population. so, the number currently of limited growth in our community officially is about 4 13,000. next slide, please. this slide summarizes our budget. this current year compared to the next proposed two years. relative to the original budget, the proposed budget presents an increase of approximately $550,000, most of which goes to fund our city grants program which is our single largest program composed of 81% of our department budget. our salaries, benefits, and other admin expenses remains stable at 19% cumulatively. our fte will go up slightly from 5.7fte to six very hard working professionals. just some detail on the major budget changes. the mayor has proposed a 10% across the board increase to support services that address

domestic violence, sexual assault and human trafficking. in addition there is a 1.5% cost of doing business increase to all grantees. and the mayor is proposing $75,000 to fund the family friendly workplace ordinance out yeev in partnership with community based advocacy based organization. next slide. ~ outreach [speaker not understood] prevention grants program, our single largest program, together work to support survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and human trafficking. with those increases i just mentioned, the total becomes 4.65 million. and the pie chart reflects how those monies are allocated. about 48% fund crisis lines, legal services, intervention and advocacy programs. about 30% funds bed night and domestic violence transitional programs, a quarter of the funds go to support prevention efforts. i want to acknowledge beverly

up ton who is in the audience, executive director of the domestic violence consortium who works really closely with these community agency. next slide. in terms of outcomes, what are the service outcomes for these programs? we funded 31 programs last fiscal year. this is 12-13. we're still collecting data from 13-14. there is a $3.3 million allocation, about 20,000 [speaker not understood] individuals were served, providing 40,000 hours of supportive services, our partner agencies did that. about 22,000 bed nights at emergency shelters and transitional housing programs. and we have two crisis lines. one for sexual assault and one for domestic violence. they fielded 18,000 calls. and what is important to note about that is 911 gets about half that many calls. it's real important to do both, community based crisis lines as well as 911.

just a few more slides. city-wide antiviolence advocacy initiatives, just want to touch on three briefly. many of you are familiar with the justice and courage oversight panel on domestic violence policy reform. we will have a final report for you in the fall and actually [speaker not understood] played a political role in putting that together. i'm pleased to report 120 recommendations from the original report had been completed. we still have 100 remaining and that work, those recommendations will be put now under the family violence council. then the mayor's task force and antihuman trafficking. our department is staffing, we created a new data collection tool and evaluated gaps in san francisco response. women in the workplace, in recognition of the fact that three out of four women do not work in government and they work in the private sector, we are doing work on the family

friendly workplace initiatives to make sure that employees and employers are well aware of this legislation and then the gender quality principles initiative. we're launching year two of [speaker not understood] encouraging corporations to let us know their best practices in expanding gender equity in the workplace. and then cities for ceta. in march at the u.n. we launched a new campaign with the first lady. mayor lee has challenged 100 mayors to join us in creating a ceta ordinance that has three core elements. first, a gender analysis to look at workforce services and city budget in order to integrate gender into operations of local government. number two, an oversight body to ensure that the work continues. and third, funding. we are advocating that municipalities put some money

behind their ceta ordinance. a modest sum, between 10 cents to 25 cents per woman resident so there can be some capacity. and this work will culminate in june 2015 when san francisco hosts the u.s. conference on mayors. so, finally in your packet you'll find a copy of the slides, an organization chart, detailed service report for violence against women grants program and our department annual report. i'm happy to answer your questions at this time. >> okay, thank you, dr. [speaker not understood]. colleagues, any questions on this presentation? okay, much appreciated. thank you for being here. and since there is no budget analyst report, you are off the hook. so, thank you. >> thank you very much. >> thanks for being in front of us. up next was our department of public works. it's actually going to be moved until wednesday. but, madam -- i'll tell you what, why don't we go straight

to our board of supervisors. [speaker not understood] if you can be here. madam clerk, can we call item number 12 with this, please? >> item number 12 is the hearing to consider the findings and recommendations of the clerk of the board pertaining to the requested cost of living adjustment to the fiscal year 2014-2015 contract for budget and legislative analyst services. ~ for the >> thank you very much, madam clerk. [speaker not understood], thanks so much for being here. >> thank you, chair and the [speaker not understood]. i'm the clerk of the board, angela [speaker not understood]. [speaker not understood] our administration and finance manager, and [speaker not understood] our accountant to present the department's

physics consolidate year 14-15 and 15-16 approval. as you can see it has not changed from the version i presented to the committee in february. however, what is not included in this proposal is the budget for radio broadcast services of our board meetings and i will offer an option to remedy this at the end of this presentation. and finally, i will provide information for item number 12, the budget analyst request for cola. to begin with in the current year, the budget is approximately 12.9 million of which is nearly 96% or 12.5 million is allocated to fund employee salary and fringe benefit costs to provide budget and legislative analyst services to [speaker not understood] annual comprehensive annual financial report. the remaining 4% or 400,000 is for the following. material supplies, departmental work order agreements and to

provide additional staff support to the assessment appeals board to reduce the current backlog of property tax appeals. slide 3 shows the distribution of current year and budget year funding. among the various sections of the department, as you can see from the bar graph, although the department's proposed budget is expected to increase to approximately 13.5 million in 14-15 and 15-16, the proportional allocation of those funds among the various divisions of the department remains relatively unchanged from year to year. the division of the board of supervisors continues to be the largest cost center in the department followed by the office of the clerk of the board, the contract for budget and legislative analyst services, the assessment appeals board, the youth commission and finally the sunshine ordinance task force. moving to the budget year or fiscal year 14-15, the department's proposed budget of 13.5 million is approximately 6 07,000 more than our current

year [speaker not understood] budget. [speaker not understood] which i presented to the committee in february. of the 6 07,000 increase 3 61 is due to base budget adjustments. the remaining 246000 increase is due to department increase in budgetary adjustments. ~ listed on the slide again presented in february. this is designed to address the business needs of the department. slide 5 dee picts the department's proposed out year budget or fiscal year 15-16, 13.5 million and it is approximately $24,000 less than our 13.5 fiscal year proposed 14-15 budget. the table on slide 5 lists the proposed changes from the budget year. these changes reflect the sunset of the assessment appeals board backlog reduction. project funding, the removal of

one-time capital equipment funding and reduce aab system maintenance costs. these reductions offset city-wide wage increases and the fiscal impact of prior year's personnel adjustments. that concludes my presentation specific to the department's proposed budgets. as i mentioned there are two policy considerations that have fiscal impact that are not currently reflected in the board's budget that i'd also like to present to you. however, before i do that, i'd like to just pause and thank ms. [speaker not understood] jones and ms. [speaker not understood] for the preparation for our information today. i'd like to thank deborah newman from the budget analyst's office and [speaker not understood] for their thorough review with our budget. we are in agreement with the budget analyst office with the recommendations to r our office. with just two slides left i would like to move to slide 6. this is about the radio broadcast services. as you are aware, in april the

board of supervisors passed a motion directing the clerk to prepare a request for qualifications, process to enable a radio station to broadcast the weekly san francisco board of supervisors meetings for an amount not to exceed 150,000. while it is our intent to allow the pool of pre-qualified firms to inform us the cost of providing this service, the motion included a not to exceed amount of 150,000. since the board made this decision after the budget was submitted, funding for these services is not included in the department's proposed budget. and to remedy this, i would suggest the budget and finance committee add 75,000 to the budget. i am not requesting the full 150,000 because it will take six months to complete the competitive solicitation and contract award process. of course, i'll come back to the committee following the competitive solicitation to recommend a contract award. my staff and i are happy to answer any questions you may have before moving to the final

item, item 12. if no questions -- >> supervisor mar. >> yeah, mr. chairman, thank you. i just wanted to thank ms. [speaker not understood] for that suggestion for the add back for broadcasting the board of supervisors meetings by radio. i know that as the board discussed that several months ago that what was emphasized was the need to have more community awareness of what happens here in city hall with various policies. and i know there's a long history with kpoo radio 95.5fm [speaker not understood]. when i talk to many constituents they ask why don't we broadcast the board on community radio any more. and i think that would be a way of increasing our reach to many, especially under served neighborhoods that stations like kpoo or others kind of

reach. but that process [speaker not understood] i'll do my best to work with colleagues as you suggested. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor mar. to item 12. item 12 is the hearing on the cola request from the budget and legislative analyst. as you recall in february, the budget and legislative analyst formally requested a 3.5% cola increase to the fiscal year 14-15 billing rates. in your packet is a memo where i have outlined the methodology and analysis. and from my review, i recommend the committee consider a 3% cola increase valued at 60 ,000 for the budget year 15-16. i considered the budget and legislative analyst request of a 3.5% increase to be reasonable. i am recommending a 3% cola because the contract language limits the increase to no more than the cola rate set by law for employees of the city,

state, or federal government which are at the highest. the m-o-us generally increased wages 3% in fiscal year 14, 15. the budget and legislative analyst made the request for 3.5% cola prior to the completion of the m-o-us. should the committee support the 3% increase, the contract requires the board to adopt a motion to enact a cost of living adjustment to the contract and should the committee wish to proceed with the cola, i have identified one-time savings in our current year budget that upon approval of the controller's office, it can be carried forward to fiscal year 14-15 for this purpose. i thank you for your time and consideration and ms. bow chan an jones are here to answer questions you may have. >> thanks, ms. [speaker not understood]. colleagues, any questions before our budget analyst report? mr. rose, can we go to your report, please?

>> mr. chair, [speaker not understood] 57,104 dollars in 14-15 all of which would be ongoing savings which would still allow an increase of 5 49,719 or [speaker not understood]. these recommendations will result in 57,104 savings to the city's general fund in 14-15. our recommended reduction to the proposed [speaker not understood]. [speaker not understood]. and as i understand it, the department concurs with our recommended reductionses. we would be happy to respond to any questions. >> okay, thank you, mr. rose. colleagues, any questions? supervisor breed? >> i was just wondering if we take the recommendations into consideration, how are we going to pay for the cola for the budget and legislative analyst, mr. rose?

>> mr. chairman, i think that question should be addressed to the clerk of the board. i don't think we should comment on that item. >> ms. [speaker not understood], do you want to give a little bit more clarity on that, on the current year savings? >> yes, chair farrell. in the current year savings we have identified funds from the 027 character of the professional services that we have remaining in the fund. in addition to -- in addition to other funds that we have in the department, chair farrell. in terms of these policy decisions and, and questions that are around this, my recommendation, chair farrell, is that you continue this item to next week where we can come back. i understand you can't make any decisions until after public comment on june 20th. >> just to clarify the question.

my understanding is that your current budget doesn't take into account the cola. >> that's correct. >> and, so, you have been able to locate funds for that particular purpose. so, the budget and legislative analyst recommended cuts won't impact that decision? >> that's correct. a >> okay, thank you. >> so, to our controller, just to clarify the action the committee should take should you wish to take this ~ >> the current year savings in the board of supervisors saving would follow year-end close. you could reappropriate that as a source in next year's budget along with this or any other use. but a carry forward would not be an appropriate action to make that happen. >> that's correct, okay, thanks. and also just to be clear, the difference between 3-1/2 and 3% is what other departments are getting and that's the rationale? >> that's correct. and the m-o-us. >> maybe to our mayor's office or controller's office, just to

be clear, my understanding was 3% was an october 1st 3% for next year, starting october 1st. it was president actually [speaker not understood]. ~ wasn't >> [speaker not understood] kate howard. [speaker not understood] effective the first period of october. the cost of that is 2.25%. >> if that is a policy rationale, i want to make sure we're clear about it as we're thinking about actual numbers putting on our budget to next week. why don't we continue this to next week and we can get it wrapped up. >> thank you very much. >> okay. thank you very much. and, again, i certainly want to go on record saying i'm fully supportive. i think the work of mr. rose on this and the entire team is incredibly valuable to all of us here. okay. up next -- >> excuse me, mr. chair. would you like to take public comment on item number 12? >> okay, we'll do that, thank you. is there anybody that wishes to comment publicly on item number 12?

please step forward. anyone will have two minutes. [speaker not understood] the city college situation. >> excuse me, sir, this is on item number 12. oh, i'm sorry, okay. >> okay, thank you very much. is there anybody that wishes to comment on item number 12? okay, seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel] >> so, i have a motion to continue item number 12. we can just -- call of the chair and we have a motion. we can take that without objection. [gavel] >> thank you very much for that. madam clerk, let's see, we have our -- we can go to the mayor's office at the end. our accessory quarter. ms. chu here. is the ethics commission here? health service system? ah, [speaker not understood] is here. okay.

>> so, catherine dodd, health service system. the mission of the health service system is dedicated to preserving and improving sustainable quality health benefits and enhancing the well-being of retirees and their families. it's governed by health service board which is made up of three elected members and four appointed members. the primary responsibilities include purchasing and administering over $737 million in health benefit contracts and keeping in compliance with

state and federal law for four different employers. as you can see on this slide. we also devise and implement strategies [speaker not understood] while maintaining fiscal health of the city and three other employers. and we administer [speaker not understood] benefits for well over 109,000 covered lives. the mayor has actually identified in the mayor's budget summary the importance of cost savings of the health service system has achieved over the past few years in terms of reducing our post employment benefit liability or [speaker not understood] over the next 25 years. we've achieved many things and i want to highlight two which will impact the budget. these are -- the first is in term of rate negotiation. this year's rate negotiation was voted on by the health service board last thursday in a negative 2% -- negative 2%

rate reduction by kaiser and a rate path by blue shield and a negative 21% reduction by -- in city plan. the rate passed by blue shield was achieved by the health service system contributing $8.8 million to buy down that rate from our trust fund. the total savings this year will be $20.9 million. so, our health costs will be $20.9 million less than they were last year. this is a result of innovation on the part of the health services board and health service system. the innovation includes business innovation, the i am ~ implementation of flex funding [speaker not understood]. the implementation of the employee group waiver plan for united healthcare retiree plan,

pharmacy benefit provided by the federal government, has achieved so far $9 million in savings. and taking advantage of the affordable care act early retirement reinvest program saved $3.4 million. total over the past [speaker not understood] years was $44 million. key innovations we're planning for fiscal year 14-15 and 15-16, we want to [speaker not understood] database. we want to -- and we want to collaborate with vendors moving forward on the issue of transparency which as you will recall was an important one at the board of supervisors last budget hearing. we need to implement peoplesoft 9.2 and [speaker not understood] to improve customer service and pack is, and we hope to improve our contract vendor management with our performance guarantees. we are launching our city-wide wellness plan which is supported by the mayor, the

controller union leaders, dhr and health service system. and then we'll be launching the hss wellness center at 1145 market street. indeed, our department is extremely effective in our use of resources. the hss budget did collaboration between hss city departments and union leaders were successful in reaching the goal of sustainable benefits. the hss budget is 1.4% of the value of our total contracts managed which is unheard of in the industry. proposed budget is not changing that much from year to year. as you can see, the largest portion is in salary and fringe benefits. 1.6 million in professional services, 1.6 million in work orders, and 35,000 in materials and supplies. the actual nitty-gritty of the budget is an increase of $1.2

million, over 600,000 of that is in cola and base costs. and in the health service board election which we have no control over in funding workers' comp claim. the only proposals we have are to streamline benefits to organize analytics to get a sense of how we're spending our health dollars in the correct places and our veriedvers spending them correctly, to ensure compliance with state and federal law, and identify other cost saving interventions, to implement the wellness plan, and to fund as needed specialized legal services. at this point we have agreed to

$165,000 -- $165,075 or 68% of the recommended reductions made by the budget analyst for 14-15. this spring the health service system budget below the $10 million threshold for review and these savings were generated through attrition saving and reduction in professional and legal services. ~ this brings we'll have an ongoing savings of 163,0 38 in 2015-2016. the remaining [speaker not understood] reduction by the budget analyst in 2014-15 requires downgrading and elimination of positions which will jeopardize hss's ability to effectively manage health care costs and transition to e-benefits and comply with state and federal law. specifically when you look back at slide 10, it will -- what's being cut is the streamline -- streamlining of emerge and e-benefits.

compliance with state and federal law in [speaker not understood] cost savings in particular. ~ identifying cost savings in particular. are there any questions? >> thank you, ms. dodd. colleagues, any questions at this point? okay, why don't we go to our budget analyst report, plea, first. >> mr. chairman, members of the committee, on page 76 of our report, we report that our recommended reductions to the proposed budget total 2 41,251 for 14-15. all those reductions are ongoing savings. [speaker not understood] or 11.2% in the department's 15-16 budget. approximately 32% or 77,000 of those recommendations will result in the city's general fund. in 14-15 we are also recommending closing out one inactive health services encumbrance resulting in a savings of [speaker not understood]. [speaker not understood] or the

recommended reductions are ongoing. savings, these reductions would allow an increase of [speaker not understood] in the department's 15-16 budget. approximately 32% or 97,336 of these almosttions will result in savings to the general fund in 15-16. ~ [speaker not understood]. >> thank you very much, mr. rose. colleagues, any questions for mr. rose at this time? okay. thank you very much. look forward to speaking mid week and also in the final report next week. okay. [speaker not understood] is here, so why don't we go to the department of elections.

>> good afternoon, john ayers, department of elections. the overview of our ballot -- our budget is pretty consistent from fiscal year to fiscal year. really, the primary driver in a number of electionses will have in a fiscal year, you'll see in 14-15, the budget remains about the same even though it's a one-election fiscal year. the reason for that is we have

-- we're asking for $2.5 million to remain on reserve for the department to use to identify and build out and pay any additional lease costs for new warehouse sites. we've been looking for about a year. we haven't identified it yet. that's why the costs are moving from the current fiscal year into the next fiscal year. then in 15-16 the elections will be held more by ballot cards, [speaker not understood] so the costs are a bit higher in 15-16 which is a two-election fiscal year versus 13-14. as far as capital expenditures, again, the big item for the department next fiscal year is identifying a new warehouse site. the lease at pier 48 should end at the end of 2015. we've been looking for really more than a year for another premiere warehouse site.