forward. >> we have public comment. some of the hand writing i cannot read. i will announce the first name and last letter. jessica w. doctor theresa palmer. jennifer e. dana k. >> i am jessica a student pharmacist from usf. first comment 85/12 passed the edge later and requires cultural training. i would encourage as part of that plan the city of san francisco its own cultural competency training. the population in san francisco is different from much of

california. a cultural training would not be adequate to help provide the compassionate care necessary for the population of san francisco. second part of comment is related to what came up earlier. i work at a retail pharmacy nothing breaks my heart more when they come in to pick up the medication and they don't have the insurance papers. it takes days. they are homeless and they have to leave the pharmacy after 14 hours and don't get medication. they might be without de beat esmedcase and we can't find them to get the updated information. if we find the insurance we can't provide them what they needed. it is almost like the efforts of the healthcare providers are almost gone to waste because they don't get the therapy that

they need. >> than thank you. >> i am jennifer. i have multiple comments. regarding cultural competency, i heard statements about linguistic competency. in recent bargaining dph changed the way that they compensate staff when they offer services to clients in the native language. staff are discouraged from speaking in the native tongues because they are not compensated for it. staff are told do not speak the foreign language unless you are certified that is appalling. regarding icm. i have to say thank you for talking with staff. when the criteria for step down was developed, it was not

developed with any input from staff. if we change the way we do things to expect it to work we should not rely on consultants or those of the administrators we need to talk to those doing the work and touching our clients on a day-to-day basis. there was a moment where we mentioned stabilize, adults who do not stabilize. this brings me to the arts. the clients who are users of services in a high way need more care for a long time. this is a severe illness. when beds at the arf are closed we are not able to stabilize people to maintain the stagization. -- stabilization. we negotiated with the mayor and came to an agreement about if arf. there are 23 beds vacant and 54 beds lost right now.

people are evicted from the man or, from the aurora home and from -- 54 are evicted, homes are closing with 23 vacant beds and are not allowed to move people. i do know why that is. these people need a home. >> thank you. >> the thing that strikes me as essential pieces to puzzle with 4,000 people is the intensive case management. basically doctor sung said they did not increase capacity for intensive case management. thing whiteled down the waiting list and some could go to other places but they had to increase

the caseloads. doctor bland tells me 4,000 people, 90% don't have intensive case management. there is a critical absence of staff. i heard a lot of acronyms and aspirational starts but i didn't hear about when these 4,000 people are going to get taken care of. it sounds like at the rate we are going they are not going to get taken care of unless you get more staff and you really do it. it is very discouraging. >> thank you. i have deanna law.

>> i am deanna long i work for the san francisco community clinic nonprofit community health centers throughout san francisco. we specialize in providing culturally competent care in different neighborhoods. i just want to call out two things. that doctor bland and could fax mentioned that i was happy to hear. one is emphasis on the behavioral health work force. you

there are those with an emergency medical bill. ab1611 would protect these patients against the emergency surprise bill. >> thank you. that is all the speakers i have.

is there anyone else who would like to speak on these two items? if not it is in the hands of the commission. if you have a question or comment please identify the presenter to address that comment or question to. >> i think i don't actually have a question at this point because i think that the initial presentation on the challenges facing our behavioral health services was extremely comprehensive. i thank the doctor for taking on the role of the acting director to move forward with as much progress as you have been able to do. i think that the key thing she has laid out and doctor bland

identified was not so much the identification of the problems because those now have been very well elicited and certainly the doctor has helped summarize the issues that we are facing especially as you look at the homeless. i think the doctor has broadened that to say and the rest of our population needs a certain amount of support and health. we have heard the issue of cultural competent, the need clearly of language capability, the challenge of being able to actually meet the client. i don't think to say we are not going to say that. any door wherever would come in and now we are also looking at how we can outreach and try to meet them where they are. i understand that we may go outside the doors to be able to bring them in at whatever

location you are with your diagram, for example, but we need the outreach. this has been a very good discussion about how we are facing behavior health. i think the doctor for the next four or five years is saying that we may be looking at a change of even the entire process of both mental and physical health if the state's program about medicaid is actually carried out. going through a number of hoops yet, but she is warning us again and that fits fairly well with the rest of our presentations this afternoon in terms of all of the possible changes and even the planning commission issues of what to do about facilities. i think that only shows the dynamic process that healthcare is undergoing. what i i see is one of the

biggest challenges to try to answer these needs is really what is it that we are going to be able to have as a work force and it goes back to i think our health network was talking about. the real challenge right now is we are going to have all of these ideas, some of which are going to need immediate implementation to help the homeless, to help those who actually also have other mental health programs that are not homeless but need the same help because some of them are also on the streets. they are not getting the care they need. how many are not going to be able to be from the homeless population in the intensive care they need. where do we get that? we heard from the community consortium they have trouble and we have heard that, i think that is really one of the biggest

challenges. i understand with the new director of human resources we need to identify people or we can't put them in a system and we have to accelerate how we work with identified personnel, potential personnel because they will go elsewhere. the identification of personnel and keeping them going is almost as critical as looking at opening the new hospital or as we were looking at the personnel for management of the epic program. i see that as a lesson that i have gotten today that is a real challenge and how our director is going to be able to work with the different -- well what opportunities they are going to have. i could ask the director what he

view views as a way to move on this and what we might look for in terms of implementing what are very nicely developed and certainly well thought out ideas. >> i am sorry are you specifically asking about the work force? yes, we can't identify personnel to carry out the programs that we are working on, we are not really going to move the needle. >> this is something that is for michael brown in the back now, our new hr director i talked with nim within his first hour of starting laying out a plan to focus and recruit on these positions. going back to your comments, we have a proof of concept with regard to hospital skill. it takes considerable resources to do that, right. if you look at what mayor breed

has talked about as increased investments in the work and we need to talk across the different stakeholders including unions and civil service to provide incentives for people to come and stay in the work. we have been looking at things to have more opportunity for people to stay, other incentive programs as well. we also need to create a culture of excitement with h.i.v. having reengaged in the h.i.v. clinic there. there are people that worked there for years. i think they could get compensated better in other places. they are mission driven and inspired. i think many of our behavioral health team are committed to that. we need to expand that

perspective in our culture that people can be shown to make a difference in that way. it is a combination of focus, data, priorities and making sure that this is a priority and people are supported in moving that forward. i would repeat that. also, shifting the culture with regard to where we call a difference when we do epic. many in the room were major contributors. it was a heavy lift, but we did that lift when we addressed the h.i.v. epidemic, we found a way to do that. key is those were not issues just one part of the department, right? that was not the only job of a director within the units or section. that was a department priority

and resources were brought forward to do that to make a difference. this problem didn't happen overnight and we are not going to solve it overnight. as you saw with the behavioral health network we are making structural changes to have a road map to go forward starting now and into the near future. >> one final comment with jeff. in regard to the work force. it is very important that work force be able to not just have the knowledge and the credentials. this is where i think unless we do that we don't reach equity. we can't answer the disparities. whether it be because of a cultural issue in terms of working with african-american communities or with some of our other foreign language speaking

communities that we are able to also work with that. i know that is the real challenge. it is very important for us to be able to answer the disparity especially for a fairly sizable part of our population. >> thank you. >> i would make a comment that for the first time in many years i have been a part of the system i see a cultural shift in the government entities in relationship to the community that we have been serving all of this time. what we need to do is continue that cultural shift in the government and cb o community so that when we deliver what has been presented today that those communities, those cb os and the department people are invested in and committed to doing the work because without that shift, we will be having this conversation next year and

i do not want to have it next year. i want to also suggest that because it was so explicit in doctors presentations we understand where we are going now we have though create resources and will to get there. i thanks you both for the reports that were educational for me as well. other comments. >> i would echo that. you have done a very comprehensive job of identifying the population. of course, the challenges of the work force and the aspects about the population that is so critical. i wonder if you collaborate a little bit how you envision the behavioral health services working to the goals. do you have any targets? i know there are some about how long it takes to house people,

what percentage would be housed in certain period of time. that is not part of mental health. are there any new targets you have developed that you think you can reach in the near term? i also notice i think there are 800 people right now working within the mental health system. have you thought about how you u can redeploy these people to the top of their licenses, incorporate remote providers, which is a huge opportunity for us, where you are going with that. where within the system you expect to find did leadership and creativity to move along in these paths you have outlined? >> thanthank you for the questi. i am going to invite doctor sung the invite the second half of

the question. i was assigned for two years to complete in survey to make these recommendations. it is important to acknowledge with in the two year timeframe there are many recommendations that our team is working to help the health development develop a framework for implementation we won't be present to see them did deployed. with respect to the work force, it is important to come back to the community member's comment. one of the key investments the mayor agreed to make is to supplement the number of intensive case managers. we have a target and goal. right now we have one case manager for every 17 clients. when people have complex needs like the 4,000 based on our

success in the department, full-service partnerships is one case manager to every 10 clients that requires more people, more case managers and also resources to recruit and retain. in thinking about the outcomes i have been pleased with the support and collaboration with the deputy director of support services looking at developing clear outcomes for the intensive case management services across the board. as pointed out earlier the system has been very closely focused on compliance and regulatory measures which are process measures. we are now taking the shift to ask the difficult questions about what where the actual outcomes associated with the interventions. we think about care coordination and particularly for intensive case management, what is happening with housing status?

how much do they spend time in jail? are they engaged in meaningful activity? are they engaged in physical and mental healthcare consistently? the baseline measures. we are pleased to have the partnership to assess the case management services at that level. i would like doctor sung to respond to the second half of the question. >> thank you for the question. i think the question was redeploying staff? yes, because we have to meet the needs of the changes moving forward. how do we deploy them? what will it lookalikes? we need to fill the current positions. that is one of the challenges. we prioritize this and i appreciate the partnership as well. thinking about what is it going

to take to hire staff and keep staff? what they see is you know what happens when you change staff, there is a loss of connection with clients. they have to learn. they get burned out if you have a one to 17 caseloads and they leave again. it is a cycle. the shifting will have to happen at the same time. does that make sense? >> thank you. >> thanthank you, doctor sung fr your service today and as we go forward. >> would you like to economic in? i would like to know the commission has lost quorum. this is an informational session. would you like to check in about

if rest of the agenda? >> yes, we have two other items the fourth quarter report and the office of compliance and private seize annual update. i would request that we move those to a meeting in the future. i am making that request to my colleagues up here. if there is no objection we will do that and i will have mark schedule it for us. >> i agree. >> we have agreement. we will move those items to a future meeting. >> you can consider adjournment at this point. you are unable to vote because you are not a full body so the meeting is adjourned. good night. good morning. [ina

san francisco department of ina emergency management and we are excited to be here today for this event. today is bark at the park. we have a saying the first time we exchange a business card shouldn't be during a emergency [inaudible] san francisco fleet week is sth only freet week in the nation that combines the [inaudible]

with disaster response training. we have military, public service and community suvs dogs here to demonstrate their capabilities. rescue demonstration, bomb detection. we also have community suvs dogs here from can 9 compan jn [inaudible] have come back from over seas [inaudible] you will see a wide range of activities. >> this is seth and he is [inaudible] into my person >> my name is nob naib this is my military working dog fredy, she is a search dog and that means he has the capability to work on and off the least to locate [inaudible] he will be doing basic obedience. >> we have [inaudible] moving

around, going around going around [inaudible] you have to center have the dog that says i smell it but where is it now? [inaudible] boarder protection agriculture special ist and work out of san francisco international airport with my dog floid. floid is a 6 year old beagle trained to [inaudible] inbound international flights. today boid floid will do a demonstration what he does at a airport so we'll have [inaudible] see if he can find them in the busyness [inaudible] floid is what we call a [inaudible] response dog so while we search passengers arriving floid will sniff bags and sit on a bag if he thinks they have fruit in the bag. floid as been on [inaudible]

>> the department of emergency managet and public safety and police and fire department work consistently with the [inaudible] military partner tooz respond to a emergency. [inaudible] go to sf 72.org. you will find basic guides to prepare yourself, family . >> good afternoon. welcome to the land use and transportation committee for the board of supervisors. i am the chair of this committee. joined to my right by the vice chair and by a committee member. we're also joined by supervisor

fewer. clerk, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: please make sure to silence all cellphones and electronic devices. any speaker cards to be included as part of the file should be submitted to the clerk. items to be acted on today will appear on the november 12 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. item 1 is the transfer of 1419 bryant street and 1215 street known as the city's animal shelter incurred under the jurisdiction of the acc to the mta. >> the floor is yours. >> thank you very much. good afternoon. i am the deputy director of the real estate division.

before you is the transfer of two propertyies, 1200-15 street and currently used as an office and animal shelter and 1419 bryant street under the jurisdiction and former use by the san francisco municipal use transportation agency for $0. currently the 15 street site is not adequate for a.c.c.'s uses. it has 29,000 square rentable feet, while the bryant street property has 3300 square feet and would be upgraded to increased to approximately 44,000 square feet by adding a second floor in the existing building structure. sfmta currently has two sites right near the 15 street parcel, including the maintenance facility. both departments desire the exchange and entered into discussions in 2016.

appraisals were obtained and the former director of property determined the fair market value was the same of each based on the appraisals. review appraisals were also performed. an m.o.v. was drafted and finalized and taken to the commission. a general plan referral was obtained. an exemption from environmental review was obtained for the acc project at bryant's site in 2016. we ask for your positive recommendation, and i have people from sfmta and acc here with me if you have any questions. >> so i've looked at the packet. colleagues, do you have any questions? >> not yet. >> so i've read the packet and i'm comfortable with this. this may be some questions. you just referenced the fact that the mta owns land near

1200-15th across the street and i believe directly across 15th as well. i was wondering if -- what the mta ooess plans are and whether there can be some consolidation there, whether you want to abandon any of that. i'm not sure what you use that little triangle to the south for, but there is a building on it as i recall. i think it's like a metal shed kind of building that does not in the supervisor's opinion have any historical value, but i could be wrong. that's going to lead me to my next question about 23a, but we can get to that in a minute. >> i'm the manager of real estate for the sfmta. i have with me today also our long-range acid development

developer. in terms of our future intent when we initiate this jurisdictional transfer, we plan on relocating our parking enforcement group into this new site. so that would become the new headquarters for our parking enforcement function. and then everything else around it in terms of our yard and our existing parking lot and our non-revenue vehicle area will remain as it is. that is pretty much where we are right now. >> i can add, i'm from the sfmta now, i can add a couple of comments to what jason said. one, the small structure that you alluded to that's to the south of 15 street, that's for tire service for the vehicles. it's a free-standing structure, but part of the flin facility. we have looked at a couple of options to expand the footprint of the site.

we worked with public works to do some different test fits. there is a very large drainage culverts that make building on to treat street difficult. for currently for animal control there is a dog run. >> you mean on the other side of the fence? >> yes, that's correct. technically i think it was part of the right of way and is above that drainage culvert. if you have a passive use, it's easy to obviously locate that there. did that answer all of your questions? >> i'm trying to figure out if you have long-term, viable, efficient plans for the rest of that site, given that you could actually potentially abandon that little piece of 15th that nobody uses -- goes to nowhere. >> and we believe that -- again, we played with a number of concepts with public works, but

we believe the square footage and i know the total mentioned was a little under 15,000. either renovating or building a new structure would be adequate for enforcement's needs. we don't see a pressing need to enapproach further into the right of way that's there. >> and as to the bryant site, the overhead power folks went where? >> they went to our burke warehouse on burke avenue. it was a pretty significant capital improvement project that we did. now they're in a central warehouse for various functions. >> relative to the chapter 23a considerations as to whether or not or why it is not surplus, anything you want to say on the record about that? >> the only thing that i would say is that we currently our enforcement division is in a number of leases. so it's essentially been our policy to try and move our

functions into permanent sites that are under the jurisdiction of the sfmta, so this is in line with that. they're a little bit scattered all over the place. so it's a proper place to give them a proper facility in a place that would work better. >> you'll be getting out of those leases when? >> when these would be placed in service. we're looking at public works evaluating a number of scenarios. renovation is one option or construction is another. it is a historic resource. so part of the environmental review path will have a better sense as to the timetable. but i would say approximately -- to put a number on it, maybe starting construction 2022, 2021. >> it's a vastly different project if you scrape it and start all over than retrofit it?

>> that's exactly right. we're evaluating the pros and cons. >> any members of the public that want to speak on this interjurisdictional exchange between two city departments. seeing none and given the fair market value is the same and no money is exchanged, i will close public comment and make a motion to send this item with recommendation without objection. >> clerk: item 2 is the hearing on the implementation efforts to make biodiversity a city-wide priority. >> this has been brought to us by supervisor fewer who has joined us. >> thank you, chair peskin, for scheduling this hearing. i introduced a resolution to prioritize these goals for the

city of san francisco in partnership with sf planning. biodiversity is since the accident for a thriving ecosystem upon which we depend on food, health, and clean water. this must be part of the strategy to address climate change. in urban areas we do not always prioritize our natural environment or think about how to preserve and nurture ecological sustainability. in my neighborhood we are surrounded by natural borders. while not all neighborhoods are surrounded by the same green and open space, we should be working in all districts to ensure that biodiversity and environmental protection for the benefit and enjoyment of all our communities. over the last few years there were policies developed that pertain to the conservation of natural resources and supporting biodiversity in san francisco. there is currently an

interagency working group which includes biologically rich ecosystems, community and ecological stewardship, ecological planning and design and resilience in a living city. many agencies have worked opt on the resolution which the board of supervisor passed for making a biodiversity policy real in san francisco. the resolution calls for an interagency working group and an implementation report on the establishment of local biodiversity as a city-wide policy. it is at today's hearing that we are pleased to receive this report. if i may, chair, call on the next speaker. >> the hearing is all yours. go for it. >> i would like to call up debbie rafel, the director of

san francisco government. >> thank you, chair, and members of the committee for welcoming us today to talk about this incredible important issue that feels timely, considering what is on item 3 in your agenda. clearly in this time of climate crisis and impacts of climate change, thinking about what possibility we have for natural solutions and valuing our natural ecosystems could not be more important. the biodiversity crisis that we are in is clearly on us right now. i am going to spend just a couple minutes reminding us of that global context. then i'm going to turn it over to two of my colleagues. they will talk about the follow up that city agencies have been

working on since the board of supervisors adopted this last year. they will be followed by comments from city agencies who are bringing to you first-person stories of their commitment and their experience. so this is important because it puts san francisco in a global context. these red areas on the map are considered biodiversity hot spots. 2.4% of the planet accounts for over 50% of the species. the red on this map are areas which are considered key for biodiversity and yet threatened. less than 30% of the species are still in existence in everywhere you see red on this map. clearly if you look at north america and the united states, california has an opportunity and an obligation to treasure and take action to preserve its biodiversity. this crisis is obviously not just on those areas in red.

we are approaching a mass extinction that we have not seen since the last mass extinction, which was 65 million years ago when the dinosaurs went extinct. we expect to lose 2 million species. in the 19th century, the u.s. has lost 30% of its birds. if you go into california, this is a picture of a monarch butterfly, just since the passing of this resolution, they have decreased by 85%. the resolution and the work that it entails and san francisco's response. so clearly this is not an issue that is unique to san francisco. scientists and activists, conservationists around the world are saying to us nature needs half. what that means is we need to

make sure that half of the world's surface, whether it's water or land, is preserved and supported for the habitat that is needed. now, how does that mean in a city like san francisco, a deep urban environment like we are? what opportunities do we have for a nature needs half movement? starting with our natural areas and what you're going to hear in item 3 are our parks, the natural areas, the green spaces we have in the city need our attention. in addition, we need to look at creative ways to increase our biodiversity by looking at green roofs and looking at vertical or narrow parks, streets, plazas, any opportunity we have to rip up concrete and support habitat. i want to end with this concept which is very familiar to you in the board of supervisors. our climate action strategy, 080100 roots. i find most of the time when i

come before the group i'm talking about 080100. 80% trips out of cars, 100% renewal energy giving off diesel and natural gas and gasoline as well. a big part of our strategy is the lower part, the part that says we must support biodiversitied, we must support open and green spaces, not only in our 7-mile border, but also managed in the city and county of san francisco. once we do think of roots as part of our climate action strategy, we absorb stormwater runoff, we cool our neighborhoods, we improve air quality. the list goes on and on. so 0-80-100 roots is our strategy. today i'm pleased that we will

be focusing on the roots part. so with that as a response to the call and the detail of the resolution, i'm going to turn it over to peter to take it from here. >> thank you very much, debbie. good afternoon, everyone, supervisors, peter brasto from the department of the environment. i'm going to tell you a little bit about the nuts and bolts of the resolution and what we did with the different departments. and just overall i'll say just following up on what debbie said about roots and greening. this resolution is not just about getting more green, but from green to biodiverse. we want our landscapes, gardens, et cetera, to be functional for climate resilience and we want them to support wildlife habitat. overall the resolution did two things. one was to elevate biodiversity as a city-wide priority and the

second is to set up an inter-agency collaboration, as you heard from supervisor fewer's terrific introduction. so i'll talk more about that in a moment. for example -- oh, i've got to go to the next slide. there we go. one of the things -- projects like this, are what the resolution promotes. places like this new linear park in central soma neighborhood which will be planted with local native plants and gardens so folks can connect on their lunch hour. among our core goals and principles in this work, the 2018 biodiversity resolution calls out an equity and nature connection, equitiability in folks connecting to nature as one of our top priorities. everyone in san francisco should have the opportunity to connect to nature every day. and i should say that this work

of equity and nature connection and of conservation, regulation -- restoration and stewardship of the city's areas has been going on. in fact, the resolution highlights this legacy and really calls upon us to expand upon this work. okay. so again, core to the resolution was the direction for these 15 different city agencies to collaborate together. so we've been doing that ever since -- we've been doing that since the resolution in 2018, but we got clear direction from the resolution for all 15 to work together and to do so on a monthly basis and to proceed through initiatives, which i'll talk about. we've built a strong network of biodiversity champions,

representatives from the different departments who are enthusiastic about implementing this work. really, i would say this robust interagency collaboration is someone of the more impressive outcomes of the resolution. among the actual resolved clauses of the resolution speaking in resolution speak, the departments were asked to make public commitments of how they propose to implement the city's biodiversity vision. so you'll see on page 4 of the report that's in your packet, that they had several choices in order to do that. some -- many drafted a memo or authored a memo to their leadership. one department made a presentation at their commission with all kinds of materials and it was really well received. that was at the library. and some libraries passed their

own resolutions. that was at the port and the airport and of course the planning department. you'll hear from lisa fisher later. another key part of the resolution was us, the department of environment, me, drafting bachl a way to accumulate data and information from all the different departments. so we sent out basically a form, if you will, to all 15 departments and they sent it back to us. we created a compendium of information about what departments are doing now, what they've done in the past, and what they might propose to do in the future in terms of implementing our biodiversity vision. so i'm going to talk about a few of kind of our current collaborative efforts, and then lisa is going to talk about some of the proposed new initiatives. so this is a list of four among many things that obviously many of our departments do, but we're

calling this out specifically because we wanted to highlight these things as collaborations among the departments. so the planning department and the department of environment created this plant finder. it's a way to give the public as well as city agencies an easy way to build plant lists to plan habitat in the built environment. we're continuing to perfect that and want to make sure that's working with everybody and everybody buys into how it works so we can make a go-to resource for all things plant in san francisco. also our department and the planning department have worked together what we have called our biodiversity design guidelines. they're in a draft form right now and we've been vetting them with a couple of different developers from the private sector to see how they could be implemented. as we go forward here with our department colleagues, we want

to strengthen them and bring them to fru sissing to be something that will be a key tool in implementing bio divedi landscapes. third to last. biodiversity training. we have been delivering a beta training to our department colleagues over the last couple of years. this is something that's really key in terms of making sure all the employees and the different departments are on the same page in terms of what their understanding is and what tools we have to do it together. we'll be expanding that and really trying to up our level of commitment to deliver that training to all the different departments. finally, we'll continue meeting as a group and taking what you'll hear about today and working on those and bringing them back again in even more developed form.

i think that was everything i was going to say. i'm going to invite lisa to talk about new initiatives and she's going to mention challenges and next steps. >> thank you, peter. >> hello, supervisors. good afternoon. thank you so much for all your support in the last i guess now year and a half and also your attention today. we hope that this presentation and our memo gives you all a lot of great talking points for the narratives you might be having with your own constituents when you hair we need better flood protection or safer places for our kids to play, this idea of integrating more greening can happen throughout our city. i'm from the planning department. i lead the resilience and sustainability departments. i'm part of the core agencies working on all of this. really with other folks in the room helping to knit these two

issues together and deliver on the co-benefits all of that can provide. i only have a few more minutes with you all. so we're going to go through the top ideas of key initiatives. as mentioned, these came from the department level surveys. we asked the departments what are folks doing, where are the opportunities, where do the products exist where we can be amplifying greening and where we turn more paving in a lang time. it's the biodiversity crisis that we need to do our best practices the first time around, or it's more stuff to retrofit down the line. i'm going to go through the ideas that the agencies came up with together. first of all within native plant production. in part because of your production and this city wide elevating this idea and this vision, we have had a lot of success working with the major

development projects on incorporating california and local native plants into the open space projects as well as working with the colleagues on city-led projects and other open spaces. we are going to need a lot more plants. we feel the city has an opportunity to take ownership of this. we really especially see the opportunity in a lot of our currently vacant or underutilized sites, whether it a future development site. we're looking at this in central soma, for example, and these native plant nurseries are opportunities to provide neighborhood beautification as well as workforce development. and also pollinating the areas across the city and where we have projects going on to redevelop parks, plazas, and amplify the streets and

sidewalks. you may think of civic center plaza. other areas where we can have these areas that connect folks. what actually is habitat supportive greening. by the city taking a lead in integrating these in different areas in the city, they serve as tetsing beds for which species work the best in which microclimates for our city. we can then share this with our private sector development partners. we've been inspired about work in los angeles about incorporating native plants and healthy landscapes into our affordable housing areas. equity is a huge focus of this work and how do we get landing scape -- landscaping and the right type of that into our environments. this is important to us and we're excited to dig into that.

also city-owned land as well as private-sector projects, we're taking a look at all our current codes and thinking about how can we require more greening and the right types of greening and how can we provide really clear tools, so that as one of your constituents gets an infraction because they've paved over their front yard and they need to have half of that front yard be permeable and 25% be landscaped. this is a picture of a golf course where we have a lot of areas in and around where we need people to stand and walk where we can be transitioning into ecosystem restoration. finally, this is a two-part initiative that is, one, this idea of the bioregional park which is centred around twin

peaks bit integrates several different disparate pieces and represents native lands that are looking to be co-joined. this is a ten-year grassroots efforts that has been evolving. one of the recent additions is the cross-town trail. it's connecting through the city connecting a lot of small parks and open spaces up over tin peaks and ending up down in presidio and lands end and connecting nature in this unique way and how can we create new and restored habitat pieces in and around this area. so i have two more slides. one is really about the key challenges and one to let you know the immediate and next steps. as we searched internally as 15 departments as we continued to meet monthly and share what we

found in those surveys. kind of these four challenges are the ones that keep rising to the top. we find them across our work plans and projects and also in conversations we have with private developers. we're going to be digging into those specifically and figuring out through these key initiatives how we can start to solve for those. the first two are really about the project design and implementation. how do we have enough staff. how do we have the right design tools. how do we have in our plojt line items actual plantings, which are cheaper per square foot than plantings. there is this maintenance piece and a lot of times different projects go from one department to the next. one person gets funding to design it, another person gets funding to maintain it. nobody gets funding in