>> president laguana: the meeting is being called to order 4:30 p.m. the small business commission media service and sfgov tv for televising the meeting which can be viewed on sfgov tv 2 or live streamed on sfgovtv.org. members of the public who will be calling in the number is (415)655-0001. access code, 2487 601 5734. press pound pound to be added to

the line. when connected you will hear the meeting discussions but you will be muted and in listen mode only. when your item come us. , dial star 3 to be added to the speaker line. if you dial star three before public comment, you will be added to the queue. when you are called for public comment, please mute the device you're listening to the meeting on. public comment during the meeting is limited to three minutes per speaker unless otherwise established by the presiding officer of the meeting. speakers are requested required to speak their name. sfgov tv please show office of small business slide. >> small business commission is the forum which your opinion and concerns affects small businesses in san francisco. the office of small business is best place to get answers during local emergency. if you need assistance with

shawl business matters you can find us online or telephone. our services are free of charge. before item number one i like to thank media services and sfgov tv for coordinating this virtual hearing and the live stream. please call item number one. >> clerk: item one is roll call. [ roll call ] commissioner dickerson is absent. you have a quorum. >> president laguana: next item please. sorry, we need to do the ramaytush ohlone land acknowledgement. vice president zouzounis, will

you read the land acknowledgement please. >> vice president zouzounis: it would be my honor. the san francisco small business commission and office of small business staff acknowledges that we are unceded homeland of the ramaytush ohlone who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. as the indigenous stewards of this land, in accordance with their tradition, the ramaytush ohlone have never ceded, lost nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place as well as for all people who reside in their traditional territory. as guests, we recognize that we benefit from living and working on their traditional homeland. we wish to pay our respects by acknowledging ancestors, elders and relatives of the ramaytush ohlone community and by affirming their sovereign right as first people.

>> president laguana: great. thank you so much. next item. >> clerk: item two, this is a discussion item. presenting today we have kristin evans. the commission will hear presentation about the compassionate alternative response team in san francisco which will provide deescalation and support to unhoused members in crises and the work they will do as it relates to small business.

>> president laguana: we're still trying to get vinny to connect. i don't know if you wanted to add some opening remarks. by the way, kristin, good to see and hear from you and looking forward to seeing and hearing from vinny as well. >> sounds great. >> president laguana: we'll

recess for a minute to get vinny connected. director do you have guidance here? >> clerk: we can give it one minute. thank you. he said he's having technical challenges. i recommend we might be able to move on to another item and come back to this one. >> president laguana: sounds fine with me. >> clerk: okay. >> president laguana: we're pausing this item and come back to item 2. let's go shorter items. item 4. >> clerk: item 4, approval of the draft meeting minutes.

>> president laguana: commission ers are there any comments or questions on the minutes? matthew, is there any public commenters on the line about item number 4 on the minutes? seeing none, public comment is closed. next item. >> clerk: we need a motion to pass the minutes. >> president laguana: oh, okay. i move to pass the minutes. second? >> i second. >> president laguana: thank you. >> clerk: [roll call vote]. motion passes with four votes

and one absent. >> president laguana: great. next item please. this could be item 5. >> clerk: item 5, general public comment. discussion item allows members of the public to comment generally on matters within the small business commission's jurisdiction that not on today's calendar. suggest new agenda items for the agenda to future consideration. >> president laguana: any members of the public that like to make comments on item not on the agenda. seeing none, public comment is closed. this is unusual situation. >> clerk: i'm going to tell him to call in perhaps. >> president laguana: yeah, that might be the appropriate way to

go. director, how do you feel about making the director's report? >> i can do that. it's also relatively short. >> president laguana: item 6 please. >> clerk: item 6 director's report and discussion item. >> good afternoon commissioners. i wanted to send a reminder that on march 14th, which is right around the corneller, are commission meeting will be in person. that will be at room 400, which is the fourth floor of city hall. at that time, we may likely be welcoming another commissioner and new commissioner and some of you may have not done an in-person meeting yet. it will be exciting for all of us.

if you have any questions, corns or any accommodation issues that you want us to be aware of, be sure to let me me and kerry know. on that note, i want to share that tomorrow at the full board of supervisors meeting, the board will be considering the appointment of tiffany walker-carter as the board appointee to fill the vacancy on this commission for the seat that was previously vacated by former commissioner kathleen dully. she is a owner of a restaurant and member of s.f. black wall street. we are excited that she may be joining us soon and likely going to be sworn in by president walton on wednesday. in terms of the city's rent release program, some of you may have heard, they launched a rent

release program that experienced hardship throughout the pandemic. as of today, they received about 249 applications. this definitely exceeds the originally anticipated amount of awards which is 50 grants to be provided to businesses for rent release due to covid pandemic impacts. we know this is a popular program. we won't be able to fulfill all of the -- applicant request. the board is considering the family friendly workplace ordinance. this is something that you have actually already weighed in on. we provided a set of recommendations to all the

sponsors. that's at tomorrow's full board meeting. i know this commission weighed on the graffiti of the ordinance. we think it may go to committee on march 10th and we're still continuing to work with our office on amendments, potential amendments and also aware that supervisor stefani is interested. i'm happy to answer questions

and take comments at this time. thank you. >> president laguana: commission ers, do we have any comments or questions? >> commissioner huie: thank you, director. i'll just ask, as the change in requirement for masks and otherwise have come and changing on a state level every day, how are we getting information to small businesses who want to rain their own set of rules or need help enforcing existing ones? i haven't seen any clear guidance. i wanted to see if i'm missing something. >> thank you for that. we did send out once the health order changed in san francisco.

we sent out an e-blast to our small business list. to explain that what the new rules are and that businesses have the choice to go above and beyond and implement event stricter requirements. we've also posted that item and are posting all of our e-blast items on our web page so people can continue to refer to that. we have new staff to help us really beef up our social media messaging as well. if there's anything you feel like still not getting out there, we're open to suggestions. those were some of the channelus that we went through alongside the office of economic and workforce development. they did something similar as

well. >> commissioner huie: i do remember that e-mail that went out. congrats on the upgraded website and everything. that's really exciting. >> president laguana: the website looks phenomenal. really good. any other commissioner comments or questions? is there any public commenters on the line on the director's report? seeing numb, public comment is closed. >> clerk: vinny is on the phone. we can go back to our presentation. >> president laguana: we will go back to item 2 now. >> clerk: i'm going to say it again. item 2, s.f. compassionate

alternative response team presentation. >> good afternoon, commission. >> clerk: let me pull up your slide show. >> i apologize, for the technical difficulties. thank you for your patience. >> president laguana: it happens these days.

>> good afternoon everyone. really glad do see some of your faces this afternoon. i'm speaking as a citizen and a

resident of san francisco. not affiliated with any organization this afternoon. as a member of the coalition of individuals and community organizations in support of the compassionate alternative response team. i thank you for your time. we in san francisco have been confronted with a long-standing issue over many years now which is the growing challenge of homelessness on our streets. over many policy cycles and budget cycles, different bodies of the city and county of san francisco have identified that police as a search response to non-emergency service calls related to homelessness is not effectively affecting

individuals out of homelessness. in 2019 over 65,000 homeless related calls were dispatched and responded to by sfpd. there were 27sfpd outreach members to respond to specific areas of the city at about an estimated cost of $4.85 million. the conversations around how ineffective this response has been, resulted in 2019 at a unanimous resolution as well as community advocates who agreed that policing was a costly and ineffective punitive response. community needed need to happen to come up a proposal for a

different response. sort of at this time, for context, these levels have a median response time about 83 minutes. that's well over an hour. that response time has been pretty intractable over the last decade. as part of this convening, many academic experts who study the issue of police violence as well as alternative responses to policing, were convened with community service providers as well as a number of community organizations that advocate for homelessness to discuss a solution. they came up with a report that was shared with a number of commissioners here when it was released in the fall of it 2021. called the compassionate alternative response team. its primary goal are to eliminate police as the fairness

primary responders to non-emergency calls for service involving unhoused people. increase safety for unhoused and housed people and to reduce the harm and trauma inflicted to ongoing exposures to street level experiences and street level conflicts between unhoused and housed neighbors. an additional goal of the compassionate alternative response team proposal was to build neighborhood capacity by investing in a community-led, community-based dispatch response so that housed neighbors and businesses can more effectively and more thoughtfully respond to street level challenges that result in care and not criminalization of poverty. the coalition continues to grow. after the initial proposal was released, we continued to advocate for its implementation and its operational through city

agencies. you can see a small assortment of the community organizations that support this approach. also, in 2021, we received the unanimous support of all 11 board of supervisors members on a policy resolution supporting an alternative response like c.a.r.t. in principle. it resulted in an allocation of just over $3 million to implement the first phase of this plan. to date, that money is still allocated but has not been spent. we're happy to come before the small business commission to dialogue about why a plan like this is so important for small business operators and their workers to ask that you support the program and its design. in recognition of the precious

time that we have, i'm going to skip the next three slides. >> president laguana: vinny. i encourage you to go ahead and walk through those three slides. we have unusually light agenda today. we have time to learn more about this. >> oh, okay. thank you board president. i wanted to be mindful of your time. i'm happy to go back through the program design slide. as i mentioned, the program was designed in collaboration in a consensus-based process. typically sort of reforms involving police. community members are often brought in after reforms are proposed. part of the value of the development of the c.a.r.t.

proposal was that stakeholders were convened before a solution was proposed. this is a truly remarkable process because it really allowed stakeholders to have meaningful conversation around what a solution would look like, what communities at the center. the design of this compassionate alternative response team is that a community-based organization not a city agency, but a nonprofit. would provide street response whenever calls were made for service. these teams would be dispatched by the organization fulfilling the role and they would respond to calls either through calls diverted from 911 or 311 and transferred to that particular agency and their dispatch and

or, direct hotline where residents visit operators and workers can call directly for a response to a situation involving someone that is unhoused or experiencing homelessness. like i mentioned, this approach was based on a study of nearly 2000 similar alternative responses around the country and throughout the world. the best practices from those programs were applied to the framework of san francisco because we know that the city has such a unique landscape here not only with regards to our city infrastructure but our community of nonprofit providers and service providers that support the homelessness and housing. the board of supervisors approved as unanimous policy resolution in support of c.a.r.t. in 2021 and allocated

$3 million for its inception. we believe that the annual budget to respond to 60,000 calls will be approximately $6.825 million. as i mentioned, through a series of conversations and negotiations through the budgeting process, the board of supervisors allocated just over $3 million to do a smaller scale version of c.a.r.t. and line item at the discretion of the mayor's office.

as i mentioned, in this two-prong approach, there will be a response, which will be the immediate response when someone calls for service. this would include conflict resolution, deescalation. for example if an individual sleeping in the doorway, house, resident or business owner, call, do and request for a c.a.r.t. team to help resolve and do a warm handoff for that individual to be connected to a survey. c.a.r.t. is not a care navigation service. we are a street response service, conflict resolution service and deescalation service that would provide a warm hand off to a very system of homeless response providers who have access to provide referrals to services and shelter bin.

the second prong of c.a.r.t. this would be investing in building community capacity. we know that most of the city's responses to homelessness are targeted to very specific neighborhoods. however, small businesses and homelessness are issues that prevalent in every corner of the city. a response in the sunset look very differently than the response in the tenderloin. there are lot of individuals who live in s.r.o.s who are

classified of home rest because of their limited infrastructure. part of the c.a.r.t. approach is to strengthen the community response so that we can prevent things from becoming a crises and prevent an unnecessary burdening of the emergency response system. carey, i'm not sure if kristin evans is here. i wanted to segway to business owner kristin evan to provide little bit of case study examination of what a community-led intervention might look like. >> thank you. hi everybody. i am the owner of book smith. which is an independent bookstore that i had since 2007.

homelessness looks little bit differently in different commercial corridors. one of the things that we hear always from customers, from employees and from homeless individuals themselves is that, there really is a lack of immediate response when there's situation like this. someone is blocking an entrance

way, that someone is urinating, defecating, may be having some type of crises that doesn't rise to the level of requiring paramedics care but may be slowly deteriorating situation overtime. one thing that we really true it will need is an alternative to the police. i would say additionally, the paramedics. those resources do not have ability to connect people to case management, social work, in path off the streets. those resources are primarily reserved for the hot team, which does not come to the haight regularly. they are primarily reserved i

know that the haight is similar to northeast and castro and some other neighborhood commercial corridors that are frequented by residents and tourists alike. one organization is -- i wanted to describe for the brief time that they were operating how valuable partner they were and our commercial corridor. it was a local organization started by a merchant. they recruited people from the neighborhood who were experiencing homelessness to do graffiti embankment and garbage collection. in exchange, they were provided

housing in a hotel. you can see how that was very win-win-win. it provided the individuals with a place to be that was sanctioned and real benefit for service that was much needed in the neighborhood. main thing is how it was similar to c.a.r.t., something with a cell phone that knew the people, knew that people that were experiencing homelessness in our neighborhood and knew them by name, knew how long they have been experiencing homelessness and some of the challenges that person might be experiencing whether that's addiction or mental health or other

challenges. it was a person who could essentially work with individuals on a path to excellent homelessness and problem solved around reducing challenges related to encampments. in the haight, it manifest not in are the form of physical tents, we have large groups of people that would gather and block sidewalks. in our neighborhood police should be focused on ensuring pedestrian safety and reducing speeding and things along those

lines. should not responding to issues people blocking the sidewalk. people that are in the best position to have these conversations are people that really know the folks and can help negotiate and manage and deescalate and basically, is like harm reduction approach for the street.

i'll hand it back to you vinny. >> thank you, so much kristin. it might be a little premature because i'm sure you have questions for us. i wanted to share with the commission our acts. we love to continue to be in dialogue with you. we would appreciate your consideration for endorsement of the proposal, advocating not only operators but their workers who are looking for more community city wide response. we are unfairly burdening lot of small business workers with being putting them in a really uncomfortable position by not giving them effective response

resources, sustainably to resolve lot of these street level issues. we've made lot of strides to respond to the individuals on our street who are closest to harm and very much frequent users of our behavioral health system. there are a number of individuals living on the streets that are not yet at crises. that deserves just as much care and consideration. we believe there is an enormous amount of compassion within our community to provide another layer of support on the spectrum of services to increase the livability of our city.

i yield back to the commission for any questions. >> president laguana: thank you. thank you for the wonderful presentation and all the background information. i think it would be good time to remind folks, the commission and the public and presenters, that starting last month and over the next couple of months, we are hearing a number of different ideas at the request of many people in the small business community. about how to address public safety in our commercial corridors. i want to make sure everybody understands that we're not considering any one proposal. we're looking at a wide variety of different approaches to the problems of public safety in our current commercial corridors. for our presenters, i want to

manage the expectations here. that the commission generally does not endorse any one organization or one proposal. we will hear ideas when we feel the commission is briefed and provide ideas in the form of resolution or letter and in that resolution or letter, we will recommend approaches rather than specific organization. i want to make sure that's the role that we can play. we can talk about the approach that you are making and the strategies here and how that can

interact with and benefit our small business community. i want to make sure for folks for your sake and our commissioners that it's not appropriate for us to say that one obligation should get funding or endorse one organization. we probably won't dive into that side of that. with that, commissioners, do you have any questions or comments? vice president zouzounis. >> vice president zouzounis: tha nk you for being here. the coalition on homeless -- [ indiscernible ] others involved in the report and initiatives are really important allies. i'm really happy that we're

getting this on our agenda officially. we can have this conversation part of how small businesses can support our unhoused community. i'm hearing feedback. i don't think that's me. >> president laguana: it might be you coming over the phone. vinny you may want to mute. >> vice president zouzounis: som e of the things i want to ask, i like to report. it was really thorough in the since, you're doing the bottom up communication and feasibility with the people most impacted by

these kind of policies. you came with the numbers and funding. i guess the first question is where are we at? you have $3 million allocated but that's waiting on a ballot measure or could be voted on? that's my first question, where are we as prospect. the second question i have is i would love to learn what kind of partners with the department of public health that you think would execute this r.f.p. i do want to note that the department of public health is pretty vast in different offices. they're not necessarily the most trusted partner when it comes to small businesses.

some of the nonprofits that they contract with to oversee some of the license categories that small businesses have or some of the public health concerns that are in code under the department of public health, how that led to volunteers and kind of nonprofit cohorts. there are some codes with the d.p.h. that might be a long-term conversation how can we look at the existing landscape of like

nonprofit contract and transport, public health and small business and where we can work on building trust there if that is the route that this is going to go. small business training and education was a big piece of your report. didn't see really any specific proposals around how that would be conducted. right now small businesses kind of just called the police for everything. we aren't given a wrap sheet of it phone numbers how to report hazardous waste, versus how to deal with safety issue. those are the main questions. where are we at and what do you see as the training component for small businesses?

>> thank you commissioner zouzounis. i'll try to tackle this. as i mentioned, there is $3 million allocated for some sort of alternate response that the mayor can spend at any point. my understanding it's currently sitting within the department of emergency management and before they decide to issue an r.f.p. call for request for proposal, the department of emergency management is convening number of stakeholders to talk about what an alternate response would look like. this is part of national conversation part of transforming 911. it's not happening here in san francisco but it's happening in oakland, it's happening in sacramento and it's happening across the country.

there are initiatives to establish a separate suicide line. there's a initiative to establish 988. there's a initiative to reconsider how 211 responds to the needs of communities that are not necessarily a emergency but still require a coordinated response from the community infrastructure. we do believe that the coalition that the c.a.r.t. proposal is a good proposal. it's built on the success of other proposals including the one that most people know is cahoots in eugene, oregon. where a significant number of calls have been diverted out of police responses toward the community-based provider. at this time, because the r.f.p. process has not begun, we as

coalition members don't necessarily lift up any one community provider or another. to your oath -- other question about training, it will be up to the provider who fulfills the r.f.p. to submit a proposal or full training module thankfully because other alternatives exist throughout the country. there is existing training material from atlanta or from denver or from the transforming 911 convening that's happening to the university of chicago. there is a body of work that --

whoever eventually fulfills the r.f.p. can work from to understand how best practices that have already been identified to be applied here in san francisco. >> vice president zouzounis: tha t's great. a question may be we would have to follow-up if we talked to sfpd again, how does this make sense with their new reporting system which they mentioned to us last time. with all these changes, i know it's going to be a lot to translate this new protocols to the public. we'll stay tuned for how that plays out. i think the intent behind this is what we were very interested to hear. i think our role in understanding the landscape of where small businesses interact

with our unhoused neighbors is not just alternative to calling the police but understanding where there's other codes that are subjecting small businesses to may be make a certain call that they otherwise wouldn't. thank you so much for the presentation. >> president laguana: thank you.

commissioner huie. >> commissioner huie: thank you very much for your presentation. i guess i have couple of questions. i noticed your presentation was very much kind of comparing traditional police response to having a much more compassionate response to individuals. i don't think anybody can disagree that's what we want for all of us to have a more compassionate response to all humans and all people and all beings. i'm wondering how this takes into account for the street crises response team that's been in action? how this program is different --

[ indiscernible ] just wondering how the c.a.r.t. coalition differs from the police response team. is there an appetite to work collaboratively with the street response team that's already been in action? i have a crazy dog here. >> i'm happy to take this on too. thank you so much commissioner huie for that question. the calls for service -- the coalition that established the compassionate alternative response team, examined were all

c level calls. these are all non-emergency calls. there are three levels of calls of which there are sort of self-determined target response time. a level calls typically are immediately life-threatening and have a very quick response time. the street crises response team a as i understand it, was structured to respond to the second tier priority calls, b level calls. there's a third priority level which is non-emergency, non-life threatening, c level calls. which in 2019, there were over 65,000c level non-emergency

calls that were made. sfpd police officer was dispatched in response. this analysis was done in collaboration with the department of emergency management as well as members of the department of public health wells representative from the mayor's office. the analysis that was done was very careful in acknowledging a very small but very burdensome portfolio of nonemergency calls we felt would be very situated for a community response and not a police response. additionally, part of the c.a.r.t. proposal includes establishing and convening an ongoing collaboration, learning and adaptive task force.

this is a group of dispatched response pryers that would come together to study both successful and less than successful responses so that dispatch protocols could be updated on an on going basis. those are the two aspects of the report that might provide more information to your question. >> commissioner huie: do you know the difference between c level and b level call? >> i will defer specifically to the d.e.m. i believe that the goal is to provide a response time of about 20 minutes for b level call and right now the median response time for c level calls is typically somewhere near an hour. that's the target response team. that gives you a sense of the

level of priority there. >> commissioner huie: what would be considered. b or c level? this happened to me personally. i was walking down the street, we were kind of accosted by somebody who was having mental health crises. they were threatening us, i felt like my gosh, this person needs help. i'm not going to be the person who try to do anything right now. i was walking where my daughter. i called -- the person behind me was calling 911 already. i asked them to ask for the street crises response team. they were there right away. i know the average response time in december for the street crises response team was 15 or 16 minutes in december.

i know it was pretty quick. it was definitely my experience was very quick. i wasn't sure exactly what elevated this call to being -- was that i asked for it specifically because i knew about the program was it because of the threatening nature of the situation. i'm wondering as a regular resident of the city, i think if you do ask for it, you will get the street crises response team. >> i was going to take a stab at it. i think what you just described is exactly the difference

between potential threat to elevate to a life harm. the difference, for example, would be somebody who may be blocking a sidewalk, that would be a c priority call. someone making abusive threat, that will be a b level call. someone had a knife, that will be an a level call. >> commissioner huie: thank you so much. >> just to add to that, i would refer to d.e.m. they have a whole description of dispatch and priority tiers. i'll defer to d.e.m. for the specific classification calls. just for context in 2019, d.e.m.

fielded over 2 million calls. we're looking at the 65,000 over 1.2, very small number of d.e.m. calls. a significant enough that would unburden the emergency response system so as well as police resources towards higher priority issues. >> commissioner huie: thank you very much. >> president laguana: thank you. let me follow-up on that. you're saying about roughly about 5% of the calls to d.e.m. are triggering the crises response. what are all those other calls? are they just general -- what's the word -- checking to make sure they're okay kind of stuff? what's the difference between the 1.2 million calls and the

65,000 calls? >> thank you. i'm unfortunately out of the scope of my knowing. i don't really have information about the other calls. what i will say is this, i think there are a number of different bodies at the city including the budget analyst responding to request as multiple board of supervisors committee. that have studied emergency responses. [ please stand by ]

>> president: i think we heard something similar from lazar when he was here at thelast meeting . so i'm curious about i guess the triage aspect of this. just a casual point of ...

well, actuallylet me double back . she spoke earlieabout an organization she had been involved in that have wound down, taking into the streets . am i getting the correct ? so what worked and didn't work about that program and how is carter improving upon it? >> that program was very effective from a merchant perspectives because we had a very direct line of communication to a resource that could be responsive on the streets and present very quickly. it was also a benefit because of the resource that was localized.as i said, they really understood the population in our neighborhood

. i would probably guess that the length of homelessness by individuals in our neighborhood varies from a few weeks to 10 or more years. so to have the people that know the folks that have been in the neighborhood for a year or longer and whether or not they have mental health issues and challenges, the primary response that we have without that organization is the police andthe police have the ability toessentially 5150 someone . ask them to move along . but what we don't have is a resource that is like a hot team resourcethat is a community-based organization . the source that can assist that person through whatever

challenge they're experiencing at this moment . that might be moreof an issue related to the merchants concern . about blockage is a very consistent one. somebody who is regularly sleeping in your doorway and your staff ishaving confrontations with them in the morning when they're trying to open up a storefront . those are typical everyday experiences that are emergent experience. you don't want to haveto call the policeto ask a person to move from your doorway . >> president: i'm totally clear on that . i was trying to i guess figure out ... first of all i agree and will stipulate that having a local response that's familiar with the people and are able to track them over time will probably lead to more effective responses and it sounds like that's what taking it to the streets was.

and you said it was effective so i'm wondering ... >> does itnot exist anymore ? supervisor bree was our supervisor when it was funded and then she becamemayor . it was replaced, the contact was replaced by another organization called downtown streets which primarily focused on the trash picking up aspect and not working with individuals in thecommunity and bringing them on a path towards ending their homelessness . that was just priorities of the supervisors. >> president: when we talk aboutcart , is it anticipated to be presumably andanticipated

to be citywide ? >> then he can answer that as well but it's my understanding that because of all thethings we were talking about . the standing up to services like the strip team and you were referencing the sport team. their street crisis response or street wellness response and then ... [inaudible] basically, those entities are being put up at the sametime . and there is this notion of doing more like a pilot initially so it's my understanding they been talking about centering resources initially in the western half of the city. again, also really primarily because skirt is operating most

heavily in the tenderloin at this point and the rest of the city is being less service response, seeing the concentration of resources in the points. one the session this and had around this particular getting the 3 million just to issue our fee and have that the initially a smallerscope on the western side . >> president: is there ... usually when you spend money in business is not as it half as much money you get a business half the size. you get startup money and then there's ... you know, i guess additional money that is scaled differentlydepending where you are in the business . what do you think to pilot this program, what is the minimum

amount ofstaff ? walk me through what it looks like as a minimum viable product. >> thank you and if i may i like to try to talk us through. as someone who operated a small business for over a decade i encountered theseconstraints all the time as well as human resource constraints . the cart proposal we think would be most effective. iftwo things were implemented, if it were citywide and available 24 hours a day, seven days a week . the 6.8 million that was proposed was based on those tw assumptions , thatthey would respond to the 60,000 calls that were identified in the analysis . based on logic if we were to narrow the window of dispatch codes that carter wouldbe

responsible for , there would be some need for infrastructure in order to make sure that you have dispatch teams and response teams available 24 hours a day, seven days a week but maybe this nonemergency code would be assigned to cart. other ways we know like the call volume would probably be much higher in the early morning through the eveningand lower after 10 pm but we also know people have been experiencing homelessness after 10 pm as well . in the slide that i provided you'll see an appendix with a list of the dispatch codes which were initiallyconsidered with the $6.8 million budget .

i would say with half of that budget my recommendation would be to focus on a handful of thosedispatch codes . and make the service available citywide and 24hours a day, seven days a week . >> president: okay. i guess looking at it from the outside in i can see why policymakers would be a little nervous about putting a lot of budget into something that is still finding its footing. i know when we tried to do new stuff in ourbusiness we will start with small just validate it and then scale it up . i would say the vast majority of things we tried don't work or don'twork as we thought they were going to work . so i can certainly understand from your perspective that a citywide program 24 seven, if

everythingelse works perfectly that would be the most effective program but it's hard to argue with . the question is it sounds like there's still ... i'm still trying to wrap my head around wherethe program fits in . you have the 65,000 calls but it's a little unclear what makes up those calls, what makes themdifferent from the other 1.2 million calls . and i mean, it's not a critique. it's more just, i'm wondering if there would be a way to get a minimum viable product out just to show how it could work. what with this program look like if it was safe for example just the hate?

who would you need to have to make a single neighborhood work? is it a dispatch person, a response person? does every call need to have multiple response people were just one? are there other services after that cart will do after just the initial response or is it just about we get the call and we send somebody out and that person assesses and then triage is where the on house person or persons start going through some type kind ofcrisis go next . >> these are all valid concerns that we've heard on the listing for this proposal. i'll say the 65,000 calls and encapsulate ninedifferent dispatch codes . ranging from anywhere from well-being checks to violations to panhandling to suspicious

persons and suspicious persons in a car. there is some basis for the 65,000 as it relates to a dispatch code with the highest prevalence of being associated with someone that identifies as experiencing homelessness. it's a little bit harder to just aggregate the remaining calls because dem does not define a subcode that directly identifies whether a call involves someone that's homeless. so for example it doesn't tag homeless. your 911 calls. so the analysis was done, what's the dispatch codes, where roberts must and another

a number of other city representativessaid these are the dispatch codes. once the highest proportion of individuals we know that are experiencing homelessness ? if that helps to contextualize . >> that helps, coulduse the to the partabout what it would take to say launch cards on a single neighborhood basis ? what does thestaffing look like on that ? >> i do think at the minimum , you need someone to operate dispatch. usually a 24 hour program requires at least three a day. so three day, 21 shifts a week. so you know, in order to pay a meaningful wage for highly skilledwork which is what this is , that would help inform what the staffing would need. but it's at least three shifts a day. and at least two because anyone doing this outreach should never dothat outreach alone .

>> okay. so at least two people responding to every call . >> that's right. and that's just street-level dispatch response calls. that would be the first of the two prongs. the second would be any follow-up outreach whether it's educating you know, the caller who asked for service about the outcome which is often times we don't inform citizens after a response call what the outcome is. part of the cart is to close that loophole which says we can't disappear the problem off our streets by calling 911 and 311 and the frustration comes after calling for service the problem still persists . part of the cart response is to say close that loop and make

sure we follow up with our committee members to say how was this resolved and what can we do to continue to make sure we resolve this in a way that gets people out ofhomelessness . >> would you say thecart person is playing the cause i case worker role with respect to the person experiencing homelessness ? >> i think there's case navigation is something that i think is not necessarily the primary function of a cart responder but it's important for them to understand their role in handing off to a capable care navigator . and the necessary forensic, the detail you need to collect so that you can properly do a warm handoff about someone you know. when you are cited for a violation the details that you intake are very different than say someone who responds and is

trying to censor the solution around the needs of the unhoused individual. >>president: that makes sense . i can see why limiting the dispatch codes would help you narrow in on specific protocols for how to respond and yocould expand laterally from their . if that was working well . i'm interested in the pilot part of this but i think we are at, approaching the end of our time and we probably need to check in with public comment unless any commissioners have comments or questions . >> i have a quick question. part of the ordinance, i can't believe that still exists in this form.

that's kind of a separate process that you all are proposing since that needs to be legislated off of the books. that's kind of going to be like a parallel initiative to this? that's my question. >> it's such a byzantine response that we have now to calls involving individuals who are homeless. i would say that you know, part of this is just educating about what do we want as the result of the call of service? what's the purpose of calling when someone is quote unquote violating an ordinance? what is the end result you want and as a community the and discussion has tobe at the end of the day , do we want to resolve a call for service that's really getting someone

out of homelessness? >> i agree. my question was a matter of changing the phone response protocol system. seems like one thing but doesn't it live ina law in its own right ? >> i can answer that. if it was anordinance that was passed by ballot measure , and it's an interesting, it was sold to the voters as a tool in the toolbox but these wouldn't necessarily use . so we've actually seen it unevenly used across the city. and interestingly enough, i don'tknow if you read about the

tenderloin emergency plan and stepping up the response to drug users . they've referenced they were going to start to use that as part of that response. i would say for the most part, there are some real challenges with city liability around citli that passed. there was a court case in bois , we commonly referred to it as boise that basically said if you're not providing an offer of shelter, then you cannotsite for arrest a person . for simply existing in space becausethey have no alternative . where as apractical matter , we've seen citli be not regularly used by the police

because those shelter resources have not existed and the police donot have that resource to offer .but i think in the case where taking itback to the tenderloin emergency plan , they have more coordinated response between police and the team that would be planning those shelter offers. they would be working to provide that coordinated response so that it would be covered by the potential legal problems there. >> that washelpful, thank you . >> president: out just add it seems like one of the most challenging aspects is how to triage the initial call from the business, regardless ofwhat is triggering the call . whether it's citli or sidewalk blockage or somebody in crisis . i guess in theory it sounds

like a lot of different phone numbers would work i'm a little skeptical justknowing how business owners are and how difficult it is to train employees . >> that's why i think will tell you this is actually envisioning using the same number, 911 as a way of channeling those calls to the appropriate response. so because those calls are going to911 today , some people may in the same circumstance might call hot team, mike 2311. so i think we're actually seeingpeople making different choices already about where they're trying to address that concern . but what part would be specifically a part of the 911 response, it would be calls that would be allocated to a

community response so they don't riseto the level of requiring or needing a police response . >> are you saying that people would call 911 and then dispatch would ... >> right, so an aspect would be diverging callsthat goes through 911 then 311 . the proposal for a specific hotline or cart was directly in response to feedback we got from boots. the programming in eugene oregon but a lot of people hav listed . they started without the direct pop by for many years and realized there were a significant numberof individuals who wouldn't call for service at all . one of their biggest suggestions in developing our proposal when we consulted the , they said it would be really beneficial to have conversation

as to whether this community would benefit from a hotline that was dedicated to individuals who wanted to call specifically because they knew a non-police response needed to be dispatched. that came out of conversation among the coalition of stakeholders. >> including from many unhoused individuals. many of them would prefer not to call 911 because of previous experience is maybe not being ideal . they don't want to start at 911. they want to start somewhere else . >>president: that's a tricky and challenging aspect . i feel at least a little bit smarter after this presentatio . by the way, i want to say for the benefit of the public, vice

president zouzounis mentioned a report. i don't believe that report is under supplementalmaterials but if you search cart sf on google you can find it quickly . it is as vice president zouzounis said, it's a wonderfully comprehensive report with holes and questions with the unhoused community on what they would like to respond with or the kinds of responses they would find effective. to your last point benny, i think that's another complex a fire here is the experiences people have had in the past might make them notinclined to use 911 . it's a lot of stuff to think about here. unfortunately we can't get quite to your full iq in just one half hour presentation.

but we certainly appreciate both of you sharing your time with us and unless you have any last things youwant to say, we will go to public comment . so with that, matt, any public commenters on the line ? >> we have 2 people listening in the meeting. >> president: ifyou want to make apublic comment you can hitá3 to raise your hand. we will give you another 20 or 30 seconds . i know that was a long presentation .and has anybody raised their hands?

>> i don't believe so. >> no one has raised their han . >> seeing nine, public comment is closed. then he and kristin on behalf of the commission i want to commend you for all the work you do on this incredibly ethical and vexing issue. i appreciate you taking time out to try and make us look a bit smarter about this stuff. i hope we can play a helpful andpositive role in contributing to this conversation .and thank you for everything you do and thank you for the presentationand we are honored to have you here tonight . >> thank you. >> thank you commissioners, it'salways a pleasure to present as well . >> wonderful. next item please.

>> item 3,amendment to commission rules of order. this is a discussion and action item . the commission will make an item to amend rollcall to include acknowledgment of the ramaytush ohlone community. article 3, section 11. the director and i are happy to answer any questions but this basically would codify your resolution about the land acknowledgment and put it into anofficial meeting protocol . >> i think we've already voted on this. >> i believe the commission had a resolution to incorporate this into meetings. but it wasn't put into our actual rules of order if that makessense . >> president: twodifferent steps . okay, so commissioners, any comments orquestions ?

pretty self-explanatory. are there any public commenters on the line? >> there is no one wishing to make public comment. >> public comment is closed,i move we accept the rules of order . amendment. >> seconded by vice president zouzounis. okay. i'll read the role. commissionerdickerson is absent . commissioner huie. [roll call vote] motion passes. >> president: allright, next item please .

>> item 7, commissioner comments and questions and new business. this is a discussion item and allows thepresident, vice president and commissioners to report our recent activities, and make inquiries . >> president: do we have any updates or news items? we are all sleepy but it's been quite a week. i think that isperfectly understandable . i'm in the exact same boat . okay. i don't see anything. matthew, is there any public comment on our lack of comment? >> there is no comment. >> president: seeing nine, publiccomment is closed .next item please.

>> item 8,adjournment. please show the office of small business slide . >> president: of course i lost the ... slide language. one second, please. we're reading about one of the other things. okay. we will end with a reminder the small business commission is the official public forum to voice your opinion and concerns about policies that affect the economic vitality of small businesses in san francisco and the office of small business is thebest place to getanswers about doing business in san francisco during the local

emergency . if you need assistance, continue to reach out to the office of small business .and i will make a motion to adjour . >> i second. >> president: hold on.i will make a motion to adjourn in honor of the people of ukraine and the suffering they're going through and in solidaritywith them . >> i second. >> i will read the role. [roll call vote] motion passes. with 4 votes, one absent and this meeting is adjourned at 6:0 2 pm. >> president: thank you so muc

. >> good night everybody.

. >> supervisor mar: good morning. the meeting will come to order. i'm supervisor gordon mar, the chair of this committee and