SF Budget Committee Debates Fiscal Cliff, Child Care, and Downtown Priorities at June 20, 2024 Hearing
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
San Francisco Budget and Appropriations Committee Special Meeting
June 20, 2024
The Budget and Appropriations Committee (Chair Connie Chan, Vice Chair Rafael Mandelman, Members Myrna Melgar and Shamann Walton, with President Aaron Peskin absent) held a special meeting on June 20, 2024, to continue scrutinizing the Mayor's proposed FY 2024-2025 and 2025-2026 budget. Chair Chan warned of a "fiscal cliff" in January 2025 if spending was not matched to flat revenue growth, emphasizing that every dollar counts for child care, food access, and senior services. The committee debated major departmental budgets, fee proposals, and policy recommendations from the Budget and Legislative Analyst (BLA), voting on several items while leaving key budget ordinances and contentious decisions pending.
Consent Calendar
- Item 1 (SFPUC Grant): Accepted and forwarded $23,368,920.23 in federal ARPA funds to assist eligible residential and commercial customers with water and wastewater arrears accrued during the COVID-19 pandemic. Forwarded to the July 2, 2024 full Board meeting.
- Items 8 & 9 (City Administrator Fees): Forwarded ordinances to increase County Clerk fees for civil marriage ceremonies by $5 and raise annual entertainment license renewal fees by 15% for brick-and-mortar businesses, with future adjustments tied to CPI.
- Items 10 & 11 (Rec and Park): Forwarded a resolution accepting a $2,000,000 USDA Forest Service grant for reforestation and workforce development in Southeast San Francisco parks, and an ordinance imposing a $5 fee on recreation program registrations to support the department's scholarship fund.
- Item 14 (BLA Services COLA): Approved a 4% cost-of-living adjustment for the Budget and Legislative Analyst contract, resulting in an annual increase of approximately $125,000.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Item 5 (Baby Prop C): Dozens of childcare providers, parents, and advocates (including Alan Wong, Mary Evelyn Thomas, Catherine McFarlane, and representatives from the Low Income Investment Fund and Parent Voices SF) urged the committee to protect the Baby Prop C fund for its voter-approved purpose of expanding early care and education. Speakers implored the committee to limit any interest diversion to two years and set a minimum fund balance of $300 million, expressing fatigue over repeatedly defending the measure from budget raids.
- Item 12 (Court Reservation Fees): A large number of tennis and pickleball players (Peter Mueller, Laura, Barbara, Lisa Shaw, etc.) overwhelmingly opposed the proposed $5/hour court reservation fee. They called it a money grab, argued it unfairly targeted seniors and families, and criticized the department's lack of community engagement. Many suggested the department should instead charge private schools and paid coaches who profit from public courts.
Discussion Items
- Early Care and Education (Item 5): The BLA recommended shifting general fund facility costs to the Public Education Enrichment Fund (PEF) and denying an upward substitution. The Department of Early Childhood (DEC) opposed both recommendations, arguing the PEF shift would deny care for 53 children and the position was needed to manage an expanding grant system. The committee (Chan, Melgar, Walton) rejected the BLA recommendations. Supervisor Melgar introduced successful amendments to the baseline ordinance, limiting the use of Baby Prop C interest to two fiscal years and setting the fund's minimum cash balance at $300 million. The amended ordinance was forwarded.
- Department of Children, Youth and Their Families / Human Rights Commission (Items 6, 7): The BLA recommended over $13 million in combined cuts to community-based organization grants above the children's and transitional age youth baselines. Directors Maria Su (DCYF) and Sheryl Davis (HRC) argued the funds were already allocated to critical programs for youth, families, and equity initiatives. Chair Chan, Supervisor Melgar, and Supervisor Walton rejected the BLA policy recommendations to protect these services, though Chan held firm against upward substitutions citywide. The JCYC grant agreements totaling over $83 million were forwarded.
- Office of Economic and Workforce Development (OEWD): The deep divide centered on OEWD's $15 million proposal for the downtown core, including security patrols, free parking, activations, and permit center staff. Director Phillips defended it as vital for the experience economy and hospitality jobs. Chair Chan and Supervisor Walton strongly opposed several elements, contrasting the $1 million for Union Square activations and $2 million for Powell Street with cuts to community ambassadors in neighborhoods like Bayview and workforce programs. Supervisor Melgar was skeptical, noting the free parking was a non-starter. Vice Chair Mandelman supported the investment. The item was left undecided.
- Human Services Agency (HSA) Move: A compromise was reached on funding for the move from 170 Otis Street. The BLA recommended $7.6 million in cuts in year one and $6.6 million in year two. Director Rhorer detailed the active moves to 1650 Mission and 1455 Market. The committee agreed to save $3.5 million instead of $5 million in Year 1 for planning, accepted the cut for canceled debt service (Rec 2), and rejected the Year 2 cut entirely to allow for future facility purchases.
- Homelessness and Supportive Housing (HSH) OASIS Hotel: A compromise was reached placing $2.3 million (instead of the BLA's recommended $4.6 million) on reserve for the Providence Foundation contract. The committee required a quarterly report on progress toward shoring up the operator or transitioning to a new one, ensuring no disruption to services for families.
- Rec and Park Court Fees (Item 12): The BLA recommended denying two upward substitutions (a deputy director and a manager). The committee mostly supported the BLA on staffing. The primary policy fight was over the $5 court reservation fee. Supervisors Chan, Melgar, and Walton expressed openness to a fee but wanted a restructured system allowing free walk-up play and tiered charges for private entities and paid coaches. Deputy City Attorney Pearson clarified the board can only approve or reject the ordinance as written. The item was left undecided, with the department asked to work with the Mayor's office on an alternative model.
Key Outcomes
| Action | Items | Details | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Forwarded to Full Board | Items 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14 | SFPUC grant, amended Baby Prop C ordinance, HRC and DCYF grant agreements, fee updates, Rec and Park grants/fees, BLA contract COLA. | | Compromises Reached | HSA, HSH | Agreed to $3.5M cut to HSA move funding (accepting planning details), rejected Year 2 cuts. Placed $2.3M on reserve for OASIS Hotel operator oversight. | | BLA Policy Recs Rejected | DCYF, HRC, OEWD (in part)| Committee rejected recommendations to cut CBO grants above baselines, preserving youth, workforce, and equity programs. | | Undecided / Pending | Items 2, 3, 4 (Main Budget), OEWD Downtown, Item 12 (Court Fees), Item 13, Items 15-17 | Final budget ordinances, downtown core investment, park court reservation fee structure, and remaining department budgets were left for the committee's final deliberations on June 24 and June 25. |
Meeting Transcript
Good morning. The meeting will come to order. Welcome to the June 20th, 2024 meeting of the budget and appropriation committee. I'm Supervisor Connie Chan, Chair of the Committee. I'm joined by Supervisors Mirna Malgar and Shaman Walton, shortly by Vice Chair Rafael Mendelman and uh President Aaron Paskin. Our clerk is Brent Halipa. I would like to thank Kalina Mendoza from SFGov TV for broadcasting this meeting. Mr. Clark, do you have any announcement? Just a friend of reminder to those in the tenants to please make sure to sell and sell cell phones and electronic devices to prevent interruptions to our proceedings. Should you have any documents to be included as part of the file, they should be submitted to myself, the clerk. Public comment will be taken on each item on this agenda when your item of interest comes up in public comment is called. Please line up to speak on the west side of the chamber to your right, my left along those curtains. And while not uh required to provide public comment, we do invite you to fill out a comment card and leave them on the trade by the television to your left by the doors if you wish to be accurately recorded for the minutes. Alternatively, you may submit public comment in writing in either of the following ways. Email them to myself, the budget and appropriations committee clerk at BRENT dot J A L I P A at SFGO V dot ORG. If you submit public comment via email, it will be forwarded to the supervisors and also included as part of the official file. You may also send your written comments via U.S. Postal Service to our office in City Hall at one Dr. Carlton B. Goodlit Place, Room 244, San Francisco, California, 94102. And Madam Chair, that completes my announcements. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Uh, before we get started, I just want to explain to the public how this week's agenda will proceed. Last week we hear from city departments about their budget pro uh proposals, and this week departments are returning to address proposed reduction by this committee and for their departments. The department's schedule to appear today and tomorrow are listed on the agenda. However, if a department agrees to our proposed reductions and does not have trailing legislation, they have not been required to return. You can find the trailing legislation listed in the agenda today. Um today we will address items 5 through 11. Each of these items will have public comment, but we remind the public to keep the remarks related to the trailer, not the overall department budget. We will not have general public comment today. Instead, general public comment that address any or all department budget will be heard on Monday, June 24th, starting at 10 a.m. in this chambers. Um that uh again, uh all public comments um both for the trailing legislation and uh Monday will be limited to one minute. Um so before we do get started with the budget though, uh, we do have one sensitive um time sensitive item uh uh uh to dispense uh with the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. So Mr. Clark, please call item number one. Yes, item number one is a resolution authorizing the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission to accept and expend federal funds from the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 and administrative administered by the State Water Resources Control Board with a total amount of approximately 23.4 million to assist eligible residential and commercial customers who accrued waste water and or wastewater arrears who received discounts for water and or wastewater services during the extent COVID-19 pandemic from June 16th, 2021 through December 31st, 2022, effective upon approval of this resolution. Madam Chair. Thank you. And today we have Jeremy Spitz, uh policy and government affairs, a manager from SFPUC. Thank you. Good morning, Chair Chan, Supervisor Melgar, Supervisor Walton. Thank you so much for hearing this item. I'll be very brief this morning, uh, but I did want to start by thanking you, Chair Chan, for sponsoring this item and scheduling it for a hearing today so we could get approval before the end of the fiscal year. The item before you today authorizes the SFPUC to accept and expend around 23 million in federal funds from the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, administered by the State Water Resources Control Board to assist eligible uh residential and commercial customers who accrued water and or wastewater beers or received discounts during the COVID-19 pandemic from June 16, 2021 through December 31st, 2022. We cannot be more proud to bring this item before you today. The SFPUC led a coalition of utilities and environmental justice groups to advocate for and secure access to a second round of funding, unlocking an additional 600 million in funding for utility arrears relief. This 23 million is the last portion of over 46 million in relief for SFPUC customers, a disproportionate number of whom are BIPOC or live in environmental justice communities.
openpublica.com