Skip to main content
Internet Archive's 25th Anniversary Logo

tv   Government Access Programming  SFGTV  August 5, 2018 1:00am-2:01am PDT

1:00 am
my building is four stories tall next to buildings that are eight stories tall and two stories tall. in addition, standing on the roof of my building, you can look across the entirety of nob hill and see other decks installed on rooftops of other buildings. i would summarize by saying i support this construction. i don't believe it's out of character with the neighborhood. if you look within a through-block radius of this -- three-block radius of this unit, you'll see similar roof decks, taller buildings, and i think we need all the housing we can get. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening, board commissioners, board? board? board of appeals. my name is michael chen. i'm a resident in san francisco. i'm here to speak in favor of the project sponsors, todd
1:01 am
mavis and kevin chang, and i'm also here on behalf of yimby action, a housing advocacy group in san francisco. as someone who's relatively new to san francisco and one thing who's younger, one thing i hear from myself and a lot of my friends, we have a lot of anxiety about our housing. i talk to a lot of people, and i feel like everybody here has a housing story. if you bought recently or you say oh, yeah, i got out bid by all cash deals, 90%, because i had this great story and i was able to connect to the previous seller. i had people who say oh, yeah, i'm going to get an eviction, owner moving in, or new construction, and the owner might hike my rent up by 10%. i know about owners that talk about the sacrifices that they make. it's a one bedroom that they flux into a three bedroom so
1:02 am
they can stay in san francisco, and even that might not be enough. san francisco is losing rent control units, they awe're los families. i know a lot of people that say hey, when they look at the math, it's not worth it. i think the project i requested a rehearing or to reinstate the site permit because this adds more chairs to our game. it means that you have more people who are able to live and love san francisco the way that i do, and the way that i hope that you all do, as well. it means that people can live at 1033, 1037, 1039 washington street, whatever the new number is, and they can walk down the street to the dim sum lounge. it means they can access the library that's on the same block. it means that they can take the cable car to work and enjoy the great view that you see as you go over on california street. i think the housing is good.
1:03 am
i think that adding more people to enjoy the city is a good. i think that this is being done in a way that is actually in line with the existing character of the neighborhood, even if it is technically noncompliant. and so for these reasons, i would request that you support the provincial -- project sponsor's request. >> clerk: okay. this is not rebuttal because we actually had a full hearing. >> actualcommissioners? >> actually, i have a question for the project sponsor. understanding, this is just for the findings. in the brief, it mentioned that you had alternative drawings or ideas for that top level, but
1:04 am
yet they were not provided in our brief. do you have something to present that you can put on the overhead or orally? >> todd mavis. at this time, we do not. it might be presumptuous to bring drawings to this particular hearing unless we get a little bit more of a sense to the board's reaction to our request that we adopt alternative findings or grant a rehearing to be able to address the concerns of this board with respect to intensifying at none -- i'm sorry. i'm going to call it nonconforming. i can't remember the term you used. >> i'm sorry. you answered my question, thank you. >> we would be willing to work with the appellant, work with
1:05 am
you, get guidance. >> okay. you answered my question. thank you. >> thank you. >> comments, commissioners? >> no, i'm prepared to suggest the findings as they are written with the change in verbiage as suggested by the -- by mr. sanchez. >> so you're prepared to accept the findings prepared by the executive director? okay. >> on the other hand -- >> okay. >> -- i know that the variance hearing and the -- the second appeal are not connected in any way, but at which point, after
1:06 am
reviewing the documents, again, i have had a change of heart, because although i do not believe it's affordable housing, that it will provide additional housing to our city as well as to the simple fact that the structural upgrades would add safety to that building and to the adjacent buildings, as well. i'm probably not in the majority, but i would offer a rehearing. >> any other comments? was your -- [inaudible] >> that's correct. commissioner swig, was yours a motion? i'm not sure i heard it. >> i'm prepared to make that motion. >> clerk: so you want to make a motion to adopt the findings -- >> the findings with the change in verbiage as suggested by mr. sanchez. >> clerk: okay. with the change in the verbiage
1:07 am
suggested by scott sanchez. >> scott sanchez. >> clerk: all right. so on that motion by vise -- vice president swig -- [roll call] >> clerk: okay. so that motion passes, and the proposed findings are adopted. >> next case. >> clerk: we will now move onto item number seven. this is appeal number 17-055, mahar mamarzadei versus san francisco department of urban forestry.
1:08 am
[agenda item read] >> clerk: note on february 28, 2018, the board voted 5-0 to continue the appeal to allow time for the parties to discuss settlement. so we've had a hearing on this matter, and so each party will get three minutes each total, no rebuttal, and we will hear first from the appellant. >> good evening. francisco gutierrez, attorney for the appellant. before cutting into the time, i would have a request. we do have three speakers, but the way we have postponed the hearing and continued it to this date was to meet and try to settle this matter with bureau of urban forestry. we did ultimately meet with
1:09 am
chris buck on the 10th. which would like to smith pictures that include written analysis, as well, so i would ask the board for their permission to circulate copies of those documents because they are relevant to this hearing and it would be to prevent man test injustice against appellant as the discussion is relevant to the discussions with urban forestry, but also in support of his appeal. i have 11 copies of these documents here, and i ask request to circulate it. >> well, i'm not going to -- you can submit it, but we're not going to have time to review it. >> so this is to avoid a rehearing. we met with bureau of urban forestry on april the 10. one of the main concerns expressed by the bureau. >> if you're going to talk to the issues of the case, then we're going to start your time,
1:10 am
om? >> that's fine. we can start the time. >> if you have a potential settlement, then you can go ahead and present that. >> president fung, we don't. we don't have a settlement, we don't have a -- >> okay. why don't you go ahead and make your case. >> okay. speaking today will be myself, counsel for appellant, his arborist, and we also have an independent arborist. the issue we have is whether the columbia species is the appropriate tree. there's a tree growth study that's prepared by mr. leggett, who in addition to be a certified arborist has a bachelor of science degree from california state university fresno in plant sciences, and what that study concludes is that tree should be categorized
1:11 am
as a medium sized tree on the tree street list. >> good evening. i'm roy leggett, and the growth rate study is comparing the shoot extension lengths on the known varieties of platinous trees planted here in san francisco. i looked at the segments of growth on young trees, and it is clear that those columbia trees are growing as a slower, more compat growth rate. they should be medium category trees which would be consistent with the bureau of urban forestry's request, and so we do have copies of the study with photographs that clearly show how those measurements interact with the overall growth rate. mr. crawford is here, as well,
1:12 am
and can certainly speak to this particular issue. >> hello. nicholas crawford. i'm an arborist and also a counselor on the urban forestry council. i wanted to speak to this because i think this is an example of a great scenario where the bureau had to say these are the guidelines, but i think planting a tree that has a smaller variety, the columbia versus other varieties would be appropriate for this space. looking at it, i think it -- the space would allow for these two trees, not just one. i think that especially because the property owner is willing to go to great lengths to care for this tree for his life and also put it into the deed for
1:13 am
future owners, i think that makes a pretty compelling case to allow him to do what he's asking to do in plant two trees here. >> mr. crawford, what was the spacing between the two trees? >> 14 feet. >> in your opinion, that is acceptable for the root balls of these two tree snz. >> certainly for the root balls, but -- these two trees? >> certainly for the root balls, but the canopies, i think you could expect them to be intertwined during maturity, but with pruning, you could maintain that successfully. >> clerk: okay. thank you. we will now hear from the department. >> good evening.
1:14 am
chris buck with san francisco public works bureau of urban forestry and urban forester, and i should be able to stick within the three minutes. we tried to reach a settlement but were unsuccessful. the hearing was february 28, and the applicant was proactive to set a follow up meeting. we met on april 10. i was hoping the applicant would come to that meeting ready to discuss medium sized species, but it was clear from mr. crawford's report that they remained focused planting the columbia variety. i reviewed the additional material and met with our superintendent, carla short, and conducted an internet search to show that this is categorized as a large stature tree at maturity. the documents that i provided to the applicant april 30
1:15 am
demonstrated this in each case. i do not do this to educate myself further on the issue because i am the professional that's most knowledgeable about tree spacing and this species in san francisco. both as the urban forester and as a previous education coordinator for friend of the urban forests. allowing one large stature tree to be planted within a narrow sidewalk setting that is additionally impacted by two bay windows that extend above the sidewalk. the second point, allowing the planting of two medium sized trees at maturity to be planted just 14 feet apart measure down the center. tree spacing guidelines recommend 15 to 20 feet between small stature species, 20 to 25 for medium and 30 or medium for large stature species.
1:16 am
third point, a willingness to consider many different species options that are medium sized trees at maturity. the fourth point, street light conflict. we can allow the planting of medium sized trees, but two platinous would mean that two trees are too close to the street light pole. the current basing is just 14 feet away. this is another argument for why two platinous or plain trees at this frontage is not feasible. planting two columbia just 14 feet apart in this section of cortland avenue is something we want to avoid in the public right of away even with an offer like this from the property owner to maintain the
1:17 am
trees. i will note that both the the valencia streetscape project, those are platinous columbia, they were planted eight years ago and doing quite well. additionally market street is going through a better market street plan, and one of the species proposed for replacement? columbia. why, because it's a really wide sidewalk. >> clerk: okay. thank you, mr. buck. >> mr. buck. >> stay there. >> okay. >> during your meeting, did you bring up acceptable species that are small stature and medium stature? >> i did mention that -- >> specific ones, right? >> we had been discussing some specific ones earlier in the proceedings, you know, previous hearings prior, but i did state the obvious way was clearly, the team here has -- obvious
1:18 am
way was clearly, we are not here to discuss the species k i can remember the last hearing because i had asked several questions because they had showed the platinous trees on broadway or pacific that were actually spaced closer, and i remember asking how old those were. did you have pictures of the tree that you mentioned on market or other locations that you just mentioned? >> market and valencia, i don't have them with me. >> so, i mean, how long would it take for these trees -- and
1:19 am
i understand that in the last hearing, we also brought up that there's no guarantee that this owner is going to be there in perpetuity, and that's largely some of the issue. but i believe at the last hearing, it was discussed that the trees on broadway are confide old, but they were close in proximity and they aren't towering. >> correct. there are two mature trees. there are a few examples that they provided on the face that certainly look compelling. one of them was at the top of pa isk is heights, so the wind -- pacific heights, so the wind is brutalizing them. the other was a mistake of our inspector who allowed two platinous trees to be planted close together. there's going to be cases that slip through the cracks, but we don't want to knowingly perpetuate that problem. >> okay. thank you. >> okay. >> can i ask the permit holders a question? >> we still have public comment
1:20 am
sk skbl. >> i'm sorry. if you want to go ahead -- >> okay. is there any public comment on this item? >> good evening, commissioners. my name is terry mills, and i'm a president of the bernal heights tree community. i was informed of the problems earlier this evening, and i would like to speak in support of the proposal to replace two trees with two trees. our committee has been arranging and arguing of protecting the existing trees in bernal heights for 25 years. we've managed to save quite a few from the parks department and from the street department.
1:21 am
not from the water department, but we've maintained the trees we've had for quite a few years. and in this case, cortland avenue several years ago had very few trees. problem trees, eucalyptus dropping on people and stuff, but we managed to persuade as a neighborhood some movement to get 25 trees planted on cortland several years ago. and not all of them have survived for a few years, but we now have tree planting on cortland, our village street, and i would just like to submit that i would appreciate if this project could go ahead, get two new trees. thank you. >> thank you. mr. mills, are you still on the
1:22 am
design review committee? >> you bet. >> okay sk. >> i've got a question for you, sir. so as the tree person in -- in this particular district, you don't have a concern that these trees are going to be at a higher growth -- they're canopy's going to be to -- >> i don't have the technical knowledge that i heard stated earlier as -- to answer your question. we have some big trees, on cortland, that the city has to come out and trim once in a while so that they don't kill somebody. i don't see having a large crown as a problem from the tree committee standpoint. >> okay. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> clerk: thank you. is there any other public comment on this item? okay.
1:23 am
seeing none, commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> i have another question for mr. buck. >> yeah. i'll follow up after you, sir. >> after you. >> no, no, no, go ahead. >> okay. mr. buck, since with you heard this originally, the legislation passed -- this is a street tree now that is to be maintained by d.u.f., isn't it? >> correct. the street trees are now the maintenance responsibility of public works. >> is there an issue with public maintenance of this so that it does -- in terms of it being pruned and not overly grown? >> we are not supportive of the pruning plan, but if overturned, the way to do this is there is a mechanism within our code to allow property owners to assume responsibility in two ways.
1:24 am
one, they could assume responsibility for a temporary pruning of a tree or a full legal opt out, where the property owner would assume the maintenance responsibility for the street tree adjacent to their property. trees, however, are still under our jurisdiction. so, you know, typically, that would be done for existing trees, so we're still be supportive of the proposal, but that -- there is a mechanism for that to take place. if the board wishes, it could overturn this and find in favor of the appellant and that they assume responsibility for the m maintenance of the street trees. the challenge, of course, for us is long-term. we've said no to a lot of people over the years, and i do worry about that. and you know, you can always jam things into the sidewalk and just say oh, we'll see how it happens, but there is a mechanism that would allow them to -- to do that.
1:25 am
even though we don't support it legally, it would be allowable. >> okay. thank you. commissioner swig? >> yes. just for clarification purposes, we're here because they're appealing your action to tear down two, put up one, right? and -- and i think we suggested last time that you all talk, and there -- and you were fairly flexible into tearing down two and putting in two with a caveat they are a smaller format trees. >> mm-hmm. >> in your opinion, or the fact is that the appellant rejected that option summarily, without any conversation on the subject. >> two of that specific species, so correct, there's
1:26 am
really no discussion. >> right, and a medium sized tree of that -- of a variation or a hybrid or whatever. i'm not a tree guy -- was -- was completely unacceptable to them in that discussion. >> correct. >> discussion in the sense that it was brought up. >> you could recommend it be a small stature. >> small or medium. >> so teven having the medium stature's a give, and we're also willing to live with one very statuesque tree at that point. we're not comfortable with letting the public make the decision on this one. we're just not. >> mm-hmm. >> that answer your question, commissioner swig? >> yeah. so it's the hail mary on this one really is a question, now,
1:27 am
we're in discussion, to the appellant, here's your last chance. you want two mediums or are you going to stand and we'll just hear the -- >> well, i think the other -- we have one additional option, that is they take full responsibility is what the -- >> yeah, and i'm -- you know -- >> actually, i have a question -- >> yeah. you've heard my long life story, which is it's a long life. that tree will be here longer than anybody here, and -- >> maybe. >> -- and i'm not prepared to rely on the ultimate, ultimate owner, even if this owner -- >> okay. commissioner, you have a question? >> yeah. i have a question for the permit holder, so whoever wants to come forward. one question. are you willing to assume 100% responsibility in perpetuity for the trees, and two, you can answer them in any order you
1:28 am
like. is there any option other than this specific tree? >> commissioner, one, so 100% liability is actually allowed within the code. section 805 of the san francisco public works code allows the bureau to enter into street maintenance agreements with the property owners. if i could have the projector, at our meeting with mr. buck, i submitted a draft of a street tree maintenance agreement that would be recorded against title. i had no response from the bureau whether or not they would accept this. they did not even -- >> okay. and the second question? >> -- follow up. on the second question, it prespoe presupposes the tree was not appropriate. with respect, it was not a hail mary pass. the way they categorize the columbia tree is wrong.
1:29 am
in relying on the scientific study by mr. leggett, supporting our argument, we wants to show that this tree is appropriate because it fits within what the bureau is telling us and is telling what this board is appropriate, which is a medium sized tree. >> okay. but the question i asked is are you willing to accept another tree other than that particular species? >> the answer is no. >> no. >> okay. thank you. >> okay, commissioners. who would like to start? >> sure, i'll start. if they're willing to assume 100% responsibility, and it's a -- an n.s.r., so it's a special deed of restrictions, and it goes on title, i don't have a problem approving it. the trees that are there now are in poor shape. they're cobranching or co something.
1:30 am
they're not very attractive. [please stand by]
1:31 am
1:32 am
1:33 am
1:34 am
>> when i open up the paper every day, i'm just amazed at how many different environmental issues keep popping up. when i think about what planet i want to leave for my children and other generations, i think about what kind of contribution i can make on a personal level to the environment. >> it was really easy to sign up for the program. i just went online to, i signed up and then started getting pieces in the mail letting me know i
1:35 am
was going switch over and poof it happened. now when i want to pay my bill, i go to pg&e and i don't see any difference in paying now. if you're a family on the budget, if you sign up for the regular green program, it's not going to change your bill at all. you can sign up online or call. you'll have the peace of mind knowing you're doing your part in your household to help the environment. >> good morning, everyone. i'm barbara ga sierra, the director of health and i'm be your m.c. this morning and i want to thank you all for being here today for this program announcement. and i want to thank victoria manner, one of our incredible care facilities, for hosting us this morning. and so we have several
1:36 am
distinguished leaders with us this morning. and our mayor london breed, we hope to have our president of the board of supervisors malia cohen. and our new supervisor rafael mandelman and the owner of the victorian manner bernadette joseph. bernadette is the second generation of owners of this type of facilities and we really appreciate her family's commitment to the communities that we serve. our residential care homes are very important form of housing in san francisco, providing compassionate support for our community who live independently. the department of health, the department of aging, and i want to acknowledge that we have our department heads with us today. and both departments depend on these homes and facilities to ensure our clients are safe and that they get the care that they need. so we're so fortunate to work and live in a city that cares -- cares for its most vulnerable community members.
1:37 am
our strongest leaders for this is our own mayor, mayor london breed. mayor breed is committed to ensuring those facing behavioral and health challenges are provided care and housing that they need. so please welcome mayor london breed. [applause] >> mayor breed: thank you, barbara, and thank you, everyone, for being here today. i'm really excited to be here and as mayor i have made it clear that one of my top priorities is to not only address many of the challenges that we face with so many people struggling with mental illness, but, more importantly, to address issues of homelessness. we have to make sure that we invest in preventing homelessness in the first place. and we know that this particular facility, along with so many others throughout our city, continue to struggle
1:38 am
financially. they struggle financially due to lack of funding from the state, from the federal government, and what that means is that time and time again in our city we need to figure out ways in which we can continue to support the great work that this facility is doing and others like it. so today i'm really proud to announce that we're investing over $1 million over the next two years from one-time revenue to stabilize residential care facilities that support our most vulnerable population throughout san francisco. [applause] and, let me tell you what it will do. it will help 37 residential care facilities and house more than 350 people in our city, including many of our seniors. some of these people suffer with serious behavioral health and medical issues.
1:39 am
many have a history of homeless homelessness. and we know again that the best solution is it to prevent homelessness in the first place. one of the care providers that support one of the ones that will receive funding as we said before is victoria manor which we are here today, located in district 5, which is now represented by supervisor brown. this place has 90 beds and it serves 26 clients for the department of public health. the facilities like these have been under strain as i said in terms of lack of funding and the city currently spends $2.5 million through the department of public health to provide supplemental funding to close the spending gap. and i want to, again, i appreciate barbara g garcia for identifying where the needs are and making sure that we are using city resources in the most efficient way to support this community. but this is a complex issue
1:40 am
which requires a holistic approach to look at now and the financial challenges of the future. and this additional funding is a down payment and demonstrates our commitment to ensure that these providers can care for and to serve our community. the department of aging and adult services is convening a working group along with the department of public health and the office of economic and workforce development to analyze the current demand and study options to meet the needs of the future throughout this city. i expect to hear recommendations by the end of this year and until then this funding will help to ensure that we continue to serve hundreds of san francisco residents who would otherwise be at risk of homelessness and who would otherwise not be able to care for themselves. i want to thank the supervisors who are here today for their tireless work in preparing this coming fiscal year's budget, who
1:41 am
is now our board president and was leader during this budget time, she was also the finance chair, supervisor malia cohen. and i am hoping to sign this into law hopefully soon and i have sent a letter to president cohen outlining my support for this funding and how we're able to move forward in our shared priorities. we know that there's a lot of work to do and it takes a village. it takes a lot of our departments it takes members of the board of supervisors, and i'm glad to be joined by someone who has been my partner although he's just joined the board of supervisors, supervisor rafael mandelman who has really been a champion for issues around mental health. we're so grateful for his support here today. and i also want to take this opportunity to acknowledge roma guy who has also been an incredible advocate behind mental health reforms and pushing for more mental health stabilization beds in our city
1:42 am
to, again, care for our most vulnerable population of citizens in san francisco. with that i'd like to provide an opportunity for the president of the board, president malia cohen, to say a few words. [applause] >> thank you, and good morning, ladies and gentlemen. what a wonderful day, mayor breed, also a fantastic start. this is exciting news. i'm thrilled to join the mayor as well as my colleagues, supervisor mandelman and supervisor brown, as well as my partners in the department of public health that are standing up here with me, to announce this $100 million for board and care. san francisco has always been a city that has been committed to supporting our most vulnerable residents. you know what, we haven't stopped yet. we're actually recommitting and reaffirming that commitment today. this year i'm proud that the -- that our budget process was,
1:43 am
quite frankly, most transparent. and policy driven. a collaborative process that we have seen to date. in the month leading up to the budget we spoke with community activists, we have spoken with our residents, we polled our residents and, of course, we surveyed the colleagues on the board of supervisors. resoundingly without a doubt we have heard that homelessness is a top priority for particularly those who are suffering mental health issues. we have a responsibility to keep our residents, to help them to remain in healthy condition, and it's a top priority of ours and we want to have them in a safe place to live and access to care and treatment. and so it is actually through our policy-driven process that we allocated $47 million in additional funding for homelessness. i think that is an important figure to note. the board of supervisors has directed over $4 million towards
1:44 am
housing and homeless solutions and it's going to manifest itself in several ways, ways that you will be able to see instantly. first, in housing subsidies for families and seniors, mental health services and street medicine teams, patch the funding for residential care facilities. that's a critical one. patch 23u7din funding for residl care facilities. and also for those facing eviction. so this additional million dollars for the board and care facilities is without a doubt welcomed. it's a welcomed investment to help 355 san franciscoians facing displacement and also dealing with mental illness. this is directly aligned with the board's budget priorities and our commitment to ending homelessness and ensuring that our most vulnerable residents are safe, healthy and housed. thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen.
1:45 am
[applause] >> thank you, president cohen, it was one of the best budget processes i have been involved in so thank you. we are so fortunate today to have our board member from this district, i have worked with her for many years and we're very proud to bring her up to the podium. [applause] >> thank you. thank you to everyone that is here today. the residents of victoria manor. and also thank you mayor breed for finding this additional million funding to help our board and care facilities throughout the city. and president cohen and supervisor mandelman, thank you for supporting this. i think that it's so important. i have to thank roma guy and barbara garcia because anytime that i have questions they're the boots on the ground and i call them. i want to just thank you for all of of the years that you have
1:46 am
been supportive in giving advice. i have a personal story. a neighbor of mine actually was losing her place, her roommate situation because of her mental health issues. when i saw her on the street she told me, this was almost 13, 14 years ago. and she told me her social worker suggested that she go into a room and care board facility. she was really frightened. i think that she had no idea what they were about, and neither did i, but then i saw her months later and she was so well taken care of. she was happy. and she told me how much this really meant to her. and she had a family -- i think she was an eighth resident in care. and i have been very supportive of the board and care. because if it's the right situation for that right person
1:47 am
it's vital. it's taking care of our most vulnerable residents and we need to step up. it's part of our housing stock, and i said that affordable housing is one of my priorities. this is affordable housing for our most vulnerable residents. i want to also thank all of the angels out there that take care of our residents here. and thank bernie joseph for being one of those people, second generation, that isn't saying i can't do it, you know, because a lot of people -- a lot of people age out in these board and cares and they can't do it anymore. they don't have someone to replace them. and i just really think that it's amazing that it's a family affair because they are a family here. so i want to thank everyone for coming out and i'm very excited moving forward of how we look creatively at supporting our most vulnerable residents. thank you. [applause] >> thank you supervisor brown. our newest board member rafael
1:48 am
mandelman, and in recent conversations with supervisors he's very interested in looking at housing, skill nursing and residential care facilities i know is one of his top priorities. so supervisor mandelman, thank you so much. [applause] >> good morning, everybody. i am incredibly pleased to be here to support mayor breed and her team, director garcia, for all of great work you have done to make this a possibility. and for identifying these additional funds to help to meet the critical need. decades ago when california set itself on the path towards deinstitutionalization and closing our state mental hospitals we were promised a network of community care facilities. i think that we all know that that promise was never kept. but to the incident that it was kept it was through places like this in the community where folks could get the care that they need. today in san francisco we have
1:49 am
lost and are at risk of further loss of dozens, if not hundreds, of board and care facilities that provide house askin housine for our most vulnerable neighbors. i have spoken frequently and over the last year about my mother and her struggles with mental illness. she was housed for most of her adult life in board and care facilities. some were good, some were not so good. but they were essential to keeping her housed. make no mistake but for facilities like this one, hundreds, if not thousands of additional san franciscoians would be in hospitals or jails or on our streets. so as we work to move the thousands of currently unhoused homeless san franciscoians off the streets and into care it's critical that we stabilize our stock of board and care facilities and create more care options for those who need them. i like that the mayor referred
1:50 am
to this as a down payment and i think that is the right way to think of it. it's an important first step in addressing a need that i imagine that we will be grappling with for most of your administration but that i have complete confidence that working together with roma guy telling us what to do, we will be able to solve. so i'm very glad to be here and very grateful to be included. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, supervisor mandelman. i just wanted to acknowledge bernie's family, her husband and daughter are here and i know that it's a family -- a family affair for this project. so i do want to thank you for all of the work and the support that you give to bernie to provide such a beautiful location for our clients. one of the important processes for our clients is social support. and so to be together and to learn together and to support each other is one of the
1:51 am
important processes and also important contribution that a facility like this provides. so it would be such a great honor and i want to acknowledged kelly, our transitions director, who really manages with bernie and i heard that she's one of the best negotiators as bernie says, that she does what she is told to. and we are appreciative of both of the teams and so i appreciate you, bernie, and i want to bring you up. [applause] >> good morning. i'm bernadette joseph, the owner and director of operations at victorian manor. thank you, mayor breed, and supervisor cohen and supervisor mandelman and supervisor brown, and director of health garcia, barbara garcia. thank you for being here and for your support for our seniors. here at victorian manor we serve over 90 elderly clients with various needs, including
1:52 am
dementia, medical and mental health needs. our home provides a place where seniors can live in the community and be as independent as possible. we welcome with open hearts and open arms a diverse group of residents, including a frail and vulnerable elderly population and we see every day what a big difference it makes for them to have the right place to live with the full activity program that enriches their lives. thank you mayor breed for recognizing the work of residential care facilities for the elderly like victorian manor. the new funding will help us to make ends meet. and to continue to serve the seniors that we care so much about. we are happy that the city is also looking into long-term solutions to keep the facilities like ours, residential care facilities for the elderly, to have them remain in san
1:53 am
francisco. so, thank you so much. [applause] >> thank you, that's the end of our program. and i'm sure that the press may have questions and i'll leave that to the press. thank you. >> any questions... anything off topic we'll take on the side. >> can you say specifically what the funding will go towards, is it services or more beds? >> one of the important things that we have done with the facilities is that we have provided them with an extra amount per day for the bed and part of that is because we have individuals with different levels of need and that really helps for the staffing of the beds, and making sure that the right staff is for the right client and their needs. so this will provide extra dollars for a per bed space that we pay for and we work that out with the owners so they have the
1:54 am
right staffing. bernadette, if you would like to add anything? [laughter]. >> where is the money coming from? >> the department will be working with the board of supervisors and the mayor's office for the one-time dollars that the mayor allocated for this. >> that money goes towards staff wages and health care? >> and as you know we pay per diem per day and that extra dollars the staffing has. >> can you talk more about why this is a piece of the puzzle that deserves the extra money? there's a lot of other things out there that need help as well. >> i think that we don't spend enough time talking about stopping something from happening in the first place. when you think about the amount
1:55 am
of money it takes whether it's wages for employees, or an increase in the dollars that it takes to feed people, whether it's additional services, physical therapy, social services and things that go into actually taking care of some of the individuals who are in board and care, the costs are going up. then what happens when there's a huge gap, that means most likely that sometimes they can't necessarily take care of all of the clients that they have. and the reason why this is important is because if they have a budget shortfall then that means that they go from 90 beds to maybe even 80 beds so they could at least afford to cover the costs of those particular individuals. this is important because where are we going to put 10 people that might be displaced because of a lack of funds? and so in looking at, you know, all of these particular board and care facilities and the increase in costs and the challenges to meet the need, we have to make sure that we keep every single bed. we have to make sure that we do everything that we can to
1:56 am
prevent, you know, something from happening in the first place and that is the possibility of losing those beds which means that those people are going to have to go somewhere. and we have to do everything that we can to make sure that they don't end up on the streets and that's what this is about is prevention. >> any other questions? >> can you explain a little bit about -- i was shocked by the number that we have lost -- it looks like almost 30 of these facilities in the last five years. why that is happening. >> well, it's exactly what mayor breed talked about is the fact -- and also the fact that some of these were family owned and the cost of doing this -- and this is all over california and this is not just san francisco. but the cost of doing these types of facilities, particularly as they depend on the ssfai dollars that comes in doesn't always match the overall cost of the facilities and the services. so it's exactly why we're trying to provide them some stabilization. we started doing this almost 11
1:57 am
years ago really looking at how to work with the residential care facilities in both ways. one, to provide them dollars to serve clients with higher needs and also to help them to cover their costs that ssfai doesn't always cover. because the increases don't match the cost of doing business. >> all right, thank you.
1:58 am
1:59 am
2:00 am
>> commission thanks sfgovtv which can be viewed on sfgovtv2, or live streamed. members of the public, please take this opportunity to silence your phones and other electronic devices. public comment during the meeting is limited to three minutes unless otherwise established by the presiding officer of the meeting. speakers are requesting but not required to state their names. completion of a speaker card, while optional, will help ensure proper spelling of speaker names in the written record of the meeting. please place speaker cards in the basket to the right of the. they will be card in the order they are placed in


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on