tv Government Access Programming SFGTV May 17, 2019 2:00pm-3:01pm PDT
meal capacity increased to 274,000 home delivered meals per year. 200% increase over the 13, 14 contracted fiscal year. i'm sorry. okay. i will do this over. so for home delivered meals, we're comparing to what we did in fiscal year '13, '14. so for adults with disabilities in '13, '14, we were serving 415 individuals. we now have capacity to serve about 630.
our meal capacity is increased from 83,000 home delivered meals per year to 274,000 home delivered meals per year which is a 200% increase. for congreg ate meals we were serving 452 individuals a year, and now it's over 400 individuals per year. so the point being that the dignity fund has really helped us increase the services. it's not enough or adequate. we continue to have wait lists for these programs, but we know we're working toward being able to serve more people in these areas. i'm going to end because i'm sure i'm out of time. there are other things that we continue to fund.
one is there's a state program -- actually, it's a federal approach really called age and disability resource connection. the federal government created the administration for community living. i don't know. maybe it was five or six years ago. what that did is it brought together the aging world with some of the disability federal offices and put them all into one place called administration for community living. then they really encouraged area agencies on aging to put together age and disability resource connections at the local level. so san francisco is one of the few cities that has -- that is -- there's something that we're certified by the state or something -- that's not the word, but something to that effect where we've said this is our plan for putting together some age and disability work.
here it is. we've been certified by the state to do that. what that means is our office has a partnership with independent living resource center to really work together to make sure people with disabilities and older people know about resources and that those are resources and information referral are available to them. our way of doing that in san francisco is to have age and disability -- i'm sorry -- age and disability resource centers across the city, and we have 13 of them. one of them is through tour works it's focused on younger people with disabilities. so that's what we've done there. then i guess lastly, we fund advocacy. it allows you to fund advocacy even with older americans act dollars because the federal government knew and continues to know there's not nearly enough money in some of these services. we fund senior and disability
action to really do a lot of advocacy at the city and state level to ensure that people with disabilities and older adults have resources. i'm going to end with that. there are other programs that we have that serve both populations, but i really wanted to focus in on some of the changes. i hope that's helpful, and i'm happy to take any questions. >> thank you for that informative presentation and being so sensitive around the time. we will jump in councilmember questions. we'll go in order of request. so first order is alex madrid. >> thank you for coming. i have a lot of questions, but with the time limited, just hopefully a question, one that i noted 92,000 people with
disabilities? >> uh-huh. >> in san francisco? >> right. so that's -- that comes from the 2016 american community survey five-year estimates. yes, that would be 94,000 people out of the 800 whatever thousand people in san francisco. >> all right. so the second thing is that, can you talk a little bit about the in-home support services? i have concerns about funding regarding in-home support services and possibly some people could say it would be
reduced because of the federal and state funding issues. >> right. that's a good question. so right now, it looks pretty good. i think when jerry brown was governor, he decided that counties should pay more into in-home supportive services and that the state should pay less. so that caused a lot of concern in san francisco where we have so many people who are reliant upon in-home support everybody services to live safely at home. but when governor newsome came in, he's professed he's interested in maintaining that service. i don't really -- under governor newsome, i don't see that changing, but, you know, we have to continually remain vigilant
and think about ways to ensure that that system can grow to meet the needs of a larger population even than it's serving now. so it's really important to keep that advocacy up at the state and federal levels. >> can you please clarify? right now, it's based on the city and county inclusive, the funding? >> right now, there's not -- i guess what i'm trying to say, right now, there's not a challenge with funding, and there's no conversation about ours being cut. that's not a thing right now. but it's always important to remain vigilant around that. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you, council member madrid. councilmember orkid sassouni.
>> i have a few things within the deaf community. the number of deaf seniors is really reduced. there are not many deaf seniors in the city anymore. however, there are deaf people who have college degrees unemployed. they don't have jobs. is there a way if they can find jobs? it's very difficult to find jobs in the city. it takes a long time to really make that happen. so many deaf people who live within san francisco, even though they have a college degree, can't afford to live here or stay here. you know, interpreting services is fine, but they're looking for someone who has asl skills for social events. also, for young people who are deaf. so how do you address that? because i'm not seeing a lot of support in that area. i feel that many deaf people may
come here. they may move here and think it's a beautiful city, but there's no social opportunities, and they leave. or, you know, there might be an asl student group, college students or people who are learning sign, but they're not really a good match for those deaf individuals who have already grad graduated from cole and have a degree and are looking for a job and social life. i'm wondering how you're addressing that in the community. >> it sounds like two questions. one is about social interaction and one is about jobs. so jobs, that's a really tough one. we actually have an organization that we work with that really is leading conversations in the city around workforce opportunities for people with different disabilities as well as for older adults. but i think it's a -- you know, i think this is an area that we are fairly new in in our
department. so there was a hearing last year, and nicole and i were both involved in it where supervisor yee -- i don't think he was president then, but he brought people together to say, what are we doing about people with disabilities and older people in the workforce? what are the opportunities? where can we make headway? we had a lot of recommendations, and then, you know, some -- i think he was able to get some money into the community through community living campaign, which is one of the programs that is trying to find employment for people with various disabilities and older adults. but that's still really small. it's still really -- we're still at the beginning of these conversations. i think, you know, one of the things that we need to continue to do is push on that front as
well. the tech council, which is staffed by the department of aging adult services but has a lot of different participants from the corporate sector, from the city, and from community providers has taken workforce issues on as it' its big focus r the next four years. what they're really hoping is they're going to get some corporate interest, that they're going to get one or two big companies that will say yes, we realize that we need to do this better. we want to partner with you. we haven't quite found that yet. we've had some partnership from microsoft, but it's been, you know, still small. we're going and visiting programs like the arc because they have done a good job of partnering with local -- both local businesses but some of the really good big tech companies in san francisco and we want to learn how they've done that to
see if we can do that with other populations from the ones they serve. so it's a challenge. i'm not going to say that we've gotten there, but it's certainly something we're talking about a lot and are thinking about. in terms of social, i think, you know, really what i would love to do is maybe have a more in depth conversation about what those kinds of things would look like because funding things that really connect people and really get people out of isolation are really very much in our mission as a department. so i would love to do that. i can reach out -- reach through nicole and maybe we can have a further conversation about how we design something like that together. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, councilmember. last but not least,
councilmember helen smolinski. >> thank you for being here and for your words. point of clarification. your department serves adults 18 and older. >> right. >> bottom line. okay. disabled, elderly or not across the spectrum, 18 and up. >> disabled or older but not -- i wouldn't get -- i'm not older and i don't identify as having a disability, i would not be able to get services through my department. >> okay. so disabled or over 60. >> over 60. >> all right. thank you for speaking and giving us a little bit of the history. i found it galling that after the departments were merged in 2000 that funding didn't follow the disabled community.
>> right. me, too. >> i also find it galling that the name change -- you know, it is such a big deal or so seemingly difficult to fix because i think that seems crucial. i'm glad we're proceeding accordingly it sounds like. again, it's been 19 years. >> yes. >> and this is news to me that this department helps the disabled community. so i'm glad you're here. i'm glad you've been at the top position for three-plus years. so i want to encourage the changes you're making and say thank you and encourage them even more because similarly to my colleagues up here, you know, i understand the need and the desire for a cultural center.
my question would be, has that -- is that more attractive to fund than some other areas like employment services, housing services, advocacy, legal services? i've been hearing a lot about the cultural center, but i know for a lot of our population, you know, help me find a job first. help me stay in the city first. >> right. i think -- you know, i think it's all of those things. i mean, the things that we do fund now are all of those things for older adults. so now we have legal services for people with disabilities, and we have legal experts. we have, you know, food programs. we have employment programs. they're just not very well funded yesterday, not well enough funded yet, but we have those. i think at the same time, you know, what we've heard from the communities when we did the community needs assessment is that people need a place to go to be together.
but that's also a place to center some of the activities, a place to have employment services. it gives us a place to put those. when we've tried to do stuff in other ways, it hasn't been quite as successful. having one place where we start to just brand it as this is someplace where people with disabilities can go for all of those things, to me, makes a lot of sense. no. that's not more attractive than the other things at all. but it is a place for people to receive those. it's also a place where people can come together and start to say what else do we need and how do we advocate for that. things that maybe i wouldn't have heard of because of there are people in desperate corners saying things like we need this but i don't know about it, our community of listeners doesn't know about it when we're out there asking people, it's just much more likely to have it
centered where, you know, we can start really imagining what new things we can do and how we can be more helpful to the community. so no. all of those things are super important and getting a job and being able to stay in san francisco, that's what we hear from everyone. i mean, technically, we're not the -- we do have some dollars for helping older adults and people with disabilities find jobs, but we're not really that department. what we really need to do is link more successfully with our other departments and work through the tech council to make that happened because i think that's going to be more successful. we just don't have that many dollars for that particular thing, but we want to be part of that conversation and part of the solution. i don't know if that completely answers your question. >> it does, but the -- so then the primary mission to your -- of your department is, you just said housing and employment really isn't --
>> housing -- >> or employment. i don't mean to -- i'm not trying to pin you down. >> yes. >> it's more like for my own understanding. i think for this council's understanding because as a mother of a disabled child, my experience is often going to one department that sounds like it's where i need to go. >> right. >> and then everybody is always very nice, but then it's oh, it's not quite. i need to go to this department. well, we do a piece of that, but you need to go there. maybe that's the nature of the beast. maybe that's city government. but right here right now, if i'm making referrals to folks out in the community and i say go to the department of aging and adult serves because they can help you with what? >> right. so primarily -- it's changing. so that's -- it's not an easy
answer because primarily, it has been nutrition, transportation, case management, community services which has basically meant senior centers. it's exercise classes. it's those kinds of things. but more recently because we've seen more and more of a need for things like housing and employment, you know, and those requests have bubbled up more and more, we have gotten a little bit into that role. so we do have a small housing subsidy program, but we're not the primary housing provider for san francisco. that's really mayor's office of housing and community development and the homeless department, which serves homeless people, obviously, and does supportive housing. we have a small subsidy program to help people prevent homelessness. we have gotten into employment services a little bit because
people came up and said people with disabilities and seniors have nowhere to go. where do we go? if we go to the regular workforce programs, we don't feel like people really understand that we need to work and we want to work and we want to be engaged in community. so we've kind of ventured into that a little bit. i see a role with those things. hopefully this will answer i yor question about city government i see our role as being able to give people the right information about exactly -- and help be part of the solution of, you know, kind of explaining the spectrum of services within the city. if people come and say i don't have this, we should be able to tell them where it is. in the city, we're not there yet. truthfully, we're not. we're still trying to convince people that older people should work and people with disabilities should work and have a right to work. i mean, that's -- it's still
really hard. >> i think -- thank you very much. i'm going to step in just because i know we're running over time and there's public comment. so i want to get to that and say thank you. then i think it sounds to me like it would be a good idea to bring the commission and this council together again to really talk about some of these things in a public way. >> that would be great. if the council would like to do that, i would be happy to help arrange that. >> great. >> okay. thank you very much. i would ask that council -- i know we have two other council members who would like to speak, but because of time constraints, if that would be okay, we can talk off-line. i would like to go to public comment, if we have any. i believe we do. so thank you council members for your indulgence. we're going to move on to public comment. >> there's one speaker card for this agenda item.
it's from joe ramirez from prc. >> hi. i'm joe ramirez. i'm the managing director for employment services at prc. we're an agency that does work forces recovery and mental health services. we see about 5,000 people a year in my workforce program. many we're with the workforce division of san francisco county. we see about 600 people. we're a partner with the california department of rehabilitation. so it sounds like they need to be brought to the table. thank you. it's a very complicated system. we don't actually know what each other are doing, but what i didn't see in the data is the immune system functioning issues. we are one of the largest cities with hiv and aids, over 17,000,
with 9,000 people with aids. that's not represented in the data. there was a working group with sharine's agency for 50 plus because the majority of people are aging. for diverse sake, i want to make sure that doesn't get lost in the conversation. what happens when we talk about lgbtqi, if i don't see myself there, i become invisible. another reminder of the stigma for living with hiv and integrating people with other populations. i think the other points i have to make is a reminder of mental health and homelessness of the population. it's on an uptick. make sure these doorways are open without stigma with trauma informed understanding of the life experience of the individuals that we see on the streets and can't get in the door of these things because a lot of homeless individuals are seniors that we think broad and wide to create more inclusivity so that people can live with dignity and respect.
thanks. >> thank you. is there anyone on the bridge line that has public comment? no? okay. i believe we have another public comment. >> yeah. there's one more, denise from sac. >> i was told i didn't need to fill out a comment card for each item. should i do that moving forward? >> thank you. >> yeah. i want to thank sharine for her presentation. she really does care about people with disabilities and i learned a lot from it. there's so much things i want to comment on. i don't have time. one of things, does the community living fund fall under aging and adult services? can anybody answer that question? no. it doesn't. >> i don't know. >> because i had a comment on that.
>> right. excuse me. yeah. >> the community living fund fall under -- >> yes. >> excuse me. i don't mean to interrupt. if you can provide your comments and during breaks you can ask any questions because right now we just want to hear your public comment. >> my comment is very specifically to that. >> right. >> and what she's talking about which is living in the community as a disabled person and if their department is managing community living fund, that's very important. that's what my comment. >> yeah. okay. please continue. >> okay. so i'm somebody who uses the services. i do believe the name is incredibly confusing. to took a disability attorney to even inform me that they existed and that they could help me because of the name and just the confusion. i've used community living fund, which was started by the way because disabled people in laguna honda were being accused sexually and physically by providers at laguna honda. there was a lawsuit that created the community living fund to help people live in the community and not be segregated.
disabled people in san francisco, like myself, are segregated. the community living fund failed to help me in so many ways. it really was a horrible experience especially with my social worker, michael boyer and page usted, his supervisor. they told me i couldn't change social workers. in the time i was there, i was not able to get access to home delivered food. their phones did not work for months. my social worker would not follow up on things for weeks at a time. so it became so bad they wouldn't help me get any sort of batteries for my wheelchair or mobility equipment i needed for my power wheelchair. i was not able to get a ramp to access my home. i was not able to get in-home support services or a phone for accessibility needs. this program is really flawed.
i would like oversight for it. fortunately, mod stepped in and helped me get the food i needed. they helped me with transportation and other issues and so i'm grateful to mod for that, but community living fund has a long way to go. it's a good program. i don't want to see it go away, but i would like to see it improved especially getting people's power wheelchairs working so we can live in the community. that's the point that we're not segregated. thank you. >> thank you. i understand we have one more public comment. >> yes, mr. tiffany yu, diversibility. >> hi. i'm tiffany yu from diverse ability. good to see you again. i just wanted to say two quick things. number one is i'm really excited about the name change because i do agree that it can be misleading. i'm wondering if in the meantime, we can add to the
website where it mentions people with disabilities anywhere on the website, put in parenthesis, 18 plus so that it's extremely clear that this is the community that it serves. so in addition to that, i also -- i've mentioned this at a council meeting before. the needs of young people with disabilities are different than those who are does abled with older adults. as we think about programming and how we want to rebrand, i'm hoping that you will take this younger disabled community in account. the second thing, as someone who served on the leadership committee for the disability cultural and community center, i know there were questions about what need it fulfilled. i think for me, when i think about overall well-being, it consists of our mental health, our physical health, and our social health and the disability cultural center to me really fits that social health category of making sure we have the sense of belonging and community and relationship that we can show up into potentially our workspaces
i'd like to welcome information item number 7. our presenter, director meagan weir and sava cronenberg. and they're going to do presentation on vision zero action strategy. thank you for being here. >> thank you for having us. i'm with the municipal transportation agency. i'm the pedestrian safety program manager. i'm joined today by my colleague, meagan weir, who is the director of a role that i cannot -- i'll let her introduce herself when she stands up a few slides from now. we, together, co-chair vision zero. the task force, which is a community and city group who work toward ending fatalities of
pedestrians in san francisco. this lays out the strategic actions and the steps that the city will take toward advancing the zero vision goal, but also other policy areas and goals that are really important to this group. and it's really important for us to talk to this community, specifically because seniors, very specifically, and people with disabilities additionally, are severely impacted by traffic violence in san francisco. and we're the group who is working to improve those outcomes. so vision zero was passed in san francisco in 2014. which is five years ago. we were the second city in the united states to pass a vision zero policy to end traffic fatalities. now we're joined by dozens of cities nationally. and i'm really heartened to see a national regional statewide conversation starting about traffic safety. i think many don't know how
adversely it impacts our society and our neighborhoods, but you know, when you're kind of in the thick of it, you hear how many people know someone hit by a car and how that has impacted their lives. san francisco, we've been tracking how many fatalities we have annually for a century. and this represents -- this grab shows 15 years. and you see the highest number of fatalities at 41 in the year 2007. we adopted vision zero in 2014, a year that we had 31 fatalities. 2017 was our least fatal year in the history of our record keeping. with still far too many deaths at 20. and we had 23 deaths last year in 2018. i'm saddened to report that currently to date we have 11 recorded fatalities and three
probable that will be by the end of the month, so we're certainly trending in the wrong direction, but we're hopeful that the strategy, it's not a panacea, but it is a blueprint for the place we want to get. vision zero is guided internationally and nationally by core principles of number one, saving lives, that we want to get our fatalities to zero. that we as government can prevent deaths. that we need to think about how we do prevention in an equitable way so we're making sure the outcomes are best for everyone, not just some. the speed is the predominating factor in whether someone litsches or dies when hit by a car. and the ways to improve the outcomes for people is reengineering our streets, and by doing communication, education, enforcement and improving our vehicles, whether
they're a car or a scooter, to ensure when a collision occurs that they are not -- that it is not fatal. throughout vision zero as a core function of our program, we have a really robust engagement community process and i'm pleased to have nicole participating. we have a lot of active seniors and people with disabilities in our processes. as part of our strategy update that we did last year, we engaged hundreds of san franciscans across the city in the neighborhoods through coffee talks and tea talks at rec centres, pools, ymcas, just talking about our policy goal and asking for new ideas about how we can achieve vision zero with their help. and we've had some really strong community processes within the city and engaging most vocal advocates to make sure that our actions reflect the needs of the communities that we serve.
so, we passed the vision zero policy, and they adopted the resolution we get to zero by 2024. so the obvious question is what will it take to get to zero? our answer is in this graphic that i'll talk about. so one is strategic actions. so we're going to talk about those toward the end of the presentation, which is the steps that the city and city government will take to get to zero through engineering, education, and enforcement activities. next is our transformative policies. to the right of that, our complementary goals. and lastly, everything we do, whether it's a strategic action or goal, is rooted in equity. i'm going to talk about that in a second. number one, the complementary goals. so this is the idea, one that we're trying to advance, ending
fatalities is intersectional to other city goals, that it doesn't stand alone and we need other goals of the city to advance for us to achieve zero. that includes housing and especially affordable housing. the further out people have to live in the region to get to their job here in san francisco, the more likely they are they're in a car, the more likely they're to be involved in a collision. and that is related to the number of vehicle miles traveled, which is a wonky transportation term, but how many people are driving in a car on a daily basis. having housing near your job or near any of the other activities that you need to get to, whether it's a supermarket, a senior center, a pool, heavily implemented how safe our streets will be. also, because i work for the sfmta, when people make a transportation choice, they need to make a sustainable
transportation choice. we need to see muni being reliable, efficient, effective and a great choice for every san franciscan to make. and the nice balance of that one is related to mode shifts. some trips can be taken by muni, some trips by walking or biking. we want to encourage those trips and make them desirable and not a last-ditch choice because your car happens to be in the garage that day. and all of these also relate to our climate goals in the city. every single one of these steps is toward a sustainable future and so is vision zero and so is our climate action goal. what we've been thinking about along with the community, how can we advance these intersectional goals to get to our safety goal and how can the safety goal advance these goals? and that they're one and the same. we can't people not on muni. we can't see trends towards
biking be reduced in order to get -- and get to vision zero. it's not going to happen. they have to move together at the same time, so we're encouraged by the work that our colleagues across the city do to advance these goals. the second sort of pillar of our work is the transformative policy agenda. thinks the question we guest -- this is the question we get most frequently. there are shackles that i can do. these four policies are regulated at the state level. they come from sacramento. unless we can advance some of those policies which are all proven tools to reduce traffic fatalities, there is a limited number of things i can do in my seat in government in san francisco to do my work. these four goals are automated enforcement. this is advanced heavily through
prior legislation in sacramento, but we were unsuccessful. pricing, the number of vehicle miles traveled. urban speed limit setting. there is a wonky engineering tool that defines how we set our speed limits across the state of california. and it doesn't leave any room for engineering judgment. and so we cannot reduce speed limits unless the cars that are traveling on the street are moving slower. which is crazy. so we would like to change the state law. i will tell you that the federal government just changed how this rule, called the 85th percentile rule, so california will be lagging behind the federal government at this juncture. and lastly, the local regulation of transportation network companies. those are regulated at the state level, meaning that the city of san francisco can't require vehicles, driver testing, driver
training, anything related to über and lyft. and as a result, we have no power over how they choose to operate in the city. so the ask is for some version of local regulation here in san francisco, not in sacramento. all of these are rooted in equity. what it means, none of these should disproportionately if we change these laws impact the most at-risk communities. i think seniors and people with disabilities are those at-risk community. i heard time and time again specifically around pricing, that there is a perception it's regressive. and it certainly can be regressive in it's implemented in a way that it is implemented in the london. that's where we need san francisco solutions for san francisco problems. i really believe if we use an equity lens to develop a pricing policy, we can find a way for it
not to be regressive and disproportionately impact communities. but currently, we can't even use that tool because we're forbidden by the state. i'm going to pass this to macon, who is going to talk about how we're thinking about equity in general. >> thank you so much. good afternoon, everyone, thank you for the opportunity to be here. i'm with the san francisco department of public health. and as said, with respect to vision zero, we know if we don't lead with equity, if we don't prioritize vision zero actions for our most vulnerable communities, we'll never achieve vision zero. and people with disabilities, seniors, communities of color, are particularly vulnerable to traffic deaths and severe injuries. and thus, are a focus of the vision zero work. that means deepening our
community engagement, prioritizing and monitoring improvements throughout the city to address the population. and ensuring that any policies don't have unintended consequences. -- on our vulnerable communities. and also, i work in the health department. we partner with zuckerberg san francisco general hospital to develop more comprehensive surveillance system. that includes capturing people with disabilities in our data to better understand and address patterns. so now we're going to do -- of course. now i'm just going to do a deeper dive into the actions that are in the action strategies and really highlighting a subset of actions that really focus on issues raised through our community engagement that were of particular interest to people with disabilities. under our safe streets, or engineering category, that includes completing near-term
improvements. we have a new traffic calming program that is focusing on areas where we've seen injuries, people with disabilities. also, implementing countdown signals and audible signals on the high injury network. improving accessibility and bikeway designs. encouraging a curb management pilot project, with respect to über and lyft, and center that occur, so -- accidents that occur. and doing work with the guidance on outreach and engagement. safe people, that encompasses things like education and enforcement. we'll be talking about our action to convene city and community stakeholders to better identify needs of people with disabilities and secure funding.
dph currently has safe street for seniors program that engages seniors and people with disabilities through multilingual presentations and community grants, and that is included grants to senior and disability action as well as lighthouse for the blind. we're also creating a driver training program for transportation network companies. again a real focus on über and lyft and how their drivers can be safe drivers in our city. and then also focussing on emerging mobility. so as devices like e scooters and ebikes enter our city's network, ensuring that users and people on the streets alike understand what the rules are with respect to the safe use of these new devices. under safe vehicles, we're also doing work with across the city on autonomous vehicles, so understanding the opportunities and challenges of this new