they leave probation. we think this is a very conservative recommendation and they will be adequately staffed, especially once they start hiring the eight vacant positions. in terms of the car, same thing, we're recommending one car for the one position. we think that that would be adequate given their ratio of one car per two probation officers. >> [inaudible] recommendation, madam chair, on page 54. the department has provided us with documentation on their pending lease, and we feel that that recommendation now should be withdrawn so there will be no reserve recommendation from the budget analyst. ok, thank you very much. no additional questions on this item, colleagues? from my understanding, the

budget analyst has withdrawn the reserve recommendation that is on page 54. there are still outstanding areas on page 52 and 53. the department is in disagreement with three of the four items, from my understanding. colleagues, some thoughts on this? supervisor kim? supervisor kim: it seems like we have been holding off on some of these decisions until later, and i am more than happy to defer to the committee on that. i will, however, say that i plan on supporting the adult probation department in their asks in not taking action on the budget analyst recommendations for these items. but i do think you could do one last car. i do not see it. but i think approving two cars is appropriate given that there are three staff members been

approved in this action. but i am happy to hold off on this action until later. supervisor chu: thank you. i have been the one saying let's defer until we have more information, particularly for the temporary-miscellaneous areas. that is where i have been fuzzy about the recommendation. i do, however, think that in terms of the deputy probation officers, although i do understand what you're asking for them and support that end in the budget analyst has appropriately asked that you have additional staffing, i am concerned that you do have the existing eight vacant positions. for me, yes lasorda from the place that i have asked for deferral on issues -- i am sorta from the place that i have asked for deferral until we have more information. but it is concerning to me that when we get the supplemental for additional deputy probation officers that that was not with the money was spent on. but i know your department has done wonderful work under your leadership i am concerned that you have deputy probation officers that are currently vacant.

so i just want to express my thoughts about that. supervisor cohen? supervisor cohen: thank you. chief, and steny have eight vacant slots. can you tell me when you have plans to fill them? >> july. supervisor cohen: 8, all at one time? >> actually, i will be hiring 20 in july. it has been delayed because the list tired. so i cannot hire the deputy probation until we had a full test. then we did the test and interviews. and we put those individuals in the background back in april, but it takes 90 days to get a background. so that is the only reason that we have the vacancies, and they will all be filled in july. and they all have to go through a minimum of nine weeks' training. and, chairman chu, i want to

make sure that i adequately said that the temporary help, the majority, we had prop f retirees doing actual probation work. we had probation aides actually supporting probation work. and there were some administered of things, but we had to basically put those into place, policies and other things that we were working on. so that is what we did. we just did not go take -- and we utilize salary savings, department all salary savings, which includes, but not only the probation positions, but to answer the question, they will all be filled in july. and all those caseloads will be brought up. also, we get those packets 120 days ahead of time from the prison, and we know projections. my numbers have been right on. that is why i am asking for the positions now and not in the second year. again, it would take us that

whole time all over again. our backgrounds will not be done. the bottom line is that i truly believe in my projections and that the caseloads will be here. supervisor cohen: i wanted to weigh in a little bit representing my neighborhoods in the city. really keyed into the need for public safety. public safety does not just stop with the police department, does not stop with the sheriff's department, but i see adult probation during realignment being a very important partner in our public safety and reentry time that we're living in. i am actually inclined to support the chief on her budget

request. i do share the same concerns as supervisor kim, possibly not two cars, but one. but being a partner with you and public safety and a lot of the folks that are coming back to the community are nestled into the southeastern neighborhood. i do feel that sense of urgency. i feel that stress and can see from analysis that the police department is providing me, the stress that it is providing on the community. and i would like to continue to support you and your efforts through your budget request. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor. supervisor chu: thank you. colleagues, there was one area where there was agreement and that is the attrition savings. do we have a motion to accept that? we will take that without objection.

again, the department and the budget analyst did remove the reserve recommendation. on the remainder of the items, as supervisor wiener and supervisor kim expressed, perhaps we can carry these over. but i am not sure that the tiberi miscellaneous should be held at exactly what it is. i am not sure i am convinced about the ability for the department to hire those probation officers. i'd like to see more information on that. thank you. let's move on to the human services agency. >> supervisors, director of the human services agency. we have had great discussions with the budget analyst over the last week and have come to

agreement on all of the recommendations except for one or two, but they're the same issue, just separate recommendations. and that is the recommendation on is82 -- on page 82 regarding the 0922 manager that would be overseen the lgbt task force and work on it dementia for seniors. and the director is here to speak to that if you like more details. supervisor chu: thank you. >> again, i would like to thank the office for the solution we have had to most of the items that were recommended, but we are in disagreement on the 0922 manager position. it has been recommended to move to an 1824. the department has been doing a lot of strategic work on various

issues over the last especially five years. recently, we have undertaken the work-related to managed care, the moving of the disabled population into managed care and dual eligible projects happening within california. that has resulted in us needing to take some of the staff that have been working on some of our other strategic work away from the work, and that is especially true around our dementia strategic plan. we have had to move because there is an imperative around the managed care work to move staff from one to the other. you may remember that the dementia strategic plan is a 10- year plan. we are in the second, moving into the third year of that. we have learned a lot in those first two years related to the level of staff that is needed to do the work and the staff time related to that. in addition to that, recently, you may remember -- certainly,

supervisor, you remember the hearing in the spring related to lgbt seniors, and we will be moving shortly on creating a task force that will be doing investigations and putting a plant together. that is additional work coming our way, but we're not staffed up to do. in terms of the recommendation for 1824, the department has spent an enormous amount of time doing this kind of strategic work. we're very clear about the staff and the qualification that person needs to bring to the various levels of work. there are times when an analyst is the appropriate position. in this case, neither of these projects are. this person will be working with executive directors from the nonprofit community, as well as working with the mayor's office and members of the board. in terms of really drilling to the point in bringing people together around the key items

around both of these issues. for example, on the dementia care strategic plan, we're far enough since the -- enough into the implementation to realize that although we have an 85 + population that is growing quickly, and one out of every two of those folks has dementia, we really do not have safe places for those folks to be. again, working with the various folks and around that issue. i also wanted to comment that we have recommended that we move this position to 20-25 hours per week to resulting in a $42,000 savings over the year. when you look at our recommendation versus the analyst recommendation, and if you had them full-time, that was only about the $4,000 difference in those positions. supervisor chu: thank you very

much. from my understanding, the department is in agreement with all of the items on page 83, one 83, 84, 85, and a project on page 87. with regard to the policy recommendation on page 86, that is tied to the item on the manager principal analyst position on page 82 where the department is still providing to the board and the budget analyst at likewise savings by reducing full-time positions to a part- time position, correct? the budget analysts. >> there are components to the recommendation, what is the exception. we're not recommending it, so we can go down to 9.24 hire date of august 1. the second part is consistent with other recommendations, recommending this is manager 1. we don't believe this is an

appropriate classification. they specified that management positions typically meant supervise staff and this is not a position that will be supervising staff. and the remainder, because this is a new program, we consider this to be a policy called for the board of supervisors because it will give the determination if they want this program. so that i understand the difference, -- the the understan supervisor kim: the understand the difference, is in addition? -- so that i understand the difference, is it in addition? of day.

>> of the budget analyst recommendation represents a $16,000 savings to us. the department's alternative is a $200,000 plus addition. >> any colleagues have comments? >> de you have someone in place currently? i had a question about the interim exceptions. do you have someone in place this week that will be able to start on july 1? >> we have someone we have been working with. >> somewhat on his staff being paid part-time? thank you. >> we appreciate the budget

analyst and the department able to come to agreement on the vast majority of disagreements. it was well over $1 million. we're down to under $100,000 of disagreement over one position. when we first did the lgbt taskforce legislation, we had initially anticipated the task force would be staffed without adding headcount. we had discussions about that. when i first saw this, i was a little bit apprehensive. but in thinking about it, and i am convinced that it is appropriate for a couple reasons. it is a part-time positions and it has been reduced beyond what it was before.

there is also a to pinpoint issue that this is not just for the lgbt task force, there is a need for staffing for the dementia related network. this would be a low-level and clerical ministerial support in terms of the agenda and the minutes. given the growing senior population in the city and our need to grapple with those issues, i am convinced that a part-time higher level positions to that the person can do the substantive policy work, it is warranted. i was skeptical at first, but i am convinced this is appropriate. i suggest that we support the department on this. supervisor kim: i was not aware this was a part-time position.

>> we started looking at it as a full-time position, but we have come to the conclusion that we could use part-time and it would work for us. .625. supervisor kim: one other question on pragmatic hiring by july 1. now you have someone in mind, but is there a process you have to go through before you hire the individual? >> not even debating in this position exists, but the interim position i still have trouble with. why do we need to approve that when it is next week? >> we believe that with this particular classification, we will have less of the allied time to put someone in place than any other position.

supervisor kim: but you will not be able to hire by july 1. >> august 1 will be fine. supervisor chu: if there are no other questions, anything else? given that we have a majority of agreement from the department and also that there is an alternative to one of the recommendations that seems to make sense, i would like to propose that perhaps we accept all of the budget analyst recommendations where they currently have an agreement with the budget analysts. the project goes out on page 87, we do not accept the policy recommendation on page 86. and related to the last recommendation that state's the $16,000. instead, we will take the

recommendation to have a 0922 position only at part time. also to allow it to begin august 1, that would result, and my understanding, $42,000 in savings plus $16,000 roughly in savings. can we entertain that motion? supervisor avalos: got was very well stated. i will support this motion and also was a co-sponsor. how wanted to make sure i said supervisor chu: we have that motion on the floor and we will do that without objection. he will now go to the department

of public health. >> good afternoon, supervisors. how want to thank the staff, particularly pemoline. and we are in agreement on a list of amended recommendations. we're not in agreement with the policy recommendation regarding the staffing necessary for the whole office. supervisor chu: can we go to the regular recommendations first? >> as the department indicated, we are in agreement with everything on page 67 with the exception of we're withdrawing $465,000 for professional and specialized services. on 67, the department is in

agreement with everything on page 68. on page 69, the department agrees with the revised recommendation that would increase specialized services by $150,000 so that it would go from $5.6 million to $5 million .3 million. the amount would b 5 millioe --e recommendations you do not see at all. one is a psychiatric social worker with related benefits. it is to reduce to .92 the 2012 start date.

a savings of 9840. an additional $40,000, so the totals would be changed in 12- 13. the total savings would be 951,000. i'm sorry. 848,972 in 12-13 to include 522 and an ongoing of 605450. in the second year of 1314, there woudl be an ongoing savings and the department is

an agreement with all of these recommendations. supervisor avalos: just a question about i have been hearing from a lot of people about the graveyard shift and apparently there was going to be a change about creating a joint system with general hospital, but it looks like the construction has not been able -- hope the change hasn't been enabled. as there been a reversal? >> we are reducing to telephone operators and we found there were only taking 10 calls. we are moving that to a nursing support staff. they will be trained in getting the necessary equipment. the other staff will have to be trained to do that to receive this savings of $140,000 doing

that. there is a transfer of function. supervisor avalos: the staff is being laid off? >> we will try to find positions for them, but it could be an outcome of that. this is part of the efficiency in order to not cut other services. supervisor avalos: i have heard reports that we have -- at what we have will be not adequate. >> we believe it is adequate and the staff will not take on those responsibilities until they are trained. the equipment is there to enable them to do that work. this is a non-clinical service that even the folks there have to be trained in these areas of the emergency operation.

that can be trained to other staff. in fact, they will be closer to the nursing office to do that. supervisor cohen: how many persons could lose their position? >> two full time fte's. >> you are going to eliminate -- >> senior telephone operators. supervisor cohen: and we are moving the nursing staff? >> just the graveyard shift. supervisor chu: in terms of those positions, generally what is the volume of telephone calls that come in for that service? >> i don't know during the daytime, but i assume we can give you that. during the daytime they take a lot of calls from outside people that want to visit their loved ones in the hospital.

the volume is much higher. but during the nighttime, there're only 10 calls a night. supervisor chu: we have agreement on a number of recommendations at the other is the outstanding policy question. i know that bevin dufty is here to speak as well, but before we do that, can we accept the budget analyst recommendations except for the areas where they have articulated a change. on page 67, the specialized service reduction has been withdrawn. on page 69, it has been increased by $150,000 in terms of cuts. the budget analyst has articulated additional cuts on

the current expenses worth 50,000. and a later start date for psychiatric workers that would result in savings of 848 -- i am sorry, $98,000. >> is $9,840. in the psychiatric work is just a starting time and the other expenses are $40,000. supervisor chu: do we have that motion? without objection. >> if i may talk a little bit about the staffing of the whole office. these positions are really essential for the department of public health. i can tell you that since he has been in this office, i speak to him if not bailey, multiple

times a day to try to coordinate with so that staff is important. i hope you know my support for that. supervisor chu: thank you, director garcia. another request last week, so in regard to these, if you can come up and share information with the committee. >> good morning. and do you want to ask a question or do you and me to talk for a second? supervisor kim: speaking generally to these positions listed under the policy recommendations, i know some questions had come out and this is within the department so i apologize for not bringing you up prior. just some questions regarding the recent budget requests around enhancing shelter staff

and our housing rental subsidy program. i know is in large part with initiatives with ho. >> i will try to blend them together. lopez tried to look at outcomes for individuals in support of public and affordable housing, living in the continuum of housing services and the continuance of families striving to become successful. to speak to your question correctly, there was a hearing about shelter access earlier this spring and it brought a lot of different issues and challenges. the city has faced very difficult budget times, so the focus has been on preventing cuts. i think this is very different focusing on poverty for the city. there is an area where there is a level of