Minutes
Shelter Monitoring Committee
February 1, 2006
25 VanNess, Room 800,
10:00-12:00
Members present: James Chionsini, Diana Valentine, Bianca Henry, Joyce Crum, Judi Irani, David Nakanishi, Kendra Stewardson,
Members not present: Dorothy Harris, Maxine Pauson
Non-Members: Greg Kats, Briana Wirrom, Trent Rhorer, Jennifer Williams, Cindy Ward, Dawn Lawson, Justine, Marcus Webb, Hank Wilson, Yalaanda Ellsberry, Quentin Mecke, Carissa Chandler, Dariush Kayhan, Shelley Rhoder, George Smith, Patricia Harrison, Allison Smith, Karen Perkins
I.Call to Order
Diana Valentine committee Chairperson reviewed basic ground rules.
II. Agenda for 1/04/06 (approved)with additions of:
1) 1) DHS present to respond to SMC letter,
2) Project Homeless Connect 2/16/06
3) Shelter Directors meeting 2/27/06
III.Approval of minutes from 12/07/05 and 1/4/06
(Approved)
IV.Revocation of Kendra Stewardson’s resignation
Kendra wants to rejoin the committee. She thought her resignation from Project Homeless Connect would disqualify her from participation with SMC. Mayors office representatives were informed of her resignation.
Proposal 1: Revoke Kendra’s resignation.
(Approved unanimously)
V.City Attorney Jennifer Williams presentation
Joyce has been communicating with her. SMC was created by ordinance and it is advisory in nature only. City Attorney reviewed the legislation with emphasis on section 20.304, Sections and Duties.
SF administrative code, chapter 20, article XII, ordinance 283-04, file no 041449 approved 12/1/04 Link to Shelter Monitoring Committee legislation: http://www.sfgov.orgftp/uploadedfiles/bdsupvrs/ordinances04/o0283-04.pdf
She stated that the main idea is to have the group enter shelters and collect information respectfully and to report back to relevant committees and departments. It is a way that residents and staff can communicate with committees and departments. There is a report requirement of quarterly reports and 4 unannounced and 2 announced inspections per shelter each year. The city department identified as responsible for rectification of identified problems has 30 days to respond in writing to the committee. City attorney stated that the ordinance is limited in its scope and has no enforcement capacity.
There was some discussion around issues of confidentiality and city attorney stated that a persons status in a shelter is not confidential but pursuant to section 10850 of the Welfare and Institutions code the status of people on public aid is confidential. The aid recipient can choose to disclose whatever they want but there arises the issue of the ability to give “consent” because many people may not fully understand what they are agreeing to divulge if they are disabled. Confidentiality is a murky issue even with respect to HIPAA requirements. Care Not Cash recipients are protected in terms of confidentiality but others are not.
The SMC consent form was discussed and city attorney requested a copy to review.
The attorney stated that there is no state law guaranteeing privacy rights of shelter residents but case law has a theme that suggests the 4th amendment and other constitutional rights apply to residents.
Sunshine Ordinance was discussed. Committee was reminded that a seriatum meeting is when a majority of people on a committee are conferring about an issue without officially posting a public notice for that meeting. Case law defines it narrowly. Logistical and scheduling aspects are allowed. There were further questions about subcommittees and Jennifer Williams stated that she is the counsel for SMC. Chair inquired about obtaining alternate counsel. Apparently no other counsel is available. This area will be revisited in the future.
Regarding the conflict of interest issue, city attorney said that section 1090 of the Government Code states that public officials voting on contracts is not allowed. This is defined by the state ethics commission and the state ethics commission. The Political Reform act prohibits involvement by govt officials if there is a financial effect on their interest. Salaries are exempted from this. There is no conflict of interest for city employees to serve on the SMC because the legislation specifically allows them to.
She referenced the 11/23/06 SMC presentation to the Rules Committee regarding visible roster of shelter residents at Hamilton family emergency shelter. Disclosure of domestic violence locations etc is restricted only if it is a 24 hour domestic violence shelter.
Regarding the notion of “First Come First Served” policy at MSC-S it was suggested that this is a violation if people are left out in the cold or they are given a shelter bed that they can not get to or into (as in the case of a paraplegic being given a top bunk). This is a problem and it shouldn’t happen, but it does.
Bianca Henry mentioned that people get sent to distant shelters (like Providence) that they cant get to or wont go to and they end up getting tickets for sleeping outdoors.
Dariush Kayhan said that there is now a database tracking mechanism incorporated with the CHANGES computer system that can identify problem areas…
Judi Iranyi noted that some of her handicapped clients report being sent to shelters they cant get to. MAP van transportation is unreliable.
Dariush: We make “reasonable accommodations” across the whole system and we need to document places where reasonable accommodations are not being met.
Judi: What about special accommodations for mentally disabled people?
Jennifer Williams: Ben Aames goes to shelters and assists them and is available 24/7 via cell phone.
Joyce Crum mentioned that clients will stand in line waiting to get a bed in a particular shelter and will refuse to go to other shelters when beds are available.
Discussion around issues of why clients do not want to go to various shelters. It was suggested that DHS could track the number of people who are not accessing shelters after being assigned by using the CHANGES computer system. They compare number of disabled people assigned to shelters with the number of disabled people who went to a shelter and the number of disabled clients who did not use shelters could be determined.
James, Joyce, David and Judi volunteered to form a subcommittee to look into access to shelters.
Public Comment:
George Smith: How can the SMC be challenged in a neutral place? Things are being said about my staff and agency that I would like to complain about.
Shelley Rhoder: Agencies can send people to the SMC meetings to advocate.
James Chionsini (SMC secretary) mentioned that there are currently vacancies on the SMC and encouraged interested parties to apply via the board of supervisors and Local homeless Coordinating Board as those bodies are the ones that appoint members. He distributed a list of current vacancies and application forms for Board of Supervisors.
VI.Approval of Reports:
a) Sanctuary unannounced visit (12/7/05) approved with corrections:
1. page 2 “safety” section should read, “Shelter does not appear to be ADA compliant”
2. page 2 “cultural competency” should read, “Spanish-speaking capacity is available…”
Also it was suggested that a copy of the report be sent to Mayors office on Disability since there is some debate around ADA and DBI requirements regarding authorization of ADA compliance.
b) Episcopal Sanctuary unannounced 12/7/05 approved
c) Providence (not available)
d) Trinity Episcopal (not available)
e) Mission resource (Not available)
Public Comment:
George Smith expressed some concerns about “cleanliness” and how is this determined. Also he inquired about what type of things the SMC will be looking for.
Shelley Rhoder said that all the requirements are detailed in the city contract with the shelter.
Pat Harrison asked about how SMC members can be identified.
Joyce Crum stated that she had sent an email to all shelters with a list of committee members that is to be placed at the front desks of all shelters. In lieu of identification badges, SMC members can use drivers licenses to identify themselves and staff can match ID with name on list.
VII.DHS response to SMC letter
Trent Rhorer presented an explanation of the Department of Human Services response to the Shelter Monitoring Committee letter requesting a cost analysis of the price of sheltering families versus placing them in hotels. (see attachment 1 an 2 for letters).
Mr. Rhorer mentioned 3 issues:
1) The requested cost analysis is not relevant because DHS is not considering the alternative of placing families in SRO hotels. His staff is overworked and it is not viable to request that they perform an analysis of a proposal that is not being considered.
2) Regarding HFEC (1525 Waller Street) issue of church landlord wanting them to move. The situation is untenable. DHS is working on preserving the emergency beds that could be lost. There is a possibility of moving the beds to 260 Golden gate but the # of beds that will be there is not known at the present time. DHS is trying to minimize the loss of beds available in shelter system and maximize the number of beds without overcrowding. Hamilton Board has not approved it yet. The number of beds that could be lost is not known.
3) Regarding the statement in the letter that the department must comply with requests made from the SMC, he pointed out that the legislation does not compel the department to do this.
VIII.Shelter Directors meeting 2/27/05
It was discussed that a good idea would be to attend the monthly Shelter Directors Meeting (1440 Harrison 2nd floor, 1:00) to introduce the committee and get to know directors. SMC could go and review the legislation and let them know what role of SMC is. It is important to cultivate respectful working relationships with providers. Shelters should provide SMC with contact people in each shelter. James will send a printed copy of the guidelines (monitoring tool)
James can go.
IX.ECS meeting
It was suggested that we prepare an agenda in advance and discuss it with ECS prior to the meeting. We get all our questions and agenda in order. Proposed agenda;
a) introductions and clarifications of rules
b) protocols for developing a mutually respectful relationship
c) clarifications of CPR training
d) on f/u visit we found no emergency medical supplies
David Nakanishi suggested that we get the HSA perspective and find out what the contracts mandate. We can request from ECS what their policy and procedures are and what they are supposed to be doing.
Joyce Crum: ECS and HSA reports should be the focus of our meeting. We can compare what HSA has in its contract.
Proposal 2: At ECS meeting have introductions then follow up with the issue of the reports. If reports are released before that meeting then the issue will be discussed as well.
(Approved unanimously)
discussion:
Shelter Resident (wishes to be anonymous): I am the one who performed CPR on the woman who died and no one has asked me anything about it. I don’t know what kind of investigation is going on.
Diana Valentine: We don’t know who the specific people are who is doing the investigation.
Karen Perkins: All staff are trained in CPR at Next Door within 90 days of hire date
Bianca Henry: What about people who came here and testified that no one did CPR?
David Nakinishi: All the more reason for SMC to stay in contact with people who testify.
Joyce Crum: Will provide an official HSA contract.
James will follow up
Proposal to allow public comment at this time because of number of people present and time limitation.
Public Comment:
Next Door Resident (name withheld): My brother is a resident of Sanctuary. He was physically attacked by staff who held a pair of scissors to his throat and cut the skin. He was then moved to Next Door but he did not get immediate access. He is afraid to go anywhere near Sanctuary for fear of being assaulted by the staff person. Case managers were informed . There has been an increased hostility among staff to women. Also women are subjected to verbal and physical harassment by residents on the floor. Staff are not responsive to this and don’t do enough. Several staff are openly hostile and appear to lack sensitivity. I feel targeted in there.
(It should be noted that the woman was reporting what her brother told her, she did not personally report witnessing the incident.)
Joyce C: Thank you for being public about this. Please document everything.
David N: It is important to document things and we need a log of time and day.
Allison Smith: I echo what Joyce and David have said. Safety is important and we encourage people to write down complaints. We need this issue to be documented.
Shelley Rhoder: I just came to inform SMC that St Boniface is losing their lease at the end of March. These are non CAAP long term beds. HAS presented it in their contingency plan. Also 4 case managers at Next Door, some at MSC-S and our entire contract. There is a Shelter hearing on 2/13 at 1:00 City Hall Board of Supervisors Audits and Oversight committee.
George Smith: (ED of Ella Hill Hutch): Before we are put under the microscope it should be clarified that people who are on the committee are qualified. Also the agencies should get together and meet to find out who is being investigated by the committee. Shelters are doing everything they can and are faced with issues that are not known by the committee.
Pat Harrison: The committee can help us educate the clients about what we can do. Our staff need to cooperate with us. People need to stay in touch.
Yalaanda Elsberry: If things happen and you are truly concerned then why not be on top of your staff before things escalate? There shouldn’t be a situation where no one knows what is going on in the shelters of this nature. If the supervisor would have said something to me after Melinda’s death and talked to us then I would not have gone to the media. Residents in the shelters know what the problems are and you should too. Who put the blindfold on your eyes?
X.Project Homeless Connect 2/16/06 10:00-4:00
James can volunteer to staff the table. Kendra can help out part time.
XI.Staff Person update:
Three people have applied. Five have said they would apply. He wants to fast track it through and will be calling Human Resources to decide. It should be about three weeks. Maybe we can have a person in a month. Interview committee: Joyce, Judy, Diana and David.
Meeting time ended. Remaining temstabled until next month
a) approval of letter to be cent to MSC-S
b) SMC vacancies and recruitment of ew members
c) report back from committees
d) schedule of visits
XII.Adjournment
Next SMC meeting Wednesday, March 1, 2006
10:00am-12:00pm, 25 Van Ness room #800
Appendix 1
Executive Director
Human Services Agency
170 Otis, 8th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94103
I am writing in response to your letter dated December 14, 2005. You replied to the issue of the Hamilton Emergency shelter and the safety of families staying there. The Shelter Monitoring Committee is part of the City and County of San Francisco. It's activities are mandated by the city and the committee requested that Human Services Agency conduct a cost analysis of the cost of sheltering families versus placing them in hotel. The committee officially approved this request that was presented to you.
We based our recommendations on documentation and meetings with Hamilton Family Emergence Center
administrators, front line staff and shelter residents. You are explicitly refusing to cooperate with a formal request by an official city committee that was created through legislation passed by the San Francisco Board of supervisors.
Hamilton Family Emergency Center is in a dire situation where they are on a month-to-month lease with a landlord that has explicitly stated that they want the residents out of the former locker room that is currently serving as a shelter for families and children. We are concerned about the Human Services Agency's contingency plans in the event that Hamilton Family Emergency Center loses its month-to-month lease. You state that "the HAS does not plan to place families in hotel rooms." We are requesting clarification about what, if any, alternative facilities and plans are being considered. Please include any addresses of any potential sites.
The committee remaining concerned about the safety of the HFEC site
itself, given that health and safety issues have been documented as areas of focus in the past. This is a well known and on going problem, as Shelter Monitoring Committee reports indicate. We reiterate our request for both a cost analysis of hotel rooms for families and the clarification of HSA's cohesive plan to prevent homeless families at the emergency shelter from ending up on the streets.
Sincerely,
Shelter Monitoring Committee
Appendix 2
January 25, 2006
Diana Valentine
Chair, Shelter Monitoring Committee
Sent via email: diana.valentine@gmail.com
Dear Ms Valentine:
This letter is in response to your letter (sent via email) of January 13, 2006 in which the Shelter Monitoring again requests that HSA conduct a cost analysis of hotel rooms for families. As I stated in my letter of December 14, 2005, HSA will not conduct the requested analysis as we do not plan to place families in hotel rooms. We are currently working with Hamilton Family Center to develop alternatives to the Hamilton Emergency Shelter in anticipation of the landlord’s termination of the lease. Representatives from HSA will provide information to the Shelter Monitoring Committee regarding this transition at the next committee meeting.
I disagree with your implication in the letter that I must adhere to the demands of the Shelter Monitoring Committee as it is an official City committee created through legislation passed by the Board of Supervisors. As you know, the purpose of the Shelter Monitoring Committee is "to provide the Mayor, the Board of Supervisors, the Local Homeless Coordinating Board, the public, and any other appropriate agency with accurate, comprehensive information about the conditions in and operations of shelters covered by this Article." (See section 20.303.) To that end, the legislation requires the Committee to conduct site visits to all shelters at least four times per year in order to gather information pertaining to a number of different topics, including health and safety conditions in the shelters. (Sect. 30.304(a).) The legislation also requires the Committee to then submit quarterly reports to various people, including the Mayor, the Board of Supervisors, and the appropriate city department responsible to take the Committee's recommended action. (Sect. 30.304(b).)
Nothing in the legislation gives the Committee the authority to require a City department or other entity to conduct an investigation or to submit written responses to a Committee inquiry. It appears that the intent behind the legislation was to give the Committee the tools to conduct its own research by going into the shelters and talking to shelter residents directly, not by demanding city departments to do it for them.
If the Committee issues a formal report to the appropriate recipients listed in the legislation and recommends that HSA take certain action, I will instruct my staff to respond within 30 days with a written response, consistent with Admin. Code section 20.304(b). Until that occurs, this agency will continue to make best efforts to work with the Committee given our very significant workload demands associated with implementing and overseeing a multitude of programs to serve those in need.
Thank you for your continued work on the Committee.
Sincerely,
Trent Rhorer
Executive Director
