population in the city as a whole. this should not be accepted. the initial study appended damage b concludes the project would not result in cumulative impacts on public services. yet, it did not analyze the projects on city college. again, the draft scir review of this is inadequate. in many other areas, the draft scir has no objective criteria to serve for determining that the impacts aren't less than significant. accordingly, it is a flawed document that must be revised before it is submitted for final review. thank you for your consideration. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissionerrerings. i'm amy ohare, i'm the sunny rev representative on the advisory

committee and on the association and i'm speaking for the board today. i want to address a particular aspect of the environmental report and that is alternative c. that's opening to vehicular traffic. you want you to urge the planning department to support this alternative. as currently planned, there are two openings for vehicular traffic in and out of the reservoir site and a third access point would be provided. mitigating some of the locked-in nature of the suit. when it was concluded that thisd reduce bottlenecks into the neighborhood and this would extend site traffic and can be acom datad withouaccommodated ig

neighborhood. the draft states that opening this would redistribute traffic from ocean avenue and fredda calloway resulting in transit delay and this would provide emergency vehicles better access. further, it would result project generated traffic volume at lee avenue which is identified in the draft report as a troublesome intersection with a lot of projected congestion. in 1917, westwood park laid out several stub-end street -- laid out with several stub-end street. in 1986, westwood park successfully blocked the opening of one on the west side of westwood park and so that's just a solid wall and on the other side is the el dorado development which happened in the '80s.

the plan envisioned the stubs would be connecting up with new streets as future residential development happened in the surrounding neighborhoods. connecting this to the balboa project would seem like an obvious part of the site but apparently, the barrier to do so lies far in the past. i have a conveyance real estate which was just provided to me by the assessor today which shows in 1955, westwood park acquired a slice of san ramon way at the end as a lot, which a a lot a ls made up out of a public street and this is a barrier, because it's at the employee of the balboa reservoir project and i urge them to override this

project. >> thank you, ma'am. your time is up. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. garry barringer and i live within three blocks of this proposed area and i have lived there for over 40 years. i first found out about this project in this meeting today when i was taking my dog for a walk right where the project is to be built. i saw on these lampposts this public notice wrapped around. i treed to read it and i looked goofy walking around and around because it wasn't readable to the public. finally, i was able to sense it's from the planning commission. i got a name and an mau email ai wrote miss cowling and told her

my problems and she directed me to the website and she was helpful and i went to the planning commission and picked up this woke or tome, as i call it. as i read through it, started calling this the balboa housing boondoggle project and i cannot separate the actual project from this deir. it's like they borrowed some sharpies from donald trump and through a line and ignored the reality. the neighbors of this project and students of city college will be facing this. one example. the graft as cir fails to include the city college

multi-use building as a receptor, which i think is a euphemism for young kids. it's 150 feet from the construction site used for childhood classes where children attend classes on the site. the short-term measurement location information in the seir, which is on page 3, section c9 notes that, and i quote from the deir, that college campuses are not considered a noise sensitive receptor, end quote. the nub has childcare classes and will be use ed this way andd

qualities as a noise sensitive receptor and they ignore that as they ignore the impact at city college and reardone college. i strongly urge you to go with alternative a which is do nothing and start back at the drawing board to build affordable housing for teachers and students. >> i want to thank the planning department. it identifies concerns that are issues that cannot be mitigated, including noise, transportation and air quality. my focus today will be on noise. noise affects on residents and

childcare centres have been ignored. they're itwo childcare centres e identified in the dri. they're close to the development than the all-t3 locations and this lies in an area downwind of the construction site. the styles and freeda calloway serves the residents as well as childcare centre and preschool center and needs a 24-hour noise study. we suggest noise study where a replacement of city daycare

centre is planned for the future. the first mitigation measure for noise recommending truck haul routes, avoid the adjacent rardon high school along plymouth avenue. there's one alternative route, the ocean to ocean avenue adjacent to a receptor, harmony family childcare. they're all located at or near all of the identified possible entrance and exit sites, points. the alternative is already identified in the cumulative transportation items 4 and 6b. the routes are subject and unavoidable adverse impacts to transportation and circulation even and mitigation. it would own exacerbate an

unmitigatable project issue. the first mitigation of the report also recommends undertaking the noisiest activities during times of least disturbance to surrounding residents and occupants, which are identified as 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. this coincides with a period with daycare centres and nursery schools are in session. it holds classes and after-school activities and the majority of classes including child development classes in the multiuse building. >> next speaker, please. >> thank you for your time. i'm kristine hansen and i don't know if you can see this, but the cars in this lot, i don't think you're showing the pictur.

this has little information about the pressure that city agencies have exerted upon the creation of city college's facility's master plan. the meetings ongoing today began during the time of the state take-over of the school. city agencies began meeting then with the state imposed administration. the administrative records makes slim mention of those meetings. in 2017, they showed by then that at least 17 of the private meetings had occurred, mostly as f planning. it was news to trusty davula who sits on the cac, representing city college. the city college's facility planners whose work is included answers to the question, what is the appropriate place for city agencies to address the facility's master plan was in

public comment? if you talk the record presented in the draft at face value, you would get the impression this, indeed, has been the behaviour of city agencies. but this is not what the collection of emails, agendas and minutes and notes show. the agendas for those meetings are similar with a top item being the city college facility's master plan. your planner, jeremy shaw, even attended one effort consultant job interviews on june 8, 2015, with the blessing of a former state-appointed facility's head at city college. the facility's master plan has been upgraded twice and rebooted once. the intrusion of city agencies into a plan that should have been focused on the scroll's education master plan and focused on the needs of students has instead been formed around a private development that has literally cost the taxpayers

millions in bond money. the collection will be forwarded to you as written public comment. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> my name is marcy rin -rbgs ane.i was not going to talk buti was so moved by what was offered, i had to underscore, there's a very critical flaw in the draft eir that it does not address city college either as a part of the overall setting or vital public service. this is a school that has been a part of the life and the city for generations. it's trained people for central job and public services provided to countless people through lifelong learning and to not consider the impact seems to be

a serious flaw that should be reexamined. the second thing i wanted to address is there's a lot of talk about affordable house ang i wantehousing.if you look at thet plan, the request is for 18% footballer housing for people making 80% of the median income, which would be $66,500 a year and an additional 17% for moderate income and that's 120% over the ami, talking $99,500,000 a year. there's no robert t no responsio build it and i know this is about the eur anurir, but the al

affordable housing will be gone from giving away this public land to a private developer is less than one-fifth. of course, the biggest cost in building housing is the land and if the public land were not given away it could all be affordable. just think about that. >> thank you, next speaker. >> i'm a resident for 44 years. i live on plymouth avenue and i view the parking lot every morning. it is full. it is necessary. and it should remain because during at least this type time,e said he wanted to put another

100,000 people in the county of san francisco. now i'm asking you that to think about education. if you reduce about parking space, at the moment represents 4% of the student body which is not very much. in regards to the hour of this lot, i was really disenchanted at the seir to showing such a lousy picture to mislead everybody. can you imagine if you have 1,200 units right at the entrance of 280?

i've expressed this before, it runs right through city college and wildwood. when you need emergency water in case we have an earthquake to kill the fires, there is no emergency water supply for the west-end and south area of san francisco. would you please get busy before you start building? and get that done.

i'm against building 1200 units. in regards to building, the shaking of the construction elements way above the liability demands of construction and my house is old and i do not want to have cracks in my stucco. >> good afternoon. i'm president of the westwood park association homeowner's association and a member of the citizen's advisory committee sometimes called the cac. on behalf of the board of

directors, the neighbor most affected by this development, i'm glad to tell you i will be brief. we'll put on comments on the dsir in writing. but i will say this, that the dseir is severely flawed. and we will tell you why in writing. i will outline now only a series of some of the flaws and you've heard hints from these things from other speakers. first, we will discuss the failure of the dsir to accurately address the secondary impacts caus caused by the lossf existing housing, including impacts on transit, lyft and uber drivers. second, we will discuss the failure to take into consideration the cumulative transportation impacts of the projected increase and city college enrollment. there's an increase as the dseir

correctly notes of, i think 26% to 56% over the next few years and fails to take that into consideration. next, the dseir fails to mention that city college has an agreement and will undertake to have 500 hu 500 units on the eat basin. in addition, the consideration of the building of the paec and steam building is going go on simultaneously and the dsir does not take into consideration the tremendous environmental problems caused by a simultaneous construction on the east basin and west basin, which will result in no parking remaining. next, there's an extreme error in discussing reduce the dens densetive alternative b. and we will show why i false. next, there's the improper

inclusion of alternative on ramon way and that should be rejecrejected and we will show . last, the rejection bit planning department of the use of the side for city college as an alternative was not appropriate. public land should not be used. for anything but public good. parties in the scoping process requested that this alternative of using project land for city college should be an alternative. the planning department rejected that and that was inappropriate under the law. i only had two minutes and i've tried to be brief. thank you very much and we will put the rest of our comments in writing. or no, we will put those comments in writing. >> thank you. next speaker, please. i'm with westwood park association. youly on plymouth avenue with my wife of 18 years. i can attest to the situation of

the violence level due to the parking and driving situation. westwood park was built for model ts and modellasms. model . the violence level goes on all of the time, day and night. people are going 40 miles per hour and bypassing the stop signs and running the red light at ocean avenue and plymouth avenue. i do not believe that the eir takes into account the death that will happen to city college. city college needs different types of things. some of it may be building, some parking, some may be an on-ramp to the freeway and it knees different things. do not leave city college out of this and thirdly, the environmental impact to the neighborhood will be overwhelming. when they rebuilt ocean avenue, they used right behind you our house, that abuts as a donald dg

ground for asphalt and there were over 70 filed complaints for damages to homes, shoe sewer lines, et cetera, et cetera. please reject this dir. if you want one in reality, then have all of stakeholders pratt participate in creating one. >> next speak speaker, please. >> i'm laura fry. thank you for your patience. i don't think the impact on city college has been really addressed in this and i want to remind the planning department that the timing of the development the process began at the same time the acquisition crisis began. so city college was out of the

loop and it's never really caught up. my second issue is density. this is a downtown-style project without the downtown style streets. and as mentioned, the firefighting infrastructure, water pipes that accommodate the dense housing in the other parts of the city that have dense housing, their water structure is totally different than what we have in this area and that lack of firefighting infrastructure won't be a hazard to the residents of the development itself, but it would be a hazard to all of the surrounding neighborhoods. i've gone to all of the barcic meetings and the department kept assuring us that the parameters would have a strong bearing on the final plan. the density of this project far exceeds the density built if the parameters had been followed. in the urban design parameters, it stated the height would be 2n

gradually go to 65 on the east. now it starts out, i think it's 30, 35, and then it jumps real quick and goes high to 78 or 88 feet. and then my other concern is sam ramon way. in the der, it is downplayed and on plymouth, it's basically one lane, 1200 block of plymouth where i live, there's always parking cars on both streets. so it's a single lane. you have go into the driveways and let people pass and this happens all day. the driveways are small and if a car is big or the driver isn't such a good driver, it can take a long time for people to move down the street. sometimes people get really upset. sometimes they get nasty and sometimes they scream and

sometimes they just sit and the eir just sort of really downplayed this that it would slow traffic. as the previous speaker said, sometimes people still go fast on plymouth and people there regard this as a negative, not a positive. and then just, you think the predictions of the traffic through sam ramon is inaccurate leadershienactinaccuratelylow. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm with the westwood park association board member. i know that comments should be narrowly focused on technical issues, but i do have one nontechnical operation that has relevance to one of the

technical objections to the sufficiency of the draft. our goal is to support a housing project on the reservoir for people of modest means. it's a project that creates a new neighborhood with sufficient open space and a welcoming environment for everyone, a project with a number of units to be supported by the existing and planned infrastructure. and one that does not damage a crown jewel of the city, city college, where the students who attend in a better life for themselves and their families. it doesn't accomplish these goals. however, there was a proposal, submitted by related of california developer during the rfp process, a process that westwood park was frozen out of by the balboa citizen's advisory committee and a project that we could support. it brings me to a relevant objection, the reduced option of

800 units of 1b is unknown. that's corrected. it a 680 unit project with parking to accommodate city college and they said they could reduce the number of units further and still make a profit. yet this document ignores that real-world fact and concludes that the financial feasibility option of 800 units is unknown, even though though a well-known said it could make profit. they must conclude a reduced profit is feasible and study the impacts of that option. we will submit that in writing, as well and thank you for your time. >> thank you and next speaker, please. >> my name is harry bernstein.

i'm a faculty member at city college. i would like to provide context in the subsequent eir of the balboa reservoir project. the words significant, unavoidable impact. impacts on the college students, faculty and staff, students at the adjacent high school and students in the childcare programme at the adjacent multiuse building. so these to topics, noise, qualy and transportation came up before the planning commission at their meeting in august and this was the context i want to mention. the mayor has sought to

streamline development in, housg development in san francisco. so she is trying t trying to hal factors that are considered in sequa to reduce the required mitigation. so besides secondary ones like cultural and they include air quality and transportation. the city is trading no trying no consider and they've done that with parking. so that's where we're going to make, just to save months, save some dollars but to give the public and the public health

less opportunity, less consideration. separate topic, the description of the project sitting baseline, existing condition is un-adequate. the primary use of the lower reservoir since 1946 has been parking. today it's spill-over of student parking. except for the years 1946 to 1954. and that was the time that the college itself occupied the entire balboa reservoir site. so the college really has -- the impact on the colleges, secondary impact and not parking yourself because that's an issue considered in other becauses, but the impacts on the college and the access to education, which it has some priority.

>> next speaker, please. >> i'm representing the san francisco housing action coalition. we've been going to these meetings for years and i'll keep it short. i assume you know our position on it. we've been advocate for this project because of our city's housing shortage. and while no one project can solve the housing shortage this is a big step. in terms of eir, we find this to be adequate and complete and that's all i have for you today. >> next speaker, please. now. >> good evening. my name is john winston and i have the at-large seat on the balboa reservoir cic and i'm the chair. i'm here to talk about transportation and circulation. the impacts, i believe, will be significant, but i disagree with the report that they will be

unmimitigated. they will pay impact fees which should be applied at the point of impact where it occurs. that's where they need it the most. but the city can and must do more. recent san francisco history is full of projects like the metrion centre, the chase center and all without parking and all to lead to traffic apocalypse. we got a great civic amenity. this is to accommodate the influx of new residents and the projected increase in ccuf students. new houses on ocean avenue add car, foot and bike traffic.

they need to avoid worse gridlock and in keeping with the city's first policy, the first time we heard the words transit tonight. in addition to the cac, i serve as the adviser committee. from that perch, i can see ocean geneva and ocean avenue as high injury corridors and that means there have been enough serious injuries due to the design of the streets that they are due and fundable for complete resign. in short, true transit first regioning of circulation for the neighborhood is needed and has to be implemented. at our september 30th, cac meeting, they will present plan for the ocean avenue safety project. i hope to hear about a safe, beautiful and walk to bart and

better pedestrian bicycle access to ccsf and the ocean avenue shopping district but in future meetings, i hope to hear more about a comprehensive, proactive plan. this is a great opportunity to deal with problems that have accumulated over many, many years and now we need a change for sustainable generations. thank you for your time. >> thank you. any more speakers for public comment? >> there's an oversight in my comments. you have an empty lot on the cover of the dsir. i would like to give this copy for the record and for the members. >> thank you, you can just leave it right there. >> ok. >> and one for the record, please. >> anyone else for public comment, come on up. >> rita evans dropped this off.

she had to leave, thank you. >> anyone else, going once, public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. we're adjourned. >> okay.

we are here to get the job done. good morning. is it morning still? i've been up since 5:00 i think. i'm trying to keep -- i've been to so many places throughout the day. this is probably the fifth or sixth, but who's counting? thank you all so much for joining us here today. with me i have dr. grant colfax, who is the director of the department of public health, as well as dr. anton nagusablan who is the director of mental health reform. daniel leary, the c.e.o. and founder of tipping point community, and matthew state, the chair of u.c.f. department of psychiatry here in san francisco. i'm excited because these are incredible leaders in our community who are going to help us with some really challenging problems that we know we face as a city. last week we launched the mental

health reform initiative to help those at the intersection of homeless, mental illness, and substance abuse disorder in san francisco. and through our detailed analyst, dr. nagusablan and the department of public health have identified the people in our city who are most vulnerable and in need of help. now, to be clear, we see it. but now we have clear and accurate data. of those 4,000 individuals, 41% frequently use urgent and emergency psychiatric services. 95% of those folks suffer from alcohol use disorder. 35% are african-americans, despite the fact that we have a less than 6% population of african-americans in san francisco overall. so we have a lot of work to do ahead of us to provide the behavioural healthcare that people need. we need partners to do it.

we need to work with our state officials, with our philanthropic organizations and our non-profit communities. that's why today i'm excited to announce that the city has partnered with tipping point community and ucsf who share our goals of addressing the mental health crisis in our city and providing people with the care that they need. we know that addressing the needs of the most vulnerable requires experts in the field, it requires collaboration and the development of public-private partners. tipping point and ucsf department of psychiatry came together to really understand how to improve the outcomes for san francisco residents experiencing long-term homeless, but who also have challenges with behavioural health. they worked with the city

departments and various community-based organizations who helped to put together information to inform this comprehensive report, including the department of public health, the department of homeless and supportive services, the hospital council, p.r.c. thank you, brent andrews for being here and your amazing work. health right 360. thank you for your rigorous work on what we deal with in terms of treatment for folks who also sadly deal with substance use disorder as well. thanks to the rigorous research conducted by tipping point and ucsf. we have a report that we can use to implement data-driven policy decisions that will effectively work and change our city for the better. this report highlights how philanthropic and public funding can work hand in hand to help

san franciscans suffering. they have provided several recommendations to improve our system coordination, because we know that it definitely has a few holes in it and it needs to be better coordinated. enhancing people's access to treatment. meeting people where we are. we can't think they're going to show up at the door of a location for help or for support. we are going to need to go out there in the streets and meet people where they are. engaging more people in care and services. we are excited to partner with them to implement these recommendations. but also in order to address the mental health crisis in our city. we need to build on what is already working. we're going to do that in part by expanding the number of hummingbird beds in a city, in our city. today i'm really pleased to

announce that thanks to the funding from tipping point, we'll be able to add 15 new hummingbird beds which offer psychiatric respite. that is absolutely amazing and it's really expensive. [ applause ]. >> mayor breed: so with these new beds, we'll be able to connect people experiencing homelessness with behavioural health needs, the care that they need. i'm not sure if any of you have visited the hummingbird facility at s.f. general, but it is absolutely amazing. i had an opportunity to not only touch bases with clients, but we also did an announcement last year expanding the number of beds at that location as well. to hear someone say to me that i'm trying, it's hard, but i'm glad to have help, it makes all

the difference in the world. this is an incredible facility and i'm so proud of the work that they do. as dr. nagusablan will get into more details, we know that the vast majority of the 4,000 people we have identified unfortunately have alcohol use disorder. the tipping point report includes some innovative suggestions for treating those suffering from alcohol use disorder and we are looking forward to making some changes and implementing some of these in the coming months. there will be more could you tell mes to come and dr. nagusablan will continue to implement our approach to healthcare because that's his job. we will recommend more ways to improve care for our city's most vulnerable residents. we all, as i said, need to work together to address this challenge that we face.

with policy, financial investments, and working in a collaborative approach. so we truly appreciate the partnership of ucsf and tipping point. now, i want to turn this over to the c.e.o. of tipping point community. they've done a lot of work to address homelessness and taking it a step further by digging into the root causes of some of the challenges we face to make the right kinds of investments. this is going to make a world of difference. ladies and gentlemen, daniel leary. [ applause ]]. >> thank you, mayor breed for your leadership. we know that the primary cause of homelessness is a lack of

affordable housing, but we also know that behavioural health conditions, like mental illness and substance use disorders contribute to homelessness. without a stable home, these conditions are far harder to treat. in partnership with ucsf's department of psychiatry, tipping point engaged a public health consultancy called john snow inc. to improve opportunities for san francisco's existing behavioural system. we convened leaders from city departments, from ucsf, from s.f. general hospital, and a variety of community-based service providers. we conducted dozens of stakeholder interviews, including a focus group at the respite center. we engaged closely with the department of public health throughout the process, checking assumptions and findings against the experience of our city

partners. now, as the mayor said, the findings are in. we need to know the names and needs of everyone who is homeless with a behavioural healthcare need, provide wrap-around services that promote stabilization and a path to permanent housing, and ensure that systems and services proactively address and reduce disparities, especially among black and lgbtq individuals experiencing homelessness. tipping point's role going forward will be to fund the priority investments in the department of public health and the service community, while encouraging our philanthropic partners and peers to do the same. we are taking the first steps towards making this vision a reality. today we are announcing that tipping point will invest up to $3 million to create a second hummingbird psychiatric respite center, replicating their --

[ applause ]. >> as the mayor said, this is the type of program you want to replicate. this will expand access to a critical supportive step out of homelessness. we invite all of our other funders and friends throughout the city to explore the report findings out today and invest in the recommendations and join us. now i'd like to introduce two people that are working every day to improve the health outcomes of our neighbors. please join me in welcoming dr. anton nigusse bland, who is the director of mental health reform and dr. grant colfax, the director of public health. >> thank you, mayor breed, for leading the way. if we're going to reform our system of care for the nearly

4,000 san franciscans who are most in need, everyone will have to work together. that's why it's so important to be standing here with our partners at tipping point and ucsf talking about these common goals that we share and advancing our shared vision. i want that briefly highlight a couple of findings in this report that reinforce our own. first, behavioural health outcomes are health outcomes and they are far worse for people of color. this report points out that black men die as almost twice the rate of white men of liver cirrohsis even though they have lower rates of alcohol disorder. we also found of the people experiencing homelessness, substance abuse problems have a

higher incidence. alcohol remains a persistent and enormous public health issue that impacts the lives and health of many san franciscans. our most recent community health needs assessment revealed that two out of five adults surveyed reported a survey of binge alcohol use. between 2014 and 2016, over 8,000 emergency room visits resulted from alcohol-related issues. we can help. we know how to care for alcohol use disorders. we've already begun to work on the kind of evidence-based approaches to chronic alcoholism that this report recommends and particularly exploring the development of a managed alcohol program. the research is very strong that managed alcohol programs, medications, and treatment can reduce the harms of excessive

alcohol use. we can create safety and stability for people if we innovate on this problem together. we need to make sure that proven solutions are applied in a thoughtful way and extend their reach to people who have not had sufficient access to the help that they most need. we also agree with the report's findings that we should make it easier to get realtime data about our system of care. we are launching the very kind of collaboration across city agencies that this report urges us to purview. we expect to be able to provide this transparent information about our beds and our system of care to the providers, clients, and members of the public so that all of us have a better understanding and is have an improved ability to access care. we know that research and philanthropy will play important roles in making these recommendations a reality. we are grateful for that support and partnership. [ applause ].

>> good morning, everybody. i'm grant colfax. i'm the director of health. i'd like to thank mayor breed for her leadership, ucsf, and tipping point for the ongoing and strengthened partnership that they have with the department. of course, dr. nigusse bland for his bold leadership in his vision for us to do better as a community as we address the intersection of the homelessness and behavioural health issues. this is an important day. we are coming together focusing on solving problems and improving health for the population of nearly 4,000 san franciscans who are experiencing homelessness, mental health, and substance use disorders. today we announced a significant commitment of partnership to meet those goals.

a population focus means not only a focus on treatment of the issue patients, but we look at the big picture. we change the way the system responds when a public health challenge is this great. we learn. we look at the problem from multiple angles. we draw on clinical expertise and data. we try new approaches. we learn what works. we stop what doesn't. we measure results and we built a track record of success. we figured this out when we look at h.i.v. look at the numbers being released this week. we've gone from ground zero in the aids epidemic, to pledging to be the first city to get to zero. that didn't happen overnight. it took multiple stakeholders from across san francisco.

we need to use that experience to address other deep health challenges in our city. progress does not happen and cannot happen in isolation. as with h.i.v., we know that forging behavioural health solutions for san francisco residents experiencing homelessness and health issues will take researchers and clinicians, community stakeholders, clients, philanthropists and the support of the public. i and we are grateful for the contributions of tipping point and ucsf. these two robust institutions that we're fortunate to have in san francisco. the health department looks forward to partnering with them and many others with the significant behavioural health challenges facing people experiencing homelessness in san francisco. together we can and we will heal our city. thank you. [ applause ].

>> mayor breed: thank you. now, i don't know if any of you caught this, but john snow inc. did the report. you know nothing, john snow? nobody caught that? okay. next up we have dr. matt state from ucsf. [ applause ]. >> thank you so much, mayor breed. truly, i'm thrilled to be able to stand here today with a group of leaders who are so dedicated to this city and to the most pressing social problems we face, including chronic homelessness. more than 30 years ago, at the height of the aids crisis, local government in san francisco health providers, academicia, philanthropy, set aside parochial differences and came together to attack what seemed like an insurmountable

challenge. this week mayor breed sat with the department of public health and ucsf to review the remarkable progress that has been made in this struggle and to double efforts to work collaboratively to be the first city to get to zero, something that must have seemed impossibly out of reach three decades ago. this is the inspiration for our efforts and it is the model that we are pursuing to address the intersection of mental illness, homelessness, and substance use disorders. this report is a product of all these organizations coming together to help develop a consensus road map that develops tangible, immediate differences in the lives of individuals and families experiencing psychiatric illness and substance use disorder. the work that went into it from clinicians, other service providers, and many others. i can't thank mayor breed,

director colfax, and dr. nigusse bland enough for your leadership and inspiration. and to daniel leary and the tipping point folks, it's been a remarkable partnership. we're tremendously grateful at ucsf. there are several other people i want to mention. first, i really would like to underscore a tremendous contribution from jane hawgood and john pritzger for their help to launch this collaboration and bring us together. as you've heard today, it will be the partnership of academia and the city and philanthropy that really promises to allow us to move forward on a critically important and admittedly extremely difficult challenge. ucsf and the city have a long partnership beginning 150 years ago, when ucsf doctors began

caring for san franciscans in the city's general hospital. today ucsf clinicians continue to care for the city's most vulnerable, including children and adults, at san francisco general hospital and in a range of outstanding community-focused programs for those suffering from mental illness and substance use disorders. from our division of city-wide case management, our division of substance abuse and addiction management, our psychiatric emergency services to name just a few. as chair of the department of psychiatry at ucsf, i could not be more proud of our people and our long-standing partnership with the city that has allowed us to work every day to make a difference in the lives of our patients and their families. as a representative of ucsf here today, i can't stress enough our commitment to collaborate in taking on these big challenges, our department of psychiatry, the new homelessness and housing initiative, our students, our

faculty and trainees are all determined to work together to find ways to tackle the most pressing health and health equity challenges we face, including the nexus of mental illness, substance abuse, and homelessness. thank you again, mayor, director colfax, dr. nigusse bland, and daniel, for your tremendous partnership and efforts. [ applause ]. >> mayor breed: so there you have it. let me just say that we all know that the challenges that we face as a city weren't created overnight. there won't be any easy fixes. it will take time. it will take, as every speaker here as said, collaboration, working together, seeking out the professionals who have the expertise in the medical arena and the non-profit sector, our policy-makers to provide the right kinds of solutions. this is so critical because when

we look at homelessness and the challenges that, sadly, around 4,000 residents of our homeless community face, we know that it's not just homeless people who are dealing with a number of these issues in terms of behavioural health. it is time that we take just a different approach towards addressing behavioural health challenges in our city and in our country. that we begin to get rid of the stigma attached to seeking health for people who sometimes are dealing with depression and other issues that continue to plague our society. one of the things that i am really committed to is making sure that we have wellness centers in all of our high schools in san francisco, all of our schools in general, so that when kids are dealing with trauma or any other kind of situation, that they have the help and the support that they need in the place where they study and learn every single day. looking at creative and

innovative solutions is how we are going to create a city that is healthy and is thriving. i want to thank all of you for the work that you have done and will continue to do to get us to a better place with all of these leaders, all of these amazing people, all of these incredible minds. i know it's only a matter of time before we get to that better place that we deserve to be. thank you all so much for being here today. [ applause ]. [♪]