>> and i'm the board chair for the mayor's disability commission. today is march 18th, 2022. the public meeting [indiscernible]. >> clerk: this meeting is broadcast to the public on sfgov-tv and it is open captioned and sign language interpreted. there's nine public meetings yearly and they're generally held on the third friday of the month. please call the mayor's office on disability for further information or to request accommodations at 415-554-6789.

for voice or by email at mod@sfgov.org. our next meeting is on friday april 18th from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. >> at this time i would like to address what happened from last weekend. and i would ask the clerk to read the statement. >> clerk: okay, so i'm reading the statement on behalf of alex, co-chair madrid. as co-chair i would like to address the issue of civility during meetings. disagreement will always play a role in government. and the key is to focus on the strengths and the weaknesses of proposed solutions to community

problems. not to engage in personal attacks against those who favor different solutions. we live in a city where diverse perspectives, and meetings are beneficial to hear all of these differing points of view while keeping the best interests of our community in mind. everyone is right to have their view heard as a central democratic value. mcd members request to treat each other and members of the public with respect and we expect the same from the public we thank you for joining us. >> co-chair madrid: thank you for that. now can you please read the roll call. >> clerk: okay [roll call]

and that is it for roll call. >> co-chair madrid: thank you. now i will go to item number -- [indiscernible] can you read the agenda. >> clerk: item 1, welcome and roll call. and item 2, reading and approval of the agenda. item 3 is public comment. item 4 is an information item, a co-chair report. item 5 is an information item called "keep us connected 2022

campaign and empowered sf assessment" and the presentation by marie jobling and carla soumala from the san francisco tech council and the dignity fund coalition. and item 6 is the information item on updates on the disability cultural center and dignity fund. and item 7 is the report from the mayor's office of disability. and item 8 is correspondence, and item 9 is public comment. and item 10 is a discussion item for council member communities and announcements. and item 11 is adjournment. that's all for the agenda.

>> i think that you are muted. >> co-chair madrid: sorry about that. are there any members [indiscernible] on the agenda. >> i approve. aye. >> tiffany, i approve. i second. >> co-chair madrid: thank you. public comment. can you please open up it up for public comment. >> clerk: yes. so we welcome the public's participation during public comment period. there will be an opportunity for public comment at the beginning and the end of the meeting, as well as after specific items on the agenda.

each comment is limited to three minutes, although comments may be limited to two minutes when there's a long queue of people waiting to make comments. at the end of the comment period, we will move on to the next commenter. if you want the council to respond to your comment following the meeting, please provide your contact information by email message to mod@sfgov.org. with the subject "mcd comment reply request." you may also provide additional comments by email to this address or by calling 415-554-6789. members of the public can join the meeting as participants and can make public comment during the public comment period. members of the public can join the webinar by using the link

provided in the agenda. to join the webinar using a telephone you can dial 1-(669)-900-6833. and the webinar i.d. is 854-1955-0368. if you join the webinar using your computer or tablet or smartphone zoom app you can click on the raised hand icon and you will be recognized when it's your turn to make public comment. you can also use the q&a feature in zoom webinar to be recognized or to make a comment. if you wish to be recognized type in the q&a box that you want to make a comment and hit send. and you can type it into the q&a box and the clerk can also read

it for you. if you join by phone dial star, 9, when you want to be recognized and you'll be prompted when it's your turn to make comments. we welcome suggestions on how to make the meetings more accessible. send feedback to mod@sfgov.org. if you need assistance accessing the meeting call 415-919-9562. or send an email to mod@sfgov.org. at this time, members of the public may address the council on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the council that are not on this meeting agenda. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the council will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the council for up to three minutes.

the brown act forbids the council from taking action or discussing any items not appearing on the posted agenda, including those items raised at public comment. so, with that announcement, i do see that we have at least one member of the public who is indicating they want to make public comment. >> co-chair madrid: all right. >> clerk: patricia, you have been permitted to unmute. >> caller: yes, can you hear me? >> clerk: yes. >> caller: yeah, i just wanted to convey to the mayor's disability council how disappointed i was and disheartened that you decided to ignore an almost unanimous response from the public at your last meeting about the closure of j.f.k. when you came out in favor of

permanent closure of that mile and a half stretch of j.f.k., i really feel that you're letting down a significant number of members, residents and taxpayers and voters of san francisco. people like me. i'm disabled. it's very difficult for me to walk. i have a muscle disease that is incurable and progressive. i fatigue very easily. i'm in fear of falling down. i have to be extremely careful and i walk with a whirlator. the best and the safest manner for people like me to go to the park and enjoy the attractions along that length of j.f.k. is in a private car with someone.

i don't see why we can't compromise instead of giving everything to the coalition that they want and the harassment and intimidate pedestrians all the time. and i think the letter that i think that your attorney wrote about how ada laws do not apply in this case, i think that is rather twisted logic and can be easily be refuted because there is still parking in golden gate park. able-bodied people just have to walk a little further, but they can still park in the park. disabled people can't walk a mile to get to the museum. they can't all park in the museum parking garage because it's too expensive. it's like a disability tax. so i just want to let you know

that i really think you dropped the ball and for a disability council, it makes me wonder if you're really taking into account the people that you're supposed to support and represent. thank you very much. >> co-chair madrid: thank you for your comments. are there any public comments at this time? >> clerk: yes. anon, you have been permitted to unmute. >> caller: hi. i'm a civil rights activist and disability activist in san francisco and i publish videos of corruption and unethical

corruption on youtube under activism and disability in san francisco. the previous comment i think that speaks to the widespread public opinion that this council and the mayor's office on disability have not supported and served the disabled public during the pandemic, especially, and for some time before as well. alex madrid and orkid sassouni demanded that i stop emailing them and asking questions about vaccine access or why these meetings were cancelled and rescheduled. for the first seven months of the pandemic these meetings were not even held and actually back in may 2020, there was a deletion of the public record of the emergency town hall meeting on covid response. that -- that deletion, that record, made it impossible for me to track and to find out where lifesaving ppe could be administered and supported and, in fact, the website last i checked still said that there was ppe available for disabled

people and there is not. that website by the way is an inspiration -- it's disgusting and a vast misrepresentation of what this city has done or lack thereof for disabled people. i tried three times yesterday, and the mayor's office on disability doesn't even bother to check such things to make sure that they're accessible to the public. despite numerous, numerous requests, mod refuses to work with the city to publish the home vaccine program to let severely disabled people know that there's a vaccine program that you can actually access to your home. they refused to publish there, i have no idea why. that program was many months late and as a result i became one of the last people to actually get a vaccine. and one of the last people to get any kind of support around

the covid-19 pandemic. additionally, this department -- the mayor's office on disability was found guilty of breaking the law and refusing to release my own disability records and lack thereof by the sunshine ordinance task force. they were found completely guilty by unanimous vote of 10 commissioners. and i think that speaks to the incompetence of the mayor's office on disability right now and the incompetence of the mayor's disability council. please do better, please make sure that people can access covid-19 data and publish the home vaccine program, and please respond to emails about these issues and, please keep these meetings active and let us video participate in these meetings, just like we would be able to if this was in person. there's no reason for you to force us to have our cameras off. that's it for my time. >> co-chair madrid: thank you. how many do we have for public

comment? >> clerk: we have one more caller who wants to make public comment. >> co-chair madrid: okay. if we have more, public comment from three minutes to two minutes. >> clerk: okay. so, caller ending in 1003, you have been permitted to unmute. >> caller: hello, my name is will railing and i am -- and i have three minutes, correct? >> co-chair madrid: yes. co- >> caller: i'm speaking for accessible san francisco, an unincorporated non-profit association. i appreciate these general comment times as an opportunity to speak to you about things which are important for accessibility in san francisco.

but which might not be the worst thing that's happening in the city right now. there are so many things going on, at any given time, so many different opportunities to improve accessibility in our community. and the most important of these is often on your agenda, like today, as full agenda items and for good reason, but i appreciate these general public comments and to remind you of issues and problems which aren't one of the major things agendized for today. so today i want to give a short update on the shared spaces program. shared spaces is the program which allowed thousands of additional businesses to use the streets and sidewalks beyond what was allowed before. now, this week on tuesday, two days ago, three days ago, the board of supervisors approved an ordinance which will eliminate any fines for violations by the shared spaces operators until 2023. now, it's very important to note that this will not apply to

accessible violations. accessibility violations are not deferred. i do want to thank supervisor peskin for putting that exception into the legislation that he proposed. for that reason, we did not think that there was any reason to oppose the legislation. the city did not decide as a matter of law that accessibility violations by shared space operators can continue. now, that said, unfortunately, as a practical matter the barriers in the shared spaces program are being allowed to continue. i want to make sure that you are all aware of that. although, i think that you probably are all aware of that, because many of us as we go anywhere in the city where there are shared spaces in operation can't help but notice how many of them are not accessible. a great many do not even attempt to provide an accessible table for dining or drinking, even when an accessible table is

attempted, the accessible table does not actually comply with the code standards which determine compliance. many shared spaces, especially the ones constructed of wood at the curb, have barriers right at the entrance. either a full step, and too high of a lip or no ramp at all -- with no ramp at all -- or there's an attempt at a ramp but one has been built which would not even be safe to use much less compliant with accessibility standards. so we have been concerned that many have been built a year and a half ago and still restaurants and bars still discriminate against people with disability. there's no exception to accessibility to a one-day street fair or an event in a park. many have now discriminated now for 500 days in a row and counting and we don't see any legitimacy for the bureaucratic type responses that we're hearing such as, you know, we don't have the resources to stop this discrimination, we're

working on it, or that somehow it is okay to provide food and beverages in other ways. okay. these are public accommodations and they must be made accessible. there's no excuse. thank you. >> co-chair madrid: thank you for your comment. are there any other public comment at this time? >> clerk: there are no other public commenters at this time. >> co-chair madrid: thank you. therefore, i will proceed to the co-chair report. i want to acknowledge a member of the mayor's disability --

[indiscernible] and members of the san francisco [indiscernible] thank you for coming to us. >> thank you for having me and i hope that we can cooperate. >> co-chair madrid: thank you. now i'm going to read the co-chair report. >> clerk: okay, for the co-chair report we have the february meeting, the mdc adopted a resolution about the proposed closure of j.f.k. drive and

golden gate park. it can be found at the mcd website under "resolutions." the resolution was sent to the mayor and the board and the recreation and parks commission, the director tumlin and director ginsberg. and the resolution was referred to by mta board members, recreation and parks commissioners and public commenters during their joint meeting on march 10th. since then, the mcd has been asked by director ginsburg and the supervisor connie chan to provide additional feedback and the specifics about the specifics of the resolution and mcd will continue to actively address this matter. >> co-chair madrid: i am a member of a [indiscernible] to

the mayor's office disability commission, and i am going to go to the board of supervisors on monday to be appointed for another [indiscernible] the co-chair, [indiscernible] to this report. >> this is orkid. i just want to make sure -- i'm not sure that it was mentioned at the previous meeting, i know that the meeting went quite long. and i just want to remind folks

to please be -- to please honor bob plantol who passed away. i don't have anything else on the report but i just know that our february meeting was quite intense in the discussion of the golden gate park access. it was quite a hot topic. so now that a resolution has been created, there are indeed other items within that that you can review. that doesn't mean anything to be opposed or in support of, mostly just items for the public to review and hope that we can work together successfully and keep golden gate park accessible for all. and that is it for me. no further reports. >> co-chair madrid: thank you, orkid. and we're moving to agenda item number 5 which is keep us connected 2022 campaign and

empowered s.f. tech needs assessment. presented by marie jobling and carla soumala, san francisco tech council and the dignity fund coalition. welcome to both. >> all right, thank you very much, i think that karla will get us started here today. >> thank you very much for having us. we're so delighted to be here. i am karla soumala and i'm here with marie jobling, she's the co-chair of the dignity fund coalition and the co-executive director at community living campaign. we're joined by cecile peritt who is the lead author on the

report that i'll talk about today and these days, she is the assistant director of disability access and inclusion with the ucff office of diversity and outreach. and so she will be here to field questions once i kind of go over the materials on the report. and so this -- we'll go ahead and get started. am i allowed to pull up the slides or can you enable me to do that? >> co-chair madrid: if you can -- to do it from our end. >> okay. >> i believe that john has that slide deck. >> co-chair madrid: one moment.

while i share the screen. >> oh, perfect, i will pull it up right now. got it. all right. and i will make sure that everybody can see my screen here. and can you all see my screen? is that -- is that available to you? >> and you need to go to slide show. >> yeah, i'm just trying to move the things around to get me there. there we go. >> co-chair madrid: thank you. >> all right. so, thank you, everyone. this is the 2021 findings and policy recommendations from the empowered san francisco tech needs assessment survey. and as i mentioned, this is

conducted by cecile puertz when she was working with "thriving in place" and she can answer further questions. this is also done in collaboration and for the mayor's office on disability as well as for the department of disability and aging services. and we appreciate all of their efforts. there are many, many, many more people, cecile would say, that need to be thanked, but we won't go into all of that today. we'll provide the website where you can see all of the collaborators there. >> karla? could you speak more slowly, please. for purposes of interpreting and for audiences watching on tv. >> perfect. all right. so as i said, marie jobling and i are here today, and we'll go over the key findings and recommendations from this report. why is this report so important? first of all, i would like to say that it is hot off the

press. it is recent, and it is relevant, and it points to the key needs that emerged in the disability community, and in particular among older adults during the pandemic. and it also provides us with some of the data that we need to really continue to advance digital inclusion for older adults and people with disabilities. this powerpoint will be made available to you where you can find a p.d.f. report and you can also find a summary on the website as well as all of the raw data. so there's a lot of information that goes along with this. these links are live. so why is this issue so urgent? it's probably not something that you need to be convinced of today. but technology connects us with

our health providers, with food, with housing, employment, family and friends. this has never been more so than during the pandemic. which we are still struggling with. without devices, internet access, assistive or adaptive technology and digital literacy support, so many people are left behind. what we've also learned is that this increases -- without these connections -- it increases social isolation and loneliness and barriers to tele-health are a public health issue. the methodology for this report -- this is a very, very brief overview. a total of 3,080 surveys were collected a year ago this spring. they were conducted in a number of different modes -- print,

phone, digital, in-person, and braille. what the survey -- or what the study results are based on, however, is the survey pool of 1,529 participants with san francisco's zip codes. the other people who filled it out were not in that -- in that s.f. zip code. the approach was community driven and involved participation on the part of those who are surveyed, including in-focus groups. a couple of different things that i will point out with a few highlights here in terms of age and disability and demographics 55% of the survey respondents were older adults, 60 and over. 9% were transition-aged youth. by disability, you can see on your screen and some of these i will not be able to go through

everything, but the top five disabilities indicated by those surveyed, mobility disabilities, chronic pain, deaf or hard-of-hearing, mental health, and blind or low vision. in terms of income and language demographics, 70% of the participants are from communities of color. 33% have household incomes of less than $20,000. and the top five languages include english, cantonese, american sign language, spanish and mandarin. in terms of housing and veteran status, about 88% of those surveyed lived or housed either in apartments, rentals, affordable housing, living with friends or family, supportive housing or rsos.

about 5% of the respondents were responsing homelessness. in terms of veteran status, a very good sampling, 23% are veterans. these are the top 10 zip codes. we won't go through all of them today. but you will be able to look these up. 9%, the highest number came from western edition, tenderloin and mid-market. and as you can see, go into many of the neighborhoods in the city that do often lack access. so the key research questions -- what were the researchers trying to discover with this report? they wanted to know what are the tech barriers and unmeet needs of san francisco residents with disabilities, older adults and

multipellly marginalized communities that had been most impacted during covid-19. the next question is -- let me move -- what are the links between digital and equality and income, race, ethnicity, disability, age, language, housing veteran status and patterns of digital red lining. what are the opportunities for targeted and strategic interventions to increase levels of digital connectedness? so some of this was discovering what the barriers were, what the links are, and where the opportunities are. so during the pandemic, this is a broad overview, 64% of the participants said that technology was a barrier to receiving vital services. and an interesting aside to this is that though the data indicated that there wasn't as much need for devices or

internet access as perhaps they had anticipated, but the -- but technology itself was critical. so what were the top five barriers to internet access? the top was the unaffordable cost of high-speed internet. so, in other words, reliable internet that allows a person to go online and to conduct a tele-health visit or to do other kinds of important business. the cost of devices, insufficient smartphone data was yet another one. unreliable internet connections and concerns about safety and security online. so where were people getting -- were accessing the internet in those who are surveyed? the top sources include paid broadband internet in public,

wifi hot spots. smartphone data, or smartphone internet data plans were the third. so this is really, really interesting. what were the top five service needs that people indicated? health, food, housing assistance, covid information, and computer literacy training. which is really important considering that it made it into that top five. what we also learned is that getting medical or receiving medical services through tele-health was both vital and challenging. 67% of respondents reported receiving medical services through tele-health. but, 57% reported missing important medical appointments either not able to do tele-health or get to their medical care centers. this was particularly urgent in

the latinx older adult community where 50% reported not using internet -- or not being able to use tele-health. and so what were the top five barriers to accessing tele-health services? lack of devices, affordability, again, training, the need for assistive or adaptive technologies, things like screen readers and all of the things that come along with that to make a connection meaningful and possible. and language access. we learned also that public computer labs were essential. i won't go into all of the data here, but before the pandemic, the vast majority of those in the transition-aged youth, people residing in -- sorry about that -- in assisted living

or experiencing homelessness, and 82% of veterans got their internet access at these public hubs. so libraries, community centers, that sort of thing. most of these -- actually all of these things closed down during the pandemic. and another thing that we learned is that free or low-cost tech assistive technology and training is critical. and so all of these kinds of things -- so what were those top needs -- low cost was the primary need and training on what was available and how to use it, all right, were the next two. and, finally, access to free or low-cost repairs. and this need for a.t. was greater among older adults and people with chronic pain or mental health disability, low

income, and sro residents and black, ladinx and aapi community and those who are monolingual. what came out of this report in terms of recommendations? what needs to happen? first, is expand free or low cost digital connectivity to residents with disabilities and older adults. absolutely necessary. there are a couple of different ways -- things that need to happen. this is not a simple recommendation. and there are different aspects of it from expanding fiber to housing pipelines, creating digital navigator hubs, and developing stronger outreach channels. another recommendation is to pilot initiatives aimed at lowering barriers to tele-health access. again, not a simple recommendation. many pieces involved. but people need -- first of all,

internet access, tools and digital literacy skills to be able to able to hop on a tele-health visit, but -- so, you know, this means making sure that tele-health services are accessible to everybody who needs it. the other thing -- bilingual services. those are often difficult to access. and another recommendation is increase funding and distribution of free and low-cost assistive technology. there isn't enough available in the community labs, the community computer labs, and we need more resources in this area. and also in training staff -- how to use the assistive technologies so they can work with participants who enter the lab. so i'm going to turn this over right now to marie jobling, because we have painted a

picture for you, and now we want to talk about what's happening on the ground right now. >> all right, thank you very much. well, i think that the first thing i want to do is to thank cecile and her team of people who put together this incredible piece of research and the organizations that funded it. you know, it will be a long time before we have anything as detailed, as specific, targeted to all of the communities that we want to know more about and want to be able to serve. so, a special thank you to cecile and folks who helped to make this report possible. and i think that one of the things that we're looking to do kind of all together is to figure out how to continue to take it on the road, so what you have learned today, some of which you probably already knew, there's a lot of communities who don't have a clue. a lot of policymakers who don't have a clue. so we do want to take this on the road. but as often happens, you know, you have a wonderful plan with recommendations, and in this case an incredible amount of

data. but then where's the money to actually implement some of what is being asked for? so we are launching another equip keep us connected" campaign and we're calling it the pandemic edition well, because there's more reason now to be able to do it. >> marie, would you speak a little slower. >> sorry. i am so excited here. so you got the thank you part. so now as we go forward, we're looking to launch a new "keep us connected" campaign. and we're calling it the pandemic edition, because it is really the most needed of all of the campaigns that we've done around this issue. and we're targeting those things that were mentioned here as being critically important. free or low-cost internet. free or low-cost devices and assistive technology. tele-health. training and technical support in multiple languages.

creating a clear pathway for people to find digital inclusion resources. and public technology hubs. and if we go to the next slide here, we will be able to see as a campaign we're trying to make the tools available on the dignity fund website, which is sfdignityfund.org. and when you go to that site you will see on the right-hand side that there's a menu of features that makes the website more accessible. so you can access a screen reader, increase the contrast, improve the text size and make a number of other adaptations to make it as accessible as possible. the first step in our campaign is an online petition that is now available on that website in english, chinese, spanish and tagalog. so if everyone that is watching this afterwards could go to that

website and click the link and add one more signature, that would be fabulous. we also have a flyer that is available for download that details all of the money requests that we're building into the city's budget justice coalition's ask, and that we're working to sort of organize advocacy for over the next few months. and so for anybody who wants to get more involved in the advocacy portion of this, you can email info@sfdignityfund.org or call 415-821-1003, extension 115. and so, again, thank you so much, and we're so pleased that cecile is here who can answer probably any question that you have about the data and the report. >> thank you, karla. this is cecile puertz who

oversaw the city-wide need assessments and as karla mentioned i'm serving my role as the assistant director of disability access and inclusion at ucff. and i'm available if anybody has questions. >> co-chair madrid: thank you to of three of you. and we'll ask our fellow commissioners if there are any questions, please raise your hand and i will call you one by one. i see helen.

>> thank you, alex. and thank you, marie, and cecile and karla, for the good work. i'm curious, were there any findings that surprised you? >> hi, helen, thank you, this is cecile. so i think when we set out to df by saying that when we set out to do this study it was really, really important for us to center the knowledge and expertise of those who are most impacted in the design of this study. so i think that really contributed to the diversity of folks that we were able to survey. so i think that that was always a surprise as well, is that we were able to reach -- i mean, even when we look at the language, aer is percentage of folks whose language is asl or american sign language, to see a good representative sample. of course, that means that there's a lot more work to do in how to reach the community.

but i just wanted to thank orkid sassouni who served as a community advisor who helped to us reach the folks in the community. also, you know, surprising i think also during a pandemic how do we survey people about digital -- about their barriers to digital inclusion when only the main method is online survey? i think that really how do we adjust our community organizing strategies and serving strategies to reach people where they're at. and so that was alsoage important thing to think about, and how to work with organizers and going into neighborhoods that maybe have historically not been listened to or heard as much. and so i think that those were some important -- i think that the transition-aged youth, is

that we heard from a lot of transition-aged youth and veterans. the only thing that i will add to that is the tele-health barriers. you know, when we further -- and part of the reason why we made this data publicly available as well on the thriving in place website is that we really want to encourage more -- more research into this data and to further look at the intersections of race, language, veteran status, housing, income, age, and digital inequality. so i think that, you know, when we looked at that data and saw that latinx community members were experiencing even higher disparities and higher barriers to tele-health, that was a real signal to us that we need to be looking at this as an intersectional issue. thank you for that question.

>> commissioner smolinski: thank you. >> co-chair madrid: thank you. now i'll go to [indiscernible]. >> yes, i just want to say thank you to cecile for really starting this project and i know that it was not an easy one and i know that you had to gather quite a lot of people to get respondents. and i think that it is very interesting that there was an article recently regarding tele-health and the impact on people in diverse communities, bipoc folks and i think that it is true across the country that we are seeing disparities. in the deaf community, people are using video remote interpreting which is very different than the video relay service. and doctors typically want to contract very specifically with certain providers versus others,

that may not know who the deaf consumers prefer. and another barrier is, for example, on treasure island, the continual lack of consistent electricity is causing a lot of issues for individuals with how to access whatever is provided to them through the internet or through other things. so especially for individuals who live in sros or otherwise low-income, access is such a big issue. and then, again, when it comes to big corporations and their technologies, i think that, for example, at&t is providing -- or transitioning to providing isps, and i can't be more specific, but there are local i.s.p.s here in san francisco that potentially could be looked into in terms of providing access on a more local basis. these larger companies, the walls that we hit with them, are

quite challenging, especially for folks with low income. it is a real challenge to have that already small ssi check to go to cover such an essential service as internet. so there's really no way, right, for us to empower people to ask for a discount with these larger companies versus these more local companies, local isps that can help with that -- that might be a way -- something that we can invest in that would help to make more sense for our low-income residents. and then for deaf and blind individuals, often they're very underemployed and it's very difficult for them to even get the equipment that they need to access their computers to get it in working order and get it replaced when needed. iphones every few years need

to be replaced. all of these things can also be considered when we are surveying individuals around technology. i know that there's a lot to cover so i did want to really first mention how much work i know that you did and what an impact this has had around people's access. so, thank you. it's really wonderful trying to keep it short. >> if i could just make a quick comment. thank you so much, orkid, and i think that sort of moving forward i think that it is absolutely critical that in our digital inclusion efforts in the city of san francisco, is to really to actively consult and include deaf and hard-of-hearing community members and deaf blind community members in the design of our programs. and sitting and being in leadership positions really is absolutely critical because being a person who is hearing

did not always understand and i think that a lot of people who are designing these digital inclusion programs may not have the nuance and insight and lived experience that deaf and hard-of-hearing folks do have. so i thank you, orkid, for your leadership and to the connections that you made with the community to understand what barriers people are actually experiencing. >> co-chair sassouni: and one other thing that i would add is probably partnering -- what is it -- the california phone access program, and they have funding that you could potentially partner with them to see how it's used for seniors in particular who are losing their hearing and are no longer able to access a telephone without assistive technology. so that may be something that you might find useful. it's public funding. just something to keep in mind.

okay, i'll wrap it up for the next person now. >> co-chair madrid: thank you. tiffany. >> commissioner yu: hello, hi, cecile. congratulations on your new role. and thank you, marie and karla and cecile for the presentation i know my involvement in the s.f. tech council, i've had access to see it come to fruition. so this question actually isn't as much about the report, but it's more about the outreach. and so i think one of the things that was really impressive about this, cecile, was the way that you were able to tap into not only the intersections that exist within the disability community, but also reach some parts of our community that are harder to reach. and so i was wondering if, like, that process of how you did the outreach was, like, documented anywhere so that we can use that as a model -- not only for us at

mdc as we think about how we can do better with outreach as well >> thank you so much, tiffany, for that comment. and just sort of seeing sort of the power behind the methodology. i would say in terms of addressing your question around is it documented. in the report we talk about the role that our community advisors play and we also -- so that was sort of the first step is identifying a diverse cross-section of people that were all paid to be on our advisory committee to help to sort of guide and steer the outreach. through that, we also designed a number of different sort of multimodal approaches to distributing the survey. so that was a piece of it too as karla mentioned in braille and large print, digital, phone based. and then we also really prioritized language access. since we know that sort of there

are a lot of existing barriers around language and digital inclusion. it also -- partnerships were huge as well. we partnered with one city -- a number of city agencies. one was the office of civic engagement and immigration affairs. ocea, and they have a community ambassador model where they train and pay community ambassadors who are from those communities to conduct public outreach, to connect people to resources. and so those folks were paid as well to help to support us in sros and a lot of our outreach to the unhoused population was conducted in that way. so that is definitely was a really informative model to help us start thinking about what a digital navigator's program might look like, and how outreach sort of during a crisis or a pandemic, and how we take those lessons and continue applying them moving forward.

so also i just wanted to thank all of the housing organizers and people working in sros and people in the disability community who really help to connect us to areas of san francisco. one example is in visitacion valley, and at the simon community development center. and i think that a lot of our outreach allows us to go into the community safely to meet with community leaders who are trusted in those communities, so i really attribute the success of this project to those community leaders. so i hope that answered some of your questions. thank you, tiffany. >> co-chair madrid: thank you. are there any other questions? i go to the staff, are there any staff members that have question at this time?

nicole? >> i wanted to direct our thanks to our presenters here and especially to cecile for all of your work on the survey itself and to marie and to karla for moving it through the next steps. for members of the public especially, i wonder -- i know that we have presented these, or you have presented these as kind of the top five aggregate issues. what did you see in the report that you would elevate as the most singular issue for people with disabilities? i wonder if you could reiterate that again. i know a lot of our community are also older adults, but when you specifically look at issues facing people with disabilities

in terms of technology, was the greatest barrier the assistive technology access? or were there other things? i wonder if you could illuminate more specific to disability, to the degree that you're able to, and maybe a few of the things related to the disability community in particular that really didn't make it into the top five, but are still critically important that we look at as a city. >> that's a great question, thank you, nicole. sure. so, i mean, i could start by talking a little bit more about -- i mean, one thing that really stood out to me specific to transition-aged youth with disabilities is also, you know, when we're thinking about a lot of digital inclusion programs are geared or designed perhaps

for older adults and -- i would say for older adults. i think that there's a large chunk of the population of transition-aged youth who are sort of left out of that conversation. especially as it relates to employment. so we did find that that is, you know, a significant piece of having access to technology -- consistent and high quality, you know, if that's not in place, then how are young transition-aged youth accessing employment, education? and digital literacy trainings that are really customized to their needs and to their lived experiences. so, you know, hearing from the street services and also, you know, of people who are chronically homeless or experience chronic homelessness, residents of sros with disabilities and veterans as well. so we learned quite a bit from justice involved, veterans with

disabilities. so i think that really moving forward i think that it really highlights the importance of connecting with veterans services, connecting with transition-aged youth services, and then as you mentioned the assistive technology piece and i think, you know, as orkid sassouni was mentioning really the -- all of the different ways that assistive technology is a critical piece. so it's one thing to have a computer and internet connection, but if you don't have the a.t. hardware and software and then the training, and the knowledge that those options are available to you, then how can one maintain -- connect meaningfully and effectively with their community? so i think that -- and just sort of the incredible -- the last thing that i'll say on that is just the incredible wealth of knowledge that exists in the disability community around and

organizing around mutual aid. how to access resources around technology. and there's tremendous knowledge there. and i know that the importance of continuing to tap into that and to employ people with disabilities in leadership positions to help to design these digital equity programs and potentially these labs, technology labs, in the future. >> can i jump in on that in terms of assistive technologies these s.f. tech council recently had a section with our access and learning work group, and we had someone from the white house jeffrey cologne, and another from irlc, and they did kind of like a quick overview of the kinds of assistive technologies that are available within their organizations. and we had tremendous

participation in the work group that day. and a lot of interest in learning more. so this idea of training not just lab instructors and lab staff, but really helping a much wider group of people aware of assistive technologies and what's out there. i think that is a big piece of it, because there is some stuff there and people don't know how to -- how to refer or to get to it, or any of those things. >> that's great. i think that is fantastic. i just really encourage as community living campaign and the tech council continue to move forward with promoting the findings, that we really highlight the unique findings about people with disabilities. we did such excellent outreach and we really reached members of

our community who we never reached before. and i'm so impressed by that. and we do a good job of highlighting that part. so i want to make sure that we do equally as good a job highlighting some of the disability specific findings that we -- what we have learned and continually use this model and this tool as a way to encourage everyone that this is the way that we should be doing research and outreach, and this is the way that we should be talking about and elevating disability specific concerns. so, thank you very much, for your work on this. i really appreciate it. >> co-chair madrid: thank you, nicole. are there other questions at this time? before i take public comment, i have a question.

first of all, thank you for your work, and thank you, cecile, for coming back to give us an update. you do an amazing job. [indiscernible] what has been done to mitigate the gap?

[indiscernible]. >> thank you so much. marie, did you want to jump in and talk more about the budget campaign. >> it's just to say, you know, i have learned so much -- even on this conversation. you know, i think that the point is that raising this as an issue and being able to take the report raises consciousness everywhere and there has to be an advocacy piece and what will you do and involve the communities as being leaders and employees and folks who help to shape the solution. so through the dignity coalition we'll try to get as far as we can on that. and it is a grassroots campaign i will say that slower. it is a grassroots campaign. so we're hoping that if folks are interested they will let us

know through the website. >> co-chair madrid: i'm not talking about the money aspect, i'm talking about giving access to people that possibly need it right now. that's what i'm saying to you. >> i mean, there are -- our organization and a number of others do have some ways to provide support now. we can hook people up with subsidized free internet. we have a device program, where you get new users and others access and they can keep the device if they're engaged. we have the abilities integrator whose job it is to keep us honest and make sure that we're doing everything that we can to provide equal access. so -- but it's a drop in the bucket compared to what is

really needed here. so the city spends an incredible amount of money on its own technology every year, and we'll spend $54 million on the city's side of technology to reach the community, but there's nowhere near as much money being provided to the community to be able to connect from their end. >> co-chair madrid: with that -- >> through the chair, i just have one more question, marie said something that raised a concern that i have. so i know that we wanted to direct people to the website to participate in the campaign. where do we direct people who want to participate and do not have internet access? >> that is the issue, isn't it? so i think that we're working through a number of organizations to do the outreach in person. and looking for ways, you know, whether it's through, you know, government tv, or other things

where people can connect and get information. as things begin to open up a little bit, i know that we're planning to hit every street fair that we can to be able to talk to folks. and, you know, the more organizations that help us to kind of reach folks and where there are resources now and hook them up, but, if not, to make this a big issue for the city. you know, i think that we just have to make it an issue. >> co-chair madrid: just one suggestion is that maybe we're trying to [indiscernible] who need devices and go from there. i know that cecile works right

now to do that, and maybe you guys can talk more. and now we'll go to public comment. we'll take the opportunity for public comment at this time. >> clerk: okay, as a reminder to the public, if you want to make public comment and you're using the zoom webinar platform you can indicate your interest in making public comment by pressing on the raised hand icon. you can also make public comment over the phone, and call star 9 to raise your hand and you will be prompted when it's your turn to unmute. if you want to have your public comment read by the clerk, you can write your public comment in the q&a box, in the webinar

platform. with that, i do see that we have a couple members of the public who want to make public comment so, we'll start with caller 4284. you have been permitted to unmute. caller ending in 4284, you can unmute by dialing star, 6 over the phone. >> caller: hello? >> clerk: hello. >> caller: yeah. so i have been listening to the presentation, and i appreciate that needs assessment done, but i want to talk about the infrastructure bill that has set

aside a lot of money for high-speed internet, but we also need to impress upon the institutions like the hospitals, that they need to create space, centers, for people who are challenged can go and get help. and this also involves the banking system. there are a lot of things that are done digitally but people who are challenged are not given the opportunities to use the technology. we have a small group working on a digital platform, so we are open to helping anybody who needs help. and i think so that we do have

some large companies who are willing to help, but they need a business plan. and i know that there are small companies that want to help the physically challenged, and here comes the outreach. and we need to impress on the city and the county of san francisco that they do spend a lot of money themselves, and there's one of your members who stated that they do not give sufficient resources to the community. so right now we are working on something that is going to not have to beg the city and waste our time, but i can tell you

that there are modems now that can be used much more powerful than the old modems and there are companies willing to help. so i'm going to go on your website and please i can talk to somebody from one of your presenters, and we can work together to go to a better place. i'm here in san francisco, and my name is francesco da costa, and i'm the director of environmental justice advocacy. and once again i thank you for the needs assessment done, and now we need to have our goals, short-term goals and our long-term goals. thank you very much. >> co-chair madrid: thank you for your comments. are there any other public commenters at this time? >> clerk: yes. anon, you have been permitted to unmute. >> caller: hi, i'm a disability

and civil rights activist and i post videos of ethical misconduct and corruption in san francisco on a youtube page called disability and activism in san francisco. i appreciate the effort that was gone into the presentations today. i for one though am a little confused with the agenda item 6 was supposed to go over the disability cultural center. if somebody wants to clarify if that is coming up next, that is the overwhelmingly desired thing that people wanted with the dignity fund. for those that don't know, the dignity fund was passed in 2016 by san francisco voters to give millions and millions and millions of dollars to the city so that veterans and disabled people and seniors could live with dignity. i would love to slow down but unfortunately we don't get a lot of time to speak so i'll try to, but it's very difficult. the public is not prioritized at these meetings. and it's always been a bit of a shame that this council and the mayor's office on disability,

which were created in the 90s to help to facilitate the communications between the community are primarily used for presentations. so, you know, mdc just sits in your high chairs and you just watch city departments talk about how great things are. and things are not great, things are really, really bad for disabled people. and these meetings give me a queasy feeling in my stomach because there's so much toxic positivity that happens in them and we are being displaced in massive droves, according to the 2022 census, 5.7% of san franciscans are people with disabilities. that is down drastically because now landlords are using covid to intimidate and harass us by coming into our homes without wearing ppe, and mdc and mod do nothing about this. and additionally, you know, you're supposed to have a disability cultural center. there are, fortunately, cultural centers for all other minority

groups and there's a filipino cultural center and african-american cultural center, and there's a lot of senior community centers, there's nothing for disabled people. there is no place that we can go and get to know one another and communicate with each other. we have nothing for that. and voters gave millions and millions of dollars of taxpayer money to this city to create such a place called a disability cultural center. i have fought for public records requests to understand what is happening with that cultural center and why it's not done constructed, which should have happened many years ago. and the dignity fund was passed in 2016, and so i would really appreciate an update. because that's what we need. we need to stop living in isolation and stop being gentrified out of this city and we need to be able to meet each other and coordinate and organize. i want to thank the people that presented here for actually mentioning people in sros and low-income individuals and mod and mdc usually ignores and the

rates of depression and suicide among our veterans and other disabled members. it's a real struggle out here, folks, and there's nothing wrong with being a little bit sad when you present at the condition of disabled people in this city. we don't always have to pretend to be positive and upbeat and happy because things are really, really hard right now. that's it for my time. >> co-chair madrid: thank you for calling. and i just want to clarify to the public that we are on item number 5, which is keep us connected 2022 campaign and empowered s.f. tech needs assessment. and after that we will have an

update on the disability cultural center and the dignity fund. again, that would be after the council break. are there any other public comments at this time? >> clerk: i do not see any other public commenters at this time. >> co-chair madrid: thank you. i just want to thank marie and karla for coming back and to come to this body and giving us an update. i hope that this is the beginning of working together, and please come back. and help us to meet the many

needs in the disability community again. thank you for coming. and with that, the council will take a 15-minute break. and after that we will have a presentation by kelly dearman, the director of department of disability and aging services. she will be talking to us regarding the disability cultural center and the dignity fund. with that, we'll take a break. , everybody.

>> clerk: thank you, everyone. a reminder to return by 2:35. >> co-chair madrid: the -- and now we are continuing with our agenda with item number 6. the information item updates on disability cultural center and the dignity fund, presented by katie dearman, the department of disability and aging and services. good to see you again. >> nice to see you, alex. thank you.

i appreciate being able to share with you the information around the cultural center and the dignity fund. i think that there are some slides. >> co-chair madrid: [indiscernible]. >> clerk: one moment. do you need presenter access, kelly? >> i do not. i spoke to john and he was going to advance the slides. >> clerk: let's wait for that, for the slides to go up. one moment. i can also speak to it, and just make sure that you all get the slides.

either way. >> co-chair madrid: let's wait. [indiscernible] is that okay, kelly? >> yeah. >> co-chair madrid: i am sure john is working on it right now >> so i want to confirm that we have access to them. i can't see john, so i don't know -- if we're working on it or not. i would recommend -- >> [indiscernible] access to the slides myself. just setting it up on my machine right now. >> thank you.

okay, i believe they are showing. >> yes, thank you. okay, all right, so we can move to the next slide. i'm first going to speak on the disability cultural community center. and, yeah, so whenever you can move the slides that would be great. thank you. okay, so we are working with the mercy housing -- >> i'm sorry, kelly, one moment i wanted to make sure that we have full screen access and now we do. please continue. thank you so much. i'm sorry. >> it's totally fine. so we're working with the kelsey mercy housing and mov on various aspects of the project from the general foot print of the space and the request for proposals to identify service providers.

and you can go back -- there's a comprehensive needs assessment which included analysis of literature, and resources and models available. and exploration of the existing community and cultural centers in san francisco and their external trends. in that focus group with the leaders from government and non-profit and community and advocacy organizations, and in addition longmore had a core committee of disabled leaders who worked collaboratively with them. so the goals of this cultural center is a place where people with disabilities can gather, access information and resources. information and input will be gathered through the community engagement process, and as part of their work with the community, longmore developed values and mission statements in

order to guide the creation of this center. those values and mission statements were incorporated into the principles. so some of the principles include creating a space for diverse people with disables tos to come together, and advancing social and disability justice and celebrating disability culture and provide and providing information about and access to disability programs and services. and, like i said, the request for proposals is currently under review by the human services agency contract so i can't really speak to what is in that request of proposal until it comes out. but i know that there was a groundbreaking a couple of weeks ago to start the construction. and so it is finally after a very long time underway. so we're pleased with that. next slide, please.

and in termings of the dignity fund, as was mentioned earlier, this is based on a proposition i, and that was passed in november 2016. and it does provide -- set aside protected funding for services for older adults, adults with disabilities and their caregivers. and so now here we are in the year 2022, next slide, please. so it established $38 million of funding that was set aside that grows by $33 million over 10 years. and the way that this -- the planning and funding cycle works, it's a four-year planning and funding cycle and as many of you know that we just completed the community needs assessment

which happens every four years. and the goal of that is to see what we're doing and what we should be doing and what are the unmet needs among san francisco's older adults and adults with disabilities. after we do the -- after we do the needs assessment, after that is completed, then we do a service and allocation plan. and so the needs assessment identifies how the funding will be allocated over the next four years based on what we find in the needs assessment. there's also the oversight and advisory committee that advises in the administration of the dignity fund to ensure that we are using that money in the way that it is planned and designed next slide, please.

so -- so in terms of some of the initiatives that we look at, and that we've been doing with the fund, some more community service centered programs. there's been a lot of talk about caregivers and caregiver support and need for respite, but also as you all know we're in a crisis in terms of the workforce. and so how do we reach them, and how do we get more people involved in the care giving process. then there's -- i have already spoken about the cultural center, and how can we expand services for adults with disabilities, including the cultural center, including food we do not provide housing, obviously, but we, you know, how can we ensure that we're providing all of the resources that we can so that people can

get proper housing. and then also around nutrition and support for people with chronic health conditions, and also our department works with veterans and how are we making sure that we're meeting the needs of veterans as well. and as we all saw during the pandemic, isolation is -- is a real problem that i'm sure that we all knew about prior to the pandemic, but it became really visible during the pandemic so how are we combating that. and the programs for our transgender and gender non-conforming people. and, lastly, how do we ensure that we're doing enough outreach to strengthen our awareness of our existing services. and one of the things that we will be doing is coming out with an online service directory, and we've been talking about this