>> during the coronavirus disease covid-19 emergency, this committee will convene remotely until it is allowed to meet in person. comments or opportunity to speak during the public comment period are available by calling 415-655-0001, access code 146-187-9247. again, 146-187-9247, and then

pound and then pound again. when connected, you will hear the meeting discussions, but you will be muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up, press star, three to enter the queue. best practices are to speak slowly and clearly and from a quiet location. please note that this meeting is being recorded and will be available at sfgovtv.org. >> all right. thank you so much, secretary hom. so welcome, everybody, to the our city, our home oversight committee for april 20, 2021, and we're going to call the roll. [roll call]

>> thank you so much. we have a quorum, and we're going to actually move item 2 to the item 3, which is discussion by the commit -- move item 2 to the end of the calendar and move to item 3, discussion by the committee regarding a general overview and member priorities for the fiscal year 21-22 and fiscal

year 22-23 investment plan. i do want to point out, for item 7, which is prevention, we're going to separate out the adult items, so also want to point to item 9 for our liaison, our mental health liaison, brett andrews, if there are areas in there that you can speak to, you're welcome to present on those areas. also, secretary hom, in terms of public comment, we just want to make sure that we have time to get through everything today, so we will be shortening public comment based on how many commenters we have. if we have a substantial number, we will be shortening it to two minutes, and if we

have even more, we will be shortening it to one minute. i want to thank andrea evans and matthew dougherty. thank you so, so much. so we will go right into item 3, and i am going to turn it over first to our data officer and our systems investment liaison, cynthia. i'm going to turn it over to you first to give an overview of the process, and then, we'll turn it over to each liaison so they can talk about their area. >> thank you. and i just want to thank each member of this committee, chair

[inaudible], vice chair d'antonio, h.s.h., mohcd, and d.p.h. so this is a team effort, and i think i am glad that we wanted to be this collaborative and community input really shaped so much our thinking, so we thank everyone who participated. so sod, we're really going to go through each area of the four funding area, and kind of present each area. one thing to note is since we presented everything two weeks ago through our last ocoh meeting, we went through a number of meetings and controller staff to really get better alignment on where we might have had differences with community input versus or committee input versus

department asks, figuring out where we could come together on certain things, where it made sense to prioritize certain things that people were looking for in these presentations. so where we're at is even after many meetings in the public and community in recent weeks. we also had a large meeting with a public stakeholder group on friday, april 16. we also had some comments from that, as well. the controller's office sent a survey to committee members to get more input, and so that's how we're providing from where we are today. i just want to preface everything by saying we are going to try to work through each section, have discussion of each section, and then a

motor. one syringe i want to ask about each section -- and this is a question for the committee and chair williams. do we want to go through where the conflicts are or do we want to think about that now, would we like to -- >> i have spoken with the liaisons that have potential conflicts, so i think they are quite aware of where we have potential conflicts, so i would ask the potential liaisons if they have potential conflict to speak to that now in terms of what your needs are -- so yeah, i'll just turn to -- if you could raise your hand so i could see the participants, so i'll go to member andrew first. >> thank you so much. good to see everyone. so yeah, i would probably -- i understand that i have running p.r.c., running a behavioral

health organization, have a conflict on -- on my section, and i'm getting conflicting information because i heard there was an opportunity in through for there to be a general overview, and if i -- i'm not sure that if -- embedded within the conflict, there's still an tblt to talk high level about the process that we went through. so share williams, you're shaking your head, so i'll reserve my time and continue it for then, but i will acknowledge that there's a conflict. >> yes, and member ant ruse, you can do that during item 3, the mental health section, where we can piece out those areas that you're not conflicted, if you're able to. >> honestly, i would just say then, maybe, from the outset, that given your e-mail to me at

7:00 this morning, that someone took a red -- a yellow highlighter to, that i wasn't a part of, i would recommend we continue the mental health discussion because i did not at all participate in that sheet at all. i signed off on a document in partnership with others that member nagendra is talking about the process, and somehow, this document that i'm talking about today at 7:00 in the morning is not the document that i signed off on. frankly, i think the controller's office and city attorney may need to lean in on this, but at this moment, i am ill prepared to discuss a document that i did not actually sign off and introduce. >> that is totally fine, member

andrews, and we can continue the mental health section. >> can i pose one question, and you may not be prepared or able to answer it. do we know who actually modified the -- modified the investment plan, mental health? >> so what i shared with you is not the investment plan. those what was the department was proposing. that's the department's proposal where there's questions, so this is different from the investment plan. >> okay. >> so the document that i shared with you was the department's proposal. so it's up to you. in item 3, i think you can still speak generally tot investment plan, but in those areas where there's still legal questions, we can continue the mental health bucket mentality. >> yes. i think they're all related, so

i think it would be important to have a weigh-in from the county attorney's office because what would happen it is would get coopted on one interpretation whether it fits within prop c or if it does not, and that somehow has to be a separate conversation that has to be fully reconciled, and we can have a full and honest conversation about the proposals that are there. i'm assuming that the other plans do or do not have challenges around them, and i would recommend, if that's the case, all of them are going to get murky and get muddy, if they're going to fit within prop c? so that's where i am with this -- this -- at this moment.

and so to that end, i would recommend that we continue the mental health proposal. >> thank you, member andrews. and i see that controller and laura put themselves on camera. did you want to discuss it. >> good morning, chair and members of the committee. i just wanted to add that our office did not have the time to review the mental health and eligibility of the measure? so i think a continuance until next week would allow us to conduct that review and comment on that action. >> thank you. did you have comments, laura? >> just to confirm that that

document was received by member nagendra, so it was modified by the -- so the department version had corrections in it? >> so thank you. all the reason we need to continue this item and come together on this piece. thank you, member andrews, and i will go to member leadbetter. did you have anything? >> yes. so i need to recuse myself from the housing discussion in its entirety, and then i understand i need to step away completely and then get reinvited back and then pull out the pieces on the [inaudible]. >> thank you.

i don't know if member miller has joined us yet. i'm not seeing her here, but if there's no other conflicts, i'm going to pass it back to member nagendra. >> i have not seen her come in. >> okay. thank you, member hom. okay. member nagendra? >> i'm just conflicted on the flex pool because i'm on the board of an organization that receives funding. i don't know if it's better to pull that piece out or if we have quorumed vote on it, i'm fine to stay out of the discussion, but whatever the best way to do that, but it's just one line item. >> and is that -- those items are in the family as well as

the youth. [inaudible] >> yeah, the flexible housing subsidy, that's a good point. >> i mean, i think we can do that if we're efficient. i need all your support on this. i think that is definitely possible. we just need to be efficient with our time. all right. so i'm glad we got that business dealt with, and now, i believe we can go into general comment about the totality of the recommendation and the investment plans, so do i pass it back to you, member nagendra, or do you want to have one of our liaisons go? >> i think we're ready to go into liaison discussion unless there's anything else any of our members do have anything else? >> i would just like to say

thank you, and just a reminder that we had such incredible community participation, and i just want to shout out everyone for that, and i think the intention is after we do this vote that we continue to build the voice of the community in this work, and i think the one question i have that i don't see allocated is around -- and i don't know if we could potentially make a motion on this to reserve some funds from the administrative bucket until we figure out how we're going to do our engagement with people with lived experience? we have committed to that week as a group. we just haven't gotten out to the community impact and communications groups, so even if i'm understanding correctly, we're potentially setting aside $2.5 million for the administrative fees, and then

the rest sort of maybe got reallocated across our bucket. but i think minimally, we should potentially reserve $1 million until we figure out how we're going to engage people with lived experience and their leadership through this process. >> thank you, member leadbetter. i'm going to go to the controller's office in terms of clarifying what's available in terms of the funding bucket. there's a motion on the floor, but i want to go to the controller's office first. >> i can confirm that we have pulled out $2.5 million, and that amount of funding is designated for the purposes laid out in the ordinance, which are kind of the administration of the tax

itself, the tax collector's role in managing the fund as well as the controller's managing the committee role. we're working up a plan now that contains the staffing that we need to manage the committee as well as some set-aside funding that address some of the funding but not formalized, . so one of the ideas that has come up in the past has been this community sort of focus group idea to sort of get input from the community. i think there's -- that needs to get kind of fleshed out and well rounded, but we have set aside money to support that. also, there's the charge of the committee to do a needs assessment every three years. i think there's some on going work that needs to be done on

what that means, but we've set aside some work on that, as well. we're kind of pulling a place holder in managing the committee in the interests of court of achieving your goals, so we can figure out how to implement that over time, but that $2.5 million is to support the administrative functions as well as the committee work moving forward. >> okay. member leadbetter, i think you were commenting about that outside of the 2.5 million. >> yeah. i'd like to make a motion to add that to the additional 2.5, so you can take it out of the [inaudible] bucket if you need, but i think the 2.5 is also

very humble on your part. so i just want to thank you guys for all of your work and recognize that that is absolutely needed to support the work of the controller's office. >> laura, did you have a direct response? >> i just wanted to flag that taking out additional funds, it means we have to recalculate all of the additional funds out of the fund bucket, which would make it difficult to come to decisions in the remainder of the items because the tally will be different. i think we need to figure out what the needs are from the committee and budget for them and create -- if we get clear ideas of what the ideas of the committee are and what those goals are, we can create a

budget for that and determine what the appropriations are and how they work. i want to caution that moving toward 3.5 million will result in a recalculating all of the budget. >> so i think, member leadbetter, we can urge something for another amount, but not order it, in terms of what we're saying. >> i'm wanting to be flexible, but if lawyer is is telling me that there's enough flexibility, we could potentially get through 1 million again through conversation, that's fine. i just know we haven't gotten a

lot of clarity through advance repayments. getting money seems to be harder than preserving. >> it's a two-year budget, but we can reassess in the second year if we need to and recalculate the fund balances if we feel like we didn't have enough to do the work that the committee wanted to do with that fund. we can reassess and reallocate in the next budget, as well? i'm not super clear on what the -- as well as the charge of the needs assessment and other administrative staff, like our interpreters. so i -- if we can hear from the

committee about the use that you have of that bucket, we can create an administration of that and rebalance from there? but it may make it a little more complicated for today's discussion to try to do that without a clear sort of plan or expectation from the committee around what to use the money to do. >> okay. [inaudible] >> -- from everybody, and i appreciate that. thank you. >> so member leadbetter, did you want to withdraw your motion. >> sure. yeah. i'll withdraw. >> okay. thank you. so we're now back on the general discussion of member priorities, and so i -- you know, you guys have the floor. if you want to talk about any of your priorities looking at the entirety of the investment plan, you're welcome to.

did you want to [inaudible] -- or i know you mentioned. i'm not sure, member andrews, if you're trying to unmute -- unmute yourself. >> okay. i'm here. sorry about that. it had to do with i had to do a quick e-mail. so are we just going to generally talk about what we are -- or yeah. so this -- i'm going to do my best to walk this fine line. so one thing that i just wanted to say is since -- building off of member leadbetter's comments, it was a comprehensive process, and it was herculean, chair, for

everyone who is a part of this process. that said, i'm struggling today because i feel that there are many games afoot, and as a behavioral health liaison, i'm not certain of all the conversations being had. so what i'm going to do now is just confirm the process that we went through and then just basically overall say a statement, and from that point on, i'm just going to recuse myself from the discussion. so like many, i participated in the community living session. i took copious notes -- community listening session. i took

of us to do our best to follow the process that is laid before us. so again, it's clear their side conversations because we have documents that have resulted in that, and it -- if you have brought me on as a liaison and recognize me as an expert in the field, one must trust the recommendations of that expert and their counsel and advisors along the way. and i put that out there as a tee-up for conversations that

you all are going to have today in your respective areas, and then later in the continuance of mental health proposals. that being said, i'm just going to stop there and thank everybody for your time and commitment to this really important work and also understand that it is not a conflict or three -- or not in the least challenging for many of us who have been in this work for many, many, many years, so good luck to you in all of your discussions today. >> member andrews, just want to clarify that you will be joining us for the votes -- because we're continuing the mental health -- >> i will be here for the votes for the other liaisons, for sure. >> okay. thank you so much. so with that, i see member leadbetter --

>> no, that's a leftover. >> member friedenbach? >> just wanted to thank -- just wanted to thank brett for all of his work on the behavioral health section and also take some responsibility if there is something, you know, feeling of, like -- you know, like -- you know, disrespecting or anything like that, pretty's role in this. i think where we've kind of had the twist is where we've had these meetings with the our city, our home legal counsel and controller's office, and there was a whole bunch of identification of issues whether they were in the prop c

legislation by our counsel, and then, as controller rosenfield said, they didn't have enough time to drill down into some of the gray area questions, so chair williams suggested that we put those items that were identified in gray, put them off. there wasn't any other changes besides that, other than really wanting to weigh them. so in those areas, there was, like, what everybody had identified as continuing gray areas, and those were the areas that we wanted to go back and talk about. so there was -- in the legal analysis language, it was just identifying where that gray area was, so that is -- so that was -- yeah. so i just wanted to say that this was -- you know, that was what was -- was -- was going on there, and i think it was

really -- i really appreciate it because i appreciate the careful conversation of -- of -- of -- of the prop c language and intent and really trying to get clarity on these things that we don't have clarity on. so thank you today for -- this is -- as in all of the sections, which we'll be talking about later, a lot of struggle and a lot of work, and just trying to really balance these different needs, and that was really clear on the behavioral health section and what was going on in it, and i just wanted to say that. thanks. >> thank you so much, member friedenbach -- i think i see member nagendra. >> i also wanted to underscore

the discussion around the process. i appreciate what member andrews is also -- is reflecting on, and we have all, i think, tried to honor the process of being as transparent as process with the community members and with each other, and this has been an hour by hour day by day changing process. what i wanted to say was, member andrews, yes, what was sent to the controller, i sent that last night, so i want to take responsibility, and that i think everybody had been seen, the liaisons, and except for what jennie said. i'm sorry for that. definitely not an intention, and as far as i think, it was different, but the language was the same as far as i can tell. thank you for bringing as much

transparency to the process as much as possible, and member andrews, i thank you for your discussion on that. >> and i wanted to go to laura for the investment plan, so was there any input that you wanted to give? >> so i was doing that on part of the investment planning group. we didn't get any specific questions submitted? so i think it's more going through the final feedback development of it as it sort of gets flushed out, but i didn't see anything that would sort of address the [inaudible] but i think that'll be reflected in whatever final document is prepared. >> thank you so much. so with that, i'm going to move

us to public comment. so secretary hom, is there any public comment for item 3? >> members of the public what wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001, access code 146-187-9247, then press pound and pound again. pretty star, three to enter the queue, and wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted to begin your comments. and at this point, i would like to invite our translators in to layout the process for providing public comment. [speaking spanish language]

[end of translation]. >> hello. this is harvey.

i'm going to interpret. [speaking cantonese language] >> great. thank you so much. i'm checking the attendee list now. we have seven public comments at this point, so i'm going to go ahead and take the first

caller. >> and they have two minutes each. >> okay. great. hello, caller? translators, can you welcome the first caller? [speaking spanish language]

>> so we can't answer any questions. i just want to make that clear. [speaking spanish language] >> my comment is that i would like you guys to really work to the people who would be able to

have housing. people like us that have families, that have small children, that have an appropriate space to live in. i live with all of my family members, and we only live in one single space, one room. because the rent situation in san francisco is very expensive, and the high levels of rent does not allow us to be

able to move. thank you. [end of translation]. >> thank you. next caller? >> just one second, because they move around. so i'll take caller 20. hello, caller? >> hello. my name is catalina, and i live with my family in a single room for 12 years, and it's difficult to be safe with my family in the hotels. we share a bathroom and a kitchen, and my kids cannot play in the hallway. i would like to invite you guys to come and see the hotels, to

see the conditions of families with kids living in a room. and in closing, i want to mention that the prop c was passed as a measure of creating new propositions, and money should not be used to cover city that the city was already operating, especially those that do not create new situations. and i thank you for your time in listening to our comments, but this is really important that we live in a hotel especially with kids, that's a really difficult space. thank you. that's really all for me today. >> great. thank you. i'll take the next caller. >> the numbers are moving around for me? hello, caller?

>> yes, i'm kristin evans, and i was one of the three proponents for proposition c. i want to honor the work and the time that everyone has put in with respect to the time that everyone has put in for use of these funds, and i want to reiterate that there continues to be concerns about our city, our home funds about the list of the proposition c measure. there was so much time and every day put into passing that language, securing signatures about what was in the ballot measure, and there's been persistent concerns about the department recommendations

being inconsistent and incompatible with the language text. so, you know, i -- i want to acknowledge that there may be a feeling that there was a lot of time and effort being put into recommendations, but -- in the -- in the final analysis, we need to be consistent with what we committed to voters with how these funds would be spent, especially if we ever want to go back and increase the amount of funds available. we have to be honest and truthful about how we intended to spend the money, make recommendations that were consistent with that. as you know, we were tied up with a lawsuit for many years, and the other side was arguing that we would misspend the dollars. so this is why this is so absolutely critical that we are consistent with what we

communicated to voters and the legal text of the measure. thanks so much. >> all right. thank you. i'll go ahead and take the next caller. hello, caller? >> hi. >> hello? >> hi. >> yes, you have three minutes. >> yes. this is steve weiss, and just keeping this in the form of a comment, i think it would be helpful for the public listening to have a better understanding of which document was being discussed earlier in the context of potential conflicts, so i'll leave it there, and thank you all for your time. >> great. thank you. >> hello, caller?

hello, caller? >> bueno? >> yes. can we have our interpreter? [speaking spanish language]

>> yes, hello. my name is carmen, and i would like to just comment that i am a mother of three children, and i'm actually living in a residential hotel, and i have a teenager and two smaller children, and living as a single mother in this situation is something dignified. i would like for you to work on the situation where you can help families like mine that have children. i would like you to help on the measure that allows for a better situation.

and as a final thought, i want to urge the city to approve these measures in a final way to better my situation, and that's to invest money in programs that are already going on instead of using them in this kind of a situation. that will be all. thank you. [end of translation]. >> great. thank you. take the next caller. hello, caller? translator, can you welcome our

next caller, please? [speaking spanish language] >> harvey, would you be able to welcome our caller, as well? >> oh, sure. [speaking cantonese language] >> hello, caller? we're going to move onto our next caller. at this point, we don't have any additional public comments.

oh, give me one second. i see a hand raised again. we'll take the next caller. hello, caller? hello? >> hello, my name is miguel cabrera. [inaudible] >> okay. so you have three minutes -- or no, you have two minutes. [inaudible] >> so i want to mention to remind the committee and everyone in san francisco that when we created this proposal for proposition c, we had more

money, that these -- this proposal that we were working on is for generating about 4,000 housing units if we [inaudible] but at the same time 1,000 housing units for families with children. so families that were living in a hotel coming to live in shelter [inaudible] so -- and then so i wanted to speak -- [inaudible] and then, so -- and

[inaudible] so -- >> is there someone else on the line? >> let me check the line. there's -- i believe it's the background of the caller. >> so any ways -- hello? >> you have 30 seconds. [inaudible] >> so yeah, i was mentioned that, so yeah, what we're

recommending is [inaudible] that we were requesting for the families, and [inaudible] the many that we do spending from prop c, so we're spending on other programs and we want to create, and we don't want this money spending in all other areas that we already have. when we created this, we were creating it for hokeless -- homeless families and other people that need it.

so thank you so much. >> thank you, caller. i'll go ahead and take the next caller. hello, caller? >> good morning. thank you so much. >> you have two minutes. >> my name is deana florez, and i'm the director of programs at the lourdes street services. we get to serve the tenants of the s.r.o.s in the mission district and also get to really get a sense of how our immigrant families are doing on the ground right now and want to really elevate not just the work of this committee but also all of the work of the people in the background and the coalition to engage everyone throughout this process of implementation. i'm calling in today to elevate not just the folks that could make it today, who called in, but i want to make sure we remember the intention of this

proposition and that in your decision making, we are clear of what many folks mentioned that we want to create a solution to homelessness, and we understand there are [inaudible] that the city needs to advocate for and create funding for, but there are portions of the homeless committee that aren't being spoken for. with that, you know, i think there's so many obstacles that we have, so many resources that are much needed. we need new strategies, and i think that's the intention of prop c and want to elevate and move that, and thank you for

your time. >> great. thank you. i'll take the next caller. hello, caller? hello, caller? hello, caller. you have two minutes. can the translator welcome our caller? [speaking spanish language] >> he speaks chinese. [speaking cantonese language]

>> okay. i would like to share my

personal comments. i just find out that it had been years the housing abilities, programs, the supply is very scarce, so it probably take me a few years, even though i'm not able to be -- to apply for it. and also, i would much appreciated if you could increase the minimum requirement so that many of us would be able to be qualified to apply for this housing program because this is a very important program for us. >> okay.

do we have another -- >> okay. i'll move onto the next caller. hello, caller? >> yes, hi. can you hear me? >> yes. you have two minutes. >> hello. my name is anaya revelo. i am a single mom of three, and i want to share my little story. me and my kids were living in little rooms, and we were finally able to get a housing thanks to one of your housing programs, so i just want to say we need more permanent solutions, more housing, fore affordable solutions -- more affordable solutions that families can apply to. when my kids were living in rooms, it was very hard. we didn't have a place for them to make meals or a place for them to play or have 23re7bds over, so it hurt them a lot, and i know many families are hurting right now because of

that situation, so i ask that you please invest some of this money into housing. thank you. >> great. thank you. we'll take the next caller. hello, caller? hello, caller? >> hello? >> hello. >> hello? [speaking spanish language]

>> [inaudible] once again, i would like to propose that measure c be approved, that it indeed verify that the people will benefit, benefit those people that are without homes who are about to lose their homes.

>> this is already the third time that i'm doing this, and i've been gone homeless. >> and the situation is that people go and be homeless real fast, and this is a situation that is reoccurring and never

fixes itself, and it is the time that we just go homeless. >> and please let her know that her time is up, as well. >> and i totally approve what the commission is trying to do, which is buy building structures and repurpose them so that they can have more

homes that are more affordable. [end of translation]. >> great. i'll take the next caller. >> great. thank you hear me? >> yes. you have two minutes. >> great. okay. so i was born and raised here in san francisco all my life and live in the western addition. i have experienced homelessness for the last seven years, not being put in the proper places for me concerning permanent housing due to my dual diagnosis. i just want to make sure that the money goes where it needs to go and the city comes up with new programs because it's not doing what it's going to. i don't think i'll be where i'm at today without the dual diagnosis, so i just feel that

proposition c passed a measure for creating new permanent solutions to homelessness, and i did not -- not new programs. some of the programs that the city has there. i received it from some of the new programs that i have on board, and that's how i was able to get stable and get the support that i needed, from people being where i been, and like me, they came from the streets, and i would like us to collaborate on this for solutions. so i just believe that the city, they need to put the money -- money should be put to cover not the city programs but to create new permanent solutions, and right now, we don't have solutions, so i'll stop. thank you. >> okay.

thank you, caller. i'll take the next caller. hello, caller? >> hello, okay. >> can you hear me? >> yes. >> my name is martha davis, and i'm director of the homeless prenatal program. [inaudible] are key for the prop c program, and that solution is housing. while i believe that it's important to purchase hotels and keep single adults housed, it's very much like an s.r.o., and it's not suitable for families, we've heard that already this morning, as well, that they're just not a place that kids should be raised in, and so i'm hoping that you will invest -- and i believe you will -- in families, but also

in construction -- in new construction, housing. there's just not enough, and for years, we have tried to move families that are in s.r.o.s into permanent housing. but as we've also heard, the list is so long that people can't get in. i want to thank you for your work. herculean is an understatement, but housing, please, let's find housing for people, and it's not in hotel rooms. they need to have their own bathrooms, kitchens, and rooms to sleep in. so thank you for your -- and that's all i'm going to say in. one other thing, i would like to say i hope you would be flexible, after you're purchasing buildings, that you would purchase other items and not let it sit in the bucket until next year. thank you. >> thank you so much.

hello, caller? hello, caller? >> espanol? >> do you speak chinese? >> yes. >> hello, harvey, can you give translation services? [speaking cantonese language]

>> okay. i would like to tell you that i have been immigrate over seven years. i live with my husband and daughter six years old. we have been living in an extremely small room in chinatown, only about 80 square feet. you can imagine our space of activities is very, very small. so the only thing my daughter wants to do is go to school so she would not be crammed in such a small cubicle. i'll ask the caller to continue.

>> okay. i also would like to share with you my difficulties. since i have -- since i have to take care of my daughter, i am not able to work, and also, i find out even though i ply for the housing authority program -- though i apply for the housing authority program, the requirement is very high. can make it very difficult to qualify for such a program.

>> okay. all right. well, i also would let you know there are so many immigrants living in such small cubicles in chinatown, so actually, i'm coming here today to speak on behalf of them. we really hope that you would have the sufficient fund to really support all of us, and also lower the criterias in order we be qualified to apply for your program, and this is our sincerest request. >> great. thank you, caller. hello, caller? >> yes. this is david elliot lewis,

member of the public. you talk about people being homeless and lived experiences, and i have experience in both. the way you have configured webex, you hide the participant list, which is just wrong. i cannot see any other participants. that would not happen in a real-world meeting. if i came to city hall, i would see the other participants in the meeting. i also cannot see the chat. that's a chat, like, for your private members. i also cannot ask a question by chat or use public comment chat. if you want to engage the

public, please conform your meeting to the public, so we can engage. you've also turned off our video? if we were in public, you could see our faces. why can't you see our faces in this virtual meeting. none of this feels like. all of it feels exclusionary, and you're not the only working group or commission that does this, but it just doesn't feel right. regarding the other comments of sticking to the law, yes, of course, i hope you will, but i think that goes without saying. thank you so much for your time and attention, and thank you all for volunteering to do this. i appreciate it. that's all. david elliot lewis. >> great. thank you. just give me one more second. i believe i've got everybody

that -- that has raised their hand. great. the current hands that are raised, i've already got them. we can go onto the next item. >> great. thank you, secretary hom, and all the public commenters who came out today. we will now move to item 4, which is discussion and action by the committee on adult housing investments proposed in the fisk of year 21-22 and 22-23. when we move to the vote, there's been a request by member reggio to pull out the flex vote items, so i want to turn it over to member reggio.

>> thank you, chair williams, and appreciate the work of all of you and just express the efforts of the department in our efforts to pull together. i think in this section, we're close, but we're not entirely with the document, but in many ways, we are aligned. thank everyone for the votes on this. >> i'm sorry. i'm going to have to recuse myself in this section, and just a reminder, from the presenter bucket, there will be likely a $28 million transfer to housing if necessary. >> member leadbetter, if you want, you can just turnoff your microphone. >> julie, i can go ahead and move you to the attendee list. >> okay. thank you.

and then, the last item is the $28 million transfer from preventative to housing. >> thank you. so back to this, yes. i was seeing if i was muted, and i was not. are we able to bring up the graph of the adult housing? >> i can bring that up. give me one second. >> and as you are bringing that up, on the adult housing, there's two other sections related to housing, which is families, which i think we'll discuss next, and t.a.y., which is transition age youth. so what we're seeing is the adult related housing, but i think it represents bringing on those additional units of

housing that we recognize which are needed. you go to the top of that column, let me give you, before going into detail on this, let me give you the overview that what we're asking for is the funds to leverage the acquisition of 612 and 712 units. the number of units that will be produced are actually dependent on the funds from outside -- state funds, federal funds, other funds that might be applicable to this. so when i say we should be getting funds for this, it could be a little bit more, it could be a little bit less. okay.

can i get this back on here, the table? if we look at the fourth, fifth, and sixth columns, which are what we're asking for in the projected results. if you go to the second line, the $58.1 million, that is in line with the city's recommendation that ocoh funds be used toward the -- our obligation on the match obligation with the low-key funding, which brought on the diva and renata hotels that

brought in about 362 units that brought on units or some units that are being rehabbed or some that are still to come. moving on, this was a request of $11 million. it's now that we at the city are recommending $5 million to go towards the operations of up to 287 units at sites that are named in the far right column, and this is as a result of eraf funding, state funding that was pulled in in 2020, and that's where i made my request, as well. this next line is really a very significant one. we had started out -- and i think that was brought to you

in early april -- that was going to be $100 million of acquisition of properties, acquisition of rehab. this would be hotels, possibly student housing or places that would possibly be used for student housing, other places that might house adults as we negotiated, the other funding did not remain available to us. and through the back and forth with the city and some of the community members, we have that currently at $52 million, which, again, is leverage depending on what money would come in federally, what money would come in from state. we are targeting anywhere from 250 to 350 units of housing, and if we can bring in more

leverage or external funding, that would make that stretch further. but that's basing an assumption on the cost of those units being 350, closer to 400,000 per unit, and that would provide us, again, using this leverage, obviously, to do the math -- this doesn't provide everything, but bring us about 250 units. next line, 350 units. remember, we're hoping we get 350 units out of the possession, so we're projecting the cost of running the operations and services adequately funded at roughly 20k per unit, which is about the same as the city is projecting on that, and that

would cost, over the course of two years, $8.8 million. we go to the next line. this one is $7 million over the years of two years toward operation and services for the 339 or 362 residents of the properties. chair williams, help me on this. we're skipping the flex funding right now? >> we're going to take it as a separate vote. if you can talk about it -- >> okay. i hope this doesn't compromise what i'm going to say right now. in a way, it's a trade-off. if you have more flex spending, flex pool units or subsidies, then, there is less money available for acquisition.

we put more into acquisition, we would have less money available for flex pool. in listening to the community and in some discussion back and forth, on the committee side, i think we were of the opinion that we should keep that acquisition as is and keep the flex pool, which i will talk about in just a minute or a little bit, as it. so skipping it for now, let's go to the short-term subsidies or medium-term subsidies, which are rapid rehousing, let me just make sure -- someone stick with me a minute. if you look at the outcomes, it's additional units for

s.i.p., shelter-in-place recipients. we had rejected some of that in -- we had discussed some of that in our december meeting, and it would augment it to 285. it also includes some form of workforce development with the scattered housing in safe sites. it is providing $4.7 million for 50 slots over a course of two years, and that would be specifically related to justice-involved persons, persons exiting incarceration that, in other cases, may be entering the homeless community

here in san francisco. so if you put all of that together, that's an ask of -- well, no. excluding the flex -- >> so you can include the flex. we're just going to have two different votes. >> oh, i can talk about the flex -- [inaudible] >> -- i just want to enter the discussion. if there's going to be a trade-off of a type of it was that a member has a conflict with and whether or not to spend more or less money on, we're going to have to set that out at the beginning so the member can leave the conversation. for example, if cynthia wants to enter the conversation, it can't be about the subsidized

housing, as with. >> -- as well. >> great. so i think that cynthia understanding that. member reggio, if we could move on. >> great. so i think the next slide is line 10. i'd like to talk about that. thank you. so line 10, flex pool, we're asking for $49 million, almost $50 million, to provide 650 s.i.p. residents a place, to provide rent subsidies and services in scattered sites. yes. and i think that's in line with the city request that was part of the s.i.p. exit plan. we had granted or recommended 300 -- could have been 325 -- 300-something of those units or subsidies back in december.

this would be the additional 650 that the department was asking for. [please stand by]

million in order to do the things i find in here. >> thank you so much for all of your hard work, member reggio. i know this is a big, big pot, so thank you so much for all your dedication. i'm going to open it up to the committee, as it has already been flagged by laura and myself. any discussion in regards to tradeoffs, regarding flex and acquisition, if you have a conflict, please recuse yourself

from the discussion. it doesn't mean have you to log off, just do not speak to that item. and i'm going to turn it to vice chair deantonio. >> thank you, so much, member reggio, for all of your hard work on this. this is really comprehensive and really great work, and i'm excited to share this as well. my only, like, qualm that i have is what i brought up last time, really around the inflation rate. i still feel like it is high. i feel like, especially we're doing hazard pay and bonuses and the cost of inflation is really tied to the increases in labor costs. so, like, it feels kind of redundant to me a little bit. but that is just me. i feel like committing to 3% inflation rate, like, ongoing is very high, in my opinion. but, yeah, that's my only

little thing, so, thank you. >> thank you. member reggio, did you want to make any comments to that? >> yeah. and i can't claim expertise in that regard, but i can say my experience, when i was director, that is really not a high number. by the time you put in, let's say, a moderate increase in salaries, that are, in many case, way too low, and arguably should be raised more than 3%, and then you look at every vendor in town going up, despite what you think, going up to that level, you look in -- it is just something where 3% is barely going to make it. to do less than that, i think puts us in a position where d.o.c.h. funds are not going to cover it. and it depends on the budget here.

we're bringing on new units. we're paying for operations to fund, and yet we're saying it may not cover the whole thing. so, personally, i think the 3% is conservative. and i would not recommend that we go lower than that. >> chairwoman: thank you so much, member reggio, and i just want to say to the channel 10 at this the committee at this time, we just want to move through these items, and if there are motions that the members want to put on the table, i know we've had a significant amount of time to go through these proposals and ask questions and dig into this, so is there a motion for the adult -- i know we're going to separate out, member reggio, the flex pool from this motion. if we could, if there is a motion -- i see member reggio, and member freedombach. did you have a comment? >> thanks so much for all of the hard work on this. i know this was a bear, a

difficult one. i wanted to make a motion, just before we vote on the section. i wanted to make a couple of motions just generally about the prioritization of the type of housing. so it's not like a change to the specific work sheet, but basically i'll fill out the motion more specifically, but basically around asking the city to prioritize tourist and student housing that has bathrooms in suite, and kitchenettes, and the ability to convert to adult housing. just putting that out there as a body is really important. i would like to see us kind of expand the housing

stock. we could buy a tourist hotel or s.r.o.s, and it gives us more poor people's housing. i wanted to make a general thing around that, and a similar motion around families, trying to make sure that acquisitions -- we're not talking about acquiring buildings that are already occupied, but buildings that homeless people could move into, and that we have some big units in the mix. so i wanted to make some general motions around that. i want to ask if this is the appropriate time to do that? >> chairwoman: you can make the adult motion right now, member freedombach, so if you want to restate the adult housing motion. >> okay, great. oh, this is a lot of documents on my screen. okay. so i'm making a motion that for all adult acquisitions, we recommend that the city prioritize geographic diversity, tourist and student housing, with in suite

bathrooms or ability to convert to studios in order to expand dignified housing for impoverished homeless people. >> chairwoman: thank you. is there a second? >> second. >> chairwoman: it has been seconded by vice chair deantonio. >> chairwoman: can you call the roll. [roll call] >> chairwoman: all right. so the motion passes. thank you. i'll go back to member reggio on the entirety of

the package, separate from the flex, if we could do that. >> so let me just comment on one thing. i saw that laura marshal was going to remark. and, laura, let me invite you in, if you want to clarify that, too, or add to this. but there is an issue on here, on the shorter term subsidies. >> i think we can work that out on the back end. >> can we do it on the back end, or do we need -- good. a reflection of whether or not we were exceeding the 12%. so let's not worry about that. thank you, laura. chair williams, should i offer -- >> chairwoman: yes. [laughter] >> let me make a motion that we pass -- that we recommend the adult permanent housing as

presented, excluding, for the moment, the flex housing section. >> chairwoman: thank you, member reggio. is there a second? >> second. >> chairwoman: all right. so seconded by vice chair deantonio. any discussion on the motion? >> i have a clarifying question, member freedombach, about moving the money over from prevention. >> yes. >> when we vote on this, does this include the money added in from prevention or exclude? >> chairwoman: i see a note that says this is in the red, member reggio, can you clarify? >> well, what we say right now is this does not include any money being moved over from prevention. i have been party to conversations knowing that that was possible, that it would come, but i did not have a figure, and i

didn't calculate it in it. i would be inclined to say that would be most welcome, but that we not move on that. it would take a level of analysis right now in allocation, that we hold on doing that, and perhaps carry that over to whatever the special meeting is, if there is going to be an extra $24 million available. >> chairwoman: laura, can you speak to that? i see the note there? >> i don't know where that note came from. i think that was a proposal by julie saying that there was extra funding in the prevention and sort of proposing that it be moved over. there are technical details around how it would move. it has to comply with the funding breakdown. so there is, like -- assuming the committee passes the recommendation around the bucket, there would potentially be funding left over.

and because prevention is not a cap, you could go below the threshold and move that money to other things, but it would need to come into the housing bucket proportional to the bucket, so the subcategories. so it wouldn't be $28 million in the adult section. it would be spread throughout, and there would be some back-end work we would need to do to recalculate all of the percentages around that. i would concur with member reggio's suggestion to not include that in the current recommendation, the current array of funding choices, because they don't actually account for that change in the numbers. >> chairwoman: thank you so much, laura. member reggio, your motion is on the floor. is there a second? >> we had a second -- >> chairwoman: sorry. from vice chair deantonio. thank you. member freedombach, it sounds like we will

address that at another point. >> and the exiting, sheltering street, under -- oh, wait, we're talking about flex pool, yeah. so that piece, i just wanted to make sure that was in there. we've gotten -- unone of one of thethings that happened during the zip hotels, some people were offered treatment, and they were offered treatment and hotels. and they were opted out, and i wanted to make sure we had the language in there so those coming out of treatment could get access to those. at the previous meeting, i know there was mentions including folks from other shelters as well, and treats. so, yeah, i just wanted -- >> i did think that the stuff in red -- i don't

know if we want to make it more clear in the motion. [simultaneous talking] >> it is just notes on the document, but it looks like the numbers that were actually presented here, the $52 million, it does not include the $28 million for prevention. that is just a note. to your point, i don't know what shift you would like to add to -- >> just suggesting that the exiting treatment shelter in street be put into black by laura, and we're clearly voting on all black language in the chart. >> is that correct, member reggio? is that exiting treatment shelter street -- >> yeah. it was definitely intended for street and sheltered and the exiting treatment makes perfect sense to me. i think that is completely

a reasonable change. >> this is actually not included in the original motion because it excluded the flex pool. >> chairwoman: that's right. we're not voting on flex pool right now. [simultaneous talking] >> i apologize. >> chairwoman: all right. so it has been moved and seconded. any further questions or discussions before we go to roll call vote? all right. hearing or seeing none, secretary, could you please call the roll. [roll call]

>> chairwoman: we're doing a roll call on the adult portion, except the flex pool. >> yes. [roll call continuing] >> chairwoman: so the motion passes. thank you, everyone. thank you, member reggio. we're now going to the flex pool portion of adult. so member reggio, or any member that would like to make a motion. >> i'd like to make a motion we approve the flex pool recommendations, including -- including the red language around exiting treatment shelter in street. >> second.

>> chairwoman: is that vice chair deantonio? >> yes. >> chairman: okay. thank you. actually, i want to pause and, secretary holm, can you ask if there is specific public comment on item 4. i know we have some general public comment. so is there a way to kind of do that before we go to the roll call vote? i want to respect that process. >> i do want to ask john, though, our city attorney who is on the line, currently we're taking votes, but i wanted to make sure that we are supposed to be taking public comment before each vote. is that correct, john? >> yeah -- >> chairwoman: typically, yeah. >> deputy attorney general john gibner. sorry, i should have jumped in before the last vote. you should take public comments before all of the votes. you should take public

comment before taking any vote on an item before your first vote. one other note. the committee said that member nagendra is going to recuse on flex housing. >> chairwoman: yes. >> if that is right, before you take that second vote, member nagendra, you should step out of the virtual bay. >> thank you. >> chairwoman: thank you. yeah. the thing is, it is hard to distinguish with the public comment which item -- if we could, secretary holm, before moving to the vote, if we could ask there are comments specific to item 4. from the public. >> yes. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001, i.d. 1461879247, then ##.

if you haven't already done so, please dial *3 to line up to speak. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comment. please note you have two minutes. again, this is specifically for item 4. translators, would you be able to read the script as well, and indicate they will have two minutes, and this is specifically for item 4. >> and also commenting and no questioning, right? >> chairwoman: no questioning. just commenting.[speaking forein language] [interpreter speaking]

[end of translation]

>> i'm here. >> can you please let the member know to call in and dial *3 if they want to provide public comment specifically to item 4. and they will have two minutes. >> okay. *3. [interpreter speaking] >> i'll speak in mandarin again. [interpreter speaking]

>> i'm finished. thank you. >> okay. i'll take the first caller. hello, caller? [simultaneous talking] >> we have family here waiting to speak for the third item. is that okay that the family is here that can speak for that item because they are still waiting. >> chairwoman: we're on item 4. is this for item 4? >> no. it is for item 3, the prop "c" funding allocation. the family here are still waiting. >> chairwoman: city attorney gibner, i want to take the comment, but we're on item 4.

this is what i was just talking about. so can we accommodate the family that is here, or wait until our general public comment later. >> we do have an item regarding family housing. so there is a future item they can speak on if it is related to family housing. >> you should generally not take public comment out of order because it will mix it all up. you could maybe -- if there is a member of the public who has time constraints and won't be around when you reach the family housing discussion, you could call that public comment separately after you call this one. but you should really parse it out so that people aren't crossing lines. >> chairman: thank you. i knew you were going to say that.

so, i'm sorry, but can you both move to that public comment, caller, when we get out of the adult public comment. if you could just hold on with us for a little longer, we'll get to you very soon. so you can give us about five minutes, and we'll get there. >> hello, caller? >> caller: hello. >> do you need translation? translation? cantonese or spanish? harvey, can you please translate. [interpreter speaking]

>> my name is yoyo. we have families sharing the toilet in chinatown. i would like to request that you would have more funding in measure "c" so that we would be able to provide more qualities of the affordable housing to us.[speaking foreign language]

>> speaking through interpreter: that's the reason i appear in the meeting today. i really hope the city will highly consider to have more funds allocated in measure "c," so that we will be able to move out from the cubic in chinatown, asap, to be able to participate in the affordable housing program, and that there will be 30% of the funds that we can apply. finished. >> chairwoman: harvey, can you say in cantonese and chinese that we're taking only public comment on adult housing. and we'll take public comment on family housing shortly. [interpreter speaking]

>> do i need to translate in mandarin? >> chairwoman: no. just cantonese and spanish is good. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> hello, caller. can you translate in spanish, please. patty, can you translate in spanish we'll be taking public comment on the next item? [speaking spanish] >> chairwoman: thank you so much. secretary holm, if you can

call any public comment for adult housing, if there is any public comment on adult housing? you're muted, secretary holm. >> sorry. hello, caller? >> caller: yes, is this for adult housing? >> caller: yes. i speak chinese. [speaking chinese] [interpreter speaking] >> speaking through interpreter: i want to discuss about family housing program. >> chairwoman: that is next. if you could reiterate we're going to talk about that in the next five

minutes. [interpreter speaking] >> interpreter's finished. >> hello, cawrm. caller, is this regarding adult housing? [interpreter speaking] >> can you make sure that it is for -- >> okay. [interpreter speaking] >> caller: i wanted to discuss about family housing. i know it is not ready yet. i'll be waiting, then. >> great. thank you. hello, caller. this is for adult housing. this is public comment for adult housing.

[interpreter speaking][speakingn language] >> i have already advised attendees about this. >> thank you. hello, caller? >> caller: yes, this is david elliot lewis, regarding item 4, adult housing. resources are scarce, and i hope you will use the money well by investing in more cost-effective units, which would include housing that is already built. there are already hotel and apartment buildings for sale, that could be purchased at a much less cost than brand new supportive housing.

and there is also emerging forms of prefab, modular housing, that can be built in factories. community housing is using factory o.s., that are building prefab units, that can be brought on the site, i think it is 30% less cost construction-wise, and there may be less expensive prefab housing. so it gives you more housing for the dollar. and i hope you'll specify these more cost-effective housing. david elliot lewis. that's my comment. thank you. >> great. thank you so much. i'll take the next caller. hello, caller? can you -- [interpreter speaking]

>> i advised him to wait for the while. the interpreter is finished speaking. >> thank you. let me just take one final look. there are no additional comments for item four. >> chairman: that. thank you to our translator. it is all about language. it is really great to see this. and so we'll talk the roll on the flex pool part of the adult housing investment. secretary holm? [roll call]

>> chairwoman: all right. so the motion passes. thank you, member reggio. and we'll now move to the next bucket, and what we've all be waiting for, and we'll take the public comment on family housing now because we know we have a number of folks waiting. so if you could -- >> can i make a suggestion? we could, perhaps, combine items 5 and 6 and hear them both together as a way to kind of streamline the agenda, to combine both 5 and 6 to hear about family and day housing, and we can hear public comment for both and review the items for both, and then hear motions on both. and i think that the

attorney general, john gibner, might have additional guidance on the last item before we move on. >> chairwoman: is that possible, attorney general gibner, to combine those? >> yes. you can combine public comment on those two items, and then take the vote separately after public comment. one clean-up piece on the last item, because you took a couple of votes before public comment. is i would recommend you retake those votes. so you can rescind member friedenbach's motion. and to adopt member reggio's motion, approving all of the adult housing in the flex. >> chairwoman: great. let's do it. member reggio, if you could rescind the adult housing motion separate from the flex pool, and then member friedenbach,

if you could do the same on the priorities. we'll start with member reggio. >> i would move to rescind, if i'm saying that correctly, the motion to approve the adult housing recommendations, minus the flex pool. is that correct? >> it's just a streamlined thing. you can move to rescind and readopt. >> so i move to rescind and readopt the adult housing recommendations, exclusive of the flex pool. >> chairwoman: great. thank you. is there a second. >> second. >> chairwoman: thank you vice chair deantonio for seconding. any discussion on the motion? seeing none, we will take the roll call vote on this. [roll call]

>> chairwoman: i just want to say, member nagendra, you're not recused on this. >> i'm sorry. >> chairwoman: no worries. i know this is getting a little squirrely. e . >> so i can change myanswer to . >> chairwoman: so the motion passes. >> i rescind and reintroduce my motion to pass flex pool subsidies for adults -- >> chairwoman: no, it is just the priorities. >> the -- >> chairwoman: the statements made about prioritizing -- >> oh, okay. so i rescind and reintroduce my motion that for all adult

acquisitions, we recommend that the city prioritize geographic diversity and (indiscernable) for unhoused and impoverished people. >> chairwoman: thank you. a second? >> second. >> chairwoman: seconded by vice chair deantonio. any discussion on the motion? seeing none, we'll do do a roll call. [roll call] >> this one i am recused on because it is the priorities for the flex pool. is that correct? >> chairwoman: it is all of it. but i believe -- i'm sorry. oh, no. >> you can participate in this vote. it is all right complete. already done. >> i say yes. thank you.

>> chairwoman: all right. so the motion passes. we're gooving. so we're going to go to public comment for family housing and for day housing. so any for public comment for housing and day. we're taking that public comment right now. >> member of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item to call 415-655-0001, i.d. 1461879247, then ##. if you haven't already done so, dial *3 to line up to speak. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comment. please note you have two minutes. translator, can you go ahead and repeat that same thing? [interpreter speaking]

>> interpreter is finished speaking. thank you. >> chairwoman: and spanish interpretation, patty? [interpreter speaking]

>> chairwoman: all right. so is there any public comment, secretary holm? >> yes. there are currently seven. i'll take the first caller. hello, caller? >> español? >> the caller hung up. i'm going to take the next caller. hello, caller. >> caller: hello. [interpreter speaking]

>> hello, harvey, would you be able to translate that piece? >> my name is -- i'm sorry, i forgot to unmute. i have been living in the cubical of chinatone, and the. is very, very terrible, because we have to share a kitch, toilet, and bathroom for many units. and my unit is very close to the toilet and bathroom, and i suffer a lot of noise pollutions when i'm staying there. okay.[speaking foreign

language] >> i want to let you know we are a family of three. especially i would like to let you know my wife has mental issues, and then living in a crowded space is really causing a tremendous impact to her. and especially i want to share how difficult my life is. my daughter has to go to school, but she has to wait more than 20 minutes for bathroom and restroom because it is shared by many members of the units.[spean

language] >> speaking through interpreter: and i also would like to emphasize this cubical, or room, if you can call it, is very, very tiny. so i really would like to have the -- if the city would consider giving more funds for the people living in the cubical area for so long so that we will be able to move out asap and have a better living environment for our family. thank you.

>> interpreter is finished speaking. >> she has 30 seconds remaining? [interpreter speaking][speakingn language] >> speaking through interpreter: during all of these years, i have filled out all of those applications with no response. i come here sincerely, and please set up more funds for these kind of families so we will be able to move it in a very timely manner. i appreciate your understanding and your

report. >> interpreter speaking, finished. >> thank you. i'll take the next caller. >> español? >> yes, we have spanish-speaking translation. patty? [speaking spanish] >> hello, caller? >> chinese?

>> chinese. okay.[speaking foreign language] >> speaking through interpreter: hello the, everyone. i have a family of six living in a very, very tiny small room. i have two daughters, aged is 14 and 13, and twin sons, who are both six years old.[speaking foreign language]

>> speaking through interpreter: i want to let you know how difficult our life has been facing all these years. our room is so small, we have to do everything on the bed. we eat on the bed. our kids have to study on the bed. and then even though we have no room to sleep

sometimes, my husband has to sleep on the floor. and then we have to wait so long for the toilet and the restroom. and sometimes because the area is so humid and with my two youngest sons, they all have skin issues. i would just like to share with you all our living condition and situation -- it is really worse than you can imagine. [interpreter speaking]

[interpreter speaking] >> great. harvey, i believe you're on mute. >> speaking through interpreter: okay. i also would like to let you know during covid-19, all of my kids have to shelter in place, and they stay at home all of the time. can you imagine 24 hours they have to be together, in a small area. and even though if they were able to move out for a few minutes, the neighbors were not happy with us for moving around. so you could imagine how difficult we have been suffering. and i hope you could understand our situation. i beg and beg for you guys

to on the measure "c" you could consider giving more funds for the group of people that we've been living in the cubicals or small area like this. >> the interpreter is finished speaking. >> thank you. hello, caller? you speak chinese? [interpreter speaking][speakingn language]

[interpreter speaking] >> speaking through interpreter: hello, everyone. my name is shou. and i have been living in the cubical in chinatown when i immigrate into the united states. we've been staying in the cubical in chinatown for so long, not because there is no other option. it is because the rent outside has been so expensive, we cannot afford it. we have moved from place to place, still within the cubical within chinatown. it is only because the situation that we're facing is getting worse and worse. i give you an example. the last one we lived in a

cubical, there was a mental unit neighbor that keep on harassing us verbally and also physically. and we have no other option to move in other cubicals in the chinatown. but i could tell you, wherever we move, the situation would not be getting any better. [interpreter speaking][speakingn

language] >> okay. >> speaking through interpreter: well, as i mentioned before, you could imagine how stressful and how nervous and how tense and high pressure when we were living with a serious mental neighbor. so once we moved out from the last cubical that we lived, the one we live now are not even better. there are so many cockroaches in the area. and the air and the room is very stuffy and it is hard to breathe. we have an air machine, but the reading is almost

always 200 and above. my kids always have issues, coughing, nose bleeding, and this kind of thing we can never stop. so we really need a place we can really call a decent place, to be able for human beings to live. this is the great concern that we really want to speed up and share it with you folks. [interpreter speaking] >> she has 30 seconds. >> okay.[speaking foreign language] >> okay.

>> speaking through interpreter: well, i also want to let you know during the past few years, i have been applying for the affordable housing, but we never got it. i'm not quite sure whether because the number is very scarce and limited. and we would also like to share my feeling is because living in such a situation and environment, it really gives a negative impact for the kids growing up in this area. i hope you would seriously consider giving more funds under measure "c" and understand our terrible situation that we've been facing for those people living in cubicals in chinatown. >> interpreter is finished. >> hello, caller. >> yes. this is david elliot lewis. i wanted to talk about the importance of having dignified and healthy housing.

if you're going to invest money in housing, every unit, whether it is purchased or purpose-built, should have a bathroom and cooking facilities. the cooking facilities and bathroom are both critical for hygiene and for health. asking people to live in congregate facilities with congregate cooking facilities or having them eat out, that doesn't make sense in the age of covid, which will be with us for years. i just think there should be a minimum requirement, both bathrooms and cooking facilities, in anything that you buy or build. david elliot lewis. thank you for your time. >> thank you so much. hello, caller? >> español? >> chinese?

[interpreter speaking][speakingn language] >> okay. >> speaking through interpreter: hello, everyone, my name is yee. i've been living in the chinatown for over 16 years. we are a family of five. [interpreter speaking][speakingn language]

>> okay. >> speaking through interpreter: well, as i told you, i have a family of five. the youngest son always asking me how long i have to wait to have my own bed because all five of us have been living on the same bed for that long. and my mouth keep wide open because i have no answer to my kids. [interpreter speaking][speakingn language] >> okay. >> speaking through interpreter: as i told you, i have been applying for the affordable housing the last 16 years. i'm very disappointed we are not able to get one.

i imagine because the criteria is so high, and that we are not able to qualify. [interpreter speaking][speakingn language] >> okay.[speaking foreign language] >> okay. >> speaking through interpreter: well, i hope folks will understand that we really have been having a serious health issues, that we've been all together in such a small space, 24 hours around the

clock, during shelter in place. every one of us have respiratory problems. and because of the air being very terrible and stuffy, i really would hope and beg that something would happen soon and that we have more funds allocated to the group of people like us so that we would at least have some hope in the future. >> let her know she has 20 seconds remaining. [interpreter speaking][speakingn language] >> okay. >> speaking through interpreter: so i'm really asking that during

our waiting, i'm asking you to allocate more on the measure "c." i also was asking for some kind of financial subsidiaries for the people who have been waiting for getting approved to get into the housing program because this kind of living environment is really creates a terrible negative impact for the kids who grow here. we really have suffered so much in all these years. i hope our requests will be heard and be understood, and we really appreciate your help and support. >> interpreter speaking is finished. >> great, thank you. [please stand by]

>> it's really important that san francisco supports this population that have been widely underserved in our community. [inaudible] >> -- and considering that women are most often the sole or primary caregivers or children is vital that these women get the support that they need while they're navigating and challenges the systems face: mental health, trauma, and housing.

it's important that they need the space and time to work on these things, get back on their feet, of course, with the goal being that they're on track to permanent and stable housing. it's really, really important that we work on keeping the women and children together as a family unit and work on treating them not as individual adults because we see more positive outcomes when families get to grow together. thank you for all the work that you've done, and i implore you to work on housing stabilizations for women and their kids. >> thank you for your call. hello, caller? hello, caller? there's no additional public

comments at this time. >> thank you very much. >> could we just -- last time, there was a bunch -- could we just do it one more time with the interpreters so i can make sure that nobody gets missed? >> okay. so interpreters, can you -- >> oh, sure, oh, sure. [speaking cantonese language] >> interpreter: interpreter speaking finish. >> patty? [speaking spanish language]

[end of translation]. >> thank you so much. so we'll give it 30 seconds, and secretary ho, can you check? >> we do have a caller.

>> hello. my phone cut out. are we on prevention investments? >> no, we're on family housing. >> okay. thank you. >> no further callers. >> okay. great. so i see member friedenbach, you have your hand raised, but member reggio, if you could walk us through the family and the t.a.y. >> okay. let's go with family first, if we may, having just heard somebody -- so many people speak to the families. so again, we're going to start with that column and the

outcomes related. so previously in december, we released for family $4.7 million. released meaning recommended to the board. there was a little bit of bonus pay for that and families. there was $100 million that would be leveraged in this case for mostly construction where we would see mohcd active in the strike team acquisition. the reason we're doing this is we believe there will be a more limited supply of housing that is suitable for families given the size and the level of need there. and the downside is it takes a

little bit longer to develop and acquire. we're looking at mohcd hoping that mohcd would take the funds, issue a [inaudible] to the developer, and this fund would be leveraged, having to be brought in some other sources, as well. leverage is a guess, but guessing it would pull in about 560 k for development. we would be considers in the provider -- would be looking at

services in the -- considering the provider and builders. we're projecting a cost of 9.4 million for the total development of costs and services. if you look all the way to the right, it assumes that ocoh operating commitment for services and commitment, fully increased, up to $13.4 million per year as the number of units

would increase to 450. the funding would allow us to get the buildings. by 2023, if we can get to that 450 over the course of time, and there will be additional commitment over time, which is why we're reserving some funds here. we're going to skip affordable housing for now. if we can go up to t.a.y. -- or do you want me to do everything? >> yeah. we're doing everything for t.a.y. >> okay, so i can go through flexible? >> you can go through everything. >> okay. the community was not recommending with us that we go with rapid rehousing and short-term subsidies but rather

long-term support. initially, we had this at 500 units. we couldn't afford 500 units with subsidies. we couldn't afford that, so we're leaving it at 300. we're very impressed by the folks that were calling, including the homeless population, in our view, folks who were housed three, four, five six in a room with a bathroom down the hall, and that would be at a cost of the

340 k per year subsidy. and if we can go to the top one, the t.a.y., we previously released in december, 5.5 for 20 flex pool and 60 rapid rehousing. we are recommending $90 million released to develop at least 225 units acquired in rehousing and approximately 25 for those with behavioral health needs. we're assuming the cost of about 350 to 400 per unit. and while we're covering the full cost here because -- or doing the math, we're putting in full cost because of the greater challenge we think it

might be for leveraging outside funds for an aging population. nevertheless, we're encouraging the strike team as it goes about its work to look at how to bring that above that 90 number. we're looking at acquisitions, plus goods and services at folks who are in the eraf funded -- any way, i think it's called the artmar. skipping down, operations, specific, if you go down to

line 23, the bridge housing would be 2.3 million. flex, that would be 4.6 and 7.5 over the two years. that's a total for t.a.y. that's being requested of $114 million, and chair, i don't know if you want a motion now -- >> thank you, and we're actually going to -- member nagendra is going to recuse herself for all of this, so if there's a motion for family, we'll take that first. >> i see member friedenbach has her hand raised. >> umm, thank you. okay. am i unmuted?

okay. so i have a motion for family that i had mentioned earlier that, really just concerned about making sure that when we do acquisitions, we don't acquire buildings that are already filled from tenants and we can't make room for new tenants. so my motion is for all family acquisitions, we recommend that housing include some larger units, and in any acquisition, that they be at least two thirds vacant so homeless can move in. >> okay. we have a motion. can we have a second? >> second. >> okay. can she rereal it. >> so my motion is for any

family acquisitions, we recommend that housing include some larger units, and in any acquisition, that they be at least two thirds vacant so homeless can move in. >> okay. we've got a motion and a second. can we call the roll on this? [roll call] >> so the motion passes. so it's -- member friedenbach, did you have -- >> yeah, just one more motion. i'm going to combine these, even though they're not totally connected. i want to make sure that in our line -- or row 32, p.s.h.

operations and services and new acquisitions, that we add, slash, new construction, and that where we mention families, we say families and pregnant people. >> all right. and that is a -- all right. city attorney, laura, can we take that language or do we need a motion? >> so are you just saying insert the policy discussion around these items, you would

want to make sure that it's families and pregnant people? >> correct. >> okay. i have a motion to ensure that -- i guess i'm wondering whether that is, like, are we changing a definition in sort of this? >> we're calling out the need that pregnant people have that are currently underserved by our system, so we want to definitively put that in there as we're moving this forward that pregnant people are considered. >> yeah. and my question is, is that definitional for the ordinance. are we redefining something about this for this bucket? >> we're not redefining. i'm adding it in from a policy perspective. >> okay. >> so do we need it as a

motion? that's the question. >> can i jump in? hi. is it -- could it be possible -- and this is to member friedenbach. could it be possible in the notes to the right that we just specify that we have a lot of things in there, that we say sort of a little more information on what we mean by it? so in there, if we also say understanding that families who are homeless also include woman who are pregnant. >> yeah. member freeden bomb, it sounds like the statement is we want pregnant women to be recognized as families, so member

friedenbach, if you could make a motion far that. >> so we move that pregnant women are recommended as families in our family housing section. >> i'd like to make a friendly amendment, as someone who cannot biologically have a child. can we focus on people like me who cannot have a child? >> she said pregnant people. >> so i cannot be pregnant, so how i'd like this language to be modified is to include pregnant people or individuals who are in the process of -- i don't know how to put this right, but i'm just going to

say it, individuals who are preparing to have a child, so individuals regardless of biology. >> yeah. that sounds great, member haines. >> i would hate for a situation to come later who says, i cannot get pregnant, but i am preparing to have a child, so i would appreciate the language to be inclusive of that. >> thank you, member haines, for that discussion. hello? hello? >> hi. this is deputy city attorney givner. just following up on laura's note earlier, if the committee is proposing to appropriate funds into the bucket that must

support families with children under 18, then the statement must include families who are preparing to have children but do not currently have children under 18 may expand that bucket. i'll look into that further and get back to you, but i want to flag that as potentially a definition. >> well, pregnant people would include people under 18 because zero is zero and above. that is the piece i think member haines is now adding in there, so i -- i mean, i would just say, it's up to you, member friedenbach. >> i'm going to restate the motion. so i'm moving to include pregnant people and those who are preparing to have children

if legally allowable in the family housing section. >> thank you, member friedenbach. is there a second? i think vice chair d'antonio, you were the seconder. >> yeah. i'll second. >> okay. so -- >> i would -- there's obviously not time to get complete clarification from the city attorney, but we're trying to be inclusive, and i appreciate member friedenbach for her willingness to be inclusive there. it still sort of creates an opportunity where those people are unfortunately not going to get it, so i don't want to

beleaguer this point anymore, other than it's my thought that we be a little bit more inclusive in their language to include people who cannot have a biologically unable to have children but are preparing to have a children themselves. >> i don't think we can do that now, but i want to -- [inaudible] >> sure. i just want to be clear where i can. you all know that i'm two spirited and that i would like to have a child. i did have a knee jerk the way that came, and i know that others did, as well. >> thank you. we need to have a vote, so secretary hom, can you please call the roll on this motion? [roll call]

>> yes. so the motion passes, so member reggio, we're now on thai and complete families, so if you or someone else would like to make a motion on the t.a.y. and family pods? >> so i would move we approve the recommendation as presented for both the t.a.y. and the family contemplations. >> and city attorney givner, quickly, do we have to separate that out or can we take it together on both, the vote? >> you can take it together. >> okay. great. thank you. any -- is there a second on the motion? >> i'll second.

>> okay. seconded by member friedenbach. any discussion on the second important, the t.a.y. portion? okay. secretary hom, please take us through roll call.

[roll call] >> okay. the motion is approved. we have some extra time. there's an sfgovtv issue that we have a little later, so we do need -- we don't have that much time because they'll have to stop recording, but we can kind of hopefully at least get one more through, and then, we can check in before we do the next one. >> okay. awesome. so i'm going to turn it over to cynthia for number 7? >> thank you, chair williams. so i want to acknowledge member leadbetter for being the liaison and doing the incredible work that involves working with mohcd and h.s.h., so i'm going to do my best through get through this, and i'm going to go fast.

i just wanted to give some quick overall comments just to contextualize this so i can go faster. so the first three target homeless prevention, eviction prevention, problem [inaudible] we're putting together for a reason is sort of the bulk of the program. this is the work that mohcd and h.s.h. have been doing with their provide network to expand their prevention system and really start to scale to meet that need. and this is focusing on a more

targeted homeless prevention which is building on their eviction prevention and housing stabilization work. there's not many in the first year, but eventually, it will be added. right now, those are added to special populations below, and eventually, it'll have problem solving, as well. the other thing that we have in this proposal is really combining some of these short to medium term rental subsidies. really, we heard loud and clear from communities, from city departments, to make this set of strategies more flexible especially during this list of rad gees to have greater caps and more flexible uses, so that's really what's kind of embedded in these

recommendations and the targets range depending on the household needs. but we heard the calls for the increasing amounts. so i will just say that, and i'll go through them a little bit more in detail. you can see the bulk in the top homelessness prevention and the whole sort of immediate -- short to medium term flexible subsidies, and the description where we thumb from, it was really a mix of the departments and the listening sessions, and you can see that the plexible financial systems and the targeted homelessness prevention are really meant to serve people who may become homelessness and that reaches out to into housing situations to people who don't have a lease and will be at access points in other situations.

[inaudible] and some multiyear, and any unspent funding in these subpopulation categories could then eventually be reallocated if it works out. this is something that really came through the listening sessions, and to exit homelessness and ensure housing stability for adults that would be available at access points and other facilities that serve adults, so training stipends and stuff like that to help people increase their availability and income. then, we have short to medium term rental subsidies for housing stabilitization purports? so we specifically have for justice involved people, we heard this in justice involvement listening sessions, to make sure that this is

allocated here specifically for people who are justice involved to make it more accessible or equitable for justice involved. with regard to justice involved women and their children, this is for housing stabilization. problem solving plus for the shelter in place rehousing. that's in the h.s.h. specifically for the shelter in place that are in the hotels currently. then, you have a series of flexible problem solving, flexible [inaudible] bucket for transition-aged youth, and then, we also have a specific bucket for veterans to layer on

these flexible subsidies along with whatever is available to veterans in the shelter in place, flex pool, other categories of funding. legal and support services to support disability income is here and other workforce strategies to support young adults. there's also direct -- i believe one of these is direct cash. in row 16, there's direct cash transfer. i want to point this out. the flexible subsidy is direct cash transfer to youth and young adults experiencing homeless, so i wanted to call that out, as well. i'm going to stop there and see if there's any questions, discussion, or anything i've missed. >> thank you, member nagendra. we're actually going to go to public comment?

>> members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001 and enter access 164-187-9247, then press pound and pound again. press star, three to enter the queue to speak, and wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. you will have two minutes, and translators, could you also go through your speech, as well? [speaking cantonese language]

>> i'm so sorry. this is member nagendra. i should mention that we have 28 million available before we go into public comment so that we don't lose that, and that is available to go into public housing. >> okay. thank you. so patty, can you also -- >> mm-hmm. sure. [speaking spanish language]

>> great. thank you. i'll take the first caller. >> hi. my name is wesley saber. i am a policy manager for g.l.i.d.e. thank you for this policy recommendation and the thoughtful recommendations that have been put forth today. on behalf of g.l.i.d.e., i strongly urge you to fund these. 69% of our clients are experiencing homelessness or

are marginally housed. the covid-19 pandemic has hit low-income tenants in the bay area especially hard. approximately 140,000 households are behind on rent, owing nearly $500 billion. every day at g.l.i.d.e., we see people making difficult choices, including food and health care. that's why an integrated model is just so important for reducing the total number of homelessness in families.

in a survey conducted by our family, youth, and child care, 93% of respondents reported income losses due to the pandemic. 46% did not have any weekly income, and 71% of the women surveyed said g.l.i.d.e. has helped them avoid hunger, so please support these programs so san francisco can provide comprehensive rental and related assistance for unhoused and other vulnerable populations. thank you. >> thank you. secretary hom, how many public commenters do we have in the queue? >> we have two more. >> okay. two minutes is fine. >> we have one more. one dropped off. hello, caller? >> hi. this is steve culbertson, the director of swords to

plowshares. the secretaries of h.u.d. and the v.a. declared one week ago today that they are going to work on educational backgrounding veteran homelessness again and we are committed to ending veteran homelessness. there are currently as of today 305 veterans on the list in san francisco, and with this fund ing that's committed today, we believe we will be able to end veterans homelessness -- veteran homelessness in san francisco. we want to thank you for your hard work, specifically for julia and cynthia for including this in the section, and we look forward to working with you into the future. thank you.

>> great. there are no additional public comment. >> okay. thank you. i'm going to go back to member nagendra. do you have a motion for prevention? >> i move to vote on the prevention -- i move to vote on the entire block of prevention recommendations. >> thank you. is there a second? >> can i clarify that you're moving to recommend the entire block. >> yes, i recommend the entire block, and we're going to move to recommend the entire block and just vote on them as one block. >> okay. great. thank you. is there a second? >> i'll second. >> second. >> all right. i heard a second from member reggio. any discussion?

i think we've discussed quite a bit, but secretary hom, could you call the roll. [roll call] >> all right. so that motion passes. thank you, everyone, and we are at 12:42. i'm going to check in again with our staff. if we can go to shelter and move through that briefly. laura, mary, are you guys good? can we -- >> yeah. we have a hard stop at one for our translators and for our video, so we may have to pause if it goes long. >> we're trying to get -- i have a hard at 1:00, too, so let's get into it, so member

friedenbach, please. >> hi. thank you, chair williams. so the shelter section, this was the recommendations that used 100% of the shelter funds, so we kind of had to -- in order to get community priorities in there, we had to reduce some of the stuff from the city, and i think we landed as a really good balanced spot after a lot of really positive discussion. but you'll see on that first row is the previously released, and then, that includes our release, december 30, 2020, with the backfill things. so the first thing that's the trailer program that's out in the bayview, out in the water there, and they were able to reanalyze their costs and bring those down, which is great, and

this would continue 120 trailers through -- in an on going way. the next piece is the safe sleeping spots, and that is basically continuing and aligning with the city's response. we reduced it slightly because the safe sleeping village on stannion is supposed to close, but we're talking about increasing the spots in 22-23, and there was a request for navigation operations from the city, and we partially funded that. we've mostly funded that, but shaved some of that. their ask was 16.5, and we

moved it down to 13.5. this was asking them to come up with other sources. prop c doesn't have to be the only funding sources. this is really exciting. we heard a lot about this, about wanting to have a safe parking program in the bayview. this is about 100 slots. we also have this beautiful opportunity for the drop-in shelter, which we heard from the community, to able to convert a hotel to a drop-in center for family. we're trying to partner with parole for folks coming out of jail to have a place to land, and we heard a lot around d.v.

and pregnant people and families, which includes adopted families, anything that -- however people identify as families, about wanting to have some more interventions there? and we ended up doing hotel vouchers, emergency hotel vouchers, to expand to those that were happening in both d.v. and the homeless system so we could have about five hotels per night for folks fleeing domestic violence when the shelters are full and shelters for pregnant people. there were a couple of things that were zeroed out that i kept on there that i want to make we come back and look at when some of these funds goes? we have a congregate living center in the mission. consider moving away from that so there's a little bit more

privacy there. we have folks with more severe behavioral health issues, and it would be wonderful to be able to do that, and there's a hotel where we could do that if we wanted to do that in the future where the owner is really amenable to doing that, and it's a really nice space. so those are two things that are not on there but that i just wanted to mention. we have about 600,000 leftover at the end of next fiscal year but i said it would be freed up to do some other stuff. big things that we want to do in the future in the shelter system as a whole. i'll stop there. >> thank you very much, member friedenbach. did you want to make a motion? >> yeah. >> i'm sorry.

did we need to take public comment? >> oh, yes, we need public comment. secretary hom? >> members of the public who wish to make public comment should call 415-655-0001 and then enter access code 146-187-9247. press pound and pound again. please wait until the system indicated you have been unmuted and then you may begin your comments. you will have two minutes. translators, could you provide your comments. [speaking cantonese language]

[end of translation]. >> interpreter speaking finished. thank you. [speaking spanish language] >> thank you. secretary hom, do we have any

public comment? >> i do not see any public comment. >> okay. so member friedenbach, if you would like to make a motion, the floor is yours. >> yes. i'd like to make a motion that the body approve the shelter recommendations as outlined in the chart. >> okay. is there a second? >> second. >> seconded by -- oh, seconded by member leadbetter. welcome back, member leadbetter. any discussion on the motion? seeing none, secretary hom, do a roll call. >> i see several speakers. >> i think those are from the previous one. >> okay. i'll go ahead and call the roll. [roll call]

>> so the motion passes, and we now have to go back to general public comment, item 1, so is there any general public comment for items not on the agenda? >> i will go ahead and call. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001, access code 146-187-9247, pound, and then pound again. if you have not already done so, press star, three to speak, and the system will indicate when you may begin your comments. you will have two minutes. translators?

>> thank you. [speaking cantonese language] >> interpreter speaking finished. thank you. [speaking spanish language]

>> thank you so much, and this is again for actually item 2, items that are not on the agenda, so is there any public comment for items that are not on the agenda. >> i don't see any public comments. >> okay. thank you, secretary hom, and i just want to affirm with city attorney givner, we are tabling item 9 and item 10. do we need a motion for that. >> madam president, you do not need to take a motion. the chair can decide not to proceed. >> thank you. just making sure.

all right. is there a motion to adjourn? >> can i just take a second to note, i think [inaudible] this is quite a historic day, and i just want to recognize that for many of us, we've lost loved ones, we've worked in that field for a long time, and i just want to take a moment to remember all the lives out there that were touched out there. stay safe, everybody, and thank you for your work. >> thank you so much, member leadbetter. i should pause, as well. this is a very intense day for us. we're going to have the results, i know, of the george floyd trial in the next hour, and just want to say i appreciate all of you guys so much. this is monumental, and i just

want to tell you that i appreciate everyone. we've got five minutes on the clock. is there anything that anyone -- >> so since some items are going to be continued, we're going to try to schedule the follow-up meeting for next week, so just be on the look out for that. it'll be for the behavioral health section only, but -- and the last item. so just -- just to flag that we're going to loop back for that, so be on the look out for a poll or just a meeting invite, so we'll try to get that done asap. >> thank you. and again a big thank you to our interpreters and city attorney givner and for sfgovtv for hanging with us. any other -- >> i've just got to say, this

has been such a long journey for me personally, getting this to the ballot, and this is just a lot of blood, sweat, and tears. everyone here, i just think this is an such an amazing team, and i just want to thank all the brilliance and everything that they bring to the table and all of us who worked on prop c because it was a monumental effort, and, like, it's coming to fruition, and this is going to be so amazing, so big love. >> thank you all. appreciate it, and is there a motion to adjourn? who wants to do the honor? >> so moved, with gratitude to all of you. >> all right. so it's been moved by member reggio.

is there a second? seconded by vice chair d'antonio. let's do a roll call on this, secretary hom. [roll call] >> and we are -- i see member miller, did you have your hand -- oh, no, you're good. so we are now adjourned at 12:57 p.m. big thanks to all of you, and we will be setting up the mental health meeting with you all.

>> hello everyone. i'm san francisco mayor london breed and i'm really happy to join you all today. can we believe that it's been over a year now since we've been living in the new world of the covid-19 pandemic. and i know that i'm smiling right now and it has everything to do with the fact that all of what we've done and everything that we've talked about in the past in terms of where we need

to get to, we're finally getting there. and so today, as a result of the work from our governor and the state, today is the first official day for those who are over the age of 50 can actually get the vaccine. we've announced before, people over the age of 65, emergency workers, restaurant workers, public safety personnel, essential workers, grocery store clerks, muni drivers and others are still eligible. but we are now adding an additional group to the eligibility pool. here in san francisco, our efforts have been really incredible and dr. colfax will talk a little bit more about that. but at least 45% of san franciscans have received their first dose. and over 62% of those over the age of 65 have received their

second dose as well, they're fully vaccinated. this is higher than the national and state average. san francisco is doing an incredible job with vaccinating people and some of you probably have seen some of the reports that suggest san franciscans in general are those who most likely want the vaccine. that's why our efforts have been so successful. and, yes, we know it's been challenging with certain communities and we knew that if we didn't embed equity in our outreach efforts to address this pandemic from day one with testing and resources, but also with the vaccine, then we wouldn't be where we are today. this is why in neighborhoods like the bayviewpoint and other places where we are seeing high

rates of infection. this is why we have set up pop-up and mobile sites and locations in those neighborhoods and have made it easy for people to access vaccines without an appointment because we knew that was going to be critical to getting those who are a little hesitant about getting the vaccine. it would prevent them from doing it. we knew that especially many of our seniors didn't have access to the internet and may not understand how to use a computer and it was important to make it easy for them to access the vaccine. and our partnership with people like annie chung who you will hear from in a moment with the seniors, the large senior population we have in chinatown and the work she's done and the outreach she has made to reach

those seniors. meeting people where they are and putting equity at the forefront of everything we do is why san francisco has been a leader, not just in the number of case rates and the number of deaths in our very dense city, but a leader on rolling out the vaccine and getting people back to the lives that we know and love. but we're still not there. we expect by this weekend we'll be at 50% of san franciscans vaccinated. and, by mid may, we expect to be at 80%. so we're moving right along, but we also have to remind ourselves that this is not over. we are still in a pandemic. we still need to be cautious around others, wearing our mask, socially distanced and

following the health guidelines in a way that's going to keep us safe and keep our numbers down. we have about twenty people in the hospital right now. one of the lowest numbers we've experienced since this pandemic. we should be proud of what we've been able to accomplish in this city and i can't wait until we're at that point where we are able to socialize without masks. where we are able to go back to events. and that time is coming sooner rather than later. next friday is opening day. the san francisco giants opening day. and although they are limited in the number of people that they will be able to allow in the ball park, they work with our department of public health to come up with a plan to keep people who are in the ball park safe as they buy concessions and go to the restrooms and interact with one another. they're limiting the number of people who can come to the ball

park. you have to have proof of a vaccination or proof that you've been tested within a certain time period, but you know what, that's better than not having opening day allow fans at all. so there will be fans, there will be games. we will see this city start to come alive again one day at a time on this beautiful sunny day where the temperature is expected to be over 82 degrees. let's not get too comfortable because i know most of us are going to want to go hang out in our parks and enjoy the outdoors on this beautiful day in san francisco, but we still need to be mindful. we're still in the pandemic, and if we want more days like this, if we want more opportunities to open more things in our city, it still requires each and every one of us to do our part. now this sunday is easter sunday. and, i don't know about you,

but easter is one of my favorite holidays because what it means is that spring is here. and, when i was growing up, we got to wear our hats and new dresses and that's when we got our new outfits. it was always easter sunday. i look forward to coming together with my family and my community. and this year is going to be a little bit different. so i want to ask you all to be very careful. i know that a lot of you may want to have events and gatherings and so one of the things that dr. colfax will talk about or the guidelines in what we suggest you to do in order to safely gather with friends and family because we don't want you to do what you might of typically done. we want you to do what's safe to do so that we can continue to get out of this pandemic. with that, i want to introduce dr. grant colfax. >> thank you.

hi everybody. and thank you, mayor breed for your ongoing leadership in this unprecedented time. i'm delighted today that we're able to make vaccines available for all san franciscans ages 50 and over. with this expansion and eligibility, thousands of san franciscans will be able to get protection from covid, begin to safely interact with vaccinated loved ones, contribute to our collective effort to vaccinate the entire city, to achieve herd immunity, and allow us to more safely open our economy. this expansion and eligibility comes as we are very close to reaching the milestone of 50%

of our adult population having received at least one dose of the vaccine. and, for our residents 65 and over who we know are most at risk for complications, hospitalizations and dying from covid-19, an impressive 82% have received at least one dose and 62% are now fully vaccinated. as a city overall, we are doing much better at slowing the spread of this virus. at the peak of our surge, earlier this year, we were averaging 370 new cases a day. as of last week, that number was down to 33. so i am optimistic for our future, but we also still need to be realistic about where things stand today. by no means are we out of the woods yet and cases in san

francisco have slowly started to climb again. now we're still at a low rate, but just in the last week, we've seen an increase of 20% in our case rate. this is not unexpected. we know as cities re-open including in san francisco, cases gradually go up. the virus is again spreading, so we must be vigilant in wearing masks, social distancing, and following the precautions that we know slows the spread. after all, together we have beaten back three surges. and i know we do not want to see a significant fourth surge here. we are seeing alarming conditions in other parts of the country. as you know, the cdc director and other health care experts are worried. that is why it's so important for us to fully immunize our city. until we reach that

all-important herd immunity, the virus will always have the possibility of surging again. and, of course, variants remain a concern. they are here in the bay area and we must remain vigilant. and though the state's expanded eligibility comes as welcome news and i'm grateful for this, we still don't have enough vaccine supply. our ability to serve all those who are eligible depends on that supply and we don't have enough supply yet. so we are ready to go when those vaccines come. we have the infrastructure in place to vaccinate at least 20,000 san franciscans a day. we are ready to get those vaccine into arms, we just don't have the vaccine. and, if we have sufficient supply to achieve our capacity, we could have over 80% of adults vaccinated with first doses by mid may. now, although the state does

now currently allow for fully vaccinated individuals to interact indoors with fully vaccinated people from other households without masks, the san francisco health department agrees with the cdc around small private indoor social gatherings. once the state allows us, and we're hopeful the state will follow the cdc guidelines very soon because they are based in science and evidence and give people fully vaccinated a chance to engage with others in a way we haven't been able to do so for over a year, we will loosen restrictions so that vaccinated individuals can safely interact indoors and small gatherings unmasked with other household members that are also fully vaccinate or otherwise low risk single households. this is yet another reason to get vaccinated. i have to also include a

reminder in this, that even if you get vaccinated and are fully vaccinated, if you get symptoms or are exposed to somebody with covid-19, please get tested. testing remains a key cornerstone to our ability to slow the spread of the virus. these vaccines are excellent and safe, but they aren't perfect. as we expand eligibility to more san franciscans, our admission is to bring vaccines to those communities most impacted by covid-19. and, therefore, we will continue to prioritize equitable distribution throughout the city. one great example of how we can do this is through our mobile vaccination teams and tomorrow alone, we will be conducting vaccinations at the white house for the blind and at ping u.n. housing site in chinatown. still using our shelter-in-place in town.

today i was at next door shelter where i have a clinic and it was amazing to be able to take patients i was see right over to the mobile vaccine team getting vaccine to arms in realtime. as we gradually move forward in the opening of our city, we will do so carefully. we will make sure that as we loosen restrictions to support businesses, bring back jobs, and restore the vibrancy of the city. we are on the right path, we are making great progress. thank you. keep the mask on. stay strong. get vaccinated when you're eligible and it's your turn and let's hope that vaccine supply to improve. thank you. >> thank you, dr. colfax. and now i want to introduce annie chung with self-help for the elderly.

thank you so much for being here today. >> good morning everyone. thank you, mayor breed. and dr. grant colfax. may i thank you really the department of public health and all your teams that are working on the covid response. we feel really proud to be a community partner because every time when our community is facing challenges whether it's with testing or with the vaccines rolled out, we always feel there's someone at d.p.h. that we can go to and express our concerns and very quickly, i think mayor breed and her team have responded, you know, to our community needs. for example, back in january and february when we found that vaccines are beginning to be available, none of our seniors and none of the community who

don't speak english well could navigate those sign-up sites. when we expressed the need for bilingual materials, your team came up with the flyers. yet the sites were still in english. so they couldn't get the vaccines. so i think as we work closely with the response. and we feel that -- it's really important that we bring the vaccines to the community versus waiting, you know, for those diverse community who don't have the internet nor the language capacity to sign up for a vaccine appointment. so really, thank you, on behalf of all of our seniors for listening and responding to our needs. we work closely with the all-american medical group, the

chinese hospital, the chinese health coalition, the ymca chinatown coalition, and also cdc. so as a group, we can go around and do outreach and also education work on how important it is for our community to be vaccinated. when d.p.h. expanded the qualification considering s.r.o. residents to qualify as congregate housing, we were very happy. so as of tomorrow, you will start to see all the residents in public housing as well as s.r.o. residents in chinatown. we'll get them vaccinated very soon. we work closely with aamg doctors who are all bi-lingual. where the seniors are picking

up their daily meals and right there, the community doctors also give the injections and the vaccinations to our seniors. you can see the big smiles on our seniors' faces despite they were worried they would have some side effect, but because they have their own doctors during the i inoculation and they are excited they are really familiar and comfortable, so that lowered the sense of discomfort and fear. so i think that's a good model, director colfax to bring the vaccines to really where the patients and the clients are and then they get a sense that, you know, the whole city and the whole community is taken care of, their needs. we are thankful for the departments and mayor breed particularly for your team. thank you, really so much. we appreciate the efforts that you're opening up the vaccine to people from 50 years and

older, but we're still concerned that there's 10% to 20% of seniors that are still not vaccinated. so we'll work closely with your staff to bring the vaccines to the homebound seniors as our next project. it's a labor of love, but from our experience in doing the covid response work, we're not short of volunteers. i think there are many volunteers who are willing to be drivers, volunteer doctors and helpers to bring the vaccines to the thousands of homebound seniors and persons with disabilities. so we'll work closely with you on that project. so thank you very much, mayor and dr. colfax. we need our community to be vaccinate. thank you. >> thank you, again, annie, for

being here with us today and also the work that you do to take care of so many seniors and i cannot wait until we're open again so i can go visit them and enjoy the entertainment and food and festivities. i know it's especially hard for some of our seniors living in isolation. so having self-help for the elderly and keep that connection with them is so critical in getting people vaccinated is so important because i know more than anything, they want to come together again. so, with that, thank you all for joining us. and, at this time, we'll take a few questions. >> the reality of people [inaudible] employment right away, what do you think of people who might get frustrated trying to navigate the system? are you concerned for the people who are eligible before this group

[inaudible] now that more people are trying to sign on? >> i'm not concerned because of the efforts that we talked about as far as equity because we have mobile sites. we have people who are going to certain neighborhoods where we see high infection rates who are providing the vaccine to people and so we're taking our lead from community based organizations, but we did this from the very beginning. that's why over 62% of people over the age of 65 in san francisco are vaccinated and over 80% of them have already received their first dose. that's unheard of on a national level. i'm not concerned about reaching those communities. and, keep in mind i don't think we'll ever get to 100% because there are some people who are hesitant and that's why i got the vaccine. i wanted people in the western edition where we had a lot of folks who were saying i'm not going to get the vaccine.

i wanted them to see that i got it and that it's safe and that they should get it too and i know there were a few people including one of my friend's mom and she said i'm only here because you're here, mayor, and i'll go ahead and get it. that's really where we are and what we're going to do. i'm not concerned because of the city's efforts and our work and the prioritizization for certain zip codes and the places where people can drop in and get the vaccine, but, you know, we're going to have more supply on top of that. so it's going to be a lot easier and it just requires people to be a little patient and we're going to get there. >> more than two weeks fully vaccinated. are you feeling any differently? >> i am smiling more, i think. i think, for me, i'm still wearing my mask and doing my part and keeping my distance. and i still -- i think it's now

out of habit, but i'm looking forward to maybe before i probably would have never gone to the giants opening day, but now i'll probably stop by and check it out a little bit. so i'm a little bit more comfortable, i think, going out in public. for the most part, i'm hoping we get more san franciscans vaccinated. >> [inaudible] >> yeah. i just think that it's unfortunate and it's another distraction from getting our kids back in school. i think, you know, when the grown-ups all of a sudden become the story and become the distraction and this case and many other things that have sadly happened at the school board, then it takes away from what's most important and no one person should be more important than protecting and

supporting our kids and getting them back in school. >> [inaudible] >> i'm not prepared to provide any updates as to where we are. i mean, this is a pending lawsuit, so we want to make sure what's appropriate to say and what isn't appropriate to say before we start talking specifically about things that we plan to do. i do know this is one of the reasons, you know, not necessarily a lawsuit, but the lack of movement by the school district is one of the reasons why we're developing this program "summer together" because we can't just wait for them to sit around and get their stuff together. we have kids struggling now. and if you think about it the achievement gap was problematic and it's gotten worse. and you think about what's going to happen to these kids if they don't get the kind of

education they deserve to get within the next couple of years, then we're going to have a problems. i'm focusing on what they're going to do. the kids will have the ability to participate in a program that will help with the learning loss that they i'm sure experienced over the course of this past year during the pandemic >> [inaudible] >> as i said, i am not prepared to talk about that at this time. i want to make sure that i understand the legalities. it just happened yesterday. so before i make any public statements or comments, i want to make sure i understand fully what this could mean and what the city can do to participate or be involved in this in any kind of way. it is a lawsuit that's geared towards specific members and the school district and we know that the school district is its own entity.

we also know that the city stands ready and willing to help to support our kids in any way we possibly can. and, as i said, this is another, you know, unfortunate failure of, you know, a particular individual in this case as it relates to our children. if you really care about kids, then there are things you just will do or will not do to impact their lives and i think it's unfortunate we're at this state of affairs. >> [inaudible] >> well, the appetite, you mean of the people once folks are in a better place of being

vaccinated? well, i know that most people are going to want to come together with people that they may have not been able to come together with before especially those who have elderly parents. i'm hearing a lot about people who had babies and they wanted the babies to meet their grandparents. and so i'm seeing a lot more of that where people are feeling a lot more comfortable and less afraid of possibly having an impact on someone who is more vulnerable. i think that people are going to want to get together more. i want to go see a play or a concert or -- i'll take anything at this point, but i'm going to be more interested in doing things that we haven't been able to do as a result of this pandemic. i'm looking forward to seeing people singing. like, right now, there's a prohibition right now on those who can go out and entertainment, there's some limitations here because we are still in this, but we have to proceed with caution because

the last thing i want to do is come to the people of san francisco and say, yes, we're at 80%, first vaccinations of all san franciscans, but, guess what, we're seeing a surge and i have to shut the city down again. like that's the last thing i want us to do. so i think we're still going to need to proceed with caution. we're going to have to ride this wave and continue to do our very best. >> [inaudible] >> i can't hear you at all. i'm sorry. >> [inaudible] >> the advice to find an appointment for the seniors? we're going to be doing a lot of outreach not just with self-help for the elderly, but we have aging and adult services. a lot of our programs to be able to identify seniors in those hardest hit communities

through outreach and the various programs we fund and offering, you know, rides to seniors and letting them know about the specific locations and being able to walk with the seniors and i'll give you an example. so maxine hall where i got my vaccine in the wherein district location. you don't need maxine hall. so folks that are part of an organization of seniors like people at the senior service center there are people there who offered to walk them or use the vans to drive them around the corner if they want to get their vaccine are canning them every single day and there's just another of organic outreach everett that's happening with a number of agencies that serve senior communities throughout san francisco. >> i was going to ask more about the following [inaudible] >> okay.

anything else? >> [inaudible] >> i can commit to san francisco's what? >> you can commit [inaudible] >> no. i can't commit that. all right. thank you. on february 25, 2020r

declared a local state of emergency related to covid-19, and on may 29, 2020, the mayor's office authorized all commissions to reconvene remotely. this will be our 20 remote hearing. remote hearings require everyone's attention, and, most of all, your patience.

if you are not speaking, please mute your microphone. sfgovtv is streaming and airing this event live. once the building inspection commission hearing concludes, sfgovtv will then begin broadcasting our hearing live. comments or opportunities to speak during the public comment period are available by calling 415-655-0001 and entering access code 187-181-1395. when you hear the item that you want to comment on, press star, three to enter the queue. when your allotted time is reached, i will announce that your time is up and take the

next person queued to speak. best practices are to call from a quiet location, speak slowly and clearly, and state your name. i'd like to take roll at this time. [roll call] >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. first on your agenda is general public comment. at this time, members of the public may address the commission for up to three

minutes. members of the public, this is your opportunity to comment on items not on the agenda. seeing no members of the public wishing to offer public comment, public comment is closed. we are now on item 2, department matters. >> thank you, commissioners. i'd like to remind you that the public conference is open. it's going to occur virtually again june 8 from june 10. this is a great way to get your training underway, basically, your preservation that we track through the office of his

torque preservation. -- historic preservation. that's all i have, commission. thank you. >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. i do have a member of the public wishing to speak. i will ask if it's appropriate at this time. member of the public, you have been unmuted. which item did you wish to speak to? >> hi, there. i wanted to speak in general public comment, but i couldn't get in in time. >> clerk: chair, should we open public comment up to let this comment back in? >> yes. >> thank you. my name is bridget maily. this is one of seven carnegie

branch libraries in san francisco. the building has not been landmarked. i'm requesting today, during your commission comments and questions, you ask for a status update to this designation. the report was completed by me on a pro bono basis, was thorough and complete, and i've heard nothing contrary from department staff. the report followed the layout of the six previous reports. one thing that i regret not including was the detail of the reading room. the six previous reports noted the spatial volume of the reading room was a [inaudible]

this adjacent project will result in a permanent change to the interior aesthetics of the main reading room by blocking light to the south facing windows. i'm asking that when you finally receive the library designation report, that you update the language of the character defining features of the main reading room, not just for this library, but for all carnegie libraries, to read, the spatial reading room and the natural light afforded by the generous windows at the room perimeters. let's amend the carnegie reports so that future projects will not have the same detrimental future impacts. let's not let the same thing happen to the other carnegie libraries. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. okay. members of the public, last

call for general public comment. seeing no additional requests to speak, general public comment is closed, and we can resume our agenda. >> i had a question for rich about the agenda. >> clerk: sure. >> rich, i looked at the agenda for each day, and i noticed there are a lot of important cabinets on the first day. will anybody from the planning department be presented? >> yeah. from what i understand, alison who is our lead from archaeo as well as ceqa is presenting on a mitigation webinar. we're actually just starting to get polled about what everyone else is doing since everyone else tends to do a little bit of their whole thing, but we'll

gather up any of the issues that the staff are leading and follow along. >> yeah. i just wanted to know definitely if our staff would be participating. thank you. >> clerk: okay. if there are no further questions for department staff, we can move onto item 2, department matters or announcements. >> i have no matters or announcements at this time. >> clerk: item 3, consideration of adoption of draft minutes for april 7, 2021. members of the public, this is your time to address minutes. we have no attendees, so public comment is closed. [inaudible] >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. i heard two motions and no seconds. >> second.

>> clerk: thank you. on that motion to adopt the minutes -- [roll call] >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously 7-0, placing us on item 4, commissioner comments and questions. >> so i -- during public comment, we heard that somebody is interested in inquiring about the status of the golden gate valley branch library, so if we could have somebody from the staff provide us with a

status report at our next commission meeting, that would be great. >> sure, we're happy to do that at the next meeting. >> thank you. >> clerk: commissioner pearlman is requesting to speak. >> yes, thank you. i was going to ask the same thing, so i was just going to ask that. thank you. >> clerk: very good. if there are no additional comments from members of the commission, we can move onto your regular calendar for item 2021-002933-pca to simplify restrictions on small businesses. this is a planning code amendment. staff, are you prepared to make your presentation? >> yes. laurel [inaudible] from the mayor's office will do an introduction, and then, i will do the presentation. >> thank you, sheela, and thank

you, commissioners, for having us here today. this is the mayor's building recovery act [inaudible] she asked planning staff and the office of economic and workforce development to come together to explore ways to further cut bureaucracy to cut red tape and [inaudible] and to provide protections and opportunities for entertainment establishments in san francisco. this large piece of legislation aims to achieve all three goals and specifically for the part that catches your purview, it will explore ways that businesses and historic spaces

can get open more expeditiously. i'll leave it to sheela to explain the details. >> thank you, laurel, and i'm going to share -- ta-da. did that work? >> clerk: we can see it, but you might want to make it full screen. >> i can do that. all right. is that look good? >> clerk: great. >> all right. good afternoon, commissioners. i am sheela nickolopoulos, planning department staff. as laurel said, there are three parts of this small business recovery act. one is to cut through bureaucracy by cutting through prop h and other elements by opening a neighborhood business. second, by implementing

flexibility to support short-term recovery and the long-term viability of our neighborhood businesses. this will also support our shared spaces goals, and finally protections and opportunities for businesses our arts. performance and art spaces were some of the first businesses to close at the start of the pandemic and will likely be some of the last to reopen. so i just want to give you some context of some of the precovid challenges that businesses were experiencing before the pandemic hit. so in the past year, with the option of on-line shopping, consumers want to buy locally what they can't buy on-line, and there were costs for retail establishments, including start-up costs and on going costs, particularly in an area

with high cost of living, and we had several city reports that go into detail about these challenges, including the 2008 oewd state of the retail sector, and we had a 2009 study on m.c.s. to highlight some of the changes that we've seen in this past decade, one retail sector has grown much more than any other, and that's dining. this uses data from the north american classification industry. the top four lines of the chart are blue is restaurants. the green is apparel, the dark green is groceries, and the other is personal care. restaurants were especially hit hard in the 2008 recession and again in this last year, during the pandemic.

and then we -- i want to talk about some of our covid aspects that we've seen, as well. in the dramatic way, it's affecting how we work, shop, and socialize, as well. downtown areas are relatively quiet right now. we are also seeing renewed interest in the 15-minute neighborhood. as workers stay home and transit is limited, it's underscoring the need of meeting daily needs more home.

to go into more about the covid impacts for neighborhood patrons, neighborhoods vulnerable to the economic aspects of the pandemic are likely neighborhood based. neighborhoods where they've seen dramatic changes in their patron base are more hit by the impact. some neighborhoods have seen dramatic move out rates. per change of move out data from usps, there's been a 600% increase of move-out rates from chinatown and nob hill. in san francisco overall, we've seen a rise in retail vacancy rates. on-line sales have increased as more people shop at home.

there is an uncertainty about pent-up demand. some speculate that consumers are eager to return to old habits, while others are positive that new shopping factors will remain. there's more than a year's worth of opening and closing have been extremely difficult. their doors were shut from march to november, closed again in december, and still operating at limited capacity. we've had more than 100 restaurants in san francisco close, and there's been a 45% decrease in small business openings per chamber of commerce, from the development department, san francisco and san mateo have lost 120,000 jobs, mostly in hospitality, but also in food service and

drinking. we've had fee deferrals for business season tax registration. the shared spaces has gone from less than 100 to more than 2,000 businesses operating these spaces. there's been an eviction moratorium, and there's been more than $11 million to support workers who have had

covid and faced financial hardships. last summer, the -- following the shelter in place orders and anticipating severe economic impacts of the pandemic, the mayor created the pandemic tax ordinance to identify tangible steps towards financial recovery. one was to focus on redesigning the permit process, extending and supporting the shared spaces program, rethinking the rules that reflect temporary arts, culture and hospitality and entertainment and catalyzing neighborhoods recovery through the arts. in the fall, voters -- 61% of voters approved prop h. i'm sure you're familiar with this, so just to highlight some of the key points, there's a 30-day permit for permitting commercial uses, and

restaurants, limited restaurants, and other uses were principally permitted citywide, which really changed the landscape. now to give you some background, i will dive into the specifics. it's a dense piece of legislation, so i'll move through these one by one. this will expand the prop h guarantees. under prop h, the 30-day processing applied to all ground floor retail in neighborhood commercial zoning, and this will expand the process into all districts, including mixed-use and downtown; including planning, d.b.i., p.u.c., and public works. this ordinance would expand the benefits to more businesses. the 30-day permitting for

processing permits benefits the city by reducing the staff time on principally permitted uses. secondly, to make this 30 days possible, we are removing the 311 notification requirement for mixed use and commercial zoning. this is already in place for neighborhood commercial zoning, and would be expanded. this will help us implement the 30-day. lastly, we're going to make bars, night time entertainment, medical cannabis dispensaries, nonretail service, and chain retail [inaudible]

that 11 but they are still a local enterprise. so dealing with category of further cutting bureaucracy, one is the elimination of the abandonment clause. under the current regulation, if a bar with conditional authorization were to close and the space sits vacant for three years, an incoming bar will have to repeat that process. currently, a restaurant, limited restaurant, or retail applying for a conditional use authorization is required to provide a calculation for other businesses within 300 feet of their area. the difference between a

limited restaurant and a restaurant per planning code definitions might not be clear to an applicant who's collecting the data. so the linear feet calculations don't always represent how one may experience the streetscape, so it may not be a meaningful measurement. an important note to this is that under prop h, restaurants and limited restaurants are principlely permitted in almost all n.c.s for at least the next three years, so this will be in the 23 zoning districts that require n.c.s for bars and all of the n.c.s where formula retail requires a c.u. and then, the last piece on here is that the small business recovery act will reduce the time -- well, actually, so this one -- i want to move forward. so this one, i'd like to kick over to rich to talk through this proposed -- there's

actually a proposed modification, and we had included a recommendation in the memo, and upon further review by staff, we'd like to alter that modification. and rich, do you want to talk through the specifics of what this means and why? >> sorry. sorry. i'm having trouble with my video [inaudible]. yeah, i'm happy to chat about what this means. so when we were first chatting with the mayor's office, we wanted to reduce the minor permit to alter from 20 days to 10 days. in reviewing the timeline for these uses, we recognize that even having some noticing on a 30-day policy is challenging. that is an admin certificate of

appropriateness or minor permit to alter. still has to follow all of the rules that are in article 10 or 11. it just means the staff are conducting an administrative review of the project basically, so right now, we're currently working under a delegation that was adopted in 2019 for basically identifying the scopes of work that qualify for admin review versus full review by the historic preservation commission. since we've had the admin and minor process, and since 2012, we've had a little over 1,000 admin and minor permits to alter. of those 1,000, we've only received three requests for hearing, which is basically when a member of the public asks and challenges a staff definition of the staff review and requests the full h.p.c. to

decide if a full certificate of appropriateness is required or not. >> thank you, and we can certainly circle back to questions about that following the rest of the presentation. so continuing on in our category of enhancing flexibility. so first, prop h permitted outdoor areas in n.c.t.s with specific limitations, they had to be on the ground floor, waiting between 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., operating not in association with a bar use and where associated with i arestaurant or limited restaurant, the outdoor activity area had to include seating, not standing areas for patrons. this ordinance would principally permit rooftop uses with those same provisions where they're applicable. any rooftop operations during this would be subject to all

health, safety, and egress requirements. secondly, this will allow restaurants, not just limited restaurants, to host catering businesses. this will give businesses and entrepreneurs more opportunity to share space and operating costs. this change will offer another path towards recovery. submitting a.d.u.s in the rear of commercial space as allowed for regular dwelling units. so the -- this ordinance will allow a.d.u.s constructed in the rear commercial space a minimum 25 feet depth is maintained facing the commercial street front. it allows an a.d.u. to take space on the ground floor. in most cases, where the commercial space is flush with the sidewalk, this means that residential space can take over any amount of ground floor except the front 25 feet which has to be occupied with an

active use. as a.d.u.s must be an accessory to residential, it would apply only to commercial and not residential. we will also delete the unique definitions -- so this simplification reduces the overall number of separate retail definitions and is intended to decrease the need for change of use permits, particularly for permits that are so similar, like instructal gyms and services.

on the ground floor, this change will not trigger any changes to the permitting of cad boarding gym or instructional service, but it will make trade shop more specific in 1 and c. lastly, we get to our category of supporting arts and culture. so the first one is the -- this actually would permit temporary entertainment resources in outdoor areas, including temporary structures for a maximum of two years. this would provide artists and performers for recovery opportunities. this will create a new planning code section to add a j.a.m. permit to continue with added flexibility. this was implemented under the emergency declaration, and this

program will allow it to continue. there's a proposal for a new c.u. to remove night time entertainment uses for two years. the c.u. for removal provides a stopgap measure during recovery and is supported by the venue coalition. the small business recovery act will also remain planning code requirements to impose certain predetermined conditions in order to impose a c.u. for each project. the planning commission and entertainment commissions would still have the ability to impose any requirement they see fit. in addition, there's a few police code amendments that are also built into this that i'll just highlight quickly. [inaudible] without an entertainment permit. the second is to remove a

restriction on one-time permits where they're currently limited to 12 days in a 12-month period, we're going to remove that restriction and move a limited live performance from 10:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. to give asummary to the equity impact, it's to reduce the need for capital and open impacts. we recognize that simply removing these barriers does not lead to -- does not directly lead to equitable out comes, so we see all of this supported by all of the other support programs to support those who need it, whether it be individual businesses or neighborhoods and communities. for a.d.u.s, we hope this might be able to produce more

affordable housing time that is embedded within neighborhood amenities, and i just want to note there's no prohibition against modifying anything against future desires so we can continue to be responsive to neighborhoods' needs. i do want to note we received letters of support from the san francisco chamber of kmergs, the yerba buena community benefit district, the hayes c.b.d., the castro c.b.d., and the mission c.b.d. thank you. >> clerk: thank you, sheela. that concludes staff presentation. we should open this up for public comment. members of the public that would like -- if you would like to speak to this matter, please press star then three to be

added to the queue. okay. we have one member of the public in the attendee list, but i guess they don't want to speak to this matter, so public comment is closed, and the matter is now before you. and so this is a planning code amendment for your recommendation to the planning commission. we'll then approve and move it to the board of supervisors if it continues that path. >> commissioner pearlman, did you -- >> yes, thank you. am i correct in understanding there is only one item in this entire package that relates to the historic preservation commission? is that correct? >> that is correct. so we gave you the whole show so you could get the full picture. >> well, thank you. i do appreciate that. i do have a question about that

one item. i wonder, did you entertain eliminating [inaudible] for the administrative of the acoa and the mpta. it says we're at a level of less than .3 of 1%. if it's administrative, why do you need any appeal period? i assume that's probably a ceqa thing. it just seems like eliminating that entirely would not be a huge change in the status quo.

>> fully removing the requirement is probably not feasible. we are able to modify it, and i think the current code currently outlines the process for administrative review toest to just ensure that property owners are taking the review of their landmarks according to, you know, the rules that the city has basically developed. so we still will kind of conduct the review of those proposals and sign off on them. we will just avoid the notice process in terms of processing the applications now. >> maybe i didn't understand. i was talking about the appeal. not that we should eliminate them, but the appeal -- if i'm understanding properly, there's

still a ten-day appeal period for an issued acoa or mpcj. this to rich? >> yeah, that's correct. so with any appeal process, there's still a ten-day appeal period. so because it's a discretionary action from the department, basically, it's something that is appealable unless, you know, instituted by statute. so i might defer to the city attorney for additional questions on this, but that's my understanding. >> i'll just chime in. this is liz watty, director of planning. should somebody want to appeal the admin for the minor, it's the same appeal body as the permit itself, so the idea is any member of the public can appeal any building permit, so if someone would want to appeal that individual or the minor, it would likely run

concurrently with the appeals period with the building permit itself, so we're hoping, again, to pinch out any redundancy or notification time that we don't feel is bringing any value to the end product. >> thank you. >> i had a question -- actually, two questions. so let's -- let's say just, for example, there is that legacy business that -- there's a legacy business -- sorry. i'm in my office with the dogs -- and they needed to take a break for a year or two years. are you saying through this new -- or through this revised amendment, they would be able to open again without going through any of the processes

this that they would have to do previously? >> regardless of if it's a legacy or any type of business, if they had shut their doors but they remained in a building, they wouldn't have to go through any sort of process. >> my next question is having access to this information for people who are not native english speakers. will this be available in various languages? >> yes.

>> if a person who is maybe not comfortable speaking english has questions to go through this new process, are there humans available for that person to have a consultation with? >> yes. >> thank you. >> are there any further questions? yes, commissioner nagaswaran. >> hi. i've read through some of these

parts of this program. are some of them a two-year period and other parts permanent? can you please explain? >> what parts are permanent versus what would be temporary? so all -- everything will be permanent except for a few things. in addition, the other one, the two-year one is the limited live performance piece, and that would be limited to two years, as well.

>> thank you. also, how do people find out about these programs? do they go to the city website or how do they find out what it provides? >> the prop h, like, the 30-day program. the city has done quite a bit to advertise that and reach out to associations, for sure, and then, oewd targets specific communities and populations, and they have strong ties with the neighborhood planning groups that can help disseminate changes, as well. >> [inaudible] are saying oh, hey, you're eligible for this. go provide through this way so you can access the 30-daytime line. so i think d.b.i., d.p.h., they're helping us get the word

out to their constituents, as well. >> are there any other comments or questions from the commission? >> president matsuda, i'd like to [inaudible]. >> me, too. >> [inaudible]. >> hi, thanks. the commissioner in me wants to comment on this, a whole lot of things are positive. something that i was happy to hear about was since the prop h location processing [inaudible] that was implemented in january, 75% [inaudible] and 42% are women-owned businesses, and that is -- especially in the retail sector, these changes support our racial and social equity goals, and so i hope that our social equity

team will recommend further updates to further these goals next year. further, i want to acknowledge that a lot of this falls on staff, both the mayor's staff and the planning staff to develop those code changes, and i know how hard it can be. but i just want to say that we as commissioners get it in that as planning staff have had to adopt to covid related changes, including working from home, and i was so impressed and kind of blown away by the volume and breadth of work changes you brought to us at the last hearing. i thank you for your flexibility and hard workup to now and also in the future because these were all really important goals for us as a city to recover. >> thank you very much. >> commissioner foley?

>> you know, for someone who actually operates multiple businesses and works with a bull of small businesses and nonprofits, i think all of this work that you're doing is super great. i think trying to cleanup these things and trying to get these businesses open up in a reasonable time i think kind of helps the fabric of our neighborhoods and our community but also allows the planning staff to do work that's more interesting. i just want to say thank you for all this hard work, and i really appreciate it. >> thank you. any other commissioners that would like to make comments or questions? commissioner so, please use the chat if you would like to make some comments? >> hi. thank you, president matsuda. i'd just like to say a few words about the [inaudible] between the planning staff and oewd. i'm all for streamlining these processes and cutting down the

red tape that we can possibly do to make sure that our small businesses and community minority women-owned businesses can get their feet back on track. it is very important, and i'm really happy that we are progressing to this point where we have a really untilable robust staff to review projects, and we have track records in the past ten years that we prove we can do it, and we are now ready to make things happen faster, and we can allocate to other sources to more needed projects and with the limited resources that we have. so i would like to motion to approve this recommendation -- is it motion to approve, right, or is it discussion only?

>> clerk: the recommendation is motion for approval. >> i so want to motion that. >> second. >> second. >> i think -- do we need, since the modification that was outlined in the resolution is slightly different from what we have brought to you today, so i just want to make sure that we're approving that -- the modification that we had discussed to -- >> i'm sorry, commissioner

foley. did you have additional comments that you wanted to make? >> no, i'm done. >> clerk: okay. very good. if there's nothing further, there's been a motion that's been seconded to approve the modification made by board members and staff. on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously, 7-0, and concludes your ever-so-brief agenda today. thank you for joining us, and apologies for interrupting your afternoon. >> thank you so much for joining us.

who told you we were going to be here? it was supposed to a secret.

i got a call thursday from mayor breed saying "i want to come down." and it literally brought a tear to my eye. before i introduce his honor, willy brown, who i want to tell you a quick story. there was a rumor he was going to run for mayor and i ran into him in north beach and i just put my hand out and i said would you make your first campaign promise and he said "yeah, whatever it is. what do you want?" i said, "i'd like to see water running through lotus fountain." he said, "you got it." and it wasn't an easy project. if they put water in it it was going to actually blow up.

so i'd like to bring a long-time lotus flower supporter. earthquake celebration. and celebrated those brave souls who rebuilt the city from the ashes. so it's my honor to introduce his honor. and wish him an 87th birthday. >> i am, of course, delighted to again be here with all of you for the occasion of memorializing and remembering how difficult it must have been in 1906 for lots of people in san francisco who at the time the clock struck, the city began to fall apart and before it was over within a few hours, the city had fallen apart. but, as usual, if you read

yesterday, you know in the chronicle that, in fact, the city came rolling back. and it always coming rolling back and when lee housekeeper approached me in the middle '90s asking about this fountain there was a time period where absolutely i said, "i don't understand why that fountain isn't already working." i had no idea that fountain hadn't worked in hundreds of years and no one bothered to do anything about it. fortunately, there was a fellow named ed lee. he stepped up. i gave him directions on what i needed to have done and ultimately, it did get done. it got done because many of you were participating in one way or another providing the

inspiration. and, since the time that this fountain began to emit water again, every mayor thereafter has made it his or her responsibility to see that that fountain continues to spray water, that you continue to come here on april 18th, early morning for the express if you were of making sure that san francisco continues to remember what we are all about. and, believe me, it was a very special breed of people who in 1906 actually started the process of the resurrection of san francisco. so it shouldn't surprise you that some many, many years later, more than 100 years later, the word "breed" is still the foundation of our city.

the new mayor is "breed." i don't know if that's her real name. i have no idea, but i do know that it represents everything this city is all about for so many years and i am just delighted, believe me and i was told by lee housekeeper that again we would be celebrating. i actually thought i might be here alone. i remember one time i came here and they said "you've got to speak." and it was like one minute before the phone would ring and low and behold i said not enough time. on this occasion. ladies and gentlemen, the mayor of san francisco and the lady who keeps the fountain going, mayor london breed. >> thank you, mayor willy

brown. we appreciate you being here early this morning. and let me just start by saying i appreciate the city so much and everything you all have done to keep us safe when we had to shut this city down a year ago. today, we commemorate the 1906 earthquake and we also recognize our first responders. we have our fire chief janine nick olson today as well as our police chief bill scott and the person who has been leading during this pandemic, the emergency operation center thank you all so much. dr. colfax didn't get up this early in the morning. when i think about san francisco in the 1906 earthquake and how far we've come, just think about it. 250,000 people were homeless because of the earthquake and the fire. when i think about san

francisco and our resilience, that's what we've been talking about this entire pandemic. we've come so far and we have made magic happen out of tragedy. the 1989 earthquake. many of us were around during that earthquake. maybe not the 1986, the embarcadero was shadowed by a freeway and now it's open and bright and available for all to enjoy and to see. the same with this pandemic with san franciscans. we go through earthquakes. we go through pandemics. we go through things. when the time comes and we need to rise up like the phoenix we are, we stand strong, proud, and together and that's what the people of san francisco did in 1906 when we rebuilt this

city and that's why we come here today to show appreciation to the guardians of the city, to show respect for the people who risk their lives to remember the 250,000 people who were homeless and the thousands of people who lost their lives. at this time, we commemorate the 1906 earthquake and we recognize how amazing and strong we are as a city and so i'm given the signal from martha cohen that we are almost at a minute. are we there, martha? all right. and our sheriff paul miamoto is here. thank you so much, sheriff, for joining us. and, at this time, in recognition for those first responders, for the people we lost during the 1906

earthquake, for the people we lost during this pandemic. let's take a moment of silence.

thank you all so much for joining us in prayer. we're glad you've seen us survive 150 years. thank you again to the fire department and our chief and the police department and the department of public health, our sheriff's department, our first responders, the people who will continue to be the guardians of san francisco, we are coming out of this pandemic and we are coming out stronger than ever. thank you so much. ♪ san francisco open your gate here is your wondering one saying no more

♪♪ ♪ san francisco welcome - >> shop & dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges resident to do their showing up and dining within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services within the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique successful and vibrant so where will you shop & dine in the 49 san francisco owes must of the charm to the unique characterization of each corridor has a distinction permanent our neighbors are the economic engine of the city. >> if we could a afford the lot by these we'll not to have the kind of store in the future the kids will eat from some restaurants chinatown has phobia one of the

best the most unique neighborhood shopping areas of san francisco. >> chinatown is one of the oldest chinatown in the state we need to be able allergies the people and that's the reason chinatown is showing more of the people will the traditional thepg. >> north beach is i know one of the last little italian community. >> one of the last neighborhood that hadn't changed a whole lot and san francisco community so strong and the sense of partnership with businesses as well and i just love north beach

community old school italian comfort and love that is what italians are all about we need people to come here and shop here so we can keep this going not only us but, of course, everything else in the community i think local businesses the small ones and coffee shops are unique in their own way that is the characteristic of the neighborhood i peace officer prefer it is local character you have to support them. >> really notice the port this community we really need to kind of really shop locally and support the communityly live in it is more economic for people to survive here. >> i came down to treasure

island to look for a we've got a long ways to go. ring i just got married and didn't want something on line i've met artists and local business owners they need money to go out and shop this is important to short them i think you get better things. >> definitely supporting the local community always good is it interesting to find things i never knew existed or see that that way. >> i think that is really great that san francisco seize the vails of small business and creates the shop & dine in the 49 to support businesses make people all the residents and visitors realize had cool things are made and produced in san w

sustainable future . >> san francisco streets and puffs make up 25 percent of cities e city's land area more than all the parks combined they're far two wide and have large flight area the pavement to parks is to test the variants by ininexpensive changing did new open spaces the city made up of streets in you think about the potential of having this space for a purpose it is demands for the best for bikes and families to gather. >> through a collaborative effort with the department we the public works and the municipal transportation agency pavement to parks is bringing initiative ideas to our streets. >> so the face of the street is

the core of our program we have in the public right-of-way meaning streets that can have areas perpetrated for something else. >> i'm here with john francis pavement to parks manager and this parklet on van ness street first of all, what is a parklet and part of pavement to parks program basically an expense of the walk in a public realm for people to hang anti nor a urban acceptable space for people to use. >> parklets sponsors have to apply to be considered for the program but they come to us you know saying we want to do this and create a new space on our street it is a community driven program. >> the program goes beyond just parklets vacant lots and other

spaces are converted we're here at playland on 43 this is place is cool with loots things to do and plenty of space to play so we came up with that idea to revitalizations this underutilized yard by going to the community and what they said want to see here we saw that everybody wants to see everything to we want this to be a space for everyone. >> yeah. >> we partnered with the pavement to parks program and so we had the contract for building 236 blot community garden it start with a lot of jacuzzi hammers and bulldozer and now the point we're planting trees and flowers we have basketball

courts there is so much to do here. >> there's a very full program that they simply joy that and meet the community and friends and about be about the lighter side of city people are more engaged not just the customers. >> with the help of community pavement to parks is reimagining the potential of our student streets if you want more information visit them as the pavement to parks or contact pavement to parks at sfgovtv.org

. >> the hon. london breed: we came back from that. you all remember how dark is used to be at the embarcadero, and we took what was a tragedy for our city, and we created something amazing and something beautiful, light and hope, as a result of the darkness, and that's the same thing that we're going to do as a result of this pandemic. you know, we are here in this community, opening yet another site because the people of this community, and in particular, the latino community, they have been the hardest hit by this pandemic not just in san francisco by in the state. so when you look at equity, and you talk about who is most impacted, the latino community, representing over 12% of the population, yet over 40% of those who were diagnosed with covid and over 20% of those who passed away because of covid, these latino task force and a

number of organizations in this community, they met with me, and the stories that i heard were very heartbreaking because we as a city thought with some of our programs, our recovery and resources we were providing to workers and rent relief, we thought it was enough. we thought what we were doing was enough, and we were wrong. we were wrong because the community was on the ground, doing the work, helping and serving people, and they were dealing with serious challenges, and the numbers did not lie. the numbers demonstrated clearly we weren't investing enough. so with the help of our department of public health and h.s.h. and other agencies and the city and supervisor ronen, the supervisor for this district, we came together, and we found the resources to

invest an additional $29 million in this community in particular. [cheers and applause] >> the hon. london breed: and this community stepped up and did even more work than they were doing before. the food hub, and i see roberto here, hernandez, thank you so much for your help with the mission food hub. the latino task force with john and valerie and so many volunteers who were opening up not just testing sites but also these new vaccination sites. this was possible because of this community. this site is possibly because this community came together and made it possible. so when i think about the early dark days of this pandemic, i

can't help but be excited about the future of our city because of the people of our city and how we have looked out and up lifted one another during one of the most challenging times. so we are in a good place, and i know i'm here today because we're kicking off another vaccination center. i know we have to meet people where they are and make it easier to get an appointment necessary, because i know my family. they do not make appointments. they say, where are they supposed to go? no one is going to ask you questions about your immigration status or anything else, and it's easy for you to do it, you're going to do it. and let me tell you, i am so proud of this city. we are still pleading the effort. not only since the beginning of this pandemic have we had some

of the lowest rates of any other country, the lowest infection rates and the lowest death rates, even though we are one of the densest cities in the country, we have been able to vaccinate over 60% of san franciscans who are eligible to be vaccinated. almost 60% of those over the age of 65. think about it. [applause] >> the hon. london breed: even with the challenges, and one of our goals was to do 10,000 vaccinations each day, and we have been meeting and exceeding that even with limited supply. and we are doing that because the latino task force and other organizations have been providing these pop ups to make it easier to get access to this vaccine. the state doesn't even come close to our numbers, and the

national average is even lower. san francisco, we have something to be very, very proud of. we have one of the lowest hospital rates that we've had since the beginning of this pandemic, and we are finally seeing lower numbers since last april in the latino community for the first time since this pandemic began. [applause] >> the hon. london breed: but that means we don't let up. we go harder, we go stronger. we keep moving forward because i want to be able to show up at a press conference and see people without masks eventually. i want to be able to show up to an event and have a good time. i want to hear singing and performances. i want our kids back in school. i want our places of business open and thriving. [applause] >> the hon. london breed: and there is no question that all of you want that, too. so the last thing i want to say

is make sure that you have the hard conversations with your family members because it's so important that they get vaccinated. let me tell you, and let me just be honest, for african americans, for my family members, it's been some hard conversations. i ain't going to get that. i don't know what's in that virus, whatever, whatever, and what i say to them is, what i'm most concerned about, because a lot of the conversations are with a lot of my elderly family members. what i say to them, the chances that you will die if you get the vaccine are slim to none. but if you get covid, the likelihood that you will not be here could seriously be likely because many of my family members have underlying health conditions who are older, and i don't want to lose them. that's why i got the vaccine to

show them, that if i can get it, you can get it, too. so let's have those hard conversations with our family members. i'm not a doctor or medical expert, although, as soon as they ask me a question, i'm texting dr. colfax, asking him, my mama said this, my mama said that. but the point is you can talk to them about the vaccine and convince them about this because what this means is less people dying in our city. that's what this means to me, and that's why we have an obligation to do everything we can to get everyone vaccinated as soon as possible, and we are doing our part to open these local sites to make sure it happens and that it's more efficient than ever. so thank you so much for your work, and thank you all so much for being here today. [applause]

>> the hon. london breed: and at this time, i'd like to introduce the supervisor for this district, supervisor hillary ronen. [applause] >> supervisor ronen: oh, thank you so much, madam mayor, for leading us through the hardest year of our lives. thank you. i -- i -- i don't know about you all, but looking at all of your faces, and the weight of what we've been through together has hit me quite hard. everyone here, from the latino task force, valerie, tracey, john, roberto, so many of you have worked nonstop since day one. i look at mary ellen carroll, the head of our department of emergency management -- can we please give her a hand?

this woman, you have to drag her on a one-day vacation, and if we're lucky, she'll go. we have to take her phone away. dr. colfax, you have been a hero in keeping us safe as much as you can from day one. i look at deon jones, and a nurse who helped created response to the first plague that san francisco survived, the hiv/aids plague and was here from day one to get us through the next plague, and deon, thank you. thank you. the press, you guys have been out here from day one, keeping us informed, putting your lives on the line. i look at all of you, and we all have been doing this from day one, and i have just

profound gratitude for getting us to the way we are today, and where we are today is we're on the way to beating this. dr. colfax and madam mayor, thank you. two in the mission, two in the mission. it's because of places like this -- [applause] >> supervisor ronen: -- that we are on the way to beating this disease. i got my second shop at the capp and 22 location on monday, and this was similar to what the mayor was telling us. i was the only white person there, and i was never so happy to be the only white person anywhere. everyone around me was speaking spanish. they were from the community. in many cases and instances, they were dragged to the site to get vaccine from members of their own community, and i thought to myself, this is the

reason that we are leading the nation in terms of numbers and beating this viert, and so so -- virus, and so thank you from the bottom of my heart. my colleague, supervisor matt haney, who has been informing people how to get the vaccine. thank you for your incredible work doing that. and i just want to say, like the mayor, we are this close to beating it, but it'll only work if we get every single one of us to get this vaccine and do it as soon as we can. thank you. and -- thank you. [applause] >> supervisor ronen: and with that, i want to introduce a hero of mine, the director of the department of public health, dr. grant colfax.

[applause] >> well, good morning. is it still morning? good afternoon, whatever. it is a beautiful day. yes, thank you, and thank you for the kind words. it's wonderful and inspiring to be at this site, and i just want to say, first of all, thank you to the latino task force for showing us and others how to lead the way, for teaching us to do what's right. thank you very much for helping us do this right, for helping us learn how to be humble, respond to community, invest in community, and make the partnership and community leading the way. thank you, mayor breed, for your leadership, and thank you,

supervisor ronen, for your leadership. and i'm going to express my gratitude, again, to the latino task force, and your help in having us develop comprehensive, culturally appropriate outreach, testing, contact tracing. what you determined and helped us establish, the low barrier, the low barrier that every door needs to be the right door. bureaucracy wasn't always the right door at the beginning of this pandemic. i admit that, but we adjusted, and we evolved, and that's why we are here today, having 60% of san franciscans eligible to get the vaccine, with numbers

lower than they've ever been. we are doing relatively well there, especially when compared to other vaccines across the city, where latinos represent only 12% of recipients, again, emphasizing the need for these neighborhood access sites low barrier drop-ins. the city's dashboard shows that for d.p.h. vaccines, the neighborhoods with the largest number of vaccines received are the bayview, the mission, and the excelsior. so on behalf of the whole department, i want to thank you all for your work and the incredible effort of this accessible network that we've developed, this ecosystem.

it hasn't been effort. it's taken some work, some zoom calls, zoom calls, but we were there. i want to thank local 261, supervisor ronen, supervisor haney, our newest assessor, assessor torres. so as you know, vaccine supply remains limited in san francisco, and with the expansion of people being eligible to 16 and above

citywide, it will be challenging, but i'm excited to see people walking in here. this is the right way to do this. 12,000 a day going into arms, a capacity of 20,000. we're ready to go here. we just need more, and we need to stay vigilant. these variants continue to remain a concern. we're watching areas of the country like michigan, where case numbers are going up. be socially distant, wear a mask, and encourage your family to get vaccinated as soon as possible. we will be in this longer, so the sooner we get vaccine into arms, the better we will do and the sooner we can get back to normal, and we can have this press conference with all the masks off. thank you so much. [applause] >> the hon. london breed: thank you, dr. colfax, and i want to

introduce valerie coulier. she really is the mother of this community and just has been doing an incredible job in getting all of these great places set up in the community, so come on up, valerie. >> thank you, mayor, so much. i want to thank the red lightning women power group for singing and opening up for the mayor this morning, and also for sherea for the land acknowledgement. i want to thank our mayor for being with us today. i'm very, very possessive here, territorial, and every single city official. you tell us that you see us and that you see the community's hard work and dedication, and

for that, i appreciate your leadership. i don't think it could have happened under any other mayor, mayor london breed. now, i think i'm going to go into an academy award speech, but i want to thank the latino task for being that, a force. all the organizations involved, all the indigenous haves, and all the committees, what you see here is just a glimpse of all the hard work that the health committee puts in. what you don't see here today is the hard work of 14 other committees, actually 15, if you executive committee, tracey, angela, and gloria. also, absolutely local 21, the laborers union, the latino task force resource hub, on 19 and

alabama, was their home, and now, they've moved here, and guess what? we followed them. in the latino culture, we have a saying, mi casa es su casa, my home is your home. this has not been easy. we stepped on each other's toes a lot in the beginning. today's community vaccine hub, like the one in excelsior, shoutout to excelsior back there in the back, patty. i see you. you can trust us to take care of them with dignity and compassion. thank you to the media for being here.

you are not fake, you are real. you do not always get recognized for being here to tell our story, so thank you for being here. in closing, there was olga from another union. we want to make sure that every single union member is vaccinated. just know that i love you and appreciate you, the latino task force loves you and appreciates you. thank you so much. thank you. [applause] >> the hon. london breed: thank you, valerie, and thank you for recognizing local 87 seiu. olga, thank you for all you do and your members do to take care of this city. all right. that is our press conference. i know that most people who showed up today, when they showed up to get their vaccine, that they might be on camera,

so we apologize for getting all in your business because you know how folks are about their medical business. i know how i am about people in my medical business. thank you, everyone, for all you do today. let's continue to take care of one another and let's continue to do what we have to do so we can takeoff our masks and wave them in the air like we just don't care eventually.

>> good morning. welcome to the rules committee of the san francisco board of supervisors for today, monday, april 19th, '21. i'm joined by supervisor ahsha safai and supervisor chan. >> clerk: members will be participating in the meeting remotely. committee members will attend the meeting and participate in the meeting as if they were physically present. public comment will be available. comments are offered to speak during public comment period by

calling (415) 655-0001. the meeting id is 187 733 9419. then press pound and pound again. when connected, you will hear the meeting discussions but be in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up, best practices are to call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television or radio. you can also submit public comment to me. if you submit public comment by e-mail, it will be forwarded to the supervisors and will be included as part of the official agenda. that includes my initial comments. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, can you please call the

next item? >> clerk: yes. item number one is concerning two members april 27th, 2023, to the sunshine ordinance task force. >> supervisor peskin: okay. colleagues, we have gotten this one on time as both of these seats expire at the end of this month on april 27th. so this is timely. we have two encumbents for two seats, seats 4 and 11. and, with that, why don't we turn it over to the two applicants and if you will briefly address the committee, we've got, as you heard, some thirty-two applicants for nine seats on the next item. so if you can keep it to 2 minutes a piece, that would be great. i want to appreciate your work on the sunshine ordinance task

force. the floor is yours. >> thank you. good morning and thank you to chair peskin, and supervisor mandelman and supervisor chan. thank you for considering my nomination to the northern california chapter of the society of professional journalists to serve the sunshine ordinance taskforce. just about two months ago, i went through this process. i've worked in the tech industry for about a decade. my first job in this space was with india currents, a bay area company which has been a monthly print publication.

a few years ago, i left my job to become a freelance journalist. though i continue to serve on the foundation board and advisory council, being as i am deeply invested in the community publications. in 2015, while add india currents, i met michael hard, the editor of the san francisco examiner and convinced him to take me on as a columnist writing about issues confronting communities of color in san francisco. i'm also the director of programs for sb media services. i'm sorry. there was some noise there.

ethnic media services. a dear friend and mentor and i began to gain tremendous. as part of the gratto i teach a class to columns to san francisco writers of color. my work is situated almost entirely in the city. what do i bring to the sunshine ordinance task force? i bring enthusiasm, dedication and a service to the city. i bring with me a commitment to ensure and protect public access in meetings by the sunshine ordinance, the brown act and the public california records act. and i bring an experience. if the rules committee and the board of supervisors see fit to approve my nomination to the

sunshine ordinance taskforce, thank you for this opportunity. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. why don't we move on to mr. wolf if there are no questions from colleagues. the floor is yours. >> thank you, chair peskin, supervisors chan and mandelman. i appreciate once again this time for reappointment as we had just done a couple of months ago. >> supervisor peskin: right. >> but i won't keep you -- i'll keep it brief because i know you have a full schedule for today. i appreciate your we have a really great team on the task

force now and everything is beginning to get back in motion. >> supervisor peskin: thanks a lot, bruce. like you said, we did just do this a couple of months ago and we too are hitting our pandemic stride on this committee. so thank you for that and thank you for your service. are there any questions from committee members? seeing nobody on the chat which i have now fixed. thank you. are there any members of the public who would like to testify on item number 1. >> clerk: yes. members of the public should call (415) 655-0001. the meeting id is 187 733 9419 then press pound and pound again. press star to speak to lineup. please wait until the system has indicated you have been unmuted and you may begin your

comment. at this time, i believe we have three callers but nobody is in line to speak. actually we have -- there's no one in line to speak. >> supervisor peskin: okay. then public comment is closed, then colleagues, if there's no objection i would like to make a motion to send jaya padmanabhan for seat 4 with a residency waiver and bruce wolfe to seat 11. seeing no names up in the chat. mr. clerk, can you please call the roll on that motion. >> clerk: yes. on that motion [roll call] the motion passes without objection. >> supervisor peskin: okay. next item, please.

>> clerk: next on the agenda is item number two to the cannabis oversight committee. i'd just like to take this opportunity to remind members our applicants today to please turn off your camera and mute your microphone until we call on you to speak. i'm trying to keep your comments to 2 minutes. thank you very much. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, mr. young. colleagues, in the three months that we've been together or so -- three or so months that we've been together on this committee, i don't think we've seen such overwhelming interest in this case, 32 individuals for 9 seats. let me just start with a little bit of house cleaning the

encumbent would like to apply for that seat again. and somehow there was some communication error as to how he did not reapply. but there will be a forthcoming application for that seat which nobody applied for. every encumbent in the existing seat has reapplied of the 32 individual applicants, you will note that some seven of them would require residency waivers if this committee were to forward them. with that, i thought that what might be helpful and, colleagues, if you will indulge me would be for us to actually start by hearing from the

office of cannabis,a, as to where they are in their process in any number of ways ranging from how many permits have been issued, how many equity assets have been approved, thousand things are going with peace agreements and collective bargaining agreements and any other questions we may have. so if that is okay with you supervisors mandelman and chan, i wanted to turn it over for a quick briefing from the office of cannabis as well as to ask them how the cannabis oversight committee function within the office's work has been going and whether it's been helpful and with the utility of the oversight committee has been. with that, i don't know whether we have ms. rodriguez from the office of cannabis or whether we have mr. law or mr. patell. which one of you are here?

>> good morning, chair. this is marcy rodriguez from the office of cannabis. i'm here with my colleagues ray law and cash patell. thank you for having us this morning. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. >> so right now, i think we're just waiting to share our screen or have the authority to do so. once that's done, we can run through a very brief update answering all the questions you just proposed. >> supervisor peskin: that would be great. mr. clerk, could you please give ms. rodriguez. >> please give that to ray law. he's got the presentation. thank you. >> thank you, chair peskin. and thank you, victor, i just got the function. let me share my screen very quickly. all right. >> thank you. and while ray's getting that

situated for everyone, i think there's a square box on the side, ray, to get rid of that. and to your point, chair peskin, thank you for acknowledging the overwhelming interest and i think that shows how effective and supportive the cannabis oversight committee has been to the process for, you know, furthering our -- pardon me, that's the doorbellment for the work we've been doing for the industry t. very briefly, i just wanted to orient all of us here with this slide. we are a young office. we've been around for just about three years. it was 2018 when we opened our equity application process and the actual application came online. there was overwhelming interest, as you know, and their queue formed for our equity applicants.

that q form has gone away. we are still a small, but mighty team of seven. next slide, please. thank you. these are the core functions that we oversee about the cannabis. there are quite a few here, important ones. certainly equity vrgs. e we permit businesses and events. what kind of events, events like land and we're hoping the pilot program can continue in light of covid, of course, we had to put a pause on all of that. we're hoping october will sort of be back to normal. we will make, we enforce, we will ensure that businesses we have online will continue to be compliant. as well as pushing back with the illicit market.

we do our part to limit youth access and exposure. our oversight committee as you know and yule meet cash patell. we do cross department of racial equity work as our office is grounded in equity work and we stood up the first of its kind cannabis grant program where they supported the state and funding that's coming from the state to support equity in the community. next slide, please. so here is to help orient everyone. tiers one through six. tier one. tier three those who have been federally forced against and forced to shut down their businesses. our existing industry. that would be our legacy

operators as well as medical dispensaries. ones who came through our amnesty program. and general applicants is tier six. i'm going to focus on tier one through four for today's presentation. tier one applicants, they have been prioritized. i think was the right one supportive to our community. certainly, we'll take a little time before we're recovered as far as the office of cannabis is concerned, but definitely an important decision to make on behalf of the city. these are individuals who have decided to support our equity commitment and support businesses providing rent-free commercial space or technical assistance in exchange for their own permit. prioritized because they ceased operation in order to get an earlier priority. our existing industry, these

are our medical dispensaries, the operators that have been operating all along as well as our temporary permits, our manufacturers, our distributors, our delivery operators. next slide, please. and, ray. you're on mute, ray. >> sorry. i was on mute. in order to unmute myself i need to get out of the full screen and i will get back in and move on. all right. thank you, mojz. rodriguez. we have a total of 167 applications 30 of them in the bay which means they are very close to permit issuance, but the pandemic has caused pro

visional challenges and secure contractor to do the work. and so, now, we have 14 equity permit issue and the next one system expected to be issued this week and the rest of the applicants are actively engaging with the public parcels across city agency. so for tier two applications which means two of them are actively engaging with building department of sf now. so for tier 3, that's pre-existing and nonconforming operators. operators and free federally enforce mcds.

our office has processed this group of applications, one of which is actively engaging with the permitting process now. so, lastly for tier 4 applications, that includes existing mcds and temporary public holders. for mcds, we have 55 mcds who are currently operating under the permit and as we just mentioned. besides this group, we also have 75 temporary public holders with 145 cannabis activities from the supply chain side which includes cultivation and manufacturing, so on and so forth. so this slide talks about the cannabis oversight committee. so it's been one year since the first meeting was held on december 9th, 2019, because it

took some time for the recoupment and appointment process. these meetings are led by our office, but because our office is a small office, we want to maintain as a mutual party. so we had to identify funding in our budget to contract with a third party vendor, resources development associate to provide administrative support to this body. this body has 16 members including voting and non-voting members. there are nine voting members of 16 and a membership renewal for voting members are happening right now. and this body has built a great momentum in the cost of last year in terms of providing recommendations on different letters including legislative priorities, compassion programs and shared manufacturing. for technical assistance

programs, areas like permit and grant support as well as workforce and business development. this body also provides recommendations on direct grants, eligibility criteria, including ownership stake and ehlingbility determined by individuals, but not businesses. those are the quick highlights of the cannabis oversight committee and before we conclude this meeting, i just also wanted to mention my colleague cash patell is also on this call. >> supervisor peskin: so let me just ask a host of questions that i referenced earlier and thank you, ms. rodriguez and mr. law, for that high-level

update. and i think one of the most important things there is really for all intensive purposes this committee kicked off right before the pandemic and has for all intensive purposes has really only been operational for a year and i say that because while there is as we note to the good vast interest, it's also a very, it's a young office with an even younger oversight committee and the reason i say that is because i would -- i'm always interested in getting new blood and i think my colleagues would agree with that, but it's also such an infant oversight body that that leans a little bit towards encumbency because it's still getting its feet on the ground. how much enforcement staff do

you have. do you have an enforcement backlog? how is that going? >> thank you for that question. i think that's a very important question. as you know we're seven. we have over ten core functions. we are spread pretty thin and enforcement. our focus right now is to ensure we can support our existing industry, those who are permitted and make sure they're compliant because this is a duel licensure. we want to make sure san francisco shines bright. that said, there is an illicit market that is thriving and we need to do what we can to push back on that. as of now, we take a civil position. in other words, we go by way of

our code enforcement. we are not focused on the criminal side wanting to not criminalize this industry. we are short-staffed. we take incidents and calls as they come to us both through 311 and our anonymous process online with our website. we at a later date would love to talk with you if you're interested in hearing more about this. i think it's an important part of the work that we do to ensure that all of this work continues to thrive and support our city. and be a wonderful opportunity for tourism and other things, we want to make sure we have a safe and robust industry here in san francisco. i know, earlier, you talked about l.p.a. and so all businesses come under compliance under article 16. we are in the process probably

by the end of this month to start to process tier 4 which means bringing our medical existing industry through our process, they will be under our per view and they will be required to follow our rules, but there have been some challenges i do believe with respect to the industry. with respect to article 16, everyone is currently compliant. >> supervisor peskin: excellent. thank you. colleagues, are there any questions for the office of cannabis? and i'm pretty sure my chat button's working thanks to billy. seeing none. why don't we go to our 32 applicants in the order they appear on the agenda and if you can hold to to two minutes each, that's going to be over an hour before we get to public comment. so thank you, ms. rodriguez and

mr. law, and seeing neither of my colleagues asking any questions, why don't we start with perry jones. >> hello, can you hear me. >> supervisor peskin: yes, are we can. >> hello, all. i want to thank you for your attention today and thanks to the office of cannabis for all the work that you've been doing. i would like to introduce myself. my name is perry jones. i'm a san francisco native born and raised. i'm also the owner and c.e.o. of caly hills which is an equity ran company. i have a long history of grass root organizations. working around publications for youth at risk and juvenile

justice and reform. i was able to work with juvenile hall by being able to have workshops there. i think i would be a good candidate for this position because i have been able to be outspoken when it comes to equity preservation being impacted by the w.o.d. which is the war on drugs. and also being the face of showing that it can be done and in a right way thanks to the office of cannabis and this initiative to proposition 64. i've been able to learn this program, it's been two years since identify been in equity. a lot of people probably don't believe in it. it is restorative justice at its finest and definitely a good look for our studio. because it started off pretty slow. i know we have some butches

along the road. i myself as a business owner, i can say there are some safeguards that i have in place and i would like to be furthermore apart of that. it's still taboo when it comes to coming up to this platform as post traumatic stress. me, myself personally, i believe i will be an asset to this committee. i have been involved i've also been outspoken when it comes to legislative aspect of it and also present myself in rules and regulations in order to make this right as far as moving in to the industry. i know we talk about the wholistic market and that's the market that i represent. i would like to be a spokesman for that but also disenfranchised community. the mission community which has been marginalized and red lined. so, again, this is an

opportunity and i would give thanks to have this opportunity to be a business owner which i never thought would be possible, but it is possible and i would like to shed that light to those who are in the darkness about this opportunity in making sure that no predatory deals are made. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, mr. jones. we will move on to ali jamalian for seats 8 and 9. >> good morning, chair peskin, supervisor chan, supervisor mandelman. good morning all. i'm going to keep my intro short. i'm the owner and founder of sunset connect, an sf brand that pays ohmage to community. i've been supplying