sheriff's budget and population is infected, as well as a probation. we have been working with the district attorney's office and public defender's office and having this conversation. part of the realignment plan will also be focused on creating these alternative sentences to try and mitigate a large impact to the shares population. supervisor mirkarimi: but there will be a risk assessment based on the population that is returning here. so the community that is also critical is the reentry community. >> absolutely. that is why we felt it was so important to get out in front of it as quickly as possible and to talk to the committee and to the reentry council. we will unveil a draft plan in terms of what the components consist of on a july 12 at a hearing. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. supervisor chu: thank you for those questions. it is a good segue. i intended to ask the mayor's budget office to provide an update on the state budget for

us. perhaps he can let us know where there might be some questions and where we might have some clarity. >> absolutely, madam chair. mayor's budget director. it looks like there is an agreement on the state budget, but as always, the fact that items have been adopted it does not give us complete clarity on where things stand. my office, the departments are going through the proposal right now and trying to assess what the impact would be. i would say the two biggest pieces that are going to provide us some uncertainty are the proposal on redevelopment. right now, it looks like there will be a significant financial impact on the city as a result of the redevelopment proposal. there are a number outstanding legal questions about how that is actually going to be implemented. it is probably going to take as a little while to comb through

what that means for us. but it does look like the proposal is either we can allow our agency to be eliminated, or if we choose not to do so, we would be obligated to pay a significant sum to the state. it will have a financial impact on the city. i am confident it will take us a little while to sort out exactly what that means. the other part is realignment, and as we have just discussed, we will be working on finalizing our numbers for that item. there is still some uncertainty on exactly what the state budget will look like over the course of the next half a year or so. the governors and legislatures proposal includes an assumption of revenue. it includes an assumption about what will happen if those revenues are not realized. essentially, there is about $4 billion of new revenues as soon,

and there are cuts that would be implemented if the revenue does not come in to certain trigger levels. those cuts would significantly affect some of the educational institutions, but there are also cuts that would affect the city government. depending on what kind of news we are seeing in the economy, there'll probably be some level of uncertainty about the impacts of the state budget on our local government program medically and financially over the course of the next half of the year -- programatically and financially over the course of the next half of year. supervisor chu: thank you. just to clarify, we have talked a lot about realignment. i know that supervisor mirkarimi will be calling that item to the public safety committee to have a better vetting of what that might mean. with regard to redevelopment, it is intriguing what you have said. that the current proposal, as is

laid out, is that potentially we have the ability to continue our redevelopment agency at the local level, but that would require a payout to the state in this year. >> that is correct. essentially, the original proposal, back in january of this year from the governor's office, was to eliminate redevelopment agencies and is essentially no longer have that option for local governments. the newer proposal, and again, there are significant outstanding legal and technical questions about how this thing will look and how it will be implemented, but essentially, the centerpiece of it is that local redevelopment agencies have the option of remaining in existence but would be required to make a payment to the state. the total value of that payment to the state is about $1.7 billion from each of the local

redevelopment agencies. we are calculating the impact call on the final legislation and on what that will mean for san francisco. but it is probably in the $20 million to $30 million range. in future years, there would be an ongoing payment, but the ongoing payments would be at a lower level. there would be a one-time larger payment required by the city in the current fiscal year. and then that would drop down. there would be a one-time hit and then a smaller ongoing series of payments that will occur over the long term or in perpetuity. supervisor chu: conceptually, we would expect that if you wanted to maintain our redeveloper at agency, it is likely that san francisco would have to pay some kind of lump-sum payment, a onetime payment in this coming fiscal year, and perhaps an ongoing payment in years out that will not be as large?

>> that is correct. one of the issues that is going to prison for us financially is -- it will probably put some strain on us financially in the current year, meaning that the size of our reserve currently budgeted at $15 million is less than the total value of the payment for the current year. although, of course, we have a sales-tax measure submitted to the board which with add to that reserve. but that will put some strain on us in the budget year and fiscal year 2011-2012. but hopefully, depending on what else happens with every development agencies, that will be a one-time expenditure. a portion of that will be a one- time expenditure, rather than a large ongoing payment. so there would be a one-time impact to our budget in fiscal year 2011-2012. but it looks like the ongoing impact will be less than that. supervisor chu: one final question one of the department

coming up later on is the children and families commission. i know that part of the state plans originally had anticipated taking the number, or significant amount of the reserves, from first fives. is that off the table? >> the final budget proposal -- and they are not sleeping the balance from a first 5 at the level that was contemplated in the budget proposal that was vetoed by the governor a week or two ago. and it had been challenged in the court, and that with the governors logic, you did not want to include that in the budget given the legal uncertainty. so the impact on first five will be less than contemplated under previous budget proposals. supervisor chu: ok, thank you. we left off with the adult probation department presentation. the department is in agreement.

did we do the budget analyst response yet? we did, ok. colleagues, if we can, given that there is agreement to take the project closeout balance of $1,208 and also take the cuts worth $110,592. we can take that without objection? thank you. the next department is the asian art museum. >> good morning. we're pleased to confirm. asian art museum, chief operating officer and cfo. we are in agreement with mr. rose's office and are prepared to accept the $53,465 cut to our general fund budget. the reason that we are able to

take this cut is we are in an unusual situation, with several positions that are open. this cut really is reflective of the timescale for hiring those positions in the first several months of the year. with the caveat that we would hope to work with the mayor's office next year to restore funds sufficient to be able to cover the minimum staffing levels at the museum, that is the situation that we face and we are able to take a cut for the current year. we wish to thank the supervisors and mr. rose's office. supervisor chu: thank you. mr. rose. >> the agreed upon recommendations of $53,465, which are general fund reductions. supervisor chu: thank you. given that the department is in agreement, can we take this without objection? that will be the case. thank you very much.

next, we did not have recommendations, but i believe there are questions with regard to the arts commission. one of the questions i had was whether there was any ability to further fund some of the programs to deal with the graffiti abatement efforts the arts commission has been working on. >> thank you for the opportunity to come back and address some of the questions raised at the last budget hearing. there are two presentations documents in front of you. i would like to start whistling the recommendations raised by supervisor carmen chu.

yet a question about the 10 staff members at the arts commission associated with the public art program. in this presentation, we walk you through the responsibilities and workload these 10 individuals are involved with and differentiate the fact s seven of them are really working on the public art part and two are associated with the civic art collection with administratively, we have that all together. one is doing the financial work, the reporting work for that program. there are six project managers handling a workload between 60 and 70 works of art, public art projects. supervisor chu: each of the

staff members are managing 10 projects a year? >> it has actually averaged a little bit higher than that. there were additional slides that demonstrate how the amount of public art projects has ballooned in the last three years. three years ago, the total number of contracts was about 842,000. for the last two fiscal years, including this fiscal year, you see they are above $3 million. running through a summary of the projects but are involved with, central subway has 11 public art projects, general hospital has 14, recreation and parks has 13, public utilities commission has five, trans day has 5, the public library has three, the public safety

building has three, the airport currently has two but we just completed five projects. other public our programs are five. you get a sense of the workload currently underway. with the other capital investments the city is expected to make its infrastructure in the next few years, there will be new public arts projects that will be coming forward. that is why we say the workload is between 60 and 70 projects per year that are ongoing. going forward and looking at what the collection activities do, there are two slides said detail work associated with that. jumping ahead a little bit, you raised some questions about how some of these public art projects might want to have

impact in their surrounding neighborhoods. we decided to highlight a few things done in the last year- and-a-half that talk about how these public art projects in packed the streetscape. a longstanding project of the embarcadero was one of them. the installation of the language of the birds in one of the most traffic tourism sight of this city, the intersection of broadway and columbus. it has been a phenomenally successful works that bridges the cultures of north beach was chinatown. leland avenue generated a fabulous project called street life. the valencia streetscape improvements has generated a work of art. one of the largest and most

impressive outdoor improvements was to the plaza where we used an artist to use colored pavement to impact the plaza. if anyone has a chance to see that, it's quite a phenomenal change to the streetscape. but -- upcoming projects include the surrounding area of general hospital, soma west and the public safety building. going to the question you started out with, how will we try to change and improve the street smart program, we are going to be talking with the department of public works, which is our partner in this effort. we're going to change our memorandum of understanding so

we will incorporate more communication between the property owners and surrounding neighbors. that will be more labor- intensive, but your point was well taken. as you astutely, given your financing background, urged us to do more with less. we've been able to allocate an additional $20,000 by shifting administrative costs and by funding 10 more murals and the program for the next upcoming fiscal year, that will bring the total number of minerals to 30. we will continue to raise money through community challenge grants and seek outside funding for the program. i believe that addresses the questions. if i can now shift -- do you

have any follow-up on that? supervisor chu: i just want to thank you for taking the time to do that and we appreciate being able to free up the additional allocation to work on some of the murals that deals with the three problems. -- with the graffiti problems. i also want to thank you for the change with reaching out to the local community before we install these are works. that will be an improvement in the process and i look forward to hearing your update. >> if i can draw your attention to the second presentation which addresses the questions raised by president chiu, who does the arts commission commission to do all these public arts projects? where do they reside?

we start on the third page with a summary slide that provides a five-year overview. this is a cumulative average. we see out of a total of 115 contracts, 55 of them or 48% went to san francisco resident artists. if we look at the bay area which includes san francisco, the number shoots up to 86 contracts and a 75% of the artists. in terms of dollar amounts, it's a good break down as well. in the terms of total dollars spent in the san francisco area, you've got a little over $4 million. that represents 44%. for the purpose of thoroughness, we provide you with several

slides which i will not go through. there are several slides covering the five years, summarizing a particular page. are there any questions before i move on to the final question? supervisor chiu: the issue raised last year -- and was trying to understand why so few artists contracts were being awarded to san francisco artists. i appreciate the jump we've seen, but i'm shocked at the numbers -- only 22% of contracts went to san francisco -- people from san francisco. this year, 62% going to local artists. tell me how the arts commission -- was happening before and why after some public pressure to we

see more contracts being awarded to local artists? >> with all due respect, it has not been a response to political pressure. this program has hovered at about 75% bay area artists being commissioned by the arts commission over 30 years. the process the arts commission uses -- supervisor chiu: you said 75% over the past 30 years? >> that is what staff has informed me over the long term. the bay area artists, which include san francisco, was hovering at about 75%. supervisor chiu: why has that dropped significantly in the last decade? >> it has not dropped in the last decade. the years you are planning to, want to show you what we use in selecting artists.

it's a very competitive process and is driven by a community- based feedback. whenever projects we undertake always includes a component of community feedback and planned participation. supervisor chiu: can you explain that? i hear the exact opposite from the local artists' community. they feel shut out. >> what that means is we have the composition of a selection panel. these are people who will look at the large pool of artists who look at the proposals. the composition of that panel includes the client agency where the work is originated from -- being commissioned from. then the surrounding community,

whatever the appropriate surrounding community involvement is, and the number of arts professionals. these panels are the ones who select the artists. the arts commission also makes an effort to make a very wide call, an open call to get artists to submit to these open competitions. on an annual basis, every time we have one of these commissions, we put out the word. one of the things when we started to look at this in greater detail, we wanted to make sure our open poll and in recent years, it is also going out in multiple languages. one of the things we are starting to see is a greater response from ethnic communities that are coming forward, being put into the pool to compete and being viewed by the panels and being selected. i think that is one of the

improvements that might account for the bump you are talking about. but the process is very competitive and we are proud to say that in san francisco, there are a lot of very talented artists that have been part of the program. supervisor chiu: you are saying the reason we have moved from 22% in 2008 and 2009 to 62% this past year has been a result of better outreach to local diverse artists? >> the director of the program is here. she will help illustrate this better. >> that is true. i would like to go back to the selection panel. is a very competitive process. artists are selected for particular projects and we're usually looking for particular skills and abilities to address

whatever the opportunity is for that particular project. that is with the panels are looking at. they are not necessarily looking at where somebody lives or other aspects of the artist. they are looking at their skill level. the reason i show you this averages because it does go up and down over years depending on but the project is. but consistently, we have had 6% to 75% bay area artists, not just san francisco, but bay area artists, which has longstanding been our priority for commissioning artists in this program. this last year, knowing your particular concern about local

artists, we have made a greater effort out reach, limiting projects to just local artists and designing projects that i knew we could, with the talent pool here in san francisco, fill with local artists. supervisor chiu: i just wanted to say to my colleagues, when i've first started looking in this, i was contemplating what we should have some sort of number ensuring some grants go to local artists and i am heartened the numbers of dreamt significantly and look forward to the trend continuing -- had jumped cygnus' him -- had jumped significantly. supervisor mirkarimi: to that

point, similarly on my mind, i was wondering if we should seriously consider legislation like our local hiring policy that we should have a policy that prioritizes the grand distribution for local artists? i don't believe we are quite at that stage because there has been some marketable improvement in dissemination of grants to local artists. but in my district and many of our districts, it is home to a very sizable community and one that often goes unnoticed, but one we want to keep nurturing as best as we possibly can. many of us have opened our offices at 4 exhibits to feature local artists. we feel like we're doing our part in some way to promote the local arts, so we like to see through the grant program that underscores this effort.

if we have to legislate this commitment, that is something i would seriously want to consider. what i am hearing in this conversation is that it's improving in the right direction and it makes it unnecessary. that is important to note as well. >> thank you for your concern, supervisor mirkarimi. it is something san francisco can take a great deal of pride in. is a cultural capital at its home to many different artists, visual arts and particular. we have to be mindful that san francisco nationally was one of the first to adopt the art in richmond ordinance. -- the arts in richmond ordinance. that helped hold municipalities across the nation. we are looked at as a leader in this field and one of the things i would caution, and i would love for the supervisor to keep

in mind, is that competition for public art is an international competition. the artists who actually live here with us are competing for projects in albuquerque, completing for projects in texas and across the country, new york, and they're often successful. if we take a protectionist posture, that might be something that might be emulated in other communities across the country and could backfire on our artists and their ability to win commissions in other places. supervisor mirkarimi: i agree with you and that is not worth what this conversation to go. when people come to san francisco, i think they have a different impression about our reputation and our ability to earn that reputation of being very supportive of the arts. i don't mean the primary art institutions, many underground,

alternative art institutions where there is a healthy recognition both by city government and by our funding mechanisms. i think it is improving quite a bit, but the feedback i often get from people, such as some of the people visiting san francisco and to have made san francisco their new home, is that they are let down or underwhelmed by that commitment from city hall. to that point, i have to say i'm really impressed and delighted to see the level of street art going out brown san francisco and some of the most distressed areas. near the mid market area of the street art, that is great. i love checking it out and i tell people that the public are out there, it is worthy of its own tour so that people can check out the public art installations, especially i