Im michelle levis, soma resident. As you all know, soma has been in development for San Francisco and has become a neighborhood of ultra rich and ultra poor. I would like to advocate for an increased range of affordability. We have families where two families work minimum wage jobs and they dont qualify for the affordability, making too much. I have a struggle between talking about the new dream community when across the street, part pardon my language is a [beep] show. Its hard to not think about what is happening on the other side of sixth street. The school is in crisis. We have one school in our district and talking about a new school is ridiculous to me. We had to get pinterest to pay for a second social worker because we have the highest number of homeless kids. 85 of middle schoolers were reading below grade levels. We know that means they will drop out and become incarcerated. For us, its a huger issue, instead of just what is happening in the footprint of this plan area, but we hope that some of this can reach over to the other side of 6th street. Park and rec in this plan, i frankly have more faith elsewhere than the soma plan. The rec center has not had hand towels since may. So there are issues when we talk about renovating the rec center and creating parks, what it means for now . How can we creep eight new when we dont take care of what we have . And i feel theres disproportionate investment in structures, not people. There are people in crisis that need the support and putting it into a building or a set of activities doesnt meet the need where it is. I dont want my kids to have to see that on the way to school. Its a huge issue that we hope can be taken as a whole and not just within that footprint. Thank you. Seeing no further comments on item number 3, i request that we close Public Comment. Public comment is closed. I want to thank all of the staff and members of the public and supervisor kim and her staff for the long road its taken to get to here. In the first hearing i raised some questions about whether or not there are studies that could allow for more housing and we discussed that offline, and also talked a little bit supervisor kim, havent talked to you about it, but the initial propk notion of metering and to see if there were ways that we can meter the amount of housing as offices being developed. I think thats a conversation we should be having. Before i got back on the board, supervisor kim attempted to do that and ran into some opposition from the other side of this building. But to get the plan forward, it has to get out of this board. It may be an opportunity to insert metering in, so we dont end up with office and then housing way later. You guys can take a crack at that as you would like, but also a way to communicate with my colleague as were supposed to do. Noted. Well come back to you. And i know that weve had conversations and i know first of all, i know through watching some of the Planning Commission meetings, theres been a lot of Public Comment about the balance of housing and office and theres been requests to examine where we can adore add or convert within central soma. Can you go into that a little bit . Yes. The plan has 7,000 Housing Units rebuilt. I. E. R. Assumed 8,000 or so Housing Units in the area. So there is margin to move that around. That said, since we started the conversation, we identified a few locations where we have additional housing. The Planning Department was not considering use of the state density bonus in this area. Supervisor kim, we looked at that, so its resulted in about 600 more Housing Development units. And weve identified a few office sites proposing to carve out space for Affordable Housing, so that adds to the total. There are not many more moves up our sleeves to add units altogether, unless some of the sites that are slated to be office somehow switch over to be residential and that moves the needle, recognizing you want to move that within the bandwidth of i. E. R. Or else we have to start that over. So we discussed this previously and the 30,000, 40,000. Right. Its abstract, but to make it a jobsoriented district, were requiring large parcels to be jobsoriented and the threshold is 30,000 square feet. If it moves to 40,000, it will be several hundred other units built in the neighborhood. Thank you. A number of things i want to know one additional question for mr. Wartheim. One member of the public talked about height and shadows. Yes. We would not allow any building to move forward with a shadow on south park. That is built in and thats why heights around south park are around 45 feet. And well make sure any building would not. So none of the heights being contemplated in the central soma plan right now would add additional shadow to south park . No. Thank you. I just want to acknowledge the members of the community that came out today. And for talking about the priorities that the community would like to see in terms of how we distribute the benefits of the central soma plan. And, first of all, to acknowledge that we have a community thats accepting of density and growth and height and i think that says a lot about the neighborhood that the south market is. But ensuring that as we accept growth and we understand that it is a role to build more housing in San Francisco and the bay area that we want to ensure that the benefits or the value that private developers are building upon, that it be shared with the community and how we would like to see that value shared. And to reiterate to be sure that were supporting our Small Businesses and our legacy businesses and those communities with the leather lgbtq community, as well as filipino, and making sure its more than historic districts, that were able to support them to live and continuing elements of south of market community. I also heard a need to ensure that we are supporting our tenants and allowing them to continue to live there with support services and Legal Support in languageappropriate services and that we are ensuring preservation of Affordable Housing and building new housing. I had just heard about a site grand aurenti, singleroom occupancy hotel units that have housed philippifilipino Members Community and the city is working to acquire the 22 units, but i had a heart attack when i heard about the 10 million in deferred maintenance that is coming with that site. And so theres a lot of work to do to preserve units and not build new ones. Finally, i think its important to note that were able to articulate the list of priorities that we have under the different buckets of benefits. And i did want to just, again, support some members of our public that spoke about air quality. I think its incredibly sad when we hear about, you know, all the particulate matter that people see on the leaves and our trees in the other open space areas. I see that in my unit where i live when i open my windows, but we want to be sure as we grow this neighborhood its safe neighborhoods for children, families and seniors to live in. So im very excited about the plan of the portion of the plan that will be dedicated funding to improve air quality and greening the district. I think thats just vital. We need to make sure that people are living, thriving, and were doing what we can to mitigate for the negative environmental impacts in the neighborhood finally and most importantly, what i walk away from, we need to think about how the governing structure of the fees as they come out through the multiple buckets, Affordable Housing, residential, environmental, pdr, open space, schools, childcare and cultural preservation, that as much as we can that we set our priorities with the soma plan and we have a longterm governing structure that can ensure that fees 5, 10 years down the road still reflect our community priorities. We heard mention of the cac through the former Redevelopment Area plans. I should note we have the Soma Stabilization Fund that looked at how to distribute infrastructure and community service, looking at it as an option for some of the fees as well as the eastern Neighborhoods Advisory Committee as well. So michael is to work with the community as well as planning to set up a governing structure for how we disperse fees in the future. I think theres a lot of work to do and i ask the community to help us to develop our list of priorities as well, as we think about what the Priority Services are, im struck by, you know, hearing the staff at betsy carmichael, in terms of the readi reading level scores, its hard it hear, but sacramento does project spending needs for prison based on 3rd grade test scores. There is a nexus between when children succeed in Elementary School and the likelihood of ending up in our prison system. So whatever we can to do strengthen our communities in the long term, i think we should certainly be focused on that. Finally, i mentioned this in the beginning, but really thinking about our cultural districts and how we support that through the central soma plan as well. So this is the second of three hearings that ive called on the central soma plan. I want to thank all the departments for being here. Weve didnt ask all of you to come up and speak today, but think its important for the departments to hear from the board and members of the community. So, chair peskin, i have no further comment. I make a motion to file this item. Councillor peskin happy to file the item and look forward to the third hearing and hearing both from members of the public as well as continuing to work with supervisor kim and Planning Department staff on the notion of metering. With that, well file the item and adjourn the hearing. Ok, lets get started. Welcome to our special, special, special budget and finance Committee Meeting for monday, december 11th, 2017. I am norman yee and i will chair this committee as soon as everyone is quiet. Thank you, very much. I am joined by supervisor jeff sheehy and ahsha safai. These are my Committee Members and today is ms. Linda the clerk is miss linda wong. The committee would also like to acknowledge the staff of sfgtv, jesse larson and i cannot read it. We record each of our meetings and make the transcripts Available Online madam clerk any announcements. Silence cellphones and Electronic Devices and completed speaker cards to be included as part of the file to be submitted to the clerk, thank you. Before we begin can we have a motion to excuse supervisor ma leah cohen and katie katy tang from this meeting. Motion passes. No object object. Madam clerk can you call item number one. Clerk declaring a homeless shelter emergency and authorize ing the direct offer public work to improve facilities and the director of the department of homelessness and support of housing to contract for Homeless Services and officer services to protect the health, safety and welfare of individuals effected by homelessness and all San Francisco citizens. We have jeff kazski department of homelessness and department of public works here to present. Good afternoon, supervisors, jeff, director of the department of homelessness and Supportive Housing. I want to share some information with you regarding why we believe San Francisco is currently experiencing a shelter emergency and homelessness crisis. I dont think that we have to walk very far and look out doors to see living on our streets suffering and without access to basic hygiene needs and at this time, we saw that 7,499 people were experiencing homelessness on any given night and i think its also important to note in any given and theres 25,000 people unique individuals who experience homelessness in San Francisco and we have a very High Percentage of the Homeless Population in our city 58 that are unsheltered living on our streets and 4,000 people on any given night that are sleeping out of doors. Thirtytwo of that population is over the age of 51 and 40 having drug or addiction disorders. You will see that there has been where weve had some good successes overtime, weve seen an increase in the number of young people experiencing homelessness and relative to the Homeless Population and also an increase in the number of people who are over 61 years of age Senior Citizens who are experiencing homelessness and again, approximately 58 of un sheltered. Being unsheltered causes a whole variety of healthrelated issues some of which are very obvious not having a place to go to the bathroom to cook food, to take a shower and theyre recently in Southern California has been an outbreak of hepatitis a which has led to hospitalization and deaths many in the city of san diego and the problem has spread to santa cruz and los angeles and in San Francisco, we have been able to do a lot of vaccinations and take other measures to keep that outbreak from happening but none the less the acts of showers to shelter and housing is making us a risk for hepatitis a and other out breaks. We have seen and im sure this is again you all are familiar with this issue and receive many of the complaints that i do theres been an increase in the number of complaints related to unsheltered homelessness and you will see here just the very large increase in 311 calls related to this issue between 2015 and 2017 and you will also see where as we have invested a fair amount in our homelessness response system we have over 2,000 beds of temporary shelter available, mainly 1,389 shelter beds for adults and transition age youth. We still have a waiting list of over 1,000 people on any given night currently in need of shelter. As such, the mayor has announced his challenge to get a thousand additional people off the streets this winter that will require the expansion of our shelter system to meet the demands that currently exists helping cut the time it takes for us to bring shelters and other fail facilities online by four to six months and it will sunset in february february 15te looking at right now specifically this resolution to help move forward projects that are going to bring shelter and Navigation Centers quickly online and at this point well turn it over to edgar lopez that will talk to the specifics of the resolution. Good afternoon exercise, edgar lopez with public works as jeff mentioned the resolution before you would enable public works to implement fast deployment of shelters by allowing us to cut it takes to pre cure Construction Contracts for us to order trailers, tents, and bring in site utilities to bring in water and power and sewer and able to cut period time it takes by at least a third and i would be happy to answer specific questions that you may have. I see no questions and we have a b. L. A. Report. Good afternoon chair yee and analist office yes as we talk about on page four of our report , for the Emergency Declaration for 440 turning street the estimated cost of the is 7. 8 million in renovations and legislation calendered for wednesday december 13th budget and it would approve the funding for this project and there are more details presented to that committee and for the emergency shelters mr. Lopez i think comments on the two sights looked at right now that are one at fifth and bryant and one on 13th street that are under the jurisdiction of cal trans and our public works is working on the actual defining the project scope and that the department of homelessness will return in january to the board of january 2018 on the estimates for these projects and the code itself defines an emergency is a sudden unforeseeable and unexpected occurrence which isnt the case with these two Emergency Declarations however they have discretion under the administrative code to declare an emergency and i will want to say and i dont believe it was mentioned in the presentations, its a question has come up about the openendedness of the Emergency Declaration for homeless shelters and my understanding is that the department would what they did . Didnt catch that they did introduce a amendment to the legislation to sunset on february 15th. And we do consider it to be a policy matter for the board. Thank you for your report. So i dont see the amendments in here. Where are the amendments . Does anybody have a copy or is someone that the only thing being requested to be amended . Just for records for those that may not have caught it, this is a further amended in to work being asked to be amended and that says the resolution sunset at the time that the permanent emergency ordinance is enacted or on february 15th, 2018 which ever comes first. Any other questions . I have a question to our city attorney. City attorney mr. Gibner, so this is a resolution effecting the add min code but not amending the addmin code . Thats right. This section of the administrative code authorizes the board of supervisor to declare an emergency by resolution and authorized emergency work in response to that emergency and the amendment that you have before you indicates that the board may be adopted may adopt an ordinance, it wouldnt technically be an emergency ordinance which say special category under the charter but adopt an ordinance amending the administrative code or exemption s to the administrative code and it would be broader you could wave different Competitive Bidding processes by ordinance than by resolution. So this is not an addment to the code it is accessing that section of the add men code. Thats right. That was it . Ok. A