Transcripts For SFGTV Our City Our Home Oversight Committee 20220909

Submit your Public Comment by mail. And tell be forward to the committee and included part of official files this meeting is recordd and available sfgov. Org thank you. We call this meeting to order it is thursday august 25, 2022. We will start with roll call. Number catalano. Here. Member denning. Absent. Vice chair dantonio. Absent. Member friedenbach. Present officer leadbetter. Here. Member miller. Absent. Member reggio. Here. Chair williams. Present. We have kwoer and up move into our land acknowledgment. We acknowledge we are on the unseed home land. No audio. As the stewards of the land in accordance with their translations the Ramaytush Ohlone never forgotten their responsibilities as the care takers. As well as for all people reside in their traditional territory we benefit from living and working on their home land. Pay respects acknowledging the ancestors and irrelevant tifs of the Ramaytush Ohlone upon community and affirming their rights as first people. Thank you. We will move in our next item. Public comment on any matter not on the agenda of the is there Public Comment. Member who is wish to provide comment should call 4156550001 access id 2497 531 8347. Press pound and pound again. Dial star 3 to lineup to speak. A prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. Wait until the system indicated you have been unmuted. Note you have 2 minutes. I want to make note member miller joined our meeting. I will take the first caller. You have 2 minutes. Thank you. Good morning chair and Committee Members im the policy associate for [inaudible]. One of the cosponsors of prop c special invested in ensure the public has a way to understand how prop c dollars are uses. The voters and the [inaudible] of the committee. We would like to propose holding a discussion of necessary changes to the dash burden and be added to the next meetingss agenda. Prop c funds this work are ints gravel to addressing homelessness. We cannot ford to have the promise of the proposition under mined [inaudible]. To appreciate the progress the committee stroifed to achieve. The public should be able to engage with accessible data and information about implementation we look forward to further discussion hopefully as an agenda item. Thank you. Hi. You have 2 minutes. This is Kristin Evans i was a proponent for prop c. And i want to echo what alliana just spoke upon. You know when we went on a road hoe to the Community Groups talking about the promises of prop c we made commitments to give updates on how the money was being spent. It is really important we have access to digestible information that explains how the prop c dollars were used. I dont think the dash board is there. As somebody that gets questions on social media about where the prospect c dollars are being spent i struggle myself. To take information from various hsh presentations and pull together the answers to questions about how the money is spent. I would love to have that one place to director people so they see clearly the number of people that have been housed. The number of people that have been had Homelessness Prevention. Number of people supported with Behavioral Health that does with the resources. Thank you, so muchch check for additional opinion comments. I dont see any. Thank you. Next so much for Public Commenters. We will move to itemly approval of the Meeting Minutes from july 28 of 22. So moved. Moved by member reggio, is there a second . I can second it. Friedenbach. Is there Public Comment on this . Members who wish to provide comment call 4156550001 access id 2497 531 8347 upon pound and pound again. Dial star 3 to line up to speak a prompt will indicate you raised your hand wait until you have been unmuted. Note you have 2 minutes. Check the list now. That was a hold over from before. I dont see Public Comment. For this item. Gi want to recognize vice chair [inaudible] joined. Member catalano. Yes. Member denning. Vice chair dantonio. Yes. Member friedenbach. Yes. Officer leadbetter. Yes. Member miller. Yes. Member reggio. Yes. Chair williams. Yes. Minutes have been approved now item 4 our resolution to allow teleconferenced meetings this resolution provide and reviewed by members in preparation for this meeting iffure want to seat text the link is there. So given the continued state of covid19, and the benefits of the physical distancing to control spread, and also the opportunity for public to provide comment in the virtual setting the Committee Meets by teleupon conferencing for the next 30days and revisit at the next regular meeting. Is there more . Thats it. Okay. Is there opinion comments on this item. Members who wish to provide Public Comment should call 4156550001 access id 2497 531 8347 press pound and pounds again. Dial star 3 to lineup to speak. A system prompt will let you know when it is your time to speak. You have 2 minutes. I see a Public Comment i will take the first caller. Yes. Kristin everyones. I wanted to encourage us to really think about how do we include voices that cannot access these meetings. I than this is a problem not just for this body but all the bodies meeting during the pandemic. For people experiencing mobile homelessness. Many lack access to the ability to watch the proceedings and participate in them. And i would love for us to really figure out ways to encourage participation and this process. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have additional callers . We do not. Thank you. Be that is there a motion to approve . I move it. Gi than was moved by officer leadbetter. Yes. Second by member catalano. Any further discussion. I do think it would be great to meet in person, i mean may be hybrid on the board of supervisors do or are think burglar exploring that we miss something and i know for households gnaw out there if there is a way to do that in the future absolutely. Thank you member friedenbach. I have been speaking to our staff. I dont know if staffments to provide an update of where we are in terms of returning to in person. Sure. I have spoken with the Technology People and with connected to the Mayors Office. There are not plans or time lines for us to hesitate to say return to in person we have never been in person. And i think the point is well is an important one about how do we make the meeting more accessible to people and connect with people. In ways that are meaningful and share the information about what is going on and opportunity to comment. I look forward to working with you guys to figure out how exactly we can do that. Despite our current digital, teleconferenced state. I know you have been in touch with i see member reggio . Yes. Just a question may be you said that, is our practice the same as all other commissions except for the board of supervisors . Or are there exceptions for some of the committees and commissions . Can they committees that are meeting in person. Not they know of. I do think there were one or 2 committees that were sort of legislateively required to do their work in person. And thinking like the redistricting conversations needed to be in person. But otherwise, as far as i know, all other committees and policy bodies are meeting remote. Thank you. Thank you. And thank you members and to our Public Commenters we want to get to the place where we can have meetings in person. I agree that it is about you know inclusion and we will work with the city to goat that point. We had a motion and second. I knowledge we fwl to secretary upon hawn. Member catalano. Yes. Member denning. Vice chair dantonio. Yea. Member friedenbach. Yes. Officer leadbetter. Why i hope the callers stay on i of course we can talk more about interesting ways to do data and deeply engaging on folks. Thank you for calling in. Member miller. Yes. Member reggio. Yes. Chair williams. Yes. All right. The resolution is approved and we will continue the conversation about returning our not returning being in public having it in person. Next item. Needs assessment preview. And we will have discussion so i will turn it over to angels tow kick us off. Yes. And officer leadbetter will take a minute. Officer leadbetter good morning, everybody. Excited to have this otagenda. Start regular conversation. I want to really thank the callers makes me excited that people are showing up and engaged and wanting to think about president dash board and think about data and want to engage with it and track progress and look at this as a way to understand what is working for people on the streets who are experiencing homeless knowledge. What is not and what we need to really implement and put in our recommendations to make our system stronger. I think when we started out with imagining the committees and i encouragedm vice chair dantonio to chime in. We imagined a robust Accountability Committee that we would think creative about but figure out how to deepen the education and really engagement with the data and the progress and you know i knowledge the creative part is how do we take this out to the community in ways that you know can be very proactive. And acceptable and track the progress. I wonder if at some point i think i can follow up with jesse and julia after this, i wonder if there is a way we have regular Community Based meetings that are like working groups that allow for analytical conversation. You know not just analytical but experienced base conversations. Im up for talking to the call horse called and see with we can do to come up with something we have not done before in the city would be exciting. So, put a pin in that for later. You know you got me excited with your calls and grateful for you showing up. And down to do whatever works for folks. So, kickoff the Needs Assessment. Ment to say the Needs Assessment and provides an opportunity for the committee to engage with each other and the departments and the public at large in the cocreation of our system. And the spending of local dollars. I shared before that work closely with jesse in alameda count tow do some of this work and due to the engagement with people through focus groups and livid experience. It was transformtive to the system and broke all old ideas and brought new ideas. I think we have that opportunity in front of us and if we can sour on the the engagement with experience which i have great conversations with angels and he department and after today hopefully with the communities. So, as a review what we adopted for the Needs Assessment process. The slide is up here. First the population analysis. That was the initial analysis present in the november of 2021. And updated with data juneaugust. You know the point in time count came out. We will talk more in the future and i really encourage anyone who wants to dive deep in questions about the count and set up a time with jesse im happy to be a part of those conversations. She offered her time to sit with anyone who wants to divest the counts data and ask questions, get feedback. The inventory gaps ajs in march the performance. Qualitative analysis with the work going on with the department. And aprilassist and engagementllow the expertise Leadership Program strike through until we figure out another path. Reporting and discussion and revisit Needs Assessment and presentation in november after budget recommendations that will serve to meet our legislative requirements presented to the Mayors Office and the board of supervisors every 3 years. The lived expertise leadership. Still in progress. I will turn it over to jesse for a preview of the Performance Analysis that is under way thank you, officer leadbetter. Good morning, committee. So officer leadbetter did a great job walk through what would the mr. President s by the committee in march. And highlighting the progress so far report has been released. And so i look forward to dig nothing that in the coming months. As well as Housing Inventory count. I have been working with the departments to try to figure out and reassess how we are estimating the number of households expected to experience homelessness in a year. That work is under way. It is under way. Hsh provided data on the measures the Performance Analysis and that is what we will start looking at today. Also provided the desegregation broken it out by race. And so we will look at measures 2 and 5. I dont expect you to know i will tell you in a bit. Today and just beginning that process of starting to look at data and upon think about what it does well and where the limitations are. There is a limited cycle focus groups under way and im proposing that we calendar and agendize the discussion of our approach of the committee stake holder engage am for this fall. There are things in the works i hope to be able to will wrapped xup presented back to you. And can sort of chart out a vision for how stake holder engagement continuous. Angels karmics we did do 4 focus groups in the spring. Yea. They were programs started. Shared about what needed to change in the programs and when was working and they almost all were robust discussions and you know that information should be available publicly. We did all the work should be reported the Qualitative Analysis already taken place. I dont want to lose that. The focus groups from the focus groups are in available on the city our home website. And anyone should feel free to sends me an e mail and i will provide the director link to the documents. Today, well shift and start looking at system performance. And upon begin that process. Um my goal today is to Lay Foundation for the engagement that officer leadbetter talked about and provide a high level over view of how system performance is measured in the homeless response system what it means and limitations are. Wham it does well. And begin to have that conversation. From the out set i like to establish the data is never perfect t. Is a dey way of representing the world and representation that is selective. We seek out t. Has quality and completeness issues and other constraints. Data provide a Vantage Point this is not available. Allows us to see the big picture. Our data and measurements will not say everything they provide valuable insights. Well look at the hud office of special Needs Assistance Program the snaps office. Their system Performance Measures. And so in part because the most long standing and well developed. System level measures i have seen and known. There are a number of other systems that are developing including the state of california that are developing measures and working on that. But we will look at these hud system Performance Measures. Okay. There are a number of strengths. And i think the system level prop to say is important because homelessness is a problem that is not solved by a Single Program or Funding Source. People sprngs homelessness need a combination of programs and services and taking that system level view. Helps us see that the combinations are and understand the impact of our program and system. The system Performance Measures provide a high level vow how people enter the system and flow through the system. Developd and tested over time. The federal. 2009 describes most of the measures proposed in 2011. Standardized the data and homeless system and laid foundation and 2014, the system Performance Measures were formalized. These are standard measures and have the universe the Data Elements and equations are defined by the snaps office and provided vendors they are public low available and you can look at them if you are interested. They are national. Right. Cocs continuing to care across the country using the same measures built in their homeless Management System and because of that the measures form a shared language and foundation for talking about performance and out come across community in the u. S. Well is something San Francisco is evaluated on. Hud uses these measures in the care funding competition that is under way now. And as an opportunity for communities to accept assess the progress compared with last year. And really assess progress toward the gospel making homelessness rare and one time only. I gallon through the measures through that lens of making homelessness rare and brief and one time only and see how they connect. There are 3 measures connected to making home littleness rare. Rougs the number of people home little for the of first time. Rugs the number of people sprngs homelessness. And nkszing housing stability for people at risk of homelessness or homeless using broader definition in system Performance Measures 2 and 6. Brief. Trying to reduce the length of time people experience homeless knows. Measures system performance measure one length of time. Increasing the number of people who obtained permanent housing. Tracked in system performance measure upon 7. And reducing the number of people who return to homelessness making ontime. We will look at this today, measure 2, increasing income for stabilization. System performance measure 4 and increasing retention of permanent housing pressure 7. Okay. So thats the good news about the system Performance Measures. There are limitations. So from the point of view of o ko, the system Performance Measures tell us about some but not all of the population that our city our home is concerned with. Specific low they tell us about homeless house holdses. People who are at risk of homelessness sro families, over crowd, live nothing poverty the measures dont enter in that represent or reflect what is happening for those households. The system Performance Measures take focus shelters, housing programs in the system. They dont reflect the important advancement of the last 5 years. It is coordinated entry. Coordinatedent row entry is a federal requirement. And that creates gaps. And some limitations of when we see and how we understand our system to work. Another challenge right, is that the measures in terms of people individual people. Instead of households. Which is a way of looking and seeing. And then it for sure hud funded programs are in there. But not hud funded programs may or may not. And that is a limitation. Upon one that you know many people are working on to bring this coverage up so we can have a robust understanding of what is happening in the system. But in many case system in the there yet. There are few challenges connected to the measures. These are measures system performance how different programs are working together. How flow is happening in the system. They are not measures of what the is happening with the population of all the people who are experiencing homeless knowledge. I will return in a little while. Context is important with the measures the pandemic is impacting did theasm and we dont know what that looks luke and we are trying to figure it out. Many of the measures require 3 year reporting periods. Pandemic will reverberate for a long time. There is a lot of geo graphic variation what is good in one part of the country is a problem in another. And data quality or coverage initiatives. Not having enough coverage is not a great thing but sometimes increasing the coverage getting more organizations to participate can make you look like you are failing you will see in a minute. The other thing about the measures it is important to review, compare and repeat. Look at these year over year, time after time. Lets get into this you see some how this plays out. What i have described. And beginning with measure 5. I picked 2 measures i think connect with our focus in the quarter on Homelessness Prevention. Measure 5. Number of importance homeless for the first time that sounds great. Tell be helpful here. Translation of that goal that vision in an quantity ~ifiable metric is an art. The place where we are not talking about population about people become homeless but people touching the system. It measures change in the number of importance entering shelleder. Rapid rehousing and permanent Supportive Housing who dont have prior enrollment in the previous 2 months. Counts everyone who enters during the year and subtracts anyone enroll instead previous 2 years. New york and dc and chicago shelter is more availability. For the community and bay area that have sizeable numbers live nothing unsheltered conditions including safe sleep and parking and encampments, this measure does not live up to the title of representing the number of persons who become homeless. Caththe measure to show people in emergency shell and permanent housing newly homeless or people who have been unsheltered and connecting with those programs the first time in 2 years, this may provide an indication of movement from unsheltered to sheltered and housed situations. It is possible on the west chayote is a better measure of flow in the systems capacity to bring in people. In theory we want to see decreases in the member of people touching the system for the first time props as a community that have a large grouch people who are responsiblesing unsheltered homeless knows having a large rate of people touching the system that could be positive. Here is the data shown. Im showing 2 years. 21 and 22. Because of the pandemic. These are both pandemic years. When i look i think, wow. That is seems like 72 a High Percentage of people touch being for the first time and 59 as well. Seems high. And so i wonder what was going o. Right. That could be shaping the data. What are we seeing here. There are a number of interceptions. May be the pandemic expansion of shell and housing enabled san finish to responded more effectively to people unsheltered is here as an increase of people touching the system for the first time. Could show the expansion during that time. I think about how is housing impacting this measure in the future . Well come back. Another way of representing same measure. Looking more at the numbers of people. Right. You see that more people were enroll in the programs. During 22. Than 21. And this represents the same number, 4300 in 21 and 42 huh human in 22 touched the system for the first time. An alternate explanation the team bringing more organizations participating in the Information System and data system. Called the one system in San Francisco. This would enhajjes the quality and confident of our data coming out of each. Great and show us an increase in the orange. Like first Time Homeless. People served and entered in hmis for the first time. Yes. Okay. So again. Like im not entirely sure tell be interesting to see how this conscience does that 43 or 4200 people touching the system for the first time does that continue to be about capacity or other factors that we are aware of that help us interpret what is happening. Now i like to propose this measure is describing the systems capacity, again. Shaped by a variety of factors and look at the measure more as a measure of flow and move am. Than a measure of first Time Homeless knows. And the last thing is againful we need to look at the measures annually and that will help us unpack and understand what we are seeing here. Before moving on. I want to show the measures by race and ethnicity. I provide 2 measures of population for comparison. Green shoes the new to shelter in housing. Oranges results from 22 point in time count sorry have an and blue shows San Francisco population at the upon 2020 census. You see the racial desparities we are familiar with African Americans make up a large part of the Homeless Population and American Indian or indigenous this is small. Asianamerican or asian, black, africanamerican or african. Multiracial. Native hawaii or pacific islander. White and hispanic. Company things that are noteworthy here. You am get the slides and look at them in more detail. In 2019, 18 describing themselves hispanic. Compared with 30 in 2022. That is a change. Or feels like a bit of a change. And then also important to note the proportion of people identifying white in 2022 increased from 29 up to 2019 count to 42 at the 2022. So im looking forward to dig nothing that pit report. Next week. And trying to unpack what is going on. Will 22 proportions for latino and white are closer to the 2017 count. We are seeing regression. Re turns to homelessness and open it up for questions. What does it measure . It measures the extent to which importance exit permanent housing return to homelessness in 624 monthses. Figuring out whether the Permanent Housing Solutions are effective and long lasting in ending homelessness. Follows people who exited permanent housing during the 2 years ahead of the reporting period sxf then looks at the intervening 2 years to see who return said. And provides, that is confusing. Takes thinking. We will play that out on the next slide. Provides return data less than 0sick monthses. 6 to 12 and then to 24 months and what we want to see is decreases in the number of people returning to homelessness. There is a limitation here in a household returns and another community you say Contra Costa County it will not show up here. Roois right. This is a measure behalf is going on in the San Francisco system. Not what is hatching in the population. Unfortunately, right. We want to know are people returning in other parts of the bay area or california. Or in the country even. The last thing i will say this measure would be helpful to be able to see data in terms of households. Households returning to mol homelessness versus individual. All right. Returns to homelessness in 2 years. Interesting the rate of return 13 is consistent across both years. Butt size the universes are different. There are more people upon in fiscal in 2021 than in 22. And this is where we will do the math of the measure. So fiscal 22, small are group of people there. The reporting period where it would track the excess would be excess took place between juvenile 19 and june of 20. The start of the pandemic it captures that fiscal 22 reflects exit during this First Quarter of the pandemic. This could explain the decrease in the total exits to permanent housing that year. One strength is that it breaks out returns in time. Can help communities identify the moments for intervention. Less than sick months is a time that zero to 6 month period this is important. Upon 4344 return do so quickly. Small and concerning amount restate your name in the next 6 months. And there is an up tick 13 to 24 months. Right . Desegregating by race. This shows the rate of returns on homeless innocence upon 2 years. You see in gray the proportion of permanent housing broken by race and in green proportion of returns in 2 years broken out by race and ethnicity. The pit suri have is orange, again. Providing that broader context and the San Francisco population, blue. Again. To provide that measure of population. American indian make up the same proportion of permanent housing exits and returns. Asian or asianamerican make up a higher proportion at 6 than permanent housing exits at 3 . And you see on the bottom these are not the universe are not the same 1, 214 exits included here permanent housing included and 160 return. Much smaller group. People identifying as black make up 42 of permanent how longs exits but 46 of return. Identifying multiracial, native, pacific i landser make up a higher proportion of exit and whites make up the same as exits and returns. People identifying hispanic have a significant difference making up 26 of permanent housing exit in this year. And 33 of the returns. Look at this data differently. Look within each group. System average for returns is 13 . And you read this chart as showing of the 53 people identified as American Indian, alaska or indigenous exited permanent housing 13 returned to homelessness in 2 years. Several groups have small universe, there are 35 and people identifyinga asian or asianamerican there are 42. In these cases a few individuals make a significant impact. But still the returns stand out. And tell be worth watching over time. By way of conclusion here and opening up to conversation, so given this over view, which i hope has not been too deep in the weeds and given you in perspective and things to think about on the system Performance Measures, you know, our city our home fund made significant investment in Homelessness Prevention. Shelters, service. What impact might the investments have on the homeless response performance . I dropped in the 2 measures to reminds of what they are. I can take this down. I will pause, and may be back to facilitate conversation, discussion. Yea. Also if want to [inaudible]. Upon before we take this back . Im eatingtory hear when the Community Members have to say thank you for your great presentation. We will start with vice chair dantonio. Thank you. [inaudible] i have thoughts and questions and i have thoughts i want to start with what the callers were call nothing for and member leadbetter was talking about engaging the communities. This is something we talked about early on. And it was going to be that calmed role that when sean leaving it fell off. I agree we need multiple touch points with data and informing the commune and beyond meet nothing person we need better dastasm we have our might bes but if we get call busy it im like, i think we should have something on you tube. We need content that is accessible and we than the communities like used and has access to which off line after hours. If they dont make a specific time for or go to a complicated website and i dont think the data is digestible enough for everybody in the community. To see. Even having a port like executive summary a one pager that is really easy to navigate and visually appealing walking luon you tube. And i think there are people withhold per in with us on this. And also if we develop a body like there could be ownership. Just put thanksgiving out there i think we can do better and kraeth dont is easy these days. So. I will say that. Okay. I have a question about so i guess when we are looking at the cons of the hud framework. The data is interesting but for me i see a lot of holes. And you know is it possible to apply this framework but like include other things like develop our own model . I mean we have a lot of monteseems like i know it is new but it seems to take a one time fits all approach and i dont know if this is right for us. Il say that. I think it is a publish for households and looking at families. It seems to focus a lot on, i thought about the single adult system. This is good for that and the one size fits all approach. If we create strategies and interventions we than we need to be more and i think we have the capacity to do that and why not set the standards for like what that looks like. Here in San Francisco. I think well is always going to be a focus and the data on more visible homelessness is like iconic unsheltered homelessness and misses the people who fall in the cracks we talk about the gaps i think. Iemgs this is abstract. But okay. And i had a question about also the Housing Inventory count that you said you were working on . Does that include a pipeline for housing and like how far out is this pipeline . And then like what fasters are looking at for that housing invenn story count. I think like is it looking at Affordable Housing development and look at all Development Across the city. Is it looking like in and out migration . Job creation and big are Company Better coming and bring more people to live in the city . Are is that part of the analysis . What like what factors are locked at in general . And sorry if im off here. I will stop there. I dont know jesse. Sorry. I know upon the Housing Inventory count you have seen, right. It covers Emergency Shelter transitional housing. The one you have diagonal i thought you were talking about you were working on member else. Permanent Supportive Housing and other. Losts and local it is beg your pardon when resources of does the literally homeless system control. Right and it provides does not give you a look at the pipeline. But it gives you a look except in that year. Allows communities to say this is currently online. And this is what is planned this year. Which is helpful i 99ing a Community Like San Francisco things are constantsly evolving and changing. You go to other sources you want to know and understand you know i think the Department Keep track of big are more pipe lines. Looking out 10 years even. Public housing authority. Right . Have to [inaudible] together to do this. Is this something we vehicled a goal of working on is having master documents that has all of that . Um i would like to see and i dont know if they are here on this call i would like to see like okay. Like the bmr program. Typically more successful during like nonrecessionary periods and so when there is more development . So im just curious if what that bmr pipeline looks like now. I do think that something we talked about is somehow tying voucher recipient and rapid rehouse to the bmr program in some way . And i think that is something we can look at . But i wrndz if there is a lot of development now or not. [inaudible]. Good morning. I will Mayors Office of housing and community development. We can provide a pipeline report to share with the committee. Great. And could you publicly include like, um basically, i dont know like how many years back and also back and like in the future of the trends of how Much Development in the bmr pipeline increase said or decreased . If this makes sense. I noted that. Great. Thank you. Thats helpful. We are planning a presentation from the Planning Department and planning presentation from planning to talk about the housing leaderships and some of the work they are doing on future look and policy. Priority. That will be later this fall. Look forward to that. Thank you. And then, yea, i was wondering, i dont know if anyone has, or you or jesse or member leadbetter around like is it possible to use this hud framework and add other elements that we would want to add. As far as like families that are doubled up and family in sros. Park parsing it out in some ways. If they have a model and we have inputs for that model can we make it our own . My thought but i dont knowful i might be far off. I think it it is a good idea i think the question is what you said do we have inputs. That is the real challenges i have been digging in to a variety the schools the cal works and different sources to depending on concrete information and i think that might be something planning can help us with if they do a lot of work in senseis. They do. They will i think it will be in october. Homeless has doubled up families. Member friedenbach. A couple of quick things. May be im stating the obvious. Prop c was not looking at literal homeless and if you look at that terminology, because um you know for example our members rapid housing. Stay with friends staying in the shelter. So it is really people are so in and out inner experience it is about whether you have secure housing or not. And so that is what, i know you are trying to get to jessica. I wanted with mindsful to that. The other spooes spees on the increase the numbers looking at it is numbers of people entering in homelessness the last company years the hotels would have shifted that. Significant cannot low the people who a lot of the people having access to the hotels were not traditionally necessarily the same who had access to other parts of the system. We have such a as you pointed out. Yea well is a lot of people who dont interface with the system this are homeless and so it and as we shift policy and priorities and do the things suddenly they are then in the system and that does not reflect. I think the pit and also just want to remind folks did the survey in the mission district. I think that was helpful. That was more of a point in time style report. Butment to make sure folks are looking at that. I believe it is available on the Latino Task Force website. And that could be data that we can draw from. It is one district but given the 55 increase in latino homelessness in the survey, i think it does the survey does go apples to apples it is a big comparison over the years so we see trends and helpful in that way. That is a good report to look at. And then lastly, i think you know really what people were asking for the people in Public Comment was something simple. And that is in the going become to that. And having that up there around how people are prep venting displace am. All of those numbers like numbers of peoples served in the categories. That would be that is hard to get at through the website and a lot of it like we really have ton what you are looking for. Um there i think there is some also some easy stouf do around having you know lists of reports like when we get like the report tab people click and has our reports and have to work on the peddling to make it accessible, which im happy to help with. But, yea. So those are my comments. Thank you, so much. Member friedenbach. I will put myself on stack here i want to second the comments both vice chair dantonio and member friedenbach, my day gig is research and i just do like it is idea of creating new frame works and doing things differents low to be able to gets the data we need and to be able to move the needle. I know what you are saying in termless of the inputs and getting the data sets that can get us there. I feel like, i dont know. Them is a frustration sometimes with the city like how we are not able to capture some of this information to be able to move and to make the Smart Investments to than what the Public Commenters were saying earlier is that we are making that dfrngs difference. We have things visible like the acquisition and in chet and alternative you know, interventions. Yea. I feel like if there is a way to you know think about alternative frameworks so we are not in this cycle of data collection. Gaps. I dont have the answer and i love this we have our so many great minds together but yea, colleagues i love for us to think more and that is something we can dive into at the retreat is knowing that you know sometimes the systems are scyllod and not talking to each other or collecting the same data points. How do we continue to move the neetsz. It is utmost concern to me and want to second the comments that i heard on that point. And i doment to say officer leadbetter is doing a fabulous job and ysy is no criticism there. I know it is challenging. You know understanding like the components that go in this type of research. Yea, it is something this is top of mind for me as well. Officer leadbetter . Yea. I am actively engaged and entered to see how our you know universe keeps growing and building. And when we can learn from it. And you know i think at the risk of repeating myself, always, for me the lived experience provides an opportunity to get strit to the heart of the matter. When we speak to the communities in a way that is miles an hour actionable than what we are longterm work of building a robust and data set. So i want to keep that top of minds and try to build that out and support angels and he department to move quickly as possible toward that. And im looking at the data and if i understand it correctly, the returns to homelessness 13 return rate, and i want to talk to Committee Members if you know the data nationally and put angelso the spot. How does this compare to other communities. 10 seems awful about i dont know. Those other things i want to finds the pieces that we can really make strong recommendations. Areas that we should be concerned about and i i dont know. Of course anyone exiting you know the system in a way that is unsuccessful is troubling. Yea when you get to 13 number. That seems rough. May beis not. I dont know. Yea. The data is available for other communities we look and i if the stakes were in the so high you would talk about it differents low. 13 is tough to feel. Pleased with that number. It is important to notice that is 13 of all people who exited t. Is permanent Supportive Housing and rapid rehousing exits and people who exited family and friends other permanent destinations outside of the system to have that in mind. And may be another project like where are the people coming from. What innerventions . Is there a process. May be there is in the a pattern men it is somewhere else. It brings up more questions possible loam than answer. I can point you toward 13 is lower than other communities i worked with. Thats good news and may be witness we get used to seeing these things i want love to hear from the departments and perspective these other things were looking at and concerned with and i think we have seen that conversation advance around Racial Equity in the last couple years understanding when the departmentses are focusing on and which measures they are using. And make their decision as well. Thank you. I see member reggio. And this is in regard to jesse your last comment. 13 is lower than other communities meaning it is other communities have a higher number higher rate. Rate of return. I ghs is what i wanted say. If you look at 13 of people homeless this is concerning but you also look at 87 of people who became housed maintain that housing to the extent that is a real number. I think it is a complex issue. Draw attention to this mornings paper. A major article on exits from homelessness and housing of the specific type evictions and most concerning, of course, on other people cant sustain house and we have to be concernod that stuff. But the other hand 87 i dont think we should lose site of the significance of this. I want to comment. Worthwhile read for all of us. Thank you, member reggio. May be sends this article out to the committee if folks have not seen it. I will go back to the officer leadbetter. Is that from before. That was from before. All right. Colleaguesil move us long to our next item if there is no further discussion. First about to Public Comments. Secretary. Members who wish to provide comment call 4156550001, access id 2497 531 8347 press pound and pounds again then star 3 to upon lineup to speak. This is kristin everyones. I want to thank everyone for the discussion on this item. I appreciate the interest and ensuring we are creating transparency and digestible information and communication. To the public that supported prop c and may be more important low information for those who oppose today communicate the accountability of using the dollars to create solutions to upon ends homelessness and prevent it. I was going to mention a lot of times the dash boards 3 up a lot of the data and lack the context that you were discussing. Sew, i would love to see Something Like where you talk about the number of people that entered in the coordinatedent row system and information that surrounds that that explains that these shifts with people with the focus of out reach and the way that out reach changes over time and put that commentary around that data set t. Is clear about what are the influencers and factors of change in that data. Somebody this works with people on the street, i know that the hot team has will a rotating a number of priorities they are focusing on any point in time. The focus is sometimes on housing because it is available and so there is a big are push to push people to do a coordinated. Provideset commentary that surrounds that information to explain why that data might change over time. Can be somebody i think mentioned pulling it up at 11 at night without the benefit of the Committee Discussion have the ability we [inaudible]. Appreciate the discussion. Thank you, caller. Thicking the list for additional callers and i dont see any. Thank you so much. We will move to item 6 a spotlight on targeted Homelessness Prevention we have hsh and as well as our own Homelessness Prevention liaison i will turn it to member katiea lana. I wanted offer before i turn it over to hsh. 4 points the first is when we are covering today and when we are not. Looking at the Homelessness Prevention and diversion kfth fund. 4 different types of funding the first is e vingz prevention and housing stabilization. Second for problem solving the third is for targeted Homelessness Prevention and the last is for supports within the system. There are resources fundsd and we will zoom in on targeted Homelessness Prevention and julia will with for this presentation. Im sure folks saw in the pit report released the under all the circumstanced estimate that for every household housed in San Francisco the estimate is unhoused with estimate of 20 hundred people will experience homelessness we continue is essential for you to address our housing and homelessness. Our system is serving households never served before. This is exciting we think about expanding the types of resources and the reach of work we do and hugely Important Role the funds play. In our city. And last is the this has been this work on prevention a collaboration which means really excite to see i know we heard and talks in the commit eat role of housing authority. The role that [inaudible]. And in the w we have it do. [speaking fast]. The way our departments can Work Together toward this issue. With that i will turn it over to juliettea. Hi, everybody. Im the manager for Homelessness Prevention and problem solving at hsh. Before i start i have to disable my video because of my band width. Before i start i want to say i want to recognize that i am the one presenting im speaking on hsh and mo [inaudible]. And presenting on the work that will [inaudible] here today. I will share my screen. Looks great. You are in the presentation. Correct. I am going to let me see. Disable my video. Hold on. I will stop sharing. I wanted to i have about 20 minutes worth of material to cover with yall. I do ask you hold your questions until the ends of the presentation and i will try to make this as engaging as possible. I start with a quick over view of funds of the foundational principles and strategies of targeted prevention. To provide context. [inaudible]. This slide contains an over view of the [inaudible] language for the prevention bucket and clarify what is nina shared the prevention bucket funds several activities and today we focus on the Homelessness Prevention. The told in the bucket is 104. 5 million. Out of which, this specific activity of targeted prevention represents about 52 . I wanted share with yall that the operational name given to the program the San Francisco emergency rental assistance program. Throughout the presentation im talking about the same thing. Community name that is recognized. I wanted briefly talk about how this program was designed. With the following foundational principle in minds. Of the principle of effective targeting. Sort of meaning this resource should be delivered to those with the highest likely hoofed losing Health Without this assist analysis. The founding principle of Racial Equity that he states all elements designed for racial and ethnic desparity. Foundational of reduced barriers. The service should be issued a fine. Have a low administrative better than and mull pull avenues for access and a flexible response regardless of the support level that the households receive. Antidisplace am the system should be designed to prevent homelessness and the displacement of the vulnerable. And finally the foundational princeables affordable. The system should be designed to preserve affordable. We are departing from a one size fits all model and focus on providing what assistance is needed to provide homelessness. Second is is that of Supportive Service the intent to provide any assistance especially around nation of [inaudible] or delivery of service or assistance that will assist in ensure housing stability. And preventing homelessness. And third engagement and collaborate rigz with partner system. This is essential to structural homelessness and identifying people who would not in in contact with the homelessness and this includes other system surrounding employment, education, health care and justice. I do want to note that especially this last fitsical year focussed on designing and implementing this program. And we are still in when we consider a covid relief phase. Main focus on providing rental assistance. Okay. But this fiscal year we will expand to include more flexible Financial Assistance and scaling and Supportive Service component. I will talk about this later. This slide provideings context to the funding service. You can tell prospect c plays a significant mrel this budget break downful first, that the targeted the the targeted prevention allocation is divided between hsh and [inaudible]. Right. From this current fiscal the total allocation is 21 million and for next fiscal year the total allocation is 25 million. It is divided split. Among the 2 departments. This figure include and Carry Forward from the previous fiscal year. The Funding Source you see here on the right side of the screen. They were part of an victim of federal and state funds for covid rental relief. You can tell theyre not on going. This is a good time for me to mention the launch of the sf era program capping in the larger context of one first, a state program provide reasonal relief and second, other significant funding allocations. So far we used prop c strategically a way to supplement and fill gaps. You see prop c has become or will the main on going resource moving forward. The other thing in this slide hsh admin costs are 3 of this budget line item and that usually the break down for Fund Providers providing targeted presension assistance follows a rowel of 35 of the funds operational and saul row details. And 65 going to. Direct. With the prop c allocations. The households serves with prospect c funds. Hsh is 78 . And 100 for targeted homelessness starting next fiscal year. This the left side of the slide lists the Community Organizations that are providing targeted Prevention Services that are funded by [inaudible] and hsh and or hsh. This organization provide the full gammet of service out reach. Help people apply for assistance. Through the documentation verification process and issue official assistance. On the right, we listed what we are taug calling the navigation partners. These Community Providers are getting [inaudible] out reach and assist with applications . But dont issue financial assist analysis. However they play a vital role in this process as well. In both . I have highlighted the programs theory working with mytd for eviction prevention. As we than targeted prevention and eviction prevention can be interrelated. You see from this list, we have a diverse, very comprehensive and very well rounded grouch Community Providers. I want to pivot now and talk about how prevention functions. So how can access Prevention Service in different ways an online application in multiple languages. Households wuk in or call a provider. Can walk in or call any navigation partner and we have online applications multiple languages and paper applications in multiple languages. The bread and butter of this intervention. One of the most Important Foundation principles of this innervention is target. I want to the next 3 slides will talk about how we are reaching the most vulnerable. Through the sf era program. We have comp tent neighborhood based cbos. There is diverse language. We have also providers population specific. Providers that their core competency is to provide assistance to families. Others who competence is target youth and then asianpacific. The program has a Multimedia Marketing strategy. We are organizers know about it. We have information about the program in the city and countys website. There are fliers. Muni bus signs and each provider has out reach and engagement strategies the Homeless Prenatal Program has a food bank. And the sf noticers distribute it. Jost we have evidence based targeting. That is embed in the the online application. That when we assist most vulnererable. We have over vulnerability factor in our targeted approach i will talk b. Share through this prop we are screening household in not out. Screening households in and we are serving households that in the past, may never have been eligible for services. I have listed 20 plus characteristic. I want to clarify households dont meet all of the criteria to qualify. Im showing with you all. The 20 lutz characteristic that we are looking at have you neverability factors we understand may have core relation with higher risk of homelessness. These have differents rates and scores and they list this is the list of factors that characteristics that were developed over air year long process. And experts in the field like beth sheen or ucsf played a role in vetting these. The frgsz can were facilitated by home and roej nal prop to homeless prevention and included a wide variety of xhounlts providers. You can tell, we are looking at many different characteristics including household composition. Including snapshot of the financial situation. Including any drastic changes. History of homelessness, recent ins carseration or discharge from a facility. We are well rounded vulnerability factors. In order for Service Applicants need to be a residents of San Francisco. Income 80 of ami or below and be at risk of homelessness or housing instability determined by the characteristic i shared with you. I want to make a note about the income 80 . You will see in the next slide that 89 of the households we have served since may of 21 have been under 30 ai. We are targeting and working with extremely low income households. We have this threshold here to really allow the program to prevent upon antidisplacement as well. The majority of households applying and receiving service under 30 . Birch go in the slide i want toityerate something i shared water earlier that the sf era program happened in covid rental relief and other players and other Funding Sources that play in recently we mack myselfed source of funding. And utilize the state program. Federal funds the main source of the assistance. But now that the state program is closed and federal funds are winding down, prop c funds [inaudible]. This is what this slide is talking about. The those do not apply to the state or qualify to the state program or not receiving assistance through the state program. From april 22 on. Because the state Program Sunset march 31 of 22. From april 22 on. Sf era helps up to 7, 500 per calendar year. Providers have the ability to go through a waiver request for hsh to issue up thousands and household receive back rent up to 3 rent those who demonstrate severe rent burden and to receive moving assistance in the shape of a security depos and i or first and left months rent. I also like to highlight. Does in the ask about immigration status. The program is available to any tenability or household. Who has a rental obligation. This includes leasing and tenants and households not on the lease. I upon want to highlight how households living in situations can qualify for assistance. Homeless we verify tenancy and residency through payments. This is very important the design element of it. I think it is appropriate to the renter dynamics we see in san front and haare most vulner annual households have to do in order to survive in San Francisco in terms of paying rent. And i want to clarify that for house old holds rent partially paid by subsidy, only helps with the households portion of the rents and facilitate the household going through a recertification structure. Just a quick visual of how official assistance is issued. The household applies online or assisted to apply online. Application is screened for eligibility. Especially around being a San Francisco resident and ami. And eligible applicants assigned a caseworker at our funded providers the caseworker meets with the household to verify information and collect documents and then the household application is approved and assistance is issued. I explain in the a previous slide that right now so far they have been providing reasonal relief in a post covid context. As we are entering the fiscal year, we are working on the following expansions. Really embodying the founding principal not one size fits all and flexible funds to cover what it it is the household needs to remain housed. Examples are emergency childcare. Emergency car repair and utility. Also starting to provide more house stabilization services. Examples of this will be houses stability plan. Miles an hour intentional keksz employmented share with you that keep are gathering feedback from household who is received rental assistance, so we can inform that the sign of stabilization and understands what the need is. And finally addressing service gaps between systems and to understand the structural will cause of homelessness and an example is we are working with the department of asian and Adult Services to increase services and access. I want to pivot a bit to talk about data. So a snop shot we served i shared before 89 of applicants had 30 brs of ami or below a percentage homeless. We serve black and brown households. We served households from neighborhoods most vulnerable to eviction and displacement and all risk of become homeless based on vulnerability factors. I wanted to share a break down of all applications so far. From may of 21 to the day i pull third degree data august 18. I want to shout out to the providers that have been working on this you can tell we have about 1011 prevention providers. They is done a lot of work. This would not have been possible. We processed over 6500 applications. 68 percent of applications of total applications were approved. 13 were not and 18 unfortunately were not able to resume contact after they first applied. 68 of applications this were completed and approved meaning received assistance this is 4, 400 houses out of those political 38 received prospect c funds. The rest received treasury and general funds. What the next 3 slides highlight key Demographic Data from all the households we have served. In terms of race over 50 of applicants were black, indigenous and color. The following racial break downs. 19 were white and 30 were left the field blank or did not answer. We speculate here a lot of these are latin x, latino. You know latinos can be black, white, asian, indigenous. Multirishl. But they can identify as latina only. As a race. We believe that play a role here in this being blank. In terms of ethnicity. 33 of the applicants identified latin x. This is very much in line higher than the most recent picture. In terms of gender identity, over 50 were female identified. And in terms of sexual orientation. 15 identified in the lbgtq community and 10 declined answer. Everybody else was defined hetero~ sexual, straight. In terms of age. You see that the bulk of applicants between 25 and 50 years of age. We had less than 3 of applicants in 25 years of age or less. Younger. And 33 over age 50 with 4 being 70 and above. Partnership with [inaudible] is personal. Here reiterating something i shared which is that 89 of our households that we serve were under 40 ami out of which 21 have zero income. 97 of applications were under 50 ami. Briefly highlighting the geographic locations. Coming from households where applicants were residence are likely to be disaccompliced and in terms of homelessness. 35 of applicants had sprnlsd previous homelessness ever or the last 2 years and most were assigned to hsh. Ghan is one of the expertise of the department. I wanted go over the average amounts of assistance that have been distributed to all households and down by background and future rent or move in. In terms of back rent providers distributed for prop c only funds. Distributed 2. 7 Million Dollars in back rents. 624 households received this service and average of 4, 342 for this need. For future rent. Households that have do have a high rent burden receive third degree service. 508 households received future rent. For an average of 3, 764 dollars. Over 1. 9 million funds of prop c and moving assistance 276 households received the service. A total was a bit over 1 admissible. And the average was 3, 819. This will be an upcoming evidence of our prevention efforts the most comprehensive an evaluation that will be lead by ucsf with hope and i shared are the nonprofit leading the targeted prevention and the point of this evaluation will be to demonstrate no audio. The criteria for this the program terse still need to be discussed but i think we will want it look at our targeting tool criteria to see how it is performing and understand if make tweaks. If we are leaving anybody out. And obviously to look at returns to the system. I do want to share about a minianalysis. A small scale i want to share this with yall. A min analysis on returns this was for hsh and happened in the context of our Program Monitoring for last fiscal year. So duringor Program Monitoring for left fiscal we looked at 10 of completed applications that remember served by hsh. In the First Quarter of last year. That was 93 cases. So then we review data for in the one system it see this household hadarc sesz any out reach. Shelter, coordinated entrance. Problem solving or Housing Service after having received sf assistance and also locked at prevention application. Online plat furthermore to see the house reapplied for a second round. And we found that within 6 months after receiving assistance the return was 10 . 9 households. I think this is a pretty good outcome and wanted share this is the paradox of prevention. [inaudible] if we were seeing zero returns. We would have to wonder upon we are targeting the right households we are poseed target without this assistance [inaudible]. If we saw zero returns we would ask yourself, are you targeting the right people . The same time we dont want to have too high of retirn because then the assistance we provided is not effective. That is the paradox of an evaluation around our prevention. I thought that this was promising number to share with yall. I have 2 slides left and almost done. So00 autolast 2 slidesmented address the over all need for prevention. So i wanted to be transparent and share that our modeling has recommend to mature and be sophisticated. Now hsh do not have a sophisticated model for the over all need for Prevention Service this is is an area for future growth. This will be a different measure from inflow when we are trying to do is prevents that. You know we wanted provide possible proxies to predict the over all node for prevention in the futures. Some things i wanted highlight. Possible proxy to predict the over all node for prevention in the community could be. Meaning they may be 30 or 50 ama and also another could be take the households not count in the the picture doubled up households and or take in consideration evictions, displacement and employment by demographic characteristic. That is my presentation. Thank you very much for hang nothing there. I think i took a little long are than what i had anticipated. I apologize. There was not [inaudible] around being concise as possible. And now00 eye dont know who to leave it to. Thank you. Thank you, that was an excellent presentation. Just in the spirit of where we are with time i will open up for discussion i want to let everyone know a hard stop at 11. 30 weave will table future agenda items i will turn it to vice chair dan tonia and member friedenbach. Thank you that was a great. Ation i enjoy today a lot. But that was agreement i guess i have a couple thoughts. How i dont know if you guys have data or like anyone on the call like um about landlords and the prevention like program and basically i do feel like having to get your landlord or property manager involved in the process creates a barrier you might see people fall up. I think we see that with doubled up families. I upon just would say that might be something this come up a lot for you. I wanted shadow a program in washington, d. C. Out for a year the dc flex rental subsidy and it is a combination with a rental Subsidy Program and emergency like what you are doing it it is in the middle. It basically cuts out the landlord from being involved. It is super new. There is in the a lot of data on the success yet theyre released a report. Might be interesting to look at. How do we create low barrier that gives autonomy to the person receiving the funds. And i think like the most very well inable have a harder time going to the Authority Figure of a landlord or property manager. Some give up before they trifle. Encourage us to look at that. I like the component of lived experience you are talking to folk who is are going through the program. It is superior important. Um i would like to dive in a bit more to the data if possible at some point as far as in the no contact and deny ineligible. When state does the no contact appear and denied what were the reasons. And like the major reasons people were denied. Um yea. And then i like to see like a break down of um like families, single adults and like youth. So they are also you know it is bucketses that we are looking at. And then how many people were in like Affordable Housing. Like Public Housing, bmr like all of the programings versus the private market and like within that like look at that data as well, like, people more on the private market denied or who made no contact or was it you know, people um and more like Public Housing program. Um and sorry. 2 more thoughts. And so i would vote for using eli as the data like on that last slide rent burden in San Francisco and major met reareas people are rent burdened. Now the average is 50 anyway. For likent row Level Software engineer. So that might not be the best data point or average of eli and bli. I think also it is easier to finds the numbers. Um my will last thought. Keep nothing mind with the prop c funds having to pay for new programs or finds new programs like if we are looking at prop c the only Funding Source, next year, which also is concerning to me . How do we do that, like,y than edu and other City Partners were doing programs similar to this. It seems like the funding might have to come from somewhere else. And i think it should. Honest low. Everything cant be on prop cs back. Great work. Thank you. Thank you. So much. To know that you may want to comment to member dantonios point around the landlord piece. Just quickly i know we have time contrains we designed air tenant Centric Program for San Francisco. And we do have in our Program Guidelines that when our providers have difficult obtaining information from a Master Tenant or landlord that the assistance is provided to the tenant. So we have that in place and have our providers do diligence and landlords can include Master Tenants as well. So in terms of just facilitating that assistance to attentives. Thank you. Yea. I will say i did go through the program myself. And that was probably the biggest blocker. That i saw . And there is in the enough transparency. We need to make sure serve informed on the process and not try to hide it and some like scare giving money directly . This is what is rooted in . And so that some be clear the delayed my money for like, over a month. And so i could see people dropping aweoff. We noted your comments as well and happy to respond to all of them. Thank you. I chair, williams i have 2 quick questions. It is thank you. The max allowance higher for large are households and [inaudible]. No audio. Issue or for reason they will not make up the income . I want to sure. So just quickly. So this march no audio. [audio garbled. That the most catastrophic period and moving forward the 7500 to 10 thousand dollars limit is not paceod household size or rent but we do review cases, case by case and like the entire development of our program it has beenity rative. We may increase the limits based on community need. Of is there was member friedenbach, another longterm the longterm. Yes. So as juliettea mentioned, this is part of a larger system. And that system includes tenant based rental subsisubsidies. We have antidisplace am. A program we also have our senior disabled Subsidy Program and in fact, our sfe providers are on going subsidy providers. So that would be the solution that we would identify for the households. Yeach thats great. Want to like eventually get to the place of unmet need. Wee want adjustments if we need to and want to second your brilliant presentation. Appreciate you. Yea. Thank you. Awe some. Thank you. We will go to Public Comment. Secretary. Members who wish to provide comment call 4156550001 access id 2497 531 8347 prez pounds and pounds again then star 3 to enter the speaker line. A prompt will indicate you raised your hand. Wait until you have been unmuted and you may beginful you have 2 minutes we have a commenter. I will be quick wimp will can suggest to juliettea that the household number is powerful. Where you said over 600 households were by prop c dollars to pay back revenlts i would love to see what that mean in terms of actual people that homelessness was prevented for. Is that 700 people or is that 1200 people that is the type of information that can be powerful and communicating the results of impact when we think about homelessness in terms of number of people. Thanks. Thank you. Checking the list there are no callers. Thank you, secretary. And i will hundred it become to member cata llano to close us out. We are a couple minutes over time. Thanks to teams for the work to build up this part of our system and for the time and attention and intention in this presentation. Excited see where this goes. And for more presentations and spotlights like this, thank you very much. Yes. Thank you very much, too everyone. For the excellent presentations. We will be tabling item 8 so at this time we will take a motion to adjourn. So moved. Moved by member reggio and vice chair dantonio. All right. And we will go to a roll call vote. Member cata llano. Yes. Dantonio. Yes. Member friedenbach yes officer leadbetter. Yes. Member miller. Member reggio. Yes. Chair williams. Yes. We are adjourned it is 11 33 a. M. Thank you, have a wonderful day and rest of your week. Good evening and welcome to the september 7, hybrid meeting of the San Francisco board of appeals. Rick swig am presiding joined by Vice President lopez remote low. And commissioner john trasvina. We expect commissioner lemberg shortly. Also present is upon brad russy provide any needed legal advice at the controls of the board legal system and im Julie Rosenberg the executive director. Well be joined from