representing prop c, prop g and also prop c. i want to say little bit about -- i don't know if lot of you know about myself. i'm fourth generations chinese-american, four generations of my family have been educated draw the san francisco public schools. my grandfather was educate in the the oriental public schools. my mother and father were educated here. then i got on to the school board in 2009, quit my job for the last eight years from 2019 to 2016, i made $461.75 a month

serving on the san francisco board of education. was humbling. i was an advocate on the other side of the podium yelling at the school district all the time. when i was there, i learned a lot. i was very humble how hard people worked educating their students. i want to say that because i was there and raising three children, being stay at home mom and taking care of young children for a very long period of time, is very taxing. i know how hard our early childhood educators work. i know how hard our sfusd educators work too. i think that when i i think about homelessness, i want to grad school. no one expected i would go or go to college when i did earning i remember one thing from grad

school. that was maslow hierarchy of need. if you're hungry or sheltered, you can't learn and meet your full potential. i think what this budget really shows is that, although, a majority of the money was put toward a lot of homeless and housing initiatives, i think we carved out enough money for san francisco educators. i meanwhile sfusd, in my book, there's not at hierarchy. i don't think the work of childhood educators is less valuable than the words who teach k to 12. if we want to talk about educational outcomes, must look at 0 to 5 and those years. especially for those wonderful communities we are trying to close achievement gap. while i was on the school board,

i wrote the resolution for ethnic study for restorative practices looking at the systemic racism in the system. what we're seeing here is a compromise. it is a compromise of great realizing what the voters wanted but also that there's great need. what i have been disappointed it, take money from affordable housing acquisition, take them from substance abuse, give -- earmark more money. it's not about. it's about that all of these things are really super important. all of these things are part of raising the village and supplying the village that our children need in san francisco. i'm thrilled that we are all together on this. knowing this isn't the last money.

there's more money coming. i also want to echo what supervisor mandelman said. i was on the school board when we sent out 506 pink notices. the thing that saved us was rainy day fund. rainy day fund. i was at the charter amendment to have the public education enrichment fund. city and -- there was nowellness centres. all these things our children need city and county of san franciscos puts in un$1 million every year into the fund. it pays for these things. they are essential support for our students and also for our teachers. i want to the say, this has been

learning experience for me. i'm glad and proud of my colleagues that we have all come together and this is only the first $185 million. i'm hearing there's more down the pipe. i'm hoping we can have an open conversation about how this money should be spent. i will say, that needs of the homeless folks that are living on our streets, i think if you have a child in public schools, if you work in public schools, if you're an early ed teacher, if you are a senior, if you are a people like us who are parents or part of the community, we know we have a homeless crises. we know that there are people in need. we know that children are homeless too. this resolution also includes an intent to make the homeless

request and housing request that the mayor has pick for us that we are actually taking from. it makes it whole too. is it everything that we need? absolutely not. i'm a fourth generation chinese-american. i'm glad that we have come together. i heard from colleagues that's request for the city departments to actually outline exactly what is being funded. i will open again for questions and comments of the city department. mr. comptroller. >> madam chair, i was going to briefly suggest, you have number of department heads here today

that i'm sure will be open and welcome discuss with the board. >> good afternoon supervisors department of homelessness and supportive housing. very briefly, the current proposal would fund 300 units of lisaed housing for chronically homeless adults. it funds the expansion of existing navigation centre cents

well as safe centre. we believe once cuir given the go ahead, we'll be able to put most of this online within six months. thank you very much. >> good afternoon supervisors, greg wagner, acting director of department of public health. to express grated fo gratitud. we've been in the process of doing evaluation of key gaps in our system of behavioral healthcare services. focused on the epidemic of homelessness and homeless individuals on the street. proposed funding in this legislation addressed two key areas of need. the first will be to purchase additional 14 beds at the st. mary's healing centre.

this program has been -- facility was open in 2017. at that time we purchased 40 of the 54 beds available. it will allow us to purchase the remaining 14 beds that's needed. the second component, which is also very optimistic it would allow us to add 72 residential

step-down beds. this is a newer model of program. after people go through residential treatment program for substance use, often, that's a productive program. as they're coming out, there's a need for additional period of time for them to stabilize anybody who knows people struggled through addiction and recovery from addiction. this would allow for level of care to live in environment with other people recovering from addiction.

>> good afternoon supervisors. the budget as proposed would do several things. it would provide $40 million for our small site acquisition and loan program. this is very important program that keeps valued member of our community here in san francisco. secondly, it would provide $42,000,000.456 for ne$42,000,0. severely mentally ill individuals as well as homeless seniors. it will be the new home to the urgent care clinic. the street outreach team and

homeless outreach team. those services are provided in seismically compromised building. we're very much looking forward to relocating those services. we would have $6 million that will jump start the development on three new affordable housing development across the city. we have $14 million for site acquisition. this money will leverage

$5 million in grant money we got from the metropolitan transportation commission for an acquisition and the transit orient development neighborhood. we are looking forward to buying a site and putting a stake in the ground. colleagues any questions at all? supervisor mandelman. >> supervisor mandelman: i want to thank three department it is working on these proposals. number of them were anticipated in prop c. i want to drill down more on the st. mary's bed. i'm one of the people who insisted these remain in.

my understand -- i want to address the issue. i heard not all the st. mary bed are used for san franciscans. some of them are being used for sonoma county or other counties. can you address that? >> yes, i can. thank you supervisor. when the facility was open, 54-bed capacity facility. that the due to budget constraints, san francisco department of public health san francisco it funds for 40 of those beds. in the interim as we purchased 40 and there were 14 remaining, the program has been working

with marin county and with kaiser and has contracted on kind of as needed basis to make those beds available to those two entities. >> supervisor mandelman: those are the 14? >> exactly. the funds that will be included in the supplemental, will allow us to use additional 14 beds for san francisco residents to prioritize those beds for individuals that are priority clients for our public health system. >> supervisor mandelman: my understanding is that when people are taking to psychiatric emergency services, there's a

challenge for our system. we have a pretty impacted psych unit at s.f. general. doctors in p.e.s. are struggling. there isn't always a place upstairs, bed available now for the people who are being brought into p.e.s. that's a challenge for our system. one solution that might be create bunch more psychiatric acute beds through s.f. general, but really what i heard from doctors, they're not sure they need more of those acute psych beds. they have people stuck in the acute psych beds who could be lower level of care.

also, when we don't have those beds in san francisco, we have to contract out of county and send san franciscans to other places for those placements. this sort addresses that. it may not be enough. it moves if the direction of addressing that real shortage of subacute psych beds for people who are coming out of hospital hospitalization. >> our goal is to have our clients a the lowest level of care that's appropriate. this is one of the options that allow us not to have people in patient psych beds, cost of inpatient psych bed is five times the cost of community-based bed. you're not receiving the most

appropriate level of care if you're unnecessarily inpatient. >> supervisor mandelman: in terms of the substance used beds, my understanding it, we can basically get drug treatment for most folks just right to access treatment. we can get them into a 90-day program. we frequently have nowhere for them to go after 90 days is up. they go for very short drug treatment program to the streets and back to an s.r.o. community. narrothey're not able to contino receive care.

there's a chance that not on cycle of treatment where they can succeed, using again, back to treatment. around and around. that's the point of the 72 beds. >> that's exactly right. it's level of care that allows next step coming out of substance use, residential treatment. there's quite bit of evidence having that next step allows people to continue the process of recovering and getting healthy.

in addition we'll have pipeline availability into the residential programs. we're hoping you get better results and increase that capacity in treatment. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you. we have upwards thousand people on the shelter waiting list. the mayor identified goal creating a thousand shelter beds. that may not eliminate that. how close does it get us to the mayor 1000 shelter bed goal? >> this adds approximately 300 beds. we are working on a plan to add

thousand beds some time in 2020 locating sites and doing good design work does take time. we're hopeful we'll be able to find the resources to achieve that goal. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you. ms. hartley. mainly about small sites. my experience small sites has been the short time i have been in always. i a number of proposed small site acquisitions. >> we started off slow in 2014.

we then got a big allocation of funds. we take 10% of inclusionary fees. we bid small site development. there's some constraints on the small site program i know that the supervisors very aware of. it's difficult. especially when you're trying to keep residents that we really value housed. those are costs and developed for capacity. we did then, however, we did have a very prolific small site acquisition period. we've got about 200 units that have been preserved. they mostly been in district 9, some if district 6. they've been spread around. they've been continued if d9 because there's been a very active developer there.

>> supervisor mandelman: superve there's a need in our districts. >> we also would very much like to expand our small site program. not just with the funding but in the application. it money will go long way towards that. i like to work with you both supervisor few and mandelman and all the interview supervisors tk about ways to do capacity building to bring more nonprofits on board.

>> supervisor mandelman: is there a cap? >> the planning code cap small sites program at 25 units. we put small site funding into the proposition a at general bond, 25 bandage. 25 -- $25 billion. we have been able to do larger buildings and that would be my goal as well. we can really -- if a 50-unit building comes online -- >> supervisor mandelman: seem like there's more bang for your buck. >> i agree. we have total agreement and desire to expand into under served districts to build out capacity and get economies of scale with buying bigger buildings. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you.

>> supervisor fewer: supervisor ronen. >> supervisor ronen: could you explain how you're calling it a safe shelter site. it's different from a regular shelter? >> yeah, it's in between. lot of things that we learned in the sites around the low barrier entry more flexible rules. people able to eat when they want to rather than set times. it is a model that we're going to continue to pursue.

it's really kind of best of both words approach to providing people with temporary shelter. >> supervisor ronen: do you have a location determined. my concern all throughout the 2018-2019 fiscal year there was funding available for navigation and it hasn't been touched. if we appropriate this money for this purpose and therefore not another purpose, will it actually be used this year for this purpose? >> yes. we are very close to having site for the navigation centre. that one is more challenging because the population are concentrated if specific

neighborhood. we've been very specific about where we want to place that site which makes it little bit harder. with safe centre, opening quite few navigation centres, we're going to start with the basic structure and then do bring in the utilities afterwards. for example, division circle, it took us quite a lot of time to bring the utilities in. it was the hardest part of the job. we'll get the structure set up and bring in generator and temporary water and seasonnatio- sanitation facilities. should allow us to open up the sites. >> supervisor ronen: is that because of the pg&e se shenanig.

>> the issue with the centre is trying to find a location. we are looking at one specific site now. because we're looking specific neighborhoods, it's harder to find an appropriate location for that facility. >> supervisor ronen: the safe centre, you're feeling confident of the various locations you're looking, you'll be able to lisa or buy one quickly and get it up and running? >> yes. >> supervisor ronen: now we're going upwards 300 additional beds coming online, hopefully very soon, does that mean that you'll be able to -- is there going to be a time limit on the amount of time people can stay in those beds? that's been one of the major problems. people get in. they might get some stability and they are released back.

in many cases on to the streets. they feel like they lose your community, their belongings their sense of regularity and then only to be turned back to the street. >> there's three types of navigation centre beds. about 50% is could pathways for housing bads. those are for high priority clients. we also have seven-day beds. we have only 15 but we have seven day beds that are used for emergency situations. the remaining beds about 45% of

them are what we call time limited beds. they are 30-day plus. you can stay for 30 days, as long as you're accessing services and moving forward towards addressing -- could be you're waiting to get in permanent shelter or looking for another housing option, we'll continue to extend. i should point since navigation centres opened, only 15% exited. there's a fair amount of discussion about this issue. i are say it's the vast majority of people who go into navigation centres do not exit because they are forced out. >> supervisor ronen: i know that supervisor stefani and mandelman have a hearing coming up on

homelessness. we can talk about it more in in-depth there. thank you. >> i have a few questions for the comptroller regarding the mechanics of the reserves and how that's going to work. understanding that the reserves that go into this fund are for one purposes and they are going to salaries. i want to make sure we're lining the charter and the voter approved requirements. >> the rainy day one time reserve not ending up in this reserve. what's happening if the proposal, the rainy day reserve is used as the charter said it should. for one-time purposes only. it frees up like amount of

discretionary general fund money that can be placed into the reserve. general fund money, excess eraf and property tax money end up in this reserve. >> thank you for that clarification. aredly-- are there any requirements to access the funds? >> the language that governs the fund is on page 16 of the amendment. you have that in front of you. this is unappropriated reserve we are creating in the amendment. it draws from it and it would require appropriation action by the board of supervisors to pull money out for these purposes. the two specific purposes outlined are for staff and teachers of the sfusd wage increases and then secondly for early care educator wage

increases that authorize earlier in the ordinance. basically, the way the language works here, it says that this is to be last resort. the goal of the reserve is to meet the funding gap on this programs and begin in fiscal year 2021. to the extent a other city revenues not available prior to that date, or other school district revenues or legally available reserves are not available to meet that need. this would be a source you can draw upon. it's the way the language works. frankly we will expect to see new developments in each of those areas. we've talked about some of them here today. such as should the city receive excess eraf funds.

for '19 and '20. the ongoing eraf benefit we have will continue to trigger increases in other baselines. it's outlined in the safety net but last safety net. >> one more question around that, supervisor mandelman touched on it. there's lot of trepidation around dipping in the reserves. has this anything like this been done before? it's very creative. i compliment my colleagues for coming up with this. i'm wondering if it sets precedence or do you have worries around it?

>> these are just my opinions on this. these are choices for the mayor and board. one distinction to draw early is this concept that we're drawing out of reserve to do it. we're not. what's happening here, excess eraf funds became available if the current year that weren't anticipated in the city's budget. that triggered deposits that unknown to us to number of different places. including the baseline and rainy day reserve. we're not reaching -- the proposal here is not reaching the rainy day reserve. rather taking that new news that would have flowed to the rainy one-time reserves and effectively making contribution to a different reserve. financially speaking, the best of all worlds looking ahead to the next recession, would be to not have touched the rageny day

-- rainy day to continue to happen to gro grow thatgbalance. it's important to remember, there's a significant rainy day proper reserve contribution that continues to happen. so the size of the rainy day reserve approximately doubling as a result of the contributions of rainy day that continues to occur here. >> thank you very much. >> i want to thank mr. rosenfeld for helping think that reserve through. from the supervisor perspective, it is my strong hope we'll be able reserve this new reserve that we are creating.

i think that we will. i hope we get additional eraf windfall. my hope we'll have stronger revenues for 1/9/20. '19, '20. we are going to take care of them. we will reserv preserve this ant in downturn cuts a has to

happen. we talked about the unprecedented contributions that the county makes. >> supervisor fewer: absolutely. when i was on the school board, we had to send out layoff notices. the rainy day fund bailed us out. we have a recommendation from the budget analyst for the departments to come back and report. i like to take the recommendation and approve the recommendation from the b.l.a. i would like to make a motion to

continue item 4 to the call of the chair. can we take that without objection? thank you very much. on item 5, i would like to make an motion to accept the amendment. you can taken that without objection. then, to continue this item to monday february 11th. thank you very much. i think those items 4 and 5 are done. is that correct? thank you. also, i would like it say thank you to our wonderful comptroller and rosenfeld and to the mayor's budget department. thank you very much. thank you to mayor breed. the priorities, everything that she suggest we fund, they are

good things and things that are needed. i want to thank the mayor for her wisdom and also for these recommendations that we were able to approve. thank you very much. let's go on to item 6. madam clerk read item 6. thank you very much. i believe mr. livingston is here to present. >> i'm deputy director for finance and information technology of the san francisco transportation agency. thank you chair fewer and committee members. i'll be very brief.

we have an amendment to offer. the original legislation, the first proposal was to devote the full $38 million of the m.a.t. baseline fundst that resulted from the eraf fund to improve customer experience at the m.t.a. which is to accelerate replacement of 151 height rail right -- vehicles. after further conversations, an arrangement was struck for other high priority projects a were identified. in conversations with mayor and members of the board.

amendment we're offering today includes $19.2 million for the light rail vehicle replacement for the acceleration of light rail vehicle replacement. $13.8 million for energy audit and conservation projects at m.t.a. facilities and $5 million to expand our efforts in small business impact mitigation on our capital program. i'm happy to answer any questions about these proposals. >> supervisor mandelman: i want to thank you. i represent a district that's served by the late rail vehicles. i'm hearing about the constituents about the under performance of the trains. i need it see the m.t.a. acquire those and move forward as

quickly as possible. i would be more alarmed by this change if i did not have a strong belief that there will be a second installment of eraf. we'll be able to get the remainder of that out of that second part that will come in. thank you for your efforts to replace the current fleet. >> supervisor stefani: thank you chair fewer. i have a question around the $5 million that will be allocated to a small business impact mitigation fund. thank you for listening to the board of supervisors. i think we all expressed our desire to look into a after what's been happening. i'm wondering what are the mechanics of that fund? how a will be accessed? how will businesses tap into that?

>> sure, we have been -- we have been working closely with the mayor's office with the workforce economic development on these kinds of measures on our projects. these funds supplement those efforts and we'll continue the way we have been. it's really a project by project implementation as to the specific needs of the businesses with the type of project that we're conducting. i think we have report from the b.l.a. >> i wanted to note the odd procedure nature of this m.t.a. supplemental. board of supervisors has limited authority over the m.t.a.

budget. they bring you a proposal for two-year budget and for supplemental appropriations during that period. the board can let the m.t.a. budget can go into effect by not acting. or the board can reject the m.t.a. budget proposal within hitle30days. today m.t.a. is proposing this appropriation. you should amend ordinance to match up what he described and beyond a, ultimately the board can vote to approve it within 30 days or vote to reject it by 7-11 votes by 30 day

>> supervisor fewer: i believe the b.l.a. has a report for us? >> our report is the promotion of the $38.1 million baseline allocation excess eraf fund. board has approved the contract. it includes expansion vehicles mostly for the subway. to date the m.t.a. has 46 of those vehicles.

we've had some differences of opinion hear. in terms of responses what supervisor mandelman was talking about, on page 29 tables 2 and 3 we look at total funding sources for the light rail vehicle. in terms of committed funds, it's assuming out the entire budget it the $38 million will be applied to that. now if it's $19 million, that means they'll be about $19 million short of what they have with their total budget which have to be made up. i want to point out if table 3, there's already $18 million shortfall in the total funding

that's needed for the light rail vehicle. otherwise, we to recommend approval. >> supervisor fewer: colleagues any questions? mr. rosenfeld? do you have some prepared amendments for us to consider? >> yes. >> supervisor safai: as communicated by s.f. m.t.a. >> amendment that he walked through in front of you. the clerk has signed original copy. only action is for the board to move that amendment and continue this item to the special meeting on monday. >> supervisor safai: thank you very much. colleagues any more comments or questions on this item?

seeing none. i would like to make a motion to approve these amendments and continue this item to the budget and finance committee meeting of monday february 11th. >> as amended. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. madam clerk can you please read item number 7 please. i think we have the clerk here to present to us. >> chair fewer, i ask your indulgence for three more minutes i'm here today for the departments administrative deputy who organize this information for this hearing

today. i'm here with other leadership in the clerk's office. we thank you for your past year's budget allowance protecting the public right it know what the businesses that comes before the board and further the budget allowance that you provided to us for the fulltime employees in this department over the last 22 years. we are very much appreciative of. we thank our unique and remarkable employees, your staff and mine for their commitment for thei their ethics. it's an honor to present to you proposed budget for the legislative branch, board of supervisors, for fiscal year 2019 through 2021 in december we presented a snapshot of the department current budgets and ask the committee for their budget instructions in crafting the proposed budget that is before you today. once you're ready to approve the

proposed budget, i are submit it more the next phase of the budge review to the mayor by february 21st. in june, we'll report any changes to the committee that may have occurred between your approval today and your final approval in june. we have three slides. this particular slide comprises our presentation. the proposed major changes presented in december are here and i will highlight just for items specifically item 3, we're requesting ongoing annual support in the amount of $34,000 for minor enhancement, maintenance, updates and training for our constituent management contract. which should be rolled out in april to your offices. tim 6 is in collaboration with the generous leadership of the san francisco public laborer.

we will hearing on our joint proposed m.o.u. we are installing some equipment and library and we will be bringing an m.o.u. to this committee. if the m.o.u. is successful, we would need it attend the capital committee regarding larger costs that we will be associated with the lower level of the library in addition to power generator need. i want to touch on two other items. item 8 is regarding our need for confidential space. we've received an amount of $500,000 which we will not be adding to our department budget. we have a placeholder of $200,000. if we decide to move forward, we will bring you more clear costs that will be associated with our request for confidential space.

regarding item 9, we want to ensure proper upkeep of our investment for the assessment appeals board. we finished that multiyear project. this 80,000 would support for future updates and enhancements some which are rared by the state of california. now to our revenues. this graph shows that the assessment appeals board and the land use appeal, as you know, the a.a.b. revenues goes through a cycle. our revenue has been declining since 2012 and 2013 after the real estate value in san francisco began to recover from the economic downturn. the number of assessment appeals filings and hearings have been demographicking, askin-- deskin. the market is projected it remain strong in the last few years. trends are significant inning

further demographic it our revenue by approximately $58,000. kind of good thing. some other sources, such as the surcharge on land use appeals are growing. slide 4 shows the 2019 through 20 base budget and the proposed changes by category for the expenditures and the revenues i discussed. if you approved proposed changes our expenditure budgets will increase. bringing the proposed budget to approximately $17 million. we'll have more clear costed as a to what it is come june.

this concludes my presentation. >> supervisor fewer: colleagues any questions? let's open it up for public comment. any members public it like to comment. public comment is now closes. let's have a motion here. >> i move we forward this. >> supervisor fewer: agree. >> i move this be heard and filed. >> supervisor fewer: i appreciate that. >> the chair is able to submit it to the mayor and comptroller. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. any items before us today? >> there are no other items. >> supervisor fewer: we are adjourned [adjourned]

>> everything is done in-house. i think it is done. i have always been passionate about gelato. every single slaver has its own recipe. we have our own