tv Government Access Programming SFGTV June 9, 2018 7:00am-8:01am PDT
if the motion fails today, community input will contribute to a more transparent process that can yield a fully informed and beneficial policy that includes best practices that would address and incorporate best practices from communities across the country so good jobs are available for all of san francisco workers. thank you very much. thank you for your comments, next speaker?
the monthly payment you heard about is not a payment to the unions, it is a payment for health care. it is a payment for pensions, it is a payment for workers. that is what we in the union stand for. that is what we ask you to stand for and we don't think that has to be done at the expense of small business, but we can work together and profit together. thank you. thank you for your comments. next speaker, please? good afternoon, my time is tony rodriguez. we do work in online bay area counties. i've done this position for 11 years. for 11 years, i've dealt with project labor all over the bay area. they've worked for 11 years and people keep coming back to do them.
when you all stood in front and said how great this was for the workers, we could haverr.nnnnns nezt::::::(vbed we weren't fast tracking. the last thing i'll say is in union, contractors that are signatory to our union. i've been in my union for 35 yea years. 31 of those contractors were formal workers who decided to go into business for themselves. they were making a living, decided to stay union. when i hear about small contractors or small businesses, it all works. it's a protection for the workers is what the pla is about. anybody who is against the pla is really wanting to continue to abuse and take advantage of the workers.
i think everyone here really said they were for protecting the workers when we presented this. thank you. thank you for your comments. next speaker? good afternoon, supervisors. happy election day. my name is julianna choice summer. i'm not up here to discuss the merits of pla. we shouldn't be doing this today. i don't want to discuss the merits of pla next week either because we need more time. you've seen all the speakers who have gone ahead of me. we need a bit more time. listen, small businesses, we don't have lawyers on staff. we don't have people that can come to city hall on our behalf. we have to take time off work. these guys are busy. that's why you may not have heard from them yet. you will hear from them. we need to slow it down a little bit. there are a lot of folks that want to chime in. let's just allow them to do so. please vote no on item 28. we're having good conversations now, but i don't think we can complete it in a week. let's keep going with it.
please vote no on 28. thank you. thank you for your comments. thank you, madam chair. i represent 2500 electrical workers here in town. i'm here to speak in favor of item 28. we've heard a bunch of people say no, but i'll say yes. mike touched most of the issues that we would normally hit, as did tony. we heard from the people from the avc and we heard other people talk about opportunity for people of color, for women, e etc. our apprenticeship for inside wirement alone has more female apprentices than the abc has in northern california, just in san francisco.
where is that opportunity? we go out, we recruit. we weren't a great organization forever, but we've made great strides. and whether it's y cd asking me to come out and speak to a classroom of three people prepping for our test, we go out and do it and we make that outreach. we do work for the community, we are the community, our workers are. there's another side to this shining city. and on the other side of this shining city, people are getting robbed every day on public works projects. and the administrator's report that came out vastly underestimated it. we found more on two school projects, just electrical
workers, than what they quoted. it's rampant. and without union workers on site, you won't be able to protect those workers. thank you for your time. thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. thank you for the opportunity to speak. i'm with the chinese american democratic club. we are also opposing the motion to pull the city wide pla from the government audit and oversight committee. you know, we're not against the pla, we're not. we believe that the unions do a lot of great things. but what we do need is we need opportunities for small businesses, which are predominantly -- many of which are minority and women-owned businesses, to be able to grow and thrive and then to become union signatory. it's a symbiotic process if it's done right. when irresponsible pla's are
put in place, when small businesses are locked out, many of which are minority and women-owned. it affects the livelihoods of every single one of them that has put in blood and sweat into their businesses. i would urge the board of supervisors today to deny the motion to call up the issue into the committee as a whole. and i would encourage you to allow the unions and small contractors to continue to negotiate and to get it right. we've got an equity program and other issues. we need an equity program in our pla, thank you. thank your for your comments, next speaker? i'm here to speak on item
28 in support of item 28 for the project labor agreement. i've heard people say that this thing has been rushed through and they don't want it rushed through. nothing could be further from the truth. we've been working on this for over a year and a half. we've had multiple meetings. some of the people who spoke against item 28 were in those meetings. and the building trade has made concessions, huge concessions on some parts. so we listened and we decided the best thing to do was to meet with the small businesses and hear what their problems are. we did that and we did that multiple times. we made huge concessions. it's not like this is kust flying up here and no one's been talking about it. otherwise, like a few of my guys said earlier, we would have pushed this through months ago. but we didn't want to do that. we wanted to make sure everybody was heard. as far as the comments about
people of color not getting due process, i agree with that. but i agree that it's the people of color that are the workers that aren't getting due process. the worker that is are being exploited on all these jobs. as far as i'm concerned, this pla is about san francisco workers. union and non-union alike to make sure that they're getting what they're supposed to be getting by law. and what's right for them. and isn't this city all about that? i think it is. the small businesses still can prosper under a project labor agreement. it's been done at the school district, it's been done at the puc. i can tell you firsthand.
we've been watching on behalf of the labor council this been going on for a long time. we've been in the meetings that some of my brothers have been and sisters have been talking about recently. and that is to make sure that this is done right. . this has been in committee for over a year. there have been many amendments made.
there have been amendments galore. by the way, the labor council is in 100% support of this project. so it's time to move this forward. this is just looking like delay tactics to us when we find out that there's gonna be yet another hearing and possibly other things moving on. so we're urging you to vote yes on 28 and let's get this process finalized after all these many, many, many months. thank you for your comments. next speaker? supervisors, my name is hanson lee. i have a sister, we go to
church together and i wish to use her minutes if that's okay. no, that's not allowed in here. you can use up your two minutes and she may use her's. okay. i guess my minutes are suddenly cut in half. supervisors, i've been here many, many times when i was president of the asian american contract association. let me remind you this item 28, there's a sponsor.
four years ago, i had liver cancer. doing work there is way more full and wholehearted. but this week, i watched a movie. what we are doing now is people of color exclusive. and we are all race to the bottom. this union brother told me they want to talk to us. i guess the city or the mayor don't want to include us.
race to the bottom. this mayor, you know i wasn't a big fan of our mayor lee. but compared to this white mayor -- thank your for your comments. thank you for your comments. madam president? sir, i'm sorry. your time is up. i'm sorry. i apologize. your time is up. we have to give everyone equal time. thank you. thank you. tom gilberti, it doesn't seem like 28 is ready to go. but i'm gonna switch subjects. there was another election 50 years ago. and a gentleman won the election and then lost his life.
robert kennedy, what does it mean to be against communism if one's own system denies the value of the individual and gives all the power to the government. just as the communists do. the cold war long provided for the allies to abuse their own populations. but kennedy was declaring those days must end. everywhere the senator went, he challenged his right host. in the last years of bobby kenne kennedy, he became increasingly estranged from the washington political light. his critique of the american foreign policy became more passionate as the war in southeast asia drew on and drew the doubtful eye of the white
house that began spying on kennedy as if he was a hostile foreign agent. and then there was mr. garrison during this time. excellent book, i just finished it. we have gone a long way in the wrong direction. the labor guys right here with telling it. we need to firm up this country again and our city. it's not very well. thank you. thank you for your comments. next speaker? madam president, madam clerk, i think we can vote on 28 today. it seems like you're gonna make somebody unhappy.
i have an item for you that probably won't make anybody unhappy. i sit in the back of the room and i kind of watch what's going well and what's not going well. and you know, i noticed that there wasn't an in memoriam for dwight clark. there was? there should be an in memoriam for dwight clark. we have 30 years of football dominance in the bay area if you include the high schools, the colleges. that had an economic and financial positive for the area as well. thank your for your comments. next speaker? madam president? any other members of the public who'd like to provide public comment at this time? seeing none, public comment is now closed. and just for clarity, i submitted an in memoriam for dwight clark and did not make any comments, thank you.
supervisor fewer? thank you, president breed. colleagues, i am a strong supporter of labor and i am proud to have authored the largest and strongest project labor agreement that the san francisco unified school district has ever seen. that said, i have some questions coming up about the proposed city wide pla before the board now. and frankly, i don't understand what the urgency is. to pull this legislation from committee after 1 1/2 years of this sitting at the board. many stake holders are coming forward with concerns about this legislation that i think need to be addressed through amendments. and these amendments are likely to be subjective, requiring discussion at more than one
committee meeting. i also understand that there are many stake holders who would like to weigh in on this legislation through public comment. ultimately, the best pro-tess for this to happen is that committee, not at the full board, and i've spoken to colleague supervisor kim who has committed to scheduling this legislation at the government audit and oversight committee on june 20th. the controller's office conducted a risk benefit analysis of the proposed city wide pla in march of 2016. we acknowledge that this will result in increased costs to the city and county. and i have heard directly from one works rec and park that they expect increased costs. we have not seen a fiscal analysis of this legislation. and since it was moved from budget and finance, and i believe that this analysis is important to understand before taking action as a board, as the fiscal impact could be considerable. i also do not understand what the impact of this legislation
would be on small contractors, particularly small businesses owned by women and people of color. after hearing serious concerns from dozens of small contractors, this issue deserves further discussion. in particular, i don't believe this pla, as currently written, addresses my concern about pathways to good jobs for formally incarcerated people in san francisco's construction industry as disadvantaged workers. for all these reasons, colleagues, i urge you to vote no on this item today to allow for the discussion, thank you. thank you, supervisor fewer. supervisor peskin? thank you, madam president, colleagues. first of all, let me concur with supervisor few er. what we're discussing here is whether or not we're gonna have a committee meeting in committee or a committee meeting at the board of supervisors as a whole. that's what's before us here
today. every once in a while, we saw this a few weeks ago, it requires somebody, in this case, supervisor safai, to move the process forward by challenging us to a committee of the whole. what this has brought about is the fact that there will be, on a date certain, i've heard two different dates. june the 11th and june the 20th. i would personally prefer june the 11th, which is actually a day earlier than the full board would have heard it on june the 12th. that aside, i want to send a couple of messages. because i want to pass a pla, i would like to pass it soon. it has been sitting around for too long. and it has been sitting around for too long because no one has really, i think, done the tough work of convening the parties and hammering out the last few things that need to be hammered out. and so yes, that is on a mayor
and we're having an election today and it will be on whoever is the likely mayor in the days ahead. and i beseech the parties to do some really good work between now and six days from now, if that indeed is the date. i also want to say, as a supervisor, when you have the city administrator, who we all voted unanimously to re appoap and department heads coming and expressing concerns, my instinct is to say okay, i need to get you in a room and let's iron these things out. that has clearly not -- i don't want to say it hasn't happened, it just hasn't been successful yet. i'm not sure exactly why. but i did actually ask if there were some meetings. and yes, there were. they didn't go anywhere, in one
person's opinion. i really think it's incumbent that that hard discussion happens. it's incumbent on the parties that that hard discussion happens in the next few days. i want to pass a pla, i want to do it quickly. i think that it is right that it happen in committee. it is very extraordinary that we have a committee of the whole. and i hope that we can get this done next monday or in the next couple of meetings as the gao committee. thank you, supervisor peskin. supervisor safai? thank you, madam president. much of what i was going to say supervisor peskin said. just for clarity, the process of pulling something from a committee to the full board still allows for there to be a committee hearing. that's why we call it a committee of the whole. this process, we have been meeting with many folks in the lbe community. we have been meeting with folks in the building trade. myself and president breed have met with city departments and the city administrator. as supervisor peskin said,
there has been progress. the amended version that you see in front of you today from the perspective of the building trades, as you heard them say, has made some significant concessions on their side. that does not mean the debate is done. that means that we are going to have a committee hearing. and i met with five members of the folks from the community as well as president breed's staff just this last week and we received even more comments and we are still continuing the conversation and we're happy to continue that conversation. i don't want to get into any of the merits or any of the policies of the pla. that's not what's before us today. before us today is scheduling. and supervisor kim and i had been in conversations. we had looked at multiple dates over the last three weeks. there wasn't an ability, given all the things that were going on, particularly today being election day, to find the right time. meetings were going to happen, those meetings were cancelled.
there was one that was tomorrow. i think everyone would be on the floor exhausted. so that does not make sense either. we had discussed having it on monday, june the 11th. if that's the will of the chair of that committee, i will support that. and there will be a process. the idea that there would be no democracy in a committee of the whole is absolutely not trued. that was proposed two weeks ago by supervisor fewer to have a conversation about apartments and operation maintenance agreements. we were trying to have scheduling conversations. we were able to resolve that and we did have that committee hearing and we moved the process forward. i am in support of having it on june the 11th. i am in support of having a pla. i am in support of respecting the great work that's been done in the history of this city to support lbe's and incorporating all that great work into something. but my perspective is the perspective and always will be the perspective of workers first. and that's how i approach this
conversation. thank you, supervisor safai. just for clarify, i sit on gao committee and i've made it clear that i will not be here on june 11th. but i am planning to attend the meeting on june 20th. supervisor kim? thank you. as chair of the committee, i just want to clarify that we are working to schedule this now on monday, june 11th. we are still working to confirm this with the agenda. supervisor peskin and i will be there. so it would be great to have a replacement so that we can walk around. but i do just want to warn members of the public that we do sit on land use committee at 1:00 p.m. as much work as can happen on wednesday, thursday and friday to hammer this out and get to a consensus so that we can pass this out of committee on monday, june 11th, is appreciated. but we will be scheduling it. i think it's much more appropriate to be heard at committee than at the full board of supervisors.
and i'm happy to schedule it. thank you, supervisor kim. supervisor safai, would you like to continue to support the committee as a whole? i guess we can table that item. motion to table made by supervisor safai. seconded by supervisor peskin. colleagues, can we take that without objection. without objection, this item is tabled. madam clerk, any other items before us today? please read the in memoriam. today's meeting will be adjourned in memory of the following beloved individuals on behalf of president breed, dwight clark. on behalf of supervisor ronen for the late renee yenes. madam clerk, any other items before us today? that concludes our business
>> clerk: good afternoon. welcome to our june 4, 2018, land use committee meeting i'm katy tang. to my left, supervisor safai and i think we'll be joined by supervisor kim in a moment. our clerk is erica major. madam clerk, any announcements? >> clerk: please make sure to silence all cell phones and electronic devices. any documents to be submitted in the file submitted to the clerk. they will be on the june 4 agenda unless otherwise stated. >> supervisor tang: let call item 1. >> clerk: to re-authorizing the section 210 concerning new production, distribution and repair space and development of new production and distribution and repair appropriate findings.
>> supervisor tang: afterwards, we'll have planning staff after the presentation. >> thank you, chair, tang. and good afternoon. good afternoon to you, as well, supervisor safai. i'm an aide in malia cohen's office. and we're here to ask for your support for item 1, which supervisor legislation designed to incentivize permanently affordable pdr space. it works somewhat like on-site affordable housing model. higher-income, mixed use office space offset the cost of maintaining affordable p.d.r. it's a narrow region and p.d.r. spaces across the city. if we don't build these spaces, they will cease to exist and we want to reserve as much p.d.r. space as we can. the legislation was -- this really is removing a sunset from
a pilot program that was established in 2015. and it uses a cross-subsidation model, with the ground p.d.r. and the other 2/3 with office spaces. no residential allow. the project sponsor must submit a detailed business plan as specifying who the tenants will be, measures they're taking -- measures to ensure the building types are suitable for p.d.r. users and make an effort to work with the community and the city on hiring workers from disadvantaged backgrounds. i will invite planner diego sanchez up to give a few more technical details about how this would work. >> supervisor tang: great. thank you. and also in your presentation, you could maybe sure results of the legislation and the -- upon its expiration, i'm sure it's helped many projects in the community. if you could share if it had expired what we would be
prevented from doing. >> diego sanchez, planning department staff. superviso supervisors, the planning department heard this may 3. several members of the public testified to show their support and how successful it's been at 100 hooper site. several commissioners remarked, e e expressing their gratitude to supervisor cohen for establishing this and they voted unanimously to approve the ordinance. that's the report from planning commission. if you have further details, we can fill those in as well. thank you. >> supervisor tang: do we have any questions, comments? okay. seems like it's a good thing. so we'll good to public comment on item 1. any members of the public that wish to speak, please come on up. >> supervisors, kate service, sf maid and i will just answer directly as the project sponsor
and now owner of 150 hooper, which is part of the 100 hooper campus. this legislation is really the only tool we have right now to incentivize new construction. and very importantly, on sites that are basically empty. these are p.d.r. sites that there is nothing usable and this is really adding density and making it possible for these kinds of projects to pencil. 150 hooper itself, which is a portion of the 100 hooper project, will be open actual later this summer. it's four stories, 60,000 square feet of significantly below-market space it will house dozens of manufacturers with guaranteed more than 60% of their employees across the building being low-income at the time of hire. so it's been a resounding success and we're very excited to see more of these kinds of projects move forward. we hope you will consider supporting this today.
thank you. >> supervisor tang: thank you very much. any other members that wish to comment on item 1? okay. yes? come on up. >> good afternoon, supervisors. thor sizloski, 1850 bryant project in the mission, a nonprofit building that we're building in the p.d.r. 1g different hit. we're in support of this legislation we'd like to see if can be considered to include affordable housing as part of this. and also child care, understanding that to incentivize p.d.r. development in the city is to create public benefit as well, to allow things that create public benefit. if you can allow office, which is something that will generate income for the project, which is a public benefit. so just wanted to submit that for your consideration. >> supervisor tang: thank you very much. any other members of the public wish to comment on item 1? seeing none, public comment is now closed.
we're joined by supervisor kim. can we have a motion on item 1? >> i would like to make a motion to send it to full board with positive recommendation. >> supervisor tang: we can do that without objection. so moved. thank you very much. madam clerk, item 2, please. >> clerk: item 2 a president lose authorizing the continued operation of the navigation center located at 1950 mission street through september 30, 2018, and the continued operation of navigation center located at 20 12th street through december 31, 2021. >> supervisor tang: thank you very much. and this is an item that is sponsored by the mayor's office and supervisor kim, i don't know if she wanted to make any opening remarks? do you -- okay. >> supervisor kim: thank you, colleagues. this is just the extension of two of our first navigation centers at 1915 mission and at
the civic center hotel. because the construction will not start as originally anticipated, we're just temporarily extending 1915 mission until september 30 of this year and continue the operation of our civic center navigation center through december 31, 2021. this ensures as we're waiting for construction to begin, that vacant sites are not being left unused and continuing to house people that live on our streets at the navigation center. as soon as construction is ready to go and ready to build the housing at 1915 mission, it will be 100% affordable housing for families and that the space will be available and we will have our other navigation centers, which are currently under construction, ready to open. we do have the department of homelessness and supportive services here as well. not sure if you want to make any comments. >> supervisor tang: with that, we'll bring up emily cohen. >> thank you, supervisors. as supervisor kim said, this resolution before you will
extend operations at the original 1950 mission street and civic center hotel. you all are quite familiar with what navigation centers are, so i won't go into much detail. the 1950 mission street navigation center opened in march, 2015. it launched our building other centers. it's been part of a solution to address street homelessness. the development on site has been delayed until at least fall of this year. we're proposing to extend our operations there until the end of september, which will allow the replacement site to open in time, so guests that remain at that navigation center can transition and so that we don't have an ongoing, vacant parcel at 1950 mission. civic center hotel is a 93-room former hotel being operated as
navigation center. it will be developed into housing and the construction has been delayed and they don't anticipate beginning the construction on that site until the end of 2021, so we're proposing to continue the use of the site as a navigation center until they're ready to break down. replacement sites that -- or currently sites we're currently working on in terms of navigation centers, bayshore navigation center will have 128 beds. quinn navigation center will have 125 beds. and the soma navigation center at 5th and bryant will have 86 beds. so we're continuing to grow capacity and preserve the space available to do so. articulates the extensions that we're requesting and this this articulates how many people have been served at each of the navigation center sites since opening. as you can see, the programs are
having impact for critical people unsheltered in our community and we want to continue this as long as possible. happy to take any questions that you might have. >> supervisor tang: great. thank you for the update. questions and comments? seeing none, i know we've talked about a lot of these centers and want to thank the department for all of the work on this. at this time, we'll open up item 2 to public comment. any members of the public that wish to speak, please come on up. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is dale seymour. long time person in the city of san francisco and in the tenderloin. spent 18 of my long time years homeless, living out on the streets. so i know a little bit about this situation with navigation centers. so now i run a school that hopes formerly homeless people that gets their lives together and there's a good number of my
students that are living in navigation centers, so they're a very important part of the fabric of the city. i just spoke at a land use summit last week in seattle, washington, and almost every question was directed at our navigation centers. so we really should realize what a gem we have in these navigation centers. the navigation center civic center when i was homeless, i lived in there. the department of homelessness put me in there for two years. so i know the importance of having a place to call yourself home, even if just for a few more days than we're expecting it to be. both of the navigation centers, actually improve the neighborhoods. i know what civic center was before it game a navigation center. that street was nothing nice whatsoever. i know what mission was before the navigation centers. some people that are protesting it say the navigation center brought all of that population to the mission. no, it didn't.
no, it didn't. that population was there way before. and it's people that are in the navigation system that go in and out and mind their own business and don't bother anyone and they're actually improving their lives. so whatever you can do to keep this extension going until september, we may have to be here again in september in case construction doesn't start. i don't want to see that block being vacant not one day for anything. thank you for your congratulations. -- thank you for your consideration. >> good afternoon. my name is annotte leonard wiki and we're with community partnership. we're here to support the centers in san francisco. the civic center has been a safe respite for 336 street homeless adults. we've served folks that otherwise would not access shelters, including 125 women and transgender women that are
particularly vulnerable living on the streets. and we have 46 participants that identify as veterans. housing takes time and it's a limited resource, but in our time at civic center, we've ensured that 153 formerly homeless adults are now in safe and permanent housing. that's 58% of our total. prior to coming a navigation center, the neighborhood wasn't so great. the ground floor was mostly boarded up windows and neighbors expressed concerns about quality of life and safety issues. with our navigation center in place, the entire ground floor is used. it's light and bright and we've rejuvenated the block and addressed concerns. removing the civic center would create opportunity form the community to erode. continued support enables us as a prior to focus on the folks meant to be serving. the continued operation as
navigation centers and civic center navigation center in particular displays to the community that serving people experiencing homelessness with respect and is aing nitty is a san francisco priority. thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is dennis mccray and i'm the director of shelters for episcopal community services. we are the operator of the 1950 mission street navigation center. as you can see from the statistics, we serve nearly 2,000 people there and we continue to serve people. we have 75 beds there right now. we are -- we are aware that there has been some concern about the impact that the navigation center on the immediate neighborhood where the navigation center is located. we actually are quite diligent
about making sure that the immediate landscape around the navigation center is kept as decongested as possible. 95% of the people you may see on that block are already housed. and they have no connection to the navigation center. so we are diligent in making sure that staff go out every day. we clean up every hour. they go out on a regular basis to ask folks to move on. when we see a tent out there, we immediately call the hot team, to have them come and address folks and see if they are actually interested in services. we have an incredible relationship with the san francisco police department and they come by quite often. and we've been putting up no loitering signs outside.
so we will continue to do due diligence to make sure that that area is kept clear. thank you. >> how you doing? i'm joseph livingston. i stay at the navigation. it's a good program. i was homeless. i've been homeless since '95. and they're helping me find a place. i think you should keep that. no don't put no other buildings up because you need buildings like that so they can house people. if you don't have buildings like that, how they going to get housing? you put it in places you trying to build, you know what i mean? keep the place. they doing a good job. and them people that hang out front, they've been hanging out there since that was a school. police didn't get them away from there then. they're not trying now. they're trying to make us look bad. thank you.
>> good afternoon, board of supervisors. my name is george agler, i'm a resident over there at navigation center. now they help people that want the help. and they have helped me so much. i wish there was more of them. it's great. and -- excuse me. you don't know how much they've helped me. and i wish there was more of them, you know, to help everybody that wants it, you know? an extension would be great to help everybody else like they helped me. they helped me tremendously get off the street and try to get a roof over my head. it's -- they're doing so much work for us, you know? and i want you to understand how i feel in my heart for the place. if you would just think about it. it gets a lot of people off the streets and puts a roof over their head and they help so much
the people that want it and a lot of people want it. and the people that are hanging in front and stuff like that, i imagine they've been there. i don't know. but they don't get involved in our stuff. the people coming out there, they come out there and clean the area, to make sure everything's right, you know, for the residents that live in there. and i just -- my heart wishes that you would give the extension and it would carry on, you know? the navigation center has done so much for everybody there, especially for me, you know? thank you. >> supervisor tang: thank you so much. are there any other members of the public that wish to comment on item two? please -- please come on up, if you would like to speak on item two. >> my name is michael rodriguez. and i'm a resident at the
navigation center. i've been homeless for five or six years, directly in this neighborhood. if there wouldn't have been a navigation center, i wouldn't have been able to get myself get together again. we've had focus and focus on the things that we need in the community. i've worked with the hot team to show them where the encampments are at. in reality, they don't have enough help. there are not enough facilities to house everybody. there's not enough housing. we get circulated. we go in and get cleaned up and try to work on our paperwork and work on housing. if there is no housing, there is nothing they can do. we go back on the streets again and go back to the same camps. it's just a circle. and i think it's terrible that
people are trying to criminalize housing, criminalize being homeless. you know, what we need is some affordable housing. i mean, who can afford $3,000 to $4,000 for a 1-bedroom. i don't make that much money in two months. so, yes, i believe that the navigation center needs some kind of extension and maybe even open up other facilities to help us get us off the streets. >> supervisor tang: thank you very much for sharing that. any other members of the public, please come up for item 2.
>> i guess you got to hear some opposition sometime. i guess my problem with the navigation center is is the city and county of san francisco is not trained in standards of care in the contract. jeff kaczynski and his people have actually blocked the monitoring committee of doing inspections of the navigation center. so we're at a point where we don't really know what's happening and i don't know what -- i don't know if the city auditor has done another audit to see what's happening, how long have been stayed, what type
of services are happening. we just have a lot of problems because the grievance policy, the shelter extension policy, we -- it's just -- it just seems like they've thrown all of the protections with the navigation centers out the window. all of them. the shelter extension policy. the grievance policy. the shelter training manual. it's an excessive list of them just throwing out laws to protect the homeless. we -- this is a horrible direction that san francisco has taken where we can dump homeless people somewhere and just ignore the laws and protections that people have fought five, 10, or more years for. i think i just really believe that you should do something as
to how jeff kaczynski and episcopal services of san francisco has refused overtly to follow the laws of -- and their contract of the city and county of san francisco. >> supervisor tang: thank you very much. any other members of the public that wish to comment on item 2? okay. seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, any questions, further comments on item 2? okay. seeing none, can we get a motion to pass this forward with positive recommendation as a committee report? >> supervisor safai: so moved. >> supervisor tang: okay. we'll could that without objection. thank you, colleagues. madam clerk, any other items for us today? >> clerk: there's no further business. >> supervisor tang: okay. thank you. we're adjourned. ssion
for tuesday, june 5. happy election day. could you please read the roll? [roll call] we're waiting for sfg-tv to get with us. all right. [roll call] you have a quorum. directors borden and torres will not be here. prohibition of sound-producing devices. ringing of phones and pagers and other electronic devices are prohibited. if one goes off, you may be asked to leave the room. cell phones on vibrate cause microphone interference. the board requests theyr