mayor's office, holding some of our dollars for potential state reductions so that we can backfill child care services and family resource center is. once again, these are the areas that we feel are crucial for supporting families in the city. supervisor avalos: as far as loss of funding, something that is not being planned, correct? >> i cannot speak for the city, but it is something you would have to ask the mayor's office. in terms of planning, we are working very closely with the human services agency, as these are the departments that currently fund the family resource center is. for those three departments, we are working closely but partners to make sure that current funding levels will stay whole. particularly for next year.

supervisor avalos: i know that the family resource center has a good approach to meeting the diversity in san francisco. what about working with same-sex parent families? >> we have one family resource center that is specific to lgbtq families. that particular center is run by the families coalition. once again, we are proposing that to the mayor's office. supervisor avalos: thank you both for the great report. i would like you to comment on this policy debate that has been going on. we have had limited resources and been trying to serve not just the most vulnerable families.

looking at struggling, middle- class families that are trying hard to make ends meet. there is preschool and trying to be more flexible about other things, but i will just ask, with limited resources, how do you plan to deal with that policy dilemma? >> dcys is mandated by the charter to be universal, in theory. we have funding programs for all of the services in the city, but we do have policies imbedded for allocation plans that ask us and require us to mandate or target services to highest need populations in high as need neighborhoods. within our own policy documents, we have outlined what those are, based on needs assessments, an

index that we worked closely to develop with service agencies. so, based on that information, it is how we make our allocation plan. i realize the san francisco went through their planning process and during that time it was determined that preschool for all initiative was to be universal. we were not going to be means tested. we believed in the framework and the idea that we would want to blend child care programs with children of all economic status. because we believe that it was and is the best practice. making sure that all of our children will learn and grow together. supervisor avalos: i am concerned that despite peerage in terms of preschool programs universally, there are kids that are low-income on the waiting

list with access to funds and funding not being available. you have to wonder, if we do have a universal program for kids from very low income families who are not able to get into preschool, but it is not universal. a way to assess that, whether it is the right policy, we can apply a universal child care program across all of our different populations based on their income. but the scale might be more effective in making sure that low-income families do not fall on the waiting list with programs that are universally applied. >> i agree. i think that the questions you are raising are particularly important, especially during the

economic downturn that we have right now. i think that a conversation around how many slots we have available for high as need families, and the other part of this, the quality of those slots. i think we're the psa initiative came in -- i think that where the psa initiative came in initially, i know that some commissioners have different opinions on this, but it was not to expand and increase slots. it was built upon available and existing slot. i would love to engage in a conversation about how we more effectively use funding for child care throughout the city so that we can make sure that we increase the number of slots, but also improve quality. i think that cassandra, in her leadership, has done just that,

where we worked very closely with the school district and said that you have earned the funding that goes into the programs. so, if we work together to leverage those dollars, building upon the school district dollars so that we can increase the loss and qualities of those slots. because at the end of the day one of the findings in the report is that only 57% of the can of artists are actually entering kindergarten ready. that is not ok. we have a huge problem in terms of quality and the number. i know that my peers would miss them under your leadership further. supervisor avalos: thank you. i appreciate your comments in

your presentation. i know that deep down in your heart you wish that our society really cared about kids. based on the ways that we make decisions that on funding in all levels of government, i think it be better at the local level. i am glad that we have folks like you doing the work. providers who are making these really difficult decisions about how we spend our resources. thank you for that. we will go on to public comment. we are open for public comment on item #6. seeing no one come forward, we will close public comment. this item we can move forward with recommendations and without objection. madam clerk, could you please call our last item? >> item number 7.

ordinance amending san francisco transportation code, division i, by amending section 7.2.30 to establish a two hour maximum time limit for parking at inoperable or broken parking meters for on-street parking, and adding section 7.2.65 to establish a two hour maximum time limit for parking at inoperable or broken parking meters for off-street parking. supervisor avalos: welcome. >> good morning. thank you for hearing this item this morning. we are here before you to change the policy for the city as we are implementing sf park. we are experimenting with time limits in certain areas that have no time limits at all. one of the issues we have identified it is the fact that

if we are to do that, there could be broken meters with parking for more significant about the time. trying to tighten up, creating city-wide policies for parking meters that are broken, giving you a parking cap. for example, if there is a 30 minute time limit in the city, this is particularly important for the areas that will not have time limits to create a use for a citywide policy to show that there is free parking in some of the areas and to issue fairness. we are asking for approval on this policy.

we had originally recommended a 1 hour time limit, the board suggested two hours. supervisor avalos: was there discussion over this being implemented only in areas of the city where the park program was in existence? >> there was some discussion, but we have expanded the citywide time limit. we have moved at the city wide standard to two hours across the city as well. we are trying to give citizens more time to do what they need to do. right now the city wide standard is two hours. supervisor avalos: under the current parking meter program that we have, outside of park sf, how long does it take for a

leader to get fix medicared? >> it depends on the exact meter. it takes us about 24 hours to 48 hours, once we are notified that the meter is broken. right now we do not have the backup software to tell us, in the background, and someone has to call us to tell us that the meter's broken. on sf park we can tell immediately. timing for those are much shorter. for the other city-wide meters, it takes 2448 hours. supervisor avalos: how often according to a collection? >> it depends on the routes.

some routes we go there daily. other routes, we go there less frequently. we deploy the forces as they fill up. supervisor avalos: so, generally it is about one week? when does that go citywide again? >> we are working currently from project experience. that should be out in the next 12 months or so. we expect to see this parking program in the city as consistent within the next 18 to 24 months. supervisor avalos: what about a

system without meters where there could be ways of paying online or with your credit card? where you would not have a physical leader doing the work, monitoring how long you are staying parked? how what with this policy interact with that system? >> there are some areas, particularly england, that have experimented with broke ringleader -- removing meters complete. a space where they would propel through their cell phone. the important feature is that an individual must have access to a cell phone. so, it would have to be an area where individuals would not have that be available.

it would be significant work for the citizens as many of them do not have the technology available. supervisor avalos: what is the -- i do not know if it is an estimate, but the expectations of the mta of how many meters will be out at any given time? you have factor that into the cost of the program and what you can expect to get in terms of revenue in the change in law? >> what is so much better with these leaders is that you can tell easily when they are broken. the frequency is less and we are expected to see a much higher frequency.

we actually have a pretty good track record of broken meters. several years ago there were a lot, but technology and the infrastructure has changed. 1.2% of broken meters is not a lot right now. in we do expect that to go down over time. supervisor avalos: the most common ways that one will break down? >> the most common is someone puts something in their that does not belong. paper or some other kinds of calling. the biggest issue is someone putting something into the slot. not allowing anyone else to put anything into that leader. supervisor avalos: the meters in

the program, do they have other common things? i have had some difficulty at some of them. others are fairly straightforward. >> i think that that is one of the things we are seeing. the sensitivity of the meters, the credit cards, we have had similar complaints. there seems to be a jiggling of the card in some of the meters. this is why a pilot is so important. if you do want an upgrade program, we want them all to recognize credit cards affectively. the meter being tested right now is the only single space meter. vendors are working to figure out what is causing this sensitivity. hopefully that will be resolved by the time there is procurement. supervisor avalos: ok. supervisor mar: thank you for

the proposal. i know the the december decision, you look at other variations and i am glad we are not taking a los angeles approach. sounds like a los angeles bars people from parking at broken meters. we are taking a more san francisco approach. but i know it will have to be a cultural change. myself, like other drivers, i know that i feel like i have hit a jackpot when i come to a meter that appears to be broken. but i think that this will take a decent amount of education. i hope that there is a good community process that allows neighborhoods to know that this is a new policy. >> this was posted on various

web sites. we have to find and of real estate on the meter to posted, but it will have a uniform policy. right now it could be a half- hour, two hours, three hours. supervisor mar: i agree that this seems to be an equitable and fair approach that will help to bring in the revenue for the mta that is sorely needed. from the supervisors mentioning of the broken meters, most common experience is that it is the card slot that is getting jammed for some reason. so that using my mta card or credit card, sometimes it does not work. it is less of a cooling problem and now it is more with the cards. supervisor avalos: it is always

something in san francisco. ok, we will stop for public comment. any member of the public? please come forward. seeing no one, we will close public comment. this item, i would like to move forward with recommendations. without objection. madam clerk, are there any other items before us? >> no, mr. chairman. supervisor avalos: we are adjourned. thank you.