>> welcome to the budget meeting, i want to thank sfgtv covering today's meeting, and madam clerk, do we have any announcements? >> yes, mr. chair, silence all

cell phones and electronic devices and completed speaker cards to be included as part of the file should be submitted to the clerk and items acted upon today will be continued to june 26th, unless always indicated. >> okay, thank you, madam clerk, so colleagues, today we are going to continue our discussion of the 2014, 2015 budget. and we are going to go into recess here for the next hour and 15 minutes and reconvene at 11:30 to hear the different budget and to finalize those today and to move toward finalizing our own budgets and colleagu >> the city of san francisco sfgtv meeting of the budget and finance committee occurring june 25, 2014, will begin shortly. >> could you call?

>> number one,proposed annual budget and appropriation ordinance appropriating all estimated receipts and all estimated expenditures for selected departments of the city and county of san francisco as of june 2, 2014, for the fys ending june 30, 2015, and june 30, 2016. >> >> item two,proposed annual salary ordinance enumerating positions in the annual budget and appropriation ordinance for the fys ending june 30, 2015, and june 30, 2016, continuing, creating, or establishing these positions; enumerating and including therein all positions created by charter or state law for which compensations are paid from city and county funds and appropriated in the annual appropriation ordinance; authorizing appointments or continuation of appointments thereto; specifying and fixing the compensations and work schedules thereof; and authorizing appointments to temporary positions and fixing compensations therefore. >> okay, thank you madam clerk, we are going to continue our budget discussions and we have the last city departments to come through her today, we have an order, and one that we will take first, because of a meeting out of town is rec and parks and if you would come up first? >> and chair ferrill, could i just announce that i would like us to also, bring up the office of city administrators to discuss the grants for the arts and cultural equity as well, after the other departments

complete. >> we will be getting in contact with miss kelley. >> good afternoon, supervisors, and it is, we are back to our second discussion about our budget, and without laying out the whole budget presentation again, i think that we are in full agreement with the budget analyst, with one exception on our cuts and i do thank the budget analysts for their work and partnership of reviewing the budget and we are comfortable with all of the cuts and we are asking to hold on to two vehicle substitutions that were in the budget that budget analyst is proposed to be deleted. and the vehicles that are essential tool in delivering the public service to our field staff, we are actually, and it is inadequate and it is old and it breaks down quite a bit and because of our system, our gardeners and custodians are often left without service vehicles, many of them don't have them at all. and many of our custodians are

transported and so the issue of two vehicles and one is the replacement of a van that is over 18 years old and the other is a small maintenance truck for the service number one that is in the richmond and the marina complexes. and that has broken down quite a bit. and it has left our gardeners and staff without an adequate ability to get to the parts that they will service. >> thank you, colleagues any questions? >> if not, mr. rose, could you go to your revised report, please? >> mr. chairman, and members of the committee, on page 41, of our report, and our recommended reductions of the budget total

621230, in 14, 15, all of the one time savings and our recommended reductions to the proposed budget total 2, 5, 17, 15, 16, the one time savings as i understand it except for two trucks and i will go into that further on pages 42, and 43 of our report to the department concurs that our recommended reductions, so the first truck supervisors, is on page... i am sorry? >> year one or two two? >> and one is year two, and that is the first one, that i am going to, on page 42, and let me read this to you, if i might, supervisors, this line item includes, funds for the purchase of three chevy, colorado trucks to replace the existing trucks, the budgeted amount for the trucks was higher than the quotes. so that is one issue which i

don't think that the department disagrees with. there is a recommended reduction for the quote. but they are in disagreement with the recommendation to delete one of the three trucks mainly, one that would replace the vehicle 651652, which was purchased in 2001, and has 32,000 miles on it. 32,000 miles. and that is with the vehicle that they want to replace. the department met the requirement under the health air and clean ordinance to reduce the vehicles by 15 percent in part by turning in 8 vehicles to the department of administrative services center shops. and the vehicle returned to the central shops do not represent the reduction in the city's vehicle fleet because they may be reallocated to the other departments or used as a credit for future replacement vehicles

with this recommended reduction, the department will have 170 vehicles, the department is being approved to purchase, ten others so we are recommending, supervisors, which is not before you, because we are not recommending a cut we are recommending approval of ten additional vehicles for the department so that they will have a total, of 10 extra trucks for 15/16 and the second one that i will go to right now. and let me just reemphasize if you approve the department's request and you are replacing a vehicle at 32,000 miles on it. >> it is important to know that all of the vehicles are replacement vehicles. we believe that the replacements of the fleet is inadequate and short and i think that we might have a

little bit of confusion on the miles, we think that it has considerably more miles on it, i can't speak to that. but i can speak that the fleet manager has identified this vehicle for replacement because it has been in the central shops numerous times since its purchase, it breaks down constantly, which is frankly more disruptive than not having the vehicle at all. the second one is a van... >> mr. rose, >> this will be in the first year, 14/15. just approve one request for a replacement truck, 651685, purchased in 1997 and has driven approximately 75,000. the department met the requirement to reduce the

vehicles by 15 percent in part, this is the same statement that i made in the prior thing. they are going to have 170 vehicles, the department is approved to purchase, ten other trucks, and we are recommending ten replacement vehicles out of ten and reduction of two, and the reasons are as i stated basically that one has 32,000 miles and roughly on it and one has roughly 75,000 miles on it. those are our recommendations. and if you do not accept the budget analyst recommendation on the trucks, i would suggest that you you do accept the minor cut based on the quotation price. >> okay. >> any discrepancy between what the what the quote is, and what was budgeted for the vehicles. and you know, our fleet is does

not happen on the ground and attempting to do their jobs, and these are all replacement vehicles and we have budgeted them, with our own dollars and tried to prioritize them, and this is a front staff delivery service issue that our own food analyst and staff has identified in need of replacement. >> okay. >> the budget, and the difference in the quote if you will, but in my perspective, highlights areas in district two and one that one of the trucks will serve, but i know from the other districts this is the delivery of the guarding services that the residents do demand them and i do want to see that, and see that happen. so, that will be my suggestion, and colleagues welcome any comments. >> supervisor mar? >> thank you, and i will just chime in, and i am okay with

the reduction of the quote amount, but i think that the two vehicles, are necessary for rec and park department and so i will not be supporting the budget analyst request to reduce it, and support the rec and park department, to add those two additional vehicles. >> so purpose mar, do i hear you making a motion to accept the recommendations for rec and park, except for the two vehicles, although we will accept the quote. >> yes, i make that motion. >> okay. >> i will second that. >> we have a second and could we take that without objection? >> so moved. >> thank you. >> and next we have our planning department. thank you. supervisors, we have this productive conversations and we are in agreement on the budget at this point and i want to thank the analyst and the staff for the work, and happy to answer any questions shs thank you. >> okay. >> thank you, mr. ram, any questions for mr. ram? >> okay. mr. rose, could we go to the

revised report. >> yes, mr. chairman and members of the committee on page 6 of the report, recommended of the reduction, 323,757, of that amount, savings and reductions still allow an increase of 8 million dollars, or 27, 283,195, and of that amount, the department incurs with the recommended reductions on page 7 and 8 of the report. >> any questions for mr. rose or for mr. m? >> okay, do we have a motion, supervisor mar and breed? could i have a motion to accept the recommendations? >> the motion that you can take that without objection? >> thank you very much. >> okay. and up next, we have the district attorney's office. >> good morning, share ferrill,

and supervisors, kristine, standing in for the district attorney. we have reached agreement with the budget analyst on their proposed cuts, and happy to answer any questions, if you have any. >> okay, thank you, mr. beary, if no more questions, why don't we go to your report mr. rose. >> on page 13 of our report, i recommended reductions to the proposed budget, 344,834. and of that amount, 77,579 are ongoing savings and 267, 256 are one time savings and these will allow a increase of 1.7 million for the budget and the recommended reductions of 137, 797 and 15/16, and 75,000 a one time safe ands these reductions will allow an increase of 171,000, or four tenth of a

percent, in the department's budget, and we still consider it to be a policy supervisors, regarding the designation of the previously approved positions by the board of supervisors and there is a limited term of positions for the district attorneys and the domestic violence unit and as i understand it, except for the policy matter which we did not make a specific cut, the district attorney controls the recommended reduction on page 14, to 17 of the report. >> okay, thank you mr. rose. >> any questions for mr. rose or bary. >> if not, do we have a motion to accept the analyst recommendations? >> so moved. >> could we take that without objection. >> thank you. up next we have juvenile probation. >> good morning, committee. chairman ferrill, we have had very productive conversations with the budget analyst, this past week, and we are in agreement with the recommendations for the reductions in our budget.

>> okay. thanks. colleagues, no other questions, we will move away to mr. rose's report. >> excuse me hold on, supervisor avalos. >> just some questions from last year at log cabin there was maintenance work, and replacing the showers, we went back and forth about that, could you say that work has been done. >> that work is actually in progress and we are working closely with dpw and in the process of contracting with the vendors that are actually going to do the work and so it is schedule... >> and the list before us as an emergency thing, and it is just done now? >> unfortunately these processes take a lot longer than we would like but the work is in progress. and should be completed this year. >> okay. thank you. >> the tone was different, last year, but that is how things

work around here. >> okay, thank you. >> no other questions, mr. rose, why don't we go to your updated report, please? >> mr., chairman, and members of the committee on page 22 of our report, i recommended the reductions of the proposed budget, 158,133, of that amount, 25,,000 in savings, and these reductions are an increase of 1.8 million of 4.9 percent of the department for the budget, and our recommended reduction to that total, 163,527, 25,000 ongoing savings and 138,000 are one time savings and these will allow an increase of 3.6 million or 9.2 percent in the departments 15, 16 budget and as i understand it the department does incur with the recommended reductions. >> thank you, mr. rose, any questions for mr. rose, or the department? could i have a motion to accept the analyst recommendations? we have a motion? we can take that without objection. >> okay.

>> okay, up next, thank you very much, we have adult probation. good morning, supervisors. i am the chief probation officer, and the staff were ordered productive conversations that we had this week also and we are in agreement with the board's revised analyst recommendations with the exception of one item, and which is our attrition rate. and there is a recommendation to raise adult probation's attrition rate, 143,782 in 14, 15, and 167,190 in 15/16 and as i reported last week's session, there were already about 75 officers short of what we should have to supervisor our case loads, for apta standards and this cut will result in an

additional adding additional probation officer to that and prevent me of moving forward to being able to hire an officer for the sex offender unit relative to the containment model and i appreciate that we have had the significant salary savings over the last couple of years ask that is because we staffed up and hired 35 positions and so those savings that previously had been available are no longer available, because we have actually hired those staff. so, i respect mr. rose's recommendation that i would ask that the board not take this specific recommendation to increase our attrition that will further drive our caseload, shortfalls. >> okay, thank you, colleagues any questions right now? >> okay. mr. rose, could you go to your report? >> yes, mr. chairman, on page 28 of our report, our recommended reduction, and all of which are ongoing savings, and it would allow an increase

of 4.2 million and 15.6 percent in the department's 14/15 budget and recommend closing out the prior year, that will allow the return of 9,646 to the general funds and together those two recommendations total 329,969 and recommend placing, 358,000 on the budget and finance committee reserve, and pending justification for these, and these funds were requested by the department and consultants to formalize the implementation of the criminal justice department, these funds were not included in the 13, 14, and the 15, 17, 18, information and communications and technology plan previously adopted by the board of supervisors and the department has 528,000 in unspent funds that were appropriate ated by the board of supervisors and our recommended reductions 341,731 in 15, 16 and ongoing

safe togs increase, of 2 million, or 6.5 percent to the department's budget, and so as i understand it, the department concurwise all of our recommendations, including the reserves shown on pages 29 and 30, with the exception of the attrition savings and the only thing that i will add about the attrition savings mr. chairman and members of the committee, one of our analyst josh low this year, and he gave me a copy of his notes, and let me just read you what he has in his notes. under attrition and savings, 510,000 in permanent surplus in 13, 14, and so they added 510,000 in surplus, and our recommended reduction, our recommended cut is 105,073. with the department also did not comment on, is that in

addition to the attrition savings, we have recommended an additional 2 positions. for the department. and so for these reasons, we believe that our recommendation is very reasonable, and we recommend that you accept it. >> mr. rose, again, what is the department, or the department's budget going from last year to this year in increase of how much? >> it is going up four million 465,988 or 16.8 percent and now in fairness to the department, let me be my own devil's advocate, when we made that presentation, of an increase in the department's budget, that includes salary increases and so that is some what misleading and that is not the basis of recommended cut and the basis is based on a detailed analysis of what our analyst did and as i told you before, we are very conservative and it is why, supervisors in the report that you requested that we issued

today, separately, it shows huge surpluses every year. in salary surpluses. >> okay. >> we have not even scratched the surface. >> thank you mr. rose. >> supervisor avalos? >> i would like a motion to take all of the recommendations including attrition savings. >> okay. >> yeah, okay. >> we can take that without objection. >> okay. >> thank you very much. >> to our arts commission, please. good morning the stephenson arts commission and i want to thank the budget and analyst office for the dialogue over the past week and we are currently not yet in agreement with the recommendations for the reduction of 110,790 and there is a reduction of 100,000 recommendation to the furniture and fixture and equipment to moved to the veteran's memorial building next year, we feel

that we have gone through an elaborate process through the mayor's budget phase and we had a review of the budget through the department of real estate and we do have the project manager from the department of public works, here to help answer any questions. but we feel that the budget has already been reduced in the discussions that we have had today. and we feel like it is an adequate budget to fund the move to the war memorial for the arts commission and this is an important move us and allow us to care for the specific art collection and allow them the access to the space in the veteran's war memorial building. >> regarding the recommendation, we do have a staff member in this position and we do expect to fully expend the allocation for the temporary salaries in the next fiscal year and in fiscal year 16 and so we are not in agreement at this time. >> okay, just to understand the budget analyst is recommending 110,790 in year one and 7,000 in year two. >> you are objecting to all of

it. >> yes. >> correct. >> mr. rose, your report? >> yes. mr. chairman, members of the committee, on page 35 of our report, a recommended reduction to the proposed budget, 110,790, as he just stated of that amount, 10,790, are ongoing and 100 one time savings. and all of the recommended reductions are ongoing savings, and mr. chairman and members of the committee, this department, this is absolutely classic, burt wyman of our staff is here and i have his notes. and i mean, you can't make these notes up. that is how classic they are. let me read them to you. the department has budgeted 21 percent eight more work stations and office chairs, than positions, the combined average cost of the chairs and work stations are $5300 or

42,000 more than needed. partners stated these additional desk work stations are for unattorneys and unpaid staff, the cost are ten percent greater than similar chairs recently purchased and approved by this board of supervisors, ten percent more. and the department is budgeting 81 additional chairs of 37,600 range from 36 percent to 42 percent more than similar chairs recently purchased by the public utilities commission, approved by this board of supervisors. 60 stackable chairs at 384 dollars per chair for a total of 23,040, similar chairs priced at $100 per chair on staples.com. and furthermore, the chosen vendor which is herman miller, on-line, price, for the budgeted number of chairs, is

over $1700 less than the budget's budgeted amount, including shipping and taxes. the department has budgeted 48 office chairs at $919 per chair for 44,112 dollars. similar high quality supportive chairs, were $250 to $400 less in staple's.com. and this was 919 dollars, that they budgeted. the chosen vendor, for the budgeted number of chairs is $5500 less than the department's budget amount including shipping and taxes the department budgeted 46 work stations of an average cost of $4400. that is 204,000 in total, similar high quality work stations from vendors cost, $1500 to $2500 less per work station. one dishwasher at $1900, $1300

greater than the median dishwasher, on best buy.com, and two fridges at $1800 per, and $1,000 greater than the median price on best buy.com, and one lecturn, over 3800 more than the highest on office max and 2438 greater than median price on office max.com, the department has provided one vendor quote for movage and stoertage of the art collection, and our recommended reduction of 100,000 if it is accepted the department would still have over 600,000 or 68 percent of its total budget, to purchase furniture and equipment, more than the amount based on the budget and analyst review. this is a classic example of what our analysts do. and as far as the temporary salaries are concerned, that

was based on historical experience and reflect the actual expenditures. >> thank you, mr. rose, i appreciate that. >> supervisor mar. >> okay. >> i just wanted to know if he could respond, and i would like to thank our budget analyst and burt for the thorough notes and i have never heard that level of detail, but it sure what you are saying makes sense, but i know that the protection of the civic art collection and a major move are different than your usual shift of furniture and moves. >> yes, first of all let me address the specific addition of the work stations for our interns. you will see that our budget for general fund is going down for the next two years. and given the current situation in the city and our response to needing to be able to look at the situation we have been very efficient rather than asking for new staffing position to bringing in the interns from the golden school of policy and

other areas to assist in the work. i think that the additional work stations are to accommodate the unpaid staff and yes, there are additional stations that we have now and we are not asking for additional staff to sit in those seats, but we are asking for seats that we can have our interns and additional staff to sit in. in regard to the vendor selection, i will ask that tyler lamont from the management team speak to that issue. >> good afternoon, supervisors and i am tara and i am the project manager and i developed the budget for the furnishing for the arts commission. i am sorry that burt the analyst did not contact me before calling staples and a number of others to find prices. >> we base our prices on several key criteria for the city employees, this is the

functionsalty, what does the person do and dur ability and sustainability and these are critical issues and so one of the issues with respect to the arts commission is a small department and so it suffers from the economies of scale for the admin, for the veteran building is $4200 compared to $8600, down to $4,000. and we have we have done these project and old procedure jects and we have not gone out to bid yet, and these are, the one question that i did get from burt is why someone in the basement have as decent a chair as someone in an office. well the basement is a critical function, it