that funding was secured. supervisor chu: you talked about this in terms of the project cost coming in, where the cost estimates were. we saw the cost of the project went down by $4.7 million. do we anticipate any other opportunities to reduce the cost to the project? >> at this point, no. >supervisor chu: in terms of the city contribution, this is something i still have questions on. 6.5 is not a little number. then again, we have seen this before. supervisor at the los talked about different financing methods, whether we pay that in cash or we will live up somehow. going back to the question about the 4.7 in reduced cost, what the court did was ruled that into reducing the shortfall in phase two. given what we know, in terms of some of the options for financing the shortfall, knowing that some of these options are good sources, conservative sources, that exceeds the 6.9.

is there opportunity to reduce that contribution level? >> unfortunately, the cash needed now for phase one and costs are certain. the phase two sources are not in place at this point. so there is no way for me to say yes to that question at this point. the reduction in the project cost was overwhelmingly driven by a reduction in the cost to demolition, which used to be on the event authority's ledger. when the port assumed those costs, it was a much lower estimate then we have assumed for the that authority. the overall picture of phase one changed their little. the cost over all is lower on the project, and the event a party is not contributing to the demolition of shore power, building. supervisor chu: i understand for phase two there is no way be can expect passenger facility charges, for example, because we

do not have the cruise terminal up. i understand there is a matter of timing for different resources for funding. i understand we need to work on moving forward with pier 27 quickly. the question is, if it is a matter of up front loading of cost, expenses for the city, do we have an opportunity to reevaluate how things get paid for past phase one of the project? >> yes, i think we have an opportunity to really with the payment sources. if the city were to issue debt with the port in a cop, we could look to other sources of payment in the general fund, should these other sources come in, become certain. supervisor chu: thank you. if there are no questions from the committee, why don't we go to the budget analyst's report. >> on page 4 of our report, we report the phase one budget of the pier 27 cruise terminal

project is $62 million. that is shown in the attachment on page 7 of our report. table to on page five of our report provides details of the funding sources for this phase one, including the subject requested $8,450,000, which was previously placed on reserve by the board of supervisors. on page five, we point out, as shown in table 2, if the board doesn't approve 9,000,500 to $4,457, that would include the release of reserve of $8 million as well as $603,000 in interest earnings. i believe that was approved by the board yesterday. then the board of supervisors would have appropriated $33 million. that is about 53.1% of the phase

one budget of $62.3 million for the pier 27 cruise terminal project. we recommend you approve the request and release of the $8 million. the reserve by the board of supervisors. whereas a recommendation now shows your final determination pending the final appeal, you have already done that yesterday at the full board. we have an unqualified recommendation to release the reserve funds. supervisor chu: thank you. when we open this up for public comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor avalos: motion to release. supervisor chu: motion to release those reserves. second. without objection. item for. >> item 4. ordinance re-appropriating $1,846,265 of general fund reserves for state revenue loss to backfill federal funding reductions to hiv/aids programs

at the department of public health in fy2011-2012. supervisor chu: we have a representative from the department of public health. for your presentation, can i asked julian from supervisor wiener's office to read a statement? i believe the supervisor wanted to be here but has a conflict with an mtc meeting he is attending. >> thank you. colleagues, i am currently at a meeting of the mtc in oakland and am disappointed i cannot bear personally to advocate for this funding. today, the committee is considering a critical and life- saving supplemental that continues and identifies those living with hiv aids. this appropriation will prevent an almost immediate reduction of services resulting from federal grant from the care act of

funding. i asked the committee to support this legislation and i want to thank mayor lee and supervisor campos and a lot de for their work. sandridge cisco has fought this disease for 35 years, sometimes alone, back in the day when we had a president who refused to say the words hiv aids. over time, our government began to the knowledge the disease and supports to fight it. even with state and federal support, our city has always stepped up to ensure sentences to was to get part to insure critical services for residents ascent -- affected by hiv aids. given the destructive budget bigger in sacramento and washington in recent years, we need to be even more self- reliant. one of the most import sources of funding for hiv aids services is the ryan white care act. things two-hour ravenna's and hero nancy pelosi, our funding remained intact for two years. leader policy carried unending wanted to maintain the funding

long past when any other normal official would have been able to do so. but funding cuts have now come and we have to respond to it. in the current fiscal year through june 30, we will lose approximately $1.8 million in ryan white funding. the appropriation before you would bechtel that amount from our state federal reserve accounts and would allow us to continue funding lifesaving services. next fiscal year we anticipate a cut of 4.2 $5 million. yesterday, i called for a hearing to discuss how to approach this devastating reduction in federal funding. i know we will all work are to address it and to fulfill our obligation to those living with and at risk for hiv aids. thank you, and i ask for your support. >supervisor chu: thank you for your statement. why don't go to the department. >> thank you. greg white appeared department of public health. thank you for considering this item. as you know, our ryan white

funding of about $25 million per year, we were recently informed that we would take a reduction in our funding effective march 1, 2012. that funding is primarily the stop loss portion of the funding. it is equivalent to about $4.2 million to the city. the appropriation before you is a level of funding sufficient to replace that lost funding through the end of the fiscal year. the thought process here is that we are on a very tight timeline. notification of the loss of funding was received by the city within the last couple of months. that does not leave us much time to react and respond. the hope here is to be able to appropriate money to get us through the end of the year. then there is a larger policy

questions, discussion to be had with the mayor and board of supervisors about the way things look, going forward, that can happen as part of the budget deliberations and in the context of your other decision. this funding would allow us to remain all through the end of the fiscal year and to keep those services intact. the budget analyst has looked at our initial legislation that was submitted and made some recommendations. we agree with those recommendations, and thanks to the budget analyst for identifying that correction. the amendment proposed in the budget analyst report is -- again, we agree with that, will be sufficient to keep us at the level of funding we are currently at through the end of the fiscal year. happy to answer any questions. supervisor chu: questions about any federal maintenance of effort impact on this allocation. the federal government often makes us maintain a certain level of funding for certain

projects in order to receive any new funding. how would this be considered? would we be able to meet the maintenance of efforts requirements simple because our budget for the department of public health will go up by that much anyhow? could you explain that? >> very good question. that has been a question surrounding this. as you know, the stop-loss funding has been in jeopardy in several occasions in the past. occasionally, the funding has been protected, but each time we face the question, and amendment of the effort issue has come up. in the past, the way the maintenance of effort formula was calculated was based on our level of general fund contribution to these services. an increase in our general fund appropriation, assuming there was an ongoing increase, would have increased our maintenance of effort requirement.

as of a couple of years ago, there was a change in how the maintenance of effort for the is calculated. set of criteria that we used to determine our level of maintenance effort. that calculation will remain stable. the level of general fund appropriation in and of itself does not increase our maintenance of effort requirement. we are now allowed, after the change in how the threshold is calculated, to make an additional appropriation without resetting the base line. our base line will remain at the level that is currently and any level agreed to by the county and federal government. supervisor chu: thank you. let's go to the budget analyst report. >> members of the committee, on page 3 of our report, we state we estimate the reduction in the requested -- in the federal ryan grant funds for the four-month period, requested from march 12001 -- 2011 --

therefore, we recommend you amend the proposed ordinance to reduce the appropriation by $272,138. to our record amount of 152472. you propose the ordnance as recommended. supervisor chu: i know many of us are aware of the portfolio services provided through these programs. for the public identification, what would this $1.5 million due from the period of march through june? what would it be for? >> a chevy health services. basically, it would prevent us from having to implement quickly andcut across the board0

of our providers, with no additional intent. >> -- supervisor chu: great. what kind of services are provided? >> primary medical care, support services that would include anything? benefits to hospice care, etc.. supervisor chu: does it include hospice services? >> there is a medical case management connected to housing, but it is separate. supervisor chu: thank you. let's item that some -- let's open this item to public comment. we have three spiked -- three speaker cards. [reads names] >> hello, my name is mike smith. i am the president of the hiv aids provider's network, the consortium of nonprofit agencies

that provide services to people with aids in san francisco. i would like to thank the mayor and the supervisors for moving forward with this so quickly. as the department has stated, based on the new numbers from mr. rose, these funds are very necessary and will allow us to maintain safety net services for people with hiv for an interim as we work collaborative the with the city to look at what to do over a longer period of time. without stepping out on behalf of the city -- without the stepping up on the behalf of the city, we would be looking at a variety of cuts to a number of programs that the city takes great pride in presenting. it would be very disruptive to just cut those back for four months, if there is no longer term solution in the new year. staff would be laid off and

changes would take effect that would be hard to reinstate when there might be opportunity for a longer-term solution. be very much appreciate the support on this motion. supervisor chu: next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is lee jewel. i am one of the cochairs on the hiv council. i am also a person with hiv. i have an aids diagnosis. i rely on these care services. i know how important they are two members of our community who are most at need of these services. i hope that you will support this amendment. we do understand that this city is facing very hard times. the economy is bad across the country. we have continued to face reductions in our grants, year after year. this would be a substantial blow to us. we look forward to your supporting our amendment.

supervisor chu: thank you. next speaker. >> good morning, supervisors. happy new year. we are with the community planning group responsible for allocating federal dollars. as a part of our deliberation, we are required to look at the needs of people who live with hiv, including underinsured and low-income people. we have reduced services as our federal grant has dropped. i want you to hear from us on the planning council that there are no other cuts that can be made to these life-saving services without losing essential programs that are keeping people with hiv alive. these are budget cuts that can very well mean life or death for people living with hiv in san and cisco. we are asking for your support for this short term replacement

of federal funds and we look forward to working with you, the health department, and the mayor's office, to come up with longer-term solutions. supervisor chu: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is douglas. i would like to speak on behalf of this ordinance. it is something that is necessary. the month -- the money would benefit so many patients. as a precaution, i would like to thank the budget analyst for revising the amount downward. i am sure that he had good reason to. i think that this is a good idea, revising the amount down word, for whatever reason he sees fit. to use this money effectively, i would like to say for -- who knows how many times -- the department of public health must be closely monitored to

avoid inefficiency. in my 20 years of expense -- expertise -- experience, i got into many difficult questions surrounding waste and inefficiency. that if we were going to use this money for the benefit of the patient, we should closely monitor the department of public health. i will make the recommendation that they must be audited formally as a complete unit and, according to my information, that has never been done in the history of the d p h. let's do the audit and use the money effectively so that the patients benefit the most. thank you. supervisor chu: thank you. are there any other speakers on this item? item number four? seeing no one, the item is closed. supervisor kim? supervisor kim: how much money

is currently left in our state revenue fund now? maybe i will ask my second question as well. how much more do we anticipate, given the recent needs from the state? i want to get a sense for what we have lost and how much we are expecting in supplementals before the 30th of june. why is it that we are not de appropriating the entire amount, given that the adult day health centers are now funded by the state? >> to the chair, supervisor kim, as shown on page 3-4 of the report, if you approve and then fine return on the

balance, 1.5 million back to the state revenue last reserve fund, there will be a new balance. however, i would add that this comment was written without our recommended reduction of the $200,000 plus, so you would add an additional $200,000 to the $13.2 million balance. supervisor kim: that was my misunderstanding. i thought that we were only de appropriating the amount that is now being requested. but it is the entire dollar amount? >> correct. the balance would go back into the state revenue reserve fund. supervisor kim: this is the only supplemental be made to the state reserve? >> i would defer to the mayor's

office about what they have pending before them. supervisor chu: from the mayor's budget office, i believe that we have allocated a certain amount for the adult day care. it wound up not being used. there was a previous request for child care subsidies, but that was not the source of money. it was actually through dpys. i believe that that is all for now supervisor kim: i what -- for now. supervisor kim: i wanted to get a sense of what we might be anticipating, since there are so many worthy funds to come before us. >> good morning. we are working on a six month budget status report, which will be completed likely on february 8, or thereabouts. part of that analysis, they are working for the upcoming week and it includes reconciling reserves. but we do not know about the cuts, the biggest picture beyond

the reductions talked about here, there is continued uncertainty regarding a series of losses of federal or state money and the department of public health. of course, there is the news regarding the dissolution of the redevelopment agency and the financial impact of that, which will be provided in the report. there are reductions that have been approved by the state legislature for other social service programs in social -- in san francisco. many of them have been approved by the courts, and they may ultimately wind up being implemented. and then there is the reduction where there are changes in a way that the city is required to reimburse the state for certain expenses for juvenile probation that are under way and somewhat driven by the population. those are the big picture costs that you have either not seen as

supplementals -- many of them are still uncertain because they are being temporarily blocked by the courts and they may not ultimately wind up being implemented by the state. we will give you a much fuller update on the reserve and the remaining cuts to be mayor may not see at the end of the fiscal year. supervisor kim: i do plan on supporting this today. i think that this is a good use of our state reserve loss funds. i think that these services are incredibly important. similar to adult day health care, a lot of the services that people depend on through june until we can fear out how to fill in gaps. but it would be important to get a sense of the fund. i know that everything coming to us will be just as important to lots of members of our community. we want a sense of how we are looking at that overall $15 million. supervisor avalos: i will be

supportive of this supplemental as well. i also want to make sure that we are doing our due diligence to make sure that we can find the funding to keep the programs going into the next fiscal year as well. key life giving in life affirming services, we want to make sure we can carry on with them. supervisor chu: to lie detect a motion to amend the item as recommended by the budget analyst? a reduction from the $1,846,000 to $1,500,000? and the department agrees with that. we can take that without objection. on the item itself? supervisor chu: motion to send it forward. -- supervisor avalos: motion to send it forward as articulated. supervisor chu: i am fine with sending this forward, but i want

to articulate my reservations about the certainty for funding in the upcoming year. we are competing with a lot of different, very worthy causes, whether it is igshss or cuts to other programs. i am not sure what will happen in the coming year, it is to be determined. again, i hope that people understand that this one action to restore the full value of its for the remainder of this year, there is still a question as to what will be possible for the next year. i want to be sure that everyone's here is aware of that and that that is actually on the public record as well. i want to thank all the members of the public that came to speak on this issue. we have a motion and we will take that without objection. ok.

just a notice on this item, since it was amended can i ask with the department to work with our clerk to make sure that we have copies of any amended legislation? we have had problems in the past where we have not gotten be amended issue ended held up our agenda for the board. with that, we are adjourned. thank you.

>> hello. 9 judge terri l. jackson. the court is now recruiting prospective civil grand jurors. our goal is to develop a pool of candidates that is inclusive of all segments of our city's population. >> the jury conducts investigations and publishes findings and recommendations. these reports them become a key part of the civic dialog on how we can make san francisco a better place to live and work. >> i want to encourage anyone that is on the fence, is considering participating as a grand jury member, to do so. >> so if you are interested in our local city government and

would like to work with 18 other enthusiastic citizens committed to improving its operations, i encourage you to consider applying for service on the civil grand jury. >> for more information, visit the civil grand jury website at sfgov.org/courts or call