Housing, LGBTQ, Transitional Age Youth - December 9, 2013 - Minutes
Meeting Date:
December 9, 2013 (All day)
Related Meeting Content:
San Francisco Youth Commission
Housing, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender, and Transitional Age Youth Issues Committee
Minutes
Monday, December 9, 2013
5:00-7:00pm
City Hall, Room 345A
1. Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Pl.
San Francisco, CA 94102
There will be public comment on each item.
Chair: Eric Wu; Members: Lily Marshall-Fricker, DeAsia Landrum, Monica Flores, Angel Van Stark
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
 The meeting was called to order at 5:07 pm. Commissioners present: Marshall-Fricker, Wu, Flores, Landrum; Commissioners absent: Van Stark; Staff present: Adele Carpenter
There was quorumCommissioner Landrum left the meeting at 6:10 pm.
Commissioners checked in by sharing the song that characterized their last 24 hours.
2. Approval of Agenda (Action Item)
Commissioner Flores, seconded by Commissioner Marshall-Fricker, moved to approve the agenda. The motion was approved by acclamation. There was no public comment.3. Approval of Minutes (Action Item)
A. November 25, 2013 (Document A)Commissioner Landrum, seconded by Commissioner Marshall-Fricker, moved to approve the minutes from November 25, 2013. This motion was approved by acclamation.
There was no public comment.
4. Public Comment on Items not on Agenda (Discussion Only)
Kayla Dawes, an SFSU student, introduced herself to the committee.5. Staff Report
Staff member, Adele Carpenter, reminded commissioners about the requirement to finish the anti-harassment training. She shared updates from the upcoming Board of Education meeting agenda, including an item on whether the school district should sell the City land to develop affordable housing.7. Business (All Items to Follow Discussion and Possible Action)
A. Work on committee’s housing related prioritiesThe chair called item 7 out of order because the presenter for item 6 was not present.
The committee discussed wanting to ask HSA and DPH for data regarding turnover rates and youth outcome for youth in TAY housing. The committee discussed how to generate youth interest in housing issues while waiting for the coordinated effort to evaluate TAY housing models to take shape. Committee members discussed the possibility of having an off-site meeting dedicated to housing issues that could serve as an overall snapshot of youth concerns with housing and mobilize a group of young people around housing issues (a youth housing coalition). The committee could also produce a report from first-person testimony.
Commissioner Wu shared his past preparation around the possibility of having a district 3 and district 6 youth housing townhall. Committee members suggested also including youth in TAY housing, youth in public housing, and youth not involved in particular programs, as well as youth in SRO’s. Commissioner Landrum suggested coming up with a framework that would engage youth at the event, even if they could not prepare projects before. Staff member, Adele Carpenter, suggested including youth in student and/or subletting with roommates—perhaps these youth could use support around tenant rights, etc. even though they are not involved in housing programs.
Commissioners decided to dedicate time at mid-year retreat to work on an off-site townhall. They agreed to work on things in this order: Goals of event, design of activities, agenda, invite list, come up with long-range plans. Some initial goals of the event are awareness and long-term youth lobby on housing issues. Commissioners were interested in reaching out to: TAY SF, MOHCD, Larkin YAB, and ILSP about the event. Commissioner Landrum agreed to reach out to TAY SF. Commissioner Wu agreed to look at the District 1 youth townhall for ideas.
There was no public comment.
B. Updates regarding other committee priorities
Commissioner Wu gave an update on the Children’s Fund/PEEF youth townhall. There were between 65-80 youth present with strong participation. The ideas and notes from the meeting break-outs are being compiled.
There was no public comment.
6. Presentations (Discussion Only)
A. Overview of the Work of San Francisco Community Land TrustPresenter: Bruce Wolfe, Board Secretary, San Francisco Community Land Trust
Mr. Wolfe apologized for arriving late. He explained the Land Trust has been involved in conversations about saving Marcus Books’ building. He explained the basic premise of a land trust is that it takes property out of the private sector and puts it into the public sector, where decisions about it can be made collectively. Mr. Wolfe has been with the Land Trust (LT) since its incorporation in 2006.
The LT seeks to purchase tenant-inhabited buildings being Ellis Act-evicted. They negotiate purchase of the property. They create a cooperative non-profit where tenants are shareholders. There are similar models in New York City. The LT can help with outright homeownership but prioritizes tenancy/lifetime leases. The LT owns the building and will hold it in perpetuity. They transfer the building to the cooperative through and 99 year lease.
The LT believes this model could be good for queer and TAY youth. The LT provides education and consultation for members. The co-ops are autonomous. There are many challenges with having co-ops in urban settings. Many co-ops hire staff to help with upkeep.
Commissioner Wu asked about the education involved in working with tenants to take responsibility for the cooperative and the long term viability of the property.
Mr. Wolfe explained that the LT will hire translators, work with all tenants through workshops to train everyone to work as a group, resolve conflicts, and form working committees. For transitional age youth, while there may be challenges, there is the possibility of stable housing providing a bedrock, as well as the community of support present in co-ops.
Staff member, Adele Carpenter, asked how the LT model could be used to acquire buildings that young people can move into, assuming that most young people do not already have leases in buildings. She asked what it would look like to support this type of model on a policy level.
Mr. Wolfe explained the model does not specify that it is limited to existing inhabited buildings. The model is for low and moderate income people (approximately under 60K/year). Those verifications are performed by MOHCD. MOHCD also helps secure funding and loans for the acquisition of property. There are funds for small-site acquisition, but the LT must make sure they are aware when new properties become available. The LT does not receive 100% of the purchase price from the City, but may be able to secure a down payment.
The presenter explained if youth commissioners were interested in this model, they could identify a city-owned surplus property or non-profit seller selling a property zoned for multi-family use. MOHCD keeps a running database of properties. Then they negotiate transfer of the ownership. The LT helps with pre-development, ie, electrical and earthquake upgrades, then once they building is occupied, they begin the education component. The biggest step is identifying property, such as property the city already owns.
Commissioners and staff asked questions about points of entry for young people.
Mr. Wolfe explained that the group working on the project would have to brainstorm entry points and eligibility criteria for the project. What would entry requirements be? For example, community service could be one. Once formed, the co-op is independent.
Commissioner Wu thanked Mr. Wolfe and gave closing remarks. He asked how to follow up.
Mr. Wolfe explained that another meeting would be necessary to talk over framework and workshop a strategy, develop the ask and bring to the City (ie, the city attorney, etc.). The LT provides the technical assistance.
There was no public comment.