week. >> they've planted trees, and normally, we water them, but they recently got a truck about 1.5 years ago, so they're able to water 500 trees. but whatever they don't water, we water. >> supervisor peskin: okay. that's a little different than what mr. weidenmeyer said. maybe we can clear this up, because that's been one of the sources of my confusions or questions. if d.u.f. has planted 5,000 trees, most of them are in their three-year need to be

watered time frame, and what mr. weidenmeyer said is they water them for three years and then, they turn them over to you, which means you would need to be doing several thousand a week, so i'd like to get to the bottom of that. and then, on the same thing, department of urban forestry -- i assume the 6,852 trees that have been removed yet replaced because the property funding model, it can't be for new trees, per se. it can be used for existing trees that were removed, so does that mean -- if you've removed 6,852, have we planted 6,852 -- and sorry. this is my rambling train of thought -- why are we watering

between department of urban forestry and land department half of that? >> yes. if i miss anything, please remind me. the trees that we've planted, or the bulk of them are planted by f.u.f., and then, it gets watered by 500 trees or we give a watering list to clean city and they water them, so it's all getting watered by us. the trees outside of the three-year list, they're getting removed. f.u.f. would like to get another truck so they can get all the trees water, but what

brian was indicating was they water the day of -- oh, brian's here. would you like to direct the question to him? >> supervisor peskin: sure. do you want to help clear this up, brian? >> so yes. thank you for the question, supervisor peskin. i think [indiscernible] is describing the process correctly. we water 500 of those on a rolling basis as our capacity permits with the one watering truck we have, and then, we have to send the planting list to the city that, as nick described, and i'm learning here, then covers the watering of those 500 that we don't water, so between the city's crews and the clean city folks that are contracted. >> supervisor peskin: got it. and there's another possibility where -- and i'll mention this

later, there are community watering groups, and those groups have been helpful in escaping beyond these limits of what we can water. >> supervisor peskin: and i'll bring this up because i have a slide of people watering in two different parts of san francisco, but the charge, which i am not pointing fingers but just want to optimize and get fixed if it needs to be fixed, which it sounds like it does, some trees are getting watered that aren't surviving. one question on this slide, and i'm sorry to bring it up, but i mentioned it yesterday, and that is given the unfortunate -- this is fodder

for a different hearing and under a totally different title, and i know that supervisor mar has shared these concerns, but given the extremely unfortunate revelations and subsequent indictment of the former head of public works and revelations about our garbage monopoly, giving huge amount of money which was given to a parks alliance subaccount which were used and solely under the control of the former director of public works, relative to the contract between public works and clean city, can you just let us know how -- why that's been maintained? >> sure. that was something that we were uncertain about, and we've been checking with our counterparts with the city attorney's office and with the controller's

office to make sure that our contracts could continue, and we've trusted them to do their investigation, but it, to date, has not impacted our ability to work with clean city, and from our perspective, they've been a great partner. they do a really great work with the watering and maintenance of trees. their success rate has been excellent. we did put this out as a competitive bid, and they were -- they were competitive. that's how they were able to enter in the contract with their bid, so i'm hopeful that we can continue partnering with them because they're watering so many trees, and there are very few folks that are willing to get on these, but that's been the history. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. really good answer. i'm sorry, but i did want to

check that off. >> supervisor mar: i did want to ask a few questions on that follow-up, clean city. [indiscernible]. >> sure. if we have a business that we contract with for the pruning, they have to have a requirement that they meet as a contractor, but for our grants, it's a little different, where we require workforce development to receive a grant, so i think it's beneficial for the city to have that workforce development job training component. the other bids, where we have for tree pruning, it could be awarded to a smaller local business, and it could also go to a much larger company that's

a statewide operation, and they have to partner with local businesses to makeup a percentage of their work, so i say grant because it's a different way that we issued the work to them versus our contractors, where we have different requirements and the different mechanism. >> chair mar: and it sounds like different opportunities for workforce development. >> yes. i should mention that being a nonprofit is one of the reasons. >> chair mar: and when was the contract to clean city for the watering started, and what's the amount -- annual amount? >> i don't have those numbers. i know that it was year ago,

and it goes up for renewal, and we keep submitting for renewal. the history of that, and the amount, i could definitely send to you. >> chair mar: okay. yeah, i'd appreciate that. and then, final question. how is it divided up, the tree water? you say there's seven d.p.w. staff that do watering full time, and then, the clean city folks? >> yes, good question. so we have a preference to consolidate all of our watering in one area of the city. it's more efficient for them, and every time we change their tree list, the -- it's, like,

changed to their grant in a way, in a small way. but with our crews, it's easier to just tell one of our staff members, hey, we're going to add this tree or take this tree off, and they can edit their route slightly. and as a result, most of our clean city trees are centered in one area, and then, we have our crews do the rest of it. it makes sense for them to concentrate there and focus what they're doing. >> chair mar: so it's sort of a geographic turf, just -- and i don't think -- i don't -- oh, supervisor peskin asked a

question about the 6,852 trees that were removed. i'm assuming that's since street tree s.f. was created and whether those were replaced and how they -- how were they -- so i guess that's a question i would like some clarification on, whether those 6,852 trees were replaced, and who replaced them? >> this also reminds me i didn't fully answer supervisor peskin's answer, either. so the properties are are -- property funds are designated for use of maintenance, and we did ask the city attorney if we could use that, and we got the response that it's approved for maintenance and approval work, and this creates a gap in

planting. i will share this. with prop k transportation authority funds or with supervisor add-backs for capital budget money, we can use that, and we have, and that's been our capital funding money. what you mention brings up a good topic of when we remove a tree, that's somebody who's receptive to a tree, so we do want to replace those trees, and they'll even voluntary, if you plant it, i'll water it, and we plant that really quickly. we have a goal of replacing in 90 days if somebody wants to water. but there's also an equity perspective, and i'll share

that, too, where we have a lot of trees in concentrated parts of the tree. if we can only afford to replace the trees that we're removing, then we only end up repeating those trees in those areas. >> chair mar: thank you. i just was wondering if you could just estimate what percentage or how many of those 6,852 trees that were removed by d.p.w. since street tree s.f. was started have been replaced. is it close to 100% or you don't know? >> i don't have that.

i'll have to get back to you, but i'll add that as a note to follow up. >> chair mar: okay. supervisor peskin, do you have any -- >> supervisor peskin: oh, i have lots that i could continue till dinner time, but i'll let mr. crawford continue with his slide. >> so regarding planting, we described this as the unintended consequence of success, meaning, we're removing dead, dying, hazardous trees, and it's creating this need for replacement trees, but it's unfunded without the additional money to makeup what we're doing. the press is aware of it, we're aware of it. this is something that's been really important to us to address. the removal numbers here shows

the historical number that's jumped up as we've scaled up our program, and it's beginning to taper off over the last couple of years we finally were able to catch up. i don't think this number will drop off because it makes sense, but it does create this need for planting replacement trees: so actually, before i got into that, one more thing that i just wanted to mention

was -- let me pull up my notes here -- we do have a tree notification page similar to what danny was mentioning in his presentation. we have this page on our website to notify folks of trees being removed in their neighborhood, and it came about as a board of appeals settlement agreement with neighbors in the district three surrounding washington square park, where they protested the removal of some trees, and we trees to replace the trees that we were removing, but also trees surrounding the neighborhood, and we followed through on that. we planted about 50 trees in a neighborhood event in the area there, and another component was to improve our notification of tree removals happening in

the neighborhood, and we expanded that to make it accessible to everyone across the city so that even if you're not walking past the tree removal area, you can see it on the website. it's broken up into each district so you can see what's close to you what's going to be removed. i'm grateful for that feedback, and we're listing that on there so it's becoming a central

repository on that. there's a bit of an overlap where it could be a street tree. if it's on their property -- and i don't know that m.t.a. has a whole lot of trees on, like, their property. it's mostly on their intersection of their projects on street trees that are in the public right-of-way, and that's what gets posted on the page. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. >> i want to talk about planting strategy, and similar to the notification page, i'd like to talk about how we got here. this year, we were audited by the budget and legislative analyst, and that audit was a deep dive into our processes, our finances.

they interviewed our staff to really find out how we functioned to find out what we were doing and what we could do better, and they came up with land recommendations. one of them is already complete, and we do support the other eight recommendations and are working on them. one of the recommendations that came out was for the board of supervisors, which i would subtly recommended and if this can be sustained, i would love that; consider allocating general funding to close

allocation gaps. our goal of hitting 155,000 street trees by 2040, in order to do that, we've got to plant 4,000 per year. we came up with that number based on about 2500 trees that we need to replace as we remove, and then another 1500 trees annually to actually through our canopy. if our costs are about $2,000 a tree, then we need a certain number a year, and i'm also going to share not only how many trees we need but where we're going to plant those.

. >> clerk: we have received a presidential action memo appointing supervisor peskin as president in place of supervisor stefani for the 1:30 meeting, so that has changed. >> so our urban canopy of 13.7% is not enough, and we know that, and we want to grow that, but it's also something we want to do in an equitable way. we've conducted a racial equity

analysis across our department, and we really want to find out how this impacts our work in the planting aspect. so we have this environmental justice map, which i'll show in another slide, too, but you can see where it highlights the climate resilience need. this overlaps with what brian was talking about, the heat impacts, especially on the eastern side of the city, it's disproportionately impacted. but you can see the pollution, how we need to focus on planting trees there. our goal is to achieve street tree equity in all san francisco neighborhoods, and we want our planting work to reflect progress towards that goal. as the san francisco chronicle

made us aware this year, you can drive a link between street trees and income, so what we'd like to do is draw a straight line across all income levels where we have an equitable tree canopy cover. this intentionally excludes trees and parkland because i think that can skew the numbers, and i find this a

striking overlap with the environmental justice map. so talk about our progress on tree planting, you can see that it's hovered around this 1500 to 3,000 trees per year range, and we're talking trees that are in-house crews plus friends of the urban forest and also climate action now for those first three years, where we'll get those numbers for the first fiscal year. and also our forestry inspection team, which is critical because if we're enforcing the code, if you have a large renovation, where you're somehow flouting the tree requirement ordinance, our

inspectors are making sure that the trees get plants, and that's something that we can enforce other enterities to do do -- entities to do their share. >> supervisor peskin: do you know the [indiscernible] that's something i think we could do a better job of tracking it. we're also finding that it could be species dependent.

we are always trying to plant new species, but sometimes they don't establish as well and we're replacing them. there's also mortality from vandalism, which is really high for us, fortunately, and other reasons where a tree may not

make it, but that is something that's worth tracking better for us. >> supervisor peskin: and just anecdotally, if i were just to apply this to these numbers, it would be, weirdly enough, in this period of time, the almost exact element in round numbers, almost the exact number of trees removed, 6800. i think, overall, we agree that we are just at the water line. we're just -- we're planting as many as we're removing. i think the net gain since prop e has been a net gain of 300

trees we have to collectively seriously up our game if we're going to get to anywhere near 4,000 a year. i think we projected to hit that number by 2034, and that was more ambitious because you thought you had more. i think we've learned stuff along the way, which is that 2500 a year didn't deal with mortality adequately, but i think we need to be transparent with the public about what

we've learned in since getting onto covid, but i'll let you go on. >> yeah, no, thank you. when we're aware of a struggling tree, we want to make it right. 311 has been a good way for us to hear that in real-time. for that north beach planting, i was out there the day that we were doing it with a clean team group, and i went back out there yesterday, and there are some vacant tree basins,. it's not a high number citywide, but it does happen. when we got poor quality trees,

then we hope that the tree makes it, but it does inform us where we buy trees, and if they're not good quality, we say, we'll buy our trees elsewhere, and we know that we're being measured by the top of our urban canopy, and i think it's important that we do this successfully. >> supervisor peskin: yeah, and then i'll say this, and then i'll try to shut up. having very clear metrics about what was set forth in the plan or alternatively, if we need to revise the plan, but having very clear metrics to advise on on an annual basis is important

because we did go to the voters, and we have to show to what extent those promises are being kept, and i think that is metrics on, yes, trees removed, planted, mortality, and where we are so that everybody can see that graphic in relatively real-time or at least on a periodic basis.

>> this business of trees is certainly what we care about the most, and we definitely want to grow our tree canopy. we're grateful for the support that we're receiving, and we feel the responsibility. i want to talk a little bit about the 28 street case study and -- 24 street case study and

how this has worked for us. 24 street, i have to tell you, a beautiful busy area that has a lot of dense trees that are part of the fabric of that corridor. when we took a closer look at them, we realized that there were a lot of trees that were really stressed that we'd have to do a lot of impact on, and those trees are relative to the community. the trees caused a lot of damage to structures and sidewalks. delivery vehicles are jammed in there, and they're regularly bumping up against the trees and doing damage, and this [indiscernible] is doing

damage, which is unfortunate, and you can tell they're being affected by that and the drought. this is something that didn't happen by accident. it took a two-year outreach, where we knew this would be a big impact, and we wanted to start that conversation proactively, and it was something that we thought was

the right thing to do, despite being a really hard thing to do. and i'm route proud to say if you go down there, you can see the impacts. it's maples with -- and i'm proud to say if you go down there, you can see the impacts. it's maples mixed in with gingkos, and when we've got shorter days and a greater need for heating, you've got less fossil fuels being consumed.

so [indiscernible] within a few blocks north and south so we can saturate all of those available basins, so that's a great example of that partnership. and one other example that i'd like to talk about, we're looking at the future of our urban forestry program, and

it's looking really shabby right now. it's bear earth, and it's really striking for the city. somebody coming off the freeway, going down that off ramp, it's really striking, and what we're looking at is a tree nursery, something that will make it very inviting, but it'll serve a functional purpose, being able to grow small trees from a bare root and put them in a bot. with the irrigation, we'll be able to grow them to a size that we can plant the street trees. and this was just a dream a year ago, but the mayor set aside funting in the cap cal --

funding in the capital budget. this is, i think, an exciting time to be able to do some coal things now that we've knocked out some other things, like maintenance. so we're getting $2.5 million, and we have aalso got our prop k funding, and cal fire grants, which we could get, but it's

especially valuable for our partners, and then, this infrastructure money, which we're hopeful. our position is we're one of just a handful of cities, that if we apply for that, we'd be able to receive that. so here is our planting funding, planting and establishment money. so you can see the huge jump with the general fund money in the current year, 300 -- or $3 million, which includes those numbers i showed, about 500,000 that we had last year, too. and then, we get a charge chunk, hovered about

1.1 million. and g.o. bonds revenues dropping, they are planting to reduce that by 1% from their budget. we have a meeting at 6:00 p.m. tonight, where we'll be making the presentation and the request, and hopefully, we'll get the funding reinstated. the largest most reliable chunk of funding for us, and it is worrisome that may not come to fruition. >> supervisor peskin: i think the voters are the arbiters of that, but as i said at the outset of this hearing, you're talking to a receptive

audience. >> thank you. >> supervisor peskin: i really want to thank you. i've got a ton of questions, but i have a meeting with the controller on recology at 2:00, but i want to hear from mr. gonchar and the public. what i want to know is if we can go to public comment and continue this hearing because i think there's a lot of information and a lot we can do that can result in my working with chair mar to come forward with not only a set of additional questions but additional questions relative to policy changes that are within our purview. so mr. gonchar, if it is okay with you and chair mar, and we can continue this to another meeting of this committee, because i think there's a lot of value in this hearing, i

would like to actually not have the b.l.a. report and direct people to look at it, and we'll put it -- make sure that it is on-line and go to public comment because at 2:00, i've got to go meet with the controller on recology. my apologies, dan, to have you sit here, but know that your june 14 report is now front and center in all of our minds, and it really does have some great recommendations. >> of course, supervisor. >> supervisor peskin: my apologies. >> chair mar: thanks, supervisor peskin, and i think all of that makes sense to me, so why don't we go to public comment right now. >> supervisor peskin: yes, and i will present mr. lance karnes' research, which we didn't have time for that.

>> clerk: so members of the public who wish to call in, do so following the instructions on your screen right now. dial 415-600-0001, enter the meeting i.d. 2489-479-6006. press pound twice and then star, three to enter the queue. for those of you in the queue, and i see there's three of you, wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. mr. smith, could you unmute the line for the first caller. >> oh, hello. this is lance karnes. if you could bring up my slide

deck. i'm watching on sfgovtv. i can't see -- >> clerk: yes, it's going to take a moment for us to snap that in place, so hang on just a moment, please. >> clerk: sorry, everyone, for your patience. we have to find this specially arranged public comment presentation from lance karnes. there are quite a bit of moving papers in the creation of this

meeting. >> chair mar: thank you, mr. clerk, for all your work. >> clerk: let's, for now, go to the next speaker, if we can, so when mr. karnes is back on, we can throw it up. >> i can help out with that, john, if you need me to -- >> i would be ready to go if you give me one moment. this is victor young. >> clerk: thank you, victor. mr. karnes, if you're still

there -- >> yes. >> clerk: okay. please begin. >> okay. i'm not seeing the slide deck. >> clerk: there is a delay between the broadcast and the phone call that you're on, but we are displaying that, as well. >> i can go blind. good afternoon. my name is lance karnes, and next slide, please. this tree shown here was not watered by public works for six months. [indiscernible] for three years. next slide, please. i performed a tree watering audit, 75 trees total. only 28 trees were watered, or about 35%.

[indiscernible]. >> next slide, please, and here's a watering success story, mission verde is a resident watering [indiscernible] created by public works. 140 watering areas created in the area and side streets. here's mission area residents, my grandchildren included, with push carts.

[indiscernible]. >> thank you, supervisors, for holding this hearing. >> clerk: thank you very much, mr. carnes, and just so everyone knows, we are in receipt of those slides, and those slides have been added as a part of the file and automobile to consult with the research center. mr. smith, could you please connect us to the next caller. >> hello. thanks so much for holding this hearing. my name's sarah jones. i am on staff at the sfmta. i'm also a member of the board of friends of the urban forest, but i'm here today on my own time, and i'm speaking today as a resident of district 5. so as many people has mentioned

today, our urban forest is a deeply effective way to make our city equal on two main goals: neighborhood equity and climate resilience. trees are a way that people are directly responsible for contributing and shaping their space. trees shouldn't be seen as something extra or something that's an amenity. trees are one piece of the fix and something we can't do without, really. so now, i want to talk a little bit about the context of the trees are our connective tissues of the streets of our

communities. as supervisor mar mentioned, they are our most pervasive [indiscernible] another way that trees are essential is they are reaching part of that 80. street trees are safer and more hospitable spaces for -- >> clerk: thank you. your comments are concluded. >> supervisor peskin: miss jones, if you could finish that sentence, that would be great. >> sure, thank you.

i just wanted to point out that as transportation authority noted, repaired harm to communities and climate resiliency are some of the top goals that we need to achieve on our streets, and there are many ways to do that, and one of them is that fundamental piece of funding, you know, funding, planting, and maintenance of trees on our streets. thank you. >> thank you. this is an anonymous caller. in the past, people could not refuse a tree. there were different reasons that they would have to.

seniors or disabled or buckled sidewalks or trip and falls is not addressed, and cost of concrete and cement accounts for 6% of the world's pollution on par of steel production pollution. the half percent sales tax provides a covert tree funding. there should be one funding source to identify the cost of the urban forest in the city. for over a decade, a decade ago, the report from the urban [indiscernible] that were planted in district 8, and they were demanding that you accept

the street tree in district 8 a decade ago. we need to have a discussion on the use of the transportation funding under the prop k and in the future proposition that's going to be on the ballot, so for now, we need to identify funding for the urban forest in one lucid area and not have it fragmented. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. can we get the next caller,

please. >> unfortunately, i probably know more about legislation policy and practices on street trees than most people in this city. the legislation is not enough because it reduces public process. public process is one of the reasons that canopy is making any progress, including this hearing. this legislation has not had enough time to be examined, including by our own department of urban forestry, whose job it is to do so.

i had the unfortunate experience of going to the sunshine ordinance task force with rec and park, which i proved they have no record of tree plantings and approvals, which means they've been submitting football numbers to the department of urban forestry in the last several years, and i would also point out that rec park capital projects do not require that. trees up and die for lack of water. prop e, there was a lag between the time it took effect and the tree watering took effect --

>> clerk: thank you for your time. sorry to cut you off, but each speaker has two minutes. can we have the next speaker, please. >> thank you. catherine howard, outer sunset. two years ago, the city planted new trees on sunset, but then, the city did not come and water them, and they eventually died. in addition to not taking care of new street trees, the upkeep of older trees did not fare much better. b.a.r.t. won't bother to design a station canopy that preserves

mature trees, and many street trees are labelled a hazard and then cut down even though other trees with the same label manage to stay upright for years. the hazard term is a category that could be used by a city department with a new article 16 legislation, and that is going to eliminate public appeals of hazard trees. what could possibly go wrong? as climate change gains speed, san francisco must change its priorities and value mature trees. they provide wildlife habitat, protection, and shade, and i look forward to a robust conversation and protection of our street trees and nourishment of our urban canopy for the benefit and protection of all san franciscans.

thank you. >> clerk: thank you. can we get the next comment, please. >> yes, hello. first off, i want to thank the supervisors for this inquiry into the -- our tree problem. i really appreciate that attention. there have been problems with trying to have citizens communicate with the city about the problems they have maintaining -- caring for their trees. i had questions about the questions that supervisor peskin placed.

the stuff on the picture is playing at a very different time that i'm talking. in any event, i wanted to assert that no tree, no healthy tree can be replaced for any reason. construction by some builder, the trees were here before we were. they have rights of their own. we went through this with tree removal by m.t.a. on geary boulevard. a very healthy elderly, with 50 more years to its life, cypress was taken out because it didn't fit in with their plans. when it was appealed, it was only heard by people within their own department, not by the board of appeals, and even so, the board of appeals has very seldom done anything to help us protect the trees.

i wanted to suggest, for the tree watering, that more community efforts could be made to share in the care of the trees. maybe even certain communities could adopt a tree so that -- >> clerk: thank you. speaker's time has concluded. could we have the next caller, please. [please stand by]

>> and determination to care for our city. so much of what we talk about is planting trees. many people don't realize that 75% of the city's budget, which it really doesn't have, 75% goes to paying watering crews. thank you for sharing your comments. we have reach the end of the queue for public comment. >> public comment is now closed. i want to thank all the speakers. i know you're all passionate advocates for greening trees in

our city. thank you for all you do. i think we should wrap up this hearing today and continue it because there's still the la presentation and more discussion to be had. do you have any closing comments. >> i want to thank all of the people that appeared for public comment and my staff for helping prepare me for this meeting and all of the departmental staff who presented. there's a lot we can do here not just on the legislative side but transparency and data are important. governmental and organizational changes. we did not discuss things yet about whether or not there should be uniform standards. i think we can get to that at

our next hearing. i would make a motion to continue to a date certain or to a call of the chair. >> call of the chair because we're still trying to schedule meetings in move. >> so moved. let us here it next month. >> on the motion offered that the hearing be moved to the call of the chair. there are two ayes. >> great. thank you. >> thank you everyone. is there any further business. >> there is no further business. we are adjourned. thanks everyone.

>> he is a real leader that listens and knows how to bring people together. brought this department together like never before. i am so excited to be swearing in the next chief of the san francisco fire department, ladies and gentlemen, let's welcome, jeanine nicholson. (applause).

>> i grew up total tomboy, athlete. i loved a good crisis, a good challenge. i grew up across the street from the fire station. my dad used to take me there to vote. i never saw any female firefighters because there weren't any in the 1970s. i didn't know i could be a fire fighter. when i moved to san francisco in 1990, some things opened up. i saw women doing things they hadn't been doing when i was growing up. one thing was firefighting. a woman recruited me at the gay-pride parade in 1991. it was a perfect fit. i liked using my brain, body, working as a team, figuring things out, troubleshooting and coming upppppppppppppppppppppppp

>> chair haney: i'm matt haney, chair of the budget and finance committee. our clerk is miss linda wong, and i want to thank kalina mendoza of sfgovtv for broadcasting this meeting. miss clerk, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes. the board recognizes access to city services is essential and invites public participation in the following ways. public comment will be available on each item on this

agenda, and sfgovtv cable channel 28, 76, and 99 and sfgovtv are streaming this meeting live. public comment is available on each item on this agenda. when the item you are interested in is announced, dial 415-554-0001, meeting i.d. 2483-861-3621, then press pound twice. press star, three to enter the queue, call from a quiet location, turn down the volume

on your television or computer, and speak slowly and clearly. finally, items acted upon on expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda of october 18 unless otherwise stated. this concludes my announcements. >> chair haney: thank you. we have a very full agenda, and i thank everyone for being brief in their presentations.

we are going to take item 6 out of order. madam clerk, will you please call item 6. >> clerk: yes. [agenda item read]. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item 14 call 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2483-861-3621, then press pound and pound again. press star, three to enter the queue for public comment, and please wait until the system has indicated your line has been unmuted before you begin your comments. >> chair haney: and i'll turn it over to chair walton for some additional comments.

>> president walton: thank you. i appreciate you moving this up because of your crazy calendar. i appreciate you calling this out of order. i did introduce resources to s

permanent exit from homelessness. two-thirds of the increase in the number of unsheltered individuals from 2017 to 2019 was due to people sleeping in vehicles. according to the homeless count conducted by the city in 2021, there were 1,088 inhabited vehicles in san francisco, with 677 of those in district 10. the state park staff and multiple city departments have

collaborated to place people living in their vehicles in temporary housing and shelters. our office has worked closely with the department of homelessness and supportive housing, amendly member -- assembly member david chu's office to provide options to connect people to long-term care and housing. a 312-square-foot parking lot has been identified, known as the boat launch parking lot, located at candlestick park, as a recommended vehicle triage center because it will not impact the operations, parking, or recreation use of the candlestick point state recreation area. the property also has exist wa

appreciate president walton for his early support for our safe parking, and that's why we advocates as strong as we did in the budget process for the addition of this as a model of the prop c oversight committee. folks working in this area advocated for this model, and we had the controller do an independent analysis to judge the success of this program. a large percentage of folks were moved into permanent supportive housing. there were zero incidents the entire time for 1.5 years, so

for all those folks that are putting information out there that this is going to bring crime, that this is going to have a negative impact, that this is not something that will be something positive for the community, i can tell you, with 100% clarity, that this was not only a benefit to the area, but that that third of the people that came out that were opposed to this model, many of them stopped me on the street or called my office said they were absolutely wrong and were impressed by the impact that they had. not to mention that you're taking folks that are in the

do this are 70% of the people that are unhoused are living in vehicles, so we have a responsibility to come up with a solution. why are the bayview doing this? oh, well, the excelsior did it first, and we showed what a positive impact it can have. so i want to thank everyone for

pushing for this in the budget process, which will provide only 200 spaces, but i am in full support of this, and we will continue to advocate for this in other parts of san francisco. i know that other supervisors, as am i, are looking for another spot that we can do this again and again until we can get as many folks that are living in vehicles and unhoused into permanent supportive housing. thank you, chair haney and supervisor walton.

>> chair haney: thank you, supervisor safai. as you said, the people living in their cars account for a number of people experiencing homelessness. we have shelters, navigation centers, supportive housing, not enough of those, and now, we need vehicle triage centers, and i appreciate everyone else coming together around this. this is a real problem that everyone is experiencing, and it'll make our city better. director mcspadden? >> thank you, chair haney and committee members, and can i give my staff a second to get my slide deck up? i'll start by saying -- well, first, i'm shireen mcspadden, director of public housing.

i'm joined with a number of my staff to answer any questions after my presentation. so here to talk about the candlestick vehicle triage center proposed sublease, and i'm just going to pause to get the slides up. >> good morning. this is dylan schneider. director mcspadden, the slides should be up. is everyone able to see them? >> yes. okay. so if we could go to the second slide. so the 2019 point in time count indicated that two-thirds of the unsheltered people in san francisco were experiencing what we call vehicular

hokelessness. a study found 677 occupied vehicles in 2021. district 10 opened this vehicle triage center in district 11, so our 2021 budget included allocations to fund new safe parking projects, and that was supported by mayor breed. it was also supported by our city, our home oversight committee, and i want to thank supervisor safai for his continued leadership on this. for almost two years, the city has been participating in other going conversations with city stakeholders. we've engaged with a variety of

stakeholders and also the state park system. we've spent a lot of time outreaching to people in the area, trying to engage people living in their vehicles so they know services are available and to get them into the housing pipeline as soon as possible. since the start of the pandemic, approximately in approximately 100 to 150 vehicles have lived in the vicinity of the candlestick state park area, and it's really grown to an unsafe level. so our v.t.c., vehicle triage center, in an unused boat parking lot at candlestick, is our solution.

it's what we called a low barrier -- call a low-barrier model that provides people experiencing homelessness to live safely while accessing services on-site or to live safely while accessing services elsewhere. 677 vehicles counted in d-10. since the start of the pandemic, 100 to 200 vehicles have actually started this encampment. we plan to work closely with partners and other city agencies on coordinated outreach to the people living in this area, and also, on jamestown avenue, by gilman and carroll avenue by ingles.

this will help address pressing neighborhood concerns. next slide. so again -- sorry. next slide. so at the vehicle triage center, people will be able to access a number of services. this includes case management, 24-7 security and staffing, bathrooms, sanitation stations, mobile showers, laundry, mobile black water pumping, and spaces for case managers and others to meet with people there. we're aiming for an opening of phase one at the end of 2021. so the phase one of the program is expected to open with

approximately 78 parking spots after minimal site improvement work to provide these critical resources as quickly as possible. h.s.h. will continue to work with the department of public works to make improvements, and we anticipate phase to to be open within six months of opening, so we're probably thinking june or july of 202 is. phase two is when we'll have the full capacity of 150 parking spots. so our resolution would authorize the director of real estate on behalf of h.s.h. to negotiate and execute a sublease with the california state parks for 312,000 square feet of property, and the lease would be for two years.

the rent is to be paid through an in-kind law and parking improvement service that would improve utilization of the park and surrounding area. we're operating on a very tight timeline as the state lands commission meeting is meeting in about two weeks. if we don't get this on there now, we'll have to wait to open this site until 2022, which will cause greater impact to the neighborhood and community. we've received guidance to the city attorney that our proposed amendments are not substantive. the proposed amendments have been sent to the chair, the clerk, and the city attorney, and we have staff from h.s.h. to provide further clarity if you have questions.

thank you. >> chair haney: thank you so much, director mcspadden. i appreciate this, and i appreciate the amendments and the urgency of us moving this forward to get it open as soon as possible. is there a b.l.a. report on this item? >> yes, chair haney. nick menard from the b.l.a. on this item. the proposed resolution would approve [indiscernible] with the california department of parks and recreation for a vehicle triage center and the candlestick point recreak area and endorse the area for a vehicle triage center and in-kind off-site public services nearby. as stated did i director mcspadden, this proposed sublease provides for a two-year term and is valued at $312,000 per year. the city would provide security

and monitoring services in order to restore access to the park. the estimated annual cost, which is estimated right now at $5.2 million to operate the vehicle triage center is higher than what the parks and recreation department has in its budget, so therefore, it may return to the board in 2022 and we're recommending approval. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> chair haney: thank you. supervisor mar? >> supervisor mar: thanks, chair haney. you know, i just wanted to

thank director mcspadden and h.s.h. and also director pennick on all of the work on this. also, to president walton for your leadership, and i just

think this is -- we certainly need more of these vehicle triage centers created, and we need one, i think, urgently on the west side. you know, there's a high concentration of people living in vehicles on lake merced boulevard and also scattered through my district on the great highway, so i'm just wondering what the plan is for additional vehicle triage

centers. >> so thank you, supervisor. we have two planned for the west side, and we definitely want to work with you, with supervisor chan, and supervisor melgar to figure out where they'll be and have a conversation with you. >> supervisor mar: okay. thank you. >> chair haney: i know that the governor put out the call to use all of the possible state land available for our response to homelessness, and i think this is an example of the sort of thing we should be doing with public land, whether it's state, local, or federal.

madam clerk, can you announce the call-in information for the public? i know there were some questions about whether people had the number in the information before i open it up for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2483-861-3621, then press symbol pound twice. press star, three to enter the queue or raise your hand. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted before you begin to speak. mr. chair, you're on mute. >> chair haney: we'll allow one minute for public comment.

>> clerk: thank you. members of the public who wish to make public comment, please press star, three to enter the queue. for those who have already done so, please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted before you begin to speak. operations, are there any callers in the queue? >> operator: madam clerk, there are seven callers in the queue. >> good morning. my name is steven courier. i just wanted to say it was my honor to be a cochair and to successfully bring this project to our district and i am

wholeheartedly relieved that we brought this to our district. i would be happy to meet with shamann or people in his district to tell them what we went through and how we did it. i'm very honored to speak to you today and would be very honored if i was asked to participate in that project. thank you so much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hi, howdy. i just wanted to comment that the idea of this triage center is something that i support, but the triage center is only going to support 10% of the people who need it, and i think

bringing additional law enforcement down on people is a bad plan, so i would reconsider that being the sole mechanism and how that creates an additional problem potentially. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hello, supervisors. think -- my name is russell morena. i live right around the corner, and i want to give a shoutout to supervisor walton and his district. it looks like you've already made up your mind that you're going to do this, and that's fine. but before you do, do three things. open the park up to parking. the park is open but open up the parking. number two, clean it up. make sure that if you do this,

make sure that the park is free of r.v.s and encampments. please don't let the area around the park, around the boulevard be congested with r.v.s and encampments. and two, hard stop. you've been saying two years. let it be a two-year experiment. after two years, a hard stop. let it return to the state park, and go onto another site in the district for two years. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> candlestick -- shamann walton has not only allowed the deterioration of alice griffith

and candlestick park area, but third world road conditions, violent mentally ill drug addicts have invaded our specific apartment building, urinating and defecating, shooting up in laundry rooms, parking lots, and back alleys. a homeless addict have violently attacked me and my daughter. i've called the police several times. we at alice griffith have had mentally ill homeless addicts banging on apartment doors and trying to get into residents' homes. my daughter, who is autistic, is afraid to go outside to ride her bike, go outside, or go to the park because of homeless

mentally ill drug addicts, and i'm scared. >> clerk: thank you for your comment. again, if you wish to make public comment, please press star, three to enter the queue. currently, we have six callers in the queue and 30 listening. >> yes. i'd just like to know why anyone would like to put a triage center in the highest covid positive area of the city? please put the triage center in the part of the city that can absorb it. also, i don't hear any part of the city addressing the needs of the park.

i'm disappointed to hear that you're going to approve this without wanting any funding that goes to fixing at least minimally the fence of the express highway. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hi. i think that i might be next. i want to appreciate the kind of problem that we're trying to solve here, but i have considerable concerns about the location that's being chosen as somebody who uses candlestick park every day. that area has significantly deteriorated over the course of the last couple of years, but so has the bayview neighborhood in general? so it's a little unclear what this is going to do to address the r.v. encampments around the

bayview. it's unclear -- i want to enforce what the previous speaker said, what it's going to do to address the bigger issues around gilman. this is one of the most isolated areas of the city that has very few services, and putting a bunch of people in the area without anything to support them around it seems like a particularly problematic idea, so i would like to see some strong assessment of how this plays out. i'd like to see a much better public assessment of what's done -- >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hi, there. this is annette margolis. i'm a current bayview resident. i also use the park every day, and i'm a born and raised san franciscan from the richmond

district. like, i really appreciate all the work done to solve the problem of our unhoused. i also share the concerns of the previous callers about a lack of services, and i'm confused, like, are we literally rounding everyone up against their will and having them come to this site? i would like a little more information around what's going on and what's going onto support them. and case management, there's nothing to support them. there's no grocery store, there's no corner store, so i'm concerned with that. and i'm concerned about the lack of engagement or community engagement. i only heard about this because someone i follow on instagram posted it? i'm concerned about this being rammed through? i think there's a number of

other commissions that you have to get them through but -- >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> my name is [indiscernible] fisher and i'm a d-10 resident and have been for a long time now. i'm outside at candlestick park every day. i walk my dog there. i am calling because i'm in opposition of this from an equity program. this is not fair to dump this on d-10 or candlestick. i think this is a nefarious way

to deal with a problem that the city needs to deal with as a whole. why not fort mason or marina green or crissy park or somewhere else around the city? saying that the homeless are already here is a failure of the supervisors and the mayor who allowed this to happen, so dumping it on us and saying that we need to deal with it is not solving the problem to our satisfaction. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to comment on this item should call 415-655-0001. meeting i.d. is 2483-861-3621, then press the symbol pound twice. if you have not already done

so, press star, three. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. >> hi. this is r.j. sloane. i want to thank you for your leadership in this area. in addition to the tiny homes that are starting to be installed, i have issues around the confined space of a car for living, for a replacement for housing, so i was just hoping there might be a reasonable or an end game for car living and entering into housing. let's not forget the day-to-day

experiences of living in such confined spaces, such as cars and tiny homes, and we might even want to try living in one of these small spaces ourselves for a week or so just to experience what we're expecting others to experience. thank you so much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good morning. my name is shirley moore, and i am the president of the bayview neighborhood association. i am a resident, and i live about a quarter of a mile from the park, and i think i oppose the sublease of the candlestick state park for a vehicle triage center, and i think that the [indiscernible] and the disinvestment of the state park

is purposeful and premeditated by our elected officials. to take away the only state park for our residents and families is criminal, and i think that the administration of the homelessness and the homeless issue, i sympathize with these people, but our elected officials are not doing enough to speak to and to try to resolve this issue. i propose that the money raised for this vehicle triage center be used to reinvest in the park and bring the park back up to use for families. the homeless health services nor our -- >> operator: your time has expired. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hi. i'm a resident of candlestick,

and i'm opposed to the d.t.c. some neighbors may have a different goal than me. maybe any plan that moves some portion of the current r.v.s is a one, but for me, getting this one camp moved away from my house and the children's playground 20 feet away is my goal. at the intersection of randall and bill ingersoll way is a camp hosting what i see is the largest drug dealing operation around. he is using the covid loophole as a cover. he lives in an $80,000 r.v. and he and his dealers drive lexuss and infinities.

he's boasted to his friends he's not moving to the d.t.c. -- >> clerk: thank you for your comments. we have one more caller in the queue. again, callers who have already called in and would like to comment on this item, please press star, three now. can we please have the final caller? >> hi. good morning. i just have a comment or just a question. when i'm out with law enforcement, they say it's covid mandated that they can't do anything, so if we open up this vehicle triage and we're still under the moratorium, what difference is it if we open it up or not if law

enforcement is not going to be able to enforce things? that's just my only concern. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. we just received two additional callers. >> operator: madam clerk, those two additional callers have dropped from the queue. >> chair haney: thank you. >> clerk: operations, are there anymore callers in the queue? i believe there's one more.

>> hi -- [indiscernible]. >> clerk: my apologies. just wanted to let everyone know you are allowed one time of one minute to speak on this item. >> chair haney: can you. with that, public comment is closed. thank you to everyone who called in to share your feedback. public comment is closed. president walton? >> president walton: thank you so much, chair haney. i do want to say thank you to everyone who called in to express their concerns. we continue to have conversation with community about what this is and is not. i do live in the area.

i'm not just a supervisor but i live in this area. my family is here. my kids come here, my grand kids come here, and my friends come here. i've seen the rise of people living in their vehicles in this area, and this vehicle triage area really addresses your concerns. let me say this to anyone out there, our office takes allegations of crime seriously.

this is very important to us, and we take crime serious. captain marin has been on meetings, so please let us know. we take crime very serious, but again, i want to stress that there is no data to support any increases in crime in the area. and i do want to say, we're not giving away park space. we have other parks in the area as well as other areas of san francisco, and this will address your concerns.

the department of homelessness and supportive housing will install a perimeter fence around this site. there will be picnic area, guard shack, trash containers, parking stalls for r.v.s and vehicles and toilets, showers, trailers, janitorial services, so the things that the community is expressing they are concerned with, the vehicle triage site actually addresses. we just want to continue to get factual information out to community. we want to express we've had reports of vehicle triage centers working in other communities, and i would not

have someone from this community as someone who lives in this community be proposing something that i do not think would address your concerns. as far as outreach, my goal is to continue to get the accurate information out to community, get the facts out to community. we do have a deadline. we worked very hard on this during the budget process to get the resources for this. i've had several conversations with people in the community, and we have a large part of community who supports this. we're going to continue to work with all of you, and that's my role, is to continue to work with you to address your concerns and the issues that you present, and this vehicle

triage center is something that is going to solve a lot of the concerns. i would not be pushing this, promoting this, supporting this, and having conversations with you about this if i did not believe that, and so i want to thank chair haney, i want to thank supervisors mar and safai, and thank you for allowing me to go first because we have a busy day, and thank you for allowing me to call in. >> chair haney: thank you. vice chair safai? >> supervisor safai: thank you, mr. chair. just wanted to make sure on the record that i was added as a cosponsor for this item, and just wants to underscore one last point that was made.

one of the things about this model that's replicated is having on-site staffing 24 hours a day. it is something that we fought for, and when we negotiated for this in district 11, bob wells park station, there wasn't necessarily a full embracing of the ideas that the community was putting forward, and one of them was having 24-hour staffing and having it be staffed at the appropriate level. i know for this particular site, there will be multiple staff members 24 hours a day as president walton said, and then, they act as a liaison with the captain, as president walton underscored. with the security and the on-site staffing, people will see an improvement in the area for the services that are

there. so that's what i was trying to say earlier. we had a site where there might be crime or things happening. in almost two years or a year and nine months, we had no incidents, constant communication with the police captain, sfmta, public works, and other areas. just wanted to underscore that, and thank you, president walton, for this, bringing this forward, and we're here to support in any way we can. thank you, mr. chair. . >> chair haney: thank you, and thank you for your comments. supervisor mar, anything you would like to add? >> supervisor mar: no, except that i would like to be added as a cosponsor, as well.

>> chair haney: thank you. i don't want to be left out, so i will be added as a cosponsor, as well. and i know there was an amendment, so i want to make a motion to accept the amendments requested by the department of homelessness and supportive housing. can we have a roll call vote on that, please? >> clerk: yes. on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: there are three ayes. >> chair haney: and, madam clerk -- well, i guess, i was going to have president walton make the motion, but he's not on the committee, to i want to make a motion to move item 6 to the full board with a positive recommendation as amended. >> clerk: yes. on that motion -- [roll call]

>> supervisor safai: president walton's there. >> chair haney: yeah, he just can't make motions. [indiscernible]. >> chair haney: thank you so much to the team, and to director mcspadden, we appreciate it. all right. this will go to the full board with a positive recommendation. madam clerk, can you call item 1. [agenda item read].

>> clerk: members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2483-861-3621, then press pound twice. press star, three to lineup to speak, and wait until the system has indicated you are unmuted before you begin to speak. >> chair haney: thank you. director mcspadden? >> thank you, chair haney. this was a matter introduced last week and continued to this week because of some minor changes in the resolution.

i believe they were read into the record and that the clerk has received them. i don't know if you'd like me to represent this item or what you'd like me to do. >> chair haney: no, we don't need you to represent the item. >> chair haney, ann pearson with the city attorney. i think you should describe them before the city takes action on the amendments, and then, you can vote whether to send this to the full board.

>> [indiscernible] similar amendments are being made for both the [indiscernible] homekey since the application was made public since we introduced. correcting minor code -- misnumbering of the code. >> chair haney: okay. is there any questions from colleagues on this? simple enough. not seeing any. i'm sure we have to take public comment on this, so open this for public comment, please.

>> clerk: mr. chair, you should have a b.l.a. on this. >> chair haney: is there anything more from the b.l.a. on this item? >> chair haney, we don't have an update on this item. >> clerk: yes, mr. chair, we can open this up for public comment. operation is checking to see if there are any callers in the queue. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item, press star, three to enter the queue. for those already in the queue, please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted before you begin your comments. >> operator: madam clerk, there are two callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you. please unmute the first caller. >> good morning. this is anastasia ionnopoulos.

it is cheaper to put people in a hotel than build new permanent supportive housing. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hi, there. i'm a resident, and i live in west fillmore with my daughter -- my young daughter. she's a toddler -- and my husband. while i agree that there should be supportive housing, i don't agree with putting it in this neighborhood specifically. trying to raise kids here and talking to so many other parents that live in the neighborhood, it's becoming increasing not child friendly, and it's becoming increasingly hard. what's going to happen is families are going to start living out of the neighborhood because we already live next to a homeless shelter and nearby a

safe injection site. the dealers that are attracted to these users will move in, and we're already seeing that. our local takeout on 7 and mission, they've been dealing with so many drug dealers outside their door that's been moving there in the last few months. we no longer go there anymore because i can't be pushing my stroller in an area where people are just openly drug dealing and using. as a resident, i'm very concerned here for increasing families moving out of this neighborhood, and it's just not safe. it's really just not safe, and i know that coffee culture are already struggling, and i know they're going to shutdown.

all of these businesses that need the family and neighborhood support system, they're going to close because no one can do business with drug dealers and drug users outside. if you have the panorama turn into an unhoused building, it's going to turn into a drug yard. i already have fentanyl users use -- outside my windows and i can't open my windows -- >> clerk: thank you for your comments. >> chair haney: i also want to comment that this is not the panorama item, but please continue. >> hi. my name is [indiscernible] and i live in soma. i'm calling in support of the acquisition of the panoramic

hotel. >> chair haney: this is not the panorama. we are calling on item 1, which is the 16 street hotel. people can call in for that item, but we cannot take public comment on an item that is not in front of us yet. >> clerk: mr. atkins, could you please unmute the next caller. >> hello. i also must have misunderstood and called in on that p panoramic. >> chair haney: it'll be soon. i just want to make sure we're having the conversation altogether and that you can weigh-in on it. >> clerk: next caller, please. >> hi. my name is alec, and i'm a

resident of san francisco, and i just am calling in in support of the 16 street hotel. as the first caller said, it's a lot cheaper to house them in hotels, and so i'm calling in support of that. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next caller, please. >> [indiscernible] and i'm calling in support of also acquiring the 16 street hotel. it is safer and better for our communities for these families to be able to move in and for people to be able to have, like, the ability to have housing and, you know, therefore worry less about that. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please.

>> [indiscernible] but i want to make comment here in support [indiscernible]. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> my name is michael nulty, n-u-l-t-y, and i'm the president of the tenant coalition of san francisco. we support new housing being acquisitioned for the homeless and supportive housing. we believe that having wraparound services in these developments are very important

for the community and the community as a whole because they help keep the homeless housed for a longer period of time when having supportive housing services included. we also would like to see the -- many more of these developments in san francisco created because we need the goal of creating more housing in san francisco. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> i'm sorry. i also called for the panoramic, but i'm in favor of the 16 street project, as well. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hi. my name is seth, and i live and work in san francisco. actually work at a nonprofit in

the area that serves people experiencing homelessness, and i just wanted to say if you're worried about people using drugs, people experiencing homelessness, people experiencing mental issues, and maybe you don't care about them, maybe you just care about your families and your business, i don't care. housing is the proven solution, and i think most people on this call, i'm glad to say, realize that. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. currently, there are 32 listeners on the line and two in the queue. if you'd like to enter public comment, this is the item 3055-3061 16 street. >> hi. i'm toby calling in support of

the acquisition of the hotel on 16 street. [indiscernible]. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. mr. atkins, please let us know if there are any further callers in the queue? >> operator: madam clerk, there is one further caller in the queue. >> clerk: welcome, caller. >> my name is patricia. [speaking spanish language]

>> clerk: operations, are there any other callers in the queue? >> operator: madam clerk, there are no further callers in the queue. >> chair haney: public comment on item 1 is closed, so we have those amendments that we need to adopt. i want to make a motion to accept the amendment that was made earlier. can we please have a roll call on the amendments? >> clerk: yes. on the motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: there are three ayes. >> chair haney: i want to make a motion to move the item to the full board with a positive

recommendation as amended. can we have a roll call vote, please? >> clerk: yes. on the item -- [roll call] >> clerk: there are three ayes. >> chair haney: thank you. this will go to the full board with a positive recommendation. thank you so much again, and we will now move forward through our regular agenda. madam clerk, can you please call item 2? >> clerk: yes. [agenda item read]. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to public provide couple on this item should call

415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2483-861-3621. press pound and pound again, then press star, three to lineup to speak, and wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted before you begin to speak. >> chair haney: thank you, madam clerk, and we have tim ramirez here to present this item. >> yes. thank you, chair haney. i wanted to briefly provide in context. i'm going to pull up a very short presentation. it should be on the screen now. everybody see that okay? >> chair haney: yes. >> great. thank you. so i'm tim ramirez. i'm the [indiscernible] in the water enterprise in the p.u.c. this is a lightning strike just near san antonio reservoir

simultaneous with the rainbow, as it turns out. this is another picture of that morning, looking over calaveras reservoir, and this is what happened over the course of several weeks afterwards where smaller fires came together, known as the s.c.u. complex. here's some additional images. calaveras reservoir is off in the left, as well. you can see what happened throughout that landscape. this was a slow burning fire. it wasn't a catastrophically

hot burning or fast burning fire, but it burned almost the entire drainage area. on p.u.c. property, it turns out, it was about 10,000 acres of land very much up against the bottom of calaveras reservoir, and the take-home message for us was we have a lack of damage fences. we visited again in january, and what's changed over time is we have some real on the ground recon to survey the damage and make sure we have the funding to finish the work. it's probably going to take another couple of years, but we're back with the material and funding capacity to complete the work. that's my presentation, and i wanted to share that we're thankful for the budget and

legislative analyst's report, and we're in support of their recommendation. i'd be happy to answer any questions if you have any. >> chair haney: thank you so much. let's go to the b.l.a. report. >> thank you, chair haney. this resolution would approve an updated emergency resolution for p.u.c. work around category aver as reservation, increasing the total not to exceed work from 11 to 12.5. following field inspections, one of the two contractors no longer being available for work, and the decision to hire a construction management firm, we show the details on page 9 of our report, which totals $10.9 million and, so we therefore recommend amending the proposed resolution to no more than $10.9 million and

then amend the proposed resolution as recommended. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> chair haney: okay. great. are there any questions for the b.l.a. and the p.u.c.? i see vice chair safai? >> supervisor safai: thank you, mr. chair. i want to ask the p.u.c. does this negotiate contract fall under your p.l.a.? >> i'm going to ask greg lynan to answer that question. >> yes. good morning, supervisors. greg lynan with the contract and budget group. the p.l.a. was not related to this contract.

>> supervisor safai: was there a reason why? >> the project was small enough that we did not include the project labor agreement. >> supervisor safai: was there any thought given to going back and having this be under the p.l.a.? >> supervisor, i will have to research that and get back to you to see if we are able to review the terms of the project labor agreement at this time. >> supervisor safai: yeah. just for the other committee members, when we worked on the citywide p.l.a., we modified that city p.l.a. on the work that the p.u.c. had done for many of the infrastructure projects that they had. one of the items that came up over and over again were the size of contracts and the scope of contracts. if this were individual smaller contracts, i understand why you all would not have taken the time to do that, but i might

ask that we postpone the vote on this for one week to allow you the time or if you need some other time to go talk to other members of your department and then come back to us later in the committee, but i'm not inclined to vote in favor of this until we have clarity on that. >> chair haney: okay. is there anything more that -- that you all have on that or you want to get -- get back to us? should we continue it? what are you asking for here, vice chair safai? >> supervisor safai: well, i wanted to hear what supervisor lynan says. does he need to go and do more research and get back to us within the confines of this meeting or is it something you would report back to us at a

later time? >> supervisor, i'm trying to research what you're saying, and i can try to present it to you later today, or we can come back last week. >> supervisor safai: okay. i'm willing to give mr. lynan more time, but if we need to postpone it, i'm fine with that request. >> clerk: just for clarification, the october 20 budget and finance committee meeting is going to be cancelled due to the legal holiday, so if this item was to be continued, it would have to go on the october 27 budget and finance committee agenda, so it would -- it would have to be continued for two weeks. >> chair haney: what holiday is on october 20? >> supervisor safai: it's the week of the indigenous peoples

day, so we're not meeting that week. in any case -- >> chair haney: got it. >> supervisor safai: we'll return -- yeah. >> chair haney: madam clerk, if you could call item number 3. >> clerk: yes. [agenda item read]. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001, meeting i.d.

2483-861-3621. press pound twice and then star, three to raise your hand, and wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. >> chair haney: mr. beck? >> thank you, chair haney and supervisors mar and safai. mah beck before you. this is a master lease with the navy, which we had originally entered into in 1998. originally, the lease included several sports fields and multiple facilities within the authority's commercial leasing reservoir. as properties have transferred from the navy to the authority, the premises of this lease have been accordingly reduced, and it now includes three buildings and a recreational pathway at the island's northern edge as depicted in the image that i've put on the screen.

the master lease is renewed annually, and since the original lease has lasted more than ten years, we're required to bring it back to you. this is the 43 required extension of the lease, and i can take any questions that you may have on it. >> chair haney: okay. thank you. is there a b.l.a. report on this item? >> no, chair haney. we don't have a report on this item. >> and i should add, we pay no rent to the navy for this lease. >> chair haney: okay. can we go to public comment, please. >> clerk: e, mr. chair. operations are checking to see if there are any callers in the queue. members of the public who wish to provide any public comment on this item, please press star, three to enter the queue. for those already in the queue, please wait until the system indicates you have been

unmuted. >> operator: madam clerk, there are currently two callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you, would you please unmute the first caller. welcome, caller. >> hello. >> clerk: yes, please proceed. >> hello. my name is michael nulty, and i'm the director of coalition for a better district 6. it only makes sense to renew this lease for as long as possible so it doesn't have to keep coming back to committee

for renewal. i also appreciate the fact that the navy is not charging us any rent. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you for your comment. operations, are there any further callers in the queue? >> operator: madam clerk, there are no further callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you. >> chair haney: public comment is closed. thank you for this, director beck, and -- for this presentation. i'd like to move this forward to the full board with a positive recommendation. roll call vote, please. >> clerk: yes. [roll call] >> clerk: there are three ayes. >> chair haney: great. thank you. thank you, director beck. madam clerk, can you please call item number 4? >> clerk: yes. [agenda item read].

>> clerk: members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2483-861-3621. then press pound twice. if you have not already done so, press star, three to enter the queue to speak. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted before you begin to speak. >> chair haney: great. thank you. welcome, chair anderson. >> thank you. the retroactive request before you today is administrative in nature. the city and county of san francisco's f.y. 21-22 and f.y.

22-23 budget appropriation ordinance meets this grant, but a separate resolution is necessary. we don't have to submit this local resolution under our admin code 10.170, but it is required by the funding department of the state. it's a codified grant associated with the victim compensations board. we respectfully request your approval of this resolution, and i'm happy to answer any

questions that you may have. >> chair haney: thank you. is there a b.l.a. report on this item? >> no, chair haney, we don't have a report for this item. >> chair haney: okay. any other questions or comments? can we go to public comment, please? >> clerk: yes. operations are checking to see if there are any callers in the queue. members of the public who wish to make public comment, press star, three to enter the queue. if you have already done so, please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted before you begin to speak. operations, are there any callers in the queue? >> operator: madam clerk, there are no callers in the queue. >> chair haney: public comment is closed. i'd like to make a motion to move this to the full board

with a recommendation of the roll call vote, please. >> clerk: yes. on the motion -- >> clerk: there are three ayes. >> chair haney: all right. this'll go to the full board with a positive recommendation. thank you, miss anderson. madam clerk, can you please call item 5? >> clerk: yes. [agenda item read]. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should

call 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2483-861-3621, then press pound twice. press star, three to enter the queue to speak, and please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted before you begin to speak. >> chair haney: thank you so much, and we have miss moran from the park and recs department. >> thank you. my name is [indiscernible] moran. i work with the [indiscernible] for the rec and parks department. the legislation that's being presented is to accept and amend a contract for a project for the bayview project

contract. in order to enforce that, we need to file a declaration of restriction against the property, which is assessor's parsing 5420, lot 001. the land and water conservation grant program, the intent is to protect open space and water resources in perpetuity for future generations. it's administered at the federal level by the national park service and at the state level by the california department of parks and recreation. the city and county of san francisco has received many of these grants starting in 1966. we have 22 park properties that are protected in perpetuity including maclaren park. however, any contract that's

ten years or greater must have board approval. so at this time, the recreation and park department is bringing the legislation to approve the contract. we -- the action is retroactive because the grantment being less than 1 million was appropriated through the budget process in fiscal year 18-19 and 19-20, so we have actually expended some of the grant -- most of the grant, probably, and we are close to completing the project. it's expected to be completed in february. so in closing, i am asking for the budget and finance committee's support to -- recommendation to the board of supervisors to approve the -- the resolution and the actions described in it. >> chair haney: thank you so much. appreciate your presentation

and appreciate the work on this playground. is there a b.l.a. report on this item? >> no, chair haney. we don't have a report on this item. >> chair haney: okay. great. can we go to public comment on this item? >> clerk: yes, mr. chair, operations is checking to see if there are any public callers in the -- in the queue. members of the public, please press star, three to enter the queue. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted before you begin your comments. >> operator: madam clerk, there are one caller in the queue. >> yes. my name is michael nulty, and i'm a fifth generation san franciscan. i'd like to see more of these spaces in san francisco because we need more open space, particularly if they're going to be around for the next generation.

it's important that open space be restricted, and we need to preserve our trees and other spaces like that because it's important because of environmental concerns that we are now dealing with in our community. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. are there any other callers in the queue? >> operator: madam clerk, there are no further callers in the queue. >> chair haney: public comment is now closed. not seeing any of my colleagues make a comment. i want to move item 5 afford -- forward to the full board with a positive recommendation. roll call vote, please. >> clerk: yes. on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: there are three ayes. >> chair haney: thank you. full board with a project recommendation. thank you so much. madam clerk, can you please call item 7. >> clerk: yes, mr. chair. before that, i just wanted to

clarify that the october 13 budget and finance committee meeting is going to be cancelled, not october 20, and the next regular budget and finance committee meeting will be on october 20. i believe i misspoken, and i apologize for that. [agenda item read]

. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 2483-861-3621. press pound twice, and then press star, three to lineup to speak. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted before you begin your comments. >> chair haney: thank you. before we pass it over to director mcspadden, i just want to make a few brief comments. we all know that homelessness is the greatest crisis facing our city. time and time again, it's the top concern of our city's residents. it's a shame that we have so many residents living on our streets in such a wealthy city, and as a district 6 supervisor, it's the issue that we hear most from our constituents.

i'm concerned about those on the street, many of whom have mental health or health needs. the homelessness that families are experiencing, veterans, and the way that this impacts neighborhoods. what we also know is that the solution to homelessness is housing. there is no solution to -- for someone who is experiencing homelessness by division without giving them a place indoors that is their own to live. in order to do that, we're going to have to be creative. we're going to have to develop resources, and we're going to have to share. i want to acknowledge that this particular purchase is part of a larger strategy that the city is undertaking with a number of other sites that have come in front of this budget committee. there are a number of more that will be coming in the future, and in the year future, and i'm

grateful that we're finally seeing more parts of our city, and i'm seeing leadership of our city, both supervisor safai and supervisor mar, building housing in areas of our city and purchasing housing to get people off of our streets right now. we not only have to build new housing, but we have to secure units to move people inside immediately, and that situation is even great, when we have a situation with 25 hotels with over 2,000 people inside of them. we brought them in, and it was the right thing to do during covid, but we have to make sure they are never on the street again. for people experiencing homeless conditions, the worst thing we could do is put them back out on the streets. we are grateful that the

federal and state funds have been made available for project homekey. this has allowed us to put forward long-term solutions not only with shelter and project homekey, which was the shelter in place hotels, but for permanent housing. we need housing and especially people who are coming out of homelessness, we need permanent housing. that is how we are going to address the situation that neighbors and residents have on our street. we have to take advantage of this moment to expand our permanent housing stock, which is nowhere near where it needs to be to meet the needs on our streets. this building, the panoramic allows us to get 120 units of

permanent supportive housing as well as a 43-bedroom unit which is a suite that can be used to house homeless families. these are people that will contribute positively to our neighborhood. these are people who will not be bringing problems. these are people, members of our community that deserve just as i do, a place to live and be safe, and they are going to contribute to our neighborhoods in positive ways, and they deserve to live in dignity with support. this takes more than our fair share of the responsibility of housing people who are formerly

homeless, and i have continuously called for and supported my -- by my colleagues here. we need solutions to homelessness, and we will not stop fighting to make sure that they have a place to live long-term with dignity, and this is a part of that. this will mean over 150 units of housing for people who desperately need it who, if we did not provide it, would end up on our alleys, on our streets, in front of our doorways, and they deserve it, just like you do. so with that, i also want to note that there is a trusted

community partners involved with this. there are intensive services, and that this will be a positive thing for our neighborhood in addressing one of the most urgent and really shameful crises that we have, which are the thousands of people outdoors without a home to call their home. so with that, i want to turn it over to you, director mcspadden, to talk about this purchase, and thank you, [indiscernible], who brought this forward, and thank you for your leadership. >> thank you, chair haney. and i can see the slides are up, so i'll get started. i'm shireen mcspadden, the department head for the department of homelessness and supportive housing. i'm also joined by

andrico pettit, and also, i have members of my staff available to answer questions at the end. so as you mentioned, chair haney, this is part of a larger strategy for the city to acquire hotels. we have an unprecedented opportunity right now with homekey dollars, with prop c dollars, to make a dent in homelessness. we're looking to acquire 1500 units, and as you know, the city went through an r.f.i. process to find interested hotels and received around 85 proposals, and so we're really fortunate that we have a lot of things to look at, and we have found some of the hotels that seem to be the most promising, and this is one of them.

next slide. so the units at 1321 mission were most recently master leased by universities. the proposed conversion to affordable housing with services would allow us to serve more people and maintain the ground floor for retail. it's a really great option for affordable housing. as chair haney mentioned, it's 160 units, all with private kitchens and bathrooms, which is a very big plus for people moving in. it includes 120 studios and 43 bedroom units, so we would be able to house a number of

families in this building, and it has an elevator, and it's close to social services. this authorizes the director of h.s.h. to acquire 1321 mission street for $86.6 million with almost $173,000 in closing costs. we anticipate a quick transition from acquisition to lease up. if we are awarded homekey, we will return to the board for board approval. we have one proposed amendment to address an inaccuracy in the prior version, and the city attorney has provided guidance that these amendments are nonsubstantive. so i'm happy to read those into

the record if need be, but i think the clerk has already received them. so you can let me know what you want me to do about that. and other than that, that's the end of my presentation on this item. >> great. thank you, director mcspadden. is there a b.l.a. report on this item? >> yes, chair haney. so this proposed resolution to -- would approve the acquisition of 1321 mission street. the resolution also authorizes the department to apply for homekey grant funding. as shown on page 20 of our report, the cost per unit is $541,000. this high cost per unit is driven in part by the number of family units in that building. as a policy consideration, you know, we note that the department of homelessness is embarking on the acquisition of

800 supportive housing units or master leasing a similar number. in an effort, that's already valued at $100 million, considering the two considered at committee last week, and i think given the scale of the acquisition effort, we recommend that the board request formal policies to govern the acquisition process and present them to the board in june 2022, when they return for new spending authority. and we also request the department of homelessness to report on the status made on the acquisitions during this fiscal year and the operating of the sites. we do recommend approval of the resolution before you today for this acquisition. happy to answer any questions. >> chair haney: thank you so

much. appreciate that. colleagues, any questions or comments on that? definitely looks like -- to the department, is there any response to the b.l.a.s request there and should we integrate that into the item itself? >> i'll ask department director collin to handle that. >> we would be happy to come back to the board, i believe, in june 2022 to update the board on the acquisition and cost of operating. in terms of the first -- and our recommendation would be that that not be added to the resolution. we wouldn't want to create any additional delay on the passage of the resolution, but we're certainly happy to report back to the board at any time. >> chair haney: okay. great. that's fair.

not seeing any -- b.l.a., is that -- do you need something more formal than that? >> i'm not sure if adding a whereas clause to the department to do that would be substantive. i recommend asking the city attorney about that. i know in the past it has not. >> chair haney: deputy city attorney pearson, is this something that we could add and not be substantive? >> deputy city attorney ann pearson. requesting the department to come back to report continue is not a substantive amendment,

but it's up to you whether you want to include that in the resolution. >> chair haney: okay. we'll decide that after public comment? can we please open it up for public comment, and we'll give one minute for each. >> clerk: thank you. members of the public, please press star, three to enter the queue, and for those that have already done so, please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. operations, do we have any callers in the queue? >> operator: madam clerk, we currently have 17 callers in the queue. >> good afternoon, supervisors, members of the budget and finance committee. thanks for being a champion for these targeted acquisition for

affordable housing. this is [indiscernible] the director at compass family services. i'm also director at [indiscernible] the panoramic hotel would be such a gain. it has so much potential. up to 43 bedroom units, and hopefully additional units for families. it's not just a safe place to sleep for these families, many of whom are living in their cars right now, but [indiscernible] and more. it really represents an opportunity for these families to build their lives, so we overwhelmingly support this and urge you to present this to the board. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next caller, please. >> hello.

zach [indiscernible] and i live next door to the panoramic, and i support this purchase to acquire more housing for the homelessness. i do want to say that this can't be a responsibility for certain neighborhoods. somehow we do this here, yet north of the market, west of the freeway, somehow there's always a reason why these projects never go forward. we heard from some of our neighborhoods about drugs and crime, things that are tolerated here that aren't tolerated in other parts of the country. i do support this because i don't think that it supports crime, but housing is a human right, and i support it in this neighborhood, but i do believe it needs to be addressed. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good morning.

>> clerk: caller, please proceed. >> yes. thank you, supervisors for having us on the agenda for doing public comment. my name is sonia, and i'm on [indiscernible]. i've been homeless before, and i know that it created such a struggle in my life. i'm in favor of anything that has to do with fighting homelessness in san francisco, so please approve the purchase of the hotel. being poor doesn't mean that i am a person that is going to create more crime in the community. we are supposed to be taking care of each other and look out for each other, so please approve the hotel purchase. thank you so much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please.

welcome, caller. >> hello. >> clerk: hello. please proceed. >> chair haney: we can hear you. >> okay. my name is [indiscernible] cabrera. i work in the [indiscernible] homelessness for 20 years, and so yes, i support this project of 150 units and 40 units for families homelessness. i think it's a good idea. we need to serving the homelessness. we need to starting to do something, and i think when we seeing and [indiscernible] and terminate housing for homeless people, so it is an opportunity

for people to be stable, and i think this is the best way we do it. so i want to say thank you so much. we need to do it for work because it's time to move into permanent housing. another thing is [indiscernible] we have a lot of money. we can buy more hotel more places and building housing for homeless folks. so it's time, thank you, and yeah. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, chair and supervisors. my name is rusty saber, and i am the policy manager for glide. on behalf of the organization, we are in strong support of hotel acquisition. permanent supportive housing by way of hotel acquisition is an effective solution by way of significant savings. it allows residents to access life affirming resources such

as mental and physical health care from a place of safety and stanlt. -- stability. glide highly recommends this and recommends that the city acquire more of this housing. it's required, it's achievable, and as supervisor safai said, it is the moral obligation of our time. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> thank you for your time. i'd like to state that i oppose officially this project, and while i understand why people working to support the homeless are in favor of this project because their livelihoods depend on it, i'd like you to consider the residents of the soma with fentanyl wafting through our units at night. we see what's going on in our

neighborhoods. it doesn't work in this neighborhood because the dealers are right there. so people are encouraged by basically just in their front yard, people selling them these drugs that they then use. i do agree with this type of project, however, i don't think it works in this neighborhood. i would urge in the future for this neighborhood to continue supporting such projects if we can make sure that the people housed in these projects are families, are employed in responsible ways, if you can have nondrug dealers in these buildings. there's no reason why crowds of drug dealers are being allowed to deal drugs right outside our windows with police just driving by. i would like to say that confidently on behalf of all mothers and fathers -- >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please.

>> hello. my name is solange. i live in market and church, and right now, i'm experiencing homelessness. i'm cannot afford a place in this city. i like this city. i'm born in this city. i'm not a drug dealer, i don't consume drugs. i just want to be in a place where i like and i feel i'm part of it, so i think it's your right, guys, and it's your time to make sure that the people that's living here, like , they take care of us. like, we pay taxes. we need more affordable housing. that's the problem. the rent is very, very, very high, and there's a lot of people not getting enough money to pay one single rent. we have to live, like, six or

seven in a house. what is right about that? that is wrong, so we need more affordable housing. i just try to, yes, please, try to buy this place and keep more affordable housing. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please.

>> i'm going to give public comment. hi. my name is beth [indiscernible] and i live and work in san francisco. i was a previous unhoused youth. i can speak from experience to many of the things that i'm happy to here being said. you know, having access to housing has allowed me to access higher education, come into identity as a transgender person and control pressing issues. so generally, we know that housing is a structural foundation that many people, especially families need. this is a rare opportunity, and like i said, whatever. if you're worried about people who use drugs, experiencing homelessness, people are mental health, blah, blah, blah, whatever it is, or maybe you're not worried about them, you're

worried about yourself. we know at the end of the day, it's two birds with one stone. housing, at the end of the day, it solves those issues. i would never be able to be a quote, unquote, productive member of the society if i didn't have housing. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. welcome, caller. operations, perhaps we could circle back to this caller and take the next one. thank you. [indiscernible]. >> am i -- sorry, is it my turn? >> clerk: yeah. >> okay. thank you. i am a resident of western soma and i am against the sale of the panoramic.

i strongly urge the supervisors to look at the images of the community meetings. director mcspadden stated, we don't think it's good for us to put all of these services in one neighborhood. that's never been a good approach. the location of the panoramic is just that, one neighborhood in western soma. within two blocks, you have two low-income housing units, two low-income seniors center, and one b.m.r. we also have a safe injection enter. when it's known not to put all the locations in one location, why it does seem to be all located here? one thing is for sure, this violence refutes h.s.h.s claim that this is an appropriate

place for kids. time after time, residents have complained about how this is a dangerous neighborhood and how it has deteriorated in the last few years. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. [please stand by]

the environmental, economic and community impact of this measure has not been studied or reported on. the potential for trafficking off of the highways that is directly connected to has not been studied or reported on. the services at s.h.s. are not existence. i know many residents in the tenderloin who say that there is one caseworker for every 60 house individuals. it is a slap on the face of homeless individuals that would be housed. i understand it is the supervisor's intents to move to to sacramento. away from

this district as he's erased this dprikt his social media presence. the people that live here will have to deal with this for years and years to come. we have one chance and one opportunity to live here. we don't want to have to move and this -- >> speaker's time has expired. >> thank you. next speaker, please. welcome, caller. perhaps we can take the next caller? >> caller: hello. my name is anthony. i work in the nonprofit that provides a lot of services for unhoused folk. the panoramic can be transfered into supportive housing and 40-plus of those are large enough for families.

i think, you know, as many have stated previously, that housing is a basic right, a basic need is a starting point for a lot of people getting the services they need past that, including medical health and mental health services and those that want to complain about people that use drugs, a lot of the time just having housing as the starting point is helpful in terms of getting long-term treatment as far as medically assistive treatment for drug use. so yeah. i think this is just the starting point to something that, in the long run, will eventually help this neighborhood to get to a point where people are off the streets and in a more comfortable, stable living situation. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. just wanted to note that currently there are 44 callers listening and 19 in the queue. if you have not already done

so, please press star 3 now to be added to the queue. for those already on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates that you have been unmuted. next speaker, please. >> we're just a few blocks from the panoramic hotel. i support the acquisition of the hotel and many other hotels as you know this is only a drop in the bucket to try to solve this problem with homelessness. hopefully we can do more things like this. thank you for doing this. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: hi, there. i express my support for the acquisition of this hotel for housing for homeless individuals and families. i am in regular communication with the teachers there and the extent of the homelessness of children is very high and i can see the

devastateinging impacts. this is an absolute failure on all of our parts. no child should be without a home and a safe place to be. i don't believe these people pose a threat at all and i think we should welcome people into all of our neighborhoods. i think purchasing hotels a way for [inaudible] and construction costs takes about double and takes many, many years. hotels are ready to go and set up for this. this is an incredible opportunity to stay in federal funding to secure housing and i really hope we go for it. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hi. i live a few blocks from the panoramic and i'm calling in support of the acquisition. i think as we made clear, like housing is a solution to homelessness and this is a unprecedented opportunity to buy these hotels. we can use state and federal

funding. you know, we've seen from experience that permanent supportive housing is a way to increase overdose deaths because it is the root cause of addiction and i urge you to look into similar acquisitions of hotels across the city. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> caller: hello. i'm a resident of san francisco and i strongly, strongly support the city's acquisition of the panoramic hotel. san francisco's unhoused population sky rocketed during the pandemic and we've provided them with woefully inadequate services during that time. it is way past time that we provide housing to every unhoused san franciscan. it's one small step toward that goal tom the previous callers who opposed the project. unhoused people are normal people. the stereotypes of all unhoused people being drug dealers is unmoral and gross.

there are plenty of white people who sell marijuana who have housing in san francisco but you don't people calling in to oppose housing for them. also, [inaudible] is not a thing. that's just false. stop calling in to public comment and saying things that are completely and thoroughly false. the bottom line is, everyone deserves a home. regardless of where the services are located when there is an opportunity to provide permanent supportive housing, we should take it. supervisors, please support and approve the purchase of the panoramic hotel. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, everyone. my name is aylan. i worked with the homeless population for about 12 years and i fully support the purchase of this property to host the homeless population. housing is the first step to save lives. the purchase of this property will bring the homeless population their dignity back and will allow them to get

healthy, both physically and mentally and will allow them and give them the opportunity to stabilize their lives, to look for employment. to commit programs to support their progress. this is the time when we need to come together and support those in need. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please.

those in need. thank you. >> thank you for your comments.

next speaker, please. >> caller: good afternoon, supervisors. i'm the director of operations at the gubino project. thank you for hearing item 7 today. the project whole heartedly supports the acquisition of the panoramic 135921 mission street to add more supportive housing to our city's portfolio. especially because it will include 43 units for families. we'll keep saying this again and again. we know that housing solves homelessness and that there is no medicine as powerful thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is michael thomas and i have worked in the panoramic building for the past five years. i'm joined this morning by seven of our residents. some of whom were formerly homeless who do not have access to their own phone. i request they're each given one minute. each using my phone. >> caller: hi. my name is george. i was homeless for 11 years from 1996 to 2007 and been in supportive housing for 14 years since that time. i've been presently at the panoramic for about eight months. i'd like to make a point. this place is above standard for what you find in s.r.o. provided rooms and that presents a positive pressure toward normal thinking and behavior. and i found the last eight months, i have seen an improvement. this will set a new standard. the people here are wonderful. the facilities are way above expectations. and i don't take drugs so i can't speak for the drug usage, but i have mental wellness issues and i find myself being helped by just the personnel and the environment as well. so thank you very much.

i'm really impressed with the director. she is an honest woman. >> caller: hello. my name is jarvis. hello. my name is jarvis carpenter and i'm a resident here at the panoramic properties. i've been here about eight months. however, i'm not homeless because i'm a resident now. and i appreciate that. but i want to make a really good point here is that the management here -- al, erica -- are very helpful and approachable people here. i have mental issues. i have physical issues and they have done nothing but help me here. i say acquire this property now. do it now. right now. we're in need of this property to be helpful and safe like it is right now. but we need it to be affordable. now. thank you. have a nice day.

>> thank you, jarvis. >> caller: is it my turn now? my name is lawrence austin. i think the panoramic is a very safe and secure building and a very good place for people who need that lift of, you know, having a real home and i have experienced homelessness myself and i don't at all fit this the stereotype of the drug dealer or the person with a deep drug problem. i've had mental issues myself

and this has really lifted my spirits residing here. and i really appreciate this building and i really fully support the acquisition for affordable housing. >> hello. my name is dennis smith. i've been living in supportive housing right now at the panoramic. since 2007. and having a place to live means a lot to a person. changes their prospective. i used to, when i was homeless, in and out of jail, in and out of trouble. but being homeless and being stable, i have not been in any trouble. i want to thank everybody who supports the supportive housing and if you are against it, you need to rethink what having a house will do to a person's mentality state.

>> caller: hello. this is mika again. i spoke in the first meeting. i didn't tell you how i got here. i have two children. we all three live here and it's changed my life just being here and working here as well and just meeting people in different situations. homeless has no place. drugs has no place. it can happen in any area around. so, hopefully i'm for the acquisition of the property and hopefully we can continue to build and to help people along the way. >> caller: hello, my name is marcia. i'm a native of san francisco. i was homeless for 13 to 15 years. [inaudible] has helped me, but when it came down to it, i was [inaudible].

it's wonderful to have a place to stay. so s.r.o. for three years for a nice apartment for yourself. it gives people courage and to rebuild their lives because you rebuild community with their lives, too. so, that is why i'm in support of this place because it is helpful to me. and helpful to know that i can make it from being homeless and i can stabilize my life and start [inaudible] working in school and everything else as what i've been doing. i'm just letting you know i'm 51 now and started in support housing at 38. i've been through a lot. [inaudible]. ok. good-bye. thank you.

>> caller: this is al fernandez. i live at 1321 mission. i'm in support of the sale of the building to the city. this is going to be a great building for our community. i'm proud of every single tenant that lives in the building here and i'm proud of the city of taking this step to help people. thank you. >> hi, my name is alainna and i've been living here at the panoramic for just a few short months. even though i was homeless and i moved up to the s.r.o. phase but it has always been my dream to be able to have my own pardon me and i just couldn't get there because of my mental health issues and

my dream came true and i see all these homeless people laying down on the cement. i've been given the opportunity and so many of these men and women have been given -- given us hope to become better people and other men and women think that we are special, too. and we have it within us to become a positive part of our societies. and that is what we are. thank you. >> great. that concludes the residents' naacpinger our building. thank you. >> thank you all for your comments. operations, could you please unmute the next caller.

>> caller: howdy. i live down the street. live and work from the panoramic building. walk past it every day and calling in support of the acquisition of the panoramic. it is obviously helping people's lives and there are things that prove to address the other comments -- commentaris that disagree with the acquisition that this does help stoll issues that they are talking about. it is not going to, like, increase horrible things happening on the streets. like people having the ability to live in a place is good for the neighborhood. so i am in support of the acquisition of the panoramic and hotels across san francisco in other neighborhoods, in this neighborhood to house our neighbors. operator: thank you.

currently there are 41 callers listening and 12 in the queue. if you wish to provide comments on this item, item number 7, please press star 3 now to be added to the queue. for those on hold, please continue to wait until it has been indicated you've been unmuted. next caller. >> caller: this is sue hester. i participated in all the hearings when the panoramic was built. the panoramic was built to have student populations. they were accommodating students from three universities in the san francisco and there was no hullabaloo about students. there is a hullabaloo right now around homeless housing. i support the homeless acquisition. this makes sense. this is a very dense site. it has really good transit access. it sh