companies are not hiring but seeing small businesses -- but it is small businesses hiring people. we urge you to continue support child care funding so that families can continue working and looking for work outside of the home. thank you very much. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am the second director of the richmond district neighborhood center. i thank you for this opportunity and i also thank the department of children and youth for the hard work they are having to do. this is a very difficult time. we have been the recipients of money from the department of children and youth for many years. we pride ourselves as a sort of

my line and we are here to help families stay in san francisco. the help 2000 people per week. the people that we serve are very often the targeted most at risk for additional tutoring and family supports. those people come from all over the city. i have with me our director which is one of -- one of our two very large programs that serves all of these people. understanding the terrible situation the city is in, we want you to remember that it is the whole city. part of the goals of the department of children is to make sure that we serve the whole community. >> thank you.

>> property values and -- as property values and the general fund increases, so does the city's commitment to children, youth, families. thanks to all of you for helping to protect the safety net for children, youth and families. we look forward to seeing you at the 20 anniversary. there has been cuts. property taxes have taken hits, there has been a reduction of funding for children, youth, and families. the restoration have to mitigate $7.5 million from the reductions. we know the city is facing yet another year of terrible deficits with very few

solutions. we must look at reductions and police, fire, city management. there are growing frustrations about inequity in our system. there is a fear that this will impact the growth and drive them at the city. as a city, right now we are driving out kids. the african american community in particular has been hit by this. with the vast amount of wealth in the city, how do we figure out the role of the wealthy and business communities and helping to fund safety net services for children, youth, families. >> thank you very much. are there any other speakers

that wish to comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. if there are any other questions from the committee, we can take them now. >> i wanted to thank -- and all of our communities. i wanted to reiterate what was just pointed out which is that this is less about what is in the budget versus the restoration. if there are other cuts that were made, those would probably become priorities. i think that we are in agreement that we want to fund all of these programs and how important funding for these programs are. this is overall a question for the city which i know is important for our office and many of our colleagues which is

what is our analysis and how will we analyze what these cuts will mean for the city in the long term. what does this mean in terms of increases to our public safety costs, things that are much more expensive than after-school programs. looking at that in terms of where we look at cuts citywide is really important. some dollar cuts will cost more than others. these are probably the areas that we want to cut the lead stand because that is where we are doing the most amount of work. i wanted to ask a couple of questions, i know that some concerns came out in terms of how we fund conditional age

youth. i want to see what the end results will look like when we get a better sense of what the federal government will be cutting. we're looking at 30% cuts. there is a chance that they will actually get better and we will be able to restore some of the cuts that happened to our transitional aged youth. i think the overall problem is that we don't really have a home for a transitional aged youth. i am wondering where the conversation is. that is a weakness for our city as a whole. it is hard when we look at our budget by departments because this is not really show where our city is prioritizing different issues. one area is lost on a certain

level. i don't know if you can address that a little bit. >> i agree with you. we don't have a home for -- because the mayor had asked dcyf to work with the youth commission. we had the process which took upwards of a year and a half to talk to all of our community members and stakeholders to develop a plan. within that plan, we stated that this was something that should be a priority for all of the city. we created a structure that had members of those departments coming to the table to really discuss.

however, because of the last two years budget, we have not been able to really actualize a lot of the recommendations inside of that plan. we have moved forward on a couple of things such as developing a clear understanding of creating workforce programs to really support the population and actually that is what drove the partnership with the office of workforce development to really think through what they had to commit to and what dcyf had to commit to. we worked with the partners and providers to create that framework. the other thing that the team has helped us with was creating

some transitional housing opportunities. they worked very closely with the mayor's office of housing to prioritize transitional housing. they have been successful in advocating for that. judge shoemaker has carved out housing for that particular population. there has been limited funding. at the department of public health, based -- they have funding for transitional aged youth. that is all in jeopardy. this is coming from the health services act. >> has there been any conversation on where to put transitional aged youth at least someone is looking at

the overall picture of where the funding is going and setting priorities for that population? >> unfortunately, there is not. i know that dcyf plays an active role in working with and supporting the efforts. we are a co-chair of the task force. i would like to have a further conversation with you in terms of forward this population should live. maybe we can look through all of our departments and see who oversees that of hon. community. >> i know that you had to cut 8 positions. this was the last fiscal year. >> how many did you have your

height. >> 35. >> we have been successful in getting a lot of grants. we have been able to get people on through grad-funded positions. >> there was reductions and telephones. do you have that number as well? >> we can get the actual numbers to members of the committee.

>> what are the priorities for our partners? i think we all know that everything that we find is important. if we want to make a real impact on certain areas, we have to leverage them with other priorities our partners are prioritizing with their dollars as well if you want to have the highest outcome. one of them is graduating more students out of san francisco u.s. see. -- a san francisco usc.

less than 50% of those that don't make it to ninth grade graduate from s.f.u.s.c. as much as we can leverage those dollars, it is really important. i would love to learn what you mean -- you touched briefly on this, what are you accounting for win prioritizing children's families. what are the challenges putting you at risk of negative outcomes to for -- at risk for

negative outcomes? more than looking at the restoration being a scalpel to how we make hats is looking at how we make them citywide, not just by department. some will hurt more within other departments. >> just a quick comment. i would like to say thank you to the members of the community who came out to speak. in the spirit of where we are trying to go with this budget in terms of transparency and having early feedback, this is one of those efforts to get us there. the mayor is talking about a number of different priorities ahead of when this is amended. i think this is something that will be helpful. we get to know where the 10% contingency and apartments are

coming from. we have an vicinity two-way and what we think needs to be evaluated. is there a way for us to share what their party should be. where would we want to prioritize those findings? do we not have a program that is finding it anywhere else? where are the cuts to state and federal that we should be looking at? to the extent that the members of the community have ideas for alternatives and to the extent that members might think about how you would think about prioritizing different choices that we have to make, i think that that is exactly the kind of template that this committee needs and the mayor and knees before he crashed his budget.

i would ask for your continued participation in that. >> [inaudible] >> it is it possible to get a reconsideration that includes a dollars from these other departments? that is not a good representation of what our city spends. this is what dcyf stands by age group. if we can hit one that shows what the city is spending by age group. >> we would be happy to work on putting something like that together for you. >> thank you very much. if there are no other comments or questions, can we move to continue this item to the call of the chair? without objection.

>> item number3, hearing to receive an update on the department of public health's budget for fiscal year 2011- 2012. >> thank you very much. we have barbara garcia. >> we appreciate all the work we have been doing trying to be as transparent as possible including all of our partners. i wanted to start off by showing -- creating a general fund map which is one of the largest apartments with some of the largest general fund. just to go over a minute, our budget as a whole under the appropriations category.

>> do you have any presentations? >> yes, we do. under the appropriations of the budget, 1.4 billion. our jarrell fund is up 108 million. -- our general fund. a total realignment with 545 million. revenue, which is one of the important areas we have for with, 917 million. the 545 million, you will see how we leverage to that.

this is a little bit of a public of detail that shows some of the public health areas. we're one of the few departments that provides housing >> just on this layout, what i am seeing, you have broken up the department's general sources of revenue overall. what i am seeing is that we have out of your 1.4 $6 billion budget, approximately 917 million comes from revenues and 408 comes from the general fund. realignment is 136. >> if you look, at laguna honda hospital as monody biggest

recipients. that is for matching and leveraging those dollars. >> this is practically all general fund, really. >> that is a good point. to get to the budget, we had a

69.6 million general fund reduction target, 34.8 in our base. we are very fortunate and you will see later, new dollars that really helped us balance the budget this year. our base budget balance without any service reductions, we were able to put revenue at against our base budget balance. we had to come up with $13 million in reductions proposed for the contingency. we are confident about that. this is still a deferred decision waiting for state approval. >> in order to meet the 20% reduction target, you have currently met most of that with revenue. the portion would be 13 million out of the 70.

>> we did receive $53.5 million $11.7 million. these are portend any aspects that we have to spend at least 38.5 million to meet some pretty aggressive standards from the federal government. we will only receive these funds if we meet certain milestones. there are fines if we don't meet those standards. it does allow us to expand coverage of access to health services and requires us to be able to meet access to health services under a particular time frame. we have to be able to get

individual appointments within 10 days for primary care and 15 days for specialty care. this will expand our primary care and specialty care capacity. as you can see, 53 million, we have on expanded to 30 and the rest of those, we feel that we can use for the budget balance due to the fact that particularly healthy san francisco which has gotten us further towards health care reform. shthere is a requirement to invest in our i.t. technology. we are moving our system from a

billing system to an electronic health record. we are moving to a chemical system and this requires a significant amount of i.t. investment. we understand that president chiu has an investment in this area and any questions of how we are efficient as possible, we have much more available information. >> the department it holds the stake holder meetings two or three times a year to bring our stakeholders including our department's staff along with our -- communities that we fund to talk about the budget and also to plan out how we will meet our targets. over the years, we have tried numerous ways to reduce our budget. we have talked about looking across the board cuts but we also looked at some of the issues about non matched general

funds. 2/3 of our general fund and realignment are used to draw down federal revenue. dph is a provider of last resort. this takes up about 100 million of general fund. but we cannot leverage those for revenue. there is a majority of remaining, about 70 million that is contract it. that basically leaves 70 million to prioritize our reduction. most of this is contacted services and community programs. another part of that is that of the community programs, almost 2/3 is contract it out to the cbo.

question as to clarification on the difference between the hundred million and a 70 million? >> this is 375. we spent 100 million in the areas of jail supportive housing. these are not matched, not not leverage. >> this is where he would not any finding anywhere else. >> for the individuals and the jails, for supportive services. >> we have no reductions in children's services, prevention services, hiv health services, long-term care services, and

medication support. we did try to preserve some of the services that we felt where our highest priorities. >> this is the 13 million contingency. why would we accept the efficiency measures? >> one is the reallocation of -- to ada housing. we do have new housing pipelines coming in. this was a way to relocate some of these clients into what i believe is better housing. we also have several housing -- several hundred stabilization beds. we will provide permanent housing as a way to save $1 million which includes a couple of full-time equivalents. >> these are not necessarily

administrative efficiencies. >> these are program efficiencies. >> we have done a number of the program efficiencies. last year, as you can recall, we cut several hundred clerical positions. we have reduced our administration clinic directors, primary care directors and we also created a business office last fiscal year that reduced administrators as well. this gives more detail to the reductions and efficiency measures. under our behavior services, we are cutting 4.1.

important to talk about the difference between non match fund and percentage of the total funding. in our substance-abuse area that is also an area that does not have a lot of leveraging. when you think about those community-based organizations, some of them may have more general fund than others. those that will get a non matched general fund. the total category i 2.1%. something not leverage dollars. that could be a real cat. -- some to not leverage dollars. that could be a real cut.