>> as a woman of color who grew up in san francisco i understand how institutions can have an impact on communities of color. i think having my voice was important. that is where my passion lies when the opportunity to lead an office in such a new space came up. i couldn't turn it down. i was with the district

attorney's office for a little over nine years, if you include the time as an intern as well as volunteer da, all most 13 years. during the time with the da's office i had an opportunity to serve the community not only as the assistant district attorney but as director of community relations. that afforded the opportunity to have impact on the community in an immediate way. it is one thing to work to serve the rights of those without rights, victims. it is really rewarding to work to to further the goals of our office and the commitment we have as city employees and advocates for people who don't have a voice. i don't know of anyone surprised to see me in this role. maybe people have an impression what the director of the office of cannabis should be like, what their beliefs should be.

i smash all of that. you grew up in the inner city of san francisco. my career path is not traditional. i don't think a person should limit themselves to reach full potential. i say that to young women and girls. that is important. you want to see leadership that looks diverse because your path is not predetermined. i didn't wake up thinking i was going to be a prosecutor in my life. the city administrator reached out and wanted to have a conversation and gave me interest in the new role. i thought you must not know what i do for a living. it was the opposite. she had foresight in realizing it would be helpful for somebody not only a former prosecutor but interested in shaping criminal justice reform for the city would be the right person for the space. i appreciate the foresight of the mayor to be open how we can be leaders in san francisco. i was able to transition to the

policy space. here i was able to work on legislation, community relations, communication and start to shape the ways our office was going to reform the criminal justice system. it is fulfilling for me. i could create programs and see those impact people's lives. i am the change. it took truants youth to meet with civil rights movement leaders who fought to have access to education. being a young person to understand that helped the young people realize this was an important thing to give up. what we find is that young people who are truanted have a really high homicide rate in our city, which is a sad statistic. we want to change that. >> coming from a community we are black and brown. i don't reach out to other people.

i don't think they feel the same way. >> i had the great opportunity to work on prison reform issues and criminal justice reform issues. we created a program at san quentin where we brought district opportunities to lifers and talk about how we are all impacted by the criminal justice system. we brought over 40 elected das to san quentin for the situation. now we are inviting the police department. our formerly incarcerated group born out of this programming asked for the opportunity to work on a project where we could bring the men in blue on the outside to come speak to the men on blue inside to start the healing dialogue around how the criminal justice system specifically in san francisco impacts the community. i was attracted to the role. there was a component of equity that was part of this process.

the equity community here in san francisco is a community that i had already worked with. before i took steps to visit cannabis businesses i thought it was important my team have a chance to go inside and speak to men who had been impacted. that conversation needed to happen so we know how we are making an impact with the work that we are doing. the da's office as we were leading up to the legalization of marijuana in the state we started having conversations on the policy team what that could look like. the district attorney was really focused on the right side of history for this. we realized it would be quite a heavy lift for individuals who have been negatively impacted by the war on drugs to expunge the record. it was important to figure out the framework to make it seamless and easy.

they put their minds to it after some time and many conversations the data analysts and other policy walk throughs on the team came up with the idea to engage the tech community in this process. code for america helped us developed the rhythm to be used for any jurisdiction across the state that was important to create a solution to be used to assist all jurisdictions dealing with this matter. the office of cannabis is the first office to have a completely digital application process. we worked with the digital team to develop the online application. there are going to be hiccups. we are first to do it. it is one of the most rewarding parts to offer a seamless -- to offer a seamless approach. that is how they can find solutions to solve many of the community challenges. the best way to respond to prop

64 was to retroactively expunge 9,000 cannabis related records for san francisco. it feels like justice full circle for my personal experience. in the past i was furthering the war on drugs just as my directive. really coming from a place of public safety. that was the mandate and understanding. it is nice to see that pass a society we are able to look at some of our laws and say, you know what? we got it wrong. let's get this right. i had the privilege of being in the existing framework. my predecessor nicole elliott did an incredible job bringing together the individuals super-passionate about cannabis. >> the office was created in july of 2017. i came in early 2018.

i have been able to see the office's development over time which is nice. it is exciting to be in the space, stickily in thinking about her leadership. >> looking for the office it is always we might be before my time when i was working for the forboard of supervisors. i learn new things every day it is challenging and rewarding for me. >> we get the privilege to work in an office that is innovating. we get to spearhead the robust exprogram. >> i am excited she came on board to leverage experience as a prosecutor 10 years as we contemplate enforcements but approaching it without replicating the war on drugs. >> i was hired by cam laharris.

i haven't seen a district attorney that looked kind of like me. that could be a path in my life. i might not have considered it. it is important that women and certainly women of color and spaces of leadership really do their part to bring on and mentor as many young people as they can. it is superimportant to take advantage of as many opportunities as they can when they can intern because the doors are wide open. plans change and that is okay. the way this was shaped because i took a risk to try something new and explore something and show that i was capable. you are capable, right? it was about leaning in and being at the table to say my voice matters. you find your passion, the sky

this meeting will come to order, this is the december 1st budget and finance committee meeting. i'm the chair of the committee. i'm joined by supervisor gordon mar and supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: present. >> chairman: okay. mr. cook, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes, mr. chair, the minutes will reflect that the

committee met via video conference and public access to city services is important. public comment will be available on each item of this agenda. either channels 26, 78, or 99 and sfgovtv.org. each speaker will be allowed two minutes to speak unless otherwise stated. the public comment call in number is streaming across the screen. the number is (415) 655-0001. please press star three to be added to the speaker line. speak clearly and slowly.

alternatively, you may submit public comment in either of the following ways. e-mail myself the budget and finance committee clerk. if you submit public comment via e-mail, it will be forwarded to supervisors and will be included as part of the official file. written comments may be sent to city hall. 1 dr. carlton b. goodlet place. we did receive a request for interpretive services for item number eleven. so we are working with the office of civic engagement and immigrant affairs. mr. costanza. >> translator: [speaking

spanish]. >> clerk: thank you. and finally items acted upon today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda of december 7th unless otherwise stated. mr. chair. >> chairman: thank you so much. we've got a full meeting today. thank you in advance everyone for your patience. mr. clerk, can you please call item one. >> clerk: yes. mr. chair. item one is the ordinance

waiving the fee required by public works code section 7.421 section b for temporary space occupancy permits on city streets on saturday, december 4th, 2021, sunday, december 5th, 2021. and saturday, december 11th, and sunday, december 12th. members of the public should call (415) 655-0001. meeting id is 24829454182. then press pound and pound again. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. >> chairman: thank you. i know this was continued from

last week. do we have any additional questions, remarks, or comments. >> hi, chair haney. i have no new updates as it was amended last week. >> chairman: great and is there any b.l.a. comments on this? >> chair haney, we don't have any comments on this legislation right now. >> chairman: great. thank you. can we open this up for public comment. >> clerk: yes, mr. chair. members of the public who wish to comment on this item, please press star three to be added to the line to speak. mr. atkins, please let us know if there are any callers who wish to comment. >> mr. clerk, there no callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you. >> chairman: i want to make a

motion to move item number one to the full board with a above recommendation. can we have a roll call, please. >> clerk: [roll call] we have two ayes. we have member mar absent. >> chairman: great. thank you. yes, we'll go to the full board with a positive recommendation. can you please call item number two. >> clerk: yes. item number two is a resolution retroactively authorizing public works to accept and extend the $1.9 million from the 2019 active transportation program to fund the construction of the public works alamany interchange improvements phase two project

for the project period october 2021 through june 2026. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item call (415) 655-0001. meeting id 24829454183 then press pound twice. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. mr. chair. >> chairman: thank you. and we have the department of public works to present on this item. >> good morning. the resolution before you today authorizes to accept and expend $129,000 in active

transportation grant programs funds. the project will improve alamany boulevard. this is where u.s. 101, i-280, and bishop park all intercept. this is the second phase of two phases. the first was completed earlier this year and included improvements as well. the decision was to retract this because we were only to secure matching funds through the fiscal year '22 budget and so we had to start the bidding process bare lel to this our

project manager is here in attendance and can answer project questions. >> chairman: great. is there a b.l.a. comment on this project. >> yes, chair haney. this resolution would retroactively authorize public works to accept and expend a $1.9 million fund. the action is retroactive because public works secured the matching funds only in the current budget. we showed the budget in page four of our report. and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> chairman: great. any questions or comments from

colleagues? can we open this to public comment, please? >> clerk: yes, mr. chair. operations is checking to see if there are any callers in the queue. members of the public who wish to provide comment on this item, press star three now to be added to speak. the for those on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and that's your cue to begin your comments. mr. atkins, do we have any callers? >> mr. clerk, there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you much. mr. chair. >> chairman: great. all right. i'm going to make a motion to move item two to the full board with a positive recommendation. can we take a roll call vote, please. >> clerk: on that motion to forward this item as recommended, [roll call]

we have three ayes. >> chairman: thank you so much mr. cantaneya. mr. clerk, please call item three. >> clerk: yes, mr. chair, item three is authorizing the port of san francisco to accept and exstend the grant of $1.4 million approximately to help fish and wildlife to fund the herons's head park shoreline. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call (415) 655-0001. meeting id 2482, 9454183 and then press pound twice. if you haven't already done so, please press star three to line up to speak. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. and you may begin your

comments. mr. chair. >> chairman: thank you. and i want to invite carol balk for the port of san francisco on this item. >> good morning supervisors. thanks for the opportunity to present to you this morning. i'm here today to request your authorization to accept and expend a $1.493 million grant from the california department of fish and wildlife to support the heron's head park shoreline resilience project. since the port first created wetland habitat and park amenities at heron's head park 22 years ago, subsidence, erosion, and infestation by invasive species have reduced both the quality and size of habitat without shoreline

stable legislation it is expected that it will next slide, the port's proposed living shoreline project will construct a beach behind a course sand and gravel beach allowing the marsh to migrate up land with sea level rise and providing habitat through mid century. the project also includes youth employment and community engagement projects. next slide, please. the living shoreline project

disbursing grant funds and those will be used to hire local youth, remove invasives and replace with natives. that will work. we'll continue with measure aa funding that will continue if for five years. the shoreline stabilization element is part of the project that's proposed to be funded by the california department of fish and wildlife grant that i'm here authorizing your request for today. the wetland revegetation work has gun we have already secured a $1.6 million grant which was approved by the board in july.

today we are requesting your authorization to accept and expend the $1.493 million grant for the department of fish and wild life. and the funding gap will be funded through the port or other source of funds. next slide, please. the california department of fish and wild life grant will be used for it is subject to similar terms and conditions of other state grants including indemnification, insurance, and source of funds in all communications and obligation to operate and maintain the shoreline and public open space for 25 years after the end of the grant term. i'm available to answer any

questions. >> chairman: thank you. appreciate that. and that's very exciting. is there a bla report on this item? >> chair haney, we did not report on this item. >> chairman: colleagues, questions or comments? not seeing any. can we go to public comment, please? >> clerk: yes, mr. chair. members of the public who wish to provide comment on this item, please press star 3 now to be added to the line to speak. for those already on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and that is your queue to begin your comments. do we have any callers in the queue. >> mr. clerk, there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you. mr. chair. >> chairman: great. that means public comment is closed. i think we can all agree this is a positive thing. so thank you for your work.

and i want to move item three to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> thank you. >> clerk: on the motion to move this item with a positive recommendation, [roll call] we have three ayes. >> chairman: all right. this will go to the full board with a positive recommendation. we will now call items 4 and 5 together please. >> clerk: yes, mr. chair. item number four is a resolution approving modification number three to grant number 00-464 between the city and county of san francisco. united airlines to extend the term by three years, provide for rental adjustments and update certain legal

requirements is a resolution approving modification number one to grant lease the lease between the city and county acting by and through its airport commission and united airlines inc. provide rent adjustments through the extension term and update certainly provincial requirements. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call (415) 655-0001. meeting id 24829454183 and then press pound twice. if you haven't already done so, press star three to line up to speak. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand and that is your queue to begin

your comments. mr. chair. >> chairman: thank you. and we have the airport commission to present on these items. welcome. >> thank you, supervisor. that would extended term by three years through december 2024. the leases include plot fix which is comprised of 12.03 acres for an initial annual rent of at least $2.3 million. plot 7x is comprised of 11.3 acres for an initial annual rent of $2.2 million for the operation of an on site kitchen, repair of its grand service kitchen. total revenue is estimated to be at least $2 million. regular appraisals in the renewal term. it is not required under chapter 23 of the administrative code. at the time of the negotiations

of these modifications, the airport was faced with an economic environment and recovery period. because of these unique and economic operating conditions and the short period of the extension termses, staff determined it was in its best interest to continue rent adjustment for the extension term rather than resetting the rents based on a new appraisal. i'm joined by my colleagues from aviation management and we're happy to answer any questions you may have. >> chairman: great. thank you. can we go to the b.l.a. report on this item. >> yes, chair haney. nick menard from the b.l.a. these two modifications file 21141 improves modification number three for plot 6' extending the term through december 2024 and file 21114

improves modification number one for plot 7x extending the term through december 2024. as we show on page 8 of our report, the leases would generate approximately $13.2 million in revenues for the airport. now, under the terms of the original leases, the properties were reappraised every i. years as part of the readjustment process, but that's not longer a requirement in these extensions and as the airport stated, staff opted to continue rent adjustments rather this resetting the base rent based on the new appraisal. these properties were last appraised in 2016. and the airport did not provide any analysis. so we can't evaluate whether these lease modifications are reasonably priced and so we therefore consider it to be a policy matter for the board of supervisors. >> chairman: thank you. colleagues, questions or

comments? can we go to public comment, please? >> clerk: yes, mr. chair. operations is checking to see if there are callers in the queue. members of the public who wish to provide public comment to the item, please press star 3. those on hold please wait until the system has indicated you have raised your hand. do we have any callers? >> mr. clerk, there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you very much. mr. chair. >> chairman: thank you. public comment is closed. all right. i would like to move items four and five to the full board with a positive recommendation. can we have a roll call vote, please. >> clerk: on the motion to move the items to the full board as a positive recommendation, [roll call]

we have two ayes with vice chair safai absent. >> chairman: thank you. those two items will go to the if full board with positive recommendation. >> thank you. >> chairman: mr. clerk, can you please call item number six. >> clerk: yes, mr. chair, item number six is a resolution and the department of public health as far as needed industry personnel to maintain mike cantalana dated staffing levels to increase the agreement by approximately 15.2 million for an amount not to exceed $41.2 million from july 1st,

2022, for a total agreement term for yul 1st, 2019 through june 30th, 2024. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call (415) 655-0001. meeting id 24829454183. then press pound twice. if you haven't already done so, please press star 3 to line up to speak. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. mr. chair. >> chairman: thank you. [please stand by]

>> the original budget $25 million needs increased by $264,843,000,000 to cover actual costs and meet projected costs through june 30, 2022. we need a total contract budget

52771.637 through june 30th. for the balance increase the department is proposing two additional years to be added. $17.8 million in fiscal year 22-23. $15 million in fiscal year 23-24. it does drop to $32 million. we are requesting two additional years because of the results and fallout of the pandemic. we have noted the nursing schools had to cancel clinical rotation and extend students curriculum for the 40% nursing shortage coming in the next two to three years related to nurses being fatigued, leaving the profession. we want to ensure safe staffing level as well. the department recognizes that

this is a very large contract. in the agreement with the recommendation of budget and legislative analyst. i am happy to answer your questions and there are other staff here for other answers. thank you. first to the bla report. >> thank you, chair haney. this report i will give you a revised resolution that they are submitting to the committee. it will approve agreement 3 between the department and registry staffing. this amendment increases total agreement $69.7 million.

extends two years through june 2024. as noted the current agreement does not expire until june 2022 department is requesting this extension because it has incurred expenditured that exceeded the existing not to exceed amount of $25 million by $6 million. there has been expenditures $32 million under the current agreement. we show the projected spending on the contract through june 2024 on page 15 of the report. this requested increase covers costs incurred by the department as well as projected spending through that time. due to the size of the contract uncertain future need for temporary staff we recommend the board of supervisors amend the resolution as detailed on page 16 of our report to request the department of public health report to our office regarding

actual contract spending so we can review that as part of our annual budget review. we otherwise recommend approval of the resolution as amended. >> supervisor safai. >> sorry. i was knocked off. i apologize. you know, i want to say for the record to start. i had at the request before i was on the committee i asked for this item to have different scrutiny. we continued a portion of it. we are in a different spot than we were pre-covid. a lot of the same issues and

questions i had at the hospital exist. i am not clear why even from the bla report we couldn't answer the question, some of the questions i had. one of the things i would like to know from sfgh. what are the current staffing numbers for nurses, staffing level? how many nurses do you have dph wide? how does that compare to pre-covid. i know you have had to rely heavily on contract nursing. i himself know that we made a significant push to limit the amount of time it takes to hire nurses. there is always this reliance on contract nurses versus full-time nurses. it causes me, in particular, for the work i have been doing gone out and visited the hospitals,

talked to nurses and talked to supervisors and staff and had multiple meetings with you. i was not briefed on this item and they did not reach atomy on this item. i have concerns and questions. what is the current staffing? what have you done to increase permanent staffing positions related to nurses? >> thank you for the questions. number one, sfg prior to the last couple months 7% vacancy rate. today we are at 4% vacancy rate. we have decreased the vacancy rate. i don't have the total number. i can get that to you. >> not to be argumentative. that is the opposite what i read in the bla report. it said the other way around. prior 4.5. now increased to 7%. >> as of today i went through

the hr department. we are at 4% csfg. >> laguna honda was 7%. >> what does that put you at city wide? >> that wouldn't be total number. we have nurses -- i don't have the city-wide number. we are not counting primary care. >> what is the current number of vacant positions you have for nurses? >> i can get that to you in just a minute. what we have been doing we have been doing training programs. we are actively hiring. we have had just eight training program people in emergency department. six successfully completed in the count as of 11/29. on december 13 we have another

class of nurses in the emergency department to fill vacancies. we are doing the same in critical care. two area was the highest vacancies at this point. >> do you know the current number of total vacancies? >> we are going to get those numbers. i will have them in three minutes for you. >> what is the average time now to hire a nurse? >> when we did accelerated hiring, it was about, i would say, 30, 35 days, 40 days. what we did was they did ap reviews and merit cleared and expedited hiring. the managers interviewed and did a fair where everybody was processed. the first two days we processed

45 people and 32 were nurses. it was about 45 days. >> when was this job fair? >> it was november -- last weekend in october. i want to call it a possessing fair. these are people identified for positions. instead of we brought in a crew of people from occupational health. fingerprinted and did it all-in-one day. from that point they were able to start within two weeks. >> this was a month ago? >> last weekend in october. >> do you have anyone from the hr team here today? >> i do not. i can certainly. >> for me one of the biggest

question remains the hiring process, amount of time it takes to hire nurses. then the overall vacancy rate. a number of positions that are vacant because i think that, you know, this department in particular has been accustomed to and been overly reliant on traveling nurses and contract nurses. it so to the detriment of the existing staph. we have heard a lot over the last six months about people doing mandatory over time, under staffed. i understand your staffing ratios have gone up based on covid. instead of three two one it is two to one, if i am not mistaken. you have had to hire more nurses. we consistently hear from emergency room nurses and a lot of the front line staff at sfgh.

just concerned about this over reliance and why we would be putting so much money into traveling nurses. what is this contract equate to in terms of number of full-time employees? how many equivalent full-time employees is this contract? what does it equate to? could those resources be better spent in hiring more full-time employees to your team? >> those are very good questions, supervisor. one of the things i want to add to this we have 129 nurses currently at zuckerberg that are on leave. we have people on leave for many reasons. these are leaves anywhere between three weeks to three or four months or longer.

those are permanent positions held by our staff that are on leave. they will be returning. we are using registry more for that as well. in addition, we are backfilling covid activities. we never budgeted for covid vaccines, covid tent testing, covid treatments. in addition to having to do our -- for lack of better words nine to five job -- covid added extra positions we don't have that should be time limited. >> were you done?

>> yes. >> i am sorry. i thought my connection got lost. >> do you have the current number of vacancies yet? if not i am happy to hand it over to chair haney. i know he has questions as well. you can come back. i don't want to dominate the line of questioning. another thing that is good to know we try to do this through bla report to find the equivalent number of full-time positions this contract equates to so that we are not overly reliant. i understand there is a need for this service. i am not convinced today, based on the information i presented from the bla, from what i hear from you today we have answers to all of the questions. chair haney. >> i do have the vacancy and the

numbers for dph8.49. 263 vacancies. >> is that related to this conversation today, in number of nurses and support staff around that or is that everybody? >> that is everybody. >> i am concerned about the number of nurses and the physicians this contract would be supporting. that is the number i wanted to see. >> okay. it would be open to all of these positions. if it met the criteria. >> go ahead, chair haney and come back to me. >> i appreciate those questions. i have similar questions.

do we have a strategy to rely a lot less on this sort of staffing model and what does that look like? so that we are not in a couple years relying on this model even more? >> excellent question. we have strategies in place for emergency department. we will do training programs 2.5 to three months with eight people in the training program. we are working with the colleges. i am the chair of the chief nursing officer of the hospital council. all cnos are getting together. we are facing the same problem with nurses in san francisco. we adopted a university. dph adopted university of san francisco. we are working to provide extra

clinical rotations so we have students here that understand. they will be able to do student rotations. we are going to allow our staff to work as faculty working for usf so we can really recruit people from the ground up. that is one strategy that is in place. i met with them twice in our first clinical group we will be working with will be in january cohort, spring semester. training programs every three months for critical care. we will do that. we are going to medsurgery. as nurses reassign they go to ed, critical care, maternal child health. we plan to do training programs every two months. in addition if we don't have vacancies, we would train a few per diem so that when the

vacancies came that he would be ready for a pcf position. that is best for patient care and that is what we are going for. the registry has a question if we don't get it right away the schools are great to work with. unless we have people that live in the bay area or san francisco, it is not an easy place to relocate to. that is why we are allowing students to come in and go in our specialty areas as students because we want them to see what a great place this is to work. those are a few strategies. i have more. i hope that is helpful. >> how do we compare to other hospital systems when it relates

to the departments of public health or large public hospitals when it comes to relyians on this sort of model for staffing? >> we are talking to my colleagues, they are using much more agency staff than we are. our turnover rate. we did a turnover rate from november 20 to november 21st how many left in that time. about 7.5. nationally it is 11. two highest areas of turnover emergency department and critical care which nationally are the highest because they are the most difficult areas to work. we are tracking data. we are working with our staff to have retention committees to

ensure that we are looking to keep you and then talk to staff here why do you stay in we want to really reach out to our staff and figure out what to do to support them as well. >> supervisor safai and i called a hearing in january on the broader issues of staffing. they are issues we are concerned about. when we talk to our nurses and i have been to general a few times over the last few weeks. their feeling is that they have a lot of concerns about staffing and this particular model of staffing creates challenges for our current staff. we want to rely more on a pipeline of permanent union full-time staff. i think that the size of this

contract is concerning for that reason. supervisor mar. >> thank you, chair haney. i appreciate all of the questions from you and vice chair safai for this discussion about this important budget item. i want to follow up and understand the increased cost of using the registry services if that is permanent employees because that is another important aspect in addition that has been touched on in the discussion about wanting to fill vacancies and have the important work that dph and the hospitals are doing by permanent employees. that is better for patients as well. there is an increased cost.

i wonder if you can talk about that a little bit. the higher cost involved in using the temp nurses and other employees versus permanent. >> i have a finance colleague on the line. they can answer that. >> good morning. thank you for the question, supervisor mar. eric, director of budget. the projected costs are best estimate built on factors of uncertainty and variabilities. the pandemic, retention and staffing challenges. we are requesting authority to spend when necessary to maintain the staffing level. our goal continues to be using civil service nursing and reduce

reliance on this contract. >> what is the cost differential between a f.t.e. nurse through the registry service versus a civil service nurse? >> including fringe, depending whether or not we need to pay the covid rate, it is almost equivalent in terms of cost for registry versus civil service. it might be slightly cheaper or less expensive if we were to pay the regular operating rate for the nurses. given the covidvates it is higher than civil service staffing. >> i am sorry. i was looking at the bla report. they had a section on this. according to the bla, they were

saying that the cost for f.t.e. is 14% higher than department with fringe for comparable nursing position. it would be more significantly expensive using registry service for other positions. this is just another reason that i think iowa and the board really want to see you continue -- the department continue the efforts to fill the vacant positions. i appreciate the work you have done on it and being creative about it, too. thank you. >> before any amendments or next steps can we please open up to public comment.

>> we are checking callers in the queue. members of the public press star 3 to speak. if you are on hold wait until you are unmuted and begin your comments. do we have any callers who wish to provide comment on this item? >> mr. clerk, there are no callers in the queue. >> public comment is closed. i know we have the amendments offered by the bla. i think the department is amenable to these. can i please move to accept the amendments offered. >> on the motion to accept those amendments, vice chair.

(roll call). >> we have three ayes. >> the amendments are accepted. we need to continue this item because of these amendments. supervisor safai anything more you wanted to say? there are some things you want to make sure we hear reported back when this returns to us. >> thank you, chair. i definitely would like to have someone from the hr team come to the next meeting. i want to have further discussion on what the timeline is. we spent a lot of time, as ms. denton said. we definitely need to know for the work we put in almost two

years ago if the time to hire nurses has been cut down. that is an important question to have an answer to. secondly, i want to know what the equivalent cost of this contract is in terms of full-time employees. this contract is close to $60 million. what is the trade-off? are we putting are right resources into traveling nurses and contract employees versus having them be more permanent? that is an important question to know because as i stated and i think the chair stated and we heard from the front line nurses and this is an ongoing conversation with sf general. when people feel like there is a lot of turnover, there is not a lot of consistency in staffing.

at some point people start to call in sick more, start to have more turnover. i know there has been some attrition based on all of the stress involved with having the work the last 18 months on the front leans dealing -- front lines dealing with this pandemic for the people we are trying to accommodate and hire for and sustain. it is an important conversation to have. i don't feel we fully answered those questions today. i feel the size of this contract is significant, the amount of time that is asked to extend the contract is significant. it requires more in-depth conversation. since we did this work jointly to try to improve the process of hiring, we would like to have a better understanding how many vacant nurses positions there are and get an answer to that today. i want to know how long it takes

to hire them and what the equivalent is of the contract in terms of full-time staffing. those are important questions to have answered before we make a final decision on the size of this contract that is the reason why i ask for part of it to be continued when we talked about this even -- a year ago that we had this conversation. i appreciate the fact that it is continued because of the amendments. until i have real certainty around those answers, i won't feel comfortable voting to send this contract forward. thank you, mr. chair. >> thank you. i am going to make a motion to continue this item to our next budget committee meeting december 8th as amended. can we have a roll call vote on that please. >> on the motion to continue this item to the december 8th meeting of the budget and

finance committee as amended. (roll call). >> we have three ayes. >> thank you so much. thank you. we will see you next week. appreciate it. >> this will be continued to the december 8th meeting. please call item 7. >> item 7 is a resolution approving modification modification number 2 of lease gs-0 9:00 p.m.-lca3395 between the united states of america and the city and county of san francisco acting by and through the airport commission to extend the term by three years for a new term ending january 3, 2025

and increasing the annual rent from $665,000 totaling $1.9 million for offices occuoccu-- occupied by the u.s. federal bureau of investigation at the international terminal to commence following approval by the board of supervisors. call 415-655-0001. press pound twice. dial star 3 to line up to speak. system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. wait null you are unmuted to begin your comments. mr. chair. >> thank you. welcome back. >> thank you, chair haney. airport seeks approval to the existing lease with the federal borough pro2396 square feet of office space in the

international terminal. am rent is $665,489. tropical stormnal rent based on comparative cat go rears. the total revenue over three years will be approximately $2 million. modification to extend the term for an additional three years. f.b.i. of san francisco at sfo consists of liaison agents to facilitate f.b.i. related operations at sfo which require planning and logistics. it serves as command post for national security issues and crimes on aircraft. the airport considers the fbi services critical to security. i am here with my colleagues for questions.

>> any questions or comments? not seeing any. bla, please. >> thank you. this approves modification 2 of the lease with the fbi to represent office space in the international terminal provides for parking spaces as well. i have no charge. the modification extends through jan 2023. we show on page 21 of our report it would generate $1.9 million to the airport. the lease terms are consistent with what was previously approved by this board of supervisors. we recommend approval. >> thank you. can we open up for public comment, please.

>> operations is checking for callers. members of the public press star 3 now to be added to the line to speak. please continue to wait you are unmuted to begin the comments. any callers in the queue? >> mr. clerk, no callers in the queue. >> thank you. i want to move to the full board with positive recommendation. roll call vote please. >> on the motion to move this item to the full board with positive recommendation. (roll call). >> we have three ayes. >> full board with positive recommendation. thank you so much to the airport team. please call item 8.

>> resolution authorizing the department of technology to enter into an agreement with at&t corporation to purchase wired voice and data network and telecommunication services with a not to exceed amount of approximately $80 million for a six and one-half year term of january 1, 2022 through june 30, 2028, and with one five year option to extend pursuant to charter, section 9.117. members of the public to comment call 415-655-0001. meeting id24829454183. pound twice. please dial star 3 to line up to speak. please wait until the system indicates you are unmuted to begin your comments. mr. chair. >> thank you. we have mr. shay from the

department of technology to present on this item. >> thank you, good morning supervisors and colleagues. thank you for the opportunity to present here. i am the manager at the department of technology. i am here to seek approval with at&t corporation for telephone and internet services. this new agreement with the existing agreement which will expire by the end of this year. not to exceed amount for this agreement is $80 million for 6.5 years. the estimated annual cost will be $11.1 million beryear. plus 11% for contingency. for comparison the total amount for this existing agreement is $420 million for 12 years or

$11.8 million per year on average. this new agreement will be with the california state next generation agreement. at&t hired a consulting firm for a study about existing agreements. at&t rate 26% below the state and local government average in the u.s. we are going to get a lot of benefit from this agreement. it allows us to leverage the buying power. on average 65% off the list price. we also avoid one-time cost of $2.4 million to $5.3 million to

do our own solicitation or switch to different vendor. in addition the city can stop agency service at any time to avoid the early fee charged by telecom companies. [indiscernable] discussed about the amendment to if existing agreement last year. in particular we discovered that our services did not go down. it went up during the pandemic. secondly, the contract contains most favored nation clause which guarantees the city the lowest pricing of any public or private entity. last on the list new agreement with competitors to reduce the

cost to competition. i am happy to answer your questions. my colleagues are also here to help answer questions if you have any. thank you all very much. >> thank you. bla on this? >> yes. this proposed resolution authorizes the department of technology to enter into a new agreement with at&t to provide the city with telephone and internet services for 6.5 years starting january 2022. as shown on page 26 of our report. the $80 million is based on current be annual spending which totals $11 million per year. as stated the agreement uses

latest rate negotiated by the state of california to be below market by a rate study under taken by the department. based on that rate study and forecast provided by department staff we believe this contract is reasonably priced. we recommend approval of this resolution. i will be happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. public comment, please. member of the public press star 3 to be added to the line to speak. on hold wait until the system indicates you are unmuted to begin your comments. do we have any callers?

mr. adkins. i do believe that caller was silent. next. do we have a caller on the line? >> two callers unmuted twice but they are silent lines. >> thank you, mr. atkins. last call for public comment. >> david wong. veteran san francisco i support the bmr for veterans. >> sorry. this is not that item yet. press star 3 to get back in line we will call that very soon.

now we are considering the resolution for this agreement with at&t. mr. at kins any more callers? >> hello. i know the issue. independently we are muted. when you unmute our lines we are muted on our ends and cannot get through. i am curious as to why at&t and why not any other service provider? >> we are taking public comment right now. this is not a question and answer session. if you are completed with comments we will move to the next caller. >> it is not productive. i am finished. >> thank you much. mr. adkins any callers to

comment on the agreement with at&t? >> mr. chair i believe that completes our queue. >> public comment is closed. i don't see any other questions or comments from colleagues. i want to -- no amendments. i will move to the full board with positive recommendation. roll call vote, please. >> on the motion to move forward to the full board with positive recommendation. (roll call).

>> we have three ayes. >> to full board with positive recommendation. thank you so much. >> thank you. have a nice day. >> please go to item 9. >> item 9. ordinance propiating 3pone $6 million from the issuance of the special tax bonds of the city's improvement area number 2 of the community facilities district number 2016-1 for funding of certain public facilities and infrastructure for the treasure island development project in fiscal year 2021-22 and placing such amounts on controller's reserve.

call 415-655-0001 and id24829454183. the system will indicate you have raised your hands. weight you are unmuted to -- wait until you are unmuted to comment. mr. chair. >> we have the controller's office to present. >> thank you. good morning. i am before you for the $31.63 million in a special tax on the residential building under development in treasure island improvement area 2. bond proceeds to use expenditures for public improvements. it will go to fund reserve fund and to pay. [indiscernable] the board approved this

resolution on october 26. this is tied to that bond resolution to be presented on the financing plans. we are available to answer any questions you have related to the proposed legislation. >> thank you. bla. >> we cannot report on this item. >> thank you for this update and this work. any questions or comments from colleagues? public comment, please. >> mr. chair. operations is checking for callers. members of the public who wish to comment on this ordinance regarding the issuance of special tax bonds to treasure island press star 3 to be added to the line to speak. for those on hold please continue to wait until the

system indicates you have been unmuted. mr. adkins. do we have any callers? >> yes, this is michael nolte. we believe these funds are needed to do some complete work on treasure island for a long time it is neglected by the city. it is promised to do this so it is time these permits are done to make treasure island a significant part of san francisco. >> thank you for your comments. do we have any more speaker in the queue? >> there are no further callers in the queue. >> thank you. mr. chair. >> public comment is closed. motion to move to the full board with positive recommendation.

roll call vote, please. (roll call). >> we have three ayes. >> great. thank you. full board with positive recommendation. please call item 10. >> item 10. the ordinance amending the park code to reduce or eliminate fees for admission to and use certain facilities on park property for veterans and active members of the united states armed forces. members of the public to comment call 415-655-0001. id24829454183. press pound twice. dial star 3 to line up to speak. the system prompt will indicate

you have raised your hand. wait until you are unmuted to begin your comments. >> thank you. we have supervisor mar to present on this item. >> thank you so much, colleagues for this opportunity to consider this important legislation to acknowledge and support our veterans community. as you know, i introduced this legislation last month along with another piece of legislation that would give veterans priority in the city blow market rate -- below market rate affordable housing program. this is a time when we were acknowledging and thanking the veterans in our city for sacrifice and service to our

country. i want to thank the veteran community leaders who have been working with me and my staff allen long on these new policy proposals to lift up veterans in our city. especially from the veterans affairs commission. one death one voice. i did want to specifically thank them for their work on this. this is simple. this would give veteran active duty, members of the armed forces fee waivers or discounts to key recreational facilities in the city rec and park department. this includes the japanese tea

garden, botanical garden and conservatory of flowers in golden gate park and fee waivers for swimming pools in san francisco, reduced rates for wedding at rec and park and camp mather up near yosemite. this is just a way to give thanks to our veterans for their service to our country. it is also consistent with free admission or reduced admission that veterans enjoy at national parks in california state parks and the museums and attractions in the city including california academy of signs, asian art museum and the sf for example.

this is one important step to take as a city to honor and thank veterans for their service. it is also helping veterans if you help support veterans to address one of their core challenges. as they return back to reintegrate in the community that is mental health and physical well-being. being able to freely and easily enjoy the world class recreational attractions and facilities in our city is one way to support them in the key need for veterans. chair haney i invite the budget analyst office to share their analysis of the legislation. >> thank you.

this proposed ordinance would reduce or waive fees for recreation and park facilities for veterans defined in this legislation as actively serving or veteran members of the armed servicers. we don't know the exact number of residents and tourist veterans that visit these facilities. based on our review of census and department of defense data we believe it is 3.4 to 8% of the population. as we show on page 29 of the report. we estimated the fee revenue lost between 320 to $757,000 annually. these are general purpose revenues for the department with exception of the fees for the tennis court. because this ordinance reduces revenues outside of the annual budget process, we do consider it to be a proper matter for the

board of supervisors. i am happy to answer questions about the analysis. >> thank you. i did want to say that we have been working closely with rec and park, director ginsburg and his staff on this legislation. we appreciate they support the goals of this legislation to support our veterans to create access to city recreational facilities. they have raised concerns around the budget impact and the rec and park department has suffered significant loss in revenue, particularly around fees during the pandemic. they haven't fully recovered. i do have a set of amendments i will introduce that i have worked out with rec and park departments that address their

concerns around the budget impact but still allow us to move forward to provide this important benefit to the veterans community. i did want to suggest that if we can go to public comment before discussions the amendments. there was a number of folks that were hoping to weigh in during public comment on this proposal. >> open up public comment, please. >> yes, chair haney. operations is checking to see if there are callers in the queue. members of the public to comment dial star 3 now to be added to the line to speak. on hold continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted to begin your comments. mr. adkins, any callers? >> i am nicholas from the veterans affairs commission in san francisco.

i would like to thank this committee for considering to add veterans. thank you, gordon mar and commissioner chan for making this an opportunity for veterans to come to san francisco to experience the beauty that these veterans fought for, to see how beautiful the city is. with regards to the loss in revenue. consider if a veteran comes into the museum for free, they will hit up the gift shop and buy stuff and contribute to the park. they will find a piece of belongs to the city and gravitated to san francisco art and culture. thank you for considering this measure. we are grateful to be part of the city. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. mr. adkins, next speaker, please. >> i am sally van loon, san

francisco native and resident homeowner. i am very much in support of supporting and empowering our veterans and active reserve military personnel with this proposed legislation to make all city park and rec facilities free of charge for all of our heroes. thank you so much. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hello. i am a resident apnative of san francisco. calling in support of the discount for veterans. i am a veteran wife and caregiver of veterans. girlfriends and wives parents and we agreena veterans need outdoor activities to reduce

every day stress. we have active duty members arrive in the city for various celebrations like the fleet week. these are active members on ships for months on end and training on a base that need space to stretch their legs and have a positive distraction. giving veterans and active members of the military this service encouraging them to use the spaces to improve their health habits. as a city that promotes healthy life for the public, please consider and approve this change to the park code. thank you all and have a great week. >> next speaker please. >> i am ryan miller. marine corps veteran born in san francisco. i want run suicide prevention.

i am in strong support. we are who we are because we are recruited from lower socioeconomic regions of the community. this is not a portion of the community in one of the richest cities of in the country to worry about revenue from. there are other tourists and tech pros to get this revenue from. thank you for your leadership on this. i am in enthusiastic support. thank you for listening. >> thank you for your comments. mr. adkins, next speaker, please. >> president of the sheriff's association. we support the discount for veterans. it is a great idea. they are serving all of us for

the country to protect us. thank you for embracing. a lot of callers brought up good points. in addition to that, you know, having veterans accessing the parks at a discount or free. there is another point. there is a possibility they bring family members and friends with them increasing revenue to the park. this is a positive. i think this is a great way to increase traffic to the park. fantastic thing for san francisco to do for the veterans. thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> hello. i am jason. veterans affairs commission of san francisco. i want to thank commissioner chan for helping veterans in the community here to get free

access and discounts to park access. i work with veteran justice court part of the social function is to engage with the community with free access to alternative activities instead of continuing what they are struggling with with substance abuse and metal health. this would give support for mental health and veterans in the community. thank you. [please stand by] very much for

your comments. next speaker, please.

>> caller: hi, i'm christine. thank you, commission, for inviting me to speak today. i currently live in san antonio, texas where i was born and raised and i strongly support this legislation and think that it is a great idea to offer veterans a space to [inaudible] their mental health and visit other veterans that could support them as well. a lot of times we make bonds with people that we've never met through social media platforms, now that coe visit is on the rise and still continuing to grow. it would be a great opportunity once travelers back up to meet people that you've actually connected with virtually. thank you. and i'm done speaking. >> thank you very much for your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: hi, my name is hanley. i was born and raised in san

francisco. i'm a disabled veteran and veterans affairs commissioner. i wanted to say that this bill will give thanks to all the men and women who served our country and protect our freedoms. many veterans come back home with ptsd and mental health issues and studies say that if you are outside or in a safe space, or special environment, like the wonderful parts that we have in san francisco, your ptsd and mental health will lower. i want to personally thank the supervisors. thank you, supervisor mar, for authoring this bill and supervisor melgar, stephanie wallon, safai and ronen for co-sponsoring this great bill. thank you for supporting our veterans. and one more last thing. veterans did not earn this status just in san francisco. they earned their status serving this country.

so if you guys are trying to think of limiting it to san francisco residents, you know, i think that is a slap in the face in our veterans community. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: hi, david wong. san francisco resident and also a veteran. i'm in support of this bill. thank you for the board of supervisors and thank you for commissioner chan for bringing up this legislation. saving a veteran is much, much better than trying to earn a dollar or two in the long run. and thank you and i'm in support of this legislation. thank you. bye-bye. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please.

>> caller: hello. i'm super bowl champion with the new england patriots. i'd like to thank commissioner chan and the san francisco veterans affairs for allowing me to be in support of san francisco free parks for veterans and legislation. thank you for your service for your country. i was diagnosed in 2016 with cognitive impaymenter and preparkinsons and know this will be great for the city of san francisco and all veterans worldwide. i'm rodney bailey and done speaking. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: good afternoon. my name is alfred simms.

i'm the veterans services officer for san francisco and i enthusiastically support this legislation to allow veterans free access to san francisco parks and other recreation. i'm a veteran who suffers from ptsd and i definitely understand how important it is to give us a access to cultural environment that are serene and that help us deal with our ptsd. so, thank you board of supervisors and veterans affairs commission. hanley chan, especially. thank you for all you guy dos for our veterans here in the city of san francisco. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: he hi, my name is mason. i'm an employee with united airlines for 38 years and i'm 100% disabled veteran. i'm visually impaired.

i strongly commend you for this action and strongly support it. i'm not a resident of san francisco and i believe mr. chan alluded to the fact that i think all bay area and visiting veterans should endure this privilege f you should enact it. i would say, though, that someone made the comment about veterans getting free admission and spending money. well, we were invited to the san jose symphony last week to see "harry potter" and the tickets were free. but we spent $65 in concessions, myself, my family and my daughters. there will be revenue, i'm sure, generated from this and i just really appreciate this. i commend you guys for doing this. thank you. >> thank you very much for

your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: hello. i was born and raised in san francisco and i am the location coordinator for the leads across america annual ceremony where every second or third saturday of december, we lay wreaths on the headstones of our fallen veterans. i've been doing this now for the last six or seven years in san francisco. i'm calling because i support this measure for the veterans and strong support this measure because i believe that the veterans reciprocate

purchases in our stores. this is a great opportunity for everyone. thank you. >> thank you very much for your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: hello. i'm based in san francisco and i work with veterans and i understand the special needs that sometimes veterans have to survive in san francisco and i think that, you know, we also have -- there was also issues around mental healths and, you know, the -- what the parks and the things that this legislation will provide will only benefit their health and well-being. and i think that it's very important that these -- that

this legislation move forward to the full board with recommendation and i also want to thank all the supervisors that are currently supporting this legislation. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. mr. adkins, next speaker, please. >> caller: hi, my name is courtney ellington. i'm the executive director of the veterans success venture and i'm also the c.e.o. of one vet, one voice. i'm calling because i support this bill 100% and we've been sharinging this information with veterans that come into the building and they are extremely excited that the city is finally paying

attention and their voices are being heard. so, thank you and we are excited and we are looking forward to going into the pause. i just want to say that in not only helps with the recreation and mental health, it can decrease the suicide rate. it also falls upon the health care because of veterans that walk around. education, they get to learn more about it. so, this is a great opportunity and i just want to say thank you and we support this bill. thank you, and i'm super excited. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. as of right now, we have 26 listening with three left in the queue. so if you want to provide public comment on this ordinance regarding the reduction or the recommendation of fees for admission to uncertain facilities and on property for veterans, please dial star 3 to be added to the queue. otherwise, we'll take this to the end. mr. adkins, next speaker, please. >> caller: hi, i'm david. i'm a small business owner born in san francisco, disabled veteran. i'm strongly in support of hanley chan, commissioner thank you for all of your

work and your help. this bill will help veterans and help all the people that i serve and the hundreds in the bayview area who are actual veterans and throughout san francisco and everywhere. i just wanted to support this again. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. mr. adkins, next speaker, please. >> caller: hi, i'm rodney mcclain and i'm with the justice course and i'm in city college and studying to become a social worker. one of the most important things that we cover is health and wellness for veterans. and i totally support this bill because this would help to save lives. getting out and being -- being active in the community is very, very important. so, from recreation perspective, this is so needed in our community and i

support this bill. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> caller: hello. my name is eric. i live in san francisco in upper haight. i'm a retired veteran and work for felton institute a nonprofit here in the city. i'm a case manager. i hope and support homeless vets and the general population conducting outreach to promote healthy streets and i'm in full support of this legislation and bill to give our heroes and veterans the help and support and care that they need. and we near support of this bill. god bless our heroes. thank you, veterans, for your time and service.

>> thank you for your comments. mr. adkins, do we have anymore speakers in the queue? operator: there is one caller that just entered the queue. >> thank you mu. please let them through. >> caller: hello. my name is jared and i'm a son of the city and i'm also a veteran. i was born here in 1953. so i've seen a lot of changes in this city. good and bad. but i want to thank everyone that's involved with this legislation and working on [inaudible] path because it is one part of the formula [inaudible] veterans homeless and in treatment for various reasons and mental health, substance abuse. even physical and medical. so i first again, let me say

thank you to everyone involved. but certainly please note that this is not only part of recovery for veterans, it's also up, up and away of helping some veterans come up from darkness, out of the dark places that they are. at this moment and this time and it's also positive enforcement influence for the veterans' families. as important as being a veb and having grand kids i want it also recognized about the veterans's families and help in the area of family dynamics. so thank you for caring. i work with veterans now. i've been homeless on the street and in treatment successfully so it is a very important part of the formula for success.

so, i pray that we move forward with this. thank you. >> thank you so much for your comments. mr. adkins, do we have anymore speakers in the queue? >> caller: good morning. >> hello, speaker. we do hear you. >> caller: my name -- i just got back from the v.a. hospital and i have to support my fellow veterans. i many name is bill barnacle. i am a commissioner for veterans affairs city and county of san francisco, retired united states air force. i'm very supportive of this measure and i want to thank our district advisory who's a champion and crusader for helping our veterans and aid alan wong who's also a veteran . so, thank you, supervisor.

and everyone who's supported this and [inaudible] to support my fellow veterans. thank you, supervisor mar and i think we'll make you an honorary veteran. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. mr. adkins do, we have anymore speakers? >> mr. clerk, there are no further callers in the queue. >> thank you very much. mr. chair? >> all right. public comment is now closed. thank you so much to everyone who called in for your service. and i am -- i also want to add my name as a co-sponsor of this and thank you supervisor marf your leadership. i think for all the reasons that were stated, this is such an important way to honor the service of our veterans and those who are currently serving and also make sure that we do our part to address what we know are the physical and mental toll that is taken on those who

served and making sure that we used the great public resources we have at in which the parks are at the center of that to help to contribute and support our veterans and those who are serving currently. i'm happy to turn it over to you, supervisor mar, in what you want to do with amendments. >> great. thank you so much, chair haney. and vice chair safai for your co-sponsorship of this. thanks again to everyone that called in to -- during public comment and to those of you that are veterans for your service and dedication to our country. so i -- you know, i -- i did want to say that after, in working on this legislation with rec and park, and i didn't want to -- we had a lot of discussions with them about how to make it work and -- but from a fiscal

perspective and not to worsen their already great challenges that they're dealing with, with a lot of significant revenue loss during the pandemic. so we have a couple of amendments thats i'd like the introduce to address concerns from rec and park on the fiscal impact of this really important proposal that has broad support, ib chooseding from the departments. so -- including from the department. the first is one that my assistant e-mailed removing koi tower from the list of attractions that would be subject to a waiver or discount and this is really because rec and park has stated that koi tower, they have an operator at that facility that is -- that has been operating in the red and so creating a few reduction or waivers there would potentially jeopardize the contract at koi tower so that

is a first amendment. and then the second amendment is related to the san francisco residents versus nonresidents who are veterans or current service members and rec and park had requested that we limit the scope of this just to san francisco residents and not allow the benefit for veterans who are nonresidents of san francisco. and the one -- or a couple of rationales besides the savings in lots of revenue. a lot of recreation and park facilities already have a discount for san francisco residents. so this would just be aligned with that policy. but their strong support from the veteran stakeholders that we work with then this and they expressed it during public comment that this

benefit should be available to all veterans because they really sacrifice and served our country and not just san francisco and they really should be encouraging in expanding access to them and residents to enjoy our amazing facility -- recreational facilities here. so, i would agree with that. and i would agree with the point that this could -- there is just as much a revenue generator for rec and park in the city than a revenue loss. they're going to bring residents here and spend money at our local businesses. but the amendment that i worked out with rec and park is to move ahead with this legislation covering san francisco resident benefits

in offering the fee discounts to them immediately upon the operative date of the ordinance and then for the nonresident veterans, that would be contingent on us identifying a source of revenue to cover the cost of that next budget cycle. and the need tos a rec and park budget that could lead to staff cuts and other budgetary impacts for the department. i do intend to make this amendment as we send this to the full board. i do want to make a motion

that we amend -- that we accept the first amendment eliminating koi tower from the legislation that you have in front of you. and the full board is recommended with positive recommendation with the note that i intend to make the second amendment at the full board after the city attorney is able to draft it for us. >> great. before we take a vote on that amendment, supervisor safai. >> thank you, supervisor. i think this is an important piece of legislation. i think that too often our veterans are overlooked in society. so really appreciate any opportunity that's going to give them a chance to enjoy amenities in our great city. i really appreciate -- i know that it's important to kind

of consider the fiscal impacts as well to rec and park so i think what you're proposing and have worked out with rec and park is a good solution to start with san francisco residents and then as we get into the budget process, identify a source for nonsan francisco residents that are veterans. i think that is an important point and also taking koi tower off the table given their financial structure. but i just wanted to say i think it is important to be thinking about our veterans and to be doing things that will encourage them to enjoy the amenities of our city and i think it is really, really important and also want to really thank all the veterans that called in today to participate and give their thoughts and thank you to you and your staff for the hard work on this. and the work with rec and park. and i guess i just would have one question. is the amendment that you're

going to propose, that you're going to draft in the meantime between now and the board meeting, that would be nonsubstantive. so, it wouldn't slow the legislation down. >> yep. yep. that's correct. it would narrow the scope of the legislation rather than expand it. so, the city attorney has said that it would be nonsubstantive. >> and that would be ready by the time we get to the board next week? >> yeah. that is the expectation. >> ok. thank you very much. >> all right. i believe we have at least -- we did have one amendment on the table. correct? can we take a roll call vote on that, please? >> on member mar's motion to accept the amendments as he stated. vice chair safai? >> aye. [roll call] >> we have three ayes.

>> great. and now i want to make -- do you want to make the motion, supervisor mar? >> sure. i would motion that we send this to the full board as amended with positive recommendation. >> great. roll call vote, please. >> on the motion on member mar's motion to recommend this ordinance to the full board as amended -- [roll call] >> we have three ayes. >> great. this will go to the full board with a positive recommendation as amended and thank you again, supervisor mar, for your leadership and commissioner chan and everybody who is involved in making this happen and they're all very proud to support it. all right.

why don't we call item number 11. >> thank you, chair haney. item number 11 is a hearing ton budgets and appropriatation committee's 2021 through 2023 spending plan, specifically departmentstal spending plans for essential human services. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2482-945-4183 and then press pound twice. if you are not already done so, please dial 3 to line up to speak. a system prompt will indicate that you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. we are working with the office of civic engagement and affairs to provide spanish interpretation. >> [speaking in spanish]

thank you. >> thank you. and that concludes my comments. mr. chair? >> great. thank you.

so this is a hearing that i called and i want to thank all of the department representives who are here. we're going hear from the departments of public health and the department of homelessness for housing, the mayor's office of housing and community development and the office of economic and workforce development. in addition to representatives of our hard working service providers who are here as well. this hearing is designed to clarify how our major city departmentss are implementing voter approved and board approved spending ands to get specific questions answered about the budget allocations in the city's homeless response system. death among people experiencing homelessness have surged as a result of this pandemic and in the absence of available housing services and treatment options, people are growing older and sicker as they suffer on the street. the pandemics ha forced more people into their cars and on to the street. and has disrupted access to

health care and other life-saving services. [inaudible]. accidenttal overdose deaths. we act with urgency to make housing and services available and access tonight the most vulnerable san franciscans given recent investments in homelessness and behavioral health. all of this sufferinging on our seats disproportionally impacts people of color, particularly black residents, which only underscores the urgency of getting these investments out thes door to uphold racial and economic justice across our neighborhoods and community. questions will cover the status of housing subsidies, targeting various subpopulations and including seniors, people with disabilities as well as families and traditional aged youth. the status of investments approved by prop-c and the status of federal and state funded housing allocations. i do just want to say that we did approve our budget a few

months ago and when we did, we all noted the critical and unprecedented investments and commitments that were being made, particularly around housing, homelessness and behavioral health. we also said at that time that we're going to have to ensure that those dollar get to where they're most needed. that dollars get out the door as quickly as possible and we'reled hoing ourselves account tonight the plans and investments that were being made. our city's residents have given us unprecedented levels of resources to invest in these services and they want to see outcomes and results and urgency. and so it is with that spirit that we are here to track our progress thus far and to hold ourselves accountable to this work. so with that, i want to hear from our first presenters, mary kate backahow and joe

wilson who are both members of the homeless emergency service providers association. welcome. >> good afternoon. we really appreciate the opportunity for a community presentation regarding today's hearing on the departmental spending plans. i will kick off the presentation. we will be presenting it today with introduction. my name is mary-kate buckalow and i go by she pronouns and the co-chair of hespa and i'll turn it every to joe to begin our side presentation. >> thank you, mary-kate. thank you, supervisors. chair haney, vice chair safai and supervisor mar. we appreciate this

opportunity to underscore the state of emergency we find ourselves in and the sense of urgency that should, frankly, grip all of us in terms of dealing with this crisis. my name is joe wilson, executive director of hospitality house and co-chair of hespa and we appreciate this opportunity to walk through what we feel is quite an under enlts situation that requires immediate attention. so, next slide, please. just an overview of hespa and its work and view in the community. it's a coalition of 30 community-based organizations with deep roots in unhoused communities and collectively form a critical part of city's infrastructure for the homelessness response system. they lift up the needs of unhoused people with a collective voice with the

goal of improving systems that help people exit homelessness. her advocacy has resulted in multiyear investments of approaching more than $70 million over the years in investments and housing and emergency services that have built nearly 2400 households exit homelessness since 2012. the agencies interconnect to operate life-saving programs in the city's homelessness response system. next slide, please. >> we have a major opportunity to act now. we don't have great ways of measuring how many people have passed away as a result of being unhoused. but we know that the numbers are double or even triple by some measures of what they tushl are. people are growing older and sicker on the streets and in

their vehicles as access to shelter and services, including life saving services and health care has been disrupted and covid has exacerbated an overdose epidemic with numbers of accidenttal deaths. in this situation, given unprecedented recent investments in housing, employment and behavioral health, we must act with urgency to provide housinging and life-saving services and city departments must act with urgency to release funds. we are halfway through a fiscal year and quarter of a way through a massive investment plan and we have to release the funding. next slide, please. >> so you see the image that lays out the investment of prop-c act. and the budget and

appropriatations committee, the 2021 to 2023 spending plan also made unprecedented investments in housing and services for adults, youth and families. almost halfway through this fiscal year, essential funds still have not yet been released and funds appropriated in last fiscal year remain unspent. the funds must be released now. to meet the crisis in the streets now. we can get people off the streets now and into housing now. folks are outside, we need to get them inside. winter is upon us.

we have no day to waste. next slide, please. >> thank you. this lays some groundwork for the needs we're seeing in the streets on the ground for accountability and transparency and responsibility and really seeing the funds in this investment plan. we have more than 800 vacancies and permanent supportive housing. we have more than 600 units to acquire for families and young people. and tens of millions in subsidis to release for the flexible housing subsidy pool. in terms of shelter, we have closed adult shelters to self-referral. we have nearly 100 families on the shelter wait list, which is a dramatic increase over the prior several months and even a year. and we have hundreds of thousands of dollars in hotel vouchers that have not yet been released to capture the overflow and the beds that are not available for the people who need shelter. in terms of behavioral health, we have wait list for treatments and tens of millions of ub spent funds for treatment beds and we have crisis response teams that cannot connect people to beds if we haven't brought the funding online.

finally, we have tens of millions available for workplace support. there is no coordinated plan for how when those funds will be released. next slide, please. >> so, a view from the streets in terms of shelter access. we're trying to be as -- to give credit where it should be given. that prop-c added 1,000 shelter beds including a variety of alternative shelter innovations like the candlestick safe parking program is [inaudible]. trailers and navigation centers. that is the better news. the not-so-good news is there is still no way for folks on the street to access most of these shelter beds.

access remains institutional and centralized within the healthy streets operation center, and the homeless outreach team, but not homeless people themselves. prop-c expanded shelter for families and youth and a family shelter operating at the oasis end with 15 additional emergency beds for 14-day stays and a navigation center for young people. that is the good news. the not-so-good news, again, shelter beds have been full. vouchers for hotel rooms has not been released and there are nearly 100 families on the shelter wait list. next slide, please. >> thank you. related to shelter access. so, prop-c and city general funds have provided permanent rental assistance for more

than 1,000 adults, families and young people. the good news is that the bayview flexible [inaudible] is an active procurement that has been announced. but none of the other permanent housing subsidies have been released and that represents tens of millions of dollars, some of which was approved last fiscal year to be released and with 100 families on the shelter wait list, and the situation on the streets, which is growing more dire, we need to bring these housing subsidies online because the housing acquisitions are takinging some time. and related to that, the prop city and fumds will provide 1100 units and so far five buildings with 575 units have been acquired. that is wonderful. but only 48 of these units are for family out of a projected 350 to 400 units that need to be acquired for families and only 77 units for use out of a projected 225.

there are wonderful opportunities on the horizon. there are buildings out there that could be acquired. there is a building that has 200 units that could house families owned by the same families that agreed to sell the panoramic. there are opportunities out there and it is the time to seize them. and finally, due to pandemic priorization of hotel residence denzes, folks on the street do not have priority for housing and yet there are more than 800 vacancies in existing supporting housing. next slide, please. >> a view from the streets in regards to behavioral health. the good news is the street-based teams have been rolled out, including the street crisis response teams. the street overdose response teams and street medicine support. that is good news. the not-so-good news is only 101 beds are actually open

out of 399. that is barely 25%. of those, 31 are out of county lock beds which happens to be the most inexpensive intervention for the fewest number of people. the city's budget for this year and last year allocated more than $80 million through acquisitions, behavioral health beds and treatment. at this point, as far as we know, none of funding has been released and no plan has been presented for making acquisitions or releasing the funds. other system improvements such as case management, care coordination and pharmacy expansions are in progress but not implemented as of yet. next slide, please. >> thank you. on prevention, prop-c targeted 20 million for problem solving support but there remains to be a coordinated plan for releasing those funds.

the good news is that family providers, among others, have increased the problem-solving success rate from 3%, which is really low to 15%, which is still low but improving. simply by increasing the financial results available to prevent it from early. and so addition through subtraction is still subtraction. we're serving fewer people with flatter contracts announced and we know that we need to serve with higher household elements. they will not be able to prevent people and young people and families from entering homelessness and the important thing to note here is that problem solving is a major intervention for unhoused people who have not been prioritized for housing, making it really important for everybody who's not being prioritized for housing, which is the bulk of people.

we need to provide an effective intervention. so, problem solving has to be effective. it has to be max mali effective. next slide, please. >> thank you. what is at stake for san francisco? well, as we pointed out several times, chair haney pointed out, we asked the voters for more resource and the voters responded with a resounding "yes" vote on proposition c. we have a historic investment plan developed through the overnight system with extensive community input and departmentstal participation. we must act now because every day, every delay lives are at stake. san francisco voters invested in our homelessness response

system so we can make real progress in reducing homelessness and voters could see progress being made. the bottom line, if we fail to seize this opportunity, we may in every have a second chance or another prop-c and i will be exceedingly difficult to convince voters yet again to commitment resources when they haven't seen results from the previous resources that were committed. accountability means doing better, acting bolder and thinking bigger. for more context, nearly 400,000 san franciscans have employed for benefits in an 18-month per. that is more than half the city's adult population. textbooks of thousands of san francisco renters face eviction. a crisis is real. the responsibility is ours. the moral obligation is ours. the time to act is now. there is no joy in

criticizing departments for failure to make the best opportunity that has been presented to us. we are all collectively responsible for this. the accountability is ours. the responsibility is ours. the obligation is ours. we have no excuse not to act with this unprecedented investments and opportunity to make a real difference in people's lives. we cannot lose public confidence in progressive solutions to the homelessness crisis. next slide, please. >> thank you. that concludes our presentation. >> thank you for your presentation and the call to action. i could not agree more. i am going to have us go to

each of the presentations first. well, let's see. how do we want to do this? colleagues, do you have any questions now that you want to ask of these presenters? ok. i'm going to hold my questions to the end so some of it may be answered. why don't we go next to the department of homelessness and supportive housing. director mcspadden is here. >> good morning, chair haney, supervisors. yep. looks like we have the presentation up so i'll just dive in. so i just want to thank all of you for the opportunity to present today. i'm the department head for the department of homelessness and supportive housing. and i'm here today to update

you and the committee on the progress that we've made since the budget was finalized. our budget represents significant growth, as you know, in the homelessness response system and lab multiyear process to launch all the new programs and expend all the new resources that we've got. next slide. so while we've got very many [inaudible] priorities, we identified several key initiative this is year and ongoing priorities that are really essential to the success of the department. i mean, i think one of the things that i realized in coming on as the department head is that there are justs so many initiatives going on with this department and there are some that really ultimately take different divisions in our department to work on together and so we identified those and we're really focused on those. so those include -- i guess the umbrella is that they

include our extra -- strategic planning process which is launching as we speak and will be a main activity for us over the next six months and advancing racial equity in centering racial equity in all of our work, which is a key value for us. but it is something that we'll be really work on even harder than ever over the next year. because it goes hand in hand with a strategic planning process. so, in addition to that, we're focused on rolling out the federal emergency housing program. rehousing the guests from the shelter in place hotels. evaluated and reforming coordinated entry. acquiring an opening new housing. expanding our emergency shelter system and hiring staff within the department to make all of this happen. next slide. as i said, racial equity is central to all of our work. we have published or have been implementing, actually, the h.s.h. racial equity plan and we recently hired a chief

equity officer. actually anthony started this week. we're really excited to have him on board. we're committed to serving people in communities that disproportionately experience homelessness, that includes transgender people in san francisco. and we're working hard with our community partners to really think about what that means and make sure they're engaged in the process. we also know that a majority of the people experiencing homelessness live -- stay in the tenderloin and bayview and we're essentially serving those neighborhoods through specific investments. next slide. so, kind of moving into the core components of the homelessness response system, in 2021, the homeless outreach team placed over 3300 people directly from the streets into shelter. the department continues to partner with e.p.h. and other agencies to ensure access to shelter for teams working directly with people who are living on the streets.

an example of these partnerships is the centralized referral process to ensure access to shelter for our outreach teams, including the street crisis response team and then we have the hot public phone line for people experiencing homelessness and every one of those calls gets taken and listened to even though we can't necessarily respond to people who are calling into that line. next slide. we've made significant and exciting progress including the ones included in the 2021 to 2023 budget. in partnership with the mayor's office of canadian development, we launched the targeted homelessness prevention program and provides background of future rent and move-in assistance and has dispersed $1 340i8 million and has served 301 households since july 1. we've also implemented rent

reduction across h.s.h.'s portfolio of permanent supportive housing, capping rents at 30% of income to help ensure these vulnerable households can remain stablely housed. and moving into temporary shelter, we're continuing to expand temporary shelter by opening new programs. including the noncongregant family shelter at the oasis. since july 1, we have re-opened 110 beds with another approximately 775 beds planned to re-open by the fiscal year. this does not include the winter shelter that opened on november 21. but we have several other new programs in process including the triage center in the bayview and also actively exploring opportunities to open a second phase parking program in the western part of the city. and we're excited to share that we just launched a community engagement process to master lease the property,

to pilot up to 250 spaces of semicongregant shelter. next slide. as reflexed in our key priorities, we're committed to expanding new shelter models. including both noncongregant and semicongregant shelter. we've begun the planning and design process to launch 100 hotel vouchers for vulnerable population and will continue to operate the hotel program through september 2022 while focusing on rehousing guests into permanent homes. we were excited to receive news of the extension of the fema funds for covid response including for noncongregant shelter. given that our shelter in place wind down plan extends beyond the december end date for fema rereimbursement, the additional three months of fund willing not have a significant impact on the housing or wind-down plans but the additional federal reimbursement gives us the opportunity to invest the

local resources that would have been used to operate the hotel hotels during the first quarter of 2022 and to open noncongregant winter shelter that will be available for unhoused individuals during the winter months. we're already confirmed to open 95 units at one former sip site and we're also exploring the feasibility of an additional 112 units at a second site. so we'll be sharing more details with you soon. next slide. and then just kind of moving into housing. we continue to open and operate new housing and will reach and surpass the new units with the investments included in this recent budget. the new housing includes authorization to the require three new permanent supportive housing sites. 508 units in the pipeline to open before the end of the fiscal year, including from the recent proposal to master there's garland hotel for 80 units of housing.

we've activated 480 slots for older adults and we're in the process of increasing flexible housing subsidies by approximately 700 slots to serve adults, traditional aged youth and families. we're super excited to be growing our portfolio with desirable units across the city while we continue to maximize placement into our existing portfolio. in q1 of this fiscal year, we have already placed 448 households into housing. next slide. in addition to operating the sites, we continue to expand rapid rehousing with workforce support. we're in the process of opening 350 rapid rehousing flats for adulters, 165 of which are already contracted. we're also in the process of contracting an additional 70 rapid resousing slots for transitional youth.

in 2.5 million over two years has been work ordered to the mayor's office of workforce development to provide employment services, to people experiencing homelessness. to date, $500,000 of the annual allocation has been planted and in the process of allocation right now as we speak. as i speak. and then next slide. one of our top priorities is to deploy the federal emergency housing vouchers as i mentioned earlier, in partnership with the san francisco housing authority. and just to let you know, about the allocation targets there, 249 vouchers are for families, 181 are for transitional aged youth. 340 for individuals and 186 for people fleeing violence. next slide. and there are emergency

housing vouchers on top of the categories dedefined by h.u.d. 41% or 370 of the vouchers are allocated to districts 10 and 5 and of those -- of those, 200 are earmarked for off lease residents of public housing at risk of homelessness. tipping point is providing over $1 million to bipoch nonprofits in district 10 to provide services that go along with the emergency housing vouchers. the second priority is to reduce homelessness. and the third is to decrease the inflow into homelessness and then we're providing all participating households with application support and housing search and navigation support and services. and providing housing applicants with ongoing case supports as needed.

the e.h.v.s program provides a unique opportunity to house people experiencing homelessness with these mainstream vouchers and it is really important to note that these vouchers did not come with any service vouchers so we spent time identifying them as dollars and moving things from other parts of budget to make sure that we're pairing things with the voucher to make sure that we can successfully house people and provide them with the services they need. to move successfully into that housing. and the last slide. i want to end the

presentation here and i'm available for questions and also have my deputy directors hooer as well and they can also help answer questions. any questions you might have. thank you. >> great. thank you so much. and i think we'll have you stick around, if that's ok, for questions when we get through everyone. if i could now have ms. hammer from d.p.h. >> hello, chair haney. this is dr. hillary standing in for dr. hammer who had to be out of the office urgently. i'm the director of behavioral health services. and mental health s.f. and we'll be friending to this committee on the community of public health fiscal year 2021-22 budget and focused on providing services to people experiencing homelessness. next slide.

as you can see on the slide in front of you, we're presenting an overview of the d.p.h. budgets for the current fiscal year. as you can further see, budgets for the different sections of the public health department are shown and over half are for programs that are based at zuckerberg san francisco general and within the unit that i have direction of behavioral health services. [please stand by] [please stand by]

>> as this slide shows at a very high level, all areas of our health network serve people experiencing homelessness. listed in light blue are the specific programs which serve this population. these includes specific zuckerberg, san francisco general and primary care. integrated care, mental health sf, other prop c and targeted behavioral health services programs.

with these programs we serve a large number of people experiencing homelessness each year. the chart in front of you shows estimates of people served in each of the main areas. this is from the last fiscal year. these numbers also display in the most right hand column percent of all people served in that section who are estimated to be experiencing homelessness and range from 8% all the way up to 44% in our general health services program with other programs ranging in between. let's turn to the programs that focus on people experiencing homelessness. i want the committee to know as

we focus on behavioral health as well as integrated care, i want to point out the specific programs that are located within ambulatory care that are organized around and aim to serve people experiencing homelessness. of note, these are services comprised of mostly nontraditional health services that don't rely solely on brick and mortar services but aim to deliver low threshold services. some don't have suppratt projects from larger divisions. exact amounts spent can be sometimes challenging. the specific programs with some of the approximate budgeted accounts. include tom was delurban health,

zuckerberg and castro mission health center, pop-up clinic and team lilly run by the zuckerberg department of obstetrics and gynecology. as you know, and the remain derf remainderder will outline the specific investments in mental health and substance abuse in alignment with mental health sf, office of coordinated care, street crisis response team, mental health service center and residential care and treatment beds and facilities. as the committee knows the brief background on prop c it imposes additional business taxes to create a fund to support

services specifically for homelessness and prevent homelessness. it requires 25% of available prop c funds go to the dph for new mental health services with design needs of people experiencing homelessness and serve that population specifically. there are approximately $93 million allocated for mental health spending in alignment with the ordinance. as chief financial officer of dph presented in january, there was an initial allocation of prop c funds released in 2021 for dph mental health spending. there was $51 million approved as part of that spending plan. additionally, the mayor proposed the city budget in may and the board amended through the month of june. through that budget another

$42 million was approved for new and ongoing dph programming. the approved spending plans also include $130 million of funding for acquisition and rehab sites for residential care and treatment beds as well as $4.2 million to support capital improvements for mental health center. through these spending plans all of the aspects provided funding through prop c funds. i will turn-in the last few slides to the next to show further where the specific prop c community funding areas are. of the $93 million of total prop c funding allocated to dph, approximately $55 million in fiscal year 2022 supported the key mental health service san

francisco domain areas. this will grow to about $59 million in the next fiscal year. the new prop c investments and you can see the elements from front of you builds on existing department resources and staff. it is to support implementation. this presentation provides the new investments but not the underlying budget where we started the presentation supporting the goals and efforts. also note these are the ongoing annual funding amounts approved over the last two budget cycles. i would like to next dive into the budget details for each of the four key components and highlight the funded programs in each of them. many mental health san francisco programs are linked to existing

full programs in integrated care. this is the chart in front of you now. many of the integrated care programs have been in existence for a decade. these were developed to specifically to address the emerging needs of persons experiencing homelessness and to recognize the brick and mortar clinic may be insufficiently and essentially inaccessible to persons experiencing homelessness. during the current fiscal year we will spend approximately $24 million on this constellation of services street medicine, shelter health, health services for people in shelter-in-place hotels and permanent supportive housing and new urgent care clinic with the new supportive housing site. i will turn to services for

people experiencing homelessness under the rubric of behavioral health services. as you can see, approximately $35 million in funding for 21-22. excluding prop c is dedicated to behavioral health services which i am correcting myself $24 million. can you advance to the next slide. now, i will turn to services for people experiencing homelessness. approximately $35 million is dedicated to behavioral health services tailored to persons experiencing homelessness. i will mention that these are some of the programs and include the market and turk street which serves those experiencing homelessness but not

exclusively. $4 million for hummingbird and for dual diagnosis bed. these were originally funded in 1920 with additional funding through the general fund. these were put forward up to 30 beds. this program has been delayed but we are working closely with providers on site acquisition and program design to get these online as soon as possible. i will close by emphasizing the sense of urgency that we feel about moving this program as quickly and urgently as possible to stabilize, house people and support behavioral health needs. this is absolutely an extraordinary opportunity to expand needed services and meet the needs of those out of san

francisco. thank you for your time. i am joined by my colleagues from across the department. i will also call on them to help answer any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you so much for your presentation and your work. i will hold questions and comments to the end. to the office of economic and work force development. >> thank you, chair haney and supervisors, committee members. director of workforce development at the office of economic work force development on behalf of our executive director. i am joined by director of policy and planning, cfo and we will walk you there our slides speaking to the importance of

the hearing here today. we have the work force specialist on the way able to answer questions at the conclusion of the presentation. lisa, if we can go back to the very first slide. again, on the next slide you can see supervisors, some of the framing. we know the conversations around essential human services. we thank hes pa for advocacy and for the thorough and informative presentation they provided and further to the overall conversation around the work we are doing. we will drill into the vulnerable population strategy and those experiencing homelessness. sustainable jobs, supporting

businesses, great places to live apwork in san francisco and the ability to stay and work in san francisco on the path to economic sufficiency. the work force development programs in our office and we are the office of economic and work force development. most of the prompts and desire of chair haney and colleagues to hear from us was around the work force services around the supportive housing for those experiencing homelessness. we work with over 70 community-based organizations to provide full set of workforce services to economically vulnerable populations. speaking to this pathway to economic vitality. there are elements that i won't be go into the specifics. it is there on the screen to share. from employment to career track and economic vitality where we fund and speak to in this

presentation. job centers, provide wraparound services and earn and learn communities for neighborhood job centers and communities with particular concentrated need, specialized job centers for job seekers with bearers to employment and 18-24-year-olds. we start at 17.5. training programs that you are aware of. we thank you for support for the programs. construction. long standing 15 years of city partnership with trade unions, healthcare, tech, hospitality and industries of opportunity. we are funding pathways to careers and outreach and engagement to volunteer programs. one last nod to some of the questions and prompts from the committee.

go to the next one. there it is. speaking to employment equity. one is locally required and one federally required. the city-wide work force development is breaking the priority populations including low income, under employed and homeless and priority populations as well as everyone you see in that description in that paragraph and beyond. san francisco local plan is required by the federal work force development the work force innovation and opportunity act including principles of employment equity. a set of standards and guiding community backed and developed in partnership with labor unions, community-based organizations to identify how we address the most persistent gaps

in our employment and broader economic system. these are statement in the recent request for proposals after a year of community sessions. everyone in san francisco earning the opportunity and deserving opportunity to achieve economic success. you will see value statements programs and services we seek to ensure no disadvantage or limitation of access to training or employment based on race, ethnicity, age, disability, sexual orientation. we go a step further to acknowledge race and anti-black racism which affect access and opportunity. that is the other arching approach to supporting the vulnerable populations.

these are specific to the charge from the budget committee to share the investments to support persons experiencing homelessness specifically or peh as you see it abbreviated in the next few slides. this is by no means the full budget around the vulnerable population strategy. these are target investments to support those experiencing homelessness that are available for those experiencing homelessness city-wide. i want to note just because we are talking about portfolio. the total budget increased from $34 million to $84 million that is 147% increase. there is a lot of other services out there that we align with and work with the investment by may or breed and you board of supervisors that is a partnership with human rights

and the director. if you look at these three areas, you can see that there is $12.9 million in job centers through those details. out utreach and engagement, a smaller portion $305,000. north of $4 million in training programs. those training programs that we are highlighting are programs that we are excited about as intervention to really address what is the crisis on our streets, what the leaders spoke to in terms of the need. we are enthusiastic around programs in place, programs that will will continue to rollout funded by prop c dollars. next slide. we are asked to break down where the spending by neighborhood is happening. this is job center spending. you can see investments. left to right.

bayview, mission, soma, tenderloin and city-wide through comprehensive and young adult work that we fund. the other the other neighborhoods that have investments that are supporting individuals in need of workforce services. they don't particularly serve exclusively experiences experiencing homelessness. it is important to talk about investments and job centers in neighborhoods city-wide is because it is a myth that homelessness is confined to any neighborhood or the other. it impacts community members on the streets city-wide. something that stuck with our office and work with the homeless work force collaborative no door should be a wrong door for any community member who is experiencing homelessness or exiting homelessness. these resources to take the first step to the work force are

available city-wide. within the $6.1 million that includes investments in chinatown, omi, western addition and the first time this year neighborhood job centers in the richmond and sunset and excelsior. programs that include support for persons experiencing homelessness. we spoke to the notion that the job centers are not specific to only persons experiencing homelessness. as we also have talked about in some sessions with the boards and advocates because of economic impact of covid-19 and pandemic there are many community members one paycheck away from homelessness. there is a record number of unemployment claims filed in the city and county of san francisco. hundreds of thousands of individuals impacted by

unemployment. we know without access to these services someone housed today could be unhoused tomorrow. on the right side you can see the total participants that can be served in these different job centers. for the training programs if we could go back. thank you, lisa. the training programs here are specifically funded with community partners. terrific service providers with a track record of being able to deliver specific to persons experiencing homelessness. the onramp, foot in the door for opportunities in the tech industry, health care academy training, essential work training which includes flexible earn and learn. two programs through the dream

keeper the community health program and arts program. volunteer and paid opportunities. i did want to -- total with job center opportunities and specific training slots. serve up to the number on the previous slide 5600. a couple of things. a few other investments that are worthy to note because they are not specifically only to persons experiencing homelessness but part of what we are doing in a covid response to support san francisco vulnerable communities inclusive of homelessness. covid funds we administrator that are in place this year. $5 million family relief fund commissioned by president walton last year and administratorred last year and this year $5 million is in place with investments from the board and

the mayor. $6.4 million in covid resource hubs in the mission and bayview and excelsior and right to recover program which was initiated by supervisor ronan and administratorred by our office served 6500 individuals. many are persons living in cars and for that resource they would be on the streets. steps and road ahead for us. around the work force accelerator. jen hand with our office leads the alignment work. worked with civic maker as consultant, advocates, housing homeless and supportive housing partners, the director and deputy director and her team and hardworking team and human services agency and others. we spent many, many months together on road map to better coordinate the services that

provide housing and shelter with the work force development investments. that is a process described here. we have a report to guide us in best practices program assessment and to apply trauma informed care with our work force portfolio and housing and tool kit to do this work. first opportunity for us to experience and benefit from the results of those investments is $2.5 million investment referenced by hsh for work force services to 165 adult rapid rehousing participants this year and 185 of those next year. those are prop c dollars. those are investments that we are presenting to our city our home oversight committee tomorrow. we look forward to that to get the resources out to the service providers. a lot of work happening. we are working hard and doing that because the community needs

these resources. service providers, nonprofit partners are working day and night throughout the pandemic. we are trying to do everything to work as hard as they do to meet the need and imperatives of the moment. happy to answer questions along with our cfo. lisa we can close there. >> thank you. i appreciate that. we will go to the last presenter before questions. that will be from ocd. mr. chu and mr. ramirez.

>> can you see my presentation? >> yes. >> i am going to focus primarily on the prop c dollars. we had our first question was asking a little bit what we were doing to ensure that we were providing services in a racially equitable way and hitting the target neighborhoods. we want to re-enforce the fact that we center on culturally

responsive solutions. we work in partnership with our community-based organizations. the programs that you will be hearing about today are really implemented by our community-based partners. we convene a monthly gathering of all of the counseling groups, defense organizations, many of them are the groups that are part of h e.p.a. active in the ocoh council. our strategies are formed by our monthly conversations with them. in terms of procurement process, we want to let people know when we select the cpos we work with reviewers to reflect the neighborhoods prioritized. we include questions given for advancing racial equity within that process and we found it necessary to support new

structures that investment in organizations with close relationships with stakeholders but not done this specific task before. relying on our prior grantees doesn't allow it to go deep into the communities. you will see that on slides later to talk about the range of organizations with whom we have invested. a little bit what we are doing with prop c dollars. we work closely with hsh in terms of homelessness prevention. we receive $10 million for subsidies. they have $10 million for subsidies. we split that amount. the other portion of our dollars focuses on the eviction prevention and housing stabilization which is unique to

our department. in homelessness prevention we receive $10 million. eviction prevention and housing stabilization we receive $15 million. we also received $3.5 million of one-time funds unspent from last year which we are using to supplement part of our work. we were also allocated an additional $2 million from the housing bucket to stabilize sro families. you will see how we decided to split it up in the next slide. total of $30.5 million. 21.5 will be going to augment existing partnerships. this goes towards the point that they were bringing up in terms how to get out money in a very timely way because all of our activities are given to our providers. we have identified existing

providers through existing grants where we can begin to immediately implement and get out the door $21.5 million. we receive the initial contract back in october. we will be amending those grantees immediately so that we can have these dollars go outright away. in that $21.5 million. that includes $10 million prop c rental assistance. $10.5 million will go towards eviction prevention and housing stabilization work. we have $1 million that comes from one-time prop c funds and 250k from the prop c housing bucket. i will tell you more about what is in that portion. in the augmentation we anticipate $10 million for rental assistance. we also to administer the tenant right to council program

providing fullscopy vacation defense for -- scope for the eviction defense. we anticipate augmenting that with an additional $7 million to ensure everyone in san francisco who receives the notice of eviction will qualify. we will be adding $1.7 million for counseling and outreach. $1.4 million for civil legal services. $1 million for families in shallow subsidy. $400,000 for tenant landlord mediation to avoid going to court to work out issues. $9 million from new programming as early as january. we don't have procurement for those funds. that includes 4$.5 million for

eviction prevention and housing stabilization services. a little bit from one-time prop c housing. that will be broken out into what we see as an additional $3 million for anti-displacement subsidy. $1.75 million for families and shallow subsidies. $1.2 million for housing retention once we get people into the city housing we want them to stay there. $200,000 specifically to focus on anti displacements outreach. we found like there is not one organization that has a specific mission focusing on the african-american community in this anti-displacement work. then we do have $2.75 million from one-time allocations to

assist with moving assistance and provider as assistance. details about who we work with so far. rental assistance portfolio we are working with ypd with a coalition collective impact in the western addition, black coalition on aids. native-american health center. community resource center. latino task force, those are primary partners for rental assistance piece. eviction piece. i won't be read through all of those names. you can see we fund all of the primary providers for full scope legal defense. for the housing stabilization piece. again, here we can reach out to many different communities. trying to hit as many communities as we can.

lastly, we want to acknowledge and talked with our providers. we apologize for delays. we are trying to move as quickly as we can. we think we will augment existing grants to get out $21.5 million. the other 9.5 as soon as we can with r.f.p. then prioritize expediting contracting for those organization was the most pressing cash flow needs. i know that was a quick run through, but that provides, i think, a quick overview of what we plan to do with our $30.5 million of the prop c dollars. we receive the first two work orders for those in october. we got the last work order from hsh in november. we are set to move forward getting dollars out the door.

that ends my presentation. rental assistance portfolio we are available to answer questions you might have for us. thank you very much. >> thank you. appreciate that. colleagues, any questions or comments? i know that was a lot. a lot of important topics covered in valuable updates. i will ask my colleagues if they have questions or comments. i will have public comment. there are a number of folks who wanted to give feedback including a lot of important front line providers. i want to give them a chance to do that in public comment. supervisor safai or mar. anything? i am going to go to public comment. ir believe we are going to limit

public comment to one minute then come back for a further question of which i have a number. if we could open it up. one minute for public comment. >> thank you, chair haney. checking for callers. members of the public to provide comment please press star 3 to be added to the line to speak. those on hold continue be to weight until the system indicates you are unmuted and that is your queue to begin comments. we are working with the office of civic engagement to provide spanish interpretive services for this item. please let us know if there are callers to speak.

>> good afternoon, i am dominick. i work in san francisco coalition on homelessness. i am calling the city to release the funds already allocated to provide housing and life saving services to vulnerables in san francisco. there are 100 families on the wait list for shelter funds that are allocated to move to the safe place. money is not released. families in san francisco cannot be left on the streets in vehicles or doubled up when we have the money to provide them shelters in hotels. thank you for your time today. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please.

>> [speaking spanish]. >> this is a summary. i am calling to have the funds allocated for dealing with

homelessness to be put to work with the right programs. i am tired of seeing people living in cars and in the streets who are always vulnerable to bad situations. i am hoping the board just makes sure these funds are allocated to where they need to be allocated. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> i am maria. organizer in san francisco. i was former resident of hamilton family center when my children were little. i know how difficult it is to be a parent out in the streets.

having passed proposition c we need to spend the money where it ought to go as soon as possible. i support joe wilson when he said all of the needs that can be supported now must be supported now. justice delayed is justice denied. although this hearing spoke about housing prop c. i want to bring up baby prop c. we passed it 2.5 years ago. many families are still on the waiting list. i hope that the board will look at how to move that money. it is high time that our children on the waiting list and their underpaid providers do not mys opportunities because we have the money. >> so sorry. we are timing each speaker one

minute. >> good afternoon. i am a policy associate for glide. i am calling to voice concerns about the delayed in distributing funds for homeless response f.the city departments represented in this hearing do not act voters and the general public will see lack of results. believe there is no benefit to funding efforts and homelessness. funds need distributed. many funds approved a year ago have not been distributed. lack among the programs slowed outreach for housing and prevention. there are major barriers to shelters during the covid-19 pandemic. it is vital for shelter. every day people ask for

shelter. there is no way to act. the city departments are sitting on unprecedented level of investment. homelessness is an emergency we urge you to respond immediately. >> next speaker, please. >> this is marty reagan san francisco resident. i want to thank the mayor arboard of supervisors for making the investments to move the needle on homelessness and addiction in san francisco. we look forward to putting these critical funds to work immediately to provide behavioral health, work force and education and prevention services that are critical. lives depend on it. thank you.

>> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i am the executive director for the resource center. we are thanking chair haney and supervisors for having us and speaking about this today. we are calling for the funds released to get out and help prevent and respond to the homelessness that currently is in san francisco. this is a special point of crisis that we are seeing. we are an emergency rental subsidy provider. when the funds were available we were able to help 210 households each month. giving out $1.7 million in rental subsidies. these things are so certainly to -- so essential to keep people from suffering homelessness but

to prevent it from getting worse. this is a critical time. please recommend acting now and allow the funds to go out. thank you for having this hearing today. >> next speaker, please. >> i wanted to congratulate health and human services for being a substantial portion of our budget. i want to see them continue to grow. i would love to see a greater portion of our budget and much greater than police budget. i thank you for looking for the nonviolent solutions to address the problems of homelessness on the streets. thank you, supervisors. that is all i have to say. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please.

>> good afternoon. i am rachel. i am a member and work at the homeless prenatal program. i am calling to stress urgency to release the funds in response to homelessness and behavioral crisis going on right now in san francisco. i also want to stress urgency t release flexible subsidies that are supposed to be eligible for homeless families in san francisco, in particular, highlighting undocumented persons in san francisco. the subsidy and housing that they are eligible for right now. thank you so much for your time. >> thank you for your comments. we do currently have 16 people on the line listening. two left in the queue. if you want to provide public

comment press star 3 to be added to speak. otherwise we will take these two. mr. adkins, next speaker, please. >> [speaking spanish].

>> good afternoon, board. i am lillian. i live in san francisco. i have been a resident of the city for a long time. for the last three years i have been living in shelters with my children. i am calling to ask you to release the funds because these funds will save lives. my life has been severely affected in the past two years as well as my son's access to school and my health. i am begging you to please allocate these funds to the correct programs. thank you. >> mr. adkins, next speaker, please.

>> good afternoon, members of the committee. i am calling to beg you to release funds to continue supporting families that are homeless. i want to talk about the families. [indiscernable] a lot of families are dealing with homelessness. we are still in the pandemic. it brought more issues to the families. please just release funding. we need it. it is already december and it is cold, freezing. we don't need families on the street. thank you so much for your support. >> mr. adkins, any more speakers in the queue?

>> i am. [indiscernable] i work in the homelessness. [indiscernable] what i see here is ridiculous. families. [indiscernable] we only get 40. what is going to happen with the rest of the money? we need housing because we have homeless families without housing. [indiscernable] 225 housing units used. only funding 77. what happened with the rest of

the housing units? [indiscernable] what are you going to do with these housing units? we need to move people to housing, need families in housing. [indiscernable] we need families to put in place. [indiscernable] >> your time is up. >> are there any more speaker in the queue? >> erica case, executive

director at compass family services. thank you for considering this issue. last year at compass we served 6500 parents and children. we are one part of the system. there is so much need. getting the resources approved but it is the fight to get the resources deployed. we need those funds for housing, behavioral health and services to get families and individuals and young adults housed. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. are there any more speaker in the queue? >> good afternoon. i live and work in san francisco. i work at the coalition of homelessness. i am calling on the city to release funds. they are available to provide

housing. life saving services. i just want to emphasize the failure to spend this money has devastating health impacts even before the pandemic. the average life expectancy for people living on the street was 36 years shorter of the general population. since then there are a surge of deaths among the unhoused people. delaying the spending of the funds is putting people's lives at risk. i call on the city to release the funds as quickly as you can. thank you. >> before we call the next speaker. if you are lining up to speak, system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand be. that means you are in line to

speak. after that wait until the system indicates you are unmuted to begin your comments. any more speakers? >> [speaking spanish].

>> we are timing each speaker for one minute. >> good afternoon, committee. i am an immigrant mother of two kids. i have been living in the streets in shelters for five years. i am calling you because i can't

believe that families are living in the streets like myself any more. today i receive a subsidy. i am grateful for that. i still have the families living in the streets. i know you have other responsibilities, i call on you to stand up for these hundreds of families waiting for you to release the funds. thank you. >> thank you so much. mr. adkins. any more speakers in the queue? i believe there are no more speakers, mr. chair. >> all right. thank you. public comment is closed. before i jump in, colleagues.

>> just appreciate the updated information. we will build on some of the things that were talked about yesterday at the board. there is a lot of demand apneed for support and a lot of financial uncertainty in our city. just as evidenced by today a lot of the programs and support happening it is important to have a clear picture of the financial outlook as we go to the budget. hear from the departments and people today is an important piece of the conversation. appreciate that to help us inform how we approach the upcoming budget. >> thank you. supervisor mar.

>> did we have supervisor mar freeze? >> it looks that way. >> all right. i will jump in then. >> supervisor mar, anything? yes. i want to thank you, chair haney for calling for this hearing. it was very helpful to hear all of the updates from the departments about the work that is happening right now to address homelessness in our city

in a comprehensive way. i want to thank hespa and joe and mary for presentations and for hespa for continuing to push us as a city to really address the urgency of the moment. more specifically to ensure the prop c funds that were allocated according to the our city our home spending plan, those funds are released as soon as possible. we have all heard the frustration from the community. the service providers and advocates how slow it has been for the departments to release the fund to get the programs and services online as soon as possible or expanded.

i appreciate this hearing an opportunity to check in on that issue. i just want to ensure that the departments are really hearing this message from the community. i think from us as supervisors that it is very urgent for them to do everything they can to release the funds to get the programs expended and new ones started as soon as possible. i wanted to make that statement. i know you have a lot of questions, chair haney. i might have further questions or comments afterwards. >> great. thank you to both of you for those comments. could i ask director mcspadden to come up first for a few questions.

>> you know, we heard a theme of concern around some of the delays in getting money out including contracting and invoicing delays. is there a sense you have that those delays are happening? what is your plan to address those delays? is it is related to the new priorities or some questions and how we are approaching prop c? is this what you would view as normal? >> i think we have had a history of delays. i have said to you a few times when i came on i realized how under-resourced the department had been. we really have been staffing up over the months since the fiscal year started.

we have an unprecise departmented number of staff to execute all of these contracts. it is also when you grow as fast as you have there is an on boarding process and it takes time to gel and have everybody understand their rolls. that is one thing. i think we have moved unprecedentedly quickly since the fiscal year started. we have gotten a number of new contracts out the door. we have been able to modify a number of contracts. i want to say one of the things that comes with this much money there is a huge amount of accountability, program design that has to happen in partnership with community. we can't be do it in a vacuum. that takes time. while there are some places where we have and will continue to modify contracts with existing providers, we know that

we need to build capacity in our system. that means engaging with new providers. one of the reasons for that is, as i mentioned in my presentation. we are dedicated to ensuring the provider community represents people experiencing homelessness. that means bringing on more black and brown-led organizations to do the work. engaging with organizations that serve people to do the work. while we have those providers we are working to build capacity and working to bring on new ones. we don't want to -- we understand the urgency very much. we talk about it all of the time at work. what can we do? what can we get out right now? what needs more planning? we are i feel like moving quickly with a lot of urgency. we have an unprecedented number of dollars to get out the door.

i think, you know, the committee members know that the accountability means a lot of steps to go through. just to get a contract out the door if we have a brand-new one to take three to six months. it is a frustrating process. we also want to ensure we have the protections in place that we are thinking about how we are going to monitor these contracts to ensure we get the right outcomes. that takes time to build. i see us in a different place in the next few months. staff worked hard in partnership with the community to get as many dollars out as quickly as we can in the fiscal year. if you have more specific questions i have got deputy

directors on the call as well. >> the dollars allocated for permanent housing less than half are allocated so far. wondering for permanent housing as it relates to family housing. what are the actual timelines to be able to move these forward? i know there are families on wait lists waiting for things to move forward. realtime impact on people's lives. can you speak to the family housing plan and in particular the question of when and how this is going to get out that

has already been put in the budget for permanent housing? >> i am going to ask a deputy director to speak to that specific timeline. they will probably give it more clearance than i will.

>> they will be rolling out later. single site brick and mortar. we have brought three buildings forward for acquisition this year. two of those are k buildings. we are excited about that. they are smaller buildings. total of 70 units between those two buildings. we are on the lookout for additional ones. we have 40 family units coming on as part of acquisition of panama rammic hotel. family housing is a challenge. fewer believes with large units to accommodate families as

opposed to single adults. we are continuing to scour the market for good family housing opportunities. >> we don't have a timeline on release of funds for the permanent housing or there is also just so many things here. sounds like from my feedback pretty much all of them there is a sense in all of them have not been fully released. flexible housing subsidy pool, k and family flex pools. there is a lot of feedback from people the money is not getting out even though it was allocated. is there anything to say about the timeline on any of those

things. >> the family flex subsidies were delayed. 220 in early 2022. i failedded to note earlier that part of the delay is that we have been over the last couple months working to reallocate funding to support rollout of 906 emergency housing vouchers. they are a huge resource and exciting to house 1,000 households. h. d did not provide service dollars. we had to reallocate from our budget to pay the services. we have 377 vouchers to be supported by services from plex subsidy pool budget. we prioritized getting those out

first before the regular flex vouchers because of the urgency of not using the opportunity to deploy hud vouchers which are time limited. those 377 are in process. >> mary kate. >> you spoke around contracting delays on some of these larger expenditures. some of the questions around the families. pools specifically. can you speak to both of those things and what your experience has been? >> yes. in basically 2020 during the

budget process that year there was over $1 million allocated to begin family flex pool over the next couple fiscal years, year one and two. that started in 2021. >> there has been money for quite awhile that hasn't rolled out yet. the reason there was a community process that the community has given a lot of feedback around what those subsidies should look like. i hear the priority is getting the emergency house be vouchers allocated. it is for families and survivors which we appreciate. the money for flexible housing

much has been sitting there for a while. we just need to get that process together and start rolling out the funds. to the point also about the housing acquisition plan for families in k. there is 225 units that are targeted for acquisition. 77 acquired that is wonderful. we need to acquire the balance. for families there is 350 to 450 units to be acquired and 44 acquired due to panama rammic. i am not aware of all buildings. i am not sure there are any beyond 333 12th street that is a great opportunity that folks are looking at. not sure of the plan to acquire or move forward on family housing. there are 100 families on

shelter wait. between emergency housing and we could fix that if we could figure out how to unstick and move forward on these efforts. >> i did have questions around the shelters and what our plan is around safe noncongregate shelter options as the pandemic still continues. we had a hearing on broader pandemic recovery, but where are things around shelter access and shelter expansion? as part of that we approved emergency hotel vouchers for

families. could you have somebody speak to those issues? >> i know we had those. >> we are rolling out vouchers. reinflating shelters to the extent we can in accordance with department of public health. we are going to engage in conversations with shelter providers how to move forward with congregate shelter to keep people safe there. are best practices out there that we can learn from and about in the congregate shelter system. we are expanding stabilization rooms. as i mentioned in my presentation we are looking to bring 7-eleven post on as

noncongregate shelter which is one of the first -- we are trying out different kinds of shelter in our system and trying to get away from the big congregate shelters but we need those. we are expanding that. we have a winter shelter that i mentioned that will really help with capacity in the winter months. we may open a second one. noel, you can answer the question specifically about the vouchers how many we have rolled out or hopefully you can. >> yes, the 100 vouchers in the budget has not rolled out. we are in process of deploying the k vouchers through a work order to ocd to continue

existing k hotel voucher program while ramping up the program hsh. we have not delayed the pregnant women or db vouchers. those are in planning. as the director explained, a lot of efforts in recent months are bringing much larger numbers of shelter units online. we are happy to have the hotel vouchers. a small number. by contrast we have 400 units in shelter planned to hope in the first half at 2022 at two new sites. in december we will open two additional winter shelter sites with a total of 212 units. those are all part of the effort to keep people safe during the ongoing pandemic. >> if i heard that right the vouchers that we put aside for

domestic violence and pregnant people and families, none of those have been deployed at all yet, is that right? >> that's correct. >> i know that there is a lot of individual pieces of this that i could focus in on. why does that take so long? it is in the name it is an emergency. these are vulnerable populations. we have nearly $1 million sitting in a bank for vouchers for some of the most vulnerable homeless people and we aren't using the money. why would that be? i know there are a lot of other priorities. why would that be so difficult

to deploy? >> because we have never operated a hotel voucher program before. this requires us to do a new program design, new procurement to bring providers online. the budget was signed four months ago. as the director explained. we are awash in funding. that is a wonderful problem but it takes time to do community be process, design new programs and get new contracts in place. >> are there partner organizations that have deployed hotel vouchers before? >> as i mentioned, for the k hotel vouchers there is an existing program by larkin street. the board placed the hotel voucher dollars in the hsh

budget. we are working on ordering the voucher funds so there is no gap in services for the larkin program. >> for people who are not in zip hotels, i am wondering about the access they might have to flex pool placement or the permanent supportive housing. we talked a lot about the zip hotels. there is a lot of questions about how we are making sure people who are not in the zip hotels are also accessing some of these placements. >> supervisor, we do have placements that are being made outside of the housing process.

community q placements. placements to housing for k and families have been happening throughout the pandemic through the community queue. adult placements during covid have largely focused on the zip rehousing cohort. in recent months we have begun to reinitiate adult community q placements. i am trying to grab the numbers of on maysments out -- placements for you. i can pull them up. it is significant number of placements from outside of zip this year. >> sorry. >> while you are looking at that, i have a similar related question about how we are

connecting people who are unhoused with beds, services. those coming through dph with crisis response team or at general hospital. i was recently at general hospital and surprised to find out that their sense was there were a lot of people coming there for receiving treatment or showing up for various reasons and not able to access placement to shelter or housing or directly from general hospital. you brought up this larger question how hsh is collaborating with dph and our broader health system to make sure there is integration to place people in housing or shelter from different health or

mental health treatment access points. scrt or other clinics or hospitals. >> supervisor, let me come back to that in a moment. briefly going back to the question about housing placements from outside of the sip hotels. 362 of the total 365k and family housing placements were from outside the sip system. during that same time about 50 adult placements to housing from outside the sip system. we are looking to ramp those numbers upstarting now. director mcspadden, do you want to speak to the behavioral health partnership or should i do that? >> well, i can say that we have

worked on the partnership and meeting regularly. we certainly do take referrals from san francisco general to the system. you know, maybe you can speak more specifically how that works. we do that. we reserve beds for san francisco general specifically in our system. if you are hearing people aren't able to access there could be a variety of reasons they are not. we may not have appropriate shelter housing at the time, but we have a partnership and continue to work on making sure that they have one of the highest levels of access of any partner. >> that's right. to lend more specificity. the question was around the street outreach teams and access to shelter. currently through central shelter placement process two of

the top priorities are placements from hospital discharge. also, from the street response teams which includes skirt and sf hot which also works closely in partnership with ems6. those are ongoing consistent and top priorities for shelter placement. >> sometimes they give me feedback they don't think that is happening to the degree it is. i am glad it is a priority. i would give the feedback it is something that comes up that sometimes there are not effective handoffs for placements for people who are coming through some of these

systems of care. i know there is a lot going on and a lot of people to help. i understand that. i did want to hit that feedback as well. are there any questions from colleagues for folks from hsh? i am going to ask a few questions from dph as well. >> quick question for hsh, chair haney. director mcspadden, talking to people on the street, people working on with directly with the unhoused population. there has been concern people can't self-refer to shelters. a lot has to do with existing could individual status and wanting to know are you thinking about rapid testing program to

allow people to understand where their covid-19 status is so they can access shelter if they need it? >> i don't know if answer to that question, supervisor. i will ask deputy director simons to answer. >> supervisor safai, i am not sure i understand your question correctly. i can definitely speak to community access to shelter. >> let me clarify. if someone is on the street and want to walk to a shelter today. can they walk into a shelter? >> no, they can't. that was not our process prior to covid either. >> i understand that that is a barrier for a lot of people and it is made more difficult because of not easily accessible testing to determine whether or

not people can access the shelter readily. maybe you can talk us through why people can't come into a shelter if they need it and what the process is and the barriers. >> the first thing to clarify is that being vaccinated for covid is not a requirement to enter shelter. we have consciously not made it a requirement. we don't want to set up barriers. testing for covid is a separate question. more in dph's purview. we do have testing available at all shelters for covid. that should not be a barrier. with regard to community access, before covid members of the public were able to access through 311 wait list. we had to shut that down. we now use the central shelter

placements. in addition to the central shelter placement there are other avenues for broader community access to shelter. one sf hot that a public phone line. any individual who is experiencing homelessness can call directly to that line. it is not answered. if they leave a message our hot team will follow up on all clients calls within 24 hours to make an offer of shelter. our hot team is responding 10 to 15 callers per day from that line. what you saw earlier in the presentation they made over 3300 placements into shelter from the street last year. it is a large number being placed that way. in addition to that there are a number of navigation centers and emergency shelters usuallying community referral processes. they don't go through the central process. they are able to identify people

in the community and make direct placements into the shelters. we will also be working with a number of community partners in order to fill the two winter noncongregate shelters. 212 beds coming online december and january. hot team will work with providers in the community to identify people on the street in needs of those beds. >> are you thinking about restoring the 311 process? >> we know that is a high priority for the community. there are technical barriers to restarting that weight list quickly. it would be a long and boring system. the old system is decommissioned. we need to stand up a new

shelter bed management system. that is what is making it difficult for us. one of the things that makes it difficult to restart the 311 wait list right now. >> there are other avenues of community access to meet the demand for broader public access absent 311 wait list. >> is joe still on the line? >> i want to give him an opportunity to talk about this from his experience and what they see on the ground. >> thank you, supervisor. i have to express a lot of frustration here. with all due respect i can appreciate technical barriers to standing up shelter reservation

lines. there are technical barriers for people being homeless. an additional challenge here is it just doesn't feel like we are partners in this process. [please stand by]

>> it ought to be as easy as possible for a person outside who wants to get outside which is frankly not service resistant, and it'sec