they have been very productively engaged with us in that regard. supervisor chiu: i appreciate that. obviously, i feel like we're not necessarily there at this moment for us to make a decision. colleagues, if it is ok for us to move this decision to tomorrow, i would support that. but i think if there are additional conversations that we could have, and over the last few days, i have been going back and forth between his department and sciu to see if there is a place we can get to that will work, but i am willing to keep doing that over the next 24 hours to see if we can get there. >> and so are we, supervisor. we're definitely open to have more conversations. supervisor chu: thank you. supervisor wiener: i just want to underline the issue of the police is being brought up. in my conversations with san francisco general, and with others, it seems like there are

issues around the institutional police. i think the department has been very clear that it does not want to form and run its own security service in terms of the institutional police. given that, i really want to reiterate that the potential blend between private security and the sheriff's department is one that we need to look at. i think the sheriff needs to be very much involved. i know there may have been some conversations in the past about this, but given the timing, i think it is important that we quickly engage the sheriff to see what is possible, so that we do not have a sort of this gaping either/or kind of situation. >> and we also feel that if we have that conversation, we would be open to that. we think that the ipo issue is the big management issue. we do not think that we could

get to the savings this year if we went to that model. that would be the other alternative. supervisor chu: thank you. and to the department, can you speak to the budget analyst recommendation? >> yes, i think we're almost there. i know that mr. rose may have some corrections to his report. i will see if he has those. we want to thank his office and also don, who has been very helpful. supervisor chu: thank you. budget alice recommendation. >> our total recommended reductions are $1,098,840. of those, 80.9% our general fund reductions. $345,000 are ongoing reductions. we also recommend closing out an

expended general fund incumbrances, which would allow the return of $64,709 to the general fund. the total savings of $1,000,000.106 -- and we come to the total savings with the general fund. what the department was referring to in terms of the correction, the report is correct except on page 73, which does not change the bottom line at all. on page 73, where you see the recap, the general fund impact isshould be $543,623. the total would be $888,840. the non general fund would be $210,0000. the totals would be the same.

so my citation of the original general fund savings are correct. supervisor chu: to be clear, from my understanding, the report shows savings in terms of total recommended reductions of 1,000,098 belt -- 1,000,098 $840. it should be $888,804. >> and that number on page 64 of our report is stated correctly, where i initially commented. supervisor chu: can use it to the number is again? >> of the recommended reductions, $888,840 our general fund. in addition, there's another $64,709 to close out general fund encumbrances bit of the total recommended savings would be $1,163,549. of those recommended savings,

$953,549 would be sent to the general fund. supervisor chu: is the department in agreement? >> yes, we are. supervisor chu: if we do not have any objections on taking those reductions, can we do that without objection? we will do that without objection. thank you very much to the department. are there any further questions? i know that supervisor chiu mention the desire to continue the conversation to tomorrow. supervisor chiu: i did have one more question. to the director, i understand, with regards to the security situation, 20% of the staff are managers. is that correct? >> i have no idea. i am not sure if our staff knows. 28%. supervisor chiu: 20% of the staff are managers. -- 28% of the staff for

managers. is that correct? it seems high. >> i think the question is, what is a manager? in a hospital setting where you're running 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, you have a working supervisor and my your staff that is working. we do not consider that to be management, but we consider that to be the person who would be authorizing overtime in case someone did not show up to work or would be dealing with someone injured on the job. that would be managing the staff. but the person performing the supervisory role in being in charge at night and on weekends really requires -- a 24-hour setting records to have one person in that capacity around the clock. it has to be four people or more on the 24-hour, seven day week basis. if you include those individuals in the percentage of management, you can get to a 28% number. but if you look at those as

working supervisors, it becomes a definition of who they are and what they're doing. i do not agree with the 28% factor. it is a function of who they are and what they do. i would say that the management -- to buy were talking management, to me, it would be someone -- if i were talking management, to me, it would be someone managing security. it might be working monday through friday but having a larger responsibility for managing security. working supervisors or functioning in the field, as well as performing that function -- a would not call it management. >> i exactly agree with what he is saying. this is the same issue that we discussed with the question of 71 versus 63 fte's. those steps are in supervisory roles, but they're working on the floor. if you were to eliminate those

positions, he would not be eliminating and management function. you would be eliminating a security function. so they are providing a direct security function. that is the issue that we discussed in response to your question earlier. and certainly, there would not be a 28% management ratio -- a 28% management ratio would be unacceptable for any city function of this nature, and that would not be something that would be included in the operation. supervisor chiu: i appreciate the good discussion over the spill over the next 12 to 24 hours, i would like to see if there's anything we can do -- i predicted discussion over this bill over the next 12 to 24 hours, i would like to see if there's anything we can do. we have to ensure that we have real security and safety on our wards. i will continue to push toward that. supervisor chu: thank you,

supervisor. we have acted on at the department's recommendations -- the budget analysts recommendations for the department. i want to thank ms. garcia for coming and presenting the budget. of course, we will continue dialogue around the prop j issue. next department is the human services agency. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am the director of the human services agency. we have worked with the budget analyst office over the last week and have come to agreement on the recommendations. supervisor chu: great. mr. rose, which elect to articulate those? >> -- would you like to articulate those? >> the total recommended reductions are $816,232.

there's also a close out from under expended encumbrances of $134,055. together, the recommendations resulting in a savings of $950,287, of which $488,210 are savings to the general fund. supervisor chu: thank you. and the department is in agreement with the project close out as well? >> we are. supervisor chu: thank you. given that there is agreement for both, can we did this without objection? that will be the case. thank you very much for being here. ok, colleagues, we have a number of items that are outstanding. we have gone through the departments. if i can ask for a few motions to be made -- items number one and two, we will be recessing this meeting to coincide with the remainder of the budget for tomorrow. but item one and two will be recessed until tomorrow. however, items three and four

are the aao and the aso for the enterprise departments, which we heard in may. we need to take a motion to combine both of those items into the full budget of one and two. can we entertain a motion to combine items two and three to items one and two? we have a motion. we had a second. without objection. ok. we have items number 7, 8, and 10 which were dispensed with already. items number 5 and 6, these were items we made amendments to previously because of state regulations around noticing for fees. we have to open these specific two items of public comment. i want to do that now. items number 5 and 6, are there any members of the public who wish to speak on these items, 5 and 6? this is public works, a temporary street occupancy fee and the admin code for the public administrator. we will close public comment on

these two items. colleagues, can we take a motion to send these items out to the full board? ok, we have got a motion by supervisor mirkarimi. seconded by supervisor cohen. we will do that without objection on july 12. ok. there is item number nine, which is declaring the city's intention to appropriate the available rainy day reserve funds to the unified school district. i believe we intended to schedule this earlier, but it fell off the list. i wanted to make sure that we get this forward. i believe supervisor kim as amended -- has an amendment to make or some comments. supervisor kim: thank you. i have an amendment. this is at the suggestion of supervisor mar, who pointed out that in our layoff list from the school districts, there also

paraprofessionals and child development staff. i wanted to a knowledge of that list. i distributed copies of the amendment. it is a change to the 3rd whereas. the school district will suffer a loss of revenue and it will need to notice layoffs of teachers, principals, administrators, paraprofessionals, and child development staff and due to these cuts. supervisor chu: thank you. there is a motion to amend the resolution to include paraprofessionals and child development staff to read the third whereas clause. we have a motion. can we take that without objection? we will do that without objection in these amendments would still allow us to move the item for to the full board, correct? great. so, colleagues, given the amended legislation, can we have a motion to send this out to the full board? ok, we will do that. motion made by supervisor mirkarimi. a second by supervisor kim.

we will do that without objection. i believe the only remaining items we have on the agenda are items number one, two, and again, three in four have been incorporated into one and two, and item number 11, which is the prop j. can we take a motion to recess until tomorrow at 1:00? ok, we have a motion to recess this board meeting to 1:00 tomorrow. thank you very much. we will do that without objection.

>> hello. welcome to "culturewire." we are here today with bay area artist jody chanel, and we are here to see the plaza where your piece has just been installed. >> i have been doing large-scale paintings in the galleries and museums, and the idea that in the future, i could do something that would hang out a little bit longer than the duration of the installation the kind of appeal

to me. i quickly found out about the san francisco arts commission school and realized there was a pre-qualified school you had to apply to, so i applied to the. >> how long did it take you to develop this work for the plaza? >> this was a fast track project. design development was about a month. >> let's look at the beautiful mural. i have never seen a mural created on asphalt. >> the heat of the asphalt, a new layer of asphalt. then, these wire rope templates that were fabricated for the line work get laid down and literally stamped into the asphalt, and then everything was hand-painted. >> maybe you could talk about

some of the symbolism, maybe starting in the middle and working out. >> [inaudible] the flower of industry. >> it is like a compass. there's an arrow pointing north. >> within the great bear consolation, there are two pointed stars here. they typically lead one to the northstar, otherwise known as polaris. so i thought it has a layer of theme. >> let's talk about some of the other elements in the peace. we are walking along, and there is a weather vane. there's a sweet little bird hanging on the side. what kind of bird is that? >> [inaudible] the smallest of the gulf species, and it lives around the bay area. >> you want to talk about the types of flour patterns that you send?

>> [inaudible] around 1926 or so by the dahlia society. >> what is this bird here? >> that is the california quail. >> coming up here, we had a little blustery theme. what is this area here? >> this is supposed to be the side view, the expense of the golden gate bridge. >> there it is. >> there are really beautiful elements of architecture still around, i would say that it gives that feeling over to the work. >> what are your hopes for it? >> that in a way it just becomes part of the area. i think it is starting to have that feeling. people utilize it.

they sit and, and have their lunch and play on -- they sit and, and have their lunch and play on that -- they sit and come and have their lunch and play on it. just for it to be part of the neighborhood. that is my hope. >> is such a beautiful addition to our public art in san francisco. thank you for joining us. it was nice to meet you. and thank you for telling us about your beautiful mural. thanks for watching "culturewire."

>> good morning. welcome to the budget and finance committee. my name is carmen chu. i'm joined by the supervisors. mr. victor young is here. we actually had two recess meetings. the meeting that was supposed to

start today at 1:00 and another that was supposed to star at 1:05, so we are combining both of those meetings at this time. mr. young, the 1:00 schedule and agenda, items 1-5. >> item number one, consolidating budget and annual appropriations. fiscal year ending june 30, 2012 and 2013. item # two, the annual budget. [unintelligible]

>> and would you call from the 1:05 scheduled meeting. >> item #one fiscal year ending june 30, 2012 and 2013.

item #2, fiscal year ending june 30, 2012, fiscal year ending in june 30, 2013. item #3 no, -- >> mr. clerk, we have to the bill agendas. 1:00 and 1:05. can i take a formal motion to combine the two? >> motion. >> ok, we can do that without objection. thank you, colleagues. this is the culmination of a of a very long budget process.

before we take comments from individuals and give our thanks to those who worked very hard on this, i wanted to make a motion to accept a package that you see before you. what you see before you is a summary of the budget balancing plan. it represents roughly $17.3 million worth of changes and adjustments to the budget at this time. this represents roughly $3.1 million in changes and adjustments to the public health department. 2.5 to the human services agency. 2.3 to the children, youth, and family department. small restoration to ihss. small changes to the street maintenance work. restores security and to the san francisco general hospital.

allows us to have an economy class for the departments and has a number of neighborhood improvements among other economic development initiatives and city planning efforts. to articulate, we walked through what those look-alike in terms of general broad categories. overall, it would be an amended to reflect different changes that were made. partially behalf except through this committee, budget analyst productions. 3.2 million in non-general fund cuts. there's also a fund balance technical adjustment about 346,000. war memorial hotel tax. sales tax being recognized. we will submit later as a technical adjustment. productions to the department of technology worth $250,000.

in addition to that, one final piece. as we discussed in our budget conversation, we had asked controllers office to work with departments in particular with the large overtime departments what they are over time but does look like and to make sure that what we truly believe the overtime. these are all cost neutral adjustments to the budget, so we are making changes over time for salary reductions and working in conjunction with the department. this will allow for greater transparency and to make sure we really are reflecting what the department believes will be the overtime budget in the coming year. colleagues, this is the package of amendments i am suggesting that we make. can we take a motionless? >> motion to accept the amendments presented. >> we have a motion and a

second. can we take that without objection? that would be the case. and to the mayor's budget office, with regard to the technical adjustments? >> thank you, madam chair. greg wagoner. i have a couple of items to submit to you. the first two are items that we have discussed earlier this week, with you and your staff and had intended to submit earlier in the week, but did not make the final submission, so we are doing that now. the first is an addendum to transfer a function letter, which includes a couple minor adjustments that are being approved in the budget that you are adopting, transfer of a total of seven positions -- i'm sorry, eight positions, all of which are simply administrative

corrections associated whips management adjustments in the budget -- associated with. when transferred to the administrative services department. seven positions from public works to the public utilities commission, gardners. and 1 position from the department of human resources to the access a recorder, which is a human resources position. i will submit that letter to you and to the clerk. the second piece is our first technical assessment again. this is from earlier in the week. we submitted this to you and your staff informally, but i am introducing it formally here. \ this is a set of technical assessments that are truly technical corrections to the mayor's budget commission. the largest pieces included in this adjustment are corrections to budget associated reports the

coit project entries in the budget system and transfer the justice project from the department of technology to the department of administrative services. there are several other smaller corrections that are detailed in a letter. the total impact of these adjustments is 346,00408 dollars of general fund money. that money is available for operation and is factored into the technical adjustment that i will submit next and that is being used by this committee in the proposal that you have just adopted for the balanced budget. lastly, the technical assessment, which provides the funding available