the public. everything from traditional camps to new camps, skateboarding. we go shark fishing, believe it or not. we take teens up to camp meter. we give them a week of overnight camp. recreation programming is really vital. another thing we tried to do to help support families are family events and improve park remedies. we have structure were we offer for annual family of events, and all of us have been benefited at one time or another. we have playday on the last year, there were 10,000 people coming to scaregroveouou halloween. friendly events, like the world

cup showings the last couple of years. a women's world cup event, the final in japan-usa. it was great to see thousands of what were mostly families ered in ou approach has also been geared towards families were you can now rent a bike and one part anan it toto working with the san francisco bike coalition. it will definitely be family ly. we have more farmers' markets hough of the bread. we will see 500 people, many families gathering. it is a place to eat, to socialize and have fun. we continue our closure over the weekend.

it is now closed on both saturdays and sundays. it creates more opportunities for young families teaching kids out of bike. runners, walkers, we work very closely to bring and recreation and healthy family options. something that we don't talk a lot about, but in terms of making the city livable, every ywe re on 430,000 hours. they help us to operate more efficiently. they are also getting our kids to become park stewards, and by getting their hands dirty, they take a vested interest. i know that you grew up here and spent time in the neighborhoods. i think you were a member of my staff at one point.

i think all three of you appreciate how important it is to volunteer and get your hands dirty. we believe it has an impact on the decision by kid growing up to stay in the city. we just kicked off a program where we are working with teens and giving them a monthly stipend. they will get a monthly environmental education in storage chip program. those are some of the strategies we have been using to keep families happy and thriving. in 2005, did a pretty nsivee study of determined that we woul have 35 soccer and 30 baseball and softball ff just meet demand as it was in 2005. it was growing significantly.

we needed the 30-35 more, we have about 80. we are seeing significant growth in terms of the youth sports teams. we have seen a 25% increase in sports teams and sports a hours since 2009. we have had a dramatic increase in popularity and girls' sports that is a great thing. while a lot of them were dominated by mostly other schools, we are seeing that through the schools themselves, they form their own teams getting more involved. some have partners. in 2006, after this study, we embarked upon a partnership

with the feiel -- field foundation. you hear it all the time, my kid can't get a feel the practice. we're going to the peninsula or the east bay. it coincided with the beginning of little league season. seventh of families moved to the suburbs because they could not get their kids on a ball team. i am hopeful that with the shipyard development project that it will include some oilfields over time, but we know is a long way away. we have no more land. through the partnership with the city feels that includes a synthetic turf and permit any

reservation efficiencies, we can increase -- which was to a park that was not that well populated. you will see hundreds and hundreds of people out there. between the new fields and changes we have made to the permit. a parent aided our system and said screw it, we will try to fix the system. she is tough but she has squeezed out more and more field space. that is how we met the extra 25%. the demand keeps growing. girls softball is a growing sport. soccer is off the charts right

now. we have a couple of projects in the pipeline and it will be a synthetic turf project. those projects, obviously you are aware of them. it will add an additional number of hours. supervisor farrell: does that exhausted the city field foundation? >> yep. that's it. in the 2012 parks bond, the advantage to the synthetic turf fields, they don't need to rest. fields need the rest. three months of every year. with this, we get 12 months of play instead of nine months. we don't have rain-outs. fields are in a safer state of being.

lights squeeze extra play out of it. there is a significant difference in the quality of life for our families and our kids. supervisor farrell: one anecdote that you mentioned about little league field, i worked as a park director growing up and saw a bunch of little league teams trying out. they were so excited to have their kids on the field for the first time. they did talk about the fact that they were going out to treasure island at best. i remember going to the park's growing up. i thought that growing up in the city was a great way to get exposure everywhere and the city.

playing us of " team, field hockey, it was a way to interact with the economy. >> i am living in it. i have growth that plays soccer. -- girls that play soccer. i am in five-seven different facilities. we also have to get out to treasure island. we'll be in moraga this week. supervisor farrell: good luck with that. >> we need more sports fields. supervisor farrell: you have mentioned the synthetic fields,

and some of that is controversial. my question is, as you look to the future, we live in a climate in san francisco. is this the only way to go from your point of view going forward that we will be able to actually create an awful field for everyone going forward? >> is fundamentally important if we want other families to live here. if we want to keep families here and we want to keep them healthy, we need to figure out strategies to squeeze more hours out of the field that we have, or the other option is to figure out a way to build new ones. the first strategy is probably a

lot more of an outside and a lot more potential from the second one. i am hopeful that as we continue, the southeast continues to develop the long- term planning process to think about the need for parks or there is rejuvenation, landscapes, and beautification, but a place where the kids can play. it is a story that has been before you many times, but it is investment. if we are going to do the mission that families need us to do, the city is committed to keeping families and keeping them happy, healthy, and thriving, as a matter of public policy, we have to make a decision to invest more.

which of 12% of the city's land, less than 2% of the general fund. we have been asked to reduce our spending over the last seven years. the public demand has not dissipated. and if we want to keep the families that we have, and we have more families that need and demand the services, it is only going to increase. i would much rather see haunt and investment in playgrounds and public recreation. it is critical. the public agrees. 82% of the respondents said that the city's recreation and park department he more funding. eight out of 10 respondents

spoke -- focused on playground equipment. maintaining the safety is extremely important. president chiu, you asked about the department doing a lot of things. there are a handful of the apartments that spend a lot of time focused on this. a lot of departments really share this mission. i agree it would be important to come up with a metric to figure out how we are doing. in terms of whether the metric is based on out migration or growth in public-school enrollments for growth in permits, you can probably figure that out. i am optimistic about the passion. we are all focused on this, we want this.

do not underestimate the impact that our parks and recreational amenities play in this equation. what i thought i would do is to end a little bit on a happy note. president chiu: i recognize that every department needs a set of metrics to keep in to make sure that we are achieving what we need to achieve. while it may not be one metric, it would be helpful for us to come to an agreement to say, what would be useful for us to drive toward? it is hard when the public looks of the millions of dollars we spend and everyone of these areas. if the metric is serving our families, how do we think about that? i'm looking at you and the

department heads to tell us what you think ought to be the metric so that you can come back to us to say we are making headway or we are not for what ever good or less than good reasons. >> what i wanted to end with, it has been a rather long hearing, if i can find it here, i mentioned that we have -- [unintelligible]

[chanting] >> all right. supervisor farrell: thank you, phil. we appreciate the presentation. we'll try to speed things up here. dan kelly, then you for being here from our human services agency to give a little bit of overview from your department and your perspective. >> i oversee planning for human services agency. our agency has to departments, the department of human services that includes medical, food

stamps, children's protective services, etcetera. our perspective is maybe a little broader, and the lenses basically poverty. we see family flight not isolation, but part of broader trends. the fight of african americans from the city and the alarming rise in social isolation among san franciscans, particularly low-incumbeome ones. it doesn't show very well. can that be centered? this was a great chart. the title, in particular. it shoews the adult and child

population. san francisco has always had very few children. if we look back to the 50s, the baby boom population, the sixties, white families started to migrate from the suburbs. we continue to have very low number of cities. we have fewer joe then than any other major city in the nation. -- if your children than any other major city in the nation. it is so much more acute because we have so many few were to begin with. supervisor farrell: the lowest percentage of any other major city in the country? >> yes, it has been true for several decades. manhattan is now at 15 something.

at 2000, our proportion was 14.5%, manhattan was 18.5%. even looking for comparisons, that would be the best i can think of. i want to talk about it in the context of this growing trend of economic inequality. again, we are concerned mostly with low-income families. it measures income distribution in the city. if one person in the city that all of the income, this measure would be 1.0. if it was distributed evenly among everybody, if it would bezero. -- be zero. it shows a tremendous leap in inequality in the city. it is a trend nationwide.

it is accentuated in san francisco, a very acute. it has a lot of different applications including families. it creates this two-year community. -- two-tiered community. it leads to the awful certainty with which we can say at the age of 5, what are the outcome's going to be in terms of education and so forth? thinking about that, what you see as the growth of highly educated persons in san francisco related to the knowledge economy. but you see, we have grown much higher in terms of the percentage of people with

college degrees. i think we are neck-and-neck with seattle for our lead in the nation. people with more education make more money. they drive up the cost of everything. in looking at this, imagine my department's challenge in finding work for families when they have such educational deficits. this is a little bit dated, i took it from the office of economic work force development. showing gains and losses in terms of and come. this is 1990 to 2000. you see the tremendous growth -of persons with advanced degrees at the drop of people with high school degrees.

they are probably immigrants living in an insulated labour market. this shows the age migration and san francisco between 1990 and 2010. it confirms some of the things discussed earlier. on the left is lost, on the right is gain. a slight loss for kids under five, right? but that it really accelerates when they reach school age. we have a lot of families that have children, how they move when their kids are school age. we point out a couple of other things, a huge increase. we have a lot of young adults without dependants live for five

years or whatever. and we have had a huge increase, over the age of the 45 that are at the maximum level of and come that maybe are not raising children at that point. i also want to point out the seniors there. people migrated out. you also see the huge number of very old seniors, it was a question earlier about seniors in the city. we have more seniors than any other community. it is about 16% or 17%. seniors you're very different. here there are very much influenced by immigration. they are much poorer and likely to be over the age of 80

and 75. they are less educated. 20% don't have a high-school degree. you can see them as a remnant of an earlier economic era. you could have a middle-class life in san francisco. speaking of seniors, i want to take a moment to talk about all the ramifications of their being so few children in the city. this shows in-home support services and compares san francisco to the 10 largest counties. this is people in support services, a program that provides care so that seniors and persons with disabilities can stay at home. we are more than double the next highest county. part of what that is is we have older persons that grew up here, raised their children, and their

children can't afford to raise their families here. they have moved to other communities, east bay, ariz., other states. it creates a tremendous isolation that relies on formal networks rather than more informal ones. there was a survey of seniors across 12 cities in the united states, only 24% of seniors have a child within 20 minutes of them. in most cities, it was over 40%. there were tremendous implications for the support systems. we talked about the flight of families in terms of ethnicity. put it in the broader context here of the city's history. we have a tremendous influx of

african-americans during the war. it started to decline about 1980. and especially the chinese rising at the same time. if you think about ethnic groups, often sociologists think about them competing for scarce resources. for most cities, it would be described as latino and african- american. when you look at the home buying patterns, even in 2000, only a bare majority were african american anymore. you can see the asian, pacific islanders moving into the southeast part of the city.

this breaks down race and ethnicity by age group. the bar is miners, the dark one on the right would be seniors. whites tend to be an old population. african americans are younger. asian/pacific islanders have the largest groups across the board but they also have a large number of seniors. latinos are very young, 14% of the population. 22 % of the children in the city. this shows between 1990, and this is another analysis that we did using the american communities survey from 2006 to 2008.

you see the huge loss of african-american children. you see a huge number of african-americans. we have to point out, in 1990, you weren't able to put multiple choice. part of this, there is a huge loss of african-americans. we wanted to know where they went. other cities have had large losses of african-americans. oakland dropped between 1990 and 2008. richmond from 43 to 27. you look at where they went, and you see the suburbs between san francisco and sacramento is where many of the african- americans left during that time.

for example, the number of african-americans grew by 33,000. antioch had 1700 african americans, today over 18,000. going back to the first chart, you saw white families leaving in the '60s and '70s. now we have african-american families moved into the suburbs. a lot of this movement occurred before the recession. many of these are working class families. they have moved to the suburbs or the safety net is nowhere near as strong as in san francisco. the other concern about this with african-americans is that