Supervisors hold hearing on extreme‑heat readiness; agencies, scientists and community groups call for sustained funding

San Francisco city agencies and community partners told the Board of Supervisors’ Public Safety and Neighborhood Services Committee on July 23 that while planning for extreme heat has improved since the 2017 event, the city still lacks the funding and staffing needed to scale building weatherization, electrification, and community resilience programs.

Board President Mandelmann opened the hearing by noting recent record temperatures in the city and the link between heat and increased emergency visits. ‘‘DPH data shows emergency visits and hospitalizations in the city start climbing once temperatures cross 85 degrees,’’ Mandelmann said. Dr. Anita Thakur, a UCSF physician and researcher, said extreme heat is already producing measurable health impacts in San Francisco and stressed implementation gaps. “Just 34% of San Francisco households have central air conditioning against a national average of 92%,” Thakur said, summarizing UCSF’s community survey findings (more than 500 residents surveyed; 95% reported at least one negative health impact during extreme‑heat events).

City agencies described the Heat and Air Quality Resilience Project (HACKER), a 2023 plan managed by DPH and the Office of Resilience and Capital Planning (ORCP) that coordinates 31 medium‑to‑long‑term strategies across departments. ORCP staff said the initiative is operating with roughly 1–1.5 full‑time equivalent staff dedicated to coordination; Alex Morrison noted that HACKER has convened quarterly all‑hands meetings and supported data tools used to prioritize investments. Matt Wolf (DPH) summarized health data showing EMS calls increase materially during heat events (the committee record described a 15% rise on major‑risk days and 73% on extreme‑risk days in the last decade).

Cindy Comerford of the Environment Department detailed building‑decarbonization programs—heat‑pump direct installs, workforce training through the Climate Equity Hub, and BayREN regional partnerships—and said decarbonizing the city’s building stock will require stronger incentives and recurring funding. Mary Ellen Carroll, DEM’s executive director, described improved operational readiness (prescripted alerts, activation protocols and community tabletop exercises) but warned that operational gains cannot substitute for the capital investments needed to make homes and community facilities resilient.

Community organizations urged sustained funding and partnership. Jackie Bryant (Resilient Bayview/APRI) said grants and community networks must be continued and scaled; Winnie Yu (Self Help for the Elderly) highlighted language, mobility and isolation barriers among older adults and urged multilingual wellness checks and neighborhood‑based supports. Multiple public commenters recommended a capital‑funding approach (bonds, low‑interest loans, and dedicated incentives) to accelerate heat‑safety retrofits for low‑income housing, SROs and community sites.

After questions and discussion about the scale of need and underinvestment in the city’s capital planning, Chair Dorsey moved — and the committee approved — continuing the hearing to the call of the chair to allow further engagement with the mayor’s office and additional follow‑up work on financing and implementation.