tv Government Access Programming SFGTV June 16, 2019 1:00pm-2:01pm PDT
>> i also want to say that since this budget sits in oewd, and they are coming before us, this is probably where those questions should be directed because they need to be drilled down into that budget. thank you. >> correct. director davis did share that it is across mainly three city departments, of which, over $5 million is through oewd, and we are working to figure out what portion can be sent back to h.r.c. to ensure continuity of services. there are positions budgeted in h.r.c.'s budget. i believe three positions, two positions, four positions, apologies, about four positions in h.r.c. to support the continuity of work. and milling dollars a year for the stipend. it is actually $8 million total when you take into account the position. and oewd can speak to the
specificity of what is budgeted, but it is a very coordinated effort of which h.r.c. plays a main convening and implementation role. >> thank you. supervisor mental him in? >> do you currently have any vacant positions? >> we have three. >> how long have they been vacant? >> they are actually connected to the office of sharp, so it is part of a process. they have been vacant since we were given them, but there was a process to go through hiring, which is -- which has slowed us down. >> how long has that been? >> a year basically, because funding was given last fiscal year, but it would have actually been higher a arm starting in october or november. >> wow. >> to the chair, can i answer? >> yesterday at the board of supervisors we passed an
ordinance to fix a hiccup that came up in the hiring process, because it is a very special, new department. we wanted community involved in the hiring process, but there were laws that conflicted with that that we overwrote in that legislation yesterday, which is partially why there has been this delay. >> okay. thank you. when you had to propose reductions, what did you propose , how did you deal with that? >> in all honesty, when we talked about reductions, we talked about the fact that we had been doing some reductions for a while and that we were doing a lot of temporary positions and we proposed to maintain, because we actually were operating under a debit -- deficit. >> okay. , all right. thank you. >> any other questions? thank you very much. let's move on to the department
of the status of women. i think we have a status writer here. >> please set the timer. thank you. >> good afternoon members of the budget committee. i am the director of the san francisco department on the status of women, joined by fiscal and policy manager, natalie. i want to thank our budget analyst for her work with our department. next slide. the mission of our department is to foster equitable treatment and advancement of all women and girls throughout san francisco their policy, legislation, and programs. one of the questions was about our strategic goals. we advance gender equity initiatives and our goal is to end gender-based violence. those are our two primary service areas. and just a few data points about the status of women, women provide -- comprise 40 9% of the
city's population, so chair fewer in district one, you are tied for second place with 50 2% women. supervisor stefani, district two is in first place with 50 3%, supervisor mandelman, district eight, has 44% women, supervisor ronen, district nine, 48%, and president you, you are tied at second place with 50 2% women. of all the women in san francisco, women of color make it 50 7%, and account for 50 3% of all immigrants in san francisco, over two thirds are from asia. women in poverty account for 13% of all women in san francisco, however race matters. half of all pacific islanders that are single mothers experience poverty. one in three african-american single moms, and one in four latin x. single moms are poor. fourteen% of asian whites and go moms represent poverty, and one of the root causes is domestic
violence, which is a major part of our work. we address equity issues by analysing data for gender, race, and other characteristics. this is a three year budget comparison. the proposed budget includes an increase of about $200,000 for the cost of doing business in san francisco, and we'll go directly to our city grant partner. the single largest program is the violence against women prevention and education grant program. other admin expenses are 16%, and we are not proposing any change to our six f.t.e. in terms of department initiatives, the mayor's task force on trafficking, the most recent report showed 673 cases of human trafficking in san francisco. it encourages committee and helps implement reform, to
eliminate domestic violence homicide for a period of four years beginning in 2010, but since 2014, we have had about eight incidents of murder, so there is still work to do. we are doing work on a citywide racial equity working group with the leadership of the human rights commission. we are implementing a new database on racial equity and using racial equity tool for internal policy. i wanted to plant a seed next year. we will be celebrating the centennial of the women's right to vote since august -- in august 2020. next, his department initiatives they are all grant funded. we have a u.s. department of office against women, domestic violence assessment which is a three year grant. $750,000 in partnership with the
d.a., and a.p.a. family advocates. number 2 is a blue shield of california violence prevention program with safe and sound young community developers for $384,000. and then we received an intent to award from the california department of social services, a 9 million-dollar grant to address the need of commercially sexually exploited children. and then in terms of our single largest program, the violence against women, our funding allocation is $8 million, and the chart shows the growth over time. fifty% funds crisis line services, legal services, intervention, and advocacy. there's about 21% that goes to support prevention. my last slide, this is my summary of the performance measures.
we can tell you we funded 25,000 crisis calls, 7,000 shelter bed nights, 7,000 individuals were served in 27 and 2018 budget. i will conclude there, and answer your questions. >> thank you very much. colleagues, any questions or comments? >> just a quick one. >> yes? >> so i know you explained it in your presentation, but the intergovernmental revenue from this state, what does that pay for? >> it is an intent to award, we do not have the award in hand yet, but it is a wraparound service and housing option grant for commercially sexually exploited children. we will have ten partners on that grants, principally huckleberry house and freedom forward, but also edgewood, and
there is a whole roster. we are waiting to get the contract approved at the state level to be in the next two weeks. >> and that is just a one-year contract? >> it is a three-year contract. >> it is a three year contract, but it is not over three years? >> we are the only ones in the state to receive it, and it is a pilot to see how we can grow the capacity of foster families to take in survivals of human truck -- survivors of human trafficking, into make sure their wraparound services available. >> thank you. >> i will ask my standard questions. do you have vacancies currently? >> we have six full-time f.t.e. we have 64 in those positions. we have a half-time grant funded
position that is vacant and we will have another one beginning in july 1st, assuming the state grant -- the state grant comes through and we are in the process of hiring. >> how did you deal with the directive, when you had to propose reductions, how did you deal with it? >> we are asked to identify cuts we have worked closely with our grant partners and rather than picking and choosing, we have a very strong network of service providers and the approach we take is an across-the-board cut to need to be -- meet the budget target, but thankfully, the mayor has decided not to impose those cuts for these life-saving , homelessness prevention programs. >> what is the balance of general fund versus grants? >> we are 100% general fund. these numbers reflect general
fund dollars. >> when you say you have a half-time grant funded position, you have budget in addition to the night before million dollars >> that is the blue shield grant it will be for two years. >> i guess i am asking, how much money is being leveraged outside of the general fund? >> a million dollars plus the potential $9 million. >> that is the only grant you have? >> we have three grants, the state grant, the blue shield for 385 and then the u.s. department of justice for 750. >> thank you. >> can you walk through the six positions and what each person's title is and what they do? >> we have a director, we have a commission sector terry who doubles as a recycling coordinator, all the different citywide responsibilities. we have a policy and program --
policy and projects director who is responsible for the overall direction of policy on both workplace and the ending violence, we have a policy and grant manager who helps us look for grants and is stuffing the the department of justice, domestic violence prevention effort, naturally serves as our fiscal policy manager, and let's see, how many is that? and the associate director who manages our entire violence against women prevention and grants program, our single largest program, the 8 million-dollar program that was five positions. >> myself, the commission secretary, programs, let's see, policy director, fiscal policy
manager, grants associate, and our associate director. >> so i have director, secretary , policy and projects director, then there's -- is there a policy manager and a grants manager? >> policy and grants manager. >> okay. >> fiscal policy manager. >> fiscal policy? >> fiscal and policy. >> and the final one is associate director. >> so how is the physical and policy manager different from the policy and grants manager? >> or policy and grants manager supports the department of justice, domestic violence intervention, and goes out and seeks grants.
one of the things that miss alvarez is working on is she is, in this year crew core heart, and looking at our internal policies that we want to align with the board, and the mayor's priority on equity. for example, we have a very antiquated system of collecting data, so we can't really tell you how many recommendations -- how many women are accessing our services. miss alvarez is spearheading an effort to have a tool that will collect that data for us so we can do more disaggregated analysis. >> okay. sorry, i'm sorry if i missed this, but supervisor mandelman said there was a vacant positions. you said there was one? >> 0.5 currently, and there will be one beginning july 1st, assuming things go well at the state. these are both grant funded.
the general fund funded positions are all full. >> of these six positions, which one are general fund? >> all of them. >> those are additional grants and positions that aren't included in this. >> yes. >> thank you. >> any other comments or questions? i just have one, a couple of questions, i wanted to mention that i understand that what you're department does is it gives out a life grant that aligns to your mission statement , but again, i think i said this last year, is that what i don't get from the department on the statuses of women, is actually what is the status of women in san francisco i know you have given demographic information about how many women are in each of our district, but really, what we want to know is, how are women faring in this job economy how are they fearing in the homeless crisis, how many in our
affordability crisis? how does this affect single women with children? how has this gone up in comparison, inconsistently, since i have been on the board, i have not seen that. i have seen a report from your department. it says what your department is doing. i do not see your report on the status of women of san francisco this, in my opinion, is the most disappointing thing. i see you have six members of your staff that are all general fund. i see five of these could be grant generated money and not general fund money. that is just my personal opinion i think there is disappointment of not really knowing what the status of women really is, and we are somehow setting -- and also, as a board, we are setting policy not knowing how this might impact the status of women , how well are they fearing as women? are certain policies are redoing
, are they adversely affecting women, are they encouraging the vitality and viability of women being able to stay here in san francisco? who is leading san francisco, and what are the differences among different women that they are grappling with, and i want to particularly say, the most disappointing thing about not having that report is about the health outcomes of women, and the health outcomes of women who are dealing with this. i just want to say that i know this is a high-level conversation, but i have to mention it every year. i feel like this is a big disappointment that i am not seeing that information. i understand they will be a huge undertaking in the study since we have not had a report like that, and i had asked the court and in their past reports and they are not able to give me any comprehensive reports.
therefore, will be starting from a new base of how women, specifically, are suffering in the city of san francisco, and i know that we all share the same concerns about what is happening with women, but i think, as we open up the office of racial equity, that we have to look at these things if we are looking at it through gender, how are women faring? how are they surviving here in san francisco? what are there challenges compared to the challenges of men? i think that is what we want to hone into, otherwise, we are setting up legislation and policy in the dark. inc. you very much. i appreciate it. any other questions? none. -- >> i would like to respond to that. we did post a report on the status of women on our website and we provided it to your age. we're happy to come. >> i saw that report, as i said again, it is important what your
office has done this year, but not on the status of women. that is a very different subject if you like to keep speaking about this, i'm happy to do that , but now we're running out of time. i would like the director of ethics to come up and give her presentation. thank you. >> were happy to brief you and your office. -- we are happy to and your office. >> excuse me, i want to announce that after this last presentation, we will be breaking for left for 30 minutes madame clerk, please start the clock. thank you very much. >> thank you, good afternoon, supervisors. i am happy to be here today on behalf of the ethics commission. this is my fourth year bringing
forward the commission's recommendations for the budget. i'm here with our deputy director and chief programs officer was essentially our chief financial officer and chief personnel officer. i'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. as you know, the commission was created in 1933 by san francisco book voters. our mission is to promote behavior in san francisco city government, and we do this through a range of programs, programmatic mandates. our structure and our function, you maybe aware that we are a small department. we have 23 total f.t.e.
we currently have four vacancies due to recent attrition, and also to promotional opportunities within the office. we were lucky to obtain staff in recent hiring. we are a very flat organization. we multitask at all levels. that is something you will see in all work, and in the way we approach our budget and strategy over the years. both in terms of our broad programmatic mandate, and responsibilities as well with broad functional duties that we have both to make sure we are doing disclosure effectively, trying to engage and equip the public effectively to be active participants in local democracy, to make sure we are being accountable as an office, and holding others in city government accountable for their work. we conduct policy analysis, we make the legislative recommendations, try to make sure laws are strong, workable and enforceable. specifically in terms of our strategic budget focus, there are several goals and approaches that are continuing to guide and shape the work that we are doing
, enhance compliance is critical, making sure the laws are strong and effective, something that we are very focused on and the staff is providing meaningful public exposure in a way that the public is asking for information that is useful and informative to them, and promoting accountability in public trust. key to achieving this progress in any of these areas as we invest wisely in the work that we leverage all resources we are given and entrusted to have, that we align those resources very closely with the knowledge, skills, and abilities that are required of the work we are doing and the changing nature of the work that we have. we want to focus on staff development and retention through that work. it is also critical that we adapt. it is important we effectively apply leading practices to our work. we are constantly asking ourselves, can we do better. we're constantly looking to hear from others about how we can do better and that is something you will see in the coming fiscal year is a kenny -- continued focus as we have been able to staff up the recent hiring plan.
it also requires us to track and monitor the works we know what progress looks like and we can report to you and the public about how we're doing, what we need to be doing better, and how we can collectively support transparent and accountable government in a better way. the last slide i want to highlight is specific to -- second to last, key initiatives that are ongoing at our office right now, programmatically, as you think are familiar, we are working on for public financing legislation to strengthen that program, working closely with the board. implementing and continuing to implement e-filing conversion projects to make sure that we have strong compliance tools for filers, those who are affected by the laws, as well as the public gets information in those filings. implementing those tools and data sharing to help make sure that we are providing information the way the public is interested in it and needs it , and we are working to complete audits and our enforcement program, enhancements in those areas and to complete them in a more
timely nature while trying to continue they are still objective. and then finally, completing our hiring plan. we have a good bump in our staffing with the support of this body and the mayor over the last couple of years. we're continuing to do work with that. we just recently filled those positions but, but we have had attrition this past year. we will be working with the department of human resources to continue to fulfil those processes. the last slide shows our foundation for the budget this year. our operating budget is four-point $7 million. that is exclusive of the tenth -- charter mandated fund that goes into the election campaign fund to run the financing program, so we have a budget that includes departmental requests, and we think this is a good way to make progress in our key areas. i'm happy to answer any questions you might have. >> thank you very much. any questions or comments from colleagues? supervisor ronen? >> i see that you've gone down
one f.t.e., what is that about? >> thank you for the clarification. we haven't gone down one f.t.e. there are couple of factors at play. we have two positions that are limited term positions that are expiring and we have one position that will be a limited term position in the coming year it is actually a wash. and i think there is the marginal salary savings rate that we are building in the coming year. we are actually maintaining the same headcount and proposing you to do this work maintaining the same headcount we have had. >> great. >> you suggested that you might have vacancies. i was curious to hear how many you got. >> we have four vacancies currently. we have two that came from attrition. one is from a senior clerk, one
is from our policy analyst position, and then we had to promotional opportunities and twaddle internal candidates two internal candidates and we are just one was investigative, one was an audit role. >> how long do those vacancies stay open? >> too long, in my judgement. >> just a ballpark? >> it is easily a seven-month process from posting to probably interviewing. >> it could be more? it is a challenging process and profoundly felt by all departments. that is why we are working closely with the department through the work order to provide the level of personnel resources to help us with hiring and onge -- ongoing personnel. >> are there any ongoing vacancies that have been open for more than seven months? >> yes, i'm sure. the two positions, investigator, and the auditor position where ones that we had hoped might be reallocated to a more senior
level. now we know it is not the case. we are moving forward without haste to hire those positions, but it is not uncommon to, unfortunately, have quite a lengthy hiring process. we just need to make sure we can get the talented people we have been able to hire, more of the same, in the door soon as possible so we don't move out of opportunities to hire, and retain the very best. >> how did you deal with the directive to reduce your budget? when the mayor asked, take a look at your budget, see what you can cut, was it a 2% reduction? how did you achieve that? >> i think the first approach was to recognize it as a fair request of all apart departments one was to provide the mayor's office with specific information about the accomplishments we have achieved in the last several years with the resources that the city has been investing
in, and through discussion, they were open to not cutting, and increasing, keeping a foundational budget, and increasing it to the items that were listed. we are continuing to absorb some cost and in some areas. we will continue to leverage every resource we have. we will continue to absorb what we need to and focus with intensity on the mandate that we found. >> okay. this is not directed at you in particular, but as someone who has supported every ethics reform that has come before san franciscans over the last 20 years, i have some angst about the enterprise, the commission, the department in that, is it seemed to me in that time that often the work of that department, a portion of it, becomes enforcing fines
trustworthy unwary, collecting money from smaller actors, campaigns that were not able to hire the lawyers and compliance that came out of trouble, and meanwhile, you know, the influence of money on our politics continues unabated, grows, expands, and is a challenge we haven't been able to wrap our collective arms around, and your department reached out, i think folks had run in the last cycle to get thoughts or insights or feelings , expressions of angst, and i believe that i owe them a response to that, i do think it is a challenge for you all and for us all to think a little bit about, you know, as we go further down this road, trying
to rein in the influence of money on our politics without just making it impossible for the small actors and the people who don't have attentive money. i will also say, just a lingering frustration with the 2018 cycle, where we discovered that independent expenditures on behalf of candidates would raise their expenditure limit, or could, which i could not receive and it seems so counter to what any reasonable campaign finance regulations would do. anyway, those are my existential extensions. >> okay. may i respond to that?
we all appreciate and share the concern that we don't want any of these rules to be -- it is their responsibility. i think the commission and staff are very focused on outreach, proactive outreach, information in a way that makes sense of people can understand. we do not want to be and do not want to sit chaps today. secondly, it is more about public independent expenditures. these are policy conversations we're trying to have as public financing moves forward for your consideration as the full body. we know those are issues that are deeply concerning as well. we are very interested in continuing to gauge from that discussion with you all and look for the best solutions that we can that are strong, meaningful and enforceable. thank you. >> i just want to add that i wanted to say your staff is super nice. every time you need help, they are so, so helpful. i wanted to you to know that the
department his outstanding. i think that the commission itself is plagued with issues. you keep losing commissioners. another thing is that i think if you have operated with four vacancies, and you are able to function with the vacancies, i think maybe that is the baseline , that if you have four vacancies, but you're still able to run your department need very efficient manner as you just mentioned, that perhaps the vacancies is where your baseline should be. however, i do have a question. i see your total expenditures increased by 70 9%, and they decrease by 44% in fiscal year 2021, and this is due to mandated deposit and election campaign funds. how does that work about the increases, and then decreases by 44%, and what happens with the
additions of 35%? >> thank you for the question and comments. i am happy to take more time to detail the ways in which were not able to do all the work that we are mandated to with control vacancies. the question is about public financing. the campaign fund is establishing the charter. there is a formula in the charter that requires a certain amount, $2.75 per resident to be allocated every year, every budget year, up to a maximum of $7 million in the fund. it is drawn down in years where there was a my oral election and board of supervisors election, which we saw this past year, so based on the balance of the fund , we expect to draw on a year where there is an election and that requires a big infusion of funds that is coming fiscal year. following fiscal year, depending on the frequency of use and the number of candidacies we have seen, that is the projected estimate.
we don't know actually until we get closer to the fund. >> this is really an estimate of it. >> it is an estimate, an allegation that we know for the coming year. >> for 2021? >> yes. >> thank you very much. any other questions or comments? thank you very much. this meeting will now recess for half an hour, and we will be back at let's say, 1:20 p.m. let's get a rest in each -- eat lunch, then we will
>> a baby girl. we love daughters. we all have daughters. including president yee. though he's not okay yet i think it's okay to start. mr. clerk, can you please >> 1:30? >> 1:20. set the timer at five minutes. >> clerk: yes. >> commissioner: thank you very much. police -- please proceed. >> i'm the deputy assessor and i'm acting while ms. chu is on her maternity leave. i'm her to speak for the assessor recorders office and want to kick off by saying that
we believe when the assessor succeeds, the city succeeds. what the office has done is over the last three to four years means we ramped up or property tax collections resulting in what you know about as the eraf windfall. it's been over $14,000,014 which are revenues that came to the state we didn't have to come back to the city the board of supervisors were able to spend. we've done that by eliminating really large backlogs in assessment work we had. five years ago we were behind in many cases as many as three and a half years in terms of assessing new construction and changes in ownership which are the primary ways we get growth above the 2% limit proposition
13 places on us. as a result of closing the backlogs the last two years we had double digit property tax growth. typical is 4% to 5% because not that many property turning over. the citizenry is getting their property tax bills much more quickly. and it's a more secure system because when we did have that backlog, if we didn't re-assess people timely and there was a subsequent fail the city was losing a lot of property tax revenue and by closing that gap we protected city revenue. we're also diligent on collecting transfer tax. we're skeegd -- exceeding the budget this year probably by 150%. it's a volatile tax. it's very difficult to project
and you'll see over the years it goes up and down so most of it is due to what's happening in the economy. some is due to a new audit program started with the board of supervisors' support and gone after and made demands for underpayment and collected over $40 million. as a result for legal entity changes we have much better collections. i think the compliance with controver transfer tax is much better. i want to touch on our goal to roll. this is about retiring our backlogs i couple years ago you would have seen the gas tanks a half to three-quarters full. we've been focussing on improving business processes,
standards and training and data analysis all by positions the board of supervisors has approved. so the work we've been doing together has griffen our ability -- driven our ability to drive the revenues up and we appreciate the support and think it's been a huge benefit to the city. there's also been improvements to staffs not just for improving business processes but making sure we have the labor force in order to do the work we're doing including a trainee. we just graduated our second class of trainees. they're primarily people who come from our clerical rank that do not meet the minimum qualifications to become appraisers and selected in the trainee program and after a year they become fully fledged
appraisers. it's a great career path and it's something that wouldn't be available to a lot of people would we not have the program this board supported. going forward our major initiative is the property tax assessment system. we're doing this jointly with t ttx and the controller. all the money is in our budget for this. it's a multiyear project and kicked off in october. is that my final or warning bell? >> two seconds. >> okay. wore working till -- diligently in cleaning data and get ready for audit procedures. they'll make the system work for
pats and be able to implement the split roll intended for the ballot fall 2020. we estimate the split roll when fully rolled out will be up to $720 million a year the san francisco property tax rolls but we'll have to protect that because every one of the new assessments is going to face assessment appeal, i believe. if you don't have the data backing us up, we're going to have a really hard time holding on to that revenue. so that's something that we want to hit the ground running on january 1, 2021 with the assistance of the budget before you and as we start rolling out the new property tax system. in your packet is a description
of the 1920 and 2021 budget and how the budget is changing and i'm available for questions. >> okay. colleagues, any comments or questions? supervisor mandelman. >> i want to congratulate you on the extraordinary achievements an clearing the backlogs. >> it's been very gratifying how the staff has pitched in. it's been 25 years since we've had no backlog and our staff's done an amazing job. >> commissioner: that's amazing. how are you doing on vacancies? >> at this moment we have a lot of vacancies and i have a slide up if you want to put that up.
we have 20 vacant positions right now. for our appraiser trainee program we just graduated a class in may. we're going gear up but we're not ready to run that program yet as we're doing a roll close. we anticipate another program this year. four are from a state partnership grant program we received a few years ago. that grant has not continued. those positions are slated for elimination in the second year of this budget. we got a pretty big attrition savings put in and there's six vacancies to meet the $630,000 target. we want to fill those positions
and of those eight positions, four of them, four have rolled over. four have been vacant less than six months and three vacant for almost a year and one vacant more than a year. nine of those are in our project budget for the property tax system. five we're recruiting right now and as the program moves on we'll fill the other four. right now in that program we're in our planning and definition phase. we have staff work out in but as we complete the preliminary stage starting properly in september, we're going start build. at that point we'll need to
staff up more on the project. >> president yee. >> supervisor: unless i missed it in the first minute of your presentation i notice an increase of six ftes from 169 to 175 and other positions being eliminated next year from this year. it's the four and a wasn't too sure if there are other positions eliminated because of the work you need to do but we event eliminated other positions. the position growth is because we're restoring the salary savings. the attrition savings that was
cut last year were trying to fund vacant positions that right now are in the budget as unfunded. right now there's positions but they vacant positions but they don't count as fte because they're not funded. they're essentially unfunded positions. so we're asking for 2.9 much the six positions to get funded. so we're restoring cuts from last year. those are from fte in the budget this year and adding two positions probably at 1.54 altogether. they're pro grand new positions that aren't in the budget.
>> >> supervisor: i didn't understand your explanation. it sounds more complicated than maybe the time would permit you to explain to me. >> supervisor: the assessor before having her baby said you're asking for two new positions is because you looked win your own department for savings. i see your adding six new ftes on the phone she said she was only adding two ftes to the actual budget. is that correct or not correct? >> i'll have simone jacques
speak to the language of hiring more than i do. >> i'm the assessor recorder. we're asking for two new ftes. of the six increasing 2.9 are attrition. there's no position backing it and 7 is annualization of positions from last year. does that answer your question? >> exactly. the assessor is right she's asking for two new ftes. >> it appears to be six but only two are new. >> are they permanent positions? >> two are permanent positions this year. >> and a see right here the total expenditures decreased by 2.8 in the fiscal year to the record and modernization initiative and increases by 10%
for the fiscal year 2021 to fund investment in department technologies. this takes a bump up. >> it's primarily related to the property tax assessment system and new positions and what was included in the budget. >> supervisor: thank you very much. president yee. >> in following the assessors department for a while, the few years ago you came to the board and said we need to add more ftes to catch up with the backlog. i think it was almost two years in a row were adding. now that you're caught up what's the explanation to keep them. >> you approved initiatives for catching up and analysts to understand what our backlog looked like and put policies and
procedures in place to help us assign work more efficiently. the two positions we're asking for are not related necessarily to our appraiser function. we're asking for a supervisor in our personal property position. right you we don't have a director supervisor the chief of that section has to dedicate time to supervision which is not efficient for his division. the second is a clerk position in our human resources department. >> supervisor: i'm not questioning the two new positions but a few years ago you came and said we want to add more positions. i can't remember how many. it seemed at least five. that was to catch up. now that you're caught up you'll have a constant stream of work so why would you need the five you were using to catch up?
>> i can't remember the exact number what i think you're remembering is we had gotten a short term set of three-year positions. it was to allow with the tsunami of appeals we got from the great recession. as the three-year period expired we brought the number of appeals unworked appeals down but we suddenly were facing this new tsunami of building permits and having to deal with this huge amount of new construction which is accessible and we said we created backlogs and we need help to get the backlogs done. all you remember is correct.
at this stage because we're on the cusp of implementing the new system which more data driven, we're in a transition period where we really need to focus attention on improving standards and training and getting the staff ready for using a new system. we don't have great data for commercial appraisal purposes. we have some data and we're able to get by and able to do our job but frankly we're challenged when we go to the assessment appeals board. i am extremely worried that if we launch a new system where we don't have the kind of appraisal data and market data and if the
split roll comes in we'll be in terrible shape in terms of defending values that are appealed at the assessment appeals board and right now our appeals have gone way down. it's difficult in this economy for homeowners to be challenging assessments and we're still facing big office buildings and hotels that continue to appeal the values we arrive at and frankly they win more at the assessment appeals board than they should. part is the lack of data.
when we have twice as many commercial appeals to do once we have one every three years and i don't know if that's going to make sense for the city, they'll massive amount of revenue at risk. at this point in time although it's true we don't have a wrong log to work up on we have regular work that's coming in. we need to focus the staff people on doing the research for what's coming next. it's the same people. it's appraisers doing market data research. >> supervisor: excuse me. it seems as though what i'm hearing from president yee is at one time the assessor's office requested more assistance, more ftes to address the backlog for
so long and through diligent work, you've gone through the backlog at an impressive rate so i think what president yee is asking is why are you keeping them in the budget and you're saying there's new work now. >> that's right. >> supervisor: but actually the funding for those particular ftes were specifically tied to the request of the backlog. i think what i'm paraphrasing is what president yee is questioning whether those ftes should be re-evaluated by the board since the board was the one to first grant the additional ftes to address the backlog and whether the ftes should be assigned to the new job of collecting the data. i don't think we're questioning
there's a need but the process. is that correct, president yee? correct me if i'm wrong. >> i'm after the same results. if we don't need that set of staffing and need a new set of staffing come and prove to us you need a new set. >> and how many ftes were you granted at the time to address the wrong -- backlog? >> i think it was six. >> supervisor: do you know the amount it came to? the dollar amount the six ftes amounted to what positions they were? >> i believe there were two principle appraisers and four 6241 appraisers. so this board when those positions were approved they were put into the budget and i
absolutely think this board, you can review any part of our work load or all 150 or so of our employees. it's within your purview to review what you're doing and what happens. i don't think there's nothing special about when there's an increase in the budget and it becomes part of a baseline we then are required or under special obligation to come back to justify those. but in general. >> if i may interrupt, sir. i think the procedure is if you come to us requesting for a specific project, that project is now completed. those ftes should not stay in your department without coming back to the board and saying we
need to re-allocate and want to keep these six ftes in our department but now we allocate them to this project versus, you just keeping the six ftes. so if i may, i'm just clarifying sir what the president is saying. that's all. that's simply what i'm doing. president yee would you like to follow up on this at all? >> supervisor: there may be some justification but also you use that argument and every department will say i need emergency staffing over the next two years we're going to start being nervous about granting that if everybody's going to come back and where it's baseline now and do whatever you want. i can go back and look at the
budget and bla and say why do you have the six positions? at some point you have to explain it to us. >> supervisor: anyway, thank you very much. we are not taking action today. it's more of a high-level conversation to get to know each other. any other questions? seeing none, thank you very much. our best to our wonderful assessor. thank you. right now i'd like to call up the academy of sciences and mr. michael mcgee the interim director and chief financial officer. madame clerk can you please the timer for five minutes for mr. mcgee. >> ready, go. good afternoon, chair fure,
distinguished members i'm the interim executive director, chief financial officer for the cal academy and joined by my director of finance matthew lao. on slide two the academy's proud to be a science and sustainability leader for san francisco and the rest of the world. we're in agreement with the budget and staffing allocations for the steinhart aquarium. our ftes will remain flat to last year's level. you see the budget total $6.24 million. of that, 26% goes directly to the steinhart aquarium and to staffing engineering and 26% to utilities. additionally for fy21 our budget is expected to be quite