were part of the same time process rfp, two of which require board approval. this is one, you'll see another in a couple weeks with host. we just needed to have a little extra time to finalize the exact location before we could get signed leases to ask for your approval. so, i do apologize for that. i'd be happy to answer any questions you might have and the budget analyst office does recommend approval. >> thank you very much. colleagues, any questions? airport? okay, thank you very much. to the budget legislative analyst. >> [speaker not understood] the airport is now projecting percentage rent on the first year which would result in about $61,000 more than the minimum annual guarantee of $162,000. we recommend that you amend this resolution to provide for retroactive approval. we recommend that you approve the proposed resolution as amended. >> thank you very much. colleagues, are there any questions?

okay. seeing none, at this point i'd like to open up to public comment. any members of the public that wish to comment on item number 2, please step forward. seeing none, public comment is closed. >> i'll move the amendments recommended by the budget analyst. >> okay. we have an amendment -- a motion to approve the amendments to make this retroactive to january 1st. we can do that without opposition. and we have a motion to move this forward -- >> so moved. >> to the full board with recommendation. we can do that without opposition. mr. clerk, can you please call item number 3? >> item number 3, resolution authorizing the office of contract administration to enter into the seventh amendment between the city and xtech (part of the technology store procurement vehicle) in which the amendment shall increase the contract amount from $60,490,000 to $90,580,000 for the period of january 1, 2009, through december 31, 2013. >> thank you very much. mr. jones? >> good morning, supervisors. bill jones, office of contract

administration purchasing. i'm here today, this resolution requests your consideration to approve the [speaker not understood] contract amendment to xtech, one of the technology store vendors for it services and products, and the increase is from 60,490,000 to 90,580,000, an increase of 30,0 90,000 from the period january 1st, 2009 through december 31st, 2013. a short background. the technology store is made up of contracts to provide departments with pre-qualified vendors that provide a wide range of it services and products at competitive prices and in a timely manner. the vendors compete for business within the technology store. the vendors were selected through a competitive process and the original contracts were approved by the board of

supervisors by resolution in december 2008. the contract terms started january 1st, 2009, and was for three years with two one-year options to extend. both options to extend have been exercised and the current term end december 31st, 2013. oca calculated the requested increase that we're requesting on the average expenditures from january through november 2012 and extrapolated those to the end of the contract term, included a two-month contingency and an allowance for ongoing projects. this is a requirements contract meaning that it is available to city departments on an as-needed basis. the contract value is an administrative cap and it is not a commitment to the city to spend that amount. departments may order from any of the technology store vendors

using department funds that have been approved and the board of supervisors annual budgetary process and which is certified by the controller. oca started a process to develop a new competitive solicitation to award new contracts to replace these contracts prior to them when they expire on december 31st, 2013. given the estimated contract values, oc would -- oca would be returning to the board after that solicitation to request your approval for new contracts over 10 million. i would be glad to respond to questions. >> colleagues, any questions? actually, can i just ask, mr. jones, upping the cap $30 million, what are the additional tech expenses that you anticipate just on a bigger level that will come in? so, it looks like we may exceed the limit by march 2013.

what are some examples that these large tech expenses that may be coming through the rest of the year? >> specifically on some of the allowances with you include, there are a number of ongoing large projects that were just started and the departments have not encumbered all of the funds that they anticipate to it. that is about 15 million. there is one with the treasurer tax collector in updating the bills and payments and calculations for that department. there is a replacement system for the port for their asset management system. there is an online endorsing system for the puc. there is also for puc an upgrading of their share point, for collaboration with work flow capabilitieses and enhancement. and lastly, there is a large

puc project for -- to measure their revenue generating services for water and power, and track payments for products and services. * >> thank you for being so thorough. thank you. >> thank you so much. all right. thank you very much. appreciate it. to the budget and legislative analyst? >> mr. chairman, members of the committee, we have reviewed the oca's estimates to compute to this 30 plus million dollars. we believe these estimates are reasonable and we recommend that you approve these proposed resolution. >> thank you. any questions? okay. at this point i'd like to open up to public comment. if there are any members of the public that would like to speak, please step forward. public comment is closed. >> i'll move recommendation, the recommendation. >> second. >> okay, we can move item number 3 to the full board with recommendation. we can do that without opposition. mr. clerk, can you please call item number 6?

>> item number 6, ordinance appropriating $7,169,695 of state revenue loss and $1,800,000 of prior year designated reserves of the children and families commission to fund the de-appropriation of state revenue of $534,406 at the department of public health, and $580,300 at the human services agency, and appropriating uses of $50,000 to the department of juvenile probation, $2,424,528 to the department of public health, $3,180,461 to the human services agency, $400,000 to the art commission, and $1,800,000 to the children and families commission in fiscal year 2012-2013. >> thank you. we have ms. howard here from our mayor's office of budget. >> good afternoon, supervisors, kate howard, [speaker not understood].

i'm here before you to approve an event over the supplemental that's before you appropriating fund from our state revenue lost reserve to a variety of programs that were reduced in the governor's budget last year. i also have with me staff from the human services agency, the department of aging adult services, juvenile probation, the department of public health, and the arts commission in the event that there are specific questions about any of the appropriations. as you will remember, last year the governor's budget proposed and it was adopted by the legislature a number of reductions in both local revenues and direct cuts to services that affect the city of san francisco. in anticipation of those cuts, the city appropriated $15 million pending final approval of the budget and so those funds are set aside in the

event of state cuts. we are recommending in the supplemental the approval of appropriation and $6.6 million from the state reserve fund. the item before you originally requested $8.97 million, 7.2 was from the general fund. but we will agree with the budget analyst recommendation based on updated information. for departments that are affected, the department of public health 3 million. the human services agency 3.2 million. and then floor amount for the juvenile probation department and the arts commission. on the health side, this is the reductions are largely -- the effect of new fees that will be affecting the city. so, we now will be paying for -- paying more for patients who are at institutes of mental disease and not the state mental hospital.

there are reductions in revenues to the city. at the human services agency, the reductions here would not have historically hit the city's budget. these are policy choices certainly for the mayor and the board to make. the state reduced direct support to adult day health centers as well as title 5 child care programs. and those are not services that the city has historically funded, but the supplemental does recommend backfilling those services. $2.8 million for title 5 child care cuts and $400,000 for retroactive rate reduction for adult day health as a one-time support during a time of transition for those agencies. overall the city's child care system is experiencing a $5.9 million cut which the supplemental would support $2.8 million of, and the human

services agency was able to absorb some of those cuts within their existing budget, as is the first five commission. our other departments, we have some new fees that are affecting the juvenile probation commission when we send youth in the courts, send youth to the state california youth administration, department of juvenile justice. so, we expect that will cost us about $50,000. and then as part of the state's solution of redevelopment, one of the com poets of that was that agreements between city agencies and redevelopment agencies were not binding contractual agreements. our redevelopment agency made a number of commitments over the years to support funding for the bayview opera house, and that has not been able to be sustained. and, so, in order to keep that project moving we're recommending funding for that

project as well. you can see the last point here. [speaker not understood] commission does have within their existing reserves sufficient funds to support child care programs within the existing budget. as i mentioned, we are in support of the budget analyst recommendations. happy to answer any questions or to ask my colleagues to do the same. >> supervisor avalos. >> just a quick question about the bayview opera house. didn't we approve funding for that last year as well to complete renovation? and how is it that -- i didn't expect there was going to be bite at the apple for more funding for that. >> so, that project has had a number of different sources of funding over time. there has been a general fund commitment to the project. this was one element of the funding plan which has not -- has become not available any more. but overall the project has a much larger budget than

$400,000, and this piece of it is a critical piece. it is also connected -- there is funding from the general fund. there is funding from the redevelopment agency. there is also a significant amount of work being done by the municipal transportation agency, for transportation improvements around the bayview opera house. and all of those pieces together are contributing to that project. >> i support the funding. i'd just like to see overall maybe a budget of like where the different sources are, what the plan was in terms of the renovation. it will be good to see maybe before tuesday. but i expect i'll be supportive. >> happy to provide that to you before tuesday. >> supervisor mar. >> yeah, i wanted to say i see judy from the arts commission in the audience and at some point knowing the status of that budget and the importance of it to the community, i also wanted to say that as a member

of the first 5 commission that the child care support for the first 5 commission and this allocation is really important for the city's families, especially low-income families throughout the city. >> okay, thank you very much. thank you, ms. howard. to the budget and legislative analyst. >> mr. chairman, and members of the committee, approval of this revised requested amount of $6,5 89,395, that's shown in table 4 on page 35 of our report, would result in a remaining balance on the city's state revenue last reserve fund of [speaker not understood] $810,605. we point out we recommend approval of that $6.6 million. we are recommending approval of $3,8,000,9 34 shown on page 5 of our report.

and that is for monies that would cover unavoidable or already incurred costs. and then the balance of 3,580,4 61 which is shown in table 6 on page 36 of our report, we consider that to be a policy matter only because the board determines the priorities of what should be expended from the city state revenue reserve lost fund. * so, our recommendation are on the bottom of page 36. we recommend that you amend the ordinance to delete the human service agencies, appropriation for in-house supported services administration and reduce a million 114,76 total requested appropriation by 581,300. that would reflect revised total of 5 34,0 06 remaining for the department of public health. and we recommend that you amendedth proposed ordinance on page 2 to reduce ,169,175

offsetting appropriation from state loss revenue reserve by the same 580,300 to 6,589,585. and our second recommendation is to amend the ordinance on page 2 to delete the 1,800,000 source of funding for the children with families commission. and on page 5 to delete that same 1,800,000 appropriation no longer needed by the commission. they have sufficient funds in their budget. so, it's not under budgeting that. it would be fully -- it would be fully budgeted. it's simply that in this request it's no longer needed. and we recommend that you then approve specifically the $3,800,98 4s as i state and had we consider the balance to be a policy matter for the reasons i stated. we would be happy to respond to any questions. >> colleagues, any questions? all right, thank you very much.

at this point i'd like to open up to public comment. if there are any members of the public that wish to comment on item number 6? good afternoon, board of supervisors. mar, avalos and farrell. my name is [speaker not understood], executive director of faith sf. we're a newly formed nonprofit, but we actually have a history in san francisco serving as [speaker not understood] as well whitney young child development center. we currently serve several hundred children and families in visitacion valley, bayview, western addition, and nopa area as well as hayes valley. i am in front of you today that for the last couple years the state has reduced funding to child care about 20% over the last two years. so, we've had to backfill.

and for our own fund-raising as well as being in front of the city, we really deeply appreciate the year of support that you have given us already last year and look forward to the continuing support of funding to backfill this. what it means to us specifically is that there's a long waiting list in the city. we have a long waiting list of people that need subsidized child care. a couple years ago it was about 3,000. right now it almost sits at 5,000 people waiting for child -- affordable child care slots. and the working families going to school, working very hard, if they didn't get this child care, specifically at our site, we would lose about 30 families and children. so, if they don't have subsidized child care, they might not be able to work, not go to school, not be productive citizens of san francisco. so, i urge you seriously to consider this for this year and in future years to help the families that we serve on a daily basis in san francisco

because it makes a difference. and this city is taking leadership if you do support this. i appreciate the time and effort and hope you support this wholeheartedly. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. good afternoon, supervisors. my name is monica walters. i'm the executive director at wu yee children serve is he and we serve about 250 children in three centers in chinatown, one in the tenderloin, and one in vis valley. serving children, coming from predominantly very low-income families. and i just want to echo what loland said. in term of the need for nonprofit child care providers to have us back some money. a recent 2009 market rate survey by the child care providers showed that the annual cost of child care in san francisco, for instance, is $15,000, and the average preschool cost in san francisco is 11. so, you can imagine what the subsidies do in terms of

helping to backfill and provide opportunities for our working families, to have safe quality places for their children not only to [speaker not understood] at work, but to begin their educational success. so, again, just urging you to really consider this appropriation not only in this year's budget, but in the coming years and wanting you to also know we are definitely in sacramento advocating for changes in the state cuts because we know that's really important, that we can't continue as a city to carry it alone. so, just again, to urge you to consider the appropriation and to approve it this year. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. good afternoon, board of supervisors. first of all, i would like to thank -- my name is maria [speaker not understood], we're a statewide organization advocating at the state for child care. first of all, i would like to thank you and office the mayor

for your commitment to meet the needs of our most vulnerable population. it is essential to maintaining the diversity of the city and the public health [speaker not understood] as a whole. i am here to speak on behalf of parent voices [speaker not understood] children who are on the waiting list for child care. as our economy picks up, we want to make sure we support the continuing care for these children and also those who have been desperately waiting for child care so that their parents can go to work. last month i got a call from a parent who works at san francisco general hospital. she's a receptionist. she has three children. her schedule is very tight so she was supposed to be here [speaker not understood]. to her younger children need child care, one is school age so she needs after school care. and she was in a panic when she got notice that her child care was being terminated. not because she no longer

qualifies, but because the state budget cuts -- wants to cut those in the upper income level. and these family need to keep their jobs. they want to make sure they don't lose their jobs. fortunately this parrottv didn't lose [speaker not understood] because [speaker not understood] was able to give her a program that would prevent her from losing her job. one thing that i would really like to highlight is the constant tug and pull of budget cuts and [speaker not understood] and the safety of our children. and the sooner approve of backfill and this add back backfill to help [speaker not understood] the sooner we help these families. [speaker not understood]. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. good afternoon, supervisors.

my name is mollie steyn ert, and i'm with stepping stone, we run four day care centers in san francisco. and i'm representing all of our seven nonprofit adult day health centers who were affected by 10% rate cut about a year and a half ago. the proposal that you're seeing is a retroactive charge that was put on us to pay back about a half a year of that that wasn't collected. this came at a very extraordinary time for us last year when we were not only suffering the 10% rate cut, but an additional 5%, at a time when our centers were undergoing a transition to community-based adult services. and also transition last year to managed care. these two program changes put a

tremendous amount of threat to our programs losing members of our program through that transition and just all the systems that needed to be changed with our newmanaged care providers. * this $400,000 request really, really make a huge difference in cash flow for our seven nonprofit adult day health centers, keeps us afloat while we get through this period. so, i really thank you for your consideration of supporting us on this proposal. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. good afternoon, supervisors. i'm cathy davis. i'm the executive director of bayview hunters point multi-purpose senior services and we've been running adult day for 27 years. and this has been the toughest time for our families and caregivers to survive trying to get to managed care. we do understand over a period of time that it will get

better, but the trauma of going through all of these budget cuts and trying to keep our agency alive and keep our centers open has been really difficult. and i appreciate the city and county of san francisco who get what we're doing, that we're helping family members keep their loved ones at a center during the day so that they can work, and we're supporting people who would otherwise have no place to go to give them the health care that they need. and i just wish the rest of the world would understand what that's all about. so, i just want to say thank you for the support that i know that we've been receiving, the mayor being willing to put this money aside to help us with this one time only cut. and we're struggling to survive, but we're going to make it and we're going to do what we need to do and it's because of the support we get from all of us. -- you. so, thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. * thank you very much. my name is cheryl may good and

i am the administrator for the [speaker not understood] health care center located at judith street in the outer sunset. we are a program of jewish family and children services and we serve approximately 220 frail elderly mono lingual russian seniors who are residing throughout the city of san francisco. and i would just like to concur with my colleagues that we are very appreciative of the opportunity to request the $400,000 today to fill the 10% rate gap that we've experienced. unfortunately, this is a permanent 10% rate gap and it does impact all of our clients that we serve. with the expected loss for our senterra loan of $240,000 each year, our center is still expected to operate at the previously required staffing level and provide all required services in a safe environment, which we are 110,000% committed to. this critical fund thattion we're asking for is necessary for our centers to function and makes a difference in our ability to continue to provide

vital services. and as my colleagues also mentioned this last two years have been extremely difficult with the transition to managed care and also just the possibility that our centers would no longer be around. this has created a lot of fear and distress within our centers which we have had to manage and we have also had to work diligently beyond what we ever thought to ensure that our clients would continue to be eligible for our centers. so, what i'm asking for and hopefully that we will get is the $400,000 that we are requesting today. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. hello, good afternoon, board of supervisors. my name is sarah chan, the program director of self-help for the elderly adult services. we're located in the richmond district. every day we serve around 70 to 80 very frail mono lingual china speaking seniors and i

just want to take this time to ask your continued support in this home and community based services because we know the whole state is looking into the health care reform. this is so important we keep this kind of program intact. and i really appreciate during the past you have been supporting this program. i just let you know that during this past years, the cbac, community based adult services [speaker not understood] it has put tremendous burden in the program and the seniors. and [speaker not understood] caregiver and knowing her mother is no longer eligible for the cbac program and she had just become mentally distressed and commit suicide. fortunately our program continued to serve those seniors. so, she's able to be treated. so, i just let you know that

this is tremendous impact to the family. so, the daughter now is being treated and she can continue to go to work and, so, this is so important in san francisco. we have so many caregivers and this program will really provide them opportunity to work. so, i ask your continued to support. thank you. >> thank you very much. any other members of the public who wish to comment on item number 6? seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor avalos. >> skew me. thank you, chair farrell and thank you, members of the public, for commenting and for the mayor's budget office for their presentation. * actually, this supplemental was anticipated from the last budget cycle. we knew that there were going to be gapses in adult day health and there would be gaps in child care funding. * and i was expecting this a lot earlier.