>> this meeting will come to order, welcome to the march 28, 2024 public safety and neighborhood services committee. the i with like to thank jim and james for staffing this meeting. madam clerk, do we have any announcements. >> clerk: yes, please make sure so silence all dwiesz.

public comment will be taken on each item on this agenda when your item of interest comes up and public comment is called, please line up to speak on the right. ulter nately. or you may send your written comments via u.s. postal service to our office at city hall. room 244 san francisco california, if you submit public comment in writing, it will be forwarded to the supervisor and also included as part of the official file on which you are commenting. items are expect today appear on the agenda on april 16th, 2024 unless otherwise stated.

>> thank you, madam clerk, can you please call the first item. >> clerk: the first item hearing to consider that the issuance of tip-40 on sale beer license to tyrone year pang. >> thank you, and i believe we have officer from sfpd licensing unit. >> speaker: [no audio] okay, there we go. tie ron pang operating as kim wong as applied for a type 40 license, this will allow them to have on beer premise. they're located on plot 176 which is considered high crime, they're in census crime 12404 which is a considered a low saturation area.

we recommend approve with the conditions, that the petitioner monitor the area in an effort to prevent the loitering of persons on any part of the property. and that the petition shall be responsible for maintaining free of litter over which they have control. >> thank you, so much. do we have any representatives of the applicant? i don't see any, i don't see any questions on the roster can we please open it up for public comment. >> clerk: yes, speakers should line up now, all speakers will have two speakers to speak. can the first speaker come forward and begin your comment. it appears we have no public speakers. >> seeing none, public comment is now closed. i don't see any questions or anyone on the roster.

i know that this is in district 5 and district 5 supervisor has no issues with this, so i would like to move that the clerk prepare a resolution making a determination that issuance of a type 40 on sale beer license to the applicant would serve the public convenience or necessity, may we take this motion without objection and send this resolution with a positive recommendation. >> clerk: with the motion to forward this full board, vice chair engardio. >> aye jao. member dorsey. >> aye. >> clerk: chair stefani. >> aye. >> clerk: i have three ayes. >> thank you, will you please call item number 2. >> clerk: item number 2 is a paring to consider that issuance of a type 90 on sale general music venue liquor license to filmore entertainment group, to do

business as origin boutique nightclub located at 1538 filmore. >> thank you, we turn it over to officer. >> if approved this would allow them to operate on sale music venue. i have zero protest and zero letters of support. they're in track 3 which is considered a high crime and high sag vacation, northern station has no opposition and they recommend approval with the following conditions, no noise shall be audible beyond the area of controlled licensee. petitions should monitor the area to prevent the loitering of persons on any property adjacent to the premise. and between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 2 am, they should

provide at least one security in uniform and prevent any activity which would interfere with the enjoyment of the property. the license uniform security guard must be licensed by the california state department of consumer affairs. >> thank you so much. and are there any representatives of the applicant present that would like to speak? >> speaker: good morning, i'm lilly nuguen and i own and operator gin. i own and operated origin for over ten years, we fought hard through the pandemic. we host a number of events, corporate events, we've opened up our venue to nonprofit organizations and college organizations. in our space, and we're

applying for the type 40 license, we're currently operating with the type 90 license. it's quite expensive to operate a full kitchen. there are many wonderful food establishments around us who's main offering is really good food and it's difficult to compete with michelin star rated restaurants directly across the street. we like to focus on what we do best and succeed at it and that is offering good live entertainment in the space and to be able to service all ages. and with this type 90, we can continue to keep our doors open in a historic jazz entertainment district. and sort of tough gate this tough climate in san francisco with confidence. >> thank you so much, and i know that district 5 supervisor has no issue with this permit and i don't see any questions from my colleagues, so we'll it

up oar public comment, please. >> clerk: yes, member of the public who wish to speak on this item should line up now along the windows. all speakers will have two minutes to speak. can the first speaker come forward and begin your comments. it appears we have no public speakers. >> thank you, madam clerk, seeing none public comment is now closed. again, no additional comments or questions from my colleagues. so i would like to move that the clerk prepare a resolution making a determination that issuance of a type 90 on sale general music venue to the applicant would serve the public necessity may we send this resolution to the full board with positive recommendation. >> clerk: on the motion to forward this motion to the full board, vice chair engardio. >> aye. >> clerk: member dorsey. >> aye. >> clerk: chair stefani. >> aye.

>> clerk: i three ayes. >> thank you, madam clerk, can you please call item 3. >> clerk: yes, item number 3 is a hearing to consider neighborhood and community impacts of permanent and supportive housing facilities including requirements and policies for onsite security services. >> thank you, this is sponsored by supervisor dorsey and i will turn it over to him to introduce the item and our presenters. >> thank you, chair stefani. i would like to thank chair stefani for scheduling this hearing. i would like to express my residents to residents of district 6 who have taken time to be here and others who were not here but emailed and expressed their perspectives. home rise and organization nz attendance and i look forward to an informative hearing.

before we get startd, i want to set a tone for this hearing that will swaij concerns some of the concerns about the purpose of this hearing. somebody should doubt my support for the concept of permanent supportive housing or psh as it will be referred to in this hearing. i'm also committed to making sure that we get psh right, not solely for those it serves but for the community it's a part of. i recognize the vital role that they play amid of the an array to address homelessness. i also recognize the many difficulties faced by hsh in seeking locations and approval of housing for psh use. in fact this concern is why i'm motivated to dig into this issue today and to help ensure the long term viability for our resolutions for our unhoused

residents. for me this hearing is not to beat up on any nonprofit partner, and i will confess that i have no bigger pet peeve in local government is something that i have seen working in this building. when city leaders set up city departments for failure and make a big show for blaming them. i believe that as role that our first question is what are we doing as elected leaders to make sure that our city departments and our nonprofit partners are set up for success and to best achieve the objectives that we act of them. so i'm interested in identifying and highlighting any shortcomings and how we're operating psh either at a program level or relative at a specific locations so we can build consensus. understanding that there are if there are solutions that the department can't afford, then that's a board of supervisors

issue. that's a responsibility for us to make sure that we are setting our department up with the funding that it needs to succeed. i want us to understand that what is is not working as it relates to addressing browder impacts, i want to know how and where we're failing to meet the mark to ensure our housing solutions serve the needs of their residents while meeting the reasonable expectations of their neighbors. as the city government, we cannot shy away from hearing and addresses legitimate concerns about the manner in which we're carrying out our programs specifically psh. it's wholely derived from the generosity of the san francisco voters and when i introduced this hearing, one thing i mentioned whether it's relate today prop c or incorrectly in terms of the priorities of the people that we elect, you know,

it is voters generosity that gives us budget for permanent suppose i have housing and we owe it to them to get it right or we risk losing support. that's the purpose of having a hearing. so i want to have this discussion maintaining the confidence in this program for decades to come. we cannot ignore or discount the real impact some of our operational failures are having on city residents. frustrated with their conditions in their community and growing distrustful to deliver on multiple fronts. today i know you'll hear from many resident from district 6, particularly wasoma who are deeply concerned about their community. i'm critical of folks in city hall, including me as their district supervisors.

i know that the world i signed up for and i hold no hard feelings for criticism. when i asked voters for this job, i had no expectations of escaping public scorn certainly not in today's and not with drug addiction at levels we have never seen before. but if i learned anything in my career that goes back more than 20 years, it is that any democracy public accountability makes government better. so we owe nothing less to our residents than to hear their criticisms and to accept responsibility for the role we have as their representatives to act on those criticisms. as best we can for the common good. when i first called for this hearing, our focus was the on going dialogue between business owners in the west soma neighborhood and hsh between

7th and 8 street. west soma has experienced, the shelter in place hotels and increase in public drug use public drug sales, drug driven property crime have all challenged residents and businesses like never before. this is my neighborhood too and our community covid recover is lagging behind many other neighborhoods. after the board of supervisors approved the acquisition of an apartment building using project home key funding for wholesome street last summer, the community began to meet in what became a lengthy--one of the consistent request from west soma resident has been for hsh to provide sufficient staffing for onsite security guard staff that would be available to respond for calls from residents or businesses about issues or concerns that arise in the new psh facility.

i appreciate and acknowledge that hsh has worked with the mayor's office to secure funding for safety ambassadors for west soma related to this project and i'm appreciative to the hsh and the mayor's office but we're going to hear some other things from residents today. it's my understanding from hsh that con site security as a rule not provided at phs facility even those that are 100% phs. we know that hsh does agree to fund security on a case by case basis. i look forward to hearing more from hsh today on what factors drive this decision making and i want to understand whether any consideration into any factors into their account one existing level of crime and street conditions to specifically community.

two psh shelter and private authorizing housing and create a cumulative impact on a public neighborhood. and whether whether the addition of more with a heavy concentration for unhoused residents will exacerbate problems. we as a city have chosen to homelessness in terms of houses and services. as a result i would hope that hsh and other departments take these factors when making resource allocation decisions around services for psh that will deserve--after we introduce this hearing we began receiving more information consider a relatively new supportive housing project in another district. in october of 2022, the city opened a 141 unit, phs facility

in mission bay operated by a nonprofit called home rise which up until several years ago, was considered a community partnership. they have been dealing with significant challenges, generated by this newly opened phs, these residents have been attempt to collaborate to a--and safety concerns stemming from the opening of this new facility. i don't know if we can open, there is a slide, presentation, can we open this? to give a brief overview of the magnitude of challenges this community has experienced in just the 18 months since this facility came online, i want to share some basic data provided to us by the san francisco police department regarding calls for service. between late october of 2022 and march of this year, this one building has generated 1166

calls for city service across police, fire, medical and other agencies. out of these calls, there were total of 656 police related calls for service. of these 159 are priority a calls, that means present or danger to life and/or suspect of crime seriously bodily harm. 256 of these are priority b calls that means there is potential to damage to property, the suspect may be in the yai, the crime has just occured and priority c calls for 241 incidents there is no present or potential danger but a crime scene is protected and the suspect is no longer in the area. i would add that this building is literally adjacent to the public safety building. the police headquarters, southern station, this should be the safest block in town and

instead it is, honestly, it's a public nuisance. later in this meeting we will hear from residents in mission bay who have been living in the midst of these challenging conditions, these are good hearted san franciscans who care about solving san francisco's problems and i'm impressed with the spirit of this project. all of them have expressed concerns about the city's ability to operate these facilities. we have also invited home rise and the supportive housing providers network to present here today. and our office has met with their staff multiple times over the last month, we look forward to hearing from them in effort to ensure community safety is prioritized and before we move on from the, from the calls for service, i do want to note that, some of these issues playing out on this permanent

supporting housing facility are quite serious. they include 121 calls that include fights, 41 assaults, ten incidents involving gun violence, ten incidents involving a knife. and we can get the slides down. through the chair, before we invite presenters, i don't know if there are any questions from colleagues? okay, so now i would like to ask emily cohen, deputy director with the department of homelessness and housing to the podium to present. thank you, deputy director. >> speaker: good morning, chair and community members. i'm emily and i use she her

pronouns. supervisor dorsey before i jump into my presentation, i just want to thank you for that framing, i think we all probably every one in this room, wants psh to be the best it can be for our tenants for our operators and for the neighborhoods that we live next to. i want to thank you for starting us in that tone and to that end. i also want to thank the neighbors in the room and some of the residents of psh that i see and the whole community for coming out. it will take every one and i appreciate everybody's collaborative nature. i do want to start with a little ground setting through my years, there is often some misunderstanding. so i want to make sure that we're starting from the same place of understanding supportive housing. permanent house supporting housing or psh is the most

affective and evidence we have. it is a robust intervention and it is not everything. supportive housing here in san francisco we have local state and local funded supporting, supportive housing is long term affordable housing with onsite social services. tenants pay 30 percent of their income towards rent. they have all responsibilities of these holders in san francisco. psh, is not a medical facility, we often have nurses but it's not a licensed medical facility no is it an institution, it is not a nursing home, it's really independent living with onsite supporting services and a deep

rental subsidy for folks who have histories of homelessness. we have really focused on with high vulnerabilities and barriers to ending homelessness on their own. includes over 13,000 units of housing with about 70 percent or 9,000 being site base we also have scatter site housing, lime and housing latter with a vacancy i'm pleased to announce near 7%. does fund navigation and as folks are aware, they also face

significant scrutiny when being sited. so i tell graduates student, did an impact of navigation center, and certainly not apples to apples but gives us a few interesting data points. and conducted surveys with people living near service sites. and found that they had no two i am facts. we did not see any increase of crime rates. and the perception of neighborhoods was either that things remain the same. when hsh goes out and works with community to open new

projects, we have been really en hasering this work over the last several years. we have a robust policy included in all contracts and as we renew existing programs, we're adding that in. we also established a practice of staffing and supporting community working groups of housed residents, businesses, neighborhood associations, community benefits districts and other key community stakeholders living around our program sites. this is something that we all over in all community. >> there will be no outburst

during speakers presentation, you'll have an opportunity. >> we feel hsh in collaboration with providers and community of tenants have really worked to enhance services in supportive housing over the past several years. we see people with more severe needs, we see older people and we want to meet that head on. so we have invested 32.4 million dollars over the last two years to standardize and lower the ratio in supporting housing to 1 to 20 for families and youth and to 1 to 25 for youth.

we've received robust partnerships as well as with the department of aging services. these on going partnerships are focused on overdose prevention, site base nursing, intensive case management and roving clinical care. one program that we started is the permanent advance service team otherwise known as facts. and facts is working within, now taking referrals from all housing sites to provide clinical care for tenants and support for the staff operating the programs.

in partnership with dos, wore providing in home support services to tenants who need additional with their activities of daily living as well as home safe to provide in more intensive support for older adults and people with disabilities. and this is provided to the adult protective service department. our safety procedures are robust. every housing site which is operating by nonprofits, do have 24-7 staffing to ensure tenants compliance with visitor and other safety policies and to address needs as they arrays. we--arise, we also require to report any disruption or challenges that they might face

while operating these sites. and these are reported in realtime and are received by the department. we analyze and work with each providers as we see trends emerging or issues arising. the vas majority for these are for health related emergencies and that is to be expected. these are that would have otherwise happened on the street. these are challenges of very frail population that are now happening indoors. additional policies and procedures, we do have a visitor policy, at each site and this is architect lated through the community rules, all visitors, you know, there are certain visitors hours and duration, like in many of our leases.

in compliance with these rules is an obligation with tenantcy. eviction is of course last resort but it's a tool that is available for these landlords. and then imagine, those are built in and outline when staff should should call 911, when staff should call the department and things obviously like fire or violence go right to the top and hsh and the department of emergency

management do provide training for supportive housing providers on the city's housing crisis response team and how to get support when faced with an onsite crisis. again this is just a snap shot. we see that over 50% are for health related emergencies. about 50% of the calls incidents include a call to 9-1-1 and of those calls, 76% were for paramedic intervention. we do see the highest rate of these during normal business hours and that's i guess through higher housing levels. i expected those to be higher at night. we also in advance of these hearing, looked at crime stats

around 3 recently purchased acquired supportive sites. we picked these three just a random sample because they're in different neighborhoods and two of these are youth projects which is similar to the site that we're plan to go open on followsome and we look at incidents fix months prior and six months following the opening of the project to see if there was a spike in police calls, sorry this is for reported crimes and towelly what we saw was a de crease in crime in every area that we looked at. i'm not saying the permanent housing decreased the crime but it's evidence that these projects tend to have minimum impact on public safety

generally. and the both transitional age use project similar to hol some street. there is been a lot of questions about private security in supportive housing. this is something that we've done on occasion when there is been threats of violence or when things at a particular site have gotten more intense. this is a decision that is done collaboratively and provider is able to repurpose some of their funding to paper private security or hsh can augment their contract slightly for this. we do not have a large fund for security. but we can help for time limited period with private security, based on questions from the supervisors office, we did look at the math and

estimate that in order to provide 24/7 three shifts a day onsite social security, i'm sorry, onsite private security, at our supportive housing sites this would cost between 60 and 70 million dollars annually. and my concern with private security, and they can speak. private security guards are not trained in the deescalation in the way that housing staff likely are. they do not, they may monitor the parameter of the building but they cannot walk across the street and prevent an illegal event from happening. with that said, they do provide reassurance and level of comfort to two folks.

i do think that may be felt differently by some of our tenants who may have had complex --with security in the past. they are actually out on the street engaging folks, talking to people about appropriate street behavior and are able to intervene and escalate, not just in front of our properties but on the block. and this intervention though not a silver bullet improving conditions for staff and tenants and neighbors and if, the city were to come up with more resource for supportive housing, we would strongly member ambassador services as a compliment to supportive

housing and any area as well as increasing investment in the social services delivered inside. as i mentioned earlier, we're seeing an increased accuity, and if we are to look at a 60 or 70 million dollars edition to funding, it would be well spent on increases social services and ambassadors rather than private security but again that is the bulk of the discussion here today. and i can either take questions now or after the other presenters, thank you. >> thank you. thank you, deputy director cohen, i do have a couple of questions. so i know that i have a lot of done a lot with crime data and there is a couple of observations that would i make about this, this may be a correlation but this is not something that you can make

conclusions about causity and that's true of crime data. but an observation, another thing if phenomena for some types of issues that have played out since the last few years of covid and i think this is true in my neighborhood, and in west solma, things that would have generate aid 9-1-1 call three or four years ago, are now the new normal and some of the lower level things are under reported such as car break ins. we know that in crime data, the lower you go down into property crimes and the quality of life issues, the less reliable.

in terms of, i'm interested because you mentioned the issue with increased accuity. and it feels to me that permanent supportive housing may be more expensive than we thought it was going to be. because we're looking at the budgets of all city departments. at the end of the day, we're responsible for how we're spending their money. what i would say is, we are spending money on security when we're generating close to 1200 calls for service or 600 police calls for service. we're just spending the most expensive kinds of responsive security calls, and doing it in

a way that really doesn't have the benefits that a security would have of deter ans in other words one of the things about 911, you're only respond to go problems and investigating crimes that happened. we're not in a situation where we're spending that money as wisely as we should. so i think it's on us, to work with the department especially if we're looking at situations where this is where the new norm is going to be in accuity. would you be open, if we have to go back to the drawing board to make this successful given what we're seeing in mission bay. and some of the representations are ones that west salma resident right side hearing now. that's a concern for all of us. so i think do we have to go back to the drawing board and look at what we need to do for

security especially responsiveness. what i've heard is if there is something that happens in the middle of the night, can they call somebody and get a response in the middle of the night? >> actually having a number to call is part of the good neighbor policy. and again, there is 24-7 security on property. they can do that, we will be making a publicly available known number once the site opens.

it's about $50 an hour, but i can get that for you quickly and that's something that we would look at, that would come the committee of this board has been clear about the cost of some of our projects. and that said, i think the debate is where is the security, you know, when we say security what do we mean? and open at the discussions at this point, hsh does not have the budget.

to cover two zones one was in soma one in lower hill and we've had pretty good mix results. when we talk about solutions, some of the people that i have spoken to have mentioned maybe in something in transitional age use where it's a boor lead kind of thing, somebody who would be able even if we're paying that person.

and i'm sure lark is in the street. >> ipg that's it for me. >> supervisor mandelman. >> thank you, chair stefani and thank you supervisor dorsey for calling for this hearing. and apologies for crashing but i'm interested. i'm interested in slide 3 which breaks down what supporting housing looks like in san francisco. if you can talk me through with my colleagues indulgence what some of these things mean.

society base psh like 70 percent is in buildings where we think every one in the building needs some level of services. >> that's that's correct, what i don't have a building that affordable. so many of the affordable buildings. >> that number struck me as high and potentially problematic. because i do have growing concern. and there may be good reason why you want building, i would think relatively youth building might make a lot of sense to have it all youth all coming off the streets but if we're talking about that population

that we're using psh, because as your first slide says, it's the proven solution for chronic homelessness, the kind of homelessness we're talking about is intensive services and those folks tend to have high needs in concentrating a large number of people who may have been on the streets who may have a host of mental health issues and they set of addiction challenges is hard on the staff in those buildings, hard on the people who are living in the buildings, it's hard on the neighborhood around those buildings. and i'm still concerned.

scatter sites means you have some buildings that are not affordable at all and that seemsed like the best way to do it although hard. and 13% being rapid rehousing. or what is rapid rehousing? >> so the tenant is renting housing in the market paying a portion of their income towards rent. >> okay and psh, and rapid rehousing, case managers, in the aourt or in the community. >> okay, and what does it mean to be housing latter? where people, for lack of a better word.

they have an opportunity that has fewer support services but underline affordability and that can be project base or scatter site. that's helpful for me. i'm going to quibble, i don't disagree, i think most of your presentation, acknowledges that this is a little more complicated than the statement you started with, and i think that has been demonstrated by studies and a lot of those studies are studies that have infinite resources. and that's right ran the

situation, creating kay ot, gets evicted back on the streets, these studies have the same person. they don't end up he viktd. and we try a different way and then we do it again. it works as getting somebody off the street but it's not item. the other thing that you can do, and also this point is made to people that say, no no knoxer there is some kind of ladder and then this and the other. and if you provide the right level, and you're really working with them right, at some point, maybe they don't need permanent housing.

trying to get the resources to make it look like the studies to tell us psh works. we just have some folks who probably resource. >> supervisor, i very much agree with a lot of what you just said. there is probably 5 percent of tenants who needs something higher who are not appropriately placed if you will.

we need another level of service. and when those other levels of service don't exist, they become the housing that is available for people in crisis. and those 5% is a number that we can accommodate with the right investments. i think if we can solve for that 5% are our entire portfolio would be far more stablelized.

talking about a project that we're rolling out in the next few weeks. and the types, i have been arguing for a while that there is investments that you need to make on the very low end for somebody just to get the person off the sidewalk tonight and there are investments that you need to make at the high end because there are people that will need much more support than they're getting.

and i want us to think about that. i think it points out, there is a difference the deal we have made around shelter, at least at the same time, to some ex pent we're going to use this facilities that we put into your neighborhood to make the rest of the neighborhood better. we're going to work to get them into this tiny home village,

we're going to step up police resources, we're going to kind of, you know, really focus those resources on what has been a small number of map centers. we've done a lot psh buildings. as a way to improve conditions, i'm not sure that we should, i'm not sure that's how we want to use psh. it creates sort of an apples to oranges, those map centers are not like, you may get more benefit over what would seem like an impact use.

yes, absolutely. but on the other side of that coin, you're talking usually about more people, it's a 42 unit that we're talking about here. there is a different scale and there is a different level of crisis that the guest versus tenants are in. when somebody is first coming out of the street, you're likely to see more chaos in their lives. it's likely not as big as that tradition. >> i guess, last question that i would ask, and i'm interested

in learning, is hsh and they're trying to create more programs that will have more resource. is there thought of deconcentrating some of the buildings that we have now. my impression not housing the first resort for most people but a place where lots of different kinds of people found housing of last resort. people on welfare or whatever, but also the immigrant family, the senior that has no money. lots of different people in that building. is there thought about working with our broader portfolio?

where we have folks that need help with rents along with folks who really need help. >> absolutely. so there is two types of deconcentration, one is geographic deconcentration and as we've added more buildings to our supportive housing portfolio, we've really been intentional about, we have acquired one in the tenderloin. that is operating in the shelter. and i really recognize that west soma has more, a lot of things, not just housing but shelter and drug treatment and a number of other facilities. and there is another, as we see

accuity grow, as you indicated, we have seen these sites become harder. so when we fund something, through most cd, those are partially, if somebody can look at our last portfolio, i can get you the number by the end of the hearing. those are more mix income. and the ones where we're the sole funders, that's where we see in our master lease portfolio or our continuum of care. >> and there are a number of those. >> oh yes.

reducing the number the buildings. : i would assume the reports from those buildings, ensure that maybe folks that have really high needs but i would assume those are easier buildings for i don't know. >> i can't speak to that data but maybe some of the operators could. >> i'm interested in this interesting. >> just a quick announcement, we have overflow seating, so if you cannot find a chair you may proceed to room 263 please find a seat or move to the overflow room, thank you.

>> thank you, so much. and now through the chair i would like to invite up, lauren hall for a few minutes. and for those here, not ever presenter is going to be as long as the department but i do appreciate people taking a few minutes to lend their perspective as well. ms. hall. >> speaker: thank you, i'm san francisco homeowner, the co-chair of the supportive housing network, operate over 11,000 units of psh in san francisco. represented by bipoc folks.

our residents are the fabric of this community as any of us here today. i'm concerned some of the nature of this hearing, and i just want to say that there are thousands of supportive housing residents here in the district that we're discussing that are thriving well in many sites. it's dangerous to assert that any one group of people is responsible or safety is not the responsibility. post pandemic has been a greater concern. until then, they have created a safety committee to improve and visitors to our psh sites. we recognize this is not just the job of providers and hsh.

to strategize will investment that will benefit our neighbors. we understand as operators, it's our role to create safe environments and we take that responsibility very seriously. we have practices in place, our residents are also tenants and residents of these communities, they're entitled to due process if they're behavior is in conflict and we're also relying on public safety to address negative behaviors and we cannot do the work of law enforcement if police don't respond to concerns that we have onsite, we have very little recourse. we welcome the partnership but not saying that they're not welcomed in the neighborhood. to advance our work on safer communities, shpn has advocated for greater investment.

last year we asked for four million for enhanced security investments, including security expansion of the neighborhood ambassador programs and as needed security guards for more acute issues. hsh has acquired a quarter that request. i will say as we talk about suppose i have housing but it's important to note that it's for intended for people that can thrive on in voluntary service model. that being said, as hsh presented, inve.s have been made in the city's home by the home strategic plan. but again there are challenges but part of the larger system

of care. we would welcome the support of the board in ensuring that services are readily available. i don't share the concern that 100% psh are problematic. some of the ones are thriving communities. to sort of blanket that residents have that same level of need, disservice to that community. and we have an here to work together instead of putting community members against each:00 our focus should be on prevention not just responding to them. tt our opinion that 24-7 private security is not necessary. and we don't believe it will

address some of concerns coming up. we would like to see that conversation in a more nuance way. but there are over 140 sites. the vas majority operate without complaints and those communities are thriving. as people who spend a lot of time in those buildings and remembereding, we have a vested interest in adopting measures. we welcome the opportunity to work with you, to come up with strategies that accomplish our collective goals but we don't want to stand for policies that suggest that our collective need to investment responsive or shs alone. so thanks for the opportunity. if you have any questions, i'll be happy to talk more about the work that we do. >> great, seeing no one on the

roster, i appreciate your time. that's all. through the chair next up, i would like to income nicki and mody a resident to provide some remarks. >> hello i'm nicki a resident of soma west as you mentioned. while i'm here as an individual, i am representing an entire community of west soma and that includes hundreds of us. to convoy are the seriousness of issues, i offer correspondence which is on top of our petition initialed on may 12, 2023. this petition has gained 1300 signatures. in this petition, residents express concerns about the housing projects, concentration in district 6, highlighting a

disparity in the distribution of affordable housing throughout san francisco. just to let you know know, there are over 900 units of supportive housing within blocks of 1174 hole? and now some of the most resent threat inpassion al from us, the residents west soma expressing deep concern and frustration over the proposed 111467 project. we argue that along with supportive housing and klun --will harm the community. the resent incidents and pervasive lawlessness in our neighborhood under scores a crisis that can no longr be ignored. this is dis heartening and

infuriating that the response from city official sxz law enforcement has been closely inadequate. our community is unraveling at an alarming rate. and yes, we find ourselves questioning, what would it take for to you start listening? must we wait for the unthinkable? like the murder of children in our streets before we see meaningful interventions. [booing] we highlight the residents which immigrant which faces closure due to the implication, despite communication the community feels our concerns have been largely ignored. the email's critique the standard contrasting the quick

termination of a similar project in china town with a prolonged process in soma. re, the residents believe city officials and hsh lack transparency and a fair process, pointing to negative affects on small business owners, children, seniors and the overall fabric of the community. we demand for meaningful engagement and support and reconsideration of the project, emphasizing the need for safety, support for the local economy, and equitable treatment of all neighborhoods. the threat reflect a community united in opposition to a project, we believe will destroy the essence of solam west seeking action from

leaders. add to go this, the communication highlights neglect and disregard by city official and hsh over the span of ten months. during the city has accomplished little to address the community's concerns. the case as case study exemplifies comma the community views as anti immigrant bias towards the small businesses. coupled with the broader of pushing out families and seniors, arguably the most vulnerable population. the residents depicket solma west as contain for the tee's most challenging problems demonstrating failure to social service sxz challenges equitably across the city. this narrative serves to amplify the community's call

for immediate, affective and empathetic action from hsh, mayor london breed and supervisor matt dorsey, under scoring the need for reversal concerning the 1176 project and its impact on the solma west community. while we're not opposed to the notion of supportive housing, our advocacy is for inclusive housing solutions that cater to the needs of all residents, not just shooting up on our streets with zero contribution to our local economy. >> hold on, can hold on, through the chair, i just want to remind everybody here that the rules of the board of supervisors is that there are not to be audible participation, if you want to express yourself for happy, you can do this or thumbs down, i was deliberate in the beginning of this making sure that we're going to honor a tone that

solution focused. the residents here have a right to express their grievances, that is a constitutional right in this country and we're going to honor it in the board of supervisors. so i would ask everybody here to please respect the residents and the residents to respect the advocates. we can have a respectful conversation and we can make progress and in fact the only way we're going to make progress is to have a respectful conversation. nicki, i apologize. >> thank you supervisor, dorsey. the neighborhood decline is ex set --accelerating. this is not just a failure of policy but a failure of responsibility and i will ask what will it take for to you act. must we face more tragedies before you recognize the

severity of the situation. the eyes of salma west are upon us to our lifes and safely and live lihood matters to you. >> thank you. >> thank you, very much. seeing nobody with questions, next up i would like to ask marcel davis interim director with home rise. home rice is the service provide for the mission bay project also known as mb9. >> thank you, supervisor dorsey for having us here today. me as a representation with my organization to have this much needed discussion. just a note i'm marcel davis i'm directer of services for

home rise, i've been working directly with my colleagues and neighbors of and john we forced a great relationship, even with other neighbors through arlenes to where i respond to emails 7 days a week, doing exactly what she stated, i really appreciate that tone setting, coming up with solutions. this is where it starts. in my presentation i'm going to chroniclize homerise interactions. the last 8 months and leave an update as to where we're at currently, what is working, what is changing, what has gotten better.

as our mission statement, it's to secure housing and become more sufficient sufficient. given adequate and taylor support, all people posses the capacity of high degree. this is really important as we highlight this is post po vid in folks coming out of sip hotels, our shelter in place hotels. mission bay nine opened in 2022.

in august 2023, our ceo received an email from law enforcement and also ally of ours in supportive captain martin about noise violence. coming from some of our disruptive residents. on september 26, we began to meet monthly with representatives from both, local police department who has been a great partner this in other stakeholders, steps were taken immediately after this, where we just received and embedded a lot of grown residents, i would say underable, i would say observations and things that we were quite unaware of or concerns about.

addressing the complaint by, by address the complaint about individuals loitering their buildings we installed a no loitering within 3 days just as a measure of responsiveness. we had a home rise furniture on the sidewalk, we properly contacted 311 and 911 and deescalation the situation. michael is no longer a resident of homerise. concern incidents these discussions around ways to establish and enforce new rules. that's me being one of those rules. 24-hour response. while i take on other duties and supporting my staff who is

also here and as well as the residents. we have implemented changes to community space and have actively encourage our resident to see utilize instead of congregating outside of the building, so there is a lot of observations about loitering in other parts of the building. each meeting expressed concerns from each session. and this is just a clock here and some of the listings here. i do have 15 residents who are with me today, and i feel responsible to highlight them. as i read this off, i do want

to thank them for being here and this is not a reflex --reflection, you can see violence and aggression, we addressed, there was a resident who masturbating, you'll actually see video footage today of that resident who is no longer a resident anymore through, through deescalation, i'll also say in conjunction with the madrone residents bringing we're able to find some alter na native housing that did not lead to a solution. we had a resident here drug dealing, that goes by the name of ohio, even with our acute, these are not real given names, established names by homerise,

madrone is known as a known drug dealer, we've done plenty of things to keep him off site including personal call. and immediately having this previously and again, he's not a resident, he's a visitor. the screaming women from the window. high acute has been self identified as scin phene schizophrenia, and we've deescalated in several

different ways, mainly relying on the resources. we're actively work withing this resident, we have not shared everything and i think that's as a public, as a supportive of housing provider, it's confused on what our role is between madoan and home rise staff. and have not followed through, we're still waiting for the details.

i would say that madrone with curiosity not as dismiss i havely. this was evident when we all sat at the table of nb9 and had our meetings there. home rise has been diligent.

but instead, i just break in the system. the mayor attempt, i love the holistic. home rise must abide by law and local he vixz, our residents are entitled to same protection and, as every one representatived. that just means, we cannot tell you when somebody is getting evicted. we're not in charge in terms of backlog of what this county is dealing with all evictions across the city. as we work to solve these probablies.

this is a homeless issue, the issues that we're facing with our 3 percent of our residents, are not new to neighborhood, it's important to acknowledge 97% of our residents live successful at nb9, i would like those residents to please stand with me and showing your faces and thanking you again for joining me. [applause] and this is why we're doing, our model is working, we level need to improve things but it's great to give a voice to those who are thriving in place.

more that identifying requires engagement with the city in supportive housing provider, thank you so much to explore more methods in addressing the necessity with high accuity care needs who require and benefit from permanent supportive housing. thanks for an opportunity to speak for those who don't have an opportunity to speak as much. and i do hope that we can find something ho will ising pick. --holistic. >> thank you. there is a-line that requires more patience and grace, i'm going to steal that line, that's how we find solutions. thank you to the participation and to the people who benefit, just know that is gross to my heart.

i have been in residential setting on a few facings, and i know that this is the kind of thing that can change and improve lives. and our final presenter is dnf, mission bay residents to the podium. >> hi i lived in mission bay for 12 years and i'm speaking on behalf of the hundreds of

neighbors that live-- -- ~>> the slides are there. >> speaker: i'm speaking on behalf of the hundreds of neighbors that live in the immediate vicinity of the homerise location. we believe in permanent supportive housing. however we feel that this specific location, has been poorly executed. and it is causing a great deal of pain for neighbors and home rise tenants. according to the police data as you have heard, at this location in the past 14 months, there have been more than 1,000 calls to the city including more than 600 police calls. that's an average of 50 police calls per month at this one

location. these problems are serious, there is fist fights, there is violence, there is drug dealing, neighbors have been rother these issues to hsh month low over the past six months. but virtually no progress has been made, neighbors are scared and hurting and concerned because this has been going on for 15 years. --15 months. we're here because we're asking for your help and concrete action. i want to share the severity of the incidents we're experiencing not to focus on specific incidents or individuals, but to focus on the patterns. we're seeing a pattern of violence and aggression, if you look at the photos in the top

right, you see fist fights, brawls with weapons, this is happening right out homerise entrance. and according to the police data, there is a fight happening once every three days. the bottom photo shows a tenant who publicly masturbates at the entrance of a neighboring building where families with children regularly enter and exist. families are afraid to enter their building. home risen ants and their guests are dealing drugs and this is happening at the front of the entrance and it's been happening for months. there are continually loud and gathering in front of in the

evenings and weekends. there is a home rise tenant who for four plus months has been screaming for hours out of her open window day and night. neighbors can't work, they can't sleep even with their windows closed and again this has persisted for months. there are building safety and health issues, i want to point out that the picture is a tenant that publicly breaks his window and exposes himself to neighbors, with families with neighbors who live in direct site. i want to show a map of homerise because this is important. you can see it very clearly, but the white box in the middle is a homerise building and the entrance is right directly close to the street. most of incidents that i have spoken about today, are

happening within 40 feet of the home rise entrance. you can also see the neighboring buildings very close. that is such a small area to manage. let's talk about engagement with homerise management. for the first months, home rise refused to engage with neighbors, it was only after repeated attempt to reach out to homerise and the involvement of the city attorney did homerise agree to engage with neighbors. since that time, since october 2023, we have had monthly sit downs where neighbors, me method ickly enter the pictures even with names and we ask homerise to take specific action.

after six months of monthly meetings, we have not seen, we've seen virtually no progress. unlike what was presented, we have, home rise has never asked us to follow-up with specific information, we are the ones direct --collecting the information. but the problem persist. i also wanted to talk about hsh and its roles at this location. during the planning process with mission bay, hsh made promises and assurances and those promises were not kept. hsh promised 24-7 security and it has not happened. hsh made a promise that there

would be thorough screening. that they were capable of living independently. that screening process has failed at this location. otherwise we won have 1,000 calls to the police. we have asked hsh this monthly for months and they still have not provided a clear answer. now after 15 months, neighbors are scared and frustrated. we really need to help with some concrete steps that can address these issues.

number one, homerise can help by doing the following, they can move the extremely tenants to other units in the building that do not face families with children. number 2, they can enforce the no loitering policy which is not consistently enforced especially on weekends and evenings when most problems occur. most of these incidents with happening within 40 feet of homerise's entrance. number 2, we need 24-7 security at this location. having security at the entrance will do a lot to deter the type of behavior that we're seeing because their presence reduces confidence. we understand that they can't stop crime but their presence will deter incidents happening.

i want to mention something relate today hsh presentations, they showed prime numbers for new locations, but specifically they did not include this mission bay location, and it's 1,000 service calls and more than 600 police calls. that's a dramatic increase in crime in this neighborhood since the location opened. nor this location, 24-7 security is warranted and needed. we believe hsh poor screening makes this a requirement. number 3, we need hsh to remove serious repeat offenders out of the mission bay location. he vixz take a year plus, tenants exposing themselves to families with children is not something that should be tolerated.

number 4, hsh broke their promise through scoening about tho low screening at this location. we would like to know how will hsh fix this? finally, i just want to say that we believe in permanent supportive housing and we believe that implementation matters. fixing this location of homerise at mission bay is critical because we need a model that will work successfully across the city. thank you. [applause] >> thank you so much. i don't have any comments but i do appreciate your perspective. and i will return this to the chair. >> seeing no other names on the roster, can you please open up for public comment. >> clerk: yes, members that would like to speak should line along the windows, all speakers

will have two minutes to speak. >> can the first speaker come forward. >> speaker: good morning, supervisors. >> clerk: i'm going to reset

your time. >> can every one please settle down and be quiet so we can start with public comment, thank you. >> speaker: good morning, and thank you for the hearing. wow has a lot to unpack. again we're here precovid with the same problems. so do something need to be restructure hsh, hell yeah, we're talking about impacts of person nal supportive housing. can we remember that we're out of covid, we're in a new era of history. san francisco is not alone in the historic problem. we need to address that mental health accord to go our govern is one in four. we have pandemic of fentanyl and you continue to blame it on low income, marginized populations. what are you doing about mental

health to eliminate all of these problems. what are you doing to ratio 11-25, that should deescalate your problems. pay a security $50 that can do nothing for one agency. it's not about housing, it's about mental health. it's about a pandemic of intentionally killing our people. flip the dialogue, we're not in kansas anymore, nobody is taking care of the trauma after 2020, that's affecting all of us. open your lens and start looking at a community base approach. do something about mental headlight and you will eliminate all of these problems. you ignore it and sitting on it and it's a problem. again, i want to look at the case management cost. i want to know for 7 years i've

been asking for case management ratio to client center care. why do you show 3 2000 and no evidence that it's working. and don't think that this is happening in public housing alone, it's happening in our city, because of mental health. >> clerk: your speaker time has elapsed. thank you for your comment. next speaker. >> hi, i'm happy to be here today, i'm jacqueline miller. >> as a note, jackie asked me to stand with her. >> speaker: this is march 28, 2024 at city hall in san francisco california, where, where i never had a chance to say anything, hi any name is

jacqueline, miller, i've been a resident all my life as a drug addict. i grew up not knowing myself. i grew up not knowing my true self at all. i thank, i thank god for all he has done for me. my life has been full of sorrow but thank god for blessing me through the years. i love a man, a love such a man that one's hope, one hope and happiness no more pain. that i just can't get over thanking my boss mr. hugo and mr. pete, how they have shown me, you cannot throw dollars at problems but let me help you and i am still seeking for change in the community.

thank you home rise for what we mean and with that hot meals and work withing staff to help change to a better place to live. something i never dreamed of doing, stay humble don't give up. thank you. >> speaker: good amonger, supervisors, i'm part of the working team that sits monthly with homerise and hsh. and prepares a lot of documentation to sit down and resolve these issues and request action items. i would like yourself, i think we absolutely support

supportive housing for all the good that it does, and as we heard execution matters and i think the home rise mission bay location is somehow a special case that needs and deserves special attention. for whatever reason and we think it's tied to the screening criteria by hsh that was used. we have a very difficult situation for the neighbors and by the way for the home rise tenant alike. and the fights are coming to the home tenants as well as the street. therefore this is a very special case from the neighbors perspective, warrants and deserves special special needs like 24-7 security.

if we had security there, it would do so much good for the neighbors as well as for residents of home rise. i would like to mention that many of us spent 24 hours a week and sitting very method i --ically because we don't want, like a chaotic food fight sort of discussion. i would remind us that too t took us long time. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker. >> speaker: i want to tell you this breaks my heart.

small number of people, causing a huge problem for us is really heart breaking. when i wife and i exit daily, as an elderly person i was afraid how it may impact me. they would be carefully vetted and security management would be available would be in there. i asked that they most entrance and that was denied. since home rise is next to police headquarters, i assumed we would be fine. i was wrong, every concern i have is because of a small

number of residents. i've gotten to know those people, vas majority of them are wonderful and i'm proud to be there except for what is going on in terms of public disruption and fear. i'm afraid now i'm afraid our disrupt i have street is disrupt ive daily. hire staff on a daily base, please don't tell us to call 9-1-1. and for the second, no loitinger rules business establishing an expedited eviction process for repeat offenders. in addition, relocate the

frequent offenders. >> thank you supervisors, i'm a homeowner, i raised two young daughters, supervisor dorsey met both 3 and 8, and i live literally next to door to 1176 holsome. i constantly chose to raise my daughters in a diverse neighborhood. i want them to be exposed to the urban environment. my neighbors who are with me today are very compassionate and empathetic. but, we all may have come from different back grounds, but i've never seen more neighborhood more unified. we are simple residents, asking for simple things.

i have two perplexing questions, why is soma, why with zero investment and over ten months, why must the city ignore all of our request like 24 final lea dressed. there was no mention of mission bay home rise in my of the prior conversations. let me tell you a personal story, this is my day. i have to clear the addicts doing fentanyl because my

children can't walk through. and bullied by the city and that is a disservice, thank you for your time. >> thank you so much. thank you for your comment. we want it remind all to not engage in clapping in the chamber. i want to make three suggestions. first i think it's important that the first 18 to 24 months for any permanent supportive housing is hard on the staff, it's hard on the resident and hard on neighbors as people is describing here. it's important that we fund fund those months differently.

most we'll be working with 15 to 20 percent, because the salaries are not high enough based on what we receive from the city. it's important to understand. 9 ebbeding is, you know, we operate 40 buildings in san francisco. 15 of them have some supportive housing on them. the notion that our frontline get $20-$25 to man and staff a front desk are going to be able to do what the police department enable or unwilling in some cases makes no sense and it's unsensecal that a security guard is going to be able to handle those. these are issues that require a police response. and the question that i would like you to ask is how is it possible when a police come to our buildings, they don't actually do the job that we need the police to do but we're

asking private individuals to do what the police can't. i think it's time to have the appropriate response. we need to figure out what the roll should be and get to you do it. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker. i represent as a tenant and somebody who seeds woegt both sides of this picture.

i have a mega phone and i take care of issues. i didn't realize the problem had gotten so bad in front of the building as it had until recently. and i agree that they should be moved to other units that are not on the street. every housing they all need to go and take the lessons of under served which is taught at city college. it only takes a year and a half to do. i think we should give them the parameters of two years to get these certificates that would

be the correct of solving the whole thing. because we would not need a security guard was they would know how to handle the situations. >> thank you, thank you for your comments. can we have the next speaker, please. >> i'm a bilingual counsel or and i'm here to translate. she says she is beatriz. >> speaker: [speaking spanish] >> translator: she says she

understand that she knows they have other residents that know that probably not behaved in a proper way but she just wants to let everybody know that she is here because not every one is the same. the reason she got brought to this area because during the covid pandemic she had become homeless and thanks to the center now she is housed. >> speaker: [speaking spanish] she is asking to please give them another opportunity to show that they can make a difference. and she does not want to be back in the streets. she feels that homerise is a

good how you say it, sorry, i'm a little nervous, it's a good she knows they can take better measurement on fixing things. thank you. i think the problem that i see and one of the reasons we're here is for solutions. in thed first two years that i lived somebody from somebody the supportive housing, next to mine didn't like my building and we got basic leet building was, defaced, we were spit on constantly. we went to the police and

management and nothing can be done. first of all it seems that why do people commit violence crimes, you know. a lot of them don't have money, they use drugs, why don't we

ask them why do you use drugs. they go to museum sxz symposiums and art galleries, they do nothing but drugs. but what i also like to say is that encampments in oakland and in san francisco which is a large community. there is people all over the country, they want collectives. they want community. they want culture. they had no deaths, ever since they've been evicted ten people have died and some of them from drug overdoses.

they're scared about the republican. and prop e and p was against the democratic rise. >> thank you so much for your comments. next speaker?

i didn't come here to be homeless. not one time did they come to housing. we have people that are hypochondriacs. but, you know, it's all walks of life, we got to love each other, we cannot just put people down. i mean, it's like, like my neighbor, and she does, yell out the window but she hears noises.

nobody can keep her from hearing voices and reacting too. give it a chance, it will workout. all i know is i appreciate having a place to go. the last 25 years having the most stressful 25 years of my life. i've got nothing else to say. >> thank you for taking the time to convene the hearing.

we operate quite a view, 100 percent of supportive sites in san francisco. i wanted to recognize the concerns and frustration regarding safety in support of housing. i wanted to echo many of the things that the ceo said, some of the things that i think are before us are real solutions. i think it's engagement with our neighbors, well before often a building is open, it really requires a tremendous amount of time and investment to work with our neighbors. i think and necessary ways. for folks that don't know, the first two or three years, are

challenging years with 100% supportive housing properties. and i think there are ways that we can go about staffing those buildings. after 5 or 6:00 o'clock, we don't have case managers on the property. and there is won front desk person. and that applies on weekends as well. so i just want to say that we're all committed to solutions. but there are solutions embed to us. so thank you. >> clerk: next speaker. >> speaker: i'm charles i'm the direct of paula episcopal communities. i work at 8th and howard everyday, so believe me, i see

the crime, i see some of the conditions, the drug use, i want to be super clear that permanent supportive housing is not the cause of these issues. and equating residents to criminals shuts down the conversation that we all believe that we need to have for these. these things and most cases do ensure that it's a positive presence and that the residents of the building with be part of the neighborhood as well. again if we're serious about solving homelessness, we need to increase not shut them down. it's the most affective way it end homelessness. thank you and let's work together to ensure that these programs work for their tenants as well as the broader

community. >> clerk: thank you so much, next speaker. >> speaker: good afternoon, i'm golov, my role raise immense role as i correct to individuals listening to their stories, single mothers, disabled individuals, single adults and senior citizens. they gather for community meetings and engage in conversations. their resilience inspired me to advocate for a more equitable city. puts blame. while we acknowledge the importance of addressing safety. lack of affordable housing contributes to the complex issues in our city. let us not forget that those residing in permanent housing

are not immune to crime and violence. accountability is crucial. instead we must ensure that our safety includes every especially the most vulnerable among us. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker. >> clerk: i'm an organizer with coalition on homelessness. this hearing started with praise about homelessness, ended up being about criminalizing 'em holsness. i don't appreciate that they're redice today some scary graphs of crime statistics. they're vital to many homeless residents, if we want to alleviate the use of shelter and emergency rooms and jails.

we need to be more collaborative and creative. it can't always just be more cops. we get public safety through house keys not handcuffs. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. >> next speaker. joi, i'm architect, i'm here for homeless housing, it shows it works. that's an a+, at school. the issue is that 3% of the 5 percent are extremely disruptive. so the solution is not throwing out psh and hhh with the baby with the bath water, it's addressing the three and five percent, which means putting

more more mental health issues, we saw with the slides from the broken window and a person masturbating, they need help right away, that cannot go 9 or 10 months, it needs to be addressed within a day. that person would have jumped on the window and landed on the floor and that's unfair to him and the police need to do their job on addressing the outside factors, like the drug dealers and disruptive loud music, which we have ordinances for, you're not suppose to deliver drugs, and have loud music. get those criminals arrested and have them pay res lousing, jail is probably not the solution but do make them do work to clean up the neighborhood. thank you.

>> thank you, next speaker. >> speaker: aim a resident and native my wife and i are native to this area, we have working groups going back to 100 years. mia laoej ans is to san francisco--my allegiance is to san francisco, i'm not an extremist and once created attention we're seeing some tangible, there is progress which is good, for home rise mission bay. my certain there has to be a difference between primeism,

it's my concern after reading every word, i'm a word reader that there is something missing, it's not just criteria or guard rails how are the checks and balance to see treat the people in need? and back to the 3 to 5 percent, they will cause 95% of the chaos, it's not doing themselves a service, that is causing more harm to the individual and the community at large, right. and that is inclusive of mission bay 9 within mission bay. we cannot have hsh, because they have been zero other than we'll look into it.

that is frustrating as residents and it's frustrating on the community member. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker. >> speaker: hi, good afternoon, you know, we need solutions. permanent supportive housing is a fantastic solution for a food size of that population. we have in san francisco a severe shortage, and thousands of people that are unable to access housing and typically people are homeless for ten years before they get house hading. so what are the barriers? it's the investment piece, we need it from the federal and state.

with you we have an issue with folks not wanting stuff in their neighbors, not wanting more people in their neighborhoods. and i want to take issue on the presentation, and a provider, these are social i don't inequities that we're dealing with here and people are working really hard to try to address those, that there is a bashing of nonprofit that's are happening. as well as very anti sentiment. and i think the structure really feed into that and i think working with the community and setting these things set up. because they're there are conversation that's are happening flt we have a

situation right now because there is no shelter. there is nothing that fits homelessness more than a home. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker. >> hello and good afternoon, i'm director at transitional home. we serve parents, children, our program disrupts inter generational patterns of homelessness. our program works. like our program, psh is decide to help those of the most vulnerable.

families were no longer intimidated and also saved us money. before work withing families, i worked with transition al age youths at a low barrier shelter. when we supported mental health resources and education and employment, the police and fire department asked if we closed the shelter. we didn't close the shelt, we didn't hire security we worked with each youth. been three months, employment

went from 18 to 30%. when people have the support they need, they are able to stabilize. we need to support those and providers who work to support these. >> thank you, thank you so much for your comment. thank you every one. i'm the bilingual manager, somebody who does direct services with families experiencing homelessness, i would like the board of supervisors that this the impact on that will have on our community. the city of san francisco is in a housing crisis and it's the responsibility of board of supervisors to create legislation that impacts the

community in a way that is inclusive of population, that are most vulnerable to the social problem. makes them instead consider how to come up with legislation that promotes the unity of the community and works to break down these issues so that it, the work that i do can continue to be geared towards breaking down generational curses. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. a transitional program, i work with the kids tht families, i interact with them and i see the big impact that this program is having in them from starting to get better grades to enhancing parenting schools.

they provote self advocacy. our children, the service system that gives thement support they need in order to bloom and go out there. what we need is more support from the communities, from the neighborhoods and the higher systems. if we don't provide them that, they need more. they don't need more trauma, they need our support. thank you. >> thank you, so much. >> next speaker.

>> supervisors, thank you for this conversation. mental health is a huge issue that is very important with somebody that has lived with a diagnosis by bipolar, have been 515025 times. and a month in taiwan which i have due he will citizenship. i'm disappointed that walton is not here my supervisor, there is three developments going up, mercy housing is might be all three, so i would look at what is happening in bay view. because there is a lost states where they have the navigation center.

saturday is world bipolar day, i'm happy that i'm still alive but i love san francisco, love to create chaos, love trouble, jill run for mayor, if you look at the people that ran for mayor, you see that i have submitted above daniel, because we have rank where you can vote up to 10 people. i'm going to create chaos, you want daniel to win, mic drop. >> clerk: thank you so much for your comment. next speaker. i feel embarrassed that this can found like i'm against supportive housing. the realitied is, most of us believe probably believe in supportive housing. my name is jose, i'm a resident for the past five years.

1174 is not in my back yard situation. supportive housing is complex, adding for to already sag vaited area is not right. for agility and care is not just a--it's a a quillity condition t.continues to tear at the already struggling neighborhood. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comment, next speaker, please. >> speaker: i'm chris, chief program officer at episcopal services. i believe with a lot of things that my colleagues have shared, so i'm going to go off psychiatrist because i don't want to say the same thing again. i'm going to tell you two short stories. we're getting prepared to

provide services at a new psh building, there is 100 residents. recently we learned that 70 residents will have serious mental illness. so the current staffing plan is just what best folks described, it's four case managers during the day and one overnight desk clerk for folks with serious mental illness which includes schizophrenia and things of that night. --of that type. they said maybe because we need clinicians in that building for it to be safe to be affective. another example, is last week, we called the police to come and help with one of our residents who is having an episode, he was throwing furniture out the window that hit people. the police said that they couldn't do anything, so we

psyched services and they said they couldn't do anything because police couldn't do anything. in these situations, the nonprofit is holding the ball. what we need, the solution, for the city department to see come to the table and figure out this system together. and planning can executing the services. thanks. >> clerk: thank you, next speaker. >> speaker: hi, thank you so much supervisors. my name is kay, located. and a resident who have lived and walked in salma west for over four years. so since my rount, our restaurant has encounters numberous problems including two rob he's and thefts and

harassment and we've been sent in all the evidence and videos for that and yet, the situation has not been improved. and operating a business gets harder and harder and we are very afraid, it will only get worse when the facility takes over and the city of san francisco has bought the building for seven months already and the situation has not improved yet. so the neption is in deed food but without following them and failing them as promised, then it will all be useless. so i want to repeat what we've been asking for a a long time is that, we have to enhance security measures in our neighborhoods to ensure a safe

for children with increase diligence, we can collaborate with government and to help those in need of the streets. prioritize safety above all. thank you. >> clerk: thank you, next speaker. >> i apologize for not being here earlier but i want to explain why i was not here earlier. one of our residents, somebody we provide residents services for at one of our properties decided to file a restraining against me personally. i went to court this morning, at 8:30 and was the last person to be heard because this person is a known quantity for filing restraining orders that are bogus, so i apologize for not being here, the judge asked me

to leave while the person was over talking to her, and i was hoping to go after the resident spoke so they would have a chance to do my presentation myself. and i thank you marcel for doing that. i'm disappointed at the format of this meeting. i'm disappointed because it's like you forgot who homerise who we've been to this city for the last 30 years. we house 30% of folks who have formerly homeless in the city. 30%. we have very few properties that are where three percent of our folks are struggling with two very serious issues that are having some serious impacts on our community. we need to make sure that we keep this in con next, the

solutions are not more securities but focus on what they need to be successful, in fact where we're going to house them. we need to look how the system is not working at this time. so i hope in the future when we have more discussion buzz this, we can focus our conversations on that. thank you. >> thank you, ms. jackson for your comments. next speaker. >> speaker: hi i'm rj sloan i would like to point out a fundamental flaw in supervisor dorsey data presentation, the bar graph demonstrating calls for service examine supervisor dorsey's power point presentation. in order to assess calls, psh buildings, you must show the calls for service data of non

psh buildings on our near the same block. housing is healthcare and i would like to repeat a speakers phrase, house keys not handcuffs. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker. >> speaker: hello i have handouts. i'm with the meat community, i want to thank supervisor dorsey for calling this hearing because impact on neighborhood is big deal, we are experts our 40sros 40 service sites and 100s of a advertising al supportive housing, many of which our own street and some of them earlier run with little with no concentration is ever given to house.

uncomfort a number engage on negative behaviors. in my handouts, i have copies of photos for reference which i would like to show. this is jesse at 6th street. this is men plaza. meanwhile old businesses are closing and the new business are indicate --catering to the night market by start making inside and outside continue

priority for all hsh sites and allocate funding specifically for security at existing sites. thank you. >> thank you. >> my name is james and i brought supportive to this neighborhood but why this became so contentious is because the neighbors were not being heard. they put a meth soebing in, they put a project at the corner of 6th and brayant and three at 333 street and the corner of 9th and mission, the panoramic and now project of 1174 fullsome all were forced into the neighborhood and none

of them listened to the requests of the neighbors. the manl or majority of the problems come from all of these projects they stop right at the front door. the funding is within the facility, it's not outside of the facility. these projects as this presentation is talking about is the impact that those present. the neighborhood gets an impact. it's not an i am as they house the homeless in these projects. there is no preztial treatment, i've asked for a fa tais ticks, how many having done there. the main things are, i feel you need some of the budget always to go help the neighborhood. and that's what is missing, it ends at the front door and nothing for the neighborhood.

the community needs some of those funds when a project is put in. and so far all the funds with within the facility. and that's the main problem and that's why this is so contentious is all of those projects nothing has been done in the neighbors. >> clerk: next speaker. >> speaker: good fucken afternoon and i'm i live in d5 but within walking distance of district 6. it's affective intervention, we need to be grateful that things are not fucken worse right now which it would be if these healthy neighborhood get their way, instead of constructive and collaborative solution, this dorsey waste our time to get answers on us, that

psh should not be feared. bad cop no donut, i'm sick and fucken tired and me and my fellow tenants being demonized despite my new jersey personality i'm a do sil person, and don't be masturbating in public, i was able to get so much out of being housed. caused by people who don't live in these neighborhood. i'm a psh success story, commissioner appointment and victory and i want our unwanted neighbors to have meaningful experiences as well. as well as neighborhood needs which many of us do already, fuck this hearing to hell, it

was unnecessary and stupid, i yield my time, fuck you. >> clerk: next speaker. >> hi, i'm and i'm co-chair of hesedba. so quick fact check, there are no tenants, i'm so questioning the summer west claims when it's not own open, there is zero people. can we get data on all of these changes, so even though it is about an adult site, the site is being weapon onized. so i feel i need to respond. so it makes a successful site and what we support and encourage is that when 1174 or

any other tais site are open. they include community engagement. these are standards that we uphold and maintain. sht not be treated as such. these members who work and live their lives. the real issues are on the streets outside of this site. to assist folks who are in crisis instead narrative that phs sites are hot beds of crime. this is factually incorrect and hurtful to the tenants there that just want to live in peace. thank you.

>> thank you for your comment. >> speaker: good afternoon, i would like to share with you two of my experiences from homerise impacted my neighborhood. one, open drug use. people gather at a sidewalk area between homerise and the building next door, the public safety building, this is next to the garage entrance used by the police literally just a foot or two away, they do it openly and they getaway with it. number 2, drug deals, this is what i see, despite the opening, a resident walks out, somebody is waiting, the person tosses him a small package, the resident goes back in and the other sweets away on a skateboard and done in seconds and no consequences. i don't walk down the street anymore, i would like to some day where i can talk about

baseball and football but at this point i'm afraid. this is how homerise has impacted my life. thank you. >> clerk: thank you, next speaker. >> speaker: i first moved to soma west and op in 2016 and operate a business. i spent most of my time on nonprofit and deeply love the soma community and pained to see it in its current state. i understand the need for more supportive housing, i spent a lot of time in our community, i know the research that supports this. however, i'm deeply concerned about the implementation that we have seen in the mission bay site. really to 1175. i already see extensive drug

use and dealing in front of my home. a couple of months back, i was walking home a couple of blocks and saw an armed robbery 30 feet from me. so you can understand why i'm concerned when the street conditions are already so terrible that we may start to see similar issues as we're hearing in mission bay. i understand that most residents are not causing issue, i'm glad that they have a housing option. however as we've heard, there are unfortunately few disrupt i have folks who are causing serious issues and both the police and hsh have not addressed the problems after months of engagement. thank you. >> clerk: next speaker. >> speaker: good morning and thank you for hosting us.

as somebody who lost their home as a teenager, i sympathize, i saw a man trying to submit a suicide by jumping out of his window. i saw a homerise employee rush out a mother and child as a man tries to hold the employee back and the other tries to protect the child. homerise is not providing the support that the tenants deserve. i urge you to have supportive services 24-7 to create a safer environment. thank you. >> clerk: thank you, nix speaker. >> speaker: i'm tabitha and i'm--permanent is necessary for the majority of the tenants that are housed and supported and has been affective for 25 years. it's not a mental health

facility, it's independent. has increased funding for onsite supportive services. with providers that have assisted in providing additional support. services are still limited and involuntary tee and often don't provide support on evenings and weekends. desk clerks are working alone with no after hour crisis support. all the support is voluntary and they always be some tenant that need support that we're not able to offer or don't engage with the support that is offered. alternative responses take time, relocation to another site, eviction if necessary and stabilize after connection to services, often housing with the level of care needed with individuals with high accuity is not available.

that paom with transfer too, keeping in mind, and i've heard a recommendation today that we should move the people to the other side of the building and transfer people. that is noter simple, these are people that have leases and we cannot force them to move and if we're working with people that have mental health issues, they're going to be resistant to that change. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker. >> speaker: i just want to give comment about the system that we have in place in san francisco and beyond. ensure some basic data with you. right now in san francisco average of approximately 37 to 38 people are dying inside of permanent supportive housing of drug overdose, period.

77 people died because of drug overdose, during the pandemic, we had shelter in place, hotels that were one with the same low barrier model as permanent housing. one had 26 million dollars of damage done to it by people that were clearly not housing ready. we need to start thinking about things like supervisor mandelman where we're building bridges to permanent housing. if you take somebody off the street, stabilize them, give them treatment and get them ready, their outcome in permanent supportive housing would be better and we would not have to have hearings like this because people would within be up in arms about the conditions. i know there is one permanent in china basin that had over 1,000 calls last year, 600

9-1-1 calls, that means there is people in that building that are in crisis all the time and much it is resolves around substance use disorder. there is a assembly bill in california which i'll be talking to you supervisors about, that is going to actually try to level the playing field and introduce a change to senate bill 1380 which would auto go to recovery base housing which is what we really need in san francisco. thank you very much. >> clerk: next speaker. jierkts i'm flow kelly and i live in district 9 and i volunteer on homelessness. i think today you heard a lot of possible ways of making improvements and i just, want to lift a few here. one is is to increase the

investment in psh, another is to prepare neighbors before psh program begins. another increase mental health services big time. have mental health workers working 24-7 in phs buildings. invest more dollars within the first 18 to 24 months of setting up a building, because there is problems that need to be solved. right at the beginning and the board of supervisors organizations, people who live in the psh building, neighbors and hsh alle work together. additionally we need more state investment in psh. i really want to appreciate that you gave two minutes to

all of the outstanding public comment that we heard. i appreciate that. >> clerk: thank you, next speaker. >> speaker: hi my name is hannah and i'm serving in the amercore with the team that was mentioned earlier. hearing the criminalization of psh residents today and the other other psh communities is dis heartening. psh is not the problem, the problem is lack of substance resources.

>> speaker: i think the way to go about it is something that i would like to hear more for this meeting with is for the residents and residents in this surrounding buildings that, that incompass that to get to know each other. i would like to both sides as the other, the other side of the track, they're your neighbors and human beings trying to get on with their lives and sometimes get a best out of a bad circumstances. say hello to your neighborhoods and maybe invite them to a

event, that that you get to know each other as you start to see each other with human beings and needs and valued right to quaiest and privacy. i think that will go a long way towards improving. i submit this plea to get to know your neighbors to all parties involved. that's the first step, elliot lewis, turn away congress. >> clerk: thank you mr. lewis. next speaker. >> speaker: good afternoon, i'm john avalos and i'm with the--provide permanent supportive housing and are members of the housing providers network presented here today. while i don't want to disclaim the security concerns of

mission bay residents, i'm kenteder about what creates community safety. the focus on this hearing the way data was shared without any realtime line about how changes in police calls have been made over the 18 months, drives through a very narrow conclusion that we should just be increasing security in the area. to ensure that the efforts can lead to real differences. instead, we have a drive to increase the personnel around. we also have a narrow focus on supportive housing, as you heard from homerise has a 30-year history just from home rise alone, have made

incredible improvement on people's lives that are really high quality in behavioral health service that's need greater investment. thaoz are the ones that help residents change their lives and also to improve both the residents they live in as well as the neighborhoods they live in as well. there is a great need for greater community engagement, i believe that's the role of the city under the housing support. and police department, and the leadership to ensure that we can hear more readily what concerns we have and how to best address them with the partnership and our nonprofit providers. that is the best ways to achieve public safety. >> clerk: thank you, next speaker. >> speaker: my name is barry great, i'm a resident of san francisco native, i'm homeless, i am also a resident of

services team leader at homerise. i also grew up in city hall, my great grandmother was the late bee kennedy, i've seen what the districts can do working together, despite the bikering supervisors. what we have here is a not a homerise we have a san francisco problem. we have a city problem, we have drug addiction, we have mental health issues, we video violence and that a occurs everywhere. what i'm seeing is whether a neighborhood is mental crisis, a neighbor will call our ceo today, pleasure will be put on our staff because the neighbor wants things done immediately. i have seen staff, paint somebody's window because of what a neighbor wanted done.

i've seen staff since down the front because somebody was camped out. because somebody wanted to done immediately. we have a long history of working together. we can still do it, but we have to stop criminalizing those with mental health issues and get them the help that we need. we need for clinical staff. our front desk needs help. i'm telling you right now, from somebody who was raised in the

city. >> thank you so much for your help. thank you very much for your comment. next speaker. >> speaker: thank you, committee, today marks for me 8 months exactly and 16 days of homelessness, that's a long time. 260 days grueling, not easy at all. and i'm not a beneficiary of any of this city's supportive housing environment. that whole eco is system is not open to me, and i'm bumed about that, what i say is, why not? why not? i want you to come together and think about this, we've got to make this happen, we've got to make it work for everybody. it's not just a few. you talk about just drug dealers, people doing elicit things, but listen, that'ses

all i want to say today, listen to the voisz here, i heard a lot. there is a lot of pain here, there is a lot of pain and people feel it. this is one thing that needs to get done now. whether are we going to see the light? thank you all for your indulgence. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker, please. hl owe, everybody.

it's truly a good to be here today. you the minister of cover', i said well some people call me that. they say you're the person of cover', some people call me that. i'm advocate for recovery, and i'm here to talk about the need for recovery housing. and i want to advocate for people coming out of transitional housing, coming out of jail but have done treatment in jail rose to recovery of the programs and not able to access with a clean and sober environment.

the reason i i am late is because i had to speak at the sentencing, about building that bridge. you know, that's the issue, that's the issue. it needs to be that con poem enter where poem can access recovery base housing. thank you and you all have a good day. >> thank you, next speaker. >> speaker: hello i'm from homeless person, a resident of the homerise housing currently.

for about five years, they have benefited. i would say that i'm thriving, you do think that permanent for housing is broken in many ways. and there does need to be some changes. one of the things i see, we have coordinated entry and in coordinated entry you know, they accept only people with the highest level issues. and that's who they decide to house and put in these buildings. in that case, they can't handle people with high level of disability and mental health issue and such. 9 staff is not paid enough and trained. so the solution to that,

eventually becomes eviction. and the frustration for me as a tenant is that you know landlords accept these contracts to do supportive housing but they can't deliver on that, i do really like the idea of we need luke a psh2 for people with high level issues to go to. really quickly i want to add that when psh meet with each other, we have the same complaints about the people pooping on the street and the drugs, we don't like any of that stuff, thank you. >> clerk: thank you so much for the comments, do we have any additional public comment?

it appears. >> thank you, thank you so much for coming out if there is nobody else that would like to testify today i will close public comment. supervisor dorsey, i'll turn it back over to you and let us know whether you would like to continue this to the call of the chair or file the hearing. >> okay, thank you colleagues and thank you to every one who took part in today's hearing, it's clear we have a lot of work to do. there are things that we need a address that are specific as well as systemic. at the macro level, i think we need to identify for those individuals who may need higher level of care that's something that we have to look at. we may need in the near term to

identify ways that we can move if necessary phs residents to appropriate care if those individuals should not have been in psh to begin with. we may have to address the--and ex nroer mitigation for the projects that may be creating quality of life issues. again this is about a dressing concerns and making sure that we're earning the confidence for san franciscans and what they want us to do. this hearing is the start of process to get permanent housing right and to better describe the problems here. i appreciate the collaborative tone most participate enters honored here today. i believe the tone gives me a lot of hope that we will get

this right. so let's submit to tin this work as a wise man said today, with patience and grace. i ask that we have the opportunity to continue to to the call of chair so we can revisit the topic and assess progress. >> are you making that motion. >> yeah, i would like to make that motion to continue to the call of the chair. >> madam clerk. >> clerk: and to the motion to continue this item to the call the chair. vice chair engardio. >> aye. >> clerk: member dorsey. >> aye. >> clerk: chair stefani. >> aye. >> clerk: i have three ayes. >> thank you, madam clerk will you please call the next item. >> clerk: yes, item number 4 is a hearing to receive update on the implementation of place for all ordinance. >> thank you, this sponsored by member mandelman who is here

tonight and i will turn it over to him to introduce the item and our presenters. >> thank you, chair stefani and member dorsey and engardio for making time for this check in and we're san francisco stands where regard to the goal of ending unsheltered homelessness. i know it has been a long day already and i think this will be a shorter hearing than the prior but i do think it's important to do this check in. you may recall that i, introduced the place for all ordinance along with my then cosponsor in the first year of covid as encampments would spreading. it took time to build support for the commitment for all.

i want to thank rescue sf and concerns san franciscans that pushed, pleaded and cajold the mayor to make that commitment. in june of 2022, we did and we further required that the department of supportive housing prepare and present to the board a come prohence i have city wide to end unsheltered homelessness in san francisco within three years. the rational was two-fold. unsheltered homelessness is especially bad. accesser baits underlined continue and associated with dramatically increased mortality rates. the best prevention is to prevent it from the beginning.

secondly and more pragmatickly, if we want clear sidewalks and public access for all, we have to have a safe and humane alternative to offer. our maou manity demands that and the law does too. i'm not entirely sure what it was, it was not planned for implementation for a place for all legislation. hsh behave us a one and a half

billion man to add 1,000 permanent housing units, a significant number of shelter beds, and then after three years, anticipated that the cost would continue to accelerate as we continue to need to shelter housed an every growing and expanding set of folks with needs. ipg what hsh gave us,--san francisco has been building its policy around ending homelessness. and when the hope that we end homelessness for enough individuals, we will not have homelessness on our streets.

a pretty ambitious one which is how to end unsheltered homelessness. and that may not mean ending homeless for every person our system touches but ending unsheltered homelessness and then having to figure out what to do with folks that remain homeless but still unhoused. examine then an over lesser goal which is ending encampments. at any rate, we're nearly two years since the law was passed, more than a year since hsh gave us their proposal. and i'm not sure that we have

made the progress. by the reporting that we received, another place for all is requirement for annual reporting of the number of unsheltered number of homeless people. in the report that they gave us at the end of 2022, there were you know, they were counting over 44,000, 4500, the report we got at the end of 2023, seemed similar there are a couple of different numbers. : so that does not seem like we're on track.

now hsh as a new plan and still set a goal of reducing by 50% over 5 years. and again, i don't want to, take away from the they have decreased. i think that's important, i think it's important quality of life in the city, i think it's important to addressing, our drug epidemic, but tented or untented, we should not be leaving people to die outside and i do think but i do think that we're going to run up against the wall if we don't have more place to see offer people.

only on some alleys and streets. san franciscans want us to get to a place where there are not encampments where people are trying to work and live. so today i invited hsh to give us an update on this proposal to end homelessness but they have not bought into. but also to talk more broadly about where they think we are. and then i also want to continue a conversation that we started with the department of emergency management last year where we asked them what resources beyond shelter they would need to step up their encamp resolution efforts and not allow any encamp to persist and the response that they provided is shelter, we need more shelter.

but that's a pretty broad answer for our budget and plan what does that mean? i want to thank all the community organization that's have been part of this place for all conversations for the last four plus years. includes, certainly rescue sf but many others sf travel chamber of commerce. and i also want to talk about adam in my office who has inherited this project from several prior aids who have overtime have been working for a place for all with me. and with that, i think we're going to hear from emily cohen from the department of supportive housing. >> thank you supervisor, through the chair, good afternoon, emily cohen with the department of homelessness and supportive housing. happy to be back with you and to swift our discussion a

little bit more to the shelter side of hsh's work. supervisor mandelman already gave an overview on the ordinance and what it calls for and you know, when this ordinance was originally passed in 2022, we worked with experts from around the country and looked at national best practices in modeling for, investments in the homeless service sxz what we anticipate with hope with those investments and we used similar modeling for our own plan which we issued later the next year. and you know, we really focused in a place for all on expanding the homeless response system to have an approach that moves people through the homelessness out of the street and out of the system of care.

we absolutely need to have the shelter resources and prevention resources but also as housing in as we heard earlier hearing. that is such an important part of ensuring that anyone who falls into homelessness has space to come into our system. so the place for all legislation calls for a key deliverables and you can see on this slide that shsh has delivered.

to give to the meat of the discussion, home by the bay plan and similar to a place for all, calls for really significant expansion of homeless services that not the exact proportion but essentially 4300 new units as supervisor mandelman, the best way to end this is to prevent it.

our 2022 found over 300 individuals experiencing unsheltered homelessness in a given night in our community. representing a 15% decrease from the 2019 point and time count. while we still obviously have much much more work to do, we also want to honor those

successes when we do see them. as part of a place for all, we did an administrative review of our data to produce an estimate of what we thought was unsheltered homelessness would be in 2023, we did not have a point in time count that year and found a similarly similar number in just 4200 people. we look forward to releasing the results and hope to see progress. the healthy streets operation center conducts a quarterly assessment of occupied vehicles in our community. and their data is quite impressive shown a 37% reduction in shake shifts structures on the street.

as a 42% decrease of occupied community. again this is more account for structure vehicles than people which what they point on. but it is a great benchmark to be locking at and shows over quarter progress. we now see over 1,000 enrollment. so as we expanded shelter capacity. as we expanded referrals we're seeing an increase in the placement into our programs.

we're also talking about people leaving our program successful. we talked about different interventions and housing, has played a huge role in the successful exit of homeleness across, you know, the last 6 years. if you look since 2018, we have rehoused more than 15,000 people in our community with last year being our best year yet. so we're continuing to expand this not only means adding more housing but doing a better job of reducing our vacancies. temporary shelter, we looked at the course since the homeless to look at the different types of shelter.

there is some key initiative. and we see that taking hold in really 2019. 2018 -2019, we saw an increase and when covid we saw a significant reduction in our congregate reduction but a huge increase in the non congregate shelter in place hotels. and that's what the box with blue line shows. as we have moved out of the pandemic, we have replaced with more traditional shelter and have kept a few base shelters.

we have been, you know, funded to add significant new capacity in the last budget cycle and you'll see the progress on implementing that. we have reinflated all of our shelters to our precovid capacity, we are on the brink of opening mission cabins which is 16 non congregate cabin which will be open in april.

we are looking to expand the summer, the vehicle triaage center in the bay view and add 32 more slots there. gerald commons which a a new project will add examine funded in last year's project will add cabins and safe parking and that site is slated to begin in january. you know, i, i don't need to repeat myself from our last hearing, but similar data presented, portfolio, we've also really significantly expanded this capacity and are doing i think a fantastic job of reducing our vacancy rate and putting every unit to work. and as we talk about reducing vacancy one of the key

initiatives that we've launched in the area, is called street to home. while many of our placement in the supportive housing have come directly from the streets, probably 20 to 30%. and this has moved about 60 people in and we are on track to do 6 to 10 placements every month through this program it helps us reduce our vacancies but really helps provide another pathway for unsheltered homeless folks. i guess i just talked about that and i'm happy to stop here and take any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you for the

presentation, although i give hsh a hard time on a regular basis, i do want to thank you and the folks in your department who have been asked to do impossible things and are being given sometimes contrary direction by different supervisors, the mayor, and are trying to somehow make a synthesis of what you're hearing. at-risk of adding to the cocofony, i am really interested in trying to think about and figure out, how much shelter or transitional housing san francisco needs. and how far off from that number we are. i didn't find the place in report particularly talking about that. and i don't think the number of

unsheltered homeless people which has been a little over 4,000, seemingly forever or you can go back to ten years ago and it looks like it was 4,000 around that point too. i'm not sure that rolling out 4,000 shelter beds by any to solve any problem is a good idea. it does not solve homelessness for those individuals which i know is a high priority for the department. it seems like we don't need that much if our goal is encamp resolution. how do you all, i mean, it's just a modeling? are we there? do we have the same amount of shelter? how far off, do you think we are?

is it 600 more? what do you all think it is? so outside of what is already funded, the right 6 new shelter beds, i think we need about 400 more shelter beds if we're adding, the exits and the prevention and that is what our data modeling tells us will get us to a 0% reduction. so to get to 1100, i'm not a math--100, we would need to double those numbers. >> you mean 2000 unsheltered rather than 4,000 after decades of that being the deal

would be remarkable. >> exactly but we need the matching to make shelter function. can we look a little bit at slide where is it? slide 10. >> yeah. because one way to think whether it's made a difference. and i think this is an interesting chart.

--so there is no reason for folks to leave that shelter, so anyway. it might not be the right placement. at any rate, you've managed to you know, you had to get rid of that. and we're now, and we've made these investments in additional shelter, but we're really, at this point, 350 more placements than we were prepandemic. and i hear you suggesting that maybe 400 more might be a meaningful number.

this is not a passion of hsh and this is based on modeling and if we ran a new model it would come up with a new number. but you don't think you have hsh right now does not have feel like it has the shelter the things it wants to do. how does the family shelter conversation fit into this if at all? >> i think that's a really important and timely question. so we did not separate family adult when doing the modeling but we have seen a dramatic increase in the demand for family shelter over the last nine months. we definitely need and more family shelter capacity, we added providence which started as a sip hotel shelter in place hotel. and we're going to be expanding

our emergency shelters until a space can be available becauses the fastest thing to stand up and we'll be doing that over the next four weeks. n.and whether family shelter or other types of shelter, what are the primarily ob --obstacles that you would like to confront? what are the impediment that keep you from doing more shelter transitional housing and maybe the answer is different versus what is the obstacles. >> the obstacles is pret owe consistent versus funding. we are very very fortunate to have our city our home fund, for homeless services, the shelter cap is quite low and proven to be a challenge if

that's the only source of funding for shelters. so we've, we've really succeeded at drawing down a lot of state resources for shelter and those klarz are coming in as one-time dollars. >> what do you mean by that? the building that can be used at shelter? >> no hhappen from the state is funded on an annual basis. no commitment to this being a consistent source. so over the last five years, it has been included in the budget and the dollars have grown but when they're allocated we have five years to spend the resources. so we've been spreading out the money to try to use that responsively and to fund shelter.

>> so some of this 381 shelter are being funded out of a funding source that will go away? >> that could go away, a lot of advocacy going on to keep it but this is something that keeps us up at night. in terms, funding is a key barrier and sighting is a second barrier. we have capacity issues, i feel all of that can be overcome. and then the to po* lit cal shelter like you talk about in the previous hearing. i'm,000 i'm going to make a little statement.

i campaigned for proposition c, i believe it was worth making a significant investment in ending homelessness. i don't believe that we failed to spend our shelter dollars, i think we're at, above, maxing out, and i cannot for the life of me, understand why this board and this mayor would not choose to spend some of those prop c dollars on shelter for families and shelter to help us address encampment and not have people stuck on the sidewalk. but that's just my psa that you don't have to a anything about. um, all right, i think that

might be all i have for the department. but i see that supervisor engardio has questions or comments. >> thank you, i saw in the news i think in january, a company called palette shelter came to visit san francisco, the tiny homes and maybe you may have toured with them. a locking door, this tiny home shelter seems to be popular, why not do more of it here. >> thank you for the question and through the chair, we opened our first tiny cabity community, we use a different product but it's very similar,

we use box cubes. there are several companies that manufacture these prehab shelters, and i would differ to public works why some are more, i was going to say palable but some of more interest and we need to make sure that they meet building code. they're very interested in whatever products they end up using. we use box cubes we're about to open the tiny cabin program that is also the prefab, program and the general site will also have cabin. we call them cabin, the communities call them tiny homes.

they're popular with folks living unsheltered. we are hearing that we meet variety, and they do seem a bit more welcomed by housed residents and businesses in the neighborhoods, although, you know, not exclusively. >> got it, and example that, so the places we're using, these cabins and tiny homes, is it dozens? >> so 33 goth has 70 of the cabins, mission will have 60,

61 and general --gerald will have 60 luce. >> so my next question is about scale, i see news down in san diego *, mayor has this idea of industrial space they used for fire fighter training and something like that. and the idea was 1,000 places like, why not go bold and find a place of an old pier or old parking lot where we can really scale this like they're doing in san diego. >> supervisor, if you have sites that you remember we look at, we're always shopping for sites. we're hard press to find sites that large in san francisco. and i would have concerns about operating many many years, worked in a shelter and a thousand sounds like a lot from

operational perspective. and we want to be automobile to build community and so i do think keeping the size reason is and for a neighborhood is important as well. but if you have sites that we can look at, please let us know, because we're always shopping. >> and on page, last question on page 14, the slides, you reported a vacancy of 7.1 as of february. how many supportive houses is that actually? >> 7 percent of about 9,000. so we have dramatically reduced the vacant rate through a lot of hard work of the providers and city to change our processes and procedures and documentation requirement. so hundreds are more are housed

without having to create another unit. and the majority of now 7% now are units that are off line for extended repair rather than sitting waiting for referral. let me look, i don't think have it in here, thank you, emily cohen. and the next up we have sam dodge and i think it's going to be super quick maybe not. >> yes. hello. >> you're just here to answer questions for me. or do you have anything. >> sam dodge from department of

emergency management, i get the honor of working together with diverse partnership and across the department and nonprofit providers to respond street conditions which include encampment and other situations which often are called like, homelessness, but are honesty, real diversity solutions. but shelter is a key component for most people's issue. and i want to thank thank you and the folks for all of your work. some of the folks who seem to be unhoused are not always unhoused and sometimes are being repeatedly placed in shelter by your folks and then falling out of that and

deciding to leave. i know, you know, i'm going to push you to have a conversation about encampment resolution. i think the thing that is, i hope the public understand is that the folks who are doing, the dem work, the h stock work are a lot of them are former like case managers and people who are very very committed to getting people into shelter or ideally housing and into solving the problem of these folks as w*l much as they're committed to solving the problem of supervisors and their constituents that want to us have nicer streets. and sometimes that it's lost. last year, as i said, i sent your boss mary alan a letter

and i was asking, you know and you know, this is a lot was going on last year and we had lawsuits and injunctions and many things, but the thought exercise i asked to engage in, was to think through, what resources would be needed to have a standard that no encampment would persist for more than 24 hours. even with all the great work that you were doing. we know that there were many encampments that last for weeks and often, the resolutions you know, not always but sometimes the resolutions mean the encampment moves but then it's there for many more weeks. the response know that, mary' len carol said that following discussions with the department involved with health history

operation center under the context of ample shelt for all, that is accessible 24 hours a day and if we preserve each levels we would be able to respond to everybody rapidly likely within 24 hours. i'm wondering if that's still in the view of your case. >> yes. >> supervisor, i mean, i think that we all can just, you know, honestly say that this sort of crisis on our street, is obviously, precluded by a huge housing crisis but then affected by other sorts of health crisis that we have in our society. obviously, this large new influx of fentanyl and meth, has affected what people are

engaging out there. a lot of people became homeless because of a housing crisis but in the time, they have encountered this drug market and been sort of sucked into that and made their condition more complex. so you know, it's hard to say, to predict in the future what we're going to do. we talked a little bit about with cohen about the, about family system, -- ~>> ms. cohen. >> about the family system and we're developing a family shelter system without contemplating what it would mean to have a huge immigration cries, right. and when we build out shelter systems, sometimes they become the solution to other issues like, you know, decarsarol

approach and deinstitution for hospitals, it happens all in that context. but i think, recently there was a national conference right here in san francisco got a real chance to talk with a colleague and i take the opportunity to and seattle that are similarly oriented and similar issues that they're facing and developing up, non police responses, out reach responses and inner developmental responses and coresponse with police to these various issues that have homelessness and plus. we're way ahead, that's why we can endorse this letter that director carol sent to you, because we have this great, we're one of the very few places that has a division in our fire department.

our response team that are able to divert calls and to be able to respond to people in crisis. we have other experiences which is like the heart team, 311 concerns. with an additional shelter beds, continuing with this distribution and information sharing from all of these responding developments which we developed, we can really get the right resource to the right person. i think these other components are also critical. sb43 is needed in this day and age.

i spent too much time under bridges and to not admit that there are people in addiction crisis that are really in trouble. the death rate that we have, we really need to respond with all that we can do and one of them is a 5150 for people that are absolutely stuck. so in that whole larger context, granted more shelters we can respond to issues in a rapid fashion. >> you raise an interesting point, and i think i heard you say, 1,000 more shelter beds. they're not the solve the problem. >> no. >> they solve the problem of the person that just needs a place to be.

thed solve the problem of drugs, and not a lot of people that want shelter but you need to be able to offer it. it does not solve the problem with the person with severe mental illness who can't be in a shelter with other people because it will destroy, it will just not work. and nor if you you try to put that person, that is not going to work terribly well either. there is a need for shelter, there is a also profound need for appropriate beds for people with severe mental illness that right now there is nothing, or almost nothing.

or insufficient. now when you say that, i'm not holding you to the. are you imagining i mean, would that number be lower? like family shelter? we have a family shelter crisis. that's not an encamp resolution problem. or maybe it is. >> sometimes it is, supervisors we've been engaging more and more with people living in rvs and sort of dangerous conditions and there is more interactions with families in those situations. and there is, you know, crisis situations with families that we do need access to the family system and it's, you know, it's pretty bifurcated, it's a big jump for every one but hsh has developed a good access for

access and for collaboration and we do have those, you know, conversations and partnerships. but when it gets mixed up with immigration crisis, it gets backed up. i think you touched on it too, we can't use the shelter system to solve every other institutional and national crisis. and so, we've got our hands full with the housing crisis with people experiencing homelessness and you know, sometimes people do take refuge to san francisco for a myriad of reasons. we don't want to draw bridges and all that kind of response but, for the homeless system, under funded and doing a best it can do to address the

problem to take on immigration, to take on mental health, you know, system that is under funded that's a recipe for failure. that's where we get well it looks like 500 but a thousand more. >> thank you, i don't see more questions from colleagues, so let's do public comment. >> thank you very much, if you have public comment on agenda item number 4, related on this hearing. please come forward, you'll have two minutes a piece. >> speaker: [speaking spanish] first of all, i heard that it costs 5,000 for individuals in ten cities and in shelters. why not housing? why, so it's so easy to have shelters and not housing, should the real estate is it

the grievances, the people earlier expressed, i don't know. but i've spoken to people in many encampments and in the streets and i've been in a shelter, you answered our question, would we--with solutions that will create separation of significant others, that will mean 5 p.m. curfews with exceptions, job related issues and funerals, those are the res lousings that they will allow you after 5 clock. we're not being allowed to to shelter or all our pets. also, we're forced to forgo positions that and/or stay with people that you do not trust.

we're limit thed to how much we can store, with the dangerous theft and violence. being thrown out by staff from early yelling in the middle of the night when it's raining, inside the shelters, no visitors and no con gra gabesinger non congregate and i heard a some of the shelters who tell us stories of people overdosing inside and outside the shelters. they just gave some statistics as to number of deaths 37, you think in one month. in-housing. >> thank you, i can't --yolanda for sharing your comments. next speaker, please. >> speaker: yeah i'm not happy to spend multiple hours hoer,

i'm jordan here to respond to another piece of master base. we know that we need shelter. it's cheaper than shelter. but of course the sit' diaper baby has dropped the diaper as well as a economy and dignity of currently unhoused people and waste all our fucken time again fm this is end run, i know i would never be able to move beyond shelter if we had a right for shelter like new york has. i know i would never move forward and there is no way that you can convince me otherwise. all new shelters and i'm glad that the last speaker, touched on this, all new shelters should last three piece, pet partners and should have not curfew, like the center where i graduate and we need to make sure that people graduate in a timely manner as well.

we need more fucken scattered sites supportive housing now! i yield my time, fuck you! >> clerk: thank you for sharing your comments, can we have the next speaker, please. >> speaker: thank you, jordan. i'm larry a cra man, a retired research scientist, 40 year resident, my research was at ucsf. and now, volunteer a little with the human rights work group on the coaddition with homelessness. motivated by the knowledge i gained when my husband lived on the streets and eventually overdosed from methamphetamine on the sidewalk, i have more

personal and incidental knowledge of what happens with our unhoused neighbors. and i've over the past five years, i've talked to hundreds of these neighbors and i estimate that at least 95% indicated that they would not accept shelter housing for a variety of reasons. very valid reasons. and most recently, they have been refusing congregate shelters even when the police threatened to arrest and site them. so, you know, in my mind, this raises a question. what how, how this program of incampment resolutions and

shelter housing will do. as was mentioned, shelters is more expensive than private market housing. and it's also temporary, it's not a solution. the alternative of shelter in this present day is criminalization. >> thank you, larry. >> yeah. >> thank you for sharing your comments. >> stop this. >> next speaker, please. >> speaker: hi there, thank you for holding this hearing. i'm glad you are, i understood that from the ordinance that we passed, that placed also included the pipeline to housing. i am a 20-plus volunteer with our wednesday night's summer at the parish in the castro most

holy redeemer and i can tell you a few things, most people, one of the elderly women that would come, dragging or pushing her life in a shopping cart can bags as well, say senior in her upper 70s with multiple disabilities, and once i said, show the shelter, you sometimes go to. so i went to and i shouldn't name the name of the shelt er and i said, show me the room that you're going to be in because she set her bags and everything down and there was a chair. the shelter bed, because i said where is the elevator. the shelter bed was a hard chair with another hard chair facing her to put her feet on.

we need to define our terms with shelter. it's one of those things where it's not a resolver door, in the shelter, it is a resolving door in the shelters and once inside they are glorious, is as the senior women i talked about housed, she came to the shelter to the wednesday night summer, her face was changed. there was light. >> speaker your time is concluded. thank you for sharing your comments with the committee. next speaker please. >> speaker: thank you very much for holding this hearing. >> speaker: good afternoon, david elliot lewis somebody with lived experience with homelessness, in the early 2000, i have stayed in a number

of san francisco shelter from next door to the sanctuary. to hospitality house, very grateful the fact that we had shelters and i want to say i support a place for all legislation, i have suggestions for improvement. as you know the barriers for getting people indoors are the three ps, pets, property and partners. now navigation center help address those barriers by allowing you to bring pets and more property and mart necessarier. but i think in a place for now, maybe that should be accommodated for or written into it, i have also one other suggestion for improvement a place excellent and we need to fully implement it. but what about implementing a stewardship model? for when you give people housing even if points psh or shelter, you ask them to play a role in the upkeep,

maintenance, welcoming new residents, that people give back a few hours a week, in exchange. exchanging their resident, their housing for service. just sort of a stewardship something that, i hope you move forward, that not one be the enemy of the other, we need both. we need to get people off the streets. thank you for holding this hearing and thank you for all of your good works, david elliot lewis. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for sharing your comments, can we have the next speaker please. >> speaker: thank you for holding this hearing and i think it's perfect, i'm andrea and executive director for the castro benefit district.

it's perfect that the two hearings were side by side because automobile shelt and her phs are inter twientd --intertwined. the castro has been work withing a place for all, with supervisor mandelman with at least two years and we're interested in seeing shelter be fully funded and there is enough safe shelter throughout the city. we heard that people living on the street, we have programs, the cbd have programs that work with merchants and work with people that are unhoused and trying to deescalate behavior and all those types of things. but one of the things that nobody really talked about is that, this is situation, that really, i hate to say this, has

a neck --negative impact on the compassion on the people of san francisco. the issues of compassion and how, people suppose to be such a compassionate city. because the decisions that the board of supervisors are making. to fully fund safe and i really want to say. >> clerk: thank you for your

comment. do we have anybody further who has public comment on agenda item number 4? madam chair. >> thank you, mr. clerk. public comment is now closed. supervisor mandelman. >> thank you, madam chair, thank you colleagues. thanks to all the folks who spoke, thanks to the department who are working hard on these challenges everyday, thanks to every one in san francisco who cares about this issue which i think is every one. and i would just say this, i'm proud of the work that our city folks.

we have to show people that we're not just doing good in ways that you cannot see, we're going to do good in ways that you can see. and i do think that to do that, we need to think about reprioritizing resources especially when we have significant unspent funds. we have real needs to make it better and we have a real need for expanded shelter resources. we also plainly have need for

poem with severe illness who are in the street and jail and site beds in the hospital where they do not belong. and, i'm hopeful that prop 1 will help us address the last of those issues. but i think on the first two we need to look. the mayor tried to do something around this last year, there was real resistance, i think the mayor and the board of supervisors again, need to look at what we're doing with our prop c dollars. and improving our csh. those are my thoughts right now. i would ask, i think this hearing can be heard and filed, i'm sure i'll ask for another one. >> thank you, supervisor mandelman and with that i would like to move this to file this

hearing. >> clerk: on the motion that this hearing be filed. >> engardio. >> aye. >> clerk: dorsey. >> aye. >>. >> clerk: chair stefani. >> aye. >> clerk: there are three ayes. >> thank you so much are there any other items. >> clerk: there is no further business. >> thank you, mr. clerk, we are adjourned.

>> alright. everybody. i'm san francisco mayor london breed. welcome to the innersunset! a wonderful community, a place where you can shop and dine and hang out and have a good time