tv Government Access Programming SFGTV June 28, 2018 8:00pm-9:01pm PDT
rebalancing plans for homeless and mohcd, so it was removing all items related to proposition d that was included in the first budget, removing the state revenue, reflecting the updated retiree health benefits, addressing expenditures both at h.s.h. and mohcd to fund homeless services and the legal assistance program as well as redistributing the fund balance to support that plan? the third technical adjustment is perthe controller's office request for the hotel tax revenue, the proposed ballot measure for november ? moving those funds within a clearly delineated fund within the technically budgeted system just to make crystal clear what is reflected pending that
measure. and then, balancing revenue transfers and associated expenditures in recreation and parks department, also, a technical adjustment requested by the controller's office. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. i'd like to request that the mayor authorize a growth in the budget by the amount of the closeout. can you take care of that? >> it is my understanding that before actions just taken by the board as related to police, that there was $2.06 million worth of encumbrances? >> supervisor cohen: say that one more time. how much? >> 2.06 million in encumbrances or prior closeouts identify by the budget and legislative analyst's. since that would grow the bottom line of the budget that does require the mayor's office to increase the appropriation authority. given that the board was put out a spending allocation plan
that is $31.6 million and in combination with the b.l.a. baseline cuts, this additional 2.60 million offen -- 2.60 million of encumbrances would get them to the 5 million approximately, and i have been authorized by the mayor to make that department -- increase the appropriation by the 2.60 million. >> supervisor cohen: okay. thank you. we're going to take the $45 million of discussion with the colleagues on the spending plan at the 31.6 million. okay. sorry, that was to invest in
money for more populations served by daas and lastly, i want to tacall attention to th open source voting pilot which ensures that we can get a framework for this important program moving forward. so there are a few more things also that i want to bring attention to. domestic violence services, i would like more data around what we've heard is a significant uptick in demand for these services. second, i think we need more specificity around how we can best support our seniors. i know some of my colleagues have been thinking critically about this, but i think we need to develop a suggested plan. and i'd like to see more money allocated for park activation, particularly around the lgbtq
programming and more support around organizations supporting those with chronic illnesses. and then, finally, i've heard some rumblings around growing the district specific pot. currently, we are at a $1 million allocation perdistrict. and actually, this actually represents 35% of the total spending plan, 35%. so increasing that would be to the proposed 2 million would be over 70% and would demand that we cut critical citywide services, which at this point i'm not in favor of. i want to let other people know that periodically throughout this conversation, you will see other members of the board of supervisors coming to join us so that they will be advocating on behalf or against any kind of a budget allocation. and we can begin conversation on the citywide spending plan.
[inaudible] >> supervisor cohen: yes, that's right, we can talk about it. >> supervisor stefani: thank you, supervisor, and just to add to the conversation, with regard to citywide spending and domestic violence, you know, in recent months, the board has heard the moving testimony of sexual assault and domestic violence survivors, and i do believe our city needs to protect those who are victims and work on prevention. also, we did hear this morning, public comment, people advocating for more resources to expand services. and i would like to increase the funding for domestic violence and sexual assault. do i specify the amount at this time? >> supervisor cohen: yeah, yeah. >> supervisor stefani: by 1.26 and support a direct services. also on citywide open space, i believe the citywide public space management entity is likely to be funded in this year's budget. i think it's innovative
approach that will help achieve consistency and equity in the open spaces throughout the city, and therefore i'm looking to add 200,000 toward city space activization. with regard to mental health, we hear about that every day. we heard about it in public comment this morning. i do think it's a critical issue that we need to invest in. we need to deal with the fact that the state and federal government has made cuts to mental health funding for the last three decades, and i would like at this time to increase funding to mental health services by at least $700,000. >> supervisor cohen: okay. >> supervisor stefani: and then, with regard to veterans housing, i think san francisco has historically taken care of its veterans. always, we can do more, and we've provided them with
>> supervisor cohen: okay. supervisor sheehy -- just really quickly, i appreciate you just reading your priorities into the record. that's helpful, and we will move in that direction. we'll hear from supervisor sheehy and then supervisor yee. >> supervisor sheehy: yeah, i just had a question. i'll read mine in in a minute. so just trying to understand. so right now, we have -- with the citywide list, a budget that's equivalent to the amount of money we have available.
is that correct? >> supervisor cohen: mm-hmm. >> supervisor sheehy: so in this process, if all of us add more to that, should we not also be identifying where we want to cut? >> supervisor cohen: that is correct. >> supervisor sheehy: okay. so maybe that would be -- you know, 'cause we can all say we want to add all this in, but without identifying items within the current citywide ask that we want to cut, then, i think it becomes complicated. 'cause i can say what i'd also like to have, but i don't know if i'm willing to take stuff out. does it make sense? >> supervisor cohen: it makes sense. >> supervisor sheehy: because this is a pretty good list. >> supervisor cohen: i'd like everyone to take a moment and review the citywide spending plan because the citywide spending plan, we -- i surveyed your offices, i got everyone's requests. i survey -- and we met with every advocacy group or advocate and tried to put their
requests also reflected in, and this is a conversation that's being driven around policy area. it's a complete departure from the way we have been conducting business. >> supervisor sheehy: right. >> supervisor cohen: so let's see, if i could ask the clerk to do me a favor. if you could put the citywide spending plan on the overhead so that also members of the public can follow along on this conversation, that might be helpful. >> supervisor yee: just for the controller. so what actually is the amount that we have available, including what was just cut of 1.5 million? and is there also -- i forget -- some other adjustments that weren't -- we should also include the, i think, 5 million or so that money was found somewhere?
or whatever? >> absolutely, supervisor yee, and to the committee, so the list that's produced this morning of 31.6 million by the chair corresponds to reductions made as of this morning, first thing in the morning. there's a couple of things that are above and beyond that at this point that are on my tracking list? number one, the committee just made $1 million reductions to the police department and another .5, totaling 1.5. and then yesterday we sent notification to the mayor and board of supervisors indicates that our span of june revenues indicates there's approximately 5.3 million available of additional revenue should the board and the mayor wish to spend it. >> supervisor yee: and so the 31,589,000 is less than the
5 -- 1.5, which is identified and -- >> given the police reductions and assuming the mayor's office grows the budget according to the revenue, you would have an additional 6.8 million available above and beyond this list. >> supervisor yee: correct. okay. >> supervisor cohen: may i offer some clarity in the process and how we're going to be moving forward. so this is the time to move forward. you've had the spending plan and an opportunity to take a look at it. but also, each one of you have submitted your -- in writing, your priorities. i read into the record yourself, supervisor yee and the rest of the others, i would love to hear what your thoughts are. so right now we're going to have a discussion on what you'd like to see in the budget, and the figure that we have is $31.6 million. as this conversation is unfolding, it would allow the -- the controller's office to further reconcile the cuts that we made earlier just
before this item. the thing that -- so that's the first thing. i'd love to hear what your thoughts are and what your priorities are. and the second thing i think we need to take action on as to whether or not we are going to increase the district-specific allocation, because if we increase district specific allocation, that severely changes the kind of conversation that we are going to have. now, i have heard from colleagues that they -- that they're interested in increasing the $1 million to $2 million. is there an appetite to grow this? i don't know. i know that supervisor kim is going to be joining us shortly to talk about this item, but supervisor, supervisor -- supervisor yee, if you can share what your priorities are, what you heard from people that were in your meetings. >> supervisor yee: sure.
and my total ask will probably total 6.8, and that's fine. >> supervisor cohen: well, let's talk about it. >> supervisor yee: so you can give it all to me. so i'd like to -- i ask for -- to support 4 million for early education. 2 million's on there, so there's 2 million missing. the food security piece, what's missing from at least working off of your -- your list that i would like to see would be that home delivery meals and the lunch meals would total another .5 million. this is for food security. for seniors, there's a few items in seniors. one of them being the patch gap funding for residential facilities. i'm asking for .5 million. residential development for seniors would be anoth another .5 million. youth services, i'd like to see
an addition of about 250,000 for certain -- certain types of programs that's specific to foster youth and a.p.i. youth leadership and also a referral -- you know, child care resource and referral services. and then, for vision zero, i'm asking for a modest -- since we have nothing in pedestrian or in our vision zero list, i'd like to ask for about 50,000 for ed's neighborhood for programming. and then, for mental health, i'm -- i'd like to see a mental health services for families, two clinicians at 355,000. and then, to backfill mental health services act cuts to
only drop-in centers for homeless, another 355,000. and then for housing and homelessness, i'd like to see an additional funding for subsidies for seniors and people with disabilities for housing at 1 million, and subsidies for families at 355,000. those are sort of my major buckets. >> supervisor sheehy: thanks. i can go ahead. >> supervisor cohen: supervisor sheehy? >> supervisor sheehy: i want to preface this that i think that the list that we have in front of us for citywide seems like a good starting point. i -- for me, this is a -- would be additional to that if we could get released additional funding. i know we have 1.5 million --
>> and then $200,000 a year, each year for women's cancer to provide services to assist those who are medically underserved --dash underserved visuals living with cancer. >> when i mentioned the mental health services i wanted to emphasize the services to be one can you reemphasize the reallocation figure? >> supervisor stefani: might increase ask was 700,000 spee one oh, k. thank you. so i want to move the
conversation to talk about -- supervisor fewer hasn't shared with us her priorities. >> supervisor fewer: i think this is the importance of growing the pot and now we are looking at this need. it is the other half of public safety. i would like to see an increase in workforce development for homeless people for the most vulnerable residents -- residents and i would like to increase that amount of money. i would like to also see more flexible housing subsidies, primarily for seniors and people with disability. i think we've heard huge demand for that. i would like to see an increase in home delivered meals and congregate meals. to release of ou really serve od vulnerable populations. i would like to see more money
put toward resource development for seniors and for people with disabilities. and also more money toward healthcare and risk reduction for reentry transgender women. i would like to see central staffing funded, also an a.p.i. community services and neighborhood services pack an increase in that. data. an increase in a.p.i. youth and family services and a.p.i. family services tax childcare resource referral and additional money. an increase for resources for black and latino youth and i would like to see an increase in -- i'm sorry. i would like to see advocates for mentors for fosters of youth. and i think mostly, i would say
i am not in favor of putting any money into that. i would say that i would like to emphasize is more housing subsidies and mental health services for homeless families. >> supervisor cohen: oh, k. that is fantastic. all right. it is just after one. let's take a one hour recess. that way the rest of our colleagues will be able to join us and grab some lunch, we will resume at 2:00 >> supervisor cohen: good afternoon. want to welcome you back frost budget and finance committee. we're coming out of our break. we're going to come back into session. i would like to recognize
supervisor safai and tang have joined us. and i noticed that we have a majority of the board of supervisors in the chamber today. with that, we can continue. so supervisors, thanks for joining us. and joining this conversation. just doing some technical microphones. supervisor safai, we'll start with you. what we're doing right now is having conversations. i would like for you to share with us your budget priority. you have had a chance to review the city-wide spending plan and i would be interested in hearing your ideas. >> supervisor sheehy: okay. and i will share on a city-wide scale? >> supervisor cohen: yes, please. >> supervisor sheehy: i think we've been clear in terms of
priorities by districts. >> supervisor cohen: before we get into your presentation, there's one question that i am going to be asking and i think supervisor tang will speak to it and it has to do with budget allocations for individual districts. so historically, meaning the last four years, five years, we've now been allocating out of a pot of money $1 million allocation for each supervisor district, bringing us to $11 million. i've heard from colleagues that there's a desire for it to grow, as much as $2 million. and i have heard everything from $1 million to $2 million. i would like to know what your thoughts are. >> supervisor sheehy: i will start with that. the way i approach this, this is my second year on the budget committee. thank you for having us and thank you for the process put in place. my approach had been that we would do $1 million in year one and then look at some additional funding annualized for year two.
is that the question about annualizing the million dollars over a two-year period? i'm fine with the million dollars for year one, fine with the allocation. i think it gives each one of us a fair shot at allocating the appropriate resources for the request that we have. but i do like the idea of the annualized conversation. so not necessarily having $2 million over two years, but having something close to that that we can work with. >> supervisor cohen: so $1 million each year? >> supervisor sheehy: something close to that. the way we approached it in the conversations that we had last year, which is my only experience with the allocated money, we looked at an annualized number. ours was closer to $1,750,000. so $1 million in year one and almost $1 million in year two. does that make sense?
did i say that correctly? >> supervisor cohen: i don't think so, because each district was allocated $1 million and we asked to you stay under $1 million. >> supervisor sheehy: no, no. $1 million in year one. and then some of them -- i wanted $1.3? no, no. and then the second year, there are some things that we asked that were capital requests, so we did one year funding for those. so in year -- for instance, one-time capital projects that we asked for that we were working with, working on with the department of public works, some general, conceptual, capital projects. that's why we didn't have $2 million but almost $2 million, but definitely $1 million in year one and close to $1 million in year two. >> supervisor cohen: is there an appetite to grow this budget? >> supervisor sheehy: to $2 million? >> supervisor cohen: for
example, if we gave every district $2 million for you to allocate on your own -- >> supervisor sheehy: that would be great. i would support that. >> supervisor cohen: the point i'm making is that it shrinks the citywide budget. so you have the opportunity to use your own process and that would -- what we do for one district, we have to be consistent for every district. so $2 million -- and just for clarification. it would be $2 million over two years. >> supervisor sheehy: right. >> supervisor cohen: this year, we're asking for people to make budget allocations for $2 million. kelly kirkpatrick, if you could verify that. that's $1 million over -- $1 million for one year, correct, for last year's process? she's looking it up. she will get back to us. let's pivot to your other -- >> supervisor sheehy: sure. again, i would say that we can have that conversation one of the arguments that i was
looking at is that sometimes at least the way it's been in terms of the requests that have come in, some of the different budget priorities shift given the fact that some departments that work with different organizations don't necessarily -- we don't see the same type of budget priority request, if there's been that target over two years and then a different request this year, for instance. an example would be, that we were working to fund transitional youth employment intervention work, so we worked with the department of children, youth and families on that last year. we're now pretty solid in terms of moving the conversation forward. we don't see the same level of request that we're seeing for this year. we do have some transitional work funding, but it's a different focus. one was employment and now it's
art-based, for example. so that would be -- i would say -- again, the way i looked at it based on sum capital, social service funding -- go ahead. >> supervisor cohen: i want to welcome supervisor ronen to the chamber. after you speak and say your piece, you are free to go. if you are in your office watching and want to come back and speak again, there's some fluidity right here. if you don't want inject yourself, there is fluidity. >> supervisor sheehy: sounds like therapy. get it all out. i will try to get it all out. so what i would say is i think that many of us approached the two-year process similar, where we have some funding for social service funding, and then we also have some capital. so that's -- that's why i would say, if you did some one-time capital funding in year one, you might not necessarily need it as much for year two, where you can
come back for different requests. to simplify it, you could say $2 million over two years or say $1 million year one and close to another $1 million in year two, whether it's $500,000 or $750,000. i would be open to that. and we could take away some requests from citywide coming in looking for additional money this year, now, that's more immediate. maybe $1 million in year one. $500 in year two. can i ask a question to the budget director through the chair? >> supervisor cohen: absolutely. >> supervisor sheehy: is that something that's been done, that you -- i'm sorry, what i said is, if we are looking at funding social service funding but also capital projects as part of our add-back requests, that we could say, $1 million for year one,
but less than $1 million year two given that we may not need the same level of funding in the second year as a way to balance out the requests of the citywide requests coming in? the chair posed the question to us to say, if we do $2 million solid for each supervisor -- it's a better question for the controller? okay. great. >> supervisor cohen: just a minute. give me a second. supervisor yee? your mike. >> supervisor yee: maybe the controller can clarify, but my recollection of the $1 million and so is quite different and i am pretty clear on what happened. >> supervisor cohen: okay. we'll turn back to you. >> supervisor yee: if controller can clarify, then i don't need to. >> through the chair, supervisor
safai, the board has been pretty consistent in year one about having a district allocation pot of a consistent dollar value across the districts. practice in year two have not been as uniform as what you are suggesting. i think it's been a little more ad hoc. and so it's clearly just a choice, though, but you definitely see that pressure in the year one allocations that we've seen in years past. >> supervisor sheehy: around $1 million? >> cleanly $1 million in year one. it's been a mix of ongoing programs and one-time capital investments. and sometimes the board has chosen to fund the ongoing cost of those in year two and other times they have not, which sets you up for the dynamic of a gap in year two. >> supervisor cohen: which is why we're asking people to budget for a two-year span as opposed to a one-year.
that's why. >> supervisor sheehy: if we're being asked to budget for two years, it seems to me that it's been varied in year two. because it's been varied in year two, it's -- has there been a case where it's solidly an additional $1 million in year two? >> supervisor cohen: no. >> supervisor sheehy: so my proposal would be to have something either in the $500,000 range or $750,000 in year two. and has that been -- has that change been about $500,000 to $750,000 or has it been lower? >> supervisor cohen: let me interject here. it is based on the budget. the budget varies. if we have a large budget, that there could be a larger allocation. i'm hearing for $1 million 18/19
or $500,000 or $750,000 in year two. so you are interested in growing the million dollar allocation? >> supervisor sheehy: let me be 100% clear. i'm 100% of support of $1 million in year one. i'm in support of growing the million dollar application. i would probably argue it would be better to have $500,000 in year two. >> supervisor cohen: all right. that will grow the budget -- let's see, $1.5 million -- into the record -- >> $5.5 million to give $500,000 to each of the 11 districts. >> supervisor cohen: which means in this case, we're working with $31 million -- what is the pot we're dealing with today? >> $31.6 million has been authorized. >> supervisor cohen: so that means it would leave $29 million
>> supervisor safai: and i think they have articulated the amount. it was $112,000. sorry, $100,000. >> supervisor cohen: got it. >> supervisor safai: 112,000. there is another one that's -- this is about under the category of economic development and public health, and the subcategory is a barrier remov removal. said this is about bridging the gap between latino communities that have been displaced from neighborhoods and connecting them with existing services. and this would be serving a
predominantly vulnerable population that is facing high rates of eviction and connecting that community with a continuum of care. >> supervisor cohen: which policy area is this? >> supervisor safai: economic development and public health. it is with parent engagement and education under the work that i've described. particularly with latino students and it is an entire holistic approach -- >> supervisor cohen: can you tell me the figure? >> supervisor safai: 300,000. it is a citywide focus. and then the last one is under the category of art. and art access. so we have a wonderful facility out in stern grove that is a significant amount of free programming and concert promotion and bringing in arts to the city. we also have a wonderful
amphitheater and music venue in mclaren park. the jerry garcia amphitheater. this would allow for there to be a commitment to programming on a larger citywide scale to bring in additional music programming and additional access to that part of town. is the second-largest park in the city. it has been operating some music opportunities picked up against one of the most successful one is jerry day at the jerry garcia amphitheater. we have the opportunity to expand that programming as additional funding would allow for that. >> supervisor cohen: what is the funding you are suggesting? >> supervisor safai: $100,000. >> supervisor cohen: just so i am clear, all the figures that you've given, are these just first year allocations? >> supervisor safai: based on what you said. that is correct. the way i had approached it with there would be funding for year
one and two. if we are doing it for year one, that is fine. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. my question to you is, sticking with the last example of art access and programming, if we were to break up 100,000-dollar allocation between 50,000 for the fiscal year 1819 and $50,000 in 19 and 20 -- >> my proposal is 100,000. what it would allow us to do is have more than a few concerts. what we are trying to do is expand the concert and music opportunities in a venue that has limited capacity and funding to do that. and so right now, jerry day has been doing all its own fundraising. for example. this is not about jerry day. this is about expanding and building on the success of jerry day and other programming that has been provided in that space. $100,000 would create more than a few opportunities. i think it would create maybe
three concerts. if you did $50,000, you might be able to get one and a half. this is about trying to have more than a few concerts. >> supervisor sheehy: question for the chair. the 100,000, the commissioner mentioned two venues. >> supervisor safai: the reason why i brought up stern grove -- >> supervisor sheehy: this is for your own district? >> supervisor safai: no mclaren park is not in my district. it is in district nine and 11. but the programming if they citywide programming like stern grove. that's why i brought it up because it is free concerts and free access but this is about bringing programming to the southeast part of san francisco. thank you for that question. >> supervisor cohen: are there any other citywide asks that you have? >> supervisor safai: a lot of the asks that have been brought forward by my colleagues i support. this is the one i will focus on
right now. >> supervisor cohen: oh, k. >> supervisor safai: hold on. i just want to double -- double checked. there is one more. you will like this one. this is under the policy area of workforce development and barrier removal. this is about working with, it's a school and job training program development for pregnant teenagers and training them in early childhood development so they can either run their own childcare programming in-home childcare programming and work for family childcare centres. >> supervisor cohen: what's the figure? >> supervisor safai: there is a lot of theme and a lot of requests and this is about transitional aged youth in early
childhood education. on the dollar amount is $200,000. sorry, that was the last one. >> supervisor cohen: all right. good. thank you. keep monitoring the conversation. you have the city plan in front of you. we are going to be basing all of our decisions off of this you don't have to leave. without a doubt. >> supervisor safai: i'm just kidding. >> supervisor cohen: next we will hear from supervisor tang. >> supervisor tang: i want to speak to the issue about the supervisorial district pots. i will just wait for the chair. no worries. i wanted to speak to the district pots. i agree with the supervisors. i would like to see that amount augmented to $1 million per year per district. i know it takes away from the pot but often times neighborhoods like ours do not get any neighborhood activity funded but for the fact that
these pots exist. i do know that there's been an argument made in the past that it shouldn't be just an even million or whatever amount we land on per district. certain districts have more needs than others. i would just say that often times, in terms of the actual, the bulk of the budget, it is the case that more resources are allocated to districts that needed more. and so, for example, our district in the sunset, we do not get as much in terms of homeless support and street cleaning we don't get as much in terms of safety. our pot is really something our community relies on for whether it is nonprofit organizations, or street cleaning type services. again, just to reiterate, $1 million per supervisorial district would be something i would prefer but i have trimmed down our list if we don't get their. >> supervisor cohen: i understand. so i am clear, you are advocating for $2 million? spee ate some other supervisors i had heard already speak to the
citywide clarity's and i want to thank them for that and think the chair for putting together this list to start with. for the 31 million you are trying to program. i wanted to reiterate my support for family engagement. the hundred and $15,000 for services to help parents, especially those who need help navigating the public school system. >> supervisor cohen: which policy area is this? >> supervisor tang: that would be education. family engagement. it is not a subcategory that is on this list at the moment. $115,000 which supervisors already spoke to. next, we just spoke to this as well. in terms of workforce development and some education, for out of school time subcategory for youth services, i think this is really important. i've been a huge proponent of education, especially getting use started early on. i think that it's really
important that we have programs that stand, not just one summer, but are ongoing for example, 20 oh, years. it is really critical so we can get more use -- youth into jobs in sectors like the technology sector, and so forth. >> supervisor cohen: what's the figure? >> supervisor tang: i think it was $175,000. >> supervisor cohen: and the supervisors were giving numbers, or figures for over one year. >> supervisor tang: if we could do for two years that would be great. >> supervisor cohen: oh, k. >> supervisor tang: to the other category that i want to advocate for any youth services and the subcategory would be out of school time. the program after school time and summertime programming to augment that pot. i don't know exactly how much because these are very high level summaries which is good and bad, i don't know what's in there.
i will say that i know there are a lot of needs in this category. i would like to augment it in a way to address the request that you have received and were on the bigger list originally. >> supervisor cohen: so i just want to -- >> supervisor tang: that would be line two on your citywide list. >> supervisor cohen: line two would be at a full-time. right now we have a 500,000-dollar allocation in both year one and in your two. a million dollars in total. this is with citywide. you are looking inch to expanding that, by how much? spee ate at this moment i can't say. i do not know what is in here. again we are talking very high level. i think as long as we can address all their requests that have come in and around afterschool programming and summertime programming, i think that would be great. one thing that is not on this list that is still being sorted out has to do with intensive
case management programs and community services for high risk youth in our juvenile justice system. and i think that is something we will have to, back with the mayor's budget office on. i don't know the exact amount at this time. that is something that we need to sort out and is really important. >> supervisor cohen: so it's a priority but you do not know which level we should be funding? >> supervisor tang: no. and then one thing i wanted to point out is on line 16. in terms of arts and cultural services subject very supportive of arts funding and programming and grants for organizations. i wanted to point out that perhaps we might want to reconsider the $200,000 that was allocated for fiscal years 2019 and 2020. only because supervise and pass skin and i and i hope eventually 11 colleagues will join me and our hotel tax measure that we are putting on the ballot for
november. that will provide stabilize funding for the arts community, moving forward, as well as new funding. while you have it in both the fiscal years at the moment, i wanted to have you consider that if this board is looking for more ways to increase funding in other areas, i wanted to alert you that ballot measure is coming. >> supervisor cohen: so one thing we could do, we could do it right now, colleagues, is move the conversation. because what supervisor tang is saying is there will be funding available in the year 2019, in the second year, 2020. if the measure does not pass, we will do what we did this year as we did last year. a rebalancing plan. we could conceivably take the 200,000 this into your two and move into year one as a placeholder, or we could do it
like this. let's take out $200,000 total spee ate what if you took the $200,000 unreserved pending the passage of the measure? >> supervisor cohen: we can definitely do that. the other alternative is we could take it and spend it this year and spend it in 18 block 19. there are several aspects like a. we have flexibility at this point. >> supervisor tang: to the chair, i'm not proposing to cut it. keep that. put the year two $200,000 on reserve pending the measure. >> supervisor cohen: right. >> supervisor tang: i think that is it for me for now.
again, it is, you know, better or worse, it is hard for us to tell the details behind the list. i think i heard many other supervisors speak to a lot of my priorities. i will keep it at that. thank you. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. again, for everyone's identification, the reason why we are doing it this way as it is a cleaner and more efficient way and we are making decisions based on policies, not on personality. supervisor kim, it is good to see you. you are next paragraph sorry, supervisor ronan is on their. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. again, i have been very supportive of many of the tasks that i have heard from my colleagues. i just wanted to highlight a few. there are some that are especially important to me. the first one is the cultural district staffing central coordinator that is on here for
$175,000 for both fiscal years 18, 19, 19, 20. >> supervisor cohen: the first question i have, district allocation. would you like to increase it? it is currently at $1 million. >> supervisor ronen: if we were growing the pot, i would like to increase it if we are not going to pot i would like to keep it. >> supervisor cohen: you're absolutely right if the pot is large, you will be considered growing it to what level? >> supervisor ronen: i mean, as far as we can go but i don't want to take away from is a citywide spending that we are taking away from.
that is the additional position for mohcd which is overseeing cultural districts citywide. i think it is a pretty conservative ask given how many new emerging cultural districts there are. we do want a city staff or overseeing the program to make sure they are running smoothly and allocating funds, et cetera et cetera. that is number 1. i made an ask in my districtwide list specifically for an executive director. i know supervisor kim is looking at us for the districts. i think the way this is don't -- going, is the way i am understanding it, for each individual cultural district that is in the district list to. that this overall program is an based on any one cultural
district but overseeing the entire program citywide is on our citywide list. when there's an allocation, that will be done through the district task list. but this position which is a coordinator position for all cultural districts citywide should remain in the citywide list. >> supervisor cohen: that is correct. >> supervisor ronen: so we are all on the same page there. >> supervisor cohen: what is the figure? >> supervisor ronen: it's $175,000 for both fiscal years. >> supervisor cohen: is already on the list, ok. >> supervisor ronen: i just wanted to give my general support for the homelessness and mental health services that are on there that will always be a top priority for me and my district. and then two other priorities. and this we have talked about quite a lot. the sexual assault response and
prevention and the director for the sharp office, and i did see that cheryl is here. it is on your list for 168,000 for both years. that is a top priority for my office. i know we mentioned this as a priority for me, which is not currently on this list is $1.2 million for a 20% increase to community-based contracts that are working with survivors of domestic violence. which intersects, you know, a lot of the time with sexual assault. so this is an area that's very important for me on a number of levels. we know that with demi too movement and time is up, that many more women are feeling comfortable coming forward and the place they feel comfortable going is to the community-based organizations. if you see the number of cases
of women that access different services in fiscal year 2016, we had 21,000 cases and community-based organizations while only 3,000 cases went to police departments. 1500 cases to the special victims unit, and the d.a. filed incidents in only 545 cases. the bulk of the places that survivors are seeking services, is in the community. that number has gone up substantially and we haven't met that need to. >> supervisor cohen: is as allocation over two years? b6 yes. >> supervisor cohen: 1.2 million to be broken up over two years? so this is really a $2.4 million ask b6 yes. because everyone has been saying, the first year we live to fight another day if that is
necessary. bbut the first year being the most important. ideally it would be 1.2 in each year. and then finally i just wanted to echo my support for the latino equity ask for $300,000. it is not in district nine at all, but it is because so many latino families have been displaced from district nine into other districts including 11 and ten that education. >> supervisor ronen: support work with parents throughout the city, this is what is already happening in district nine and we would like to see it spread to other communities where large latino populations are living. >> supervisor cohen: i have a question. which policy area? >> supervisor ronen: i believe that it's an education. >> supervisor cohen: thank you. 's. >> supervisor ronen: and we were talking about that ask. >> supervisor cohen: ok. so, for that one --'s.
>> supervisor ronen: is $300,000 in education. >> supervisor cohen: ok, thank you. and for clarification, that's $300,000 over two years? 's. >> supervisor ronen: that's right. >> supervisor safai: it would be $300,000 in year one. >> supervisor cohen: we are all giving different numbers. i would really like it done, you know, -- the ask is really $600,000 is what you are asking for. i translate it -- based on what she was describing, the was talking in year one. it is desirable for it to be seen manifest in your two. that is the assumption i am making unless you indicate otherwise. >> supervisor safai: it would be under, sorry to interrupt. it would be under dph. >> supervisor cohen: ok but not education