deemed noncontrolled positions. some of those positions we just don't agree that there was position should be civilian eyes iced. when we looked at the list, they were actually 68 that we felt where worthy of taking a look at. positions like the sketch artist and things like that, that we feel are worthy of taking a look at civilianization on. [please standby]

. ease standby] >> we disagree on that. so that's where we are. >> supervisor stefani: okay. and just one more question. i think everyone understands on this committee -- i don't think anyone is, i mean, denying the need for obvious public safety and police officers, and even

mentioning that there is a way to get to the 250, but in your opinion, i would just like to know whether or not the suggestions on the way to get to 250 are realistic right now or, in your opinion, whether or not we can get there any other way than you've proposed. >> immediately, i don't think that's realistic for immediate enhancement of the police department. i think the civilianization, to take a look at that, is a process that's going to take a little bit of time, any way. those positions to fund those academy classes are very much needed, i think, and realistically, it's needed right now. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. thank you. supervisor yee? supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: the positions are needed right now.

the 250 that you're suggesting is over a four-year period, so can you explain the difference between you need it right now and -- >> -- 18-19 and 50 positions for 19-20, and we're also talking about the 80 we've been budgeted for to get us up to the 1971, and then, the civilianization positions. so that -- those that i just mentioned, i think, equals the 205, i believe, is the number. and the other 45 is in subsequent years, so when i right now, i'm talking about this budget cycle, that's the subject at hand. and the 50 for this academy

class, and the 50 for 18-19, that's what i mean by right now. >> supervisor yee: okay. i just want to be real clear, and again, i don't want to go through -- >> yes, sir. >> supervisor yee: -- what we went through on monday, but when we're talking about the first class, additional class that we're talking about, it would be starting in december -- or halfway through the fiscal year -- the year one fiscal year. >> yes. >> supervisor yee: and if there were an additional second class in the second-year budget, it would be, again, halfway through the second year. so we're really talking about 1.5 years from now, when you start training them, and maybe they'll be ready at the end of the second year. so i want to make sure that we are, and the public's clear, that the time frame is not just this year, but it's going to --

by the time we're talking about having police officers from training be on the street is almost two years from now. >> so you are it takes to get

officers through the academy, you're not going to realize that -- >> supervisor cohen: pardon me. i want to move the conversation on a little bit.

mr. rose wants to say something. [inaudible] >> supervisor cohen: maybe use the mic to your left. >> madam chair and members of the committee, and supervisor yee, it is not correct to say that you would have to wait until the next budget. as you know, there's a process for a supplemental appropriation with respect to these civilianized positions, so you do not have to wait for the following budget cycle to do that. >> supervisor cohen: i'm sorry. repeat that one more time. >> the chief indicated that it's -- even if you civilianize, it's going to take time. he says he couldn't do that until next year, the next budget cycle. that is not so because we have a process for a supplemental appropriation, and that supplemental appropriation can be submitted to you at any time

after this budget once those positions are identified, so that would expedite the hiring of the civilian positions. >> so not to argue with mr. rose, we have to get the positions appropriated, we have to work with d.h.r., and that takes time. >> supervisor cohen: i guess it. it takes time, i get it. i cut norman yee off. i want to give him time to finish his thoughts, and then, jeff sheehy is going to speak, and then i'm going to speak, and then we're voting. >> supervisor yee: no, i just want to know for all of us, in terms of time frame, what can be done, what can't be done, and there's just a little difference -- maybe it's not even a difference, it's just to clarify the timing of things. that's what i was trying to do so that with that information, we can make decisions. >> thank you.

>> supervisor cohen: supervisor sheehy? >> supervisor sheehy: yes. and i don't want to completely repeat what i said on monday, but i do think the need is there. i do think the evidence shows that we're seeing a decrease in crime, but we've kind of -- not going to be able to sustain that as we discussed on monday unless we provide adequate resources. i think it is imperative -- i still come back to a captain of one of the police districts that overlaps my district, and they're 20 officers down from what they had in 2009. so -- and we see it. we see the impact of not having officers on the street everywhere where they're needed in the district. i know from my constituents that it would make a huge difference. we have seen car break-ins, we have seen home break-ins, and at least from what i've

observed, the need is there, and i think we should give the department the resources that they need. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: all right. thank you very much. i think we've deliberated on this long enough. thank you, chief, for your time. i just want to share a couple of my thoughts about this. first of all, as you know, we've done a lot of work. i've led the charge creating the department of police accountability audit and oversight for the department of police accountability, working hard with the police commission to select -- or with the community as well as the police commission to select strong commissioners that will help with the policy direction for the department. i want to acknowledge that the -- there were successful negotiations that -- that the police union settled on, and we as a body have voted on. our d.h.r. negotiators are negotiated in a fantastic manner, but we've got officers

that are making top dollar, and i think it's very fair and very reasonable to have the expectation that these officers carry themselves in the highest, most professional and utmost manner. i also heard something last week that really struck me, and that was -- i think it was walsh said that it's the newer, younger officers that are complying with the training that are turning on their body-worn camera. and that actually gave me a little bit of hope, because that means that these officers are paying attention to the climate, and you would be a fool to be policing in any street in america to think that the way life was, even just five years ago, that you can get away with things. if i'm not mistaken, i think an officer was just charged with murder earlier today for killing someone in the back as he ran away. and we don't necessarily have those problems, but what we do have is a new chief that has

come in in the 1.5 years that has changed things drastically. he has implemented crisis intervention training, to where you have seen successfully reported out on multiple fronts, on multiple news outlets, that time we are goin

continue to bring in the best and the brighest officers that are going to be working in a different environment, and quite frankly, i think it's time to let the old guard go, and that's just true natural atrition. i'm not pushing them out the door in any way. particularly the old guard that holds onto racist, sexist and homophobic text messages amongst themselves, and we have a responsibility to flush out

the department bringing in fresh new blood, if you will, so that we can have a culture of not one of a warrior mentality but one of a guardian mentality, and that is going to take a cultural shift and a change from the top down. and i think the chief has demonstrated a commitment to changing that already. homicides are down, violent crimes are down, things are moving in the downward trend. it only makes me wonder, if you had a few more resources, what you would be able to do with that. so i am going to be in favor of supporti supporting the -- the two academy classes, however, i think that you should be giving me something, too. and i want to delay new

vehicles, and that is an approximate allocation of $4.5 million. and if my memory serves me vehicle, this was a request to replace ageing vehicles, but these vehicles were still functional and still had life inside the vehicles. you don't know? okay. let me look at the chief and hear his thoughts. i appreciate the b.l.a. and their positive affirmation. chief? >> so yes, they are -- some of the vehicles are functional, and functional -- so i'm

looking at our just inventory. i want to make sure i'm clear on this but clear on the need for vehicles. we have over 100 patrol vehicles out of our 300 that are over ten years old. we have over 121 patrol vehicles that have over 100,000 miles on them. we have 249 of our 302, almost 75%, of our -- not quite 75% -- of our unmarked vehicles that are over ten years old. 200 -- i'm sorry, 191 of our 302 of unmarked vehicles have over 100,000 miles on them. our fleet is in a critical state, not only in the years and amount of miles they have

on them, we're spending an extreme amount of money on repairs, paint scraping, springs sticking out of the seats. these vehicles are the offices of the officers that we send out to do a very, very difficult job. all of you are sitting in chairs right now. imagine if you had to sit here for four hours with -- in a chair with springs popping out, exposed metal. this is what our officers are driving. and i definitely appreciate, you know the b.l.a.'s recommendation, but our vehicle -- our fleet, it's in a critical state. and i think if we continue to push that can down the road, it's not going to the best use of city resources because we're spending more in maintenance over about a two, three-year period than it costs to buy a vehicle. >> supervisor cohen: mm-hmm. i see. so the allocation is for

$4.5 million. how quickly were you planning on drawing down on that. >> well, we order the vehicles well the next budget year. $4.5 million buys, i believe about 60, 70 new vehicles. so you want to speak up? >> yeah. supervisors, the vehicle budgets are tied to individual cars, so those cars, when they are ordered, that money is encumbered, and then, when they're delivered, we pay the money. so it takes time to manufacture the vehicles, and so over the course -- you said by august? [inaudible] >> we order vehicles in august, and they arrive when they're completed. >> supervisor cohen: shipped. >> yeah. >> supervisor cohen: harvey? >> yeah. so i would ask to reconsider on that, supervisor cohen. this is really important, in my department, to our city. this is not to be taken lightly. these are the offices of our officers, and they're in really bad shape. >> supervisor cohen: okay. thank you.

mr. rose? >> i have a question. the chief is saying that everything is important. >> supervisor cohen: yes, i know. >> and these -- and you, madam chair, stated you want to approve the positions, but you want something from the chief. >> supervisor cohen: yes. >> it seems like there should be a reasonable compromise. they replace these vehicles every year, number one. number two, the vehicles from 17-18 are still coming on board. this will just delay it for one year. it is very reasonable, that recommendation. >> i would beg to differ, madam supervisor. these vehicles are in absolutely terrible shape. and to delay it -- and we've delayed it. we have the records of how many vehicles we've ordered over the last ten years. the reason they're in the shape they're in is we have gotten behind on a regular rotation. we've hired a fleet manager.

that was one of our civilian positions. our vehicles are in really bad shape, and i strongly disagree with mr. rose that a delay would not hurt this department. >> supervisor cohen: so my original question was, when will you be making the purchase? it sounds like the purchase will be made in august. and how many vehicles -- catherine, if you can come up, how many vehicles will you be purchasi purchasing? >> 82. >> supervisor cohen: so you're looking to spend the full amount. >> that's correct. >> supervisor cohen: so maybe you can speak to the 500,000 reserve body cameras? that hasn't been spent, either. >> that would be a cut we with absorb. >> supervisor cohen: that could be a cut you can absorb. supervisor fewer has a question. >> supervisor fewer: i just have a question. how many take-home vehicles do you have that your staff actually takes home and not a patrol vehicle. >> i don't have that number,

supervisor fewer, but i want to emphasize, your husband was a police officer. those vehicles are in terrible shape, and all you have to do is look at them. they're in bad shape. >> supervisor fewer: no, i agree. my question is how many take-home vehicles do you allow your police officers to take home -- >> supervisor cohen: he doesn't have that figure. >> he doesn't have that number. >> i don't have that number. >> supervisor fewer: so i'm just reiterating the question because he answered another question. so if i could get that information, i think that would be very helpful on how many -- so these replacements, are they for take home vehicles at all? or are they all for vehicles -- and are any of your vehicles electric as you're moving to electric vehicles, and is there a plan to moving to electric vehicles. >> supervisor cohen: wait, supervisor. >> supervisor fewer: i just wanted to know what vehicles -- >> supervisor cohen: he said he doesn't know. >> supervisor fewer: i'm just

requesting this information, and i think it's a reasonable request. i think it's a data point, that if we say we're going to look at this for the budget next year, i think it's important to have that data now instead of next year -- >> supervisor cohen: no, it's important to have that next year. right now, we need to move forward on this. he doesn't have the information on this, you're not going to get it. >> supervisor fewer: okay, he's not going to get it. >> supervisor cohen: no, not for today. >> supervisor fewer: not for today, but i'm asking, can you please send me that information? >> absolutely. >> supervisor cohen: so -- i'm not finished with my questions yet. $500,000 professional service contract, no professional services have been allocated. >> yes, supervisors, the request from the b.l.a. is all possible contracts that could come up in a year. we have to prioritize those contracts because we don't have enough funds in those -- in that -- that budget line, so the nonpersonnel services budget, we've transferred funds into that line -- budget line

for the last three years to the tune of about $1 million each year because we don't have enough funding in that line. >> supervisor cohen: so you can take the money, and you can charge back -- >> and you'll see us back here asking for more money. >> supervisor cohen: what exactly is professional services? how does that manifest? >> professional services are services that generally require a specialized license. so a lot of our d.n.a. contracting work, you know, when we need to send something out because it's a highly specialized analysis that our crime lab can't perform, we send that out to a vendor and pay them to do that work. it's a highly specialized work. >> supervisor cohen: okay. all right. thank you. i have a -- i'll recognize you when i'm -- okay. i have a -- actually, a question, i think, also for you, catherine.

there is $125,000 that's allocated for the workload study, and if i'm not mistaken, i think the task force has been assembled, and you guys are scheduled to meet in august. so if you get two academy classes, the b.l.a. is arguing you won't need a workload study. >> i would suggest that the two academy classes are part of -- >> supervisor cohen: high priority? >> yeah, they're high priority. they're part of a larger analysis that will need to happen, and -- and i think that analysis still needs to happen. i mean, if we don't -- we don't do it, we'll still be asking the same questions next year, what's the right number? >> supervisor cohen: yes, you will be. and just a question for clarification, is that $125,000, is that what you allocated in last year's budget, the workload study? >> supervisor yee: last year, we were able to get some funding, and i think this is the amount. >> supervisor cohen: okay. >> supervisor yee: i think there's also a match that the

police department was going to provide, so to study itself for the whole task force effort would cost more than the 125. >> supervisor cohen: okay. thank you. more questions. furniture and fixtures. now we're going to be making a move, right? you've got in the budget allocated $11.4 million, and we've been able to identify 375,000 savings. i'm thinking about taking that 375,000 in savings. >> yeah, i'm not aware where that 375. >> supervisor cohen: that's why i asked you, because i'm trying to make sure we're not cutting off our nose to spite our face. i have a question, 375 was

identified as possible savings in furniture and fixture of an overall 11.4 allocation. what is that -- what are we talking about? >> so what we had from them was a detailed budget on what they thought the cost was to move into a new building -- so it's over two years. so we looked at what they said, and this is a number of different things. this is based on a consultant study of some of things they would need. i'm assuming it's pretty technical, but we did subtraction, and what we saw on the paper was about 375,000. we have the exact number somewhere. >> supervisor cohen: so you can't tell you with specificity. >> i wouldn't be able to tell you because we're taking the entire budget that they gave us for the furniture fixtures and equipment. >> supervisor cohen: and when is the move going to be happening? what year? >> i believe that the facility

opens in early 2020. >> supervisor cohen: early 2020. so then that means that you will have an opportunity to go through the budget cycle next year for funding? >> a lot of these items in order to open the building, they have to be installed previously, and so actually that $11 million is over two years already. the first year -- so this is -- as severin, it's highly tech ely material. it has to make sure it's of a specific scientific standard and it will standup in court. >> supervisor cohen: i understand, but that's under the larger umbrella of furniture and fixtures, and i'm talking about 375,000 of that. i'm just going to take it. what i'd like, ben, if you can do my math for me, identify a savings of 375,000 -- or the

b.l.a. -- i don't know. check the math. 375,000 plus the 500,000 plus another 500,000 that this is the reserve for body worn cameras. that's almost what, 1.4 million? [inaudible] >> supervisor cohen: thank you. >> supervisor yee: chair cohen? >> supervisor cohen: yes. >> supervisor yee: in regards to the vehicles -- >> supervisor cohen: yes. >> supervisor yee: would you like to make any recommendations on that? >> supervisor cohen: i'm not sure. >> supervisor yee: okay. >> supervisor cohen: but while we do the math, why don't we let catherine stefani ask questions. >> just to ask a question just so i can make clear. you talked about a 100,000

reduction -- >> supervisor cohen: that's 500,000 reserve body cameras, then there's 500,000 for professional services contract. there's no identified actual contractor, and then, i'm seeing 375,000 that comes from the furniture fixtures portion of the budget. >> supervisor yee: 1,375,000. >> supervisor cohen: right. >> madam chair, thank you risk of complicating this, so the budget is $4 million every year. it's 17-18. it was 4 million in 19-20. they increased it to 4.5 million in 18-19, so it was $495,000 more in the prior year than the subsequent year. that's something you can consider. >> supervisor cohen: i'm not sure, catherine. maybe you can reconcile that

increase. >> there's no -- there's no consistency in the number of cars or budget for cars every year. we happened to, last year -- in this budget newly every year, i think the budget office can speak to that. it's -- the budget for all equipment citywide is zeroed out and then redetermined in each fiscal year. and if you would like to look at the overhead here, we have -- we show the number of car that have been budgeted going back to 2005. >> supervisor cohen: the last year, what about 2005? >> the number of cars that have been budgeted in total is on the overhead, going back to 2005. >> supervisor cohen: so it looks like in 2019, you've got 82 budgeted, right? >> correct. >> supervisor cohen: so in 2016 -- so there's -- you're making a shift from 48 -- those

48 vehicles -- i guess it's in 2016, so i guess they've already been purchased. >> correct. >> supervisor cohen: okay. has the 48 in 2017 been purchased already? >> yes, and those have already been deployed. >> supervisor cohen: okay. so there is a pretty large delta between 2017 and 2018 in terms of the number of cars purchased. >> so supervisor, we have -- sorry. >> supervisor cohen: that's okay. >> we have done analysis on the need for cars, and the -- in order to get into a replacement cycle that is considered a best practice, we need 139 cars annually. and -- and so we're kind of already compromising once we get to this -- these numbers. >> supervisor cohen: i know, but the thing is, it's hard to, like -- to stomach is even last year, there was an attempt, i think, to increase the command staff by six positions. we granted that.

you all got police academy classes out of last year. i mean, you know, you see what i'm saying? you come -- you actually -- your batting average is pretty -- pretty solid. and so now, it is time -- i need some concessions, and so i need you to think about that. if you need more time, then i'm happy to give more time, or i can just work with what the b.l.a. has proposed. chief? >> can we have a little bit more time? >> supervisor cohen: absolutely, but before you have that time, supervisor stefani wanted to ask some questions. >> supervisor stefani: okay. i just wanted to clarify, did we -- the police department has agreed to $3.5 million in baseline cuts, right, with the b.l.a.? >> supervisor cohen: that's true. >> supervisor stefani: okay. and then we removed 2 million, so we're 5.5 million removed from the police department. i just want to make sure i have the right number, so 5.5 million is where we're at,

kelly? >> supervisor cohen: 5.5 million is where we're at total. okay. thank you. thank you for that reminder -- over two years. supervisor yee? >> it's 4.9 for the first year. we're at -- [inaudible] >> okay. so -- you're correct. >> supervisor cohen: okay. supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: you asked me a question about the 125. that's actually not my request, when i think about it, because the funding i put in there was from last year, so that's already in there. and there was a commitment at the time that they would match it from last year's budget, so i don't know what this is for. >> supervisor cohen: okay. so thank you for that. what is the 125 workload study? 125,000? >> i'm sorry, can you repeat the question? >> supervisor cohen: sure.

so my question was there's $125,000 allocated for a workload study, and supervisor yee indicated that that money was allocated in last year's budget, and there was an undering that you would match that allocation. now, we have before us a request for an additional 125,000 for a workload study. i was under the impression that it was to continue with the revamping of the -- of work assignments and rotations and of the task force. >> madam chair, just for clarification, the 125,000 that we said was actually the money that was appropriated last year and never spent. >> supervisor cohen: oh, it was never spent. i think that answers my question. okay. thank you. thank you. all right. supervisor fewer? >> supervisor fewer: so again, b.l.a. and controller tell me what is the increase to the police budget over a two-year

period. >> so with our recommended reductions in 18-19, the increase is 44 million in 18-19 with our recommended reductions in 19-20, and this is not including our policy recommendations. the increase is 40.2 million. that is based on the total budget, so it would include the airport positions as well as the general fund positions. >> supervisor fewer: okay. thank you. i just want to state for the record i think it is important to know how many vehicles are actually replacement patrol vehicles and how many are take-home vehicles. i just want to state i think it is an important point, and i hope we can get that

information. >> supervisor cohen: okay. so it sounds like -- supervisor stefani pointed something out in error in some of my calculations that there's already a $5.5 million give back, so i'm going to be less aggressive on what i'm trying to do here. i'm going to take -- yes, catherine? okay. i'm going to take 500,000 in reserve from the body cameras, and then, i'm going to take 500,000 from professional services, and then, i'm done. and then, i'm happy to entertain a motion. [inaudible] >> supervisor cohen: excuse me? to the controller's office. >> i apologize, madam chair. i've lost track. could you -- >> supervisor cohen: sure. 500,000 from reserve for the

body worn cameras, and then, $500,000 for professional services contract. i'll leave the workload study. >> okay. understood. >> supervisor yee: i'd like -- >> supervisor cohen: supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: i'd like to at least look at the vehicle and reduce it by the 500,000 so it's consistent with last year. >> supervisor cohen: okay. so you're saying 4 million? >> supervisor yee: right. their ask is 4.5. i'd reduce it to 4. >> supervisor cohen: okay. so that's 1.5. all right. i'll make a motion -- supervisor -- ben? >> just -- we understand, so together, that's a $1 million reduction to the budget that's in front of you for body cameras -- sorry, for the professional services and the increase in the fleet allocation, and then, it's a

$500,000 closeout of a prior year project? co>> supervisor cohen: catherine -- and supervisor yee has made a request for an additional 500,000 for new vehicles. that way, it would still allow 4 million for purchases of new vehicles, and i think -- how many is one vehicle? >> it depends on the vehicle. >> supervisor cohen: about seven vehicles? >> about 70,000 perpatrol vehicle. >> supervisor cohen: 70,000? >> yes, includes all of the outfitting. >> supervisor cohen: okay. okay. i'm going to make a motion. i'll make a motion that two prior academy classes go forward. i'd like to make a motion that $500,000 from the reserve body worn camera be additionally cut, and $500,000 from the

professional services contract be additionally cut, and 500,000 from the new vehicle allocation be cut. supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: second. >> supervisor cohen: oh, i'm sorry, i wasn't looking for a second. all right. let's do a roll call vote. >> clerk: on that motion supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: aye. >> clerk: stefani, i didn't. supervisor sheehy? >> supervisor sheehy: aye. >> clerk: sheehy, aye. supervisor fewer? >> supervisor fewer: no. >> clerk: fewer, no. supervisor cohen? >> supervisor cohen: aye. >> clerk: cohen, aye. the motion passes. >> supervisor cohen: all right. chief, you're done. thank you for your time.

i'd like to call up kelly kirkpatrick to discuss technical amendments. >> thank you for your patience. i had to get all the papers together. the clerk should be bringing them over to you. i have included three rounds of technical adjustments. round one is what you had heard on monday?

all the technical cleanups about balancing overhead entries, correcting work orders, accurately reflecting grant amounts, and it includes the detail which i submitted to you all via e-mail over monday, but i wanted you to have that full package to accept. round two of which there's a letter as well as excel sheet is attached are actualizing the rebalancing plans for homeless and mohcd, so it was removing all items related to proposition d that was included in the first budget, removing the state revenue, reflecting the updated retiree health benefits, addressing expenditures both at h.s.h. and mohcd to fund homeless services and the legal assistance program as well as redistributing the fund balance to support that plan?

the third technical adjustment is perthe controller's office request for the hotel tax revenue, the proposed ballot measure for november ? moving those funds within a clearly delineated fund within the technically budgeted system just to make crystal clear what is reflected pending that measure. and then, balancing revenue transfers and associated expenditures in recreation and parks department, also, a technical adjustment requested by the controller's office. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. i'd like to request that the mayor authorize a growth in the budget by the amount of the closeout. can you take care of that? >> it is my understanding that before actions just taken by the board as related to police, that there was $2.06 million

worth of encumbrances? >> supervisor cohen: say that one more time. how much? >> 2.06 million in encumbrances or prior closeouts identify by the budget and legislative analyst's. since that would grow the bottom line of the budget that does require the mayor's office to increase the appropriation authority. given that the board was put out a spending allocation plan that is $31.6 million and in combination with the b.l.a. baseline cuts, this additional 2.60 million offen -- 2.60 million of encumbrances would get them to the 5 million approximately, and i have been authorized by the mayor to make that department -- increase the appropriation by the 2.60 million.

>> supervisor cohen: okay. thank you. we're going to take the $45 million of discussion with the colleagues on the spending plan at the 31.6 million. okay. sorry, that was to invest in

services and subsidies, we should do our part to more more money for more populations served by daas and lastly, i want to tacall attention to th open source voting pilot which ensures that we can get a framework for this important program moving forward. so there are a few more things also that i want to bring attention to. domestic violence services, i would like more data around what we've heard is a significant uptick in demand

for these services. second, i think we need more specificity around how we can best support our seniors. i know some of my colleagues have been thinking critically about this, but i think we need to develop a suggested plan. and i'd like to see more money allocated for park activation, particularly around the lgbtq programming and more support around organizations supporting those with chronic illnesses. and then, finally, i've heard some rumblings around growing the district specific pot. currently, we are at a $1 million allocation perdistrict. and actually, this actually represents 35% of the total spending plan, 35%. so increasing that would be to the proposed 2 million would be over 70% and would demand that we cut critical citywide

services, which at this point i'm not in favor of. i want to let other people know that periodically throughout this conversation, you will see other members of the board of supervisors coming to join us so that they will be advocating on behalf or against any kind of a budget allocation. and we can begin conversation on the citywide spending plan. [inaudible] >> supervisor cohen: yes, that's right, we can talk about it. >> supervisor stefani: thank you, supervisor, and just to add to the conversation, with regard to citywide spending and domestic violence, you know, in recent months, the board has heard the moving testimony of sexual assault and domestic violence survivors, and i do believe our city needs to protect those who are victims and work on prevention. also, we did hear this morning, public comment, people advocating for more resources to expand services. and i would like to increase

the funding for domestic violence and sexual assault. do i specify the amount at this time? >> supervisor cohen: yeah, yeah. >> supervisor stefani: by 1.26 and support a direct services. also on citywide open space, i believe the citywide public space management entity is likely to be funded in this year's budget. i think it's innovative approach that will help achieve consistency and equity in the open spaces throughout the city, and therefore i'm looking to add 200,000 toward city space activization. with regard to mental health, we hear about that every day. we heard about it in public comment this morning. i do think it's a critical issue that we need to invest in. we need to deal with the fact that the state and federal government has made cuts to mental health funding for the last three decades, and i would

like at this time to increase funding to mental health services by at least $700,000. >> supervisor cohen: okay. >> supervisor stefani: and then, with regard to veterans housing, i think san francisco has historically taken care of its veterans. always, we can do more, and we've provided them with

>> supervisor cohen: okay. supervisor sheehy -- just really quickly, i appreciate you just reading your priorities into the record. that's helpful, and we will move in that direction. we'll hear from supervisor sheehy and then supervisor yee. >> supervisor sheehy: yeah, i just had a question. i'll read mine in in a minute. so just trying to understand. so right now, we have -- with the citywide list, a budget that's equivalent to the amount of money we have available. is that correct? >> supervisor cohen: mm-hmm. >> supervisor sheehy: so in this process, if all of us add more to that, should we not also be identifying where we want to cut? >> supervisor cohen: that is correct. >> supervisor sheehy: okay. so maybe that would be -- you know, 'cause we can all say we want to add all this in, but without identifying items within the current citywide ask that we want to cut, then, i think it becomes complicated. 'cause i can say what i'd also like to have, but i don't know if i'm willing to take stuff

out. does it make sense? >> supervisor cohen: it makes sense. >> supervisor sheehy: because this is a pretty good list. >> supervisor cohen: i'd like everyone to take a moment and review the citywide spending plan because the citywide spending plan, we -- i surveyed your offices, i got everyone's requests. i survey -- and we met with every advocacy group or advocate and tried to put their requests also reflected in, and this is a conversation that's being driven around policy area. it's a complete departure from the way we have been conducting business. >> supervisor sheehy: right. >> supervisor cohen: so let's see, if i could ask the clerk to do me a favor. if you could put the citywide spending plan on the overhead so that also members of the public can follow along on this conversation, that might be helpful. >> supervisor yee: just for the controller.

so what actually is the amount that we have available, including what was just cut of 1.5 million? and is there also -- i forget -- some other adjustments that weren't -- we should also include the, i think, 5 million or so that money was found somewhere? or whatever? >> absolutely, supervisor yee, and to the committee, so the list that's produced this morning of 31.6 million by the chair corresponds to reductions made as of this morning, first thing in the morning. there's a couple of things that are above and beyond that at this point that are on my tracking list? number one, the committee just made $1 million reductions to the police department and another .5, totaling 1.5.

and then yesterday we sent notification to the mayor and board of supervisors indicates that our span of june revenues indicates there's approximately 5.3 million available of additional revenue should the board and the mayor wish to spend it. >> supervisor yee: and so the 31,589,000 is less than the 5 -- 1.5, which is identified and -- >> given the police reductions and assuming the mayor's office grows the budget according to the revenue, you would have an additional 6.8 million available above and beyond this list. >> supervisor yee: correct. okay. >> supervisor cohen: may i offer some clarity in the process and how we're going to be moving forward. so this is the time to move forward. you've had the spending plan and an opportunity to take a look at it. but also, each one of you have submitted your -- in writing, your priorities. i read into the record

yourself, supervisor yee and the rest of the others, i would love to hear what your thoughts are. so right now we're going to have a discussion on what you'd like to see in the budget, and the figure that we have is $31.6 million. as this conversation is unfolding, it would allow the -- the controller's office to further reconcile the cuts that we made earlier just before this item. the thing that -- so that's the first thing. i'd love to hear what your thoughts are and what your priorities are. and the second thing i think we need to take action on as to whether or not we are going to increase the district-specific allocation, because if we increase district specific allocation, that severely changes the kind of conversation that we are going to have. now, i have heard from colleagues that they -- that they're interested in increasing the $1 million to $2

million. is there an appetite to grow this? i don't know. i know that supervisor kim is going to be joining us shortly to talk about this item, but supervisor, supervisor -- supervisor yee, if you can share what your priorities are, what you heard from people that were in your meetings. >> supervisor yee: sure. and my total ask will probably total 6.8, and that's fine. >> supervisor cohen: well, let's talk about it. >> supervisor yee: so you can give it all to me. so i'd like to -- i ask for -- to support 4 million for early education. 2 million's on there, so there's 2 million missing. the food security piece, what's missing from at least working off of your -- your list that i would like to see would be that home delivery meals and the

lunch meals would total another .5 million. this is for food security. for seniors, there's a few items in seniors. one of them being the patch gap funding for residential facilities. i'm asking for .5 million. residential development for seniors would be anoth another .5 million. youth services, i'd like to see an addition of about 250,000 for certain -- certain types of programs that's specific to foster youth and a.p.i. youth leadership and also a referral -- you know, child care resource and referral services. and then, for vision zero, i'm asking for a modest -- since we have nothing in pedestrian or

in our vision zero list, i'd like to ask for about 50,000 for ed's neighborhood for programming. and then, for mental health, i'm -- i'd like to see a mental health services for families, two clinicians at 355,000. and then, to backfill mental health services act cuts to only drop-in centers for homeless, another 355,000. and then for housing and homelessness, i'd like to see an additional funding for subsidies for seniors and people with disabilities for housing at 1 million, and subsidies for families at 355,000. those are sort of my major buckets.

>> supervisor sheehy: k