City and County of San Francisco Wednesday, February 13, 2019
>> we are in for a pretty speedy meeting today.
I just wanted to welcome everyone. I am joined by supervisor
catherine stefani, and committee member supervisor rafael
mandelman.
Today jesse larson, we want to thank you from san francisco government television for broadcasting this meeting.
Madam Clerk, do you have any announcements? >> silence all cell phones and electronic devices. Speaker cars and jump documents to be included as part of the file should be submitted to the clerk pick items acted upon will
appear on the ferry 26 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated.
>> thank you. Let's call item number 1, please. >> item number 1 is resolution approving amendment number 1 to
the agreement between worksite community mental health center and the department of public health for behavioral health services to include --- -dash
increasing agreement amount by 17.9 million for an amount not
to exclude 29.9 million. For a total agreement term of
July first to December 31st.
>> thank you very much.
I believe we have the director of D.P.H. >> correct. Thank you. I am representing the department of public health back before I get started to, we realized too
late there is a clerical error and the short title. So I am just bringing that to your attention. We have already provided an amendment by the clerical error says the word fiscal
intermediary, the long title and the body of the resolution and the report done by the budget and legislative analyst is all correct.
I just wanted to point that out. You do have a corrected version that removes that word.
Today, as was stated, this is a
request to amend this contract
to continue it after its one-year term period beginning
June 30th, 2019 for three years and six months, the current contract has four
programs, included in it, and
this is a long-term community-based provider.
Therefore programs are an outpatient clinic, an outpatient crisis clinic, an intensive case management program that we refer
to as assertive community
treatment, and a child and adolescent outpatient program.
At the outpatient and the crisis
programs were both selected to a
solicitation process, and our ongoing. One of the policy considerations
that was noted here by the board
of supervisors was how is their performance one -- when the budget analyst does -- when they
did this analysis, they took the scores of each of the unique
programs to give an agency overall score, which is fine, but the way that we actually
score as my program, so we do separate and unique program
monitoring of each program, so it did average out that way to
be less then meeting standards.
when you look at the outpatient
program and the urgent care, in
all the years 14, 15, 15, 16, they met standards. In 16, 17 they exceeded standards. We don't have a performance
concern about the continuation
of this program with westside. The third program is there
intensive case management program. They inadvertently did not
provide a submitted application for that solicitation. Their past performance where
they had an issue was around the deliverables and not meeting the deliverables. This is an intensive case management program where they
have a set number of slots, with
139 slots.
We are, at this point, continuing the program, but it
has had a reduced rate, I mean a reduced number of clients.
Down from 139 to 80, so it reliance a number of clients that are assigned to their
program with the capacity that they can historically provide.
And then the fourth program is a
children and youth program that is not continuing, at least how
it is, it is not continuing right now after fiscal year 18
-- 18-19, it is not in the out years of the contract.
Otherwise, we rely upon this
program for meeting the target
population that they serve, which is primarily african-american, and we work
closely with the agency, and would recommend approval.
>> okay.
Supervisor mandelman?
>> thank you, chair if you are,
again, I am new to this, and I'm
just learning my way along, but
looking a report like this, to
me, it rings some alarm bells, and maybe on misunderstanding
it, or misreading it, there is a listing -- I guess I would like to understand about how these
scores are -- what we are measuring. What are these scores ranging
from?
This is in the B.L.A. Analysis. It doesn't sound like we have a
minimum score, or do we? And when do you become concerned, when should we be
concerned about performance under a contract, and then I recognized it May not be other providers that would do this
work, and so in that
circumstance, how do we address
concerns if we do have concerns? >> right.
The scores listed is a range of
scores -- all the agencies that provide solicitation have to
meet the minimum requirement, so that can screen out anyone at
the beginning, if they don't have medi-cal certification, they don't have the required
numbers of years of service, ability to document their
services, both -- most behavioral health services are billed to the state to draw down
medi-cal. To the door agreed that there is documentation problems, if
that's a problem, that is what
something else we check in the solicitation process.
We also, they have to have experience. There's minimum qualifications that will screen somebody out,
and when we do the scoring, the
scoring is divided into three categories, with the most points
going to the evaluation of a written proposal, and then
review of prior performances, and financial management capacity and fiscal integrity.
Those together is the scoring, we have an independent panel that reviews.
This particular solicitation with many of our sins we have
ongoing providers, and so we are meeting the requirements of going out to bid, and in some
cases, people, vendors are not
reissued contracts, but we also
have ongoing services, so we
want our providers to be successful.
We were not concerned about this score.
They met all the requirements. Their past performance for these two programs, they've met all the standards.
In the last year, it is fully audited and they exceeded the standards. The urgent care is a critical
program in our continuum of care. Someone is in crisis and they need immediate medication, that is a place where they can go with a psychiatrist always on
staff. So we don't have an ongoing
concern for that, the other program, the outpatient children's program, their score
was half of the points that you could get, but more than that,
within the solicitation, there
was missing pages, and there was , it was not a robust solicitation that gave us
comfort to continue the program as it currently is under that
model, so it is not continuing
in the prior years, forward years.
at least in that program model
structure. The intensive case management
program, when I drilled down and looked at the actual scores within the agency, it could be one, two or three, where they had their problem was with meeting the deliverables, in that problem that they had, because they could not retain
staff for what they were able to
pay, and just not enough staff,
which drives down the number of
clients they can serve, that has been a consistent issue with the
program, and so what we did is
drop the number of clients from 139 to 80. The other thing is that contract, or that peace will go out to bid, but these are
clients that have been with this program.
This program is 15 years old.
I don't know about each of the clients, but they are the
highest risk, highest users of
the system.
So as much stability as we are
able to provide, we want to provide, which is why we reduced down to the level that the agency can manage, but we are
not putting all the other 80 people somewhere else because
right now they are doing a system review and trying to change the model, are looking at changing the model of intensive case management so that there are tears of highest need to, and then you can drop down to a
cheaper level, and lest -- less
intense services. All of that is happening now, so we don't want to move any of
those 80 clients that could then have a new case manager, and
then another case manager. that's why that program is
continuing, and we are
continuing with deliverables and productivity.
It was just the one that is the
level of their capacity.
So we have adjusted the contract. We feel comfortable having them move forward. >> do we look at client outcomes
as part of scoring? >> we do look at client
outcomes.
The deputy director of adult and
older adult services can speak to that, but we do.
>> good. >> good morning. >> morning.
>> in terms of outcomes, we look at client satisfaction.
Each year, we take a look at, we
ask our clients, are you better off because of the services we provide? So that is one area.
We also have the adult needs and strengths assessment, which is a comprehensive assessment that
basically takes the time, at the point in time, and a second point in time and compares progress, so we look at risk
factors such as emotional and
behavioral symptoms, we look at
other risk factors, we look at strengths, so this is done with
a case manager and the client
together, so it tells a story about whether or not they are
able to improve.
The other part is it also takes into consideration cultural
factors, and so I think, for this particular program, when we look at it, it is predominantly
african-american. There's been a shift in the population, it is hard to retain
staff, but the story that clients are saying that basically, in terms of housing,
it is one of the biggest
challenges, and we might be able to stabilize their psychiatric symptoms, keep them out of the
hospital, but still, one of the main challenges for people
moving on is stable housing, and it is not just stable housing
for clients, but also for staff,
so that is one of the challenges
with retention, but in terms of outcomes, we are comfortable that clients are showing
improvement and doing a good number of healthy relationships. >> we look at psychiatric hospitalizations, we look at
incarcerations, we look at a lot
of the clients, we look at their health as well.
In terms of physical health, this is also a medically fragile population.
A lot of them are high users of our medical emergency room, and they show up in other parts of our system, whether it is in
jail, or being homeless as well.
Yes, we look at all of those. >> thank you.
>> all right. >> supervisor stefani? >> thank you.
I have a few questions as well.
The B.L.A. Report indicates that westside has not consistently met their budgeted level of deliverables, and you are
telling us you've dropped the
expectation of 139 people served to a tee. Is that what you are saying? >> they probably should have
been another sentence on that sentence.
The westside meeting does not meeting their deliverables
applies to the one program, the mission program, and the mission
act program is intensive case management, so they have a set
caseload, and it was 139, and we have dropped that down to 80. They are only expected to have 80 clients.
That is how much staff they have
to carry that number in the caseload. >> okay.
So I just find a disconnect unit we are dropping our expectations
of deliverables of people served
from 139 to 80, yet we are increasing the contracts from
70 million to 23 million.
I feel like there is a huge disconnect here, and I also
don't understand, why are we giving awards to service providers that are not scoring
highly on R.F.P.S, have not
always met standards, and are not at their budgeted level of deliverables?
Makes no sense to me.
>> okay, so even going into this solicitation, it is clearly
stated, it is not just the top
score, so we have a huge city, and we have a lot of different
target populations, so we try to have providers that meet all the needs of the different target
populations. Within this particular agency,
there's four programs. Two of the programs are
outpatient and crisis.
Each year, in 14, 15, 15, 16,
they have met all their standards, they have exceeded
the standards in 16, 17, they have done extremely well.
We have no concerns. The third program that is in
here, they did not submit a bid, but we are continuing to program
until we finish our system
redesign so we can continue continuity of care for the
clients that are in that program the fourth program is not
continuing after fiscal year 18-19, because I did not score well enough to hit our comfort
level for the solicitation.
So the cost of the program is
not changing each year. That one program is coming out and reducing 400,000 each year,
but the dollars are going up from 5 million, to cover the
rest of the cost of the programs
for years to, three, 4.5. They are not getting more money,
they are just having, I mean, they are not getting more money on an annual basis, they're getting less because the
children's program is coming out >> would you agree that there are steps that westside could
take to improve its performance? On the one program that is
indicated that they need to? >> the program that is indicated
that they need to improve their performance, when you look at
the actual breakdown of the categories of what the
performance was, for program performance, westside act in
1617 met their standards. For program for client satisfaction, they met
standards. For compliance with meeting all
the requirements, they met standards. For deliverables, they did not
meet standards, and so between
17, 18, and 1819, 18-19 being
the new year as the contract, we have reduced that contract, that
program by $639,000, and we
reduced the clients from 139 to 80.
we believe that readjusting those values that they are paid, and the number of clients will
allow them to have a sufficient
level of staffing to meet the needs of the 80 clients. They were not able to staff that
to accommodate 139 clients consistently, so we reduced it. >> okay, but do we need to,
based on what we need here in the city and county of san francisco, in terms of delivering service to those that
need mental health services, do
we need to be meeting that 139 instead of just 80, and how do
we get to that 139, and what can we do to help westside get their? >> we have been consistently working with westside, with this was also their request. It is a consistent problem.
We still had the money, and
there were other vendors that applied that already provide intensive case management, so we
moved the client accordingly.
Nobody stopped being served, so
that is our number 1 goal in any solicitation or any transition,
in any type of funding, or programming, is to ensure
continuity of care of the clients that are already enrolled in the program his. So I feel like we work very
closely with westside, and this was an agreement that we reached
with westside.
>> I guess we can follow up with the budget and legislative analyst in terms of their
statement about westside has not consistently met their budgeted level of deliverables, so I wait - -dash I will wait to hear more from the B.L.A. On that. >> before we hear from the
B.L.A., I want to comment that it is a little disturbing, quite
frankly, about the scores, but also that on the B.L.A. Report,
page 3, he says according to
jackie hale, D.B.H. Of contract management, all responders to the R.F.P. Were awarded contracts, and there was no minimum score required, so what
measure do we hold people to? I think this is a really
important service that westside
provides, and especially, I'm especially alarmed because this is a place to get the service to
mainly our african-american population.
When we are not -- to say that in these years, they met the standard, but this year- -dash we hear also that they are
struggling with some issues structurally within their organization. So what are we doing about it?
I think of kicking back on what my colleague said, what are we
doing about this? This is a much-needed
programming in the community. The community has depended on this program for a long time from what I am hearing.
And yet how her answer is we will eliminate the children's
program. So I just want to know, this is
a really -- this is a big need in the community, and this is
one of the only community places that they can get this type of healthcare. I actually think it is imperative upon us to make them better and help them structurally with the
infrastructure so they can serve the intended 139 people instead of the 80.
I don't think it's enough to say, well, you know, they have
been good these years, and they have these issues, and so we'll just get rid of this program, every time we get rid of a
program, we eliminate a program,
that means we eliminate service and eliminating service for
african-american communities.
>> actually we just did a solicitation specifically for african-american services, and
that is where the funding will go, because it is absolutely our
interest to retain capacity to our target populations. So there was a specific solicitation that we just
completed targeting
african-americans, and improving their health and well-being in
san francisco.
>> okay, let's -- if my colleagues don't have any more
comments, Ms. Miss campbell, our B.L.A. Report, police. >> good morning. I'm from the budget analyst office.
I wanted to speak a little bit to the question of intensive
case management that I think supervisor stefani raised, and has been discussed here. It is not specific to westside
as much as to our audit finding from our behavioral health audit.
The one area where we felt there
was a need for more resources was intensive case management. We did not recommend a number of
what was needed, by recommended the department of public health go back and look at their model in terms of increasing the
number of case managers. it is also moving people through the system. I do want to speak a little bit to what she said, which I guess
the department is looking at at least having tears of intensive
case management and case management that might address some of that. That is an area where it might
be helpful for more follow up overall in terms of not specific to this contract, the specific to the concerns about intensive case management.
>> rights. It is a part of a redesign for
us looking at intensive case
management, and so typically our
approach has been the community treatment model to do whatever
it takes to provide for the most severe, mentally ill, acute
population.
One of the challenges was that when do you actually graduate and move someone on? You have to move someone on to
create slots for another in need. And so what we've learned is
that in terms of short-term case
management and linkage, that we probably need to split our
programs up into tears, and to
focus on short-term, more acute,
three to six months, and then really, with what the act
program is, falls into our community support treatment team model where we will focus on working with clients for up to
three years, but to create flow,
in our outpatient system, we are
looking at community-based case
management, so our outpatient clinics are actually becoming a bit more robust to do some of the outreach and supports that
typically are active intensive care management provided. Just by doing that, it will create more flow in the system,
and I would think that with westside, you are seeing more
about rightsizing of the program because there outpatient programs are going to actually pick up some -- are already have
picked up some clients that they are actually providing some community-based case management
for.
So this redesign is something we've been working on for the
past year and more to come. So the wonderful thing about westside is when you think of the different levels I just described that their clients can live within their program, that is their home, so we are able to step them down for intensive
case management, to outpatient. The crisis program is able to link a client to their outpatient or to their intensive case management program, so it just creates flow in a different way than how we have things set
up before. It doesn't mean that we can't
ramp up, but I think that the agreement was, let's focus on a population that is actually
doable, and that is where we
have settled on the number of 80
it doesn't mean they can't exceed the expectations to ramp up even more, but I think a
staffing, what I mentioned before about staffing, that is the biggest challenge for them. This is a program that deals
with the most acute and most
severe, severely mentally ill, medically complex populations. In terms of being able to retain
staff, it is a challenge, so it is not just this particular community-based organization, but it is a challenge for our
workforce.
We are supporting them and hopefully this new direction will help address the flow
issue. >> do you have anything to continue with? >> in terms of the contract itself, the board is being asked to approve the first amendment
to the spot contract with westside from adult mental health services.
The original contract was awarded in December of 2017, big
but because of delays in being able to negotiate and get it to
the board, department entered into a one-year contract for a $5.3 million. They are now asking for approval
of the whole contract through
2022, to not exceed $23.3 million. In terms of our evaluation of
the fiscal components of the contract, we are recommending approval. >> thank you very much. Let's open this up for public comment period are there any members of the public who would
like to speak on this item?
Seeing none, public comment is closed. Colleagues, supervisor mandelman?
>> I clearly -- many elements of this conversation are troubling to us.
I think it sounds to me like the department probably did the right thing in that if the
provider was not able to meet these higher expectations, I do
think that freeing up that money
that would go to case management being provided by some other entity is probably the right move.
I think this challenge around the nonprofit partners being able -- unable to hire and
retain the workers to do the work that we are asking these
nonprofits to do is also embedded in this conversation. I am hearing that as well, so I
think that's a big conversation the board has been having, and
needs to continue. Anyway, I will be here yet just curious to hear what my colleagues have to say. >> would anyone like to make a
motion on this item?
Supervisor stefani? >> yes, supervisor fewer, I still have a few questions in
terms of -- we put down an R.F.P., and we have people reply
to it, we have expectations in that R.F.P., and it sounds like
to me that, and maybe just at first blush, I'm not reading this right. A sounds like they are not meeting what they would do in the R.F.P., so we are reducing
the number from 139 to 80. >> the R.F.P. That is listed in
here, that is detailed with all these points, they have done
perfectly well, every single year. >> how do we get to the point then that we say they are not meeting their deliverables?
>> that is the third program. >> okay, but then the third
program is not delineated in an R.F.P.? >> no, they didn't apply.
>> and very confused at this point. >> there's four programs. >> excuse me one second. Please respond when the
supervisor has requested you to respond. Is there a question from
supervisor stefani that you have
for her to address? >> thank you, supervisor fewer.
I am just trying to understand,
I feel like we are brushing over the fact, based on what I am
seeing in the audit, that this nonprofit, for whatever reason, having trouble meeting deliverables, and I think it
touches on a lot. The affordability, it touches on a lot in the city and county of san francisco.
I am having trouble reconciling
how we award this, knowing that we have an audit that says they are not performing at a level that we expect them to.
>> okay.
For whatever reasons. >> for me, I don't know if we can continue it for a week for more information where we can sit down and have more in-depth meetings about not just this
program, and how we are putting out the R.F.P., especially with mental health, is one of the main thing is that people are talking about in the city and county of san francisco. When I am looking at the
contract in front of me, with this information, and to approve
it at $23 million, I feel like I
would like, if it is not going to delay services to anybody, I actually would like to continue
it for one week and see if we can have more in-depth information and meetings about this one-on-one. >> okay. There is a motion to continue this item for one week.
Can we take that without objection?
>> excuse me, for clarification, the department cemented proposed
amendments to this legislation. >> yes. There is a proposed amendment on
the title change, I believe, can
we take that without objection? Great. As amended, let's continue this
item until the next budget and finance meeting.
Thank you very much. Madam Clerk, thank you.
Please call hm his two, three, and four together. >> to his resolution declaring
the intent of the city to reimburse an expenditure for proceeds of future bond dominance and authorizing the mayor touch office of housing and community development to
submit an application for the issuance of residential mortgage revenue bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed
160 million for 185 maryland street.
Item three is declaring the intent of the city to reimburse or expenditures of future bonds
and authorizing the mayor touch office of housing and community development to submit an application to commit the issuance of residential mortgage revenue bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed
$40 million. Item number 4 is a resolution declaring the intent of the city to reimburse an expenditure for
proceeds of future bonds and authorizing the mayor touch office of housing and community development to submit an application to permit the issuance of residential mortgage bonds in an aggregate principal
amount not to exceed 40 million. >> thank you very much.
I believe we have omar cortez
from the mayor touch office of housing and community development here today. Hello. >> yes. Good morning. Community just good morning
commit -- committee members. I am the senior project manager
with the mayor touch office of housing and community development, and I'm here to present items two, three, and
four. These items relate to
resolutions for proposed bond issuances for three projects.
185 maryland street, ocean beach
apartments, and the south park scatter side projects. The purpose of a resolution
before you is to approve the hearings that the city conducted on different dates in order to
comply with the federal tax equity and financial
responsibility act for the three
projects, and to make -- to ratify and approve several other actions necessary to later make
the bond possible. Including the submittal of
applications to the california debt limit allocation committee
to secure an allocation of bonds
I'm sorry.
The proposed issuance will be
conduit financing, which means that they will not require the
city to pledge any of its funds to the repayment of the bonds. I will give a brief description
on each project. The 185 maryland apartments is
located on parcel a two, on pier
70, and will be at 275 unit to
mixed income, mixed use multifamily housing project.
Fifty-five units equaling 20% of the total residential units will
be affordable to households earning less than 50% of the
A.M.I., while the rest of the units will be rented to market
rate, no residents will be displaced, because the site is
currently undeveloped.
The ocean beach apartments project entails the
rehabilitation of an existing 85 unit mixed use affordable housing development located at
760 playa street. 100% of the apartments will be
affordable to housing earning
less than 60% of A.M.I., however
because the property has assistant payments, residents
currently pay 30% of their income towards rent.
And the south park project has three existing affordable single room occupancy buildings, located within a block of each
other at 22102, and 106 south
park street. The project his total 107 and
100% to households earning less
than 60% of A.M.I. Residents of both the ocean
beach apartments will be temporarily relocated during the
project's rehabilitation.
They will be able to follow
completion. Most of them were returned to bond issuance approvals for each project at different times later
this year.
Here with me today is kelly pressler, representative from brookfield properties, the
project sponsor for the 185 maryland street apartments, also
here are representatives of the project sponsor for ocean beach
apartments.
and gail mcguire, a representative and mission house representative corporation is
present for the south part scatter side projects.
Finally, my colleagues viviana and carolyn are here to answer
any questions that you May have. Before that, on behalf of mo C.D. And the project sponsors, we would like to thank you for your consideration here today,
and look forward to your support for this project.
>> thank you. Colleagues, any questions for mr cortes? I have a few. The first project is 20%
affordable, and that is a 20% that will be affordable is 50% of A.M.I. Is that correct?
>> yes. >> why is it only 20% affordable
units? The project is part of a D.D.A.
And part of a larger development , for this specific project, it is 20%, but the
overall affordability
requirement will be met with 30%. >> thank you very much.
I want to comment on item number 3. That is in my district. I have heard complaints, I was
out there doing a workshop on emergency preparedness, almost all entirely russian speaking
and low income, and I heard complaints of the elevators being broken, in them not being able to use it. Many of them in walker's, a lot
of them physically impaired, so
I am glad that is getting done.
I am just wondering what will happen about the relocation. This is an entirely -- this
building is almost entirely a russian speaking population, and as you know, in my neighborhood, they are very comfortable there because they are our russian
speaking amenities there. I am wondering where you will relocate them. >> I will let the project sponsor speak a little bit to that, but there is a relocation
plan as an introduction. It is expected that a relocation
would last no more than two weeks for this specific project.
>> two weeks for this project? >> yes. >> that would be great spirit
who is that person? >> good morning, I am the project manager with bayside communities.
Relocation, we will work with a third party relocation
consultant who is very familiar with doing rehab projects, not
only in the state of california, but with bayside communities.
Each unit should take no more than three weeks, typically a project this size we would
tackle maybe five to eight units at a time. Each of these units would be
vacated for about two's three weeks, and we will work with
each household to establish what their needs are. In some cases, some households will express their interest in
staying with friends or family, it could be friends within the complex that they stay with
during that time period, but as
previously mentioned, we have an H.U.D. Contract, and we
absolutely don't want to do anything to jeopardize that contract.
Residents will never stay more than 30 days outside of their unit, like I said, it should
take two, maybe three weeks to do their unit. >> okay.
Please take into consideration that this particular building
holds a lot of russian speakers, very limited english speaking,
and most of them rely 100% on public transportation. When we are considering relocation, I think that those are some of the factors that I would like you to consider
around this particular building. >> yes. It will be helpful to understand that our relocation consultant,
when we get started, months before we actually start the rehab project, the relocation
consultant and there team will meet with each individual in their households to understand what their family dynamics are, to understand what their needs
are, and if translators are needed at that time, translators
will be provided by's owners. Again, 30 days prior to actually needing to vacate the unit to,
again, we will touch base with those residents and their unit, or in the community room,
wherever they feel most comfortable, with a translator if required to understand where
they should be best placed. >> thank you. I think a russian translator
will be needed in that facility. Thank you very much. Colleagues, any other questions? Seeing then, I think we do not
have a B.L.A. Report on this. Let's open it up to public comment period are there any members of the public would like
to comment on these items? seeing none, public comment is closed. Make a motion to move these
three items to the board with a positive recommendation. Can we take that without objection? Thank you very much. Please read item number 5. >> five as resolution authorizing the office of cannabis on behalf of the city
to apply for state grant funding under california cannabis equity
act of 2018. >> okay. Thank you very much. I believe we have eugene hills men, the deputy director of the
office of cannabis. >> good morning. I'm the deputy director of the office of cannabis. Today we are seeking authorization to apply for state
funding through the california
cannabis equity act of 2018 to support the san francisco
cannabis equity program and equity program participants. The state has authorized the bureau of cannabis control, upon request by a local jurisdiction,
in this case, san francisco, to provide technical assistance to a local program that helps local
equity applicants.
It would require the bcc to review and application, and to grant funding to an eligible local jurisdiction based on
specified factors. The state will require an eligible local jurisdiction that
receives grant bonds, pursuant to these provisions do use the grant funds to assist local
equity licensees in that local jurisdiction to gain entry to
and to successfully operate in
the state touch are regulated cannabis marketplace. The bureau of cannabis control
has had $10 million allocated to
it for this grant program. The bcc could allocate this funding now, however, they have
not yet. They have indicated they will
issue the R.F.P. Soon, and we have a strong interest in seeing this funding allocated to verify equity applicants as quickly as
possible.
After the award of any grant funding, we shall return to the board of supervisors to seek
approval by further resolution
to formally accept -- accept and expand grant funds.
I will be happy to take any questions. >> colleagues, any questions? Seeing none, I don't think we
have a B.L.A. Presentation. Let's open this up for public comment. Would any members of the public
like to comment? Seeing none, public comment is closed. I make a motion to move this to
the full board with a positive recommendation.
Without objection? Thank you very much. >> please call item number 6. >> resolution authorizing the city to submit applications for payment programs and related
authorizations by the california department of resources, recycling, and recovery for the
purpose of safely managing and reducing household hazardous
waste and used motor oil, and providing opportunities or beverage containers recycling
and litter cleanup. >> okay. i think we have charles see and
hear from the department of environment.
>> thank you, chair if you are, thank you supervisors. And with the san francisco department of the environment.
Before you today is a basic apply for authorization resolution for two payment programs in the california department of resource and
recovery, more commonly known as the cycle.
It is used oil payment program, and the beverage container
recycling payment program. The oil payment program helps to
promote used oil and oil filter recycling to public education, and collection opportunities for those who change their own motor
oil.
We collected over the 43 gallons
of used oil in 2017, in over 25,000 oil filters.
Were established 25 certified collection centres, representing all major san francisco neighborhoods. We submitted an application once
a year, and through that we -- they pay cities like ours to for
our efforts to support the collection and recycling of used oil. For the payment program, the process is very similar.
We submit an application once a year, and through that process, week they pay the city to support bottle and can recycling
and redemption. The container recycling payment program has seven certified redemption centres in operation
in san francisco, and over 100 beverage dealers who are paying their businesses. This apply for authorization is
essentially a renewal, because the previous one had expired, I
am happy to take any questions. >> okay.
Any questions?
Seeing none, we do also not have a B.L.A. Report to. Let's open this up for public comment. Are there any members of the public that would like to
comment on item number 6?
Seeing none, public comment is closed. I can make a positive
recommendation to the full board.
Can we take that without objection? Thank you very much.
Please call item number 7. >> item seven as resolution retroactively authorizing the police department to accept and
expand a grant in the amount of $800,000 from the united states department of justice to help improve the collection, management, and analysis of crime gun evidence for the
project -- projected period of October first, 2018, through
September 20th, 2021.
>> I believe we have patrick.
He is here, a grants manager from the san francisco police department. >> good morning.
I am the current chief financial officer for the san francisco police department. This morning, we are requesting 20 recommendation for the
retroactive -- for a resolution retroactively authorizing police department to accept and expand
grant in the amount of $800,000 from the U.S. Department of
justice, office of justice programs, bureau of justice assistance to help with the collection, management, and analysis of crime gun evidence for the project period of October first, 2018, through September 30th, 2021. I do want to make a comment on the actual resolution.
There is -- I noticed an error in the language.
It does refer to the bureau of justice statistics where it should show the bureau of
justice assistance. We will make that change. >> what line is that?
>> line five, at least on my
copy.
>> so you are referring to the office of justice program,
bureau of justice statistics class.
>> that should say assistance. >> bureau of justice assistance?
>> yes.
It also repeats on line ten, 12, they -- basically anywhere where
it says bureau of justice statistics, it should say bureau of justice assistance.
>> would you like to make those amendments now? >> yes.
>> okay, thank you.
>> are you through with your presentation? >> know, I'm trying to put in the slides. Okay.
Thank you.
Bear with me. The san francisco police department, we submitted
proposals for grant funding, and we received an award in the
amount of $800,000.
The grant period is from October 1st, 2018, to September
30th, 2021.
The reason that the resolution
is retroactive is because of the
grant start date.
It is October 1st, 2018. We did not receive notice of the
award until October 1st, so we are requesting a retroactive
resolution because by the time this resolution gets adopted to, it will be after that date.
We have not expended any funds
with this grant. It is retroactive, mainly
because of the actual start date
for the grant. This grant program is a collaboration between the san francisco police department, the san francisco district
attorney's office, the bureau of justice assistance, and the bureau of alcohol and tobacco,
firearms and explosives.
It is a collaboration between
local agencies and the A.T.F. To
leverage resources to swiftly identify firearms used
unlawfully, and their sources, and to effectively prosecute perpetrators engaged in violent
crime. The crime gun investigation
center in san francisco was
originally a pilot project that we began planning and
implementing back in 2007, and continued into 2008.
This strategic model is -- has
currently been implemented in 11 other cities throughout the
united states. The cities include los angeles,
detroit, and washington, D.C.
The A.T.F. Is administering federal agencies that are
responsible for the betrays
program.
It stands for national integrated ballistics information network.
It is the system that is used for comparison analysis of
recovered ballistic evidence. Each race is a program that is
used to provide information on a
firearm origin from the
manufacturer, to the first
purchaser of a gun.
Just a little bit of information
on what our shootings and -- shooting incidents in san
francisco, from 2014, 22016, there was an increase in the
number of shooting incidents,
size increased from 30 in 2014,
22016, up to 40 homicides by firearm in 2016.
There was a slight decrease in 2017.
I do not have the full
statistics for 2018, however, I
do have the deputy chief here
who can actually share some of
the statistics for 2018 and part of 2019. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, patrick. Good morning, supervisors. Brief anecdotal information about the program.
It is a collaborative effort. It is reducing crime and gun violence.
With me I have a lieutenant to is the officer in charge of the
crime investigation center.
The telling story here is that
at a year-to-date basis, homicides are down 33%.
This time a year ago, we were
33% out. We are 33% reduction in homicides, and in gun violence or shootings.
We have a 60 4% decrease.
His so the strategy is working, and your consideration is
requested in accepting and expanding these funds.
I can relate any -- I can answer any questions. >> colleagues, any questions? There is no report on this.
Let's open this up for public comment. Are there any money or just members of the public could wish
to comment on item number 7? Seeing none, public comment is closed.
I have one question.
I understand that this, you are notified October 1st that you
were granted to this grant. Is that correct? >> correct. >> why is it brought back to us
in February?
>> we did have to prepare the
resolution, and we do have to have their resolution presented before the police commission,
before it gets calendared to the
budget and finance committee, and also to the board of supervisors.
I do have some of the dates. >> supervisors, there was a number of dark days with the
commission, and there were some
agenda item issues.
That was part of the issue with
the commission. >> we received notice of the
award on October 1st.
There were some concerns with some of the language within the agreement. We submitted the document to a
city attorney after some review. They gave us permission to accept their word on November
8th.
The police department submitted
the acceptance to the bureau of justice assistance on November
9th.
We submitted documents to have the accept and expend resolution to submit to the police
commission in late November.
the police commission approved the accept and expend on
December 5th, after the police commission approval, we
submitted the accept and expend documents to the mayor's office, to have it introduced in front of the board and have it calendared for the budget and finance committee.
>> okay.
Supervisor stefani? >> I feel pretty satisfied with that explanation.
Icefield they proceeded in a timely manner. With regard to the amendment, I just want to make the amendment
that we change it from bureau of justice and statistics to bureau of justice assistance, that
occurs on lines one, five, ten, 12, and 20 and the resolution.
>> thank you very much.
Let's make a motion to accept those amendments without
objection. And then would you like to make a motion to accept this item? >> I would like to move this to the full board with positive recommendation. >> thank you very much. I think we can take that. Thank you.
Item number 8, please. >> resolution retroactively authorizing the police department to accept and expend
an increase to the 2018 capacity enhancement and backlog reduction program grant funds in
the amount of 61,000 from the united states department of justice to be used to upgrade
software, purchase lab equipment, and provide continuing education training for D.N.A. Analysts during their projected period of generally first, 2019, through December 31st, 2020.
>> thank you.
>> thank you.
The police department is requesting that community- -dash the committee's recommendation
for this resolution to accept
the increase in the amount of --
the increase and the award the
amount of $61,170.
The police department did have this grant included within the department's budget for fiscal
year 2018 and 2019. There is a san francisco admin
code, section 10.17, and the
controller's policy is that any increase in grant awards a
$50,000 or greater, the departments are required to
submit for an expanded resolution, so this is why we are submitting this resolution for you. >> thank you very much. >> thank you.
>> any questions or comments? Seeing none, let's open it up for public comment. Any members of the public would
like to speak on item number 8? Seeing none, public comment is closed. I would like to make a motion to
move this to the full board with
a positive recommendation. Thank you very much. Madam Clerk, please call item number 9. >> item nine is resolution approving the emergency
declaration of the director of public works to repair the
damage sewer system located between perry street and third street bridge for a cost
not to exceed $700,000.
>> mr john thomas is here, city engineer and deputy director of infrastructure for a san francisco public works. Another emergency, mr thomas. >> good morning, chair fewer, members of the committee. As you said, with public works.
I'm here to present before you the emergency declaration for repairs to the damaged storm sewer just north of the
third street bridge. In the late fall, it was discovered that there was damage to the outfall structure from
the main sewer that is on king
street just of the north.
The outpost structure had been -- had essentially crumbled in
certain locations and allowed
the title action, as well as a sewer outfall flows to take
water and soil from the ground
below third street in the area
and out into the bay. Over time, it created an emergency situation where there
was a large avoid below the third street right of way, and
immediate repair.
Our teams visited the site shortly after the inspection by the P.U.C., and determine what
the best course of action was.
We presented this to our director, mohammed nuru, and requested an emergency declaration be issued so that we can proceed with the work
immediately. That was done, and we have
selected a contractor in November and mobilize them as
quickly as possible so that we
could complete the work before the rains hit this winter. So the work was estimated at the
time to be about $700,000.
At this time, we are working out final closeout details with the contractor, of the cost is
around $660,000 or so. I think the work was completed successfully. As you know, we are doing critical work on the
third street bridge, which we need to complete prior to the
end of this year, and so we
wanted to make sure that this was also coordinated with that
effort, and we were able to do that as well. >> thank you very much. Colleagues, any questions or comments for mr thomas?
This was actually discovered through an inspection. Is that correct? >> that is really different then the last two emergency
decorations we have had here before this committee.
Let's pivot to the B.L.A. The report, please.
>> yes, the board is asking to approve the emergency declaration, which would authorize the department of
public works to solicit an agreement with a contractor to do the work without going through a competitive bid process. I believe the department has presented the process.
I do want to say that an emergency was declared on November 2nd, reported to the board to, the, on the controller
on November 3rd. The resolution was submitted on December 7th.
It is within the guidelines, or the timeline set by the
administrative code, and as chair fewer mentioned, was discovered through an inspection, which does make it different from the prior two resolutions that were brought forward, and we recommend approval. >> thank you very much. Let's open us up for public comment. Any members of the public like
to comment on item number 9? Seeing none, public comment is closed. I would like to make a motion to move this to the board with a positive recommendation. Can we take that without objection? Thank you very much.
Please read item number 10. >> item ten is resolution authorizing the director of public works to execute agreements with the california department of transportation
pertaining to the justice street improvement phase to project for
the amount of $60 million.
>> I see we have elizabeth raymo his, transportation finance
analysts in san francisco public works. >> thank you. I am went san francisco public works. Before you today is a proposed resolution that will authorize
the director of public works to execute an agreement with the california department of transportation for the jefferson street project for phase two in
the amount of $6,000,000.782000. These finds are from the road
repair and accountability act of 2017, otherwise known as senate
bill one. San francisco public works is authorized to expend these funds
due to city and county san
francisco 2019, 2020 budget and appropriation ordinance on file
with the board under
number 180574. They do require that san francisco public works governing
body, and in this case, the board of supervisors, passed a resolution which identifies the person or the position that can execute the agreement for this
project with caltrain. With that said, public works
respectfully request their committee to approve the resolution in order to execute the agreement. I am joined by the public works
public manager, and we would be happy to answer any questions
from the committee. >> thank you very much.
Colleagues, any questions?
Seeing none, there was no B.L.A. Report on this. Let's open this up for public comment. Any members of the public like
to comment on item number 10? Public comment is closed.
I would like to make a positive recommendation to the full
board, and I hope we can take that without objection. Thank you very much.
Can you please read item number 11? >> eleven is resolution approving modification of reports to a contract for the trent -- expansion improvement
program with a long engineering to extend the term by 555 calendar days and to increase a contract amount by six my $3 million for a total not to exceed an amount of
$16.3 million. >> thank you very much.
I believe we have deanna here from the san francisco international airport. >> good morning, good to see you. Thank you. The airport is approving just thinking your approval before
the publication to an existing contract for the eritrean extension and improvement
program. Modifications forward would extend the contract to October 31st, 2020, and increase a contract with six my $3 million
for a new not to exceed amount
of 16.3 million. The eritrean extension and improvement program includes the construction of an elevated
guideway extension, and two new
air train stations to serve long term parking dd, and the new
airport hotel.
The scope of work includes project controls, contract administration, cost estimating, and field inspection. The contract was a result of a 2015 request for qualification
process, with pgh wong being the
highest ranked of two respondents. As with previous contracts
considered by the board, this multiyear approval aligns the contract duration with the determined amount approved by the airport commission for a more consistent process.
The budget analyst recommends approval of the proposed modification and I'm happy to answer any questions.
>> thank you very much.
Any questions? Seeing none, let's pivot to the B.L.A. >> the board is being asked to approve the fourth amendment to the contract between pgh wong and the airport for the eritrean
extension project. the original contract amount -- this is the first time the board has seen this contract.
The original contract budget when the program was first set up was for $13 million.
It has been increased to $16 million. That is what the board is being asked to approve. The full contract, there have
been delays in the project, we summarize them on page 12 of the
report. Our understanding from the airport is a contract with
himself was not responsible for any of these delays, but actually has to extend their work because of the delays, and
as she said, the approval of
this contract at $16 million is
to bring a consistent approach
to contract approval to the board for airport capital -related contracts so that the board is approving the contract as a whole. We summarize the budget on table one of our report. We did review it and found it to be reasonable, given the delays
that were reported to us in this project, and we are recommending approval. >> thank you very much. Let's open this up for public comment. Are there any members of the
public would wish to comment on
item number 11? Seeing none, public comment is
closed. Do we have a recommendation
here, yes, supervisor mandelman? >> just a comment or concern,
which is I think this contract
was originally entered into as a
one-year agreement for $4 million, something like that, and ultimately,, we are
approving this as, how many
years, four or five years, and $16 million. That doesn't seem like a great
way to be contracting. I understand the airport is
going to be changing how it does this in the future, but I am
just registering that.
It does not feel great. >> yes, supervisor fewer, supervisor stefani, supervisor cohen, they made that very clear
last year, in the next contract, we will talk about how there is
also discontinuity between the
process, and we are making sure that going forward it is consistent, and you see the long
term contract upfront.
>> thank you very much. So let's make a motion to move this to the board with a positive recommendation.
Can we take that without objection? Thank you very much.
Madam Clerk, please call item 12. >> item 12 is resolution approving modification number
nine for the air right contract for the terminal one center
renovation project to extend the
term by four years and eight months and to extend the contract.
>> thank you very much. We have deanna from the san francisco international airport. >> good morning, again. The airport to seeking your approval for the ninth modification to an existing contract with A.C. Jv, a joint
venture for construction
management services for the airport's terminal one center renovation project.
one -- it would extend the contract through December 31st, 2023, and increase a contract by $33 million for he
knew not to exceed amount of $6,123,000,000. The terminal one center renovation project will create a new and called just consolidated
passenger screening checkpoint, priest -- three security ticket counters at, and concession in terminal one. It also includes a new baggage handling system, and checked baggage screening system. It was a result of a 2015
request for qualification. The board approve the original contract to provide the services for an initial term of one year with for four one-year options
to extend, and also saw that
last year 2018.
As with previous, the contracts considered by the board, this multiyear approval aligns a contract duration with the term and amount approved by the
airport commission for a more consistent process.
The budget analyst recommends approval of the proposed modifications, and I am happy to
answer any questions. >> colleagues, any questions? I just think the same issue that
we just spoke about.
But let's hear from the B.L.A. >> the board is being asked to approve the increase in this
contract from the current amount of $28 million, to the proposed
new amount of $61 million, and
extend the term through December 20th, 2023.
This was a contract which is a
joint venture.
I never know how to pronounce it
this is for the terminal one renovation project.
As we point out on page 17, table two of the reports, this project has been increased in
scope and cost from $400 million, to $1.4 billion. I want to go back into the
history a bit of the board's approval. The board did approve the original contract in its entirety for $23 million when
the project was at $400 million, so that was in 2015.
The board didn't approve the modification number 8 to the
contract last fall in September, to increase it to $28 million with a request that the airport come back with a full contract
for approval.
So the airport is now giving us a budget for the contract
through 2023 appear to date,
they've spent about 24.8 million on this contract.
We do outline the budget going forward. We did review the budget and considered it to be reasonable and we are recommending it for approval.
>> okay. Let's open this up for public comment period are there any members of the public that would like to comment on item
number 12? Seeing none, public comment is closed.
Supervisor stefani? >> yes, thank you, one question.
What level of scope change and passenger growth occurred to
triple the projected budget? >> we have increased, since
2015, we have seen an increase in passenger rates that have
asked us to -- some of the projects that we were going to
put in phase two are now increased to phase one, so that
is outlined in the budget and
legislative analyst report on page 16.
Things like terminal one south, terminal one north, we -- they were moved to -- which were
included in phase two to terminal one, because airports across the country, including
san francisco, are seeing a
rapid growth in flights and passenger increases.
So to make sure that we are a company- -dash accommodating all of that increase.
If you see in terminal one, it is sorely underdeveloped and
needs to be provided to the public, so we are increasing
that, which increased the scope of the project management services.
>> thank you.
>> I think that going from $400 million, to $124 billion, this is one of these examples
where it is really extreme, you
just mentioned that supervisor
cohen has had conversations with the airport before about this.
Okay. Yes, supervisor mandelman?
>> it does make you wonder what
-- this seems like a reasonable
reason to have a larger project. At one point for billion-dollar project makes sense, but what
was happening in 2015 that the folks at the airport couldn't
anticipate that? >> for this specific contract
for the project management scope , we were foreseeing a
longer-term development of the project, and because of that rapid increase in growth, I
think with the increase of economic stability, the increase
in travelling, people are more -- we just did not foresee this
increase in passenger usage of the terminals and the increase in flights.
That has been seen across airports across the country. >> over the last three years.
>> over the last few years, yes. We can definitely provide
information about the increase
of flights at S.F.O. For this specific project, I apologize I don't have those
numbers since it was on the project management side, but we
can show the increase over time,
and what we were projecting, and how high above that it has grown
in the last few years. >> okay. Is there anyone who wants to
make a motion on this? >> I definitely would love to get that information. With that, considering we've made it clear what we would like to see in the future, I would move this forward to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> okay.
We can take that without objection. Thank you very much. Madame Clark, please read item number 13.
>> item 13 -- a public auction,
surgeon parcels of property. >> thank you very much.
I believe we have amanda from the san francisco treasurer and
tax collector. >> good morning, supervisors
paragraph from the asset of the treasurer and tax collector.
I'm here to present for your approval 296 parcels that we are seeking to offer for auction in april. You have all been provided copies of an updated parcel list. If I can request that the new parcel list that has been provided replace the original that was provided with the
resolution. The only change is the removal of one parcel that has been
fully paid for. Property becomes eligible for auctions when an owner fails to pay taxes for five years, and we are required to offer properties for auction that have remained delinquent for nine years.
The parcels I am bringing to you
today are a tiny percentage of the 209,000 total parcels in the city.
We collect over $3 billion in property tax payments annually,
and over 99% of owners pay their property tax bills on time and
in full. Before you, for consideration
today, are 233 timeshares, 33
vacant lots, ten underwater lots, and ten properties with dwellings. I want to assure you that over the past six months, we have
poured over each and every
parcel here before you, and as stated in the resolution, reresearch the physical characteristics and ownership
history for each parcel on the list using property information available from the assessor and
the planning department. Every supervisor was provided with the list of parcels, along with a one page cheater that includes a parcel map and other identifying information about
the owner of record. We also expanded the research to identify as many parties of
interest as possible. We used our debt collection
expert to search publicly available and proprietary databases, city and county and other governmental records, as well as social media and internet searches. In some cases, the three search
results and parcels being removed from the list due to
title issues are ownership changes. In other cases, our frequent mailings leading up to the auction have resulted in people paying their taxes. Yet we understand that it is not
enough to simply mail -- go to these addresses and hope for the best.
We have been tracking our return mail and taking additional steps to make sure we reach any
affected party.
For each vacant parcel, we will mail to all continuous parcels
to let them know if the upcoming auction and wherever feasible, we will also be physically posting on the vacant parcels
this month. We've taken additional steps for any property where there could be an individual at risk of
losing their home.
The sheriff's deputies have visited each occupied property to provide in person notification, and in partnership with the mayor's office of housing and community development and adult protective services, we have additional resources to assist those individuals so they can pay
their taxes, and remain housed. Once approved by the board to, the list will also be published in the newspaper of record, and will be available on our website. Thank you for your consideration, and I am available for any questions. >> thank you very much.
Any questions? I have one question. So I see on this list that there
is property owner associations
on this list.
Considering before we've had an issue with one property owner
association, I am wondering, are we doing due diligence with this particular group? >> whenever you see an association up for advanced research, we are kind of searching every available
resource to try and find out who the members are, with the directors are, who their
accountants are, we are mailing to multiple locations for each
of those, and we don't stop the research until we have confirmation that someone has
received the notice and that they are aware and have an interest in the property. We are definitely doing an expanded amount of research for associations. >> thank you very much. I am also noticing that there
are many, many, many timeshares on here. What is happening with that market in san francisco? >> is an interesting question. I think as we have seen a new
parcel taxes be approved by the
voters, the cost of owning timeshares has increased significantly, and so in the past, maybe owed a couple hundred bucks on your timeshare for property taxes per year, and now it is up to about $900 because each timeshare is
usually assessed to the city
college and san francisco universal parcel taxes. That is leading into it. We are actively working with companies. There are four companies that own all the timeshares buildings
in san francisco to find a resolution, and we are learning from other counties, different
ways that they can reoffer
timeshares outside of the auction process. >> that's great. Let's see. I don't think we have a B.L.A. Report on this. Let's open it up for public comments. Are there any members of the
public that would like to speak on item 13?
Saying none, comment is closed. Colleagues, can I make a motion to move this to the board with a positive recommendation?
Can I take that without objection? Thank you very much. Please call item number 14. >> resolution approving and
authorizing a second amendment to the existing permit with another -- to extend a term ten additional years to modify provisions of the permits related to the permit fee and rent payment, and outreach and similar matters. >> I would like to note that we are joined by supervisor mar,
and we have today someone here from a recreation and parks. >> good morning, supervisors. I am the director of property and permits, it I'm here to ask your approval for the second amendment to the outside lands contract to extend it and make a
few other modifications.
Just a little bit of background,
in 2009, the department entered into the first contract for an
annual festival with another
planet entertainment going through 2013. It was following an R.F.P. At that time. In 2012, after a few years under our belts, the board unanimously approved an extension to the
contract until 2021. Today, we are requesting an
amendment to extend it for an
on top of that, it has become part of the cultural fabric of this city.
It is not just music.
It is music, art, culinary, in 2017, elected the top music
festival. It is not just about people
coming to the city. Twenty-five% of the attendees
are san francisco residents. There is also some other initiatives they do that benefit
the city. Under the existing contract,
there was $10,000 initiatives. This outside lands work which is a charitable fund which provides
grants to arts programs, and its environmental impact has become a standard bearer for other festivals for the country.
We are one of the best with a 90 2% waste diversion.
And approved by 1% last year. But the event does have an impact, and we know that. We spent a lot of time planning
and trying to help mitigate the impact on the neighbours in the community for the time during
the setup.
In advance, we have three event meetings with members of the community. We need extensively with our
other city agencies to plan for safety and impact and transportation plans and
security.
Mailers are sent to notify all the people in advance around the park. We also put it on our website a
year in advance of people can plan. We put advertisements in the local newspaper, we provide big
do not block -- it should say sidewalk, but it should say driveway signs so that
neighbours can put it up on the driveway so that people don't
block it.
There is a community hotline that is available to address complaints during the festival, on a realtime and immediate
basis, and we also keep adapting. We build one of the concerns is
that during the build, the impact on bikers. We now have dedicated bike lanes and pathways for bikers during the events.
Entering the load in
>> we did have a spike up this year, and we felt like something different was happening, and they are working with meyer
sound, which is one of the main people in the country, and some of our recent conversations are about sound baffling technology, which is something new they've
used for outside events in las vegas where there are hotels
nearby, and they will be implementing those new technologies this year to try
and address it.
So we will remain vigilant and ensuring there are adequate ways
to address the issues. >> thank you pick one other
question back I noticed another planet would be required to
donate a booth for the city or its designated nonprofit partner
to use for purposes of community and philanthropic engagement,
and/or membership outreach. Can you describe what the plan is for this booth class. >> I think that is for the park his alliance that they just
wanted a chance to have a booth where they could solicit members
and people who are interested in supporting our parks citywide.
So we added that provision for
this year to ensure that they
had a space, and we envision it will be the park his alliance right there in a prominent
location to solicit support for parks. >> great. Thank you so much.
One final comment, I didn't want to note that while the new contract would require at least
one job fair in a postevent public meeting, both to be held
in the richmond district, I would very much like to work
closely with you all to ensure
that the sense that residents are provided the opportunity to lend their voice in matters related to outside lands as well. >> absolutely.
>> thank you very much. >> any comments or questions? I would like to comment on this because 70% of golden gate
parkas my district. To my constituents, I want to
say that I know there is an impact on the community for
those three days, and we are
weighing it also of what this concert actually brings to the city and county of san francisco
and our district.
It is doing its fair share of bringing in entertainment dollars and much-needed dollars,
quite frankly, to city coffers. I believe that they have been --
the promoters are some of the last independent promoters in this country, and that the planet entertainment has worked very closely with us, and I
encourage everyone when we have
our preplanning meeting, and the meetings after the concert to attend, and to bring issues and
questions, because we will have a lot of people there to answer those questions. So we do not have a report on this, but let's open it up to public comments. I do have some members of the public that have given me cards to speak on this issue. Every speaker will have two
minutes to speak.
>> thank you. Please start, you have two minutes. >> thank you.
Good morning, supervisors.
My name is arnold woods. I am on the board of directors of western neighborhoods project. I believe some of you are familiar with the organization,
but for those who are not, we are in a nonprofit history organization dedicated to preserving and sharing the history of the west side of san francisco, once known as the outside lands but because of
this, we have had a website address of outside lands. Org. when the first outside lands music and arts festival was
being planned, we are contacted by the organizers about using the outside lands name because
we had already been using it.
We had no problem with that, of course, because the name has been part of the public lexicon
of san francisco for 150 years. In the year 2010, we were
invited to join the eagle lawns portion of the festival and have been there ever since. As you might imagine, people interested in the history of our city tend to skew to an older
demographic, but our booth at outside lands has exposed us to a younger demographic, and a much larger audience than our
typical reach. I would assume this is true for all the other nonprofit groups that are part of the eagle lands. I would also note that as a
historian cackled gate part -- park has a long and rich history as a setting for a variety of musical events pick from symphonies at the bandshell, as
the setting dating as far back as 18 hundreds, to summer of
love. They have a shared history.
For all of these reasons, the western neighborhoods project, we would like to support the extension of the permit for the outside lands music and arts festival. Thank you. >> thank you.
Next speaker. >> good morning, supervisors.
My name is well, I'm here representing the richmond neighborhood center in the
richmond district. outside lands and outside lands
works have been great partners of the richmond neighborhood
center of the past year, in many years of the festival. The foundation supported our playland on balboa festival in
the fall of 2018, which is our very own free and public life
music and arts festival. Outside lands works was recently awarded -- has recently awarded us a significant grant that will support the integration of art
and music into our multicultural and identity-based programs at both presidio and roosevelt
middle school. This partnership has helped to bring visibility to the organization, and all of our programs throughout the richmond
district, and we are very much
looking forward to participating and working closely with the
festival for many years to come. Thank you. >> thank you very much.
Next speaker, please. >> good morning. My name is barbara, and I am a
resident of the richmond district, and have been since the beginning of the festival, I just wanted to say that I think
that the promoter has bent over backwards to accommodate all the
concerns of the neighborhood,
and I feel living on the
perimeter of the affected area
that every year things improve. The traffic and parking situation seems to be getting
better every year, and the noise
seems to be getting better every year too.
I definitely supports the festival. Is a wonderful thing for san francisco.
thank you. >> next speaker, please.
>> good morning, supervisors. I too have lived on the
perimeter of the festival since its inception, and this is
something we have really made part of our life with our families. Every year, with family come
from all over the country. I bring my children, I go with
my mother, we have cousins that come into town, and it has been
something we have treasured, and to have that go away and not be
an option as a multigenerational event would be a huge shame, and I think this city needs to keep
some of its cultural and music
experience part of the fabric so
I am in full support. >> thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
>> good morning, supervisors. I am an area entertainment sales
manager for viceroy hotel group,
basically hotels.
I have had the pleasure to
partner with another planet entertainment on this festival,
I'm actually going on 12 years with them, and in short, our
properties basically assisting
hosting bands, entertainment production staff and
festivalgoers, I pulled a report this morning, it over the last 12 years, we have done our hotel
group, around to bring $3 million worth of revenue for the city and tourism. Not only is this an economic
win, I feel like this festival also builds community. I also would like to say I've
gone every 11 years, I would like to comment on what an amazing job they do on taking care of the park during this
festival. To see the evolution of their
recycling programs, how they take care of fans, but it is just great to see how they
respect the neighbours from noise ordinances and everything like that.
That's all I have pick I'm a huge fan. I hope you extends the permits.
Thank you very much. >> next speaker, please.
>> good morning, supervisors.
I am here representing the community music center.
We were founded in 1921.
Our mission is to make music accessible to everyone regardless of their financial means.
We have a branch in the richmond district, have had since 1983, and our headquarter is in the mission.
Last year we served 2700 people. We touch all ages and musical genres, and this year we will
work with financial assistance. That said, we are so pleased to be approached last year by outside lands as they developed
their philanthropy. Outside lands works has a potential to be of great service to the san francisco arts community. We were very grateful for their
grant of $60,000 over two years
to support sliding scale tuition assistance and free and low-cost
music education at our richmond district branch, and we are
excited about outside lands works connection with the
richmond campus, and how we May
support the neighborhood of the
future. We support out side lands, and it is worth giving back to san francisco.
We are in favor of the extension. So the festival can continue to bring news -- world-class musicians to san francisco and inspired generations of future musicians. Thank you. >> thank you.
Next speaker, please. >> hello. I am here representing creativity explored. We are a beneficiary of the outside lands work fund and we
are here to show our support of
the outside lands program extension.
As an organization, the focus is on building community and awaken creativity for people with disabilities. We are strong supporters of outside lands.
It is a vibrant musical showcase that enriches the san francisco
art ecosystem for programming and philanthropy.
It offers a music festival that feels homegrown and activates
the park and surrounding neighborhoods, bringing people together in community, and for those reasons, we are strong
supporters of this resolution. Thank you so much. >> thank you very much.
Next speaker, please. >> good morning, supervisors. I and the general manager of the
holiday inn up on california in a van van ness pick I've had the pleasure of working with outside lands for the last seven years
on the planning process, and
also housing a lot of the folks that set up outside lands and take it apart. It is a three-day festival, capita starts about two weeks
prior to the first day of the music, and we are the
beneficiary, directly of that business but comes into san francisco. I have 200 employees are rely on this business. The folks that come into attend the music festival, along with the workers utilize a lot of the restaurants and goods and services along the van ness corridor, as well as polk street. I can't say enough about how the
planning process has gone with outside lands. They have been a pleasure to work with. On behalf of my hotel and my
staff, we are in support of this permit extension. >> thank you very much.
Next speaker, please. >> hello everyone.
I am the associate director of the san francisco-based
nonprofit women's audio mission.
Women's audio mission is a 15-year-old music and media nonprofit that serves over 2,000
underserved women and girls a year. We operate the only recording studios in the world his built
and run entirely by women.
We offer classes to adults, afterschool programs for middle
school girls, residents needs, concerts, performances, and much more. They approached us last year, and we were very grateful to accept a grant from them a
$40,000 over two years in support of our programs.
They also offered us to get to
the festival for all of our staff. we are continuing discussions with them about what other synergistic partnerships that we
can come up with, and we really appreciate their thoughtful
efforts to support us and the underserved communities in the
bay area overall. We thank you very much in
consideration of their permit, and we are very supportive of it. Thank you. >> thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
>> hello, I am representing sandwiches which is a small business out here in san francisco. We have about three shops in san
francisco, one shop on pacifica and outside lands outreach to us
for the first time last year, wanting to help more local
restaurants, and specifically a vietnamese sandwich restaurant
to be part of the landscape of
the food vendors within outside lands. It has been, for the first time
ever doing a festival, they were really taking care of us the
whole time. And they were really adamant on the environmental impact that
they would have within the park,
so as I continue to work with us
, time and time again, asking and responding to our questions,
they would be conscious of k., we need to put planters on the
floor, we need to make sure that
the environment around us will be well taken care of.
It is harder and harder being a
part of -- being a small business within san francisco,
so it has been a real great
pleasure to be able to work with
them for an event that is three
days, yet does have a large
impact within the entire city. I'm insult -- full support of outside lands and I really
appreciate the time to speak.
Thank you. >> thank you very much. Dinosaur sandwiches. Correct class. >> yes.
>> next speaker, please. >> hello, supervisors.
I run a catering shop.
I'm a small business food vendor in the san francisco bay area. We were given the fortunate chance to work with them
starting in 2011, and we have been there since.
As you can see, I'm a big supporter of them.
Just to give you a quick brief
history, when we first started it, we had a lots of support by
the team, to another planet making sure we do things right and take care of the park. Now they have implemented a lot
of stuff such as making sure we separate all the trash, recycling, on compostable his.
They are really on top of it. They go above and beyond and really take care of the park.
I can assure you of that, for me, personally, in terms of business, we are a small
catering company. We don't have a brick-and-mortar space. They did not give us a chance, they gave us a platform to showcase whatever food is all about, and that has given us a lot more business and catering,
and on top of that, in the early stages of my business, we were
struggling just trying to make
it a float, and we banked on
outside lands, and the influx of
revenue to support us throughout the year. Obviously now things have
changed, and things are settled, and we are grateful for being
part of this festival, and I completely support the festival,
and on a personal level, I am originally from L.A., in san francisco is my home now, and basically, this is the only time that my family actually comes to visit me because they help me
run the booth, for the festival,
for the music, but to support everybody, and another quick
story, I remember one of our
food patrons was from tokyo, japan, and they specifically
went to the festival, saying this is the festival to be.
It is not only a great festival
for the locals, for business, and for everybody, and from the
environment, I think that is my
ringer. >> thank you.
Your company is? Thank you very much. >> hello.
I am from youth art exchange
which is an organization that has been focused on increasing access to visually performing arts for san francisco public
high school students since 2,000 we are incredibly excited to have a new partnership with
outside lands that supports our programming and brings new arts programming to our youth pick last year, we are able to
participate with and on sight booth, and as a result, we had our youth, many of whom have never been to a concert or festival before.
They were able to be surrounded by art makers, performance, and art lovers.
san francisco being a thriving city for the arts, our participation opened this world
up to youth to a new reality and to see a viable futures in the
arts for themselves. Additionally, we increase the
visibility of work among art and scholars, and it gave youth an opportunity to teach printmaking
to people of all ages at the festival itself. The ability to have a partner
with such a great mission match
and the synergy between us is invaluable, and we fully support
their permit. >> thank you very much.
Next speaker, please. >> good morning, supervisors. I am a san francisco-based artist, and I have been living at dolores park for the last 13
years and I used to live at
golden gate park and that place is near and dear to my heart
his. Even more importantly, in a time like this, with what is happening with the artistic community in san francisco, his events like this, and outside lands in particular that is
really important to preserve for
the cultural landscape here. >> thank you, next speaker,
please. >> good morning, I am from the
surfrider foundation.
We both run the music outreach program, which I hope to hand
off to her. We are trying to protect and serve the ocean beaches.
Gives us a global platform.
Over the 12 years or 11 years we
have been involved, we have been able to connect new volunteers to the local chapters when they
go home, we have had people from
belize, australia, japan, ireland, all over the world. This is, we first started going to outside lands because it was a fun thing to do, and to be part of equal lands was
important to us we have developed an amazing outreach opportunity for the surfrider
foundation on a global level.
We also want you to be aware of the family environment that is
they are, the community that is there, we look forward to equal
lands every year to reunite with all the other nonprofits. It's almost like our own little high school reunion.
We are also passing it off to a lot of the young san franciscans.
She is a native. Her and her friends come to outside lands, work in the booth, and then share with other people in the festival. Thank you very much.
We are in full support. >> thank you very much.
Next speaker, please.
>> good morning, supervisors.
I am with tree-lined security. We are in full support of an
extension.
Tree-lined security, is a woman-owned and minority run business enterprise, partners
with outside lands and another
planet in terms of sound monitoring and community response. I would like to thank everyone
for all the hard work inputting the festival festival together,
but also to state that outside lands and another planet have
set the benchmark in life events and festivals, and we are very
glad and happy to be part of the teams that are developing best practices in the industry. Thank you for your time and consideration.
>> thank you very much.
>> good morning, supervisors. I represent the stagehands deep
behind the scenes, workers that you guys see as a three-day festival. It is 17 days' worth of work from beginning to end for this. We did all the load in and set up of all the bands, the staging
from start to finish. It employs 450 stagehands last
year, and my colleagues are in great supports of this continued
success of the event in golden gate park. >> thank you very much. Next speaker. >> good morning, supervisors.
I am with the local 16, the stagehands union, and just to
give you some raw numbers, in
2008, we did approximately the
stagehands benefited $300,000 in wages and benefits. This includes health and welfare and pension.
Last year, it was over $900,000 that went directly into the
pockets of our workers.
We are in great support of this festival and we would appreciate your support. >> thank you very much.
Next speaker. >> good morning, supervisors. I went san francisco travel association. We are a destination market organization with over 1300 business partners. I'm happy to be here today to support the contract extension
with another planet entertainment for the music festival in golden gate park.
San francisco welcomes over 25 million visitors a year, and those visitors spent over
$10 billion in san francisco, and that brings in over
$700 million in local taxes.
This contributes to our local economy, indefinitely our local
small businesses. They have brought top talent to
san francisco for over a decade, but also expose so many visitors to golden gate park. This jewel of a park that we
have in san francisco, and his benefited greatly the recreation and park department.
Having concerts like outside
lands in our parks, and is part of the cultural landscape is a big draw for international visitors.
We want to continue to support
these concerts, in support local business, and to continue these things happening in our city. Thank you for your time and
consideration.
>> good morning. I am a fifth-generation san francisco suggest san francisco and.
I live in district ten, and I have also lived in the sunset
and the richmond, and I have two boys that go to school here in the city, I'm also a member of
local 16, the stagehand to charge a union. I support the permit going
through, and ask you to all help keep these jobs here, and help keep me and my family and the
city where we have always been. Thank you. >> thank you.
Next speaker, please.
>> I am an owner and operator of downtown san francisco. We have three locations now. I'd like to reiterate that outside lands has a huge economic and financial and marketing impact for our business.
We rely heavily on outside lands
to carry and market our business
to not only san francisco residents, or residents that visit alike. I would like to clarify that
outside lands is not just another music festival, it is
absolutely an arts and cultural and culinary events, which makes it different from all the other
music festivals in the U.S.
It makes it stand out for san francisco. Thank you. >> the name of your business again,.
>> it is called fresh role. >> thank you very much. Next speaker, please. >> good morning. I am with the local 16, one of the stagehands that works
outside lands in the backstage
areas. I'm here in support of the
extension, and it is an integral
part of my income. It has supported my family, and
a great number of my friends
attend this festival, not only from the united states, but from fank -- france and england. And because of their enjoyment of this festival, I am proud to be part of it.
I know the planet has treated us very well. Thank you. >> thank you very much. Next speaker, please.
>> good afternoon.
I am a business agent. Teamsters 2795 has members that
work this destination event, and we want to express our support
for the extension of this permits.
Thank you.
>> hello, I have lived in san
francisco 25 years. My wife and I are raising teenage daughters in the outer richmond for the last 16 years, we live on 35th avenue.
We are two blocks up the hill. Of all the events that the city
does, this is one of the best. There isn't any letter afterwards, there is no vandalism or violence, we don't
see any of that two blocks away from the festival, it is excellent. Also, my daughters walk down
there all day, and they walked back at night.
We don't worry about them at all. There's police, fire, E.M.T. Is, it is a great presence in the neighborhood, and I think they are a great neighbour to us, and
we want to see them back also, I am a stagehand with local 16 it
is the only gig I do yearly.
It is fantastic. I see the process of going in
and going out, and it just works
better than most any other
events that we go to, it is
relatively painless, and I really encourage you to extend
the permit. >> thank you. Thank you for coming out and doing your thing today.
Next speaker.
>> 2785, and it has been a big
help for our local. I have been doing it for eight
or nine years now, and I believe
that you should keep it going. >> thank you.
>> thank you. >> next speaker.
>> my name is dede rutledge.
I feel lucky to have a pleasure
to work in this particular event , and I have only been doing it for three years, but
I've been doing it for 50 years. I'd appreciate it if you would
consider us continuing to get
this permits that you have allowed us, thank you so much.
>> thank you very much. Any more people that would like
to comment on this item?
Seeing none, public comment is close. Colleagues, any comments or questions? Seeing none.
I just want to say that this is in my backyard to, quite
frankly, I personally have never attended the concert, and I have
to concur, but I have to concur that I think another planet does
a really good job of outreaching to our neighborhood, and actually responding very
responsibly to any complaints
you might have around congestion and around sound, so I
understand the contract is a
long contract, but being the only independent promoter in
this country, and be able to compete with all these large corporations, and to book these acts that san franciscans and I
would church really enjoy. It is actually necessary.
So I would like to put this before -- make a positive
recommendation to send this to the board.
Can I take it without objection? Thank you very much. No report on this. Can you please call item number 15.
>> item 15 is resolution resolution approving amendment number 2 will, authorizing the human services agency to execute
an amendment to the agreement
between the city and county --
>> quiet, please. Supporters, quiet, please.
We are still conducting a meeting. Thank you. >> please continue. >> the nonprofit san francisco
marine food bank to provide the food assistance program to older adults and adults with disabilities for a total
agreement term of July first, 2017 to June 30th, 2022, and by increasing the agreement amount by 120 million for a
total not to exceed $11.5 million. >> thank you very much.
I believe we have michael here.
He is on the human services agency.
>> good afternoon. I am with the department of adult and aging services and part of the larger human services agency. I'm joined by the director of
human services agency.
We are here today in support of the resolution approval of
amendment to to our grant agreement with the san francisco food bank. The grant agreement supports the purchase of grocery bags which are then distributed by a food
pantry and home delivery grocery program model.
The services, we see them as critical to addressing hunger, and meeting nutritional needs of older adults and adults with
disabilities in the city. These programs are an important part of larger strategies to address food security in the
city of san francisco.
This is come before you today because we have seen this contract grow significantly over the past few years. That is primarily due to additional funding which has been allocated through the annual budgeting process.
These funds are advocated for and allocated as a means to support and grow programs like
this as we have seen demand
continue for this program.
With that, I'm happy to answer any questions.
>> thank you very much. Any questions from colleagues? Seeing none, I believe there is
a B.L.A. Report on this. >> the board of supervisors is approving the second amendment
to the contract with the food bank. This contract was originally entered into through a
sole-source process. The first amendment increase the
contract to a $9.2 million, and increase the number of
unduplicated clients from $2,400
to $4,900, this amendment will
increase the contract by two by
3 million to 11.5 million, and increase the number of
undocumented clients in the year close to 6500. We showed the budget for the contract going from fiscal year
17-18 to 2021 for the entire $11.5 million contract.
We are recommending a reduction
of 189,000 based on a contingency that was budgeted in
fiscal year 17-18 that is not needed.
Otherwise we recommend approval. >> thank you very much. Let's open this up to public comment period are there any members of the public would like
to comment on this item?
Public comment is closed. As someone who helped deliver
the 250 -- 250,000th bag of
groceries to homebound seniors,
I have to say that this looks
like it is, this added money is actually needed to meet the food
insecurity that we are seeing in
san francisco, particularly among our seniors, so I would
like to make a motion to approve the amendment, and to send this to the board with a positive recommendation recommendation as amended. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Madam Clerk, I would like to make a motion to rescind the
vote on item number 1.
And I would like to make a
motion to continue that item on rescinding the vote. >> is that correct cost. >> the vote was to continue the
item to the next budget and finance committee meeting. >> I would like to now make a
motion to continue that to the
meeting of February 27th. Can I take that without objection? Thank you very much.
I would like to recess this budget and finance meeting until three P.M. Today. Thank you very much.
I will see you all done.
Test.
Test.
>>> we are back in recess.
Madam Clerk, would you please read item number 16.
>> item 16, to identify the fiscal priorities and requesting
the use commission to report. >> that's great, so now we're going to hear from our san francisco youth commission about
their budget priorities for the
fiscal year 2019-2020, and I
will allow them to introduce
themselves and I believe we have five youth commissioners presenting today.
Thank you.
>> good afternoon, supervisors.
My name is calvin quick, I'm the legislative affairs officer of the youth commission. I also represent district 5. With me today are commissioners ty from district 8, dong from
district 3, and obermyer from district 1.
We're here to give an overview
of our main priorities and then afterwards, if you have any questions, we would be happy to
take them.
So, first a bit of background. The youth commission is a
charter commission made up of 17 youth age 12 to 23.
We're appointed annually, and we
are charged by the charter to report back regularly to the board and to gather information and advise the mayor and board on the effects of policies and
programs related to youth needs, particularly concerning the
budget of the city and county. So the way the commission has
typically fulfilled this duty in the past has been through our
budget and policy priorities report.
Otherwise known as our B.P.P.S. This is a document that we compile starting around February
of each year, and that we then
present to budget and finance in around April or May.
And it's a document that
outlines all of our budgetary
and policy priorities related to youth, and the problem, of
course, that we've encountered with this as a way of communicating youth needs to the
mayor and board is that by late
April, the mayor and departments
have already made most of their
funding decisions for the
upcoming year, so the budget
that comes to the board that's
under the review by the board at
that point doesn't effectively reflect the needs of youth constituency, because that youth
voice was absent during the earlier phase of the budget
process. >> this year the youth
commission passed the omnibus preliminary priorities
resolution to streamline the
budget process.
This is to ensure that youth organizations and the youth commission have enough time to
work on their priorities and again presenting our budget
priorities early allows us to
have better say in the board of
supervisors budget proposals.
So all 17 commissioners are a part of a committee, and each committee came up with their own
list of budget priorities after reaching out to their community-based organizations
and respective city departments.
First, we have the civic engagement committee, so their
priority right now is on youth
engagement in democratic processes, specifically about
'16 and 2020, and they have reached out to the league of
women voters, asian-pacific islander, american public
affairs, department of children, youth, and their families, the colorado youth congress, the
mayors of hyattsville, maryland,
tacoma park, maryland, and berkeley, california.
Also the city council of golden,
colorado, and, of course, the
vote '16 local and national chapters. Next we have the transformative justice committee.
They are focusing on working
towards alternatives to incarceration, and they've been
working with coleman advocates,
crisco cop watch, the department of police accountability, strategies for youth. And lastly we have the housing and land use committee, and they
are working on permanent
supportive housing for transitional aged youth and the T.A.Y. Navigation center, and they have been working closely with the department of homelessness and the supportive housing, the youth advisory
board, and the youth policy
advisory committee, the lyric lavender youth recreation and information center and larkin
street youth services.
>> as maggie mentioned, when it comes to the civic engagement committee, our main focus this
year has been in increasing young people's involvement in democratic processes,
specifically with regards to
preregistration, and so our
concrete ask as far as budgetary
focus is for fee wavers for california I.D. Cards for youth 16 to 18. We found during research last
year that when it comes to major
barriers to registering to vote,
for many low-income families,
the $30 charge for obtaining the
california real I.D. Was prohibitively expensive.
So we're looking to secure
potential funding through dcyf
to waive these fees for families
that cannot afford them and to make it easier to preregister to vote.
Part of this, too, is to
increase our constituency when
it comes to youth involved in
youth organizing for our
upcoming push for vote 16-2020,
which I assure you you'll be hearing about from us in the
next coming months, and given the national moment, what's been
happening in georgia, our ask,
truly, is for S.F. To make a larger commitment to enabling young people to prepare to take
part in their democracy.
>> hi, I'm nora. I'm the chair of the transformative justice
committee, and our big focus for this year is finding
alternatives to incarceration,
so our first budget priority is mandating the instruction of law enforcement officers on cognitive development. This was a priority last year, it was kind of implemented last
fiscal year, but we really believe it should be mandatory
for all police officers to go through cognitive development training, because it really will improve the interactions between youth and police in san francisco, and although last year it was implemented a bit, we really think that this needs to have consistent implementation throughout the
year.
Our next budget priority is the investment in re-entry program for -- thank you, youth exiting the juvenile justice system. We think it's really important for there to be programs that
are invested in the youth exiting the juvenile justice
system that give them access to
job resources, supportive housing, and enabling them to have access to social workers or
community members to help their transition from the juvenile justice system, and one aspect that's important to this is connecting them with either their families or people they
feel comfortable with, because we think the gap between formally incarcerated individuals and their community
is one thing, but it makes it
really hard to transition out of the juvenile justice system, so we think programs that bring together youth and their families and communities is
really important in engaging youth in getting out of the juvenile justice system.
Thank you.
>> the housing and land use have
been meeting on the 2015 goal of
200 units of permanent supportive housing. There are outreach in the
community, printed housing is a
more sustain shl option and
gives tay options needed. The goal of the housing plan was
to create an additional 400
units for tay by 2015. Today in 2019, four years past
the deadline, only 188 unites have been completed.
Other current estimate totals experiencing homelessness in the
city, even 400 units is still not enough. We strongly recommend and urge of committing funds to bridging this gap.
Everyone, including tay, deserve
the right to feel safe.
>> in terms of the funding allocated for transitional age
use services, we're asking for proportional funding.
As of May of 2017, only 8% of
the hhs service dollars were allocated for transitional aged youth, and we know from the
point in time count that about 20% of the homeless population
are between the ages of 18 to 24.
We would also like to see the navigation center for transitional age youth be created, since the funding was
already allocated in fiscal year
2018 to '19.
>> the youth commission's fully
aware of the mayor's request of cuts up to 6% of departments
over the next two years.
We are concerned that youth and tay will be further underserved and disadvantaged as a result of the budget cuts.
The city holds many progressive
values, one of those values being youth empowerment. We believe the city needs to put
money where its mouth is and not cut funding for its programs
supporting youth and tay.
>> so just to recap, these commissions' central priorities,
which we are pushing for in
discussions with the departments concerned, we are committed to obtaining increased funding for re-entry programs, services that
help youth exiting the justice system reintegrate into society.
We are also e committed to our
ask that substantial funding be allocated towards the 2015
2015 400-unit goal for permanent
supportive housing for tay and
looking for more proportional in hhs's budget.
And finally, while we recognize
the mayor has asked for cuts in departments' budgets, we believe
for many youth-specific
services, cuts will only accentuate the existing problems
facing underserved youth and tay populations. It's, in some ways, a matter of
whether some programs and services will survive beyond
this cut year and perhaps future years of cuts if their funding is cut or withheld this year.
So we are opposed to cuts to
youth and tay-specific programs across the city and county budget. That concludes our presentation. We're available to take any questions. Thank you.
>> Supervisor Fewer: colleagues,
any questions?
Go ahead, yes. Supervisor stefani.
>> Supervisor Stefani: first of all, thank you so much for that presentation and your involvement. It's great to see you up here. I'm impressed with your work and
the priorities you laid out here.
On the transformative justice committee slide you talked about mandatory instruction for law enforcement officers for youth cognitive development and interactions with youth. I think that sounds really important and promising, and I'm wondering if you know of any programs out there that other
departments are using, or if there's a sample program that you're thinking of, or if you know of anything.
>> well, there was already a program implemented in the last
year, but it only trained 25
officers, as opposed to the
2,000-plus officers in the sfpd.
we wanted an expansion of the
program to create a program that can be taught to all sfpd officers that works with both community organizations and the
city to create, like, a baseline instruction, because we think it's really important that all
officers are trained in this and not just a few.
>> Supervisor Stefani: perfect,
great, thank you.
>> Supervisor Fewer: yes, supervisor mandelman.
>> Supervisor Mandelman: well, I
would like to echo vice chair
stefani's comments about being very impressed by this group and
the work that you've done.
I also note your calling out the
city on some failures around tay housing, and I think that is
something that is going to be of
great interest to this committee going through the next few months thinking about the budget and thinking how we can get through the budget and perhaps
through another round of eraf, certain resources for supportive
housing for formerly homeless or homeless youth. That is one thing that was part
of the coalition on homelessness
ask for this last go around of
eraf, so we're not able to come up with the funds through that, but I'm hopeful that we will going forward over the next few months.
And then, of course, the tay navigation center remains a
promise that has not been kept,
so we are hoping that it will soon be kept, but thank you for
your work.
>> Supervisor Fewer: yes, thank you for your work.
I wanted to just ask a couple of questions. one, do you have a budget amount that you're requesting for the fee waivers for california I.D.
Cards for youth 16 to 18, do you know how much that might be in a budgeted item? >> we've talked through some numbers in committee, but I think that would be a matter to touch base again with committee and to reach out, but we can get those numbers to you.
>> Supervisor Fewer: because this is the budget committee, so
we really deal in numbers, so
when you're telling us you need
fee waivers for youth, we need to actually know how much are you allocating, what does that program sort of look like, how
would you reach out, would it be need-based? I think that we do have some
models that we, you know, for youth, we can actually look at some models that we can implement this with, and then I
wanted to ask you, because I
know the resolution is that they
were -- we passed a resolution
to actually preregister every --
register every sfusd student
who's 18, but the ones that were 17 to preregister for them a year earlier, because you were able to do that by law. Have you had any kind of hearing on that to find out, or requested a hearing through the
san francisco unified school district to find out how successful that program is, what
kind of resources are being put towards that? Because that's an area you can advocate for resources within the san francisco unified school district, also if there was a coordinator of that program, if there was someone to really oversee the pushing of that.
So rachel norton, who -- commissioner rachel norton, I wrote the resolution with her,
she's still on the board until 2020.
You might want to reach out to
her to call a hearing to see how across the board it's happening
in our high schools, because, as you know, the san francisco unified school district educates
about 60,000, two-thirds of the school-aged children in san
francisco, so they would capture, quite frankly, most of
the teenagers, a proportion, of those future voters. Because I think that would be --
I haven't heard the results of that and whether or not it's
been successful or not and how many people have actually registered to vote. And then what would help would be also to just have even
through the department of
elections how many youth are registered to vote in san francisco currently, and is there an aspirational goal that you have in mind, because then we can see what we need to get
to that goal, I think, would be
kind of helpful.
Another thing is about the law
enforcement, I actually would
add in if it's all about youth,
then we would also add in about
procedures when stopping and detaining youth and also the laws and general orders
pertaining to youth and youth in schools, questioning of youth,
reading of their rights, those type of things.
And it's not just youth cognitive development, but really about the legal framework
about youth, too, because if there are officers that have not
engaged on a regular basis with youth, then they might not be
aware of all the laws that we
actually have ordinances that we have governing their behavior or what they can do around youth. And so I just think that would
be really important to add in, too. And then, let's see, the re-entry programs, yeah, I
wanted to ask you, because I'm
on the re-entry council for the city and county of san francisco, and I'm wondering if
you've partnered at all with re-entry, the re-entry council.
Because they mainly talk about adults in that re-entry council,
and it would be kind of, I think helpful, actually, to have youth voice there. Because we are looking for ways for people when they come back into general population, what
are the supports that they need, and I think that if we -- if we had a youth representative there, it would be really super helpful.
And then I also want to ask, the san francisco unified school
district stopped giving driver's education and driver's training, but we are hearing now that it
is a barrier sometimes to employment for young people. For example, if you want to go
into trades, you have to have a driver's license.
If you want to be a bus driver
or some of these living-wage jobs, you have to know how to drive. And driving is one of those jobs, to be a driver is one of those jobs that sometimes you don't need a college education and that you can actually start
driving and be part of the teamsters right after high school.
So I am wondering, have you seen
that to be of concern to youth?
Because I am hearing more broadly it's not so much the 18 year olds, but when they are
trying to get a job when they are 23 or 24 that require some
driving, that they don't have a license, and actually to get a license in san francisco can be somewhat costly. For example, you have to have someone teach you how to drive, and a lot of people don't have cars.
And also if you come from a family that they are not legally
able to get a driver's license,
then those families, who teaches who to drive?
And the san francisco unified school district used to do it. I'm wondering, have you heard if
there's a need for a fund maybe
or some program to teach youth to drive? And then I'd love to hear about that. And then I think I just want to echo what my colleagues have
said about the tay housing.
Yeah, considering that the money's been budgeted, what the heck, and so we'd love to follow
up on that, too, because the
money has already been funded,
so what's taken so long, right? Yeah, and I think the mayor has
requested cuts up to 6%, and we
will see, you know, we have very
little control over the mayor's budget instructions, and it's
true that the mayors and the
departments get first dibs at
the budget, and so I don't know
what they would be actually
cutting in there, but I would say that if you are -- that you
May want to meet with some large departments and ask and meet with the department heads and
ask them about the 6% cut and
request that they make the cuts to youth and tay-specific
programs.
>> all right, so a lot to touch on there. Firstly, when it comes to the amount of young people in san francisco who are currently
preregistered to vote, it looks
to be 1,724.
With regards to the monetary
ask, when it comes to the fee waivers for california real
I.D.S, the number we have cited and committed to based on all
our calculations and research is $60,000.
When it comes to the department
of elections more broadly, I know we've had some contact with
them when it comes to preregistration.
I haven't heard much about the
resolution automatically
registering young people to vote, but --
>> Supervisor Fewer: excuse me, I'm sorry, charlie, to interrupt
you, but it is supposed to be
part of, I think, american
democracy, which is a required
graduation course for sfusd and
all of you guys, so in order to
pass that, so that we know every
12th grader is actually taking that class, it's required, and that's why we put it in that
class, that there would be a voter registration component.
>> yeah, speaking to the
curriculum surrounding that
civics education, I know -- I believe it was two years ago,
one of our commissioners made a hard push when it comes to the
board of education to try to mandate more civics education. As far as we can tell, and we
have followed up a great deal,
we've more or less been stonewalled or written off.
>> Supervisor Fewer: so we are now, I think the board of supervisors are used to the committee who had school board members and board of supervisors, and now -- then they stopped having that committee.
They are now reconvening, if you would like, whoever the chair of
that is, you May want to ask
that that be put on the agenda. And then you could have the department of elections here,
and then you could have also
sfusd, their curriculum folks,
and then it would be important
to know how many youth in the
2020 election would be eligible
to vote as a population, right, 1,723, is that a low number, or
is that a high number?
Like, it seems kind of low to
me, but wondering what the aspirational goal is then,
right, because we know the
earlier you vote, voting is a
habit, the earlier you vote, the
more prolific voter you will be.
Hence, vote '16.
>> we can speak to strategy around vote '16 another time. We actually just had a
stakeholders meeting to set down some of the long-term strategy around that, so we can certainly be in touch with your office around that.
When it comes to sfusd and
classes to obtain a driver's
license, as far as I would
guess, if $30 is prohibitively expensive, my guess is $200
driving lessons, of which i believe you need three, certainly would be a barrier, so if there was some way to
subsidize that through sfusd, again, that would certainly be
an option or idea that the commission would be interested in pursuing.
>> Supervisor Fewer: what I was thinking is, if it's not through sfusd, is it through the
initiative of giving every youth
a job? And part of job training?
What I didn't know is, if this is an issue that youth have brought up or not. If they think it's important. So if it's not important, I would say you probably wouldn't prioritize it, but if you're
hearing that it's important, then I think they want to learn to drive and don't have the opportunity to learn, then I
think it's worth exploring
actually as part of a youth job development. >> got ya. Well, we'll definitely be in touch with our community partners around that question.
When it comes to your questions
around questioning of youth
re-entry programs and touching base with the re-entry council,
I'm going to turn it over to nora.
>> Supervisor Fewer: okay. >> hi, I also just want to share that as a youth that is
currently in high school, I have
definitely heard that very few
people I know actually have driver's licenses, and most aren't really looking to get them either, partially because of how long it takes to get a driver's license, and also because it is really expensive to get driver's licenses, and I can't speak to how that affects people looking to get jobs in
driving, but I do know that it is pretty rare.
>> Supervisor Fewer: okay, thanks.
So the re-entry council.
>> so we -- sorry, can you
repeat what you asked again? Sorry.
>> Supervisor Fewer: so the re-entry council is a place where a whole bunch of city departments get together, and I sit on it representing the board of supervisors, and we brainstorm about some of the issues that are a barrier to success for people who are coming out of incarceration.
So we're looking at those supports.
How to connect them to jobs, what is kind of the other supports that they need, housing, those type of things, but also examining the supports
that we do have, are they
effective, and then also looking
at why our incarceration rate is
so disproportionately african-american and latino.
So those type of conversations
we have, too, but if you wanted to connect to the re-entry council, I think it fits in sort
of perfectly about re-entry from
youth, for youth, because you do serve adults also.
This could be a very, I think, good committee to even come to address one day or about some of
your ideas around re-entry for youth, because most of the conversations we have is re-entry around adults. >> yeah, I think that is a really important aspect and perspective to see about re-entry programs for youth, and I think it is very, very similar
to a lot of things we're looking at in the incarceration of youth in san francisco and the juvenile justice system.
>> Supervisor Fewer: thank you very much.
>> thank you.
>> just one more piece to that.
Just occurred to me, we did receive a presentation from someone from the re-entry
council earlier this year. There was some discussion about
the proposing of a mandated
youth seat or more ideally
multiple mandated youth seats, but that's something we'll definitely touch base with.
>> Supervisor Fewer: you May want to advocate for that,
because we do have people who
have been formerly incarcerated
and there's seats designated for them, too. So it's great to have seats at the table, voices. Any other questions?
Let's open it to public comment. Are there any members of the public that would like to comment on this issue?
Seeing none, public comment is
now closed. So, I think I would like to continue this item to the call of the chair. Would that be okay? We can take that without
objection, so we can call you guys back. Thank you very much.
So, take that without objection,
and then, Madam Clerk, are there
any other items before us today?
>> Clerk: there are no other items on today's agenda.
>> Supervisor Fewer: thank you very much, our meeting's
