>> president cohen: yes. >> i was just saying thank you, i'll be brief and if commissioner carter-oberstone ever gives a training on cross-examination i'm there. so some of the questions that he's posed hit the crux of the problem and i think some of the solutions are definitely in the ripa executive report. d.p.a. wholeheartedly endorsed the recommendations made by the ripa board in their 2022 best practices report. we encourage the public and all of the commissioners to read that report and consider the recommendations that are met that have been enumerated in that report. i just want to point out that d.p.a. has been in discussions and has been creating policy in conjunction with sfpd and other agencies to ask sfpd to

transition to its intelligence based policing rather than hot spot based policing and we anticipate having some policies and recommendations on that issue next quarter. also d.p.a. is also discussing with various agencies and stakeholders, ideas and policies that would limit pretextural stops in a sane and reasonable way a recommendation also discussed in the best practices report. i know that our director of policy has already drafted the language that we would like to present to anybody that's interested. and, finally, d.p.a.'s drafting policy and it's pretty much close to being done that concerns limiting consent searches especially those that are precipitated by probation and conditions. so i do think that these recommendations are not, you know, sfpd had the opportunity to explain that they're creating and discussing policies. i just want to make sure that everyone understands that d.p.a. is doing the same thing

and don't leave us out of the conversation because we have ideas that are evidence-based and that are in the works also. thank you. >> i think we'll definitely have you as part of the working group, ms. rosenstein. >> director: in case it wasn't clear by the information led, that's the difference and the distinction on having standards that are objective that are specifically and intentional about creating race neutral outcomes. i just wanted to explain it in case people don't understand thelingo of the terms we're talking about and the other thing i want to remind folks is that if it's not up there already, we will post the ripa report on d.p.a.'s website in case people want to read it or look at some of the details including the executive summaries for the work that's been ongoing. >> president cohen: thank you. all right.

9:33. we're going to take a very brief recess. five minutes. stretch your legs and we'll be back. [please stand by]

. >> president cohen: all right. let's go ahead and take public comment. >> secretary: at this time, the public is now welcome to

make public comment regarding line item eleven. if you would like to make public comment, please press star three now. good evening, caller, you have two minutes. >> caller: great. thank you. good evening president cohen and commissioners. my name is wesley saber and i am the senior policy manager for glide. glide's a proud member to end bias stops and we really appreciate the conversation that's taken place this evening about the need to end pretext stops in san francisco. thank you to the chief scott for recognizing the need for these restrictions. we've submitted associated recommendations that were detailed in a letter to president cohen and vice president elias on november 10th and our main recommendation is to ban pretext stops and the unrelated searches. it's time to move forward with these types of reforms. sfpd has found once again that black san franciscans are overrepresented per capita in

all interactions with the department. and traffic stops are the most common way people come into contact with police and san francisco mirrors the state and nation in overpolicing communities of color via these pretext stops and more still are seeking to do the same. so if we are serious about equity in transforming the community's relationship with the police, we have to start by taking on the most common interaction with law enforcement and stop the pretext. we would like to work with you in addressing this matter and we believe that together we can end pretext stops in san francisco and in doing so address the disparity we continue to see tracked in enforcement as noted in the ripa report. thank you and that's my time. appreciate you. >> secretary: thank you, caller. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: good evening, commissioners. chief scott, and executive

director henderson. this is brian cox. the ripa report shouldn't surprise anyone. racial disparities have been high for nearly half a decade these reports have been published. this applies to use of force and this is true even though the black population has shrunk in san francisco because of decades of chronic investment. what's true is that the reform efforts are moving too slowly and made too sub substantiative impact. the chief should welcome those questions with a chance to identify and understand what drives the disparities. but this appears too familiar at this point. we're going to see real movement and action on taking steps to end the disparities such as banning consent searches or whether someone is on probation parol.

months ago, i spoke about a coalition of dozens of stakeholders. our office among others in san francisco pushing to end low level traffic stops and do little to improve public safety. the 2022 ripa recommendation recommended reevaluating pretextural stops. this isn't new or revolutionary. so it's time we have some actual movement on this. it's time the commission engage in this action and i think we've been doing this for too long. let's see some movement on this. >> secretary: thank you, caller. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: good evening. my name is kit hodge. i want to highlight four stats from the data that you won't hear from sfpd in this report. please know that sfpd removed 2016 and 2017 data from the

stop and search graph in slide 24. it's worse now than all other quarters. this measure has not changed since 2016 when sfpd began to form the program based on the data so far for 2021. they make up 35% and 309% of fiscal control. it doesn't eliminate racial disparities and policing that has failed. we must not fail to that end when most policy bodies set and targeted reductions in racial disparities and sfpd work.

to stop enforcing minor traffic violations there is that list of recommendations. we recently sent a letter to a member of the commission asking for a response. we hope you share some of the urgency and respond with partnership and action. thank you. >> secretary: thank you, caller. good evening, caller, you have two minutes. >> caller: hello. i'm with the core team of wealth and disparities in the black community founded by felicia jones. there's a lot of talk about chief scott and not actual data. after you've gathered all the data and formed research and come up with a possible hypothesis, it's time to conduct some experiments who either prove or disprove that

hypothesis. is this even remotely possible that officers are targeting black people to minor traffic stops. let's try removing that variable and see if the disparity dropping. has sfpd ceased all low level traffic stops by police as other cities are doing. make it harder for them to act on bias. have them only be allowed to make if when officers no longer have the discretion to stop whenever they want, then you will have evidence of racial bias. i urge the police commission to agendize a serious discussion about the elimination of traffic stops and minor violations and then act on that policy change.

thank you. >> secretary: thank you, caller. good evening, caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: thank you, this is john crew again. and my thoughts have been communicated repeatedly in writing. the most recent is a submission that's in the commission's 30-day correspondence file dated january 31st. i want to make a few points in response to what i heard tonight. i've been saying for a long time, the problem here is a complete and utter lack of urgency sea to address this issue. they have normalized these disparities and i think you hear it in the chief's explanations, never acting. they just quickly go through a few things. when he brings up organizational accountability, this was brought up by the 21st century task force in 2015.

in the department responded to it and said they were going to address it. that was one of the key things that was being looked at and the hearing last year and now. this whole issue that somehow it's a new thing that organizational accountability has to be part of the puzzle is another sign that's not being taken seriously with explicit bias. all of the experts say what you're dealing with explicit bias, you don't have to wait to prove it, you take the steps to identify it and minimize it. that was in the last year's ripa board report recommendation that i called on this body of the department to act on and what we hear from the chief is we've got to prove it. with all do respect, chief, it's not just stops that result in searches. if someone said i'm not going to give you consent, you don't need a search.

it's also a fishing expedition. at this point, they do not have a fundamental understanding of the scope which is a sign that this is not a priority. lastly, i will say -- >> secretary: thank you, caller. president cohen, that's the end of public comment. >> president cohen: thank you. let's continue moving forward on the agenda. >> secretary: line item twelve has been removed from tonight's agenda. line item 13, discussion and possible action to adopt a resolution urging the board of supervisors to authorize the chief of police to accept and expend a grant in the amount of $123,664.99 from the u.s. department of justice bureau of justice assistance under the fiscal year 2021. patrick leahy bullet proof vest partnership to fund purchases of vests for law enforcement officers, in the police

department sheriff's department, adult probation department, and juvenile probation department. >> president cohen: is there a presentation or any member of the department that wants to talk on this? all right seeing none. let's go to public comment. >> secretary: for members of the public that would like to make comment online item 13, please press star three now. president cohen, there is no public comment. >> president cohen: great. is there a motion to accept and expend the grant? i'll make that motion: is there a second? seconded by commissioner elias. please call the roll. >> secretary: on the motion, [roll call]

you have seven yeses. >> president cohen: great. thank you. it's unanimous. please call the next item. >> secretary: line item 14, public comment on all matters pertaining to item 16 below, closed session including public comment on item 15 vote whether to hold item 16 in closed session. members of the public that would like to make public comment, please press star three now. and, president cohen, there's no public comment. >> president cohen: all right. great. let's go into closed session. [please stand by]

. >> president cohen: we're back in open session. i'll make a motion not to disclose any or all items on 16. is there a motion and a second? i'll motion. is there a second. ekd ied by commissioner byrne. >> secretary: on the motion not to close, [roll call]

you have seven yeses. >> president cohen: thank you. all right. ladies and gentlemen we are adjourned. >> secretary: president cohen, we have one more item to go back to 3.01. >> president cohen: that's right. please call the item. >> secretary: line item eight, discussion and possible action to revise general order 3.01. item continued from january 12th, 2022, discussion and possible action. >> president cohen: i'll make a motion to continue this item help me recall the date.

>> vice president elias: i think the motion was made and passed which will move it. >> commissioner hamasaki: right. >> commissioner: second. >> president cohen: so in terms of procedure, how do we address item eight? >> secretary: the motion was done and passed in closed session. we can just read the vote into the record. >> president cohen: okay. so a vote was taken 4-3 to continue this item until march 2nd, 2022. thank you. >> secretary: and finally, line item 18, adjournment, action item. >> president cohen: all right. ladies and gentlemen, now we are adjourned. good night. >> commissioner hamasaki: thank you and very good night.

today we are going to talk about fire safety. we are here at the urban center on mission street in san

francisco. it's a wonderful display. a little house in the urban center exhibition center that shows what it's like in a home in san francisco after an earthquake. one of the major issues that we are going to face after earthquakes are fire hazard. we are happy to have the fire marshall join us today. >> thank you. my pleasure. >> we talk about the san francisco earthquake that was a fire that mostly devastated the city. how do we avoid that kind of problem. how can we reduce fire hazard? >> the construction was a lot different. we don't expect what we had then. we want to make sure with the gas heaters that the gas is shut off. >> if you shut it off you are

going to have no hot water or heat. be careful not to shut it off unless you smell gas. >> absolutely because once you do shut it off you should have the utility company come in and turn it back on. here is a mock up of a gas hear the on a house. where would we find the gas meter? >> it should be in your garage. everyone should be familiar with where the gas meter is. >> one of the tools is a wrench, a crescent wrench. >> yes. the crescent wrench is good and this is a perfect example of how to have it so you can loosen it up and use it when you need it. >> okay. let's go inside to

talk about fire safety. many of the issues here relate to fire, for example, we have a little smoke detector and i see you brought one here, a carbon monoxide smoke detector. >> this is a combination of smoke and carbon monoxide detector. they are required in single homes now and in apartment buildings. if gas appliance is not burning properly this will alert you before the fumes buildup and will affect you negatively. >> this is a battery powered? >> this is a battery powered and it has a 10 year battery life. a lot of times you may have one or the other. if you put in just a carbon monoxide

detector, it's important to have one of these too. every house should have a fire extinguisher, yes. >> one thing people expect to do when the power goes out after an earthquake about using candles. what would you recommend? >> if you have a battery operated candle would be better to use. this kind of a candle, you wouldn't want it in an area where it can cause a fire or aftershock that it doesn't rollover. you definitely want to have this in a non-combustible surface. >> now, here we have our stove. after a significant earthquake we expect that we may have gas

disrupted and so without gas in your home, how are you going to cook? >> well, i wouldn't recommend cooking inside of the house. you have to go outside and use a portable stove or something else. >> so it wouldn't be safe to use your fireplace to cook? >> not at first. you should check it by a professional first. >> outside should be a safe place to cook as long as you stay away from buildings and doors and windows. >> yes. that will be fine. >> here we have some alternative cooking areas. >> you can barbecue and if you

have a regular propane bark could barbecue. >> thank you for joining us. and thanks for this terrific space that you have in this exhibition space and thanks for helping san francisco stay safe. this meeting will come to order. this is the february 2nd, 2022, budget and finance committee. the 2nd of 2022.

committee members asha safai. mr. clerk, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes, mr. chair, to the same extent as though physically present. the board recognizes that public access to city services is essential and invite public participation in the following ways. public comment will be available on items on the agenda and sfgovtv.org are streaming the public call-in number across the screen. each comments or opportunities to speak are available via phone call by calling

(415) 655-0001. today's meeting 24833326847. you will be muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up, please dial star three to be added to the speaker line, speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television, radio, or streaming device. you may submit public comment in either of the following ways at sfgov.org. if you submit public comment, it will be forwarded to supervisors and will be included as part of the official file. the number one dr. carlton b. goodlet place room 244, san francisco, california. finally items acted upon today

are expected to appear on the board of agenda today. mr. chair. >> chairman: thank you so much and thank you everyone for being here. we have a full budget and finance committee agenda today. thank you for being brief with your presentations and in advance for your patience and thank you to the public who's joining us. mr. clerk, can you please call item one. >> clerk: you are muted. >> clerk: let's try that again. item number one is a resolution for the department of homelessness serving approximately 250 adults located at 711 post street.

through june 30th, 2024. for a total not to exceed the amount of $18.7 million pursuant to charter section affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act. members of the public should call (415) 655-0001. the meeting id is 248364877 then press pound twice. dial star three 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 so much, mr. clerk, and we have

emily cohen who's here to present on this item. >> thank you. i have a very brief presentation to share with all of you. the resolution before you is to approve a grant 0 that is intended to serve approximately 250 adults experiencing homelessness. the total not to exceed the grant is just over $18.7 million and the term is through the end of june 2024. under the proposed agreement, urban alkami would provide 24-7

support and operation services as well as street activation. we're so excited about the property, this facility really offers a unique building type for the shelter. we have learned from the 25s.i.p. hotels that a less congregate version of shelter is powerful for the guest and an operable model going forward. this has 123 individual rooms that range in size from singles to quads. as i said before with an estimated capacity of about 250 people. there are bathrooms and showers on each floor.

really significant community space for services and for lounging and social activity. there's storage. there's a commercial kitchen and dining area and we plan to with street activation services also to be provided by urban alkami and which we think will bring a wholistic approach to the shelter that really takes into the consideration the host community as well as the shelter guest. as i mentioned, we are proposing to partner with urban alkamie for operations of this program. u.a. has pretty extensive experience working with us in managing shelter-in-place hotels, state sleep programs, vehicle triage centers and activating public spaces through their street practicioner services. urban alkamie is a program

dealing with addiction and homelessness. and it has a unique and successful model that's currently being replicated throughout california and other parts of the country as well and we're excited to partner with them on this initiative. since we met last, h.s.h. has had the opportunity to work closely with supervisor peskin and his office as well as the lower knob hill alliance and we have met several times. so in addition to our large community meetings in advance of introduction, we've been meeting regularly with the neighborhood alliance. we have toured the community with the neighborhood to identify areas where extra support is needed. we have agreed to expand street activation services and we're deeply committed to an ongoing partnership with the neighborhood. through the participation of and staffing in ongoing working

group. just last night, we received a letter from the neighborhood alliance with 16 requests for the center. we've already responded and we feel confident we're going to be able to accommodate some of those requests. i really appreciate the time over the last few weeks to get to know folks from the neighborhood alliance and look forward to continuing to work closely with them if and when the project moves forward. i will stop there and take any questions that you have. >> chairman: i do want to give you the opportunity. you and i have talked about this. you know, one of the things that this committee was hoping that could be explored was the possibility of purchasing the building and if you have any update on that and what can be shared about that prospect. >> yes, thank you very much, chair haney for the question.

the city has entered into a letter of interest with the property owner to begin the due diligence process to explore acquisition of this property. as i mentioned before, it's a unique asset and i think one that would benefit the homeless response system in the long term. additionally, i failed to mention, we do have a miner amendment to the resolution that has been shared with the chair's office and the clerk. i'm happy to read that into the record if that would be helpful. i have been advised from the city attorney it's nonsubstantive and defer to them. >> chairman: great. and just to be clear about the letter of intent if we were to decide to purchase the building, you know, in the middle of the contract itself, how can we pursue both of these things simultaneously?

>> both the lease early if need be. if we were to buy the building, we would terminate the lease with the property owner, of course. in terms of the contract which is before the board today, we also have the ability to cancel or amend as needed. although, it is our intent to operate this as a shelter for adults for the next two and a half years which is the length of the contract and if we are to buy the property, we would throughout that time do research and explore possible models that may either be emergency ongoing shelter or think about transitional housing or permanent housing, whatever the right use might be. we're very open minded about future use of the site, but do intend to operate it in the immediate future shelter. so whether the city ends up

owning it. >> chairman: got it. the okay. thank you. i'm sure they'll be further comments and questions on things. i know that there was some changes on that even since you had prepared this presentation. so i think it's important for you to share that first. and supervisor safai. supervisor safai, are you there? >> supervisor safai: mr. chair, you know what, i see supervisor peskin, his district, i want to defer to him and then if you don't mind, come back to me after he goes. >> chairman: sure. welcome, supervisor peskin. i will pass it over to you and thank you for your work on this and working with the department and the neighbors and welcome. >> thank you, chair haney, and

members of the budget committee. let me associate myself with some of the words that ms. cohen on behalf of the department of homelessness and housing said relative to how we use the intervening period between january 5th when this was scheduled right after the holidays and today i really want to thank the individuals who have come together at the edge of my district and supervisor haney's district who have committed a lot of time. we have had now four meetings, most of them in person. it is an organization that is new, but is learning a lot about how the city operates and have very real and valid concerns about their neighborhood both with and without the proposed facility. and i actually have said and

i'll repeat here that if there's one silver lining to this whole episode, it's the fact that this area that here to for has really not had any organized residential neighborhood voice has come together in the form of lower knob hill neighborhood alliance. so i welcome that and look forward in my next three years as supervisor and working with them to improve the quality of life in that neighborhood which is probably the only area in the northeast corner that has not had a long-term organized residential neighborhood voice in the form of the neighborhood association. so i'm very pleased about that. and i want to restate the obvious which is that the city got off to a bad foot with the neighborhood, that the period between thanksgiving and the winter holidays is when a

couple of, you know, zoom meetings that neighbors had to enter their e-mail addresses to participate in. obviously, all of this exacerbated and made more complicated by covid was a bad start. i want to thank director sharine mcsadden and ms. cohen for the willingness for sincere good faith discussions with the neighborhood to demystify some of what we're doing, to walk the neighborhood. to see the current state of the neighborhood. i frankly had this not been scheduled on january 5th would have used the time to do those constructive engagements anyway, but here we are. and after -- i don't want to speak for the neighborhood, but i am pleased that the

neighborhood has come forward with a list of the 16 items that ms. cohen spoke to. i think many of them are things that the city can and should and as you heard from emily are agreeing to. i think that if this facility is to be located here and i say that as the supervisor who has been a vocal champion for the. >> commissioner taylor: nav center at 888 post street for very close by as the advocate for the 232 room grenada and supportive housing which has by the way of h.s.h. had its trying times as has been reporting widely in large part

because of the property management and of opiscapal community services and same holds true of my commitment to the deeushgszva hotel. all of these have come online in the last year or two. and the neighborhood is up against it. so it's i think critical if we are going to succeed in this case to address the crisis of homelessness on our streets that the city has to perform super latively and if we don't, it is going to make the location of these types of facilities in other parts of the city much more difficult. so i appreciate the little less than a month.

frankly i think that the changes that we have seen and the letters that have been exchanged last night and this morning are a great step in the right direction. i actually think this would benefit for -- there's nothing like a deadline to bring parties together. i think this would benefit from one more week at this committee

so that there can actually be some finalization of those commitments by the city before it is rushed to the board. that would be my friendly professional suggestion. and with that, thank you for your indulgence, budget committee. >> chairman: thank you, supervisor peskin for those updates and for your hard work and staff i'm sure as well and to all of the neighbors and residents. some of whom are in your district. some in my district who have contributed to this process and i also have the opportunity to meet with the lower knob hill neighbors and appreciated their insight on this and thank you for your work on it. >> supervisor safai: thank you, mr. chair. thanks supervisor peskin for your team and hard work. when i agreed to and i know

this entire budget committee agreed to continuance one of the primary goals was to really advance the conversation for the city to potentially buy the building. i have spoken to the property owner, checked in with our negotiating team. this is a. both sides have come to a strong agreement. these next 60 days will allow the city to do its due diligence to investigate the building and i think and not necessarily leasing long term. it allows for the city to have additional possibilities for

future uses. the neighbors have talked about wanting. it allows us to have that additional option. so my number one goal was to move forward a conversation that would be a fair purchase price, not something at all cost, but something that would meet the market price and it seems as though we've reached that point and so i think that's a real important step in the conversation. really appreciate the letter we got last night. i really appreciate the lower knob hill leadership group and the department. it wasn't a list of unreasonable demands. one of the things i heard them say and i asked the department to incorporate in and they agreed in their letter was to

essentially limit their capacity at 250. if there is any additional need even though the capacity may exist that if this is done right and if there's a need for it to go above that, nothing would happen without there being community process and reengaging and seeking the approval of the supervisor, the board, and the community. i think that's an important thing. another thing was to expand and this is something that the community and the supervisor asked for. i think this is an important aspect is extending the support services to 24 hours a day. that's something that we fought really hard for when we did our safe parking. we asked for it to be 24 hours, 7 days a week and in the year and a half that we had our safe parking run by the same group, we had maybe one incident. having eyes on the ground and ambassadors out there is important to the community.

another thing in terms of the weapons policy. the response says if the individuals sound with a fire firearm, that firearm will immediately be turned over. i just want ms. collin to clarify. my understanding is if someone's found with a firearm, they will be asked to be dismissed and no longer be able to be in the shelters. is that correct? >> that's correct. we do have a weapons policy that involves confiscating a firearm and turning them over to police but it's also possession of a firearm is also cause for immediate removal of the shelter. that's the policy consistent with all of our shelter programs. >> supervisor safai: right and i know that that was a big point of concern from the neighbors in terms of all the e-mails and letters that we got with the weapons policy that didn't seem to be in line with some of the concerns. but thank you for clarifying that. i think that's really

important. so it seems to me as though many of the concerns have been met. many of the biggest concerns have been met, being able to buy the building is a really important step forward, capping the limit at 250 that will be scaled up and then to supervisor peskin's point. i think that one of the other things that's really important i'll give you an opportunity to respond to this, the operation of the building is super important and we can create shelters. we can create supportive housing. we can create affordable housing or market rate housing for that matter. but if it's not managed properly and done in an effective manner, then there's always concern. so can you talk about the process by which you have a scaling up in terms of the number of beds that will be open, but how will the management of the building be monitored and how will you

ensure that they're meeting the goals of being a strong operator? as i've said, i've work wednesday this group in the past. they did a phenomenal job in my district, but this is a different type of service. so and that was a major concern from the neighbors. so i just want to give you the opportunity to talk about if things are going well, it's obvious things will continue. if things are not going well and there's a tremendous amount of concern or miss management, how does h.s.h. handle that situation? >> thank you very much for the question, vice chair safai. as you alluded to, we have agreed to a ramp-up in terms of capacity starting at 150 and working our way to 250 over the course of i think seven months and agree to, you know, our intent has always been to focus -- to serve 250 people up to 250 people at the shelter and so we will continue that

effort. in terms of operations, urban alkamie will have staff on site within the building 24/7. support service workers on site connecting people with care. keeping the peace, really promoting a healthy and healing environment ensuring that peoples' basic daily needs are met. we will also have practicioners out on the street, 24/7 ensuring that the property and the project remain a good neighbor. and then we also have daytime case management services that will be focused on connecting people staying at the shelter with the services and resources needed to move through their experience of homelessness.

>> there was an ordinance passed by the board of supervisors in 2019. an emergency shelter ordinance. that emergency shelter ordinance created a framework for your department to hire and work with contractors to operate facilities. can you talk about that a little bit? >> yes. there's a shelter crises ordinance passed by unanimous vote in 2019. h.s.h. has the ability to negotiate into homeless service providers. they supported this ordinance out of a goal to specifically expedite the process of opening shelters and related to social services. it is a provision that we do utilize to cut many months off our processes. in compliance with this

ordinance, we report annually -- every contractor has been entered under the authority of the ordinance. we'll continue to do so for the life of the provision. >> okay, thank you deputy director kone. i want to thank your department for engaging. thank you supervisor peskin for your leadership working with the community from where we were when you came in our office and see the letter we got last night. i think it's a tremendous amount of progress in a very short period of time. deadlines usually motivates people to come to some form of agreement. i'm very happy that this purchase is moving forward aggressively, very happy that there's been significant concessions in terms of limiting the number of beds, expanding the services on site and

ensuring this is a model for success. thank you mr. chair. >> chair: supervisor mar? >> supervisor mar: thank you, chair haney. i want to thank supervisor peskin and emily and h.s.h. and the lower knob hill neighbor for a quick productive community engagement discussion of this project over the past weeks. i do want to say this was what very important to me when we considered this a month ago that the city really commit to real outreach and meaningful engagement with the neighbors about this important project. to me, i think this is an

example of how we can do these projects right and really not just jump to the conclusion. listening to them, allowing them to voice their very legitimate concerns and in this case, really come up with a very reasonable list of requests that the city for this project, the 16 items that were in the letter that i saw that we received last night. i appreciate the h.s.h.'s response. there will be a ongoing discussion about. i think it's been very productive. i do appreciate that.

i guess i look forward. i know probably have lot of folks who will share their perspective in the discussion during public comment. i look forward to hearing that. thank you. >> chair haney: thank you for that. supervisor mar. i did have couple of other quick questions and i'll save my final comments for after public comment. i'm sure we have folks who want to speak. some of the questions, supervisor safai touched on this little bit, were related to the level of services that are going to be provided at the facility. what i've seen in our success, i know you helped to lead on this ms. cohen, when we had our shelter-in-place hotels, part of what made those more successful and allowed us to get folks to go in and stay in was that we

were really offering a pathway to be off the street permanently. there was a real commitment that the folks who go in there, if they stay in there, will be supported to get a more permanent placement. is there a commitment of that type for the people who come into this shelter and what how exactly are we talking about that and framing that? i do want to say that, there are a -- we do need beds to get people off the streets. what we see with larger congregate shelter, they don't have wraparound services and case management, they often end up cycling in and out. they don't see a lot of value in staying there over the long-term because there isn't a future

exit that is going to be more permanent. can we speak to sort of what you envisioned and what our commitment is to people who come into this facility in terms of how long they'll stay and what our goal is for them in terms of an exit? >> thank you very much, chair haney. there's currently not an length of stay limit within our shelter system. at the beginning of the pandemic, we did away with that to help stabilize the community within shelter. that continues to be the policy for now. if that changes with across our shelter system, this policy will change in alignment with that. similarly, guests who stay at the shelter, there's an emphasis connecting them with housing assessment to determine who's eligible for housing and who may

not be eligible for city subsidy through our housing response system. there's not a guarantee housing accomplishment at this shelter similar to any other shelter. we're bringing in covid vulnerable people. we did make commitment to rehousing them. it's going quite well. that said, our entire shelter system, we are committed to rehousing people who's vulnerabilities indicate they need permanent supportive housing. this shelter will be in alignment with our other shelter programs. we want to assess everyone and work to house our most vulnerable folks. we cannot jump the line.

>> chair haney: the services at this facility will be similar to those provided in a navigation center and similar types of rules and structures? is it obviously one big difference it's not congregate, other types of differences or ways you distinguish what we are doing at this facility versus the embarcadero navigation center. >> it is not -- it is a different model because of the individual rooms. this program also includes social services. the navigation centers have a very high level of service. this has a more moderate. this program has a more moderate level of service. it is aligned slightly deeper services than our traditional

congregate shelters. >> chair haney: midway between navigation. >> and a traditional shelter. as part of our strategic planning process that we'll be engaging into throughout the year, we want to look at shelter as a whole and look at how we can integrate the right level of social service at each shelter and focus on those housing placements. we'll be looking across-the-board at our shelter service model going forward. then adjusting contracts as needed. >> chair haney: one of the things that i've and others have been focused on and interested in is how we make sure that there are adequate behavioral health services on site and as

well as assessments and referral for people who need either mental health services or addiction treatment. is that something that's going to be provided on site by urban alchemy? will there be d.p.h. folks on site. urban alchemy is an organization and a provider that worked with as much as many in my district. i have huge respect for them. i think that we should be clear they are newer in providing services like the ones that will be provided at this facility. are they going to do the assessment and intake? how when it comes to behavioral health services, who's going to provide that?

>> urban alchemy will have healthcare coordinators on site the care coordinators are responsible for linking people with ongoing services. behavioral health services is something that a particular individual needs. we will be doing referrals to those providers and making the connections in partnership with the guests. urban alchemy will be supporting the community as a whole at 7-eleven in terms of immediate behavioral health needs crises management and deescalation. then the long-term services are about working with our existing providers and existing services in the community. there may be some co-located programming but much of the programming will be coordinated through urban alchemy for people to receive in the community. this is very consistent with many of our other program

models. >> chair haney: the actual role that urban alchemy is going to play is obviously staffing the facility, providing the care, some of the care services, some of the connections and coordinate nations to other types of intake. they'll be providing the neighborhood outreach and security. is that right? in that case, i'm not aware of a model like that. i don't think we have -- the other navigation centers -- staff on site are not providing the neighborhood. i think there's actually lot of advantage in urban alchemy as uniquely position to be able to do those things and hopefully, some of the questions about how this works with neighborhood outreach, will be addressed.

is that the case? they are providing all of those things? >> that is the case. i think this is a real advantage of working with urban alchemy. outside of the division circle navigation center, we included a contract with another partner to do street cleaning. it was downtown streets. to do some of that cleaning. that was really helpful and helped make the shelter, navigation center more welcome to neighbors. what they do is that connection into the shelter. if somebody staying in the shelter hanging out, they say this isn't necessarily a pot you can hang out. they can say come back in and let's go inside and talk. by urban alchemy sort of doing the street work that also letting them inside, they'll be able to engage with those guests, for longer experiences.

if they're outside as well as within the program. we're really excited about testing this out. as we face challenges, i do think that there's going to be a role for street engagement in partnership with shelter operations. to think about how shelters are good neighbors going forward. we want to try this out and see if it makes a difference. >> chair haney: will urban alchemy have a zone similar to what we have embarcadero and urban alchemy themselves will be able to provide that outreach and then what will be the relationship between the folks at urban alchemy who are running the shelter and the many other urban alchemy folks who are in the tenderloin? we have now urban alchemy folks

who are on most blocks in the tenderloin. will they have some sort of access to the shelter? how will that work? >> shelter access will continue to be centralized. access to the shelter will be similar to other shelters. we are proposing to have a prioritization for the immediate area, that's something we can work out with the neighborhood association similar what we've done at the embarcadero. yes, there will be a zone. we're working with the neighborhood alliance to determine the footprint of that zone. that's where urban alchemy will be activated daily and we will be coordinating with the homeless outreach team if people need placement into a shelter. it doesn't become -- the shelter does not become the place that all urban alchemy street practitioners can refer to. the referral process remains centralized as it is for all of our shelter system. >> chair haney: got it.

, okay. i will say that shelter and transitional housing are solutions to homelessness. right now, we do not have enough spots for people who are on the streets. it's hard to get people inside. non-congregate facilities in particular are more effective. people accept the placements, they get better services there. there are often lot of bureaucratic barriers getting peopled in. i hope that urban alchemy stewards won't have direct access to placement that they can help to -- because they're going to be paying multiple roles here -- ensure that people who are on the streets actually are able to get inside. when that's done well and there's accountability, what we seen, as you know and seen in other facilities in my district,

we reduce neighborhood homelessness. we've seen a reduction in the neighborhood homelessness around the embarcadero navigation center because we set up a zone and we tracked it. we helped to get people inside in that area. i do hope that there's a real commitment around the barriers that can prevent us from getting people inside and the opportunities that this model presents and then a real transparency and accountability and commitment to reduce homelessness in the surrounding area. similar to the commitment that we make with a navigation center. that actually the focus is on helping people in the area and that we really are able to demonstrate that's happening. supervisor peskin, is there anything you want to say before we go to public comment? i don't know if this sparked anything for you?

>> supervisor peskin: no, i've been down this road every day for the last month. at any rate, if you gave us one more week to put a ribbon on this thing, i appreciate that. >> chair haney: thank you. mr. clerk, do we have any public comment? >> clerk: thank you. operations, just checking if there's any callers in the queue. members of the public who wish to provide comment on it item, press star 3 now. mr. chair, how long are we holding public comment for? >> chair haney: one minute each. >> clerk: mr. atkins, let us know if there are any callers to comment on this item.

>> caller: hello, my name is jonathan. i live in district three. i work in district six, about three blocks from this location. i wanted to express my excitement and support for h.s.h.'s proposal. we have a huge encampment on the 300 block of dallas. we need places for people to go. i also deeply respect and appreciate supervisor peskin's work with the neighborhood. i want to express my support for permanent supportive housing at 711 post. it's a great opportunity. thanks. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker please. >> caller: good morning. i live in lower pacific heights.

i'm a 35-year resident of san francisco. i wanted to say i really appreciated the discussion i just listened to. i thought it was a really good effort to address the neighbor's concerns. i understand why people would be concerned. i think we're on a good path to deal with homelessness in this type of model under a hardened by the good work that urban alchemy is doing. i'm calling in support of 711 post street. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker please. >> caller: hello, i'm evelyn messenger. there's been lot of progress. i want to thank you for doing that. especially supervisor peskin and also especially, the lower knob hill community alliance for the hard work they've been doing.

i live in lower knob hill. i agree with supervisor peskin that we need one more week for sure. the first thing is that, over the last three years, the city opened 11 facilities, serving unhoused citizens in lower knob hill community. the truth is, any new shelters can go somewhere else. we have plenty. i have two questions. the agreed changes we hear about, can they be implemented in the contract before the funds are allocated as opposed to allocating the funds? this is supposed to happen later. in our community, feel strongly there should be a six-month trial period at the full capacity. and spend six months seeing what happens and we should meet again and decide. thank you.

>> clerk: next speaker please. okay, we can come back to that caller. >> caller: hi, good morning. i live in district six. i'm in full support of this emergency respondent shelter shelt --response shelter withou. i want to pond to something that supervisor peskin said that the one silver lining here is the formation. i appreciate that. the silver lining of this project and highest priority here, should be the immediate

shelter for hundreds you have our neighbors who passes on the sidewalks. we need homeless housing now. this is part of the tenderloin emergency that you all concurred. when your house is on fire, do we spend a month and a week discussing what the community was consulted enough. do we put the fire out immediately. we need an emergency response and we need it today. if we don't want people living on the streets, we need to make space inside now. it's that simple. please move forward today. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker. >> caller: good morning everyone. my name is ms. nikki child. i'm calling in favor of h.s.h. proposal to acquire the property at 711 post street for the purpose of creating the congregate shelter.

there's 5000 unsheltered individuals on our street. 50% are senior citizens. we have a really large elderly population living outside. that's not acceptable. i think this property is a really good property because previously used as a hospital and it's uniquely set up for communal living and very convenient restrooms. everything is already set in place. i think it's a good property. only stipulation is that i believe it is necessary to have this 24-hour supervision of the service provider and also san francisco police department outside just to keep the community safe and clean. also to be able to have consistency from the business community and the hotel community. >> clerk: i apologize for cutting you off, as chair

indicated, we are timing each speaker one minute. thank you for your comments. next speaker please. >> caller: i'm a 15-year resident of knob hill. the most important thing the city can do is acquire some of the buildings that were residential hotels that were housing and became tourism. i notice that the ones used as

hotels now, city paying vast amount of money to the owners. the other thing is, urban alchemy seems like a very hopeful solution here. episcopal community service -- i lived here over 20 years. i know -- >> clerk: thank you for your comments. just as update. we have 45 callers listening to this meeting with 23 lined up to speak. we are timing each speaker at one minute. your participation is important to us.

we do appreciate your patience. mr. atkins, next speaker please. >> caller: my name is emma, i'm calling from st. anthony. i want toed to express my support of this proposed shelter with over 5000 people who are unsheltered on our streets. it's important to create more housing as quickly as we can. [ indiscernible ] >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker please. >> caller: this is kevin. i'm a resident of the lower knob hill. i like to express my opposition to this facility. i have no faith that urban alchemy can operate this and keep the community safe and keep

the facility in a safe place for both the residents and the community. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next caller please. >> caller: good morning. my name is mark jenkins. i'm general manager at courtyard. i want to express my concerns about this shelter. request that we not move forward until more comprehensive evaluation can be done. we appreciate supervisor peskin hearing our concerns. with urban alchemy, this will be the largest here.

[ indiscernible ] >> caller: i'm calling in to strongly support this proposal. i was born and raised in the bay area. i was active member of the san francisco chapter. i live at 711 post. i think this is what we need to

help our neighbors. i would urge us not lose sight of this scale. supervisor peskin we need shelter and support for these people who are in our community who will currently failing and delaying that support is shameful. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you so much for your comments. >> caller: good morning chair haney and supervisors. i'm a policy associate for glide. i'm calling in support of the current agreement for 711 post street. san francisco suffers from issues to access to shelter and pathway.

during the pandemic, access to shelter has been so restrictive. when nearly two years, there's been no way to put folks in shelter and limited provider referral. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. >> caller: good morning. i'm director of internal affairs

policy. i'm calling in support of the 711 post. this is a really great step towards doing that. we are very excited about the building and the potential for smaller, more secure, more private places for unhoused members of our community to stabilize and move to their next step for housing. thank you very much. >> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: hello. good morning. my name is susan brown. i am a resident, 30-year plus resident of lower knob hill. i have serious concerns about

adding the shelter. not specifically having a shelter but the fact that you need rules and specific things our neighborhood has been destroyed already. we have filth and safety issues. we can't go out of the house. it's terrifying around here at this point. to bring in another 250 beds in a small radius where we already have problems. i would like to mention emily cohen, just this morning, in this meeting, she was excited for testing this out, which is the new facility. testing this out, we're going to bring 250 more homeless people into a small pace to test it out? i don't think that's appropriate. we need to fix the housing that we have. fix the streets of our neighborhood. make it safe and clean again.

>> clerk: thank you for your comments. we are timing each speaker one minute. next speaker please. >> caller: hello. my name is dr. allen cooper. i want to thank supervisor haney for representing our community. [ indiscernible ] this building will provide an excellent location.

>> clerk: next speaker please. >> caller: good morning. my name is trisha. i live next door to 711. i'm against this project. i have seen the building. the building is not appropriate for what emily cohen. community space is too small. kitchen is too small. dining space is too small. the space will not hold safely

the number of people she would like to shelter or the personal amenities she like to offer them. in order for this project to succeed it need to be licensed social service workers on duty to oversight the project. i'm against this. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. we do still have 41 members of the public dialed into this call with 15 in line to speak. if you're part of the 41, and you have not already provided your testimony, please press star 3 now. >> caller: the area has been going down and you have to pick

up feces all the time. they can go outside and any time they want and do drugs. what's the reason for this? it should be in a better neighborhood, not this neighborhood. this neighborhood is trying to survive now. it's hard for us to survive if you will let more homeless people come down here. i don't understand what you doing. i've been here 40 years, now i'm going to be homeless because you want to put homeless people up here. i don't understand. it should be somewhere else. it shouldn't be here. thank you very much. >> clerk: next speaker please.

>> caller: good morning. i'm in strong opposition to this shelter. i live two doors down. i been here for 22 years. most people not in this neighborhood are all for it, it means one less in theirs. we love to talk about equity, there's no equity for us who live in the neighborhood now who had to deal with all the new shelters already in the recent time. the h.s.h. keeps talking about the perfect building. that may be the case, unfortunately, it's not the perfect neighborhood. we had influx of shelters in the last year and a half and adding another one is too much. the city and h.s.h. -- shelt other than paper sounds good. i suggest holding h.s.h. to approving the current ones in the surrounding areas. those aren't working now. peskin spoke to it little bit. why wouldn't we live to the pie in the sky about this one? there's been 10 businesses at least on this street that closed

in the last year and a half. it's not just because of covid. they say they are moving to less sustained and disgusting neighborhood. >> clerk: thank you so much for your comments. >> caller: good morning. i'm andrew lang. i work in the lower knob hill neighborhood. i urge you to vote no on the proposal to urban alchemy. the city is already converted post, and grenada hotel in our neighborhood. we've done our fair share. i've been observing and participating with our neighborhood alliance. the group has done a tremendous amount of work in a very short period of time. they trying to meet the city

half way. they trying to get a proposal that will work. it's important in you go forward with the shelter that's well planned and well organized and it has the backing of the neighborhood. i strongly urge that you give this matter further consideration. i think supervisor peskin suggestion for one week continuance is appropriate. there are far too many details to work out in this phone call. thank you. >> clerk: thank you andrew lang for your comments. next speaker. >> caller: hi. i'm calling in support of this facility. i understand people don't living there near the facilities. this is definitely a step in the right direction.

i don't think just because from one neighborhood, we have to wait with all this delay and delay. the key way to deal with homelessness is to provide housing. it's something that will improve the neighborhood. it will improve the city. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker please. we hear you george. >> caller: hi.

my name is george moffitt. i'm other than of a property in the neighborhood. the way supervisors have allowed this neighborhood to deteriorate is nothing short of befalling. i spoke supervisor haney campaigners last week. i said to him, he has no right to run for anything until he gets the neighborhood cleaned up. this neighborhood is filthy. you allowed it to denigrate. more concerned with people who are criminals, villains, drug dealers, drug users and people who don't care about the

neighborhood than individuals and residents who live there. i say shame on you. you have destroyed this city. you go around like paragons of virtue. you're completely and utterly inept. >> clerk: thanks for your comments. next speaker please. >> caller: this is jim chapel. i'm a 45-year san francisco resident and urban planner by training, member of the housing action coalition. there are thousands of people in san francisco experiencing homelessness today. 8000 of them unhoused and many of them living on the street in this neighborhood. please pass this measure forward to the full board of supervisors today to the extent that there are issues of the 16 points to be worked out.

get them worked out between now and full board meeting. don't delay this any more. there's a crises on our streets. people are dying on our streets. let's move. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker please. >> caller: hello. i strongly opposed this facility. you don't live in this neighborhood. we have 11 shelters in five block radius. this is insane. emily cohen has changed her mind and statements multiple times. this is unfair. in terms of hotel, we have people from seattle staying here. they're coming from other counties and other states because they heard we have free hollows and free places for them to stay. this is unsustainable. we have drug dealers that are

taking over this neighborhood because they service the shelter. i encourage you to look to the patriots that have been sent to the board of supervisors. urban alchemy has a very bad reputation in l.a. and san francisco. somebody needs to look at this. fbi is investigating every contract and urban alchemy is right in there with big papa mall. we need to stop this. we have 11 shelters right in the five block radius. this needs to stop now. none of this works. there's no treatment. >> clerk: thank you so much for your comments. next speaker please.

>> caller: i'm against the approval of the project at 711 post i'm a long-term resident. this is not a good idea. it's just an expansion of the containment zone. i was told before the last vote that it could be delayed. this time i was told it would pass. vote no. it is what's right for our neighborhood and right for san francisco. why are we having this meeting with input from the public if supervisor haney already made up their mind and they are voting to approve as reported in this morning's san francisco standard. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker please.

might be unattended line. next speaker please. >> caller: hello. my name is susan walsh. good morning supervisors and ms. i'm a member of the lower knob hill neighborhood alliance. i'm also on the executive committee and have been meeting with people regularly including the supervisors.

i'm asking to continue this matter for one week. so we can actually incorporate all of these promises that we received from ms. cohen this morning, probably about an hour before the meeting. it's very important to have these promises that they putting forth in sight before this comes down the budget committee. some of the things that they're actually suggesting are going to increase the budget, which is why it should stay in the budget committee until those items that have been actually amended into the agreement. with that, i would say thank you. >> clerk: thank you susan walsh for your comments. next speaker please. >> caller: hi, i live in lower knob hill. thank you supervisor peskin for standing with your community.

we utilized every moment the time that you gave us. we'll continue to do that. we're more educated about the deficiencies that could put the unhoused in our neighborhood in danger, having that many people tightly packed into a tinderbox with no medically licensed practitioners. no economic assistance to local businesses, no street cleaning servicings, no way for the community to report issues. no penalties or crimes for breaking the law and open use of the most dangerous street drug. we know you do a good job outside the shelter we continue to be concerned inside the shelter. we submitted our findings. we're almost there. please put this in writing and giving the opportunity to approve the language that will

be going forward. >> caller: good morning. cory smith on behalf of the housing action coalition in support. i did share additional planners of our petition. i want to express our appreciation to h.s.h., supervisor peskin and others who have par taken in the conversation. we know that it is important to create these types of shelters as a piece of the solution. not the only thing that we need to do. additionally, we know that shelters like this work. the embarcadero was a big play. now it's a better situation than it was before. i sincerely hope for the same thing for this neighborhood. i do understand the concern for

neighbors. i encourage you to move this forward and create homes for people. thank you very much. >> caller: my name is julie. my kid go to school in the neighborhood. i'm generally for housing, i'm confused about why this is being rushed. i'm wondering what happened to the navigation center that waiting on other folks working on. we need to get shelter sight it's what people actually use. i hear lot of pet and property and concerned that the plan that i heard laid out today doesn't quite meet that. .i hope that we'll take the time to get this right so it will work to get people from exit

from the streets that they'll take. thank you. >> caller: hello. i'm ian. i'm resident of knob hill. i'm part of the executive committee for the neighborhood alliance. i have questions and comments. as full code analysis been completed on this building related to the intended occupancy egress and life safety requirements to allow for the occupancy goals of the residents and workers? has the fire inspector approved this reduction? we have not seen any evidence that up to 318 people associated, staff and guests can be accommodated in this

123-room, 48-bath facility and comply to all building codes and public health codes. the covid protocols, is that going to limit the occupancy of the facility? these rooms are extraordinarily small. 318 people in this small building seems like there might be issues. thank you. >> clerk: hello, speaker. >> caller: hi. this is jennifer from coalition on homelessness. i'm calling in support of the project. i had the opportunity to look at the building and has a really lot of potential. what we're facing right now, we have a situation where we have

votes that have been out on the streets for two years during the pandemic. those who are not able to get into a hotel were really -- have been stuck out there without access to shelter, without access to residential treatment, without access to housing. we have a situation where folks are deteriorating out on the streets. they are desperate for some place to stay. the congregate shelter option is okay outside of a pandemic but during the pandemic, it's really challenging. this gives us the opportunity to have private room for folks to be able shelter couples for the first time. each floor has a community place. there's a lot of things to do to build community within the building. we can house folks for shelters.

>> caller: for all the callers like cory smith that are working in support of this proposal, in your backyard or other neighborhoods. lower knob hill resident and calling to express my frustration and strong opposition of this incredibly plan at 711 post street. which could lead to the hands of unqualified group. i have no confidence in urban alchemy's ability to be first-time landlord and successfully run this no rules experimental shelter. please relationship the -- please respect the request of supervisor peskin of lower knob hill. >> clerk: we are down to five

speakers waiting to speak. if you have not provided your comments yet, please dial star 3 now. otherwise we'll take the five to the end. >> caller: my name is michael. i live on post street just down the street from the proposed site. i'm against this proposal. i don't want to postpone, i want it killed. i know how these things go. probably a done deal. this whole listening to the neighbors, just checking off a box of the government required checklist to award a contract. $17 million a year is insane. my question is how can we assure once this site is there, which i know it's going to go for, will be managed and keeping promise to neighbors. the assurances that h.s.h. given

us producing results, how can we hold them to that? they promise these things and then it doesn't happen. one last thing, guns are expensive. most people don't have guns. i'm concerned about blades. most crimes in the neighborhood has been stabbing. how about a no weapons policy at all? what a concept that could be? it's insane. >> caller: i'm against this project. for one simple reason. you have some characters here in san francisco, these are

unsavory characters. this project should be stopped. no proper permits for the building. no consideration for the residents who live in the location. this project should be flushed down the commode. thank you very much. >> caller: hello, i'm a knob hill resident. i'm calling in opposition to the planned project. if you were honest and you want the tenderloin -- urban alchemy

is a joke. i have what hard time believing they can operate a shelter. i'm opposing the plan to proceed with this. thank you. >> caller: hello. i want to say, please vote

against the shelter. i'm 78 and i lived in this community for 20 years. 11 shelters is too much. what do you see for san francisco? our streets are already filthy and dangerous. putting another shelter in our neighborhood is going to implode. this shelter will fail. urban alchemy has no experience. this is warehousing. this facility is unsuited. please, vote against this. it's not covid safe. it's not fire safe. it's not going to be helpful to anybody. thank you.

>> caller: hi. my name is terry. i live on post street. i am against the facility in this location. i want to be clear that i am not against facilities to house homeless and to help them get on their feet. i simply am against the increased amount of homeless shelters and facilities in this area. we have become a containment area. also known as a ghetto. you're increasing it by coming up the hill and we cannot withstand the amount of filth and health hazards, addictions, drug dealers that are unattended to. we don't know how to fight this if the police can't fight it and

if the services that we pay for. we have no trash cans. we don't have bus service. we need help cleaning the streets up now. we need help. >> caller: hi. i live -- i think the homeless problem affects us all. we really do have to tackle this. it seems glacial the way we're able to provide housing to get people off the streets. i do respect the concerns of concentration of these facilities. i do think to make the better not worse by getting people off the streets. i would welcome one in my neighborhood. we should be putting them all

around the city. thank you. >> caller: this is steve. i'm a san francisco resident. i would like to welcome facility in my area. we do have homeless residents o. our streets now. i think it would improve our community. i strongly urge you to move forward with this project. i believe the ability to acquire the project is also an option. it won't preclude you from delaying to get people off the street now. this is literally the coldest time of year.

you should really think about the time that it takes to lead, change up the proposal and thew affects the people that are being delayed. please move forward without delay. this project, we need this and many more just like it. thank you. >> clerk: do we have any more speakers in the queue? >> caller: hi. i'm calling from the tenderloin. i work here. i'm asking you to support this project. we are in a situation where we

have thousands of people on the street and we need people to be housed. i want to correct from everyone is saying on the line saying there's a 11 shelters. that's not true at all. we have one shelter and one nav center. they make so there's less people on the street. i urge you to prioritize the safety and health of our most vulnerable residents, people who are without housing than prioritizing the comfort of people who are already housed and would rather not see shelters by them. please dot right thing. please support this. we need more of this. we need more shelter housing. thank you so much. i hope that we support this project. thank you. >> clerk: are there any more speakers in the queue? request >> there are no further callers

in the queue. >> chair haney: thank you. public comment is closed. i want to thank everyone who called in to offer their perspective and thank all of the neighbors. i want to the folks from lower knob hill neighbor alliance who i met with. it does sound like there was progress on number of fronts. i want to thank everybody for their hard work and commitment on that. one of the things that came out of it, that was important to this committee, was possibility of purchasing the building and then additional support services outreach, security around the area that was something that came up for lot of folks. thank you everyone for your hard work on this and input and one of the things that i did want to

clarify. there was some reference to some of the commitments that were made in the letter of response and being able to codify those. what i assume you're asking for this to move forward today. what are some of the next steps that you have on your end and sort of clarifying and codifying some of the things moving forward? ms. cohen? is she here? >> she can't get off mute. i'm director of the homelessness and supportive housing. i'm sorry i wasn't able to be here earlier. ms. cohen is unable to get off mute. we have engaged with the lower

knob hill alliance and had some really good conversations over the past few weeks and have gotten a better understanding what some of the concerns are. we had an exchange last night, a letter that said there were some things that they were really wanting us to consider. we answered them this morning and said, there are some specific things that they want to -- that we can do. we will commit to meeting with them before next week to kind of help to ensure that they are comfortable with the way that we are codifying those. this is all happening quickly. we need to meet with them and say this is what that means.

>> chair haney: that's something i'm guessing will happen in the near term? >> yes. it will happen in the next couple of days. we're working to make sure that we can set that up right now. >> chair haney: i know there was some reference to in the presentation. one of the things that we found very helpful and effective within embarcadero navigation center was sort of neighborhood advisory body that met regularly and looked at different indicators and data and then also was able to help get feedback and express concerns. lot of ways, one of the things they did was offer various types of support as well. is there going to be some sort of approach, similar approach here? >> absolutely. we think that's really an important piece of bit. any time we do this in the community and rely on the

community support. we have agreed with alliance that we will set that up. we need to talk about with them about what the cadence is. how often we end up meeting and who should be involved. we are absolutely committed to that. >> chair haney: great. i know there was an amendment that needs to be made. colleagues, any final questions or comments? >> supervisor safai: i would say that, again, really excited this is an ability for the city. i've been a loud proponent of purchasing property to have multiple options as we address our homeless crises in the city. i think you articulated, there's a need for support and need for

shelter and need for transitional and need for multidifferent levels. i'm excited about that. i feel confident that process will move forward. appreciate director mcfadden and director cohen ability to respond to the requests and meet a number of them. thank you for agreeing to capping 250 without any future plans to do so without coming back to the community. i think that's an important amendment. i think also, asking for 24-hour on site. i appreciate the callers. i appreciate even some of the reservations. this is important in conversation to have today. i think that the requested amendments have been made. if there is additional work that needs to be done, i think we have time between now and moving to the full board of supervisors to continue those conversations.

i feel confident with this moving forward today. i have all the faith in supervisor peskin to continue the work with the group, with the knob hill neighborhood alliance and other interested parties to ensure that this ongoing conversation will happen happen. thank you everyone who called in today. thank you to the department and thank you supervisor peskin for his hard work and his team on this. thank you, chair. >> chair haney: thank you. supervisor mar? >> supervisor mar: thank you. i want to thank all the community members who called in during public comment and sharing your perspective on this. i think this is clearal much need -- clearly much needed project for our homeless strategy to add more transition

shelter beds and creating a new model here with this opportunity. i appreciate all the work of h.s.h. on it. i think by continuing this from our prior -- before the budget and finance committee meeting earlier, it allowed for more meaningful engagement with the lower knob hill neighbors and it has been very productive in clarifying their specific and very legitimate concerns. i appreciate supervisor peskin and his leadership role in helping to facilitate those conversations. and director mcfadden and emily cohen for engaging in that. i appreciate your commitment to continue to engage with the lower knob hill on the alliance

in ensuring that this project is able to move forward. much needed and very important project able to move forward with the support of the neighbors and the community. thank you. >> chair haney: thank you. ditto to all of that. thank you again to everybody who took the time and everyone from the neighborhood who called in and participated in those conversations. i want to make a motion to amend the resolution as offered by h.s.h. can we have a roll call vote on the amendment please. >> clerk: the motion to amend the resolution offered by h.s.h. [roll call vote] we have three ayes. >> chair haney: thank you. i want to make a motion to move item 1 to the full board with a positive relate of recommendatis

amended. >> clerk: to the full board with a positive recommendation. [roll call vote]. we have three ayes. >> chair haney: thank you so much. thank you everyone. please call items 2 and 3 together. >> clerk: item 2 and 3 is legislation referring to the construction acquisition and improvement of certain transportation street safety and transit related capital improvement and related cost necessary for purposes authorizing landlords to pass through 50% of resulting property tax increase to residential tenants providing for the levy and collection of taxes to pay both the principle and interest on such bonds incorporating the provisions of administrative code sections

5.30 through 5.36. setting requirements for the election. the proposed bond not a project under the california environmental quality act and finding that the proposed bond is in conformity with the policy of the planning code and general plan consistency requirement of the charter and administrative code. item number 2 is the ordinance calling and providing for a special election to be held in the city and county on tuesday june 7, 2022 for submitting to san francisco voters a proposition of the city and county of $400 million to finance the cost of the administrative code section 6.27, requiring certain funded projects to be subject to a project labor agreement. item number 3 is the resolution determining and declaring demand.

members of the public wishing to provide public comment on these items call (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 2483 332 6847. then press pound twice. if you haven't already done so, dial star 3 to line up to speak. system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. please wait for the system indicate you have been unmuted. >> chair haney: i believe we are joined by m.t.a. >> good afternoon. we were thinking this was going to be a procedural vote or at least what was up for discussion was just the amendment that was added last time.

we don't have anybody here to make a presentation. i do have my colleague, joel goldberg who can give a quick overview if necessary. >> chair haney: i wanted to see if you had anything more to add? is there anything more to add from the b.l.a.? >> we don't have any updates to our report. we continue to recommend approval. >> chair haney: all right. can we open this up to public comment please? >> clerk: thank you. operations, is checking to see if there's any callers in the queue. members of the public who wish to provide comment on these items please press star 3 now. system prompt will indicate -- - mr. atkins, first speaker

please. >> caller: do i have one minute or two minutes. >> clerk: two minutes. >> caller: i'm speaking on my behalf. the following are exerts from my public comment at the capital planning committee meeting on october 18 and december 13, 2021. m.t.a. has fundamentally flawed because prop e is fundamentally flawed. the m.t.a. is a 20-year experiment which is failed to deliver. prop e destroyed most checks and balances. m.t.a. is an enterprise department that's a burden to the general fund. the m.t.a. has serious internal issues. the director has stated that the m.t.a. is a culture of fear and staff won't report major issues with the capital project. the in in the capital projects has been criticized by the controller office and the civil

grand jury. m.t.a.'s project such as mission has had the negative impacts. the director stated multiple times that the project has the overwhelming support both of neighbors and the merchants. this is a misrepresentation. in 2014, voters passed an m.t.a. bond of $500 million. a construction work has died in the twin peaks project. this is up to this and many other factors added to a vote of bill confidence forever the m.t.a. bond and the m.t.a. itself. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. do we have any more speakers?

>> caller: hi, quick word in support of this important transit funding measure. all of your transportation climate ambition zero goals rely on sufficient funding for public transit. while i have concerns about sfmta's track record on --project delivery. i know that history continue. thank you so much. >> clerk: thank you. do we have any more callers? >> there are no further callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you very much. >> chair haney: public comment is closed. thank you everyone who called in. i want to make a motion to move items 2 and 3 to the full board with a positive recommendation. can we have a roll call vote

please. >> clerk: on the motion for both items to the full board with a positive recommendation. [roll call vote] we have three ayes. >> chair haney: thank you. please call items 4 and 5 together? >> clerk: yes. items 4, is a resolution approving authorizing amendment to the lease land management agreement to the recreation park department and the san francisco botanical garden society and golden gate park to include the japanese teagarden and the conservatory of flowers. item 5 is an ordinance amending

the park code to waive fees to the japanese teagarden and conservatory of flowers. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on these items should call (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 2483 332 6847. then press pound twice. please dial star 3 to line up to speak. system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand.

>> chair haney: all right. i know we had another request, i believe from supervisor chan to continue this. i believe there are some ungoing conversations that are taking place. i wanted to turn it over to supervisor mar as well who may have some thoughts on this in terms of how to move forward. unless you want to have a full presentation or not. i just got notified that there was a request to continue this again. i don't know if it's worth having a full presentation. supervisor mar, do you have thoughts on how you want to handle this? >> supervisor mar: i would be supportive of supervisor chan's request for further continuance.

this is an important issue to her. golden gate park is in district one. she's been in ongoing discussions with the department about these two items. the management and operating agreement over the garden and also the fees charged. i did want to also see if i can move an amendment that i worked on with rec and park and the mayor's office with item 5 the admission fee item. i believe my office distributed the proposed amendment on monday. just to remind you, late last --year the board passed unanimously ordinance for the san francisco veterans community. due to the fiscal constraints,

that legislation did not extend the fee waivers to non-resident veterans. in partnership with rec and park and mayor breed, with the additional revenue that will come in from item 5, due to dynamic pricing for non-resident visitors to the park, we're able to extend the fee waiver to non-resident veterans for the -- with the amendments i'm proposing will do that. whether they live in the city boundaries or not, veterans really have made unique sacrifices to our community. this amendment will further expand and strengthen our commitment to honor that service by providing free access to all veteran and support their mental and physical well-being.

i thank mayor breed for her partnership and i like to be added as a co-sponsor to item number 5. >> chair haney: was that an amendment? >> supervisor mar: yes. we circulated the amendment to item number 5. that would just align it with the ordinance that we passed earlier, waiving fees for veterans and reduce fees for veterans who are sf residents, extending the fee waiver. i worked with rec and park and the mayor's office on this. i would like to move that we adopt the amendment. >> chair haney: okay. great.

why don't we -- go ahead. >> this is deputy city attorney. do we have a representative from the mayor's office? otherwise can we confirm that they have consent to the ordinance? >> supervisor mar: yeah. i think. [please stand by]

>> it is my understanding the amendments are substantive and require continuance. we are happy to present this week or next week because this item will be back on your agenda and continue to work with any

supervisors that are interested in this ordinance in that interim. >> why don't we do that. supervisor mar made a motion on the amendment. public comment, please. >> clerk: operations is checking to see if there are callers in the queue. members of the public press star 3 to speak. if you are on hold continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted to comment. first caller, please. >> caller: i have been a volunteer and member of the botanical garden for six years in support of the proposal to merge the san francisco botanical gardens and japanese tea gardens into golden gate park gardens.

i am passionate as a leader in biodiversity and plant conservision. the valuable plant collections are incredible assets to make san francisco a destination. the gardens are a beautiful resource as we have seen during the pandemic. they are also important institutions tory search, education and conservision. they need strong support and recognition by the city. i commend you for considering this proposal for a positive future for these three spaces. the partnership will provide support for each garden and bring a wide recognition of combined appeal as san francisco landmarks and institutions. i want to add specifically that i support the free resident

admission at all three prices if the flex pricing allows the much needed revenue to keep the gardens beautiful and thriving and well maintained. thank you for the opportunity to comment. >> clerk: thank you. mr. atkins, next speaker, please. >> caller: hello. i am michael. i am delighted to support agenda items 4 and 5. currentlity am at the botanical garden from 2000 to 2011 i was the director. i have historical and current observation how well things are going. i wanted to really commend rec and park director ginsburg for his strong leadership and willingness to cooperate to

bring in additional funds. the executive director has conducted a strong fund-raising campaign so there is a good financial background and foundation for the work they are doing. the other thing that should be mentioned is that this garden is home to more plants than most gardens in the world can support. the department of curation has forged ties internationally. they are looking at species about to go ex ticket and bringing them back to life. based on these two fundamental aspects, fund-raising and the function the most im important aspect is education and this

have a strong youth education program which is training young people to be stewards of the planet. it is essential. i think that extending these benefits and skills and the excellent staffing to these two other gardens. oldest japanese tea garden in the united states apbeautiful conservatory of flowers will benefit visitors from the city or from outside the region. >> clerk: i apologize for cutting you off. we are timing each speaker at two minutes. mr. atkins, next speaker, please. >> caller: hello, i am a small business owner, volunteer

educator and advocate for this amazing legislation to allow veterans to get out to the local parks and access the great outdoors in the beautiful city. please continue this program for everybody coming to the great city of san francisco. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. >> caller: good afternoon. i am carol. i live in district 7. i work in the tenderloin. as volunteer with the botanical gardens i am speaking in favor of the mayor's proposed resolution and ordinance. as a san francisco teacher i support joining the japanese tea garden and conservatory of flowers with the botanical gardens under the existing lease and management agreement.

singular identity and combined administration these treasures would flourish and be recognized among the nation's best. expanding the premsises under the lease and management agreement means there are more ground to cover and more infrastructure needing care, maintenance, improvement and resources. the ordinance goes hand-in-hand with the merger by creating a modest and rational plan to earn much needed revenue for the benefit of the gardens by combining festival pricing on nonresident admission fees with free admission for residents, ordinance sales to attract more visitors and expand community engagement. i support an investment in the gardens of golden gate park to benefit current and future generations. thank you for your consideration

and for your public service. call. >> clerk: next speaker. >> caller: i am a san francisco native resident of district 2 in support of the mayor's ordinance merging these three institutions, keeping admission free to san francisco residents and veterans and those on active military duty as well as supporting this flex pricing. being born and raised here in san francisco i have enjoyed all of golden gate parks amenities andtutions over my life as well as my children have. over the last almost 20 years now, i have supported the garden and served on its board. i am pride full of the

advancements we have made. serving in that capacity has given me insight into management and operations and the special attention required for this museum. commission has been a crucial and important part of that support. working closely with our partners at rec and park has become a very successful -- we have been successful in the garden improvement fund. there was skeptics at first. it has proved itself over eight years now to be a key component to the support of the garden and its infrastructure. key to that as well will be flex pricing. i feel it imperative all three institutions be allowed that

flex pricing. the special attention they need deserves that. partnership with board and staff of rec and park has been very successful solution. bringing these institutions under one management umbrella will bring about another successful solution. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: i am chris mcdonald. i would like to write you to consider voting yes to the parks and recs bill. i am a veteran and also commander of post 1 american legion. i do a lot for helping veterans in the city as well as supporting the city and helping

the food bank and different other agencies that support local homeless shelters and different things like that. presently i am in the hospital right now because i got ran over by a truck. if you could consider supporting the bill, i would appreciate it. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: good afternoon. i am a veteran supporting this. like this gentleman prior to me, i am a veteran myself and i support this. this will be a great thing for all of us. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker, please.

hi, this is henry chan. i was born and raised if san francisco serving on the veterans affairs commission. highly support this. thank you, supervisor marfor championing our veterans. this is much needed for our veterans mental health and community. thank you. i am in full support of this. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: eddy ramirez. native of san francisco, veteran 22 years air force. i totally support this bill. it is going to not only open the door for other veterans in the local area but there has been people that want to come down to

san francisco from travis air force base. this would be a great opportunity for them not only to visit the city but spend money in the city. i do support this. thank you all for your support and hopefully you will get this passed and on the record. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: hello. i am courtney ellington. c.e.o. of one set one board. executive director of the veterans success venture. i would like to thank you so much for rec and park and the mayor's office for passing this bill. this is connecting the committee to veterans, and this is a great way to do that. this is huge for the veteran

community. i am at the va hospital surrounded with veterans. i cannot wait to share the news. as a matter of fact we will be celebrating this on february 12th from 12:00 to 2:00 at the golden gate band shell with special guess appearance bidan -- by mr. daniel glover. we will celebrate this bill and your support and the community support. i heard a view volunteers from the park to colin. this is a great opportunity for veterans to have volunteer opportunities to help keep these parks beautiful. thank you, thank you, thank you.

>> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: board secretary of the botanical society. i support agenda items 4 and 5 including veterans amendment. assuming the flex pricing allows enough revenue for the fund. these are living museums, not simply green pace. plants require knowledge, care and maintenance. the san francisco climate and fog means we are able to grow and conserve plants from around the world that might be lost due to climate change. we want these sites to be accredited museums. current nonresident admission pricing is low compared to other botanical gardens does not provide stable revenue required. as community based board i want to ensure the committee the garden society takes commitment

to sound financial practices and fiduciary obligations to the city seriously. financials are audited yearly with form 990 are available to the public on the website. finance chair is partner with kcmg in the city. this will create not eliminate jobs. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker, please. >> caller: hello. i am nicholas veterans affairs commissioner. i live on embarcadero. it is a great place to live. thank you, supervisor haney forgetting that up and running. i would like to request you guys to consider continuing to support allowing veteran access

throughout the nation. americans veterans get access to the san francisco parks. one idea veterans are attached to coins and trinkets. if we sell on admission it might be a great way to generate revenue. it would be great to give a proposal and ideas of ways to generate revenue through merchandise sales. it is a beautiful place in san francisco. we want to support it anyway we can including volunteering. i am older in age. i fell in love with growing plants and i would love to volunteer there as well. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon i am a disabled veteran in support for the parks for vets.

from firsthand experience that fresh air is the best place for sustainable support for veterans and locals. this is not only them but their children and children's children to enjoy this. this is huge in assisting with the mental and physical health and educational benefits to be a role model city for other cities to follow. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: good afternoon. i am jill maxwell board chair of the san francisco botanical garden society and 21-year volunteer at the botanical gardens in the nursery now in the children's garden. i am very invested in the success and future of the gardens at golden gate park.

i speak in favor of the amendment to add the japanese tea garden to the leasing management agreement. i support the veterans amendment. like any leading botanical gardens we are lucky to have the japanese garden within walking distance. this is a great opportunity for more comprehensive educational cultural experience at these three unique locations in the heart of golden gate park. this is a chance to streamline management functions under one leadership. the ordinance to waive admission fee. we need to continue flex pricing for out of town visitors. this doesn't impose an undue burden. the current fees are low for

large botanical gardens across the country. this revenue is critical to support the programs of the three gardens. all three are living museums requirerring special care. flex pricing worries are not born out. no visitor complaints about admission fees, and i heard many comments on how the appearance of the garden improved increased revenue and how grateful people are. the board of the san francisco botanical garden society is 100% in favor of the merger. in closing, we ask the board of supervisors to approve the merger and continue flexible pricing for out of town visitors. thank you very much. >> clerk: next speaker, please.

>> charles baker, native of san francisco. veteran of the united states air force. i am in full support of parks for vets, all veterans. thank you for your support here today. thank you for hearing me out. >> clerk: thank you, charles baker. next speaker, please. >> caller: hello. i am eric brooks. army veteran, san francisco resident. my full support of the veterans and military occupants who receive free access to our san francisco parks and rec.

it is a great pleasure being service among you all and we appreciate your service among the veterans in particular. thank you for coming together to allow this to happen. i want to thank you all as friends and family as well. we are drawn together with future goals and opportunities. glad to be part. much peace and blessings. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. we do have 21 members of the public currently listening. three left in if queue to speak. if you are part of 21 and you have not provided your testimony and you wish to do so please press star 3 to be added to the line to speak. otherwise we will take the three to the end. next speaker, please.

>> caller: i live in the outer sunset. former staff member with the botanical gardens and i grew up in the gardens and raising my own children. i support the ordinance and veterans amendment. i especially support the flex pricing. these are critical to support the diversity and beauty and safety of these gardens. i can share my learning and engagement director experience and i am so excited for the educational reach of the gardens. all sites have worked with great care and effort under similar mission to reach sf students. this will allow greater reach and impact. thank you for your service and

consideration. >> clerk: next speaker, please please.[indiscernable] the arboretum was a great please where you could meet people and get lost in urban environment. important for many people who need to get away from stress. the society paid 3 $00,000 to a lobbyist -- $300,000 to make it private. our guests are nonresidents. if they just moved here and they are from oakland we have to pay $13 on weekends and $17 million to go to urban outfitters? that does not compute.

this does not begin to cover the costs of the gardens. you will see how they took off the plaza for the gift shop they pay $100 per year for the office space. nothing for using space in the argens. it is not fair. why is this business allowed to take over and private ties these three facilities. the conservatory of flowers and tea gardens are for everybody. they are transferring respect paying $1 million for this. we need increased ability to access three days on -- free days on saturday and sunday to all three facilities. 4:00 on summer evenings. they should be open to the public for three. we need vision here, not just money. they control these funds.

it is outrages they are able to control the entirety of these funds and no public inputs. you see the celebration gardens. hundreds of thousands of taxpayer money. no input from the public. they were putting a building on top of the hill. they moved it down. right now -- >> clerk: your time is up. we are timing two minutes. next speaker, please. >> caller: i am a veteran from memphis, tennessee. i plan to visit california. i support the bill. i am even planning on visiting

california february 12 for the vet one voice. i do support the bill. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: hello. i am lucy fisher. i am a resident of district 8. i am a member of the botanical garden. i am a friend of the japanese tea garden. i am calling in support of items 4 and 5. i support the merging of the three gardens in the park. in favor of flee admission for san francisco residents and military veterans and flexible pricing for out of town

visitors. i live within walking distance of the park and have seen increased use of the park in the last couple years. multiple improvements in the park. i very much anticipate if the item 4 and 5 passes we will continue to see more public programs, programs for kids and conservation of our plants. the conservatory are so much in leadership about but the japanese tea garden is a huge tourist attraction. the merger will also allow the continued improvement of the temple gate, pagoda and the grounds within it. thank you so much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments.

next speaker, please. >> caller: i am jane. i am a native of san francisco from outer richmond district 35 years. as lifelong fan of public open spaces and parks. golden gate park is special because of the location, accessibility and all that it has to offer those who come to use and enjoy it. as a san francisco resident and board member of the botanical gardens i support the resolution to merge conservevatory of now hers and tea garden and botanical gardens. i support free resident mission at all three sites to enable more families to visit for

enjoyment, landscape while learning about environment. pricing allows the much needed revenue for the garden improvement fund. admission pricing is low compared to across the country and will not provide stable revenue allowing a regular admission price increase for nonresidents will serve the gardens well. we need more resources not less to support this critical infrastructure such as pathways, irrigation, planting, repairs. these are essential to keep the gardens well maintained. i urge your support. thank you.

>> do we have any more speakers in the queue?