Good morning.

The meeting will come to order.

Welcome to the June 3rd, 2026 of the Budget and Finance Committee.

I am Supervisor Connie Chan, Chair of the Committee.

Our clerk, it's Brent Hallipa.

I would like to thank Jeanette uh Iganoff from SFTV for broadcasting this meeting.

And now I uh welcome and join by Vice Chair Supervisor Matt Dorsey.

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 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 and writing in either of the following ways.

Email them to myself, the budget and finance committee clerk at Br ENT.j 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 and city hall at one Dr.

Carlton be good at place.

Room 244, San Francisco, California, 94102.

And finally, items acted upon today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors' agenda of June 9th, unless otherwise stated.

Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr.

Clerk.

And before we call item number one, I would like to just remind the public that we have budget and legislative analyst reports for items two, three, eight, eleven, twelve on today's agenda.

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

Then we will take questions and public comments.

So with that, Mr.

Clark, please call item number one.

Yes, item number one is an ordinance.

Waiving the competitive solicitation requirement under the administrative code and authorizing the director of public works to retroactively enter into an agreement with the transgender district in the amount of 24.5 thousand for the purposes of printing and installing placemaking banners in the transgender district in the southeastern tenderloin and along sixth street south of market.

Madam Chair.

Thank you and colleagues.

Uh this item was continued from last week because we were anticipating a grant agreement, but as it turns a copy of the grant agreement, but as it turns out, it seems like we're waived because of the waiving of the competitive bidding for this project that we no longer uh we needed to have a grant agreement, and the issue has been resolved with city attorney's office.

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

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

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.

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

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

Aye.

Dorsey, aye.

Member Sauter.

Sauter, aye.

Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Mr.

Clerk, please call item number two.

Item number two retro is a resolution retroactively approving amendment number four to a grant agreement between the Office of Economic and Workforce Development and Bay Area Community Resources for Management of the Community Economic Recovery Hubs grant to increase the contract amount by 1.5 million for a total not to exceed amount of approximately 16.8 million for the period of July 1st, 2022 through June 30th, 2026.

Effective upon approval of this resolution by the board, uh, and to authorize the executive director of the Office of Economic and Workforce Development to enter into amendments or modifications to the contract prior to its final execution by all parties that do not materially increase the obligations nor liabilities to the city and are necessary to effectuate the purposes of the contract.

Thank you, Mr.

Clerk.

Sorry.

Sorry.

Thank you, Mr.

Clerk, and welcome to Supervisor Cheyenne Chen to the chamber.

And um, this is her item and would like to invite her to do welcoming remark or opening remark.

Thanks.

Apologies.

Go ahead.

So my computer is set up.

Sorry, yeah.

Yes, I might hold.

So sorry, we need to check.

Supervisor, would it be okay if we actually have the presentation then?

Okay, let's have the presentation while we set her up.

All right, good morning, Chair Chan.

Uh, Vice Chair Dorsey and Supervisor Sauter, Rin Floyd Rodriguez with the Office of Economic and Workforce Development, Workforce Division.

I'll be joined also with my colleague Chris Yatano.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today regarding this resolution to approve amendment number four to a grant agreement between the Office of Economic and Workforce Development and Bay Area Community Resources for Management of the Community Economic Recovery Hubs.

This grant agreement will increase the contract amount by 1.5 million for the period of July 1, 2022 through July through June 30th, 2026, and would be an extension of existing services.

So onto the back of the grant background.

These resource hubs have provided a variety of support, intake assessment, and referral services for targeted low-income and vulnerable communities.

Again, the primary grantee has is Bay Area Community Resources, and there are three economic recovery sites across the city located in the Excelsior, Mission, Visitation Valley neighborhoods.

They have served as a point of entry access for the public workforce system, affiliated government agencies, community-based partners, and provide job placement assistance, sector trainings, post-secondary education, unemployment and insurance, unemployment insurance assistance, housing assistance, public benefits registration, and food and transportation support.

These were originally established to support COVID emergency response and transition since to provide ongoing economic recovery and been a vital part of the community.

To speak to the vital part of the community, there through the previous iterations of this grant agreement, OEWD has been able to provide critical services to thousands of clients.

The community impact is most notable in neighborhoods with hubs.

Those would be the Ocean View, Merced Heights, and Ingleside site, which included 1,000 approximately 1,500 clients, the mission hub, which supported just shy of 950 clients, and the visitation valley hub, which supported um just over 550 clients.

To speak a little bit to the contract history, BACR, or Bay Area Community Resources, was originally selected through RFP 223 in November of 2022 for the original agreement.

Since then, the agreement has been amended three times to increase the not to exceed amounts and extend the contract term.

Scope of services have uh have remained consistent throughout the term of the contract, and service targets have varied year to year based on funding allocations to the contract.

All right, next we would like to address the BLA recommendations to move forward with an acceptance if possible.

OEW has been high communication with DLA analyst Nicholas Menard, and of the five recommendations, OEWD has provided information to resolve four of the outline items.

We'd like to speak to each of those for a moment.

Um the first would be to validate the fiscal year 24-25 participant data for this grant.

OEWD is still conducting program monitoring for this current fiscal year, and this contract and organization will be contract will be monitored as a part of that process.

Um we have reviewed and provided data for fiscal year 24-25, including a comprehensive in-take tracking sheet per client on the client basis, provided um corresponding annual year-end demographics reports, and annual performance outcome reporting to ensure that participant level data is captured accurate and reflective in this reporting.

For item number two, um, to provide line item spending detail and spending by BACR and any subcontractor for fiscal year 20 fiscal year 25-26 for this grant.

OEWD has provided a line item budget with spending details by BACR and all subcontractors.

Uh OEWD has also provided fiscal year 2526 year to date actuals for this contract.

For item number three, to clarify the permitted fiscal year 2526 subcontractors for this grant and update the grant agreement to reflect the permitted subcontractors.

We clarified that over the course of this contract, there have been several subcontractors.

This is been ongoing since 2022 for the grant for previous fiscal years or the amended versions.

The current amendment for the current fiscal year includes two uh two subcontractors, which includes NOVS, Mission Language and Vocational School, and Meta, Mission Economic Development Agency, which are outlined in the budget with specific line items amounts, specific line item amounts.

And lastly, to commit to establish line item budgets for all grant agreements.

The budget was provided after the initial BLA report was produced.

And OEWD has and has been and is committed to establishing line item budgets for all of its grant agreements for all of it, its grant agreements as a formal requirement of our contracts and grants process.

To speak to the one item for discussion, I'll pass it over to my colleague Chris Yatana.

Good morning, supervisors.

We just wanted to address one of the recommendations from the BLA in removing all references to gift cards.

Gift cards are a form of supportive service commonly used to support our job seekers.

Common uses of these gift cards can be professional attire for job interviews, transportation expenses, etc.

This contract does allow a small amount of $3,200 for supportive services that will include the issuance of gift cards.

We respectfully request that this remain in the contract.

We have been in high communication with the BLA analysts on how we will ensure that these gift cards are spent in the way that they are intended and to the specific client that they have been assigned to.

Next slide, please.

These improvements are throughout the department.

This work has been in response to reports, audits, and policies issued by the BLA and the controller's office.

Work to date includes developing theories of change and OKR frameworks, fiscal monitoring improvements, procurement process improvements, and updating the department's record retention policy.

The work that's currently underway is finalizing performance measure and target setting methodologies per the controller's office policy, finalizing contract monitoring procedures, finalizing grant agreement template updates, updating our program monitoring procedures, improving data systems improvements, digital solutions development, and finalizing our invoice policies.

This is the work that you often don't see in real life.

This is a lot of the behind the scenes work that the department is doing to uh keep pace with all of the new rules for contract monitoring within the city.

This is this work is very critical to us meeting our obligations and meeting standards, and it's the work that often goes unseen, but is critical to serving community.

Therefore, OEWD refrespectfully requests that committee advance this resolution authorizing OEWD to amend the contract to increase a contract amount by 1.5 million dollars for a total not to exceed amount of 16,779,099 for a term ending on June 30th, 2026.

Thank you so much for your time.

Ren and I are here to answer any questions you may have.

And thank you to Supervisor Chen for supporting this resolution for the department.

Thank you.

Good morning, Nick Minard from the Budget Legislative Analyst Office.

Item two is a resolution that would amend the grant agreement between OEWD and Bay Area Community Resources to add $1.5 million dollars to the agreement and increase the value to $16.8 million dollars.

There's no change to the term, which ends June 2026.

The agreement funds uh workforce hubs in Visitation Valley, uh, the mission and the Excelsior, where people can come get referrals to workforce services and other types of benefits.

Um, the services are already have already been provided because this the program was for this fiscal year.

So this 1.5 million dollars is actually to pay for services that have already been provided by BACR and its subcontractors.

The funding for this agreement comes from a board add back for workforce programs that was approved as part of the 25-26 budget process.

And it's for that those reasons I had several recommendations to improve the agreement, but also to not approve this resolution until those changes were implemented.

So I'll give you an update on each of those recommendations.

One is to remove all references to gift cards in the agreement.

The agreement does allow for gift cards.

I was told that there were no gift cards distributed in the past couple years.

It turns out that's not the case.

And so then the question became well, what are the controls around gift cards?

I've been in conversation with leadership at OEWD to review their controls.

They have a legacy gift card policy that I think is good but needs to be modernized.

They also have a draft policy to enhance their review of invoices, which then validate that the gift cards are are valid expenditures for people eligible to participate in this program.

That policy is still in draft form, but will be implemented as part of the invoice review for the money that's before you now, and does contain the I think the necessary controls to that you would want around a gift card policy and consistent with the controller's accounting policies and procedures.

So I feel better about the gift card issue.

The participant data we had concerns about because the number of people recorded as participating in the program in 2425 was exactly the goal of the contract, 7,150 people.

And I can tell you that almost never happens, especially with a number like that.

So after some digging, what we learned is that the nonprofit stopped counting people after they reached that goal.

So I think, and I did take a look at the data that OEWD has access to.

It does seem reasonable.

I do think, as part of that process, though, I've learned that the department has not done program monitoring on this particular grant.

They've done it on BACR as a whole, particularly the work, the federally funded workforce programs.

Uh, but they have not done like an like an in-depth program monitoring review that you would expect, and is actually required by this contract, and the city's policies for grants with nonprofit organizations, they've not looked at, they've not they've not done an in-depth review of their participant data.

So I do think that contingent on your approval that they should do a sample review of their participant data to validate it.

And that will be part of their review of the eligibility of expenditures that that the nonprofit will be submitting for reimbursement.

We also did not have a budget last week.

We do have one now.

Uh and it is it does feel reasonable, it's roughly consistent to what um the budget for the program was last year, with the exception that BACR's role is shrunk, and their subcontract, Mission Language Vocational School, their role has increased from about $600,000 last year to $1.3 million this year.

So we have that.

We don't know how much is actually spent because the invoices have not yet been submitted to OEWD.

Um so it's possible that not all this $1.5 million is necessary.

Um the other question we had is that we got multiple.

It wasn't clear to me who the subcontractors were.

Uh and there was only one subcontractor in the current version of the agreement and in the new version of the agreement.

It's now OEWD has clarified that there are two subcontractors, Mission Language Vocational School and Mission Economic Development Agency, the second emeta will be added to this draft uh agreement that you're approving, or that's before you to make sure that they can get paid.

Their budget shows them they're getting twenty thousand dollars this year to help MLVS pay for um tax preparation.

And then finally, we our recommendation was to have OEWD commit to establishing line item budgets for all their grant agreements in advance before money goes out.

Um I believe I have extracted that commitment from department leadership to do a budget before the grant agreement is executed rather than at the end of the fiscal year when the money's been spent.

Uh so I I think now I've shifted from a do not approve recommendation to making this a policy matter.

I do think that there's still improvements to be made at OEWD, uh, but I I want to thank OEWD's um engagement with our office over the past couple days on these recommendations.

Thank you.

Um Supervisor Chim.

Thank you, Chair Chair.

Um again, I I want to thank OEWD, thank the BLA for really communicating and working closely with my office as well.

Kali, I I'm really also asking that you pass this item out of committee with recommendation today.

Um this program is really critical in serving vulnerable population across the city, but especially from the presentation that we know.

Uh immigrant working class family living on the margins in the Excelsior, OMI, missions, out of missions, and visitation valley neighborhood, really spending uh the district of District 9, 10, and 11.

The services provided are essential direct services to the community.

And San Francisco residents could lose access to foo, workforce support, and even housing and health care without this critical supports.

And I definitely understand there were a number of questions that the BLA also reported and clarified now, and also uh this is really around reporting and accountability.

And I believe that OEWD will continue to work with the grantee to make sure that and to also continue to make change in improving tracking and and the reporting compliance is part of it.

And my office is also committed to work with the department and also with the community that they are in controls to ensure tax dollars are spent in a very responsible way that this program that impacts District 9, 10, and 11 can continue to be successful.

So thank you, colleagues.

Thank you, and Supervisor Sauter.

Uh thank you, Chair Chan, Supervisor Chen.

Um, and thank you to the BLA for digging into this and for uh the improvements and for um you know the the thought here.

Uh I have a qu a few questions for OEWD, please.

Thank you.

Um, so we're looking at this agreement through June 30th, 2026.

What happens after that?

Is this anticipated to, please?

Uh yes, these services are gonna continue through our job centered network, and OEWD just completed RFP 235.

We have issued awards uh to eight job centers, eight job eight centralized job centers, and so services to the mission OMI uh and visitation valley will be provided through those new contracts that will begin July 1st.

So different contract, different RFP um same providers, same community providers.

Okay, so but different RFP.

Yes.

Completely different contract, subject to all of uh what the analysts shared, all of our new policies and procedures.

What's before us today is simply through June 30th?

Yes, okay.

So I think that's a big part of my question here is um, you know, if if what we're learning today and the improvements we have to make, it seems like putting those in this next RFP and this next program is is probably where we should spend our time, uh rather than litigating this for the next uh few weeks.

You know, that being said, I do want to ask again, maybe for the future, uh, what sort of it sounds like the program monitoring on this has been quite lax and sporadic going forward in this next program for the job centers.

What are you doing to tighten that up and and what tools do you have to do that?

Uh we this contract will be a part of our year-end program monitoring, and we will be conducting a process through our finance uh our finance team on this particular contract, both on the program side and the financial side to ensure this the funds were spent according to the contract.

I mean, specifically though, are you going to do more regular check-ins?

It's it just seems like things have that.

We there is a high level of communication between our staff and the organization.

And so I do think we want to be able to better document those processes.

I will say, and the analysts did share this, that um our all of our workforce grants actually did a very robust program monitoring.

Our portfolio is quite enormous on our within our department, so we're still in the process of doing program monitoring for our for our contracts.

So this will be included for review.

Yeah, I just think it's it's something to learn from.

And if we're if you're missing the fact that we're being told gift cards are not being used, and they are that is pretty troubling if we're talking about another subcontractor being added that was not supposed to be there, that's pretty troubling.

Um, and you know, I think we can lay blame on the on the uh on the nonprofit here, but I think also you know that's part of your role is to catch this and and make sure it doesn't come down to the last minute with BLA coming forward and flagging this.

Um is anyone from Bay Area Community Resources here today to speak to this?

Uh we do have representatives from the organization.

Um they can answer questions.

Um, yeah, I would love to hear from them if we could.

Hi.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Ruth Barajes, executive director of Latino Task Force at Mission Language and Vocational School.

Great.

I would I would love to hear from you if you can, just some of your uh, you know, the dialogue with OEWD and some of these improvements that have been made, um, your commitment to to fix some of these oversights.

If you can share any of that, and and the work you're doing too.

I mean, we have a high level understanding from the referral numbers, but we'd love to hear more specifics on the impact that you're making as well.

Absolutely.

So, first let me ask sort of the first-party question.

So um having been a grantee of uh so I was previously employed at Bay Area Community Resources, and part of what you're witnessing is the transition of um contract oversight from uh a Bay Area Community Resources over to a mission language and vocational school, um, but in the time I have been with Latinal Task Force between both organizations.

Um we I have had a lot of experience being monitored by OEWD.

Um there have I think you know that what you're witnessing to be honest is a reflection of this being a contract that started during the pandemic.

And if folks remember the pandemic was kind of a hard time, right?

And I think um to OEWD's credit, uh I think they've tried to really maintain as much of the flexibility that really started during the pandemic itself.

Um that said, I have seen um like many nonprofits, an uptick in policy and um compliance, and it's something that we um are familiar with with other OEWD contracts, um, but also welcome that oversight.

We're already making um changes that we have um been hearing from OED OEWD and other departments that are very similar in nature, that is really being applied to all nonprofits.

Um so it's definitely not a concern for us.

Um we're definitely, you know, willing to comply.

Uh what we're hearing makes a lot of sense.

Um, and so for the first part, absolutely, no question there.

Um, in terms of the uh second piece to the question, uh in terms of uh impact, uh, you know, I've I've been blessed to uh be uh responsible for the operation of the of the resource hubs under Latino Task Force, which was the original operator throughout this, you know, since 2020.

Um and uh we have witnessed some significant impact.

I think during the pandemic, first where we're seeing um the uh just like the just the life-saving resources that that really came from our recovery hubs or resource hubs.

Um as we transition from the pandemic and move from a from this um COVID response model into recovery, um, what we have seen is that uh folks, our community, our immigrant population, our folks at color in San Francisco are still recovering from what they impacted, what what the ways that they were impacted during the pandemic, and that looks like being uh food insecure, that looks like being housing insecure, that looks like being uh underemployed, and so that is what recovery has looked like for us as we have transitioned in the last few years post-pandemic.

Um, and so what so in that and you know, obviously the data doesn't really show a full picture.

You see, for last year alone, 7,150 individuals.

Um, if we dig a little deeper, we'll see that uh the highest needs, for example, were in housing, employment and literally basic needs from food to even hygiene.

Um many times when folks come to this country for the first time and and to San Francisco specifically, they come to us because we are a trusted, uh our sites are trusted in community, and so um folks in community are telling other folks to come in and and that they're safe with us.

Um and when there are fires in community, it's Red Cross refers them to us.

So we are very trusted by really reputable organizations and institutions.

When the strike hit where for SFUSD, we opened up our doors and made sure the families and the students were taken care of.

So I think what since 2020, we have really um beyond the the beyond COVID have been a site about that has really been about responding to crisis, and so we're very proud of that track record, um, but willing to um do what we need to wrap up this year, and as OEWD leadership mentioned, uh we did apply to the most recent RFP and were awarded uh as one of the eight job centers um with the lead agency being mission language and vocational school.

Thanks for sharing all that.

And I think you know, from from that and also when my colleague speaks to the good work you're doing and take that seriously.

I just want to see that reflected in the numbers.

So, you know, to hear that uh the numbers, you know, you stop counting the uh the participants, the clients at a certain point once you hit the goal.

I mean, that's um concerning.

Can you speak to how you've already changed how you're doing intake or how you're doing tracking to fix that?

Yeah, I think I think what you're seeing in the 7,150 is the right direct impact of the folks that like literally come to our resource hubs and say, Hey, I need help with a job, hey, I I need I don't have a place to sleep tonight, that kind of thing.

Um, and then there's a number of other folks that we are serving um with food distribution, for example, that may not even show up in the numbers.

So I think what we're look what we're looking at is really like two tiers of data in a sense, the really intent folks that are really in terms of served in really intensive ways, and then those who are served maybe kind of a one-off, just like needing something in the media, um, and and so when that happens, I think folks who have done crisis work before knows sometimes you give folks what they need and they don't come back, and so going through like a a process of collecting all their name and cut and information, you know, that really takes building relationships and collecting that information.

So what we have done uh more recently is to make sure that um we are capturing in real time to the extent that clients feel comfortable, of course, because that's the other thing we're seeing is a lot of folks are afraid.

Especially with the, you know, as it as uh was mentioned previously, we're serving vulnerable folks who are immigrants who during the during the immigration enforcement were very fearful, so there were definitely times where we've had to serve them and they didn't necessarily feel comfortable sharing their information.

So we have done some things to really make sure that we are collecting information more on the front end, um, following up, and you know, we're continuing to offer more services to really build the continuous relationship, even if there's not a continuous uh you know crisis that we're responding to them individually, but just making sure that they know that that we're that we're here and and and willing to continue and that requires sharing additional information so that we can log it.

Yeah, I think.

Well, it's true.

I I also don't think that that's that dynamic is what prohibits you from continuing to.

I mean, in the fact that the participant data is landed exactly to your goal.

I mean, that's uh that's curious, and and so that is specifically what I think we all want to see changed.

Um, uh okay.

Um very well.

Um thanks for being here and uh working through this with the department.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, Supervisor Sauter.

Uh I am looking to see if in the events that this body approve this item today to um be out to full board for vote.

I want to understand because this item is actually retroactive.

Um, but if I understand correctly, budget and legislative analysts indicated that there's still invoices that have not been received.

Um to clarify, we amended this contract in February to add $500,000.

We have uh received invoices for that current amount.

Uh we shared those invoices with uh analyst menard, and so we have with with what we are currently in contract with, we have invoices and documentation with respect to that amount.

The retroactive to increase the amount by an additional 1.5 invoices obviously have not been submitted because we're not in contract uh with the organization.

So uh is your question around Well, my question is that but that's retroactive additional dollars that we're approving.

Yes, but I get that you don't have contract yet.

We're not in contract for the additional 1.5 million dollars.

Therefore, the contractor could not submit invoices for the additional 1.5.

But we have received invoices for the current $500,000 that we are encumbered for.

But it's retroactive for the additional dollars.

The additional 1.5, yes, it's retroactive for services that have been continuously provided.

Yes.

Right.

So we're approving a retroactive 1.5 million dollars.

Yes.

And yet you still don't have the invoice for that retroactive 1.5 million.

No, because invoices cannot be some.

So we are currently in contract.

The remaining balance for that contract for this fiscal year is currently $500,000.

We have the department has received invoices for that amount.

We are seeking approval to retroactively add an additional 1.5 million dollars.

There have been expenses occurred by the provider, but invoices have not been submitted to the department for the additional 1.5.

We have been shared what from the provider, how much funding, how many expense how much expenses has been incurred directly by the provider, but those invoices have not yet been submitted to the department.

And is it procedurally typically that's how it happens when you're in contract, and as you complete the contract, then you will put them provide the invoice.

This year has been a painful year for OEWD when we were asked to put a lot of our staff hiring on hold.

Our contracts team became very decimated.

We went from a team of eight people down to 2.5 to the point where we had to reassign staff within the department to support the team to play catch up on several contracts.

And so this along with many contracts, just we had a backup in the queue of just an enormous amount of work to catch up on.

Are we saying that should this item go out to full board next Tuesday?

There's no way that invoices can be provided to you.

Absolutely.

Invoices, once we get into contract, invoices can be submitted by the provider and we can process those.

We have been able to work to fill our contracts and our finance team back up to services, and we work tirelessly to just work through our log, but we're confident we are able to once those invoices are submitted to the department being able to pay them within 30 days.

Let me try to ask that more specifically.

Are you saying that then you know should this actually agreement get out of this body?

Then we will then you will be able to process that invoices before a full board vote on Tuesday.

No, we will not be able to do that.

We will need to move to the full board, get the board's approval.

We will need to wait the mayor's signature on this piece of legislation.

We will be able to execute contract within three to five business days after the mayor signs.

Once he signs that we will have the city attorney, our executive director, and the NBACR execute the signatures, and once those are executed, invoices can be submitted for this additional 1.5 million dollars.

Okay, thank you.

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

Let's go to public comment on this item.

Yes, right now opening public comment for this item number two.

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

Seeing no public comments, public comment is now close.

What is your will?

What are your thoughts?

Thank you, Chair Chan.

Um, I understand um, you know, serving especially when we are talking about marginalized uh immigrant community.

Um, I just want to continue to uphold that uh we continue to improve in monitoring, tracking, and making sure that report compliance is being strengthened, so then we make sure that we are re providing the direct services that is serving the most marginalized community and also uh making sure that this programs uh continue to be successful.

Um I also understand uh that you know, Chair Chan, you asked lots of questions about procedurals and practices and and policies, and and I think this is in a time where um, because my understanding is the services already being provided, and this is really also essential, uh, especially to District 9, 10, and 11.

Um, and I would still recommend that we continue to uh work with the department and making sure that what with our community programs to make sure that we continue to have um good good poll calls and and good compliances to make sure that we uh spending our tax dollar in a responsible way and move forward and then continue our conversation and that that that is my position to continue to recommend that um the committee to support and vote this piece of uh item out of committee with positive recommendation.

Understood, thank you.

Um thank you, Chair.

Uh you know, I'm trying to weigh the uh the real shortcomings we've heard here, and I think it's it's uh it's unclear how much of that falls on OEWD and the monitoring versus the provider themselves.

I don't think I could support this with recommendation.

I think this is something you know we need to send a uh a signal to our colleagues that there are concerns here.

Uh, there's you know good work happening and it's supported by the district supervisor, but there's also uh grave concerns as flagged by BLA.

Uh for me, uh, you know, that means uh we should send this without recommendation uh at the very least.

Um, so I would uh make a motion to send this to the full board without recommendation, understood.

Vice Chair Dorsey, your thoughts.

I as a practice, I think when we send it out for um to the full board without recommendation, I think it's a courtesy to our colleagues to discuss some issues that we may have some reservations similarly to how we did it yesterday.

I just thought it was a courtesy to people about some one of the items that deserved everybody's attention.

The budget committee, in the in particular, I think has an obligation to the rest of our colleagues because we're the legislative branch and control the purse strings to just explain things when there's a discussion about them.

So it's it has been a practice.

I think it's a good one.

I'll support it.

Understood.

Um we close plop by comments.

And so let's do roll call on the motion to send to the full board without recommendation.

And on that motion by member solder.

That we refer this resolution to the full board without recommendation.

Vice Chair Dorsey.

Dorsey, aye.

Member Sauter.

Sauter, aye, Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Thank you, Supervisor Chim.

And with that, Mr.

Clerk, please call item number three.

Yes, item number three is a resolution approving modification number one to a contract with SITA Information Networking Computing USA Inc.

for support of airports shared use passenger processing systems to extend the term for three years for a total term of July 1st, 2024 through June 30th, 2029, and increase the contract amount by approximately 9.7 million for a new contract amount not to exceed approximately 16.8 million pursuant to the charter.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

And today we have SFO here.

Good morning, Chair Chan, Vice Chair Dorsey.

I'm uh Supervisor Sauter.

Daniel Sang with SFO.

Uh today the airport request is your approval for modification number one to extend professional service contract with CETA information network computing USA Incorporated.

Uh this modification increases the contract amount by nine million seven hundred thousand five hundred and forty six dollars for a new total amount not to exceed sixteen million seven hundred and eighty thousand five hundred and forty six dollars.

In addition, it updates the scope of service and exercises the three-year option to extend the term to June 30th, 2029.

Uh CEDA serves as the system administrator for the passenger processing system and provides level one support, which focuses on identifying, documenting, and resolving frontline users, custom and customer issues related to the PPS system.

They are responsible for managing troubled tickets, responding to airline service requests, repairing or replacing defective equipment, tracking spare parts inventory, and maintaining consumable supplies such as printer paper, uh bag tags, and uh boarding passes.

Under this modification, the scope of work will update the list of supported vendor applications, installed hardware and equipment counts, and level one support services will continue to be provided 24 hours a day and seven days a week.

The airport reviews uh the trends with uh the contractor weekly, and the contractor also issues a monthly report as part of the performance monitoring, and the contract meet the contractor meet or exceeds expectations in all acclaimable performance categories, and the BLA has recommended approval.

I'm happy to answer any questions after.

Thank you.

I'm sorry, go ahead.

My apologies.

Item three is a resolution that approves an uh an amendment to the airport's contract with CEDA networking.

The amendment increases the value of the contract to 16.8 million dollars and extends the agreement through June 2029.

You can see so CETA uh basically maintains the passenger processing systems in the airport.

So it's the terminals where you get your boarding passes and bag tax and things like that throughout the airport.

Uh you can see the performance on page nine of our report.

Their performance is measured by the speed with which they respond to and resolve uh help tickets related to those terminals, and you can see that they're meeting the expectations of the contract or are just very high, close to 98% in most cases.

Uh on page nine of the report, you can also see the budget for this contract.

It's 3.2 million dollars a year.

Uh funded by airport revenues.

We recommend approval of item three.

Thank you.

I don't see any name on the roster.

I don't have additional question at this moment.

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

Yes, so we have any members of the public question addresses this committee regarding this item number three.

That was your opportunity.

Madam Chair, we have no speakers.

Seeing no public comments, public comment is now closed.

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

On that motion to refer to the full board with recommendation, Vice Chair Dorsey.

Dorsey, aye, member solder.

Sodder, aye, Chair Chan.

Aye, Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And Mr.

Clark, please call item number four.

Yes, item number four has a resolution retroactively authorizing the Office of Cannabis to accept and expand a grant award in the not to exceed amount of approximately two point one million and to expend interest earned or accrued on grant funds for the grant term of April 1st, 2026 through October 31st, 2027 from the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development for the local equity grants program for local jurisdictions to execute the agreement with the governor's office and any extensions or amendments there too on behalf of the city and county to indemnify the governor's office for liability arising out of the performance of this contract and approving the grant agreement pursuant to the charter.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

And we have the city administrator's office here.

Yes, good morning, Chair Chan.

Vice Chair Dorsey, Supervisor Sauter.

I'm Angela Yip here on behalf of the Office of Cannabis.

And today I'm here as we are every year to request your approval to accept and expend a grant from the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development, also known as GoBiz.

So following the state passage of Proposition 64, GoBiz established the cannabis equity grants program for local jurisdictions to help local governments support equity cannabis applicants and licensees.

And this year, the Office of Cannabis has been awarded a GoBiz grant in the amount of $2,169,952 to fund our local social equity grants program.

A little bit of background about our program.

Since 2020, the Office of Cannabis has routinely secured state grants to support social equity permitting and compliance in San Francisco.

And since then, the office has distributed over $13 million in state funded grants directly to over 90 local businesses.

These businesses can utilize the funding to help pay for rent, capital improvements, regulatory fees, testing, equipment, and many other costs associated with running a successful and compliant cannabis business in the regulated market.

To date, our social equity grant program has a utilization rate of over 95%, and recipients self-report that they are satisfied over 90% of recipients are satisfied with the program.

Supervisors, we know that cannabis business owners face many challenges to operating in the regulated market, and this grant is an important resource to help businesses remain compliant.

We're very grateful to the state for their continued support with funding and to the board uh to date for your support of this program.

Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair Dorsey.

Thank you, Chair Chan.

I just wanted to ask about the use of the grant for funding with compliance.

I know that there are for a lot of the vendors a sort of good neighbor policy.

Um I will mention that I've over the years have been around for a lot of the policy debates about this going back to a time when there was a lot of suspicion about then medical cannabis establishments.

What was interesting to me was when I became a supervisor, it happened in at least two neighborhoods where I heard from neighbors of cannabis dispensaries how much they appreciated having a cannabis dispensary in their neighborhood because there was a security guard on site.

And it was really interesting to me to see that what was envisioned years ago as a good neighborhood to have you know to minimize the public nuisances was actually turning out to be really good neighbors that were really appreciated by local businesses and residents in the area.

So to the extent we can help, um, you know, this kind of grant helps those businesses.

Is that something that is uh is an appropriate or allowable use of those funds?

Yes, absolutely.

And we also have deputy director of the office of cannabis, Jeremy Schwartz here, and he's helped me confirm that yes, absolutely uh businesses can can use these funds to support compliance with their good neighbor policies.

Okay, um, I just I mean I I will say I I appreciate that the state does this, and I think there are some challenges that um you know these businesses in a in a sort of newly regulated space where there's a lot of unregulated and illicit competition.

Um, you know, I'm sensitive to what these businesses are facing, and I appreciate the work that we're doing to help them succeed.

Thank you, Vice Chair Dorsey.

Thank you, and we'll go to public comment on this item.

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

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

Seeing no public comments, public common is now closed, um colleagues.

I would like to make the motion to move this item to full board with recommendation and a roll call, please.

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

Dorsey, I member Sauter.

Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, I we have three ayes.

The motion passes.

And Mr.

Clark, please call item number five.

Yes, item number five is a resolution authorizing all city and county departments to submit applications for all grants funded by the 2024 climate bond or California proposition four for which they are eligible.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

And we have Department of Environment here.

Good morning.

My name is Alice Hurr, and I'm the senior policy and public affairs coordinator for the environment department.

I'm here to discuss a resolution that authorizes all city apartments to apply for proposition four grants.

Prop 4 or the 2024 climate bond was a voter approved measure that authorized a multi-billion dollar investment in local projects that strengthen communities through initiatives like protecting drinking water, reducing wildfire and flood risks, restoring natural places, and a number of other environmental and climate causes.

As of May 2026, there was $4 billion in funding available.

However, to apply for this funding, certain grant administrating states agencies require jurisdictions to have a resolution in place at the time of application authorizing interested parties to apply for and execute documents in relation to these grants.

Resolutions to apply are a common minimum requirement for state level grant applications, and city departments cannot apply for these competitive Prop 4 uh grant opportunities without one.

The resolution before you today for consideration serves as this minimum requirement, and a major grant application cycle is due at the end of June.

For city departments to engage in this cycle, this resolution must be approved before that grant due date.

The environment department and as well as a number of other city departments are looking at a number of prop four grant opportunities, and so we've coordinated with many of them on this resolution that will allow departments to apply for these grants.

Thank you.

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

I don't have additional questions.

We'll go to public comment on this item.

Yes, we're opening public comment on this item number five.

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

Seeing no public commons, public comment is now closed.

Thank you for bringing this grant before us today.

We appreciate it.

I hope that we will be successful in receiving the grant.

And with that, um I would like to move this item to full board with recommendation and a roll call, please.

And I motion to refer to the full board with recommendation.

Vice Chair Dorsey, Dorsey, aye.

Member Sauter.

Aye.

Sauter, aye, Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, aye.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And Mr.

Clark, please call item six and seven together.

Yes, item numbers six and seven are resolutions retroactively authorizing the police department to execute the following.

Item number six uh is an amendment to a grant agreement with the board of state and community corrections for the organized retail theft prevention grant program extending the grant term from June 1st, 2027 for a new grant term of October 1st, 2023 through June 1st, 2028, with no change to the grant amount of approximately 15.3 million.

Item number seven, uh accepts and expands an in-kind gift of 1800 units of naloxone in 2025, valued at 43.2,000 through the naloxone distribution project, which is funded by the substance abuse and mental health Services Administration and administered by the Department of Health Care Services.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

And today we have the uh police department here.

Good morning, Chair Chan, Vice Chair Dorsey.

This item retroactively authorizes SFPD to execute amendment number one to our existing organized retail theft grant from the California Board of State and Community Corrections or BSEC.

This amendment is a no cost extension.

It extends the grant term from June 1st, 2027 to June 1st, 2028.

Again, with no increase in funding and no expansion of previously authorized expend expenditures.

The grant amount will remain 15.3 million dollars.

The item is retroactive because after the department submitted the signed amendment following approval of our no cost extension request.

We determined with BSEC that the board's prior authorization did not expressly authorize execution of grant amendments or include the extended grant term.

An updated board resolution is therefore required by BSEC before the amendment can be fully executed.

Again, the amendment does not add funding or change the scope of the grant.

It simply provides additional time to fully expend the remaining funds and complete required reporting, audits, invoicing, and close out activities.

The grant has greatly supported SFPD's efforts to combat organized retail theft crime citywide.

Since October 1st, 2023, SFPD has recorded 9,227 organized retail crime incidents and has made 4,178 organized retail crime arrests.

For these reasons, the department respectfully requests this committee's recommendation of the resolution.

Happy to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Sorry, that was for retail theft.

Sorry, Vice Chair Dorsey.

Just for my edification.

When we have data on organized retail theft incidents, how do we know that it's organized versus I don't know?

You know, there are some categories of retail theft that are more, I think we said we think of sort of like addiction driven or sort of one offs as opposed to more sophisticated um organized efforts.

Like how do you know when we're calculating the data on that?

So the grant actually funds an analyst within our organized retail crime uh task force who receives incident reports, analyzes those insert incident reports along with uh the investigators assigned to those cases to make those determinations, which is how we're able to track that data.

Thank you.

Would you like to move on to the next item?

Certainly.

The next item retroactively authorizes SFPD to accept and expend an in-kind gift of 1,800 units of naloxone received from the state's naloxone distribution project.

The naloxone was provided by a state administered program funded by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

It's valued at 43,200.

The items retroactive because the state automatically ships the naloxone after approving the department's applications, and the department receives the naloxone before board consideration of accept and expend.

And that's been the department's practice over the last several years.

The naloxone is used to support overdose response efforts and help combat opioid overdose related deaths.

For these reasons, we respectfully request this committee's recommendation of the resolution.

Happy to answer any questions.

Thank you.

I don't see any name on the roster.

I don't have additional questions.

Let's go to public comments on these both of these items.

Thank you.

Yes, we are now opening public comment for both these item numbers six and seven.

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 now closed.

Colleagues, I would like to move both items to full board with recommendation and a roll call, please.

And on a motion to refer both resolutions to the full board with the recommendation.

Dorsey, I.

Member Sauter, Soder, I.

Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, I.

We have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Yes, item number eight is a resolution approving and uh unamended and restated lease agreement between the city and county and TADS Inc.

for a the retail space located at 44 Ellis Street in the Ellis O'Farrell Garage to amend the calculation of the monthly base rent to a percentage rent calculated as eight percent of gross revenues retroactive to January 1st, 2021, to amend the monthly water charge to 2.4,000 retroactive to February 1st, 2024, to amend the calculation of base rent and water charge during the first option to extend to require TADS to pay a $4,000 administrative fee to impose minimum hours of operation to waive TAD's obligation to pay base rent for the period beginning on April 1st, 2020 through December 31st, 2020, and to waive TAD's obligation to pay outstanding water charges for the period beginning February 1st, 2020 to January 31st, 2024.

Effective upon approval of this resolution through the expiration date of April 30th, 2029.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

And Supervisor Soder.

Thank you, Chair Chan.

Um, we are continuing to work with MTA on a few final items here.

Uh, particularly on this lease agreement.

Uh so after public comment, it's my intention to ask for a continuance to June 17th on this item.

Thank you.

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

Yes, we are now opening public comment for this item for the continuance of this item number eight.

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

See no public comments, public comment is now closed.

Um, on the motion to continue to June 17th, uh roll call, please.

And on that motion by member solder that we continue this resolution to the June 17th meeting of this committee.

Vice Chair Dorsey, Dorsey, I.

Member Sauter.

Solder, aye, Chair Chan.

I.

Chan I.

We have three eyes.

The motion passes.

Um, my apologies.

I recognize that it needs to have amendments, and my assumption is the amendments are actually not ready.

And then on the 17, we will amend it.

But I want to be clear that it seems like the amendments will be substantive.

And and should that happen.

Sorry, I just wanted to say out loud for the continuance that if the amendments that is going to make to be made and approved on the 17th and is substantive, and then it will have to continue, it will then go into July.

Because all the budget, it will be the only budget and finance committee meeting June 17.

June 17 will be the last budget and finance committee for the month of June.

And then the next one will be on in July.

I just want to make sure that we're all.

Is that if that correct?

And then also if that's okay.

Deputy City Attorney Brad Russian my understanding on this item is that the department wishes to revise the lease to include an escalation provision on the rent for the first extension period that's available under the lease, and that they're going to prepare the draft of that amendment so that it's in the file for the board for the committee to hear before the next committee hearing, and that the actual resolution doesn't need to be amended.

I think that if the file is complete before the committee here, when the item is noticed, that um the committee can move forward with it on that date without there being a continuance.

Thank you.

Thank you for the clarification.

I just want to make sure of that, and then with that, let's call the next item is item number nine.

Yes, item number nine is a resolution approving and authorizing the director of property on behalf of the Department of Public Health to execute an office lease for the continued use of office space located at 796 Brandon Street, floor two, with 796 Brandon Street LLC as landlord effective upon approval of this resolution and upon execution of the office lease by the director of property with an estimated commencement date of July 1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2031, with two five-year extension options.

The initial term starting at a monthly base rent of approximately 3.3,000 for a total annual base rent of approximately 40.7,000 with annual 3% increases and authorizing the director to take other actions in respect to the office lease, uh, including entering into amendments or modifications and exercising extension options, who are taking other actions with respect to the office lease that the director or property deems to be in the best interest of the city and do not materially increase the obligations nor liabilities, do not materially decrease the benefits of the city are necessary or advisable to effectuate the purposes of the office lease or this resolution and are in compliance with all applicable laws, including the city's charter.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

And today we have Rio Este here on behalf of the Department of Public Health.

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

Yes, I'm here to present to you and seek your approval of a resolution authorizing the a new lease for an existing facility at 796 Brandon on the second floor.

And before I get into the real estate points, I have uh David Leva with the Jail Health Services who has worked at this facility for over 20 years to tell you a little bit about what they do.

Good morning, everyone.

Thank you for the opportunity to share some uh information on our program.

Um so uh my name is David Leva.

I'm a health program coordinator with Jail Health Services.

Um I work for an agency called HIV and Integrated Services, which is a program of Joe Health, and our small and amazing team provide status neutral services and dedicated care coordination of some of the most vulnerable and at high risk for contract some of the most vulnerable and um uh high risk patients for contracting HIV or HEPC.

And our program provides a variety of services to the incarcerated population of San Francisco, and some of those services include primary medical care and custody and post-release comprehensive case management, reentry discharge planning, STI testing and treatment, uh care coordination services, and custody health education groups, overdose prevention and narcand distribution services, and linkage and navigation to medical mental health, substance use, and housing services.

Um, this office space has served as our administrative headquarters outside of the jails since the early nineties, and the current jail facilities lack a dedicated workspace uh to fit our team of ten.

Um, and this dedicated work office space helps to have uh helps to give us a secure and private place for staff meetings, individual supervision sessions, trainings, individual um uh work stations, and an opportunity to have a space outside of the jail facility.

Thank you.

So we're we're seeking a term of five years with uh two additional options.

We have uh the rent is forty dollars a square foot, uh three percent annual escalations.

It includes um two uh parking spaces, which would actually lower the rent closer to thirty-three dollars when you take that into consideration.

Operational expenses are completely covered except for the trash, which is eighteen dollars a month.

Um, and we're just uh seeking your approval of this resolution.

If you have any questions, David and I are both here to answer them.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We appreciate your work.

Um, we'll go to public comment on this item.

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

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 comments now closed.

Thank you and uh colleagues.

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

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

Dorsey, I.

Member Sauter, Sauter, aye, Chair Chan.

I chan.

I we have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um, Mr.

Clerk, can we call items 10 and 11 together?

Yes, item number 10 and 11 are resolutions with the following.

Item number 10 authorizes the Department of Public Health to enter into a performance contract with the California Department of Healthcare Services, incorporating the Behavioral Health Services Act, Lantern Petra Short Act, projects for assistance in transition from homelessness, community mental health services block grant, substance use prevention, treatment and recovery services block grant and crisis counseling assistance and training program for the period of July 1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2029, and item number 11 approves amendment number one to the agreement between the city and county acting by and through the Department of Public Health and Westside Community Mental Health Center to provide short-term respite beds plus health stabilization support for people experiencing homelessness to extend the term by two years from June 30th, 2026 for a new term of June 2nd, 2025 through June 30th, 2028, and to increase the amount by approximately 13.7 million for a new total not to exceed amount of 21.4 million and to authorize DPH to enter to amendments or modifications to the agreement had 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 item 11 has a budget and legislative analyst report.

So let's go to item number 10 for the presentation, and then we'll go to an item 11 for the presentation, and then we'll go to right after the presentation, we'll go to the BLA report.

An item for the Department of Public Health, Behavioral Health Services, to enter into agreements with the State Department of Healthcare Services for a contract named Performance Contract, which includes four programs, sorry, six programs administered by the Department of Healthcare Services.

These programs include the Behavioral Health Services Act, the Lutterman Petri Short Act, known as LPS, projects for assistance in transition from homelessness, community mental health services block grant, the substance use prevention treatment and recovery services block grant, and the crisis counseling assistance and training program.

This contract term will be from July 1st, 2026 to June 30th of 2029.

The current contract, which was previously approved by this body, the Budget and Finance Committee was approved back in May of 2021 and is sets to expire June of this month.

So next slide, please.

So those programs are administered by the state, but um locally are operated by the Behavioral Health Services Division of DPH, and there is no funding included in this contract itself.

The performance contract establishes compliance and reporting standards, including but not limited to expenditure requirements, minimum service standards, beneficiaries protections, and fiscal and service reporting requirements.

The funding is included in the Mails proposed budget as part of the annual city budget process.

By Chair Dorsey.

Thank you, Chair Chair.

So it's curious, are there new reporting um compliance or performance requirements in this contract compared to uh the current agreement?

Yes.

So one change that has um taken place uh in advance of this uh new contract is what is referred to as Behavioral Health Services Act that was previously known as the Mental Health Services Act, and I believe the last week or so um there was a hearing that was held in this committee for the BHSA integrated plan.

So that plan in itself um includes new requirements around how the BHS funding or used to fund programs, what types of programs, what reporting, etc.

I also wanted to ask um there's prevention.

I it looks like there's substance use prevention treatment recovery services block grant, there's their services on prevention.

How does um could you describe like how you what kind of prevention services there are for this?

Right.

So the various provision services include like uh media campaign um educational um programs to increase awareness to um prevent uh the serious or persistent mental illness, as well as early intervention, so really providing communication in different languages in different communities, part partnering with various community-based organizations to um again increased knowledge and education when it comes to those that at risk, especially of communities of colors at risk of experiencing um mental illness or substance use disorder.

Okay.

The reason I ask is just when we having worked on um drug policy, especially around when we had a hearing on four pillars, which is a European approach that talks about prevention, treatment, harm reduction, and enforcement.

I've noticed among jurisdictions sometimes we the prevention is defined differently.

Um it's often sort of sequenced as let's keep people off of it's more of a public awareness campaign before the fact.

But I've also seen approaches to prevention that include things like relapse prevention.

In other words, it's almost a post-treatment re uh investments that we can be making, which is a form of prevention because you've made investments in people's treatment and recovery.

What can we do now to make investments to keep them there?

Um it's just an it's it's sort of a as I've worked on this.

I it I have noticed that the term prevention isn't necessarily shared among jurisdictions, how we approach that.

So I was just curious if that's is relapse prevention ever considered part of the prevention strategy?

Yes, I mean any uh form of uh preventing anyone to relapse, it's uh it's a uh acceptable intervention because obviously your goal is to prevent people from reverting back to you know the challenges that they had prior to recovery.

Okay, thanks.

Are you welcome?

Thank you.

Um we're ready to go to item 11.

Thank you so much.

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

My name is Kelly Hom.

I am the Director of Substance Use Services for the Department of Public Health Behavioral Health Services.

Um next slide.

DPH is here today seeking approval for an amendment to extend our contract with West Side Community Mental Health Center for their Eleanor Fagan Center, which provides short-term respite and stabilization for individuals experiencing homelessness.

This amendment would extend the terms of their contract to from June 30th, 2026 through June 30th, 2028 for a total of three years, and the amendment would increase the not-to-exceed amount by 13.7 million, bringing the total just under 21.5 million.

The Eleanor Fagan Center is located at 1018 Mission Street.

It provides a safe place for individuals who are unhoused who also are experiencing issues with substance use as their first step in exiting homelessness.

Individuals will receive support and linkages to housing treatment and recovery in a drug-free environment.

It's a partnership between Westside and San Francisco Department of Public Health, along with the San Francisco Homelessness and Supportive Housing.

All clients will receive a full assessment, including medical, mental health, and substance use needs assessment.

The length of stay is for about three months, and their capacity is 72 beds.

And I also just wanted to provide a little bit of um outcome data.

So it's been in existence since it's opened in um August of 18.

I mean, sorry, August 18th of 2025, they have provided around 5,000 encounters serving 183 unique individuals, with 93% of those folks leaving with a referral to the next step in their treatment and recovery.

Um we respectfully request your approval.

Uh we are in alignment with the BLA recommendations to uh move this to full board.

Thank you.

Vice Chair Dorsey.

Um thank you, Chair Chan.

Can you go over the numbers again?

Um there was the number the data on encounters and then individual unique individuals served and then.

Yes, about oh, this not necessarily in the slides, but 5,000 encounters.

Serving 183 unique individuals.

Okay.

And what's the successful, I guess the I'm trying to think of how we phrase it.

It's sort of a successful placement to the next step rate.

And 93% are leave Eleanor Fagan with a referral to the next step in their treatment or recovery pathway.

Okay.

Can you just to help us understand that that is we we know that they're going, they're confirmed when they leave.

It means that they've been engaged in conversations about um how the next what treatment options are available for them, in terms also including housing and medical supports that they can follow up with.

And they've successfully talked to them about, you know, what are what are the benefits of treatment, how to engage in treatment.

Um, yes.

Okay, that's great.

Thanks.

Thank you.

I I actually like to piggyback on that too, that when they exit the program, um, because they're these are actually unhoused individuals.

So does that actually mean that besides the treatment in its salve, it also comes with housing.

They can be referred to residential treatment, they can also be referred to housing supports, and so these are this is beyond the scope of this um respite service.

So this service is focused really on stabilization and respite and then linkages to existing other services.

And could you actually help I mean understand what it means by field base?

Yes.

So uh so West Side Community Mental Health Services operates a mental health facility located um at 12th and Howard, and they set they have clinicians that will come on site to the 1018 mission location to engage with clients to have complete assessments to evaluate what are the next steps for the individual.

So the primary location where the facilities license for that mental health service is located on 12th Street.

And sorry.

So what you're trying to tell me is, or I I want to understand if I understand correctly, is that clearly, you know, the physicians actually have a base where they could probably have clients visit, but really um the field-based program, the approach is really the physicians for clinicians, they're going to shelter sites.

They're going to the Eleanor Fagan Center, so that it's a ends up being a one-stop shop that the the individuals at Eleanora Fagin do not have to leave in order to uh seek that other professional service.

Yeah, because I'm just trying to also understand too.

I think that um chief uh policy chief Cuno Modi has mentioned in a past when we have these shelter um or slash hotel, I should say um that we uh end up inherited during the pandemic, um clearly some of them become a shelter or are housing that is not quite permanent, but then clearly can turn into clinical treatment in those spaces.

I'm just kind of curious to see if this is like one of those models that we end up going to be investing in.

So this is is designed, it's really not designed as shelter.

I mean, shelter seems to be more there's a longer length of time in in their stay.

Um this is really meant to just really stabilize them and link them to the next level.

Interesting.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yeah, thank you.

I appreciate the information.

Thank you for the question.

No, I thank you, Chair Chan.

I really like um I you're sort of picking up on where you are.

One of the things that I know in some of our programs, permanent supportive housing, for example, I've said, I I often feel that the issue that we sometimes have with permanent supportive housing isn't with the permanent supportive housing providers, it's with we, the city, asking permanent supportive housing to solve problems that it was never designed to solve, and that's one of the reasons that I think this model is really something I'm optimistic about because this is endeavoring to solve problems and work with behavioral health needs in a clinical capacity.

This is this it feels to me like among the missing elements.

This is one of them.

So I'm really encouraged to hear some good numbers.

I still I haven't had time to sort of dig in, but you'll probably be hearing from me offline because I would love to uh get a little bit better informed and come down and visit again because I've been there once or twice.

But we welcome it.

Okay, thanks.

My apologies, I'm a little bit out of sort.

Do we do BLA report?

No.

I'm so sorry.

No problem.

I had a long night, so I'm sorry.

It's always like that the day after election day.

Yes.

Item 11 is a resolution that approves an amendment to the DPH contract with the West Side.

The amendment extends the agreement through June 2028 and increases the value to 21.5 million dollars.

Uh you can see the performance of the program uh year to date on pages 21 and 22 of the report.

Some of that was uh alluded to by um Ms.

Hom.

And on page 22, you can see the budget for this program is about six point six million dollars next year, um, or seventy thousand dollars per bed.

Um, it is basically the same cost as a HSH uh shelter bed, which is less medically intensive.

Um, and this contract is funded by homeless gross receipts tax, um, and ultimately it will be medical eligible, at least for um a portion of the services.

So that will also offset the city's cost.

We recommend approval of item eleven.

Thank you.

I'm also pleased to hear that it's covered by Medicaid.

You get to have reimbursement.

Um, so with that, let's go to public comment on this item on these two items.

Yes, we are opening.

Uh public comment on both these item numbers 10 and 11.

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 comments now closed.

Colleagues, I would like to send these two items to full board with recommendation and a roll call, please.

And on that motion to refer both resolutions to the full board with recommendation.

Vice Chair Dorsey.

Dorsey, I.

Member Sauter Sauter, aye.

Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, I we have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Thank you.

And Mr.

Clerk, please call items 12 and 13 together.

Yes, item numbers 12 and 13 are resolutions approving the following as it relates to real property owned by the city located at 1820 Po Street for a multifamily rental housing project known as Golden Gate Apartments with Golden Gate Departments LP as the borrower.

Item number two approves and authorizes the director of property and mayor's office of housing and community development to enter into a ground lease with the borrower for a lease term of 75 years and one 24-year option to extend and an annual base rent of 15,000 in order to re rehabilitate the project.

Execute an amended and restated loan agreement to provide the borrower with a loan and an aggregate principal amount not to exceed approximately 22.5 million to finance the project, adopting findings that the project and proposed transactions are consistent with the general plan and the eight priority policies of the planning code, confirming the planning department's determination under the California Environmental Quality Act and authorizing director of property and or director of MOCD or their designates to execute any documents related to the ground lease and the amended and restated loan agreement for the project and make certain modifications to such documents and take certain actions in furtherance of that resolution as defined.

And item number 13 approves for the purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as amended, authorizing the execution and delivery of a multifamily housing revenue note in one or more series in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed approximately 18.7 million for the purpose of providing financing for the rehabilitation of the project, approving the forms of and authorizing the executions of a funding loan agreement, providing the terms and conditions of the loan from the funding lender to the city, and execution and delivery of the note.

A project loan agreement providing the terms and conditions of the loan from the city to the borrower, a regulatory agreement and declaration of restrictive covenants, authorizing the collection of certain fees, approving modifications, changes, and additions to those documents as defined, ratifying and approving any action here to forward taken in connection with the back-to-back loans, the note and the project, and granting general authority to city officials to take actions necessary to implement the resolution and related matters as defined.

Madam Chair.

Thank you.

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

Hi, good morning.

My name is Claire Costres.

I am a project manager with the Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development.

Today we're asking to authorize the resolution for the delivery of tax exempt and taxable bond funds of up to approximately 19 million dollars.

And the resolution approving the mayor's office of housing and community development loan agreement for up to approximately 22.5 million, including a reconfiguration of existing funds on the project, and a past permanent loan with no new subsidy funds.

In addition, entering into a ground lease with the project for a term of 75 years and one 24-year option to extend with an annual base rent of $15,000.

1820 Post Street, also known as Golden Gate Apartments, is an existing 100% affordable housing development for families in the Western edition.

The development sponsor is Chinatown Community Development Center.

This project consists of 72 units made up of studios, one, two, three, and four bedroom apartments.

This project has 55 units with project-based Section 8 vouchers, and all units are restricted to 60 to 90% AMI.

The rehabilitation scope of this project includes the following upgrading exterior cladding and waterproofing, window and roof replacement, unit kitchen, bathroom and flooring replacement, accessibility improvements to the exterior path of travel, sewer line repairs, and phased tenant relocation.

Tenants will be relocated in three phases and will be temporarily relocated for not more than a year.

And all relocation funds will be funded by the project.

This project has not undergone a major rehabilitation since its acquisition by CCDC in 1999.

The total cost of this project is 75 million dollars.

With most CD's contribution of 22.6 million dollars of that, 22 million dollars is a pass hard debt mortgage.

And additionally, the $530,000 of recast of existing debt with tax credit equity of $21.9 million and income from operations of $1.9 million.

The timeline for this project will begin in July 2026 with all construction to finish in March 2028, and all residents will have returned to the project by April 2028.

And we also have the Associate Director of Housing Development from CCDC.

If there are any additional questions, thank you.

Thank you.

Item 12 is a resolution that approves an amended and restated loan agreement with Golden Gate Apartments LP, which is an affiliate of CCTC.

The loan is for 22.6 million dollars.

The resolution also approves the forgiveness of 1.3 million dollars under an existing ground lease for that site.

And the resolution finally also approves a new ground lease for the site.

We show the total project cost on page 28 of our report, which it's about a 75 million dollar rehabilitation project, with the city providing this 22.6 million dollar loan.

The bulk of it is from the past program, which has to be repaid.

MOHCD's 20 year projections for this project show that the project income will be sufficient to make those uh debt service payments.

And we recommend approval of item 12.

Thank you for your presentation.

Uh and I don't see any name on the roster.

I don't have an additional question.

Um let's go to public comments on this item.

Yes, we are opening public comment for these items 12 and 13.

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 comments now closed.

Colleagues, I would like to send these two items to full board with recommendation and the roll call, please.

And on that motion to refer both items to the full board with a recommendation, Vice Chair Dorsey.

Dorsey, aye.

Member Sauter.

Sauter, aye.

Chair Chan.

Aye.

Chan, I you have three ayes.

The motion passes.

Thank you.

And Mr.

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

Uh Madam Chair, that concludes our business.

The meetings adjourn.