so i'm happy to go back with the controller's office. for example, one spot says problem solving workforce and those were two different categories completely in the proposal. so i'll circle back and do what i can to contribute. thank you. >> chairman: thank you, member leadbetter. we will now move to item 6. are there any updates from our liaisons on proposed future items? i see. i've got some hands here. so i've got vice chair d'antonio, member reggio and member friedenbach. >> great. thank you so much. as the community liaison, for next month's agenda, i would like to have something on there regarding this work group that

we're going to have around community feedback, our needs assessment, systems model and how the controller's office is laying out a time line and gathering feedback and what we're all putting into that. i don't know what that agenda item is called, but we can come up with something. yeah. so i would like to see that on the agenda. >> chairman: thank you. member reggio and then member miller. >> yes. i'd like to request on the agenda that we have a report from ms. reitain so we can see

what's actually happening tip. i realize we've been making limits as of specificity. but right now, at least i have gotten no feedback on it and i think it would be to the benefit of the committee to hear where we are on that. >> chairman: thank you, member reggio. we'll go to member miller. >> it's kind of a big request and i'm not sure if other members are interested, but i know because we run a few different filter models in particular, los angeles and san francisco the safe sleeping village, the call has come up over and over again and even though it's not my model we just happen to run some of them, i find myself getting in these conversations all the

time or frequently with my supervisors. it's also one of the most, but the supervisor also said a lot of it when we're trying to figure it out, a lot of it has to do with the population and you kind of need a higher staff ratio. so i've heard a lot of different things, but compared to the b.t.c. model, you can provide shelter for more people, but it's also one of the most popular destinations when unsheltered people are asked where they want to go. so i guess what i'm asking you is it's hard to compare apples to oranges, to strawberries. like what are the costs of the different shelter models.

i know i'm not clear about it and we run different models and i would like to understand what each model costs, kind of the popularity of them among our unhoused neighbors or guests of these shelters, you know, what works, what doesn't, because right now it just feels like it's an argument without a lot of context and i would just, i would like at some point to understand that as a group. and so we also understand what works best for what population. so as our board of supervisors and our mayor is making decisions moving forward, it's not just here's a cost without any context. i would like at some point on this agenda, some kind of presentation of from h.s.h. or whoever's appropriate to kind

of show us, compare apples to apples, you know, in a variety of different, you know, formats so we can understand what costs, what each model costs and who tends to frequent them. do certain models require more staffing or not, you know. you get the picture, right. so i would like that. >> thank you member. i'll work on that piece with jessica henry. >> well, i can wait. i just wanted to bring up about that we're trying to schedule a special meeting for next week. we've got responses from a few of you, but it would be great

to get responses from all of you. i know that's a topic that's come up a number of times. there will be a memo from the controller's office that comes out i'll stay in the next 24 hours to sort of brief everyone on that issue and then, you know, we can accept questions by e-mail to make sure we use that time efficiently. we do need to hear from you about when next week, next friday you can have the meeting, if you can make it and then be on the look-out for that posting. >> chairman: thank you so much. we'll go to member friedenbach. >> yeah. i just wanted to second member miller's idea. i really like that. i know when we were doing the shelter stuff, one of the things that we struggled with is that question, was the per person cost, but also just in

addition to that is maybe i feel like there was some ideas on how to bring the cost down, like purchasing the tower trailers instead of renting them and stuff like that, but i never, that information was never given. >> chairman: we lost you member friedenbach. >> because we in an emergency basis and it might be more permanent things that we can do that are cost effective. >> chairman: we lost you for a bit, member friedenbach. >> oh, just more permanent type stuff. like for example purchasing the showers instead of renting them. that kind of thing. >> chairman: thank you. member leadbetter. >> are we still doing suggested agenda items? >> chairman: we are. >> okay. i would love to hear from

d.p.h. as well as some of the community based organizations that are interested in the behavioral health expansion. i know our ask at the last committee was for the process particularly around behavioral health and p.s.h. for d.p.h.'s engagement community processing. i know they are doing that. i want to thank the leadership there for participating in that together with the supportive housing provider's network and i'd just love to hear an update on what's coming out of those groups and also hear from husba because they have made the request for behavioral health in shelters and i think it's all a very similar conversation. how they're going to partner with the city around expanding behavioral health services and what's the strategy there. >> chairman: thank you member.

we'll go to member miller. >> yeah. i've been dying to ask this question for so many meetings because when we talk about increased behavioral health, i'm a big believer in meeting people where they are and as a newly i think there's a shortage of mental health providers where people know them and that breaks down the stigma but what i'm interested to know if we create these models, are there really some colleges or licensed commissions that can fill this need because if there aren't,

then it seems like we, did we also have to look at that part of it? what are we going to do to make sure that we can fulfill the need inside these shelters and also people who really are trying to understand it, i mean, it's much easier to go get an office in the flood building of marin county somewhere and be a therapist. so i just want to make sure we explore those questions and make sure this is the model we want to use and make sure we have a strategy. >> chairman: thank you, member miller. i see member reggio. >> i just wanted to respond to that part. i think it's a really important issue and maybe the other side to are there enough. the question is do we

compensate sufficiently in order to attract and carry people and i would say historically, we absolutely have not and i can't tell you in the last two or three years, but i can tell you for many years before that, we had a constant screen of people leaving the nonprofits to go to the public sector because they were compensated 25%, 30% more. they have pensions, that remains a problem i think and i think it's a problem that the department's and maybe it's not ourselves. i think we kind of talked that before. but the department's need to look at if they want to va nonprofit community with capacity to carry out the things that we say we need to solve homelessness. the contracts have to pay more. >> chairman: thank you, member reggio and we have member andrew. >> yeah. i just quickly want to jump in

and second or third that. as you all know, this is one of my constant refrains. it's great we're building a system of care. i'm not sure it is right to focus on those who are vulnerable and homeless and i don't think we've done a great job over the years of focusing on those who are at risk of being homeless and that often is our direct service providers who are underpaid trying to stay in the city. can't stay in the city and it's just and it's difficult, i say this as an employer, it's very difficult to recruit and to retain staff and so as we continue to develop this system of care thinking about the contracts fully paying for the services and creating in some kind of way, possibly in partnership with the city if maybe our colleges, a pipeline of service providers and direct service providers and clinicians.

member miller, i love what you said. people provide the services, not the dollars and so we use the dollars to hire the people to provide the services and let's not forget that. so i'm really excited to continue this conversation and hopefully it will lead to some strategies and tactics that are lasting and meaningful in a very robust system of care. we have a lot of work ahead of us and we need people to do it. thank you. >> chairman: thank you so much. i see member miller, i know we do need to go to public comment. i'm trying to get us out before 11:30. that's the goal. >> i'll be super quick. i just want to say, not only mental health people, but in general, front line people. they are way under paid and it's a problem and we wonder why the quality of services are bad, but it's reflected in what we pay people who work in shelters and s.r.o.s and everything else and i think that we really as a committee

need to start looking at the pay scale of folks in this field. >> chairman: thank you so much. i definitely want to third, fourth that comment as well. we'll now go to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item please call 4156550001 access code 1464829489 then pound and pound again. 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. spanish interpreter, please. >> can you hear me? okay. [speaking spanish]

. >> clerk: great. thank you. harvey, give me one second. >> yes. thank you. [speaking foreign language]

thank you. i'm done. >> clerk: great. thank you. i'm checking the list now and i do see a hand raised. welcome caller. >> hello. >> hello, caller, you have three minutes. >> thank you. [inaudible] we're an organization, private sector alliance of

organizations in san francisco. we're looking to add more beds in san francisco. i just want to applaud member miller for raising the idea of spending more time to look at the analysis of the relative cost of different solutions and different types of housing. i don't think there's been enough discussion and prioritization on what are the costs if you look at the building on a larger system not just this year, next year, but projects that will take several years in that capacity. so i very much want to see that conversation happen and have a look at which of our dollars gets us help to the most people. thank you. >> chairman: thank you. >> clerk: great. thank you. we do not have any additional callers. dhrm thank you. is there a motion to adjourn? >> so moved. >> chairman: moved by member

andrews, i believe. >> that's correct. >> chairman: is there a second? >> second. >> chairman: seconded by member reggio. can we do a roll call. >> clerk: [roll call] >> chairman: thank you everyone. we are adjourned at 11:32 a.m. have a great day everyone.