mentioned reasons why people -- why youth were detained, and i'm wondering what other factors influence the judicial decision. i understand it's a judicial decision, obviously, to detain a minor. is that made solely on the basis of the offense, the law that's been violated or is there other factors taken into consideration? >> so there are certain provisions of state law that require that a youth who is at least 14 years of age and commits a violent offense in this state must be detained until they appear in front of a judge, so that is not optional. that is mandatory, embedded in state law. in addition, we often have young people that have committed domestic violence against a parent or sibling. those are young people who are not immediately going back home based on that offense. and the other challenge that we face in our juvenile justice system -- and this is a statewide challenge, that many young people have committed

multiple offenses at all hours of the night where there is concern that there simply isn't sufficient guidance, supervision, and support within the family home for that young person to return to their family. >> supervisor stefani: and through the chair, that brings me to another question about existing community service for youth. do you feel that we definitely need to grow the capacity of what we have in terms of outside c.b.o.s and other things besides detention? obviously, we have a gap there. i'm wondering if you believe we need to grow that capacity? >> i believe we absolutely need to grow the capacity. we need shelter care for girls, we need facilities that will serve our undocumented youth who don't have a parent or guardian that is available to them. we also need clinical services for young people. i'm confident that we have sufficient case management capacity. in fact, we are probably overresourced with case

management capacity within our community. we need providers that are going to be able to engage these young people with clinical services in order to address family therapy issues and other dynamics such as trauma that these young people are experiencing in their communities and in their family homes, and that's where there is a shortage. i would also add that there are a number of young people that are placed outside of the state of california, outside of the county of san francisco in residential facilities simply because the capacity to serve those young people locally does not exist in san francisco. >> supervisor stefani: one last question through the chair. are there other stakeholders with whom we should consult before passing this legislation? do you feel there are others that we haven't? >> absolutely. there are a number of individuals and community groups in san francisco who should be consulted for a decision of this gravity. the african american community

at large should be consulted. the naacp has vocalized the absence of conversation with them. the juvenile probation commission, while supervisor walton has appeared before that commission on at least one occasion, there was no prior discussion with that commission in advance of introducing this legislation, nor was there conversation with the juvenile justice commission which is a state authorized body that works under the superior court. and obviously in advance of recommending a dismantling of the plan of the juvenile justice system, we should talk to the judiciary to make sure they are in support and are helping to guide that decision. >> supervisor stefani: thank you. i think that concludes my questions, and i just wanted to follow up with a few more comments in terms of, obviously, this is a very contentious issue. it's a very emotional issue, and i think we all have more in

common on this than we do differences, and i think that the focus for me has always been on improving outcomes for our youth. and i was very encouraged after attending last week's blue ribbon meeting where so many stakeholders were at the table, and i'm committed to improving outcomes for youth. i was very encouraged to hear about new york city's progress with their close to home initiative, neighbor progress. they have about 100 youth in detention out of 8.5 million which would be the equivalent of 9 here in san francisco, so i think we can definitely do better. i look forward to continuing to engage with the panel and to continue hearing its recommendations. i know that recommendation panels actually work. even when you have that many

people at the table, there's diverse stakeholders at the blue ribbon panel. and just like when we had the panel to save st. luke's hospital, it was very contentious at the time, but it was even better in the end. i think we need to wait to close juvenile hall to have a plan in place if we're going to do it by a date certain. but that doesn't mean we can't take action to combat what is happening in juvenile hall right now. i went to juvenile hall myself to see what it was like and better understand the issue. i think we can do things like not locking doors, to improve youth outcome, and the list that supervisor ronen read

concerns me. i think regardless, reviewing that list, sitting down, and having a conversation about how we might do better i think is something we can do right now, something we can do immediately. i think those conversations need to be had, and why aren't we looking to make immediate changes within the hall right now? i think that's something that has to be looked at. i know that in the chronicle, they mentioned the missouri model that they had juvenile hall more like a dorm than a detention center, and i see no reason why we couldn't take immediate steps to take action to turn things around within the hall at this time before we even take action to close it. so for me, i do believe this piece of legislation is well intentioned.

i have so much respect for my colleagues because i know that i'm on the same page in terms of why we're doing that, but when you flip to the solution, i'm not there yet because i really have a hard time closing juvenile hall with a date certain without an actionable plan in place, without a plan in place when i know that the state obligates us to have a detention center for youth with violent felonies or whatever. so i'm just not in a place where i can definitively close it on a date certain even with the amendments, which i would support, but at the same time, i'm not there yet with something this date certain. i am there with you that something needs to be done, changes need to be made, and we can do better. so thank you, supervisor walton, for bringing this to

our attention. >> president yee: thank you. supervisor safai? >> supervisor safai: thank you, president yee. this causes discomfort. you can feel the jubilation on some people's part, and you can feel the anxiety on other people's part. but for me, this is about history. this is about where we look at where we're at as a country at this point in time. we incarcerate more people in this country than any other country in the world. we have a culture of incarceration. and the folks that are being incarcerated also happen to be disproportionately african american and latino and pacific islander. that is a fact that is indisputable.

and for me, when i see that, and i see the discomfort and disruption that that creates for the families and communities that that is perpetrated upon, i'm okay with making people uncomfortable. i'm okay with the anxiety and the discomfort that it produces. that is in no way meant to disrespect all the hard work and effort that many in this room have put into and have dedicated their life to turning people's lives around. this is in no way an assault on you, director nance, in my opinion, at least from my perspective. other people might feel differently. this is in no way meant to disrespect the naacp. i have great respect -- i have great respect for the naacp, and i will continue to. i believe that through the leadership of supervisor walton, as well as our mayor, mayor breed. mayor breed has commissioned a blue ribbon commission.

mayor breed has put forward a very difficult task and charge to that commission. i believe there is going to be significant overlap and meeting of the minds. this proposal talks about a working group, it talks about presenting plans on a six-month basis. it has very much in common with the blue ribbon commission. i also want to appreciate, supervisor walton -- i came to you very early on, asked for a seat specifically on organized labor. i know for organized labor to have a seat at the table. also for folks in the community, you were making those adjustments. i think those were very important. i think some of the amendments you've made on meet and confer and in terms of having their voice heard, this is not an easy transition, so i appreciate that. i also asked not for a representative from the court, but the superior court judge to

have a seat at the table. i think that is very important. and then lastly, that a final report would be presented to this body, and this body would have the authority to approve that report final to any decision that were made. all of those amendments were done in such a way that give me the confidence and as director nance said, ultimately, ultimately if the work we do -- excuse me, chief nance, if, ultimately, if the work that we do is not accepted by the court, it will be rejected. it will be rejected. and if it is, it will be accepted. i know this process will be open to any and all that want to be a part of it. i know that those who might have felt excluded will have an opportunity -- this will not happen overnight. it's 2019. 2021 is 2.5 years from now.

the only thing i'd like to highlight on a part of this, just as a friendly amendment, supervisor walton, with regard to the working group and the final report, on-lines 13 through 18, and it says the board may act by resolution, i'd like to suggest that it read shall act by resolution. that's the only thing i would add by a friendly amendment. and shaking your head, deputy city attorney givner? >> mr. givner: deputy city attorney jon givner. a report should not direct a board to take action. the working group is required to submit a -- to submit a plan to the board. the working group is required to submit a resolution to the board along with that plan which will put the resolution

and the plan before board, and the board can decide whether it wants to vote on that resolution and adopt the plan. >> supervisor safai: so you're saying we cannot change the word? >> mr. givner: you can, but i would leave it as may. >> supervisor safai: thank you. chief nance, i'm sorry for saying director. thank you very much, chair. >> president yee: supervisor safai, are you still -- >> supervisor safai: i would -- >> president yee: -- wanting to make that amendment? >> supervisor safai: i would want to make that amendment, but if there's other motions, he made his amendment, so -- >> president yee: we'll come to that. just remind me. >> supervisor safai: okay. thank you. >> president yee: supervisor walton? >> supervisor walton: thank you. there's a thousand things i

want to get clear. i've had conversations with people who are yelling and screaming like babies in the audience. because i don't agree with you does not mean i did not consult with you. i want to be clear, i do not have to agree with people, and that does not mean that we've not been consulted, but i'm glad, so glad, supervisor stefani that you called chief nance in here. and since chief nance is excited about telling me how to do my job, i have a question for you about yours. so first, chief nance, if i could ask you a few questions please, and thank you for being here. >> president yee: supervisor walton? >> supervisor walton: through the chair. >> president yee: thank you very much. >> supervisor walton: what's the likelihood of a juvenile ending up in juvenile hall or incarcerated? >> there are studies that

exist, and i know there was a study referenced in the ordinance. to be clear, that study focused on 35,000 individuals in chicago, illinois, a city i know very well. 35,000 individuals, and the authors of that study indicate that in order to solidify the justification for using that study, other studies in other jurisdictions should be done. and therefore, no such study like that has been done in san francisco. i can give you some presumptions about that. >> supervisor walton: since you're an expert -- >> a presumption is if a young person doesn't get their needs met, if they're not in an environment where therapeutic programs are delivered, that their likelihood of recidivism is high, but just so you know, most young people are not detained in juvenile hall, and most young people on probation

are successful. >> supervisor walton: correct, but we are talking about the ones that are detained, the ones who are locked up, the ones who have not been given opportunities to rehabilitation in custody, what is the likelihood of them being incarcerated in the future or we don't have that data right now. >> no such study has been conducted. >> supervisor walton: secondly, do we lock up foster kids who have nowhere else to go? >> absolutely not. that is against the law to lock up foster youth who have no place else to go. >> supervisor walton: so what do we do with foster youth who have not committed an offense, what do we do with those young people? >> those young people would be

subject to the child welfare system as operated by the human services agency. >> supervisor walton: and if nobody takes them? >> the child welfare agency is mandated to take those young people. >> supervisor walton: and are there municipalities in this state to your knowledge that have closed their juvenile hall at this point in time? >> there are smaller jurisdictions in the state that have closed their juvenile hall, yes, that is correct. >> supervisor walton: so we have other municipalities who have already closed their juvenile hall in the state of california. >> only to the extent that they have a subsequent juvenile hall facility where they can place their young people, and every county in the state that operates a juvenile justice system, and that is the rest of the other 57 counties all have the capacity either within their county or through a partnership with a neighboring county to detain young people. >> supervisor walton: correct, but we do have municipalities that have closed their juvenile

hall in the state of california. >> that is correct. >> supervisor walton: when was log cabin closed? >> log cabin ranch was closed somewhere in june of 2018. >> supervisor walton: and what is the plans that we're doing with log cabin ranch since it's been closed? >> so the log cabin ranch is part of a more comprehensive plan with respect to the facilities that are operated by the juvenile justice system. at the time that the blue ribbon panel was created and this ordinance was introduced, we were already in the throes of bringing on a consultant to did he v d develop that master plan. >> supervisor walton: so were you hiding that process from the rest of the world because no one heard about that until you introduced the -- >> supervisor walton, there was no plan at that time. however, there was a process in place already initiated in

partnership with the department of public works in our department to create a master plan for facilities that would have been inclusive of both log cabin ranch and our juvenile justice administration building. so that process was already launched, and we scoped it back in favor of waiting for the outcomes either from the blue r ribbon panel or a task force. we didn't want to initiate the process -- >> supervisor walton: where were these conversations happening because there was never a conversation with anyone about what was going to happen with the ranch until the ordinance was introduced. so was this happening behind closed doors? when was this planning process taking place? >> so i realize you've only been to the juvenile probation commission meeting once. >> supervisor walton: correct. >> but the juvenile probation commission meeting is the body

that has been hearing the feedback towards developing an alternative for log cabin ranch. we've kept them informed of the process. in addition, we've also kept informed our juvenile justice delinquency administration team, which consisted of the judges, district attorneys, public defenders, so this work is happening in partnership with the juvenile justice stakeholders who have a key role in deciding what the future should be for young people who require that level of incarceration. >> supervisor walton: and it was just publicized after the ordinance. >> i'm not sure what your question is. >> supervisor walton: i'm asking when you decided to let people know and inform people that you were having discussions about what we could possibly do with log cabin ranch moving forward? >> that is incorrect.

those discussions have been happening monthly since the closure of log cabin ranch. >> supervisor walton: we talked about -- you're exactly right in terms of judges making decisions where our young people go, and i've actually had personal conversations with judges in san francisco in terms of them wanting to see alternatives that look different and have had those conversations with them and been thorough in our conversations about how excited some of them would be if they saw a positive alternative. one thing i want to clarify in your statements and the belief of some folks is there is always going to be an in custody alternative because by state law, some people are required to be incarcerated. but what that in custody experience will look like will also provide alternate for young people to be

rehabilitated and receive the supports to effectively make change, even if they're going to be gone for a long time, and even if the crime that was committed was a serious offense. so i want to be clear, when we make comments, and we make irresponsible statements as if we're not going to have an in-custody experience for young people per state law, that is not in this lemgislation. this legislation talks about there will be that opportunity and there will be an opportunity for young people to make a better change. >> to be clear, i have not stated that san francisco will not have a juvenile hall because i know the state law provision that requires that we have that capacity. the only difference in what i have stated thus far in all of my conversations on this issue is that if the court does not believe that the facility that

exists within the county is a sufficient environment to house young people, that they can require those young people are housed outside the county. >> supervisor walton: correct, but that happens now? >> that does not happen now. >> supervisor walton: we have no cases where that's happened in san francisco. >> supervisor walton, i think you're conflating the -- >> supervisor walton: the question is have we placed young people outside the county right now? >> not for juvenile detention purposes. >> supervisor walton: my last question is with 2.5-year timeline to actually come up with alternatives and work closely with the experts, work closely with the community, do you feel that you are not prepared to reimagine juvenile hall and come up with that alternative currently in your role? >> i would say that i can be as innovative and as visionary as

the next person. and i completely support efforts moving toward reform, and i completely understand why this ordinance is introduced. but let me be very, very clear. i also recognize that there are very significant challenges with respect to the timelines for creating alternative facilities, staffing those facilities, making sure that the programming is in place, making sure that the school and the mental health facilities are also colocated there, as well as having the opportunity to stand those institutions up in such a way as to replace the existing facility. i'm concerned that that can't happen in 6 months' time. >> supervisor walton: once this ordinance passes, you don't have confidence in your leadership to do that? >> it's not about confidence in my leadership, it's about confidence that that's going to happen in the timeline that's being given.

>> supervisor walton: so you're confiden confident in your leadership or not? >> president yee: supervisor -- excuse me, i'd like to move this discussion along. we have a -- some amendments, and we will need to vote on this, and we have one more speaker. >> supervisor walton: i definitely appreciate it, president yee. i did not call chief nance here, but since he's here, i have the ability to ask questions here. >> president yee: i just want to move it along. >> supervisor walton: i understand. >> i just want to be clear, i am confident in my leadership ability, but i'm not sure that the current timeline is realistic. >> supervisor walton: so 2.5 years is not an appropriate time to come up with an appropriate lock up for the betterment of our young people? >> i am wholly confident that the vision for a future

juvenile justice and juvenile hall setting can be realized within 2.5 years. i am not confident that the institution that will serve as the facility to house these young people will be in plan within 6 months of being delivered. >> supervisor walton: so have you already looked at some of the residential treatment that we have for young people and the opportunities to build off of those models and the opportunity to get this done? because what you're saying is this translates into something that you don't have the modelling to do. but if i look at residential treatment facilities here, and we're talking about a small population, then you're telling me as a leader of the juvenile probation department, you don't feel you can put all those pieces together in this timeline? >> what i'm suggesting to you is that even if we were successful in developing the vision and the plan for the future, there are entities

outside of my department and outside of the city and county of san francisco that would have to look at those plans, approve those plans, and make determinations as to the feasibility and the suitability of whatever vision gets created, and having experienced this process with the board of state and community corrections, i am completely confident that that is something that is not going to happen in a short period of time. and to the extent that the contracting rules are going to require us to develop the capacity to make those modifications, it simply is going to be a real challenge to do that in six months. >> supervisor walton: real challenge, but not impossible. >> i don't know if it's impossible. >> supervisor walton: but not impossible. >> a real challenge, but not likely. >> president yee: supervisor ronen? >> supervisor ronen: yes. i have a couple of follow up

questions to the chief through the chair. how many young people currently incarcerated are awaiting release to a nonlock placement? >> there are 15 young people in custody right now that are waiting for placement. some have failed their prior placement and are waiting to be replaced. some have new offenses that they committed while they were in those residential settings and are now waiting for adjudication. so all told, i would say there are at least 15 young people today that are in that placement category. not all of them have been adjudicated on their current matter, and not all of them have a dispositional plan that has already been approved by the court. >> supervisor ronen: so of those 15 youth who will very shortly, if not today, be

released to an insecure placement, an unlocked placement, how long have they been at juvenile hall? >> i don't know. i haven't looked at their cases. >> supervisor ronen: how about a range? >> i wouldn't want to guess because the census changes every day. i would want to give you a date without actually looking at those records, but i can get that for you. >> supervisor ronen: after a risk assessment has been done by your department and it's been determined that the kid is not dangerous if they're released to the public, if they're -- that a child should be released, have you ever overrode that assessment and kept the kid locked up? >> yes. >> supervisor ronen: can you -- does that happen often? >> it happens occasionally. some of the circumstances where

that might happen is, for example, if we have a young person that does not have a parent or guardian or other responsible person to whom they can be released, that young person, we would override that detention and hold that young person in custody. [please stand by]

>> that's not a true statement. >> it is a true statement. >> i appreciate you saying it's a true statement but it's simply not true and when the -- our agency -- >> excuse me. can you ask for the president. >> i'm happy to answer the question. please, let me answer the question. someone has given you false information. when the girl's shelter closed, our agency wasn't even notified that the girl's shelter was closing. we don't have a direct funding

relationship with catholic charities, girl's shelter and we called their agency into our office to meet with them so we can better understand why they made that decision. it was clear to us, through that conversation, that they made that decision because it wasn't cost effective for them to continue to operate the girl's shelter when they had such a small census of girls in the facility. and it had nothing to do with defending by the probation department, human services agency or department of children youth. >> i'm having my staff send me the e-mail from dcyf where they say they defunded the shelter so we have no community placement for girls and i think it's outrageous that we've done that and it's something we need to fix. is your department right now facing a lawsuit for unlawfully i am cars ratinincarcerate rati.

>> i cannot speak publicly regarding pending litigation. >> it's my understanding your department is in violation. there was a court order to release a young person and the young person was way passed in our juvenile hall. >> one thing i will say on that point and you can talk to the city attorney's office, we have one lawsuit. in the san francisco juvenile rotatioprobation department. when i talked about how common lawsuits are in the city and in public service agencies, they repeatedly applaud the fact that there are so few litigation matters in the juvenile probation department. it's not by chance. it's because we purposely looked to follow the law and when there

are errors, we address it immediately and make sure it doesn't happen again. while i can't talk about a specific case, i can tell you that that is a rarity in san francisco's juvenile probation department. >> supervisor yee: thank you, very much. >> it's extremely rare for the chief district attorney and the chief public defender in a department to be exact agreement on something. they have opposite rules and in fact they serve in an adversarial relationship although slightly more friendly in juvenile court. they both agree that at any given time in san francisco, understate law, only about 15 youth at any given time need to be in a detained setting. they gave us the exact same number when we asked them. they both, also, our district

attorney and public defender have endorsed this legislation and agree that juvenile hall should be shut down. that rarely happens for the leaders of our criminal-justice system on opposite sides to be in agreement on that. the fact is, the juvenile hall is say punishment-based system for children, the majority of whom have been traumatized throughout their young lives, who have witnesses unspeakable violence and who suffer from mental health disorders. in fact, the chief complaint of most young people in juvenile hall is they can't sleep at night. yet, they're detained by themselves in a locked, tiny concrete cell with only a steel toilet and a concrete slab and a thin mattress to sleep on for 11 hours a day. 11 hours a day when they can't sleep.

now, i would ask you, i am a mother of a young child. though i have white skin, and my child has white skin, which means the likelihood she will go to juvenile hall, despite the fact she will break the law at various points in her life because most teenagers do, the chances of her going to juvenile hall are very slim. the fact that we have a system that is punishment-based, doesn't allow kids to speak at meals. teenagers with developing brains are isolated from one other so much of the day, is just fundamentally wrong. you can put lipstick on a pig but it is still a pig. it's time to close juvenile hall now and do so responsibly. >> supervisor yee: so, i think i have one more speaker. supervisor fewer, are you still requesting to speak?

>> thank you, president. i cancel my request to speak. >> there's been a friendly amendment to your amendments. supervisor walton. >> mr. chair. >> supervisor yee: yes. >> point of clarification, i did speak with the deputy city attorney to clarify my friendly amendment. if he could speak to that it's rewording that falls in line with his recommendation. >> deputy city attorney gibner. >> thank you mr. president. so, the gist of what have safai was proposing was supervisor walton's amendment says the working group must submit a final plan to the board along

with a proposed resolution and supervisor safai's proposal is the closure cannot occur until the board adopts a resolution approving a final plan. and to make that happen, we would leave the word may in supervisor walton's amendment but supervisor safai would add a sentence to the end of section 119.3, which is on page 5 of the ordinance. it would read, additionally notwithstanding the foregoing juvenile hall may not be closed until the final report of the working group required by section 5.40-6d has been approved by resolution. >> supervisor yee: supervisor walton, did you get that?

>> i'm ok with that. >> supervisor yee: ok. so, that is a friendly amendment so we have all the amendments. so, if there's no objection, there was a motion made by supervisor walton is there a second? >> supervisor ronen. if no objection, the amendment passes. for the amended ordinance, madam clerk, can you please call roll. >> on item 14, supervisor ronen. >> yes. >> safai. >> aye. >> supervisor stefani. >> no. >> walton. >> yes. >> yee. >> aye. >> brown. >> aye. >> fewer. >> aye. >> hey knee. haney. >> hey. >> mandelman.

>> aye. >> mar. >> aye. >> peskin. there are 10 ayes and one no with supervisor stefani in the e dissent. >> supervisor yee: we have gone way over the 2:30 accommodations. so let's get to that item, please. madam clerk. >> clerk: yes, mr. president. today we have two accommodations offered by supervisor brown and supervisor mandelman. >> supervisor yee: supervisor brown. >> yes. thank you president. he is one of the fairs' founders

which created to revive the hate after a period of economic crisis following the end of the hippie era, summer of love. leon helped develop the board into a functional organization to solidify the hate street fairs presence in the original message. under his rule the fair continued to grow and develop this event every year. after the passing of the executive producer, leon recognized that the fair was in danger. robert stepped up to the plate and insured the fair continued to exist in its present form. >> supervisor yee: hold on until they close the door. can can you please ask them to be quiet?

>> i'm still talking about you, robert. hang on a little bit. there's a lot to talk about. >> supervisor yee: we want to hear what supervisor brown has to say so we're waiting for them to close the door. after pablo's passing in 2006, robert was the executive director and presenter of the fire advisory board. under robert's lead the fair has become more family oriented and attendance has grown every year. and 70,000 in 2007 to 100,000 in 2008. additionally, 78% of the vendors returned every year, another sign is a solid neighborhood roots and continued success.

in his four decades, over four decades, isn't it robert, like 47 years. >> 41. >> ok, 41. i was giving you a few extra. of working this fair, robert has never missed a single fair. showing that his love and dedication to the hate ashbury neighborhood and i know robert you want to retire this year but i don't think we're going to let you. you say that every year and every year you come back and produce an amazing fair. the hate ashbury street hair has received national and international accommodations as well as a large amount of prestigious awards. and the hate ashbury fair is this weekend on the 15th. >> on the ninth. >> it's june 9th. >> june 9th. i'm ahead. so it's this saturday. >> sunday. >> geez. >> i'm going to be there,

robert, really i am. i know what it is. i just have to have my calender in front of me. so it's this sunday and it's from 10 -- give me the hours. >> from 11:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. >> i'll be there at 10:00. >> it's 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. i just really hope everyone goes down. this fair is an amazing fair. anybody that has been there knows what an amazing fair it is and how much fun you have. they also have a children's alley every year. children can come. they have jumpy houses and all kinds of things for kids to come and play and they have music from all kinds of amazing artists. so definitely you should be coming to the fair this weekend.

we have the hate ashbury street fair contribution to the hate culture and perception and history. thank you, robert. >> thank you for the honor. i'm very grateful. i want to take a moment to share this recognition with two other people. foremost, pablo, the lion of the hate for developing and managing the street fair for 28 years. he provided me with a platform that allowed me to continue to producing the event. another person that needs to be acknowledged also is supervisor harvey milk. his guidance and support to celebrate the birth in the mid-70s. harvey was a view community activist. lastly, it's handed over to a

worthy group of individuals. michael xavier, and alex and also christina billda. they will carry on the tradition and i want to invite everybody to the 42nd annual street festival this weekendment we'll present a tribute to marty balance on who passed away in in september of 2018. he was the lead male singer of jefferson airplane star ship and an individual artist himself. and we have recruited little rogers and the goose bumps to take on the messonic stage. thank you. [applause]

>> supervisor mandelman, you are up. >> thank you, president yee. come on up. we kept you waiting a little while. thank you for sticking around. each year on june 5th we have hiv long-term awareness day. on june 5th, 1981 the center for disease control more bitty and mortality weekly report published a brief account of five young, gay men that have been diagnosed with a rare type of pneumonia indicating signs of compromised immune systems. the counts sent shock ways throughout gay community and around the world. tomorrow we will mark the 28th anniversary of the issuance of

that report and the fight against hiv. i am humbled to recognize one of our long-term survivors here in san francisco harry brow. harry has lived with hiv has his life and one of our city's longest term survivors. you look good. >> thank you. >> he remembers when hiv was only know as a gay cancer or a gay plague. he lost his friend gary to the disease in the 1980s around the time of his own diagnosis which at the time was a death sentence. his grief motivated him to dive in a growing volunteer movement and he received training from the project to be a emotional support volunteer for people struggling with h.i.v.-aids. he remembers one of the first clients who already lost his lover and couldn't walk down the

street without starting to cry. harry volunteered for many years helping dozens cope with their disease and his last client was larry meltser. by the end of the 1980s, harry was exhausted by grief having lost count of the number of friends he lost to the disease. he left san francisco and in the mid-90s, he was diagnosed with aids and his t-cell count dwindled to 20. the cocktail came just in time and he was able to recover. after his recovery, harry returned to san francisco and upon doing so connected with other long-term survivors. in recent years, he is embraced work with organizations like the san francisco aids foundation, shawn tee and let's kick ass. aids survivors syndrome. he attended this year's aids

watch advocacy event in washington d.c. and has made trips to advocate for lgbtq, senior and disabled issues at the state capital. harry often speaks at events sharing his story with others and in addition to his advocacy work, he volunteers his time to connection visitors with our neighborhood and history. he served as a embassador for the past six years in castor and a glbt historical society for the last year. harry, it's an honor to honor you today and thank you for your decades of support. would you like to say a few words? [applause] >> thank you, supervisor mandelman, staff, board of supervisors, the mayor and the city of san francisco for this commontation during pride month 2019. i would like the individuals who have recommended me that i receive it.

joe hollen and kev anderson. this is a bittersweet moment for me being proud and pleased to know i'm given something of value, it's not a small thing to me. i know the reasons he found to step out and not a small thing either. there was no way to know when i came to san francisco in the early '70s to strike a cord for gay freedom, that would bring me through the worse times of my life. what did i know in my early 20s in the monumental issues we were addressing while fighting for our rights? then came the '80s and fighting for our lives. how were we to digest turn backs pulling together to fight the enemy. somehow we found our way and modeled it for the rest of the country and the world. aids has left a scar and a legacy that will live forever. my contribution now is to speak out to those who cannot be here today because of the horrendous health crisis that was ignored

by our country. i was one who applauded those heroes but stood by in shock, awe and fear while those men and women risked more than i was willing to at the time. but now i find myself angry, hurt, and tired but alive. energized and still here. this jacket i wear was made by a man who received asylum after being confronted with death in his home country for just being homosexual. i wear it for the thousands of homosexuals around the world who look to us, here in san francisco, for hope. i hope we continue to make our mark on the struggle for acceptance globally. i'm proud of my participation in the castro embassadors and being a dose ant at the glbt museum. let us not forget our past as we honor our present and look to our future. i accept this commontation for me and all those who helped to

manifest our vision of freedom for all. thank you. [applause] >> madam clerk, let's go back to our regular agenda and why don't you go ahead and call item number 15. >> clerk: item 15 is a resolution to authorizes the mayor to cast a ballot in the affirmative for the renewal and expansion of the the north of

market tenderloin community benefit district with real property owned by the city, subject to assessment in the district. >> ok. go ahead and call roll. >> on item 15, supervisor ronen. [ roll call ] there are eight ayes. >> ok. this resolution is adopted. we have eight yes. madam clerk call the next item. >> clerk: an ordinance to amend the administrative code to allow

applications for mills act contracts for historic properties to be filled concurrently with applications for designation of the same properties and to affirm the ceqa determination. this is passed on first reading unanimously. >> item 17 and 18 together. >> supervisor yee: yes, please. >> clerk: here are two resolutions that the two dick or license would approve the item for 17 it's a premise to program is as soo transfer liquor liceng business as dolda's market at 168 through 186 eddy street and for item 18 the issuance of a type 64 special on sale general theater liquor license to the center for new music at 55 tailor and requesting that the

california department of alcoholic beverage control impose conditions on the issuance of both licenses. >> colleagues, can we take these items same house same call? these resolutions are adapted unanimously. >> clerk: the administrative code to change the office of sexual harassment and assault response and prevention from a department directly under the human rights commission to a division of the human rights commission department under the executive director of the human rights commission and to modify the appointment process for the director of the office. >> supervisor yee: this or gib dinnance is passed unanimous plea. please call the next item. >> clerk: 20 is a motion to approve the mayor's appointment to the success or agency commission for the unexpired portion of a four-year term ending november 3rd, 2020. >> supervisor yee: colleagues,

can we take this item same house same call without objection. this motion is approved unanimously. please call number 21. >> clerk: item 21 a motion to appoint la tel aviv hassani groulx gray ending february 21st, 2023. >> i just wanted to say a couple words at the rules committee chair on behalf of mr. gray. i am hoping all my colleagues will fools the recommendation of the rules committee to appoint mr. gray to the ethics committee. the seat on the commission has been vacant since the regular i guesresignation of quinton cop n march. we know how important it is to ensuring transparency in city government and holding us accountable to the public. when the seat opened it was a rare opportunity for the board to recruit someone who who add a fresh voice and new energy to

this work and latif is suited for this role. as a native san francisco who grew up in the western edition and lives in bay view he knows how history and how decisions made in city hall impact the lives of everyday people. and as an attorney who has been both a public defender and a civil rights champion, he brings both the investigative savvy and the commitment to public advocacy that are essential to the work of the ethic's commission. i am very excited to support him today and i hope he will join me in voting to approve this appointment. thank you. >> supervisor yee: madam clerk, please call roll on this item. >> clerk: [ roll call ]

>> clerk: there are 11 ayes. >> supervisor yee: this motion is approved unanimously. madam clerk, call the next item. >> clerk: item 22 an ordinance to authorize procedures for the appointment of a conserve ter with a person with serious mental illness and designating the city attorney to institute judicial and the amend the administrative code to establish the housing conservatorship working group for a city's implementation of the housing conservatorship program. >> supervisor yee: supervisor mandelman. >> colleagues, a lot, perhaps too much has already been said about sb-1045. i'm sure lots of us, all of us would be happy to move on. i do have some amendments i want to introduce today. they're before you.

they do four main things. one, using the existing framework employed bit out patient treatment plan, when an individual has been referred for conservatorship under bc-1045, staff known as the aot care team will make multiple attempts to engage the individual in voluntary services and treatment. those attempts shall occur immediately after referral and before evaluation begins and immediately after the public conservator confirms the individual's eligibility for conservative ship but before a court petition to establish the conservative to be ship has been filed and after the position has been filed prior to the court hearing, those changes are reflected on page five lines 19-25 and page six lines one and two and lines 12-25. two, prior to submitting a petition for conservatorship, the city shall make a documented offer