that, of course city workers make you know much more of a living go wage and have great benefits and our nonprofit workers should have it, too it's a total inequality another point i want to bring up again private contractors with the city have those awkward increases from the contract and payroll some have a calculation ♪ there to have a for profit in the contract so this is a complete enequality between the nonprofits and the for profits contractors and the reality is the work percentage your members do they serve the hotels and help people find houshdz they're open the front lines of the constitutional rights and our workers what we see our workers really struggling and having to have

longer than and longer than consultant time and not being able to support they are families and trying to go and find other work that is hurting the residents of the city so this is not a lot of money this shouldn't be a big thing this is what is fair it put in line with other workers in the city and simply keeps you want to mp i >> thank you . next speaker. >> >> good morning. i'm doggie diner doug styles the director of the hocking beggar program when the committee improved we don't see any increased revenue we don't sell properties we work with people at huckleberry we work with families in san francisco it is only coming to our contractor with the we have to ask for

increases we can keep with some of the expends we have i'm going to throw a couple of numbers all right. in the last year through our improvements increased by 7.4 percent our benefits over the last 5 years have increased annually 15 percent we have a had percent increase in the afternoon for our staff 1.5 percent didn't add up and adding 7.5 is a step towards that we need a loefrment fix so we don't have to come forward here everyday pass this onto the full board and talk about long term strategies for the challenge. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i'm nancy deputy director of the social services we serve over 22

hundred people in the city that are hopeless the point i want to make the speakers have said things about the long term solution think about do the math if the minimum wage is - what does 7.5 percent get you may $23 a month or $5 a week bethink about that in making this dignities. >> thank you. >> thank you for putting this into process pefb. >> debbie from the human services network i want to look at 9 properties for a moment i understand that some supervisors are uncomfortable that came about shortly after the budget process concluded i agree that is not the way we want to do

things but one crucial piece of information after the process was done in october the controller put out a report $22 million in unanticipated revenue for fiscal year 2014-2015 if we had known about the $22 million when the 3wuk9 u budget process was going on i feel confident the board would have live approved 7.5 percent that combined with the mayors percentage would be less than i think the speakers have spoken lont to the need and you've heard hours and hours of testimony talking about the needed many of the needs have beenes batdz by policies that led to tremendous rent increases in areas where our nonprofits are most needed

with improved wages and benefits those are great things but exudate our needs this deserves to go to the full board for a vote and imexplore you pass this out the committee today. >> thank you mofrnl on the public that wishes to speak mr. chairman we're ready to close public comment. >> okay public comment is closed. schair. >> thank you. i wanted to thank all the speakers from the nonprofits management and workers for many of the human services system in the city but i'll call it our critical safety net this is an issuance or issue about fairness and urban finished business from the last nonprofit i want to read from the board

resolution that thought passed introduced in july and passed in august that was sponsored by supervisor mar, supervisor yee supervisor cohen and i believe supervisor kim there are a stronger majority on the board to follow through with the language upon release of the city caver the general fund balance versus the soon to be budget and be it therefore resolved be it therefore resolved that the board of supervisors shall approve the amount up to $3.57 million for the fiscal year to fund a cost of don't go business that contract with the city and county of san francisco so i'll urge my colleagues to as many norm said send this forward to the full board so there is a vote and i stronger urge your support for the supplemental i make a motion we move and

support the supplemental. >> thank you supervisor mar (clapping) supervisor kim. >> thank you chair dpaerl i want to notwithstanding supervisor mar and sdmoomz for bringing 13th century this supplemental before the board having served on the budget committee i've become conservationist when it comes to the city coffers when i support the supplemental appropriations and one of the last rotates to come in first from the supplemental proipthdz i want to make sure when we do things ratting ad hoc or appetites meal in their important priorities for the city i think to make the proipgdz are in june when we have a look at the entire pie of the city needs and make good decisions based on you'll the priorities that's being said in june question didn't have a

complete picture of the revenue as we don't every june if we had known an additional $22 million were coming in 0 not only the 7.5 cost of living i would have said this board would have done a full 3 percent i think at this time we have a complete picture of the financial revenues that can building spent out in the fiscal year? a fieftd fund in the a equality issue when our contracted get a cost of doing by itself, if you were doing for nonprofit legal or real estate services or other contracting services on a regular basis at the board you get a step up that's automatically in yourself karaoke we should be providing that same for nonprofit workers

(clapping) and that makes a statement on behalf of the city we spent those who do services that are incredibly their work is not as valued we expected you to live in powerful to do this work this is the wrong statement coming from the city i hope structurally we're able to see that as a city and look at it an elevator or step up with the contracts he fully support that and not only are we doing the 7.5 today but we're doing it late this should have gone to the workers in july this is a short time of the year and then on a personal level i spent 6 years in the nonprofit sector i started well, i started at

$27,000.33 when i changed job and over the course feeling 6 yshdz my salary went up roughly 5 thousand dollars in my year on the board my salary is do you believe that in 5 years it is important in by the president our workers to live here and do the important work whether organizing or providing health care services this is something we support on an annual based i'll share one story a colleague at a nonprofit he was a lawyer and worked with the children and youth in householder that were impacted by denies and he went on food stamps to support his family i think that is just not what we want our workers that are doing most of the important work to go throw in a comprehensive time in the city i support the supplemental today.

>> supervisor tang. >> thank you. i agree with the majority of supervisor kim's comments reilly that wanting to hostile how important our nonprofit workers are previously i volunteered for a joint for free that's how important the services are for the community i know that my procedure makes people confused about playing my intentions i have voted against supplementals that were foster by high colleague supervisor farrell not because i didn't believe in the process but my hesitation with the original resolution why i couldn't support that promise i want to make sure by the look at the fundamental issues as many of you stated long term you don't have to come back and fight for

the pieces of funding and the brubt budget process i want to remind you ooufsh i've supported the increasing the minimum wage to address the long term term infrastructureal issues see back then i supported a nonprofit certification supplemental i generally don't support supplementals i think the only without parole one i support outside of the budget process to make sure that we can make sure our nonprofits stays here in san francisco and make sure they get on their feet if they're in trouble so i want to remind you there's been times i deviated from what i believed in to make sure that our nonprofits in the long term can survive in san francisco i believe that this deserves time at the full board

to the members to vote on i'll deeight from supervisor mar and say were so through the budget i want to taking into consideration in the grand scheme of things i'll support it to the full board to the full board but really for me it's a process issue right now, i'm so on to considering all this with the budget process that is very, very soon. >> supervisor avalos. >> thank you i appreciate this item going to the forbidding without recommendations i think that maintains because there were there was a majority off people even with the change of the supervisor who will support this according to the reds that was passed last year just i understand the concerns

about process but just process for increasing the cola is in process for that 15 years if not more, more every year we get to cola as part of the budget process and it happens to be in the mayor's office budget office in the mayor's office so there's been years we've actually had a hearing mid year to talk about how to get the cola into the budget process when the budget comes before the board of supervisors we actually have been programming reprogramming or doing add backside from 15 to $20 million over the past years and the co-la a 5 to $6 million is not it is eased to get into and add that process is only able to move other than 15 to

$20 million i know we're part of the process and the process is ongoing for forever we want to make sure this part of the process this constitution we are having right now can form w45i9s happening in the mayor's office to get co-la in the budgeted to program before it comes to the board of supervisors and focus on other things around san francisco affordability crisis thank you to everyone for coming here and your testimony and actually your work providing services for low income struggling as follows i have a lot of friends that worked at evidently wood they worked longer a year and dedication and didn't get paid well but they believe in and they made a huge difference in people's lives and decisive to get paid well. >> supervisor mar. >> i guess i wanted it thank

supervisor tang for her suggestion for me to modify my motion i'll modify you my motion i'm really glad supervisor kim talked about her nonprofit orientation and most of my working for the grassroots nonprofit organizations and supervisor avalos as well i know the stories and the struggles that people expressed and the testimony today the burn out the turnover the neighborhood instability caused by it but especially the defunding of the hard working community-based organizations i'm glad you put a face on the budget supplemental and appreciative that we're going to be able to move forward

with a positive recommendation mountain valley pipeline my hope to with kweep e keep did pressure on city council will city hall with the question of parity thank you to etch i make the motion we move forward without recommendations. >> i'll be supporting the motion to the full board when this came out about last year, i i obviously support a lot of the the colas but the present nature outside of the budget process is dangers and not support 2 i said that last year this is what i said that being said this is something else we need to address so i'm happy to do that certainly but the process at the end of a budget cycle to say

based on the can have if a extra money this is a dangerous precedent can't make that in san francisco if we do so those funds are not going they don't go to other causes only to reduce the deficit so not as if it's free money that went to another project, if you will, but again that being said i think that's the right call we have the discussion again next week. >> supervisor mar made it without recommendations madam clerk item 7. >> a hearing a presentation from the planning department and the mayor's office of housing and community development on the disbursement for the incongruous

for the rincon hill community and the stabilization fund. >> thank you madam clerk that is sponsored by supervisor kim. >> and so supervisor i'm going to turn it over to lead the hearing. >> thank you chair farrell and thank you to the committee for hearing this item in disof last year you've been following the mayor's office of housing and community development discovered 45 thousand dollars plus dollars dedicated to the infrastructure improvement south of market withdrawn from the city account at the area of association of bay area government a bag since discovering the withdrawal that included $374000 plus of the rincon hill the city attorney's office demanded the return of

the fund i believe that two or three weeks ago the fund were sgrurd without proper authorization soon after recorded in the paper it was fraud and by the time of fund rob was arrested and i want to recognize and this thing the good work of city attorney's office the office of public finance and investigation of this matter after discovered by the mayor's office of disabilities and a bag and the finest authority they voted on february 2nd to return those fund in total to the city i did call this public hearing a little bit prior to all the exciting developments that have come out since we've learned of the missing fund i thought it

was important to hold the hearing today to really delve into and have a report back to the board on the missing funds that is in the process of being returned and the projects that have been identified to go n up in the south of market i want to recognize that those fund were held in place for a little bit over three or four years even though they were ready to be spent down for pressing needs throughout the reejdz from rincon hill ranging from south park in a neighborhood that has the highest rate of vehicle pedestrian collisions in the city yet those dollars were not spent down even though there was a cac clear criminal outcome to the issue that is separate i want to get a good understand how impact feeds are sgrurd and

who has the oversight i think what is troubling outside of the criminal aspect with the impact fees i'm troubled by the factored we have those fund in place is as early as 2011 when i was first in office not spent down for my entire term at the board of supervisors because they had noting been spent down it disclosed an opportunity for the fraud and perhaps an opportunity preserved by this employee abused it was almost inviable to the community and our office because we have a diversity of impact fees through a variety of plans we release we have a vulnerability in the city i want to have a good understanding who the oversight for the funds are and how we can

make sure those funds are spent down i do want to recognize i do centuries dlovl both this office there's been there's been triggers put in place previously through the city i know that nadia's office in the office of public finance released an audit with a bag trying to figure out how the withdrawals happened one way or the other without the cities authorization so help us recognize that fairly early on that being said i want to make sure we can prevent something like that from happening again i have some presenters here first from the housing and urban development and from the statewide i citywide planning

said our key members the south of market stable shut up fund have a hard stop at noon and this is 1155 can we ask our chairs to step up first. >> before that i'm sorry i don't know if there's opening comments from the budget members. >> supervisor kim can i say that the gentle council for a bag is here i want to authenticities the finance authority for the corporation mr. clark yes, ma'am bewilder the fund is an 2k5i7b9 and separate person from a bag there's a separate investigation to insure that nerves happens again mined from the finance

from the corporation it is an entity that needs more oversight but it separate from a bag. >> thank you supervisor mar any public comment? supervisor mar and i sit on the a bag as directors i was going to mention the council of a bag and they're here for questions from the budget committee. >> thank you, supervisor kim and supervisors thank you for let's see us get to this thank you, supervisor kim and staff for putting this hearing together and tirelessly workings working to get those fund and also the staff of the city attorney's office for getting the fund restored and the gentleman from the chronicle and

a bag for restoring the fund our biggest thaktsz to the community to have those fund restored to put that mild the money we saw the money was stolen and as steward of those fund with the south of market stakeholder we worked with the community everyday and know the incredible need for investment following the notice those fund will be returned the cac held a meeting with the structural to finalize the projects that were the most immediate need a custom nation of a process where the residents and nonprofit organizations overwhelming and feedback we've received at supervisor kim alluded to silver is a dangerous and sadly something dangerous

neighborhood for pedestrians in reaching a crisis selma is ground zero we recommend those be used for crossroads to intrshgsdz that are particularly dangerous for the youth and citizens in the area and the safety xhochltd in south park a place that serves families in sro's we looked forward to working with the board of supervisors to assure those public safety issues move forward as quickly as possible i'm going to turn it over to my chair. >> hi members of the board this is definitely an emotional rooster and affordability for

the weigh on the cac decision-making process community engagement is only one piece a community process is is lengthy and takes intention and thoughtfulness so moving forward along with tracking the process adu's of the existing program we're planning to identify the projects and align them with quarterly financial updates from staff the projects that came out of the funds are the community projects and we can't wait to get them all started. >> so i don't know if you have a little bit more time i want to ask about the process when you first learned that the infrastructure feeds 0 when do you first learn about the infrastructure feeds being in

existence? >> so in 2013 i believe it was it should be in the presentation the timeline this will be you know unfortunately, i jumped lady of the presentation but we learned about the fund in mid-2013 and at the destruction u instruction of the cac the staff prepared apple update on those and since that time we've been working to schedule meeting with a number of city department liked rec and park to identify the best used for those funds, in fact, we've had south park many of the presenter slated to come in at the time, we learned the fund were missing in middle 2013, the cac had been working to identify the projects in bringing in the various nonprofits and city groups that had a the same thing in those

infrastructure projects. >> a year and a half for the fund our offense was aware of the needs for the funds i walked ♪ 2011 so you know one of my kind of big annoyances about the issues we have needs in the community that could have been spent do you think i'm occurs once again the cac learned about the fund how long does it take to disburse those funds >> our process has been to you know once we were alerted to the fund we did an outreach and invited did agrees and members that have upcoming like rec and park to come to us to