neighborhoods with so much cultural presence and learnings, that we want to preserve. [♪♪♪] please stand by for the city and county of san francisco budget and finance committee meeting of july 20, 2022. >> the meeting will come to order. this is july 20, 2022 budget finance committee meeting. i'll chair ronen.

joined by committee member gordon mar. shortly joined by vise chair supervisor ahsha safai. i like to thank james for broadcasting the meeting. mr. clerk, do you have any anounments >> just friendly reminder to make sure the silence cell phones and electronic devices. the board is convening hybrid meetings. also provide remote accessvilley telephone. the board recognize equitable public access is essential and will be taking public comment. first, public comment will be taken on each item. those attending in person will speak first and take those on the telephone line watching channels 26, 28, 78, or 99 and sfgovtv. the call in

number is streaming across the scream. 415-655-0001. when connect youd hear the meeting discussion but be muted and listening mode. when your item coming up those joining in person should line up to speak and on the telephone dial star 3 to be added to the speaker line. if you are on the telephone turn off the tv and listening devices. each speaker is allowed 2 minutes to speak. you can may submit public comment e-mail to myself the budget finance clerk brent (inaudible) it will be forwarded to the supervisors and also included as part of the official file. may send written comments by

u.s. postal service to office city hall, 1 dr. carlten b goodlet place. items acted upon today are expected to appear on board of supervisors agenda of july 26, unless otherwise stated. >> thaupg thank you, please call item 1. >> resolution designated world journal to be the outreach community periodical of the city county for chinese community. those joining and wish to comment call 415-655-o001 and enter id >> thank you. i believe we

have mrs. curela here to present. >> thank you chair ronen and supervisor mar. i'm drckter of office of contract administration and i'm here today to introduce a amendment to the resolution for designation of the periodical for the chinese community outreach advertising contract. last week if you recall the full board voted to sever this particular recommendation from the broader resolution for designation of multiple neighborhood and community outreach periodicals. our office received an inquiry of the award of chinese community contract subsequent to the introduction of the resolution for award of all the advertising contracts. as a result of the inquiry from (inaudible) our office further reviewed the submitted bid from the newspaper and we recognize we overlooked material provided, specific to the newspaper circulation numbers, which was a component of the

evaluation. as such, we have reevaluateed our scoring and have revised the scores for this particular outreach periodical designation. more specifically in the circulation component the newspaper receives 3.18 points for circulation which results in the newspaper becoming the highest scoring bidder for the chinese community outreach periodical by.25 points. so, recommending the newspaper be designated as the chinese community advertising periodical which replace the recommendation for wind journal. additionally, i do want to note oca found we mistakenly forward to include the (inaudible) though

in fact our evaluation our initial evaluation in fact should have been recommended. so, we have amended the resolution to reflect these two changes. if i'm not mistaken i believe these are substantive changes that may require the item to be continued. >> question to the city attorney. are these substantive changes? >> deputy city attorney ann pearson. the addition of the neighborhood periodical but removing wind journal and replacing would be. >> supervisor mar. >> thank you chair ronen and director for the explanation and the update on this somewhat complicated matter, and i just wanted to make sure i'm understanding, because i have some conflicting

information. so, the amendment would add the wind newspaper-would retain world journal as the community outreach periodical for the chinese community, but also add the wind as a second one, is that correct? >> no, actually, oca can only recommend the highest scoring proposer, and so that is why we are retracting our recommendation for wind journal, which is now a lower scoring then wind newspaper and again as i mentioned wind newspaper with the revised scoring is the winner essentially the highest scoring by .25 points. >> okay. so, the amendment would replace world journal with the wind because the outreach periodical

for the chinese community city wide? >> that is correct. >> my staff made a amendment that includes both world journal and wind as both of them, but-i guess i don't-- >> maybe i can explain. so, what we submitted as the revised amendment or the amended resolution yesterday to the clerk does replace world journal with wind, because wind is the highest scoring. that said, it has been i think practice or guidance from the city attorney office that the supervisors can in fact add periodicals or change that recommendation. >> uh-huh. >> differ to the city attorney on this. thank you. >> great. this also

the amendment-there is a additional amendment that adds the potrero view serving on 1, 2, 3-maybe 6 neighborhoods. >> correct. >> why do we need to add this or make the amendment? can you explain that again? >> yes. as i mentioned before, in our initial scoring potrero view actually was noted as the highest scoring in fact i think they were the only proposer that submitted for this particular category. the documents we submitted initially when we introduced this does indicate they should have been awarded, we just mistakenly forgot to include potrero view so like to add it now. >> so it was a oversight? >> yes. >> okay. i'm supportive of the amendments that you presented and i just maybe have a more general question.

why-particularly the chinese community outreach designation or periodical designation, why wasn't this caught sooner, because it has been very awkward in the process and-yeah. >> yes. thank you for that question supervisor mar. so, i would note, we do as a office do take protests and inquiries very seriously and when they come in we do review them and see if there is anything that our office should have done differently. normally when we are recommending--before we come to the board we do issue generally a notice of intent to award. there is a protest period where any bidder can object to the scoring. that did not happen in this case. it is now something that we are looking at in terms of the process for these

particular advertising contracts and it will be our process be revised next year so it highlighted a oversight on our part for our recommendation coming forward. >> got it. we did have a hearing in the budget committee on the original item probably a couple months ago, so in this case the complaint or the appeal happened late in the process and got- >> that is correct. it happened after we introduced the resolution, but again we have to take it under consideration and make corrections as needed. >> thank you. thanks. >> thank you. can we open the item up for public comment? >> yes madam chair. members who wish to speak on the resolution and joining in person line up to speak now.

call 415-655-0001 with meeting id and press pond twice. for those in the queue continue to wait until the system indicates you are unmuted and that is your queue to begin comments. madam chair, no speakers in the queue. >> thank you public comment is now closed. would you like- >> i like to move that we adopt the amendments as described and presented by director corrala. >> roll call vote. >> yes, on the motion to accept the amendments offered by (inaudible) [roll call] we have 3 ayes. >> thank you. i now like to make a motion to continue this item to july 27 budget and finance meeting as

amended. >> on the motion to continue this item to the july 27 meeting. [roll call] we have 3 ayes. >> motion passes unanimously. item 2. >> item 2 is resolution approving authorizing the sale to santa clara water district for $33 thousand of approximately 11 thousand square feet of real property located near man someplace zano way in sunnyvale california. surplus land and exempt surplus land. adopting fiendings under the administrative code. offering the sale for property through competitive bidding is impractical and not public interest affirming the planning department determination under ceqa, adopting findings the sale of the property

is consistent with the general plan and planning code. and authorizing the puc general manager and or city director of property to execute documents make certain modifications and take certain actions in furtherance of the resolution and authorize puc general manager or director of property to enter into any additions amendments or other modifications to the sale agreement that do not materially decrease the benefit of the city with respect to the property nor increase the obligations or liability of either puc or the city and necessary or adviseable to complete the transaction contemplated in the sale agreement to effect wait the purpose and intent of the resolution. members joining remotely and wish to comment please call 415-655-0001. press star 3 to enter the speaker line. the system will indicate you raised

your hand and when the system indicates you have been unmute td is queue to begin comments. madam chair. >> thank you, and i believe maybe online we have mr. bargo from puc here to present. no? is there anyone from the puc that is here to present on this item? >> yes, i do see- >> i'm here. >> okay, great. >> good morning madam chair, supervisors. tony barto, puc real estate. may i have the slides please? >> give me one moment and i will find the right one. >> okay.

>> hi, tony this is jeremy, i can present the slides if needed. >> okay, please. please do. thank you. so, the item before you is the proposed sale of 11 thousand square foot city owned parcel to santa clara water district or valley water. next slide, please. this is a depiction of the real property owned by the city through its public utility commission located in the city of sunnyvale nearby munzano way. the property is improved with the service road, which provides access to santa clara valley water district facility with a concrete ramp structure that is a segment of a bicycle

pedestrian trail currently under license to the city of sunnyvale. next slide, please. the puc has no utility use for the property deemed underutilized dated december 2015 and signed by the assistant general managers of the puc. the water enterprise, ag, wastewater enterprise and power enterprise ag. the puc proposes to sell the property to raise needed funds at the market price of $33 thousand. the city of sunnyvale will continue to maintain the concrete ramp structure under a new agreement with valley water. next slide, please. valley water wishes to

purchase the property and has the authority to exercise the power of imminent domain to compel the city to sell the property for valley water use for district purposes including access to the facility. a competitive bidding process is impractical or not in the public interest because the sale of the property to valley water will avoid the expense time, effort and risk involve in imminent domain litigation. next slide, please. the property is surplus land as defined in california government code section 54221b, because it is owned in fee by the city i not necessary for this city's use. the property is exempt surplus land defined

in california government code because it is surplus land the city will transfer to another agency for the agency use. next slide, please. the city retained a mei appraiser who determined a fair market value to be $33 thousand as of february 2021. the city director real property approved that appraisal may of 2021. the appraisal was updated in december of 2021 and the appraiser concluding the same value conclusion of $33 thousand. the city director of property approved the updated appraisal january of this year. next slide, please. in the meeting on april 12, 2022, the san francisco public utility commission approved this sale by the resolution number 22-00070 and the sfpuc kindly request the budget and

finance committee recommend this resolution to the full board. with that, happy to take any questions. >> any questions colleagues? nope. seeing none, can we open the item up for public comment? >> yes, members of the public who wish to speak and joining in person line up now to speak. for those remotely call 415-655 -0001. and meeting id. press star 3 twice. wait until the system waits you have been unmuted and that is the queue to begin comments. we have no in person speakers and no speakers on the telephone. >> pub lic comment is closed. the price of the land is the lowest price of the land i have ever seen and assume that's because of the imminent domain possibility of the

land, is that correct? >> well, it is also because of the small area. it is only-just under 11 thousand square feet. >> got it. got it. okay. i would like to make a motion to send the item to full board with positive recommendation. can we get a roll call vote? >> on the motion to forward the resolution to full board with positive recommendation. [roll call] >> we have 3 ayes. >> motion passes unanimously. thank you so much. mr. clerk, can you please read item number 3. >> item 3 is resolution adopting the recommendations of the guaranteed income advisory group from pilot to policy change and establishing a city policy in support of guaranteed income. members of the public who are joining remotely and wish to comment please call 415-655-0001 meeting

id24998489506 and pound twice. press star. when the system indicates you have been unmuted that is the queue to begin comments. >> thank you, supervisor safai. >> thank you. thank you madam chair. thank you everyone. wanted to really spend a few minutes and some time talking about adopting the recommendations of the guaranteed income advisory group, and then working to establish the city policy in support of guaranteed income. this resolution today is based on the work from former colleague supervisor matt haney who authorized legislation to establish the income advisory group to advise on guaranteed income and universal basic income. one issue we should consider is whether the various pilot programs we established are working, and how we can move from pilot program to policy change as the title of

the report states. let me just say as we begin very clearly i'm a strong supporter of universal basic income and guaranteed income. the covid-19 pandemic has exposed what is a ongoing and often theme in the city and that is one we truly are a tale of two cities and something that has gone on for quite some time in san francisco, and i think it is shown in how inequitable the recovery has been for different communities. in my district working families and middle class families are being squeezed with the cost of every day living on the rise. whether it is rent, transportation, child care, access to good and healthy food, families need support, and they need cash relief to help them get through the

challenges that we face on a daily basis. the advisory group was comprised of community representatives and department leadership. i want to thank treasurer sis narrow office for providing the initial infrastructure. i also want to thank jim pew from universal income project for meeting with me earlier as we were preparing for the hearing today. i agree with him, people closest to the problem should be the ones most involved designing the program and overall program design. so, in that i like to invite departmental representatives for comments. i believe we will begin with deputy director (inaudible) which lead the projeth. cheryl davis, from human rights commission and deputy director suzy smith from human services agency. let's start with (inaudible) >> goodern moing.

thank you so much for allowing us to come and speak. again, my name is (inaudible) i serve as chief assistant treasurer for city and county. we provided presentations and i'll walk through them and give a high level. we were honored to staff the guaranteed income advisory group. it was well suited given expertise in banking and social justice work. san francisco guaranteed income group was created to advise the board mayor and appropriate city departments. i want to thank the second slide shows the diverse and deep knowledge that the members had on the committee and then the advisory group. jim is here and dr. davis and (inaudible) will speak after i speak about it. the recommendations in the report examine how to move from pilot to policy. while maintaining

the strength of the city support for pilot development implementation and ultimately achieving scale. the process that the group went through was significant and if you go to the next slide you'll see they established shared principal including defining what guaranteed income went and cash assistance a diverse definition across the scope and grounding san francisco in what they thought was the most meaningful way to address systemic economic disparities. >> are we viewing slides for the presentation? >> i think they were handed out, were they not? >> hard copy. >> sorry, we are on the slide that says shared principal. sorry about that. thank you. thank you supervisor. define what guaranteed income and cash assistance was since there are many definitions out there. the process also involved deep learning from experts.

you will see the subsequent pages the background research that went through. we had staff that did sigcon research analysis as well as hud leadership come and speak to the advisory group itself and spoke to community activists around their experiences and needs and a lot of the community activist that help design and shape some of the programs that we (inaudible) also included inventory of the pilot and programs that exist in san francisco. the recommendation you move forward after you see the slide with process and we have this here for you on the website so you can see any details if you like but i won't go through in detail. moving forward with the recommendations-noted on the slide states coordinate and align through centralized guaranteed income unit. these

recommendations reflect a belief correct and unconditional cash transfers are effective anti-poverty tool. it is really clear and important to us the notion of unconditional is strategically intentionally part of the definition. that the investment to craelt create and run them pras is needed to bring thecurrent field of san francisco to scale and addressing the systemic needs we have within san francisco. in addition the recommendations and the first core recommendation is to coordinate and align pilots and policies through a centralized guaranteed income unit that staff to support the city wide work. that includes looking at research as well asfunding. the second recommendation is center community voices and the planning. the implementation and evaluation of the work itself. this includes focus on racial equity and changing the

narrative from scarcity to deservedness abendance and dignity. critical hone in on the opponent this is not about need, but really about changing the definitions of deservedness to elevate the conversation and recognize the shift these funds were striving to achieve. and lastly, the group recommends the city think big and pursue structural sustainable and scalable reform and strategy. this includes strategies to expand cash support through the tax system itself similar what we saw in covid. deeper investment for families and children focus on youth. expanding access to public benefits. in addition one of the outcomes of the advisory group was online resource that provides insights to policy and program staff to begin the journey for developing guaranteed income efforts. happy to take questions along

with my colleague. i call up suzy smith from human service agency as well as dr. davis who also lead and spearheaded robust powerful discussion this morning about the guaranteed income. >> good morn chair ronen, supervisor safai and supervisor mar. thank you again for calling this hearing today. suzy smith deputy director at san francisco human service agency and honored to represent hsa on the guaranteed income advisory group which includes stakeholders with lived experience, foundations, practitioners and advocates. i want to speak briefly about hsa role in this work and on a couple recommendation that touch on implementation. one of our goals in the gi space is help protect guaranteed income

payments from negatively impacting people public benefits. proud we partnered with the california department of social services early on to identify legal pathways to exempt gi income from certain public benefits. since we work to help establish the legal authority and regulatory pathways and process actually exempt income san francisco we applied for through the exemption authority and process to submit two guarantee income waver applications so people do not center to choose between receiving guaranteed income and benefits like cal fresh and cal works and we will play that role in applying for the states for the wavers as more programs are implemented in san francisco. i are want to lift up two recommendations from the report we will be acting on specifically. one of the

recommendations is thinking about which population to focus gi pilots on. the report recommends considering racial equity and targeting periods of critical transition in one's life. recommends specifically using a life course approach to target guaranteed income intervention, storing sensitive life stages that can really shift the trajectories and reduce disparities and increase wellbeing so things like first time pregnant moms, or foster youth transitioning out of care. towards that end, hsa will be applying forfunding from the state guaranteed income pilot initiative to provide guaranteed income for all youth exiting child welfare and juvenile probation. this is a first in its kind state of california is investing $35 million in guaranteed income

and to prioritize populations are foster youth and pregnant mothers. we haven't gotten the funds but i think will be competitive in our application. in the an ticipation of the funding engage youth and cbo designing the process. to the point about evaluation, the state has already secured an evalwaiter to understand how these different models are implemented across the state. what are the most effective components. research has proven gi is effective but there are nuances when it is layered with what else and which populations these efforts can be most effective. excited the state will have a evalwaiter and we will seek a local evaluator assuming we get the funds. second under the think big recommendation the group recommends pursuing reforms that both expand and increase access to

public benefits. our department has and will continue to do this through the leadership roles in state-wide association. these advocacy efforts with allied organizations locally and across the state resulted in significant policy changes like expanding medi-cal to all undocumented residents and assets limit frz thing like medi-cal and expanding the funding that cal works families get every month so these are significant advocacy pushes my department and allied departments locally and across the state have been pushing for years and continue to push. with our touch points with nearly every (inaudible) we look forward to continuing to partner in the collective and important work to institutionalize guaranteed income practices and change the

narrative. thanks again for drawing attention to the important issue and happy to answer any questions the committee may have. >> good morning. i will try to be quick here. i just are wanted to first formost thank you for for hold ing the hearing and advancing this work. i also want to point out and thank you for mentioning as well, britany (inaudible) who is online was working with supervisor at that time haney's office because the hrc had been working with abundant birth projict and other initiatives and want to icmasure the coordinated approach is something we have been working on quite a while to get them listed to understand where resources were happening and also understand the impact and the evaluation so the

coordinated efforts have been and continue to be very important to us. it is work we will continue to support. last year or i think last year we hosted a session a forum arond that and working with michael tubs and folks to talk specifically about that. also worked with derrick hamilton who was a part of the conversation this morning leading the work nationally on baby bonds and having conversations around guaranteed income. the other piece that is really important to me and the office the human rights commission is around community sentards. the work we have been doing is informed by community and it is going to continue to be and we want to center that as we build out-we are redesigning the human rights commission, the department to have a division that focuses on economic rights to support this. britany (inaudible) will be leading that and then arond the deeper

investments, the cash supports the baby bond, the work already done for k to college but also thinking about it in terms of how we support entrepreneurs, how we support the care in industry and able to sure up that and making sure whether it is seniors or young children that there is a support system and understanding there are gaps in that regard, and also thinking about it in the connection to jobs guarantees and understanding that when we plan sometimes for our workforce development training programs, that there is still a gap fill and that people are being penalized to going back to learn and become more self-sufficient so thank the treasurerophilus for the leadership in the work but want to make sure as we continue this work that we are intentional, that we are thinking about how to collaborate and that we are not duplicateing the wheel but actually supporting and leveraging the work already been done. thank you.

>> thank you mrs. suzy smith and director davis and najel for your presentation today. i think one thing and dont know who would like to comment on this, but it sounds like we have a number of different pilot programs going already in san francisco. maybe najel or director davis you can talk about it, but it would be nice to hear-you mentioned abundant birth project but sounds like there's a few that are already happening. maybe you can spend a couple minutes talking about those that are already in motion and then the coordination effort you are talking about. >> i will let tagel-there are over a dozen city wide right now and so there is

the arts yurba buena has been leading. several smaller ones embedded within department so there is one through the dream keeper initiative one specifically for entrepreneurs. there is also one that we have within our department where we have been working on it. several around violence prevention and safety one with the police department that is paying and you all may have seen the presentation before focused on high risk or people involved in violent crimes and being able to keep them from returning into that so we have been using that as a incentive to have people do that. we also have one mislabeled cash for criminals that got lots of negative attention so there are quite a few that run the gamut that are for the abundant birth project mentioned for pregnant and parenting black and sonoma or

pacific islander women so quite a few. what we are working on now that we have been intentional about at the hrc is first documenting that to share the list we have with you, but also trying to understand how we measure success and then the other piece is that we heard from folks $500 a month in san francisco is not a lot, and so that deeper investment can look like more then expanding the number of people we serve, maybe going deeper with the amount of money we give to understand the real impact so we want to play arond with some of that but t tagel may have more information. >> thank you so much. i believe dr. davis covered the gamut of it. we have many embedded in oewd as dr. davis stated. many are focus said on entrepreneur so thinking about working with individuals and moving them into jobs as one of the key pieces as well as birth

project as we heard about in addition we have other departments that are starting. we have one with (inaudible) that is about to start in october. there are discussions with the women (inaudible) and the one that suzy smith spoke about of hsa and the large program funded in partnership with the state so there are quite a gamut. i think they would all be fair to say the way they address the definition is all a little varied so it is one reason why the coordinated effort spoken about is something critical to look at as well as research connected to that. >> great. so, yes, i just know that was in the report there were over a dozen pilots happening right now. it is one reason why i think we need to further the conversation about a main coordinator and insuring that efforts are not duplicated but also coordinated. i think that is a really

important thing so i wanted to get that on the record today. wanted to give anyone in the audience and any member of the audience from the advisory group in the room to speak before we go to public comment but i know supervisor mar has a comment that he wanted to make. >> go ahead supervisor mar. >> thank you supervisor safai and chair ronen. first of all i wanted to thank everyone that is a part of this very thoughtful and important process and guaranteed income advisory group and i really appreciate how we as a city have approached this really innovative and important new economic security justice strategy in a comprehensive way across city departments and key stakeholders getting input through a great process to come

up with this set of recommendations and appreciate the-how the think big framing on this and how we need to think beyond just important pilots and that are starting up and scaling up, but also expanding and strengthening cash supports in different ways, particularly through advocacy on the state level. appreciate all of this. i had just a question. i wanted to understand, it is great we already started up a number of pilots here in the city and these are exciting and important, but based on the recommendations and on all the work of the advisory group over looks like about a year long process or more, are there-what are the priority

pilots that we are looking at coming up and i think suzy did you touch on that in the presentation? >> i touched on one which is the largest. in the budget last year the state of california allocated $35 million to gi pilots across the state so it it the first of the kind in the nation in terms of this large public investment and so we are-as mentioned one of the prioritized population is foster youth exiting the system so we have been doing a lot of planning and working with foster youth and experts arond what that design would look like and we are going to in our application going to put forth for a thousand or $1200 a month for 18 months to have two different cycles and we dedicated-there a local match requirement so we dedicated $2

million from hsa budget for next fiscal year to meet that match requirement to be able to be part of the state wide network that is building the narrative change and momentum to have many of these and have more data to be able to advocate for large scale adoption. that's-and we are supporting others that come to us worried about the benefit piece and implications and don't want to tell families they need to decide between cal works and guaranteed income payment so playing the supportive role (inaudible) so, we developed a template and helping organizations interested in that support as well. >> thank you. that sounds really great to hear about the foster youth focus and it is part of a state wide initiative too, so thank you. >> if i could just add i would say the one reason why we need coordinated is because

at this point there is no centralized. it is every department will come to you and say, you should fund my thing or my thing is right and so i think that's the most important critical piece for this is that the challenge for some of this is around as we make these pilots and are think about it, what is the actual-what is the data tell in terms how many people will be served or how much money we have or what does the equity look like because we make focus doing something with artists but if we have millions of dollars to spend on artist and only have 10 artists doest that make sense? how dewe make sure it isn't just about what we have access to but what the needs are and where the needs are and i think without a centralized way to do that that it will just be us

listening to really great ideas and going with that because they are great ideas but when we line them all up, we may need to pivot. >> thank you. just couple other questions. >> sure, go ahead. >> i was just trying to understand the current thinking around the difference between guaranteed income programs and compared to other types of direct cash assistance. there is direct cash assistance to very low income individuals. we also have wage subsidy programs for-to raise wages for low paid workers, particularly now with child care workers in our city, and then there is also stipends i know

sometimes included in workerse foprograms to allow the participants to be able to focus on the program. i'm trying to understand maybe the difference between those types of direct cash assistance to folks with a very specific objective and guaranteed income programs. >> thank you supervisor for the question. i think there is a couple pieces. one is you saw from the third recommendation reinforcing other kinds of policy initiative that help so that is included in cash programs, tax exemption, assistant programs that are alsofunded by the government and so guaranteed income or cash assistance isn't a substitution to those but augmentation and the definition gronded on instead of model of no string attached. predictable, ist canant, on going and no strings attach so that is the piece that

improved their economical being and provides them the agency to move forward as they choose, because it is not connect ed to strings and predictable known and sustained duration. >> thank you. what is the amount of monthly direct cash assistance or the range i guess for the guaranteed income programs. >> the range i have been familiar at the lowest end is $500 a month but as dr. davis pointed out no one can be supported by that. the application we are going to submit with $1200 a month highest i heard of. hsh they are also piloting a direct cash transfer program for people who dont qualify for public-subsidized housing, but are in the problem solving stage so to help with

housing stability but also no strings attached so that is also around $1200 a month. >> just quick clr fayication, the abundant birth project ranged from a thousand to $1500 a month. >> thank you. very important work that you are doing so thank you all for your work and for all the recommendations. i would love to be added as a cosponsor to the item as well. thank you. >> i just wanted to say that the fact it is the three of you leading and this project gives me much excitement and calm, because you all three of you are just such incredible leaders in your respective fields and this is such an important program and getting this right and getting this coordinated throughout

the city could make a difference on whether or not we can keep any diversity of income in this city, and many people so i want to appreciate you all, tell how excited i am that the three of you at the helm and just tell you i'm incredibly excited and supportive of this work. thank you. and i too would lairk like to be added as cosponsor. >> great. thank you. one thing i think is the most important-not the most important but a important point to highlight and think i heard all you reference that today is the narrative change and the change in the language around guaranteed income. it has gone through a arduous conversation and discussion about poverty, how we approach it, how we talk about it, and how we reframe it. wanted to give a opportunity from any members of the public involved in

the advisory group and i think jim is here, so give him a opportunity to speak before we go to public comment. >> thank you. jim hue codirector universal income project and member of guaranteed income advisory group. i just want to start by saying it was a great experience to participate in the group. i felt we really were able to delve into what this would mean for san franciscans, what does it require to get this right and have the most (inaudible) again, to explore how transformative the potential is when you do give money with no strings attached ongoing away to allow people to plan for the future to be able in the driver seat of their lives so to be able to chart the path to challenges they are facing. i would echo all the recommendations we heard so far. what is discussed here has great potential to

lead to incredible policy changes in san francisco and particularly stress the point come up around bringing people closest to the problem into the planning phaseism we want to make sure the people who really understand what is going on are there at the table at every step of the process and actually thinking through what is the design, how teat good it right. far too often public policy is designed room of people who didn't have a good understanding what was happening on the streets and i think that we have a opportunity here to really get this right and we are lucky to have great examples. the abundant berth project went through extensive community design process and lots to learn what they have done but those in the ongoing administration around the program and pilots and policies able to take advantage of that lived expertise there

is huge potential there and eager to see that move forward. thank you. >> thank you jim. can we open up public comment? >> yes, please. >> yes, members who wish to speak line up now to speak. for those listening remotely call 415-655-0001. once connected press star 3 to enter the speaker line. for those in the queue wait until the system endicates you have been unmuted. there is a queue to begin comments. as we have no further speakers here in the chamber, mr. atkins please unmute the first caller. >> supervisors have been paying attention to this guaranteed income advisory group and establishing a city

policy in support of guaranteed income, but i want you supervisors to tell me what the hell are you doing with affordable housing? people cant live under a roof. so, if you dont have a roof how can you apply for guaranteed income? it is a shame that middle class people are living in tents all overour city and then we have the director of the human rights commission with these two women and one woman says $500 and the other woman comes to the mic and says no it is $1500. who is (inaudible) in broad daylight? we once had the

bayview coordinating council. we have the black leadership council of san francisco. we have the environmental justice advocacy. we have southeast sector community development corporation. we serve the people. city and county of san francisco to put (inaudible) in our way. take money and give to innercircle rather then the community and you bring these women here and you bring the director of the human rights commission who is now involved in gimmicks at the chase center and trying to hoodwink us in broad daylight. shame on you. stop bringing the gimmicks to our attention and wasting our time. >> thank you for your comments. and madam chair that completes

the queue. >> public comment is closed. supervisor safai. >> i thought maybe one day we could have mr. decosta come in and talk about something positive on the record and it would be something positive arond guaranteed income but he can take anything positive and turn it into a negative. normally i don't comment on public comment but couldn't help myself this time because this is such a important topic. but anyway, i'm sure i'll get a ear full from him. i think we might have britany (inaudible) on the line. i just want to double check mr. clerk. is she online? >> i do not see her log on. >> okay, wanted to double check to make sure. so, thank you madam chair for letting us have this hearing. i know we have a lot we are catching up on. i ink this is is a important topic. i want to

thank director davis, joe, suzy for the amazing work that you all have done. this is such a important topic and if anything i think covid really highlight ed a lot of disparity already there, underscored it and motivated to do better and underscored the need what is out there and how we mobilize during covid how we have impact. whether right to recover or cash assistance for food or intervention for child care. all the things and wonderful projects that have begin so sometimes out of crisis we can have something really positive as a result. want to thank jim, all the advisory group members that contributesed to this and everyone that has come out today to support the progress. we made significant strides. really encouraged suzy to hear about the foster youth pilot project. that is going to be amazing and as you

know, there the correlation between and they have the highest risk becoming homeless and unhoused in the transition so sure that is a lot of what the research and focus is about so i really appreciate hsa focusing on that community. to mr. decasta points we are doing transitional youth age housing throughout the city. we have a number of beds being created for transitional age youth. that is a priority for the body in supportive housing so we will see that happen and are expand and it will fit nicely with this pilot project because the project begins in my district and other parts of the city. over the summer recess we will work on the goal bringing back legislation in the fall and focus on

centralization and coordination, so want to thank everyone today. with that, madam chair i like to move forward that we snd this resolution to the full board with positive recommendation. >> can we have a roll call vote? >> on that motion by vice chair safai resolution forward to the full board with positive recommendation. [roll call] >> 3 ayes. >> the motion passes unanimously. thank you so much everyone. can you please read item number 4? >> yes. resolution declaring intent of the city county to reimburse proceeds principal amount not to exceed $51.2 million. authorize the director of the mayor office and housing community development to submit application and related documents to the california debt limit allocation

committee to permit the issuance of residential mortgage revenue bonds in aggregate principal amount not to exceed 51.1 million dollar 11 innes court hunters point shipyard block 56. direct the controller office to hold in amount not to exceed $100 thousand authorize the director to certify to said like the city has on deposit the required amount. authorize the director to pay amount equal to deposit to the state of california if the city fails to issue the residential mortgage revenue bonds. authorizing and directing execution of any documents necessary to implement this resolution as defined and ratifying and approving any action in connection with the project and application. members of the public joining remotely and wish to comment,

please call 415-655-0001. id24998489506 press pound twice. once connected press star 3 to enter the speaker line. when the system endicates you are unmuted that is the queue to begin comments. madam chair. >> thank you, we have william willcox with us to present on the item. >> good morning chair ronen and members. william willcox the bond program manager with mayor office of housing and community development. i am here to present on items 4 and 5. these items relate to resolution for proposed bond issuance for two projects. >> mr. willcox, before you go on can i have the clerk read item 5 and we can hear them together and then you can speak to both of them? >> that would be great. thank you. >> can you please read item 5. >> item 5, also

resolution declaring intent of city and county to reemburse expenditures from proceeds principal amount not to exceed 32.5 $32.5 million authorize the office of housing is squl uncommunity development to submit related documents to permit issuance of residential bonds in principal amount not to exceed $32.5 million for 98 franklin street and authorize the director to direct the controller office to hold in trust not to exceed hundred thousand in like procedures and authorize the same as item 4. madam chair. >> thank you so much. please continue mr. willcox. >> thank you chair ronen. so, (inaudible) 11 innes court hunters point ship yard block 56 and 98 franklin street. the

purpose of the resolutions is ratify and approve several actions necessary to make the bond issuance possible including submittal of applications to secure allocation of bonds. the proposed bond ixuance are conduit financing. this is just to allow to apply to the state forfunding and does not commit anything more. 11 innes court is 73 unit hundred percent affordable multifamily projeth. the project is part of the hunter point shipyard phase 1 and all units will be available to houses earning 50 percent or less of the ami. projects also include 7550 square foot landscape court yard with play area and picnic area. 98 franklin street is mixed income development that include 72 affordable

units and (inaudible) the bond financing onlyby used for the 72 affordable housing units. it is separately (inaudible) so the public funds only go to affordable, which all the affordable housing will be available earning 50 percent or less of ami. the units are portion of the inclusionary requirement for the project. section 4156i of the planning code allows for the use of tax exempt bond to finance inclusionary units. the building is going it include a number of amenities including the roof deck, bbq and with bike parking. (inaudible) return to the board of supervisors for bond issuance for each project at different times likely early next year after we get the allocations hopefully. in closing, also here for 11 innes court is (inaudible) with mercy housing the sponsor of the project and

joe walsh (inaudible) as my colleague elizabeth (inaudible) from ocii who is the housing manager for innes court. on behalf of (inaudible) project sponsors we like to thank you for your consideration here today and look forward to your support for these projects. >> thank you so much colleagues, any questions? seeing none, can we please open the item up for public comment? for these items for public comment. >> yes, members who wish to speak on both items 4 and 5 and joining in person line up now to speak. for those listening remotely call 415-655-0001 you need to press star 3. sorry, enter id24998489506 press pound twice. once connected press star 3 to enter the speaker line for those already in the queue continue to wait until the system inedicates

you have been unmuted and will be your queue to begin comments. no in-person speakersism mr. atkins with you please unmute the caller? >> this is francisco decosta once again. no supervisor under the brown act is allowed (inaudible) i know supervisor was trying to steal some land from the city, and i can speak to it, but i stop at that. let's go to the agenda item. we do not any housing on land that is prone to liquefaction and flooding but more that is contaminated. the record of decision was not approved by the citizens of san francisco

those representing the bayview hunter point. i have been the director of (inaudible) don't need a buffoon to tell me what i speak is wrong or i'm negative. i have to speak truth of power. i'm not a thief. i never stolen anything. nor have i taken anything from the city and county of san francisco. so, please don't through the arrow in the air. the shipyard is contaminated. we know this. there was a grand jury report on it. why dozent the gentleman read the grand jury report? (inaudible) the board of supervisors dont know about the (inaudible) nothinged sh bebuilt on the shipyard. the grand jury said so.

but the board of supervisors (inaudible) revenue board measures. we don't have a board of supervisors who represent the people. they represent the crooks. >> your time expired. >> again and again and again. >> apologies for cutting you off mr. decosta, we are timing each speaker 2 minutes today. just checking the queue. madam chair, we have no more speakers. >> thank you public comment is now closed. like to make a motion to send items 4 and 5 to the full board with positive recommendation. can we have a roll call vote? >> on that motion to forward the resolutions 4 and 5 to the full board with positive recommendation. [roll call] >> we have 3 ayes.

>> thank you. the motion pass unanimously. mr. clerk, can you please read item 6 and 7 together? >> yes, madam chair. item 6 resolution approving in accordance with section 147f of internal revenue code issuance of tax exempt obligations by the california state wide committees development authority in principal amount not to exceed $40 million to finance or refinance capital facilities owned by california college of arts and item 7 is resolution approving for the purpose of internal revenue code of 1986 as amended the issuance and sale revenue obligations by the california enterprise development authority in aggregate principal amount not to exceed $7.5 million to refinance the acquisition construction instillation rehabilitation,

equipping and furnishing of capital facilities owned and operated by progress foundation. members of the public joining remotely and wish to comment on items 6 and 7 please call 415-655-0001 meeting id is 24998489506 and press pond twice. once connected press star 3 to enter the speaker line. when system indicates you have been unmuted that is it queue to begin comments. >> thank you, we have michele (inaudible) to speak on both items. >> good morning members of committee. michelle (inaudible) from the controller office public finance. thank you for considering these resolutions today and also we have available representatives from california college of the arts and issuer california state wide community

development authority and also for the second item we have representatives from progress foundation so they can speak more in detail about it organization or project if there needs more specific questions about those. i'll start with the first item 6, remeender for the committee and mublic the tax (inaudible) allows debt issues on a tex exempt basis by non profit organizations through joint power authority. in this case the proposed finance is issued on behalf of california college of the art a non profit public benefit corporation. thadebt will be issued through a joint power authority the city and county is a m participating member. issue bonds (inaudible) the resolution is before you because tax law requires the governing body of the jurisdiction in which the project is located approve the financing and the projethafter providing the

opportunity for public hearing so the bonds can be issued oen tax exempt basis. the jurisdiction is not obligated for payment on the pond so for the federal regulations publicished a erhaing notice may 31. public hearing held by the office of public finance on june 9 and no comments from any members of public received through the public hearing process. the project i'll give you quick summary. the proceeds will be used in amount to exceed $40 million. (inaudible) at the (inaudible) [difficulty understanding speaker] founding in 1907 to provide education for artists and designers. continues to the present day. cca

educate student to shape culture and (inaudible) benefiting location in san francisco bay area the (inaudible) life long creative work cultivating invasion community (inaudible) social environmental responsibility. the non profit coeducational institutions (inaudible) 1239 under graduate and 380 graduate students (inaudible) approval of the legislation will have no fiscal impact to san francisco, located in district 6 and legislation is sponsored by supervisor dorsey. item 7 i won't go into what a tefra is. same explanation and process pertains to item 7 however that

resolution is for progress foundation a california non profit benefit organization. the resolution approves revenue obligations through california enterprise development authority. again, joint power authority to which the sit a belongs. authorize issue bonds and other forms of dent. we published the hearing notice on the website may 11. held a public hearing by teleconfrn may 18 and no public comments were received through the process. the proceeds of the obligations in this resolution (inaudible) not to exceed $7.5 million (inaudible) proceeds used to finance the cost of acquisition construction instillation rehabilitation and (inaudible) 3400 montgomery drive in santa rosa,

(inaudible) pay transaction cost and related cost. more progress foundation, a private non profit mental health agency operating in san francisco, napa and sonoma county. the primary treatment is described by the social rehabilitation a home like treatment environment. the importance of building therapeutic relationship and encourage active participation of it client in the treatment planning. founded in 1969 and the organization provides those experiencing symptoms of serious mental illness and cooccurring disord ers with alternative to institutional placement andens traition the individuals back to the community. over the last several decades developed community based programs to support the clients and keep from returning to institutions or correctional facilities. according to the website the

progress foundation operate 19 programs service more then 3 thousand individuals and are not turn away the client and work with the challenges in multiple areas including alcohol and substance abuse, major (inaudible) in addition part of the progress foundation is offer training that hope to provide more effective treatment opportunity for their clients. as mentioned there are multiple project locations throughout san francisco. the legislation is sponsored by chair ronen at our meeting and again approval of this legislation will have no fiscal impact to the city as obligation is paid entirely from payments by the bar and no pledge made by the city. we have any question, happy to address them. thank you. >> thank you so much. any

questions colleagues? no. seeing none, if we can please open these items for public comment. >> yes, madam chair. members of the public who wish to speak on the item and in joing in person line up now to speak. for those listening remotely call 415-655-0001 and meeting id24998489506 press pound twice. once connected press star 3 to enter the speaker line. continue to wait until the system waits you are unmuted. that is your queue to begin comments. we have no in-person speakers in the chamber. madam chair we have no one on queue. >> public comment is closed. i just wanted to appreciate the work on item number 7 on the issuance and sale of bonds for the progress foundation, progress foundation is a essential essential part of our mental health

treatment system in san francisco and the organization does extraordinary work that is progressive over time and understanding substance abuse and mental illness doesn't always follow a linear track, but people go up and down in terms of wellness and illness and that the system accommodates for that. but not only that, progress foundation truly believes that every individual can get well and can lead productive lives, so i want to say it is a honor to be sponsoring item number 7 and i want to thank everyone for their hard work on these items. with that, i like to make a motion to send items 6 and 7 to the full board with positive recommendation.

>> on that motion to send the resolution in items number 6 and 7 to the full board with positive recommendation. [roll call] >> we have 3 ayes. >> the motions pass unanimously. thank you so much. please read itedm 8. >> item number 8. resolution retroactb authorize the department of public works to accept and expend $2.4 million from the california department of transportation clean california local enhancement program to up grade facilities on the state highway system in support of south of market street tree nursery project for a term of march 1, 2022 through june 30, 2023. approving authorizing public works to enter into a cooperative agreement with caltrans regarding project construction and implementation and

affirming the california department of transportation determination under ceqa. members of the public who joining remotely and wish to comment please call 415-655-0001, enter id24998489506. press pound twice. once connected press star 3 enter the speaker line. the system prompt will indicate you raised your hand and when you are unmuted that is your queue to begin comments. madam chair. >> thank you, we have john suede from dpw to present on this item. >> good morning, john sway there contract and grant manager for san francisco public works. here today to request the committee approval of the next step resolution to allow public works to accept and expend $2.4 million in funded to the state department of transportation clean california local enhancement program. thefunding will be used to construct a

new street tree nursery environmental education center and work force training silet on a vacant caltrans free way parcel between 5 street on and off ramp at harrison and brian street and south of market neighborhood. you can see the site and proposed improvements behind me here. funded improvements include security fencing and gates, modular office building, landscaping, public art, vehicle access and electrical and water service. the space will be utilized for growing storing container trees planted on streets throughout the city, educational and volunteer programming is also envisioned at the site. the resolution is considered retroactive because the funding agreement includes a march 2022 start date however public works has not accepted the money nor signed agreement yet. thank you for considering recommendation of this resolution to full board. >> thank you so much. call olleagues any

questions? supervisor mar. >> i just wanted to thank dpw for your work on this. this is really exciting new development in our street tree program so thank you and i just had a question. just to understand how this fits into the department overall or ongoing street tree plan and strategy. is this replacing--where is the work currently happening right now? how would this new facility increase our-the department or city capacity to nurture and plant more trees in the city? >> thank you supervisor mar. this is part of the effort to

expand street tree planting city wide in san francisco and by creating a street tree nursery-a main region is the public works maintenance yard on cesar chavez we have very little area to store trees for planting and no space to grow trees so this will allow to store and manage and stage trees for planting activities we are intending to increase over the coming years and in addition many trees we wish to plant in san francisco are not common in the commercial nursery trade, so this includes native trees we would like to plant more of in san francisco and also trees we are more well acclimated to the local climate to allow us to avoid some of the sourcing problems we had with trees. that will contribute and also just the goals in terms of educating the public, this is a high visibility location and will allow to celebrate urban

forestry in san francisco and crebt to the greening of south of market neighborhood and environmental justice impact of the free way. this is a early part of the plan to increase street tree planting over the years as we grow trees and cycle through more trees for planting as we hope to generate more funding for tree planting with the help of the board over the coming years. >> absolutely. i'm really committed to supporting that expansion of the street tree planting and to meet our urban forestry plan goals. is this-is this the first-department first dedicated street tree nursery? i want to understand the significance of this and up to now the department just use spaces at existing facilities for other purposes for storage and nurturing of trees? >> yes, this is a first for us. we have not been

growing trees ourselves. other departments have done that, i believe rec park and many native plant nurseries but public works has not operated a nursery for street trees so this is a new venture. >> very exciting. i also love the environmental education and the connection to the south of market neighborhood. thank you so much. i like to be added as a cosponsor to this. >> can you please open the item up for public comment. >> yes, members who wish to speak on the item and joining in person line up now to speak. listening remotely call 415-655-0001. the id is 24998489506. pres pound twice. uns with connected press star 3 to enter the speaker line, wait until the system indicates the system is unmuted

and begin your comments. no in person speakers in the chamber. madam chair, there are no speakers in the queue. >> public comment is now closed. like to do the honor supervisor mar. sorry. >> no big deal. i want to say ip want to thank public works for this. we invest significant time in my district over the last few years, planted over 2,000 trees and very concerned about expanding the tree canopy, so really excited bet the opportunity to have a nursery, so want to thank public works for their hard work on this and thinking about the future of trees in the city as we confront the climate change challenges. please add me as a cosponsor. >> i like to move we send the item to full board with positive recommendation. >> on that motion by member mar that this resolution forward to

full board with positive recommendation. [roll call] we have 3 ayes. >> motion passes unanimously. mr. clerk can you read item 9? >> item 9 ordinance amending the administrative code to authorize the tax collector to establish procedures for the consideration of delinquent property tax penalty cancellation when the dedelinquency is due to the city failure to send a notice to the tax to the owner of the prairpt acquired after the lien date on the secured roll, and to delegate the authority to the grant such penalty cancellations to the tax collector. [providing public comment instructions]

madam chair. >> thank you. supervisor safai. >> thank you. colleagues i introduced this item at the request of the treasurer tax collector office. we confronted a situation like this where the lien was assessed property changed hands and new owner not made aware. usually happenwise family trust so we want to delegate the authority to treasurer tax collector to resolve the situations. we are joined by eric mankey from the trexier tax collector office. >> thank you supervisors. good afternoon now i think. chair ronen. as supervisor safai mentioned and we appreciate your sponsorship, this ordinance allows the tax collector to wave delinquent property tax penalties if the delinquency is due to the city failure to send tax bill to new home owner. there is

a narrow timeframe where new property owners may not receive a property tax bill because their purchase occurs after the secure role is finalized and after the property tax bill has been print ed. this ordinance which is simply authorize the tax collector to wave any delinquent properties associated with this specific circumstance. provided the taxes are paid by june 30 of that fiscal year as the supervisor mention california law does allow this and we ask for your support so we can (inaudible) unique situation for new home owners. thank you and happy to answer any questions. >> great. any questions? thank you for being here. mr. clerk, can we please open the item up for public comment? >> yes, members of the public who wish to speak on the ordinance and joining in person line up now to speak. those listening