however, it does not seem unreasonable to think that there may be a cut. as you can sort of here, many of these reductions proposed by the federal government could come count each other, right? cdbg funds, work force and economic development, as well as community development. we know we also have concerns about what is happening at the state level with redevelopment. so there may be compounding impact that i think are important for us to be thinking about. other impact that will not affect the city's budget directly but could affect our community in san francisco are proposed cuts to programs like head start, the corporation for national service, as well as

proposals to change family planning funding or eliminate family planning funding. two other things i wanted to point out to you that are important to be aware of as you are thinking about the budget and the federal picture. the federal stimulus acts was signed into law at the beginning of 2009, so some of the funds that were associated with the recovery act are expiring or have been fully extended. for example, there was an additional grant of funding for workforce programs and work force training. that funding has been entirely extended or will be by the end of the fiscal year. so there will be an impact on services in san francisco. the expansion we were able to do with that federal funding -- the funding is no longer available. i also know that many people are

concerned about the ryan white funds, and we have been fortunate to receive stop-loss funding with the support of now leader nancy pelosi's office. currently there are, as you are all i'm sure aware -- we are in a time of no earmarks, so this stop-loss funding is viewed by many as an earmarked, and currently does not exist for san francisco. that impact on the city's budget and services in the hiv/aids are reno would be about $4.3 million -- the hiv/aids arena. supervisor chu: supervisor, you have a question? >> i did. i have heard some talk that the leader was going to get that move into the base line or whatever it is called, so we may end up possibly not losing that

funding. do you have any insight into that? >> i did have a conversation with the speaker's office, and my understanding is that the funding is not secure at this time. they have not been able to move it to be based. -- move it to the base. supervisor wiener: is it that they have not succeeded yet and may not succeed? what level of optimism or pessimism do we have at this point? >> at this point, my understanding is that no one is particularly optimistic about any funding that could be characterized as an earmarked -- an earmark, as this is sometimes characterized. happy to answer any other questions you may have. supervisor chu: thank you. just for the rundown of the different programs and where we expect some of the impacts to be

-- we currently receive $22 million. the cut on the table is up to a 10% cut in the out years. the department thinks it will be more like 25% or 35% loss. and then in terms of the whole program, we expect an $850,000 reduction, roughly? 10%? and then for the work force investment funding, the president has put forward a plan not to make any cuts to the dollars that we get, but the house is currently proposing eliminating that entire funding, correct? >> that is right. supervisor chu: in terms of other programs where it does not directly flow the has an impact on services provided, we are not sure exactly what the impact on the city overall would be, but heads the family planning monies -- anything else we are missing?

>> americorps this up. there may be others. i'm happy to provide details on programs that benefit san franciscans but do not flow directly through san francisco's budget. supervisor chu: that would be great. i know we have item 3 also, which is a resolution. would you like to present that item as well? >> i think mr. chu from the mayor's office of housing is here to address that issue. >> good afternoon, director of community development from the mayor's office of housing. i think you have heard the description of the possible cuts. let me give you a little bit of the latest update we have from our partners, the national community development

association. they have been working, trying to have meetings with each and every senator because that is where we feel we may have to focus to save this program. in their meetings with the senators, they had discovered that many of the newest senators were unaware that cdbg supported any services in their state. the educational process, i think, was useful. however, while many of the senate republicans have met with the support cdbg, they are so far united in their desire to see more federal cuts and are united in not supporting any program over any other. there was an attempt by ncda to draft a letter signed by all the members of the u.s. senate, which would support maintaining the current level of fiscal year 2010 funding.

unfortunately, republicans all stock to say we are not able to sign on to that, and some of the democratic senators felt as if it might be a conflict to support one program over another. both the california senators did sign on to that letter, asking the president to hold the line and actually increased his budget. in terms of how it might affect san francisco, we did our initial projections at a 30% cut. we know other jurisdictions that have a contingency scenario anticipating a 60% cut. we felt that that is not likely to be at that rate. again, the latest news we have from washington was that vice-

president biden and other senate democrats were planning to offer up perhaps $30 billion in cuts for fiscal year 2011, including cuts that have been made in the past including the continuing resolution. conservative republicans were asking for $60 billion, so this would be meeting them half way, which matches up with our projection for 30% cuts. the petition to maintain level funding has been supported by the u.s. conference of mayors. we're doing all we can to preserve the funding, but we did want to offer this resolution so that the mayor and board could be on record to work with the city's congressional delegation and other partners to preserve as much as possible for cdbg. the national committee

development association did say that they -- the national community development association did say that the fiscal year 2012 budget negotiations may be even more difficult than the fiscal year 2011 discussions in terms of cdbg. \ that is one thing to keep in mind. in the past, when we had this, we needed to go back up, but we do not anticipate this reduction. if anything, it may go down. that is a little bit more the background, and we do ask your support in passing this resolution. supervisor chiu: -- supervisor chu: thank you. quick question in terms of your timeline -- i know that the cdbg money is go out for your rgp process in a bit -- for your rp fp process in advance of our

budget. what dates are looking at, and will your department's work basically be centered around an assumption of a 30% cut production? and are you going forward with a potential contingency, or are you going to leave it at the 30%? >> that is an excellent question. we are going forward with our 30% projection. as of now, hud requested we stay on the same time line, which required us to submit our action plan by may 15. we usually come to the board through this committee at the end of april for and accept and expend resolution. there may be a possibility that we come to your not with it will accept and expend if we do not have the actual allocation, but instead, we come to you with a request to approve the submission of the action plan with this contingency budget, which will allow us to satisfy the hud requirements. we would come back to you, perhaps in may, for the true

accept and expend, and we would amend the action plan. does mean that there is, unfortunately, a degree of uncertainty with the cbo's. we would be discussing with each of you individually your suggestions. in the best case scenario, we do have some contingencies. we do have some contingencies if it is worse than 30%. it will be a very difficult discussion if it is greater than 30%, but we intend to see you at the end of april for either and accept and expend for an approval to submit the action plan with this contingency. supervisor chu: thank you. and the question for ms. howard, with regards to the budget, again, the federal fiscal year, right now, they are operating under a continuing resolution with extensions that occur

periodically. when have we received with the federal budget would look like, and when do we think that will be? >> apologies, supervisor. i'm not sure what the typical timeline is. in just checking around. do you happen to know? and in the past, i think that the budget has tended to be approved in february or march. we get our allocations as early as february, sometimes march. right now, we have gotten mixed messages as to whether or not congress will be able to come to an agreement. at the end of this continuing resolution. which, as ms. howard said, expires april 8. we may be able to get to you before that time, but it can go

either way. supervisor chu: thank you. if we do not have questions from the committee, and going to open up for public comment -- i'm going to open up for public comment. >> ♪ federal cuts budget day by day cuts day-by-day 0, city and state why did you take the money away you promised us so dearly and the budget yearly and i hope you hear me budget cuts day-by-day bring it back away

if you hear me bring the budget back and near me we need the budget clearly budget yearly day-by-day ♪ thanks. supervisor chu: any other members of the public who wish to comment on these items? >> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm with the chinatown community development center. i'm here today on behalf of a network of asia/pacific islanders serving community- based organizations. it is a network of about seven coalitions that actually span roughly 25 to 30 organizations and provide services to the entire city in terms of our geographic scope. first of all, i wanted to thank supervisor chu for putting this

hearing on. one of the things that is not well understood in our communities is just how much the federal budget impacts the services we are able to provide, and i do not think folks in our community really have an understanding of how these cuts are going to hurt us and potentially change the face of our communities. we have been trying to gather some data on just how deep these cuts are going to go, and even though our network is about 25 or 30 organizations, we are beginning the process, and we have gathered some data on cuts to about six organizations right now. just based on those six, we found out that federal funding helps fund services to about 5000 clients, so it's 60% cut -- a 60% cut would mean a loss of about 3000 or so low-income clients in the city. i also wanted to point out

something else. i do not know of it is mentioned, i walked in a little bit late, but one of the cuts being proposed by the republican congress right now is a complete cut to hud's section 202 budget, which is one of the sole federal sources for senior affordable housing. that program has created about 1000 units of senior affordable housing in san francisco. if that is cut out, you can understand what the impact will be. thank you very much for your time. i urge you to support the resolution and work closer with the community on protecting these cuts. supervisor chu: thank you. question for you with regards to the section 20 to funding cuts, can you explain that in more detail for me? >> hud has a program to fund development for housing developers doing senior units. the units are structured

somewhat similar to section 8 where seniors who do qualify a actually only have to pay up to 30% of income as rent. it is really an incredibly vital program for seniors. chinatown community development center completed in roughly 2007 a building in chinatown called the international hotel. a beautiful new project on the corner of jackson street. 101 units. even though there was only 101 units in the building, whenever we opened up the application, on the first day, there was a line spanning about to reveal a blocks, and we ultimately ended up getting 10,000 applications for 100 spots. i think that really speaks to the need and demand for affordable senior housing. these types of draconian cuts are not just going to impact senior housing and cdbg.

they are going across the board, and i think the kind of devastation they could bring to volatile communities in the city and across the country are really profound. i really applaud the city and supervisor chu for bringing up this issue. supervisor chu: what was the impact, do you think, from that potential cut? >> this was proposing to zero of that program. i think for me, the impact would be that it would be near impossible, i think, to create that kind of deeply affordable senior housing if those cuts are actually imposed. given the state of the universe and be right now in terms of affordable housing financing, i'm sure that has been discussed here, or if not, it probably should be discussed here. unfortunately, any cuts to that degree, so i would be concerned

that we would not ever be able to get deeply affordable units in this or any other city again. supervisor chu: thank you. next speaker please. >> i am with self-help for the elderly. i want to underscore what was repeatedly stated, that the federal funding that the cbo's are receiving for our service, and any cut would have a really adverse impact on the lives of all of our clients. i want to highlight this by just sharing with you, i send out a survey to all of our components, and we have 12 programs stretching from nutrition to home-delivered meals to very vulnerable, disabled home-bound seniors, to case management, and all of our employment training

programs. these are job creation, job training, and job placement programs. altogether, 12 federal programs. we are receiving close to about $4.8 million right now for all these 12 programs. in a fitting over 3000 seniors -- benefiting over 3000 seniors from affordable housing to affordable health care to training and also naturalization citizenship program. if we follow the recommended cuts right now, the number of these programs will be zero out, and i do not know how our community and seniors will be able to take these cuts. on top of these millions of dollars of cuts coming down from the federal government, we already have reported back to you earlier that $1.6 million, about the health care center, will be eliminated. unless the state legislature has

a continuing recommendation, how to continue the program. many of the seniors are so vulnerable that almost immediately, we will see an increase in nursing home placement. i hope that you will work with us [inaudible] supervisor chu: thank you. >> good afternoon. executive director of japanese community council. i came here today specifically to raise some awareness on what the impact is going to be of the loss of federal stimulus funds, particularly on youth employment opportunities. the san francisco youth survey has been ministered to thousands of young people over the last few years. consistently, the activity that

young people request in the city are job opportunities. i raise this because we are involved in a number of the community programs, and i realize there are a lot of impact on some of the current proposals, but what i'm here to talk about are what is already going to happen as a result of the loss of stimulus funds. i realize that it is -- a lot has been said about our inability to offset reductions from the federal level, but what i'm here to raise awareness about is the fact that it is actually the stimulus fund that mitigated cuts at the local level. what is going to happen this year is as a result of the fact that we have budgeted, based on the fact that we have funds available, this coming year, we're looking at probably at least 1000 less youth employment opportunities for this city alone.

that is only taking into account some of the larger programs in the city, and i think we can all agree that among some of the smaller programs, we are only going to see even additional declines. i have here a summary of what i'm talking about. i think it is imperative that as we continue to have -- as this budget process moves forward, we think about what reductions were already made. i have this year to leave for you all today. thank you. supervisor chu: thank you. are there other members of the public like to speak on this item? why don't we close public comment? we have two items before us. supervisor chiu. supervisor chiu: i want to thank our chairwoman as well as members of the public that have come up to testify on behalf of this resolution.

i have spoken to many service providers around the community, and the cuts we are facing this year i think are nothing like what we have faced in prior years. i've often said that in recent years with the budget, we have had to cut to the bone. this year, we are going to have to be cutting bone. the news we are getting from the federal government is incredibly bleak. i have a feeling that all of us will be supporting this resolution. i certainly urge that and i urge all of us to work with community members, particularly the folks that came here today, to get the word out to folks that these cuts are unacceptable and hopefully asked representatives in congress to fight for what we need to have happen here. supervisor chu: thank you. do we have a motion -- supervisor kim? supervisor kim: if we are taking co-sponsor ships from supervisors, i would love to [no audio]

supervisor chiu: i would be happy to be added as well. supervisor chu: do we have a motion to file item two and 2 cents item 3 forward with recommendation? okay, without objection. thank you. item four please. >> item four, a hearing on monthly overtime reports discussing the five city departments using the most overtime in the preceding month. supervisor chu: thank you very much. this item -- we will be scheduling overtime reports for current year expenses in the subcommittee. i apologize. this will be at our subcommittee meetings in the future. the controller will give a presentation on this item. >> good afternoon, supervisors.

each month we issued an overtime report on the highest earning city departments in terms of overtime use and then slice the year we issue a more comprehensive report. we issued to the most recent report on march 1st and i can provide a couple of snapshots from it. generally speaking, the city overtime spending and the current year is projected to remain below the peak from several years ago but has inched up in the last year. we project overtime spending of $132 million across all departments. this is $12 million up from the actual from last year. to provide some longer-term context, three years ago the city at its peak spent $167

million in overtime. we have seen a significant increase in overtime spending. we are still projecting to spend approximately $25 million less on overtime for a reduction of about 17% from peak. we have had a significant drop- off for two years and we have seeing a modest increase during the current year. in terms of hours, which is not necessarily the same thing given what is going on with wages, we project that 5.6% of our salary hours will be paid as overtime and that is down from 6.6% three years ago. again, up modestly in the current year. as we have talked about before in this committee, we are really talking about five city

departments which accounts for about 80% of spending across the city. the five largest city department's account for 88% of overtime spending. within those departments, we see increases in three and decreases in two verses there actuals from the prior year. the mta is projected to spend approximately $5 billion more. public health is under $2 million more and that the fire department, approximately $6 million more. those account for the majority of the increase that i talked about that is a $12 million increase, those three departments. the other two large overtime using departments show a decline during the current year versus

actual spending last year. the police department is expected to spend a million and a half less than this year. the sheriff's office to spending approximately 1.5 million less on overtime than they did last year at this time. we have seen a mix of trends that consume the overtime expenses for the city. the mta, fire and police are all a absorbing their overtime expenditures within budget. dph and the sheriff's department are anticipating meeting a supplemental to cover some of their costs. some are overspending but absorbing this within their budget. that is the case for three of