of their approximapossessions. we can put a few more resources to getting people off the street is and getting people working again. we are people, not the homeless. thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm wendy click. i'm from hospitality house. i want to just ask for funding in restoring the mental health services. this is an assess to the program that i work for at hospitality house. each week when i see an individual come in for individual or group wellness groups, they come out lighter on their feet. those that are in our community receive the same case managers for various support, and with those case managers there's over 100 maintained housing once they're off the street. we have one community members who was homeless for three years, and he had a approach the bench staying in, but confidence his wellness and community managers that have supported him, he has may i approa approach -- maintained housing for a year. so i'm asking you to fund the

housing and community support services. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speakers. >> hi. my name is becky, and i'm here to support and ask for funding for our youth organizing. purchase our youth are here. one of them spoke. we have currently summer youth programs where our youth get to understand the issues that are affecting them are systemic, and this really empowers them to do their information. they're able to do, you know, inform and then pass this onto, like, their neighbors and such, and really, we know that -- we often talk about youth being the future, but they are now, they are experiencing what we are experiencing. they are part of this community, and we know that it's really important to work together, so we are working with others asking for $300,000 for youth funding, particularly or specifically 100,000 for

casa de just cause. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speaker. >> my name is marie job for the community living campaign. i'm here to talk employment, particularly employment of seniors and people are -- with disabilities. 61% of the people in san francisco lack basic economic security. the unemployment rate for people with disabilities is five times the rate for others, so among the employment asks, there were two of particular interest to us. one is the s.f. reserve program, which was 317,000, and the other was for the senior community employment services program, which was 250,000, both providing subsidized employment for nonprofits. we want to be part of the solution to issues you heard today, so please put us to work. when you go back to your office, you'll find a flock of worker ducks have left more about this message in your office. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speaker.

>> good afternoon, board of supervisors. my name is judy young. i'm the executive director at the vietnamese youth support center. we're asking to support a mental health program supporting vulnerable vietnamese youth and families who are experiencing depression and trauma that go untreated, and when they ask to see a therapist, they have to wait two to three months to see a culturally competent therapist. so with the grant, we would be able to serve youth at our community site with an on-site therapist. and the second ask is a $160,000 facilities renovation. this will allow us to serve over 500 youth in our community with bathrooms and a.d.a. compliant. we currently only have one bathroom, so we hope you'll consider this request as part

of your budget appropriation. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speaker. >> thank you. how you doing. hi, supervisors? we're all nonprofit. i just need help -- we're going to walk the streets in the bayview, we're working with parents, single parents, mentors, we're going to mess with kids with behavior problems, we're going with y.g.c. i ain't on calendar, i just want walking through it. i wanted to put you on notice, and we are a 501(c)3. we'll be working the bayview district, mission district, chinatown. we need to address the kids that don't have food, not having breakfast in the morning. you know, we need to get in their face and kill them with literature. we should be up and running real soon, so we need you all

support. you'll see me again. and you all doing a great job, and you all look nice in here. nice staff. take care. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speaker. >> hi, supervisors. debbie lerman from the human services network. first i want to thank the mayor's office for supporting our nonprofits by doing a cost of doing business increase in each year, and renewing our nonprofit displacement founding. we ask the board to do what you can to grow the pot and to prioritize the budget justice coalition ask and will assist our vulnerable and low-income communities who have been left out of the city's wealth explosion. i want to touch on the process. we want to ensure that this body achieves its goals of transparency and community engagement. i w i am concerned about the limit of public comment time to one

minute which limits speakers to broad generalized comments without time to discuss policy. we ask that you also do not delay any of the add backs, make your add backs as specific as possible because it takes a lot of time to r.f.p. and contract things, get the money out to the community as quickly as possible. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. thank you. next speaker. >> hello. my name is deanna. i'm here to ask you to please consider parents for public schools and keeping them in the budget. they do an incredible service for the community, particularly for marginalized parents, mostly parents of color and immigrant parents in bridging the gap of understanding from maybe the public education systems that they're used to and being able to choose the school appropriate for their child and also in facilitating

that intimidating process of make even not knowing the language and parents for public schools does a great job of empowering parents to want to become increasingly engaged in their students' education, and also to bring community with fellow parents of their parents schools and to be able to make a positive impact on the educational futures, and as we all know, the overall out comes of that child. is that telling me -- >> supervisor cohen: yes, it is. next speaker. okay. >>. [speaking spanish] [voice of interpreter] >> my name is guadalupe, and i

live in bayview. and i want to please -- oh . and i want to please ask you to support p.t.s., which is through parents for public schools in your budget because they really help us develop our engagement as parents and our knowledge of -- so that we can better help our child's educational future. they give us information about everything we don't know, and they help us better support our children, and we need to have parents for public schools. we're all latino parents because we don't necessarily understand everything that the district provides us with, language gaps. and they really help us with that support.

thank you. [end of translation] >> supervisor cohen: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. thank you for this opportunity. my name's daisy hernandez, i am latino outreach coordinator. i am working in bayview area and mission and visitacion area, too, and i would like please include p.p.s. in your budget because we really do great support for the family, and if this is not happen, the family is going to be affected. please remember p.p.s. i think we're doing great job. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. are there any other members of the public -- please come up. >> jean adams, lifelong san franciscan, long time member from the days of old son mary's

housing community, there's a new wave of homelessness coming to san francisco. there are only grandmas raising grand kids, reference mayor london breed raised by grandma, reference mayor willie brown raised by grandma, but for how long can grandma continue raising grand kids? there's been no cola raise in three years, and yet the cola increased imposed on rent stablized apartments year offer year. that means rents going up and will soon exceed income for these old people. ten cities will soon become wheelchair cities --

[inaudible] >> supervisor cohen: miss adams, thank you for your document. your time -- you've exceeded your time. is there any other member of the public that would like to speak in public comment? okay. seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you very much. thank you to the men and women that came to public comment. we heard and took copious note oz wh s on what we heard. what i'd like to do is continue items 1 and 2 to the june 21 meeting. do i have a second? seconded by supervisor stefani, and madam clerk, do we have any other business? >> clerk: that concludes our business. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. we're adjourned.

>> supervisor cohen: good morning, ladies and gentlemen. good morning, i love the fact that everyone's excited. i heard all this excitement and discussion. you all are so fired up to be here to talk about the budget, talk about proposed cuts. this is what i live for. i'm happy to be here. i hope you guys are happy to be here. i want to recognize my committee, vise president -- or vice chair sandy fewer, jeff sheehy on my right, kathrin stefani and norman yee on my left. we've got a pretty long day today and tomorrow scheduled. we're going to be hearing

thoughtful rebuttals, i hope. i'm sure some of you will come up with some not so thoughtful rebuttals, but that's okay. all right. so i just want to welcome everyone to day four of department presentations. yea, we've made it. the first three days have been eventful. today we're hearing the recommended changed made by their budget legislative analysts. those departments who've reached out in agreement with the b.l.a., and for whom we have no questions, we're going to reach out to you first, and then you will be dismissed. departments who do not agree with the b.l.a. or whose reports include policy recommendition as, you can present your case. this committee will try to make as many decisions as possible today.

for the media, we will make decisions monday morning. we also have some procedural legislation that we need to take care of today. as in the past, we will call those items together with their department's presentation, we will hear the reports, we will take public comment on those items at that particular time. with that, i'd like to call up the following departments who are in agreement for whom -- and departments that we do not have questions for. and before we go a little -- any further, i want to just recognize our friends at sfgov tv, jesse larson and colina mendoza, and of course our faithful clerk linda wong is here. she's one of my favorite clerks here, just on top of her game. madam clerk, are there any announcements, anything we need to take care of today? >> yes. please silence any cell phones or electronic devices. documents or anything to be

included as part of the file should be submitted. items acted on today will be part of the june 25 agenda unless otherwise stated. >> supervisor cohen: okay. i'd like to get started and call items 1 and 2, please. >> clerk: yes. [agenda item read] >> supervisor cohen: all right. so this is the order that we're going to be calling departments. first we're going to be hearing from health service sam systems, the assessor, controller, fine arts museum, asian art museum, public works, emergency management, superior court, adult probation, juvenile probation, treasurer tax collector, art commission, war memorial, children and families commission, children, youth and their families, public health, the board of

supervisors, and the department of police accountability. just want to let the department of public health know and dcyf, we've got questions for you, so we'll most likely see you tomorrow. just want to manage expectations. all right. first up, human service agency, come on down. we should have, like, the price is right theme music playing right now. exactly. that's right, trent. i love that energy. >> good morning, board of supervisors. >> good morning. >> the human services agency is in green with the budget analyst's recommendation, however, there is one item that they recommend on reserve, that herrine mcspadden, director of the agency will speak to. it's related to the dignity fund. >> supervisor cohen: okay. great. thank you. >> good morning, supervisors. so we are in disagreement with the budget and legislative analysts on one item, and that's that putting the dignity

fund allocation for 18-19 on reserve. it's our interpretation that the board does not need to approve this. i have presented the allocation to you twice already, but it is also not -- it's our understanding that you don't need to approve it. the charter addresses the fund's fore year planning cycle. fiscal year 18-19 is year two of the process. this service allocation plan is to be developed through a comprehensive planning process. however, section 16.128-6 indicates that prior to the completion of the first service allocation plan and while the first planning cycle's in process, daas, in consultation with our over sight and committee may fend money based on an existing needs analysis. >> supervisor cohen: one more thing, shereen, madam clerk,

can you call item three? >> clerk: yes. item three, resolution approving and affirming the 2018 dignity community funds needs assessment. >> supervisor cohen: all right. thank you. go ahead. >> okay. so that -- that item or that piece of it, and then, i need to also present to you the community needs assessment today for your approval and to hopefully move on it to the full board next week. >> supervisor cohen: all right. >> so this year, we've been business busy doing the dignity needs assessment. i gijust want to start by givi

some evidence where we are. this plan are outline funding strategies for the next four years and be based on the needs assessment. that also includes all of the dollars that we have in the -- in the dignity fund bucket, which is approximately 54 million right now. the cycle will begin again in 2020 -- 2021 and '22 with another large scale community needs assessment. our goal with the dignity fund community needs assessment was to really have a very, very robust participatory process with many opportunities for input from community and service providers. we also wanted to develop a robust useful information to help us figure out the needs assessment. we brought on a consultant firm that focuses its word to strengthen social and economic

effort and promotes social justice for vulnerable populations. we used a mixed methods approach. we really wanted to unsure that we heard directly from consumers. we did this through community forums, which i've already talked to you about a bit. we used focus groups. the focus groups included consumer population like cantonese speakers, older adults, people with hiv and younger adults with disabilities. focus groups were also held with other individuals, such as city officials and faith based community leaders. we also concluded a community survey that gathered over 1400 responses in total. the survey has sections specifically for informal caregivers and also service provider as well as consumers.

the third key part of this assessment was the equity analysis. in here, we examined how populations face systemic barriers or how people are not accessing our services as well as how participation and funding varies across city districts. the equity factors included communities of color, low-income, limited english flew entercy, isolation, and lgbtq identification. so i wanted to start with our strengths, our findings. one, what we found out is overall we're serving one in four of the city's older adults. furthermore we're serving one half of the city's older adults, which i thought was really great. the equity analysis found the city is generally serving older populations at a higher overall rate than younger levels. almost one in three of the

city's seniors of color are engaged in community services funded by daas. this indicates that partnerships with community based organizations are successfully reaching these populations. also, consumers accessing services tend to view them favorably, which of course we wanted to know. these services help meet their basis needs and also provide social engagement and provide opportunities for learning and skill building. and gaps and recommendations, the assessment helped us identify areas where we can do better and do more. one key issue that we noted is that people don't know how to find our services. we need to do a lot around public awareness in how to access services. people had identified barriers, some real, some not real to accessing services, and so we need to do a better job of letting people now of how to access services and when they -- when they shouldn't be

experiencing barriers. we also heard that many older adults and people with disabilities feel excluded from the broader city community. they describe experiences of ageism and ablism. the assessment also found that younger adults underage 60 with disabilities are accessing services at a lower rate. while our services are open to both older adults and people with disability did as, many of our contractors have expertise with and focus on seniors. the younger populations are interested in different types of activities and support, and we need to do a better job in that area. we've also heard that the name of our department is really confusing. we don't use the term disability in our name, so we're going to look into changing the name. right now it's the department of ageing and adult services, and people with disabilities don't always see themselves in that name and don't osknow where to go for services. informal caregivers, family and friends helping a loved one would benefit from more

support. we have put some money into dignity fund for caregivers also, but it's something we need to continue to focus on. the assessment also highlights for us that improvement in data collection in our services will help us better understand service utilization and trend. the assessment predated the local ordinance requiring collection of sexual orientation and gender identity data, and this really limited our and the how we support our lgbtq populations. so looking forward, our main task is to draft the four-year service and allocation plan. it's going to take us this next year to do that, and we'll be conducting deeper dives into various areas so that we know better who we're serving and who we need to serve, so those areas are communities of color, and when we say that, we're

thinking about sub populations of communities of color, adults with disabilities, the lgbtq population and caregivers, and that concludes my community with the community needs assessment. >> supervisor cohen: real quick question about the community needs assessment. it was done on paper. >> it was done on paper, it was done on-line, we had community focus groups, and funt forum-- community forums, but it was done on-line. >> supervisor cohen: and how many people -- how many respondents were there to this survey? >> 1400. >> oh, okay, so it is a pretty good, decent snapshot. >> supervisor cohen: all right. thank you very much. we're going to take public comment, we're going to take action on this, and then, we'll take item three. >> is there anyone that would like to comment on item three,

the dignity fund community needs assessment? all right. seeing none, public comment is closed. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor cohen: okay. i'd like to make a motion -- oh, excuse me, supervisor yee. i didn't see your name. >> supervisor yee: sherreen, and this is where i'm seeing some issues, and not just your needs assessment, it's the timing of the needs assessment and what we're trying to do in this budget procedure. >> right. >> supervisor yee: as you know, there's quite a few asks to add back or increase for seniors or people with disabilities. so this makes it real awkward, i can't figure out whether in your needs assessment, whether

or not some of these programs that are being asked to be funded would be part of that -- the result of the needs assessment or not, because then, we're faced with -- we decide to somehow get other funding for these programs or would they come out of, you know, whatever you have to allocate for -- for the needs assessment. >> okay. so two answers to that, supervisor. the first thing is that needs assessment is intended to inform our process going forward for the next four years, so we'll send the next year really looking at that needs assessment and using it to develop our service allocation for the full dignity fund $54 million -- approximately $54 million. that he had is, we did use the needs assessment to put together our service allocation plan for 18-19 which just

includes the $3 million added to the overall dignity fund. and so for example, one of the things that came up from the community that i know is on the list that you're looking at is an ability to really advertise services because we know that people don't know about those services. that's in our service allocation plan for 18-19. looking at behavioral health needs, so there was a request for case management for people with a higher level of need. that's something that we've put in to look at, and we've put some money into, like, study the need for that and figure out what the best approach is in our plan for 18-19 out of that 3 million. also need for more services for younger people with disabilities. we put some money in for home delivered meals because we know there's a huge wait list, and there was a request for that. so we're trying to address needs out of the community

needs assessment with that $3 million, absolutely. it's not enough to cover all of the ask, though. >> supervisor yee: okay. thanks for your explanation. >> supervisor cohen: all right, colleagues, is there any other questions? all right. i'd like to make a motion to approve and send this need assessment with a positive recommendation to the full board. second by supervisor fewer. supervisor yee, can we take that without objection? all right. we'll take this without objection. thank you. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor cohen: all right. now back to items one and two. so at this point, i read down the list of departments that are in agreement. i would like to ask for the b.l.a. to speak -- to speak on behalf of these departments and

discuss with us their proposed cuts. and after we hear from the b.l.a.'s report, we will then hear -- i will ask departments if they are in agreement, and if they are in agreement, then, we will take action. >> good morning, chair cohen and members of the committee. >> supervisor cohen: good morning. >> so i'm just going to readout our recommendation for each of these departments. >> supervisor cohen: yes, please. >> so for health services system, the budget and legislative analysts recommended reductioned in the proposed action totaling $84,000 in 18-19. of these reductions, all of them are one time savings, they

would still allow an increase of 1.7 in the department's 2018-19 budget. in addition we recommended closing out unencumbrances, and in year two, we recommend reductions to the pros budget of 87,558. of those reductions, they're all ongoing, and none are one-time. these reductions would still allow an increase of 1.8% in the department's 2019-2020 budget. for the assessor-recorder, we recommend reductions to the proposed budget total 1,017,829 in 18-19. of these reductions, 215,508

are ongoing savings, and 128,321 are one time savings. they would allow an 11.5% savings. b.l.a. recommendations to the proposed budget in 19-20 total 384,988. all of them are ongoing savings. these reductions -- actually, that's for the assess oor, and then, for controller's office our recommended reductions for year one are 120,000. of these, 100,000 are ongoing savings and 20,000 are one time savings. this would allow an increase of

1.3% in the department's 18-19 budget. in addition, we recommend closing out extended encumbrances of 126,000 for a total general fund savings of 321,126. in year two, rerecommend reductions of $100,000, and all of them are ongoing savings. and then, elections, we recommend reducing the proposed budget by $115,000 in 18-19.

of these reductions, 70,000 are ongoing and 45,000 are one-time savings. these reductions would still allow an increase of about 3.7 million or 25 .4% in the department's total budget. in 19-20, we recommend $175,000 of reductions. all of these are ongoing savings, which still allow an increase in year two of about 3.1 million or 16.6% in the department's budget. fine arts museum, i believe we -- for fine arts museum, we recommend reductions to the

proposed budget of 15,703 in 18-19. all of these reductions are one-time savings. these reductions still allow an increase of 249,117 or 1.1% of the department's 18-19 budget. and in 19-20, we recommend reductions to the proposed budget of $50,000. of the $50,000, they're all one-time, again, all one time, not ongoing. these reductions would still allow an increase of 565,820 of the department's 19-20 budget. for the asian art museum, we recommend reductions to the proposed budget that total 16,119 in 18-19. of the 16,119 in recommended reductions, they're all

ongoing. they would still allow an increase of #.9% in the department's 18-19 budget. and public works. for the department of public works, we recommend our total recommended reductions are $1,386,262. of those reductions, 926,554 are ongoing and 459,708 are one-time savings. these reductions would still allow an increase of $17,416,830 in the department's 18-19 budget. for 19-20, we recommend reductions that total $990277.

of that, 941,331 are ongoing and 48,946 are one-time savings. for the department of emergency management, we provided a revised report for emergency management which has been handed out. >> supervisor cohen: okay. >> and our -- >> supervisor cohen: let me ask a question. has the department had a chance to look at these revised changes? >> yes. our understanding is that they agree. >> supervisor cohen: okay. they agree. please proceed. >> so for department of emergency management we recommend reductions of

427,999. >> supervisor cohen: what's the -- >> i'm sorry. i read off the old report. let me just read the revised. so take two for department of emergency management. the budget and legislative analyst's recommendations reductions total 405,491, 52,689 are ongoing and 352,802 are one time savings. these would still allow an increase of $7,289,894. in addition we recommend closing prior year unencumbrances. and in 19-20, we recommend reductions that total $53,732,

and all of those are ongoing savings. so the next is superior court. for the superior court, we recommend total reductions of $21,000 in 18-19. all of the $21,000 in recommended reductions are ongoing savings. these would still allow an increase of 243,274 or 0.9% in the department's 18-19 budget. in 19-20, we recommend again the $21,000 which are ongoing savings. for adult probation -- >> supervisor cohen: and this is also a revised recommendation? >> yes. the cut sheet was revised. it was just a minor technical

issue. >> supervisor cohen: okay. >> for adult probation, we recommend our total reductions to the proposed budget are $828,904 in 18-19. of that, 750,998 are ongoing savings, and 77,906 are one time savings. this would still allow an increase of 14.9% in the department's 18-19 budget. in addition, the budget and legislative analyst recommends closing out prior year unextended encumbrances. in 19-20, our recommended reductions to the proposed budget total $750,998, which

are ongoing savings. these reductions would still allow an increase of 2.1 million or 5% in the department's 19-20 budget. budget and legislationtive analyst's total reduction to juvenile probation are all one time savings. we don't have any recommendations for 19-20. for the treasurer tax

collector, the b.l.a. recommendations to the proposed budget total 389,469 in 19-18. 25,000 are ongoing, and 364,969 are one time savings. in addition, the b.l.a. recommends closing out prior year unextended encumbrances for a total general fund savings of 619,528. in year two, we recommend reductions that total $528,000. all of those are ongoing savings. [inaudible] >> -- all of these recommended

reductions are one time savings. these reductions would still allow an increase of 4,587,000 in the department's 18-19 budget. in addition we recommend closing out prior unextended encumbrances, and we have no recommended reductions in 19-20 for the arts commission. for the war memorial, we recommend -- our total recommended reductions to the proposed budget total $36,174 in 18-19. of those reductions, $3,720 are ongoing savings and $32,454 are one time savings. these would still allow an increase of 584,152 or 2.2% in

the department's 18-19 budget. in year two, our recommended rebucks to the proposed budget total 4,974. of those, 3,720 are ongoing, and 1,120 are one time. this would still allow an increase of 12.2% in the department's 19-20 budget. for the department of children, youth, and their families, the budget and legislative analyst's total recommended reductions are $88,017 in 18-19. all of these are ongoing savings. thee reductions would still allow an increase of 25,436 -- i'm sorry.

they're one time savings, not ongoing savings. these reductions would still allow an increase of 25 million or 11.9% in the department's 18-19 budget, and we do not have any recommendations for 19-20. for public health, for the department of public health, budget and legislative analyst's recommended reduction to the proposed budget, 161,712 are ongoing savings. these reductions would still allow an increase of 170

million or 7.8% in the department's 18-19 budget. for year two, our recommended reductions to the proposed budget total $1,769,153. of these reductions, 1,669,153 are ongoing savings, and 100,000 are one time savings. o for the board of supervisors, the budget and legislative analyst's recommended reductions to the proposed budget total 53,357 in 18-19. all of these are ongoing saves.

this would still allow an increase of 278,000 or 1.8% in the department's 18-19 budget. in addition, the b.l.a. recommended closing out prior year unextended encumbrances. in 19-20, we recommend reductions that total $23,636, all of the recommended reductions are ongoing savings. this would still allow an increase of about 23,000 or.1% of the department's budget. and the last one we're going to go over at this moment is the department of police accountability. for the department of police accountability, the b.l.a.'s recommended reductions to the

proposed budget total 225,000 in 18-19, all of which are one time savetions. this would still allow an increase in 1.1 million or 16.2% in the department's 18-19 budget, and we do not have any proposed reductions in 19-20 in the department of police accountability. i believe i got them all. >> supervisor cohen: all right. thank you very much. appreciate your due diligence. okay. so to the department heads, are we still in agreement? are you sure? don't feel pressured. if you want to change your minds. if you have a sudden change of heart. it's like if you ever go to the christian church, and the past or calls you to the special altar. if you want to go tomorrow, we can hear from you tomorrow as well as monday. all right. sounds like we are all in agreement. congratulations. what do we do now? i don't know what to do now. we have so much peace going on.

thank you to the b.l.a. departments that are all in agreement, you're dismissed, and thank you for being here. i just want to being national that d.c.h. and dcyf, we will see you tomorrow. >> madam chair? >> supervisor cohen: yes. >> ben rosenfield, i would ask that you make a motion to accept the department's recommendations, and that'll allow us to act on it as he go. >> supervisor cohen: folks, i'll introduce a motion if there's no discussion. the motion to accept the budget and legislative analyst's recommended cuts. i saw a second from supervisor jeff sheehy. may we take this without objection? all right. we will take this without objection. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. what's next?

okay. we've got -- i want to call up h.s.a. h.s.a., we'll hear your b.l.a. report. >> chair cohen, members of the committee, for the human services agency, the budget and legislative analyst's recommended reductions to the proposed budget total

1,701,295. of that -- sorry. okay. of the 1,701,295 in 18-19, 1,601,295 are ongoing savings and 100,000 are one time saves. these reductions would still allow an increase of 5.8% in the department's 18-19 budget.

budget and legislative analy . >> supervisor cohen: thank you. trent, i want to give you an opportunity. >> good morning, again, commit members. trent rohrer, human services agency. we are in agreement, however, we do have the one item, the dignity fund being on reserve, which director mcspadden spoke about earlier. we're in agreement with the completed monetary items, but we're not in agreement with the items being put on reserve. >> supervisor cohen: sherreen, i am comfortable as i authored the dignity fund, got it to the voters, and been working on it since its inception. i am not comfortable with placing it on reserve. maybe you can articulate a little b little bit more as to why

you're asking that it be removed. >> so the 3 million, i'm asking it to not be on reserve because it's not part of the legislation that it be on reserve and that the board ask to pass the allocation of the $3 million. you need to approve the community needs assessment, which you've now approved, and it'll move forward to the full board, but the allocation doesn't need to be approved by the board. >> supervisor cohen: so because the allocation doesn't need to be approved by the board and it's not detailed in the ordinance, but there's still -- there still should be like a spending plan. i don't have a clear understanding of where, how, or how much, and what i understand from the needs assessment, that's going to be shaping the direction, so i'm going to assume even the department doesn't have a clear idea as to how the 3 million will be drawn down. >> no, we do have a spending plan, and that's what i presented to you last year when we presented our budget. that's the sheet we passed out to you so you have it. so yes, we have a very clear

idea of what we want today do with that, the oversight and advisory committee has approved it, the commission has approved it, and that is the process that's laid out in the legislation that those groups need to approve it. i did put it in as part of our budget when i present it to you last week. if you have concerns about it, i'd be happy to answer any questions, but what i'm concerned is getting the money as quickly out the door as we can. we can start preparing for that if we can move forward with it. >> supervisor cohen: i think the way i understand the way the reserve works is you would come back to this body and you would say this is where and exactly how much we're going to be spending this, and then, the allocation is immediately relinquished. i don't really feel like a gap of time. this is something we can start as soon as next week or in a few weeks, up coming weeks. i don't -- >> okay. i just -- because i came and present it had in april, and then came and presented it

again last week, it just seems like it's not necessary to present it again. i'm happy to do that if that's the process. >> supervisor cohen: so you're saying that there are no changes. >> there are no changes. it's exactly what i presented last week, and if you still have it, it's in that sheet or i can recirculate it if you'd like. >> supervisor cohen: i don't know. let me ask my colleagues. dow a do you have any questions, supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: no. i remember the presentation about the spending plan, and at the time, i was comfortable with the plan itself. >> supervisor cohen: okay. >> supervisor fewer: and yeah, i'm comfortable with it, too, chair cohen. >> supervisor cohen: okay. it sounds like there may be a majority of support to move it forward, then. anyone, would you like to make a motion, supervisor? >> supervisor yee: sure. let's take the recommendations of the b.l.a. except for the amount they suggest to be put on reserve. >> supervisor cohen: okay. let's go ahead -- i want to go back to the b.l.a. could you speak to the reasons

why you're suggesting that this remain on reserve? >> hi. good morning, chair. so the main reason why we recommended that these moneys be put on reserve is that the department has not spent down the money that was allocated this year. >> supervisor cohen: speak into the mic a little bit more. >> can you hear me now? >> supervisor cohen: yes, sir. >> so the main reason we recommended this money be put on reserve is the department hasn't spent down the moneys allocated this year. they do have money available, and we're seeing that they're not spending down at their projected pace, so why not put this allocation for this coming year on reserve while the service allocation plan is formally approved, and they get a better sense of things. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. can you respond to that? >> yes. there is some money that has not been spent down yet, and that's just really a function of the fact that it takes a lot of time to get the r.f.p.'s out the door. we had to have two commission

meetings this month just to get all of our items out the door. we had our final one yesterday, so that shouldn't be an issue. >> supervisor cohen: well, the issue is that you have money that you haven't spent down, and you said that you would like to -- you want this money so that you can spend it immediately, so i'm having a hard time with that. >> so the month notty that we haven't spent it allocated. it's still allocated to various things. it was a $6 million in the first year that we allocated to very specific items, and it just took a long time to get the money out the door. this new money for 18-19 is being allocated for different things, so we're ready to get this out the door if we can. last year, we tried as much as we can to modify contracts when we could, we tried hard to get modifies to contracts done, but it's a very long process, so it took a while to get that out the door. but the new 3 million is