that looks like the impetus should come from the mayor's office and in order for it to be fully effective and a collaboration only body so i appreciate the comment of no hostile takeovers they don't happen i should clarify those two funds the coordination not consolidation and we're in support of the two ballot measures >> thank you. >> (clapping) >> good evening i'm celo say from the advocates for children youth colorado planning man as funded the coalition that has helped organized of parents and young people to strengthen the public education and enrichment

fund i've shared those recommendations with all of you but to highlight a couple we believe astronomy that we need to strengthen the citywide alignment and appreciate that's been highlighted by the working group we support the mayors proposal we do building the cost of any cooperation strategy we don't believe that such a body should be responsible for oversight and like the board of education they 0 handle that, etc. we support the language in the charter that calls for a stronger coordination of alignment and support the idea of trailing ordinance to follow with details. and as jessica mentioned we support two ballot measures one

to reauthorize the children's amendment and one to support of peace for the district of both fund. we also are calling for the elimination of the children's amendment for peace we believe as a city we need to a state our commitment inform o to the next generation and we're recommending to create a - we're calling for an expansion of the children's fund for the transitional age youth and calling for an increase in the children's fund and peace we're supporting rome the trigger for the full amount of funding for the school districts (clapping.) >> michelle parker again, i'm with the second district pta and

able to serve on the community chris coalition i'm excited about being being a part of those conversations there's no question about the impact that peace funding is here we still have librarians there's one point i want to bring up i've heard it a lot and that's as we begin to see our funding restored back to 20074 and 8 level and have a better economy i want to not think of peace as a ceiling to what we're spending but important things that need more funding we know all or rapid you funding is coming from peace we hope we'll consider

adding funds from the general funds and not think of peace as a funding fund and be more effective. thank you >> thank you. >> so the sxhiment is now closed. i will open up briefly for the board. anyone having commits thank you rachel >> i actually have questions i think we need age more clarity you mentioned a little bit about the children and family council and the clufk what are those and how are they postponed and what authority do they have. i have to say the outstanding issues are the guts of this thing there's a list of things

i'm keenly interested if. i feel like we're a little bit information light right now. >> do you want to get a response. >> would anyone like to respond. i'll give a it shot >> to answer the questions about the council and the collaborative one thing i'll say i think speaking for the working group as a whole is there are a lot of different details that need to be flushed out. and there's an openness to many, you know, different configurations. so whether the level of specific it should be included in the charter itself that's a question that's being discussed what's

the right level of detail that's should be written into the language like general language that captures key concepts so that's, you know, one question in and of itself but along the way if there's a discussion that does relate to adding some detail within the proposed chapter amendment then that could include issues about what it the representation in our city council, what is the right level of description for the collaborative - it's not finalized by any means commissioner >> i mean so the purpose of this presentation tonight was to

- i mean to accomplish what were the outcomes you wanted to disciplinarian. >> so have a public conversation of what we're talking about in a working group commissioners so we actually accelerate the conversations around getting resolutions to some lingering questions. part of what's also been apparently, there's going to be disagreements even on this body in terms of what we want to see in terms of going forward so we wanted to start that public conversation about this and what those questions are going to be >> so i'm almost done. so i would just is, you know, i mean - based on my conversations

with staffer there's very little disagreement son the peace part of this about our opposition it on the trigger, to taking out the in kind, taking out the sunset i don't see much controversy more controversy open is children's fund side i continue to be opted to doing one ballot measure we have so if you answers so i need to state it opposition. i'm intrigued by the idea that was mentioned which say, i do think that whatever goes into the charter should be relatively board and general so we can

should tell this issues and the trailing legislation that's the first time i've heard it stated that way it's district r inwill go contributing we have to have language introduced at the board of supervisors bend of may; right? so that makes me that he nervous i've said locking those two together in one initiative limits our flexibility and our ability to maneuver we don't need to do that. anyway, i'm in favor of anything that preserves our flexibility and allows us to time to flush the issues out >> anyone else? commissioner wynns and then commissioner haney. brief commits, please >> i have to say that i too in

discussions with the members of the board of supervisors and the discussions i have concerns about a single initiative. honestly, i think it's going to be a harder sell. and i also have concerns about as you know the board knows i'm concerned about language that says this children and family council is going to be the one that defines the outcomes and i'm even more concerned recently, i heard we had an earlier debate about the insertion of the controller's office as the refer and fafrlt of the evaluations i find that business arrest.

one as those things are developed i think i think but i know it would be true we're more likely to get consensus on the board show us language if you're proposing which i don't think is necessary at all that the chapter amendment will have language for the council that's not a chapter issue but i want the language that clearly sets the educational outcome goals and evaluating them is the domain of the board of education and not any council that's made up of staff people i want them to be the city staff people i want to propose actual language before i say okay we're protected. my worry about there's one thing

i want to ask we've talked about before it's not on the list it's the issue that currently, the peace spending plan is approved by the board of supervisors. i would like to see language and something in our agreements or discussions with the city that staying say what they get to do is make sure that we actually spent the money the way we said we would not giving them a plan because in the past even though not anticipated to be such we've heard about the consequences today when it comes down to it the board of supervisors thought oh, that's the opportunity we'll use it opportunity to get what we want about the in kind services and it was out of blue.

so that's my i mean a as a matter of principle i want to publicly say i'm worried about that we have an excellent relationship with the city. we're writing smoking something still i think should be permanent why the only sunset should be for the children's project and peace the only things for the kids the police department and the fire department and the library there's no sunset. so i, you know, (clapping.) let's say hopefully, we'll get to the permanent set aside permanentcy can be changed by a new charter but we actually know that's within there now is a lever that's been used in a way that's not satisfying i want to

say publicly i'm absolutely against any in kind services or trigger. so here's my bottom line about a circumstantial initiative at the current times what's been said to the board we're talking to the city about the concerns but let's go ahead and say this let's link those things together let's say we might be more libel to link the initiatives which could be a hard sell we've got thankful only if we consider that only if we get a proposal that we like that's my position >> thank you commissioner haney. >> i'll make brief commits than a question.

this is our opportunity to say this publicly i will echo the commits that have been made a top priority for this board is having the peace and concerns relatively to the structure address in this process. the in kind services the trigger and sunset and maintaining our role to make those decisions those have been from the beginning our conversation to be a top priority for us and i say and speak not for the rest of the board but i hope the public understands that's our top priority and the second piece i echo some of the questions around information light i have a hard understanding there is a sense we support i'll speak for

myself we support better cooperation and communication and setting oaks and goals we share all of that is great data information shaifrg but so much is in the details who's on the counsels and what the alternatives are so we want to see those things happen i want to know when we're in a place to see the specification so we can make decisions. the community folks have come together and put together a great list of recommendations we can say we support those things as well and our things but you can't have both in some cases we're making choices here and if we're making those choices as a board particularly as we talk about the policy solutions if we support the oaks and improvements and coordination i

absolutely do what does that look like and the details of it and when are we going to have that conversation if at all before there's a discussion of the legislation that's drafted and the last thing i'll say on there are some important questions that relate to the children's fund that i don't think we've fully discussed whether publically or privately so i also want to put that out there we do think we'll getting get so it point we as a board took a position on the outstanding children's funds issues how do we feel about the transitional use and the fees i've been asked publicly and privately what did the board think i don't think we have. obviously, we have discussed we

have other priorities here those do relate to the important programs and kids in the city often we speak out directly related to funding are not thrsz that's an important thing i guess i want more information this is my relating brief commits it's all relative i want to know about the further conversation what it would look like in terms of of language because it's one thing to support i will do personally a lot of those goals we've set forward and in trusting our staff to moved on those but in terms of choices we've made around language and detail and trade offices i want to know more about those choices

>> thank you. commissioner mendoza-mcdonnell >> thank you. i just wanted to comment on the pieces that came up. on the sense i think that i'd like i think sunset is a good thing because it's the best practice those practice even with the last ten years we've had with the case and children's fund where it gives us an opportunity to revamp and tweak and again, it's the best practice again, i'd like to see the sunset obey extended so 25, thirty years versed 8 to 10 years and commissioners when all of the charters have sunsets and commissioner and supervisor kim gave us a good write up.

i'm a no on the in kind and in terms of the one initiative vs. the two initiatives i feel strongly about the initiative because we've done in the campaigns and doing those collectively we can talk about those initiatives for the children i think everybody understands and the effort we've made people don't understand where the money comes from they don't see the separation of the children's fund and peace necessarily but there are funds that help support our kids. if we're going to be looking at a policy or a way to support all our kids in a collective way doing this together makes sense. i want to remind folks there are a lot of initiatives on the

november ballot and for us to distinguish the two that are important under one initiative is going to be a lot easier fuss are to deliver then is jumbled up ballet that will be experienced in november. >> thank you, commissioner. >> you support the idea of the concept of a children's agenda and i want to talk about the commissioner mendoza-mcdonnell initiatives i feel strongly i want to hear for arguments on both sides of the one vs. 2 initiatives, however, being kind initiative we're going to be insistent w that the governance

be kept sprairl. i support eliminating the trigger eliminating the in kind services. i think i need more information about the sunset it would be great to get more information. i have one question for staff. the distinction between the council and our children collaborative my impression ask roof of the combrns is proposed to to to be concentrated where our children are collaborative they're our nonprofit partners we're going down the road of silos and my strong suggestion is we bring everyone around the table the school district and

department heads because that's the direction that we've been going and i just want to offer one life example having seen successful implementation of that collaboration that can be found in the cities violate council actually, we have 3 people representing the elderly abuse but around the table are reflect partners we've focused open particular policy priorities without influencing the independent vice presidents or nonprofit but coming together and being problem solveers together 0 so what is the distinction between family council vs. our children city collaboratives >> deputy superintendant. >> vice president the main

distinction is the council would really be more like the body you described that's comprised of representatives from the city or department heads or what i have are referred to as implementers leadership from the key school district departments that interface with the city departments to share the clientele and the community members. so a multiply industries group to could be, you know, a fairly large group that services as a steering committee representing the multi perspectives you mentioned using the anomaly of the provider. the collaborative would be very different it would be basically

dedicated staff to support the work of the council. so it would be a small group of folks that are basically full-time in a working full-time to support of the work of the council such as helping to facilitate the development of a youth outcomes framework a joint youth framework helping to facilitate let's work to implement data sharing protocol or agreement, and to create an inventory of services that are really transparent and seamless to all of the students and families that receive the services which doesn't exist in a cohesive way right now. it's deeply connected to the council but the roles those folks would be working on this a small broke up group of people

to be determined working on the collaborative work full-time. that's the distinction and the council itself would have connections to the city governance structure as well as to the board of education. so they won't be making the but doing the developing the proposals, developing straw designs that will need to be adapted by the bodies of the city and the school district. >> thank you, my more comments. i have brief comments about 3 pages are i first want to say this is first, we wanted to bring this to a public forum to tell the public b.a. about what the board members have feeling and as a whole about the

proposals. i am against any kind of in kind services being charged and, of course, no trigger and the sunset i don't want to go through this again but i will agree to a sunset that's thirty or 40 years. see if that's possible and i want to say we've had a lot of conversation about this one ballots or two ballot measures and so personally, i want to put on record that i am willing to take a leap of faith and have a larger children's agenda. this is you can't why? because we need a larger safety net we have the students for 6 hours a day but more and more students are falling into homelessness.

i want the city to be on the same agenda for our children i believe in serving our students we have duplicate services we are trying to duplicate minnesota health centers it's a hard thing to do alone i want to actually all our city departments to realize we have a responsibility to the children of san francisco. we service the largest amount of children in san francisco. we're kenya aware of what they need they enter our schools everyday. if we're trying to do it alone without the support of city i want them it's impossible to close our racial achievement grandpa to get our children ready for college it's impossible we're 49th in the

country we've got to be more cooperated we need to work in larger collaboration and that is a good way to do that. i want the city learned to be aligned with our children and children's needs. i want them to be concerned we're losing our a african-american population and we're concerned about losing them in the schools i want the city to be on the same track and be in cooperation when we talk about 9 - for all of san francisco children's to is a have a bigger agenda. so i guess i'm not so afraid of giving up governance what we've

seen and heard doesn't say we give up combrns its nor aligned and better effective and efficient of fund. clearly we can't do that alone i'm going to be honest. i think i'm my fourth-generation san franciscan i'm afraid of the future for san francisco for our children. i do this somewhat out of fear for our families that find it harder and harder to live in san francisco and survive here but i also do it for the future of the children and the families and in particular our students that will graduate from our city hall's and hope they'll be able to live here and raise children. i believe in order to do that we must work with the city to