mr. wright! mr. wright! no. done. mr. wright, we're done here, mr. wright. >> [interjections] >> i don't know, mr. wright. and since i'm chair of this committee, i really don't know right now. because right now time talking about items 4 and 5. another public comment, i'm sorry. and then -- yes, so anyone that would like to have public comment, please line up. everyone has two minutes. mr. wright took five, but here we go. >> john, here in the coit tower hat. i want to clarify the amendments, chair fewer, the amendments you handed me, they say are -- there is still a change or two in them. i want to clarify that what is in the language is what was stated, that the department will be able to lower fees -- i think at any time, which i don't think anyone disagrees with to incentivize visitation. and to raise fees up to 50% in different months, different for different attractions. it might be helpful to go through the attractions and explain to people when. what i can't tell from here is if the department can do this and let you know, or if the board need

mr. wright, we did take action on it. we approved it. >> i would like you to -- to see you get into public housing since you've got million to -- millions to spend. the way you're taking care of business by spending money only in shelters instead of permanent housing, you're only wasting money. it's been projected that you would have an additional negative cash flow again if you keep spending money like you're doing. $643.9 million has been forecast within five years if you keep taking care of business the way you're doing, okay? by housing the homeless people and giving them permanent housing, you'll cut down on the expenses as far as treatments and the medical services, going to san francisco general hospital, services by the sheriff's department, by the direct housing program, mental health services, and ageing services for the people of san francisco. i want to call it to your attention that he hyou had an 8 -- that you had an $88.2 million cash flow last year. you had an $88.2 million cash flow problem when the curre

mr. wright -- that would like to speak on this item? i can call some names, mr. wright, while you're getting together. [nam [names read] >> chair fewer: okay. so if those people can lineup. mr. wright, you're first. come on down. >> i want to put this in the record, too, and i object to the mayor's office on housing. every time you say 100% affordable housing, and you set the a.m.i. requirement at 40%. now your demonstration took place earlier this week. you said affordable housing, and you're going to start off at 40% of the a.m.i. that means people, the lowest income, you've got to make $68,950 a year to be a tenant to live in the building. and if you're not making that much money, your application is rejected. i appreciate kate hartley coming up and talking about or below. that's a damn lie. in your application, if you're not making the bait rate where they're starting the -- base rate where they're starting the a.m.i., that's a lie. you're not only doing it here, but you did it again at mission rock when jane kim was here. jane kim said that it's supposed to b

mr. wright -- thank you, michael. mr. wright, thank you, mr. wright. thank you, mr. wright. okay, public comment is now closed. there's a motion. can we have a second? supervisor mandelman second that? >> supervisor yee: chair fewer? thank you for the public comment, and i just want to make sure that the public understands that in this bond measure, that there's several other categories where the income eligibility actually starts from zero, and we made sure that we're putting legislation through to make sure that some of the senior housing will actually reach those that are on fixed income, which is around 15%. >> supervisor fewer: okay. thank you very much. all right. thank you, mr. wright. public comment is over. all right. we have a motion and we have a second. and i think we can take that without objection. thank you very much. mr. clerk, can you please call items no. 4 and 5 together? >> clerk: item no. 4 is the budget and appropriation ordinance appropriating all estimated receipts and all estimated expenditures for departments of the city for fiscal years ending june

mr. wright. >> okay. before i get started, i'm going to start off answering the question asked by the honorable co-worker stefani. she asked right here, tell us your wish list, as big as it is, tell us the supervisor -- >> clerk: mr. wright, please get on the mic so we can hear you. thank you. >> she asked, tell us, where do we go? what is -- where do we invest our dollars? how do we stop putting someone back into the streets? okay. now, my demonstration further is compounded by a professional nurse practitioner who says it very clearly, study after study shows that programs that provide long-term stable housing with additional services pertaining to mental health and surprised services programming improves the customer's mentally ill homeless patients. now in order to do that, i demonstrated well over several times that you can get a public housing complex for $56 million, understand me, and it's a three-story building that houses 144 people. you can put the homeless people in these types of properties a

mr. wright. any other public comment? seeing none, public comment is now closed. this is a policy matter, and i checked, and i see no representation here from those supervisors where they're in their district, i move to continue this item -- oh, that's not how it works, i think. >> supervisor mandelman: coming in hot. >> chair fewer: the comp exceeds the original amount by $4.2 million, but not the original cost. so can there be a motion, please? >> supervisor mandelman: i move that we forward this to the full board with a positive recommendation with the unanimous sense of all three of us that we would love to see some of these projects in our districts. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. we can take that without objection. thank you very much, mr. clerk. mr. clerk, can you read agenda item number 9, please. [agenda item read]. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. i think we have colleen del rosario with the mayor's office of housing and community development. >> i am here today to request the authorization of expenditures of the soma community stablization fund

mr. wright. mr. wright, thank you very much. mr. wright, thank you very much. would you actually address mr. wright's questions about the affordable levels that this, this affordable housing will accommodate on a side bar conversation? thank you very much. any other public comments, seeing non, public comment is closed. i make a motion to move this to the board supervisors meeting of july 16th. positive recommendation. could i have a second? seconded by mandelman. take that without objection, thank you very much. and now let's get on to our department hearing, first one up is our city attorney, mr. dennis herera. please set the time for five minutes. >> i'm joined by the managing attorney and chief financial officer. in a nutshell, we are your lawyers, provide legal services fo every city department, board, agency. assist in drafting legislation, objective legal advice in the city so decision makers like you did make decisions on a common understa understanding of the law. defend all legal claims and lawsuits and negotiate and recommend settlements for your app

mr. wright. >> good morning. when you talk about employment, and you talk about salary increases, you've got a tendency of overlooking your employment. you've got a great deal of employment discrimination. you've got a great deal of violations of title 7 of the united states of america's code service, the 2000-e series pertaining to the unequal pay act. you've got exempt employees working for the city that's been working here for 25 years. no medical coverage, no pension plan, no kind of annuity plan, but yet you're giving cost of living raises to one type of employees and yet another type of employees don't have any benefits doing the same type of work in the same type of departments within the city. so i think that should be addressed because you're in violation of that law, and no one has checked that. ronen has demonstrated she has experience as far as attorney is concerned. if she looks into that, i'm sure she'll agree with me. >> chair fewer: thank you very much, mr. wright. any other public comment? public

mr. wright, the game's going to start in 25 minutes. >> hello. i'm betsy white and i'm very mindful of the game and your patience. i've been a conflict panel lawyer in san francisco, indigent defense for 35 years, and i've been a supervisor for 38. supervisor ronen was on one of my jury panels a few years ago. i'm here to tell you why this funding we're asking for is so essential. i'm 66 years old. when i graduated, i had $8,000 in debt. lawyers today, when they graduate from high school, they are $150,000 in debt. they cannot graduate from school, make $74 an hour, open an office, pay for staff, run their practice. there is no way we can continue to recruit young, passionate independent lawyers into private practice unless funding is increased. i'm a perfect example of someone who could come into private practice at a time where it was more affordable and it was possible for all of us to live in san francisco and work and thrive. and now i'm 66, and i'm going to be part of the 25% of panel that's going to retire, who came in the way that i do. t

mr. wright. thank you. any other public comments on this item? i am seeing none. public comment is closed. mr. clark, let's call number seven. [reading items] >> good afternoon. thank you. jamie parks over at cr livable streets divisions which runs our capital projects. i want to provide an update this afternoon on what we are terming our quick build program which is a term we came up with a few months ago. it's really a continued evolution of the way we are delivering vision zero projects. ever since we adopted vision zero in 2014 we have been working to deliver projects, safety improvement continuously faster. this is the next generation in the process. we will start by really echoing what the chair mentioned at the beginning of this meeting, 2019 has not been a good year for vision zero outcomes. in particular, i may not have the numbers exactly right. there was a. in late february where i think we had five fatalities in the. of 10 days. i think i made it clear to everyone that the process was not coming fast enough. from a letter that the mayor sent to the dire

mr. wright. any other public comment? >> in conjunction with the increase in attorney employment with review and analysis of prior judicial determination and response to the changing legal environment, will you consider youth mental health counseling as an adjunct priority? i've spoken with several deportees abroad who have spent time in u.s. prison prior to deportation. these individuals shared a common story. they were a passenger in a vehicle, they were unaware that drugs were present. their charges in sentencing, simply explaining their circumstances took the edge off the conversation in each incident. i think psychological counseling or talk therapy for young people might save these cities significant funds and direct these youth downed the correct track. a brief word on implicit bias. there's an interesting technique i discovered to ameliorate it. simply imagining the individual going about this lives on a daily basis, conscious psychological transposition or playing with metacognition. i've heard some of the materi

mr. wright. are there any other members of the public who would like to testify on items 1, 5 or 6? seeing none, we'll close public comment and i will make a motion to continue items 1 and 6 to the call of the chair and continue items 6 for one week to the meeting of june 24 and we'll take that without objection. i'm sorry -- i will re-open public comment. i'm sorry. if there's any other members of the public that would like to testimony to my left, your right, the floor is yours. >> at this point what are you allowing us to speak on? >> commissioner: you can speak on any of those three aforementioned items. >> so i'm here for number 5 for the legitimization program for the 18th street. as me information we'll do a continuance. >> commissioner: yes, the sponsor of the legislation, supervisor ronin asked me to continue the matter. >> my request is we have it scheduled for two weeks out so people in in our hofs -- office to reschedule clients. >> commissioner: the way it works here is i respond to the sponsoring supervisor. so if the sponsoring supervisor wants it in two weeks -- hold

mr. wright here? oh, mr. wright, i'd like to open up public comment? >> is this on one and two now? >> on items 1 and 2, and remember, if you speak now, mr. wright, you can't speak later. >> always want to speak after you speak when the trail is hot. >> supervisor fewer: okay, trail is hot, come on up. another thing, i want to tell the listening public, if you would like to comment later when we recess back, i will open up public comment again for those people who would like to speak. right now, mr. wright would like to speak on items 1 and 2 while the trail is hot. >> now, talk about you sleep at the wheel, you more asleep at the wheel, you're drunk driving, that's what you're doing. being disappointed in yourself, you should be furious. you talk about your wasted money, that demonstration you did yesterday, where you agreed to another goddamned navigation center, when you have the audacity to what is the best way to house people without sending them through your system and putting them back on the goddamn streets and i show you how to build a 27 story apartment building complex to

mr. wright. >> yeah, i object -- you got my time here, right? i object to this part where you say property tax increases, especially the part to residential tenants. the tenants already having a hard time enough to survive here in the city as it is. and about security and the treatment of the landlords, you're further giving them opportunity to make it harder for people to survive in the city. so i object to that, but everything else seems all right to me. and i want to speak up where you've got the police department involved. i want to say i object to how the police chief has been treated by the union. he's been asked to resign and he's got good control over his staff. a good example was when that female was driving that car, and the whole police station at the tenderloin rushed out with the history of the police officers. that could have been an easy excuse for each and every police officer to unload their firearm and murder that female, and not one cop shot not one god damn bullet. where if that was the past police chiefs whose skin color was

mr. wright. >> just want to point out again -- >> mr. wright, hold on a minute. because you did not come when i called public comment, now we are going to rescind the vote so you may have public comment if you will wait a minute. i make a motion to rescind the last vote, seconded by supervisor mandelman. public comment is now reopened. mr. wright. >> this is an example of the amount of money that you are asking for item number one could easily have been paid by the collection of legal taxes from not only twitter, but the nine other high-tech companies that's been getting a free ride from the city and county of san francisco. i demonstrated what they collected multi-trillions and billions of dollars and by the same response to building the multi-skyscraper in chicago. and an example of one time frame of them getting preferential treatment and tax evasion and money that should be spent on the most vulnerable people that need permanent housing and projects discussed in item number one. $1,571,858, not collected just during this time frame alone. and this has been go

mr. wright. thank you, mr. wright. any other public comment on item number nine? seeing none, public comment is now closed. it is a hard job, though, michael. just f.y.i. i see that we have -- oh. let's -- let's have president yee -- >> let the remarks about item nine -- >> do you have any comments on item number nine or is it a question about public works budget? >> it is a question about public works budget. not the right time? >> no, president yee first. >> great. >> so, from the b.l.a. report, the amount of $1,292,500 is identical for the year 2019-20 and 20-21. but one of them says it is ongoing, the other one says it is a one-time savings. i'm just wondering that was sort of a clerical error or not. >> could you repeat your question? >> so, the -- in your recommendations, i'm with the intent page -- >> page 64? >> 62. and you read it out that way, too. so the $1,292,500 is the same amount both years? >> actually it's not. i apologize if that is the way i read it. we have $1,492,500 in recommended reductions in fiscal year 19-20. $1, 292,500 are ongoing. and

mr. wright. next speaker, please. i'd like to know that you are closely monitoring child development spending for example. from what i understand, there are 400 children being supported in 12 centers and 32 children in nonfamily child care homes, baby sitting services essentially for 3-month-old babies, to 3-5-year-old children depending on the site. there are 102 children and 8 pregnant mothers in home-based programs. there are 48 weekly, 90 minute support visits from what i've read. i have a total of 532 kids here. and 8 pregnant females. i'm looking at a $24 million budget last year. and as of last week's budget proposal, it looks like there was $11 million and something else for an additional $32 million i believe for the same program. at any rate, i understand they provide a meal program serving tens of thousands of infants and toddlers. essentially a food program. i understand they have a childhood -- or child care provider support services department which is a mouthful. do you have access to their disbursement

mr. wright? >> i don't know if you guys know about this, but i had a major part with the fall of untested right kids. i was the person who spoke up during women's month when everyone was -- i was the one that said i was speaking out for the females who have not been represented by the district attorney's office and about 1,000 untested right kids sitting at the hall of justice. i was the one that said that, i was watching the educational show, and a soft female rape victims call out for help, which was a victim of being raped by bill cosby. she complained about how everywhere she goes, she gets hit with the fact that the statute of limitation is passed, and is there anyone who can help us with this problem? went to the law library and came up with this law that is called continual injury, which means that the statute of limitations is tall, and as a result, the demonstration that i made during women's month because calls the issue to have a hearing on the untested right kids, and during that hear

mr. wright, thank you. >> okay. as you know, our combat veterans have a suicide rate of 22 people per day. and as a result, the police officers have also come to my attention that they have a suicide rate, as well. that needs to be addressed. says right here, plus police suicides at more than 160 for the year 2018 have rose for a third straight year. that's nearly tripled the rate of officers killed in the line of duty. moreover, suicide among the surviving law enforcement happens about every 17 hours, and the rate among firefighters has sharply increased. my point is that my housing opportunity demonstration pertaining to a 27-story building, apartment building complex, are moved to have two floors for rehabilitation for people who are firefighters, veterans, and our veterans, and also the homeless people that's out in the street and the people who you want to put in conservatorship, instead of having a shortage of -- the behavioral health system and by the same response the remainder of the units can be used for h