need is to build alternative behaviors. if it's anti-social cognitions, the need is to develop less risky thinking. if the risk factor is anti-social attitude, the need is to reduce association with criminal others. if the risk factor is family and marital discord, the need is reduce conflict and build positive relationships.

if it's poor school and work programs, we would enhance performance, often use a system of reward. if the risk factor is lose you're or recreation activities, we enhance outside involvement. and if it's substance use, we would reduce use through treatment. not forgetting that mental health is at the core of this. evidence-based intervention, this is kind of my thing is where we focus resources and high-risk cases. we find that the best outcome comes from the highest risk cases. we find that in our collaborative courts. we target needs such as anger, substance abuse, criminal generalic peers. we use cognitive behavioral techniques, including thinking

for a change. which we're studying right now in the jail with doctor scheme and we're calling it change your mind, to see if we can make an evidence based intervention for folks to really change outcomes. and integrated dual diagnosis treatment, we can't treat the substance abuse if we're not looking at mental health. supported employment, supported housing. supported is the key word. we need it, but not good luck, a here's your apartment, we're not going to see as much success if we don't have someone going there to support you when you're making the transition. we have one mental health court. we have behavioral health court, we have misdemeanor health court. i work in our behavioral health,

our misdemeanor behavioral health and the changes i get to see are amazing. i get to see people live lives better than they had ever anticipated. and i'm lucky that i get to do that work. i love it. that's the slide show. that's the presentation sort of what we're doing in jail when folks do get to us. as lieutenant said earlier, we see it as a failure when someone does get to us, but there is no wrong time to start helping. so when folks do arrive in jail, we're happy to help and pick up. and sometimes, unfortunately, that incarceration or arrest is the event that precipitates the actual change, healing and wellness, it's not ideal, but we do the best we can. >> co-chair blacksten: i want to thank you for your presentation.

and this is of real interest, what you're doing in the jails. it's fantastic. i know that there are some community organizations which includes religious groups that come in and try to help as well. so you're all out there doing good things. i want to open this up to the council. are there any members, colleagues, who would like to ask questions? >> council member madrid: i do. i have a question. a couple of questions for you. one question is i know that the problem is that -- >> could you repeat the question? >> is my primary work with jails? >> yes, or community? >> my job is interesting, it's a bit of a hybrid. my office is in the jail. and i'm in the jail every day. i'm also in court every day. and i'm often in the community every day.

and i sort of follow people from the time they get arrested until we get them into some form of stable treatment that will address their needs. and then i'll follow up with them during the court process. >> council member madrid: so my question is, how do you see peop people -- civic center, i understand there is a challenge right now between mental illness and drug abuse usage. so i understand that lieutenant just spoke about trained officers that identify those

issues. can you educate us on what you guys do, specifically on those people, and how many percentage of people that go back to the streets? >> sure. in a crisis situation on the street, as lieutenant said, is not the right time or are the police the right people to make the distinction, this is a symptom of a serious mental illness or what we're seeing, methamphetamine use typically. my staff is really good at differentiating that. we have the luxury that no other social worker in san francisco has, which is time and space away from the drugs.

so folks who come in presenting with psychosis or mania, paranoia, all the symptoms that we see that can be mirrored in both mood disorder, thought disorder or substance use, if it's substance use, it goes away typically. there are instances where the substance use has been so significant and so prolonged we'll see the symptoms linger for a really, really long time. for the most part, if somebody comes in and they've been out five days using methamphetamine, in four days after they've slept, eaten and showered, they're not longer presenting that way. so that's a luxury we only have in the jail, that our counterparts in the community don't get to see. they're seeing folks come in every day, using or not and get to know them that way. we get to distinguish them. it's not to say one trumps the other. they're both significant. we want to treat both people

coming in, the person with the smi and the person with the significant stimulant use disorder. so we typically see them clear if it's just substances. if it's both, mental illness and substance use, we'll address that, treat the symptoms, we have psychiatry, clinicians, we see people very regularly, we have psychiatric housing units in the jail, where we're doing groups, thinking for a change, thinking safety, where people can talk about what is going on with them. we bring 12-step in the jail also. how many people relapse? both are chronic. serious mental illness is chronic and treatable. and substance use is chronic and treatable. it depends on the person. someone in smi diagnosis is more likely to relapse than somebody without one. but we've seen people doing

great. walking over here to the civic center, i've seen people who are not doing great. >> co-chair blacksten: are there any other people on the council that have questions? >> council member mcdonald: if that's you unprepared, that was very impressive. >> found out an hour ago. >> council member mcdonald: very good. >> co-chair blacksten: i just had one quick question. i know that the group that comes into the jail to do services and you know, hold different kinds of sessions, are you still doing quite a bit of that? >> oh, yes. we host all kinds of groups, everything from the spca brings in animal therapy, pet therapy to our psychiatric housing units where folks get to play with the therapy dog. when i see the dog, i'm having a better day. so someone who doesn't get to leave at 5:00, it makes a big

difference. >> co-chair blacksten: that's great. i heard of one situation, i don't know if it's san francisco, i have a guide dog. and they were bringing -- they had someone bringing in these little puppies to do therapy for the people in jail. so that's what you're talking about then with the animals? >> the spca trains people to bring their pets in, they train the person and the pet to go into hospitals, jails, all type of environments, to do pet-assisted therapy that is to reduce stress. it's beautiful. ever since we started it a couple of years ago, especially with the ladies in the psychiatric unit, we see women looking forward to monday. it may seem so simple, but acts of humanity and kindness and

thoughtfulness, they don't go unnoticed by both our colleagues and the folks we're trying to serve and help. it's pretty empowering. >> co-chair blacksten: of course, i know the service animals they bring in, that works as well. i'd like to open it up to the staff. any questions by staff. >> thank you so much for pitching in and helping us with this presentation. very interesting. i'm wondering if for members of the public and for the council, you can talk about the differences between behavioral court and drug court, how is it working together? >> excellent. in san francisco, we pride ourselves on our treatment courts. we have several. i mentioned a few, behavioral health, misdemeanor behavioral health, drug court, mental health court, we have young adults court, it targets the needs of 18-24-year-olds.

we have a veterans court, that targets veterans. the community justice court up here on polk street, those are quality of life crimes, folks who may not have a place to use the toilet and they get cited for it. stuff we make take for granted. if we're able to be here and showered today, not all folks can. we have different courts to address different needs. behavioral health court, three things are needed. it's voluntary. if you have your case removed and put in treatment court, you have to want to do it. would have to be diagnostically eligible, which means you need a serious mental illness diagnosis or a cognitive diagnosis and be a regional center client. either you on of those.

-- one of those. it can be a little confusing, they both address behavioral health. for drug court, you have to have a substance abuse disorder. that's not enough to get you into the court. so we will have attorneys going, look at him. you know, he definitely needs treatment, but he belongs in drug court. there is not a major mental illness that should be addressed by our court. or by the resources we have in that court. so drug court expects people to go to treatment, be successful. it's san francisco, so we always talk about harm reduction models in all of our courts and that's significant, but what with we hope and the d.a. and the judges hold, is that abstinence is a part of harm reduction. it's not separate. what is the ultimate harm

reduction? not using. it's a continuum. they don't get taken back into custody because they relapse. what it does, it brings us to the table. we have the judge two days a week, the d.a., the public defender, someone from my team and then a representative from city-wide case management and probation. we sit at the table and discuss every client on the court calendar that day, how they're doing, how we can support them. if someone is doing well, we give them a $10 gift card. if they're struggling, the judge may give them a stern talking to. not as punishment, but if the person is doing so poorly they may re-offend in a greater way or harm themselves, they may get remanded until we have a new treatment plan, but that's always the last. we may have placed them on a

5150. we sent them to a new program. i mean, we've done everything and we're well worried about their safety, we'll bring them back to stabilize. please stand by.

and are now helping other people get through the collaborative course. they are an integral part of our team. it's amazing. each court has its own personality but all the treatment courts are set up to meet them to be as successful as they want to be at that time. i just have a follow-up question. is the primary or preferred treatment modality to force someone to take medication? to deal with the psychiatric symptoms? >> the judge will never force someone to take medication. the judge and treatment team want no part of that. it feels very messy and not at

all client focused. the judge does require that people stick to their treatment plan. that individual creates with their provider. so no, there will never be, you take meds or you are going to jail, or you take meds or you are out of this court. no. but there will be a discussion, this is a treatment court. what does treatment look like. this is what your doctor is proposing. i see you don't want to take that medication, what can we look at, let's try it your way. okay, it hasn't worked for three months and you have actually come back to jail. it's a discussion. not everyone in the court is on medication and no one is court-ordered to be. >> thank you. >> great. thanks, joana. anyone else on staff? okay. we want to thank you for your presentation. this is good, this takes me back to some of my time that i

have volunteered in the community a number of years ago and you do outstanding work. we want to stay in touch with you and continue to collaborate and know what you are doing. so thank you. >> thank you. >> all right. so now we will open this up to the public for comments. and i understand there's two cards. who is the first one? >> hi, i want to thank tanya for an exhaustive fantastic presentation. that was incredible. i know only half the councilmembers are present, i hope those not present will be able to view the video from today because there are some great presentations taking place. i think the most important question i had, concerning the presentation, i was really interested to know how many of the people treated with mental health illness returned to

prison after they leave the program? my primary concern for people with mental health issues and disabilities is the issue of housing. there are three regular homeless people in my neighborhood and all three have severe disabilities. two have severe mental disabilities and one is in a wheelchair. i talk to them regularly, try to give change when i can, some food. one likes to draw and i give him drawing supplies. but there's very little i can do as an individual. so i'm very concerned about, if you don't have that stability, of housing, of basic needs met, you are just going to end up in prison again because i think people, you know, end up doing what they have to do to survive. so i just wanted to share that. i also want to share a personal story. i have a friend of mine who is a trans person, woman of color. and she has some severe mental

disabilities due to some severe child abuse in her home. her parents kicked her out because she was transgender, identified as a female, not a male. she was kicked out. she checked into a center, but after that she was homeless. living in a hotel. she stayed on my couch for a little bit. she didn't have any stability in her life and she is in san francisco because of the amazing services here for people in the lgbt community and wants to stay in san francisco. and i just wanted to share that story as one example i know in my life of people who are trying very hard to get their basic needs met and have mental health issues but are faced with homelessness and possible high risk for criminal activity to try to make ends meet. you know, providing for themselves. so yeah, again i just want to

thank the presenters. it's a great presentation. i would be really interested to know how many people return to the program after they have left. thank you. >> thank you very much. who is our second? >> winship hillier. >> thank you, madam co-chair. my name is phil winship hillier. i want to comment on the last two presentations. i didn't think of things to say about the number 6 presentation until some minutes after public comments had closed. i'm very interested at the number of mental health calls that s.f.p.d. receives. if we believe these numbers, there's one call every year for every 40 citizens in the city. by and large something like 75 or 80% of the calls that

s.f.p.d. gets are for mental health issues. that's astounding to me. but putting that together with the other presentation, i would just like to comment, there were a lot of graphs put up with a lot of numbers that i don't think are really very valid. psychiatric diagnoses are unreliable. you could have one doctor that says yes, this patient has serious mental illness. another doctor, no this patient doesn't have a serious mental illness. another doctor you get another answer and another, it just changes. it's very much in the eye of the beholder. so, i just want to make clear that i have been told i have a mental illness when i have been complaining about the involuntary outpatient treatment. i have been drugged involuntarily with power and

debilitating anti psychotic medication. i have had it so, so strongly i could barely walk. it's not very much fun when you have a plan for your day and all of the sudden you have been hit with anti-psychotic medication, you can't read, you can't work, you can't sleep, you can't do anything, you are reduce today staring at the walls for the next 4-5 hours. it's like your whole central nervous system is being hijacked out from under you. and this is being done here in this city. and then, if you complain about it, if you have anything to say, i mean, no explanation is given. no treating identity is given. and that is to basically create trauma and terror in the patient. and then if a patient complains, the patient says hey, you drugged me, what the heck are you doing? that is considered a mental health issue. i heard the bell, thank you.

then you are accused of hallucinating. i'm going to become homeless in a few years when my money runs out because i have brain damage and i can't work and i can't get a doctor to recognize it, because i can't get a doctor to recognize it, it's considered a delusion. madam chair. >> thank you. so do we have any comments on the bridge line? not at this time. and we have had comments from the audience. i think we have completed this item. number 7. and we are going to move on. again, like number 6, it's a fantastic subject matter, so

i'm sure we will return to it at some point. now we will have our third presenter. this is someone we know a little bit. his name is jorge mestayer. peer counselor, mental health association of san francisco. welcome, jorge. >> thank you. i am pretty nervous, i will read something i wrote and i will get into my story. >> you will do just fine. >> my name is jorge mestayer, i'm a peer counselor. i work for the mental health association of san francisco and mental alliance. both jobs because of my experience and that's exactly what makes me a peer. a peer is someone who has lived experience with a mental health challenge or a family member. now i want to talk about jails. i have spent quite a bit of time in jail, county jail in san francisco. an estimated one in five inmates have a mental health

challenge. a serious mental health challenge, i consider this number to be low based on my experience and the fact jails are depressing and traumatizing. there was a study done i believe is closer to the actual numbers. this study of 62 surveys from 12 countries included 22,790 prisoners, it said 65% had personality disorder, including 47% with anti-social personality disorder. it's also stated that 4% had a psychotic illness and 10% had major depression. this is somewhat closer to what i have seen in the county jails. but the real statistics, we may never know. next i would like to talk about medication in jail, or the lack thereof. when you come to jail, you will

be denied medication unless you were previously prescribed and you haven't used drugs or alcohol in the last 30 days. if you have used drug or alcohol, there will be a 30-day hold on your medication. some medication is prohibited. i was prescribed wellbutrin, an antidepressant and then i got arrested. i was cut off cold turkey because it's not allowed in the facility i was in, sf county jail. things like this are quite common. a lot of medication isn't allowed in the county jail. so next, if you get past these 30 days of no medication and having a mental health challenge and if you complain enough you might see a psychiatrist. the psychiatrist may sit with you for ten minutes and make a diagnosis.

you may have severe anxiety and then being put back in your cell. i believe the jails are the mental health facilities we lost during the reagan administration. jail is such a traumatic experience and one that could affect a person's mental health for the rest of their life. the violence there. the freedom taken away. a lot of that affects a person's mental health once they are released. yeah, that's what i wrote about my time in jail. and now i could get to my story. i was born and raised here in san francisco. traumatic childhood, a lot of different things happened to me and stuff like that. my first incident with the police was maybe 15 years old.

i was caught in a stolen vehicle. i remember being put in a cell and having severe anxiety and wanting to run out of the cell and i couldn't and just being stuck there. no one -- mental health wasn't even a subject brought up at that time. over the years i went to jail quite a few times. it was always the same. i do not have the opportunity now to c.i.t. i was part of that. i work for the mental health association. i'm also a speaker who goes and does trainings. i want to talk about behavioral health court too, as an alternate court. it is a collaborative court. what i have heard from people in the court is that they will

get into the court and they will be stuck in jail for 12-13 months while they wait for a program. all that time they spent, they could have already done their time and got out. but instead they will spend more and more time in jail and on probation, due to the fact there's not enough beds, not enough space for people to get the help they need. from what i've noticed it's been an average of 9 month's wait to just get a bed in behavioral health court from the people i've been asking. i would like to share a story about a young man i met in jail. he was 20 years old at the time. his hair was disheveled and he looked tired. we started to become friends and he shared with me why he was there and he also shared he had been 5150'd multiple times yet he didn't have psychiatric services in jail.

he didn't know what behavioral court was and that he could be part of it due to the 5150's. they drop your charges down to lesser charges. he didn't even have any awareness. so that's most of the people. they aren't aware there is behavior health court. drug court, everyone knows about drug court but people don't know about behavioral health court, or p.a.c. court or other courts in the system. now i would like to talk about stigma a little bit. so the three types of stigma we face are public, structural and self. the public stigma being things like someone putting a blanket statement and saying someone with mental health was the person that shot up this place and it was because of mental health challenges. a lot of times that is a blanket statement, that blankets everyone with mental

health challenges that they are capable of shooting up a place or something like that. the structural stigma is stuff like hospitals, institutions, like the medical model being imposed on people and we are going to fix you. the person not being an expert, just something i believe, that everyone is an expert on stuff especially about mental health challenges. and stigma surrounding being incarcerated. it's so stigmatizing to come out and try to look for a job or the way you feel about looking for a job. you get turned down quite a bit. i became depressed. i became hopeless. it took a lot for me to bounce out of that. i think services like citywide, like a wraparound service that

has therapy and help with jobs and also has psychiatrists, the wraparound service helped me and harm reduction helped me quite a bit. i have been diagnosed with quite a few different things throughout the years. right now my diagnosis is severe anxiety and depression. but in the past i have been diagnosed with schizoeffective disorder and bipolar disorder due to exposed drug use. i know what it is to hear voices in the cell while you are all alone. i've been through that myself. i wish there was more help we could give people that are incarcerated. so that's pretty much all i have to say today. thank you guys for having me share. thanks. >> yeah, thank you, jorge for sharing your personal story. that's excellent.

let's open this up to the council. do my colleagues want to ask you any questions? alex? >> hi jorge. >> hi. >> thank you for coming up and speaking to us. you didn't seem nervous at all. good job on speaking. >> thank you. >> so my question is, i think you touched upon this a little bit but, can you educate us and share with us thoughts on the issue of what's going on in the

contraband now -- shooting incident and "diagnosed" i say quote, unquote, because i don't know much about individual, but he said he shoot up, or he or she has mental illness issue. so can you -- >> expound on that? >> share your thoughts, and what we should think about before judging people. >> yeah, i guess my thoughts are that mental health

challenges, it's a big spectrum, you know. and to just like put that blanket statement over one incident. a person may or may not have mental health challenges. i read something that many involved in the shootings didn't have mental health issues. my thought is yeah maybe they do, but there's no reason to put a blanket statement out there for a person who might have depression. it's a big spectrum of things to put that blanket statement, it causes a lot more stigma for people. like myself, a lot of my life, i believed i'm a violent man because people with mental health challenges are violent and that adds fuel to that type of fire for people's self-stigma. >> thank you. >> thanks, alex. kate?

>> bravo. you have such courage. that was such an authentic presentation. it gave me a glimpse into what you have gone through and so many who don't understand that stigma is there, so we don't understand what people are going through. and thank you for making it real and authentic and speaking from your heart. >> thank you. i appreciate it. >> okay, sally? >> yeah, i second what kate said and it's also very interesting to hear all the statistics and the professionals and then hear from a person who has been there and they don't necessarily jive. but i would point out, to alex's question, when the stigma, someone with mental health shooting a place up, as you said, from the previous speaker, we learned, i think it was 66% of the crimes may not have anything to do with their mental illness anyway. it's not only do they have a

mental illness but did their mental illness contribute to what happened? i think it's a two-step process and all the public needs to be better educated about that. >> absolutely. >> yes. and i would third these comments. yeah, i think we have to look at statistics. they are essential. how does that play into the role of making things better. it's both mental health issues and other issues that contribute to people being in difficult situations like prison. tell me, briefly here, when you came out of prison, how long did it take you to really get back into mainstream and to begin working? >> it took me close to two years to actually get a job, yeah. and i had even been volunteering for a while and i got let go from the volunteer

position because of my history. >> you had a lot of support though, right? >> yeah, i've had a lot of support. especially citywide has been such abegg support for me. -- big support for me. now recovery looks like to me, going to my groups and weekly check-ins with people, using my phone when i need to. and also meditation. a bunch of different things that kind of contributed to my recovery. and especially my jobs have been so essential in me progressing. the warm line and the mental health association, you know, trains us so well. it's just a job of giving back all the time. so it's great. >> great. keep up the great work. >> thank you. >> staff, are there any comments or questions? >> yeah. through the chair. jorge, hello. you shared with me at the break how nervous you are and you

have nothing to be nervous about. everybody really felt your story. so i have a couple questions for you. were you, in your experience in the jail population, did you run into people that you thought had an undiagnosed mental illness? >> yeah. >> and how long -- you shared that you were basically 15 when you had your first contact? >> yeah. >> how long did it take to get from the age of 15 to a mental health diagnosis? >> wow, that's a good question. probably in my mid 20's when i first got diagnosed. i feel like that first question, i think there's so many people that are undiagnosed. for example that person i was talking about, just his appearance and the way he was

feeling and him telling me i have been 5150'd twice already in my life and he had no mental health diagnosis and no reason to reach out to try to get one. >> well, you know, there are so many different intersections between race, family situation and mental health. the way we identify folks. there were recent studies that said for kids of color, versus mainstream kids, if they exhibit certain behaviors, the white kids tend to get steered toward special education services, whereas the kids of color go into the criminal justice system, or being expelled or considered violent. >> yeah. >> so we do have a very long way to go. >> absolutely. >> and i think one of the issues are really around early

diagnosis and early intervention. you mentioned a lot of things started because of your own home situation and when we start thinking about, it's unfortunate. a product of the system. >> ab22, went to sacramento to try to get a mental health -- to try to make it a law. or ab 2222. >> absolutely. so what would you say was a turning point in your recovery. and if that was one person, what did they do that was actually most effective for you to kind of resonate with the commitment to recovery? >> i think the turning point for me was when i was introduced to harm reduction.

that was a big turning point for me. because before then i was caught in the aa model. alcoholics anonymous and narcotics anonymous and relapse meant the end of the world in that world. so it was always really shameful and hard to bounce back from a relapse. once i learned about harm reduction it was really quite simple to get back on the wagon every time and not feel so much shame. i think the person who most helped me was my therapist. she just stood by me and supported me through things but she also gave me ultimatums, had to be there, so yeah. i would say she was the most influential person. >> thank you so much. >> you are doing some good work. we want to keep in touch with

you, that's for sure. and keep the collaboration going. so thank you for your presentation. and that will conclude your part. we've got one public comment from zach. >> i want to thank jorge for that incredible presentation. i think it's been the best presentation today so far. the courage and bravery to speak about personal experiences like that is just astounding. and the honesty, as well. i think jorge touched upon some really vital issues for people that experience mental health disabilities. the access to medication in the prison system i think is a very crucial one. and also, he made a note, the helpfulness of therapy, it's

very helpful. i have had a very difficult time finding wheelchair-accessible therapists in san francisco. it's kind of at a crisis situation. it's very, very difficult. if m.o.d. staff has a list of wheelchair-accessible therapists that take medi-cal, i would like to have that. and i would like to speak to the stigma of mental illness is very real. i'm blown away by jorge's presentation. i think people often don't make it to this microphone and to these meetings. the day-to-day functionality could be extremely trying and extremely difficult. and the stigma, when you have been diagnosed with a mental illness, i think part of the reason, maybe part of the reason it's hard for people to get diagnosed, there's a fear there. and the fear is that if you do

get diagnosed you will be stigmatized. your words will be immediately suspect because any person could point towards the mental illness as a reason to discredit what you have to say. and i think that's a social problem that won't be solved soon, but it's an important one to take note of. and that's one of the reasons i mentioned earlier of the importance of a liaison, someone who is a support person for a person experiencing mental health crisis. having a support person that is not affiliated with the police department, or with prosecution, it's very important for people with mental disabilities to advocate for themselves and not experience that stigmatization and discrediting that could happen so often with a mental health diagnosis. thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> thanks, zach. and for all of your comments. and we hope to stay in contact with as many of you who have

made public contact with us as possible. this will be an ongoing process. [please stand by...]

>> how are people involuntary medicated in san francisco. there is a corporation called alexa pharmaceuticals, based in mountain view just 30 miles south. 2010 they filed their method of volumpsychiatric medication andr kinds of medication. what they do is they mix the medication with a propellent and then they ignite the propellent and the medicine goes into the air and then a patient can breathe it and it's as powerful and as fast-acting, this is one of their advertisements, as an injection. there's no need to force people to take medication. there's no need to test them to make sure they're voluntarily taking it. you only need a roommate who is

watching them who when they see the person, the target come down the hall, wave it in the air. they've gotten an f.t.a. approval for one of the kinds of medication but it's been tested. their patent has been tested on 50 different kinds of psychiatric medication including antipsychotic medication. these are very powerful and debilitating drugs. all the person has to do is wave it in the air. the f.d.a. approved version is to be applied to the patient's mouth. the patient is supposed to take it voluntarily. they breathe in and they're medicated. it doesn't have to be that way. it can be waved in the air. when the patient comes down the hall and they breathe that they have gotten a full dose. it is powerful. it's like being hit over the head, let me tell you, with a baseball bat. i've never been hit over the head with a baseball bat, but i imagine it to be only a little

bit worse. that's how it works, people. back to you. who is their second presenter. that's it. no more. ok. all right. i'm going to try to address a couple other things in the time remaining. one thing i want to point out about, the lack of access to therapy for people with disabilities, sometimes the rely i get is there's therapy through institute on aging program. student therapy is not therapy. someone who is not fully licensed with field experience is not therapy and i've had some very unfortunate experiences and a bad one recently with the institute on aging home therapy program because i dealt with a student that was not familiar with some symptoms i was having. and so, i just want to point out it's a human right that people have access to experience

therapists with wheelchair access. i have issues with perry, he has denied me access to mentor ship services which are very important for hiring someone in the home to help me with my basic needs. he even insinuating my ability to come to a public meeting like this was reason to deny me the services. so far he has only been willing to give me a -- someone is supposed to call me once a week to help me and those phone calls haven't been coming in. i have been trying to get access to deputy director eileen norman and executive director kelly deerman has refused me access to eileen norman and canceled our appointment we had. i tried to speak at the governing board meeting at their last one, over the phone, they would not let me make a call over the phone without intervention from other city

officials. because they do not apparently want much public comment. and when i tried to make comment over the phone, they changed the agenda on the fly so when i was in the bathroom they ended the call and before the meeting was even actually over, so that i could not make public comment, it took intervention from city staff to get them to create an e-mail so i could submit a public comment. but this is an on going serious issue. one of the reasons i'm having an addition to this with iihs i do have a caretaker right now. it's very hard to get. it took 40 interviews to get this person. and this person i found out is under investigation for beating an elderly woman. i.h.s. did not inform me of this. that's hugely unsafe and problematic and in line with what i've been bringing up at their meetings which is we do not have proper safety. there's not proper screening being done for providers. i had a provider go through my trash looking for bottles.

i had a provider tell me that she would not work for me unless i signed a time sheet for her sister and they told me they would not work for me unless i put double the hours they worked and defraud the government. these are four recent interviews. thank you for your time. >> thank you, zack. that's very good. do we have anymore public comments? is there anyone on the bridge line who would like to make a comment? my goodness, we haven't heard from the bridge line today. all right. well, we're getting towards the end of our program. information item number 10, correspondence. is there any correspondence? >> there's no correspondence at this time.

>> all right. then let's move to number 11 which is -- are there any council member comments and or announcements? no? and i don't think there's any -- i know we had tech week this last month. there's not any special meetings coming up that i know of. of course we're moving into the summer season so people tend to be on vacation. i don't have any right now either. all right, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your time and availability. appreciate you being here. i think this concludes the meeting. and my co-chair, denise would have been sharing this meeting but she had another commitment that came up almost last minute

and couldn't be here. she wanted to send her best to all of her council members. i'm taking this opportunity to extend to you, all of you sitting here with me today and staff that she would like to be here. she gives us her best. she'll be back in july. with that, i think our meeting is adjourned.

. >> clerk: commissioners. first on your agenda is items proposed for continuance. [agenda item read] [agenda item read] [agenda item read] >> clerk: commissioners,