San Francisco Government SmartTranscripts:

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Good morning. The meeting will come to order. Welcome to the 11/19/2025 meeting of the Budget and Finance Committee. I'm supervisor Connie Chan, chair of the committee. I'm joined by vice chair supervisor Matt Dorsey and member supervisor Balak Mamu. Our clerk is Brent Khalipa. I would like to thank Jamie Atchervary from SFgovTV for broadcasting this meeting. Mister Clerk, do you have any announcements?

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Yes, madam chair. Just a friendly reminder to those in attendance to please make sure to silence all cell phones and electronic devices to prevent interruptions to our proceedings. Should you have any documents to be included as part of the files, they should be submitted to myself, the clerk. 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 West side of the chamber to your right, my left, along those curtains. And while not required to provide public comment, we do invite you to fill out a comment card and leave them on the tray by the television to your left and by the doors if you wish to be accurately recorded for the minutes. Alternatively, you may submit public comment in writing in either of the following ways. Email them to myself, the budget and finance committee clerk at brent.jalipa@sfgov.org. If you submit public comment via email, it will be forwarded to the supervisors and also included as part of the official file. You may also send your written comments via US Postal Service to our office in City Hall at 1. Doctor Carlton, Beaglefoot Place, Room 244, San Francisco, California 94102. And finally, due to the Thanksgiving week, items acted upon today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda of December 2, unless otherwise stated. Madam chair?

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you, mister Clerk. And before, we call on item number one for the general public, for all items that has, that budget and legislative analyst report, we would typically go to typically go to the department presentation, then we go to the budget and legislative legislative analyst, and then we will take questions and public comments. And so with that, mister Clark, please call item number one.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Yes. Item number one is an ordinance appropriating approximately 4,500,000.0 of state cost reimbursement revenue to the Department of Elections to support costs associated with the statewide November twenty twenty five special election in fiscal year 2025 to 2026. And this ordinance requires two thirds approval vote of all members of the board of supervisors for approximately 4,200,000.0 pursuant to the charter. Madam chair.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you, mister Clark. And today, we have departmental elections, director John Narts.

[John Arntz (Director, Department of Elections)]: Good morning, supervisors. So the purpose of the ordinance before you today is to allow the city to utilize state funding totaling around $4,500,000 to reimburse the city force costs associated with conducting the the the 11/04/2025 statewide special election. This amount represents an estimate of expected costs that the Department of Elections submitted to the state before the election. At this time, the Department has yet to finalize its actual costs for the November election, and the Department must report final election related costs to the Secretary of State's Office by 02/20/2026. Although final actual election related costs haven't been set, we still expect these funds to cover the city's expenditures to to to conduct the November of twenty twenty five election. Finally, the state legislation authorizing these reimbursement funds indicates that counties can apply any re remaining funds to cover costs associated with conducting the statewide June. And I could take any questions, but I think it's the BLA's report now. Yeah.

[Nick Menard (Budget and Legislative Analyst)]: Good morning, supervisors. Nick Menard from the Budget Legislative Analyst's Office. Item one is an ordinance that would appropriate about $4,500,000 of state revenue that was not in the Department of Elections budget. The revenue was provided by the state to all counties in California to offset the cost of the special election that took place 11/04/2025, related to proposition 50. We summarize the, spending. On page three of our report, you can see how the Department of Elections will spend this money. And any unspent money, from the state can be used for the next statewide election. This appears to cover all costs associated with the November, and we recommend approval of item one.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you. Doctor Artz, do you have any projection, potentially any saving that you could be end up having from this reimbursements and that then you can actually spend on the June election in 2026?

[John Arntz (Director, Department of Elections)]: Possibly. We don't have final costs set yet, but we did focus on staffing costs for this November election. So, we are hopeful that we can apply some reimbursement funds to support the the conduct of the June with staffing costs.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: I don't see any name on the roster. We will go to public comments on this item.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Yes. If we have any members of the public who've, joined us today who wish to address this committee regarding this item number one, now is your opportunity. Madam chair, we have no speakers.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Seeing no public comments, public comment is now closed. Colleagues, I would like to move this item to full board with recommendation and a roll call, please.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: And on that motion to forward to the full board with a positive recommendation, vice chair Dorsey. Dorsey, aye. Member Mahmoud? Mahmoud, aye. Chair Chan? Aye. Chan, aye. We have three ayes.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: The motion passes. Thank you. Mister Clerk, please call item number two.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Item number two is a resolution approving the revised terms and conditions and authorizing the general manager of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission and or city's director of property to execute a purchase and sale agreement and easement deeds with San Juan Unified School District for the acquisition of an approximately 4,000 square foot easement for an underground water pipeline and associated appurtenances and an approximately 35,000 square foot temporary construction easement on and across a portion of Alameda County assessor's parcel block known as 11601 Main Street in Sunwell, California for 35,000, plus an administrative fee of 5,000, and up to 10,000 in closing costs, for a total amount not to exceed 50,000, which will be effective on the date the agreement is executed by both parties pursuant to the charter. Madam chair.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you. And today, we have SF Public Utilities Commission here.

[Dina Brazil (Right of Way Manager, SF Public Utilities Commission)]: Thank you. Good morning, supervisors. My name is Dina Brazil. I'm the right of way manager with the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission's infrastructure division, and I'm tasked with acquiring the property rights necessary, to deliver the SF PUC's capital programs. The item before you seeks to correct the terms of a purchase and sale agreement that was previously recommended by this committee on 10/30/2024, and subsequently by the Board of Supervisors on 11/05/2024. The purchase and sale agreement covers the acquisition of easements for a water pipeline across property owned by the Sunole Glen Unified School District for the SFPUC's Town Of Sunole Pipeline Project. The Town Of Sunole Pipeline is a critical asset that feeds both the potable water line and the non potable fire suppression lines to the Town Of Sunole. The SFPUC has replaced most of the aging pipeline system, and this current project will complete the effort by replacing the section of the pipeline that crosses the school. The SFPUC already owns an easement for the existing pipeline across the school property. However, the new pipeline needed to be bumped out and installed just north of the existing alignment, to avoid removing a mature tree that lies within the existing easement. SFPUC staff had worked with the superintendent of the Sunoul Glen Unified School District to negotiate an agreement for the purchase and sale of the easements. We worked together to craft an agreement that would schedule work around the academic calendar when students would not be on-site, and our temporary areas of disturbance were designed to preserve, as much as possible, the outdoor education in place. School superintendent with whom we'd worked retired in 2024, and the school district brought on a new superintendent. At around the same time, the school district experienced a change in leadership at the school board level as well. When we reached out to the new superintendent to move the agreement forward and close the transaction, she reengaged the school district's council and school board, and the school district requested that certain changes be made to the forms. Unfortunately, one of the requested changes resulted in a material increase in the city's obligations under the agreement, which requires the approval of the Board of Supervisors. In the materials I provided with this item, I included a draft of the revised agreement, redlined against the draft that had been previously approved. For transparency, I included all the changes to the form, however, only the change to section eight regarding the indemnification requires the approval of the Board of Supervisors. In the original agreement, this section only included a seller's indemnity. In the agreement before you today, the proposed revisions narrow the seller's obligations and include a mutual obligation on the city's part to indemnify the other party. We consulted with our risk management team and concluded that the changes to the indemnity are reasonable, and they fall within the range of our normal business practices. It's customary that such agreements include indemnification provisions that benefit the landlord. What you'd be what you would be recommending for approval today is a revised purchase and sale agreement for the conveyance of a perpetual pipeline easement, comprised of approximately 4,008 square feet, and a temporary construction easement, comprised of approximately 34,834 square feet. The total purchase price for the two easements is still $35,000 which is equal to the appraised value, as was determined by an independent third party appraiser. At this time, I'm happy to answer any questions.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you. And so is the amendments in section eight, the indemnity? Is that correct? Help me and help me understand and walk me through just a little bit more. Because I'm looking at the documents on file at the moment, and I am seeing a few things. And I'm trying to understand could you walk us through page number and section? Is it is it section eight on page 11?

[Dina Brazil (Right of Way Manager, SF Public Utilities Commission)]: It's section eight. I'm not sure what page it is because I don't have it in front of me right now, but it's the indemnification section. So our standard form of purchase and sale agreement, which was what was agreed to in 2024, contains only a seller's indemnity, which means that just the seller would be indemnifying the city. Mhmm. That provision generally gets negotiated, with every agreement that that we make, and it's really common, it's very uncommon for it to stay Justice Seller's indemnity. In this case, when the new superintendent and their counsel and their school board looked at it, they said, you know, wait a minute, we want the PUC to indemnify us as well. And so rather than removing the indemnity altogether, we did sort of a mutual indemnification, which does increase our obligation under the agreement, and therefore required the Board of Supervisors approval. None of the other changes in the form actually are material in that way. A lot of them are editorial, a lot of them are just to be more explicit, so our city attorney's office wouldn't have required that I come before you today if it had not been for the indemnification section.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: And then that I see that is basically I'm just trying to understand what we're doing. It looks like in section eight that now it shows indicating the seller indemnity and then the cities as well. And then there's the limitation sections for it. Yes.

[Dina Brazil (Right of Way Manager, SF Public Utilities Commission)]: That's correct. So we are indemnifying them as well. And we can be comforted by the fact that our project contractor, who's actually performing the work, indemnifies us. So that indemn that that city's indemnity then gets passed on to the contractor through our construction contract.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you. I really appreciate, this coming before us today, and thank you so much for your work. Yeah. Of course. And seeing no name on the roster, we will go to public comments on this item.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Yes. We're now opening public comment for this item number two. If we have any members of the public who wish to address this committee. Madam chair, we have no speakers.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Seeing no public comments, public comment is now closed. Colleagues, I would like to move this item to full board with recommendation and a roll call, please.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: And on the motion to forward to the full board with a positive recommendation, vice chair Dorsey. Aye. Dorsey, aye. Member of Mahmood. Mahmood, aye. Chair Chan. Aye. Chan, aye. We have three ayes.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: The motion passes. Thank you. And, mister Clark, please call item number three.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Yes. Item number three is a resolution approving amendment number one to the agreement between the city, acting by and through the Department of Public Health and Catholic Charities to provide HIV health services, rental subsidy services, to extend the term by five years from 06/30/2026 for a total term of 07/01/2021 through 06/30/2031 and to increase the amount by approximately 7,300,000.0 for a total not to exceed amount of approximately 13,400,000.0, and to authorize DPH to enter into amendments or modifications to the agreement that did not materially increase the obligations nor liabilities to the city and are necessary to effectuate the purposes of the agreement or this resolution. Madam chair.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you. And today, we have Department of Public Health here.

[Unidentified DPH representative (HIV Health Services)]: Hi. Good morning. Good morning, Chair Chan and supervisors, Dorsey and Mahmoud. Here to, request your support for an amendment to Catholic charities for HIV, sorry, HIV services rental subsidies. You could advance the slide, please. So the amendment requested is for Catholic charities. The contract amount is 7,317,206. The total amount not to exceed 13,426,414. The timeline is 06/01/2021 through 06/30/2031, so we'll be extending in an additional five years. The contractor, as mentioned, was Catholic Charities, and it's to provide rental subsidies to low income San Francisco, San Franciscans in, with HIV. So just to add, we did agree with, two recommendations that BLS, have already made and have begun work already with the contractor to revise the budget and, made changes to the two, program objectives that, were identified. So, any questions?

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: No? Thank you. Oh, well, not this time.

[Nick Menard (Budget and Legislative Analyst)]: Good morning. Item three is a resolution that approves an amendment between, on a contract between the Department of Public Health and Catholic Charities. The The amendment extends the agreement from June 2026 to June 2031, and then increases the contract value from about $6,100,000 to $13,400,000 Under this agreement, DPH funds Catholic Charities to provide rental subsidies to people who are low income and living with HIV. It provides about $450 a month to about a 154 households, every year. And the contract is funded by the general fund. You can see the contract budget on page 10 of our report. We did have a couple of recommendations to the Department of Public Health when reviewing this contract, including to consider reallocating some of the indirect cost recovery on this contract from Catholic charities to rental subsidies to be consistent with other rental subsidy contracts in the city, and also to clarify with Catholic charities on the definition of some of the performance metrics. Because as we kind of dug into the guts of the performance in this particular contract, we noticed that there was, I think, different interpretations between DPH and Catholic charities about how to measure performance on the contract. And so we had a discussion with HIV Health Services, and they're going to clarify how performance metrics should be defined going forward. And we also think this is an opportunity for this city to kind of harmonize their performance measurement of rental subsidy contracts. There are rental subsidy contracts at DPH, at HSH, at the adult probation. They all have they're all trying to measure similar things in terms of how quickly people enter the program. If people are in the program, how long are they housed, and are they stably housed for a year, and where they exit to if they exit their rental subsidy program. The definitions of all those metrics vary by department. So this could be an opportunity to make it easier on the nonprofits, some of which hold contracts with each of these departments, including Catholic charities, to harmonize some of those performance measurement standards. But we do recommend that, the board approve item three. Happy to answer any other questions.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you. I think my question is, how how is the performance, tracking recorded? Like, how is is is it paper trail? Is it, like, computer? Or how does that work?

[Unidentified DPH representative (HIV Health Services)]: Yeah. Actually, there is, a database which the state requires for all Ryan White funding, which is, of course, federal funding for HIV, and then we, a number of our agencies also receive general fund, and we have the same requirements. So they actually have to put in demographics as well as service utilization. Some of these, they can't necessarily pull every aspect of the data. So one of the things is, kind of, retention and housing stability. That wouldn't necessarily be there. They have to do a chart review. But, probably, about 85% of what objectives can be pulled.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: And there is so I'm just trying to understand better. Does that mean that, you know, they are they can actually key in the data and information on-site? And

[Unidentified DPH representative (HIV Health Services)]: Well, they they it goes into a statewide database, and actually then that registry, it's called HIV Care Connect, is actually fed up to federal reporting. So, they most agencies either have an electronic chart or they have a hard chart combination depending on the size of the agency.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: And then how do does, DPH, I I don't wanna use the word audit, but sort of review and evaluate those data?

[Unidentified DPH representative (HIV Health Services)]: Yeah. So we go you on a yearly basis, there is a section, called the business office of contract compliance. And they go on in a yearly, basis, and they do a monitoring. And we join them as what they call a subject matter aspect or system of care people. So people that are kinda familiar with the contract, and we go with them, and we do on-site audits once a year. And that's how that contract monitoring report is the product of that.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Great. I mean, I think I'm interested to learn, more about that, and, how do you, sort of, what is your response for, the BLA's recommendation?

[Unidentified DPH representative (HIV Health Services)]: Oh, it was yes to do. Would you like to I have the specifics of the wording. We've already changed it. Are you interested?

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Yes.

[Unidentified DPH representative (HIV Health Services)]: Absolutely. Okay. I just happen to have that paper right here. So it's two contract objectives. One is the program will stabilize the housing situation of greater than 80% of the program participants in less than six months of receiving the initial subsidy. And the recommendation for consistency was to increase that to 90%. And so, actually, this contract here, they were actually at 100%, so that was very easy to do. And the second one, was really around the denominator. It was looking at how do you measure retention in care if you could potentially have people joining, you know, ten, eleven, twelve month of the contract year? Do you have enough longitudinal kind of runway to assess, have the, has housing stability been maintained? So, the change is that, greater or equal to 85% of subsidy program recipients who are receiving the subsidy at the start of the contract year will continue, so that's the new language, at the start of the contract year, will continue to have maintained housing or have moved to a level of care more appropriate to their needs by the end of the contract year. So some people aren't able to maintain independent living, so we factor those folks out. And we did actually run the data using that definition, reducing those that hadn't been in, and they they got a ninety seven point three percent, so they've been very successful. So but it is a better wording, for sure. So we changed the denominator.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Wonderful. We appreciate it. Supervisor Mabu.

[Supervisor Joel Engardio (Committee Member)]: I was actually gonna ask the same question. Oh. But, just a quick follow-up. So thanks for asking, Chair Chan. I guess, how common is this metric to be you said this was not reported how it was requested. And how often is 100% success rate normally reported? That would be an anomaly.

[Unidentified DPH representative (HIV Health Services)]: So so for you to I'm I'm not sure. I've completely understood your question, but I'll take a gander at it, and then you can tell me if I haven't gotten it.

[Nick Menard (Budget and Legislative Analyst)]: Sure.

[Unidentified DPH representative (HIV Health Services)]: So in terms of the utilization, they measure on a monthly. They have to invoice it on a monthly basis. And then, in terms of the contract objectives, they're measured on a yearly basis. So at the end of the year, they have to with the contract here, they have to produce this report that shows that the work that they've done.

[Supervisor Joel Engardio (Committee Member)]: So you won't know the updated metrics based on the new calculation criteria till next year?

[Unidentified DPH representative (HIV Health Services)]: The outcome of it, yeah. Because they have to actually provide the service so the soonest we could measure it. So it's from the beginning, we've changed it so, you know, those in the first six months, they have to budgetinally be for the year. So that would be the soonest we could measure it.

[Supervisor Joel Engardio (Committee Member)]: We can't retroactively determine it for the last year.

[Unidentified DPH representative (HIV Health Services)]: Retroactively measure it? You mean to go back to yes, we can look.

[Supervisor Joel Engardio (Committee Member)]: Okay. Yes.

[Unidentified DPH representative (HIV Health Services)]: This is Beth Nery, assistant

[Beth Nery (Assistant Director, HIV Health Services, DPH)]: director of HIV health services. We did have them rerun last year's for the ones that needed to be excluded for new clients. And by last year, I actually mean the '23, 24 to match the report you were looking at. And they did actually get 22 out of 22 on two of those metrics after a closer review. One hadn't been a 100% until they limited to the current year. And, that is not completely surprising giving their so their particular service model because they in order for somebody to be on a subsidy, which is required to be in a denominator, they do really need to check their income status and connect them with housing within a month, you know, of being on the subsidy. So it's possible that we need to make some more difficult to achieve metrics for to add in to the mix, but it it is realistic for some of these metrics to be a 100%.

[Supervisor Joel Engardio (Committee Member)]: Got it. Thank you for context.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you. So with that, we'll go to public comment on this item.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Yes. We're opening public comment for this item number three. If we have any members of the public who wish to address this committee. Madam Chair, we have no speakers.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Seeing no public comments, public comment is now closed. Colleagues, I would like to send this item to, full board with recommendation with the fact that they have now addressed and clarified the definition of performance metrics. I appreciate the effort and the roll call, please, on that motion.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: And on that motion to forward this resolution to the full board with a positive recommendation, vice chair Dorsey. Dorsey, aye. Member Mahmoud. Mahmoud, aye. Chair Chan?

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Aye.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Chan, aye. We have three ayes. The motion passes.

[Unidentified DPH representative (HIV Health Services)]: Thank you for your support.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you. And, mister Clerk, please call item number four.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Yes. Item number four is a resolution retroactively authorizing the fire department to accept an expended grant in the amount of approximately 637,000 from the Federal Emergency Management Agency through the California Office of Emergency Services for the fire department's new training facility for the performance period of 08/01/2024 through 04/20/2027 and waiving indirect costs. Madam chair.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you. And today, we have the fire department here.

[Mark Corso (Finance and Planning, San Francisco Fire Department)]: Good morning, madam chair. Good morning, members of the committee. Mark Corso, finance and planning at the fire department, to present on the next item, which is an acceptance of a FEMA grant through coordinated through, the state's California Office of Emergency Services, in the amount of $637,200 as it relates to our new training facility, as well as the department's emergency operations center. The department would like to thank, Speaker Emeritus, Pelosi and her office for support in obtaining this funding through FEMA. So this is a fiscal year twenty four FEMA Emergency Operations Center grant, focusing on emergency readiness and coordination of an incident, with funds intended to support departmental emergency operations center capabilities. So the department, department's approved proposal, was to use this grant funding to support the emergency operations center, that will be part of the, department's new training facility, which is a project that is currently underway, with the support and cooperation of DPW. This is an area that, this project is underway, and the funds will be go will be used for the, backup supporting, emergency operations center that will exist in that facility to support department operations across the city. There is one piece I do wanna clarify. This is, there is retroactive language on this resolution. In general, the department's grants have a lot of retroactive, conditions from a technicality perspective. In discussing with the city attorney's office, generally, when we are awarded a, grant award, our performance period starts the day of award. And so in discussions with the city attorney's office, it's always cleaner to, start retroactive approval given we've already started the period of performance. We have not spent many made any expenditures move forward outside of the planning process of any funds for this grant, so we're not actually requesting retroactive approval of expenditures. Just, as a technicality, it's been included as retroactive. So happy to answer any questions.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you. What is the total, budget for the the project now?

[Mark Corso (Finance and Planning, San Francisco Fire Department)]: For the entire training facility? Mhmm. I believe it's a 175,000,000.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: And how much do have we secure?

[Mark Corso (Finance and Planning, San Francisco Fire Department)]: So that is covered through the Easter bond program through the city, and I can give you a brief update actually on overall project timelines. I checked in with our project manager yesterday, so these are pretty, current updates. We just received, 95% construction documents. We're currently going through the tail end of permitting. The December is tentatively set as our date for, demolition. There's not a huge amount. It's a pretty open space Yeah. For demolition. So, they're gonna be doing that and then doing some work on the pilings, but we anticipate January, February, beginning construction, and completion in the 2028.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: But we have secured all 175,000,000?

[Unidentified DPH representative (HIV Health Services)]: Correct.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Congratulations.

[Mark Corso (Finance and Planning, San Francisco Fire Department)]: Thank you. That's huge. Yeah. That's a huge big deal for the department.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: That's awesome. Well, we will keep our fingers and toes crossed for you, as you go through the construction phase, and that, congratulations on securing securing all the fundings for the facility, and we're glad that you now have additional funding from this grant.

[Mark Corso (Finance and Planning, San Francisco Fire Department)]: Thank you.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: And, supervisor Mamu.

[Supervisor Joel Engardio (Committee Member)]: One quick question. I noticed in the grant application, it was originally for $2,000,000 but the state, I believe, only awarded the $6.37 that we are, accepting here today. Was there any explanation from the state why they only gave that lower amount?

[Mark Corso (Finance and Planning, San Francisco Fire Department)]: In discussion with, Representative Pelosi's office and FEMA at the time, it was intended to be a multiyear, grant program where we could apply for a different project every year. Given the change in federal administration, that is still kind of up in the air on how that will be moving forward, but this is the the full amount that we've secured to date.

[Supervisor Joel Engardio (Committee Member)]: Got it. And it sounds like given you secured the 175,000,000 total, that that gap isn't isn't problematic in that context. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Congratulations.

[Mark Corso (Finance and Planning, San Francisco Fire Department)]: Thank you. Thank you for all for your support as well.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you. And so with that, let's go to public comment on this item.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Yes. If we have any members of the public, who wish to address this committee regarding this item number four, now is your opportunity. Madam chair, we have no speakers.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Seeing no public comments, public comment is now closed. Colleagues, I would like to move this item to full board with recommendation and a roll call, please.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: And on the motion to forward to the full board with a positive recommendation, vice chair Dorsey. Aye. Dorsey, aye. Member McMood. McMood, aye. Chair Chan?

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Aye.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Chan, aye. We have three ayes.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: The motion passes.

[Mark Corso (Finance and Planning, San Francisco Fire Department)]: Thank you.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you. Mister Clerk, do we have do we have any other business before us today?

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Madam chair, that concludes our business.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair, Budget and Finance Committee)]: Thank you. And next week, we do not have a full board meeting due to Thanksgiving and do not have a budget and finance committee, next Wednesday as well. So the meeting's adjourned.