their own ways of saying yeah, this is pretty strange what's happening. maybe we need to take stock. and of course, cities know that we -- we have to change, because cities are always on the front lines. and ever more so, of course, throughout human history, no more than 15% lived in cities, and now it's 50% on the way to 70%. cities are where it's happening, where the solutions are being found, for reasons that i'm not sure i fully understand but many of you may understand them are becoming much more responsive to the demands for change and much more creative in finding policy solutions, so thank you for

that. cities account for more than 70% of the greenhouse gas emissions, so the solutions that cities arrive at have leverage of the global response. florence is reminiscent of the one that dropped rain on houston. you know, this is really unusual. what happened with hurricane harvey is happening now with hurricane florence. not only is it -- is it stronger, with much more rain -- moisture contained and a larger storm surge, but it's being held in place. and i mentioned canada because the largest waterfalls in north

america are niagara falls. if you can picture it, think of the full flow of niagara falls for 500 days. that's how many water was dumped in texas and louisiana during five days. in some areas it was a once-in-500-year event. why? well, scientists have long been predicting it, and now, the consensus is emerging that we're messing with the -- the wind currents, the jet streams. the whole climate system is, in the words of a shrine activity 30 years ago, a -- scientist 30 years ago a giant engine for redistributing electricity from the equators to the poles. the last ice age that ended

forms the pattern of ocean currents and wind currents. now the gulfstream is slowing down. but i want to focus on the jet stream that comes across north america, and usually, it moves these storms and other weather systems across the continent and out to the east and north. but now, that -- and that pattern is defined in part by the ratio of temperature at the equator and the poles, particularly the north pole. but because the ice is melting at the north pole, this is the third year in a row when the north pole started melting in the middle of the polar -- cold pole or winter night, no sun -- polar winter night, no sun light, and the polar vortex at the north pole broke in half. any way, the ice is melting,

revealing the dark ocean and the dark land and the areas surrounding the arctic ocean, and so much more of the sun light is absorbed. that's why the temperatures are increasing two to four times more quickly at the north pole than in the tropics. so all these patterns are under pressure to change. the redistribution of heat to the pole isn't following the same pattern. so back to the jet stream. excuse the geekiness of this. i've got to get this out here because it's affecting our lives. we had a training in houston just before that monster happened, and they'd had three once in 1,000 year events in the few years prior to that. but the jet stream is now getting loopier, wavier, and every once in a while, disorganizing, and so it doesn't move these systems out. so harvey stayed there for five

days with its southeastern quadrant over the gulf of mexico, replenishing the water, so it just kept pouring into harris county. that's what they're predicting of florence. it's just staying there. i hope they're wrong, but that's what the pattern is. so many of you have experienced this. i mentioned the c40 city of houston. miami, hello, same kind of thing, and enhanced by the sea level rise. i saw fish in the ocean swimming in the streets on a sunny day. when you see an octopus in a parking garage -- maybe you've seen some of those pictures. it's crazy what's happening. and of course, tokyo was just hit, just barely spared a direct hit, and last week, the

osaka airport was completely shutdown. 6,000 people stranded for 1.5 days. they had to be rescued by boat. again, you can go around the world and just pick out the c40 cities. capetown, almost ran out of water last year because the same heat that's super charging the water cycle and causing these rain bombs is pulling it out of the soil and creating the conditions for fires and 129 million trees here dead in california. a.k.a., kindling. paris, worst flooding in 150 years. so do we have to change? yeah? yeah, we do. now, second question. can we change, that's where the excitement comes in, and that's

where all of the c40 cities are doing such great work. cities show us that we can change, yes, we can change. the leadership in this room today, especially in the absence of the leadership from the white house and the majority in fact congress is an immense source of hope. and how many times i've gone around the world and seen in people's eyes, is there hope? are we going to be able to do this? can we do this? and i always give the examples that are creating with your work -- it's -- it's so significant and so important, and why wouldn't you? your cities are on the line, and you have such talent in your cities and such enthusiasm of -- on the part of people who say look, i can do this. we can do that. here's another idea, and you're

responding and you're giving them the opportunity to demonstrate firsthand how delivering on climate promises is directly in line with many other priorities of an urban agenda. harry truman, former u.s. president said i spend 90% of my time trying to convince people what they ought to be doing in their own time. any ways, but that's what you're doing. what's the fastest growing job in the united states, by the way, according to the bureau of labor statistics? the fastest growing job is solar installer, growing nine times faster than the average job growth. there are five times as many

jobs in solar as in coal. by the way, the famous coal museum in kentucky just put solar panels on its roof and created some jobs that way. second fastest job, wind turbine technician. we're seeing amazing improvements in efficiencies of all kinds in retrofitting buildings, creating jobs that way, as well. so your climate policies are contributing to healthier, more prosperous cities, and you're taking action to put those policies into effect. recent research from c40 and what a great staff you have, anne, and those who have built this organization, a terrific group of women and men. i took a picture, and there weren't -- actually, there weren't any men in the picture except for me. i don't know what's going on

there, but in any case, the research research from c40 cities shows that urban climate policies can generate over 14 million jobs, prevent 1.3 million premature deaths annually by 2030. what's not to like? jobs, better health, growing prosperity? this is what it's all about, and that's why -- among the reasons why c40 cities are on the front lines of the climate fight. all 96 members cities have taken strong and sub-stantive steps to address the climate crisis while also working to provide a better quality of life for your citizens. cities that have signed onto the green and healthy streets declaration, including paris and mexico city and los angeles

have pledged to procure only zero emission buses from 2025, and they've pledged to make a major area of their cities a zero emissions zone by 2030. by the way, two other c40 cities, including shanghai, are already only buying electric buses, and with the urban electric process accelerating around the world, dealing with congestion and local air pollution and helping to solve the climate crisis at the same time, it's a fantastic combination of benefits. cities that have joined c40's net zero carbon building's declaration, including london, tokyo, and new york city have pledged to enact regulations and policies to ensure that all new buildings operate at net

zero emissions by 2030, and that all buildings operate, all buildings become net zero by 2050. cities that have signed onto c40's advancing towards zero waste declaration, including dubai, washington, d.c., and sydney, have pledged to reduce the amount of waste they generate by 15% by 2030, reduce municipal solid waste, disposed to landfill or insinneration -- i've got a heat lamp behind me, by the way, and increase diversion away from landfill and incineration by 70%. the answer to that second

question, can we change? yes. in most geographies, natural energy is cheaper than fossil fuels. we're approaching zero marginal costs for a growing number of hours each day, and the batteries are getting better, more cost effective, more efficient. electric cars and -- and precision and efficiency. we are in the early stages of a sustainability revolution that's powered in part by the new digital tools by the internet of things and machine learning and artificial intelligence and ultrahigh precision tooling and machining. one example from the bay area here, google has the biggest

server farm in the world. they asked their company, a.i. mine to cut down on the energy source with those servers. with no new hardware and increased output amount, they reduced their output 60%. we're seeing it all over the world. this sustainability revolution gives executive teams the ability to manage electrons and atoms and molecules with the same precision the i.t. companies have demonstrated in managing bits of information. it has the magnitude of the industrial revolution with the speed of the digital revolution, and it's -- it's as -- it's more disruptive, will be, that the digital revolution was, and it's giving us the ability to solve this

climate crisis, and the solutions are being implemented in cities. can we change? yes, we can. now, the most important question, can we change? your progress is important and impressive, but of course as you know, we cannot become complacent. we are still not winning. we are gaining on the problem, but the problem is still getting worse at a very rapid rate, so we have much more work to do. a great economist who died about a decade ago said things take longer to happen than you think they will, but then, they happen much faster than they thought you could. that's the inflextion point that we're at right now. we are looking to you, all of us, because cities are where

we're going to find the answer. 193 of the 195 nations signed that agreement. then, syria and nicaragua joined, and all 195 nations in the world became legally committed to go to zero net emissions by 2050. and i know what you're thinking. yes, donald trump made a speech, but under the law, and we are in the u.s., a nation under law, as of today, and we will remain so, under the law, the first day the united states can legally withdraw from the paris agreement happens to be the first day after the next

presidential election. so we have the answer -- and if there is a new president -- for give me for a moment -- a new president -- nothing partisan about prayer, a new president could simply give 30 days notice, and the u.s. is back in. and the u.s. is on track to meet our commitments, any way. china and india are on track to way over achieve their commitments, and we're coming up on the first five year review period where the advances in technology and the sustainability revolution makes it much easier for cities, for nations, for regional governments, to show greater ambition and increase their commitments. this is one of the key features of the paris agreement. it starts at a level that's not nearly sufficient to meet what the laws of physics require, but it has a built in escalator of ambition, and cities are showing the way for how we can

get there. it was a monumental step forward. but only more aggressive, more ambitious, and faster action from cities and all levels of government will take this collective action to the level of efficacy and success that we must achieve. so in closing, let me go back to where i began and say thank you. and i mean it from the bottom of my heart. i'm serious. i wish you could feel the emotion that i have in my heart when i tell people about all the hope that's being generated by the c40 cities. the world is looking to you, the world is building expectations for more. you know that, and you are meeting those expectations. so yes, some people say, okay, they doubt that we have the

requisite political will to succeed. don't let them say that. remind them that political will is itself a renewable resource. thank you, c40, and thank you for having me here. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. thank you very much. >> thank you so much, former vice president al gore for being an inspiration for me and for everyone in this room. what a wonderful evening, i have to say. it's been an honor to be here with all of you today. i go back to all the wonderful jobs that all of you are doing. on behalf of c40 and the global

cabinet of mayors, i'd like to thank you. our global sponsors, especially the city of san francisco for hosting this beautiful event. to everyone that joined us today in person and watching on facebook live, thank you so much. now, everyone, it's time for action. together, we can take the future, the future that we can create. thank you so much.

>> welcome, everybody to be part of the plan. i am the chief government affairs officer of meals on wheels san francisco and cochair of the long-term-care coordinating council of san francisco. [applause] [indiscernible] >> my name is -- [indiscernible] -- i am the director of system change at the independent resource center. i cochair the davie fund coalition. [applause] >> we are so excited that you have all joined us here today. we are so thrilled that you are here in person.

there are hundreds more of us joining via livestream, whether they are at home, hello to you at home, at work, a senior center, all throughout san francisco. >> i will give you a bit of background on the dignity fund coalition and some of the previous events that we have done. so the daily fund coalition is a coalition of nonprofit organizations and community groups and we advocate to seek solutions for issues that face seniors, adults with disabilities, those living with chronic illnesses and veterans. you may have attended a dignity fund coalition event in the past if you remember back in april, we did the largest and most accessible town hall of the town

hall season, and then back in january, when the mayor became mayor, we did a town hall with her to drill down on issues that affect folks with disabilities and seniors. we continue to have conversations around the master plan with today's event. >> and the long-term-care coordinating council is a 40 member advisory body appointed by the mayors of san francisco to coordinate long-term care throughout the city and county. we want to sincerely thank the meta- fund and the foundation for supporting the event today and to all of our panelists for bringing their expertise to this very important conversation. most of all, we really want to thank all of you for participating in the conversation.

we know that there is a better future for all californians if we work on this together. a few housekeeping items. i do think mar just mentioned in the beginning, just so we all know, there is a sl interpretation right here. we do have spanish and chinese system devices over here, as well as assisted delivery -- assistant listening devices to my left. the bathrooms are behind the us glazier to the entrance of where you came in. and marco, they mentioned it was a very important we do have carts. we have volunteer staff that will be walking around. please take the opportunity to fill those out and turn them back into the volunteer staff. we have the honor of introducing our first speaker today, janet spears. many of you know janet. she is the c.e.o. of meta- fund. it was established in 1998. really dedicated to advancing the health and wellness of san francisco's aging population.

janet, under her leadership, has set an audacious vision, which is to really see an inclusive, a connected, and intergenerational, a thriving and healthy san francisco for all. before joining meta- fund, she was chief operating officer at east bay community foundation, and before that, she had a 23 year career at at&t as sales vice president. janet now serves as commissioner of san francisco aging and adult services commission and is also on the board of northern california grounds makers, as well as the university of the pacific, which is her alma mater please help me and join me in welcoming her. [cheers and applause] >> what a great group we have

here today. good afternoon, good afternoon, good afternoon. thank you so much for being here welcome to our beautiful city of san francisco. what a gorgeous day we have here today. it is september, it is a wonderful time to be in the city i am janet spears, as you heard, and for the past three years, i have had the pleasure of leading san francisco's meta- fund. where our mission is to improve the health of san franciscans and particularly the older population and those furthest from access and opportunity. as fiona and anne mentioned, i recently had the pleasure and honor of being appointed to the department of aging and adult services commission where we are , a hand for the department of aging and outlook services. [applause] where we oversee the city's services related to older adults

and adults with disabilities. let me start by saying, i'm so very grateful to the long-term coordinating council and the dignity fund coalition. without them, we would not be here today. please give them a round of applause. [applause] as you heard, we also have a great support of sponsors. thank you very much for the sponsors, meals on wheels, the san francisco -- the scan foundation and meta- fund. thank you for that group of supporters. without their work and support, this event would not have come together. again, thank you for joining us today for this consequential and critical topic that we are facing here in our beautiful state of california. now, listen to this. i will see if you can feel this. california is a state of bounty and beauty.

am i right? all right. estate of a powerful economy, as well, and also a well -- and also well-documented riches. estate of diversity and migration. as a look around this room, that is so true. we are trendsetters in politics, innovation, and in culture. but we are also a state that is rapidly changing. californians are getting older. yes, i will agree, californians are getting older. as a native, i am getting older. for the first time in history, californians and i'll -- older adults will outnumber our youth. in fact, older californians are the fastest-growing demographic. within the next decade, we will double in our population. many of us also don't know that here in san francisco, this is always a shock to my friends,

that one in three of us are over 60 years old by the year 2030. that means that 30% of us will be over the age of 60 by 2030. do you know what that means? we all won't be be eating avocado toast, i guarantee you that. [laughter] many of us are going to be living on a fixed income. we are going to face higher housing costs, we are more likely to live alone than others in other communities, and we are more successful -- susceptible to social isolation and the poor health outcomes that come from that. so simply put, many, many of us will be facing the unique challenges that we are just not prepared for. this is because our systems, services, and infrastructure, be

it housing, transportation, or healthcare, are fragmented, under resourced, or it is just in crisis. we are all heirs to everything that california has to offer. because of this, we need a steadfast plan and then implementation to meet the needs of the state's aging population. at meta- fund, we are inspired and motivated by the work of our partners and those working in this space. since 2017, we have granted out five quite $5 million to older adults serving organizations. and we will continue to invest in these organizations because we want to work with and for older people, not to them, but with and for older people. that is because we believe that aging and ageism is a social

justice and human rights issue. [applause] let me say one thing. one way or another, we all are going to be affected sooner or later, and this is because 14% -- susanne is 76 years old. she has had a job and has worked professionally all of her life. she is a california native, a

bay area native, in fact,. in the seventies, she was divorced and became a single mother, and through that transition, she has been unable to save enough money to prepare for her retirement. additionally, she is still renting to this day. she commutes two hours each way i day, which is not unheard of in the bay area, as she works five days a week. now i'm sure you all can put a name or another story like this together. and the question that comes to all of, and to each of us in this is that what will be her who is going to care for her? will there be an open spot in long-term care, or will her daughter have to mortgage her house or stop working in order to have in-home care or to actually care for her mother.

will she be able to live with independence and dignity, which we all deserve. so this is why we are here today and this is why we must continue to advocate and plan for sustainable infrastructure and policies capable of supporting all of us as we age. the master plan for aging is not just a critical step towards readiness, it is our moral duty. californians, that means all of us deserve an equitable and fair future. thank you. [applause] >> so it is video time. as you know, governor gavin

newsom and mayor london breed were both scheduled to make videos. unfortunately, the governor was signing bills over the last couple of days, and so he has sent a statement of which we will put up on the screen and i will also read about his support for this work that we are doing at this time in this state for all of us. i will try to do his voice. probably not too well. [laughter] >> thank you to the dignity fund coalition for your tireless advocacy for older californians and people with disabilities in my hometown of san francisco. when we talk about california for all, we mean all. other californians and people with disabilities are part of the diversity that makes our state so extraordinary and we must do everything in our power to help them fully live in our

communities. assembling the master plan for aging was one of our first . the golden state is grain. we will be roughly 4 million older californians by 2030 half of which in san francisco will be one third. my plan is it will serve as a blueprint that will guide the state government, local communities, private organizations and philanthropy to build environments that promote healthy aging. thank you all for being here and for developing innovative ways to care for the folks in every stage of life. governor gavin newsom. [applause]

now i am pleased to show you the video for mayor london breed. >> hi, i'm mayor london breed. i want to thank the long-term care coordinating council and the dignity fund coalition for addressing issues that are critical to san francisco communities of older adults and people with disabilities. san francisco has long been a leader in this area, and we hope to lead the way for california. it is incredibly exciting that governor newsom has laid out his bowl division in establishing a state master plan for aging. this plan will allow us to continue leading in areas like housing, transportation, health and wellness, and jobs. earlier this year, we held a first of its kind job fair for older adults and people with disabilities.

we are also making munimobile easier to access and funding for more senior housing. through these initiatives, we are working to ensure that everyone can thrive in our city. i look forward to continuing to work with all of you to make san francisco an even better home for people of all ages and abilities. [applause] >> now i am delighted to introduce today's moderator. he is president and c.e.o. of the scan foundation and a longtime advocate for older californians. i would be remiss if i did not acknowledge that without the integral work on behind -- on behalf of dr. turnoff in the scan foundation, we would it be sitting here today. as many of you know, the scan foundation in collaboration with

west health, have been leading the charge for a master plan for aging in california. in fact, in 2018, they launch the public awareness campaign, we stand with seniors, to highlight the need for a statewide comprehensive master master plan for aging to a good address the growing challenges faced by older adults and their families and caregivers. and now look. we are here today. that is just amazing. thank you, bruce, and all of the people who have worked tirelessly for this effort. please give a hand for dr. bruce turn off. [applause] >> it has been a long time coming. [laughter] good afternoon, everybody. we have all these people on a live stream, let's make a little bit of noise.

there we go. i really appreciate the kind words, but i would say we are also here in downs -- in large part because cities and counties like san francisco have helped lead the way. when i look at the comments leading up to my being up here and then my chance to moderate this discussion, this region has set the way for what it means to change public policy. what does it mean to make things globally? how do we raise money to support a world that we all want? and there's a lot that has happened here in san francisco that will be incredibly meaningful to the statewide effort. i really want to help -- thank the dignity fund coalition in the san francisco long-term-care coordinating council for organizing the event today and really think all of our friends at the meta- fund. janet, you in particular, but the entire team. it is an honor to be here today. i just think that remembering this is about local engagement. i think the state can put together a thoughtful master

plan, but ultimately, it has to work globally. services are delivered locally, this is a block by block district by district exercise, and i think this conversation is incredibly important to the plan 's development and its limitations. the governor has, as you heard to the words that were presented , called for a master plan. that is incredibly bold leadership. we haven't had a governor who has been this committed to aging probably in the history of the state, to be quite frank. we should really seize this opportunity. but how do we make it meaningful a light out one of the things which is so important. we start from the ground up, not just from the top down. what you all think, how we make it heard is incredibly important the # is incredibly important. the leadership at the state has created a little portal for people to put their own ideas in

i would ask every sigel person here today, and those of you on the livestream, when you get home, go to engage and put your best idea in there. shame on us if we don't put our best ideas in there. after you have done that to the degree that you are part of an organization, a church, a temple , your service provider, the place -- the communities that you call home, you should be asking all those folks to weigh in as well. i think if we don't have substantial grounds of input, we will not get the plan that we all want and hope for. i think there's a few principles for me that are really important that i would ask you to hold the state accountable for as they do the work. the first is leadership. leadership is not just state leadership. but also local leadership and the conversation between the two of them. i think we need to a different

-- driven priorities. one of the things that i'm struck by is we live in a world that somehow things older people are over there and it is all about the surface silos, providers silos that we build policy. aging is something we all do. this is not a master plan for the aged, this is a master plan for aging. it is for every californian. rich or poor, regardless of where you live, regardless of your ethnic origin, regardless of where you are, this plan will touch you in your life at some point. whether as an older person today or an older person tomorrow. looking for data is really important. the policy priorities that are set out our data-driven and we can hold the state and local leaders accountable for how they develop policy and how they set investment priorities. i think it needs to be

comprehensive. as a physician, this is not a plan to turn the healthcare dial one more time. i'm all for making the healthcare peace more responsive , more efficient and more person centred, that's incredibly important. people are only patient -- patients when they're sitting in a hospital bed or in the dr. -- or in the doctor's waiting room. we need to see people as people. we're talking about housing, transportation, nutrition, we're were talking about how one enjoys their life. the master plan needs to be comprehensive in that way and it needs to be accountable that at the end of the day, we can actually see that the plan that has been set out is being implemented, it is being revisited, it is being invested in. if we are not getting the results we want, we should change our leadership, just to be clear. this is an opportunity we must seize. everyone of you is accountable for doing that with me.

i really look forward to our discussion. i kind of want to handle it this way. a couple of our speakers money to leave at 3:00 p.m. i will start off with questions to get going, but i am way more interested in your questions. i will ask if you that i will ask for some cards to come up, then i will do a few. we will go back and forth between that. if your questions are better than mine, then we will just do your questions. let me introduce our wonderful speakers. let me start with david choo, the california state assembly member in the 17th district. he served as the assistant speaker and chair of the assembly housing and community development committee. he served as the president of the san francisco board of supervisors. i am pleased also to be adjourned by norman yee,

president of the san francisco board of supervisors. since 2013, he has represented district seven on the san francisco board of supervisors patients january 2019, he has served as the president. i'm pleased to have san francisco board of supervisors is sandra lee fewer. she is representing the first district in san francisco. she is a fourth-generation chinese-american and has been proudly serving -- proudly lived as a resident -- resident in richmond district for over 50 years. serena makes bad and is executive director of the seven cisco department of aging and adult services. she has served as executive director here since 2015. she has more than 30 years of experience working with people with disabilities and older adults. janine parker martin works with leading age. it is an important organization here in california that represents a broad range of community services in the

not-for-profit space. before joining, she served as c.e.o. president and co-owner of the group and she has been active in healthcare for more than 30 years. finally, senator scott weiner joins us from the san mateo and san francisco areas, which he represents in the california state senate. he was elected in 2016 and he focuses extensively on housing, transportation, civil rights, criminal justice reform, clean energy, and alleviating policy. can we give them a round of applause and a welcome? [applause] we would like it louder time, if that's okay. let me start with this. thank you for being here. i am genuinely honored and pleased. i think the fact that we have

this much leadership appear says we are committed to a plan that will really make a difference across the state, but particularly in san francisco, and many of you who have added touch of leadership to this work i really want to welcome and thank you for that. let's begin with the folks who sit at this stage, senator weiner and assemblyman to -- assemblyman to. what are your hopes for the state plan? when he think about what this state needs to do, that would be meaningful to your constituents, i would love to hear your opening thoughts and how, from a spate -- state perspective, how do you hope that these would influence service delivery and planning back to your home? either of you can start. [laughter]

>> thank you for having us it is good to be back. we are also it's -- also so crazy things happen there. it was an interesting the first year with our new governor. i think we are feeling each other out. and the good thing is that governor brown is a fantastic genius of a governor governor in many ways, but there were definitely some disagreements around the safety net funding and governor newsom has been a much more -- we know that when it comes to our older adult population and our neighbors who are living with disabilities, we have in a an in norman's amount of work to do and of course, we absolutely have to sure up and

bolster and expand the program so that people are able to remain in their homes, and so that our workers are being paid a nonpoverty, more than non poverty, but moving away from poverty from the middle class, and we are drawing people into the profession, because it is a profession taking care of some of our most of own abode residence, and we want people to enter that profession and to stay there and grow there. it is in everyone's interest. so set it is -- the basic safety net needs to be shorn up. we have talked about this yesterday. we were on a panel related to ihss. we absolutely have to move towards some sort of social insurance model for long-term care. [applause] this has to happen at the

federal level, but if not at the state level. we have a system where we basically tell people, you are on your own, and if you're going to get the support, you have to send out all your money, go into poverty, and maybe your adult child may have to leave the workforce to take care of you and go into poverty. we are forcing families into poverty, into bankruptcy, it is the craziest, most ridiculous system, and we need a social insurance system so people are paying in like we do with social security and medicare, and then receiving those benefits when they need them. i hope that over time we can move in that direction. [applause] >> first of all, thank you so much for inviting me and inviting us. a someone who has invited half a dozen people to talk about this subject, this is the largest gathering of folks who have

cared about the future of aging and how california ages with dignity and in place that i have been part of. is a testament to how important this issue is. the assembly we often talk about the coming of the silver tsunami the demographics that we know are about to really place enormous pressures on our social safety net, on every social service system that we have because the fact of the matter is, the one thing that all of us have in common is we are all aging. by the year 2030, this statistic is san francisco, about 30% of our city will be over 60. scott mentioned the twaddle of us were on a panel yesterday. i realized as i said that, i will be 60 by the year 2030. [laughter] we have to figure this out. we are, frankly woefully unprepared.

i was very happy to support the development and the movement around the semester plan. because the point of the master plan is to go around the state and understand not just the breath of the experience, but the depth and the diversity of the experiences of aging. part of what i am excited about is the opportunity to address, again, the diversity of the situations that we all find ourselves in, and the san francisco bay area, given how diverse we are, we have a lot to add to this process. regardless of what ethnic community you come from, whether you are gay or straight, a woman or man, whether you have different health experiences or others, we all have something to add to the conversation. aging is such a multifaceted experience. we know from a policy perspective we have to address our housing needs of seniors because the rent is still too

damn high and we have to figure out how everyone ages in place. we have a healthcare situation that we all have to address, unless we have a single pair, with your 2030, which i would support, we have to figure out how all of us have healthcare that is affordable. how we all have long-term care that is affordable, how we can all afford, literally, economically, to live as long as we can. all of these and more are the types of conversations and questions that will be built into the master planning process , but again, let me end by saying this is where it starts when large windfalls represent a very common experience, but are dedicated to the idea that everyone should be able to age with dignity when we come together and we say we need to get this done, this is how we get it done. [applause]

>> i feel really fortunate that we have representatives from the senate assembly here. these folks need your voices to get this work done. they are not going to do this all by themselves. part of seeing a room full of people means that it is over. those of you on the livestream, even though we are still waiting to hear from you, it is important we speak up and keep the conversation going. these folks need our help to get things done. i would like to turn to you for a second, shereen, and ask you to take your magic wand for second and say, if the master plan works well, it could really help improve local services in the following ways, and maybe tie to that, is there a wish list of these things that you hope would be in? >> yeah, i think supervisor fewer had a thing before she came in so i will let her say that if she wants to.

one of the things i think is really important is to really think about advocating for local flexibility. and what we know in san francisco is we are different from every other community in california, in every community in california has its own uniqueness. local flexibility really works. the reason we know that in san francisco is because we have a dignity fund. thanks to the many people in this room, thanks to the san francisco voters, and thanks to the leadership of san francisco. we know that works. we have been able to play around a little bit, i hate to say we're playing with money, we are not. we have been able to really ask the community, what the community wants. we have been able to ask people disabilities and older adults in the community to tells what they need, and we know we really want to advocate for that to be a piece of the master plan on aging. i think the other thing that is

really important here is an integration of services and disability with older adults. we talk about the master plan in aging and the reason it is called that. there are a lot of reasons that those programs should work together and not be sideload. i think that is another thing we would really like to see. and then, of course, we would love to see attentive money go into this plan so we can execute all the things that we want to execute, but then i guess the last thing i want to say is that we are part of a conversation in san francisco that a lot of communities in california are part of. that is thinking about reframing the conversation around aging. with all respect to a sibley member to, because everyone says silver tsunami -- assembly member choo, we have an older

population and that allows us to think about, what can we do around volunteerism? how can people really participate in the workforce? what are other ways we can think about this? what is the social justice piece to this, we and how are we thinking about all the ways we can innovate to serve this population? if that goes into the plan in some way, whatever it looks like , week in san francisco, feel like there will be some victory. [applause] >> let me turn to our supervisors now for a second and kind of get your perspective on -- from a county level, what are some of the gaps you hope that the master plan could help close that would be really, really important. so many programs ride on the shoulders of the city and county , and i think the more specific we can be the better because this is the kind of stuff we can push for in the

plan. >> i defer to the president. [laughter] >> okay. i don't have to wait one or two deck is to be a senior, i am definitely a senior at age 70. these issues are really important to me personally, not just because me being a senior, but what i have dealt with, and many of us that have dealt with older family members before they passed away. i have seen a lot of that with my mother, my father, my aunt, before they passed. a lot of it is based on experience, and many of you in here probably have a similar type of experience where it becomes very personal now. why do we have this? why wasn't this service available? and what happens to these people that are on fixed income, by the

way, they just got kicked out of their home, and they are on social security or s.s.i., and there's a 65 -- they are 65 and they are homeless. these are issues that we grapple with. it is important for us to find solutions for that. helping -- how can you contribute to society for all these decades and we don't take care of them? that is where i am coming from with this. i think there's a lot of issues that i'm thinking about in which this massive plan can be so, so helpful for san francisco because we are struggling to find the solutions. it is not just our older adults or seniors that we are focusing on, this is the same issue that applies to people with disabilities. that is why the prop be, which nobody talks about, it is changing the name of the

population and a condition that actually governs it to reflect that we actually have -- would take care of people with disabilities. it seems like it isn't a big deal, but it is a big deal. that population doesn't feel like they are part of anything, and we need to make sure that we change that. i think we understand the housing problem that we are having in san francisco, and i think it has to be a big part of this massive plan in terms of how we house our seniors, what kind of housing do they need, affordable housing. what happens when these people are on fixed income that are making 50% of a.m.i. when, in san francisco's practice for affordable housing is focusing on people that are at the 50% a.m.i. that is the average median income for the area, which i don't know the exact numbers,

but we are talking probably $60,000 a year or something before you even qualify to apply for affordable housing. we are looking for those types of solutions. wait a minute, a person is making 1200 or 2,000 a month from social security, so how can we get them to qualify for housing? we are trying to build a program around that. we need resources because without the resources, these are the people that will be homeless i think it is real important for us to focus not just on one aspect of the services that they need for older adults, and particularly, as we want them to age in place, but we all know, at least i know, that at some point i can't take care of my older relatives because their needs.

i need somewhere to put them. instead of growing that service in san francisco, we tend to continue to lose out on that service. so what is left, not much, and guess what, you really need it, especially if you are low income you can shift out somewhere and use your support network. we need to address that issue. we need to develop what i call a continuum of care in these neighborhoods so that people, when they get older, as you know , it is really difficult for them to move from one unknown place to another unknown place. so that is something that i am actually trying to address and put a pilot together. we are aggressively pushing for the development of a continuum of care in san francisco.

built over at the laguna honda hospital sight mac. what i want to do is there is a hospital there for seniors and people with disabilities, and so , can we put independent living there? can we have neck to it, another building, or open a building, and assisted-living building so they are in the same neighborhood. we are aggressively doing that, but we don't have new resources. part of the master plan is how do we address these incentives, tax breaks that we do have a little of for affordable housing , and i've talked to assemblyman shu about this. for building assisted-living facilities, we don't have the same tax credits, and that's bizarre to me because you are serving the same people, and yet , it is unaffordable for us to even build these are even look at it. i could go on and on about these

things that the plan could address, but i really appreciate this effort that governor newsom is putting together. thank you for coming here. i'm so glad you are here. you are very dedicated to this issue like we all are. thank you very much. [applause] >> supervisor fewer? >> i would like to echo, thank you for coming today. i'm pleased to hear from our state representatives that we are all on the same page. i'm sandra fewer, in my district his district one, out in the richmond district. the questions that i grapple with around our aging population is very similar to the questions that my husband and i have conversations at night about. i am 62 and my husband is 64. he will ripped -- he has been retired since 2012. we are planning our later years and we have the same questions

that concerns i have for myself that i have for constituents. the largest growing population in my district is the senior population, and i have to say, as a legislator in san francisco , we are woefully unprepared. we have had a 26% reduction in homes. we are trying to save ten of them right now. most of them that serve our senior population are ihss workers, people who do homecare, so people can live in their homes, which has the best outcome for tech service for seniors and disabled folks. they are an aging population and they are currently making six and $50 an hour. in my district, the people who are being displaced into homelessness i basically seniors i meet with them on a regular basis. they tell me, you know, sandra, i retired 30 years ago, so i

know a 50-dollar increase from a landlord might not be a lot to you, but to me, that is food money, and because they cannot keep up with this rental market, they are being rapidly displaced i think the master plan, and with the quote that shereen said , i said, what would i get -- two i like out of this master plan? the main thing is i want a shipload of money. that is what it will take. [laughter]. [applause] make no mistake, we are leading on these issues, asking about senior employment. i'm hoping to build the first senior playground or recreation area because we don't have spaces that we set aside with age-appropriate equipment. the issues that my seniors are grappling with are not also just about food on the table and housing, but it is about social isolation, it is about how your

-- you were seen in society, and it is crazy. everyone at city hall, all these young staffers, basically most of the board of supervisors, i could be there mother. i just find, even being an older person in the politics of san francisco, i feel like the training is ready to feed me a pudding cup at 3:00 p.m. is the 18 font big enough? [laughter] i just think, when we talk about aging, there is a stigma about it. so when supervisor yee and yee and i talk about employment for seniors, people are like, really employment for seniors? yes. because i have so many friends. one, in fact, is retiring, but nose at the age of 65 he must get another job. this is what people need to put fable on -- food on the table. i think we should be looking at our population. who will fill these jobs that we

have here. that younger folks kind of don't want to take? and also, really meet our experience. we should be honoring part-time work. we should be honoring work and paying them at a good rate of pay, for work that is maybe not 40 hours a week in a regular work week, because after all, i think most of us have worked a 40 hour workweek most of our lives. i think when we talk about the support for seniors, yes, it is a safety net, and absolutely i think that we have to prepare for the healthcare. we have to prepare for housing, but really, the social isolation of seniors, i actually, i really feel for my seniors in my neighborhood because, quite frankly, i live in a home -- my husband and i talk about this. i live in a home with a staircase that you have to go up to, and then i have to go to another staircase to my bedroom. last october, i fell on the stairs and broke my arm.

for those of us who thought, maybe our children would take care of us, the harsh reality is , i said to my husband, i said we are on our own. what does that mean? it means that if you are of means, you might be okay, but if you are not, you are in a hell of a lot of trouble. so it is our responsibility. i think as people who have given back -- given their lives to the service, to san francisco, building the livelihood of californians, it is time now that california, the largest economy in the world, that we recognize the need for our aging population. not so that, you know, we feed you, you know, know, it is about how do we live viable lives? how are we interacting with each other? how are we multigenerational?

how are we designing programming for seniors that actually is -- we say it life long learners. so we actually do things communally, suite still have egg group of friends of all ages because we are included in all these other activities. i go to some districts in san francisco and i don't see anyone over 40 and i think, my god, get me out of here. but why is it like that and whom are we building for? i have so many wishes. i know she has a really long list, i have a really long list, too, everyone here does. because the needs are great, and because we have not prepared -- and it is coming, that is why it is going to be very costly. yes, we have a big need, $6 million. if you have asked me on the board, $6 million? i would have thought that was crazy. i think that it is not enough money, not by a longshot.

we will have to invest more and we will have to, as the population grows, we are going to have to keep reinvesting. we will have to be looking at things like a public transportation system and even a discount fare that is discounted enough. we will have to be looking at how can our families, our seniors, who are homeowners, who can no longer make it up and down the stairs. their homes are not functioning for them. how can we transition that into communal living, perhaps, or assisted-living that is turning some of the homes into affordable housing for folks. i think there is a lot of possibilities, but again, i will just say, the main thing i want from the california master plan is a lot of money. [cheers and applause]

>> we are speaking truth to power here about the master plan for aging -- aging, i hope you saw the note is on the livestream, for mature audiences only. i would like to turn to you for a second. you represent a distinct perspective on our panel, and i think about the array of providers and housing environments that your membership represents all in the not-for-profit space. i'm wondering how you hope the master plan -- we have heard a lot about services and housing models from our esteemed colleagues. i'm wondering, if you flip that in your head, what you hope the master plan will deliver to help respond to the challenges that we've laid out? >> that is a great question. thank you for inviting us, and also to be part of such a distinguished panel. this is pretty awesome, whether it is are rated or not, it is pretty awesome. one of the things that i heard

several of you say, particularly the supervisors, is that this is very personal. aging is very, very personal. what happens to me is the most important thing to me, what happens to my siblings and my parents, and my friends, it is very, very personal. where we live, where we get our healthcare services, and who supports us as we age. as i think about the master plan for aging, i am honored to be on the stakeholder advisory committee with dr. turn off and have, at first glance, see the early drafts of some of the thoughts that the department in sacramento is working on. and they are making this personal. so what is it that i want? how do i want to live? how do i want to receive healthcare? how do i want to have workers support me? how much money will i be able to access, so it is person centred

at is fundamental -- as its fundamental goal. if i look around the state, our numbers represent senior affordable housing, home and community-based services, and retirement communities. they are all nonprofits and they all represent older adults and some intergenerational housing, and people with disabilities. as i look at those, i get stopped. i got stopped in the hallway today by a woman who was asking, how could she find out more about housing opportunities in the state, in her particular community? those are the kinds of personal questions that we need to understand on the stakeholder advisory committee so that we can provide the advice to the governor in the master plan for aging, so that when you look at it, you feel that you are represented. we are here in san francisco today, but across the state, the

same conversations are occurring so that we can understand if you are an older adults, if you have children living with you, if you have a disability, if you have a mental health issue, how are we integrating those thoughts into the master plan for aging? it won't be a perfect master plan, but what we do hope is that it creates a roadmap that by the time our assemblyman become 60, when he becomes 60, that he will already have felt the impact of a roadmap that is going to help him, as well as his family members and friends because it is personal. i also want to echo what the senator mentioned a bit ago, and that is the great demand and need for long-term services and

support, and the great demand and need for long-term services and support financing. there has been some great work going on for the past 12 to 18 months in sacramento. it is trying to look at how we might be able to fund, what we might be able to fund, and what is actually funded in a long-term services and support type of benefit. whether it actually evolves into a public benefit, we don't know just yet, but we are working hard to understand what are your needs from the long-term services and support standpoint. what are the kind of things you need to be able to live in an equitable health environment, and in an equitable community so that your needs are addressed. we also hope that through this process, we can continue to open our ears and our minds to be bold and not to believe that just because it has always been

done this way, it has to be done that way in the future. so the plan may take some of you by surprise as it rules out, it may be bolder in some respects, and it may, we hope, we hope it addresses the need, your need so that it is integrated, it is collaborative, and it is in partnership with you, the people who this is going to affect the most in our state and in our county. [applause] >> i have gotten so mcgray questions from the audience and i am super honored and i want to be respectful of senator weiner and assembly member chu who had a prior commitment today. i want to make sure we get as many questions in front of the entire panel before we lose them i love your questions more than i love mine so let's open this up to anybody. maybe we can take one or two. i have a handful of them.

just grab it and go with it if that is okay. benson from potrero hill has asked, how can the master plan address important differences between urban, suburban, in rural california? i think it is a great question. does anyone want to speak on that? >> we heard earlier this week from the department of finance in sacramento. i feel our state representatives have heard these statistics and looked at them previously, but a striking component is the disparities in populations, and age distribution, and workforce in different counties in our state. with the disparities within san francisco county and nevada county are dramatic. i can't address specifically potrero hill, but what i can say

is that at the master plan for aging, we will have to address some needs slightly differently based on the geographic look. whether it is urban or rural, whether it is san francisco, nevada county, san diego -- san diego county, or somewhere else. >> the other area i put a lot of retention is an early education and childcare. we have battled this throughout the state. we all know that the bay area of san francisco is high cost of living and yet, at the state level, the reimbursement rate for our workers and contracts to provide services is the same as if you were mean grass valley or something, and you could place as much in certain places.

there has to be a way in terms of if it is paying for services that it should be differential of high cost of living types of areas. that should be part of the master plan. >> this is a really important issue that supervisor yee raised for reasons it makes no sense whatsoever, and it is not how the federal government does it. there is no sensitivity to cost-of-living in different areas. for example, assembly member chu and i have stoppers that work in our offices in this incredibly important and expensive city. they are on the same salary scale as staffers in district offices in bakersfield. it is the same.

this is true for all states of employments. this is an issue that gets raised a lot. it causes huge stress, particularly in high cost areas, and that is why he becomes hard to even find people to do the work because you were paying them what amounts to a poverty wage even though, and other areas, it might be a living wage this is something that the state has to grapple with. we have not been able to grapple with it because obviously it raises significant cost issues because we are not going to lower the wage and the lower cost areas without raising those salaries in the high cost areas. that is a big cost issue, but i think we have to at some point, really deal with it. >> i will add just a couple points. this issue of disparity and reimbursement is one that we have thought of as legislatures on many fronts. the challenges, the politics in sacramento, i will not sugarcoat this. it is very difficult to move

beyond that because we have many colleagues representing suburban and rural areas who will look at the bay area and say, we are an economically successful region. your region ought to be able to pay for the differential and we come from more economically challenged areas, so we need the money just as well. i don't want anyone to think that this is something we can waiver, but i do want to echo two things. shereen's point about the importance of not a one-size-fits-all. this master plan is going to have to find a way to create different solutions for rural california and urban california. that is just a reality. i do agree with sandy's comments that fundamental to all of this is we are going to have to invest a lot more money in this. i think we need a boatload of money to make this happen, but regardless, we know we are going to have to shift in our budget

how we prioritize it. this is important to us as a society. we're going to have to invest more in our healthcare system and our social service safety net and aging in place services, and economic and workforce development programs. all of these people need to deal with the multifaceted areas. >> one of the things we think is really important in the master plan and we are encouraging the governor and his staff to think about it. to be clear, there is a group that the governor has named as advisors to the master plan. some are actually here in the room. i am one of them. i think it is the idea that entities to be flexible and accountable. the question is, how do we create appropriate kinds of flexibility so we can do things that make sense in urban and rural areas, and accountability for how those things get delivered. what are the outcomes that we all want so that at the end of the day, there is some way of

knowing when we make a policy decision up and down the state that it can be implement it successfully, and we know the different regions. it will make a real difference in a word meant -- in rural area tell me, by show of hands, yes, this includes you on the livestream, so we will be looking for you, how many of you have been an active caregiver and somebody's life? a family member or a close friend? raise your hands. how many of you, leave your hands up, please. it is a lot. it is more than half the room, even with the bright lights on. how many of you have had at least one moment that was incredibly challenging in terms of range of care and putting -- and getting in touch with somebody? i do think there is an idea that

it shouldn't be so hard, and that this is not just a master plan for people who are already poor and qualify for public programs. this is a master plan for all older people, and the caregiving can be just as challenging right above the medicaid line as it is just below the medicaid line. a couple questions with that in mind, and i'd love to hear from everyone on the panel. they say i have lost three caregivers this year alone because we can't afford to live here or even come to work here. maybe maybe building some kind of a threshold. what can we do if there are no caregivers? because the backslide is the emergency room, the hospital bed , which is a place and nobody really wants to be. thoughts about making the program, and it is not just about san francisco, it is emblematic of the challenge up and down the state. how can we make that more robust

>> obviously caregivers need to be paid more, but even if we were to do a 50% increase in what we are paying caregivers, it still wouldn't be enough to afford housing, for the most part. this is an issue that is much broader than the caregiver. we have, you know, because of our antihousing, broken housing policy in california where we rank 49 out of 50 states with homes per capita and he threw my 5 million home deficit at all income levels, we make -- we are the tip of the spirit in san francisco. others are following us over the cliff, but we have gone over, and so we are hollowing out our

working class, folks who are in middle-class, whatever we call it, lower middle class, whatever the title is. those people who are working and who are not making a lot of money, but traditionally have been able to find a place and survive, can no longer find anything. i was talking to someone who is a manager at starbucks in the city. he said there -- they are hemorrhaging workers to other places because they can't afford to live in the city. they live an hour away and then they can't work at a starbucks there. why would they commute into the city? they're all sorts of different jobs and professions that don't pay a lot of money where we are basically saying because of the decisions we made around housing in california, we don't want to, but you know what, these are people we need, and their authors of different categories were our lives will be worse in

many different ways if folks working in retail and folks who are at the supermarket and long-term caregivers and so on and so forth, on -- are unable to live in our community. that is a broader issue we have to tackle. >> i would answer the question similarly. obviously when you have home care workers and long-term care workers and others were being paid poverty wages, that is the big issue in the conversation. we have to get a boatload of money to make sure those individuals get support they need, were given a show of hands , we also know there are many invisible members of that community. everyone who has a relative here taking care of your parents, taking care of your spouse, and thinking about how to support all of you and everyone who is that part of the generation of this workforce, and whether it be directly compensating those individuals are accommodating for how those folks are juggling what are essentially two jobs

are three jobs at once with flexible schedules, with compensation with tax policy, i think that is part of the conversation we need to have, as well. i certainly agree with senator weiner when it comes to housing. what is driving up the cost and makes it difficult for these workers is that they are travelling two or three hours away just to be able to take care of someone in someone's home for barely a minimum wage, so there is an entire housing conversation here. in the last thing i will mention is how many of you are familiar with the concept of aging in place villages? our village community members here, when i was on the board of supervisors, i think this was seven or eight years ago, i worked with a group of folks in district three to provide the first governmental funding to an aging in place model. the idea that there are lots of folks who are aging who don't necessarily need to move to the

assisted living facility or be in a very expensive environment, as long as they have some assistance with the groceries, with every day aaron's, with being able to manage some everyday things, and that is an infrastructure we need to do a much better job in investing in and building in. it is not just more efficient from a budget standpoint, it is, to sandy's point, away of how we address the community building and the social isolation, addressing the fact that we want to have vibrant communities that fully integrate in all of our communities, regardless of age. i'm a big supporter of thinking of how we fund those aging in place ordinances. [applause] >> i also think that we have to professionalize the profession of being a caregiver because they need to days off, they need to be able to take vacations themselves.

having cared for my mother who had lou gehrig's disease, it is emotional, it is full time, it is demanding and it is physical. i think when i talked to the caregivers in san francisco, they tell me about the long hours, they tell me they don't get a day off. if they take a day off, there is no one to care for that person. they also tell me that there a -- there's very little professional development on strategies on how to work with people. and some of the people that they are caring for actually are not the most pleasant people. they are very unhappy people. so when you are in pain and when you feel like your freedom has been taken away -- you will not trust people in the profession of being a caregiver.

then we should actually make steps to professionalize it so that they have the tools and the skills and the knowledge that they need to perform their jobs in a way that they feel they will be successful. >> in addition to in-house support services, the majority of caregivers our family caregivers. there are lots of people who can support family caregivers. whether it is respite programs, family caregiver programs where people are offered resources, and things like social day, adult day health, these things are really important. of the state plan could take those into account, those programs are work -- those programs work. they are limited in terms of the number of people who can access them for a variety of reasons that i won't go into, but it is really important to think about those in think about supporting families to care for people at home as much as they possibly can, and to give them those

resources like respite. they aren't so important. they supervisor viewers said, this is a very emotional, very intimate job, and it takes a lot out of people to do that, yet they want to do it and they want to have the resources to do it. >> i will group a couple questions here because i want to get as many in front of folks before we lose a couple of our speakers. charles from richmond and bob, i will put your questions together here. what can we do to combat ageism in the master plan, and in particular, are there things that we can do to make the experiences and skills of older adults and disabled adults more valued by employers? i think the larger question is about changing the frame of how we think about aging and the role of older people in society. thoughts? >> i think some of the work is we stand with seniors and it has

already begun to reframe the conversation about how we talk about people who are aging in our community. as we are sensitive to certain words and new -- we develop the master plan for aging, we will also integrate the reframing of the conversation, how do we educate caregivers, how do we talk about older adults in our communities, how do we make plans for those older adults collaborating and working together? the conversation has begun to change and there is some great work that can serve as a framework for the master plan for aging that has done some analysis on what sensitivities older adults have in certain language, how we respond ourselves to certain kinds of language, and also how it can improve our social well-being if

we are treated and talked to and talked about in language that is supportive and not condescending or disruptive. we will integrate those elements , but it is important to hear from all of you what are some of the trigger points for you as an individual, because there will be themes that we will hear, even though there has been some work that precedes this particular effort. >> i think supervisor viewers spoke to this already, but there is something, on the board of supervisors that has been supportive of in trying to get our older adults back into the workforce, whether they need to get back, or whether they want to get back, people do it for different reasons.

the fact is, the doors are not very wide open for them and we are really trying to do things in the regular market, but also even having our own city government. we have to be aggressive about that. you don't necessarily want to work full-time and full time and some of them can't work full time. but for the extensive knowledge base that they have, they are so valuable when they are working with you. they can mentor people, they can do all kinds of things. we need to do better. the job market is so tight and i

said, well, have you ever thought about reaching out to seniors who can do some of this work? they have been more -- they would be more than happy. she said my goodness, i never thought of that. i tried to hook her up with the department to see how we could do this. at the master plan, we should really have a strategy on how we can reach two private companies to encourage them to show them the value that we have as seniors. [applause] >> we are doing a lot of work in san francisco on reframing aging , in one of the things that i'm really excited about is the fund and the department of aging and adult services who are about to launch a big campaign in san francisco. i want all of you to look at that. i think we launched on october 14th. we are really trying to change

the messaging about aging in san francisco. we have a lot of other things going on, too. one of the things that we have going on is what's called the work matters collaborative which is something that really was the brainchild of the community living campaign and that's -- [applause] that is an effort with community partners, with a couple of different departments, office of economic and workforce development, the department of aging, human services, to really figure out a way to health employers hire people with disabilities and older adults. we have this workforce that is ready. we were talking to people who might want part-time jobs, and that work matters collaborative is thinking about how to do that and how to get to employers and make sure that san francisco is friendly for older workers and workers with disabilities. that is really exciting work

going on. the other thing we are doing in san francisco is we have an aging and disability friendly work group. many of you were involved on we put together. we are now carrying that out, and that is about making sure that all the planning and san francisco, whether it is the built environment, whether it is transportation, all of the things that we all use and need are planned with an age and disability friendly lens. if it works for anyone in san francisco, it should work for an older person, it should work for a person with disabilities. we have a lot of physical challenges here so that is really important. the last thing i want to say is in addition to ageism, we need to think about tackling ableism. there is a real big intersection -- [applause] -- between ableism and ageism. they are two that still happen. in san francisco, we have a training for seniors and disability action to train healthcare providers, to train

staff, to train community providers on what he feels like for a person with disabilities to engage in society in san francisco and how we, as people who don't have a disability or have a different disability, can be really sensitive to that and think about that. i think it is not just ageism. ableism is a huge conversation that we all need to have across the state. [applause] >> i just want to add one thing, also. is also important for us to really stand up for ourselves a little. i think -- what i'm thinking about is one incident where we had a disabled population come to a meeting about the bicycle coalition wanting to extend healthy saturdays, they called it because you could walk or ride your bike and close of traffic. but the main thing that the community said was we are

insulted that you call that healthy saturday. it is implying that those of us that are in wheelchairs, or elderly, they can't walk or bike , are not healthy. i think it was standing up to say, i am offended by that. if we want to have a conversation about extending your healthy saturday, you will have to rename it because that is insulting to me, and i actually think, it is okay to call people on it. it's okay for people to minimize -- they minimize who you are in society. i think it is okay to stand up for yourself and say, wait a minute, i want to correct to you i think, i myself have to catch myself, too. i just think we are not sensitive enough to it and the

bicycle coalition probably healthy saturdays, we are all in to be healthy, but how we define those things the symptoms offensive to other people, and especially people, some are disabled and need help in the community. it is okay for us to stand up and define it for themselves. everyone i think can see it as a teaching moment. [applause] >> before we lose senator weiner in a second, i have a couple questions here that are related and are very state oriented, so i will put them together. will the master plan integrate access to healthcare, mental health, and all the other kinds of services and link to that, can we think about better integrating or organizing or connecting state agencies and smaller service providers in ways that could be more efficient, maybe put money to work more effectively? i think the larger question is leaders in the state legislature

, how do we break down the silos that have been built over 50 years warehousing is here, transportation is there , housing is here. let me hear your thoughts. >> clearly that should be part of it. i cannot predict with the process will yield, but there is a growing awareness that it is all integrated. is a mentioned before with broader housing that was created in california, it affects a lot of things but directly plays into housing and security, as well as not having enough of our workforce to help care for people. of course, when people like access to healthcare, healthcare and housing and so many ways are the foundation so it is all linked. at the same time, if this master

plan process can solve the entire housing process, that is awesome, more power to you. we can't, this process can solve all of california to do problems that also impact seniors. we have to absolutely acknowledge that these are all linked and try to move the dial on them. >> it is easy for policymakers to focus on silos. you think of folks who are healthcare experts or housing experts or workforce exports or social safety experts, but that doesn't get merged together. we know that every person is a whole person and has the complexed needs and challenges and visions about who they are. in sacramento, we are trying to do what we can to break down some of these silos or give an example around healthcare and housing. imagine a chronically homeless

medi-cal person on the street. someone who is homeless who is a senior who is part of our healthcare safety net system. that person, as we know, because they are on housed, because they are exposed to the elements, separated from friends, not being told exactly want to take medication, not been connected with providers, they are cycling in and out of emergency rooms and potentially mental health centers and other social service centers and cost us typically 60 or $70,000 a year. if that same person had a supportive housing roof over their head with a caseworker, with a home, it would cost us about $20,000 a year. and yet those two areas are put into silos. we think of them in different ways. a couple of years ago, the governor wrote a bill to essentially say, let's look at this category of individuals and

think about breaking down the silos between those silos. and then you start to move forward. unfortunately, senator weiner and i have to go to another hotel conference room like this to talk about housing. the last thing i would want to say here is for me, the beauty of the master planning process is for us as a community, as san franciscans, as californians, to envision when we age, what do we see that vision for all of? and that vision clearly entails everyone having a roof over their head, everyone having access to the right healthcare. everyone being gainfully employed, if they want to, but also being in a community that is vibrant and connected to them if they want to, as well. everyone who is disabled having work opportunities.

again, the value of the master plan process is to say, we need to move forward on all these fronts at the same time in an integrated way with a boatload of money, let's get it done. [applause] >> i go to your next meeting, your next conference room, remember that housing is healthcare. it is absolutely a solution. those numbers are so critical as we think about the master plan, to think that 50,000 versus 20,000, that is a big number difference that we can impact thousands, if not millions of lives in our state. i think we need to continue to focus on housing out healthcare

and how we can continue to improve the lives of so many people. just not older adults, but people throughout the state with good housing. [applause]. [please stand by]

>> is it the intention of the master plan to address middle income people who do not qualify or maybe do not qualify yet for government services. will they be included in the thinking and the planning? >> that is a very, very important question. there is a very important category of people that are sort of called the forgotten middle. a portion of what we have already been talking about is how do we think about the master plan for aging for all? you heard that in the opening remarks, you heard that in governor newsome's opening remarks. i think we need to think about a road map, the master plan for aging for all those in california to take into consideration housing care and services, regardless of your income level. we know that kinds of supportive services and funding that is

available for very, very extremely low income, and we also know that there is probably a tail at one end of individuals who may not believe they need any funding, but as already talked about today, we know that each of us is impacted. i have a brother who lives in senior affordable housing, without services he would have gone to the er probably many, many times by now. he has never gone to the er because he has care and services. he has mental health issues, he has four chronic conditions. he has needs that have helped to have been solved by affordable housing and services. each of us is impacted, and it could be any one of us spending down our resources to become eligible for other services.

that is not what we want to occur. we want to make housing services available regardless of your income level, and also that there are criteria to help enable each of us to access services at the right point in time, and this may be an opportunity that senator wiener mentioned with long-term services and support financing. we have got taxes for medicare on the paychecks, taxes for disability in our paychecks. why can't we have an additional or some sort of capability of early funding for long-term services and support we might be able to access later? this is a very critical question as we think of california for all. we as a committee will continue to think about what is it each of us need not just one or another group of individuals, but how do we fund the great --

how do we think about the great diversity. we want to fund it all. how do we think about the great diversity in the state in all manner of speaking in those terms? (applause). >> so with our local elected officials here, a couple of questions, i will say coming from los angeles we have an enormous homeless problem if you look at the homeless count data in los angeles, the fastest growing population is older adults, which gets at the housing challenge we face up and down the state, particularly in the urban parts of the state. two questions one from victor in chinatown and one from dogpatch. what can do to stop the seniors from becomes homeless at rates

higher than the general population? if you have strategies to be helpful for the master plan, it would be great to articulate them. thoughts, ideas? >> well, i think that we could be investing more in housing subsidies. i think that and present yee can talk about this, too. in san francisco it is over 50% of our homeless population are seniors, and i see it more and more in my neighborhood, quite frankly. i think, yes, we should insist in things like more senior affordable housing, but also for those housed but at risk of being unhoused. i think we need to invest in

these subsidies to help them pay their rent. it is going to cost us and it is horrible to displace a senior from the home and put them on the streets. there are many jobs in san francisco eliminated. right at that age point we are finding that people are losing their employment. you are about 50 or so and your job is eliminated, and it is not immigrants taking the jobs away. it is technology. we are in an industrial revelation and we -- revolution and we don't have a safety net. the fact jobs are eliminated, jobs that working class jobs people have had for years. things like a safe way clerk, a toll taker. those jobs are eliminated. people about 50, 55 are seeing

their jobs eliminated without new job prospects to take their place. this is an issue for homelessness. a safetiness such as the city college. can we get certificate programs on board these people soon to lose employment, can we get them into another form of employment before they are unhoused? offering subsidies while they are able to gain a new skill. we have to adapt, quite frankly, to a changing san francisco, a changing world where i think technology is taking many of the jobs we have taken for granted that were working class jobs and people are in professions they have done for 30 years, not making enough to retire but still need to work. we need to retrain them to get them in to the work force.

[applause.] >> i probably have spoken about this earlier in which it is about housing. it is about other things, but as i mentioned earlier, the people that are -- the older adults are becoming homeless are not only older but they are the low wage earners on fixed incomes. they can't even apply for affordable housing currently. this year, and i use this acronym sos a pilot program with $5 million to buy down the units of new units of the people that are making 15% of a.m.i. could actually qualify to apply for

these housing. you have the poorest getting evicted currently, then they will be homeless. they can't pay $3,000 for a unit so we don't have the final answer to that. we need resources for that. the $5 million will probably buy down 200 units or something, and i think that has to be a priority for the city in terms of where are we going to put our tax dollars. otherwise you are not going to solve anything. you are not going to solve anything by trying to get people off the street and getting 2000 off the street last year but 5,000 are coming to the street. we need to do something on the back and front end to make sure there is housing for people. the other pieces that as some of the older adults need more than just independent living, and i talked about this, whether it is

putting them in the nursing home or assisted living, we are losing them. they don't know where to go. that is another issue that i think we really need to address. that is why i was pushing our departments to figure it out to build this concept. i want to put 300 units up there but i will talk about silos. no insult to the department workers, but i only do affordable housing or health stuff, you know, so the answer was it can't be done. i think we need to get out of that sort of silo thinking, no, it can be done. in fact, through my staff effort we figured it out for the city, and we are aggressively pursuing

it at this point. that is just the beginning. if we could get 300 units up there we could do others like that. we have continued shares so people don't have to dinliving on the street. please support that effort and let your supervisors know that sos. i wish i knew what it stands for. operating subsidies. >> or save our seniors. >> that works, too. >> i think the housing subsidies are successful in san francisco project and tenant based. another program to be expanded is a program called home safe, which is a pilot program through the department of social services. what it does is really creates a collaboration between homeless and adult protective services for people at risk that may have

behaviors that make it hard to stay housed. those kinds of programs at least really work in san francisco where we have people just on the edge of not able to keep their housing and who really need that extra support. i think the other thing that we have done in san francisco or long-term care council did was a study of the assisted living care situation in san francisco. they came up with great recommendations on, you know, how do we really save what is here, how do we support operators and think about ways to expand the assisted living housing stock. we would be happy to share that report with the master plan members. [applause.] >> that is a lovely place for me to take the last two questions before i turn the discussion back over. one is so there have been plans before. why is this one any different?

why is there any commitment to implementing the plan? i would say two things to that. first, there have been plans before that have been done by one branch of government or one committed legislature who is a champion at a time when nobody else was listening. i will argue we are in a different time and place. look at the outstanding leadership from each level of government across san francisco city and county who are with us today. if you look, we have a governor who -- by the way comes from here. he made this a policy priority in his campaign, and it is one of the key things he chose to act on in the first year. do you know anything about the role of governors to create a legacy. it is what you do in the first year that sets parameters for the years you are in office. there are five significant bills

about aspects of the master plan with really strong thoughtful vocal leadership. we have a treasurer who is personally deeply involved. it is incredibly uncommon we see this leadership at the state level. listen to the voices today at the local level. we need to support those local voices and replicate them in other parts of the state. this is the moment where we get a plan to act on. shame on us if we don't create that plan. the last question is how do we all be involved moving forward? there will be more listening sessions like these. you have legislators here at the county level who will be pushing the state to do things, you have state elected officials. the state has put in place avenues for you to give input so together we engage as one of

those, there will be other in the future. i think it is very important we speak up. the themes we have heard about housing, transportation, integrating services, making sure it is for everybody, not just people who are already poor but for all those in california. ultimately it is about the public, private sector and philanthropy. o i want to thank the panel for a terrific job. [applause.] >> all right. so we would like to thank our fantastic moderators again. [applause.] >> then i will thank our panel and say that we will give them one more round of applause.

we have david who had to depart, we have supervisor fewer, we have executive director, engenie parker martin, center wiener and of the of the board, give them all a hand of applause. [applause.] >> we also want to on behalf of the coalition and long term care coordinating council we are grateful for the support of the scan foundation and the leaders. please give them another hand. [applause.] we also really want to thank the staff and leadership of meals on wheels san francisco, home branch and community living campaign.

[applause.] they have provided resources and staffed this event. we couldn't have done it without them. we want to thank andrea adams who has done an amazing job. planning this could not have happened without you. we are grateful for you for it. we want to really make sure to thank all of the older adults that call san francisco their home. we want to make sure and promise that we are going to carry this through, we are going to see what all those in california can do to make it a better place for all of us. this is only the beginning. we want to make sure and do this again. we want to make sure we all work together, and let this be the beginning. i have a couple housekeeping items. there are so many amazing questions that included incredible comments to all of you that will go towards the

task force. we will make sure those are heard and answered. we have one electronic device at the registration table. thank you all for coming and the commitment to california, a place for all of us. [applause.]

>> everybody, let's get into it. (singing) (singing) ♪ call him ♪ ♪ and he'll be there ♪

♪ life is too short ♪ ♪ don't you hesitate ♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ call him ♪ (singing) ♪ don't let your ♪ ♪ fear overcome your faith ♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ call him right now ♪ ♪ don't you hesitate ♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ call him ♪

♪ let the spirit compel you ♪ (singing) ♪ i've been lost without you lately ♪ ♪♪♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ right now ♪ ♪ life is too short ♪ ♪ don't hesitate ♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ call him now ♪

♪ don't you let your fear ♪ ♪ overcome your faith ♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ life is way too short ♪ ♪ don't you hesitate ♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ call him ♪ ♪ we're gonna call him ♪ ♪ calling him ♪ ♪ falando casstill ♪ ♪ george floyd ♪ ♪ we're going to call his name ♪ ♪ don't you let your fear ♪ ♪ overcome your faith no ♪ >> how you all feel about that? san francisco, it's a pleasure to be here and especially as the first performer at the newly remodelled sound system infused

stage in san francisco. we want to see a lot more music here for the city by the city, by us. this song is entitled "rise". ♪ what's happening little brother ♪ ♪ are you still ♪ ♪ on the corner every day ♪ ♪ you like to pay ♪ ♪ are you still getting high ♪ ♪ deeply bothered chocolate ♪ ♪ soul complexion ♪ ♪ believe we're going to ride again ♪ ♪♪♪ ♪ would you tell a friend ♪ ♪ to come on in ♪ ♪♪♪

♪ cadillac leans ♪ ♪ side to side ♪ ♪ just a reason to ride ♪ ♪ i feel it right ♪ ♪ just might hit it again ♪ ♪ open your eyes ♪ ♪ don't be surprised ♪ ♪ when we start to win ♪ ♪ whoa ♪ ♪ when we start to win ♪ ♪ it's our time ♪♪ our time ♪ ♪ oh ♪ ♪ when we start to win ♪ can i see some hands clapping in the air right now.

come on. ♪ sometimes i want to feel ♪ ♪ like i'm the one in control ♪ ♪ but i know that's another illusion ♪ ♪ and take back every element of me ♪ ♪ oh-oh ♪ ♪ when i heal my mind ♪ ♪ body and soul ♪ san francisco. ♪♪♪ ♪ we're making moves ♪ ♪♪♪ >> clap your hands. come on. ♪ the cadillac lean ♪

♪ side to side ♪ ♪ just see the ride is a reason to ride ♪ ♪ a hit of little something ♪ ♪ and i'm feeling right ♪ ♪ just might take it again ♪ ♪ open your eyes ♪ ♪ don't be surprised ♪ ♪ when we start to win ♪ ♪ whoa ♪ ♪ yes, i do ♪ ♪ you're always ♪ ♪ on my mind ♪ ♪ i want you to keep in mind ♪ ♪♪♪ ♪ making moves ♪

♪ whoa ♪ ♪ no one can make you ♪ ♪♪♪ ♪ don't give up ♪ ♪ the spirit of the phoenix ♪ ♪ rise ♪ ♪ don't give up the spirit ♪ ♪ of the phoenix ♪ ♪ rise ♪ ♪ don't give up the spirit ♪ ♪ of the phoenix ♪ ♪ rise ♪ ♪ you gotta rise ♪ ♪ you know it's time to rise ♪

♪ you know it's our time ♪ ♪ to rise ♪ ♪ always our time to rise ♪ ♪ elevate your black mind ♪ ♪ elevate your black mind ♪ ♪ it's our time to rise ♪ (applause) does that feel good out there? this is a fantastic day. juneteenth, san francisco, this is for real. yes, indeed. i am the first lead vocalist that was ever invited to perform with the sf jazz collective. and now i get a chance to be the first performer here at this newly erected stage. ♪ i was born by the river ♪ ♪ just like this ♪

♪ i have been running ever since ♪ ♪ it's been a long ♪ ♪ long time coming ♪ ♪ but i know ♪ ♪ i know a change going to come ♪ ♪ it's been too hard living ♪ ♪ but i'm afraid to die ♪ ♪ i don't know what's up there beyond the sky ♪ ♪ it's been a long ♪ ♪ long time coming ♪ ♪ but i know ♪ ♪ yes i know ♪ ♪ a change going to come ♪ ♪ oh, yes it will ♪ ♪ i go to the movie ♪ ♪ and i go downtown ♪ and someone's always telling me ♪ ♪ boy, don't you hang around ♪ ♪ it's been a long ♪

♪ long time coming ♪ ♪ but i know ♪ ♪ yes, i know ♪ ♪ a change gonna come ♪ ♪ it's been a long ♪ ♪ time coming ♪ ♪ but we know ♪ ♪ yes we know ♪ what do we know? what do we know? ♪ that a change gonna come ♪ amen belongs right there as my mother would say. this is the real thing we're doing right now. this song is called no one is going to love you more than me. and it goes a little something like this here. you want to get up and dance? huh? come on. ♪♪♪

♪♪♪ ♪ no one would love you more ♪ ♪ than me ♪ ♪ you can ask the whole world ♪ ♪ surely they won't agree ♪ ♪♪♪ ♪ all i know ♪ ♪ is no one ♪ ♪ gonna love you ♪ ♪ more than me ♪

♪♪♪ ♪ she was younger ♪ ♪ but now she grown ♪ ♪ my feelings for this girl ♪ ♪ strong ♪ ♪ my heart is torn ♪ ♪♪♪ ♪ all i know ♪ ♪ is no one ♪ ♪ can love you more ♪ ♪ than me ♪ ♪ you can ask the whole world ♪ ♪ i'm sure they would agree ♪ ♪ you all you got to do ♪ ♪ is imagine me ♪ ♪ all i know ♪ is no one will love you more ♪ ♪ than me ♪ ♪ nobody loves you more ♪

♪ than me ♪ ♪ nobody loves you more than me ♪ ♪ nobody ♪ ♪♪♪ ♪♪♪ ♪ nobody will love you ♪ ♪ more than me ♪ ♪ you can ask the whole world ♪ ♪ i'm sure they'd all agree ♪ ♪ you don't have to worry ♪ ♪ if you ever have a need ♪

♪ all you have to do is call me ♪ ♪ all i know is no one ♪ ♪ will love you more than me ♪ ♪ no one will love you ♪ ♪ more than me ♪ ♪ you can ask the whole world ♪ ♪ i'm sure they would agree ♪ ♪ you don't have to worry ♪ ♪ if you ever need ♪ ♪ all i know is no one ♪ ♪ will love you more than me ♪ ♪ nobody loves you more ♪ ♪ than me ♪ ♪ nobody baby ♪ ♪♪♪ ♪ nobody loves you more ♪

♪ nobody loves you more ♪ ♪ nobody loves you more ♪ ♪ loves you more than me ♪ ♪ nobody loves you more ♪ ♪ nobody wants you more ♪ ♪ than me ♪ ♪ nobody baby ♪ ♪ nobody baby ♪ (applause) >> thank you. this is new music that's coming out this year. i'll be performing throughout the summer and into the fall. how about an oldie but a goody? huh? october 17th i'm going to do a tribute to marvin gay at the sf jazz. do you know the song?

just sing along. ♪♪♪ ♪ brother, brother, brother ♪ ♪ there's far too many of us crying ♪ ♪ find a way ♪ ♪ to bring happiness ♪ ♪ to each day ♪ ♪ oh brother, brother ♪ ♪ there's no need ♪ ♪ whoa ♪ ♪ not the answer ♪ ♪ you know ♪ ♪ we've got to find a way ♪

♪ what's going on ♪ ♪ hey, hey ♪ ♪ what's going on ♪ ♪♪♪ ♪ tell me what's going on ♪ ♪♪♪

♪♪♪ (singing) ♪ what's going on ♪ ♪ hey ♪ ♪ what's going on ♪ ♪ what is going ♪ ♪ going on ♪

♪ what's going on ♪ ♪ what's going ♪ ♪ going on ♪ ♪ what's going on ♪ ♪ what's going on ♪ ♪ what's going on ♪ (applause) >> what's happening brother. what's going on san francisco? put them hands up.

we're going to pick it up today. what's going on. are you loving yourself hard enough? are you putting good nutrition into your body, mind and soul often enough? keep in mind, your diet, all the things we read, see and hear every day. look at yourself and ask what's going on. thank you. i want to share this song from the heart. the warmth of other suns. it goes like this... ♪♪♪ ♪ fear and exhaustion from ♪ ♪ having to hide who we are ♪ ♪ pretending ♪ ♪ that regrets will make you stronger ♪

♪ from black pain ♪ ♪♪♪ ♪ the -- ♪ maybe we'll find our light ♪ ♪ in the warmth of other suns ♪ ♪ the warmth of other suns ♪ ♪ in the warmth of other suns ♪ ♪ maybe we'll reach out ♪ ♪ in the warmth of other suns ♪ ♪ the warmth of other suns ♪ ♪ in the warmth of other suns ♪

♪ rid the world ♪ ♪♪♪ ♪ i just want to be free ♪ ♪ we suffer from black pain ♪ ♪ for white gain ♪ ♪ you don't consider ♪ ♪ all the work we have been through ♪ ♪♪♪

♪ the warmth of other suns ♪ ♪ maybe we'll reach our height ♪ ♪ in the warmth of other suns ♪ ♪ in the warmth of other suns ♪ ♪ in the warmth of other suns ♪ ♪ in the warmth of other suns ♪ ♪ maybe we'll reach our height ♪ ♪ in the warmth of other suns ♪ ♪ the warmth of other suns ♪ my name is martin luther mccoy and this has been an honor but we have an excellent program.

you're going to see the hard work in the back. it's a beautiful day. i'll see you all in the warmth of another sun. ♪♪♪ >> come on, let's give it up for martin luther mccoy. thank you for coming. you look fabulous. do you feel fabulous? you feeling fabulous? i'm here to demand a ministry of reparations. i want a ministry of reparations now that we have a national holiday. okay? i want to get paid, baby. i want to get paid as a daughter, a granddaughter of a slave who built this country for

nothing. for nothing. i want to get paid. but before we get paid, we have to really, really thank the native people, the native people on their homelands. give it up. as stewards we recognize their duty to honor them and interpretation of ancestry lands. they were all here before we got here. and as uninvited guests, return

their lands. this is an amazing day. there's somebody looking down and smiling, somebody who died who is black, blue, pink, yellow people. you all right? i'll get wild. i will show up and show out. i want to thank mayor london breed for inviting me to do this and all of you for kicking off this juneteenth weekend here in long beach park. but you know it's nice they're giving up the national holiday, you know, don't ask, don't tell. you know what i'm saying? we can't teach our children about the history in this country of what all this means.

we're so happy you can join us for the opening of monumental -- consider this afternoon a monumental reckoning and we have dana king who will break it down to us a little later. an extraordinary artist, sharing her extraordinary art installation that honors the history and resilience of black americans. we ain't going nowhere. we built this country for nothing and still we grin better than anybody. monumental reckonings will reside in the park for at least two years. if somebody you know and love doesn't see it today, make sure they see it before it goes away. it will allow me to commune with an ancestors and the black

experience. we built the white house you all for nothing. i want my acres and a mule god damn it. and what better time to open this show this juneteenth, celebration of our culture and acknowledgement of the struggle that continues today and as of just yesterday, a federal holiday. but before we introduce our poet laurent, give it up again for martin luther mccoy and we're bringing on san francisco's ace poet laurent. where you at tongo? he's so gorgeous. i'm an old woman. i can't take this, okay?

this is tongo. hello darling. thank you for being here. >> thank you. i talk facing away from the dead. they replace me with the change in my pocket. a penny yet to be invented, you have to know how to cut a throat on the way to cutting a throat. after sleeping on a mattress, made from two garbage bags of clothes, i became content with the small gestures of planation fires. i realized how weird the universe was, so many things interrupt me while trying to

dream like your correspondence lawyer. i have 20 books next to a bullet like an old man giving advice before a revolution. explored what is there and found no brain washing, i found africa lord. i have a future, it takes place in the south, modern militancy, i'll walk on a missile for food. i'll be tired face to face with the country. old verse bringing multiculturalism replace me with a chest cavity. stories of travel through other people's stories, my mother remembers africa lord. she killed on behalf of you lord. i wore a machete all winter and nobody asked what it meant. i read 1,000 books in front of the world.

watch people play for post working surfaces and recreations of a governor's desk, find the bureaucrat and some white people scare easier, fantasizing through the art of the poor, trendy lashes locked before god. i hand over my friends lord. lord, i think i'm going to die in the war. like a blue song with no spiritual effect, apartheid white people who give birth to mathematicians, a sunday trip to church, a river mistake for a talking river. violence and drug use made in the image of god of white abolitionists. chemical assurances they were switched from black worker to white worker. in the same way i think about my

childhood. fox hole friday nights. committee points out

adjourned. >> shop & dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do their shop & dine in the 49 with 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 my name is jim woods i'm the founder of woods beer company and the proprietor of woods copy k open 2 henry adams what makes us unique is that we're reintegrated brooeg the beer and serving that cross the table people are sitting next to the xurpz drinking alongside we're having a lot of ingredient that get there's a lot to do the district of retail shop having

that really close connection with the consumer allows us to do exciting things we decided to come to treasure island because we saw it as an amazing opportunity can't be beat the views and real estate that great county starting to develop on treasure island like minded business owners with last week products and want to get on the ground floor a no-brainer for us when you you, you buying local goods made locally our supporting small business those are not created an, an sprinkle scale with all the machines and one person procreating them people are making them by hand as a result more interesting and can't get that of minor or anywhere else and san francisco a hot bed for local manufacturing in support that is what keeps your city vibrant we'll make a compelling place to

live and visit i think that local business is the lifeblood of san francisco and a vibrant community

>> flyshaker pool was a public pool located on sloat boulevard near great highway. it operated from 1925 to 1971 and was one of the largest pools in the world. after decades of use, less people visited. the pool deteriorated and was demolished in 2000. built by herbert flyshaker, pumps from the pacific ocean that were filtered and heated filled the pool. aside from the recreational activities, many schools held swim meets there. the delia flyshaker memorial building was on the west side of the pool. it had locker rooms with a sun room and mini hospital.

in 1995, a storm damaged one of the pipes that flowed to the ocean. maintenance was not met, and the pool had to close. in 1999, the pool was filled with sand and gravel. in 2000, the space became a spot for the san francisco zoo. these are some memories that many families remember swimming at flyshaker pool.

>> van ness avenue runs from market street to bay street in san francisco. south vanness runs from south of market to cesar chavez street. originally residential after the 1906 earthquake it was used as a fire break. many car dealerships and businesses exist on vanness today with expansion of bus lanes. originally marlet street was named after james vanness, seventh mayor of san francisco from 1855 to 1856.

vanness heavy are streets in santa cruz, los angeles and fresno in his honor. in 1915 streetcars started the opening of the expo. in 1950s it was removed and replaced by a tree-lined median. it was part of the central freeway from bayshore to hayes valley. it is part of uses 101. it was damaged during the 1989 earthquake. in 1992 the elevator part of the roadway was removed. it was developed into a surface boulevard. today the vanness bus rapid transit project is to have designated bus lanes service from mission. it will display the history of the city.

van ness avenue. >> chairman: this meeting will come to order. this is the june 28th, 2021 budget and appropriations. i'm joined by president walton, supervisors ronen, safai, and mar. i want to thank kaleena for broadcasting this meeting. madam clerk, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes, mr. chair. the minutes will reflect that committee members participated in this remote meeting to the extent as if publicly present. we invite public

participation in the following ways. public comment was provided on the committee meeting on friday, therefore this meeting will not take public comment on items 2 and 3. public comment can be provided by the public call-in number. each speaker will be allowed one minute to speak, by calling 415-655-0001. again, 415-655-0001. meeting i.d. 1465003948. and again, that's i.d. 1465003948. then press the symbol pound twice. when connected, you will hear discussions, but you will be muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes, please dial *3 to be added to the speaker line. please call from a quiet

location and turn down your television or radio. and you may also make public comment in the following ways: e-mail to myself, the budget and appropriations committee clerk. if you send the comment via e-mail, it will be forwarded to the supervisors and will be included as part of the official file. you can also send your public comment to 1 carlton place, room 244, san francisco, california. mr. chair, this concludes my announcement. >> chairman: thank you. can you please call items 1 and 2together. [inaudible] as of june 1st, 2021, and june 30, 2022 and june 3020.

[inaudible] mr. chair? >> chairman: thank you, madam clerk. and welcome back, colleagues. today we very much hope that we will be able to make some final decisions on these two items. and i want to thank you all and your staff for your hard work over the past few months, really since we started working on our fiscal years 21/22 and 22/23 budgets. there will be plenty more to say as we make some of the final decisions. but i want to clarify what the profits will be today. we invited back really just a handful of departments for whom we've had additional questions or actions that this committee is interested in taking. so i'm going to have two of those departments, the

department of public health, and the department of homelessness and supportive housing, this morning, and we'll recess until later this afternoon or evening and invite back a few other departments. and then we'll likely recess again after that for final committee actions later this evening. i do want to say that public comment on these items was closed on friday, june 25th. we held public comments on items 1 and 2 that day, as well as the week before we had public comment, and we appreciate everyone who took their time to share their thoughts on the budget and their input will absolutely help to guide the final decisions of this committee. with that, colleagues, as i mentioned this morning, we have the department of public health and the department of homeless and supportive housing, and then we will recess after that. first i want to welcome the department of public health and open up colleagues to any additional questions for this department. welcome back, dr. colfax.

>> doctor: thank you, chair haney and committee members. >> chairman: supervisor safai? >> thank you. i was waiting for a nice introductory speech from dr. colfax, and all he said was welcome and good morning. [laughter] >> c'mon, dr. colfax, don't you have more to say? >> doctor: i'd be happy to say more, but out of respect for the committee and others, i'm happy to answer any questions or concerns that the committee may have. thank you. supervisor safai. >> i'm just kidding. i'm just kidding. thank you. so -- if i haven't said this enough, i just want to say this again, and i know we've all said this a million times, we certainly tremendously appreciate all of the phenomenal work that you and your team have done. it can't be recognized enough. so definitely appreciate

the budget that you all have put forward, and we certainly know that this is not over yet. the struggle against this pandemic is continuing, and we need to be diligent. we need to be continuously trying to be as many steps ahead of the curve as we can. so i really appreciate that. and last time, when i highlighted all of the things you specified in the budget going forward, i think that was really important. there was that one -- however, there was that one bucket of $27 million that we talked about. i know about $13 million of it is grants, or $14 million is grants, and the remaining is general funding in year two. i haven't really gotten any super level of specificity of what the intention of that money is and why the urgency to put so much general fund in year two. i wanted to see if you all have some additional details, and if we could talk and just zero in on

that, besides all of the other good things you put forward in terms of continuing community engagement, continuing testing, continuing vaccination, continuing education, and all of the things you've done proactive and will continue to do over the next year. but this was specifically fiscal year '22/'23, so going into this time next year's budget. >> doctor: thank you, supervisor. yeah, i just would say that the estimates are based on best understanding of where we may be. it was, at the time, specified. this has obviously been a catastrophic global event, and san francisco, thankfully, avoided the worst of it, but it is also because of the investments that the mayor and the board has made in terms of our being able to respond. obviously the pandemic is not over. we're seeing concerning signals with regard to variants.

we're going to need to continue to ensure people are vaccinated. we fully expect we will continue to have ongoing outbreaks of covid-19 in our community, while we have high vaccination rates, but we do not have sufficient vaccination rates across the region or the country to reach the point where our public health interventions are not going to be necessary. that would be great if we did. but we're not there yet. so -- and obviously in terms of the response and recovery, it is going to take us, i think, many years to recover from this. and part of our budget reflects that as well. i will refer to our c.f.o., jenny, to provide some more details on the investments. and then our deputy director, dr. balba, is available to provide some more context with regard to the actual work that is being proposed in this

period. >> and specifically that $27 million bucket -- >> doctor: that's right. >> okay. thank you. >> good morning, supervisors, jenny lui, financial officer for d.p.h. as we mentioned in our last hearing, we have $150 million in total spending, $123 million in the first year. it is funded with a mix in the citywide project, about $45 million in city grants, and $35 million in general fund support. and outside is the direct help response, there are other departments involved in the recovery and response efforts outside of d.p.h. specifically in the second year, this is our estimate in terms of the breakout between the branches and our services for the second year. and it is between grants and general fund. we did receive some significant funding related to just supporting

and bolstering our public health response services. and i'll also just defer to mr. wagner, who has been working significantly on this issue. >> and so just to ask a quick exemption on this excel sheet, is that line that says $26.7 million, is that what we're talking about, and then you break it out in terms of grants and general fund? >> yes. that's the $27 million that was referred to previously, and it is broken out by $12.7 million in state and federal funding and $14 million in general fund support. >> okay. >> supervisors, greg wagner, chief operating officer. these are the categories we discussed as part of the last presentation. supervisor safai, as you described, you have the total in these categories, and how much is funded through grants and how much is funded through

general funds. some of this, there is some flexibility here, but some is dictated by the conditions of the grants. you can see where the general fund is, is predominantly in vaccines, a little bit in testing and lab, and community engagement and equity and operational sustainability. of those, i think vaccines speaks for itself. there will be some amount of an ongoing vaccine program, which will vary, depending on the course of the disease. under community engagement and equity, that is really partially an effort to outreach and educate around the vaccine program, and ongoing acknowledgment of the fact that there were disparities in our capacity for public health response. so this will be partially about covid, and also partially about establishing that

infrastructure of connection to the community, that is so critical over the course of the pandemic. and operational sustainability is an assumption about that we will have some continued protocols within our health care system, even at very low levels of covid-19 rate, of which include things like havingcapacity for a covid isolation unit at the hospital, and having infection control and staffing procedures in place within our staff and other congregate sites. >> thank you, mr. wagner. i guess what i would say is, when i see vaccination in '22/'23, and we're today 80% of san franciscans have at least had their first round, 70%, i think, have had full vaccination. i guess i need to

understand that a little bit more from a year from now that we would still be doing vaccination. now, if that means it is followup to currently what the baseline vaccines are, and there is a response that needs to be made, it seems to me like that would be much more on a dramatic scale. if we were requiring full-scale boosters or full-scale followup, that we would be going back to a model where, you know, the federal government would be providing a tremendous amount of money in terms of fema and otherwise. so i just -- when i see $14 million in general fund reserve money -- excuse me, general fund money in year '22/'23, it seems like it is kind of a placeholder to see where we're going to be a year from now. it seems much more wise, at least for this committee, that would we be having this conversation in january of next year to talk about really what the budget needed to do to adjust to

where the vaccine and where the virus is at that time, and that we would make those adjustments in our budget at that time, rather than putting that money on reserve as a placeholder for something that is, as you've taught us all along, dr. colfax and dr. baba, it is hard to predict how it is going to move forward. we have done a tremendous job in terms of vaccinating our population, and we're reopening much more aggressively. and certainly it is wise to be able to adjust. i'm just concerned about putting that level on money in year two when it sounds like that is more about if this were to take a turn that we were not ready for right now and cannot predict. >> so dr. babba will provide more context in terms of the provisions -- >> this is the grant money category. i'm not talking about those. it seems like those would

need some. yea, i'm sorry. >> doctor: i think supervisors and committee members, it is actually -- covid is going to be with us. i think it is like with h.i.v. now, right? sustained investments are going to be really important, especially in communities that are going to continue to be hardest hit by the pandemic. and, yes, we have good vaccine rates in the population overall, but we saw thousands of people who are at risk for covid-19 with this delta variant coming in, so there are a number of factors that are going to come into play. we're going to have to have a robust response for the foreseeable future. again, these are estimates, but we felt like this is important to reflect what we think, from a public health standpoint, we're going to need. so i'll let dr. babba talk a little more about the vaccination component and

any other questions you may have. >> i'll just echo that. i think for the vaccination component, one of the things we're noticing there are definitely communities that are being left behind. and what our efforts need to be at the department level to ensure there continues to be those conversations and information sharing. and how long that will take is still an open question. i think at that point, as communities potentially are undervaccinated, they will be particularly vulnerable to covid. and we will see outbreaks in those communities. so this is the ongoing efforts. and, as the general population has taken a vaccine, we have noted that these efforts have to be fairly intense. there are a lot of one and one conversations have to happen. i think that is why there is this funding, so we have a robust way of addressing those communities' needs, and working with them side by

side until there is a larger uptake so that everybody is protected. >> got it. what about the response if -- ie are obviously areas of the community that are much more vulnerable, much less vaccinated, and if there is certainly a need a year from now, if we have not done whatever we've needed to do over the next year -- i mean, we've vaccinated 70% of all adults in san francisco, fully vaccinated them, over the age of 18. i think that has taken us four months, five months? if we're not in a better place this time next year with regard to that, then something has gone wrong. but it seems to me more like there would need to be money -- a conversation about if there was a resurgence or if there was

a new variant, as you talked about the delta variant, that we would be getting significant help from the federal government again at that point. so what's your thought on that? >> doctor: that's pretty much been the model. >> i agree. if there is a need for a booster shot or if there is a change in vaccination strategy, this would be a small base that we could start working from, and we would expect the nationwide response on that as well. but even now, some of our vaccine efforts have come from the general funds because not everything is covered by the federal government. a lot is, but not everything. so i think, again, just given the unpredictable nature of covid and where it is going to head, we just need to be prepared at all these different levels to be able to step in agilely and get the information out and pivot

our response as needed. and this is a starting place for that. >> okay. i think you've answered all of my questions. i appreciate that. mr. chair, i don't have any further questions. i would just say that it seems like those buckets are more placeholders on predicting where things will be, not necessarily about the ongoing work or continued work in terms of where we are. if in this first year, when you look at the amount of investments that are there, $21 million fof for cold front vaccine, operational sustainability -- ie with everything in year one. it is the year two that i think this committee will have to come back, along with the mayor, and have a much more deeper conversation about where we are in january of next year. so i'm less inclined to

leave that $14 million just sitting there when we know we're going to have this conversation again next year for what that response would be. so that would be my closing remarks. i think we should have some, but i don't think we need that entire $14 million from what i've heard right now. >> chairman: thank you, supervisor safai. colleagues, any other questions for the department of public health? i'm not seeing any. we appreciate your time and for joining us again and for your work in answering these questions. and i guess we probably won't see you later, so thank you for being here and answering those questions. we appreciate it. >> thank you, chair and committee members. >> chairman: great. thank you.

next up with have the department of homelessness and supportive housing. >> hi, chair. i'm sorry. i couldn't get off mute quickly enough. sherry mcfaddon, director of the department of homelessness and supportive housing. we're back today because we believe you still have some outstanding questions about our safe program. is that correct? >> chairman: yes. i believe -- supervisor safai? >> no? >> just kidding. [laughter] >> chairman: supervisor safai? >> you can go first, chair. >> chairman: you would like me to go first? >> sure. >> chairman: i think one

of the questions was the cost and whether there was anyways to reduce the cost? i think it has been an ongoing question that if it costs more to give somebody a tent on a slab of concrete than it does to give them a room, why don't we just give them a room? can you address the cost? >> sure. we have come up with some ways we can control costs. i think we were initially trying to bring people and their tents into secure r securerplaces. we have a number of ways to address the costs, and i'll go through those in a minute. it is a reasonable question, chair, that why wouldn't be able to just bring people inside? i think one of the things that we know from this program and from the

community partners that we work with, is that often people are not ready to come inside. their tent is the only thing that they have. and, you know, bringing them into a safe space in their tent is kind of a first way to engage people. people who often have very high acuity and people who are often not trusting of the system. we know that bringing them into a place where they are safe and they're still in their tent means that we can ultimately engage with them and try to get them to move -- to take other resources, such as employment resources or, ultimately, exit from homelessness. we think that while we're still working on getting the best metrics that we can, initially what we see is about 40% of people have engaged in other services once they've come into safe sleep. and so that's promising, although we need to have a

better way of getting better data, and it has been challenging during covid to get all of those systems in place. we often find that people will not go into congregate shelter or into some of the other resources that we've provided to them right away. and so we still maintain that this is a really important program, that it's one of our lowest barrier programs that we have, and that we really feel strongly that we need it as part of our system. we have decided, though, that as we take over management of these sites, we're really looking at new ways to control for costs. one of them is really looking at new vendors, for rentals of facilities. for example, a new shower trailer vendor offers $13,000 a month versus an

original vendor that charged $20,000 a month. when you start adding all of those together, that's a pretty big change -- pretty big savings. it could save us close to $85,000 annually. and looking at the purchase of shower trailers versus rental could -- the purchase would be about $50,000, but the rental cost is between $13,000 and $20,000 a month. there are certain things like that that we weren't able to do initially could save us some real money. looking at things like the daily meal service and the vendors, currently we're paying about $44 per tent per day for meals. there definitely could be some more competitive meal pricing, and we could look at that. >> can i jump in for a second, chair? i want to ask on that. that is the first that i heard that you all are

providing meals. in our safe parking, we did not provide meals. so that right there is a significant difference in a daily cost. do you all provide meals in your nap centers and congregate shelters or any of the other areas in your continuum of care? or is this the only one you're providing daily meals for? i know you did in s.i.p. hotels, but that was a little unusual because of covid. and maybe this was the model under covid, but i don't think that is your normal practice. is that correct? >> the nap centers do provide meals. they provide two meals a day. >> oh. >> so that is a normal practice. >> okay. >> we were providing three meals a day at shelter during covid. and part of that, of course, was to keep people from moving around too much, and particularly

moving into the big meal sites, like st. anthony's, and it was about trying to keep people in place. >> that makes sense. so what i would say is, then, just to build on the chair's point, the last time around you guys had come back and said it was $191 a night per tent. i know that from previous hearings and other work that we've done, your nap centers range between $120120 and $191 is equal to the transitional housing, as the chair said. i think whatever the specificity is, two meals a day, one meal a day, whatever, bathrooms, permanent -- you know, all that stuff -- i think it would be -- the right way would be for you all to target more of having this equal to, or closely equal to, what you do for your

nap centers or congregate shelters, which is $120 a night versus $191 a night. i know when we did our safe parking, the model is -- de size, we did have 24-hour security, which is the right thing to do. i think you have to have mobile showers and access to porta-potties, and the meal cost is significant. so i think you have to right-size that. i don't think we're going to do that today. but i think the target should be you all should be coming in at that $100 to $120 a night. and it would change the money that is needed for 260 tents citywide. that would be the only

thing i wanted to add on. i wasn't trying to cut you off, mr. chair, but i wanted to jump in because that was the first time i heard they were provided meals at that cost. >> chair, is it okay if i continue? >> chairman: yes. >> i just wanted to say, yes, supervisor safai, i totally hear you. and we definitely do want to work to bring costs down. i think one of the issues that we see, and as i mentioned, we have a high acuity population here in these safe sleep sites, and so staff are really doing things like overdose prevention and response, and some behavioral health work, de-escalation, really trying to link people to services, and we do that in the nap center and shelters as well. the staff feels strongly there is more of an intervention needed here, and that means a little more staffing and a higher level of staffing. we can kind of control for

the costs, but this is actually kind of a different system than the shelter system for us. but, just to go -- so, basically, the other thing that i didn't mention yet about controlling costs is we have -- we don't have a standardized staffing for these sites, and so really getting that staffing standardized and maybe lowered a bit would also help with the costs. so there are a number of things that we can do to bring the costs down for this program. i think there was another question that supervisor ronen had asked about comparisons to los angeles. so we did a little research on the l.a. program, and it is essentially like ours. the costs are really similar to what we have here. and the model is basically

based on our model so we, so we didn't see vast differences in costs. >> chairman: supervisor safai, do you have further questions? >> sorry, i didn't want to cough into the microphone. i apologize. yeah, i mean, i pretty much said what, you know, my thoughts were. let me ask this: i heard you say you were going to do some things -- have you thought about what you think is actually a more reasonable or more target number per costs per night? you said there were a number of different strategies -- originally you said it was $191 a night. what do you think the

right number is? have you thought about that? i'm referencing your congregate shelter/nap center, which is $100 to $120 a night. what do you think is the right number, if it is not $191? >> i'm going to ask director whitley to weigh in on this because i know she and her team have looked at this a bit. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisor. j.p. whitley. deputy director for h.s.h. $190 is an average per night cost. and some of our nap centers are closer to $100 a day/per night. i think it would depend on some of the efficiencies that director mcfaddon mentioned, and how we could get those costs down. i'm not prepared to give a

target number at this very moment, but we are looking in the range of getting closer to that shelter number and, you know, at least, you know, $140, $145, depending on the level of services. as i said at the last meeting, meals are almost $3million of the budget, and they're onsite delivery meals, not a kitchen. >> right. >> that's a big part of the cost, the staffing level and security is about $13 million for those six sites. so as director mcfaddon said, evening out the staffing level there could help on the margin, but i don't have an exact number right now. >> so if you did your $145 a night, and you said they don't do -- you don't calculate it based on 365 days. so if you did 300 days,

that's $43,000 a tent for the year, and then you had $260, so that comes into $11.5 million, and you proposed $15 million for the year. does that sound about right? we're happy to allow you some more time to think about this, the rest of the part of the day, but i think that's the direction that seems to make sense to me, is to get the number to -- closer to less than $191 a night, which is transitional housing numbers, right? and then the committee can make a final decision, in partnership with you and your team, to what the right number is for those 260 tents. i think the 260 tents, you made a compelling argument

that that's the right number you need to kind of manage. maybe with a more cost-effective model you can actually get some additional tents. actually serving more, depending upon where things are. i think we need to look at the right number. i would just end with that. we need to get it to the right number. the target of $145 seems much more reasonable. >> chairman: great. thank you. supervisor ronen? >> i just wanted to concur with supervisor safai and thank him for his questioning. he is laughing because we've been in agreement more in this budget than we ever have in the past, so we're just -- >> i'm not laughing; i'm smiling. >> we're enjoying our agreement, our moment of agreement. but i do want to say that i think by the end of the

day, we should figure out what that right number is. i, too, agree that we the safe sleep site as part of the system, especially during this transition year. and there are reasons why people experiencing homelessness prefer to the safe sleep sites to other options. i very much understand the role they play in the system. but i, again, cannot -- it just does make common sense that they cost the same as a shelter-in-place hotel. and we've got to get that number down. so let's figure that out as we're tying up the other outstanding issues in the budget. >> chairman: thank you, supervisor ronen. president walton, were you coming on camera for a

comment? >> no. i just thought i should make my presence. [laughter] >> chairman: okay. thank you. great. we appreciate these answers and the dialogue and the questions. and we've been talking about this, you know, as well, with this department. we may make some amendments around this as we make our final decisions. supervisor safai, is there anything more you want to say before we move on? >> no. thank you, mr. chair. i think that this is the right path. i think it is fair in terms of i understand what was targeted for the year in the crisis that we were responding to and the situation that we were responding to, and covid adds an entirely different element for this population. i'm very clear these are two different populations of people, than people who are in safe parking versus

safe sleeping, and they require a different level of services and a different intensity of services. and they are, as you all have said and very clearly, that are some people that their initial step, they will refuse everything and want to remain much more independent than anything that we can offer, and this provides that -- this is a safer transition. so i want to say i understand it, i understand the need for it and i respect it, but ensuring we have the costs to right-fit it now that we're going forward, because we don't have covid, we don't need to have -- we might not necessarily need three meals a day. we might not necessarily need that same level of intensity of services. i think it allows us to control for the costs. i appreciate you, director mcfaddon, who has only been on the job now for about a month, coming in

in the middle of all of this. anyway, it is still a lot to take in. so i really appreciate you and your team. we'll continue to work with you throughout the rest of the day. i think we should right-size this number so everyone is in agreement. >> thank you. and thank you, supervisor. i just wanted to say if we're getting it down to $145, that would actually be $13.7 million as opposed to $11 million or $12 million. we'll continue to work throughout the day, and we want to make sure we have enough to actually run the program, even though we know we can bring the costs down. i look forward to the continuing dialogue. >> chairman: okay. great. thank you so much, director mcfaddon. >> thank you. >> chairman: colleagues, those were the only two departments we are going to hear from this morning, so i want to now reset this meeting, madam clerk, to 3:00 p.m. >> clerk: thank you,

mr. chair. >> chairman: thank you all. we're in recess. >> clerk: welcome back to the budget and appropriations meeting. madam clerk, please call items 1 and 2. >> clerk: ordinance appropriating all expenditures for the city and county of san francisco for the fiscal years ending june 30, 2022, and 2023. continuing to create or establish these positions. >> supervisor haney: thank you. welcome back committee members. do we have the mayor's office

here? yes. >> hi chair haney. >> supervisor haney: do you want to do your piece now? >> that would be great. thank you. budget director. i will be submitting a number of technical adjustments to you all and the clerk and within the next hour. these are truly very technical adjustments, correcting some project coding and other very technical coding for a variety of departments. the one notable change in here i would point out to you all, the budget incorrectly did not include general obligation bond debt service, so we need to appropriate that and, again, it's non general fund. it doesn't have a general fund impact. the total adjustments will grow

by 113.7 million across the two fiscal years. happy to answer any questions you have about that. i'll submit that list and letter to your office shortly. colleagues, do you have questions? i do not see any. thank you for that. we'll look forward to receiving that. colleagues, what i'm going to do now, we have jpd, the sheriff's office and police department here. i knew there were some potential questions and follow-up for one or some of the departments. i wanted to give an opportunity to do that. i'm going to start with the sheriff's office.

i did want to ask a question. >> the sheriff is trying to log on right now. he was out of town with a family commitment. i can answer your questions though. >> supervisor haney: great, thank you. i wanted to ask you about the overtime budget and if you could maybe give us a sign of what is the proposed overtime budget over the next two years and how that compares to the current fiscal year. >> give me a second to pull that up. okay. in the current fiscal year we

have 7.7 million. in the new year, we have 10.3 million, although we have an additional -- all of that additional is more than compensated for by additional atrition savings. there's the net between the overtime makes the budget lower. by about $3 million. $3 million less in spending. >> supervisor haney: in the year two, is there -- >> let me pull that up. so in the current year i said 7.7. the first year is 10.3 and in

the second year of the budget it is 9.4. >> supervisor haney: got it. >> once we add atrition in, the net amount goes up by 3 million from the current year to next year and then going next year to year two, we take out another $2 million from the budget. >> supervisor haney: i appreciate that. just so i'm clear, why are you connecting those two things? >> we weren't trying to increase the budget overall, we were trying to offset so we're not spending anymore money, we're simply moving the chess pieces

around if you will. >> supervisor haney: got it. but to be clear, you are -- your budget is growing, correct? it is -- >> well, yes. overall it is growing. if you take out -- i noted in the bla report, a significant portion of the increase is one time capital spending of $11 million. without this capital funding, our budget from last year is flat. we were, i believe, about -- it's flat. on a dollar basis, there's no increase in the budget despite cost of living adjustment. we're having to fit in that $25 million for cost of living with a flat budget.

we have really with the unit cost going up, we have less spending we are able to do on services. >> supervisor haney: thank you. colleagues, any questions? for the sheriff's office. supervisor chan. >> supervisor chan: i wanted to follow up on questions chair haney raised about the proposed budget for the next few years and i guess the question is why it really doesn't reflect what should be a significant reduction in staffing needs with the closure of county jail 4 late last year. and i'm looking at some figures

provided to us by the bla's office showing that for the sheriff's department overall, the fte for county jail functions, in the current year was about 419 ftes overall and then again, county jail 4 was closed during this year. looking ahead to the next two years, the fte numbers increased slightly in 21/22. it's 420 and 22/23 it's 423 and then the budgeted amount for staffing for county jail functions increases from this year, it's 85 million and goes up to 90 million in the next year and then 93 in the

following year. so, again, yes, just puzzling that there's not a reduction in fte for county jail functions and budgeting amount for salaries and benefits. >> that's a good question. and we have -- there are some technical adjustments we have made. last year when we reduced the staffing at c.j. 4 we took out the ftes. we have actually on a real basis, on an actual basis, we don't even have those 24 working there now. we have moved all of those people to other areas. most notably in transportation, we have been working with police to set up a better system for transporting people so that we

can maintain covid safety in the operation, keep it from -- reduce the risk of covid spreading into the sfpd but also reduce the risk of covid spreading into the jail. so we have increased our transportation function and this then alleviates work that sfpd needs to do so there can be more people working out on the street and all of that has been submitted as technical adjustments. the 24 people left in the budget have been moved into transportation and other areas. but you can see that if you take a look at actuals, we have not had anyone working in there since september of last year. but on a larger level, if you take a look at the overall

budget, we went down from 1031 fte last year to 1007 in the current year and then 1001 in the new year and that's a reduction of 24 permanent full time ftes. but in addition to that, as i mentioned last week bla doesn't show the overtime budget went down from 25 million last year to 7.6 million in the current year and that's another fte reduction of 84 ftes for a total of 108. and that is more than we have had at c.j. 4. we took the savings last year for that. >> supervisor chan: uh-huh. >> supervisor mar, can you hear me? >> supervisor mar: i can hear

you. >> i apologize for coming on late. i'm having technical difficulty. maybe clarifying further what you're referencing supervisor mar. the total 400 reflects the number of staff necessary to maintain the operations we currently have. absent c.j. 4. it is the people needed for 3 and close to 100 people needed for c.j. 2 and all together with the records people and other classifications and functions of that nature, the number is around 420, 419, whatever it was referenced in the bla report. >> supervisor mar: uh-huh. got it. thank you sheriff. and then can you explain again what happened to the roughly 100

ftes that were staffing c.j. 4? i know a number -- after it was closed, i know a good number of them fielded other positions within the department. and how has that been reflected in the budget over the last two years? >> you want me to take that, sheriff? >> go ahead. >> okay. so we have 90 fte working in the jails. and we have had 60 fte reduction, actual real reduction in overtime. but in addition to that, we've also had since the closure of c.j. 4, 30 people leave the sheriff's office, 30 sworn people leave the sheriff's

office. so we need to backfill the 30. once we account for those 30, plus the 60 fte reduction that we really did see in overtime and i just want to say that we have gotten to the lowest levels of overtime we have had since my time in office and many years before that as well. so that accounts for the 90 ftes we had at c.j. 4. >> supervisor mar: thank you. that is helpful. so you're saying the 100 fte -- roughly that were staffing c.j. 4, they are sort of accounted by increase in overtime. >> yes. you see two thirds of that in reduction in overtime and then another one third of it backfilling the separations that we had since the closure of c.j. 4, which we have not been able

to backfill because we had de facto hiring freeze because of the testing restrictions to do a review of dhr practices. we are getting back to that but unfortunately it's like a nine month process once we bring someone into the academy to get them trained. it's a really quick process to stop hiring, it's a slow process to get started back up again. >> supervisor mar: thank you. >> supervisor haney: can you -- did you say your overtime budget went from 25 million to 7 million roughly? say again? >> 7.7 million, yes, sir. >> supervisor haney: it was 25

million when? >> it was 25 million in fy-20. and then 7.7 in the current year. we had 75% decrease last year. >> supervisor haney: 75% decrease in your overtime budget. >> yes, sir. >> supervisor haney: colleagues, other questions for the sheriff? supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: hey sheriff. i wanted to say for the record to make sure we're clear on this. i think there's some confusion out there. after c.j. 4 closed and overtime was cut and some of the other positions were faded out, that

was over $20 million that was shifted from your budget and we shifted that into a targeted investment with the mayor's office and that ended up being what we called the dreamkeeper's initiative. i wanted to say that for the record. i think i was a little confused but as we dug in on the budget, i found that is exactly where it went. i think there's some confusion out there in people that have been calling our offices and sending messages to our office saying oh, c.j. 4 is closed, let's take the $22 million and repurpose it. my understanding is that already happened in this current year's budget and it is baseline and continuing going forward. can you talk about that for a second? >> i am aware that's what the intention was last year when we had our cuts that we experienced

and i believe it was 23 million. i could be wrong. i think it was over two years and the first chunk was what you mentioned supervisor safai. the reinvestment into the community programs was for the dreamkeeper initiative. >> supervisor safai: yeah, okay. thank you. and what i heard you say -- that reduction represented about 84 positions and then the other 24 positions, that was the shifting of c.j. 4? >> yes. i mean, we were planning on shutting down -- this time last year we were planning to shut down c.j. 4 and so we cut effectively 108 positions. 24 of them were permanent full

time positions and the other ones were overtime positions. >> supervisor safai: got it. i just wanted to confirm. okay. thank you mr. chair. >> supervisor haney: thank you. all right. not seeing any other questions or comments from colleagues, thank you and we may need you back a little later this evening but that is all for now.

i believe chief scott is here. are there questions at this time for chief scott or his team? >> president walton: thank you. i do have one question just in terms of the proposed academies. as we look at the proposed academies for this fiscal year and for the next, the numbers don't seem to match with the department's ability to recruit for academies. i'm wondering why the proposal of so many academies over the next couple of years when the data demonstrates the department

doesn't have the ability to even bring that many people on. >> well, supervisor, thank you president walton and chair haney. we believe they do match based on the reality of what is happening right now. we were -- after the incidents of last year, we went on a break if you will. we implemented some hiring changes to root out bias and those sort of things. which you are aware of, you were a sponsor of the initiative. with that, we were able to -- we have a thousand -- almost a thousand applicants. if our previous record, about 10% of applicants get through the process and all that, we believe that is realistic for this coming year, that and

everything else we're trying to do to spark up the recruiting efforts, we believe we can get 100. that's what we're on pace to do as we speak right now. we do believe it is realistic possibility. here's the thing i mentioned and i'll reiterate what we said in the last hearing president walton, what is difficult, to get classes of 50 like we have done in the past. we have been able to get 30, 35, maybe close to 40 but it has been difficult in the last couple of years to get classes of 50. that's not a problem because we can spread the classes out based on how many people we can get through the background process to start an academy class but we believe within that fiscal year, we'll hit the mark of around

100. we believe we can get the 100 within the two fiscal years. >> president walton: how long is the academy class? >> seven months. >> president walton: they would have to overlap? >> we've had them overlap from time to time. it depends on the budget, it depends on the flow of getting the applicants through the process, so we've had academy classes overlap. that's not uncommon at all. and it helps us in another way because when they overlap like that, one of the things we want to do, there are post requirements. this is peace officers standards in training that set the guidelines for academies when we have to -- if they fail a test

twice, those type of issues. but if it's that type of thing that causes a recruit to be dismissed or released from the academy, we can put them back in the next academy class and what we have been able to do through the process based partially on some of your initiatives is vet that out to where we can do that

quicker. it helps when we have another class going. we're not losing those people to other departments. >> president walton: i think we need to recruit differently in terms of putting strategies in place to make it beneficial for people of color and diversity for candidates to want to join the force. if we're talking about a seven month duration for each academy i don't think it's realistic to get the numbers for hiring that is supposed to happen. we appreciate your thought process around it and obviously we have a decision to make around there. it seems like it has been difficult to recruit lately.

not that things won't change when we figure out a way and i mean we, all of us figure out a way to get more folks of color and more diverse populations to want to come into careers of law enforcement. >> one thing before moving to the next question i will say, here's what we're seeing right now. we have lost some candidates to this. when you don't have the classes, a good flow of when you introduce the academy classes, some candidates do go to other

departments. it paints the picture of what is happening in policing right now. it is very competitive. recruiting across the nation is competitive. we have to compete with other departments. people -- we offer jobs and don't worry about them going to another city which just happened to us.

>> if i have a choice between not working and waiting, i'm probably going to take the job. that's the reality of life.

(please stand by...)

>> i mean, look. here's the reality. you know, and i'll say the

story because this tells you how things change. my academy class started with 108, the academy class that i was in. that's no longer doable. >> supervisor safai: but chief, i understand that. but -- so i'm getting confused. we had two classes the upcoming year and two classes the following year, 50 each. are you saying for the fiscal year 21-22, you said instead of having two classes of 50, turn that into three classes of 35 for that particular year, and then, the three classes of 35 for the second year? that's what's not clear.

>> supervisor safai: yeah. >> yeah. what is wrong with doing that in three classes is that's what the hiring class dictates. >> supervisor safai: you're still trying to stick with your same number around 100 per year. you're saying maybe you can break it into three classes instead of two. >> yes, yes, exactly, and that is exactly what i'm saying because we know that there is difficulty. the classes are smaller, and this is not just a san francisco trend, this is across the country. the recruiting environment is very difficult, so the classes are smaller but it's still doable because you can break the classes up. it's not unheard of. it's very doable, and it makes that 100 much more attainable is what i'm submitting to the

committee. >> supervisor safai: okay. got it. but you're having between 80 and 100 people retire each year. that's your number, and then, the target is to try to keep that even. >> yes, and we're on pace to keep that 100. we always get people retire that we don't expect to retire, but we expect to be on pace for 95 this fiscal year. >> supervisor safai: okay. thank you. thank you, mr. chair. i don't have any other questions. thank you, chief. >> thank you. >> president walton: so unless

you have two academies, there's no way you can have three academies in one fiscal year. >> that's why it's so important really, because, in emergency room -- in terms of academies, the best thing to do is to get into a rhythm so the output of when they come out of the academy is predictable so you know what you've got coming out. so it's very doable to hire 100 people in a year. some of those people will grad in the next fiscal year, but the next fiscal year, we hopefully will be able to continue the hiring if we want to maintain our staffing levels at an adequate level. but we have to deal with it in terms of budgets, but the best case scenario is you have a cadence of hirings that will

meet your needs.

>> president walton: there was a way that budget and academies are set up, and that's what i'm struggling with, and i'm going off of this conversation and what you're presenting. >> see, well, a smaller than

it would have been had those things not occurred. >> president walton: thank you, chief. >> chair haney: thank you, chief. we'll likely see you later on, and with that, colleagues, i am going to recess this meeting until 6:30, so we'll reconvene here as a

>> welcome back to the budget appropriations committee meeting of june 208th. , we are going to reconvene the meeting and reset the meeting

2021, regular meeting of the san francisco ethics commission, being held teleconference pursuant to the governor's executive order and declaring the existence of a local emergency dated february 25, 2020. before we proceed further, i would like to ask commission

staff member acting as our moderator to explain procedures for the remote meeting. >> clerk: thank you madam chair. to protect commission members, city employees and public, the meeting rooms of city hall are closed but we will be participating remotely. this precaution is taken pursuant to the local orders and directives. public comment is available on each item of the agenda. each member of the public is

allowed three minutes to speak. comments or opportunities to speak during the public comment period is available via phone call by calling 415-655-0001. again the phone number is 415-655-0001. access 187 131 7460. again, access code, 187 131 7460. followed by the pound sign. and then press pound again to join the meeting as an attendee. you will hear a beep when you are connected to the meeting. you will be automatically muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up, dial star 3 to raise your hand and be added to the public comment line. you will hear, you have raised your hand to ask a question. the line will be silent as you wait your turn to speak. be in a quiet location before

you speak, mute equipment around you including television, radio or computer. it is especially important that you mute your computer if you are watching via the web link to prevent feedback and echo. when the system says your line has been unmuted, it is your time to speak. you will hear staff say welcome caller. we encourage you to state your name clearly. as soon as you start speaking, you will have three minutes to provide public comment. you'll hear a bell at 30 seconds remaining. if you wish to withdraw from the public comment line, press star 3 again and you'll hear the system say you have lowered your hand. once the three minutes is done, staff will thank you and mute you. you will hear your line has been muted. attendees who wish to speak during other public comment opportunities can stay online and then press star 3 when the

next item of interest comes up. public comment may be submitted in writing and shared with the commission after the meeting has concluded and be included as part of the official file. written comments should be sent to the ethics commission. >> chair ambrose: thank you. i call the meeting to order. can you proceed to item one, the commission roll call. >> clerk: commissioners please unmute your microphones so you can verbally state your presence after your name has been called. (roll call)

madam chair with five members present, you have a quorum. >> chair ambrose: thank you very much. i want to welcome everyone back to the commission meetings in remote format and i'm assuming since we all heard city hall is reopening that we'll get some further direction from the mayor and others about what the future holds for commission meetings, but as far as i know, through the summer, we will continue in our remote meeting format. i want to remind everybody, when you're not speaking to mute your microphone so we don't get the feedback and with that, i'll call agenda item number 2, public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda. members of the public on the line and wish to speak should now dial star 3 if you haven't done so already to be added to the public comment line.

mr. moderator, please proceed with public comment. >> clerk: the ethics commission is receiving public comment on item 2. each member has up to three minutes to provide public comment. if you joined early to listen to the proceedings, now is the time to get on the line to speak. if you haven't already, please press star 3. it is important to only press it once to be moved into the queue. once you are in the queue and standing by, the system will prompt you when it is your turn to speak. it is important to call from a quiet location. please address to the commission as a whole and not only one person. we are checking to see if there are callers in the queue.

if you have just joined the meeting, we are on item 2, public comment appearing or not appearing on the agenda. you have three minutes to provide public comment, six minutes if you are online with an interpreter. you will hear a bell when you have 30 seconds remaining. if you haven't done so, press star 3 to be added to the queue. for those on hold, please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. madam chair, there are no

callers in the queue. >> chair ambrose: thank you. public comment is closed and now call item from ascent calendar, items number 3, draft minutes from the regular meeting. if any member wants public comment, they should dial in now and if a commissioner objects, an item can be removed and considered separately. before i ask the commissioners, i don't know that i need to sever the draft minutes, but i did want to note first thank the executive director pelham for following through on our request and sending the letter to the mayor concerning follow-on to

the investigative work and reporting back to us. but i know it was commissioner bell who really made the motion that we should take action in response to the item, even though i guess maybe technically i restated the motion before we voted. so it shows that i was the one who moved that the commission send the communication to the mayor. which i was just trying to restate the suggestion that commissioner bell -- i just want to make it clear that i think whatever credit where credit due -- if that can be whatever a clarification for the minutes that we all understand. don't need to continue them unless someone else thinks we should get them formally corrected. with that, is there anything else anyone wanted to pull off of the consent calendar? commissioner bush.

>> commissioner bush: as a general rule, at this time and in the future, i think it would be good if the minutes showed which person wrote the minutes and gave it to the commission. if it was the executive director, it should say executive director. if it is someone that has been delegated to that, it should say. i think it's a good practice to know who is the person who compiled the minutes and provided them to us. >> chair ambrose: okay. for the record, who does draft the minutes for the commission? >> minutes are drafted during the course of the meeting and usually captured by legislative affairs counsel pat ford.

>> chair ambrose: thank you for that. i'm getting feedback. is that my -- can you hear okay? okay. sorry, i'm just looking to see if anyone else has their hand up. with that, then i'm going to call for public comment on the consent calendar. mr. moderator, can you please read the instructions. >> clerk: thank you. the ethics commission is receiving public comment on item 3 remotely in the meeting. each member of the public has up to three minutes for public comment. you will hear a bell when you have 30 seconds remaining. if you joined the meeting early to listen to the proceedings now is the time to get in line to speak. if you haven't already, press star 3. it is important to press it only

once to enter the queue. pressing it again will move you back into listening mode. once in the queue and standing by, the system will prompt you when it is your turn to speak. it is important to call from a quiet location. please address your comment to the commission as a whole and not to individual members. we are checking for callers. stand by. if you have just joined the meeting, we're taking public comment on item 3 draft minutes of the may 24th 2021 regular meeting. if you haven't done so, press star 3 to be added to the public comment queue.

madam chair, there are no callers in the queue. i do want to clarify, i wanted to make sure -- i apologize, we are taking public comment on all consent items, is that correct? >> chair ambrose: that's correct. >> clerk: okay, there's no callers in the queue. >> chair ambrose: public comment is closed on the consent calendar. can i have a motion to adopt the consent calendar. >> so moved. >> chair ambrose: that would be commissioner chiu. and a second? commissioner bush or commissioner lee. either one. i did want to say thank you to the staff too for preparing the stipulations. i think it was a good

demonstration of the streamlining process at work and i didn't want to just let that pass. so with the motion and second, can you please call the roll on the consent calendar. >> clerk: a motion has been made and seconded. i will call the roll. (roll call) the motion is approved unanimously. >> chair ambrose: thank you. and now we're going to jump ahead to consent -- no. what number are we on to get -- >> i think agenda item 8.

>> chair ambrose: thank you. all right. page turning here as we get through my script. i'm going to call item 8, discussion and possible action on the ethics commission annual report draft for the fiscal year ending june 30th, 2021. before i turn it over to director pelham, i wanted to say thank you very much to director pelham for the draft. i did want to emphasize since we didn't talk about this before, the charter requires that the chair and the executive director prepare a draft report annually. we had come up with a rough format with the annual report last time around and haven't really talked about it since then. i want to encourage the commissioners who have thought

about how best to convey the message that the commission wants to send to anyone who might be in the audience for the reports. feel free to share your insights. i know the draft we had, it's not even a final draft, it doesn't have the chart and final data that is still being accumulated because it is a fiscal year -- end of fiscal year report that doesn't happen until the end of june. but i do want to thank you for assembling all of the various facts and acknowledging the events over the course of the year. so we have what i think is the bulk of the material to work with. so with that, i'm going to turn it over to director pelham and then i'll take comments from

commissioners and then we'll go to public comment. >> director pelham: thank you chair ambrose. commissioners, this is meant to reflect information as we know it at this point, a couple weeks before the fiscal year ends. there are a number of initiatives and work underway this year that are reflected here, though not likely to change over the next couple of weeks but we wanted to make sure when we have the final report for you and the public, it captures all the information we have through the fiscal year. the difference between the report last year, this really focuses on the past fiscal year that started july 1st. it does capture some of the changes right at the beginning of the pandemic, but we did make a conscious effort to be mindful and responsive to the questions raised last year in wanting to convey as much data as we have