Good morning.

This meeting will come to order.

Welcome to the December 10th, 2025 meeting of the Budget and Finance Committee, also

last one for this year, 2025.

I am Supervisor Connie Chan, Chair of the Committee, and I'm joined by our Vice Chair,

Matt Dorsey.

Supervisor Dorsey.

Good to have you.

Good to be here.

And also we're joined by Supervisor Cheyenne Chin.

Our clerk is Brent Haliba.

I would like to thank Sue Ednaws from SFGovTV for broadcasting this meeting.

Mr. Clerk, do you have any announcement?

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.

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 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 at 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 U.S. Postal Service or our office in City Hall at 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place.

room 244 San Francisco California 94102 and finally items acted upon today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda of December 16th unless otherwise stated.

Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. And before we call the item number one, and just like to remind the public that we, for the items that we have budget and legislative analyst report, we usually go to the department presentation, budget and legislative analyst report, and then we will have questions and comment from the body.

Then we will go to public comment. And with that, Mr. Clerk, please call item number one.

Yes, item number one is a resolution retroactively authorizing the Fire Department to accept and expend a grant in the amount of approximately $2.7 million from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to purchase self-contained breathing apparatus units for the performance period of September 26, 2024 through September 25, 2026, hand-waiving indirect costs.

Madam Chair.

Thank you, and today we have the Fire Department here.

Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the committee.

Mark Corso, Deputy Director of Finance and Planning at the Fire Department.

I'm joined by Assistant Deputy Chief Mike Mullen of our Support Services Division to present on our next item.

It's a fiscal year 2023 FEMA assistance to firefighters grant in the amount of about $2.6 million.

This is for the purchase of self-contained breathing apparatus,

which is the breathing packs and bottles that our firefighters use to actively fight an incident.

Obviously, this is a very crucial piece of safety equipment for our frontline members,

and this would be a complete replacement for all units that we have in the department.

We lasted a full replacement about 10 years ago through another FEMA grant.

Obviously, given the cost of these items, these are very difficult for us to replace given budget constraints,

so we are very thankful for FEMA for approval of this award.

This is for all frontline members in the department, so since that time, 10 years ago,

There's been numerous safety upgrades to these equipment,

so we're very happy to be procuring these new models across the board for all members,

given the safety enhancements that are included.

There's a grant match of about $275,000, which is incorporated

into our equipment and safety equipment funds, so there's no issues there.

The current period of performance ends in September 26.

We have no doubt we'll be able to meet that.

And just lastly, there is a retroactive language in this resolution,

and that's mainly because of retroactive

for the grant performance period start date.

For these grants, the performance period start date is generally the same day

we are notified of an award.

So pretty much all of our grants would be retroactive,

but rest assured we have not moved forward with any purchases

or anything like that to date, but intend to do so upon approval of this award.

So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions as well as Chief Mullin.

Thank you.

The retroactive date is last year, September, though, right?

Correct, that was the date of award and of notification

that we were actually awarded the grant

and the performance period began.

Was it not inclusive of your budget?

It was not incorporated into the budget,

so this is why we're coming separately.

Thank you.

But you got the grant in 24,

but it was not inclusive of your 25, 26 budget.

And you also haven't spent it.

Correct.

So this is a reimbursement grant.

We didn't receive any funds up front.

And so there was an administrative oversight

that it was not incorporated into our budget.

So we're going through that process now.

But we have not spent, nor do we see any issue spending it

if we're approved for this.

Understood.

Thank you.

I don't have any additional question.

Let's go to public comment.

I don't see any other name on the roster.

Let's go to public comment on this item.

Yes, we are now opening public comment for this item number one.

if we have any members of the public who have joined us today who wish to address this committee.

Madam Chair, we have no speakers.

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.

And on that motion to forward to the full board with positive recommendation, Vice Chair Dorsey.

Dorsey, aye.

Member Chen.

Chen, aye.

Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Thank you.

And Mr. Clerk, please call item number two.

Item number two is a resolution approving and authorizing the general manager of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission to execute amendment number one to a contract for engineering services for dams and reservoirs with GEI Consultants, Inc., increasing the contract amount by $7 million for a new not-to-exceed contract of $18 million with no change to the contract duration with the work starting in April 2020 and an estimated completion date of April 2031.

to add design services for the Moccasin Dam and Reservoir Long-Term Improvement Project

and planning and design services to the O'Shaughnessy Dam Outlet Works Phase II Project

under the Hecheche Water Capital Improvement Program pursuant to the charter.

Madam Chair.

Thank you, and today we have SFPUC here.

Good morning, Chair Chan and Supervisors.

My name is Carmen Ng, and I am a civil engineer with the SFPUC's Engineering Management Bureau.

I'm here this morning to present the request to approve Amendment 1 to Contract Pro 138B, Engineering Services for Dams and Reservoirs.

This amendment would increase the contract by $7 million for a total not to exceed amount of $18 million with no change to the duration to continue providing planning, design, and engineering support of the improvements to various dam and reservoir facilities.

After the Oroville Dam spillway failure in February of 2017,

that's shown on the slide, the California Division of Safety

of Dams, DSOD, sent orders to all dam owners in the state

of California to conduct condition assessments

on their spillways that are under DSOD jurisdiction.

In response to that, we advertised contracts per 138A,

B, and C in late 2019 to complete the work for all dams

and reservoirs from Hetch Hetchy down to the city.

Per 138B includes three dams in the Hetch Hetchy region,

which are shown in blue in the slide, Cherry Dam, Eleanor Dam,

and Early Intake Dam.

The other two dams in the Hetch Hetchy region,

Moccasin Dam and Oshana Sea Dam that are shown in red,

are covered under 138A.

Earlier this year, contract 205,

Water Capital Program Management Contract,

was awarded to HDR Stantec Joint Venture.

HDR is currently the prime 138A design consultant, so in anticipation of a potential conflict

of interest for them to continue providing design services, we're recommending that the

Moccasin Dam and O'Shaughnessy Dam phase two scopes be completed by the Pro 138B consultant,

which is GEI consultants, since the work falls within the same geographic area and is the

same scope.

At the time 138 was advertised in 2019, the capital plan for the project shown on the left had a budget of $213.1 million, primarily for assessments.

As DSOD analyzed and repaired Oroville Dam, they imposed additional requirements and analyses on the dam owners in the years that followed.

We've since completed needs assessments for some of these facilities, and these assessments have helped us to define project scopes.

In the latest capital plan, we have significantly increased the budget to $626.7 million to

reflect those updated needs.

So this slide, it's got a lot to digest.

Our projects are on the left.

There is a column for our current phase of each project, the current budget, and then

in the middle there is our proposed Amendment 1 modifications.

The original contract is an $11 million 11-year pool contract where we list a selection of

predetermined projects that the contract will support.

These types of contracts will allow for flexibility in obtaining professional service support

through project planning, design, and construction.

Amendment 1, which is in the middle column, asks for an additional $7 million with no additional

time to continue engineering design for Moccasin Dam project and we are also

planning to fund the planning and design of O'Shaughnessy Dam Phase 2 through

the PRR 138 B unassigned balance. And so now I'll quickly share a little bit about

the two projects that we'll be moving over. In 2018 there was a storm event

that nearly overtopped Moccasin Lower Dam and it caused significant damage. In

this photo you can see the flood water in the main spillway which is in the

center and also in the auxiliary spillway which is at the top of the photo.

The floodwaters came to within a foot of overtopping the dam.

As part of the planning work for this project, we determined that the best solution would

be to build a new side channel auxiliary spillway, line the spillway chute, and build a new stilling

basin for energy dissipation, which you can see in this photo, which is a physical model

that was built by Northwest Hydraulic Consultants in Vancouver, British Columbia, and was used

to verify the hydraulic analysis or hydraulic modeling results.

The project is currently at the 35% design phase,

and that was completed by the Pro 138A Consultant HDR.

Next slide.

The second project scope is the O'Shaughnessy Dam

and Outlet Works phase two.

That's currently in the planning phase.

The drum gates, which are shown in this photo,

and the slide gates are going to be assessed

so we can define what project we may need.

Next slide.

And also as part of this project,

There are valves that will be assessed, which include isolation valve and needle valves that are shown in this 1922 drawing of the general arrangement of the O'Shaughnessy Dam outlet system, where the needle valves regulate the flow being released from the dam.

This work has not yet started.

To recap, this is the same budget slide from earlier in the presentation.

Beyond this amendment, as these projects continue to develop, we do anticipate that we will need to find other means for contracting capacity to do the work.

and that might come in the form of either existing as needed engineering contracts for smaller efforts

or for larger efforts, we'll be drafting new RFPs.

Or we could come back for a future amendment to this 138B contract.

From a funding perspective, as the projects move through condition assessment and planning

and we learn more, updated scopes and budgets will be taken into consideration

in the 10-year capital planning and budget process.

Thank you for your time and consideration, and I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.

Good morning.

Nick Menard from the Budget Legislative Analyst Office.

Item two is a resolution that approves an amendment to a PUC contract with GEI consultants

increasing the contract value from $11 to $18 million.

The amendment does not change the term, which ends June 2031.

And under the amendment, the $7 million will be used to fund design work for two dam design

projects that were currently designed by HDR, which is now the Water Enterprise Capital

Improvement Program Manager, and so they can no longer do design work on individual projects

in that role.

So those projects are being shifted to this contract.

The PUC has rated this contractor as excellent in their most recent performance monitoring

review, and the $7 million, there's a small amount, about $150,000, that will be billed

by GEI to validate the design work by HDR

because they will then be the engineer of record

for these projects.

We show the budget on page 8 of our report.

You can see the spending by program

within the budget as provided to us by PUC.

The contract costs are funded by water and power rate payers

as the projects benefit both systems.

We recommend approval of item 2.

Thank you.

I don't have any additional questions specifically about this contract.

And I think that, again, just trying to go back to my previous,

this is just for the entire SAPUC, and I'm looking at Jeremy,

only because, you know, just kind of going back to start setting us up for the expectation of budget.

As we know, the enterprise agencies are coming through in May.

And that just not the most recent, but the year before,

that there was roughly about a billion dollars increase in our budget.

that it's really a majority of it really is because of SFPUC's capital projects.

And I think that during that time, we had a conversation again about just contracting and values management.

I do appreciate that, you know, for a decade now that SFPUC has been broken down its project management

into the design phase and the construction phase.

But I think that we want to see consistency all across all your projects.

But also when you do amendments and added value, I think so far it has been great.

Like in terms of your presentation and explaining why we're doing some of these.

And we do understand, you know, inflation, tariffs and added costs, like all sort of adds to some of it.

And not to even mention that it takes a while for you

to really finalize the scope of work

for a giant project as such.

But I think that we're going to have you report back two years

later about what has it been.

But you're welcome to say a few words on the record overall.

Thank you, Chair Chan.

Nothing really to add, but we definitely

look forward to having these conversations with you

in more detail as the budget process progresses.

Yeah, thank you.

And so I just wanted to flag that it may or may not be in May,

that we may have a separate and work with you,

but really all the enterprise agency to just separate and apart

about contracting in general leading to May before you come back to us

and maybe really have you report back specifically for SFPUC

based on the recommendation from the BLA during two years ago

during the fiscal year about contract management.

Thank you. And so colleagues with that, let's go to public comment on this item.

Yes, if we have any members of the public who have joined us today who wish you

addressed this committee regarding this item number two, now is your opportunity.

Madam Chair, we have no speakers.

Seeing no public comments, public comments now closed.

Colleagues would like to move this item to full board with recommendation and a roll call, please.

And on the motion to forward to the full board with recommendation,

Vice Chair Dorsey. Dorsey, aye. Member Chen. Chen, aye. Chair Chan. Aye. Chan, aye. We have three

ayes. The motion passes. Mr. Clerk, please call item number three. Yes, item number three is a

resolution retroactively authorizing and approving the Office of the Treasurer and Tax Collector to

execute amendment number four for a service and support agreement with Collection Solutions

Software, Inc. to enable the city and county to collect delinquent taxes and other debts

to extend the contract term for five years from November 30, 2025,

for a total term of December 1, 2016 through November 30, 2030,

with one option to renew for an additional five years

and increasing the contract by approximately $2.4 million

for a total amount not to exceed $6.9 million

to commence upon Board of Supervisors and mayoral approval.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

And today we have the Office of the Treasurer and Tax Collector here.

Good morning, Chair Chan, Supervisors, Amanda Freed from the Office of the Treasure and Tax Collector.

Today I'm here to request approval of our amendment to our agreement with Collection Solution Software, or CSS,

which is our core platform for managing the city's delinquent debt collections.

Before I review the contract, I want to provide a brief explanation of our debt collection work,

which is done through our Bureau of Delinquent Revenue, or BDR,

and I'm joined today by my colleague Jeff Schmeichel, the Director of the Bureau of Delinquent Revenue, in case we have any questions.

So BDR serves as the official collection agency for the city and county, and we work on behalf of over 20 city departments.

We believe that delinquent collections are best handled by our city staff,

who bring a commitment to ethics, fairness, and accountability that can't always be guaranteed by private sector debt collectors.

To do that work, our staff relies on a system called Collection Solution Software, or CSS,

which has been in place in our office since 2016.

It currently manages over 670,000 accounts, totaling more than $960 million in outstanding

debts.

The software supports collection of 40 municipal debts for multiple city departments, including

the public hospital, MTA, Public Works, and the PUC.

A key feature of CSS is that it's highly customizable, which allows us to integrate it with over 20 city systems that support so many different types of debts.

And in fiscal year 2425, the platform supported the collection of $146 million.

dollars. This amendment would extend the contract through November 2030 and would

increase the contract by 2.46 million bringing the total to 6.92 million. The

amendment also funds expanded digital engagement tools like text messaging and

ensures continued integration with multiple city systems. That's all. Thank

you.

Item 3 is a resolution that approves an amendment to the Treasurer tax collector contract with

collection solution software.

The amendment extends the agreement for up to 10 years through November 2035 and increases

the contract value to $6.9 million.

This software is used by the Treasurer tax collector's office and other departments to

manage the city's debt collection.

The original agreement was procured in 2016 following a competitive solicitation.

And the basis of the extension is that they're now the only vendor that can maintain the

system.

And so the Office of Contract Administration approved a waiver from the city's procurement

rules that would typically apply in this case to allow an extension of this agreement, which

would now be a 19-year agreement.

The contract requires certain levels of performance in terms of system availability and responsiveness

to city inquiries.

The vendor collection solution software is meeting those requirements, according to the

treasurer tax collector staff.

We show the budget of this contract on page 14 of the report.

You'll see it's roughly $500,000 a year.

About 64% of that is funded by the general fund based on the composition of the debt

that this software manages, and then the next biggest user is MTA

with about 26% of spending.

These are mostly licensing costs.

We do recommend approval of item three.

Thank you.

I mean, I do understand, you know, it went to, I mean, this contract,

if with the five years extension would be a total 19 years,

I am sometimes also in the area of, like, if it doesn't, if it's not broken,

like it doesn't need to be fixed and and it seems like that is where you're going with this

um just kind of curious um though uh what other information you rely on to sort of make this

decision to say hey this is a good vendor let's keep with it um is it comparing with other counties

or comparing with your existing vendors or could you just elaborate a little bit on the record

about how you came to that decision to say the right thing to do?

Sure, yeah.

I mean, I think where we started from with that,

and it's an excellent question,

is really looking at the customization that we had to do

and we would have to do with any software.

Because we collect debt on behalf of so many different departments

who, as you know, each have their own technology systems,

we estimated that it would cost several million dollars in customization

if we were to put this out to bid and bring on a new vendor.

And in this current time, that just didn't seem particularly worthwhile.

We've had really no complaints about the software.

It's met all of our needs as a department and allowed us to change and grow over time.

We are quite active in the space with other counties to sort of understand what other counties are using.

And in fact, Jeff is frequently asked to speak to others around the nation because they really see our move to CSS as kind of a benchmark that now other folks are doing as well.

Great. I mean, look, I, for one, have a lot of hesitation.

And we are having those conversations with our IT to talk about potential like AI and artificial intelligence and like uses of other technology and what would that look like.

So I'm fine if you deem this is suitable, and I'm just kind of curious of what is your benchmark.

But that's good to know.

We are the benchmark, or in partnership with the software company, that we are forming the benchmark for the nation.

So I appreciate that work.

Thank you so much.

I don't see any other name on the roster.

Let's go to public comment on this item.

Yes, we are now opening public comment for this item number three.

If we have any members of the public, I wish to address this committee.

Madam Chair, we have no speakers.

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.

And that motion to forward to the full board with recommendation, Vice Chair Dorsey.

Dorsey, aye.

Member Chen.

Chen, aye.

Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Thank you.

Thank you. And Mr. Clerk, please call item number four.

Item number four is a resolution approving the Third Amendment to the grant agreement between the city,

acting by and through the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing and Catholic Charities for Family Eviction Prevention Collaborative or FEPCO Homelessness Prevention,

extending the term by 30 months from December 31st, 2025, for a total term of July 1st, 2021 through June 30th, 2028,

increasing the agreement amount by approximately $9.5 million

for a total amount not to exceed approximately $19.3 million

and authorizing HSH to enter into any amendments or other modifications to the amendment

that do not materially increase the obligations nor liabilities

or materially decrease the benefits to the city

and are necessary or advisable to effectuate the purposes of the agreement.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

and we have our Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing here.

Good morning, Chair Chan.

Good morning, Supervisors.

Emily Cohen with the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing.

And I'm before you today with a resolution that would authorize our department

to enter into a third amendment to our grant agreement with Catholic Charities

for Family Homelessness Prevention Services.

This agreement was heard and approved by the Homelessness Oversight Commission

in November. The resolution would extend the term by two years and six months for a total term

through June 30th, 2028, which aligns with our calendar for reprocurement of our prevention

portfolio, and would increase the not-to-exceed amount by approximately 8.7 million for a new

new total not to exceed amount of approximately $18.4 million.

This contract would continue funding Catholic charities to provide homelessness prevention

support to families at risk in San Francisco, particularly the financial assistance component

of this funds back rent.

It can fund future rent and move-in assistance for households that are vulnerable to homelessness.

Through providing this type of rental assistance,

homelessness prevention programs can stabilize people in their homes

and really stem the inflow into homelessness as an incredibly cost-efficient use of resources

in terms of preventing the long-term, both traumatizing as well as expensive, experience of homelessness.

Catholic Charities, in addition to providing the financial assistance, would make referrals

to other types of programming, including legal services and support for other households as

needed as part of the program model.

This Catholic Charities program is part of our larger emergency rental assistance program,

or ERAP, and in the last fiscal year, Catholic Charities served nearly 600 households with

move-in assistance, back rent, and future rent, those clients are at high risk of becoming

homeless.

It's hard to necessarily, with prevention, predict exactly which households would fall

into homelessness, but as part of our work, we've really tried to hone in on the households

most likely to fall into homelessness for this type of assistance.

And we can see through the demographics that the population being served by Catholic Charities

really reflects the population that we see fall into homelessness,

including 38% are African American, nearly 90% are extremely low income,

83% are previously homeless, and 24% are families with children.

So this program does not exclusively serve families with children,

but does serve them as well.

And by focusing on the households most likely to become homeless,

we're getting the most solution for our resource

and ensuring that we're keeping our most vulnerable households housed.

And as you can see here, most of the assistance ranges

from between just over $2,000 per household

to just under $4,000 per household, depending on the type.

So again, a far more efficient use

and better, obviously, for the households

to avoid a situation of homelessness.

and after the BLA report I'm happy to take any questions. I do have a non-substantive amendment

that I almost forgot and Supervisor Chan if you'd like me to read into the record. Please.

So the non-substantive amendment which is on file already with the clerk and the chair

on in the short title on page one line two we need to update it to read 18,459,066

The long title, page 1, line 8, update to read $8,672,460 for a total not to exceed amount of $18,459,066.

And in the body of the resolution on page 2, lines 24 and 25, update to read, increasing the maximum expenditure by $8,672,460 for a total not to exceed amount of $18,459,066.

Thank you.

Item 4 is a resolution that approves an amendment to an HSH contract with Catholic Charities.

The amendment extends the agreement through June 2028 and increases the contract value to $18.5 million.

This contract funds Catholic Charities to provide one-time emergency rental assistance.

We summarized the performance on page 19 of the report.

you'll see that Catholic Charities is actually serving about 600 clients per year. That's well

above the 200 that are required in the contract, and they're also dispersing funds within five days

in 92% of cases, which is very close to the contract's objective of 100% of the time.

So the performance is quite good, especially compared to other rental subsidy contracts or

rental assistance contracts. Be sure on page 20 of our report, this contract is about $2.9 million

dollars a year. It's funded by a mix of the general fund and proposition C funds and we

recommend approval of item four. Thank you. I don't see any name on the roster. Let's

go to public comment on this item. Yes, if you have any members of the public

who joined us today who wish to address this committee regarding this item number four,

and that was your opportunity. Good morning. My name is Jose Guadalupe. I am the Deputy,

Associate Deputy Director for Subsidies and Housing Assistance

with Catholic Charities.

So this morning, I would like to speak today

in strong support of the continuing fully funded

FebCo Allocations Funding for Catholic Charities.

Catholic Charities plays a critical role

preventing homelessness for some of the San Francisco

most vulnerable residents to our homelessness prevention

program, housing services, and partnerships,

we work directly with families, seniors, and individuals

who are on the brink of losing their housing.

This funding is essential to ensuring the services remain

stable, accessible, and effective.

With this support, Catholic Charities

has been able to prevent displacement,

provide rapid, equitable interventions,

strengthened a network of community partnerships,

support, long-term subsidies, housing stability.

And every dollar invested in this funding

supports effective, cost-efficient homelessness

prevention, keeping people housed,

and avoiding the far-gray personal financial impacts

of entering the homelessness response system.

Without this funding, many of the households we serve

would face immediate risk of eviction or displacement.

I respectfully urge this committee

to protect and sustain this funding for us,

an amazing partnership with HSH.

And I want to say hi to my family that are watching me.

I'm nervous.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you much for addressing this committee, Jose Guadalupe.

And Madam Chair, that completes our queue.

Seeing no more public comments, public comment is now closed.

I think that with this spending, it does remind me one thing,

that as we know that the five-year projection and the revenue letter,

well, actually, no, the revenue letter comes later,

but I think we're going to have our projection for revenue soon.

I wanted to make sure that HSH is aware that because of the legislation

the legislation that we approved last year,

anything that's above the projection of $370 million,

but capping at $19 million,

is it $19 million? You're right.

$19 million, you know, it does not require,

this is the proxy money,

does not require the supermajority of eight votes.

And so I think that in advance to the budget proposal,

it's very likely either during May or April

that we would have a hearing to,

once we have a better understanding

of the revenue projection about that $19 million,

should there be,

what is the spending strategy looks like.

Thank you.

And so with that, colleagues,

I would like to move this item to,

first amend this item as proposed

by Department of Homelessness

and Supportive Housing, read out loud,

and move the amended version

to full board with recommendation.

And a roll call, please.

And on that motion, to amend this resolution, or to accept the amendments as of offer by the department, and to forward this resolution with a recommendation as amended.

Vice Chair Dorsey.

Aye.

Dorsey, aye.

Member Chen.

Aye.

Chen, aye.

Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

And Mr. Clerk, please call item number C. My apologies.

I know it's item number five.

Yes, item number five.

Yes, item number five.

Pardon, is a resolution authorizing the Director of Property to execute a second amendment to a lease between the city and La Casina, Inc.

related to the lease of city-owned property located at 101 Hyde to extend the lease for an additional five years from January 1, 1, 2027

for a total term of July 9, 2019 through December 31, 2031,

with no change to the annual base rent of $12,000,

make certain modifications to the Second Amendment to the lease,

and take certain actions in furtherance of this resolution,

and to authorize the Director of Property to enter into amendments or modifications to the lease

that do not materially increase the obligations nor liabilities to the City

and are necessary to effectuate the purposes of the lease or this resolution.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

And today we have Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development here.

Good morning, Chair and Supervisors.

My name is Robert Baca.

I'm the Joint Development Director at the Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development.

I'm here today to request approval of the Second Amendment to the lease with La Cocina at 101 Hyde Street.

This action would extend La Cocina's lease through 2031.

This is an interim use strategy that protects a valuable city asset until we can responsibly move forward with housing.

La Cocina is one of San Francisco's most recognized nonprofits supporting women, immigrants, and entrepreneurs of color who are building small food businesses.

They provide affordable commercial kitchen spaces, training, technical assistance, and access to markets.

Their participants are overwhelmingly low-income residents, many of whom face structural barriers that keep them out of the formal economy.

La Cocina's presence in the Tenderloin has real, measurable impacts.

At 101 Hyde, they support 25 small businesses and additional commercial kitchen users.

They've transformed what was once an open-air drug market into a safe and activated corner

through daily cleaning, power washing, graffiti abatement, and their overall presence in the community.

They offer free meeting spaces, discounted community event spaces, and work with the

Tenderloin residents, students, and CBOs.

Why this extension is important to the city?

From a financial standpoint, keeping La Cocina in place is significantly more cost-effective than vacancy.

When city-owned sites slated for affordable housing development sit empty,

MoCD routinely absorbs up to half a million dollars per year in holding costs,

which include security, utilities, maintenance, graffiti abatement, washing sidewalks, and blight mitigation.

Extending this lease avoids the site's sitting vacant and the city absorbing significant

holding costs while allowing a proven community-serving organization like La Cocina to continue to

operate at 101 Hyde.

Importantly, La Cocina brings in philanthropic and private dollars that support community

programming, events, and small business development.

Resources that the city might otherwise have to fund itself.

As plans for future housing at the site, MoCD remains committed to building affordable

housing on the site, but today and in the immediate future, 101 HIDE is not competitive

for limited state funding programs that are essential for new construction in San Francisco.

To affirm this commitment to develop the site in the future, MoCD is proposing to amend

the resolution before you today to add the following.

MoCD remains committed to developing affordable housing on the property and intends to issue

a request for qualifications or equivalent procurement to select a developer or development

team within two years of this resolution.

As you'll see in the recitals, and in order to keep our focus on the site for affordable

housing, MoCD will issue an RFQ for a developer within the next two years.

We are also proposing to amend the resolution before you today to add language that allows

MoCD to give a one-year notice of termination to La Cocina after two years should a housing

program proved to be feasible in the near term.

Why it's important to approve this extension now.

La Cocina needs stability to plan programming,

operate efficiently, and continue activating

this critical tenderloin corner.

Approving the amendment now strengthens

their fundraising prospects and ensures continuity

of programming while we prepare for future housing development.

La Cocina will continue to work with the mayor's office

and the Office of Economic and Workforce Development

to develop new ideas for programming and activating

the space.

Having the lease in place will support that effort.

This extension is a practical solution

to protect the city's investment,

avoids the necessary holding costs,

and keeps strong community partner in place

while we prepare for future housing.

We accept the committee and clerk's amendments.

Thank you, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Item five is a resolution that approves an amendment

to a lease that MOACD has with La Cocina for city-owned property

at 101 Hyde Street.

The amendment extends the lease, which ends December 2026,

a year from now, through December 2031.

There's no other changes to the lease terms.

So under this lease, La Cocina would continue to pay $12,000

a year in rent, including and also pay 5% of any net income

they generate in the prior year on an annual basis.

This site was acquired in 2016 by the city at no cost

and dedicated to affordable housing.

And the continuation of this lease

does allow the site to remain activated.

But because the process for selecting a developer

is ongoing and there's no certain timeline associated

with it, we did recommend that the mayor's office

consider adding this early termination provision

to the lease similar to the old mint lease that came

to a committee a couple of months ago

that would allow the city to retake control of the site

if resources can be devoted to housing at this site.

We do consider approval of this item to be a policy matter

because it's been 10 years

and there's still no plan for this site.

We have other stronger recommendations

for the board to consider in the report

that would be more work, including selling the site.

that would require additional legislation, and then repurposing those funds for affordable housing elsewhere.

Thank you. I am supportive of La Cocina just as an organization and its core mission.

I do hope that not from MOCity when it comes to the aspects of developing the site itself,

but much more from either OEWD and maybe even Human Rights Commission

to really work with La Cocina as a program and an organization for the work that they do.

Separating apart from that, I think that I do appreciate MOCD for your work

providing the amendments before us today

in focusing on the actual housing development.

I think those are two different things.

One is for the site management and housing development of the site.

And I'm glad that at some point that La Cocina and the sites come together.

But it just seemed to be in the latest lease amendment

that brings to the questions of both the future of the actual site,

effort to build that into housing, as well as the city's support for La Cocina as well.

I don't expect you, I don't expect us to solve all those problems. I think it's actually what

the lease amendment speaks in volume. It's that like we need to buy ourselves and La Cocina and

as a city a little bit more time to try to figure out like what to do with the site, but also how

can we continue to support La Cocina as an organization? So I'm in support of that and

also in support of, again, also the amendments. I think two years is a realistic time to help La

Cocina, and I also hope that it's realistic enough for the sites to be developed into housing.

As the PLA has indicated, it's been a decade long for the site, not La Cocina, but for the

sites it's it's hard I think that there should be an active efforts for like

state and federal tax credit however way we can identify it but I know it's been

hard be at one two three four Great Highway and some other sites that we

really like interested in making into affordable housing has been difficult to

getting state tax credit and bond dollars to do so. It's coming ahead. I think at

some point we have to start talking about a regional housing bond and other

funding mechanism. So thank you so much for your work. Thank you. I don't see

other name on the roster. Let's go to public comment on this item. Yes, we're

now opening public comment on this item number five. If we have any members of

the public who wish to address this committee.

Good morning, Supervisors.

I'm Casey Rios, here representing the Tindalorn People's Congress.

And we are asking you respectfully to pause on this extension.

We are very well acquainted with La Cocina's work because they've been in the site at 101

Hyde for a number of years, since 2019, and we in the neighborhood surrounding La Cocina

experienced the promise, and we're unsure if this is in fact the best interim use, especially

for the next five years.

And so what we'd like to advocate for today is perhaps a month-to-month extension for just a quarter or even two months would help

so that we could, as a community, actually weigh in on what is the best interim use for the site.

Five more years at $12,000 a year is a great boon to a nonprofit.

Many of our locally based nonprofits could benefit from that.

We don't have, for example, a community center in our neighborhood like so many other neighborhoods do.

So thank you for your attention to this.

And thank you, Casey Rios, for addressing this committee.

Madam Chair, that completes our queue.

Seeing no more public comments, public comment is now closed.

I don't know if MOCD wants to respond to the public comment, just kind of a little bit in the general plan.

Like, you have already an amendment put forward about within two years you're going to select a developer.

Do you want to kind of elaborate a little bit?

The only comment I would have is I've been in MoCity for about five years.

I manage all the interim uses.

We've had probably about nine or ten interim uses.

Thankfully, a lot of them are moving forward and they're in construction.

But it's just super expensive for us to manage a vacant site.

We've also been very active trying to find, activate sites with different interim uses,

with different nonprofits.

And the startup cost is just too expensive for a lot of these uses.

And one of the great things about working with Locasina is they invested $6 million of their own money at different times for these build-outs, which are super expensive.

You've got to bring buildings up to code.

The city, the San Francisco Foundation, funded about $1 million of that.

MoCD funded about $106,000 just in sidewalk code improvements.

So it's very expensive to activate these interim use sites, let alone operate them.

And, you know, MoCD always has a tradeoff.

Do we leave the site vacant, which, as I've said,

can cost us up to half a million dollars a year?

Or do we work with a proven nonprofit that has had a successful model out there?

Yeah, and I think that's a question also back to La Cocina, right?

Like, it was a food hall, and it was quite successful,

and I know it's no longer operating, opening.

Am I correct?

It's not an open marketplace anymore, no.

It's no longer, right?

No, it's an incubator kitchen space.

I don't know if anybody from La Cocina wants to just...

Yeah, right, because it was opening as a food hall.

Yeah, and there, it was during COVID, the foot traffic.

There wasn't enough foot traffic.

It wasn't sustainable.

So they had to make a pivot.

And so maybe La Cocina can actually explain a little bit about what is your strategy and vision for the next couple years?

Yeah, I'm happy to answer questions.

And we are so committed to being able to really focus on our core mission of business incubation and supporting small businesses and entrepreneurs.

And so when we, you know, had to kind of look at our numbers and make the hard financial decision to close to the public, we did that in the spirit of really wanting to ensure that we would still be able to serve small businesses.

So we do continue to use that space every day.

There are 25 businesses that use it as their production facility.

And then we are able to host events.

And, you know, we want to bring more programming to the space.

We've done night markets.

We've done film nights.

And, you know, if we can continue to get money to do those kinds of events, we want to continue to do them and to, you know, continue to engage with the community.

But primarily, it is really business serving and serving to, you know, the core community of small businesses that we're working with.

And is it functioning as like an incubator kitchen now, a commercial kitchen?

Exactly. Yes.

Thank you.

With that, colleagues, I would like to first amend the motion to amend the legislation as proposed by MOCD and read out loud, and then to move the amended legislation to full board with recommendation and a roll call, please.

Pardon. And on that motion to amend this resolution and accept the language as surrendered the record by the department, hint to forward the resolution to the full board with the recommendation as amended.

Vice Chair Dorsey.

Aye.

Dorsey, aye.

Member Chen.

Chen, aye.

Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, aye. We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Thank you. And Mr. Clerk, please call item number six.

Yes, item number six.

Is an ordinance amending the municipal elections code to increase the filing fee and per word fee for paid ballot arguments?

Madam Chair.

Thank you, and colleagues.

The Department of the Election has requested for this item to continue to the call, Chair,

given the fact that it's a significant increase for the ballot argument fees

and that we should have further discussion likely besides, in addition to a public hearing here.

I think that Department of Election is realizing and recognizing more work needs to be done

or more public conversation needs to be had before we decide on the fee increase.

So with that, let's go to public comment on the continuance of this item to the call, Chair.

Yes, we are opening public comment for this item number six.

If we have any members of the public who wish to speak on the continuance of this item.

Madam Chair, we have no speakers.

Seeing no public comments, public comment is now closed.

Colleagues, I would like to make the motion to continue this item to the call of Chair at a roll call, please.

And on that motion, I continue this ordinance to the call of the Chair.

Vice Chair Dorsey.

Aye.

Dorsey, aye.

Member Chen.

Chen, aye.

Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes. And Mr. Clerk, please call item number seven.

Yes, item number seven is a resolution approving amendment number one to the agreement between the city and county acting by and through the Department of Public Health and Community Forward SF to provide medical respite and sobering center services to extend the term by three years and six months from December 31st, 2025,

for a total term of July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2029,

and to increase the amount by approximately $22.2 million

for a total not to exceed an amount of $32.2 million,

and to authorize DPH to enter into amendments or modifications to the agreement,

and to 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.

Thank you, and today we have Department of Public Health here.

Good morning.

I'm Dara Papo.

I'm the Director of Whole Person Integrated Care

with the Department of Public Health.

Thank you for having us this morning.

Down.

We are here to talk about the Community Forward Medical Respite

and Sobering Center, the contract amount of $22 million,

not to exceed $32,262,830.

I think we talked about the timeline.

July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2029.

The contractor is Community Forward San Francisco.

Community Forward partners with the DPH to provide non-clinical services for our medical

respite program, which has 75 beds serving medically frail clients who need assistance

with chronic health management, medication adherence, and social services.

This allows individuals that are experiencing homelessness but are not sick enough to need to remain in the hospital to be able to get ongoing stabilizing care in the community.

It also now currently includes 10 beds for our managed alcohol program within the 75 beds of medical respite.

The sobering center provides a safe and stable place for people intoxicated on alcohol or opioids to safely sober and receive services outside of the emergency department, jail, or on the streets.

The sobering center has 14 beds.

We respectfully request approval of this item and are here if you have any follow-up questions.

Item 7 is a resolution that approves an amendment to a contract that DPH has with Community Forward.

The amendment extends the agreement through June 2029 and increases the contract value to $32.2 million.

In this agreement, DPH funds Community Forward to provide non-clinical staffing for three programs,

a medical respite and sobering center program and managed alcohol program and then also a small part

of the budget about 120 000 is for transportation to and from soma rise for patients to go to medical

appointments and other necessary appointments as we discussed in our report the managed alcohol

program which was 20 beds and in a different building that building closed and is now being

enrolled into the 75-bed program within the medical respite and sobering center program.

And we show the budget for this contract on page 33 of our report.

This is about a $6 million a year contract, primarily funded by the general fund,

and we recommend approval of item 7.

Thank you.

I know I have yet to request this of DPH before,

and only for the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing.

When we talk about permanent supportive housing sites or shelters,

during their presentation we have requested that when it comes to site-specific agreement,

we would like to see photos of the facility.

It just helps us understand what does the facility look like

and what without arranging for tour

and help us just learn more of the work that you do.

I didn't even know there's a whole person integrated care.

That's amazing.

Thank you so much for your work.

So if there is a possibility to include some photos of the sites,

I would really appreciate it.

Just help us understand what the facility looks like

And if it's possible, you will have time because once this goes out, I'm supportive of it.

I should, this committee decide that this should go out to full board.

You will have some time until January to provide some of those photos if you could create that.

I would really appreciate.

And Vice Chair Dorsey.

Thank you, Chair Chan.

I just wanted to ask, is the provision of services for folks with stimulant use disorder new?

So we have always for, so medical respite has a number of people that have stimulant use disorders.

For alcohol sobering, people come in primarily for alcohol use disorder or recovering from an opioid overdose.

We do know that there is co-occurring use with stimulants.

Individuals that are sort of only coming seeking services for stimulants are usually first directed to summarize.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

And so with that, let's go to public comment on this item.

Yes, we are now opening public comment for this item number seven.

If we have any members of the public who wish to address this committee.

Madam Chair, we have no speakers.

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.

And on the motion to forward to the full board with recommendation, Vice Chair Dorsey.

Dorsey, aye.

Member Chen.

Chen, aye.

Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

And Mr. Clerk, please call item number eight.

Yes, item number eight is a resolution approving amendment number five to the agreement between

the city and county acting by and through the Department of Public Health in Bayview-Hunters

Point Foundation to provide mental health and substance abuse services to extend the

term by 18 months from December 31, 2026 for a total term of July 1, 2018 through June 30,

2028, and to increase the amount by approximately $7.5 million for a total not to exceed amount

of approximately $25.6 million, and to authorize DPH to enter into amendments or modifications

to the agreement that do 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.

Thank you.

And with this one, we have Department of Public Health here.

Good morning, Chair Chan, Vice Chair Dorsey, and Supervisor Chan.

My name is Max Rochan, Director of Systems of Care at Behavioral Health Services.

Joining me today is our CFO Director, Drew Morrell.

I also want to acknowledge the presence of Bayview Hunters Point Foundation's executive leadership,

Mr. James Boken, CEO, and also Mr. Darrell Smith, their COO.

The overview of this contract is amendment number six to extend the contract terms 18 months from December 31st, 2026 through June 30th, 2028.

The contract amendment amount is $7.5 million and not to exceed $25.6 million.

A brief program overview, this contract provides crucial outpatient mental health services in the Bayview area.

anchoring services around adult behavior health services through case management,

individual group therapy, and crisis interventions aiming to serve 225 clients a year.

In addition to that is the children's outpatient services providing similar services

and also education-related mental health services called ERMS

where they provide therapists on-site across various schools,

across San Francisco Unified School Districts,

school district aiming to serve 80 clients per year.

Why we're here today is for this amendment, six months ago we presented this contract

and given the agency has been on controller's office tier three status, we're here to provide

an update on the actions and monitoring we have provided so far since then.

So our department is deeply, deeply invested in the success of the agency and has continued

working closely with them.

and as a result, we have, through our program monitoring and program manager support,

we have successfully worked with the agency to increase the units of services

and meeting the contracts deliverables,

serving the unduplicated clients aimed to be served for this contract.

In addition to that, we have established sustainable documentation and productivity monitoring.

Why this is important, the agency needs to be able to submit their claims

and at the same time, the documentation has to be accurate and tight enough

so that they can keep the units of services and billings earned.

We have provided very close monitoring and also technical assistance.

So technical assistance, including training on documentation practices,

how to use the electronic health monitoring, electronic health record system,

the reporting tools, and also productivity tracking tools.

We have been maintaining regular monitoring meetings with them

to ensure they're meeting these progress towards achieving these deliverables.

in addition is to make sure their referrals are in place.

So we've been working closely with them on that,

as well as strategically placing them across various school sites in the city.

And as a result, they are now reaching 26 schools across school district.

We are affirming that they are meeting and exceeding their contract deliverables

for units of services and unduplicated client counts.

For the financial update, the agency has been on controller's office tier 3, and the funding departments have provided technical assistance and conducted monthly check-ins with the agency as part of the corrective action plan process.

We are proud to announce that as of November 2025, they have reached and satisfied two key items on the corrective action plan.

One is cash flow stabilization, followed by invoicing improvements.

For the cash flow stabilization, the agency has been providing monthly cash flow projections to the city.

FY fiscal year 24-25, they're showing a near break-even result, and 25-26 quarter one showing a surplus.

For the invoicing accuracy, they have been providing the documentations and submittals on a timely basis,

and they're also accurate when the documents are submitted to us.

The citywide fiscal monitoring in August 2025 also found all invoice standards were met.

The agency is still contending with audits delay, so for fiscal year 22-23 and fiscal year 23-24.

These delays are as a result of fiscal year 21-22 audit, staff turnover, and as a result of these delaying subsequent years audits.

We are working closely with the agency to obtain this information, and the agency also on themselves have conducted pre-audit processes to streamline these two years' documentation submitted to the auditors.

We do stand behind Bayview Hunters Point Performance.

They are a vital agency serving the continuum of behavioral health services in San Francisco, in southeast sector of town, and also across San Francisco Unified School Districts.

They have brought on new leadership and have demonstrated dedicating themselves to improve

and address the corrective action items.

They are showing financial improvements year over year, resulting in positive cash flow.

They are meeting and exceeding the contracts deliverables and also in the timely and accuracy

of documentation submittal.

So we do stand behind the performance they have improved over time.

I'm happy to answer any questions you have.

Chair Chen, we do have an amendment to this, and if I may read into this.

Please.

Yeah.

So this is amendment number six to the resolution, not amending number five.

So on page one, line three, we would like to delete number five and replace it with number six.

Thank you.

Item eight is a resolution that approves an amendment to a contract that the Department of Public Health has

with Bayview 100th Point Foundation.

The amendment extends the agreement from December 2026

through June 2028 and increases the contract value

to $25.6 million.

The contract extension would allow DPH to continue

to fund two outpatient programs operated by this provider

in the Bayview, one for adults and one for children.

We discussed the program performance on page 39 of the report.

The most recent data from the Department of Public Health for 2425 shows that both programs

are meeting their client count and level of service delivery, but DPH is working with

the nonprofit to improve documentation of their activities that's necessary for DPH performance

monitoring of this program.

As we discussed on page 40, the Bayview 100's Point has also made significant progress in

resolving findings from the city's financial monitoring of nonprofits, which I think as

you all know, the city has a set of standards for financial condition and governance of

nonprofits that when we looked at this contract in May, there was no documentation provided

to the city monitors as part of the most recent process at that time.

And so the city then initiated a corrective action plan due

to significant findings as part of that review, as well as inaccurate

and late invoices submitted to DPH and other funding departments.

There has been, according to DPH, progress both in terms

of the fiscal monitoring, they've been able to complete a fiscal monitoring cycle now

and they've resolved some of the cash flow and invoicing issues that were a problem back in May.

And so as the DPH representative stated, the only outstanding issue pertaining to the Tier 3 status,

which is just the controller standards, not other issues that the departments may monitor,

are the outstanding audits.

So they're historical financial reporting issues.

in terms of going forward, there's probably less a risk now that they will go belly up the way Baker Places did, right?

Because they've resolved their invoicing and cash flow projection issues.

So I think based on all that, we're recommending approval of the entire proposed extension through June 2028.

By then, DPH will have gone through a procurement process to reprocure all the outpatient programs in their portfolio.

And we do have a recommendation as well to correct the reference in the resolution to the Sixth Amendment, not the Fifth Amendment.

Thank you.

I mean, I think here's – thank you.

Like, whenever Drew shows up, I'm like, okay, we got some issues, but we're problem-solving it, and we're going to move it along.

and if it wasn't because our previous experience I think that in the previous years I would always

say let's I hate to say that but it's to say let's only extend these like every six months

which we have done in the past like Baker's Place and to just really make sure that we understand

the progress is being made but because of learned lessons and the fact I see Drew here then we say

okay, 18 months is usually where we can say if you're in tier three,

typically it will take about a year or a year and a half for any organizations to have their new leadership,

if they already retain new leadership, and to turn it over and just have some structural reform within the organization,

and therefore we can make sure they're stable in providing those services.

So I'm glad that there's an agreement now to just extend this by 18 months.

With that said, I think this is what really for the controllers and for the BLA, and another reason why I say 18 months is fine, but I think we are going to turn back again for the budget process.

I think we need to start asking the city departments that, you know, or the contract side.

And I would say that is definitely for our city departments who receive general fund and public dollars versus the enterprise, which is we can separate the two about contracting.

But contracting dollars, or I should say, how many organizations currently under contract with that particular city department are in the category of two and three?

And out of which, those categories, the dollar amount for those categories and potential expiration date for those contract,

that could we start sinking them into a two-year fiscal year,

and within that is the every six months progress report.

Similar, almost similar, or quarterly,

like very similar to the aspects that we currently have an overtime,

like track that the controller has,

which is really what you would typically do.

But I think I'm adding a layer to,

as we track overtime for city departments,

can we track on a quarterly basis of progress of the contracted dollars that with the partners and organizations are actually in tier two and tier three.

To make sure that the progress is being made and that we flag if they're not doing well, like what is the backup plan for those services.

so that just uh i i think that we're gonna start trying to tighten the screw on that

in the coming fiscal year separate in part we're gonna probably start talking about reimbursement

for some of these services around cal aim and start thinking about that's the third bucket

for all contracts and what is the reimbursement rate actually looks like for these services

thank you I really appreciate the work it's not easy and frankly you know I want to say this about

specifically the bay which usually I don't do but specifically about Bayview Hunters Point Foundation

and the long history that it has serving the community I think this is probably the one of

very few organization that I would say that the city should commit to support and figuring out

ways that, because just the way it started for the community and what can we do to continue to

make sure that it's remained fiscally sound and also providing the deliverables that not just the

city, but really the community that it primarily serves, they deserve that. So thank you for your

work on that and so with that let's just go to I don't see any other name on the

roster let's go to public comment on this item yes we're opening public

comment for this item number eight if you have any members of the public

what should address this committee madam chair we have no speakers I see no

public comments public comment is now closed colleagues I would like to amend

first amend the make the motion to amend as proposed by Department of Public

health correcting this to be the sixth amendment and move the amended I want to

say regrettably I want to move this forward without recommendation just

giving the fact that is still remain as tier 3 but I do think that we will be

urging our colleagues in support of this passage of this amendment so with that

is to make the motion to amend and send this to full board without recommendation

and a roll call, please.

And on that motion,

to accept the clerical amendment

as offered by the department

and to forward the resolution

to the full board

without recommendation as amended.

Vice Chair Dorsey.

Dorsey, aye.

Member Chen.

Chen, aye.

Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Thank you.

And Mr. Clerk,

could you please call

items 9 through 12 together?

9 and 12.

Yeah.

Okay.

because it's all Department of Public Health.

Okay.

And accept and and expand grants.

Yes.

Item numbers 9 and 10 are resolutions retroactively authorizing the Department of Public Health

to accept and expand grants from the California Department of Health Care Services.

Item number 9 is through Blue Cross of California Partnership Plan, Inc., or Anthem,

for participation in the program entitled Housing and Homelessness Incentive Program

in an amount of $626,000 for the period of July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2026.

And item 10 is through San Francisco Health Plan for participation in the program entitled

Housing and Homelessness Incentive Program in the amount of approximately $2.5 million

for the period of January 1, 2025 through November 1, 2026

for a total amount of approximately $7.6 million for the total period of July 1, 2023

through November 1, 2026, and approving the Notice of Award Agreement pursuant to the Charter.

Item number 11 is a resolution retroactively authorizing the Department of Public Health

to accept and expend a grant increase of approximately $2 million from the Centers

for Disease Control and Prevention for participation in the program entitled High Impact

HIV Prevention and Surveillance Programs for Health Departments,

in an amount of approximately $7 million for the period of June 1, 2025 through May 31, 2026,

and a total grant amount of approximately $12.7 million for the period of August 1, 2024 through May 31, 2026,

approving the grant agreement pursuant to the Charter and to authorize 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 agreement or this resolution.

And item number 12 is a resolution also retroactively authorizing DPH to accept and expend a grant

from the National Institutes of Health through Florida State University

for participation in the program entitled Adolescent Medicine Trials Network for HIV AIDS Interventions,

our ATN, Scientific Leadership Center, for an increased amount of approximately $62,000,

for a total amount of approximately $235,000, effective on May 21, 2025,

for a total period of January 25, 2023, through November 30, 2025.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

And I know we have three different presentations for nine and ten together,

one presentation, and then we have 11 and then 12, and all from the Department of Public Health.

If you can say your name and your title and specific division within the Department of

Public Health, I would really appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Chair Chan, Vice Chair

Joycey, and Supervisor Chen. My name is Alex Boyder. I'm an administrative analyst with the

San Francisco Health Network. I'm before you today to present two retroactive grant acceptance

expends, 9 and 10 on the agenda, and they're very closely linked. They are for a Housing and

Homelessness Incentive Program grant, also known as HHIP. The grant program is jointly funded and

administered by the San Francisco Health Plan, known as SFHP, and Blue Cross of California

Partnership, known as Anthem. The first item is a retroactive grant, Accept and Expend, that will

support the Bridge and Neighborhood Services Team Program, now called Street Health Team,

by funding Richmond Area Multiservices, or RAMS, peers. The peers through Street Health Teams will

offer focused and phased interventions to support clients transitioning to ongoing care and services.

Grant total is $626,000. The project period for this grant began July 1, 2024 and goes through

June 30th of 2026.

DPH received notice of the grant on December 10th, 2024, after the predetermined project

start date.

There were some delays due to finalizing the grant agreement, and we brought this item

to the board of supervisors after going through the fiscal approvals process, including a

controller's office review and approval.

The second item is a retroactive grant accepting spend that will support the bridge and neighborhood

Services Team, Best Neighborhood Program, now called the Street Health Team, by funding

Richmond Area Multi-Services, or RAMS-Peers. Additionally, this will help DPH integrate the

Find Help Closed-Loop Referral Platform into our electronic health record system for enhanced

care management and community supports. The grant increase is $2,518,000, and the project period for

this grant began July 1st, 2023 and goes through November 1st, 2026.

DPH has received several grant increases for this grant,

and the first was on February 26th of 2025 for a project start date of January 1st, 2025.

Second grant increase was August 25th, 2025 for a project start date of November 1st, 2025.

DPH brought these two most recent grant increases together as one accepting spend

to the Board of Supervisors after going through the fiscal approval process,

including controller's office review and approval.

We respectfully request approval of these items,

and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Kind of curious, what is the delay for discussion with the grantor?

Yeah.

Sorry, for item number nine, for the Blue Cross of California Partnership.

It was for both nine and ten.

And the grant, again, is joint between SFHP and Anthem.

So once we got the grant award, we had to finish the actual grant agreement,

and that was legal review with the city attorney as well as both health plans.

Once that was completed, there were internal discussions about whether the grant was a grant increase or a separate grant,

and that took a lengthy period of time.

We consulted with the city attorney,

controller's office, as well as the grantor,

and are here before you now.

Understood.

And the conclusion that it's a grant increase.

Correct.

Interesting.

Okay.

Good to know.

Just trying to understand what was the issue.

Great.

And so with that, we can go to the next one.

Thank you.

Presentation.

Thank you.

All right.

Good morning, Chair Chan and Supervisors.

Thank you all for having me today.

My name is Nicole Trainor.

I'm the Budgets, Contracts,

and Program Operations Manager in DPH

for our Community Health Equity and Promotion Branch,

also known as CHEP.

What you have before you today is a request to accept

and expend the Centers of Disease Control grant funding

for HIV prevention.

The grant is also referred to as Integrated HIV Surveillance

and Prevention Programs for Health Departments,

also known as PS240047.

This is a continuation of a grant

that the board recently approved in 2020

and also approved in November of 2024,

and we're always grateful and thankful

for your continuous support.

The grant proposal expands our commitment

to fully integrating surveillance and prevention programs.

It supports strategies that really have contributed

to the dramatic decrease in HIV incidents over the recent years,

and it implements shifts needed to align

with the current epidemiology

and includes a much stronger equity focus.

The total funding among, for our five-year grant,

it was $5.7 million for the first grant year,

and then it's $7 million annually for all subsequent grant terms.

The funding that we receive from CDC is broken down

into three core sections that really support our internal

cross-branch staffing and program operations infrastructure.

That includes our HIV core prevention efforts.

They receive $3.9 million of the grant annual funds.

Our surveillance ARCHES branch receives $742,000 annually

and our Ending the HIV Epidemic Efforts,

which is 2.3 million of the grant.

Overall, this grant is, remains steady to ensure

that we can really continue to address the current HIV,

as well as the STI syndemics here in San Francisco.

CHEP utilizes this fund in partnership

with our cross internal branches.

The funding supports our critical infrastructure,

our DPH staffing and coordinating program planning

and program implementation, community engagement efforts,

as well as technical assistance support.

We also fund jail health services at 850 Bryant

and also San Francisco City Clinic to implement integrated HIV,

STI, and Hep C testing along with other innovative HIV

prevention programs.

These direct services also, they really dovetail nicely

with the grant and is supported through the generosity

of San Francisco's general fund dollars

that support other HIV prevention programs,

as well as our seven health access points

and community-based testing partners.

We are here seeking retroactive authorization

to approve this grant, accept and expend.

DPH budgeted the initial award amount of $5 million

through the annual appropriations ordinance,

file number 240-595 for this grant.

DPH also received a grant increase of $648,000 for the period of August 1st, 2024, through May 31st of 2025.

This was also approved by the board, file number 240987.

DPH received the notice of the grant increase on September 25th of 2025 for the project period of June 1st, 2025 to May 31st, 2026.

DPH, we brought this item to the board after going

through our fiscal approval process

and also including the Comptroller's Office review

and approval.

And so to conclude, we would like to respectfully ask

for retroactive approval for the grant accept and expend,

and we really thank you for your ongoing support

with these continued efforts for HIV prevention.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We're ready to have the next one.

Okay, great.

Good morning, Chair Chan and supervisors.

My name is Susan Buckbinder.

I'm director of Bridge HIV, which is an HIV

and STI prevention research unit housed in the Public,

in the Population Health Division

of the San Francisco Department of Public Health.

I am going to be overviewing the grant

from the Adolescent Medicine Trials Network

for HIV AIDS Intervention Scientific Leadership Center.

It's a grant increase of about approximately $62,000 for a total amount of $235,000.

The timeline is January 25th of 2023 to November 30th of 2025.

The funder is the National Institutes of Health through Florida State University.

And basically what it's doing is funding BridgeHIV to run an HIV and STI prevention clinical trials

trials through the adolescent trials network housed at the San Francisco

Department of Public Health.

Sorry.

And so we're seeking retroactive authorization to approve this grant,

accept and expend.

The project period for the grant increases May 21st, 2025 through November 30th

of 2025.

The start date was predetermined by the grantor.

San Francisco Department of Public Health received notice of this grant

increase on September 6th 2025 after the project start date and we brought this

through the fiscal approvals process including the controller's office for

review and approval before bringing it here we respectfully request retroactive

approval of this item and thank you so much for your support thank you I don't

see any name on the roster and I do not have additional question thank you so

much for your work and with that let's go to public comments on all these items

Yes, right now opening public comment for these item numbers 9 through 12

If we have any members of the public who wish to address this committee

Madam chair, we have no speakers seeing no public comments public comment is now closed colleagues

I would like to move items 9 through 12 to full board with

recommendation and a roll call please and on that motion to forward

The resolutions and item numbers 9 through 12 to the full board with the recommendation

Vice Chair Dorsey?

Aye.

Dorsey, aye.

Member Chen?

Chen, aye.

Chair Chan?

Aye.

Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Mr. Clerk, please call items 13 and 14 together.

Yes.

Item number 13 is an ordinance amending the planning code and the administrative code

by superseding certain provisions of ordinance number 149-16 to increase the surcharges on

certain planning department fees to compensate the city for appeals of planning department actions

to the board of supervisors, affirming the planning department's determination under the California

Environmental Quality Act, and making findings of consistency with the general plan and the eight

priority policies of the planning code. And item number 14 is a hearing to consider the review and

approval of the budget guidelines for the board of supervisors and clerk of the board's annual

budget for fiscal year 2026 to 2027 and 2027 to 2028. Madam Chair. Thank you. Madam Clark,

it's so good to see you and the floor is yours. Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the committee,

Angela Calvillo, clerk of the board, and I'm here today with Edward de Assis. Dr. Assis manages our

department's budget meticulously and shares every line item and invoice with me. I appreciate that,

Edward, thank you.

We are here today with the board's budget for fiscal year 26, 27, and fiscal year 27 and 28.

I'd just like to start with the board's rules of order.

Rule 6.8 starts 60 days prior to submission of the department's proposed fiscal year budget for the mayor's phase.

the board schedules this public hearing for discussion of the board's balancing guidelines

for the clerk to implement in preparation of the fiscal year budget for the board of supervisors

and the office of the clerk of the board and the divisions underneath the board of supervisors.

Further, board rule 6.9 requires the clerk to propose a timeline for additional public hearings.

We will return to the committee in January with the proposed budget based on today's guideline instruction.

Again, we will appear before you in February for submittal to the mayor's phase.

And then finally, the department's budget conversation will continue in June during the board's two-month budget phase

when the greater AAO and ASO is before this committee.

For clarity, the board has placed stringent budget practices around the responsibility of the formation of its own budget.

In comparison, the board takes four months to review its own budget to ensure that even during the high-flying boom cycles in the city,

that the board members are precisely placing funds in their department.

And you will be happy to point out those areas that are tied to charter, mandate, state law, or administrative code.

For today's hearing, we have six slides.

We're going to briefly highlight the department's current projects.

We're going to provide the department's requests, and I put those quotes around the requests because they're not true requests.

but we will learn if there are additional committee initiatives not already captured

and the guidelines certainly,

and will continue to be available for all offices if there are questions.

Just moving on to slide two,

I stated that our work is mandated from the various requirements.

The overwhelming majority of our budget does tie directly to public service.

A quick glance, let's turn your attention to the pivot table.

You'll see that approximately half of the city's budget,

half of the department's budget is tied to the salary and benefits

for the employees in the department.

Those are MOU negotiated and approved.

And then you will see Assessment Appeals Board has a budget of $1.5 million,

and we'll talk about that in just a moment.

This committee gave us three positions last year.

Our friend, Assessor Torres, has indicated that the onslaught of the economic downturn

and the appeals that are forthcoming will last until 2030.

So we have requested the committee to provide us those three positions at least until 2030.

And we'll talk about that as one of our requests.

I'll draw your attention to the full-time employees, of which we have 97.

We also have positions in this department which are 67 appointed commissioners for the AAB, the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force, the Youth Commission, the LAFCO, and the newly created Downtown Revitalization District Board.

So just to point out that pivot table, $20 million of the department's budget again belongs to MOU salary and benefits.

additionally to our memberships in the California State Association of Counties,

the National Association of Counties, NACO, and the National League of Cities, which totals $205,000.

You can see on the table there is 31% of the department's budget,

which belongs to the Office of the Clerk of the Board.

I appreciate my staff.

Always efficiently, no matter what the requirement is, whether it's a state law or a local law,

They are doing more with less, providing administrative and operational support and IT support to the district offices

and training and supporting free of charge, I might add, to all of the city departments,

moving their legislative items through the legislative process

and the training that we provide to all of the liaisons, no matter what they are,

whether they're comms or legislative government affairs.

you'll see the budget and legislative analyst services contract represents 13% of the department's budget.

The remaining 11% of the budget mainly pays for salary and fringe benefits for the employees at the AAB,

the Youth Commission, Sunshine, LAFCO, and maintenance of the assessment appeals system.

The pivot table shows the largest cost share at 73% of the total budget.

that is the DHR MOUs.

The largest next category is 23% or $6.2 million

for budget and legislative analyst services contract at 3.4.

Materials and supplies, it's remained the same year to year.

And services requested from other city departments are approximately 561,000.

So I'll turn to page three, a snapshot of just a couple of projects that we're working on.

There are many, but I will just highlight that we are working to refresh the Board of Supervisors network.

We are working really well with Michael Maxman, the city's chief information security officer.

He's assisting us greatly in refreshing our IT network.

I also appreciate City Administrator Carmen Chu and Katie Petrucione for their assistance.

The new legislative management system, we are expecting to go live with Phase 1 come the spring,

maybe February, if not sooner, and processing the continuing onslaught of the assessment appeals applications

and saving for the new assessment appeals filing system.

and maintenance of this beautiful legislative chamber.

We have the great assistance of City Administrator Carmen Chu

and the real estate director to help us refurbish the chairs that you are sitting on

and sooner rather than later these curtains that are in danger of one falling back there.

So we've cordoned it off so that the public don't get too close to it.

I will move on to slide four.

Earlier I put our budget requests in quotes, but what's before you on slide four, items one through six, these are the same requests from last June.

There is no change.

Last year this committee approved our budget for one year to be prudent so you could have this conversation again.

Whether you are interested in paying for $10,000 for the new legislative expense accounts.

for the three senior clerks in the Assessment Appeals Board to assist us with that onslaught

to determine if the funding to increase the stipends of our amazing Assessment Appeals Board members

who are doing that work, churning out work, even on weekends,

the permanent reversal of the cuts to salary and fringe benefits that was removed from our budget,

to defend our request there.

We have, as you know, long-time city employees in this department

who are not at the beginning steps,

and they are, some of them, terming out at the beginning of 2027,

and we will have to pay the vacation payouts.

So the cut in attrition savings will not allow us to do that.

We don't want to blow our salary line.

The update to number five, that's the COLA increase for the budget and legislative analyst services contract,

and the placeholder for the LAFCO minimum statutory requirement funds.

The item seven, this is not a general fund request,

but it is a fund that when city departments, including ours, are creating official advertising, 10% goes to an outreach fund.

There is a little bit more money in that fund because departments are really working hard to target the outreach fund with that 10%.

It's not getting absorbed into the general fund.

And so because of that savings, we wanted to just bring this $27,000 to the committee so that we can appropriate that fund into an appropriate fund where it is supposed to go.

And I will just briefly mention item 13, a companion item, which is the ordinance to increase the Board of Supervisors' Appeals surcharge.

This has been called with our department's budget.

this ordinance will double the surcharge for appeals to the Board of Supervisors from 120 to 240

it was last updated in 2016 this surcharge is being increased to reflect the higher value of

development projects in San Francisco and to account for CPI since 2016 this fee increase

was approved by the Planning Commission excuse me on July 17th 2025 and I believe our deputy city

attorney has a finding that he would like to add to the ordinance which we

are absolutely fine with adding that finding I think it's on page two I don't

have the document in front of me might be line 12 or something like that which

just adds the finding so then with your approval of the amendment to or item 13

and then your instructions on how to handle items one through six.

What we can do is we can propose the budget, bring that to all the offices,

and then return to you in January with having had conversations with all of the offices,

and we can further the conversation on these items at that time.

Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Clark.

I think that this is a note for the mayor's office.

Every year, it feels like we did.

Maybe that's not an accurate recollection,

but I feel like we always end up having some back and forth

a little about the COLA cost of living adjustments.

And I just want to stand firm that we will be consistent,

or I will be supportive and be consistent

about the cost of living adjustments as a line item.

and not for negotiation to be eliminated as a reduction.

We understand the mayor is going to have their budget instruction in the coming weeks

or maybe this week or next, so we look forward to it.

And so we will have those discussions.

We need to have those discussions, what that actually looks like as well from the mayor's office.

and we look forward to incorporate that instruction into your conversation with members throughout,

including with board president.

But while we have you here, we should go to item 13,

and maybe should I read out loud the amendments,

or maybe should we have our deputy city attorney, Brad Rossi, help us?

Good morning, Supervisors, Deputy City Attorney Brad Rossi.

Just a minor oversight with this ordinance, it needed to make the Planning Code Section 302 findings for public necessity, convenience, and welfare, and that has been added to the long title as well as on page 2, subsection C, affirming those findings that the Planning Commission made.

Great. Thank you.

Thank you for your work.

We always appreciate it.

We understand, you know, I also, not as of now, but maybe now, help us understand, you know, last year we have authorized you to start collecting potentially license fee for our legislature system.

How is that going?

Madam Chair, thank you for asking that question.

We have had overwhelming phone calls from various, well, offices in the city and county,

but also many throughout the state of California and other agencies who are excited about a basic agenda management system,

file management system, and minutes production.

So we are obviously wanting to make sure that we're tending to the city departments first,

but there are counties that are lining up to, you know,

they're beginning to have those conversations with their local governments.

And so my assumption then when you return,

we will have somewhat of a projection of revenue?

Yes, and I'm happy to come to this committee to present what our estimations would be

and what then the actuals are once we capture them.

But that probably won't be for another year or so

because we want to work directly with our city departments first.

Understood.

And so in our formal budget proposal in June,

we will not be seeing the projection, or we will?

We don't have the projection at this point.

No problem.

Thank you.

I just wanted to understand.

Thank you.

I don't see any other name on the roster.

Let's go to public comment on those two items.

Yes, we are now opening public comment for both the ordinance

in item number 13 and the hearing in item number 14.

if we have any members who wish to address this committee.

Ready?

Yes.

Hey, good afternoon.

Hope you're all doing well or good morning.

Hey, so as you as professional elected representatives and your staff,

you really deserve the opportunity and the ability

to understand different scenarios that you'll be faced with.

When you ask questions of professional staff regarding the budget,

they're going to someone in a cubicle who's got a spreadsheet

who may take them a week to find the answer, and then they give it to you,

and then the next week they go, the number was wrong, which is difficult, right,

because that impacts real residents, it impacts personnel.

And the city of San Francisco does not have technology that's readily available

called modeling what-if scenarios.

The staff is using spreadsheets, which is from the 1990s.

I would ask you and your staff to investigate with the comptroller's office

to look at what other government entities are doing from the federal level to the state level,

as well as corporations that are utilizing this.

Because then this would allow you and or your staff to go,

huh, if the assessment appeals don't turn out for the city, what's that impact?

How does that impact my police department, my FTEs, and any other given entity?

If the federal government is creating uncertainty from a policy change or a funding change,

what's that impact?

And you should know six months or a year ahead of time rather than last minute.

Because unfortunately in government, sometimes you're handed something that's really extremely politically painful.

Whereas if you had input earlier in the process, you could make it a much more viable option.

But as it is today, you don't have that capability within a city that should be pretty sophisticated in the center of technology, but you're still using 1990s spreadsheets.

I'm happy to work with any of your staff.

My telephone number is 408-905-6384.

And I worked in what you did for 10 years overseeing government and finance at a city of a million people.

Thank you.

Thank you much for your comments.

If we have any other members of the public who wish to address this committee regarding the surcharge ordinance or this department's budget, that was your opportunity.

Madam Chair, that completes our queue.

Thank you. Seeing no more public comments, public comment is now closed.

Thank you. And let's see, my apologies.

If I understand this correctly, we are going to move these two items to full board with recommend.

And like, I mean, like I'm trying to understand what are we doing with item number.

Madam Chair, we can we could refer the ordinance to the full board if if we choose.

Sorry. Yes.

To amend the ordinance in item number 13.

and there was an amendment offered if the committee wishes to accept that,

then we could refer that to the full board.

Understood.

So let me do this one by one.

Colleagues, I would like to amend item 13 as recommended by the city attorney

and move the amended item to full board with recommendation and a roll call on item 13.

And on that motion to amend the ordinance as so offered by the, or as read into the record by the city attorney,

and to forward that ordinance to the full board with recommendation as amended.

Vice Chair Dorsey.

Aye.

Dorsey, aye.

Member Chen.

Aye.

Chen, aye.

Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

And for item 14, colleagues, I would like to make the motion to authorize the clerk to submit this proposed budget and that this hearing be heard and filed.

A roll call, please.

And on that motion, that we authorize the clerk of the board to submit the department's proposed budget as presented to the mayor's budget office and the office of the controller, and that this hearing be heard and filed.

Vice Chair Dorsey.

Aye.

Dorsey, aye.

Member Chen.

Aye.

Chen, aye.

Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

And Mr. Clerk, do we have any other business before us today?

Madam Chair, that completes our regular business for the year.

That indeed does.

And when is our next budget committee hearing?

Have we scheduled?

I believe we are scheduled for January 7th under regular schedule.

Thank you.

And with that, the meeting is adjourned.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.