the city. we are willing to come together and have that conversation about how we support the city and are we doing the right thing. supervisor mirkarimi: on the question of the reserves, i hear the concerns expressed on what it means if the reserves are released in totality. i also hear the caveats expressed by our colleague. i am open-minded about whether we want to release them are not. it seems to be the motivation if we are able to hold back some of the money. at least it works in these kinds of situations with other departments, hopefully. but if that is not the case, then, you know, i will remain open-minded. this has been a bit of a torturous cycle. i am hoping that we are seeing

the light at the end of the tunnel here in terms of what consolidation actually means. but it seems a long and winding road. supervisor chu: we have not yet taken public comment on this item. let's do that first and come back to the item before us. are there any members of the public that wish to speak on this item? public comment is closed. just to the item over all, just some thoughts on it. when you talked about there being a way for a proper motivation for the reserve to be maintained, the one thing is that when we first put the reserve on the table, we said we would do that to the extent that pending an update on i.t. consolidation efforts for the data center -- from everything i've heard, even though the department has been delayed and

not gone the way that people thought it would, they have done everything we have asked them to do in terms of consolidation. at the new facility there are plans to do it at the airport. i believe they have met that criteria. in terms of having it reserved in place to create incentive for motivation, i think the department has demonstrated that they are delivering on the project. i do not know what further motivation could there be to lay off or spend more money, as they have done everything we have best of them. the potential for not releasing the reserves is important, given where we are in our time line. if we made the decision not to release reserves, the apartments would quickly have to figure out how to make that gap. we are not talking about small numbers. we are talking about $1.5 million from the health

department. it is not insignificant for the department in terms of how it is that they will figure this out. given what we have to do and 60 day layoff requirements, we could really benefit from one month of salary savings, meaning cuts will be larger than anticipated. that is why i would be supportive of maintaining reserves. on the issue of releasing partial reserves, the issue for this committee is the agenda in coming months. already, we have arboretum items coming up. we have several supplementals coming in through committee, in addition to the deliberations in may and june. realistically there is a way to revisit and make sure we are making progress. i am not sure the partial reserve would be the way.

frankly, we would have to hear this item again and we would hear this same information again. there are many things to focus on. perhaps a better use of time rather than telling you to come back and data consolidation, instead of coming back improving the same thing over and over again, why not tell us about the opportunities for short-term savings and where there would be if we were to move forward with projects like funding master release changes. it would be better served in terms of where the budget is going, rather than dwelling on this issue. that would be my thought on the reserves. so, committee members, we have the release of reserves. is there a motion for anything here? supervisor mirkarimi: yes, i very much agree with much of what she said. i would like to offer a slightly

different consideration. i would certainly be amenable to releasing the reserves, but i am not sure that i would want to do all of it. by understand the hectic pace we are confronted by. yet we want the trains to keep rolling forward. if i am not mistaken, there is a report due back in two months or so. and i correct on this? >> per the recommendation of the budget analyst, we would be able to provide the report to you. supervisor mirkarimi: i would be open to releasing half of the reserves today, relatives in condition to that report, let's see the progress of the report. we would then release the remainder on balance. what would that achieve? who knows. we are hoping the desired effect.

i think that that might make us feel a little bit better, just about the trajectory we are on right now. and the fact that this is only about obviously until the rest of this budget cycle. supervisor chu: with the mayor's office like to respond to a partial reserve -- with the mayor's office like to respond to a partial -- would the mayor's office like to respond to a partial reserve? >> the plea that i would make would be that i certainly agree, this conversation is not over and of the purpose of doing a partial release would be to give us a vehicle to continue to have that conversation. my plea would be, number one, what exactly are we going to try to achieve over the next three months?

but what is the goal of continuing to rally -- to leave that reserved in place? the reason that i ask, if we look at who is here -- the finance directors and chief information officers of our biggest apartments are here. this issue is very important to them. they have this uncertainty in their budget with a very short time line in front of them. in addition, we are in the process of cutting their budgets. this kind of uncertainty over what is going on while we are trying to make additional cuts, i think that is difficult for the department as they try to manage through the last three months. i understand the point that you are trying to get, there are things that we still want to accomplish here. i would argue that it would probably be operationally, in terms of our time and synergy

for the budget process, it would make more sense to have that conversation as a part of the budget process than to have us come back in a month and half in believe that operational uncertainty as they try to help us figure out how to operate the larger budget. that would be likely and request of the committee. supervisor chu: mr. president? supervisor chiu: let'to remind folks of where we were last year, i recommended cutting this full amount. we will find a way for cost savings in short order that did not happen. while i did come here open and moving forward to releasing i.t. reserves, we understand the

frustration that done enough work is being done. one question that i have for mr. wagner, do you expect various i.t. departments to be coming back with significant cost savings proposals for 2012? i am wondering if that could be the metric by which we decide to release half of the reserves? >> just so that i understand, are you referring to the consolidation proposals? or are you asking whether they are making additional i.t. cutts as part of their budgets? supervisor chiu: i am asking about both. in the next few weeks, has it been made clear to the heads of each department that they need to continue to look for savings. if they had come from consolidation, that would be great. we want to make sure that there

is that because progress for the next fiscal year. >> supervisor, you have a lot of major departments in the room. from my perspective, we have not issued them instructions to simply cut their i.t. budgets. we have given them reduction targets. as we always do, we have worked with them to understand whether i.t. savings can be a part of that goal. in terms of citywide direction, guidance and policy direction that we have been taking has been centered around discussions that have gone on through development above five- year i.t. lamps -- development of the five your i.t. plan. -- fisa your -- five year i.t.

plan. i would be open to hearing john's thoughts on that or whether there are recommendations for specific initiatives that she would like us to pursue. i think that that is the big picture. we asked departments to make reductions in proposals that they can meet best. some of those reductions will involve by tea, others involved reduction in other operating costs. -- involve i.t., others involve production in other operating costs. >> -- supervisor chiu: without i.t. reserves, this work will like it done. it has been pulling teeth to get to where we are today. i am not particularly confident

that in the next couple of months we will get to a place where we want to be. i am asking for some assurance an understanding of how that will happen. if the supervisor's idea of hanging on to these reserves is a way to make sure that this gets done in the next couple of weeks, it makes sense to me. >> madam chair, members of the committee, monique zmuda. i have been looking at these requests over the next five years. there is a pent-up demand for a number of infrastructure operating systems. the number of departments that have been forced, because there is insufficient money to take a look at their existing practices, existing operations

within the i.t. area, and make trade-offs, we know a number of departments have fresh projects where all of their computers and software must begin to be replaced. there are a number of infrastructure requirements. i can tell you that what a number of departments have done, particularly large departments, they have found existing savings within their own organization and applied those savings to meet new needs rather than request general fund money. whether or not there is a cost savings that can be used towards the deficit is another question. i do know that there is a tremendous effort to reallocate in every appropriate resources and to prioritize those resources. with respect to a partial reserve, certainly, this board has the authority and capability

to do it. i also think that with all of the hearings taking place in all of the departments, there will be ample opportunity to question the department and for the department to provide information on what their i.t. budget is and how it is changing from year to year. by that time, the board of supervisors will have access to the five-year i.t. plan and you will have the entire picture. what the financial strategies might be to meet those needs and what sacrifices the department and city needs to taken on in order to accomplish many of these. supervisor chiu: i hear that. i appreciate the information that has been done. it does make me think that what the supervisor has proposed in terms of withholding some of the i.t. reserves in this area would be a good thing. we are asking departments right

now to come up with 10% cuts, plus 10% contingency cuts. even if we get caught in the general fund in department, we are still $100 million away from where we need to be. what are different groups within these departments doing and are the things that we can do throughout the apartment of technology that will result in greater efficiencies? supervisor mirkarimi: something that has been festering for almost three to four years now, related to the west of consolidating services, and i

appreciate the sidebar conversation we just, it is that 3.5 years ago we passed legislation for all the city commissions. we want streaming audio. people that can get off their computers. the ongoing proceedings and deliberations of the number of commission task force that the general public should have complete access for, it has not happened. the budget item that was for that particular endeavor that we passed was literally under $60,000. at most, to date, from what i understand is the progress report has seen only five departments out of the huge network of departments and

agencies represented by advisory group interests have been able to get signed on. the reason for bringing this uppe, the fact that if we are nt having the hearing today about the realizing of financial savings or efficiencies have been enhanced internally, i would like to think that the outgoing benefits would be something that benefits the public directly. i am not feeling that yet, although i hear that that is happening, that it is in the making, and when we see the gift presented and unwrapped it will be in standing. but as it is now, this is problematic for me that this legislation 3.5 years later has not been realized, something that was so simple and, surely, affordable, wiring in everyone

through streaming audio. access to deliberations that are not covered by sunshine in an ongoing proceedings disclosure and sf tv. that is not happening. so, i will make an alternative motion. i would suggest pepper, and it is ok if we have friendly disagreement here, i suggest that my motion that we release half of the reserves today and we ask for a condition of report to come back within six weeks, by six weeks, to hear what the progress is. of course, i think we would be poised to release the remainder amount. supervisor chu: thank you. i am hearing a motion to release half of the reserve and to bring the item back in six weeks? correct? supervisor mirkarimi: yes.

whenever the period of time, but i am trying to give you, instead of two months, three months. supervisor chu: call of the chair, you are saying. i do not support releasing only half of it. i truly think that this budget committee needs to focus on savings and other ideas from the department. it is time to ask the part of technology to come to us and say, where else are we going to get the savings from? i do not see how i am going to squeeze this or more from i.t. consolidation. i would hate for us to spend all of this time on an issue that we are making good progress on. i think that it would be more worth our time to get cost saving alternatives in the near term, that would be a better use of our time. the other thing that i want you to understand before we take

this vote, if we say that we will take a 50% released in reserves, what we are saying is that we will only release $750,000. meaning that you have a cap or a shortfall in your budget, roughly. if we come back in one month, the department but have no ability to deal with it. let of noticing provisions would kick in and he would not be able to realize a savings. we're with the department code to figure out how to realize the shortfall? they would go directly to contracts. they are not going to reduce the rent. they will not have savings in the other categories. i want to impress upon all of us here, the reason i will not be supporting partial release, frankly, we have exhausted this item. we need to come back and monitor it, focusing on the future and

other opportunities. second of all, i think apple you will be leading the department in a bad situation. contracts and other things to close the gap. making a decision later on in the process. that is just my thought on it. i will not be supporting that motion. ok, so there is a motion to release 50% income -- continue the item to a call of the chair. could we do a role called? supervisor chiu: the supervisors have just articulated my own ambivalence. it is my hope that if he were to come back in six weeks and provide a report, that it would give us a road map of the savings that we could expect to see in the next year. i would be worried that if we simply released to the reserve,

there will be no incentive for departments to work together to compose the solutions that help us to deal with our budget situation and make us stronger as a city. i think that what the supervisor is proposing makes some sense. i understand that the departments are assuming this money is coming in, but in my mind that is part of the problem. we should have been assuming all along that we had to find cost savings and it has not happened. people have assumed that they will be able to live within the budget they have set. framing everyone's priorities and how they will find cost savings as opposed to assuming that this committee is going to not press forward with the need for overall i.t. consolidation. i think that what the supervisor has proposed makes sense and i look forward, i hope, too good

answers and solutions in the coming weeks. supervisor chu: i know that supervisor mirkarimi is looking to make a point, but one thing that i would ask to be specific, given that all of us do not intend to force the departments to cut contracts, a month other things -- the ph, where will they go with contract cuts? think about who they contract with. can we be specific about what it is we want the department to deliver so that we can be more specific? supervisor mirkarimi: i gave you the soft pitch. i have done this every year. representatives, my concern is that what i thought was an easy to do item that has become so

convoluted, it is creating doubt in liability towards consolidation altogether. within six weeks i want to hear, specifically, not only about this work order process back to department, but if there is commissioned interested business or advisory task force business that realizes the legislation passed so that you can do streaming audio to the general public of these departments. the fact that there has been no leadership on this and the bill of originally brought back to us was for $58,000, yet we are talking about tens of millions of dollars in savings that cannot begin to be realized is beginning to fester out in a way that makes me wonder in which direction you guys are going. i believe that there are efficiencies and greater efforts to seize that are being achieved on this process on the inside.

i do not know what the public is feeling on the outside. to me, this is a soft, soft pitch. try to accomplish this in six weeks. do not talk about which departments wish to that -- wish to participate. they are legislated to participate. dp is now facilitated over the administration of this. your savings, now and in the future, for $58,000, could have been realized to pick up the slack, and it never did. meanwhile, the general public is divorced from getting the streaming audio the legislated would happen. that is one example. on the bigger ticket items, the question relates to what the supervisor was talking about.

how are you going to achieve these consolidations and savings in a way where we will be able to conceive -- perceive the tangibles. whether they in kind or direct dollars savings. that is the way i would answer it. supervisor chu: supervisor chiu? supervisor chiu: i will articulate quickly. the mayor has asked for top -- 20% cut proposals from every department. i would like to know what the 20% cost savings we are expecting to see from a $200 million i.t. budget for 2012. supervisor chu: in actually, if, being on the committee, i am confused as to what it is we are asking. let's be very clear.

the reserve was originally placed on a pending update. now we want to see something else. now we want to see how the savings will be realized from the budget submission? supervisor chiu: the whole point of i.t. reserve was to figure out if there would be savings in the city. from my perspective, we have not done a good job in that. we have figured out a plan over the course of the year to figure out data consolidation, but we are not seeing savings. where are we going to find savings? we have been talking about this for years. we are still looking grantors. the problem is that if we do not come up with answers, here on the board we are forced to make budget cuts. hundreds of us will be making cuts to the parks department. if we could find consolidation

in the budget, i would prefer to spend that money providing services back-to-back and park. for several years we have been asking for this work to be -- services- two -- services back to rec and park. for several years we have been asking for this work to be done. supervisor chu: we are looking for information from the apartments, probably bardee i.t. departments. we want them to share with us as a part of their budget commission de i.t. reductions? supervisor chiu: i want to know the specific cost savings, within departments, but did i.t. budgets. but certainly i am open to understanding alternative ways to do this -- >> certainly i am open to understand and alternative ways to do this.

within the department and myself , ofdt and president chui, as you know the budget is still in development. we could take a look at the ideas on the table. it would be worthwhile to have a discussion on this so that we could get into some concrete proposals. i think that that is going to be the trick, understanding in a much more substantial level what types of savings initiatives we are talking about. supervisor chu: we are in agreement about what is required for the release of reserves? information pending from coyt and a list of where departments had issued cuts? is that clear?