and the community engagement. so thanks very much. >> thank you. >> hi, my name is todd david, i am the alvarado pta advocacy chair and i'm happy to be able to represent both groups here today. i think one of the things that commissioner wynns always reminds me that is left out of this conversation i think is so important and i hope that she will correct my numbers if i get these wrong, but over the last 10 years the san francisco unified's actual budget has slung by 20 percent. it's gone from $500 million dollars to $400 million dollars. well, the city has run a

budget deficit, its actual budget dollars have increased in the same time frame. its expenses have gone up faster than its revenues have, but at san francisco unified the actual dollars have gone down while expenses and pension obligations continue to rise. so i think it's an incredible thing that the voters of san francisco have 100 percent of the time supported local funding for our public schools and for our children and that the only place that there ever seems to be a debate as to whether there's an appropriate use of local funds, of the city funds for public schools is inside this chamber. the voters have already spoken and that 100 percent of the time we support these local funds. and so i think that that's a really important distinction that is not spoken about enough, is that the two

different budgets. from a very high level point of view talking about prop h and the children's fund, i think the voters will once again 100 percent reauthorize both of them. i think there's an opportunity to really concentrate on creating an amazing policy that could be nationally recognized as state of the art and i think that that is really where we should be intending a lot of our time and energy. thank you. >> thank you, mr. david. >> hello, my name is chelsea from coleman advocates for children and youth. i want to thank the committee for pulling together this hearing. this conversation is really helpful that it is happening kind of in a transparent way and engaging folks. i know it got pushed back an hour and a half so i know there ares on folks who wanted to stay and weren't able to. coleman advocates is really committed to the reauthorization of these funds

and protecting the investment in children and families. coleman along with margaret broadman decided to work closely with the process laura and maria laid out to engage community in these issues. the issue around in kind services, for instance, is actually concerning in terms of the double counting issue but we knee there are going to be dozens of those coming up and looking forward to diving in deep so i wanted to thank you all. >> are there any other members that would like to speak on this item? seeing none, closing public comment. commissioner wynns. >> thanks. for the listening public we should say we interchangiblely use the term piece, the public education fund, and prop h >> thank you for the clarification.

>> miss moran >> i wanted to mention we're really excited once we do the design with our stake holder council, which is from all the different groups, we're going to have a number of city-wide meetings and focus groups. there's going to be lots ever opportunities to get folks involved and have that rich conversation across school board members and service providers. we hope everybody will come out and join these meetings and also come out may 3rd if you want to join the rallying cry and get it started. >> who is going to be chairing these meetings? >> we selected someone who has some history with us and they are going to be working with maria sue and i and the stake holder council. we want people who are representing the dicht stake holder groups to help us

design the process. so, for example, the community coalition will have 4 seats on that stake holder council, we'll have the pta and parents for public schools involved so we're going to really co-design that process but we wanted to have the technical support of an external facilitator so that all of us could engage in the conversation and that we could have one group capturing all the data as we go so we can get some good reports that we can share around all these questions. >> who is the facilitator? >> i'm not sure we, i don't think we can say it yet. we interviewed 4 different groups, there was an rfp put out and we should be able to announce that the next day or two. >> how are you funding this facilitation process? >> external funding. >> in kind (laughing). >> i want to reiterate what

commissioner wynns and avalos said. historically both of these measures did come from the community, was initiated outside city hall. so as much as i can i think we should really honor that process and i think involving the community is incredibly important in many ways because they will be the ones passing all of these ballot measures, both of these ballot measures. so i hope that we can keep that in mind and now that it's a reauthorization not make it too kind of city hall centered. the second question i had was how we would involve members of the board, either board, in that process as well so we can be engaged in that discussion. >> for our board this is something that we will be angendizing on what we call our committee of the whole where we can talk about things, you know, not in a formal board meeting but have more of a dialogue about that and get input. we can also bring things back to this group and

maybe you can talk about the city side. >> well, for dcyf, we have a citizen advisory committee and we are engaging them, particularly the may 3rd event. we're hoping some of our cac members would be able to be there so they can also learn about both funds. i would be more than happy to come back to this committee or to meet with supervisors and commissioners individually and find out how we can work together. >> i think it would be good to reach out to members of our board as well to see if any of us are interested in engaging in that conversation or at least having at least one one on one with dcyf, i know i would like to be engaged in this process, i have a lot of thoughts and feedback as well. hopefully i can engage too. i think there are a number of things that have come up in this committee. i will keep

this item to the call of the chair so maybe we can hold this hearing from time to time since it's something we are proposing to put on the ballot next year. i think it's a good way for us to engage member s of the public and it's a good way for us to have a conversation piece. the last thing i will say about the in kind services, hopefully we can have a greater conversation around that. i actually understand now from the controller that we did not specify the source of funding. i guess my concern is so much of the children's fund could be considered new funding for our schools and i think that's my main concern. when the puc or department of environment funds a staff person i don't think there's the same kind of public concern that anything the puc funds and anything the doe funds could be considered additional funding for our schools. but the children's fund is a large fund and i'd hate to see 7 million, 8 million, the maximum amount be

considered new funding for the schools. i don't think that was the intent of the voters but i also understand we didn't specify that in the original prop h language and i look forward to having discussion around that. are there any other closing comments? all right, seeing none, can we take a motion to continue this item to the call of the chair? we have a motion, we can take that without objection. madam clerk, are there any other announcements? seeing none, the meeting is adjourned. thank you for your patience in sticking around. (meeting adjourned).

>> on december 28, 1912, san francisco mayor stared into a sea of 60,000 of constituents that gathered at geary. the berth of the first publicly owned transit system in the city, the san francisco municipal railway.>> all right.

gentlemen welcome to the regular meeting of the government audit. to my right is supervisor katie tang and david campos. i would also like to welcome the clerk of the committee. the clerk is miss andrea os berry and broadcasting this for sf gov tv. >> please make sure to silence all cell phones and devices.

>> thank you, very much. okay. clerk pleas read the first item. item no. 1 hearing regarding the training of job placement and disadvantaged workers. >> all right ladies and gentlemen this hearing is called by supervisors london breed. >> thanks to the committee for heeg this item today. one of the first legislations that i introduced into this office was the tax exclusion. part of the premise to figure out a way to retain and grow our tech company here in san francisco it was promise that we made to our city that we would be growing jobs. one of the questions that came up during this process is which communities and for whom are we

creating this job market for. and feedback that i often got is that are we often creating jobs for those with college degrees and backgrounds in engineering. and the question is how is this going to benefit communities that are here particularly under served communities, the south of market, tender lion and mission districts. the impetus for calling this hearing is to do a check in. this is rather new in terms of an initiative for us. the federal judge has allocated funding for our city to do a training program to help the folks get the skill set they need in order to be competitive

for a new job. not every job requires a degree in engineering and computer science but maybe skill sets that we can get through a program such as this. techsf began last fall. it's just begun. it's not a program that we can fully evaluate yet, but i think it's important that we have an opportunity while it's on going to do a check in to see if we are actually reaching the communities that we intended to reach. if we are providing the skill sets, the tech companies need and whether we are adequately partnered with tech companies to ensure it's graduates get jobs and lastly at the midway point to see if there are other ways that the board of supervisors can help this to become successful. i think what everyone fwhants -- wants in

this room is real outcome and normal san francisco residents would not normally get to this sector and all of us in the fall will be incredibly excited. that is the purpose of this hearing is really a check in with providing feedback and also to just coordinate better communications amongst the various different sectors. i know supervisor breed wants to make comments as well and want to thank her for here cosponsor ship and she talked about one of her top priorities was getting jobs for her community and we have been working very closely on this hearing and i want to thank conner johnson and supervisor breed's office. they are the ones doing the bulk of the work in getting

this hearing prepared. >> thank you so much for being here today. this is my first response -- sponsoring this hearing. the communities we serve need these kinds of opportunities. i know that us working together both from the city side and the private sector side can really help to create the kind of opportunities for our communities that are so desperately needed. i want to thank the directors, rufo and simmonds and staff for presenting today and i want to thank the tech companies that have joined us today. i know everybody is very eager to get to work and coming here to talk about this matter. it's very appreciated. while san francisco is contributing to

its economic success, that does not always reach our most disadvantaged communities. i'm here to help everyone be part of this success. i don't want this to be silicone valley or career for other areas. san francisco's tech center should be driven by san franciscans that reflect our commute -- communities. this is better for our economy and it's better for our residents. so how can we do it? first we at city hall must ensure that we are collaborating with the tech force industry and make sure we are ready for the future. we need training programs particularly for disadvantaged communities and we need private partnerships and oed's. i'm

specifically looking to answering 4 questions. is the program reaching under served communities. is it's training geared towards what tech companies actually need. is techsf partnering with companies to get jobs and what can we do to hide. the digital divide is only one part of our solution. we need to focus on transitional age youth and high school students and we need to cross program collaboration to ensure one program advance to another level. i also think we should consider what the next steps are after tech sf which is a temporary grant program. i am determined that these opportunities be shared. i look forward to your presentation

and thank you all very much for being here. >> ladies and gentlemen, time for the fun to begin. >> i want to thank supervisor breed for calling this hearing. i really appreciate the leadership that they have taken on this issue. i want to provide some context for why i think this hearing is really important. i think that everything that was said by supervisor kim and supervisor breed, i completely agree with and we welcome the prosperity that has been brought to the city by the tech companies. but i do want to provide some perspective. this city too has made an investment in these tech companies. and when we changed our tax system last year, if you look at the over all amount that the tech

industry is paying in taxes in san francisco, it's about 5 percent less they are paying today in the system. i think the board of supervisors supported the effort to move away from the payroll tax. any businesses and industry comes with responsibility. the question that i hope we get to see an answer for is what are they doing, not saying, but what are they doing in response to that investment from the city. are we truly getting anything in concrete in return. what i have seen in my neighborhood and district especially mount mission that we have seen a great influx of tech workers. we are happy to see so many people want to come into this neighborhood. but with that influx comes some

challenges. resents in the mission have increased dramatically in the last year 1/2 and it's not uncommon to see a one bedroom apartment going for $3,000 in the mission now a days. so the question is, as their workers are moving into these neighborhood, what are these companies doing to give something back. in the mission it's especially important because even though it is this hot neighborhood, 6 of 10 lowest performing schools are in the mission where many of the tech companies and many of the workers have a presence. what are they doing concretely to really give back to a city that has embraced them. i am confident of the mayor's office at work force and economic development. ron simmonds has a long history of doing the most with very little. i'm confident

with the city as ready to partner with them, but the city can only go as far as these industries are willing to go. it's really important to get the specification. we've seen a lot of chat and a lot of talk but the devil is in the detail and the proof is in the pudding and i would hope to see a lot of that today. thank you. >> okay, thank you, everyone. i'm going to briefly go over the agenda for the public. first we'll have todd ruf oh who will talk about the labor market. rond a will bring information about tech sf and the executive director will talk about techsf services and

two employers. community director and finally we'll have techsf participants i really appreciate the opportunity to come and talk about jobs. and training and preparing san franciscans and connecting san francisco to those jobs. last week the state released

unemployment rate and in march it has has a rate of 6 percent. >> it is also in those numbers we released the job growth numbers. san francisco had a job growth rate of 3.6 percent to a national average. it's a long way of saying that san francisco is recovering and san francisco is growing jobs. and it's important to sort of note that as the economy recovers, that the most powerful force for reduce unemployment is supporting the growth of these jobs in san francisco. and just from by way of background, and asment -- as many of the

supervisors noted, it doesn't just happen. it can be nurtured and reflects decisions we've made to supporting efforts and efforts to the growing manufacturing sector in san francisco. these are collective means that we make to support those jobs. in the office of economic and work force development, we see our folks in that role to help nut -- nurture that environment. there is a number of tools in economic work force development to achieve that and techsf is an important one of those tools. with that, let's get to the program.

>> thank you all this morning for having me here, supervisors. i have worked with most of you all and particularly supervisor kim, we've been at this for almost two years. just to give you some time lines around how all this came about. we responded to a grant in the fall of 2011. it was an h 1v grant and we got notification in the spring of last year that we won the award and received the fund ing in july. over the last year 1/2 we have been preparing to receive funding what we call sector academy training. this is the fourth out of my office. the first one was city