and additionally, $800,000 of the infrastructure projects required by the lease disposition agreement with the unfunded, so that is a total of $6.5 million, and the port reports to us that the mayor's office intends to include the 2012/2013 budget. in that, $4.9 million of general fund monies, $800,000 america's cup contribution money totaling $5.7 million, so that would take care of the phase one of the pier 27 cruise terminal project. additionally, $800,000 of america's cup organizing committee contribution to fund the infrastructure project requirements where there is a shortfall of that $800,000. we recommend all of these projects are totally consistent with prior board of supervisors policy approvals. we recommend you approve the ordinance on item six.

on items seven, -- on item 7, regarding the debt service of these certificates of participation, the total would be $71.2 million. that includes $38 million for project costs and about $32.7 million for estimated interest payments. the average annual debt service based on a 5.3% interest rate, as reported by -- or estimated, would be a total of $2,410,322 per year. also, we do report on page 8 that we concur with the port that they do have the ability to repay the debt, and we recommend that you approve this resolution, which again is consistent with your prior policy actions. supervisor chu: thank you.

while we open these items up for public comment? are there members of the public who wish to speak on items 6 and 7? >> it is kind of surprising that they decided to take charge of this catamaran in choppy waters. having said that, since i know we have a number of companies that are lbe's, went through the process only to find out now that the port is stepping into its general fund, and a budget analyst and controller's office and the board of supervisors they that that type of model

where dpw somehow is left out, but our engineering is given more than any other company would ask for and will be able to complete this project. some of you may not understand what i'm saying, but i hope you understand it in three or four months' time. i find it very surprising that nothing came before the land use. we have spent millions of dollars on pier 7. i would like the budget analyst or whoever is in charge to give me some analysis on that contract. having said that again, whatever the port does, this public trust

land that belongs to northern california, they should make every opportunity to give us jobs. thank you very much for your time. supervisor chu: thank you. are there other members of the public who wish to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> i believe there was an indication from the department that there was a word in the title that needs to be eliminated. >> it was a point of clarification. it is not necessary, but it is addressed throughout the resolution. supervisor chu: so no amendment is requested? the item is before us. do we have a motion to send the item forward with recommendation? we do have a second, and we will do that without objection. thank you. >> item 8, resolution approving

fiscal year 2012-2013 community development block grant program authorizing the mayor on behalf of the city and county of san francisco to apply for, accept, and expend the city's community development block grant program in thailand from the u.s. department of housing and urban development. supervisor chu: 90. this is a pretty standard item we see every of that allows the department to be able to go forward to apply for a community development block grant funding from the federal government. there are a number of other programs or funding of grants we would also like to bring together as a package, so i would like to see if we might be able to continue this item for a week to allow those items to catch up with it. before we take that action, while we open up for public comment? are there members of the public who wish to speak on item 8 at this time? seeing none, public comment is closed. do we have a motion to continue the item for a week? we have a motion to continue the

item for a week, and we can do that without objection. we have any other items before us? >> that completes the agenda. supervisor chu: thank you. we are adjourned.

>> welcome to the budget and finance committee. mr. young, you have any announcements for us? >> please silents cellphone that electronic devices. documents submitted as part of the file should be submitted to the clerk. item one, a hearing about the fiscal year 2012-2013 and 2013- 2014. >> we're asking them to come forward to share with us an update and a preview of what to expect when the budget comes to us in june. we're quickly heading in the budget season in may at aegean and i think this is one of the final the apartments that are still left to go to come to present to us.

this is an opportunity for us to hear from the department and hear the ideas and recommendations. and also to provide feedback to the department ahead of when they submit the budget to us. >> the afternoon, supervisors. thank you for the opportunity to present early before the budget is officially delivered it to you. it is a good opportunity to share thinking. there are a few slides i will share with you all. the complete slide is not telling the mayor. -- showing on there. a really high level view of the budget, the department of human

services with the human services agency serving as administrative support to both departments. generally, our budget is about one-third of federal revenue, one-third of state, and the third general fund. it has changed over the last 56 years due to the budget situation and the withdrawal of state support and the shift from state general funds to realign the funds through some recent budget actions in the capital. our total agency budget is close to $700 million. we are thinking in would be proposed for 12-13. about 35% as general fund, 240 million general fund, and the rest is a mix of state funds and

a separate sub-funds in the budget. the human services care fund, and the community living fund as well. i should say of the general fund, the entirety of the $240 million, a large portion of that is non-discretionary general fund. it is required by local statutes as is the county assistance program, or to require an effort to draw down federal and state dollars. when you break down the general fund, really about 100 million is truly discretionary money. that is sort of a ballpark, and when we get a budget reduction target, it is not of the entirety, it is of of the

discretionary money. and of that, there are programs that bear a disproportionate share of the discretionary general fund. for our agency, it is housing and homeless services which is not authorized by any local ordinance and the most is general fund this that go to support shelters and housing for single adults and the homeless prevention programs. >> you have a very large share of your budget that is represented by federal and state funding, generally. it is much larger than many of our other departments because our general fund typically leverage is a draw-down? >> correct, they are generally federally mandated programs. our welfare program for families in california, our federally required ha foster

care program as well as a host of federal matching support services and other programs. supervisor chu: what constitutes the category that you call realignment? >> realignment 1 was crafted in 1991 that goes to support services, wages, foster care, aid payments predominantly. for the second realignment, that as child welfare services, that is the big realignment with the public protection realignment. so not only including what has been talked about a lot, the probation and county jail, the child welfare services was part of the public protection peace.

again, we will reflect that, but it goes to pay for foster care payments, the staffing of workers and adoption assistance. from a policy point of view, it is good for us because it pulls child welfare services out of a state and the general fund debate every year. and it is obviously not subject to reductions by the legislature and the governor. in the break down, i mentioned a mandated portions of the budget, they comprised of federal, state, and local. it would be cash aid to single adults and families. adoption assistance payments for families to adopt, in home supportive services is a big piece of that as well.

and operating consists largely of staff at the contract and services with community partners which is about $135 million. we did a really extensive outreach campaign this year for our budget meeting, a lot of public meetings, and we sought to get input early from various stakeholders have always sought to hold meetings that are focused on particular issues rather than an agency-wide budget form. a number of meetings are community-based organizations around various programs. the department of aging and adult services. we have a commission hearing meetings, the budget town hall meetings with many of you the last number of months, he can

see the rest of the bullets, a lot of issue-specific meetings around the homeless shelter system and early childhood education. in terms of our target, the target we received from the mayor, as you know, it was a contingency for our department that translates to $2.5 million. and $5 million in the general fund. this comes off of the discretionary general fund pot. for the current year, we're able to achieve that. we have over 200 vacant positions which is over and

above our normal rate of attrition, so should the contingency be needed, who would simply move money or save money from the salary line-item. i am really pleased to say that at this point we're projecting to meet our targets, largely through revenue. which translates to know service cuts or reductions internally. the largest share of that is coming from the community first choice option. this is a component of the federal health care reform act that allows states to get a higher level of reimbursement for in-home care programs, seniors, and disabled adults. california has a very robust in- home care program.

the most robust in the country, so the state simply has to submit an application for the fed's describing how that program that the state funds in part, how that meets the criteria for that community first choice option. they have submitted an application and they are currently in dialogue with the medicaid services at the federal level on the eligibility for that revenue. supervisor kim: this is only a one-time revenue option? >> is ongoing. we think it would be retroactive to december, but we're not sure of that and we have not book any revenue for the current year. they submitted the application in december, so it could be six months. some could be february. but because that is more

uncertain, we didn't book it here. >> services provided to other sources, it wouldn't enhance or increase services? >> correct. we have a significant fund share that would offset the general fund portion resulting in $5 million in the general fund. >> it might be retroactive to december, so we might see the level of funding for the current year, but we are not sure? >> correct. >> in 13-14, you're not assuming a level of increase? >> we are, but we're not using that to meet our target. we will meet the target in other ways. we are going to carry the 5 million through, which will be an annual savings. it is not going from 5 million

to 10 million. as you know, [unintelligible] again, the state is very confident. the money is assumed in the state budget as well. >> will have heard a number of meetings in the past where there has been some concern and some desire for the mayor's budget office. >> this is the budget that we propose and the commission is approved.

so the remainder for 12-13 that we are proposing, $500,000 for a position flexed ashdown -- flex-down. we provide salary increases, but we are no longer automatically doing that. these are the eligible for hot- line workers. -- frontline workers. supervisor chu, i know you were at some of these meetings with community partners. our salary savings component is an annual rate. there is a staff turnover as well, we never realized those savings in the budget.

we started in significant savings once we close out all of those contracts. it was service delivery by our contract and community partners. this is something that was enthusiastically supported, or just a question of how do we operational is that. 0-- operationalize that. above the $5 million target is the mirror had directed us to reduce our fte count by 1%. it is about $800,000 in translates to over seven positions. supervisor chu: assuming you will keep some of the vacancies above attrition and d? -- empty?

you talked about having 200 vacancies above what is assumed. >> the fte will come off, but we will continue to have -- but we are trying to catch up in our vacancies in to get to the level where we hit the salary savings target. we are showing a couple of slides, increased demand for our services. we are doing a lot of things or you can only get so far. we are exceeding our target by about $1 million. $1.8 million when you count the fte. we are exceeding our turn get honda and the target for 13-14

will be a little lower. the position flex-down will continue to achieve savings. we think we can get revenue through the aging and adult services programs. a really big shift for the department, in case of an increase, the single indigent adult age 19-64 will be eligible for medical. formerly the ga program will be eligible for medical. it means a shift in the way that we can deliver the cash part of that assistance package.

we are exploring looking at merging the work of certified eligibility for county assistance. by combining them, we think we can -- and the eligibility workers are funded with largely county dollars. by adding that component into medicaid, we think we can draw the federal and state revenue which can save 7500 single adults. they are determined to buy a worker that drives the additional --

supervisor kim: could you clarify, also, in terms of how you do this work with high assume the department of public health, is this actually strictly through hsa? >> the bifurcation on the delivery of medical is the couty nty agency that determines eligibility whereas the services -- but we have to shift them over to meticadical. it will be on the front end. in addition, our office is at

1235 mission, and we think that through technology, we can potentially a lemonade or close the building and serve the population in the current facility. we are in the exploratory phase, but it is a hefty lease cost for us. we are, again, exploring that. supervisor chu: a city facility? >> it's owned by the school district. the contract of savings, we are proposing to increase that to 1

million. the idea is not to reduce services but to capture savings that will accrue for community partners. there are seven more positions. any further questions on that? i want to highlight, briefly, the mayor's emphasis on jobs is one of the highest if not the highest priority. we have a very large jobs program that has been proven very successful with the federal stimulus hah, a large subsidized jobs program that takes state money at a local money to pay private employers to hire individuals that are lower income as well as city

internship type positions. we're proposing to continue the program at roughly $7 million. leverage state dollars. the funds that go toward paying aid will go for wages for individuals. our target was 1000 for the fiscal year, and we have had over 1037 placements, including over 200 in the private sector. the effectiveness of this program is sort of the inital ial placement. we are finding half or more places in the private sector continue when the subsidy ends,

it shows us -- or rather than letting them go through their rehired process. there are a couple of the valuations that we will partner with. we will really test whether this might be the future for employment training and go ahead and find a job, transition into real work. supervisor kim: i do know a couple of individuals that have been part of this program. i wanted to ask you what the success rate is of the