understand what the c.b.d. is and what the benefits of this process would be. again, i just want to recognize james spinelo and tim, debra benedict, alex, erik lopez, brenda tobin and ryan jackson along with ivy lee and chris corgis for bringing this all together. i'm very excited that we are reaching the point that we can make this into a reality. and having seen what other cbds have done whether it's providing additional nighttime security, alleyway street cleaning and greening and beautification, i've seen the difference that c.b.d.s can make and it also a louse us to truly take ownership of our neighborhood and invest in it ourselves and the c.b.d. includes the part of the neighborhood i live in as well. i personally am very excited about seeing this move forward and as pointed out, in public comment, this petition doesn't guarantee the passages of c.b.d.

but it certainly shows the city's support for it. [ please stand by ]

so, colleagues, if you would'nt mind passing those motions. motion to amend. we can do that first. [gavel] and then i'd like to make a motion to move this item forward as amended with positive recommendation to the full board. and we can do that without objection. [gavel] thank you so much and thank you to all of our community leaders for your work. mr. clerk, can you please call item number three. >> resolution authorizing the office of the assessor-recorder to apply for a county assessor's grant program for the california state department of finance in the amount of $2250,000 from the period of july 1, 2018 through june 30, 2021.

>> thank you. and they are here to discuss the item here with us. i ask that we're being asked to table this item as the office is no longer applying for the grant. but we did want to give you an opportunity to speak to the committee. >> thank you, chair kim. i appreciate that. simone jacques with the office of the assessor-recorder. the department submitted the resolution along with our budget in may prior to the grant guidelines being released by the department of finance and since reassessing our priorities, have determined that now's not the time to apply for the grant and have decided to request that the item be tabled at committee. >> subject to public comment. i will make that motion. >> thank you so much. and at this time, we'll open up for public comments on item number three. seeing none, public comment is now closed. >> i move to table item number three. >> supervisor peskin has made a motions to table this item and we can do that without objection. mr. clerk, can you please call item number four. >> dading item number four is a

resolution approving certification of the memorandum of understanding between the california automated consortium eligibility system and welfare client data system consortium for the city and county for the provision of procurement and implementation of shared services which would facilitate the move toward a single statewide-automated welfare system. >> and thank you. i want to recognize danielle caplan for the human services agency for presenting on this item. this is actually quite interesting for me and i have a couple of questions about the history of how we develop so many different systems for our -- for how the state administers welfare. so i'd love to hear about that in your presentation as well. >> sure. so, i'm dan caplan, deputy director of human services agency for finance and administration. we are bringing to the board a resolution with the m.o.u. for the california awed ud --

automated consortium system known as cal-aces. the m.o.u. is part of a five-year process that we are going through now between 2018 and 2023. to develop a single automated welfare system in the state of california. at the present time, we have three systems. we have the 18-county calwin system, which san francisco participates in. there is a 39-county system as the c-4 system and los angeles county has a system refered to as the liter replacement system. c-4 and los angeles have come together to form the cal aces consortium which is a joint powers authority. next year, the counties will come together to form a

58-county calsaws joint powers authority. calsaws is obviously california state automated welfare system. and state automated welfare system is a term and every state is meant to have one. in california, we've had three. we have three at the present time. we had four several years ago. and the federal government has pushed california over the last several years in the direction of developing a single statewide automated system. there are two reasons for that, really. one is that the federal government would like the see systems that are consistent from county to county in terms of application of rules and calculations, leading to the determination of eligibility

for calworks, medi-cal, and of course the other thing is maintaining three systems expensive. and since the feds pay a very large share of the costs of these systems, they would like to reduce their costs. the m.o.u. is designed to facilitate shared development work before the 58-county j.p.a. is formed. at this point, we believe we're on a track to form the 58-county j.p.a. next summer. so we are really talking about a 10 or 11-month period that this m.o.u. will be the guiding document for shared development purposes. there are two projects that have been identified that will be worked on under the m.o.u. that we are bringing. one is a revision of the online

calworks appraisal tool, which generally is overed to as ocat. the other is the foster elgability subsystem. the m.o.u. will become effective when it is signed by all 18 counties within the calwin consortium. and lit give the calaces project the abilities to procure and contract for development work on the two programs that i just mentioned. the work that is done under this m.o.u. will be overseen by the calsaws leadership team. and that is a team put together to guide the transition process from the three consortium that exist today to the one consortium that will exist next summer and wills be the consortium that develops the final system that all 58 counties will use. at this point, we anticipate that all of the costs on the

two projects will be covered by state and federal revenue. we also anticipate that those state and federal revenues will be directed straight from the state to the calace. there is a possibility, and it is referenced in the m.o.u. attached to the materials for today's item, that leaves open the possibility of a county contribution. at this point, we don't believe that there will be one for these two projects. but the possibility is referenced. i would just say in the ongoing cost of the saws work, there's been a county share in the past. it has been very small and our current year budgets for the support of the calwin program,

98% of the cost is covered by state and federal revenue and 2% is county share w., that i'd be happy to answer any questions. >> thank you for letting us know the possible financial impact of approving this. i wanded to know historically how california set up three different systems and are we the only system that has multiple systems to distribute to our welfare benefits? >> to the best of my knowledge, we're the only state that has multiple systems and that is part of the federal government's interest in moving us to a single system. the systems have grown up over a period of time. i would characterize the calwin

counties as being middle-sized counties, probably counties with investing in social services work. and there is more sophisticated development over time. i think that has characterized the calwin consortium. the c-4 consortium has had smaller counties for the most part. has had a simpler system and then the los angeles systems have been obviously tailored to los angeles's particular needs. >> that is the calace system? >> well, calace is the combination of c-4, the 39 county c-4 consortium and los angeles county. >> i'm sorry. this is the c.r.v. and -- >> it is definitely a complicated -- >> does it make it difficult

for our recipients to transfer their benefits county to county because we have multiple systems? >> so, there is -- there are processes for transferring. with me is bernadette casino who is our calwin manager. each county has a calwin manager who serves as a liaison. >> and i see most of the bay area counties are in calwin. >> we are. mainly in calwin. >> alameda and san mateo -- >> yeah. do you want to talk about transfers? >> good morning, supervisors. i manage the calwin system. in troefrns your question, yes, having three systems does make it difficult for our participants to move from county to county. it involves sometimes faxing over documents. having a sing statewide system will make it easier for an individual to move from one county to another.

in terms of delivery of service and timely issuance of benefits. >> i'm glad that we're moving forward s. there anything that we fear losing by moving to a consolidated system because mr. caplan had mentioned that those that are on the calwins system tend to be countis that really invest and believe in human services. so is there something systematically that we could lose by being in one statewide system with countis that may have differing prioritis from san francisco's? >> in terms of policies, we have federal and state regulations to abide by. i believe that with a single statewide system, some counties will be given some leeway to introduce policis that will forward our goals and philosophies as a city and county. there will be some room for that.

however, the goal is standardization and consistency across counties. >> in the work we have done so far in moving towards a single statewide system, there's been a lot of attention given to governance questions. and we are moving to a system that is meant to -- it's almost a representative democracy system. there are six regions that have been established within the state and each region is given a number of votes based on population in the region. so, san francisco will be part of -- right? it's called the bay area group. but it is sort of a little bit larger than i think what i traditionally think of as the bay area. it starts in monterey and goes north to napa and sonoma and includes all the counties in

between. there are 12 counties in the group. and, you know, there is an opportunity for counties within each group to talk and develop position on where the system is going and to have their roementzives informed discussion at the consortium-wide level. so i think there is the ability to continue to work on pushing the growth of the system and i think that that will probably happen. from the bay area counties. there's been a lot of work to this point as we have worked on what needs to go into the initial system to look at the components of thes calwin system and to make sure that the functionalty represented by those components is adequately covered in a new calsaw system. so i -- i think you're right. i think there is attention there. but i think there is also voice

that's -- that is very possible. >> mmment . thank you. i don't have a question about the actual motion that you're asking the board of supervisors to take. i plan on supporting it. i was curious when i understood that we had three different systems that, i wasn't aware of, in the state of california what that meant for the actual user. just a quick question. this is kind of a side bar. but i know that many of our recipients move a lot. merely because of instability or insecurity of housing. and so if they miss appointments because they don't get notices, how does this h.s.a. deal with recipients that are moving all the time and, therefore, may lose eligibility because they're not able to receive mails and notifications? >> so, i mean, ongoing notify scattered showersing an issue. -- notification is an ongoing issue.

we e-mail people, text people. and this is all in an effort to be in better contact with our clients and, you know, to remind people that they have -- that they have periodic paperwork to file, that they need to come into the office. they need to re-up their eligibility. and i think we're nerl that work. -- we're early in that work but the initial findings have been promising. it does work to text and bring people in. i think it is imperfect, but we are attempting to build out communication that addresses some of that. >> yeah. it is very difficult. the unfortunate characteristic of poverty is often that you're moving a lot because of the lack of financial stability and so it's just -- i know it is an ongoing issue, but one that i've been thinking about. so, we'd love to hear more at another time. >> so do we think a lot about

it. yes. >> thank you so much, mr. caplan. see nothing other question from members of committee, we'll open it up for public comment on item number four. seeing none. public comment is now closed. colleagues can we move this item forward recommendation to the full board and dwoek that without objection. mr. clerk, can you please call item 5 and 6 together? >> agenda items number five and six are an ordinance and resolution about a lawsuit and unmitigated claim against the county and city of san francisco. >> madame chair, i would submit that perhaps we can approve these without going to closed session also in member of this panel would like to convene in closed session. but they seem pretty straight forward. >> ok. i actually didn't have questions on either item. so, can we do that with that discussion? ok. >> but we still need to take public comment.

>> yes. yes. i will take public comments on these items but won't take a motion to convene into closed session. so let's take a -- why don't we open it for public comment on items five and six. seeing no public comment, public comment is now closed. colleagues -- >> i would make a notion move item five and item six to the full board with positive recommendation. >> so we have a motion to move both items forward because we did not convene into closed session, we don't need take a motion to not disclose so we'll take that motion without objection. mr. clerk, are there any other items before this committee? >> there is no further business. >> meeting adjourned.

>> this is one place you can always count on to give you what you had before and remind you of what your san francisco history used to be. >> we hear that all the time, people bring their kids here and their grandparents brought them here and down the line. >> even though people move

away, whenever they come back to the city, they make it here. and they tell us that. >> you're going to get something made fresh, made by hand and made with quality products and something that's very, very good. ♪ >> the legacy bars and restaurants was something that was begun by san francisco simply to recognize and draw attention to the establishments. it really provides for san francisco's unique character. ♪ >> and that morphed into a request that we work with the city to develop a legacy business registration. >> i'm michael cirocco and the owner of an area bakery. ♪ the bakery started in 191. my grandfather came over from

italy and opened it up then. it is a small operation. it's not big. so everything is kind of quality that way. so i see every piece and cut every piece that comes in and out of that oven. >> i'm leslie cirocco-mitchell, a fourth generation baker here with my family. ♪ so we get up pretty early in the morning. i usually start baking around 5:00. and then you just start doing rounds of dough. loaves. >> my mom and sister basically handle the front and then i have my nephew james helps and then my two daughters and my wife come in and we actually do the baking. after that, my mom and my sister stay and sell the product, retail it. ♪ you know, i don't really think about it.

but then when i -- sometimes when i go places and i look and see places put up, oh this is our 50th anniversary and everything and we've been over 100 and that is when it kind of hits me. you know, that geez, we've been here a long time. [applause] ♪ >> a lot of people might ask why our legacy business is important. we all have our own stories to tell about our ancestry. our lineage and i'll use one example of tommy's joint. tommy's joint is a place that my husband went to as a child and he's a fourth generation san franciscan. it's a place we can still go to today with our children or grandchildren and share the stories of what was san francisco like back in the 1950s. >> i'm the general manager at

tommy's joint. people mostly recognize tommy's joint for its murals on the outside of the building. very bright blue. you drive down and see what it is. they know the building. tommy's is a san francisco hoffa, which is a german-style presenting food. we have five different carved meats and we carve it by hand at the station. you prefer it to be carved whether you like your brisket fatty or want it lean. you want your pastrami to be very lean. you can say i want that piece of corn beef and want it cut, you know, very thick and i want it with some sauerkraut. tell the guys how you want to prepare it and they will do it right in front of you. san francisco's a place that's

changing restaurants, except for tommy's joint. tommy's joint has been the same since it opened and that is important. san francisco in general that we don't lose a grip of what san francisco's came from. tommy's is a place that you'll always recognize whenever you lock in the door. you'll see the same staff, the same bartender and have the same meal and that is great. that's important. ♪ >> the service that san francisco heritage offers to the legacy businesses is to help them with that application process, to make sure that they really recognize about them what it is that makes them so special here in san francisco.

♪ so we'll help them with that application process if, in fact, the board of supervisors does recognize them as a legacy business, then that does entitle them to certain financial benefits from the city of san francisco. but i say really, more importantly, it really brings them public recognition that this is a business in san francisco that has history and that is unique to san francisco. >> it started in june of 1953. ♪ and we make everything from scratch. everything. we started a you -- we started a off with 12 flavors and mango fruits from the philippines and then started

trying them one by one and the family had a whole new clientele. the business really boomed after that. >> i think that the flavors we make reflect the diversity of san francisco. we were really surprised about the legacy project but we were thrilled to be a part of it. businesses come and go in the city. pretty tough for businesss to stay here because it is so expensive and there's so much competition. so for us who have been here all these years and still be popular and to be recognized by the city has been really a huge honor. >> we got a phone call from a woman who was 91 and she wanted to know if the mitchells still owned it and she was so happy that we were still involved, still the owners.

she was our customer in 1953. and she still comes in. but she was just making sure that we were still around and it just makes us feel, you know, very proud that we're carrying on our father's legacy. and that we mean so much to so many people. ♪ >> it provides a perspective. and i think if you only looked at it in the here and now, you're missing the context. for me, legacy businesses, legacy bars and restaurants are really about setting the context for how we come to be where we are today. >> i just think it's part of san francisco. people like to see familiar stuff. at least i know i do. >> in the 1950s, you could see a picture of tommy's joint and looks exactly the same. we haven't change add thing. >> i remember one lady saying, you know, i've been eating this ice cream since before i was born. and i thought, wow! we have, too.

♪ >> the hon. london breed: hi, everybody. thank you all for being here. many of you know that housing production here in san francisco is my number one priority. we know that we face a number of challenges, especially the bureaucratic red tape that sadly gets in the way of producing the kind of housing we need here in san francisco. we're very fortunate because there's so many creative ways to produce housing, and the reason why we are here today is to talk about a.d.u.s, accessory dwelling units, otherwise known as inlaws. and what we have discovered in trying to move forward the process is a number of challenges that exist with various city departments.

sometimes, unfortunately, inconsistent information. and part of what we know about a.d.u.s is we've already awarded 377 permits. over 90% of those 377 are rent control. they're subjected to rent control because they will be built in rent control apartment buildings, and that is pretty amazing. so with over 900 units that are in the pipeline that have yet to be issued permits, we can probably expect that a significant portion of those would be rent control as well. this is the only way when producing housing -- new housing stock that we can provide rent controlled units. these are often times more affordable, and we have to make it easier in san francisco to produce these units so that they are available to the public. just imagine being able to put 900 plus the 377 units.

that's over 1,000 new units here in san francisco that will go into our housing stock. this, along with new development, along with preservation and building more affordable housing is something that is key to producing housing here in san francisco and meeting our goal of producing 5,000 units every single year at a minimum. and so today, what i would like to talk about is my executive directive, and that is working with our fire department, our planning department and the department of building inspection, putting forth a directive to do a number of things. first of all, those over 900 units that are in the process of getting permitted, my goal is to make sure that they not only get permitted, but they get through the process within six months. i also want to make sure that the backlog of units get

addressed within a four-month time period. and finally, because of the challenges of inconsistent information, i'd like to make sure that the departments come up with clear guidelines so that when people are coming to the city and asking for direction, they're getting the clear guidelines they need so they can produce the information to get the job done within a timely manner. the goal is to get those units on the market as soon as possible, to get them completed, and to make it easier for the property owners trying to provide these units, to make it easier for them to get done. that's what this is about, and so i'm excited about this. i know that our departments are coming together to work on this particular directive already, and i really appreciate their efforts in trying to get it done. i want to also thank a number of the commissioners who are here, commissioner myrna melgar who's here from planning. i know that commissioner debra

walker is here from building commission, as well as angus. people are working together to make sure that our departments are working together, that we are doing everything we can to create housing in san francisco, and this is one of the most creative ways to produce housing stock of rent controlled units here in the city. and so at this time, i'm not sure if there is any other speakers other than me, since this is just a directive -- oh, yes, thank you. thanks for reminding me. so someone who has been an incredible advocate, a fierce advocate in helping to support this particular program, my former colleague on the board of supervisors and someone who i truly admire, someone who's innovative and is really pushing to develop new, creative ways to provide

housing, and that is supervisor from district four, supervisor katey tang, and so she's going to say a few words at this time. >> supervisor tang: first of all, i want to thank mayor breed so much for lighting this fire around the issue of a.d.u.s. first of all, it's not enough to have it on the kbobooks tha say we can create a.d.u., we have to take action. i want to thank all the different city departments that are working together to make sure this happen. recently at the board of supervisors we passed a piece of legislation that i sponsored trying to remove the legislation around a.d.u.s. we did quite a few listening sessions and working tours to find out what are the challenges to building a.d.u.s. some of the things we found out were street requirements or bicycle parking. those are really important but we can't let those things stand

in the way of creating more housing. i think in san francisco we really need a mixture of solutions for housing, right? there might be some neighborhoods where high-rise developments might be more appropriate, and there are some neighborhoods like the sunset where a.d.u.s are more appropriate, so we need to have the solutions for all of those. i definitely want to thank some of the staff who are really instrumental in pulling together all of the different interdepartmental meetings. i know my former legislative aide, monica mojan, and so many people, including mark hogan, who you'll hear from next after me were just really instrumental in sharing with us what we need to do to ease the permitting process for the creation of a.d.u.s. i want to thank everyone who made this possible. look forward to constructing more in our neighborhoods, and next, i'll turn it over to mark

hogan. [applause] >> thank you, supervisor tang. i'm mark hogan, open scope city architects. had the pleasure of working on the a.d.u. handbook starting in 2014. at the time there was only a few small parts of the city that you could build a.d.u.s and then had the pleasure of working with several members of the board of supervisors to bring that legislation citywide, and it's been amended several times, but i think the missing piece is what we're hearing today. the missing piece is getting all the various departments coordinated so that these permits can be processed efficiently, and we can actually get those units built. [applause] >> the hon. london breed: thank you. and i also would like to acknowledge the president of the planning commission, rich hillis is here, thank you for being here today. and just to be clear, the goal of the directive is to move the process forward as quickly as

possible. specifically, we want to make sure that we get -- address the backlog by pushing forward those particular projects within six months, and that a new directive is set for future projects, those who will submit applications for a.d.u., that we do it within a four-month time period, and finally, that we have an organized process with departments so that we give people clear direction of what could expect here at the city, and the departments will be continuing to work with me and report back to my office so that i know exactly the numbers, what we have in the pipeline, what the delays are, what are the challenges, so that we can move san francisco forward. housing production is something that is really important. we have, sadly, for far too long, pushed for job growth and addressed other issues in if oif -- in our city, but we have definitely not done our part in

producing more housing, which is why we're experiencing such a significant challenge, a significant affordability crisis. this is just one way i think that we can get the job done, and we want to make sure we make it easy for the people who are trying to move these projects forward, to do so, and i want to thank everyone for being here today. [applause] >> good morning. tom huang, department of building inspection. i'm here to have all of you come here today, and especially honorable mayor breed and supervisor tang to come over here, and especially their staff helping us to work with all of the department, including planning, department of public work, p.u.c., and fire department, especially. we all working as a team

with -- and we're going to fully commit to achieve the goal from that little directive, and then working as a team with all of the departme departments. and then also, i want to thank the commissions from the planning department and fire department and d.b.i. and other. we will work together, and then, you know, we will achieve all those goals. thank you to come over, and then, if you want to interview the mayor or anyone else, we can, you know, still stay on the floor to answer any questions. thank you. [applause]

>> good afternoon. the commission will please come to order.

our acting executive secretary will please call the roll. [roll call] >> our next item, please. >> our next item is proposed action item for the approval of the minutes of the august 21 health commission. >> so commissioners, the minutes for august 21 are before you for approval. is there a motion? >> move for approval. >> and a second? >> second. >> okay. the third item for discussion is the director's report. >> wait just a minute. >> sorry. >> okay. so the minutes that are sent out are incorrect, and you

have, instead, or should have a set of the new minutes before you which actually indicated the actions on item eight, which -- or let me take it, miss chang, is the minutes that were sent out in the packets correct. >> those are the most current versions. i'm not aware if there were any edits. >> i just want to make sure it's edited correctly. i'm sorry. i just want to take a look at it. yes. actually, the minutes under item ten did not carry the action that are in the packet. there should be new minutes

available to us, and, in fact, in item ten, as the commission will remember, it should actually read that the commissioners voted to defer that action for three months. so commissioners, there was a motion and second, and i would ask that you actually consider that the revised minutes that were sent out, we don't have right in front of us, but it actually in substance had indicated the action taken, which i believe you all remember. that would be added to the minutes, please. are there any other corrections? if not, then, we'll proceed with the vote. all those in favor, please say aye. all those opposed?

the ayes have it, and the minutes have been approved. and thank you. mr. chang is substituting for our executive secretary who currently is on his honeymoon. so we will get through this meeting, and we will work with you in order to do so. so therefore, would you please call the next item. >> thank you, commissioner. the next item for discussion is the director's report. >> okay. so our acting director will please give our report. >> president, members of the commission, a couple of items to highlight. we have two pieces of news on our overdose prevention programs. as you have probably heard, ab 186 passed the state legislature and is now moving to the governor for signature. that bill would authorize san

francisco to do a pilot for a new type of overdose prevention program, otherwise known as safe injection services. it would be a three-year pilot, so that is exciting news for the efforts to -- here in san francisco to confront the substance abuse epidemic that we're experiencing, and we're awaiting the governor's action on that bill. in related news last week, mayor breed, along with the tenderloin health improvement program hosted a demonstration of an overdose prevention program as -- at glide. that is a site that is a mock up to show what a program of that nature would look like. it was a good event with a tour of the site, and then remarks from leaders. and that type of program is one of the things that we're looking at here in san francisco along with other cities as one component, an

important component of our response to the drug epidemic that we're confronting in san francisco. new generation health center celebrated the reopening in its new location last week, so that was a good piece of news. as you know, that site has been looking for a new permanent home at some time and had an event last week to celebrate the opening at the site of the homeless prenatal program very near where its original site was, so that's great news for that program, and a nice event to celebrate that milestone. in sadder news for the department, joseph tatoui who was one of our street violence intervention program staff, also known as jungle, to those who knew him, was a victim of gun violence on august 23.

it's a very sad note, but i just wanted to take a moment to mention jungle and say that our thoughts are with his family and with his friends and the community. he was an important part of our d.p.h. and our san francisco family, and we want to honor his contributions to the community and, again, extend our wishes to his family and friends and the community that he worked in. >> thank you. i also want to thank mr. wagner for taking on the roll of the acting director of health at this point. we'll have more to say about the -- about dr. garcia's leaving us on our subsequent item. commissioners, questions, otherwise on the director's report at this point. commissioner loyce? >> mr. wagner, has the city

attorney or anyone from that staff or the mayor's office spoken to what was articulated in the paper regarding the federal government's response to our efforts to have a safe injection drug site and the question about whether or not they would actually pursue legal action against the city and county of san francisco and what the implications of that are? >> yeah. we've been, commissioner loyce, in conversation with the city attorney's office and also other cities that are exploring this. there are a number of cities that are looking at this as one of the facets to their response to what we're seeing nationwide. there are still legal issues that we're working through, and the event last week was not really to address that aspect, but the purpose, and i think it serves really well to do so, was allow people to envision and experience what a program like that would be like.

you can kind of see how it would work, how it would provide a positive environment for people to come inside and get engaged with services, really kind of envision how a model of that type of program might work. so it was very inspiring, the remarks from the mayor, and the others, including dr. barry zevin from the department of health spoke at the event, and the director of glide, and it was a very inspiring event. so we're continuing to work through the legal and citing and logistical issues, but i think that was a step forward for that community to think about what that type of a program might look like in san francisco. >> thank you, mr. wagner, and i was there, as well, so i appreciate your comments. >> yes, and thank you for coming, as well as commissioner bernal. >> thank you. commissioner bernal? >> yes, director wagner. first of all, thank you for this extensive report and

writing. i just want to make sure the minutes and records reflected two awards that were received by the department of public health just so it can be known that the thomas aragorn won an award and that the d.p.h. trauma systems was recognized by the association of state and territorial health officials. just wanted that known in the open health commission. >> thank you. and there were other items. i didn't read the whole report in the meeting, but it's available to the public in front, as well. >> thank you. >> thank you, commissioner bernal, to again, point that out in public for us. thank you. any further questions to the director at this point? if not, then, we will move onto our next item, please. >> item number four, general public comments. we haven't received any public comments. is there any at this time?

>> we have not received any public comment for public comment. is that what you're saying? >> correct. >> okay. so then, we'll move onto our next item. >> item number five is for discussion. it's the finance and planning committee. >> commissioner chung? >> commissioner chung? >> good afternoon, commissioners. the finance and planning committee met just before this commission meeting, and it was a short agenda to approve the consent calendar. so right in front of you and on the consent calendar, and hopefully, you have the contract report, as well, that we have made some changes, including the first contract, which is the regents university of california family and community medicine has been withdrawn for now and will be resubmit later on. and also, i think i need to

talk to -- dr. chow and commissioner bernal to help me with the second one, which is the san francisco unified school district. >> commissioner bernal, proceed. i think you caught the proposed annual amount change. >> right. it was to amend the proposed annual amount without contingency to reflect the amounts that are in the unduplicated -- or the units of service section, if that's correct, i'm looking at -- where's michelle? is she here? yes. >> that's correct, commissioner, there were some of the numbers that were included in the first set of documents that went out that needed to reflect the correct numbers, and that was the modification. >> yes, and i think the

clarification for that was while an equivalent f.t.e. was being added, that in fact, there were existing health workers who were then going out and being trained, given additional opportunity, therefore, to help when the disparrate district that's have dental health in the -- several districts. there was not just simply hiring one person who had spanish or cantonese, so i appreciate the opportunity, commissioner chung, to help elaborate on the contract, r. we increased the capacity of the health educators at the public school district to get into the schools in those areas that have disparities. >> basically represent a bunch of the workers that have hours

that were equivalent to one f.t.e. and then, some contracts that had some changes in the number is on the last page. that is for the san francisco community health authority. so the proposed total amount with contingency is supposed to be 3,552,821, and the change in total contract amount is 8,107. and the proposed annual amount without contingency is 3,172,162. and the only difference is 7 --

7,238. and those are the changes to the contract on the consent calendar. >> commissioner chung? >> yes, commissioner bernal? >> i believe there were two more changes. the first was to remove the first page for further clarification. and then, also, page four, e. clinical works was under requested action and new amendment, and not a new original, all the way to the right-hand side of the chart. >> yes. we'll also note that as being corrections to the type of contracts. sorry. >> no. so the first contract was withdrawn. there's no change to the second contract. the third contract, the change is to -- to reflect that that higher bilingual health worker is actually hired at a

full-time f.t.e. but consists of, like, multiple bilingual part-time health workers. and then -- can you repeat the fourth -- oh, it should say amend -- amended, not original. >> correct. >> okay. and then, the last change was on the last page, which were some of the typos in. so it's 3,552,821 for the proposed total contract change, in total change, 8,107. and proposed annual amount without contingency is

3,172,162. and the annual difference is 7,238. >> so commissioners, although, normally, the consent calendar is somewhat clearer, commissioners, do you have any other questions to be sure on what you're voting on? >> yeah. yes. keeping in mind that there were multiple changes to the original contract. >> yeah. >> seeing none, are there any extractions anyone wants to talk about any of these any further? if not, we'll vote on the consent calendar. all those in favor, please say aye. all those opposed? the consent calendar has been

adopted. go onto the next item. >> item number seven, it's the overview of process for the d.p.a.'s director of health. >> thank you. commissioners, as you know, two weeks ago we were surprised and saddened by the resignation of our director, barbara garcia. as you know, barbara has served as director over seven years and previously spent several decades here in the department first at tom wooddell and rising to director. during her time as director she oversaw the completion of the san francisco general hospital and the completion of the san francisco health net work along with really driving the integration of the medical and mental health services together, and then, helping to create the ability for us to move into epic and assisting with the funding from the mayor's office and the supervisors to allow us