record. mr. tom, any concluding remarks before my colleagues get more mad at me? >> no, i think we looked at this matter today as much as we can, but we can certainly make ourselves available, whether it's within these chambers or in your office or with other agencies together. >> supervisor peskin: okay. and you are aware that there is a unit owner who was not interviewed by a.b.b. who has spoken about hearing creaking for long before that window cracked, just f.y.i. -- just, mr. strong is aware. okay. to be continued madam chair. if there is no public comment, i would like to continue this to the call of the chair. >>clerk: there is.

>> supervisor peskin: oh, there is, mr. gilberti. >> tom gilberti. hearsay, john rahaim, planning commissioner. successful building is one that won't fall down. it may not function, commercially or residentially, because to create an earthquake proof building would be financially beyond profit making. i wish we could develop that a little bit more. we had cracked beams over fremont street. do you see cracked beams visually or do you need an x-ray machine? i imagine these tall buildings that won't be functionable, you might have to take x-rays, too, to see where the stresses have

gone. i'm concerned about glass, too, and not the cracked glass here, but that just leads up to it. how many glass panels and windows are going to fly out of buildings if we have an earthquake downtown? if it rains right after it, water gets in the building. the worst thing for a building is water. and then, we have 1200 -- the 1200 block of fourth street, where we have sinking sidewalk and street. and that was done by experts, too. i would also like to have the fire department here. what do they expect to happen when all this glass starts falling from the sky in an earthquake? questions. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, mr. gilberti. i just have one other question for mr. tom. mr. tom, when your inspectors

were in unit 36-b, inspecting that window, did they observe any cracks in the ceiling? i'm informed there are cracks in the ceiling in said unit. >> supervisor peskin, i would have to go back and find out. i was not -- i was not made aware of anything of that nature. >> supervisor peskin: mr. strong? >> maybe i can add because chief building inspector o'reardon did look into that dplant when i received it from our colleague at nbc, and there is no cracked ceiling marks to be observed is what i was told. >> supervisor peskin: okay. a disagreement amongst experts. with that, if there are no questions from staff, thank you -- i mean, my colleagues, thank you for your continued indulgence of this supervisor's

quixotic mission to make san francisco chamber. >>clerk: through the chair, would you like to close public comment before you take item on this item? >> supervisor peskin: i would close public comment. >> supervisor kim: we have a motion to close this item to the call of the chair. i want to thank supervisor peskin's work, and all the department's work on the tall building safety strategy. it's good that we are first to engage in work like this. as we go forward with the central soma plan, and we approve this, i think this board needs to know that we are putting together a plan that ensures the safety of all of our workers and residents, including new workers and residents that will be moving to this area as building higher and more densely

in the south of market area. so i'm hopeful that we can begin to implement a lot of the administrative changes as soon as possible because as soon as we pass a plan, many of the large projects we'll be moving forward for their individual approvals, and i would hate for them to move forward without these changes. i have to say i'm probably more concerned about existing buildings than new construction. i think the millennium has scared developers with good cause. i am very concerned about existing buildings. in particular, landlords that can't or may not feel that they can afford to make the safety improvements, and then, how these buildings then impact the safety of other buildings and of course, the neighborhood. what supervisor peskin brought up about the ownership changes i think is really critical. in fact we have very few ownership changes because

they've figured out that if you do under 49%, they don't have to pay the real estate transfer tax, and they don't trigger a number of different is -- criteria. i'd hate to see us build more and not put the precautions in place that we've studied. but i think this is really good work, and i'm appreciative to supervisor peskin for leading this charge and for all the departments for putting together this report. so we have a motion to continue this item to the call of the chair, and we can do that without objection. all right. mr. clerk, can we please call items five and six. >>clerk: agenda item number five is a resolution dlarging the intention of the board of supervisors to establish city

and county of san francisco special tax district for special soma and determining other items in connection. item six is a declaration of the intention of the board of supervisors to secure bonded indebtedness for city and county of san francisco for central soma and determining other matter nz connection there with. >> supervisor kim: thank you so much, mr. clerk. we will not be having a presentation on this item today because i will be continuing it to our special g.a.o. meeting of next thursday, october 25. i did want to make some cleanup amendments so the members of the public can see that. i will be introducing these amendments, but i have handed out copies to my colleagues and to the clerk and city attorney. they're very minor amendments, adjusting numbers on page two and on page nine i believe --

i'm sorry. page eight. and then, on pages 10 and 11, adding that -- the board of supervisors declares its intent to enter into an agreement providing for the advance and reimbursement of the funds if it is determined by the director of public -- i'm sorry, public what? okay. we should -- it's not in there. so i'm going to verbally orally add that. it is determined by the director of public finance to be in the best interests of the city because that would be a very strange directive. and then, adding in our supervisor file number 180652 on page 11. on exhibit a, adding in under neighborhood stablization and community services, small business development and workforce development. and then, within exhibit b -- i

believe this is at the end, on page 13, that after the response -- adding the words on which at least one parcel was categorized as a tier c for sale residential square footage shall be categorized ad tier c -- as tier c. so those are the amendments that i'm introducing today. before we take a motion for adopting them, i'm going to open up public comment on items four and five. seeing no public comment, public comment is now closed. colleagues, can we take a motion to adopt these amendments. >> supervisor peskin: so moved. >> supervisor kim: we can do that without objection, and we will be continuing these to the thursday, october 25 government and audit over sight committee meeting. are there any questions before we take that motion?

seeing no questions, thank you to lisa and josh for very patiently sitting through this long hearing, and we will take that motion to continue this item. mr. clarkerk, are there any furr items before this committee? >>clerk: there is no further business. >> supervisor kim: meeting is adjourned. [ gavel ]

>> good morning and welcome to the special government audit and oversight committee for thursday , october 25th. i would like to acknowledge our vice vice chair, supervisor erin peskin and. committee member, supervisor valley brown and recognize our clerk. i would like to recognize staff at san francisco government t.v. michael and samuel for ensuring our meetings are available to the public on line. do you have any announcements? >> and cherry of silence your cell phones and electronic devices. your completed speaker cards and copies of documents to be included as part of the file should be submitted to the clerk items acted upon today will appear on the november 13th, 2018 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you so much. can we please call items number

1 and 2. >> agenda item number 1 is a hearing of the purpose of conferring with and receiving advice from the city attorney regarding existing litigation in which the city as a defendant filed off every 21st, 2018 in supreme court. the case entitled sampson et al. versus the city and county of san francisco. it involves an employment dispute. item number 2 is a hearing for the purpose of conferring with receiving advice from the city attorney regarding anticipated litigation in which the city would be a defendant based on a significant exposure to litigation with the central soma special tax district. >> thank you so much. before we take a motion to convene into closed session, we will open up for public comment on items number 1 and 2. seeing none, public comment is closed close on these two items. colleagues, can we take a motion to convene into closed session? >> so moved. >> we can do that without objection. members of the public, we ask if you can exit the room for closed

session. we will convene on item number 1 and 2.. >> we are back in open session. announcement force the closed session. >> during the closed session the committee voted unanimously to file item one and to continue item two to the call of the chair. >> i would make a motion not to disclose. >> we have a motion to the to disclose. we can do that without

objection. mr. clerk, can we please call items five and six out of order. then we will go back to item three. >> item five declaring the intent of the board of supervisors to tech district 2018-1 for central soma. item 6 resolution declaring board of supervisors to incur bonded indebtedness and other debt for special tax district 2018-1 and determining other related matters. >> thank you. is the senior planning department are here to provide a very brief presentation on you the item. we have anna the director of office of public finance to answer any questions.

>> thank you. >> good morning, supervisor,

lisa chen, with the planning dent. if i could get the overhead. today's presentation will include a brief overview you have public benefits package and detail on the central soma special tax district to fund these benefits. as we mentioned we are joined from staff from office of public finance who have been instrumental in developing this and are available for questions. >> the items include two resolutions of intent. the first is to establish the special tax district including general categories of facilities and services to be funded abincludes a document to outline the specific method of applying

the tax and form agreement that project sponsors would complete. the second establishes the city will incur indebtedness. these are first official actions to establish the special tax district. when approved they will be an additional board hearing which is to be scheduled. since the plan is such a complex interry lated set of legislation this is the table of contents. it includes general amendments and planning code and admin code and zoning amendments and program document that describes the action to realize the plan. i want to highlight that today that the implementation document including the public benefits program which is under review. i have submitted a list that describes that as part of the

record today for your reference. the plan also including special tax district which including in addition to the roi before you today amendments to the city's special tax financing law. and the inclusion of housing sustainabilities district to create a review process under the california assembly bill 8073. the benefits program is one of the greatest strengths. we are creating such a great deal of capacity for development in the area means generating significant funding for public benefits. there is a three prong strategy to get there. changing zoning to accommodate significant demand for housing and jobs through taxes and other requirements. we will build upon and enhance what is great about soma. you may have seen the slides

before. they show the man paged growth we expect to see. this is existing conditions and this shows the plan at buildout. total space for 320050 jobs and 8600 knew housing units 62 million feet of growth. $2.2 billion in public benefits over the life of the plan of 25 years. existing as well as new funding sources listed here. it represents the single largest source of funding that would accrue to the city. this shows the same public benefits package by category with the second indicating the catted goes to be funded. the more detailed list of projects is in the implementation document. this is shaped by extensive

process over the last eight years at dozens of public events and hearing. it is a broader range of community uses and benefits any other plan. it including environmental sustainability and neighborhood stabilization which would be funded by the cfd. the next part of the plan focuses on mechanics of the presentation. this is the future annexation map. it ask an all annexation district. new projects subject to the tax will annex the district before the buildings are occupied. this includes a boundary larger than the plan including the downtown c-3 district as far north as market street. this was expanded in response to feedback that we should consider the longer term capital needs at the gardens in the area that is

set to expire. however, the plan itself only considers annexation of property in the central soma plan and if they choose to levee tax they would need separate legislation, da or other agreement. further, the central solve macfd would not apply to every parcel. as specified in the document or rma it would apply to large condos and nonremember projects -- nonusual projects. rental housing and community facilities would be exempt. annexation worryquired before -- with be required and it would chins the next fiscal year. it provides ongoing funding to bond against in contrast with impact fees in waves. this allows us to accelerate the

public benefits to ensure the infrastructure is in place. the city would have the right to sell or foreclose on properties that fail to pay the tax to limit the financial risk. in terms of bonded capacity, once the plan is built out we anticipate $85 million per year. the anticipated bond issuance would depend on timing. we expect the earliest 2023 to 2027 pending approval of the district determining there is capacities to support the debt and board approval. we do anticipate the city might choose to bond every five years as revenues and capital benefit

plans dictate. if the city decides to amend upward it would require a property vote. every parcel is assigned to a fitier depends on the increase. these are startingtor 2018 to -- for 2018 to 2019. this is a facility tax to be spent on capital as well as services including maintenance. after 99 years the tax drops by 75% and becomes services will no longer fund capital projects. there are two sets of rates displayed here. land use and transportation on monday supervisor kim introducerd amendments. it means that tier b would no longer be subject to the tax and

residential projects would pay tax of $2 per square foot. these were approved by committee would need to be amended in the ro i's which is in the red line copy before you. the rationale is to lower the ongoing cost to provide housing to make housing more affordable in the long-term. supervisor kim introduced the amendment to lower from 40,000 to 25,000 gross square feet. it is revenue neutral. $2.2 billion over 25 years. this is a map which corn korresponds with where we expect it do hospital. it is over time. one through 99 the base raise

will escalate 2% annually. once an individual project is in the district if it is nonusual it will escalate 4% then 2% after that. residential projects continue to escalate 2% per year as capped by state law. after the transition to services only the rate drops 75% and will be escalated by consumer price index or 5%, whichever is lower. here is the cfd expenditure plan. i will note the public benefits is anticipated for the first 25 years we do know there will continue to be expenditure needs beyond that and the cfd has a term of 99 years for capital. we know there will be needs such as sea level rise adaptation and

other capital needs. these would be decided through a future planning process which we will describe shortly. the city would have the option to lower tax rates should it decide the funding is no longer needed. you may be wondering the difference between the amount we have been saying the cfd when raise $350 million in funding versus the roi before you which would authorize the city to bond essentially up to $5.3 billion in debt. this is an explanation how those figures are related. public benefits is based on 25 years of funding. it makes this assumption that 75% will be built out built on experience from other neighborhoods. some parcels will not build or may not build to full potential. it assumes we have overlapping bonds every five years to get

the infrastructure sooner. not to speed bond -- exceed bond amount is in the other direction we want the debt to the maximum so the city can have the full range of potential revenues. 100% of development is built out instead of overlapping bonds, it assumes the bonds are sequentially one after the other to generate higher funding over a longer period. as i mentioned it includes 99 years of funding. finally, it accounts for inflation. $5.3 billion would never be adjusted upwards. this accounts for that. here are the administration entities responsible for programming the tax revenues. similar to impact fees cfd is

through capital planning. the planning committee would oversee the five year plans which are approved by the board. the office of public finance will develop the revenue projections an and oversee administration with board oversight. implementation committee will play advising role to develop the plans and finally the community advisory committee will provide public oversight. we also want to highlight the public benefits program anticipates collaboration with noncity agencies. $160 million in cfd to improve transit service to include things like bart station capacity improvements and funds for downtown extension of caltrain. they will be required to enter into the joint agreement to

spell out how funds are used and require approval of board. this concludes staff presentation. this is a summary of the actions before you today. thank you, and staff are available for questions. >> i don't see any questions from our fellow colleagues so at this time i open up for public comment on items five and six. >> hello, supervisors. i am ace on the case. case means community assistance, service enterprise. we going to make money. you talk about this stuff that i have seen decade after decade. somebody is talking about the fracture future. you are talking about 99 years lease. 20 years and all of this.

ain't no one in you this building going to be alive for to lies you are creating. i am ace, damn it. i am the founder of case. i am the scarf out-migration. the current government i was with him. i made him look like a rock star. here we are in the city by the bay. with all of these plans for people that is not around here. you are making plans with people. me as a black man in the community we ain't going to be nowhere around. that don't include us. i am here advocating to try to communicate. i am telling you all wait. i know you ain't going to pay no attention to me. on that tv i will be like trump. i ain't a church.

i ain't rich and i ain't full of shit. don't get mad. you had supervisors youing the "f" word. the of the used words. ladies and gentlemen, ace on the case waiting for the letter from the department of real estate is banned from the pressroom for life. you know that makes me feel my life is in jeopardy. that had to come from somewhere. that came from simply willy, willy brown. >> thank you so much. we have many more items for you to speak at. thank you so much, ace. any other members of th the pubc to comment. i would like to adopt the amendments as articulated by mse presentation. can we take a motion?

i don't believe i made a motion. >> i will move it. >> we have a motion. can we do that without objection? these are substantive. they require continuance to the next committee meeting. >> november 7th. thank you millio ms. chen for be today. we will continue these items. can you please call item three. >> clerk: item three hearing to consider the allegations of sexual harassment and sex discrimination in the fire department and city's policies and practices for responding to such allegations. >> thank you so much, mr. clerk. this committee has been in

conversations about allegations of sexual harassment and discrimination in the fire department. it was initiated by a settlement this committee heard last month, and we have had several subsequent conversations both with our fire department and our fire chief. we want to acknowledge and thank her for coming to the closed session hearing. i want to acknowledge that our director of human resources and equal opportunities are here to attend this hearing. due to the conversation that have occurred at closed session, colleagues and i have decided we will not fully hear this item. i want too make some remarks. i want to speak on behalf of the commit de and earl -- committee and several members how

disappointorred we were this continues to occur during the san francisco you fire department. i continue to hear about the culture at the fire department not as inclusive as it could be. not to single out one department this is an overall issue we as a nation continue to struggle with, but actions like this are completely unacceptable regardless of the reasons or motivations why they occur. i want to say that part of my motivation in wanting this hearing is not just a single settlement in hearing other things that deeply disturbing me as a woman policymaking and noting a few years back reading that the firefighter's union kicks off the annual toy drive which is a great charitable

cause that i highly commend and i am so glad the fire department undertakes every single year and provides toys to so many children around families used to be held at strip clubs in san francisco. if you are a member of the fire department and want to support a good cause female or male you had to know to the strip club to attend the events. they have moved away from the tradition or practice. i think this is the type of city activity that cannot beacondoned. i understand it is not the department that hosts these and iit is the union. i want to be on the record to express my disgust and hope that this practice and tradition changes in the future. it is not acceptable. colleagues if you want to make any comments, i will allow

ms. callanan to say a few words if she is still here. i don't see here. if you want to say a few words and we will open up four public comment on this item. >> i think you expressed the sentiments of this committee and i associate myself with your you comments. >> at this time we open for public comment on item number three. >> years ago. i am like trump, i am no chump. i am banded from the pressroom. since you are the audit committee, uppropping i and you moderate. you better get together and solve it. what i am talking about is racism. racism in the city. particularly, on the black

american. i am not an african-american. don't lump my with jessie jackson to fill his pockets. i am a black american. therefore, in the 20th certainty tree i will try to make this change around. if you took african-americans immigrate you go to the country and city, our population would be lower than 6%. it would be down to 2%. insignificant. they don't give a damn about the black folks in the city by the bay. listen to what i have to say. i am tired of it i am victimized. you think i jumped here from space because my name is ace. community assistance, service, enteenterprise. we are going to make money.

i will give the younger generation the blueprint. i am at city bay by the bay. i will tell you what i have to say. i all asking respectfully and i will relay that. i have 18 seconds. i know how to work this thing now. i am ace on the case. don't look at me like i am mr. mcgoo. i know what die. i am on a mission. >> thank you.

>> thank you. so on a -- tangential topic. i am really excited to finally hear our government audit and oversight committee. the report of the safer school sexual assault tax -- task force this is a report that our office had requested.

a little over a year and a half ago. working in conjunction with the san francisco district attorney 's office. as well as a san francisco police department. in terms of what we can do, walking with -- working with instant -- higher educational institutions here in the city and county of san francisco to streamline the process by which those that have experienced assaults and sexual assaults can report these crimes in a safe manner and in one that is respectful. i do want to state that i think we really have come a long way and i am very excited in particular about the university of san francisco's leadership role in assisting those that want to come forward on their campus. but we have have a role in

making sure that everyone feel safe. in understanding how difficult it is to move through several parallel processes within a university campus or higher education institution but also the city and county's process through the district attorney and our police department and figuring out how we can make this a more friendly system for everyone that utilizes it. i want to recognize julia weber who is a consultant and staff member for the sexual assault task force and the women's policy director for the san francisco department of the status of women who will be presenting on this item. i want to recognize the director of the department who is also here today. of course, i want to thank all the members of the task force for spending a year to craft this report with best practices and recommendations to the city and county. i want to thank you for your patience in finding a time for us to schedule this item to be

heard. thank you, so much. ms. miss weber. >> i will start out. good morning, supervisors. i'm the women's policies director. i want to thank supervisor kim for sponsoring the legislation that created the sexual assault task force. i'm really excited to prevent -- present the findings of our report. we will risk present the first part on the findings and i will present the recommendations that came out of the task force. i want to thank the members of the task force who were able to be here today. along with our favourite dog, pink who is always a delight at meetings. i will let julia start. >> good afternoon, supervisors. thank you for hearing us today and thank you supervisor kim for sponsoring the legislation. the task force was established by an ordinance that was passed in april of 2016.

i am julia weber. i'm the consultant who was brought on board through the department on the status of women to assist with this project. i was very privileged. we are bringing up -- i think we have a note that the ordinance to work with the ten members of the task force who were appointed by the board to carry out the expectations that were articulated in the ordinance. the focus was on higher education. the colleges and universities in san francisco. i want to point out how unique this approach was as far as i found through my research. this is the only time a city government asked for recommendations about what you could do to effect change in this area through the educational institutions that do business and provide education for our students at that level of college and university in san francisco. it is the first time that hit

this has happened. at the municipalities have worked on the issue, but not with the same type of leadership that you establish with the ordinance on the task force. i wanted to note that. i have spoken nationally about this at conferences. and conducted quite a bit of research on the topic. kudos to you for doing that. the task force members who are appointed, there are several here today. they were tremendous representing a broad cross-section of folks who work in the field in san francisco. one of the learnings that we encountered was that you had the foresight to include a survivor seat on the task force which was tremendous. the voices of survivors were really key to our efforts. one of the things we will point out, however is pointing that position, they had to go through the same process that you usually have to go through, which includes applying and then presenting publicly. we did get some feedback that

for survivors to have to go through that process where there is a certain amount of competition and sharing their story publicly, there were challenges around that. so it is helpful to be thinking about how we can be most effective in including survivor voices in developing our processes or establishing taskforces or commissions or setting up position so we can ensure that we have survivor voices included in a way that really reflects concerns about going public and privileging some voices over others. but we were lucky enough to have not only these ten representatives and members of the task force but at each monthly meeting, we had survivors who attended and other members of the public and experts. that was terrific. we know that the problem is significant. as it is around the country as we are increasingly drawing attention to. we have 23 colleges and

universities in san francisco. we try to get some numbers. the numbers are one of the challenges in this area. the numbers aren't great. but if we use the numbers of one and five or one and 16, one in five women can expect to experience sexual assault while on campus or in their college experience. and you use as a monk numbers about those numbers since we come into san francisco and attending school at schools that are somewhat residential although, in the urban environment it is quite different than campus is when people are on campus the whole time. we are estimating around 10,500 female students and 3,281 male students to expect experience sexual assault during their time on campus in san francisco and during the time that they are enrolled in school. we know that this is a situation that also affects transgendered people, boys and girls who are not in college. the cap -- the task force made

recommendations with respect to k-12. very limited recommendations since that wasn't within their purview. but the idea that we need to be doing preventive work before people come onto campus. we also need to -- a supervisor kim has mentioned, been paying attention to how we are handling sexual assault outside of the educational context in san francisco to support the most effective approach to this issue we know that sexual assault and cap -- on campus is an issue that is not just a public health concern but criminal justice concern. in the context of sexual assaults on campus, it has the added layer of adding educational rights and civil rights issues and having other processes and procedures, administrative procedures and procedures under federal law as well as under state law on campus. that makes it even more complex. we need to take a legal and public health approach in our

sectional as well as an intersectional approach that takes into consideration other characteristics. we know for people who are lgbtq , issues related to race, class, gender identity, a little -- other characteristics. intersecting those experiences with experience or the potential for sexual assault or violence. it is significant. in san francisco, given the diversity and commitment to civil rights and progressive approaches to handling social issues is an excellent position to be most sensitive in responding to the recommendations and the findings of the task force. so the report itself, in addition to the recommendations, we conducted significant research looking at whatever data we could find. summarizing existing laws at the local, state and federal level. we also included student perspectives of the problem. we had a representative specifically identified as

someone who could speak to student issues and could reach out to students on campus so that in addition to survivors, we have folks who are on campus who could speak to the particular cultural norms of their school and their concerns. we ended up making recommendations in six different areas that we will go into more detail, looking at a coordinated city wide and campus effort, prevention, we looked at advocacy and support issues. policy development implementation, surveys, performance measures, evaluation and transparency. we built on some of the work that had been done by the obama and biden administration in this area and tried not to reinvent the wheel but to identify the best practices that we can bring here to san francisco. we have an entire section that provides additional suggestions.

in terms of documenting the problem, we look to whatever problem we could find. san francisco women against rape identified 524 cases during fiscal year 2016 and 2017. these numbers that you will see on the slide don't record represent campus sexual assault other than the? reports which are required federal reports on the issue itself. and you can see on the bottom from the 23 institutions during 2014-2016, there were 74 documented cases. these numbers, perhaps there is overlap and perhaps they are distinct and individual cases. it is difficult to know. it is recommendations of the task force that we would have an ongoing task force and supportive ongoing efforts in this area, we could improve on data collection and do a better

job documenting the problem and reporting on these matters. you can see we included numbers that we have for the police department and per the d.a. as well as from the 23 colleges and universities. that is all included in the report. in terms of student perspectives , we conducted interviews and outreach. i generally -- in some public events and on campuses and really took advantage of our members who represented the student voice on the committee. as well as leslie simon and her connection to prevention efforts at city college and other members who work directly with students on campuses. we know that students raise a lot of concerns about how their concerns were handled when they brought them to the attention of the administration.

sometimes people believe that the title line office is in an excellent position and they may well be but they also have obligations to the institution. and we need to do some outreach to the larger community through women against rape or other social service agencies which requires coordination between the campus processes and procedures for closure campuses tend to have more resources such as city college, sit -- san francisco state, ucsf. the smaller campuses rely heavily on what we are able to provide in the community generally. making sure that we include survivor voices and student voices about prevention as well as a response, the task force is really key. the last point that i will make is a task force felt strongly it

was an opportunity, such a privilege to have this year plus time to really focus on this issue. naturally because we had a task force and we had funding and we had a staff person or consultant , we were able to draw attention to the issue and generate more it -ish -- more thinking to its picket brings people together. the group felt strongly that one of the things that we need to do is support any ongoing efforts that exist to coordinate more effectively and establish a task force i was dedicated to this issue. we wanted to highlight that there are some groups that have been working on the issue long before the task force force showed up. they too felt strongly that having a group that is tasked with focusing on this and having staff focusing on the issue is important. a sexual assault response team start which brings together representatives of different

agencies that work on this issue and help victims, and survivors of directly is the major public community-based organization that works on the issue, primarily through san francisco general. with the members of the police department, the sbu unit to, san francisco women against rape, the district attorney for sex crimes, victim services as represented here today. the san francisco women against rape mentioned trauma recovery centres and mental health clinicians. child support advocacy resource centre and that medical examiner 's office. these groups are all part of the discussion and efforts towards coordination. they are really key and yet there is no one entity that is really charged with coordination this is all in addition to their particular work and their agencies. they work on a number of

different issues. they have done quite a bit of work on improving the speed at which evidence is collected and analysed and looking at drug facilitated sexual assault, which we know is a real concern in san francisco. and then producing a brochure. a guide to help victims survivors understand what resources are available where we also include some campus information so that survivors could make decisions about which different route to choose in terms of accessing help as needed. so i will turn it over now to get into more detail about the recommendations, unless there are any questions. >> thank you. it was a real honor and privilege to have the chance to serve in my capacity and i appreciate your leadership on this. thank you. >> thank you so much for all of this incredible work. did you want to make -- >> thank you. i just want to go over, briefly,

not all 47 recommendations, but just to highlight them. as julia mentioned, they fell into six categories and then we have these icons that are associated with the recommendations once you get into the full list so you can see which sector would be involved in implementing them or if there is any funding that would be needed to have it go forward. so again, as julia mentioned, the number 1 overarching recommendation of the task force if they wanted it to continue in expanded form. it was great as an initial effort to have a year focusing on campuses but we recognize that san francisco needed an ongoing task force to look at sexual assault more broadly and to be funded to be ongoing and not just for a year. the task force finished meeting before supervisor ronan convened hearings earlier that reinforced and exposed the great need that san francisco has to improve how it responds to sexual assault

and then supervisor ronan introduced the sharp ordinance which created the sharp office and we are excited to announce that in collaboration with the human rights commission and our department, through some of the funding from the sharp office we are going to be having a staff person who can convene some kind of work group or task force to do this ongoing work. we are really excited that we will be able to implement one of the primary recommendations for an ongoing task force. the second overarching recommendation was to be mindful of changes of the federal enforcement of title ix. because previously the white house had been quite a leader in championing these. but with the advent of education secretary director, we are already seeing those protections being rolled back. we have strong laws in

california, that can protect us but we want to be mindful. in terms of highlighting recommendations from the other areas. one of the areas, important way is to ensure that cases are handled appropriately is to make sure there are memorandum -- i want to thank our g. a. who has done a good job in getting these in place in a number of institutions. so nine of our largest institutions have m.o.u. but obviously we would like all of them to have it. we have on going work of task force that we could monitor. the d.a.'s office has started this with the annual red zone events that has been quite successful and we would love to continue to have that happen. in terms of prevention, we

thought it was really important to focus resources on prevention historically, interventions on sexual assault have focused on the response, which is important but there is an incredible need to start further upstream and work on prevention. so two of the recommendations in the prevention area were to ensure that campuses have a bystander amnesty policies. if someone wants to reports that they have witnessed or been a victim of sexual assault or perhaps they were engaged in taking illegal substance and they are afraid to come forward because they will get in trouble for that, it would be clear they would not and other jurisdictions have implemented those. and looking at prevention, as julia mentioned further upstream and looking what is happening in the k-12, by the time you get to college, it is not that it is too late but you need to be doing some of that work earlier. i want to flag that the state sexual assault allegation came out with a report this year highlighting the need for prevention by