printed monthly instead of weekly and what's included in the evaluation as in prior years the board has the discretion to award the contract as you see fit to serve the city's needs for public notices to diverse to diverse communities and historical this contract has been awarded to most or all bidders and add additional outreach newspapers if you feel that the needs of the community would be better served.

i'm sorry i meant the west side. twin peaks and sunset. >> we reached out to as many as we could we can work on finding a way to include them as part of the group but right now these are the only ones we have received. >> can can we make an amendment then to reach out to west monthly and the sunset beacon? >> okay we will do that. >> just for clarification purposes, if we did amend to that affect would that allow them to come under this umbrella if they became a responsive bidder to you? >> right we would reach out and work with them correct. >> okay all right. any further questions or comments. okay we'll open this up to public comment on

items ten and 11 please. >> advertising neighborhood advertising. i submit in english and i know they would never publish my paper it's disappointing. they never published my paper or even have an interview with me and funds if you understand this is all too limited. [inaudible]. >> thank you very much. is there any other members of the public that wish to comment on items ten or 11? >> hello i'm with the san francisco examiner and weekly

san francisco examiner is the highest circulated newspaper in san francisco. we out circulate our competitors by 75 thousand on sunday and 55 thousand on thursdays and 15 thousand monday tuesday wednesday and friday. our newspapers is free. we concentrate on san francisco's knews and the great thing about a free newspaper is it gives every person in san francisco the opportunity to pickup no matter what your financial means are and in addition to that we have a pick up rate on the racks and it gives a benefit to the city by being able to read the city's message and stepping over to the san francisco weekly we

do have coverage on the west side. it said the circulation was ten thousand and that's incorrect we circulate 70 thousand of those weekly every week and 64, 300 of them are in san francisco proper and 66 thousand are in the east bay locations so i just wanted to clarify that. >> thank you. anybody else wish to comment? >> good morning i'm from the san francisco chronicle on behalf of myself and colleagues i want to thank you for considering the san francisco chronicle as one of the recipients of this type of advertising we take an active role serving our communities with pride and dedication as well as civic

and social responsibility and it's a definitive voice for the region and we reach more than 57 percent of the adult population in the county and vote in local elections and we're proud of the san francisco season of sharing fund raising money for bay area communities this past year and a contributor to the city's food bank and we created sf local and instead of celebrating with a small gathering we threw a party for the city. we appreciate your trust in the chronicle and the business relationship we've had over the years. we'd like to ask you to award us the full

advertising budget and we're confident we can serve you well and keep the residents of our great city city informed and engaged in matters of importance. >> thank you. anybody else want to comment on items ten and 11? okay seeing none public comment is closed and we'll have a few amendments here and we're doing the chronicle and the examiner as in prior years past is my understanding so we're going to use the examiner for most of this year and go back to using both of them is that correct? >> correct. >> why don't we take these separately colleagues and we're going to endeavor to send out as committee reports

so could i have a motion to approve item number 10 for tomorrow's board of supervisor's meeting? >> members of the committee. just if you were going to move item number ten and you are going to split between the two papers i'd recommend you amend it today to include the two papers and i do have amendments here if you are interested for for the clerk. >> thanks we'll do that. okay. let's entertain a motion to that effect. >> through the chair i'd like to make a motion to amend item ten to include the chronicle so it's split between the examiner. >> okay we have a motion by supervisor tang to reflect what we've done in past years and we can take the amendment

without objection and that's the underlying item as amended and we can send to tomorrow's bored of supervisor's meeting and okay colleagues item 11 neighborhood outreach. do you want to propose the amendments? >> i'd like to amend item 11 to include chinese outreach and second supervisor yee's motion. >> okay can i have a second by by supervisor mar we can that i by supervisor mar we can take that without objection. do you want to clarify your motion supervisor yee? >> i'd like to include the west portal monthly and the sunset beacon do outreach to them and consider them as a possible newspaper to do advertising for the city. >> okay we have a motion by

supervisor yee and seconded by supervisor tang and can take that without objection so colleagues as amendmented item number 11 is a committee report for tomorrow's board of supervisor's meeting. we can take that without objection. okay. thank you very much. . we're not ready for item 9 yet, correct? >> correct. >> okay. colleagues at this point in time, we're going to allow these departments to continue to have discussions with mr. rose's office and we're going into recess until 1 o'clock and we're going to hear items 2 and 3 and we have item number 9 left and a motion so look forward to seeing everyone back at 1

>> okay good afternoon. at this point welcome back from the recess of monday, june 22, 2015 of our budget & finance we're continuing with items 2 and 3 and what i'd like to do at this point, i understand that since we wanted to recess we've had 3 departments that came into agreements i'd like to invite them up the sheriff's department and the dcyf if you could someone from the did not have our budget analyst report. >> sheriff. >> good afternoon mr. chair and supervisors yes (laughter) we are in agreement

we're in agreement i guess you want to hear in the budget analyst we have a quick response. >> well sheriff weight take the others departments in agreement and do it as a group. >> okay. >> dcyf i saw mr. sue and director ram quickly make sure on the mike you're in agreement. >> thank you, supervisors john ram i'm happy to say we've reached on agreement the cut is from general fund our understanding that was backed by fee revenue i'll leave that up to the committee. >> appreciate that director ram. >> ms. sue. >> good afternoon committee we are also in agreement we also want to thank mr. rose'ss office london and our mayor's office of budget kelly the past director.

>> thank you, ms. sue okay mr. rose - mr. rose, can we go to your report on planning and dcyf the guys from planning want the clarification of non-general fund and general fund. >> and quickly as it relieves the rest of the department we'll go in the origin order but fire out of order the chief what is a family obligation that has to attend chief let's see do this i see how eager everyone is to be on the mike before the committee (laughter). >> >> yes. mr. chairman, and members of the committee our revised numbers in

2015-2016469067 and we're also recommending the general fund of hundred and 83 plus and for 2016-2017 hundred and 24 thousand 169 that's the sheriff. >> on the planning department - 33 - >> our recommended recommendations are 28931989 and that's for 2015-2016 and for 2016-2017 it is $25,000 plus and on the department of children youth and families. >> mr. rose before you leave

planning there was a question about whether or not it is general fund or non-general fund. >> sure. >> those positions were in long-range citywide planning my understanding they can because taylor there's a general fund it can, general fund. >> okay. thank you. >> so we'll be attempting to take those as general fund actions. >> on children youth and their families that's on page 27 - the revised numbers supervisors are we have no recommendation in 2015-2016 our recommendations are 269996

excuse me. 26959- >> 2659 that's what i just - >> excuse me. supervisors. >> take our time we want to get it right. >> right. >> this is what i was given it's this right here. >> ross the numbers yes. >> okay all right. the corrected numbers let me correct that is 301719 in 2015-2016 and 301719 in 2016-2017 hundred 98656.

>> okay. thank you, mr. rose now really quick sheriff you want an address comment before we go on vote on this? thank you for remembering chair farrell when we presented last week, we got a request for more information on station transfer unit i know this is not directly tied to a mr. rose but to answer the questions we want to present to you maybe that can be brought up on the screen on the next page so if you look this is what it is required of the san francisco police department in short they

would have to commit 91 thousand hours plus for the stations at a cost of $4969 million for the transfer units on the next page this is very, very quick on the next page you'll see from the san francisco sheriff's department a considerable deduction that is per year 35 thousand hours at a it cost of $1629 million theres a considerable savings next page the san francisco he sheriff's department is 59 thousand plus the sheriff's department is hundred 69 the difference of 69 thousand hours 91 plus is the equivalent of 4 sfpd officers so from the press from the push is

to put more officers on the street as we said we believe we can also affiliate that to utilize on fte and the cost is 67 percent less as well and then we know what is important the next slide to the police department it the hospital runs we're more happy to enter into a formal amendment all the time that will be a considerable savings to the please police and city by doing the hospital runs a nuke of supervisors and staff contacted us we want to complete that and i'll be happy to happy to do that >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you sheriff for putting the numbers so we've

been hearing regarding the sheriff transfer. >> station. >> excuse me. the station transfer system i appreciate it is very helpful i think we're in agreement i think this is one of the authors of the issues of the 0 police staffing we want to look for ways to make our law enforcement function as efficient as possible and if the two departments both building this is appropriate then i think we should be open to a lot of options one thing i'll say even if this is exactly as our portraying i have no reason to doubt that it is that's 44 offers a year 3 is certainly significant but that's basically one academy class and the analysis we've can you think shows we've got additional 5 hundred officers so even if in

the great idea and move forward with this is one piece of the solution i don't think you've suggested it is anything more than one piece of the solution i've not heard you say that but some of the narratives not but you but that started from the idea was this is somehow on alternative to staff the police department when it is potentially one piece of staffing up the police department. >> yeah. i agree i think there are multiple pieces not it on the table for example, the police department is on a multi yearly hiring plan we're not i think asserting how we can be that much more helpful awhile dealing with the attrition challenges i'll be happy to and the 44 their referring to too

include the hospital runs that's an academy placing class times two of another hospital run whatever we can do to get where we need to go and save money i encourage the supervisors together we can discuss how to make this work. >> sure i think our goal is to set goals for staffing with the understanding that whether it is civilianstion or other means to try to make the departments as efficient as possible i appreciate the numbers. >> okay. thank you colleagues questions or comments thank you sheriff. >> thank you. >> so colleagues we have now our budget analyst recommendations for the two departments for the sheriff's department and the dcyf and if we could have a motion to

- and planning i apologize a motion to accept those recommendations and i make a motion four this dcyf and the planning department. >> we'll take that without objection. >> okay thanks up next is the fire department chief joanne hayes-white. >> good afternoon. >> chief really quick in departments not no r in agreements perhaps an open discuss from the department heads i'd like mr. rose to give his report and the reductions and what our comfortable with for a cut prevention so what lurks in the middle. >> continuing chief joanne hayes-white san francisco fire department i want to acknowledge all the work we're close but no

totally in agreement with the budget analyst the cuts for the fiscal year is one million dollars million dollars plus we're at 7 o plus and prepared to go over what are 3 fundamental disagreements with the budget analyst. >> okay why not hear from mr. rose and then the decision. >> mr. rose. >> >> yes. mr. chairman, and members of the committee first of all, i'd like to put our recommendations in context we have recommended approval of increased expenditures over $11 million for the fire department in 2015-2016. >> those increases include funding for the vacancy positions in ems and the fire prevention and h twoshgs academy to increase the staffing levels

our recommendations is the expansion of fire and ems services target unnecessary costs in the proposed department lubricate i budget our reductions are one million dollars plus in 2015-2016 and that's less than 4 tenths of one period of time nermentdz less than one half of one percent. >> for 2016-2017 the total is 5 hundred and 4 thousand - 507.

>> supervisor farrell and we made a reduction in our recommendations of $200,000 which the department said they need for over 7, 8, 9 other than that, we'll not made changes. >> that's in 2015-2016. >> yes. >> that's the super bowl game thank you, very much. >> chief. >> thank you for the super bowl funding that was one of the 3 disagreements now we're down to 2 we feel strongly and appreciate the funding for our department and most of the departments have the faced the reductions and still making sure we're, if you will, our position the two disagreements are one over time allocate for recruitment to the tune of $240,000 we feel strongly i know many in the community through 9

support of director callahan and the civic services and the mayor's office bottom line we have a new testing process that is working out but we feel strongly i personally feel strongly is maintaining the diversity of men and women in uniform some of the initial numbers need improvements for that the diverse applicant pool the one way to have funds allocated for men and women in uniform to go out and recruit last year, it didn't get funded all the collective said thought that was money well spent on recruitment for $240,000 and the other large area and it is pulsing to me i know on 3 occasions the department has been criticized and analyzed for a function in 2002 before i was

chief the recommendation for nearly a $500,000 spending for the unit for 4 positions we're asking for 3, 13 years later for the same amount of time and we're criticized from all aspects this department does a good job we definitely do not want the positions deleted we'll take the the united states of america cuts and deal with that those o are the two things that remain and it adds up to $279,000 plus. >> could you talk about for year two that number for year two. >> i'll ask the cfo to come up. >> good afternoon mr. chair

some of that needs to be the attrition to the second year but in the neighborhood of i believe $300000 and ongoing savings. >> okay let me ask you this. >> as other departments come up to speak would that time right now helpful you we're taking action today rather than a do you see that person in court here today i would like something specific. >> that's misunderstood. >> it is helpful to have a few extra minutes. >> mr. chair the mr. rose has from the committee wishes to move forward with the money we'll load it into the financial system. >> okay. all right. >> ms. campbell. >> yes. i wanted to respond to the two recommendations that we

disagree with our recommendations are on audit finding two weeks ago we released an audit on the fire departments planning processes and the strategic planning we stated we are not recommend new general fund position we have a discussion in the topic what we have recommended one position this is consistent with other fire departments that have some kind of support strategy planning process we want to point out there's a highly paid position within the fire department which we recommended their responsibility was live strategic planning and planning my understanding the depended agreed their strategic planning process should be included we stand by our