>> supervisor ronen. >> thank you. so given that we can amend these orders, can we also add additional orders? >> given the importance of these questions, of this emergency and these answers, i would prefer to have the time overnight to look into all of the questions that you have. there have been very few emergencies declared in the past and i'm aware of prior emergencies that orders have been made that the board did not agree with and were overturned by the board. but i would much prefer to not give you quick answers in such -- >> that's totally fair. i think that is a great plan and i am glad that we just rescinded the vote then that we just took. that sounds great. if you could give us the answer to that question, that would be great. and one other question for you to research is, if we add a new order that the mayor doesn't

agree with, does she have the power to veto it? that's another question that you'll look into? thank you. >> supervisor preston. >> thank you. and along similar lines, just understanding better the process if we were to amend one of these supplemental -- what that process would be. and whether the ball then goes back to the mayor or that becomes the final order. and i want to say that i appreciate supervisor peskin teasing this out a bit and i think just to observe that we have a number of things right now that are both the subject of mayoral supplemental orders and parallel legislation moving in this body. and so to the extent that we have the authority in this process to amend more

efficiently we can sort of merge those efforts for the board to weigh in. but i think that it's critically important that we understand what that process is moving forward. >> supervisor peskin. >> through the president to deputy city attorney pearson, i know that you have the hardest job with a new client that happens to be 11 people, and i appreciate your indulgence and, please, do not mistake any of what's going on tonight in the middle of an emergency as a reflection on anything. these are the fundamental questions of this board, of our democracy, and this emergency moment. so, please, do not mistake anything that i am asking or that we're asking in any way personal whatsoever and we're just living through some tough

times. and as elected officials we really have to understand the checks and the balances, so bless your heart. >> so, madam clerk, just handed a note to me to say that the mayor does not veto motions. so whatever that is. and so right now i'd like to have a motion to continue this item to the march 24th meeting. >> so moved. >> a second? >> okay, seconded by walton. and no objectionings. and the motion passes to continue the item to next week. and so deputy city attorney, so there's been several questions that were asked. and as i agree with you, rather than just at this point, that you can do research and if you could give us a written answer,

is 24 hours adequate? >> absolutely. >> tomorrow at midnight. all right. madam clerk, anything else. >> clerk: yes, mr. president. today's meetinga adjourned in memory of the following beloved individuals on behalf of supervisor peskin for the late mr. mel sharp. >> okay. so with nothing else then, the meeting is adjourned.

>> clerk: good morning. the meeting will come to order. and wednesday to the march 4, special meeting of the government audit and oversight committee. and the chair of this committee is here and joined by aaron peskin and matt haney. thank to the clerk john carroll and thank tom loftis from sfgov-tv for staffing this meeting. any announcements. koirk silence your cellphones and electronic devices and your documents that have to be included as part of the file should be submitted to the

clerk. and it appears on the march 10, 2020 agenda unless otherwise stated. >> mr. clerk, call item number 1. >> clerk: a motion directing the clerk of the board to initiate a request for proposals process for special investigation services. >> thank you. supervisor haney, as a sponsor of this measure, the floor is yours. >> thank you, chair marr, and good morning, everyone. i think that this is, you know, obviously a very challenging time for our city right now with multiple departments who have been implicated in a larger investigation. clearly, you know, charges that have been levied by the u.s. attorney against individuals in government and outside. and it is critical that we do everything that we can to investigate fully, prevent any

future fraud or corruption, and to do everything that we can to restore the public trust. this is not a time for business as usual and i think that the public is looking to us as the board of supervisors to investigate fully to make some serious changes around accountability and transparency and to do this in a way that the public fully understands what is happening and why. i know that there are a number of things that are happening and i want to acknowledge supervisor peskin's work in really making sure that we're using our full powers as a committee and yours as well, chair marr, in restoring and bringing some role for a subpoena power here to the committee. there's, of course, also the federal investigation, the city attorney, the controller doing full investigation. and they're doing their part.

and it's critical that we do not hesitate in doing ours as the board of supervisors. the audits and the investigations that are occurring now are critical. but they are also not intentionally designed not to be comprehensive in identifying all of the areas of local government where corruption or fraud are occurring or are prone to happening. there are clearly gaps that we can complement as the board of supervisors with third-party investigative services, which allow the board of supervisors to play a much more active role. our constituents are looking to us to help restore faith in local government and i think that there's a general concern that we are going to fail to bring in outside eyes and outside role in helping to restore the integrity and trust. i think that there's a role, a

critical role for third-party independent oversight and investigation in that. san franciscoians want us to stand up for them and i think that it would behoove us to do more than -- as we have been doing -- it would behoove us to actually be proactive in how this is done. our city charter grants the board of supervisors broad powers of hearing inquiries so we can carry out our duties as the legislative branch of the city and county of san francisco. and we're also empowered to seek support in our role. to provide invaluable services to the board analyzing budgets and legislation, conducts research and helping to inform our policy proposals. the nature of the charges that have been filed and the potential for as of yet discovered illegal or inappropriate and unethical behaviors, and the need to restore accountability and transparency and trust require us as the board of supervisors to urgently procure third-party investigative services. with a special investigator we

can investigate allegations that are coming directly to us that the city employees or members of the employee have not yet felt comfortable reporting through the whistleblower problem or the current hotline. we can work closely together to identify certain policies to prevent misbehavior or corruption and how they may be violated. and we can pursue leads with the power of subpoena. we have the power of the subpoena now in this committee -- well, we will -- and with that complemented by the investigative services, would allow us to identify what sort of subpoenas are needed and to follow-up on leads. we can also look at broader systemic issues related to policies or oversight as they relate to contracts or permitting and understand what legislative changes are needed. and the important thing here is that we don't know yet exactly what will be revealed and we'll

need to follow certain leads. for last few weeks my office in partnership with the clerk of the board, the city attorney, supervisor ronen and other colleagues have thoroughly vetted options to provide the flexible, independent investigative services necessary for the board to actively respond. today i have a set of amendments to proceed with a procurement process that relies on a pool of firms prequalified by the controller's office, rather than to begin a new solicitation process. section 21.4 of the administrative code allows departments to issue prequalified pools of prospective contractors in accordance with open and fair procedures and may have lists of prequalified contractors for commodities and services for future contracts as needed by the city. and the city controller maintains such a list of prequalified audit firms including those qualified for forensic auditing and investigative services. to be clear, it is not the intent of this motion to duplicate any investigations already occurring.

we owe it to the people of san francisco to be prudent with our resources. over the next few months we'll hear regularly from the controller on their audits and likely see subpoenas and potentially cases filed by the city attorney. and to complement those efforts we'll have the support of a special investigator. we should proceed with urgency to begin this work without delay. i have another set of sort of more specifics of how this will work and what this process would look like, but i also want to ask the clerk of the boar angela calvillo to come up and to lay out a bit on how this process would work, what the timing of it would be, and then there's a couple other quick things that i want to share and then we can open up to discussion if that's okay with you, chair. >> sure, thank you so much,

supervisor haney. madam clerk, if you could just pause, supervisor peskin, i believe, had -- >> i'm happy to defer until after the clerk has spoken. >> great. >> members of the committee, chair mar, angela calvillo. if the board approves this direction for the clerk, our office will work with member offices to create to understand and to create the scope of work that would be included. areas to be investigated, timeframes. and the expected deliverables. the controller's office has as heard an upcoming list of prequalified auditing firms that have been established through a request for qualification process. and that we will utilize instead of going through the r.s.p. process which would take longer to complete. we'll send a letter of intent and solicit a proposal from the top two or three prekawstled prd firms. we would assemble a informal pan

to rank and to prioritize the qualified firms based upon the preset criteria. criteria that would include years of experience, available resources, estimated costs special investigation services with regard to potential deception, fraud and corruption within local government. the panel would recommend the most qualified firms. the clerk would then bring that to the committee or to the board for review and your approval. and once approved, we would begin to enter into negotiations with the firms and would request parallel funding at that point if necessary through a supplemental process. >> thank you. supervisor peskin. >> thank you, chairman mar, and thank you, chairman, for having this special hearing today on both of these items that have to do with one of the most sorted chapters of corruption that i've encountered in the 20 years that

i have been an on and off again member of the board of supervisors, on and off again member. i absolutely appreciate everything that the proposer of this motion said. yes, this body has an obligation, a responsibility, the charter authority, and the unlimited ability to inquire and to get to the bottom of things and i also appreciate your comments about not otherwise interfering or impeding with ongoing civil and criminal investigations. and i think -- and i just quickly read the changes that this all really comes down to what is the scope of work. and i believe that we may indeed need third-party expert outside

investigatory help. but i don't yet know the scope of what that should be. the controller is doing their work. we have the budget and legislative analyst who we can use for policy recommendations and the city attorney is doing their work and the u.s. attorney and the f.b.i. is doing their work. and this body has a role to play and, of course, the next item that has not been called is the beginning of what i imagine would be a number of different hearings delving down into this. but the only question that i have is what is the scope of work. and i would like to pause it that we don't yet know what expert things that we need that we do not have within our existing resources, be it the controller, city attorney, and budget and legislative analyst office, and, indeed, the members of the board of supervisors and our staff. so i can foresee a need for this. i'm not exactly sure how we can

authorize the letting of a contract with a prequalified pool of vendors until we know exactly what services we're requesting of them. so i just want to put that out there. i realize this is an evolving and an ever worsening set of revelations, that's the only question that i have. >> supervisor haney. >> thank you. no, and i totally appreciate that. and i think that, you know, there's a sense that -- from my perspective -- that we are going to need investigative services and support. and that the actual scope of it -- there's some things that we might put in the scope of it now but as you said a lot of this is, you know, being unveiled in various ways and there will likely be times in which we want to be flexible. one of the things, for example, i know that -- and i know that the controller is here -- that

the first report -- which i think is on somewhat narrow focus on contracting within p.d.w., and that we would have that first report come to us. and there may be things that we want to follow-up on further, specific things that come out of that that we want to have to be investigated. one of the things -- madam clerk, if you might just clarify in a little more detail this particular question of the scope and when we would really have to define the scope, how -- what is the timeline for that. because, you know, it seems to us that we have to start this process to even begin to have a conversation about the scope. and, you know, the scope could be broad and flexible is my understanding. >> that is true, through to the chair to the members. i just had a discussion with our controller who indicated that

his upcoming list should not be available for another month at least. so we would not be able to obtain even the list for several weeks. in the meantime as perhaps the g.a.o. is having hearings or perhaps as you're having briefings by the city attorney or the ethics commission or the controller, there could be items that come to light that then could inform the ultimate scope of services that you're working towards. and then we could hone our process a little bit further and then modify the scope as soon as you get more information. >> and this committee would have, of course, another opportunity to both weigh in and directly approve the scope of the services before this were to -- >> the committee could, certainly. and there seems as though there's going to be some time to do so. >> all right. so in just in terms of supervisor peskin's question, i agree that there's still some

work to figure out the scope. for us this was the first step to even to be able to have a conversation really about scope. and to begin to get the prequalified contractors on this and really start a process of discussing and defining what it is that we might move forward here. and i -- and i agree with supervisor peskin that we want to be clear about the scope before actually moving this. and that's something that i think that should happen here and it will happen also in informal conversations and happen in looking at what comes out in the next few weeks from the controller and other sources. and even other hearings that we're having, there may be things that come up and say, you know what, this is something that makes sense. this feels to me that this is something that we're going to need, even based on what came out before. i could make a list of some of the things that i would put in that scope, but i do think that we want to, you know, obviously

use resources in a way that helps us to do our job better and really represent the public's interest in terms of getting to the bottom of what's happening and also how to prevent it. but, at the same time, not to duplicate some of the things that are already happening. >> supervisor peskin? >> i absolutely agree insofar as just the technical process of procurement will take a while. that would allow us to get prepared about what that scope of work should be. and in the same way that we're preparing ourselves by potentially super majority of our colleagues on tuesday agreed to give this committee the power to issue subpoenas, which hopefully we won't need to do because we will ask each and every individual that we want to talk to to come here voluntarily. but this is another preparatory action. so, yeah, sounds good. >> thank you.

maybe we can go to public comment on this. so i do have one speaker card. eileen spoken. if there are other members of the public that would wish to speak on this item, please get in line on the righthand side of the word. >> eileen voken, here on my own behalf in strong support of this item. on my way here today on the streetcar i overheard two teenagers talking about learning to drive and the rules of the road. one said to the other, it's only illegal if you get caught. i thought that perspective was fascinating and relevant to this item. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. next speaker. >> hello, san francisco city by the bay. this is ace. you might want to hear what i've got to say. as we here going through these

processes -- i just came back from baltimore. and like i said before, before i traveled there i thought that san francisco was the most racist corrupt city in the united states until i went to baltimore. but i went there and there's corruption there. and then i came back and i seen corruption here. but i'd like to put a word out in the beginning of this process in light that i'm a black man, in light that queen bee -- i call queen bee, the mayor london breed, we as african american -- oh, scratch that -- as black americans here in san francisco -- are dealing with the most racist situation that's going on here, dealing with the reparation, outmigration and all of these other studies here. the office of racial equity. the removal of justin herman's name. so i want you all to be aware as we go on with this investigation, let it be fair,

no racial overtones. because my name is ace, damn it, and i'm on this case. so i know y'all going to be fair because we going to be watching. and you know that our population is very low and we're building up resistance right now. and like i said before, it's progressive and the moderates got to get together and solve it. what is that? the black population going down. so all these efforts, energy, and all of this money is going to be spent on this investigation, and when it comes back around with the investigation with a lot of the departments in this city by the bay -- i hope that you get the same. my name is ace and i'm on this case. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> well, let's say for the sake of argument that any district

supervisor who at some time in the distant unforeseeable future, would assist a small business owner by acquiring a monetariy subsidy for tens of thousands of dollars annually through the legacy fund program, imagine a proprietor then gets a mercedes benz for his or her daughter's 18th birthday. and weighing household expenses against profit loss, and expenditure and income imagined in that the same proprietor places campaign flyers in the windows of their home or holds a fundraiser. and either or both of these places or donates funds towards the incumbent's re-election or towards her political party. can you tell me this would not appear to constitute an impropriety? do you honestly not say that it's an essential problem

inherent with the dynamic of the program. taking on the argument further, say the proprietor holds the premise under l.l.c. and runs under a separate corporate entity and the former raises the rent on the latter. and to assure that the enterprise succeeds on paper. and also most of small property owners hold their property under corporate l.l.c. >> thank you. is there anyone else that would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. so i just would like to thank supervisor haney for bringing this motion forward. you know, i'm happy to have been a co-sponsor and to see this as an important step that we could take as a board of supervisors in our role as a legislative body. but also as the directly elected

representative of the residents in 11 districts in our city to provide oversight and potential policy or legislative changes that will result from the multiple investigations into corruption in our city right now. and i share their concerns thatt supervisor peskin raised about needing to clarify the scope of the contract or the services, the special investigation services, but it does seem that with the amendment that supervisor haney brought forward today that that is -- that is included or addressed in the amendments. so i think that, you know, i am supportive of the, you know, this motion as amended moving forward. supervisor haney? >> thank you, chair mar, and thank you for your support from the beginning on this. one question -- two quick things -- one is the controller

-- when will the list be available? and what is sort of the -- why will it take -- why is it not available? >> good morning, supervisor. so as has been referenced here earlier our office develops prequalified lists of different kinds of expertise that we use in performing our work and then we make those pools available to the department c.e.u.s to procure related services. the pool that we're talking about here is one for -- as supervisor haney has noted -- for auditing, forensic accounting and investigative services and the rest. our former pool has expired and we're in the midst of refreshing that pool. and we have been working on that in last couple months. we are near the end of that process and we have proposals in for the prequalified pool. the panel will evaluate and awarding and creating the pool within the next several weeks.

and i envision the final pool will be certified likely the last week of march. one could envision a couple pick ups in how these processes work to carry it to the first week of april. but it will be available within several weeks at the latest. >> got it. and then one thing about the -- and so, obviously, this would even -- to get to point of sending a letter of intent and soliciting proposals we need that prequalified. so at the very least we're talking about a few weeks from now or a month from now at the earliest. i want to say one thing about the scope which is that i think that one opportunity that we will have to help really define what sort of services we need actually can come with some support from the firms themselves. if we put out a letter of intent and solicit proposals, there may be some things that these firms

identify as being things that we should be looking at closely. and that will also help us to really define the scope as well. you know, in the process of the letter of intent and the proposals that come to us. so i also just want to point that out. but, again, with all of that, for any of that to happen, this is the first step and we'll have some time to better define what it is and what proposals that we're getting and, obviously, we could make a decision at some point not to move forward. but i do think that because of the likelihood that we will need these services, that it's important to move forward with this part of the process now. >> supervisor peskin. >> thank you, chair mar. so through the chair to supervisor haney, the remaining question i have is what will the role of this committee or the board or the clerk be relative to the development of that scope of work? what i think that i just heard you say is that the pool of

prequalified vendors could actually make suggestions as to what the scope of work should be. i'm trying to figure out how we advise and consent to that ever evolving scope of work and what role the board or this committee plays. >> sure. so if i could ask the clerk to come back up -- sorry. and as we think about this kind of process once we get the prequalified list of firms, as we develop the letter of intent, is that something that even at that stage that we might have this -- this committee involved with in terms of informing? and then i know that there's also some sort of more informal process where this committee may sort of give its feedback and input and then have some smaller set of either supervisors or with your support to better define that in a smaller group.

can you -- what might be a process in your view that would make sense in terms of the role of the board in this process? >> chair, thank you. >> or this committee in the process. >> through the chair to the members. obviously, supervisor haney, as we're moving through this process and we received a list and working with the members who are most interested in this, being very cautious not to break the brown act, of course. happy to bring drafts forward. happy to have this committee then guide us with the details in the scope as your information evolves. we can certainly add it to the scope. and then you can finally bless the scope. and then we can move forward with the l.o.i. >> and through the chair to deputy city attorney pearson, insofar as the next set among this agenda that has not been called is potentially an ongoing vehicle to continue to have these hearings, would it be acceptable if our clerk under

that item or a similar type of item yet to be introduced would report back about the scope? or would we need to have an ongoing hearing item because i assume that once we dispose of this item it leaves the jurisdiction of this committee. >> deputy city attorney ann pearson. the next item is a scheduled hearing concerning the essential scope of public works. i don't think that description would encompass a consideration of the scope because it might still be on the scope of that department. so i would think that you would separately notice any discussion on the scope of work that's brought back to this. this come committee. >> i suggest that we have an ongoing hearing item with prequalified vendors that we can call and schedule from time to time between now and april and thereafter to get reports and publicly advise the clerk as to the scope of work.

>> perfect. >> perfect. >> we can assist you in drafting that, supervisor haney. thank you. >> does that make sense, chair mar? >> i think that does. especially, you know, i know that the controller is working on several different specific investigations right now and it will be preparing sort of white pairs on those issues that we intend to hear in this committee and in the coming weeks. for example, i think that the first one is on the contracting practices and procedures with the department of public works. so i think that these -- so i think that -- so given that there will be more -- you know, there's ongoing investigations by multiple entities and there's going to be more information, particularly presented publicly by the controller's office, that could help to inform the scope of work. i think that it makes sense, yes, to continue this. >> perfect.

so is there a motion -- supervisor haney? >> yes. so i want to move the amendments and then move this forward as amended. >> and can we take that without objection? >> and then i'll introduce the hearing so we can have that separately. >> great. thank you. please call agenda item 2. >> clerk: agenda item be 2 is a hearing on the public works core functions as they relate to capital infrastructure project delivery, operations and contracting, as well as an overview of the department's administrative decision-making policies and process. >> thank you mr. clerk. supervisor peskin, the floor is

yours. >> thank you, chair mar, and thank you for having this special meeting today. and as i said during the last item this is one of the most sorted chapters of corruption that i've seen. maybe i was in denial, but i thought that the pay-to-play underbelly in san francisco government had gone away or receded and turns out to be abundantly untrue. i want to start out by saying words to the leadership and the rank and file employees of our public works department which is that i know many, if not all of you, worked very, very hard every day and this is as tragic

and disappointing to you personally and professionally as it is to every member of this board of supervisors and the senior leadership of the city and the people in the county of san francisco. so i want you to know that i feel that. and while we do have an obligation to inquire and to get to the bottom of it and to figure out how these infirmities came to pass and why the checks and balances failed repeatedly, and to understand the scope, i don't want this to be seen by you as a salacious political attempt by elected officials. what i want this to be -- although some of it may indeed be pretty prevehicletive, depending what rolls out through the investigations not being done by the board of

supervisors, i want this to be a exercise where we figure out how to prevent these things from happening quite frankly. if they could happen in the public works department, they could probably happen in other departments. this is about the control environment and this is about how contracts are procured, this is about the limits that we have, this is about what we're now calling the tone at the top, the culture of a department and of the workforce. and so those are all of the things that i would like to focus on and i really wanted to start at a high level. we do this once a year in a very compressed fashion at the budget committee. where 50 plus departments come through this chamber and are asked questions about what you do and what your performance metrics are and how many new f.t. you want and whatever and that gets compressed into a few minutes. i think that it would be very,

very helpful and this is not salacious. it is boring as heck to do some public works 101. just so we know that what all of those different functions are and then start to drill down on what went wrong, how to fix it and what happened in the interim between the revelations that happened in late january and now to make sure that that controlled environment has been temporarily been fixed and, obviously, this conversation should and hopefully will lead to some structural reforms. whether they are things that change our charter and have to go before the electorate of san francisco. or whether they are changes to the administrative code, in chapter 6 and 21. and whether the broad authority that the board of supervisors

unanimously granted in around streamlining as it relates to the provision of homeless facilities, needs to be taken back. this is the conversation that i would like to have. i think that it's very important to understand not only the size of the department's operating budget, but on the capital side to understand the billions of dollars of projects that flow through there that are directly under public works or are contracted services. i think that it's important for this board to be reminded and the public to be reminded that this is a department that provides services to the airport, to rec and park and to the public utilities commission. and let's drill down on that and see where that goes. i've had none of this is gotcha stuff. all of the questions that i intended to ask i have shared

with the acting director, and i'm sorry if i mess this up, but soon we'll be on a first-name basis, as well as the city administrator and staff to the department. so with that, colleagues, if you don't have any questions i thought that we would start by asking the acting director to start with a high level briefing to this committee about the organizational structure, about the budget, and then i would like to drill down into the contracting process, how contracts are let. i'm not asking about any particular contract, at least not yet today. although -- and i do want to say to supervisor haney that i very much appreciated your timely hearing on the topic of garbage cans. so i would -- i know that sounds

rather pedestrian -- but it is actually one of the things that binds every corner of this city and all of our populous and visitors together. and you held i thought a hearing that really shed light on that particular function. and, yes, there are some contracts in and around that issue of procurement of trash cans that are in the public realm that we all know about, but i think that is a good example of how we can understand at least some of the contracting procedures as it relates to obtaining and procuring commodities. and insofar as the acting director is the former director of purchasing, i know that you will be very well positioned to explain all of those procurement processes to this body. and with that i will turn it over to mr. degraff and reid.

>> good morning, supervisors. my name is alex degraff and i'm the acting director of the public works department. first i want to just say thank you for the opportunity to be here today and thank you supervisor peskin for the kind words and the rank and file of the staff at the public works department. i think you're absolutely right. we have over 1,600 individuals that do an amazing job every day -- every day. so i'm honored to be here today to provide you as an overview in the work that we do. and then in the latter half of this morning's presentation i will be discussing some of the contracting processes here. i guess that the one thing that

hasn't changed here at public works, is that we care about building and the city assets forward and for the people of san francisco. we have a vision, we have a forward thinking vision that honors the public trust. and the core values that we have are with respect and integrity and responsiveness is something that we try to drive down into every individual within the organization. we do that and we have developed a strategic plan which is focused around three goals. the first goal is that we want to be the best in a place to work. and that's not just the best as the city department to work, we want to be the best place to work in the bay area. so whether it be the private sector or the public sector, we want to be the best place to work. and that really comes down to, you know, having and honoring

the work that we do and knowing that the work that we do touches the lives of everyone in san francisco every day. in the second goal it is to drive innovation as exceptional service. as was mentioned before, we're actually one of the few departments across the city that operates every 24/7 and i would say arguably touches every person that lives and visits or otherwise comes to san francisco every day. and so we're doing that through very innovative things, whether it be the way that we come up with our routing with the street cleaning and in designing buildings, and the public infrastructure. and for the last and but not

least the third goal is to improve and inspire the stewardship of the public spaces. that includes everything from -- in the public as right-of-ways and medians and things like that. and we also have a commitment to trying to find ways to get the public to join us in some of these things. whether it be as a team event or things like that. this is truly as a partnership that we have with -- as a community that we serve. this is just a quick chart showing -- >> i don't want to spend too much time on this, but these seem to be aspirational goals and not necessarily a strategic plan per se. but here's my question -- because some of these things i

can actually in my own experience translate into real things. like what you said around goal number three, which was the improvement and inspiring of the stewardship of public spaces. and it was actually a real performance metric, which is that there are gatherings all over the city on an annual basis where people, non-public works employees, come out and participate in graffiti abatement and a host of different things. but are there any metrics that go along with goal one, be the best place to work? is there something that assesses employee satisfaction relative to driving and innovating exceptional service? are these just three aspirational goals? or is this a plan? >> no. it means that there is a plan behind it. so behind each of those goals there are two key objectives and

to give you an example about being -- or being as the best place to work. i'm aware of a survey that was conducted in this past spring and the survey went out to the public works and employees and over the last several months we have been working with our performance team within public works to try to evaluate in those comments the feedback that we got back as city employees. and we're in the process of trying to i guess to develop initiatives to address those concerns. but i would defer to my colleague julia dawson if you want with more information about the things that we have done in the past several months. but i can say that these aren't just pie in the sky concepts. we are trying to develop defined goals to meet each of these --

i'm sorry -- to try to define key objectives to allow us to meet the goals. >> why don't we circle back to that. i don't want to impede your presentation. thank you. >> excuse me. supervisor haney, did you have a question? >> i can wait. it was very similar. whether those actually -- any sort of ways of measuring each of these goals -- metrics -- yeah, same -- very similar question. >> okay, thank you. please proceed. >> as far as the organizational structure, i as acting director, report directly to the city had miadministrator, and under me there are four divisions, the infrastructure building and the operation division and the

financial management and the administration division. each which i have my deputies here today to answer more questions if they do ever come up into any one of those specific areas. but then if further broken down -- yes, sir? >> mr. atkin -- i realize that you have only been there a few weeks so i don't expect you to be steeped in all of this. i mean, it takes years to figure out all of the intricacies of a major department with over a thousand people and its structure and what have you. but i just had a few questions. which is, in your city experience, so bigger than your brief public works experience, when i looked at this organizational structure, it seemed very flat to me. i mean, it looks like you have three people, four people, but

if you look at the lines it's seven people flat who all report to the former director. is that a common structure that you would have such a flat organizational structure at the top? >> as i was saying on this chart here, i guess it gives -- it has the illusion of being flat. but when i first began in the department about a month ago now they have this massive chart. so i can assure you that there's many more layers under this, but in order to have it to be more viewable, you don't see underneath this, in the wings if you will, that it does provide. but i can tell you that the chart that i have seen more recently in our offices, it really covers as a better part of a wall. so i guess that the broader

organization of this. but to compare that to, for example, my experience at the p.u.c., i would say it has a similar structure. for example, if harlen kelly and the a.g.m.s there and the assistant and the june wror junr managers and just off the top of my head for external affairs and infrastructure division, waste water, and finance. then michael carlin is the deputy. so it's a very -- it's a similar structure there as well. as i can't speak to all of the other departments in the city, but this infrastructure is not for that form. >> you just put your finger on what i was looking for, which is that i don't see a chief of staff or a deputy in this organizational structure. i don't see an assistant chief.

i see a whole bunch of deputy chiefs, if you will, in the parlance of the police department organizational structure. but i don't see anything in between the department head -- i don't see an assistant chief, a chief of staff, a deputy chief. is that missing in this organizational structure? this is, again, not a gotcha question. i'm just trying to figure out would this structure be better if there were deputy chiefs under the general manager or director i guess that we call it here? >> as i can't say it would be better, as i'm not aware of the assistant chief or deputy and director, the role that you're referring to. however, i can discuss that one of the things that we have been thinking about is right now in

light of some of the things that happened, obviously, in the last several months. this is something that we're thinking about. but i can't say if you were to add a role here or a role there that it would be better. that's something they think that we're going to be open to and discussing whether it be in the mayor's office and the board. but in the future. >> so in this structure -- not this structure -- but in this org chart, the one thing that jumped off the page to me was the huge percentage of individuals, other than you -- the fact that you're acting makes perfect sense to me -- but the huge number of individuals on this page -- and this is the top command-and-control structure of this organization that have "acting" in front of their position. i mean, one, two, three -- i'm not including you -- we know why you're there -- one, two, three,

four, five, six, seven, eight of about 20 positions are "acting." does that make sense? or why is that? >> i think it's -- it's a mix of things, i'll say, which is like as most things in life. but i think that -- and the h.r. process here in the city isn't always the easiest thing to get through. i can tell you though as i can't speak to why the department had so many "acting" positions, and as my colleagues can probably answer that more. but the things that i can tell you though, supervisors, is this is something that i have been actively trying to address. we just -- today is wednesday -- and yesterday i met with the h.r. department within the city

administrator's office to identify some of these key positions that we need to fill. because i think that will go a long way to addressing the morale issues and things like that within the organization. so i would hope in the next several months we would be able to have several of these positions filled. >> do you know why -- and i say this in the age of love and the vscoronavirus, why the emergency management position is vacant and how long it's been vacant? >> i believe that position has been vacant for the past few months but, unfortunately, that individual passed away. >> and then there are some functions here that we are all aware of because on the board of supervisors anytime that a subdivision map is done, we have to approve it, so we see them on a weekly or a monthly basis.

but the position of the city variesurveyor is missing from h. why is that? >> my eyes are getting worse than they used to be. i believe that it's at the street use mapping. so, unfortunately, i just can't -- i can't see it. but i believe that position is there. that person reports up under -- currently my colleague. bruce stores. >> we all know his name and know his staff because they appear here regularly. the other name that was missing and i'm not picking on any individual person, but he's known to all 11 of us is larry stringer. i don't see him on here? >> larry stringer is -- was the deputy director of operations. that person is now carla short.

and larry stringer in the past several months has been supporting another group. so we asked him -- and reassigned to support asok, and given the housing crisis and the issues that we're having, addressing homelessness, we have signed him to support that team that was seen as a very -- as an urgent need. so we assigned him there. >> thank you for that explanation. i don't know if my colleagues have any yes but if they don't, keep going. >> i have one question following on the line of questioning that supervisor peskin was working on. and looking at that organizational chart, beside yourself as the acting director of public works, it looks like three out of the four deputy directors are also acting deputy directors. so you mentioned mr. stringer who was assigned to a different

priority project. that's why carla short is now the acting director. can you explain why the other two -- the other two are now acting deputy directors? >> sure. so as a similar issue, as the homelessness issue but we have an issue regarding the housing crisis as well. so the previous -- and the city engineer and john thomas was assigned to support the task force to address that. so that's when we shifted suzanne afersuscan to be the a acting deputy director in charge of infrastructure division. likewise, with regard to the city architect, as an employee who i'm sure that you all know

who retired recently. so when edgar left we asked ron alameta to step up. and so edgar retired. if i'm not in mistaken within the last several months or so. >> got it, thank you. >> just want to correct one thing because i was not doing the next level down. so i just wanted to state -- corrected numbers. which is excluding director of public works on this organizational chart of the 24 remaining top level positions, 12 of them are acting. so it's exactly half. and it would be interesting to know miss campbell or controller whether or not that similar other departments. and let me be frank with what my concern is. it is a lot easier to manipulate acting people than it is permanent people. so the reason this makes me

nervous is -- and i'm not talking about the things that have happened in the last month, but if structurally -- i don't know the answer to this -- you have a whole bunch of people who -- by the way this used to happen on commissions, with no disrespect to willie lewis brown -- he would not reappoint commissioners and he would allow them to stay and they would stay on a day-to-day basis and he could get rid of them because they were held over after the end of their term. the board of supervisors fixed that by going to the voters and asking for the charter to be amended. and the voters embraced that. but i just want to understand if this has been a long-term ongoing issue. i understand human resources is a long, complicated thing. although less true with high level positions than with normal civil service positions. so i'm a little dubious about that statement. but i would like to understand in future hearings whether or not this has been a structural

long-term problem, whether it's common in other departments. and whether it was done with any intention. >> right. and i'd be happy to come back and to report on that. i think that in large part it has a domino effect, when someone leaves we move that person up and that person moves up. but i'd be happy to come back on that. >> and the controller may have some comments. (please stand by)

in the bureau, provides engineering and construction. its management services to new infrastructure and things in the public and right-of-way. and the street use and the mapping division ensures that we have safe, accessible, as public right of ways. they're the bureau that is responsible for granting permits -- to use in the city

and the right-of-ways. and the building and repair bureau provides -- and construction repair. and remodelling services to the city-owned facilities. they also provide as emergency and repair services across the city. and the urban forestry bureau, they are responsible for providing landscaping and maintenance in the medians and the tree-planting. they're responsible for keeping the cities and streets and sidewalks and the public spaces clean which is done as mechanical, manual sweeping.

graffiti abatement and power washing as well. and the street and sewer and repair bureau is responsible for paving, street work. they do, as patch paving, they fix potholes and things like that. lastly, the general administration bureau provides the finance, accounting, and the budget, the planning and the h.r. function to -- as public works. this is a chart. i'll be brief here. it just kinds of shows what are some of the key processes that each of the bureaus performs. for example, and the building and design bureau provides architectural design and landscape design services.

they also go about ensuring those projects are built properly, pursuant to the -- and the specifications that we have laid out. likewise in the infrastructure division, designs roadways and things like that. they also provide in the building -- or they oversee in the building of those projects. operations division likewise oversees the building repair, the street repear and the services -- repair and the services associated with things that are in the public right-of-way. >> i think supervisor haney had a question. >> supervisor haney: yeah. so it seems to me when looking at the structure that sort of a pretty clear division between sort of the

architecture-engineering side of the department, which i guess would be building, design and construction, infrastructure, design and construction and then operations? can you speak to what interaction there is between those? and the situations in which they're actually working together? i have a number of questions which relate to conversations that i've had with many employees at public works over the last few weeks. and this is one of them, which is, it's on both sides, it's been their general impression that there is very little interaction. am i getting that wrong from your perspective? or in what ways do operations particularly street environmental services, urban forestry, intersect with things in infrastructure, design and

construction and building, design and construction, if at all. >> thank you, supervisor. i would imagine in the conversation with the employees of public works, that it seems that way, there is not a lot of involvement. i would say on a day-to-day basis, they're probably not involved that much, but i think behind the scenes, if you will, both myself and as my deputy and directors, there is a lot of involvement. and the reason being, for example, is enron alameda and his team is developing a design of a park or a building that is going to have to later maintained by -- and the operations team run, we are involved in making sure they're having conversations with each other, so ron and suzanne and

their teams aren't designing something that is not going to be something that is going to be able to be maintained on the operation side. so i can see if you were on the operation side and you're working in the yard, or in the field, you may not think there is a lot of involvement, but a lot of communication between the two groups, but i would say there is a fair amount. that is one thing we try to do is make sure that we, as a department, and i say it more broadly as the city, we're not designing things that we can't maintain. >> supervisor haney: so the main thing there is that if there is design going on that they would then have some advice given about how to keep it clean or

repairs? >> well, for example, we just want to make sure that when we're designing a building or designing as a right-of-way, that we are taking into consideration and the operational issues that are going to take place post construction, as relates to maintenance and upkeep of those assets. >> supervisor haney: got it. i did -- oh, >> supervisor, one thing to add, jeremie spitz. the street environmental services, all the operations bureau are also just a really -- they're on 24-7 to say an engineer sees something in the field that looks unsafe, they can call them to block off the area. it's an accessible workforce that is available 24-7 to respond to emergencies and things of that nature. like a sewer collapse or if a

sinkhole is developing or any other emergency situation. >> i did want to ask, i had a number of questions about hiring and it sort of relates to this conversation about the acting managers. under what circumstances does the department hire exempt employees, or p.x. employees instead of the traditional full-time employees? and do you track that? and do you have a sense of the percentage at public works versus other departments? certainly the perception from a lot of employees is that is something that is happening a lot at public works. in some cases excessively or inappropriately in their view. and how are you tracking that

and under what circumstances are you hiring people for those positions? and in a related thing, what is the director's role in hiring n in -- hiring? >> i'll refer to my colleague, but i guess to answer that to start, i mean there are several considerations that are made for hiring as a p.c.s. or as a permanent civil servants versus hiring a temporary person. i mean this is all in large part comes down from the ordinance, but it really depends on the needs of the department. so it would be great to hire everyone as a full-time, permanent civil servant and all the benefits that come with that, but frankly, some of it is based on need. so you -- and some of the

considerations that will be made will be if we need assistants -- if someone calls in sick and we need additional staff and those individuals that cover for the people that are out sick, we may only hire them as a part-time basis, or they may be under a different type of -- as a classification. for example, if there is more seasonal work. if we're doing -- trying to hire as paving crews, we may only hire some paving crews that can work year round, however, we know that during -- in the rainy season we're not going to be as much paving, so we don't hire those individuals in the same type of role. with that kind of work, it just depends. i also know regarding urban

forestry crews we're trying to hire, for the last several years, we've been having contract didn't work out because we didn't have the availability of individuals to hire. so there is a mix of things. but again, i'll defer to julia regarding some of the reporting that is done, but in my understanding, if we do want to hire someone whether it be permanent or exempt positions, that those -- as approvals go through -- approval process that includes m.d. h.r. and the mayor's office as well. >> i was going to add to the city-wide rules if it helps, supervisor haney? broadly defined, the charter requires that city employees are

civil service position. and the charter has very specific allowances for the use of exempt positions in very specific circumstances. they're outlined in the charter. if memory serves, there are 18 different categories. >> attorneys, doctors. >> yeah, broadly speaking, you have certain departments that are at will. the board of supervisors, the mayors office are defined as exempt. you have certain roles in leadership that are largely exempt. department heads, deputy directors are exempt under the charter. there is a set of other rule, other allowances for the use of exempt hiring. he mentioned some of the project-related work where the process of bringing on a civil servant only to have to let them go. so there is seasonal, temporary and others.

those are requested by departments, but ultimately reviewed and approved by the department of human resources. those are appealable. there is an avenue they can be challenged by other parties. i don't have information today how public works compares to other departments, but that's information we do have available and can provide. >> through the chair, we should put that in the same bucket as actings. >> i want to be clear why i think this is important because it has come up in a number of conversations with employees at public works and it relates to, obviously, questions of accountability and transparency. if you have employees who don't have those civil service protections and can be removed more easily, or hired quicker and sort of the role the director in particular of making these decisions, at least the

perception was that these folks were being put in for reasons of favoritism, sometimes inappropriately. and that heavy reliance on these types of exempt positions was an issue at public works. so if you think it's not an issue, i would love to have some really clearer data and demonstration or protections. i know there is going to be a hearing at the board around this particular issue, that these were relied on more heavily at public works. and that actually it was directly related to some of the inappropriate or even unethical behavior of the former director. >> mr. chairman, it just occurred to me, there is one thing on organizational structure that i had noted. where is john thomas?

>> you mean -- >> supervisor peskin: what was his position and why is he not one of these 24 people? >> john thomas is currently representing public works on the housing task force. that's why he's not currently showing up on the org chart, but he is still with public works and then acting in his role. >> supervisor peskin: so, he used to be the city engineer and deputy director for infrastructure, not acting. >> yes, sir. >> supervisor peskin: and me he went to what? >> he is supporting and housing task force. >> supervisor peskin: what is the housing task force? >> justin drew is -- i'm

sorry -- >> supervisor peskin: so he was on loan to the mayor's office? what does this mean? and when did this happen? i did not know we had a new city engineer. >> supervisors, this happened in october. john thomas is currently on appointed project manager 4. and the acting deputy director and city engineer is ann. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. >> supervisor haney: any other questions? please continue. >> i'll be brief on the next slide. this is just some -- and the key support roles that public works receives and also provides to various departments. we get assistance regarding our

fleet, operations provides free trade management services. and the admin team provides the accounting and budget management. and the other related services. this next slide really just provides numbers for you. i'm not going to go over each of these, but i just want it say, behind these numbers are people. and these individuals that work for them day to day do amazing things. for example, as our street cleaners, you know, they respond to more than 350 requests a day to pick up piles of trash and to steam clean our sidewalks, to clear rubbish off medians. we have individuals that come in on the swing shifts and they do

predawn cleanings of encampments and things like that. the arborist crews are out there in the heavy rains and wind storms, cleaning branches from fallen trees. and the carpenters, the glazers, the plumber, they work around the clock to sustain the city buildings. they're also there on emergency calls. if a toilet is out at the jails, if we have a broken step somewhere in the public right-of-way, if there is a sinkhole, we have street inspectors there, with the paving crews that try to solve the problem as fast as we can. we have architects, landscape architects and teams that are in developing new parks and playgrounds, firehouses, police stations and health centers. these are things that make sure

the city can survive as emergency. we have our engineers and masons that go around the city to improve curb ramps, to make the streets and sidewalks more accessible. we also partner with our non-profit partners to provide and to staff -- and for public toilets to wash them down, keep them clean. this is a great opportunity for us as a city where we provide as a workforce development programs for individuals that may not be able to find employment elsewhere. so again, this is something that i am very proud to say, this is a department that touches the

residents of san francisco every day. and this is something that we do. we have to balance the various relationships here within the city because we're often times working in the right-of-way. and public works is responsible for the streets, the sidewalks and the medians and the street trees and the curb ramps, however, we have to work with partners in utilities as pg&e and at&t, comcast, mta, muni tracks and then finally we also work with partners at the puc regarding -- and the streetlights and the water system and the sewer system as well. the other thing we provide support to city departments.

whether it be the public library, rec and park. we provide architectural and design services to these various departments. we also manage those projects to completion. we're also involved on mission zero, initiatives working with our partners at mta and the public works. and then we also do a number of work orders to maintain the public buildings here in the city. and this next chart goes to, i think, what supervisor peskin was asking for regarding the overall budget. we have our actuals for last year -- the expenditures around

$730 million and the largest portion of those are for personnel services, those relate to the add-needed -- as-needed contracts that we need to provide assistance to street cleaning, street maintenance and things like that. and the second largest piece in the budget relates to labor. these are the -- 1600 or so employees that as we employ the bulk of which are within our infrastructure division, followed by industry environmental services. >> the last side, please. a few questions. the mayor's -- the budget book

shows for the fiscal year 2018-19, 1057 total fte as compared to the 1625fte you're showing. every newspaper article i read said this is tragedy for the 1600 honest men and women of the department. i keep seeing the number 1600, but the budget said you had, in 2018-19, 1057. where are the other 600 from? >> i can help with that. the difference is between fund and positions as opposed to other appropriations for positions that are funded through offbudget cycle, appropriations for capital, as you know, the annual city budget appropriates money for thesy and you as the -- you as the board

of supervisors capital bonds and the rest. that is the difference between the numbers you see here and the positions you see here. in the budget, the board is doing two things. you're authorizing money and you're authorizing position authority. a certain amount of those positions are paid for in the budget. that is the number you're seeing on that page. but additionally when you're acting on the annual salary ordinance, you're authorizing the department to hire a larger number. i suspect the 1600 corresponds to approximately the authority you granted to public works to fill positions. >> supervisor peskin: just the value of all of that capital, as compared to what we're seeing here, is what? >> ms. dawson can probably speak to that better than i can. >> supervisor peskin: it's got to be in the billions. 3, 4? >> so we're showing here,

supervisors, the actual for the year, the nonpersonal services, a lot of that is construction. what i was trying to get at what the question you had. when you look at us as far as operating budget, it understates the activities that are under management of public works. a large portion of which is capital. so the bulk of that blue swath in nonpersonal services is really construction payments. and then many of our positions in infrastructure design and construction, in building repair and in building design and construction are offbudget positions because they rely on bonds, grants, other people's bonds. it was a little overwhelming if we showed all the funding sources. >> supervisor peskin: the left-hand side that blue portion

of the pie includes other departments for services rendered to the puc, airport, rec and park. >> it shows if we indeed have their funding sources on our contract, it will show that contract is ours, but the funds being theirs. so i was just showing you the funds under management which would point to other departmental funding sources. >> supervisor peskin: got it. the $374 million in the 2018-19 budget for total expenditures would be the pie in essence on the right. those are the positions minus some number out of the infrastructure design, building design and -- >> also street use and mapping, and some in operations, because we don't want to double-count other peoples' funds and that

would also going to work orders. we receive a lot of work orders from other city departments to do maintenance and repair, so a lot of our building repairs are offbudget. >> supervisor peskin: got it. thank you. >> supervisor haney: so just for example, the prop b just passed, the earthquake safety and emergency response bond. i think it's $628 million. d.p.w. kind of the lead -- >> yes, as public works will be the agency to deliver on the projects that are associated with that bond fund. >> supervisor haney: so for

example, that funds a number of different important earthquake safety and emergency response priorities, seismic upgrades of the neighborhood fire stations? >> right. i'll be discussing it later, but there are only six what we call -- there are only six chapter departments, six departments that can actually build things. public works, puc, airport, mta, rec and park and port. and so all of the other departments, whether it be the police department, fire department, if they want to build and construct a building, those departments would have to come to public works. >> supervisor haney: thank you. >> this next slide is a bit of

an eye chart and the next one is worse. but i wanted to talk briefly about contracting methods. the city has more or less broken up the contracting. if you're buying goods and services, that was governed in large part by chapter 21 of the admin code. if a department is looking to develop as a public work, building a building, that would be governed by chapter 6. i'm going to start this discussion with some of the different contracting methods for the procurement of goods and services as it relates to chapter 21. so in large part, if you are seeking to do a professional services contract under chapter

21, the admin code defers the authority for that in the contracting department to develop the scope, to oversee in the bidding process themselves and then that contract then comes to the office of administration for review and approval. so this would include contracts for things like, if you were hiring an accountant or hiring a consultant to provide outreach services and things like that, this is what those provisions are for. as discussed earlier, for the procurement of commodities, all those go through the office of contract administration and i'll do my best to use the trash cans as an example. so if a department wanted to buy

trash cans, they would approach the office of contract administration or o.c.a. if this was going to be a one-time purchase, o.c.a. would basically put it out to bid and we would award to the lowest bidder. if, though, for example, it was going to be something we didn't know the exact quantity in the trash cans over a period of time, we put out what you can see here, a term contract. it's undefined term, undefined as a quantity of contracts. if o.c.a. relies on the department to provide them with specifications, if they package those and they put that out to bid, o.c.a. oversees the bidding

process and o.c.a. awards the contract and then they would basically open it up in the client departments to issue as a purchase order city-wide as a term contract. there are as a few other contracting provisions. prop q, that's a proposition that passed in the 80s that basically delegates the purchasing authority from o.c.a. to the various city departments to oversee their procurement center under a certain amount. that amount was originally $5,000. it was omitted years ago. up to $10,000 and it's been at that same level ever since. o.c.a. in partnership with the

city departments reviews those transactions to make sure that the departments are following the rules as relate to delegated authority which is often times referred to here in the city as prop q. but beyond that, the only other types of contracting which aren't really contracting is the vouchers when you don't have a contract and it does happen from time to time when a department obligates the city without a contract. that is something that is a collaboration between the department, o.c.a. and the controller's office, but that is really how the -- and the chapter 21 contracts are overseen in the city.

the contract methods chapter 6, there are various -- i think we're on the wrong slide -- chapter 6, there are several different admin codes that govern different times of contracting as relates to chapter 6. the bulk of the city contracting when dealing with chapter 6 are low bid contracts. on the next slide i'll go over the amount of contracting that the public works has in the buckets, but just to give you an idea of what the methods are under chapter 6. as a formal bidding process, when you advertise a bid, typically every 10 business days we have informal bids where you can essentially reach out to a

handful of contractors receive quotes. we have what i refer to as job order contracts which are essentially you have -- you award the contracts based as a fixed profit and there is a catalog, if you will, that the contractor and the department walks the job. they itemize the different things that are needed for the job. and all the prices are spelled out as a price book. and so really you're paying -- it's a profit marchen that -- margin that has been bid out in advance. as i can certainly walk you through all of these various methods, but i don't know if you want me to do that. okay.

so before as i mentioned, there are -- sorry. >> supervisor haney: it's about the slide. so i'll let you talk about this and then jump in. >> about this slide? >> yeah. >> as i was saying before there are six chapter six departments. public works departments. we're one of the few departments in the city other than the airport that does not only construction but we have a team that handles architecture as well. with that said, i'll answer the questions. >> supervisor haney: so, of these chapter 6 departments, the public works is the only one here that doesn't have a commission? it's also one of the only large departments that doesn't have a commission? i know you're an expert in contracting across the city. does that, at all, change the

way the contracting is done in public works as compared to other departments where a commission may play some role? >> no. i mean, i would say i don't think it really -- the process of the -- the contracting process is the exact same. the departments whether it be public works or the other five chapter 6 departments, we're all following the same rules. the way that you advertise, the contracts, the bond requirements, the contract itself and the terms and conditions are in large part the same. the only thing there is a difference is on the back end of it where public works, unlike one of the other chapter 6 departments, those contracts go through a commission for approval at the end of the process, but in the public works department the department head, now me, has approval of the

contracts. but the process itself is the exact same. >> supervisor haney: the process of the folks who are bidding, et cetera, is the same except in public works the department head approves and in the other departments, there is an approval both from the department head and the commission? >> yes. but -- yes. >> supervisor haney: there is one more layer in these departments that doesn't exist in public works? >> if i may. four departments that we work on their behalf, they actually receive commission approval for the work in their commissions. so a lot of the work that we're doing is actually approved by a commission body. >> supervisor haney: by the other commission. >> because we're essentially professionals for hire. >> supervisor peskin: with exception of the slides solely

under the jurisdiction of public works. >> right. predominantly the programs we're responsible for. but even the appropriations review of budgets, things like that, are going through commissions. >> supervisor haney: you may be doing the work for another department that doesn't have a commission, like the department of homelessness -- >> that's rare. >> supervisor haney: but all of the things that are specifically for you, these would not have commission approval. but the last thing, if you could address kind of more specifically and directly the role of the director or the department head in contracts, obviously, that's really one of the reasons why we're here, because of concern about that. and their ability to manipulate the process in any way. can you speak to that? >> yeah, i mean, for the overwhelming majority of the

contract processes, i don't think the department head has that much opportunity to manipulate the process. in large part because this is a very public and transparent process. so we put the contract opportunity out to bid, whether it's to buy trash cans or build a building. it's not much opportunity to manipulate the end result, because you'd be -- and the highest rank official, the lowest bid knows that i submit the bid for a million dollars, the next firm bids million two, in order to change that the first firm would have to have no interest in their own protesters. we see protests routinely on the bids just when the firms have an opportunity to challenge the decisions that are being made. and oftentimes those decision are not being made at the level

of department head. there are other procedural reasons why they'll try and knock out one firm versus another. however, as relates to public works, some of the questions -- i think supervisor peskin referred to it earlier -- there were certain provisions that were given to address housing and the homelessness issue where there were broad authorities granted to public works and other departments to address those issues. that basically waived the competitive and bidding processes all together for those areas. so that's one area where if were going to try and put some guardrails, if you will, i would certainly advise that. like i said, i've been here about a month now in this role and that's one of the things i

did the first week of being here. even though the admin code says when we were addressing those issues, whether we're buying shelters or beds or clothes or kwhafr whatever it is to support those facilities, the admin code allows me to pick whoever i want. and to move forward, i've said even though we can do that, we aren't. we have put in a process which we're now going to require at least three quotes from firms that can provide bedding, housing, those kinds of things and we're going to assess those quotes and award based on a low bid. if there is an urgent issue we need to address, then we'll reassess that, but then we even have processes in place now by which even if there is a

pressing need to buy something to address the navigation centers we're trying to support, we have a review process in place for that. so the days of -- so one person being able to make all these decisions is no longer the case here as of public works. >> supervisor peskin: not as a matter of law, but as a matter of internal process since the revelations with mr. neuro am >> look, all the processes were put in place over many decades. 100 years since the days of the railroads running roughshod on the california state legislature and government to the days of hiring johnson and the days of

adolph sutro, where all of these mechanisms got put into law so the government didn't cheat, wouldn't give contracts to friends and donors and that's why we have all this complicated stuff. and that's why we choose as a matter of legislating to cut through the red tape that is there to protect us from cheating or colluding because there is emergency as there is in and around homelessness. it depresses me that a truck got driven through that dealing with unsheltered human beings, but that notwithstanding, the notions around the code are laud tory notions that the government would pick the lowest bid, that it is done pursuant to a process, the parties have the right to process. i think what supervisor haney is getting at and you commented on, is that it is regulated by any

contractor who thinks that they were done wrong in the process. it's not regulated by an elected official or by an oversight body that actually has the ability to do this. from time to time, and ms. campbell or budget and legislative analyst knows that every once in a while a contract that comes to this board -- that's a contract pursuant to section 9118 of the city charter in excess of $10 million or in ten years of duration, and occasionally, we will get an e-mail or a telephone call alleging impropriety in the underlying chapter 6 processes, at which point we make ms. campbell and her staff go and pulling the scoring and try to figure out whether there was any insider trading or collusion. and in the 20 years i've been here on and off, we've found it a couple of times and they've

led to litigation and what have you. the reason i'm asking you this is, look, i think every system is not perfect. and every system has ways to cheat. and every system, if it's good, has internal checks and balances to prevent that. a commission may be that. a board of supervisors may be that. transparency usually is that. but the reason i'm asking is, one of the best ways to cheat is to have an extremely truncated or compressed advertising period. so where is -- and there may not be an aggrieved party because if you have a very compressed advertising period and only one person who got tipped off bids on it, which may be the instant case here that we will get to probably at a future hearing, what oversight is there to say,

nope, this is should be on the street for 60 days, 90 days, to that the entire pool of potential commodity providers will have a chance to bid? have we looked at that relative to the scope of contracts? and then just in the next breath -- i'm sorry, you don't have to answer all of these things because some are going to take time to research. how many contracts are there? how many fall into the chapter 6 bucket? how many fall into the chapter 21 bucket? how many fall into the emergency bucket? how many fall into the bucket of where we waived all of the requirements, where i have to tell you i just assumed -- and shame on me -- that there was an internal informal process where, of course, you got on the phone or the e-mail and solicited three informal bids and then had a faster compressed process because we've got a slow-moving

homeless emergency, but it seems like that didn't happen at all. so where were the checks and balances as to that? you don't have to answer all these things today. but the first one about, is there internally within the organization, was there any chief of staff or deputy director who said, gee, mr. director, you can't put this out on the street for 10 days because that's just not long enough to expose it and lo and behold your friend may be the only bidder on it? >> i think this is something that i will come back and report on, but the admin code and corresponding rules and regulations, typically, if it's a formal bid you have 10 business days. that's usually the minimum in

requirement. so we've concluded over the years that is a reasonable amount of time. but again, i think to your point, the outreach is the big thing because you can have it on the website and unless the bidders know to come to the website, it could be on there six months, because if you're selling something that is not a good service that the city buys very often, you have to rely on your outreach. i can't speak to what happened in the past with some of our projects in public works. i can speak to the ones we did for example o.c.a. that is something we have been trying to do and better as a city, just do more outreach. i can tell you it's unfortunate we do have a large number of

bids and we unfortunately only get one bidder and it's the bidder that is incumbent. i think we as city could do a better job as outreach, but that's not limited to public works, that's a broader issue we as a city need to do more of. and hard part with that is, as a city, we're not necessarily the easiest customer to do business with. and right now we have ordinances that have basically made it impossible for us to do business with almost half the states in the country, which -- and for good reason. those are very good reasons why. so there are a lot of reasons why. sometimes we only get one bid. that's some of the things we need to juggle. >> supervisor peskin: but in the case of the garbage contract -- i understand what you said, possession is nine tenths, if

you're the incumbent provider, you are likely the future provider and once you get your nose under the tent, i understand that. but in the case of the procurement of the commodity that are these universally reviled trash cans of which supervisor haney's hearing showed we had procured over 2000 of them, that was not the case. that was a new provider. and you would think something as commonplace as rubbish cans would have dozens, if not hundreds, of providers that one could procure from all over this country, including in the half of the states that are non-encumbered by parts of chapter 12, but for what it's worth. just an observation.

>> please continue. >> the next slide will address in part some of the questions that supervisor peskin had. the next slide summarizes of our contracts now, these are the number of contracts broken down by some of the various buckets, if you will. we have 71 construction contracts with an awarded value of $334 million. we have 27 professional services contracts that are active. these are all active contracts that we have. with an award value of $21 million. we have 14 professional services contracts with value of $6.6. to clarify again, the difference between the professional services on the third line and the professional services on the second line is the professional

services on the second line are the ones that are governed by chapter 6, versus the third line which is governed by chapter 21. grants, we have 17, and then lastly we have 4,000 active commodities transactions and that's everything from tools to supplies. those are just a lot of small transactions. >> supervisor peskin: what does grants mean? >> if you go to the next slide it gives you a breakdown of the grants. these are grants for partners we have to provide litter reduction. we hire ambassador as it relates to the pit stop program. we have grantees and non-profit

partners to assist with the landscape maintenance and plantings. and then finally partners that assist us with our youth as employment programs. >> supervisor peskin: when you say grants, they're not subject to 6 or 21. >> the grants in the city are not governed by chapter 6 or chapter 21. there is a guidance memo that was issued from a group of departments here in the city, the controller's office, o.c.a., d.h.r., and the city attorney's office provided guidance on grants. it's a four-step process that a department must do if it's going to award a grant.

i'm sorry i don't know all the act steps but the main things are that the grant must go to a non-profit entity. the services being performed must be a service that would not be otherwise performed by that department, so for example, public works can't grant out to a nonprofit to do construction wo work. that is really our core work. the biggest thing we tried to address more recently as a city in regards to grant in recent years, there must be a process for grants. so we can't just award a grant just because we want to give it to one firm versus another. you must have some type of a process that you follow to award that as a grant. >> supervisor peskin: why are they characterized as grants?

all these things, and i'm not speaking to whether they're good or bad, they're all for the provision of services to somebody for something. why don't we call them contracts? >> supervisor, i don't have a good answer to that other than there is no exact provision in the admin code awarding contracts to non-profits. over the years, they've just evolved into their own special type of thing. we have contracts governed by 6 and 21. but then we also have the bucket of money governed by the city's policies and procedures through grants. >> supervisor peskin: through the chair, pursuant to our

unlimited power of inquiry, i'd love to know what the 17 are, how long they've existed, how they evolved? just one note, $300,000 may be a drop in the bucket to a $12 million budget, but there is a $300,000 discrepancy from the previous page to this. 12.8 on the previous page. 12.5 on this page. >> i'm sorry, again? >> supervisor peskin: if you look at the previous page where you break down the contracts. you indicate there are 17 grants in the amount of $12.8 million. on the next page, you set out the four categories, they total $12.5 million. >> that's correct, supervisor. i'll go back with staff and get that resolved. >> supervisor haney: just

picking up a little bit on the questions that supervisor peskin was going to around the grants. it would seem that litter reduction, landscape maintenance and planting, these are pretty core -- what i would view as core functions of the department, why aren't these done by d.p.w. staff? what sort of leads to a decision to say this is something that needs to be granted or contracted out? and how do you assess that decision? is it related to sort of specific responsibilities that are in your charter or these are outside of them in some ways? two things that i'm particularly interested in are the sidewalk cleaning services, that seem to be largely granted out.

at least as far as i can tell. and the bathroom maintenance. and also all of the monitoring and ambassador. i'm kind of interested in why monitoring and ambassador work is -- i'm guessing maybe that's the bathroom work, but why that is something that is a big part of d.p.w.'s role in general? >> that is something i'll need to go back and ask staff to get a clarification. i would assume that the operations of the pit stops isn't necessarily something that falls into the core mission of the public works department. it is a need certainly here in the city to provide rest rooms to people that don't otherwise have access to them. i think it's just something that over the last several years --

if you had to pick a department to pick up that gauntlet if you will -- that's not the right term, the gauntlet -- >> i think we slowed down the gauntlet [laughter]: good afternoon, acting director of operations. specific examples, some of those grantees perform things like sidewalk sweeping which is actually not the department's core responsibility, but recognizing that there are challenges in the city and there is a need for that, those are granted out. in terms of landscape maintenance, a lot of these are workforce development grants. and those are opportunities for non-profits to develop a green workforce we need in the city. so that is a primary function of public works, but a small amount of landscape maintenance. usually just after capital improvements are built is

granted out to non-profit organizations. >> and same with bathrooms. bathrooms and sidewalk litter removal are not viewed as primary responsibilities of the department. and how do you determine what is a primary responsibility of the department or not? why isn't bathrooms a primary responsibility considering how critical they are. they're nobody else's primary responsibility. or one of the responsibilities, it seems at this point, they seem to be a big part of -- part of your responsibility, not just a side temporary thing. >> right. well, they are limited term funding. we haven't had a dedicated funding stream for the pit stop program. we can't always hire civil service employees when there is a limited term funding. so i think bathrooms has not

historically been the department's responsibility, but we stepped up to address that, but we have not had a fully funded program at this point. >> good it, thank you. >> supervisor peskin: while we're doing our due diligence, i also wanted to ask that the grant advice memo that you referred to also be provided to the committee, so we can understand what it says and how it works. then -- i apologize because i got a couple of calls because living in the age of covid-19, but i don't think you touched on sole-source procedures unless i missed it? >> i did not. the sole source procedures under chapter 21, the contracting department submits a request to o.c.a. that is reviewed and scrutinized

by o.c.a. so you can have sole sources based on this is the only manufacturer that can do it provide a good and service. within the last, i want to say, in the five, seven years, there was a similar provision put into the chapter 6 contracting regarding the sole source procedures. the sole source procedures under chapter 6, it's very similar. under chapter 21, it could be things like, for example, we began to pave a certain street but then we realized there was one extra section we needed to complete that was not under the original contract, it would not be impracticable to bid out that one extra, so those are the

justifications. whether it be chapter 6 or chapter 21 sole source, the department is obligated to report those to the board of supervisors each year. >> thank you. please continue. >> my last slide is the reforms that we've put in place in the last month or so that i've been on board. the first one we're in the process of trying to roll out right now, we're providing a level of ethics training to all of the public works employees. it's required that under law director, deputy director and all of the individuals that touch contracts do online

training, but this is something i believe is important to provide as a baseline training everyone. because again it's a good as a government. we put in roles i was talking about before, as relates to the contracting processes when it relates to providing services to support the navigation centers. and finally we've put in some entitle processes into grants. i'll be providing the board a copy of that as well. >> supervisor peskin: together with the tightened solicitation rules. >> yes, sir. >> supervisor peskin: isn't there also a fourth thing, which as i understand it now, virtually all contracting are also being reviewed -- all

contracts are now being reviewed by the city attorney office in ways they have not done before and the controller's office, anything you want to add to that? >> yes. those are the controls that were put in place by public works, but there is also a review process put in place in the controller's office and the city attorney's office that basically says that anytime that a department is going to use chapter 6.76 or section 21 of the admin code, those contracts must be reviewed separately and apart through the controller's office and the city attorney's office. which public works fully supports that. >> if you don't have any more

questions, i really want to thank our acting director and his staff for coming. i know there are members of the public and i know that i actually have to go meet and confer over the subpoena matter with the affected unit of labor that started seven minutes ago. >> supervisor haney: one other thing that would be good to have a sense of as you're looking at reforms. again, having spoken to a number of employees as well as their labor representatives, another thing that came up was the sense that there were some situations where work could have been done in-house by d.p.w. employees and there was expertise there to do that work, but that it was being contracted out unnecessarily. and so one of the things, in terms of really, as you're looking at the other things we mentioned here, i would love to

see data around the exempt employees and the rates there and the policies around there. i would love to see that something added to your list of reforms. maybe you come back and say actually, we're doing great and there is nothing to see here, but i would appreciate if that is something you looked at because it is something that came up repeatedly when talking to folks. i also, similarly to that, this question of how you decide whether something needs to be contracted or and whether there is -- i'm sure there are policies extended to protect against this, but if that is something you would look at because the perception was among some folks there were contracts that were going out that didn't need to be contracted out and it was somehow connected to favoritism, political relationships or that sort of thing.

and again, i'm sure -- you're on expert on this in thames of the pro- -- terms of the process and how we protect against that, but from the people in the department, there was a lot of feeling that was going on. >> i can certainly come back and report on that. i can say also that there is a civil service and review process, so if any contract regarding professional services, general services that those contracts must go through the civil service commission and they also get embedded through the impacted union. so there is a whole process for that, but i'd be happy to come back and report on the number of the public works contracts that went through that process and what that amounted to for the last several years. >> i do have just one other

question. there was one -- >> supervisor peskin: there was one agency which actually is technically not a city agency. it's a creature of state law. that was not mentioned in this. i was looking back at slide 13, which totals almost half a billion dollars in awarded contracts and $12.5 million worth of grants. does that number include the transbay joint powers authority work? >> no. it does not. >> supervisor peskin: got it. so is that off-budget? i know that d.p.w. went in there to help them, but that's not reflected in anything reported today as to ongoing construction, professional services for construction? >> no, they let their own agreements and they would reimburse us, so we have had

billings to that project, but they would not be shown as expenditures coming out of the city, because they're their own authority. does that make sense? we have recovery from them. >> supervisor peskin: so we loan them our professional staff and they reimburse us? >> correct. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. >> supervisor haney: just two other last things i want to make sure to touch on. i appreciate the training around ethics. obviously, i want to be clear and supervisor peskin said this, i don't think that the frontline workers that there has been any allegations that they've done anything wrong, so i don't want them to -- i hope that it's being communicated in a way that they understand that. that this isn't -- they're not all being under some level of scrutiny when i don't think there has been any sense that

they've been behaving unethically with regards to contracts or anything else. one other thing i wanted to ask you to look at, i did get feedback there were maybe health training for frontline workers, that they felt like they were not receiving and particularly coronavirus and everything else, but just in general in terms of the health hazards that they may be coming across. if you would make sure that you have an eye towards what their needs are there. >> 100%, supervisor, i can tell you that within the last few weeks we had an opportunity to meet with local 261, that's the union that oversees laborers. and they did express concerns, so we've already started to provide more training as relates

to picking up sharp -- those are needles and things like that -- because we're most concerned with those as employees and their safety. >> supervisor haney: thank you. last thing, what is friends of d.p.w. and what role do they play? >> i don't believe there is a friends of a d.p.w. account. those are typically accounts, but say the friends of "x", those are usually accounts as a non-profit group associated with the department that collects funds to support the morale of the department and things that aren't paid through city coffers. but i don't believe there is a friends of the d.p.w. group. >> supervisor haney: thank you. >> supervisor peskin: subject to public comment, i would like to make a motion to continue this item to the call of the chair where we can receive answers to

our inquiries and ask additional questions. >> thank you, supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin: it might be helpful just to hear from our controller as to what work product you are undertaking and when we can expect it, and how it will help inform this committee, not only about our investigations, but ultimately about what changes to the a administrative code or other codes, charter amendments are covered by the body, but if you could elucidate on those questions? >> certainly, the city attorney office is under way with investigation and the indictments against former direct director nuru. as part of that and related to that, we're conducting reviews of a number of policies,

practices and procedures in the city to determine whether they're adequately controlling against waste and abuse. we envision delivering these in quick sprints as opposed to longer audit projects. we have three reviews under way. each of these will be publicly released and publicly available. i think the goal of them is to make recommendations to departments, to the mayor and board and others on ways that the city could avoid these sorts of risks to the extent possible. currently we're working on three reviews. we envision this will change over time as your work here, our city attorney work progresses. we have review of the contracting processes in department of pushing, that's the product -- public works, that's the product we're furthest along with.

they have a review under way city-wide regarding appropriate practices, procedures and rules regarding friends of organizations and the use of other city accounts to support department operations. and then lastly, we're in the midst of a review of standards and practices for ethical behavior. each of those three products, the first with public works, we hope to have publicly released in 2-3 weeks i would hope. with the other two products following shortly thereafter. we would welcome the opportunity to touch or present those products and discuss them with you as they're released. you have asked questions similar to the ones we're working through. and director talked about some of the procedures he's put in place at public works and those are topics we're looking at as well. >> thank you, city attorney. and, colleagues, i just wanted

to say that the next board meeting i'm going to introduce a standing hearing request for the different review white paper reports that are coming out of the controller's office so we can hear them in a timely way for the committee and the public. why don't we go to public comment. i know there is a few speaker cards. i just have one. eileen. if there are others that want to speak on this item, step up to the mic. >> coalition for san francisco neighborhoods here on my own behalf. here in strong support for the review of public works core functions and internal administrative policies. i would like to echo supervisor haney that this is the only major department without a board or commission. and as a side note, it's my

understanding that contracting is for best value rather than lowest cost. i would urge the committee to review d.p.w. fee-for-service structure. for example, a consultation can cost $450 for two hours consultation. it should be noted that the easter program comes under d.p.w. as the bond known as prop b, appears headed for approval, this would give d.p.w. easter program additional $628.5 million in new funding. i would urge the board to assure that the funds for the emergency fire-fighting water system are used to expand on the west side, starting with dedicated awas on taraville. it's consistent with the dig

once policy as water and sewer lines are replaced. awas on everything street was upgraded so it should be implemented on terreville. dedicated awas basically is a concern on the expanding of the west side based on the civil grand jury report, act now before it's too late, aggressively expand our water fire-fighting system. and awas has been endorsed by speak, the coalition, terreville missions and the greater west neighborhood. >> mr. washington? >> you can call me ace, i'm here on the case here. in city hall. reporters dig, you missed the best part of what is going on, that's okay. none of them was black so probably didn't make no difference to them. i'm ace, i'm on the case.

respectfully request from this department here, which in my opinion been doing a good job and i knew mohammed well and supported him and even do it today, because you're not guilty until you're found guilty. but your department, i've been having big problems. let me say this, your ambassador program, which i want that to be investigated real quick, because in my community which happen to be a black african-american however you want to call it, the western edition, the fill no more, i'm the ambassador and have been. but you treat us in the fillmore like we're nonexistent. everybody community has ambassadorship program, everybody community has c.a.c., all you got in the fillmore is

me, a.c.e. and i'm sick and tired of that. i would like to talk to who is in charge of the ambassador program because you ain't spent a damn dime in the fillmore. but that's not your problem. we've been having problems for years since willie brown been gone. they feel the fillmore, the redevelopment has gone and taken everything along. you don't clean up there. i want to sit down with you all to talk about the program and insert that. find out why there is no money spent in the western edition. my name is ace, and i'm surely on the case. i supported mohammed, but right now i want to find out where the money is going, coming and we want that done right away. my name is ace, dammit, i'm on the case. >> ace, you left your phone.

>> just wanted to note one of three private enterprise closures in general is set to examine about as a result of employee embezzlement, theft and fraud. this may occur at the morninger level alex. where non-profits are concerned, they're second to the financial service industry when it comes to corruption in terms of dollar volumes lost and at the time of ongoing theft and the concealment and the number of individuals involved. and i believe that marks once covered this territory in his famous 18th premiere which is similar to critical novel humorous accounts of england's long running administration

regarding the notorious organized corruption of those times. the masses comment marked famz from the marquis. >> any other members of the public that wish to speak? seeing none, public comment is now closed. thank you so much to acting director and d.p.w. staff for the presentation and engaging in discussion with the committee today. supervisor peskin has made a motion to continue this item to the call of the chair. can we take that without objection? mr. clerk, any other business items? >> there is no further business. >> thank you. we are adjourned.

. >> chair m >> chair mar: good morning. the meeting will come to order. welcome to the thursday, march 5 meeting of the government audit and oversight committee. i'm supervisor gordon mar, the chair of this committee, and i'm joined by supervisor matt haney, and supervisor aaron peskin will be joining us shortly, as well as supervisor

sandra lee fewer. thank you to this committee's clerk, john carroll, and i'd like to thank sfgovtv. mr. clerk, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes. please silence your cell phones and electronic devices. completed speaker cards and copies of any documents should be provided to the clerk. items acted on today will appear on the march 10 board of supervisors agenda. [agenda item read]. >> chair mar: supervisor fewer, thank you for joining us this morning as the sponsor of this hearing. the floor is yours.

>> supervisor fewer: thank you, committee. i call this hearing today after discussions with ifpte local 21 because i am concerned about the use of civil service exclusions and the impact it has on our civil service industry. i realize that discussions have been ongoing between the department of public health and local 21 regarding a process of conversion for these positions since the last hearing that we called on this issue in april 2019. since that time, this agenda -- at the time that this agenda was posted for today's meeting and this morning, an agreement has been confirmed between d.h.r. and the local 21. since that i time, we've agree to hear the agreement. with that, i'd like to bring up steve ponder from the department of human resources to present. >> good morning, supervisors.

city o steve ponder, department of human resources. i'm pleased to say we have reached an agreement. if you can pull up this screen, you can see the 12 major departments that we will be looking at. i believe this is going to be over the next 12 to 18 months. so again, we're going to set up a pretty robust schedule, monthly meetings with them in which we develop a list of c.a.d. 18 appointments for each department, and looking for some similarity among them and if any of them can be cobbled together. if you look at the economy of scale, like d.p.w., they have lots of sidewalk projects, so instead of having a number of

discreet positions, maybe we can convert some of those to p.c.s., and so that's going to be our goal over the next 12 to 18 months. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. any comments or questions from any of my colleagues? no? thank you very much. i think right now, then, we should take public comment if chair mar agrees. >> chair mar: so yeah, thank you. if there's any members of the public that wishes to speak on this item, please step forward, and you have two minutes, and you can lineup on the right-hand side of the chambers. first speaker. >> can i -- can i -- can i -- okay. i'll put my identification here. [inaudible] >> the health and human

services illegally evicted me out of my government housing. now, i'm government, and the thing is that march 20 of this year, the two years is up for human service or the mayor to manage my administration. i brought this here because they illegally evicted me out of government housing. the court ruled that it's politics, and i have to deal with the committee, so basically, all i'm saying is on march 20, the two years is up for the managing government money that's in my name. now as far as what happened, i don't know because i've got to dale with you all, but i'm -- deal with you all. but i'm saying until march 20, they're still managing my administration, which is the government money you're all speaking of. >> chair mar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi.

i'm joel kamisher, school crossing guard, and tried to address some of our problems with the guards, so we can be part-time and not exempt. if they can be fired easily, they're going to quit easily, and the city might have some savings by being exempt workers, but then, they have to spend more money by recruiting and replacing people. there's really no savings from exempt employees. and san francisco regards itself as a progressive uniontown, and they often refer to their employees as part of a union family. but sometimes, i think we're run by the absent likes of jeff bezos, mark zuckerberg, and the like. i'm just hoping that the city will do everything it can to

try to discourage the use of exempt workers or contracting out. thank you. >> chair mar: thank you. next speaker? >> good morning, supervisors. my name is kim thompson. i'm the local 21 information technology chapter president, and i serve on our unions citywide bargaining team. i've worked for the department of technology for over 30 years. the majority of my career at the city, i never paid much attention to exempt appointments. they weren't used very much, so most people weren't very aware of who was exempt until a few years ago, when three employees on my department on the same team were let go on the same day without explanation or warning. these were not limited duration project staff, these were tenured city employees. there was no way they had expected to be here one day and gone the next. this triggered a culture of

fear which stands in the ways of employees doing their best work and stops them from speaking up when they want to and when they should. i see this happening on a daily basis in my department, so i want to thank you for your support on this issue. local 21 and the city have recently made progress on addressing the except issue. i'm looking forward to working together on the process to convert these employees to permanent civil service status. we expect the city to continue to meet with us and execute the agreement in good faith. as agreed, the priority will be the departments having the highest percentages of exempt staff which should address the most egregious situations first. some of the employees are eager to become permanent civil service because they want to continue working for government and serving the community. this will build and strengthen the first-class workforce that san francisco has and should have. thank you. >> chair mar: thank you. next speaker? >> good morning, supervisors. my name is zach goldman with

local 21. 11 months ago, we filled this chamber with nearly 100 city workers who came and talked about their concerns about the abuse of exempt positions and the abuse of exempt employees. city workers highlighted how exempt positions were abused to do permanent ongoing work in violation of the city charter. they testified how exempt employees are at will, meaning they can be required at any time. and they connected the dots for us, showing how this leads to a culture of fear and intimidation that makes it hard to speak out about workplace problems, management abuses, and even serious wrongdoing and misconduct. i want to thank this committee, chairman mar, and especially supervisor fewer for really listening to city workers and using your oversight powers to push our city to do better. a year ago at the last hearing, we identified three solutions. one is we needed an audit of

all current exempt employees. two, we needed a fair process for transitioning folks from exempt employees to permanent civil service, and three, we need to strengthen workplace protections so that when people speak up, they're not intimidated, harassed, or retaliated against. i'm happy to say that local 21 has an agreement with the city that makes meaningful progress in all three areas but i would remiss not to point out the challenges that remain. reurge d.h.r. to -- we urge d.h.r. to reach agreements with employees that have problems in their areas that they deal with. the city and the supervisors must continue to remain vigilant and work with us to ensure that workers' rights are now protects and managers do not take advantage of this protection to --

>> supervisor fewer: excuse me, chair. i have a question, actually, for the public speaker. what is the third? >> thank you. the microphone got -- thank you. third, we have to have a conversation about what is the root of this problem, and from our view, the root of this problem is that the administration continues to put forward budgets that do not provide enough services to invest in city services. when you make it impossible for departments to post civil service positions, departments are going to get the work done by posting exempt positions or by contracting out. we need to get to the heart of this problem by making sure that the budget that we pass accurately reflects the resources that are needed to do the work by a professional civil service staff. >> supervisor fewer: thank you.

>> chair mar: thank you. next speaker. >> good morning to all supervisor on board. my name is antoinette johnson, and i am an exempt employee at sfpuc as a water quality tech, and i just decided to come over this home because i wanted to speak regarding me being a 49-years native of san francisco. i decided to go back to college after 24 years to get my water-wastewater treatment technology college degree. i came in on board with 20 hours per week. i do have to work several other jobs just to make my ends meet, and i would just love to have some participation in the ongoing process of civil service -- as a full-time civil service. i have been waiting patiently, i've been applying continuously

on-line to look forward to full-time work, but overall, i work hand in hand with my full-time employees with no benefits. i would love to do overtime, but unfortunately, as exempt, you can only get 20 hours per week. and i just look forward to -- well, i honestly can just say i've just been waiting patiently and holding onto serve my community here in san francisco as a native, and -- excuse me -- and i'm just waiting patiently to be a full-time exempt in my own city. i do not want to go -- honestly, i do not want to go to other cities such as davis, solano county. i want to work here continuously in my own city, where i was born and raised and make sure that the city and county of san francisco has clean potable water and safe

water for all of us, as unity, as people. and i just believe that that -- [inaudible] >> chair mar: thank you. thank you so much for your service. next speaker. >> good morning. my name is osha astrith. thank you for taking up this very important issue. we just recently about six months ago noticed a pattern at the department of technology where we had about 50 of our members occupying exempt appointments. many of these exempt appointments have been continued over several years. one, i believe, has been over two decades of multiple exempt appointments that have transpired over the years, so this is a very important issue. it's something that we look forward to working with d.h.r. to try and address.

we've requested to meet, and we're hopeful that d.h.r. will cooperate with us like they will be doing with local 21 and mirror everything that local 21 just said. we have very, very similar issues but i won't bore you with redundancy. thank you. >> chair mar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. my name is tono watanabe, a clerk at the members services agency, and a member of local 21. there are all ways for individual managers to try to bypass civil service rules as well as budget restrictions similar to presidential appointments who are in acting positions without -- sorry. without congressional approval. to keep their jobs, their loyalty is to the person who gave them the position and not

to the law, their city workers, the government, or residents of the city. public polls that can be found in any law or policy will be exploited by those who are being asked to do more with less, and so we need to make sure that there are also consequences for the managers who implement these plans without any repercussions on their jobs. they'll continue to do those things because they're still going to be employed by the city, and as long as there's pressure to show a budget decrease without actual oversight of the -- sorry. this is my first time up here, so i'm a little nervous. >> supervisor fewer: it's okay. all right. >> without the actual overtime pay, there's going to be a lot more of this coming. so i appreciate your time on this, and i hope that 1021 will

be able to work with you guys to get this kind of thing passed. thank you. >> chair mar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning, board of supervisors. i am sandra ng, the acting officer of the civil service commission. we have heard from extremely many of our union representatives, our employees, regarding the concern of exempt appointments, and so we clearly understand, and our commissioners have given direction to the department of human resources and the municipal transportation agency on the concerns on the high number of exempt appointments. and there are audits and annual reports being presented to the commission. i do want to emphasize that i -- we keep hearing the word transition and conversion, and i just want to make sure it's clear that the positions ourselves are being looked at and how they can be put into permanent civil service positions from exempt, but it

is not a guarantee that these exempt employees will transition into permanent civil service positions because according to the charter and the civil service commission rules, people must still meet the minimum qualifications, still compete in an examination process, must still be a reachable eligible before they can be appointed. so i just wanted to clarify for the board of supervisors, there is no guaranteed movement that the employee who's in the exempt position will be guaranteed a permanent civil service position because that would be a violation of the charter. thank you. >> chair mar: thank you. thank you so much, acting executive officer ng. supervisor peskin had a question. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, chair mar. i apologize for being a few minutes late. thank you for being the acting director. i knew all of your permanent

predecessors. could you please remind this body -- and i must confess, i lost track, who the members of the civil service commission are today? >> yes. our president is elizabeth selsein. our vice president is indicate sevetti, commissioner douglas chan, commissioner essex crowley, and commissioner jack miner. >> supervisor peskin: and could you remind us who that appointing authority is, and who confirms -- whether it's the board of supervisors, who confirms their appointment railroor rejection? >> they are actually appointed by the mayor. >> supervisor peskin: and are they 300 appointments?

are they appointments that the board can affirmatively reject with a two-thirds super majority within 30 days of the appointment? >> that, i cannot answer off the top of my head, but i know at the same time that when a mayor has made the appointment, it has been brought to the board of supervisors attention. >> supervisor peskin: okay. well, that would mean it's a 3.100 appointment. and i'll ask no more questions, but i do want to thank supervisor fewer. this has been an on and off again perennial issue relative to exempt and nonexempt employees, so i really want to thank the house of labor for holding our feet to the fire. i realize the issue with the crossing guards is a little bit different, and i say that -- and i'll just let you know, i have been communicating both

with chima and mr. mcguire -- if the city attorney were here, they'd yell at me because we're not allowed to have an ongoing conversation with that. but thank you, supervisor fewer, for bringing up this perennial problem that comes and goes in city government. >> chair mar: thank you. are there any other members of the public that would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel]. >> chair mar: supervisor haney? >> supervisor haney: if we could ask the member from d.h.r. to come up? so i also want to thank supervisor fewer for her work on this, and her leadership. you had mentioned that you were going to be looking at some of these departments that had over 15% of specifically local 21 employees that were exempt? and i guess could you clarify a

little bit which departments you're going to be looking at and what exactly that analysis is going to involve in a little more detail? >> yes. it's departments with 15% or more of their overall employees. for local 21, they're about 17.6%. that's just for local 21. osha, who i've spoken with before on this matter, i'll commit that i'm going to following up with her, as well. i have the same concerns with d-das, so i'll follow up with her. our concern was when we looked at this on a macro level, things looked fairly consistent. when we look at this, a lot of these look to be appropriate project hires, so our goal here in these committees is to sit -- these meetings will have the laborist to provide their

list of exempt employees and go over with them a reassessment of how it's being done. i think it's mentioned earlier there's a lot of redundancy working on sites, working on the streets, and maybe we could cobble it together to be an ongoing position. so instead of having ten different positions where people are rotating through those -- because there's 1,000 people in local 21 and cat-18, and a year later, it's down to 500. so we're looking at with ongoing work, can we convert that to p.c.s.? >> supervisor haney: i appreciate local 21 for their leadership, and i would imagine they'll be on us for this. i would say in analysis to these particular employees and

how to transition them and how to deal with them, i would suggest we look at maybe some stronger protections and controls and oversight so that this doesn't sort of grow particularly in certain classifications or in areas, so that's something i'm sure we would like to see and in terms of how we can provide better oversight. the two things that i also just want to flag that this committee will be looking ad is a very high temporary position for nurses, and we are going to be having a hearing later today with department of public health. so when there's something like that, it stands out 1600 nurses just temporary exempt, just far and away any of the other seiu positions. so it seems like there's a specific particular solution that's needed there in addition

to the one by one, one-off kind of approach to it. so i hope that would be part of the analysis. i also want to flag that i'm not especially surprised to see that. d.p.w. is at the top when it comes to the use of exempt employees in local 21. as we look at this broader question of what's happening at d.p.w. or forms at d.p.w., and even the work that the controller is doing to see what is happening at d.p.w., i would hope that would be part of this analysis because folks have said not just what this means for the workers, which is what's most important, but broader questions in the way that a department operates and

favoriti favortism. that's a concern around what's been happening in d.p.w. for obvious reasons. so i just want to be sure that that's a part of the analysis that you're doing, and there are these other efforts including looking closely at d.p.w., which this is clearly a part of that we're having a hearing later today, and also an analysis that we're having yesterday that was called for by supervisor peskin. >> yeah, absolutely on both of those points. you'll hear from my colleague this afternoon. we are working directly with d.p.h. on an expedited hiring plan with nurses, so we're hoping to solve that very quickly. regarding d.p.w. and the plans, that's kind of my plan with this, to sit down with departments instead of looking at this in discreet matters instead of realizing that most of these are ongoing and most

of this is ongoing work. so absolutely. >> chair mar: supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: thank you, chair mar. good to see you, mr. ponder. it's been at least a decade. you said there was a 15% growth in exempt positions. >> overall in the past four years, 15% growth in overall employment, and about a 15% growth in exempt employment. >> supervisor peskin: okay. so that tracks. >> correct. >> supervisor peskin: and presumably, as a matter of charter law, all of that falls into the 18 exempt categories under the charter? >> correct. >> supervisor peskin: and where -- we're not creating new departments, so they're not department heads -- actually, we did create a couple new departments, so 53 grew to 55, so there is a couple of new departments.

where is that growth? attorneys are exempt, doctors are exempt. where is that growth -- if it's 15%, and i've got two new department heads, where's that growth? >> right. it's a good question, and i don't know if i have that offhand. there's a cap on the 2% limitation. i believe most of it is in the 18 area where there is no cap, which makes sense that we're at this peak employment at 37,000, so a lot of discreet projects are being pursued by departments. so it's pretty much across the board in the city. again, i can come back and give you some of those statistics. >> supervisor peskin: yeah. i would actually, if the chair and supervisor fewer and supervisor haney are willing, i think that's actually worth hearing about in a public hearing, and i would suggest that we continue this to the call of the chair. i think that's very important, and i really want to associate myself with the comments of

supervisor haney, which is while there's certainly an absolutely legitimate and appropriate role for exempt employees in city government -- we are amongst them, the ability to make those employees heed a wayward department head's admonitions, which is now the subject of newspaper reports and yesterday's hearing is precisely why the whole concept of tenure in education and civil service in government came to exist, so i would really love to drill down to that because, quite frankly, i think we -- if we're running this government right, need more line workers and don't

necessarily need to grow the ranks of exempt management. so i would love -- and there may be very good reasons for it, mr. ponder, but i would love to actually drill down on that as a matter of public policy. >> thank you. >> chair mar: thank you. supervisor fewer? >> supervisor fewer: yes. so mr. ponder -- so i just want to say that i am so glad that you are in agreement with local 21 looking forward, but again, there are many other unions, i think, that have been bringing up these issues. so are you in discussions with other unions about this issue? >> yeah, and this came up across last year with a number of bargaining unions. local 21, they do have the biggest member amount and issues. it came up with osha today, and we are having discussions with oth other unions, as well.

>> supervisor fewer: and are you tracking violations of category 15. >> yeah. we go through a fairly elaborate documentation before we approve those, and it's actually helpful when we sit down and review the department -- their assessment of that and then also having the union in their positions so get their take on it. >> supervisor fewer: since these employees were exempt, and they were basically at the will of the manager of the city and county of san francisco, or the pleasure, how can we make sure that retaliation is protected against this process of conversion and that retaliation doesn't go on during this conversion, and that job changing to prevent someone from applying to the new permanent civil service

positions are not happening? >> yeah. we'll be working with departments and try to disassociate individuals and look at the wonrk itself. i think we spoke about that, so we will be working with departments to ensure that doesn't happen. again, it could be through this process, as i mentioned, if we cobbled together a few positions, yes, the way you make a few positions is you'd have to mold it. we can't make any guarantees that someone will get a job. although that's ideally, the goal, we have the civil service rules that we have to abide by. >> supervisor fewer: i think that supervisor haney and myself recall when we had many as-needed employees exempt, temporary employees serving breakfasts and lunches to our students every day, and some of

these employees worked 30 years as needed, even though by state law and federal law, we must supply breakfast and lunch every day to students, and every day, they came to work as an as-needed employee. and these types of abuses are wrong, i think we can all agree. when it came time to see how we could make them permanent civil service employees, again, the question of the test came up, and many of them were very concerned, that even though i've been doing this job for 30 years, and i have been called back every single day to do this job for 30 years, if i don't pass this test, this means that i'm not qualified to do this job, i think there's a disconnect here, so i just want to mention here, also, to miss ng, from the civil service commission, that i understand what our charter says, and it doesn't guarantee them a job, however, i think