San Francisco Government SmartTranscripts:

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Good morning. The meeting will come to order. Welcome to the 03/11/2026, of the Budget and Finance Committee. I am Supervisor Connie Chan, Chair of the Committee. I'm joined by Vice Chair Supervisor Dorsey and Supervisor Danny Souter. Our clerk is Brent Halipa. I would like to thank Jeanette Echinalov, my apologies, from s a gov t v for broadcasting this meeting. Mr. Clerk, do you have any announcement?

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Thank you 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 file it 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 will not require 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 by the doors if you wish for your name 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 B Goodlett Place, Room 244 San Francisco, California 94102. And finally, madam chair, items acted upon today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda of March 17 unless otherwise stated. Madam chair.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Thank you mister clerk. And before we call item number one, we'd like to just remind the public that we have budget and legislative analyst report for item five on today's agenda and so for that item we will have the department presentation first followed by the budget and legislative analyst then we will take questions and public comments with that mr clerk please call item number one

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Yes. Item item number one is an ordinance amending the health and business and tax regulations codes to revise the definition of a food mobile food facility permit, had definitions for compact mobile food operations, mobile support unit, and permitted auxiliary conveyance permits to reflect recent amendments to the California retail food code, revising existing definitions of various other items to reflect state law definitions in that code, and expand the definition of stadium concession to include food facilities and stadiums with a seating capacity of 5,000 or more establish annual permit and plan check fees for auxiliary conveyance compact mobile food operation and mobile support unit permits and waive license and permit fees for compact mobile food operations amending the public works code to include a definition for compact mobile food operations and to expand the department of public works street vending authority to include regulation of compact mobile food operations and to require the department to consult with the department of public health and the fire department when issuing rules and regulations that regulate street vendors. Madam chair.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Thank you Mr. Clerk colleagues supervisor fielder while she has requests for continuous for one more week to our March 18 meeting agenda while I do want to respect her request knowing that this legislation has been continuing for at least a couple of weeks for the also for the reason that I wanted to make sure that for any fee because of the posting requirement I would like to have a date certain continuance be it to the next meeting or a date certain should there be an agreement between supervisor fielder and the department of public health through the facilitation from the mayor's office. So with that said, I am in agreement to continue for one more week to March 18. But I certainly want to urge department of public health, supervisor Fielder, and as well as the mayor's office to really come to some agreement on this legislation by March 18. Either we continue to date certain so that we can amend accordingly or that we then will either duplicate the file and figure out potential amendment at a later date or that we be able to amend to have amendments on March 18 to allow this to go through and have a separate trailing legislation to address the issue. Those are my intention for March 18 for and and the things I would like to see as chair of this committee by March 18. And with that, mister clerk, please go to public comment on this item.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Yes. We are opening public comment on item number one if we have any members of the public who wish to address this committee regarding the continuance of this ordinance. Madam chair we have no speakers.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Seeing no public comments public comment is now closed. Colleagues I would like to move to contain this item to our next budget and finance committee meeting on March 18, and a roll call please.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: And on that motion that we continue this ordinance to the March 18 meeting of this committee, vice chair Dorsey. Aye. Dorsey, aye. Member Sauter? Aye. Sauter aye. Cho Chan. Aye. Chan aye. We have three ayes.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: The motion passes. Thank you colleagues. Mr. Clark please call item number two.

[Supervisor Rafael Mandelman (Board President)]: Yes item number two is a resolution retroactively authorizing the city and county to accept and expend a grant of approximately 1,400,000.0 from the California department of health care services for participation in a program entitled capacity and infrastructure transition expansion and development or cited round four program intergovernmental transfer IGT part of the California providing access and transforming health initiative authorizing the city to release all claims against d h c s and its third party administrator arising out of or relating to the receipt of grant funds and or activities associated with the grant program approving the grant agreement between the city acting by and through the department of public health and the cal d h c s for the purpose of providing support to help san francisco health network implement community supports and enhanced case management programs as part of the California advancing and innovating medical for a term of one year from 01/01/2026 through 12/31/2026 and for a total not to exceed amount of approximately 1,400,000.0 approving the grant agreement pursuant to the charter and authorizing the director of health to enter into amendments or modifications to the grant agreement that do not materially increase the obligations nor liabilities to the city and are necessary to effectuate the purposes of the grant or this resolution.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Madam Chair.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Thank you. And today we have the San Francisco Health Network.

[Alex Boiter (Administrative Analyst, San Francisco Health Network/DPH)]: Thank you. Good morning Chair Chan, Vice Chair Dorsey, and Supervisor Soudham. My name is Alex Boiter. I'm an administrative analyst with the San Francisco Health Network. I'm before you today to present retroactive grant, accept and expend, for providing access and transforming health, or PATH, capacity and infrastructure transition, expansion, and development cited. So, together PATH cited, round four intergovernmental transfer, or IGT. This grant is funded by the California Department of Health Care Services, and is for a total amount of $2,749,600,133.88 dollars Of that total amount, SFDPH will provide half or $1,374,816.94 as in IGT. The grant term runs from 01/01/2026 through 12/31/2026. Past cited is a grant program that provides funding to enable the transition, expansion, and development of community supports and enhanced care management programs as part of Cal AIM. More specifically, this grant is providing funding for implementation work on DPH's electronic health record system called EPIC for new community support programs. It's also providing funding for integrating EPIC with software used in the jail to support the Cal Aim Justice involved initiative. There's additional award money for epic license fees attributable to the new community supports and enhanced care management programs and additionally we were awarded some salary reimbursement for dph staff who worked on setting up the new community support and enhanced care management programs under calam. Finally, there is some additional funding for setting up asthma remediation as a new community support program. Receipting retroactive authorization to accept this grant the project period for this grant began onetwenty twenty six and goes through 12/31/2026 dph received initial notice of this grant award on 11/18/2025, and we received final approval of the budget from the grantor, DHCS, on January 1626. After this projected start date, DPH brought this item to the board after going through the fiscal approval process, including controller's office review and approval. We retro or we respectfully request retroactive approval of this item. Thank you. And I'm happy to answer any questions.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Thank you. I don't see any name on the roster. And 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 two. Now is your opportunity. Madam chair, we have no speakers.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Seeing no public comment, public comment is now closed. Colleagues, would like to before I move this forward, I do actually have one more question. Help me understand, so the retroactivity is for January 1 through end of calendar year?

[Supervisor Rafael Mandelman (Board President)]: Correct.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: And what is going to be the term of the grant beyond end of the year?

[Alex Boiter (Administrative Analyst, San Francisco Health Network/DPH)]: The grant term ends 12/31/2026.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: And will then is it are we in the process of continuing to apply for the grant?

[Alex Boiter (Administrative Analyst, San Francisco Health Network/DPH)]: We have already applied and been awarded the grant.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Beyond the calendar year?

[Alex Boiter (Administrative Analyst, San Francisco Health Network/DPH)]: No, it ends at the end of this calendar year.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Will there be available for us to apply for the grants again and for the next calendar year, potentially in continuance?

[Alex Boiter (Administrative Analyst, San Francisco Health Network/DPH)]: Unfortunately, this is the end of this grant program. It was part of California's eleven fifteen waiver that was part of CalAIM that expires at the 2026.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Understood. Thank you so much.

[Alex Boiter (Administrative Analyst, San Francisco Health Network/DPH)]: Welcome.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: 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 that we refer this resolution to the full board with recommendation vice chair dorsey. Aye. Dorsey aye. Member sotter. Aye. Sotter aye. Chair Chan

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: aye.

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

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: The motion passes. Thank you and Mr. Clerk please call item number three.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Item number three is a resolution retroactively authorizing the office of the treasurer and tax collector to accept and expand the grant in the amount of 3,000,000 from jp morgan chase bank n a for implementing the stop scams s f program from 12/15/2025 through 12/14/2028. Madam chair.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Thank you and we have office of the treasurer and tax collector.

[Nicole Agbayani (Director, Office of Financial Empowerment, Treasurer & Tax Collector)]: Morning, My name is Nicole Agbayani. I'm the director of the Office of Financial Empowerment within the Office of the Treasurer and Tax Collector. I'm joined this morning by my colleague, Eric Mankey, our policy manager within the Treasurer's Office as well. I'm here to present for your approval a resolution authorizing our office to accept and expend a grant of $3,000,000 from the JPMorgan Chase Foundation. This funding will support Stop Scams SF, a new city led strategy to stop fraud and protect San Franciscans. Just to briefly introduce our team before I jump into the grant, we are once again the Office of Financial Empowerment. We sit under the umbrella of the treasurer's office. Our work is to support the economic security and financial inclusion of all San Franciscans. And, we spend a lot of our capacity thinking about low income folks here in the city. We work alongside our sister project, the Financial Justice Project. Their work is to assess and reform fines and fees that are impacting low income San Franciscans. And, very soon, we will be redoubling down on our efforts and launching as a unified group under a new name, the Economic Justice Center. And, our work will be unified, and our mission going forward will be turn the powers of the treasurer's office into tools that help San Franciscans build savings, reduce their debt, and keep more of what they earn while eliminating unjust fine and fees and protecting people from predatory financial practices. So, you can imagine alongside this work that we do, scams and fraud have been a growing concern for us as we think about the personal finances of San Franciscans. In the treasurer's office as a whole, we're seeing scams come up in our work around tax collection and feeling a need to prevent spoofing of our collection efforts. We offer a free financial counseling program through the Office of Financial Empowerment and have been hearing more and more from our financial counselors about individuals signing up for the service because they've been victimized by scams. And, I'm sure, like, everyone in this room has gotten a scam call, a scam text, a scam email sent to them personally. And so, I'll say that our office and San Franciscans are not alone in seeing this trend. The data that I have up on the slide is national data about the impact of scams. The last complete data set was from the year 2024. Americans during that year saw a loss of 2 and a half billion 12 and a half billion dollars to fraud. And more staggering still is that it was a 25 percent increase over the previous year in 2023. I think when a lot of us think about scams and fraud, we think about the impact to our elders in the community most of all. And you can see on the data here that elders do lose the most in terms of financial losses. But we were surprised to learn in our office that actually young people are the most impacted by volume of scams, with forty four percent of younger adults reporting a financial loss due to fraud. So almost half of our young people. And here in San Francisco, when we think about this issue, we want to focus on, of course, our seniors and our youth, but also know that there is a deep impact to our immigrant populations as well. Mean, I think the last thing to highlight here is that every instance of this, particularly when it comes to government spoofing, we see as something that is then eroding trust in the city itself and in city funded programs. So, our proposal for responding to this growing concern is an initiative called Stop Scams San Francisco, Stop Scams SF. And, the idea here is to provide a comprehensive roadmap to San Franciscans all the way from prevention and education through to remediation for folks who have been victimized by these issues. The effort will prioritize prevention, rapid alerts, and trusted support. We especially want to focus in on those communities, like I mentioned, that are most likely to be targeted, but also least likely to report the issues. And some of the strategies you can see listed on the slide here that we plan to deploy include scam alerts. So, with this one, when we learn of scams that are impacting local community, we want to disseminate scam alerts through a rapid response communication network. And, we're developing multilingual educational tools to teach community members how to spot a scam and then how to protect and safeguard their personal finances. We want to develop scam proofing strategies for city communications. We can start with our own office when it comes to this but then plan to share a best practices toolkit with the rest of the city family. Like I mentioned, we already have a robust financial counseling program. And so, we would plan with this to integrate into the financial counseling program scam prevention and remediation into engagements with clients. And then, lastly, if folks are unfortunately victimized by scams, we want to have really detailed and comprehensive guidance for them on how to respond, how to report, and how to safeguard their personal finances moving forward. And, the last note I'll make on this is that we want to recognize that there's already really great efforts around the city underway from the San Francisco Police Department, as well as the Office of Cybersecurity in this space. And so, the work that we intend to do with STOP scams in this grant is meant to be additive and supportive to help to fill gaps where they might exist. So, to undertake the work, we have already applied for and we have been awarded a $3,000,000 grant from the JPMorgan Chase Foundation. The funding will cover the development and implementation of the new initiative over a three year span. It will help us with the research and development of the initiative, the launch for the public, continuing to test, iterate, improve. And then finally, like I mentioned, we want to scale and make sure we have those best practice toolkits to sustain and build on the work. The funding uses will be to help cover our staff time, although no new positions are created with the grant. It will cover professional services such as the support of a communications consultant, other programmatic costs like funding community workshops, and then operating costs to the department. And then, last note is this is a retroactive approval to align with the grant start date, which was 12/15/2025. To date, our office has not spent any of the funding for the grant, and we don't intend to spend until after the resolution is passed. That's all that I have. Thank you for your consideration, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Do you have a sample sort of example, I should say, example of the scam?

[Nicole Agbayani (Director, Office of Financial Empowerment, Treasurer & Tax Collector)]: Yeah. So one of the ones that we've seen in our office as a tax collector is folks that are essentially faking as a tax collector. So they create communications, send them to taxpayers acting as if they are a tax collector, and then seeking to have those funds be sent over to the fake entity versus our office. And, you know, we've seen with AI in particular that the scams are proliferating. They're getting better and better. And so, part of this initiative is really going to be that on the ground training to community members to hold up examples and try to train to say, let's look for these kind of key features of how to spot this as a scam. I'm not just one of many, though. We're just at the beginning of this kind of research of finding out what that universe is.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: And then what is the difference the type of scams between for younger adults versus seniors?

[Nicole Agbayani (Director, Office of Financial Empowerment, Treasurer & Tax Collector)]: Sure. It's a really wide difference. So with our young people, what we've found we've talked to some of them in focus groups so far. And what we found is a lot of them are being scammed through social media. The types of scams that they are being victimized by are a lot around that moment that they are in life where they just have their first kind of financial freedom. They're looking for things like applying for an apartment or applying for a job. And the things that are being sent to them are fake. And scammers are using those as a way to extract funds from the young people. So, volume of it is really high. And we've seen some research from Consumer Action that shows that once folks have been victimized by a scam, they can be more likely to be victimized in the future, too. So we really want to nip it in the bud. Yeah.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Understood. And does that involve also ID theft?

[Nicole Agbayani (Director, Office of Financial Empowerment, Treasurer & Tax Collector)]: Yeah. So identity theft is definitely something that's out there. When we think about our young people, they have a lot of their lives that are published out there online as well. Yeah. So that's a piece of it for sure. Identity theft is one that our financial counselors have helped folks with already. And so with that one in particular, when I talk about having this be like a trusted support network, one of the things that you have to do if you've had your identity stolen is to actually go in person to report that to the police. And so with a lot of these vulnerable communities, particularly when we think about the immigrant community or youth, They may not feel as comfortable to walk into a police station. And so in that instance, having our financial counselors actually be there to walk alongside them, go in, and help them to successfully file that police report is a really big gap that we're excited we can already do. And we hope to scale up even further with this initiative.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Understood. And clearly, there's partly this is like prevention. But then I see that you also mentioning that you provide support for victims. What does that support looks like?

[Nicole Agbayani (Director, Office of Financial Empowerment, Treasurer & Tax Collector)]: We're still building it out. But one of the things that we have found as we get deeper and deeper into this topic is that there are you really need this roadmap because scams take so many different forms. And what we haven't been able to find in all of our search and with all of the agencies that are doing a lot around prevention and education pre scam is what that road map might look like after folks have been scammed to help to recover and remediate. There's a number of different things besides that police report where you're suggested to go to file. You need to interact with your bank. And then, on top of it, there's different layers about how your payment might have been made. So, there's a different path you need to take, for example, if it was a credit card you used or if you paid someone with Venmo or PayPal. And so, of that, we're just mapping out what that roadmap would look like now. And we want to share that level of guidance for folks because we actually haven't been able to find that anywhere so far. And so we see a real gap in having that comprehensive and really easily searchable guide instead of asking folks who have already been victimized to go out and chart that course for themselves.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Has there been a conversation between the Office of Treasurer and Collective Collect Tax Collector of and with the District Attorney's Office consumer fraud units?

[Nicole Agbayani (Director, Office of Financial Empowerment, Treasurer & Tax Collector)]: We haven't gone out to too many of our city family yet. We have so far engaged with SFPD. And we're learning mostly about the outreach efforts that they're doing and the specific scams that they're really concerned about so that we can try to tailor that toolkit. But like I mentioned, it's pretty new for us, too. And so, we're really in that research and development phase. When we do go out to reach out to city family, we want to think about definitely folks on the enforcement side. We want to think about the city agencies that can help us to be really trusted conduits to get to the vulnerable communities where we might not have as strong relationships ourselves. And then, importantly, other departments similar to the tax collector that are really victimized by the spoofing, like, you know, PUC, for example, with utility bills, the courts when it comes to fake jury summons. And so, we'll have a separate conversation with them about how we can partner and help to really safeguard the different taxpayers and constituents that they serve.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Yeah. I certainly wanna strongly encourage you I sorry. My apologies. I I certainly wanna I'm gonna finish this comment. I certainly wanna strongly encourage you to actually coordinate with the district attorney's office. They do have consumer fraud units that in coordination with the victim services that they provide. I think that then your dollars of 3,000,000 will go much further with that coordination. The victim service unit also by the district attorney's office also with the expectation that they have the language capacity being able to provide you that either guidance or support and certainly be able to coordinate with victim services that eventually the hope is also holding people accountable for committing the fraud against San Francisco residents and most certainly of our office of victim service in general that newly established I know that there's a lot of focus on human trafficking and sexual assault but I certainly think that it's a worthwhile conversation to be had in a much more coordinated fashion and supervisor Sauter

[Supervisor Danny Sauter]: Thank you. And I just want to say I'm glad to see you taking this on. I think it's something that will only continue to be a bigger and bigger problem in the years ahead. And it's getting more complicated because of AI. And it's something that maybe we've historically thought of as something contained to just seniors. But I think as you illustrate with the data, particularly youth are also exposed to this. And that being said, I know that organizations that work in all of our districts, like Self Help for the Elderly, have done an incredible job of starting their own trainings and programs. So I know that, and I hope that you'll work with them to learn what they've done, and move quickly out of the research phase to, you know, get in front of our residents. So thank you.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Thank you. And 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 three, now is your opportunity. Madam chair we have no speakers.

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

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: And on that motion that we refer this resolution to the full board with recommendation. Vice chair Dorsey. Dorsey, aye. Member Sauter, Sauter aye. Chair Chan?

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Aye.

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

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: The motion passes. Mr. Clark please call item number four.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Yes item number four is a resolution authorizing the mayor's office of housing and community development to execute the standard agreements with the California department of housing and community development under the affordable housing and sustainable communities program for a total award of approximately 47,500,000.0 including 35,000,000 disbursed by cal h c d as a loan to mercy housing California one hundred nine l p for a 100% affordable housing project at 1939 Market Street and approximately 12,500,000.0 to be dispersed as a grant to the city for public transportation improvements near 1939 Market Street for the period starting on the execution date of the standard agreement through 12/10/2080 and authorizing mo c d to accept and expend the grant of up to approximately 12,500,000.0 for transportation, streetscape, and pedestrian improvements, and other transit oriented programming and improvement as approved by cal h c d. Madam chair.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Thank you. And I want to acknowledge our board president, Rafael Mendelman, is here and would like to see if he would like to start with some opening remark on this item.

[Supervisor Rafael Mandelman (Board President)]: Thank you, Madam Chair. And I am strongly supportive of this item, as evidenced by my cosponsorship of it. The district that I represent has been characterized by second highest level of displacement, no fault evictions over many years, second only to District 9. You know, early on in my time on this board, we did a District 8 affordable housing survey and, you know, saw what we already kind of knew, which is that that very high level of displacement often hits older, long term, rent controlled residents, disproportionately hits LGBT residents, and that District 8 also has, you know, very high land values that make it, and a scarcity of sites that make it quite hard to develop new affordable housing in the district. We have some legacy development, but we've seen very little of it over the last ten, fifteen years. An exception to that has been the LGBT affirming senior housing that has been done by Mercy and Open House working together. And so, a number of years ago, when we learned that there was the opportunity to buy this site and see it developed with a significant affordable housing development along the lines of what had happened at fifty five and seventy five Laguna. We, we, I was very supportive of that and urged the mayor to allocate the funds to make that happen. It did happen. We've been waiting many years to get as close as we are now. This piece of legislation moves us closer. I do have a couple of concerns about the project and have talked with them with the developers and with MoCD. We'll probably have a little conversation about that after the presentations. But this is an important project, and I hope we continue to move it forward.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Thank you. We will have the mayor's office of Housing and Community Development.

[Supervisor Rafael Mandelman (Board President)]: Though I think Supervisor Dorsey might be in the Oh, queue

[Sean [last name unknown] (Project Manager, Mercy Housing California)]: I'm also signed.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Oh, no problem. Supervisor Dorsey?

[Supervisor Matt Dorsey (Vice Chair)]: I just want I'm sorry.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Vice Chair Dorsey.

[Supervisor Matt Dorsey (Vice Chair)]: Sure. So I just wanted to express my appreciation for everyone's work on this. And I think, even though it's actually just a few blocks out of my district, but as a gay man who is aware of the fact that we have an aging population, and especially people living with HIV who often have unique challenges as they're aging. I really appreciate this kind of project. We need more of them. And I'd like to be added as a co sponsor.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Thank you. And with that, mayor's office of housing and community development.

[Matt Graves (Senior Project Manager, MOHCD)]: Good morning. My name is Matt Graves. I'm with MOCD, senior project manager. And I'm here to speak about 1939 market. As has already been kind of talked about, it is a unique project for MOCD because it is trying to target the unique needs of our aging LGBTQ population. So this is our response to that. The resolution before you, though, is actually about a bit of the financing that we need in order to build the building. And so the resolution before you, it's for an award. The award is from the state. It's ASIC. And it's actually it has two components. So it's $47,000,000 But $35,000,000 of that will go towards the construction of the site. And $12,000,000 of it will go towards various agencies within the city geared towards like public infrastructure, transportation infrastructure, bike improvements. The resolution requests authorization from MOCD to accept the grant for both the housing and on behalf of the various departments that will receive the transportation funds. So 1939 Market will have 185 affordable units and two manager units. There will be 106 units at our studios and 79 units that will be one bedrooms. The development will make use of 75 SOS subsidies, which is a subsidy to assist senior households that are low income. 55 vouchers will also be used, and that will be in coordination with the veterans office. And then we have 40 lost units for homeless senior households. We also have plus housing program, which is not a subsidy per se, but it comes with some services. Occasionally there's a subsidy, but it's really geared towards the population. So it provides HIV positive services for the residents. And Mercy has partnered with Open House to provide resident services, which we're particularly excited about given their established experience serving this exact population. AMIs for the property will range from 30% to 60%, which is equivalent to an annual salary of about $32,000 to $65,000 The building will also have 1,600 square feet of commercial space on the Ground Floor. Initially, that's going be used by Open House to provide those services. So there'll be resident meeting rooms and social services provided there. In 2020, the city acquired the site at 1939 Market Street. The building had three tenants at the time, and they all re signed their leases, and they voluntarily waived their relocation benefits. Mercy was elected in 2021 as a sponsor under MoCD's multisite RFQ. And by 2022, Mercy had filed an application to planning for entitlements under SB 35, which was approved in 2023. Also in 2023, Mercy applied for MHP, which is another state program. But they were denied due to, like, competitive reasons with their scoring. Mercy applied for more state funding in 2024, but was again denied due to competitiveness. And that time it was for ASICs, for this program. Mercy applied again for ASIC in 2025 and was awarded later on that year, resulting in this resolution before you know. Let's see. And so this shows how we've assembled the financing for the building. The ASIC funds that were awarded in 2025 allow Mercy to apply for $76,000,000 in TCAC SIDLAC funds this year, which will be the final kind of tranche of funding that we need in order to start construction. I'll just highlight right here, of all the sources, AISC is like a significant portion of that. It's $35,000,000 of the total 172,000,000 needed. We're looking at an application to the state for more financing later on this year. And we're looking for an award in August. We'll be back before the board in December. We have a ground lease that I'll be presenting on, and then, of course, a loan agreement as well. We're looking at construction starting in February 2027, with about a two year construction period, so 2029. And we'll start leasing, or marketing leasing, about six months before. That will be really like the earnest leasing, but we've already started reaching out to community members and making sure they know the project. And I have Mercy here in Open House as well, and they can comment more on those efforts. This slide shows what the $12,000,000 will be going towards. So it's going towards like right of way improvements, sensitive bikeway improvements, and rapid bus transit improvements. And then also it comes with service, like social services provided. And with that, this ends my remarks on presentation. But we have Mercy in open house who can maybe address the comments beforehand. Thank you.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Thank you. I don't see any name on the roster, as I appreciate, frankly, from the slide indicating that at the end, truly, funding does matter, like whether we can continue to have funding to fund even an approved project, it's important. I feel the same way about some of the project, frankly, the West Side. That's including 1234 Great Highway some of the affordable housing project that is approved and just waiting for financing and that's both frankly the affordable and market rate developments at this time. So I really do appreciate the fact that this is coming through with these dollars. I'm excited about it. President Mendelman.

[Supervisor Rafael Mandelman (Board President)]: Thank you, Madam Chair. And we're not having a formal presentation from Mercy and Open House. They're just here for questions. All right. Well, I'm going to express my concerns and invite anyone from OCV or Mercy or Open House to address them. The need for this project is obvious. And I spoke to that in my opening remarks. Two concerns that I have about this project. One is that it actually be queer. And two is that overburdened with that it it not not be be overburdened by a mismatch between the needs of the population that lives in the building and the operating funds that are available to meet those needs. So on the first side, on the queer of it all, this is complicated. It's a complicated conversation for us to have in this chamber. We cannot legally, using the funding sources that we are using, create queer senior housing. And the housing that was created at 55, and I apologize, at 95 Laguna is not exclusively queer. It is, I believe, majority queer. And I think that and that frankly was achieved through a lot of hard work by Open House, especially Open House, Mercy as well, a lot of creative marketing, communications, the fact that HOPWA was a significant subsidy, that is housing for people with AIDS, the neighborhood preference that applied to the project. There were many things with people working really, really hard that led to those buildings managing to stay? I mean, think one of them actually is below half queer, or may have been below half queer at various times. But in general, I think we can look at the LGBT community and say we're making, you know, we are trying to deliver housing to meet the particular needs of that community in that neighborhood. The exception to that was, and I understand may not still be, but was the PSH that was included in the second I believe in the second of the two developments. I don't remember where this came out in a SOGI hearing or how it came out. And we've often we did see in the SOGI hearings sort of consistent under representation of the LGBT community in various HSH homeless programs, which is peculiar because of the over representation of the community in that population. But my strong memory is that those PSH units may have been all not queer at when they were first filled. And I think that has changed over time as people cycle in and out. But it is entirely possible that if you turn these units over to PSH and assign them as they are going to be assigned through that process, that we are not going to end up with very many queer people at all. This building leans in more heavily into PSH and VASH, which is also formerly homeless, I believe, by a lot. More than half of the units in the building are going to be either PSH or VASH, which raises for me the concern that I just expressed, that we could end up with a building that is not even as queer as the basically half queer units we've managed to get through the other two open house Mercy projects. That would be experienced, I think, by the queer community as a betrayal, as a disappointment, and as failure. I don't want that to happen. I don't think it's good for the city. I don't think it's good for Open House. I don't think it's good for Mercy. And I want everyone to have eyes wide open and be very clear about how they're going to avoid that outcome with more than half of the units in this building. The second concern that I have about this project is informed by the experience we've had over the last several years, as I think the city has pushed MOCD and our affordable housing developers to stand up as much PSH as quickly as possible without regard to whether there was actually the funding in the project to make those units and the folks living in those units successful. I think Supervisor Dorsey has seen some of these projects in his district. Supervisor Sauter may have seen some of these projects in his district. I would suspect Supervisor Mahmoud and Fielder have seen projects like that in their districts, although I cannot speak for them. But there's a real risk that if we take the most acute people with the greatest needs, concentrate them all into a very tall building, 15 stories, and we don't have the level of subsidy available to actually meet their needs, that this building is going to be a problem, not just for the surrounding community, but for the people in that building who thought they were getting a way to stay in San Francisco for the remainder of their lives. Also, an outcome that would be viewed as a failure for the city, for Open House, and for Mercy. Now, right now, Mercy and Open House are working with what they got to get this project done, which is an operating subsidy program that is only available to permanent supportive housing. And I've asked to have conversations with head of with the mayor's chief, Kunal Modi, as well as Dan Adams, to figure out whether that's really what we want and need to do for these projects going forward. And if that is what we want to do, if that lost subsidy is actually enough to really meet the needs of the folks coming off of our PSH lists. I think that is a sort of to be determined, not yet resolved kind of a question. And we do fortunately have a couple of years before we're trying to lease up these units. But, and I will not be the supervisor at that point. So in some ways, this will be other people's problems. But I would like to have this be a project that I feel proud of and feel proud of the contribution I made to getting it done. And I do have those concerns. So I don't know if anybody wants to try to make me feel better, But I would welcome that.

[Matt Graves (Senior Project Manager, MOHCD)]: I'd love to try to make you feel better about this.

[Supervisor Rafael Mandelman (Board President)]: Thank you, Mr. Graves.

[Matt Graves (Senior Project Manager, MOHCD)]: Really what we're talking about here is like going back to that slide that I presented with the different subsidies. Different subsidies come with different ways of referring people to the project. So as many as I showed, that's kind of how many we're dealing with. So we've already reached out to the VA about the VASH vouchers. They're very aware of what this project is trying to do for the community. And they've been very supportive and excited about this. In fact, they've made their own internal policy changes needed to kind of foster this kind of building. So they're prepared. And we've been in communication with them multiple times. We also have if Mercy could come up and talk about their efforts with the other referral systems, that would provide the detail that you're looking for there. So I have Sean from Mercy, who's also the project manager, who can speak on that.

[Sean [last name unknown] (Project Manager, Mercy Housing California)]: Yes. Hi. Thank you, supervisors. Yes. So I'm happy to break down the referral processes. So out of the 187 units, 55 are VASH units. So those 55 units will be referred through the local VA. In our conversations that Matt was alluding to with the VA, they have noted that the priority target population through the VA are folks who are already housed, already stabilized, and looking for a step up essentially into a more secure permanent situation. So so far, the idea for the priority targeted population to the VASH referral units. As for the 40 lost units, those will come through the HSH referral system. Open House, they can speak to us more, is exploring the possibility of becoming an access point to ensure that the folks that we are getting are from the LGBTQ plus community. And one other option we have not yet explored with HSH, and we're currently undergoing the first iteration of this with our new project 1633 Valencia, which has been in operations for about three and onetwo months, is having half of the units, which is what we're doing at 1633 Valencia, be referred through another similar step up program. So that half of the folks out of the referrals, the 40 lost units, are also already stably housed looking for a more stable situation. So those are a couple strategies we're looking into employing to ensure that the funding that we have, the operating subsidy that we have, is sufficient to meet the needs of the future residents at 1939 Market Street. The other units so that's another 90 units, 75 of which are going to be referred all 90 of which are going to be referred to the Dahlia system. 75 of those units are through the senior operating subsidy. So a new MOCID subsidy for seniors age 62 plus that helps us match their income between what rent levels they're restricted at, which is 15 to 25% MOCID AMI, and gives us the subsidy, that difference up to 60% MOCID AMI. The other 15 units are the nine HOPWA units, which for this project do not have an operating subsidy associated with them because there's no HOPWA vouchers currently available. And then there's six non targeted unsubsidized units as well. So that's the breakdown and kind of the strategies that we've been discussing going into each referral system and each subsidy. Sure.

[Matt Graves (Senior Project Manager, MOHCD)]: Thanks, Sean. And I'll just add that we're also working with two different kinds of subsidies here. So there's a subsidy that is kind of like a check to go directly into your revenue line item. There's another kind of subsidy that doesn't look at revenue per se. It actually looks at expenses. And the gap that's created by providing units to certain populations, that gap can grow over time. So it's looking at what that gap is, and it's providing their amount based on that gap. And so it's trying to answer this exact question. So that's another point that I would bring up. So that's kind of the funding situation we're looking at. For your other point, how we lease up the building, I want to bring up Open House, who specializes in this. But I'll just say that they are working with the community. They're looking at having an engagement manager, like a dedicated staff member, to specifically look at the lease up for this building. They're also looking into peer outreach. So we would have members of this exact community actually doing outreach to the community so they know who needs the units most. And then the next thing that we are focusing on is peer organizations. So San Francisco has lots of peer organizations that we can work with who are already kind of tuned into this need. So if I could bite Maury up from Open House. He can comment on the specifics of those three strategies. Good

[Maury [last name unknown] (Executive Director, Open House)]: morning, supervisors. I to just add on some of the subsidy information that we're already meeting with the VA. And it's been pretty gratifying to hear how confident they are that most of those units will go to LGBTQ folks based on need that they're seeing. And particular around a high level of what I see as cultural competence in the department that is going to be tag teaming with us on this project. We also have a meeting tomorrow to think creatively with LGBTQ center on possibly doing a partnership around being an access point. So we are starting to strategize already on some of the issues that could impact these concerns. I do want to kind of lay out what's forming as an outreach and engagement plan for you. And this is great practice for me because I'm currently talking to donors about funding this. Because it is not a light lift, and it requires resources in really difficult times. Before I just give you an overview of this plan, I want to shout out the Open House community members here today, if you can give a wave. Open House this is the heart and soul of Open House and folks who can talk to the experience of living in buildings that already have mixed subsidies and folks facing different circumstances. They're the ones that can really have real life experience to share with you on that. My job is a lot of fundraising. And a couple of things have risen to the top. I've been at Open House as executive director for six months now. And two priority projects I see moving forward. One is building advocacy and policy arm. I cut my teeth in the AIDS epidemic. We know what community organizing in action looks like. And we know the power of having voices of communities impacted at these meetings. And there is a missing voice, I think, for older LGBTQ folks in this city and in Sacramento. So that is one project that we are going full force to look for resources to get started at our organization. I feel like if we don't have that, the next three years could flatten us, right? I think that's true for a lot of community organizations. The second top issue is occupancy and outreach and community engagement around 1939. I'm not going to sugarcoat it. It's going to be hard work. And again, we're talking about an eighteen month plan. A few folks have raised their eyebrows when I say we need eighteen months. We need eighteen months. If we're going to achieve the goal we want, we need boots on the ground. We don't need the kind of outreach that has come to us. You know, we don't need the kind of outreaches meet us over by our offices. It's going across the city and working with our partner organizations and working with organizations we've never worked with before. I think there's a way to get to what we want while respecting and working within fair housing guidelines. Our plan is dynamic. Open house has a hustle bone. Not every organization can say that. We have a history of producing. We're not perfect. There are some issues that President Mandelin has brought up that I think in hindsight there could have been some different strategies. We have a different strategy now. That's what we can do. So let me just give you an overview. This eighteen month project is going to cost probably around $250,000 It's all hands on deck. It's creating outreach and engagement strategy, not only with our current queer partner organizations, but with neighborhood associations. We Hayes Valley Neighborhood Association has invited us in the next couple weeks to come to their meeting to talk about this project. They have great excitement. We want to talk we want to work with the Castro Business District. We want to go to clinics. We want to go to churches that are queer affirming. We want to talk with senior services. We have a great partnership already with some of them, but we want to build that. And we want to get this kind of roll out into our friendly LGBTQ media. We're going to create really simple, accessible tools for folks. Clear and simple, and queer and simple. We want them to know the timeline. We want them to see a sample application so they understand what it looks like. We want to provide one to one support to sit down with folks who are interested. And we want them to understand eligibility. So tools are going to be simple with examples. We're going to assemble a core team. We're going to have a project coordinator. And we are. We're going to hire three or four community members who are leaders and can talk about life at Open Health. And will be highly trained in going through Dahlia and going through other systems. Where to go and how to get the help they need. Again, we've been already meeting with the VA team and feel really excited about them helping us meet the mark. We have a lot of partner organizations, and we want to do nineteen thirty nine events at those organizations. We want what our community enjoys and needs. We want food and drink there, and we probably want some good music. We want to have our peers present, and we want to have them available doing office hours, along with our coordinator at different organizations throughout the city. And we want to know who needs follow-up help. We're going to build and track a list of interested community members. We know that getting into any building can be overwhelming when you're dealing with health issues, when you're dealing with mental health issues, social isolation. So we're going to meet folks where they are to get help and support them through this process. Leading up to the application opening up, we're going to have a team of 20 trained staff and volunteers with laptops ready to get folks from our community in the application process fast, with completion, and maximize their chances of getting in quickly, whether it's the lottery or elsewhere. What I want to say is, it's not, well, you're all facing your own set of stresses. Fundraising in this time, you know, I've been in ED five times. This is the most challenging time that I've seen. And we are prioritizing this. And I think Open House is an organization that has a strong reputation because of its outcomes. And there's no guarantee on this, but I can tell you this is our top two priorities in the year coming forward. So just so you know, the eighteen month rollout would be us coming out loud and proud next Pride month next year, and having this 1939 campaign and rolling from there.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Thank you. President Mandelman?

[Supervisor Rafael Mandelman (Board President)]: Yeah. Are you done, Mr. Graves?

[Alex Boiter (Administrative Analyst, San Francisco Health Network/DPH)]: I am.

[Supervisor Rafael Mandelman (Board President)]: Okay. And thank you for thanks to everyone who spoke. And I'm encouraged by Open House's plan. And I think, and I am hopeful that the VA will stay true to its commitments over the next several years. I would just note this is a federal agency. But if they do, those 55 units, or some large number of them, could be available for queer people. I think that the outreach work that Open House is talking about could help ensure that the senior operating subsidy units have enough queer people going into those lotteries that we don't end up with embarrassing outcomes. I remain a little worried, both on the acuity side and on the queerness side, about the loss units. But I think that's a conversation that can continue over the next, I mean, will continue while I'm in office, and I hope it continues under my successor. Maybe we'll get it all resolved. But anyway, thanks to everyone who's doing all this work. I know it's super hard. I know the funding sources are complicated and messy and hard to work with. And it's hard to do affordable housing, and especially hard to do queer, senior affordable housing. And so for everyone who's trying to get that done, lots and lots of thanks.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Thank you. I wanted to, if I may, add like a few nuggets of especially working with the VA hospital VA and just trying to have a better understanding. Are there conversation in discussion about prioritizing potentially Ryan White Act recipients? Are there conversation about, prioritizing those who receive continuum of care subsidies from Medicaid in a combination of that so that in the scoring of prioritizing, I should say, in terms of either through the VA system or the Dahlia system that you are prioritizing and being able to identify those as categories and criterias?

[Matt Graves (Senior Project Manager, MOHCD)]: I'm not sure about in our conversations with the VA, I'm not sure how they are scoring or assessing. So I can find that out and

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Yes, let

[Matt Graves (Senior Project Manager, MOHCD)]: your office know. But I know that there is some kind of scoring feature. Are you aware of any? No. Yeah, we'll get back to you on that.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Yeah, I think that given how the federal government is changing the funding formula for Ryan White, meaning only funding and allowing the city to reimburse for those who receive care reside where they where they reside I think that this is a probably a nexus about if we were to identify recipients both for the ryan white care ryan white act care within the city's jurisdiction as well as having you know like affordable housing in San Francisco I think it's something that like it's worthwhile to have those conversation to identify the needs and that I do understand you know there are certain restrictions but I certainly think that wire and white act recipients are really a sort of the overlapping between federal governments and really San Francisco residents among the LGBTQ community. I think there got to be an active effort to also again to working with actually our local service provider and I really appreciate again you know having the working with lgbtq center and many other organizations but I I definitely strong partnership continuance even through the Thalia system on the local level as well not just the VA system but also Thalia system that to prioritize those efforts and for identifying criteria that we can help to prioritize the community and identifying the people who are already on the list and the lottery list. Thank you, President Mendelman, for sitting in and asking these questions. My assumption is that we could open this for public comment thank you for your work.

[Matt Graves (Senior Project Manager, MOHCD)]: Thank you.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Let' go to public comment on this item.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Yes we' now opening public comment for this item number four if we have any members of the public who wish to address this committee. Madam chair we have no speakers. Wait hold on I guess we do.

[Laurie St. John Baldwin (Public Commenter)]: Good morning. My name is Laurie St. John Baldwin. I'm a third generation native San Franciscan, and I happen to it happens to be my 70 birthday today. Open House is a lifeline for me. I am a resident of the Mercy Open House on 95 Laguna Street. And as a native daughter, I've invested my career, tax money, and building the city. And I just feel that it's imperative that there's a place for me and others to be reassured, a home to be an investment of elder LGBQ folks here in the Bay Area. And I just really believe that this is imperative for the city to support. And with the new project coming, I just it would just be wonderful to be able to have what we've been discussing to come to fruition. And with that, I say thank you.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Thank you much for addressing this committee. If we have any more speakers, if we could line up by the curtain so we don't have these awkward pauses. Thanks. Next speaker.

[Unidentified Public Commenter (Transgender woman)]: Okay, well, hi. Good afternoon. Thank you so much. I get super emotional when I talk about open house because for the simple fact that I believe that it's allowed me a life that I could never imagine. I am the statistic of the person who needed the help the most. I am a transgendered woman who is my community, my family has been brutalized for so many years. And to have a safe place to just put my hand on my pillow and know that I am in that moment the safest that I've been in many years. I'd like you to imagine what security looks like for all of you and in the aspect of, you know, where it comes from. I mean, you might have family. You might have parents. You might have community who support you. Now, imagine having all of that taken away, and you don't have any of it. And then imagine that you wake up and you're 65 years old because it's going to happen, it happens, and it's scary. And then imagine having that waking up 65 and trying to live on $800 a month. It's a hard reality of survival. Imagine what aging with dignity looks like to all of you. It looks like to me that I have a community that I live with that is like minded, that supports me for who I am, not how much money I have, not how much money I don't have, not you know, I am the statistic of I'm HIV positive. I'm a drug addict in recovery for

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Speaker's time has expired. Thank you so much for addressing this committee. With no further speakers, Madam Chair, that completes our queue.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Seeing no more public comments. Public comment is now closed. President Mendelman, what is your will on this item?

[Supervisor Rafael Mandelman (Board President)]: I would ask the committee forward this to the full board with positive recommendation.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Vice Chair Dorsey, would you like to make the motion?

[Supervisor Rafael Mandelman (Board President)]: Sure.

[Supervisor Matt Dorsey (Vice Chair)]: Thank you. Madam chair, I would like to forward this to the full board with our positive recommendation.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Roll call please.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: And on that motion by vice chair Dorsey. Aye. We refer this resolution to the full board with the recommendation. Vice chair Dorsey. Aye. And Dorsey, aye. Member Sauter? Aye. Sauter, aye. Chair Chan? Aye. Chan, aye. We have three ayes.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: The motion passes. Mr. Clerk please call item number five.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: Yes item number five is a resolution approving amendment number five between the city acting by and through the office of contract administration and universal protection service l p doing business has allied universal security services for unarmed security guard services at general hospital extending the contract by six months for a total term of 02/15/2023 through 12/14/2026 and increasing the contract amount by 3,200,000.0 for a new total not exceed amount of 15,380,000.00 effective upon approval of this resolution and to authorize o c a to enter into amendments or modifications to the contract that did not materially increase the obligations nor liabilities to the city and are necessary to effectuate the purposes of the contract or this resolution. Madam Chair.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Thank you. And today we have the office of city administrator here.

[Sophie Hayward (Office of Contract Administration)]: Good morning, Chair Chan and supervisors. I'm here this I'm Sophie Hayward, I should start. And I'm here this morning on behalf of the Office of Contract Administration to seek a recommendation from you of approval to amend the existing contract with Allied Universal Security Services. The amendment we seek would amend would increase the not to exceed amount to $15,380,000 which is an increase of $3,200,000 And it would extend the term by six months to 12/14/2026. OCA originally entered into this contract with Allied in February 2023, and we've been back several times for amendments. A first amendment was executed in March 2024 to increase the not to exceed amount due to service gaps because of staffing shortages. And then, a second amendment was executed September 2024 to further increase the not to exceed amount. Additional amendments were executed in February and December 2025 to increase the not to exceed amount, as well as to extend the contract term to allow time for a new solicitation. And as outlined in the memo from OCA, the average monthly spend over the last three plus years has been close to $300,000 The proposed amendment is based on actual and projected expenditures, plus an additional 20% contingency. As you know, the provision of security services is essential to operations at DPH. Security guards assigned to this contract provide access control. They screen people entering DPH facilities, and they respond to incidents when they occur. This concludes my very brief presentation. I'm joined today by Lorna Walker, who's the Deputy Director at OCA, as well as Basil Price, the Director of Security at DPH. And all three of us are available for questions. Thank you.

[Christina Malment (Budget and Legislative Analyst’s Office)]: Good morning, supervisors. Christina Malment from the Budget and Legislative Analyst Office. The proposed resolution would approve an amendment to an existing contract with Allied Universal Security Services for unarmed security guard services at San Francisco General Hospital to extend the term by six months through 12/14/2026, and to increase the not to exceed amount by $3,200,000 for a total of $15,380,000 Following the fatal stabbing of a social worker at SF General Hospital, DPH has increased security staffing at Buildings 80 And 90 to add two additional posts. So DPH is requesting an amendment to this agreement to add those additional hours and also to extend the agreement to give them time to procure a new contract. They also plan to commission a third party analysis of their security needs more broadly and may increase staffing under this contract following that analysis. Exhibit one on page four of our report shows the basis of the not to exceed amount, which includes a 20% contingency as well as a 40% additional adjustment to allow for potential increases in staffing. 60% is a very large contingency, which means the Board of Supervisors doesn't know exactly what you're authorizing in terms of service levels. But rather than reducing the amount and having this contract come back within the next year, we recommend that the board of supervisors request that DPH come back or provide a report to the board of supervisors more broadly on their security needs and costs for this contract, other security contracts, use of deputy sheriffs, and to report on how their needs are addressed in the upcoming budget in advance of their first budget hearing in June. We recommend approval of item five.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Yeah. I mean, think it is not just I think maybe this is something that we look to the city administrators to help address the overall security plan contract we just approved one recently sfmta that we just approved you know on the security contract now with you know SF general we we do look forward to having this more con like comprehensive conversation with director kitler tovia kitler as well as the city administrator the overall like the security plan for city buildings that's inclusive of city hall and and of course city agency and and city property that how do we balance between utilizing our deputy sheriffs who actually are now clearly also need to figure out their overtime spending with their limited capacity and versus contracting out security contracts. And I appreciate the third party analysis. But is the third party analysis specifically for Department of Public Health and involving the general premise of San Francisco General Hospital?

[Christina Malment (Budget and Legislative Analyst’s Office)]: I think I'd let DPH speak to that. You.

[Lorna Walker (Deputy Director, Office of Contract Administration)]: Good morning. Lorna Walker, Deputy Director at OCA. Yes, it is for DPH. Mr. Price can address if you have specific questions. It's a procurement to hire a consulting firm who will do an analysis of DPH's buildings and instructor advise as to what the security measures should be put in place.

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: And so that's inclusive of all the clinics, including like clinics and everywhere Yes. Understood. Wonderful. Okay. Thank you. I also wish that we have similar analysis in all public building, which I think we are somewhat undertaking it. But we probably take that in house, I think, for the budget process. So I'm expecting the layering of Department of Public Health along with the citywide conversation, because SPUC and other facilities are in need of security as well. Vice Chair Dorsey.

[Supervisor Matt Dorsey (Vice Chair)]: Thank you, Chair Chan. I just want to associate myself with your remarks. I think it is important that we, as supervisors in general and as members of the budget committee in particular be apprised of the security challenges that are facing our departments and in particular their employees. I think that's one thing in my own time in the city attorney's office, that I really came to learn is that the city and county of San Francisco is an employer before it's anything. And when we have tragedies like this playing out, I appreciate that there is going to be security analysts with expertise in this to make an independent assessment so that we're not just beefing up or not based on what we think, but having actual experts on that. But once we get that expertise, I think it is important that it be shared with us because I think we have an obligation to be informed on this as well. So I appreciate the BLA's recommendation that this be presented to us.

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

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

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

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: On that motion to refer this resolution to the full board with recommendation vice chair Dorsey.

[Supervisor Matt Dorsey (Vice Chair)]: Aye.

[Brent Jalipa (Committee Clerk)]: And Dorsey, aye. Member Sauter? Aye. Sauter, aye. Chair Chan?

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: Aye.

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

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: The motion passes. And Mr. Clark, do we have any other items before us today?

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

[Supervisor Connie Chan (Chair)]: And seeing and the meetings adjourned.