expertise. i'm the board president, ideal with the trustees, and the deputy director runs the museums. i'm sure there will be many conversations between the deputy director and the director should he choose to keep the director, because the director has the ability to remove anyone he wishes to remove. i'm sure he won't do that right away but he will do whatever he feels will strengthen this museum. that will be up to him. i know what he'll do is what he believes is the right thing for this museum. that's why we hired him. >> about timing. i think you said the -- [inaudible] there was a meeting on march 4, so

the trustees met 2 hours before the announcement. i was wondering about the timing of that? >> the selection committee was formed a year ago january. and we met all through the year. we had 8 finalist and these people were brought in to meet with the committee. there are 13 people on the selection committee. there were a number of names that were considered, more names than the 8. we narrowed it down to 8 and then we brought them in and out of the 8 there were 3 finalist and those 3 finalist were brought in a number of times. you can imagine trying to get 13 people with lives and 8 people who are directors who are high up in museums to come in and then be anonymous when you wanted to bring them to the museums and not let the staff recognize them because they are

recognizable people with really in incredibly difficult task. you have some months where directors are running their own exhibitions and with trustees that have children out of school and it's difficult to get these people together. and that was when we are were doing the search for john buchannon as well. so finally in january, the selection committee voted to appoint collin bailey. however, we had to be in sync with his board and he was not able to inform his board until yesterday. that was the time lapse and that is why we canceled the march 14th board meeting because there was no point to have it. we had to vote to appoint him because by our charter we appoint, not

elect. the selection committee votes on it and it goes to the board and our board today voted to appoint him, both in the section of our board meeting. it was to afford him the courtesy to talk to his own board and the people he needed to talk to before we could inform our board. and that was unfortunately a time lag of about 6 weeks. and he of course wanted to give proper notice and that's why he will not be officially joining us until june 1st. >> any other questions? okay. well thank you all very much. i hope we'll see you many many times in our press conferences

and our dealings with our new director and the great success that i'm sure he will bring for the success here at the fine arts museums. thank you. [ applause ] adjourned. >> good afternoon everyone welcome to the budget and finance committee meeting for wednesday march 27th. we're going to be joined by several supervisors. i would like to thank the

members of the tv. >> please silence phones and electronic. item will be on the next agenda if otherwise dates my item one. on the state of hiv services and 2013 and 2014 and the committee organizations will report open the federal and state cuts to the hiv services and how the city can respond for making up the cuts on a local level >> this meeting was called by

supervisor wiener. i wish we didn't have to have this hearing another year of abandonment by the majority of the house of representatives will cause us to experience a significant cut to our hiv funding for services and - and our city will and can respond to it. by a preponderance of all the evidence in the earlier 1980s when the aids first hit san francisco and our country san francisco had to go it alone. the federal government was not a help and, in fact, as we recall

the president, president reagan didn't utter the words until late 1980s and we in san francisco built a system of care so that we could take care of our own or the many people who suffered and suffered for many years with the disease the federal government started to support our efforts and the state that was incredibly helpful and we've seen over the years when we had a partner in providing care to people and phil protection strategies and we continued to be a leader and the rest of the world looks to san francisco for the models we've developed but but

unfortunately, the craziness has gotten worse and worse and more short sighted over time we have seen significant reductions in support and particularly from the federal government in terms of ryan white and as well as cvc prevention care. new injections in san francisco continue to fall. we are winning the war on aids in san francisco but those cuts from the federal government continue to challenge us and specifically threaten to derail the progress we maid make.

so today, we're going to hear from our department of the public health and community organizations about the strategist the endesk about the cuts we're about to experience yet again from the federal government and about how we locally in san francisco, california renew and continue to move forward on our own commitment with those living with the disease and frisks the disease. so we'll start with the public health and dr. garcia >> to the chair and the boards members first i want to let the audience know we provide direct services in the county of los angeles with all our partners. as many of you know, we continue

to see reductions in our hiv and aids funding. there has been more - the fact that health care reform is being mrementdz many people who dooptdz on our program for the medical care they'll have the opportunity to be covered under medicaid but to note that the population at large is not covered but we'll continue to cover some of those services. san francisco has create an incredible system of care and some are here because they're afraid we're losing our health care in the community. as you will see in the portions

of hiv and aids area you'll hear from our department we're losing more costs to other programs. and we're in constant contact with our providers >> thank you. good afternoon supervisors and chief financial officer. i will go through the presentation in front of you relate quickly i know it's a long afternoon and a lot of people waiting to speak. in the packet i handed you go to the back we have at our front the general budget update but if

you turn to page 7 we start the information on this presentation. so as you know and as supervisor wiener state we have a couple of significant funding issues the first is we face the continued reductions both for hiv services and prevention that went into effect those are reductions in federal reductions and we have additional reductions in the coming year so we have both those challenges to deal with

and we still have little information about what the impact of the federal sequesterer b mr. mean in the streams. i won't dwell too much but just a current overview of where we are about 15 though 5 hundred people living with aids as of the end of not that i'm aware of. as barb said it had peeked and declined as we have had some impact on the total numbers in the city and we see some trends continue downward in new cases on a it's not significantly to

be continued but we have some progress with new therapies. on the rhine white as you know, the biggest part of our funding is ryan white aid that comes from a formula of additional allocations for the aids program. where we are right now we're still awaiting information on our final awards from the coming year but the most recently estimate is we're likely to faces a $1.2 million for focus year 2013 and 15 and we're still awaiting information and that

number didn't include the estimates of this sequester i'll get to later. as supervisor wiener referred we have quite a bit of history of up and down predominantly downstairs as we've got federally funding down and replaced from representatives like our supervisors and last year, we had a significant reduction that was not replaced that reduction continues into the current year and will continue flo into 13 and fourteen and in terms of the rescues we've seen in the ryan

white fund can you give just a general overview so people can see the dramatic you downturn >> i have on the next slide a history of our ryan white part a that's the bulk of our ryan white funding. you can see the pattern of 2001 to the focus year at the beginning of 2000 our award was closed to $35 million that's declined over the last 12, 13 years and you can see where we're at a little over $20 million and this is the san francisco award if you look at the regional awards it will be

higher. but you can see the up and down but a general downward trend over the last few years >> we have that one year 2007, 2008 which saw a big reduction in the grant ward. was that made up by the city? >> that was made up from a general fund from the city that year there was a single large reduction the city stepped up on a one-time basis and the subsequent years our grant was increased to offset that reduction. so if you looked at the history of the general fund this matter put into the hiv, aids program

you would there is was a general increase to partially offset that and do you have a graft to show what happens over the years? >> yes. i have the data - am i able to use the overhead? actually, i don't need it i have it on a separate file here. it's not the visual format that would be ideal. >> maybe i have something - if

it's too difficult to share it goes along with the presentation. >> but we'll provided that data to you, we certainly have it available. in addition to the ryan white reductions that we've seen over the past two years we've also got reductions from our hiv prevention. in 2010 there was a relifetime that shifted funding away from certain geographical regionals that had success in parts of the country that were increasing and decreasing the effects of the epidemic. the impact is based on the new

funding schedule san francisco will have used 40 percent of their grants for prevention between not that i'm aware of and 2016. at not that i'm aware of we're at $8 million but we're going to decline further >> i assume you'll agree with this but the cdc cuts are punishing san francisco for reimbursing infections. >> we're losing funding as a result of our skwek the flip side is there's a great need and that's the driver. >> the solution would be to increase the funding to those parts of the country not to

punish san francisco for reimbursing infections. has the cdc borlthd to do an analysis with the increase of infections they would - if they're going to do an analysis they should show the number of people who would not contract hiv who are now going to contract it by taking money away from san francisco >> i don't know what the cdcs global prospective is on that but we do have studies of what the impact is in terms of impacts in the community and what that means in terms of prevented cases and we can

certainly provide that. but there is slightly a trade-off in that shift >> of course, it's a trade-off of people's lives. and i would like that information. i'm sure it exists and you'll hear the frustration in my voice because so much o so many of us have been working hard to let people know to be safe and to use the techniques and to lose this kind of funding and potential see the frustration >> it captures a lot of our feelings in the city. so just to continue we're

projected as part of that prevention funding we're schedule to receive a reduction to continue in 2013 in addition to the $2.2 million reduction for the current year budget. and, of course, we're continuing to work with the community to discuss what the implementations of this are. how those kits can best be accommodated and minute missed the impact. so just to give you a couple of tables that have a high-level summary in terms of funding. this is the serum of the reductions in the entrants to each of the two programs over the two focus years for the upcoming budget. we're up around $5. million and

4.8 for hiv prevention. and to take another look at the global outlook for the next 2 years. as you know in the 2013 budget process when he faced the budgets to ryan white we worked closely with the mayor's office and the members of the board on the approach to that problem we're able to get general fund to restore those reductions for the years 2013 fully gu but in focus year 2014 there wasn't enough general fund dollars available and they were back filled at 50 with general fund.

so you can see on this table we have total reductions on those programs of $10.5 million and the baseline dollars that have been reallocated and this is the base budget for the two years coming up and that's $5.2 million in on a fourteen and that's spread through the programs >> and this will go up? >> so next slide we have the estimates on the sequester. there's a lot of uncertainty here so we've got on the

spreadsheet in front of you are the initial estimates based on the percentage reductions are and what that would mean. the information is still changing and this is probably a negative impact, of course, it's uncertain but it would especially show what would happen if we have the 16 percent reductions to ryan white and on top of those have another additional cuts to the funding. so it's about $900,000 to wrooin white and for a total of $1.3 million and again, i emphasis those are very

preliminary as to how those reductions will be implemented. so lastly and getting a little bit to our question supervisor wiener you had asked for some numbers on impacts of what those funding reductions are, of course, the actual impact of this would depend upon how the reductions are implemented locally and how we allocate those reductions across the program but it is to give you a sense of what we assumed it was spread evenly across the program the general approach in the past the impact from ryan white would

be 17 hundred and duplicated clients are served and about 54 thousand units of serve across the various core and support programs provided under ryan white. in cdc to your question supervisor wiener with those funding reductions we're looking at 17 thousand reimbursed contacts as a result of those reductions and we do have estimates so we can and will share what that translates to in terms of numbers reimbursed new cases of hiv. so i will leave it at that unless there are additional questions? >> colleagues any questions? >> and before we go any

further. >> i apologize that i have to step out thought he meeting but there was a problem with the way this was calendared normally this committee allows for another supervisor to set in that allows a quorum and something happened here so that didn't happen. i also want to thank the chair of the committee for giving me the opportunity to say a few words about this. again, it's my pleasure to work with supervisor wiener. but i think we have an obligation to make sure we protect the safety net and there are different degrees of vulnerability and when he look at the kinds of funding