Good morning.

The meeting will come to order.

Welcome to the March 25th 2026 meeting of the Budget and Finance Committee.

I'm Supervisor Connie Chan, Chair of the Committee.

I'm joined by Vice Chair Supervisor Matt Dorsey and Member Supervisor Danny Souter.

Our clerk, it's Brent Haliba.

I would like to thank Jamie Averchery from SFGAU TV for broadcasting this meeting.

Mr.

Clark, do you have any announcement?

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Just a friendly reminder to those in attendance.

So 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 in 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 trade 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 finance committee clerk at B R E N T dot J A L I P A 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 to our office in City Hall at one Dr.

Carlton be good place.

Room 244, San Francisco, California.

94102.

And finally, due to our spring legislative recess, items acted upon today are expected to appear on the Board of Supervisors agenda of April 7th, unless otherwise stated.

Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr.

Clerk.

And before we call item number one, I'm going to like to remind everyone that we have budget and legislative analysts report from items one through seven on today's agenda.

And for those items, we will have the department presentation first, followed by the budget and legislative analyst report.

Then we will take questions and then go to public common.

So with that, Mr.

Clerk, please call item number one.

Yes, item number one is a resolution approving modification number three to a contract with Hallmark Aviation Services LP for Airport Information and Guest Assistance Services to extend the term for one year from June 30th, 2026 for a total term of July 1st, 2024 through June 30th, 2027, and to increase the contract amount by approximately 10.4 million for a new contract amount not to exceed approximately 30.4 million pursuant to the charter.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

And today we have SFO here.

Good morning, Deanna Volek with SFO.

The proposed resolution would approve the third modification to an existing contract between the airport and Hallmark to exercise the second of three one-year options to extend the contract from July 1st, 2024 through June 30th, 2027, and increase the contract not to exceed amount by 10.4 million for airport information and guest services.

The original contract was the result of a competitive request for proposals process.

This modification will allow Hallmark and its LBE subcontractor Polaris to continue to perform essential guest service work at SFO, such as line management in the international arrivals area, wayfinding and information desk operations.

In addition, this modification expands staffing to support guest navigation during our major construction projects, including Terminal 3 West Modernization, and accommodate in anticipated increases in passenger traffic.

In 2025, staff assisted 2.7 million guests at 16 information desks.

The contract employs individuals with diverse backgrounds, nearly all being bilingual at a minimum, and a reflection of San Francisco's welcoming spirit.

The BLA has recommended approval, and I am here with my colleague from guest services to answer any questions.

Christina Malamut from the Budget and Legislative Analysts Office.

The proposed resolution would approve an amendment to an existing contract between the airport and Hallmark Aviation Services to extend the term by one year through June 2027 and increase the not-to-exceed amount by approximately 10.4 million for a new total of approximately 30.4 million.

Staffs the airport information desks.

Exhibit one on page five of our report shows the basis of the not to exceed amount.

The annual budget in the extension year is 10.4 million.

That reflects the increases in staffing.

It also reflects increases in the hourly rates and benefits for staff.

It's funded by airport operating revenues, and we recommend approval of item one.

Thank you.

And I'm just out of curiosity and try to understand the calculation of contingency budget for the 22.6%.

And I'm just kind of curious how how does the 26 22 point six percent come about?

Sure.

Um I'd like to call my colleague Christopher Birch, who can explain as the director of guest services.

Thank you.

Good morning, uh Supervisors Chris Burch, Director of Guest Experience, and I oversee the contract.

Could you repeat the question?

Sorry.

Uh just uh it seems to uh if I understand it correctly, and maybe I'm I am inaccurate in my understandings, and please correct me.

Um it seems like there is a uh for this dollar amount that you're coming for uh a new contract for this amendment that includes a 22.6 percent of contingency uh while it is funded by the airport.

I'm just kind of curious how this the calculation of 22.6 percent of contingency uh come about.

So that's our uh that's our projection for a number of scope elements that we think could be activated during the contract year.

Um we have a brand new airport integrated operations center uh that's just launched, and we are anticipating that they will begin to rely on a an increased uh agent presence in the terminal to address things that we just are now finding out about our operation because we're in this integrated uh situation.

Um we uh continue to have additional construction activity this morning.

Uh we have a new routing in between terminal uh three and the international turmoil that requires additional uh staffing to address uh elevator issues.

Um we construction support, frankly, in the AIOC are the two main drivers of that.

And they're just a little bit unknown, so we wanted to make sure um that we had a projection of costs that we felt good about and that um when these increases occur, if they do occur during the contract year, that we'd be able to accommodate them.

So um if I I'm paraphrasing of I'm trying to understand what you just explained, meaning that the 22.6 percent of contingency is actually a calculation of potential uh additional staffing that is necessary during the duration of this contract, which is about one year term.

Right.

Thank you.

Absolutely.

Uh I don't see any additional questions.

Uh I don't have additional questions.

I don't need seeing name on the roster, and let's go to public comment on this item.

Thank you.

Yes, we're opening public comment for this item number one.

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

Madam Chair, we have no speakers.

See no public comments.

Public comment is now closed.

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

And on that motion that we refer this resolution to the full board with a recommendation.

Vice Chair Dorsey.

Dorsey, aye, member Sauter.

Solder, I chair Chan.

I.

Chair and I.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Um Mr.

Clerk, please call item number two.

Item number two is a resolution authorizing the office of the assessor recorder to execute amendment number two to a contract with SAPient Corporation for the implementation and maintenance of a property assessment system replacement project, increasing the contract by approximately 6.7 million for a new total not to exceed amount of approximately 33.9 million, and extending the contract duration from nine years and two months to 13 years and eight months for a total term of November 1st, 2018 through June 30th, 2032.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

And today we have the assessor recorder's office here.

Good morning, Chairtian members of the committee.

Uh, my name is Simone Jacques.

I'm the deputy assessor of finance and administration.

Uh the resolution before you authorizes our office to amend our contract with Publicus Sapient to continue operations and maintenance of the system for five years, and that's from 2728 through 3132.

Uh next slide, please.

Um before the board uh of supervisors and this committee many times over the past 10 years.

Um and our project was part of a larger system uh replacement effort and a partnership with the treasurer and tax collector and controller in our office to replace systems that had been in place for decades.

Uh these aging systems managed the assessment, the billing, collection, and apportionment of around $4 billion at the time uh in property tax revenue, um, and were significantly past their useful lives.

Through the property assessment and tax system project, the treasurer and controller replaced their tax property tax system in 2020.

Our property assessment system, which we call SMART, went live through a phased approach.

Phase one was completed in 2021.

Phase two finally went live last fall after some significant delays, which we came to you about three years ago with our first contract amendment on.

Next slide, please, Emily.

Our staff are using it and it's open to the public.

And the ongoing maintenance costs are contemplated in our baseline budget for the next two fiscal years, which will be back before you, as you know.

Next slide, please, Emily.

In terms of the amendment, I I touched on this, but it increases the contract not to exceed amount by 6.7 million solely to pay for the ongoing maintenance of the system with the existing vendor.

We're exercising our only extension option and will not have additional extensions beyond this amendment.

Therefore, uh we're okay to accept what you'll find in the budget and legislative analysts recommendation, which is to make the extension language clear in this amendment.

We're happy to do that.

Concurrent with the amendment, we are also going to be developing a plan to upskill our own staff so that we can properly maintain the system in-house.

So just want to conclude by thanking the board of supervisors and the mayor for supporting this project and helping to bring us into the modern technology age.

I know that the assessor wishes he could be here to thank you in person.

Um, but we are we are very happy to have a system in production.

So thank you for considering the item.

I'm happy to take your questions at this time.

Thank you.

The proposed resolution would approve an amendment to an existing contract between the Office of the Assessor Recorder and Sapient Corporation for ongoing support and maintenance of the assessor's property assessment system called SMART to extend the term by about four and a half years through June 2032 and increase and not to exceed amount by about 6.8 million for a new total of 33.9 million.

Um SAPIN is replacing the assessor's property assessment system.

The system went live in September of 2025 and is transitioning to ongoing maintenance and support.

As the Office of the Assessor mentioned, the project has been delayed by approximately four years since the original timeline.

Since the Board of Supervisors last approved amendment one, implementation costs have increased by 16.6 million, largely due to vendor caused delays.

In recognition of that failure, the vendor is contributing or absorbing 15.3 million of those costs, and the city is funding 1.3 million of those costs.

The assessor intends to transition system support in-house in the future, but currently doesn't have staff capacity to support the system.

Exhibit one on page 10 of our report shows the basis of the not to exceed amount.

The $6.8 million dollar increase includes an additional $1.3 million for implementation, as well as annual maintenance costs of about $1.2 million.

The contract is funded by the general fund, and we recommend approval of item two.

Thank you.

You know, this was 2023 when it had its first amendment sponsored by then board president or supervisor Aaron Peskin.

Came before us at that time.

It was for a policy matter for the board, and clearly the board agreed uh to continue even though it was clearly uh fairly significant delay because it was supposed to schedule to go lie on May 2021.

Um and then it didn't happen until February 2024.

Then it was delayed to 2024, but it sounds like there was actually further delay even from February 2024 when it was first approved in 2023.

So what we have agreed or approved uh in 2023 turns out to be still like delay from the time that it was approved in 2023.

And now it you the contractor uh, you know, through through the assessor return to us and say, well, um let's uh have additional dollars.

Uh but meanwhile, because of these years of delay, 2021, so five years delay, um, that we now will say we we are contributing 15 million dollars roughly, right, uh, of staffing time.

How we understand though having a better records of that dollars that is show from the contractor, like that dollar amount.

How did it come about?

How me better understand um what that actually means uh for the city.

Um that uh negotiation happened uh between sort of when we found uh a significant failure in the design of the system, which was around August of 2023.

So it was shortly after we came to you with the amendment.

We stopped the project at that time.

Uh we were very close to not continuing with the vendor.

Um we negotiated between sort of that time frame and January on what it would cost to get the project to completion.

Uh the vendor provided uh their uh negotiating um proposal, which was to split the cost half and half, and that was their $16 million uh proposal.

We reviewed uh you know that against the amendment that what we'd negotiated in amendment one.

Um and the costs uh seemed similar.

Um and instead of splitting the cost with the vendor half and half, we took about eight percent of that responsibility.

They took the remaining 92, and that's where sort of that split came from.

Uh did that answer your question, Chair Chan?

Uh sure.

And uh well, uh overall, like uh you did.

How me better understand again um that so what happened here is uh if I understand correctly, this is mainly uh this $15 million that in discussion here is really a discussion about staffing time.

It's yeah, it's the vendor's time to continue the project beyond sort of when the the system failed uh to September essentially 2025 when we just went live.

So it's around two years of cost um on both sides.

Uh we had to continue our staff, um, and they did as well.

So they also um augmented their project team.

We had a I'll just say a B team on the project before.

Um they uh brought in a new project management team as well as augmented their testing on the system.

So there were some significant investments on their side um that that $15 million is paid for.

I mean, it's they were spending um, you know, about $750 to a million dollars per month on the project.

So a two-year time frame, you know, is uh is a long time when the project was supposed to originally go live in three years.

So are any of these records of staffing included of what we're seeing on the legislative file today?

I I'm trying to, my apologies.

I I I will I I didn't get a chance to really comb through your agreements um that I'm looking at right now, and uh, but my assumption is is which is like 989 pages long.

Um but I am trying to understand are there actually staffing that is through the um what you just described for two years.

Are there staffing sort of invoices that are included uh with this?

Uh the invoices don't detail that level um of information.

Um we do have sort of cost estimates from their team, which show sort of the cost of their 85 member uh team from Zapient, um, as well as uh a cost breakdown of the team that's proposed under this amendment.

It's about 10 people, and that's what the one point one to sort of 1.3 in the out years cost is is paying for.

Undership.

In that case, we would love to have those information on the legislative file.

Great.

Just um I I think again today I'm in support of this.

Let's move forward with this.

Let's get this done.

Um, you know, because we're here now.

We've been entangled for since 2019.

Um and it it is time for us to wrap it up.

Um but I do think that I would like to have some concrete information to be included in this agreement and in this uh approval of this amendment so that we can actually see the accounting for um the staffing uh for the very least and try try to help us understand the staffing level uh indicated.

I I am glad that you did push back um on this conversation with them that you know showing I don't know how you come up with the eight percents on the on the city's time and 92 percent uh uh of their of their time that they should bear the costs for.

If you want to walk us through I'm I'm happy to hear like how do you negotiate that?

But um, you know, it's been it's been uh it's been a while, so I I appreciate that.

I see that.

Supervisor Souter.

Thank you.

Uh I was gonna ask about the you know, with this delay, what what sort of accountability SAPIN is taking?

But it sounds like from the BLA they're um they're gonna bear the brunt of most of this cost, which it um which should be the case.

Um a few questions.

How is this delay impacting the end user, be it a resident right now?

Like what are we losing out on because of this delay in their experience?

Uh great question, thank you.

Um we uh the end user was not did not lose out on anything because the system really provided new functionality that did not exist uh previously.

We did have a dark time uh between around June and go live where we weren't able to process items.

This was last year before our go live.

Um and so there was some impact to you know being able to do our normal business at that time.

We've gotten over that and and work has begun in the system.

Um and so there really was no impact to taxpayers of the delay itself uh in terms of their access to the system.

Um the new functionality that they're able to use is you know a hundred times better than what what existed previously.

So it's really an enhancement to to taxpayers.

Okay.

And then again, long delay, long period.

Um I guess the question is uh how do you still have confidence in this consultant?

Uh and along the the journey along this long journey, have you I mean, did you start an effort to look at alternative providers at some at some point during the process?

Uh well, our confidence uh has improved.

As I mentioned, you know, when we noticed this failure, our confidence was zero.

We were ready to issue a notice of default.

We were able to negotiate that 8% because a system had not been built, and they you know didn't follow through on their commitment on our contract.

And we believe we had a very strong negotiating position to say we're not going to pay for half of this cost.

This is on you uh vendor.

Um in terms of um sort of why we uh want to move forward, uh there is a lot, you know, this is a very large complex system.

Prop 13 is not easy to implement systematically in terms of assessment and valuation and sort of understanding the rules and in which scenarios they apply.

Uh we simply do not have the capacity or the skill set in-house to be able to main this maintain this system.

Um we aren't certain that another vendor would be able to do it either.

This was really custom built, which was not anticipated at the beginning.

Uh it was sort of supposed to use inherent functionality.

Um, and it was found that that really could not be done and allow us to manage our systems efficiently.

Um so we have not done that search uh to see if other vendors, you know, there is a very limited vendor market for these types of systems.

Um, even 10 years ago when we conducted the RFP, there were very few off-the-shelf systems.

Um and so, you know, we have not done a new market scan.

It is, you know, a decade later and it's possible.

Um, but our priority is really trying to find staff uh and upskill our own staff so that we can maintain the system.

We know our process.

And as long as we have the technical uh capability in-house, we believe we can I believe we can do that without relying heavily on a vendor, and that is really sort of where I think we need to be headed.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Um, and the item will be uh appearing actually a week after next week where we'll be on legislative recess, and I'm looking to our to Mr.

Clerk to help remind me again uh if we pass this, when would the item appear at full board?

Uh that would be April 7th, Madam Chair.

April, thank you so much.

And April 2nd.

So uh between now and till April 2nd when we does come back to full board, I I do hope that we can see a breakdown uh or whatever information that you can provide in terms of staffing for the over two periods of two years of period of time that or somewhat of a breakdown of that 15 million and and whether it's staffing or is it equipment?

I'm just making assumption, but to help us understand the contribution of of from sapiens.

Um I think ultimately is that I do not hope to see this contract um before us again.

Um because I think if we were to, I think it will be a very different conversation.

Thank you, Chair Chan.

We're happy to provide that information, and I do not want to bring this contract back to this board.

Thank you.

Uh and with that, let's go to public comment on this item.

Yes, if we have any members of the public who joined us today who wish to address this committee regarding this item number two, that was your opportunity.

Madam Chair, we have no speakers.

Seeing no public comment, public comment is now closed.

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

And on that motion, will we refer this resolution to the full board with a recommendation?

Vice Chair Dorsey.

Dorsey, uh, member Sauter.

Solder, aye, Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Thank you, Supervisor.

Thank you.

And Mr.

Clerk, please call item number three.

Item number three is a resolution retroactively authorizing a contract between the city and county, hacking by and through the Human Services Agency and the San Francisco Marin Food Bank for the provision of the CalFresh Stopgap Emergency Gift Card Initiative for a term of two months from October 30th, 2025 through December 31st, 2025, for a total not to exceed amount of 9.1 million, and retroactively approving amendment number one, adding repayment instructions as well as revised repayment and reporting.

Effective January 30th, 2026.

Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr.

Clerk.

Um I do want to first really thank the Human Services Agency for the work that you have done and in partnership with Marin Fruit Bank during the time like last year when we um facing cuts from the Trump administration with SNAPs.

Um you step up to the plate, you immediately make sure that it works for the recipients of SNAP for San Francisco throughout like the entire city.

We I I just want to thank you.

Thank you so much for the work and thank you so much for bringing this before us today.

Uh and um I hope that we don't have to do this again.

Um but I'm afraid that we may and that I am in antip anticipation of it.

Uh we will be ready to budget process and to really have a more earnest conversation about what that actually will look like.

But at least I think you have drill in my head now.

That is a hundred and twelve thousand recipients of SNAP in San Francisco, and out of which, like I think 48,000 are seniors, 18,000 are children.

Um, and so we we appreciate the work that you're doing.

And and with the with the number also drawing my head is 20 million dollars per month is what is required to support this 112,000 individuals uh that are the SNAPs and recipients.

So thank you for your work and the floor is yours.

Thank you, Supervisor Chan.

Um Susie Smith, Deputy Director for Policy Planning and Public Affairs at HSA.

And I also want to thank the mayor and your the board's foresight in putting aside 400 million dollars in emergency funding for events just like this that we worried about and were able to draw on so quickly.

Um I do think I mean this is an opportunity just to pause and reflect on the moment that we're in, and I will say that it was one of my proudest moments in our collective proudness moments as a city to be able to act as quickly as we did to support San Franciscans when our federal government failed us.

And I'll say, you know, my decade at HSA, it's it's one of our my proudest accomplishments, and I know Trent as well in 25 years at the agency.

Um so as you referenced, you know, we have 112,000 San Franciscans, one out of seven residents are supported by CalFresh.

These are seniors, these are people with disabilities, um, people experiencing homelessness, low-wage workers who rely on SNAP every month to put food on the table.

We got notified by the state around October 20th that the USDA would not be using releasing federal emergency funds that are set aside for this very purpose.

And so in three days, my team designed an $18 million equity-based alternative federal food program using our CalFresh administrative data to tier different levels of support depending on the family size and depending on frankly how much we could raise from philanthropy.

And a week later, October 27th, the Crankstart Foundation, which we are so grateful to, they put the challenge grant before us and they said if you contribute city, nine million, we will contribute nine million.

And this board and this mayor acted within 24 hours in approving the funding so that we could issue these grocery cards for CalFresh families.

And we partnered across the city, we partnered with the treasurer's office to identify a vendor quickly, a local uh company that had experience specifically in gift cards in emergency activations.

They supported the wildfires down in LA and the Houston floods, and provided both a digital and physical card.

So we had six days from the time the funding was approved to prepare a recipient list for 82,000 households, translated into five different threshold languages, and ready hundreds of frontline HSA workers and community partners to support people who needed help in activating the cards.

We established a call center and trained staff over the weekend, developed a training program, a CBO toolkit, and our service center staff ended up assisting 11,000 households to activate their cards by phone or in person.

And despite uh a massive spike in our call volume, we had 10,000 calls some weeks.

80% of our callers waited less than five minutes, and only 4% dropped the calls.

So our operations remained strong despite the spike in work.

And one week after the board and Crankstart's board approved the funding, 18,000 San Franciscans on day one were the first to claim the benefit, which is a testament to how much low-income San Franciscans rely on this benefit to put food on the table.

Two weeks later, we had 53,000 people claim their gift cards.

And by the activation deadline, eight weeks later, we had over 65,000 CalFresh recipients claim their cards in 14.4 million dollars worth of support.

We also did a massive outreach campaign because this was a new a new program and there was so much confusion at the federal level.

We did texting, social media, letters, posters, flyers, FAQs, all translated.

We held daily strike teams where we used the activation data to look at specific populations and neighborhoods that were underutilizing the support and then deploying specific strategies with our partners to help increase those activation rates.

And we learned a lot, honestly, about emergency operations and how to, you know, how to move forward in this way, should this or when this happens again.

We also activated a wide network, other departments.

We partnered closely with HSH to reach unhoused community members, DEC with FRCs, DOS with the aging and disability resource network, OED did merchant walks to let merchants know about these cards.

And we presented their CBO toolkit to over 400 community-based organizations.

So really widespread hitting every corner of the city API Council, Latino Task Force, African American Faith-Based Coalition, we did ethnic media, traditional media.

We did in-person support efforts where we partnered with Chinese newcomers and glide and other leaders in the community that stepped up without extra payment to say, like, we want to help the community come to our offices, help people enroll.

I mean, in one day, Chinese newcomers had a couple hundred people, and it was 500 people on one day.

So it was really an amazing effort, about 92%, maybe even higher of the Chinese community members on CalFresh activated their cards.

And then finally, we did extra support for people experiencing homelessness or those with general delivery addresses or PO boxes.

We were really worried from day one that these folks would not are not checking their mail, wouldn't get the letter.

And so we decided for that population to allow them to come in person and pick up physical cards.

And again, it was a matter of days that we set that up.

So I'm really grateful for our service center, all of our service center partners and eligibility workers.

So in the end, about 80% of the eligible households redeemed their cards.

And I think that's a remarkable number given the vulnerability of the population we serve.

The fact that we designed and launched this in less than a week, and where the activation period was only two months, right?

So pretty we were pretty proud of that.

And as of March 22nd, uh 92% of the funds have been spent.

So 13.2 million of the 13.4 that were activated.

And the contract here, the retroactive emergency contract with the food bank.

Um the food bank served as the fiscal intermediary.

As a foundation, Crankstart couldn't fund our for-profit partner.

And so we needed an intermediary that could hold the funds.

And we selected them because of the credibility in the community, obviously a leader in the food space.

They were able to say yes within like 48 hours.

And Crankstart already funds them, so they had that trust, which was critically important.

So again, you know, we were able to partner across government, across philanthropy, our CBOs to really make a meaningful difference in the lives of our most vulnerable San Franciscans, and um, you know, ensured that when the federal government let them down, we did not.

Happy to answer any questions.

Um we are we partnered with Crankstart in um an article that was submitted to the Stanford Social Science Innovation Review, SSI SSIR, and around some of our lessons learned and how like what philanthropy learned too.

Others came to us, other counties came to us asking for help, other foundations contacted Crankstart saying, you know, how did you do this?

So we are um hopefully that will get published, and we are documenting some of those lessons learned for future activation and and doing an evaluation, and we'll be happy to share those learnings as as they come forward.

Sorry, I had to have a brag moment.

The proposed resolution would approve a contract between HSA and the San Francisco Marin Food Bank for the CalFresh Stopgap Emergency Gift Card Initiative with a two-month term through December 2025 and an amount not to exceed 9.1 million.

It also retroactively approves an amendment to that agreement to add repayment instructions and revised reporting requirements.

Um following the lapse in federal funding for CalFresh, HSA entered into an emergency contract with San Francisco Marine Food Bank to distribute $18 million to CalFresh recipients and gift cards.

That includes $9 million donation provided by Crankstart and $9 million that was in city funds that was appropriated from the state and federal revenue risk reserve, plus an additional 100,000 to cover the cost of the physical gift cards.

Clients had until December 31st to activate the gift cards and have until the end of March to spend down those gift cards with any unspent funds returned to the city.

As the department reported, 80% of eligible households activated their gift cards for a total of $14.4 million in benefits.

And based on more up-to-date information provided by the department, $13.2 million of that has been spent or 92%.

HSA has already received uh 1.8 million back from the Marine Food Bank for the gift cards that were not activated and will receive a number, another payment back for any unspent funds on the activated gift cards, which could be up to $500,000.

We recommend approval of item three.

And Christina, just one point of clarification.

For the unspent funds, we made an agreement with Crankstart that we would be splitting those funds.

And so we're getting half, and Crankstart's getting half back.

So just wanted to make sure that was clear for the record.

Thank you.

Thank you.

You should brag about this moment.

I I think that what maybe some do not recall, and I certainly do is that this not only happened around you know holidays time, holiday times for us, especially throughout the city.

It coincides like the regrettable blackout city wide uh moment as well, the time where people could then end up getting their gift card to really um have those spoiled goods that they end up have to you know replace um during those moments, being able to have this car actually activated.

We visited Chinatown and have conversation with those recipients of the gift cards, um, or I I did and and during those times and it was um both not only for the recipients but also for small business who are mainly the grocers and others that finding uh because it was actually a quite a loss should the recipients not be able to use their EBT cards uh or benefits to purchase their daily groceries.

Um so this was really helpful as well to be able to come in that time.

Um thank you so much for your work, Supervisor Sauder.

Thank you.

And I'll just echo that.

I think this is remarkable, and I think that what you've done here um deserves more recognition and deserves to be studied for you to be able to pull this together so quickly.

I think it's a good reminder of what we can do when there's urgent needs.

And I think it's um just quite a contrast to our last item where we had a private for-profit company that is doing a four-year delay, and um here we are as government, here you are doing this in a matter of days.

So thank you.

And um, you know, unfortunately, it's a reminder too, and I when I'm seeing SNAP of the um, you know, of the challenges ahead, not only with federal cuts, but even with state cuts with market match being proposed to be cut.

Um, and I think it's something we have to keep our eye on.

But thank you.

Thank you.

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

And on the recognition front, I will say I nominated um my team and the others that were leading this effort for a Spur Good Government Award, and they got it.

So you can come to the reward ceremony and uh cheer them on.

Thank you.

Congrats.

Uh, let's go to public comment on this item.

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

If we have any members of the public who wish to address this committee, good afternoon, budget and finance committee.

Griffin Lee speaking here as a resident.

Um wasn't coming for this item, but I I do think I do want to thank and appreciate the mayor and the board and everyone working together uh to get this done so quickly in response to uh the federal um stoppage of of funds.

Um I think this is what it means to really show up and step up in a really crucial time uh for a very important matter.

So thank you, Miranda Food Bank, Crankstart, the mayor, and the board.

Appreciate it.

Thank you much, Griffin Lee, for addressing this committee.

And with no further speakers, Madam Chair, to completes our queue.

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

And with that, and we colleagues, I would like to move this item forward with positive recommendation and a roll call, please.

And on that motion that we refer this resolution to the full board with a positive recommendation, Vice Chair Dorsey.

Dorsey, I member Sauter.

Sauter, I Chair Chan.

I.

Chan I.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

And Mr.

Clark, please call items four through six together.

Yes, item numbers four through six.

Our resolution is approving amendment number two to the following agreements between the city and county acting by and through the Department of Public Health to operate health access points for new total terms of January 1st, 2023 through June 30th, 2030, or June 30th, 2030.

And to authorize DPH to enter into amendments or modifications to the agreements that do not materially increase the obligations nor liabilities to the city and are necessary to effectuate the purposes of the agreements or their respective resolutions.

Item number four is with the San Francisco AIDS Foundation to also provide capacity building services to extend the term by four years from June 30th, 2026, and to increase the amount by approximately 11.9 million for a new total not tech seed amount of 23.8 million.

Item number five is with Rafiki Coalition for Health and Wellness to extend the term by three years from June 30th, 2027, to increase the amount by approximately 10.6 million for a new total not to exceed amount of approximately 20 million.

And item number six is with Instituto Familiar de la Rasa Inc.

to extend the term by three years from June 30th, 2027, and to increase the amount by approximately 9.2 million for a new total amount not to exceed uh approximately 17 million.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

And today we have Department of Public Health here.

I good morning, supervisors, um Chair, Chan.

My name is Nicole Trainers, all good to see you again.

I've been here several times.

Um I'm with the community health equity and promotion branch, and I'm the system of care budget contract and programs operation manager.

And again, thank you for this opportunity to present three contract amendments for equity um based health access points.

Um next slide.

And before I go into the three the three slides, um I do want to clarify that our health access points, this model is designed as wraparound services, and they provide approxim approximately 13 standard of care services, which include integrated HIV, HCV, STI testing, primary care, mental health services, overdose prevention, health and recovery, um, also linkage to basic needs and social services as well, which includes folks to walk into um the doors and receive um food security, housing support, linkage, and also employment as well.

So for the first contract amendment request, again, it's for the San Francisco AIDS Foundation and the amount of 11.9 million, again, with the total to not do not exceed amount of 23 point million.

SFAF provides integrated again HAP services along with capacity building support within the health access network to ensure that this model is successful and sustained over time.

The foundation specifically provides services that are tailored to gay MSM community members in San Francisco, central centrally located in the Castro and Soma neighborhoods.

Next slide, please.

The second contract amendment request is for Rafiki Coalition, again in the amount of 10.6 million with a total not to exceed amount of 20 million.

Rafiki provides integrated HAP services as well that are specifically tailored to Black African American San Franciscans in unique historical communities, which include Baby Hunters Point, Patrail Hill, Sunnydale, and Fillmore neighborhoods as well.

And the third and final contract amendment request is for Instituto de la Rasa, again in the amount of 9.2 million with a total do not exceed amount of 17 million.

IFR also provides integrated health access point services specifically tailored to the Latino SF community and historical SF mission district.

Next slide.

The next few slides you will see I provided some photos of each of the health access points so you can get a visual of where these services occur within the four walls.

However, I do want to point out to you that the health access points model was not just designed to provide services in the four walls.

It's really designed to expand that services within the community, meeting folks where they are.

So even though each of these health access points they focus on a specific population and they're embedded in a neighborhood, I do want to point out that this model requires really strong coordination and collaboration.

And so it was intentionally designed this way with the community input and community voice.

We ensure that there's coordinated partners across all of the community-based organizations.

So we do have lead health access points, and we also have subcontractors.

We have communication pathways.

We have a really strong referral process where we're not just giving anyone a card.

We're making sure that they've reached their destination and they're receiving care as well.

Again, this creates a seamless service environment in which individuals can enter any health access point regardless of how they identify or regardless of how they walk through this world.

So I really wanted to point that out that these health access points work very, very closely together.

And this first slide you see here is the SFAF MSM hat.

And so you'll hear you see here this is their strut clinic.

They have several other clinics where where services are provided, but you also can see they use this as a community engagement space, and they're a well-trusted organization within San Francisco.

You can go to the next slide, please.

And here is a pictures of Rafiki Coalition.

I'm really proud to say that Rafiki has come in such such a long way.

As you know, there in Bayview Hunters Point, it's been a health desert over there.

And we've been working with Southeast Health Center, some of the Hope SF centers to really connect to Rafiki as well to create again another system of care in that neighborhood.

With the capacity building support of the foundation, Rafiki was able to purchase this building that you see here is a beautiful building.

It's at 5,000 Third Street.

This is where their primary health access point services will occur.

So there are folks who walk up and down 3rd Street who can literally just walk into this building and receive services.

I also would like to point out that while this building is under construction, Rafiki has really positioned themselves and partnerships with organizations like Glide and AHP who provide mobile testing, that they can go into Sunnydale housing and provide testing on site.

They can go into Feelmore and provide testing on site.

So it's just not testing here in Baby Hunters Point, but we want to reach black folks all across San Francisco, right?

So I'm really proud of the the um this this what they've overcome.

The the found that that agency has been through a lot.

Um the last slide.

And here you see us in IFR, Instituto de la Rasa.

They are um historically located in the mission district.

They have really, really strong ties to the Latino community in San Francisco.

Um here again is their beautiful space.

They have a um hold a lot of cultural events here.

They also provide services, but through their partnerships, they're just not providing services in the mission districts.

I want to make that very clear.

They also partner with the other subcontractors who are located and specialize in outreach to other Latino folks who live outside the mission district, and that is why we need this strong coordinated collaboration across all of these health access points.

And it's really designed so integrated that you cannot tease this apart.

Um go to the next slide.

So in closing, DPH agrees with the BLA recommendations, and we respectfully request approval of these three contract amendments.

And before we open up for questions, um we are also requesting several amendments to the legislation.

And Clerk, would you like me to read those amendments into records?

Please.

Great.

On page one, line two, we would like to delete the number 2383293 and add 21889643.

On page one, line eight, we would like to delete the number 238323 and add 21889643.

On page two, line six, we would like to delete the number 23832, 933, and add 21889643.

Thank you, supervisors, for your continued support, and I'm available for questions you have about the health access points.

The proposed resolutions would approve amendments to existing DPH contracts for health access point programs to extend the terms through June 2030 and uh fund the increase and not to exceed amounts to fund the extended terms.

Uh the contracts are with Instituto Familiar de la Raza for the Latinx population, San Francisco AIDS Foundation for the Men Who Have Sex with Men Health Access Point Program, the Rafiki Coalition for Health and Wellness for the Black African American Health Access Point Programs.

These programs primarily provide STD testing and treatment.

They also provide linkages to care and some mental health services.

Two of the programs exceeded standards in the most recent program monitoring by DPH.

Um however, the Rafiki program was rated as below standards due to uh not meeting their contracted units of service as well as some invoicing issues.

Um since that time, um DPH has provided updated information that shows that they are on track to meet units of service targets.

They have also hired some senior finance staff and are working with TPH on the invoicing and they appear on track to meet the uh standards of the program.

Exhibit three on page 20 of our report shows the basis of the not-to-exceed amounts.

Uh the annual budgets are between 2.3 and 2.6 million for each program.

Um for the most part, these budgets are remaining flat in the extended term.

The one exception is there's a 400,000 dollar reduction to the annual budget for the San Francisco AIDS Foundation because DPH has cut their capacity building support to Rafiki as part of a broader effort to reduce capacity building and then DPH's nonprofit portfolio.

The agreements are funded by the general fund and we recommend approval of items 4, 5, and 6.

Thank you.

Uh correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the 400,000 capacity building is the 17 million dollars of cuts from the DPH, which the board already held the B.

Linson hearing for um two year fiscal years ago.

And thank you so much for the work that you're doing.

I am pleased to hear you know, some of these um Rafiki like work to continue to grow and make sure that they're fiscally sound.

And um and I do appreciate the presentation today, like with the photos um of the the meetings and events.

Um those are actually really helpful.

So I I appreciate that.

Um Vice Chair Dorsey.

Thank you, Chair Chan.

I really appreciate that a lot of the services include um treatment for substance use.

And I know that was one of the, I think seven populations for which the RFP sought to provide health access point services.

I just want to clarify, because I I think I know the answer, but just for because I have gotten this question.

Okay.

Um to the extent um harm reduction services are included.

Will it and will this be in in sort of uh will it comport with Mayor Lurie's directive to make sure that we're doing it in a way that has that includes proactive outreach on drug treatment and access to to program sort of consistent with the recovery first ordinance that I authored and some of the work that we're doing together.

Yes, absolutely.

You're spot on.

And so when we initially wrote out this RFP, there were 13 standards of care specifically, and that was from the community and what they wanted to see when they walked through the door.

But you're right, there has been a new directive by the mayor, and so we're shifting those um descriptions of the standards of care, would essentially we had three buckets of harm reduction, overdose prevention, and syringe access and disposal.

And so what we restructured are in the process of restructuring, those three are really combined, and it's really about overdose health and recovery with uh emphasis on recovery and ensuring that people have access to recovery services and ensure that we are saving lives and preventing overdose prevention.

So you are absolutely right on we are restructuring those components of the model.

Great.

Thanks so much.

I would just say just to add just for clarification, because I think sometimes in the public debate, um there can be sort of a either harm reduction or treatment, and that's not the way the continuum works.

Harm reduction is something that really needs to be an essential part of this, but if if we're all rowing in the same direction to support and incentivize uh long-term recovery, that's really what the aim is.

So I really appreciate this, so I'm happy to support it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh and with that, let's go to public comments on all these three items.

Thank you for your continued support.

Really appreciate it.

Yes, if we have any members of the public who wish to address this committee regarding these items four through six, that was your opportunity.

I'm back.

Uh Griffin Lee, District 2 resident and representing Connected SF staff and members.

Um Supervisor Dorsey, Souter, and Chan.

I I really think we really think we need to go back to the drawing board here.

Um in this presentation, there's no talk about outcomes nor accountability.

If you go through the second draft amendments in each one of these files, harm reduction is all over it.

Forty times in one document as part of required services and training.

While I know Mayor Lurie's directive allowed, we and we know that the mayor's directive last year allowed for access to syringes indoors.

We're still seeing the SFH Foundation distribute enablement like syringes outdoors.

I've never we've never seen City Hall be this proactive over something over something like this.

Two of these contracts, current expiration date isn't until June 30th, 2027.

Whether or not these two or three contracts are already allotted into the budget, I think the recovery community, those that I spoke to over the last 48 hours, along with our staff and members would really appreciate an audit and really uh more clarity on what we're tracking here to define success.

Because over and over again, these contracts get rubber stamped, and we're still seeing 600 plus people die on our streets today.

Thank you very much.

Thank you much, Griffin Lee.

Next speaker, please.

Oh.

Actually, with no further speakers, Madam Chair, that completes our queue.

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

Just want to clarify this is a health access points that it's inclusive of treatment for sexually transmitted disease uh for the vulnerable populations.

And so with that, colleagues, I would like to first amend um item number four uh as offer and uh indicated by department of and write through by Department of Public Health, and with that is to send uh amended item four and then uh and with item five and six to full board with recommendation uh and a roll call, please.

And on that motion that we refer all three resolutions to the full board with recommendation item oh sorry.

Take that back.

With that motion to amend number four to lower the non-text seed amount as so stated by the department, and that we refer all three resolutions to the full board with the recommendation number four as amended.

Vice Chair Dorsey.

Dorsey, I, Member Sauter.

Sauter.

I chair Chan.

I.

Chan, I.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

And Mr.

Clark, please call item seven and eight together.

Items seven and eight.

Are resolutions approving and authorizing the following as it relates to real property owned by the city located at 105 Westeria Lane, formerly known as 11 Free to Colo Way, and known as Balboa Reservoir Building Eight.

Uh approving the director of property in the mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development.

Uh yes, to enter, like um actually apologies.

Resolutions approving and authorizing the following is a release to real property owned by the city, located at 105 Westeria Lane, formerly known as 11 Free to Calaway and known as Balboa Reservoir Building A.

Uh item number seven approves and authorizes the director of property and the mayor's office of housing and community development to enter into a ground lease for a real property with Balboa Lee Avenue LP for a lease term of 75 years and one twenty-four-year option to extend uh an annual base rent of 15,000, authorizing an amended and restated loan agreement in an amount not to exceed approximately 29.9 million for a minimum loan term of 57 years to finance the development and construction of a 158 unit multifamily rental housing development uh for affordable to very very low and low-income households plus one managers unit.

Uh adopting findings that the project and proposed transactions are consistent with the general plan and the eight priority policies of the planning code and authorizing the director of property and/or director of Mo C D to execute the ground lease uh loan agreement and make certain modifications to such agreements and take certain actions in furtherance of this resolution as defined.

And item number eight approves for purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as amended and authorizes the execution and delivery of a multifamily housing revenue note in one or more series, hit an aggregate principal amount not to exceed approximately 112.7 million, approving the forms of and authorizing the execution of a funding loan agreement, providing the terms and conditions of the loan from the funding lender to the city, and the execution and delivery of the note, approving the form of a project loan agreement, providing the terms and conditions of the loan from the city to Balboa Gateway LP, and a regulatory agreement and declaration of restrictive covenants authorizing the collection of fees, approving modifications, changes and additions to the documents, ratifying and approving any action heretofore taken in connection with the back-to-back loans, uh, and that the note and the project granting general authority to city officials to take actions necessary to implement the resolution and related matters as defined.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

And I want to acknowledge uh Supervisor Sauter.

Thank you, Chair.

Um before we begin this time, I just want to welcome some students from my district.

We've got sixth graders from Notre Dame.

Thank you for coming, everyone.

This is um you're at our budget and finance committee meeting.

Hi.

So it's this meeting is uh every Wednesday, and we have committee meetings throughout the week.

And then on Tuesday, we have our big board meeting.

So if you would have been here yesterday, the room would have been packed.

Um but thanks for for coming.

Um it's an honor to have you here.

I hope you have a great visit today.

Um we've had uh six or seven agenda items before this, and this is our last item.

We're gonna be talking now about a really big housing project that's um one of the bigger housing projects that San Francisco has.

So you're welcome to stay and follow along for a little bit.

And once you get a little bored, you can go out and continue your tour.

But thanks for being here.

And thank you to the teachers and chaperones as well.

Well, welcome.

Uh and with that, um, we have Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development here.

Uh thank you.

And good morning, Chair Chan and Committee members Dorsey and Sauter.

My name is Andrew Strong, and I'm project manager at the Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development.

I'm here to present on items seven and eight for Affordable Housing Development Building A at the Balboa Reservoir site.

The purpose of the two resolutions before you are to authorize bonds, a gap loan, and ground lease for building A.

Item 7 approves the MOCD loan agreement of up to 29 million two hundred eighty thousand seven hundred fifty-seven dollars and uh execution of the ground lease for building A.

And then item eight authorizes the execution and delivery of tax exempt and taxable bonds of up to 112,711,100 for building A.

Balboa Reservoir is a development agreement project that was approved by the Board of Supervisors in August 2020.

The project is a 17-acre site located across from City College and will include multiple buildings of new market rate units and units affordable to low-income residents.

The first phase of infrastructure developed by Bridge Housing is currently underway and will provide utilities, public right-of-ways, including streets and sidewalks, sewer systems, and other transportation improvements.

The roughly 5.7 acres of infrastructure work in this phase will also include grading and site preparation for two new 100% affordable buildings totaling these new units.

The first of these two buildings, building E is already under construction.

The second building, building A, for which these resolutions apply, will have its pad ready for construction by late April for a May 2026 construction start.

As mentioned, building A is the second 100% affordable development at Balboa Reservoir and will be developed by Bridge Housing.

The project will serve families between 40 to 80% area median income through 158 affordable units with one non-restricted manager's unit.

The project will consist of 13 studios, 65 one-bedrooms, 42 bedrooms, 43 bedrooms, and one additional three-bedroom managers unit.

Financing for building A will include funds for MOCD from MOCD, sorry, the infill infrastructure grant, IAG funds, and affordable housing and sustainable communities, ASIC awards from the state's housing and community development department, as well as housing tax credit equity and construction and permanent loans.

$33 million in ASIC funds will contribute to the housing budget through an HCD loan, while an additional $12.7 million will contribute to transportation related improvements through an HCD grant.

Financing is targeted to close by the end of April 2026 for building A with construction to commence May 2026.

And we're anticipating project completion by March of 2028.

Leaseup is anticipated to be completed by September of 2028.

Lastly, we would like to make a clerical amendment to the long title of the resolution to change the name of the developer from Balboa Lee Avenue LP to Balboa Gateway LP.

Balboa Reservoir Building A is an excellent opportunity to improve geographic equity by expanding affordable housing in San Francisco's West Side neighborhoods.

I'm joined here today by John Moyman from Bridge Housing, and we are happy to answer any questions that you all may have.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Item 7 is a proposed resolution that would approve an amended and restated loan agreement to provide gap financing for building A to a bridged housing affiliate in an amount not to exceed approximately $29.3 million.

And it also approves a long-term ground lease.

Under a development agreement, the Balboa Reservoir Project is going to provide 550 affordable housing units and 550 market rate units.

The development agreement also requires the city provide gap financing for about a third of those units and that the developer provide gap financing for the remaining two-thirds of the affordable units.

However, as we previously reported to the board, the market rate development is currently on pause, and so the developer and the city worked together to reprioritize infrastructure to advance the first two affordable housing projects, including building A, the subject of the proposed resolution.

The city also agreed to provide an infrastructure loan for that first phase of development because the affordable housing projects were at risk of losing state funding if the infrastructure didn't proceed.

Building A will provide 158 affordable units.

Exhibit five on page 33 of our report shows the total development cost, which is the basis of the loan amount.

The total development cost per unit as well as a city subsidy per unit are greater than typical most city projects, and that's due to the cost of the infrastructure.

And that infrastructure loan was previously approved by the Board of Supervisors.

As we reported in September, the city's total contribution so far to the affordable housing for Bob Reservoir project is approximately $87 million, including this proposed loan.

And that's about $36 million more than what is required on the development agreement.

But this proposed resolution is consistent with that information previously provided to the board.

We recommend approval of item seven.

Thank you.

Please help me understand.

Thank you so much for bringing this project forward.

Please help me understand.

What tax credit?

And is it state tax credit or federal tax credit or both?

State.

So the um the project was awarded uh tax credits funding in the fall of 2025, which has allowed us to move forward with this with this project.

And then in on top of that, in addition to it is $33 million, which is 17.5% of the state fund.

And is that bond hours?

Yeah, the $33 million ASIC.

Yeah, so that is the affordable housing and sustainability sustainable communities award, uh which uh the project also received from the State's uh HCD department.

But it's not a loan.

So yeah, this is where ASIC is a little confusing.

So when you get an ASIC award, there is both a loan component and a grant component.

So the $33 million is a loan from the State of California.

And then on top of that, there's an additional $12.7 million that is granted to the project, but the grant is specifically restricted to transportation improvements affiliated with the project.

So that includes things like upgraded uh bikeways, sidewalks, um, uh two new BART cars, and then funding to MTA to uh improve um the area.

Yeah, transportation in the area.

Sure.

I mean, it's a transit-oriented um space.

Absolutely.

Um with that um loan, though, if you can help me uh uh understand a bit more about that $33 million loan, the state loan.

What does the repayment actually look like?

Is it coming from the city or is it how how does that work?

And or is it developers gonna actually repay that loan?

Yeah, I would need to I would need to get back to you with the specifics of that, um, which I can do.

Um but my I I believe that it comes out of the projects um uh waterfall as part of the um the project budget.

Because we do the same.

I mean, like we we actually provide city loan, but then when the project is completed, when they turn keys, then it then it's no longer really a loan and because now they actually have completed the project.

So on my assumption is what you are trying to say is it's very similar approach.

It functions in the same way as the same.

Great.

Thank you so much uh for answering the question.

And with that, um I don't see any under name on the roster.

We're ready to go to public comment on this item.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yes, we're now opening public comment for this for both items seven and eight.

If we have any members of the public who wish to address this committee, Madam Chair, we have no speakers.

Seeing no public commons, public comment is out close.

Um colleagues, I also wanted to let you know that uh Supervisor Mirna Malgar once wanted to join us today to express her support uh for this project in her district.

Uh she very much uh cares about it.

Uh regrettably she is, or actually not so much for us.

We are we appreciate her representation and her leadership at as at MTC currently, and so she can't join us today, but um that is the same attendment that she would like to relate on these two items.

So therefore, with that, I would like to first amend the item as requested by the mayor's office of housing and community development uh for item seven, and with the amended version of item seven and eight, we will send these two items to a full board with recommendation and a roll call, please.

And on that motion that we accept the clerical amendment as so offered by the department.

And that we refer both resolutions to the full board with recommendation with item seven as amended.

Vice Chair Dorsey.

Dorsey.

Aye, Members Hodder.

Sauder, I chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

And with that, Mr.

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

Uh Madam Chair, that completes our business.

The meeting is adjourned.