we have lived at post street 737 post street together ever since we have been in this city, 20 years next month. i work for a number of entities you have recognized always in this service for the betterment for the greater good in this city. i fear that unless we are helped i'm going to be homeless and i'm going to die on the streets. i'm uncomfortable with the fairly recent designation of myself as disabled. i'm not good at asking people for things. i'm not something i want to become used to. i really need your help here. thank you for your time. >> thank you, mr. parker. public speaker: good morning. i'm don, i have

lived in the city for 25 years and i live in the castro. i thank you for your public service. your job is not easy. you deal with problems daily that the city faces.. some meetings like these are very long and open dialogue and i hope you find solutions. those are huge problems but this is not one today. this is basically from right and wrong. a small group of individuals are facing the market rate and ramp up to those market rates. the advocate for the national human rights campaign. he holds a solid commitment to civic responsibility, to

the lgbtq community. if we see today as the intervention of this city and private excuse for special privileges. we ask the city to allow these people to live here. the recent decision by the owner to raise those significantly effective subjects them not only from their home but from san francisco. please make the right decision. please do not let this happen. please let them contribute to the city i love. >> thank you for being here.

public speaker: hi, my name is treata. i don't live in san francisco anymore because i have been priced out. i live in oakland. i am now being priced out. i have a small business and i provide for staff so they can contribute. i understand that sequoia is running a business. as i sat here in these chambers, this is my first time here. i am horrified and i think that you should be ashamed because these are people. i heard from someone who is sick, i heard from someone who is a senior citizen. i heard stories that make me want to cry. like, i get this is your job everyday, but this is people's homes. people who have lived there

for 17 years. seriously? even if they are late 1 month. these are people. so i came to support colton because i'm new on the rainbow honor walk and they are doing it to preserve history. i feel this is very important.. as i sat here in this room, i am horrified and as i look at the landscape and looking at san francisco suing for this sanctuary city. sanctuary who? >> there is no applause allowed. >> i just wanted to put some heart in this discussion. what if that were your mother, what if that were your son or brother? what about you? are you going home tonight? because 6 months from now, colton might

not be. i think that's my time. >> thank you very much. public speaker: good to see you. thank you all three of you for your support for public education. i'm susan, the president of the united for education in san francisco. these are moving stories, these speakers who live in that apartment complex are the heart of san francisco and we need to keep them here. my comments will focus on don and public educators in san francisco. focus on san francisco public education, we have come here to talk about how housing is affecting the educators of san francisco. as

mr. pop lisa pointed out he spends many hours with the students he loves. we have heard so many stories over the last few years. as we were coming to chambers, he told me about a coworker, dedicated person, she was a mentor for him. last summer she left for santa rosa because she couldn't afford to stay here. not only are our students moving out, but also the educators who plan to stay here. i do hope that you will be able to continue the good work that you are doing and keep these educators and their neighbors where they currently are. thank you very much. >> hello. the director of housing rights committee.

i am so sick of coming here as you are probably sick of us. i prepared a whole bunch, but as i see people coming here and beg this corporation. pinnacle is one of the largest developers in the area. they are upholding well in the bay. they can afford to let this rest. we keep that you talking about how much affordable housing we need to build be we keep doing this on so many levels and we end up with a situation where tennants have to come and beg about how they are worthy to be in this city.

long-term residents have to come out here over and over to city hall and to their landlords and to their landlord's lawyers and >> how do we do that. one needed a paramedic in the lobby because it was too much for him. when are we going to stop this? when are we going to hold these accountable. when are we not going to lose anymore

units. >> thank you. >> thank you for your advocacy and your work. we appreciate seeing you. >> thank you, supervisors for having this hearing. i want to reiterate those thoughts. steven, the attorneys of the landlord says this is about the equities. damn right it's about the equities. it's about all of these people who have brought heart wrenching stories about how they are going to lose their home in their communities and how irreparable harm is going to be done to their lives and how this company wants to make as much money as possible. the city is trying to come up with a solution that works for people, but my understanding is that the company has blown

us off and not trying to work with the tennants. it's like the city is trying to come up with a solution. right now we are asking ourselves is it about what you can get away with or about what's right, because, things are shifting really quickly in this country and you are asking what you can get away with quickly or what is right. this is san francisco, this is our first line of defense. we need to protect our tennants, we need to protect this city. thank you. >> thank you. public speaker: hi, i'm born and raised san franciscan. i was here to speak at the urban shield comment for the finance committee. noticing the similarities between what we need to do in this age of trump where we are seeing deportations and

my colleague and this new era of restaurant spent all weekend fighting deportation at the airport and making the connection between deportation and displacement and evictions in san francisco. as a born and raised san franciscan, as fred said having to come here over and over and beg for our ability to stay in this city is something that we are going to need to keep fighting and we are going to keep fighting and we urge you to find solutions for the tenants. as you try to find solutions to prevent immigrants from being deported from this city. >> thank you. mr. robles? public speaker: good morning, committee members.

i feel anger and outrage about what's happening. i want to echo what the wife of mr. cone an amy said earlier. i did speak with mr. cone an who was on his way to this committee hearing was not able to make it because of his physical condition. the stress of this ordeal is causing him a great amount of stress. the fire department was here and he'sen route right now to san francisco general. that's the degree how an eviction situation can hurt particularly a senior. it turns his world upside down and now he's going to the hospital. we have to be with his wife so she can be with her husband. he's 74 years old. he has lived

there for 70 years. i keep talking about these unethical people, unethical business. every time the landlord says jump, it seems we have to jump. whenever it becomes this rent increase it becomes this trump like executive order and we have to bow down and obey. this is the anniversary of the hotel evictions. much of this is unethical. we have seen the effect of this on seniors. i'm here to say that it's wrong and we should not have to fight this hard to keep what it is that we have. we need to do a much better job as a city. it's shameful that we've had to endure, our seniors and other people with disabilities have endured unethical behavior by the real estate folks that have no conscious whatsoever.

>> thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. robles. public speaker: i didn't fill out a card. is that okay? i myself went through an ellis eviction and saw one of my upstairs neighbors died in the process because of the stress after living there for 25 years. and so i know what that is to be forced out of my immediate committee. i'm one of the lucky ones that was able to remain in my neighborhood, but my immediate community, i miss dearly because mr. jongz who lived across the street because he knew that i would call him if his light didn't go on at a certain time. another elderly woman knew i would

stop by on a daily basis. i can't do that right now. i would like you to work with the city to find a way to allow these people to stay in their homes with affordable rents. they have contributed their hearts and their wisdom to this community. for the greater san francisco community to not destabilize the community. please find a way for these people to stay in their homes. >> thank you. if you have not signed a speaker card, you are still welcome to speak. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. if you have already spoken, there is no more speaking time.

please come up to the mic and speak. >> sony, the legislative staff is here to provide answers to any questions. please step up to the mic, sir. if you would like to speak, please come to the mic. public speaker: this is very serious. very, very serious. my name is jeffrey amen and i live in the tenderloin, 10th district. i will support the honorable

mr. louis -- fair con. this is the paper. he's a black muslim. for us it's very strange because for 37 years iran has been so completely demonized to be a world military threat which it is not. expression about one lopsided media that i don't think anyone has confronted the united states media like this. i also support the jewish federation, jewish family and children's services. the organization of america, my -- i'm very angry. i

encountered four policemen . one of them was giving a citation to a homeless man who cannot afford it and they were laughing about it. i came to the city attorney's office to ask for the firing of that police officer and the captain of the tenderloin police station, she's go to to go and so does that police officer. this is the san francisco of saint francis, it is not. it is not. thank you. >>supervisor jane kim: thank you very much. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. before i hand over the hearing to supervisor peskin, i just want to thank all the members of the public for coming out. we in our district also had two major developments which many moon ago we had

negotiated a percentage of affordable units within those developments but with an expired affordability requirement. i know there is one development in president breed's district and i want to acknowledge the mayor's office of housing for working so closely with our office of tennants. we were able to come up with a resolution on south beach harbor marina and bayside villages in order to keep all of those tennants there with lifetime leases and also the city did purchase a portion to remain permanently affordable in the future. at this time we no longer negotiate those deals anymore because decades later which felt like a long time, we have found that we have many long-term and short-term residents with expired units that are facing eviction because they can not afford

the increased prices. working with the mayor's office, i know they have done in credible work to work with the owner. i have not called on this item and neither has president breed. i'm really looking forward to hear from sequoia as to why there is so much difficulty in coming to an agreement in saving the homes of so many teachers, residents that contribute greatly to this city. even if you don't, you should be able to stay here in your home, here in san francisco. i want to acknowledge the work of the mayor's office of housing. i know they made several offers to purchase these units. with no further comments, i would like to call supervisor peskin who is the chair of this district. >>supervisor aaron peskin: thank you, you took the words out of my mouth. this is an outmoded way of doing exempt bond.

we don't do them anymore. there are only two in san francisco especially with the south beach marina apartment issues. it's down to this building and the fillmore center, and what supervisor kim said is just right. this is the only instance where the owner is not being cooperative and i want to again thank olson lee and his staff and his previous staff, sophie hayward who have been willing to put our money where our mouth is, maybe not as much as equity would like. i mean, it's just horrible that at the dawn of the 21st century we are looking at a scene out of a charles dickens novel a hundred or more years ago. we are better than that, sequoia is better

than, mr. carter is better than that, ms. mccheery is better than that. quite frankly while there is no disagreement as mr. mcdonnell, counsel for the owner says about the rights, there is something that i have to say for the record and that is relative to the investment in so far as 80% of the units have been at market rate from the beginning of that investment and given what's happened in this real estate market, your client, sir, ms. mccherry, you have done extraordinarily well. when i hear about these 20% of the units which are occupied by seniors and disabled and musicians and the teachers who are educating our students. when i hear that they are

"bond loss". respectfully, it makes me want to throw up. so, ms. mccherry, i would like to ask you a few questions truly in the spirit of wanting to do a deal with you. a year ago, mr. lee and his organization offered a substantial amount of the taxpayers money in order to safe guard these 50 units with over 50 human beings in them. for a long-term, your organization countered that and subsequently we have made another offer that your organization has refused to even respond to. we are talking about real people's lives. i don't know how you sleep at night, but can we get a deal done, ma'am? >> we have some thoughts, some things that were willing to do. >> please speak into the mic,

man. and i have yourself. >> my name is cynthia mccherry at sequoia. we have some thoughts on what we are willing to do, but because of some proposals is not something that the ownership is interested in due to the fact that the bond financing is gone and our credit is no longer there, the cost of the financing has gone up significantly. >> i suspect that you and mr. lee or donald here can walk out in the hallway and talk about ways we can help refinance your project. we would be more than happy to help. we have financial resources and most importantly we have human resources count at 54 of them who by golly we need to work together to save so they can go home tonight and sleep in peace, and that is what we

have to do. i don't want to spend the next several years of my life trying to figure out every deal that you or any of your investors or the other llc's have other interest in san francisco. i don't want to spend the rest of my year this year trying to figure out how you are going to take permits out to do additional work on that building or the alcatraz theatre, but i will do that if we could not solve this issue where we are willing to adequately and fairly compensate your organization. we must get this deal done. i can ask you a million questions about who rider construction is and who rider post street llc is and who the real estate is and the apartments is, let's save that for another day because i would

like to finish this morning's hearings knowing that you are going to sit down with mr. lee where mr. mcdonnell has by the way, represented tennants in the past who is a practicing buddhist and cares about people wants to get it done. we are going to continue this hearing. you guys are going to come back with a beautiful wonderful deal and my tennants are going to be taken care of and they will live happily ever after. >> i'm not in a position. i'm not the owner. >> i understand that. but would you start to negotiate with our folks? donald can you do that? >> yes, sir. >> thank you, counselor. mr. lee, thank you for your efforts.

anything you want to tell us before i have a heart attack? >> i think this hearing again demonstrates the richness of this city and the need to preserve our economic diversity. measures, goals that the board and the mayor jointly share. we were very successful in negotiating agreements with south beach and bayside where it was a win win for everybody. and we hope that with the spirit of trying to get to a deal that we will come to a resolution that will also be a win win. and, again, let me just describe again, what we did for those other two transactions. we basically preserved the long-term affordability for all the units at south beach and as

they saw it were able to negotiate lifetime leases for all the existing tennants, for the units on turnover will be 70 units of the 172 will be preserved ultimately at middle income levels. and, so we can reach a deal. the folks that we negotiated were also for profit corporations who also had investors, who also in some cases had shareholders and they also had a fiduciary responsibility but were able to make a deal. i hope we are able to make a deal and preserve the homes for all of these wonderful people. >> thank you. i don't know if there is anything you want to add, but the floor is yours. i appreciate the work that you have done and that of your predecessor. sophie hayward. i was going to call her middle brook, that shows how

well i have known her. >> thank you, supervisor. i have been working in affordable housing for 20 years mostly as a developer for non-profit organizations and these sort of hearings are heart wrenching and important and i want to thank you all for your support and our efforts for this really important work that we do. i am confident if we have a partner on the other side of the table that is willing to negotiate with us, we can come to a fair and reasonable agreement for the owner and the residents. thank you. >> so, why don't we continue this to our next meeting. i'm sorry. >>supervisor jane kim: president breed? >>supervisor london breed: thank you, i wanted to thank supervisor peskin for his comments and for holding this hearing. one of the conversations that oftentimes

is ignored is a conversation around preservation of our existing affordable housing stock. we have those discussions on a regular basis primarily because we have so many affordable housing units developed specifically in district 5 through the redevelopment agency that are falling apart, but we also have as was mentioned as supervisor kim and supervisor peskin, the fillmore center. the expiration of units that will potentially lose their affordability and i know we have been working on that for over 2 years to try to come to a specific agreement around those particular units to protect the affordability for the people who are counting on us to do so. i mean, i don't know about you, even with the decent salary of the member of the board of supervisors, not only do i have a roommate, but if my rent went

up $500 basically i would have to figure out something and end up with bad credit. it's not fair to expect someone to pay a ridiculous amount of money and more importantly what i appreciate about the mayor's office of housing is their willingness to say, we are not asking you to put up any money, we are just asking you to work with us to figure out an appropriate dollar amount so that we can do all we can to preserve these units as affordable. i don't think that's an unreasonable request. i also appreciate supervisor peskin bringing up the refinancing and the bonding capacity and how the city with our decent bond rating could lend support in this particular matter. this is not something that is impossible to do, but, the folks who are at the table have to have the willingness to want to do it. so, i am committed just like

supervisor peskin to try to bring a resolution to this particular matter so the individuals who are just really probably living day-to-day in fear of what's going to happen to their homes, their livelihood so that they can sleep peacefully at night. i just want to thank all the members of the public who have come out in support of them, but more importantly i appreciate the desire to come to the table finally to try to come up with some sort of solution, and i am committed to being as supportive as i can to a resolution. i know mr. lee will do a great job at that. thank you all again, and we really appreciate the fact that we are finally getting some where on this particular issue and will continue to watch it closely. >>supervisor jane kim: thank you, president breed. i think we are all committed

to this project since it's all in our district. i want to reiterate to the owner of this property. it was very disappointing that we had to call on this item and i understand that you are no longer legally mandated to keep the units affordable. the city is offering to purchase these units from you. we are not asking you for a charitable contribution. i really hope we can work something out. there is a long term relationship to be had with the city. i'm very confident with the mayor's housing that working on larger developments for our office and district 6. without one of our property owners, there was a pension fund for public employees and they felt that by judiciary duty to ensure maximum profitability in terms of their assets.

but many of our developers are doing quite well. this is really a small way to give back attend sure vibrancy of our city. supervisor peskin, any comments? >>supervisor aaron peskin: yes, i would like to say i really appreciate those who are here on the board as i said the other day in some film that i prefer to enter the arena with honey, but if you are going to enter with vinegar, you should get the large bottle out. i hope that we are able to enter this arena with honey and i understand that parts of sequoia equity's thinking in this that you don't have other properties in san francisco

or you don't contemplate having them in san francisco, so you can be my words, not yours, reckless and unaccountable in your behavior because you have nothing to lose, how far that maybe true because that's how it's reported to me. let me say something about that which i am going to ask the city attorney if we can't come to some equitable resolution to explore doing precisely what we did in the millennium case which is bringing suit for failure to disclose to these individuals that their bmr units would go to market rate at some point and the fact that that is not according to my knowledge in any written instrument, i believe maybe, i'm not a lawyer, but i have got one down the hall which we can litigate which is something we can resolve to the parties. think about that. i have that

amount of leverage, but why don't we get this deal done and let the people sleep at night. thank you all for coming and thank you for testifying and sorry you have to go through this. >> >>supervisor jane kim: thank you, supervisor peskin. we will accept this without opposition. we would like to thank the public for coming and sharing your testimony and we are looking for closure on this agreement and the successful announcement for all of our residents. thank you. >> madam clerk, you are right. madam clerk, are there any other items before this committee today. >> there is no further business. >> thank you very much. meeting is adjourned. [ meeting is adjourned ] >> -

>> san francisco is known worldwide for its atmospheric waterfront where spectacular views are by piers and sight and sounds are xhanl changing we come to the here for exercise relax

ball games entertainment, recreation market, exhilaration a wide variety of contributions easily enjoyed look up the bay the waterfront is boosting for activities boosting over 25 visitors every year the port of san francisco manages 7 may have million dollars of waterfront from hyde street and fisherman's wharf to the cargo terminals and name shoreline the architecture like pier 70 and the ferry building is here for the embarcadero and a national treasure the port also supports 10 different maritime industries

alongside with the recreational attractions making san francisco one of the most viable working waterfronts in the world but did you think that our waterfront faces serious challenges if earthquake to damage the seawall and the embarcadero roadway rising seawalls will cause flooding at high tides and major repairs to a safe many of the piers the port is at a critically turnl point time to plan for the future of san francisco's waterfront this year the port is updating it's marts plan the plan working group to invite a wide variety of poichdz from the city and bayview and other advisory teams

to share their expertise if intense and maritime operations the waterfront land use plan has guided the use and development of the lanes for the last 20 years major physical changes take place along the waterfront and now is the time to update the waterfront plan to continue improvements that will keep our waterfront vibrate, public and resilient the biggest challenges facing the waterfront are out the site an aging seawall along the embarcadero roadway and seawalls that will rise by 21 hundred to provide and productivity of tides seawall is built over weak soils and mud the next earthquake will cause it to settle several feet without the urgent repairs that will damage the promenade and

other things we've been fortunate over the last hundred years less than one foot of seawall over the next hundred years scientists say we'll have 6 feet of seawall rise imagine the pier 30/32 will be floated, the embarcadero will be flooded our transportation system is fog to be heavy impacts unfortunately, the port didn't have the financial resources to repair all the deteriorating piers let alone the adaptations for sea level rise. >> it is clear that the port can't pay for the seawall reinforcement or deal with the sea level rise on its own needs to raise money to take care of the properties at take care of the maintenance on the properties no way absent anti

funding the issues of sea level rise or the schematic conditions of seawall can be development. >> as studies talk about the seawall challenges the working group is look at the issues please come share our ideas about recreation, pier activities, shoreline habitat, historic preservation and transportation issues and viral protection. >> we know this planning process will not have one question and one answer we need the diversity of the opinions how people feel about san francisco waterfront and want to hear all the opinions. >> the challenges call for big decisions now is the time to explore now and creative ideas to protect and preserve san francisco waterfront. >> now is the time to get involved to help to shape the future of our waterfront.

>> we need the debate please come forward and engage in the process. >> this is your waterfront and this is your opportunity to get involved be part of solution help san francisco create the waterfront we want for the future. >> this is really to dream big and i think about what our waterfront looked like for all san franciscans today and generations to come. >> get involved with the planning process that will set the fraction for what is coming at the port. >> find for in upgrading dates on the ports website. >> (ship blowing horn in

distances) one. >> hello yes. okay. >> yeah. >> call the roll first? commissioner president james wait a minute, i have - good morning. welcome to the department of aging & adult

services meeting can we have the roll call >> commissioner president james commissioner vice president seriina commissioner loo commissioner itani is excused commissioner ow commissioner roy i wanted to announce the regular meeting of is february 15th at 2:00 p.m. at city hall in room 416. >> okay this is a special commission meeting to hear the budget can i have an approval of the agenda february 1st agenda today? can i have a motion >> there is a motion that has been seconded that we approve the agenda all in favor, signify by saying i. >> opposed? the i's have it. and the that item passes i understand the january minutes

have incomplete can i have a motion to table. >> so moved. >> second sew there is a motion that has been seconded that we table the january 4th minutes to >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? the i's have it. and so the motion carries at this time item 4 is there any general public comment at this time? any general public comment housing unit we'll move to the next item in my new business the new business is item a all items are action items and require a vote by the commission a consideration and possible action rewarding the department of aging & adult services proposed budget for fiscal year

2017-2018 and 2018-2019 >> can i have a motion? >> to discuss. >> so moved. >> second. >> we have sam kaplan. >> thank you are we - thank you and what we do omi i'm dan kaplan a p da director for finance and administration as you recall dot budget along with the department of human services are prepared by the human services agency and the budget staff of the human services

agency is partly represented in the room today so martha petersen the long will lead on the budget and others that have begun to work and, of course, sarah who is the director of the budget for the human services agency so the putting together the budget is a concentrated restraining order complicated one that involves people from all over the agency identifying new leads and areas where there are problems to address through the budget process and what the budget do did they collect and analyze and ask questions they try and set it up for decision making for the people that ultimately and go to a proposal

certainly for the department of aging & adult services a key player in that and we will ultimate get to a budget proposal between now and the next time i'm back on february 15th what we are doing at this point we are setting the budget context we're reviewing what the 16, 17 budget looks like we're talking about some of the ongoing issues and one of the things we all know but easy to forget although a budget is an expenditure plan for a one year period not like everything is new every year we are in the world where most of the issues we're dealing with issues last year and will be issues the year after next year so what we are

doing is incremental that is important to think about the before you get in process as incremental process having said that, i'll review at the highest level the 2016-2017 budget and going to review some of the financial pressures on the city and how that plays into our budget making process for next year and spend a little bit of time talking about the state budget how that affects us and spend a little bit of time open federal issue that is in the papers the affordable health care and what the trump administration seems to be attempting to do with that and the second is the administration policy towards sanctuary cities that is hard to talk about it's developing minute by minute and

go into a little bit of the discussion of dos problematic issues one thing we've been fiscal year on in the current fiscal year and what things we want to focus on as we move forward that's the plan for this presentation i'll start going through it i will at a certain want i'm going to turn it over to sheree and happy to talk questions as we go along so - to start in the current fiscal year 2016-2017 dovrs has a 200 and 63 million dollars budget we look at this the first slide looks at funding sources so as you can see slightly less than a 3rd of money for the dos program comes from the federal government and that mainly funds ihss

programs and the aps program and small pieces of other programs that funds the older americans act that is an important part of the office of disabilities and reasonable those in federal, state danish grants and on the lower right of $8.6 million the older american money is federal money in the bucket we have stated money that comes primary to support the ihss program we have what we call realignment to money or realignment money that is money that comes to the county from the state it is funded by sales tax and vehicle

revenue money there for funding for specific programs in the dot project the adult protective services is funded in part by 2011 realignment to the money and then there is what you expect the substantial amount of general fund it supports the ihss program through what we call the ihss mou in two slices in the slice that is referred to as work order recovery for $21 million and the aid work order is money that comes to us from another city department in this case it is the department

of health and the department of health pays to the hsa or dot an amount of money that is meant to proximate the city general fund share the health benefit program for ihss workers that is where it comes from and it is what it is use for and then the last slice that we have a general fund operating which funds portions of staffing costs and funded lots of payments to cbo contractor and the office of aging program okay so as you can see most of the pie slices on the chart relate to the ihss program with that 24

thousandish represents the you know sort of in terms of total volume and money the biggest program within dos obviously it is one of many important programs but as far as the budget goes it is the big program and it is got a number of pieces in here which are e multiplied to help you understand obviously we spend money on county staff and workers and entity workers and work with ihss procedures this is 17 or $18 million ihss public authority expenditures or the public authority itself about $2 million that is for the

registry for the states mandated advocatecy for the administration of the health benefit program and then we have health and dental program $29 million a substantial expense and then we have what we call independent provider wagess a payment we make to the state to cover the county share of the ihss program there was a big loss budget cost associated with the ihss program and that's - that exists because of the way ihss provider are paid so we do work at the setting up care plans for the ihss could clients and workers

and missed time sheet those time sheets are processed through the state ihss payroll that cuts checks to ihss workers the federal and state share of the cost of ihss wages therefore don't appear in the dos bucket carried in a separate state level budget so staff at hsa has attempted to estimate the amount of additional ihss wage money over and above what appears on this slide and it is on the order of $300 million in - this is money that is paid to ihss workers in the city of san francisco to work with the city of san francisco clients but didn't hit the dos budget so it you put it together an ihss

program total costs around $475 million i think that is important for people to understand that that that is you have a bigger program that is it looks like in this particular - >> hold on okay. >> thank you. >> so the last way we look at the budget we look at the character the character in san francisco city budget speak is that category of expenditure and so what you can see we've done

we broken out the types of payments aid payments are payments that primarily support of ihss program they include what we pay to the state and a as part of ihss mou and through the public authority to the san francisco health plan for ihss provider benefits what we pay to cbo called home bridge that manages and delivers services there the contract mode ihss program are all aid payments as you can see we have salary and fringe benefit costs we have a small amount of professional services, and then contract services that are payments to community-based organizations okay so this f this fiscal year what

happens every couple of years the city does an update the financial plan and that is to look at the current budget and treat it as if it was not going to change for 5 years but would under the course of inflation and things that the city has made commitments to expenditures will probably grow certainly in the 5 year plan and an account to make an accurate revenue workout the reason we do this is because the bottom line to get a sense of gap between the stream of expenditures we expect going forward and the stream of revenue going forward the gap is zero a wonderful situation not yet been my experience but can

vision that in this year's financial plan what the and the city is really the controller's office and the mayor's office of budget working together with help and commentary from any agencies they've forecast is a relatively small gap in the budget year and then a stream of growing gaps that between expenditures and revenues going forward and so in the budget year it is certainly the case they anticipate that there will be a growth in revenues and pegged that at $44 million increase in revenue but going along with that is a growth in expected expenditure the expenditure is not exactly new at 200 and 63 million dollars a

gap of one and $19 million the mobs and controller's office work on citywide solutions or ways of bringing down the gap but parcel out that to individual agencies to hsa share is relatively modest about one $.5 million and what i'll say is that - so when i say it the modest total budget $850 million that was the huge thing for us and so you know if there was nothing else going on we'll find a way to cover that with revenues that would be - would effect of none of our programs and as i'll go forward that is not exactly the situation we're in that would be a a happy

situation the gap is expected to go up in the subsequent year $3 million so then we get to the state budget and as you can see the governor releases by law a first proposed budget on january 10th state staff have been working on it for quite a while months at this point and the governor proposed you know a very large portion of the state budget is, of course, payment to county with minimal programs with administrator state for many programs certainly for social services but for public health department so a great portion of state budget is growing to from

the county and, of course, the school districts under the governors proposed budget there are a number of reductions to hsa programs the largest being dos i'll come to that last to let you know the others in the calfresh are the food stamps about one million dollars reduction in expected state calfresh is tied to the coddling statewide has been dropping in san francisco they haven't been dropping and so in here we get do one of the difficulties that we run into in situations where there is a dropping

allocation citywide and typically the accounts have agreed to in a drop in allocation spread that out proportionally we don't reallocate on the county by kunth based coddling not impossible we could do that and if a lot of county in the situation we're in some kind of pressure to do that but if we follow the way of paralleling out reductions in the past decade we'll take our share it will be about one million dollars again, it is relatively small in the scheme of things you should know in the cal works cal medicaid part of our program we tend to move money around from county to county and certainly a county overspending

has the ability to go to other county and say we expect to be over spending by millions of dollars who has money many counties under spend we believe in our collective interest to pend as much of the allocation as possible exultance or counties who are under spending will say okay. he have $5 million that can be spaepd to people overspending so - we call a redistribution we're actually right at the beginning of the 16, 17 redistribution process now and my dissatisfy a fourthing how much we need in the programs and send out a request into the big pool off people that have money we can

pickup this million dollars redistribution process second thing is 2011 realignment revenue is shrinking and linking relative to past projections not an absolute decline in the stashgs or the vehicle licensing are the revenues we've built a bucket on to bioannual budget this year that assumes $600,000 u thousand dollars more in realignments and so, now based on the governors projections we're in agreement of that number that creates a problem you should know that in the dos budget we have about two or $3 million of 2011 realignment revenue for the aps program most of 2011 realignment it in child

welfare and the adoptions so dos doesn't have to absorb this. >> and then the bigger and more problematic reduction that we have is what the cal works program reduction cal works with the main maintenance program on the federal level that is referred to the cal works single allocation fund the eligibility for the cal works program welfare to work program or employment services program training, placement and subsidized wage program it is funded stage one childcare for people who are praeptd in welfare to work program and then a small program for pregnant

teens call the cal earth program and the cal works methodology is also very much tied to coddling and cal works coddling is not coming down cal works and calfresh as you expect are independent on the strength of the labor market and as demand for labor interposes in the economy the number of people on calfresh and cal workers come down to find a job and either we help people get placed or they find a job and certainly in san francisco, california works has been sliding done the difficulty i'll contrast with the cal works this is second year statewide cut is

$200 million a cut of one one and $50 million last year so what happens that tielgdz up spending much less money important redistribution so we'll not be able to pick up the cut through the distribution process now i'll get to it - >> are we hold questions to the end. >> would you rather wait until we finish. >> no, no i'm available to answer any questions. >> that of the clarification the 2011 realignment $600,000 is not entirely a dos responsibility but spread across other departments is that right? >> prepared. >> against dos and the department of human services the lions share is underneath in the

department of human services and is that true of cal works >> cal works will be entirety within department of human services. >> as with calfresh the difficulty is that our general funds are shared. >> okay. >> so when we have to come up with a reduction you know it comes from programs within the hsa. >> okay. the last item is what we've estimated to be a $43 million cost impact in the ihss program so everything i've said is simple and straurlt compared to what i'm able to say i apologize the ihss program traditionally and traditionally stopped in the year 2012 a traditional ran in

the following way there was an administratively allocation million dollars of state money county had to match that money and the feds wouldn't match that the sharing ratio for the administratively costs was 50 percent federal and 35 state and 1 county once a county spent on the administration of the ihss program an amount that packed out the state allocation the federal government would continue to match at 50 percent but the county had to make up the states share many counties over matched the offer matched when we spend modern an agency over matched did states share san francisco certainly did and therefore picked up 50 percent

of the administrative costs for the last portion but administration is a small part of ihss with regards to the big piece of the whole which is ihss workers wages and benefits the way it worked a county through the public authority negotiated a wage and benefit package with a union representing ihss workers as seiu alleviate in san francisco as almost everywhere and the state would participate in the costs of ihss worker wages and benefits up to a - for a number of years during the early part of the last decade that cap was raised fairly regularly but it kept on getting slightly better that happens

until the year 2007 when the cap for wages and benefits reached $12.10 per hour so what we paid per hour plus the benefits for the first $12.10 the state participated the fess at this time were putting in $0.50 on the dollar and the state was putting in 3? 35, 32 and the county picked up the rest and everything over the states cap the county was picking up the entire non-federal share in the year 2012 the coordinated career initiative was introduced in the state legislation and it

envisioned a high-level of integration between medical costs, behavioral health costs, and long term support services costs of which ihss is the largest and counties said if there is a coordination that is fine a good thing in many aspects and in-home care is less expensive than nursing and cost cares under the waivers so people who are managing the cost of integrated care program will want to shift as many people into the program our county costs will go up to deliver a state and the state said fair enough we'll create a maintenance payment from the county and that so moved e will

be based on the fiscal year year 2011 costs inflated by 3 and a half percent and inflated more in the county is negotiating wage changes with the local union and so we went into that mode and our costs went up 3 and a half percent a year and in the early years we did negotiate 2 small wage increases by having a higher so movmo e but - the nuf hours provided stated flat and started to grow if you look at the last decade a number of years the program was growing by

10 percent per year and under schwarzenegger administration they tried hard not to be an administrator and the growth flattened out there the more recent period of time it started to grow the restrictions were taken off and started growing with the demographics of the states and city in the last several years the program is growing by 7 or 8 percent a year we have been held harmless, if you will, from the growth of the our program in the city that's one thing the other thing that happened is you will remember san francisco passed the minimum wage ordinance voter approved minimum wage ordinance and when that happened we went

to the state and we said in essence we have been reading the state law on the ihss mo e and what triggers a change we don't know the minimum wage ordinance triggers the can change the change is the negotiation between the public authority and the union what happens in san francisco is what effects outcome e all workers not special to do with the ihss program the wages will have to go up with the minimum wage law but didn't happen to trigger an adjustment in the forest payments so the state accepted our argument on that we've been sheltered, if you will, from the cost increases associated with the implementation of the minimum wage law in san francisco okay. that gets out to 2030

in the law that established the cooperated care refers to say a poison pill clause it says in essence that from the department of finance determines the cooperated care as constructed is not cost effective for the state it can recommend backing away from it and the governor can by administrative action issue it so the dennis has made that finding and the governor in the budget has proposed the end of the cooperated care initiative at the mid point of the next fiscal year and the ending of the ihss mo e at the beginning of the next

circle so what that will do assuming it happens as proposed in the governors budget is it will return us to the old way of financing the ihss program had the mo e never existed our costs would be growing over the several years with the coddling and growth of wages there has been medical inflation claim we've also argued we shouldn't have to pay a change to the mo e and they accepted our argument to have known that as well that's another call we've within sheltered much smaller and so we are finding is ourselves in essence from finger 11, 12 will hit in fiscal year

2017-2018 that's why we have a enormous amount of hours so you know, i should say obviously we are in a political world here this is i think hitting san francisco prepare for the worst and hope for the best a little bit harder because of minimum wage ordinance in san francisco but a similar issue throughout the month of larger counties of the state the governors budget characterize this as a savings to the state of $626 million so obviously it is our share is $43 million and the rest is other people's problems a lot of push back from the counties in general and we have many other counties working together on how to negotiate this so that it is

manageable but it is sitting here now at the proposal that is very huge and we have to decide how to budget that is obviously going to be a decision that hsa dot and the mayor's office and the controller's office all get involved in to make it together >> commissioner sims do you have a sense of timeline for the discussions with the state? >> so the discussions are starting now they're being handled from the county side by c sake the california association of counties they're being put if obviously lack if counties agencies this is

kicking off right now you know there will be obviously a lot of work within individual legislatures where the costs are significant this will be a concern to our delegation for the alameda to the morin delegation and la yes for your political strength if so starting off now i'm expecting given the way these things play out didn't get hammered down until the restrictions is released at governor releases one that take into consideration new forecasts for revenues and expenses but also take into account you know the political works that happened between the

first budget and - so i don't know, we'll absolutely know until then have a good feeling before the mayor releases his budget on june 3rd anyway it certainly is an issue that the decision makers will be part of this and be aware of we sheree and i spent time with the controller's office staff it is on the radar screen things like that so then we get to the federal level this is an interesting year obviously as everyone knows the two major issues there are lots of issues we are concerned

with the city and social services agency within the city but the two largest at the moment are has to do with with the state of the affordable health care and the treatment of sanctuary cities and i'm sure like me you're all reading the papers and seeing things unfold day to day but with regard - and in san francisco ways i feel when we put things on paper it is up to date but with the affordable health care act congress has through the reconciliation process set up to consider to eliminate portions of the affordable health care act that are expense that represents specific expenses the

federal government and people are concerned the things that might be in their sites are tliengz things like subsidies on the exchanges and things like the expansion the medicaid program and you know obviously the subsidies in the exchanges are things that are crucial for making the exchanges work if they're not there go people that are required and who benefit from buying plans through the exchanges will not be able to afford them many of those people will be amongst the healthier people and will buy insurance products and as a result, the risk will become different in the exchange in the insurance market and the higher percentage of people who are still buying will be people are higher needs

which will over the course further destabilize the market and drive up prices that is another thing we are worried and the second is we have had great growth here in the city and throughout california in general and throughout the nation in general as a result of expansion of the medicaid bloiblt before the expansion medicaid eligibility was mainly for families and for aged blind and disabled and the expansion has done is allowed medicaid eligibility for individuals who have incomes up to one and 38 percent of poverty level so san francisco - this year

are a number of medicaid covered lives since is athens grown if 101 thousand to shy of one and 95 thousand a huge growth with people who are individuals that are up to one and 38 percent who are people that were doing without insurance prior so the huge impact on individuals and then, of course, a huge impact on the systems that care for the expanded population obviously an area of huge concern the president himself has oishd

an executive order directing members of his administration to scale back the program where they can under existing laws not absolutely sure to anyone what that means and how much room they have to move but obviously there is a huge amount of opposition politically amongst the grassroots folks you, you know in the lawsuits there is a huge amount of opposition that is form but clearly the republican leadership has an interest in doing something to scale back the affordable health care act and the trump administration is at least playing even though the president has an various times suggested he's interested in a plan that covers more people so you know we've got all sorts of contradicts going around here the second thing that is more

press is over the last few days is funding to sanctuary cities and the president as you can see during the campaign said he felt that city's cities that didn't coordinate with the immigration officials are outside of law and need to coordinate and he'll seek to find ways to stop federal money coming to cities and states and counties that didn't coordinate and he has issued an executive order which will be read to that effect as of this morning san francisco has filed a lawsuit opposing that and know there's been a lot of conversation to what extent does he have the room to move to

executive order that is one theory he can't do anything but stop a number of grants to cities and counties of law enforcement which he said he didn't want to stop and you know we look at money the big money in the city of san francisco it is in programs like hsa including dotting dos so with the ihss program has a vast amount of that $475 million to federal money the back door money it federal money and the ihss money is federal money so within dos and hsa for the cal works program and calfresh and the eligibility, etc. the child

welfare so there's you know potentially a risk to us, of course, it has been argued those are all funding streams that that are provided by federal statutes and see the president didn't have the ability simply by executive order to stop those and then there is, of course, the most recent line that is coming out which is a states' rights argument that says the president or the federal government didn't have the right to compel states and localities to cooperate with law enforcement items because that's essentially depressing local people to do a federal function so - and well, see where all of that goes it is certainly hoover

in the background in a huge way in all of the budget process on the other hand, you know we're trying to be aware of it but isolate we know on the local state level so i'm going to turn it over to sherren to talk about the more problematic side of that and she - >> i have a question i am looking at charters section 116.07 with the message system that the department should establish in terms of the looking at the needs of seniors. >> uh-huh. >> and i don't see anything in here where other departments are

establishing that do we - are you aware are we stacey establishing that that would be criteria. >> i'm sorry where commissioner president james >> i'm saying the equality metrics system with the rec and park they have established looking at low income areas and usually district 10 and 11 and they look at what is the crime rate and make the portion of protect from this district into proportion what the whole city can - do you have that. >> we're not doing that ♪ budget >> well, it is something that has been turned over to the

human rights commission and it says etch department shall have an equality metrics to establish the baseline of the existing program i'm wondering if we need to be aware of that i'm aware of what rec and park is doing our department for example, looking at african-americans and latinos showing up in the community those are the counties that have low protect. >> we've been tracking that that's how we see the programs 3r0id in the neighborhood this establishes we'll be doing that in more detail than before we certainly have to do a survey and reflex assessment we we look at neighborhoods and factors like income and factors of

ethnicity and don't look at things like crime but with the dignity fund the legislation compels us to do a need assessment and gap analysis what we're going to be able to address some of the questions that is written into that legislation with that process and i'll be talking about how we'll get the process started for the dignity fund and rolling that in when i do my part of report that's a good question. >> so the differences the dignity fund will talk about an allocation process of money that is in the budget in building the budget sort of the top level we don't try to allocate to particular communities we try to allocate to the particular needs and

functions but we do it in a relatively citywide way and who through the planning process or the dignity fund or introduce our needs assessment or frankly through our procurement process we have the ability to allocate the money so it is spread out throughout the community. >> so it's just a - different piece of project. >> it is specifically to me i mean that is it specifically focused only you look at all of the things not does that effect that one community and have a set of guidelines - the human rights commission is involved in that also so i just want to make sure bring it to the surface you're aware. >> i don't disagree but that happens at different stages in the process we're talking about.

>> thank you commissioner president james we'll make sure we're looking at that. >> thank you, dan so dan has presidential laid out the bankruptcy the budget factors we're dealing with right now and so what i'll be doing is talk about some of the things some of the highlights what we're doing current with money we've received in the current year from the mayor's office and the board of supervisors add that process and talk about where we are with the dignity fund process and in the next meeting when we come back on february 15th we'll be talking about the line items we'll be presenting to the mayor and for you before the mayor's office so want to start by saying that you know because of what dan said you know you'll not see a lot of requests from the dos this time that goes to the

mayor's office we're not adding full-time equality positions in the internal staffing and not asking for a lot of things in county services either this is part of our instruction not keep a flat budget but to cut back a little bit when you see what we bring forward we have been creative about swapping out stuff that is important things to fund but figure out how to stay within our means. >> that's the big pot of new money in dos is, of course, the - >> in the last year the nutrition program has an additional 2. million dollars through the add backs from the mayor's office and the board of supervisors so that was great i think our budget for nutrition now is

close to $19 million more than double 6 years ago there are hunger seniors and people with disabilities we've been fortunate to i'd like to take the opportunity add to the nutrition budget in the past 6 years and provided funding to pilot a home care for clients that earn too much for ihss we are looking at studying that process to see if providing home care for people in middle-class or elderly adults just need to maybe a certain number of home care hours to stay at home safely and see if that impacts their lives and we'll be bringing that contract commission i belive in the

meeting in march. >> a question what is too much what are we talking about. >> when we bring it to the commission we'll talk specifics and set that up specifically commissioner president james we if people don't qualify for an unsupported services but were needed home care a lot of the they're not getting the home care they need can't spend the money on it or spending money on home care and not able to buy other things they need the organization that will be taking that on will set up clear criteria we're not talking about serving a lot of people we have limited dollars and that's a pilot program. >> are but talking about 50 thousand or one hundred thousand or what. >> i'm not sure until we bring that to the commission.

>> honestly can't remember we went back and forth about that question. >> we'll bring it and have plenty of chances to answer it had been clear in the presentation. >> for clarification you mean that will come before us in the february or march meeting not the next meeting. >> the next meeting is a regular commission meeting including the budget february 15th maybe march. >> might be march. >> oh. >> sorry. >> it might be april coming soon. >> and then new programs for senior employment and senior disability employment i don't know if we've awarded it contract it will be the 15 that is exciting one of the things we've been talking about a lot that a lot of older adults can't

afford to retire a lot of younger adult people with disabilities have a hard time assessing the job market i'm excited to see if we can make an impact in people's lives creating jobs this will be the nonprofit working closely with the federal government and other nonprofits to create city of ended position they'll take on those - done work around the lgbt isolation and with the housing subsidies a program in the last fiscal year and were agriculture through the mayor's office and the board to extend it program with the housing subsidies to help people stay in

their homes and a lot of people maybe lost a spouse or partner and can't afford to pay rent that's one of the main groups of people who have lost someone in their lives and case management wage increase is something the community advocated for we've talked about that the case management they've been unable to keep the case management because they tend to go to the city or hospitals they get better benefits we work hard to get the mayor who put that into his budget and the vinyl expansions came although the add back process and able to implement those with our 3 village programs we have