Good afternoon, everybody, and welcome to the April 22nd, 2026 Budget and Appropriations Committee meeting.

I am your chair for this afternoon, Supervisor Shimon Walton.

I'm joined by Supervisor Alan Wong, Supervisor Cheyenne Chan, and soon to be joined by Supervisor Danny Sauter.

We also have Brent Halipa, who will be our clerk this afternoon, and we are excited to say thank you to Kalina Mendoza from SFGov TV for making sure that this meeting is broadcast to the public so everyone can tune in.

Mr.

Clerk, do you have any announcements?

Yes, just a further reminder to those in attendance to please make sure to silence all 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 uh each item on this agenda.

When your item of interest comes up and 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 required to provide public comment, we do invite you to fill out a comment card and leave them on the trade by the t television to your left uh by the doors.

If you wish for your name 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 Br ENT 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 Be Good Place, Room 244, San Francisco, California, 94102.

And uh in partnership with our Office of Civic Engagement and Immigrant Affairs, uh we do have uh interpreted uh interpretive services available for this meeting in Cantonese Mandarin, uh Spanish and Filipino to assist us during public comment until 4 30 this afternoon.

Uh given the public turnout present, uh, it will give a friendly reminder that the committee is empowered to hear public comment on the item that is currently in discussion and request that your commentary stay on that topic.

Uh I may ask you to redirect your comments if you're speaking on family affordability during our hearing on workforce programming.

Uh if only to ensure interpretive assistance is available for those who need it for the second hearing.

Uh, if I can please have um our colleagues at uh Edo CIA uh give those instructions uh in language, it would be much appreciated.

Solamente I those puntos in the order is commentarius sobre cada tema.

Um this in gang or the hoy phone contrasting as he how late ho yiquale tangyao so being up on what he mean.

Um you gonna so you should go.

Thank you much.

Thank you, Wong Arturo Casenza and Raymond Boris uh for your assistance today.

And uh Mr.

Chair Potem.

Thank you so much, Clerk Khalipa.

Uh and before we call item number one, we want to make a motion to excuse Chair Connie Chan, Vice Chair Matt Dorsey, and President Mandelman.

So I'll make that motion now, please.

And I need a second.

And on that motion by Chair Pro Tem Walton, seconded by Member Sauter.

Um Chair Chan, Members Mandelman and Dorsey from attending today's meeting.

Member Sauter.

Sauter I.

Member Chen.

Chen I.

Member Wong.

Aye.

Wong I.

Oh, sorry.

Oh, we say Wong, my apologies.

Yes.

Wang I and uh Chair Potem Walton.

Aye.

Uh Walton, I.

Uh, we have four eyes.

Thank you.

Motion carries.

And Mr.

Clerk, would you please call item number one?

Yes, item number one.

Pardon, pardon.

Is our hearing to examine workforce programming across city departments, including any potential cuts to workforce training and employment programs that help San Francisco residents get to work, including programming for youth through adults as well as ambassador programs.

Thank you so much.

And we are here this afternoon, as you know, to hear about our workforce programs in the city and some of the impacts that may be taking place as we move forward.

I do want to make sure that all of our presenters are aware that we did send over a set of questions that we want to be answered within your presentations.

They'll also make the process of this hearing go smoother if they are addressed somewhere around budgeting and funding, special populations, staffing and layoffs, labor market alignment, participant success and outcomes, barrier removal and support services, systems coordination, and equity and final impact.

So I hope these are addressed within your presentations as we did send this information over ahead of time.

But I do appreciate all the city departments being here as well as the public being here for this hearing.

Workforce is important in San Francisco and making sure that we have the support services and resources we need to get people to work are a major priority.

So with that said, I am going to call up city departments and I'll tell you what the order is going to be like.

Thank you, Supervisor Walton.

Good afternoon, Supervisor Chen, Salter and Wong.

I'm Sharice Dorsey Smith, Director of the Department of Children, Youth and Family.

And so DCY funding is organized around results and outcomes that we seek for children, youth, TEA, and families.

They are supported by nurturing families and communities, physically and emotionally healthy, ready to learn and succeed in school, and ready for college work and productive adulthood.

Within each of these results, DCYF service areas provide a range of funding and strategies.

And for the purpose of this hearing, I'm going to focus on youth workforce development.

The YWD service area for us includes services that are implemented by CBOs and other city departments.

So the grants that are direct to CBOs, the funding amount is around 29, 20.9 million.

And then we also have the work orders to city departments that are around 2.4 million.

So the total is 23.3 million.

The different strategies and initiatives that fall under our CBOs are our high school partnerships, which are based on school, school sites, the mayor's youth employment and education program, our Y our youth workforce development general, and then our youth workforce development, transitional age youth and young adults.

For the department, the work orders that go to city departments.

We um provide funds to the Department of Public Health, Department of Public Works, Office of Civic Engagement in Immigrant Affairs, and Recreation and Park.

We have no cuts in any of our agencies and funding to those services.

So like I said previously, our high school partnerships are based in embedded in SFUSD schools.

Our targeted schools are downtown high, O'Connell, June Jordan, Burton, and SF International.

We then have my EP, which the target population are high school students in grades 9 through 12, and that is work-based learning opportunities for youth with no work experience.

Then we have our YWD General, which are job readiness training, career exposure, and work-based learning for the target population of youth ages to 14, SF Justice Involved Youth 14 to 17, and high school at risk or system involved youth ages 14 to 17.

And then finally, we have our YWD TA strategy, which focuses on job readiness, job placements, career exposure, and transition planning.

The target populations are 18 to 24 and 18 to 24 youth who are justice system involved.

The work order funding that we provide to the other departments.

So for DPH, we provide support to their TASE system of care workforce training program.

In that program, participants gain skills for employment and behavioral health and receive certification and play and placement.

For the Department of Public Works, we fund the Urban Forestry Program, which participants learn plant care while helping and maintaining trees and green spaces.

We provide funding to OSEA for the Dream SF Fellows Program.

Fellows gain job skills, leadership experience through paid fellowships, and then for Recreation Parks Department, we support the Green Agers and Work Creation, where participants gain job skills and placements at RPD sites.

We also did not do any cuts to city departments for these areas of support.

Just to give you a high level of our highlights of the participants in which we were able to serve.

So in 24-25, we served 3,764 unique participants.

We probably we served more than that, but once again, these were unique and not duplicative.

You can look and see the age group, primarily 14 to 17 are our highest population served at 30 73.5%, then goes to 18 to 24.

Race and ethnicity, the highest population served are Latin Latin Latinx at 33.5%, then comes Asian at 29.9 and African American at 18.5.

Gender breakdown, you can see, and I won't go through, you can see all the districts.

The highest districts that we're serving young people fall in D10, 11, and 9, followed by D5.

The breakdown predominantly 49 point, it's almost equal, 49.3% male, 46.7% female, and then the other populations.

Job placements.

So we provide five different four different types.

So in-house placements, we had 104 internships, around 12 job shadows, and 115.

This is through the agencies.

Private for profit, 84 were placed in internships, two job shadow, 312 work experience, private nonprofit.

There were 978 internships, seven job shadows, 339 placements, and then in public government, 41 internships, 11 job shadows, and 18 work experience.

We survey all of our students or the program survey all the students who are involved in workforce programs, and just to highlight a little bit of what the results that came back from that, 80% of the respondents reported developing education or career goals and understanding the steps needed to achieve their goals as a result of the programs that they participated in.

79% reported developing job search skills, 69% reported developing financial literacy skills, such as opening bank accounts and budgets.

I hope to increase that moving forward.

We have several performance measures that are attached to each of our strategies.

This is just a synopsis based on our high school partnership, MyEP, YW General, and YWD TEA.

The performance measures or outcomes that we look at are the number of participants served versus those projected.

We have a target of 90%.

You can when you look at the chart, you'll see for each strategy how those how the agencies that make up those strategies did as a whole.

Work-based learning experience, we want 85% to have achieved that.

For transition plan completion, 90% of the students who are participating in these programs complete a transition plan of as they're exiting these workforce opportunities, what they're going to do in their next phase.

Quality improvement completion, we do a programmatic quality assessment of all of our programs.

75% of the youth need to feel as if they're supported by adults and have someone to be able to tap to.

Education and career adult development, 75% would have identified what their education and career goals are after participation in the program, job readiness skills gained, financial literacy gained, skills gained, and employment at program completion.

And as you can see in looking at the chart, for the most part, a lot of our strategies, a lot of the agencies within this are firing at all cylinders and have over overshot the target percentage needed to be in compliance.

There's a couple of areas where we need some work, which we're working on at this year.

And I am complete.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Director Dorsey.

I do have just one question in terms of your public housing youth and young people who families may be on benefits.

What opportunities are you providing for them?

They're able to go into all the different workforce opportunities.

So our YWD General, our My EBE, the high school partnership.

They're the we have a priority population outreach.

So we make sure that all the programs are outreaching to our African Latinx, Pacific Islander, Asian low-income, housing development youth.

So every program is actually for that population.

If you're asking if there's a specific program that just focuses on youth and housing development, no.

Thank you so much.

See any other questions or comments from colleagues?

Thank you, Director Dorsey.

Thank you.

Now we will bring up the representative from the Human Services Agency.

Good afternoon.

Susie Smith, Deputy Director for Policy Planning and Public Affairs at San Francisco Human Services Agency.

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to talk about HSA's programming.

This is an overview here.

We offer a wide variety of workforce strategies and services that are specifically for people on public benefits.

Our focus in this particular moment is ensuring that our CalFresh and Medi-Cal clients have work and community service opportunities available to them in order to meet the new work requirements being imposed upon our clients as a result of HR1.

Given the scale of the impact of HR1, we are centering our workforce programs on programs that can scale, and we have no cuts to our workforce development staff at HSA.

While our ultimate goal is to support clients on their path to self-sufficiency, we recognize that individuals in our system are at a variety of different stages of their employment journey.

So to meet those varied needs, we group our services into several core categories that you can see here, ranging from helping clients to build foundational work habits while maintaining work requirements to support in securing and maintaining employment.

The budget here is our total budget is 43 million.

The budget that we're presenting here is specifically for the Department of Benefits and Family Services.

We already had the DOS hearing, and so the funding here is the 34.6 million reflected.

And we the only cuts that we have are in our 2.1 million, and that is in sub-specialty populations that are already being served or can be served by our broader programs that can scale.

So I'm going to do here is just go through each of these different strategies to give a sense of what we offer, but first give a profile of our clients.

As you can see, most of our clients are between the ages of 25 and 54.

And on the next slide, we break down who we serve by zip code.

The top zip codes that we serve are 94102, 94103, and 94124.

And so next slide.

And of those who report race and ethnicity, it's not a required field within our public benefits administrative system, but of those that report, about 20% who receive workforce services are black African American, 18% Latin X, 10% white, and 6% AEPI.

This category employment barriers removal really focuses on helping clients stabilize barriers so they can meaningfully move into a variety of training or employment programs.

Many of our clients, as you know, they want to work, they face language barriers, they face educational barriers.

And so this is really to help remove some of those barriers and put them on a pathway towards self-sufficiency.

Similarly, the next set of services around job readiness and support.

And for these clients, this is focusing on again foundational skills in the earliest stages of job readiness.

So while some job readiness programs include job search and support and connection, a lot of this is really helping to prepare for more intensive training.

It focuses on people that have really very little work experience.

And in particular, a lot of our clients speak languages other than English, so the vocational ed is really important, and that educational support is really important.

On this next slide, we talk about vocational education and training.

This is really to upskill clients, transition to new careers.

They're for people who have completed the basic job readiness and they're ready for more hands-on training in areas like clerical, healthcare, construction, commercial driving, hospitality, and culinary.

And then many of you have probably heard of our jobs now program.

This is where we focus on subsidized employment programs.

So enabling people to get a foot in the door by by subsidizing their wages and providing structured on-site training and support.

So this is really an earn and learn model.

It enables people to get a foot in the door who might otherwise not be able to.

We partner with a variety of private sector partners as well as public sector employers to support clients who are really ready for the employment.

And again, I'm not I don't go over each of the data points in terms of the numbers of placements, but presented here for each of these.

More details on the PST program.

It's really a one of our flagship program.

It's a six-month work-based paid learning opportunity designed to help people build technical skills and the experience needed to enter the public sector.

Many of our departments are partners in this, and they receive our clients in placements, and they get that real-world experience while also being supported through case management and job search.

And then finally, our on-site training program.

This is a six-month wage subsidy program where participants can earn a paycheck while gaining experience in the private sector.

And we have restructured this program to have very specific training goals and oversight with the employers.

So we're not just giving them, you know, sort of subsidized labor, but we're really giving them these clients an opportunity to get on-site training and working with the employers to have a very strong partnership on what those training goals are.

And we expect that our clients will be hired.

That's part of the MOU, and we have a high placement rate in this program.

So it's just a brief overview.

We have a lot of robust programming.

It depends on what the clients need are, and we tailor those services according to the different needs that they have.

Happy to answer any questions.

Thank you so much, Director Smith.

I do have a few questions.

What's an example of a subpopulation?

Yeah, sure.

So we had we had a program specifically for LGBTQ plus population.

We had an employment program specifically for people experiencing homelessness.

Many of these folks are eligible for our existing program, and what we're doing is we're referring them into our larger scale programs.

I think we're just at a moment where we can't have sort of custom designed programs, and we're talking about you know nine 19,000 people on CalFresh that we're going to have to place in opportunities.

So that's what I'm talking about.

We're looking at where we can serve people at scale in this particular moment.

And definitely don't have to answer this now, but I would love just a follow-up as we look at jobs now, the percentage of folks who are working in the private sector and percentage working in nonprofit.

And you know, I can get that for you.

Um also hearing conversations about possible mergers with workforce from OEWD coming to HSA.

Is there any truth to that?

Have you heard any of the things that we have to do?

It's rumors.

And then lastly, was the work and families credit eliminated?

That was eliminated.

And the reason for that is that when we first started the working families tax credit program, it was really it was before the state had an EITC program, and part of the draw was to get people to apply for the federal program, and then later now to the state program, our amount was much smaller.

And so the idea was it was pre-a bigger program by the state, and it was an incentive to get the federal tax credit.

Now that we have a state and federal tax credit, we it went in looking at a moment, not that any tax credit is important for low-income working families we support, but at this moment when we had so many budget cuts to contend with, it was one of the areas that we unfortunately had to let go.

But they are eligible for the federal exactly.

But they are eligible for the federal exactly there and we there are still Vita sites that are helping people get both the state and the federal tax credit.

Ours was much smaller and it was kind of an incentive initially again to draw down the Federal funds so they can still they're still eligible the state and federal which is thousands of dollars as opposed to like a couple hundred dollars.

Got it.

I do see we have questions from Supervisor Souter.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you for the presentation.

I know we're not in the climate where we're talking about expansion and more funding, but if we were I just I I wonder you kind of have this web of different programs that reach different populations and and needs where do you think we are leaving people behind where where are we missing targeted outreach or targeted on ramps right now if you could expand in one direction or if you had the resources to do that where would you put that?

Yeah it's a great question and I think as as we look at HR1 and those requirements one of the things we are interested in doing is expanding community sites for people to be placed in part because if someone on CalFresh is placed in a community based organization, the number of hours they have to work is less than if they were in other settings and the sort of technical reason around where we look at the CalFresh dollar amount and you divide by minimum wage and that's the number of hours they'd have to be that have to work and so expanding our community sites to receive CalFresh recipients and medical recipients later would be one area.

Another area would be expanding our on site training program our sort of private sector partnership program that helps not only the clients but also it's it's an economic stimulus for the you know for local employers.

So those those are two areas that we would look to thank you.

Thank you Supervisor Sauter Supervisor Chin.

Thank you Chair I know you may not may not have some of the data but I'm very interested in look at uh uh the wage subsidy program that you mentioned like even with a Psi MOU that the intention is to after um training that the individual is getting an MOU actually getting a a job placement at the Federal Nonprofit uh sector so I wonder if you have any uh numbers on like the age group the demographic and who are they serving because Poven is pretty successful with that.

Yeah so I do have the overall numbers in terms of our placement rate for the for our subsidized program.

So in in uh the last full fiscal year 24-25 at least 72 percent of our participants who completed their subsidized platement placements were later hired into unsubsidized jobs and if you're interested in um demographics of how that breaks out I can certainly get get that for you after that would be great so it's a high and we the other thing that we do is we match we look at longer term outcomes by matching our client um data to EDD earnings over time and we find when we do this longer longitudinal kind of looking a couple years out how are they doing about 58% of our clients are in our earning without any of our subsidies and and fully employed.

So we do subsidized employment is a really great strategy to your early question.

That's why we want to invest in it but we also know that's not appropriate for everybody and so we're trying to find you know community sites that can be appropriate for one set of clients and then more subsidized placements for folks that are really ready.

Yeah if I can also get uh some data on like the the job category that would be great like what kind of industry we we collect that a higher placement rate that would be great too yeah hospital yeah we collect that and we can share that with you.

Thank you.

Great questions thank you Supervisor Chan and thank you Director Smith I don't see anyone else on the roster for questions so thank you so much.

We will now hear from the Office of Economic and Workforce Development I know Director Topier is here and I believe all information or conversations around MOCD will be included in your presentation.

Correct.

Okay thank you good afternoon Chair Walton and members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to present our workforce programs and initiatives this afternoon supporting pathways for San Franciscans to thrive is not only central to our work it is a deeply held personal value that has guided me throughout my career my 27 year long career in San Francisco.

Now as a department head my priority for OEWD is to build upon the legacy work of this department and continue to expand workforce opportunities for all San Franciscans.

We served thousands of clients across all of our programs and services.

I do want to take this opportunity to put to bed this rumor.

We will not be merging our workforce team with HSA.

I take tremendous pride in the portfolio that our workforce team delivers to job seekers in San Francisco every single day.

I believe that long-term economic vitality is critically dependent on a robust, comprehensive and sustainable workforce development system.

We are the city's lead department for workforce development, providing strategic leadership and coordination for San Francisco and the Bay Area region.

We work with our 24 sister agencies to coordinate workforce investments and evaluate programs, which include collaboration around funding so that departments that are best positioned to deliver services have the resources to do so.

For example, MOCD work orders approximately 1.5 million dollars of Federal Community Development Block grant funding to OEWD to workforce services every year.

Our workforce division is the largest departmental team and has the largest budget allocation, underscoring the critical and central role it plays in advancing our mission.

For fiscal year 2627, we were directed to find 10 million dollars in cuts.

On February 23rd, we submitted a budget with $3.8 million in program cuts across the department.

By redesigning job centers to fold in wraparound services through centralized job center models, we are eliminating administrative redundancies and ensuring a more streamlined experience for job seekers.

We were able to identify 1.5 million dollars in operational efficiencies within our workforce portfolio, which is what we submitted during the department phase for workforce cuts.

Subsequently, we were also asked to identify 22 personnel cuts, and in response, OEWD has eliminated a total of 19 filled and vacant positions.

Program and staff reductions were strategic and designed to protect client-facing services and program continuity.

Our proposed budget will continue to deliver critical workforce programs.

What you see here is not a disparate list of programs.

This is a highly integrated citywide economic infrastructure.

Our portfolio is deliberately engineered to move residents from initial outreach all the way to sustainable employment while supplying local businesses with the exact talent they need to grow.

We have five strategic focus areas.

At the core of the system is our sector training.

Through academies like City Build, Tech SF, Healthcare, and Hospitality, we are aligning our talent pipeline directly with San Francisco's highest growth industries, delivering the field-ready certified professionals our economy requires.

With an 89% completion rate, graduates of our City Build Academy are securing average starting wages of $31 per hour.

Our youth and young adult services program functions as a launch pad for emerging talent.

By providing early access to paid professional experience, we are building the economic security that keeps families rooted in San Francisco.

To guarantee this system is equitable, our job-centered network, operated by trusted, culturally competent providers, anchors these resources across the city in the heart of our neighborhoods, including the Mission, Bayview, and Chinatown.

We support local business growth by providing no-cost customized recruitment services and access to pre-vetted San Francisco candidates.

We've built relationships with more than 600 employers and supported nearly 1,800 hires.

Finally, what makes this entire architecture work is our system strategy, which is the strategic backbone for these investments.

Part of this work is convening committees such as Workforce Investment SF, or WISIF, and the Committee on City Workforce Alignment, which helps all of our city stakeholders work together to be more efficient and effective with every dollar we deploy in workforce development.

Our team ensures that workforce investments are tied to clear metrics, enrollment, completion, placement, placement wage, and retention, supporting department-wide performance goals and citywide goals to evaluate workforce programs and their effectiveness.

One of the things we will be focusing on going forward is how we can increase connections to and strengthen relationships with employer partners.

I want to emphasize that our workforce infrastructure does not operate in a vacuum.

We execute citywide priorities, and I want to highlight the tangible outcomes behind these pillars.

Last year we successfully connected 3,600 residents to jobs and careers, actively supplying local businesses with the talent they need to stay and grow in San Francisco.

When the city mandates safer streets, we deploy the personnel.

Last year, programs that are part of our public safety academy placed 265 residents directly into frontline roles, including EMTs, street ambassadors, and security staff.

We are tackling public health and housing simultaneously, in addition to training over 250 health care professionals.

We deployed employment specialists directly to supportive housing sites, helping vulnerable residents secure both jobs and housing.

We advance San Francisco's housing and infrastructure goals by ensuring the city is built by its own residents.

Through CitiBuild, a program that has trained thousands of San Franciscans over its 20-year history, we provide the field-ready workforce needed to construct essential affordable housing and public infrastructure.

And true equity means workforce stability.

Removing the structural barriers that prevent talented residents from participating in our econom in our economy is critical.

That is why we invest in child care, transportation, justice system navigation, and more, so that these barriers do not stand in the way of economic opportunity.

The family opportunity agenda announced in the beginning of this year sets a clear goal.

Make San Francisco a place where families can stay, afford to live, and grow.

Executing that requires a specialized workforce, and we are delivering it across two critical fronts.

Over the last three years, we have trained and certified the early childhood educators required to actually staff those centers.

And we are working on expanding our program, our sorry, our program reach to young adults through a partnership with DCYF, SFUSD, and CCSF.

Secondly, to secure the future for our young people, our youth and young adult programs provide paid internships, mentorship, and career readiness programs that complement the city's new high school certification initiatives.

To maintain San Francisco's reputation as a world class destination, we need a world-class workforce.

Our hospitality graduates work at the finest hotels, restaurants, and bars in the city.

We advance government efficiency by leading citywide workforce alignment efforts.

This year, we streamlined workforce investments across the city by evaluating nearly 300 programs in 24 departments and publishing the citywide workforce development plan, which guides more than 200 million dollars in community-based and internal workforce initiatives.

San Francisco continues to have the second lowest unemployment in California at 3.9 percent.

This is below both the state at 5.5 and Federal at 4.3 percent.

We have aligned our current and future sector training programs with labor market needs and opportunities.

Construction, tech, hospitality and health care continue to grow and are aligned with our existing sector strategy, and we have now identified the growing professional and business services sector as an opportunity to potentially expand our programming.

RFP 235 is valued at 23.8 million dollars and is live and is structured to protect existing programs and maintain continuity for clients.

We intend to invest in these six key program areas seen on the screen.

If we are required to make additional programmatic cuts, we will look to limit those reductions to specialized pilot areas of opportunity, again to preserve these core programs.

RFP 235 covers a four-year period and is flexible, enabling us to pause or pace investments while also leaving the door open should future resources become available.

We are currently evaluating submissions and anticipate sending award notifications in early May.

I want to thank you for your time today.

In closing, I want to reiterate that despite the city's challenging budget situation, we have made every effort to maintain the highest possible level of service and support to our communities.

Thank you.

Thank you, Director Topier, and I do have several questions.

The first one is just in terms of layoffs, what percentage of departmental layoffs are on the econ side versus the workforce development side?

The total percentage, so the workforce side I think was a 13 percent.

Sorry.

Sorry, I'm sorry, I hadn't broken it down versus because it's different.

Every single division in the office took cuts.

Let me try it differently.

So, yeah, I see what we're doing.

From the layoff standpoint, how many people are being laid off from the econ side and how many people were being laid off from the workforce side?

So we laid off uh eight positions on the workforce team.

Uh and then 11 positions on the econ side.

And then how many are actual people?

Thirteen.

Thirteen people?

And what was the process for determining layoffs?

We really tried to focus on how to maintain existing programs and find efficiencies.

I mean, I I can tell you that every single one of these layoffs is incredibly difficult.

These were not easy decisions to make.

And it really was focused on trying to find where we had resources that we could deploy to maintain the existing program.

And what's the racial breakdown of layoffs?

I don't have that.

Supervisor, I can I can work with HR to get that to you.

What did you say?

Is 13 people?

You got a rough idea of how many people of color versus how many people in a majority may have done?

I I I do not have that.

Um I can tell you that you know we are one of the most diverse departments in the city, and we take a great deal of pride in our diversity.

Uh and decisions were not made on the racial background ground, but I I can I I don't have that information.

I can certainly ask HR to provide that information to you.

Do you think everybody laid off was a person of color?

No.

Um and then what would you what would you say the ultimate goal of workforce development is?

I I believe workforce development is critical to San Francisco's ongoing economic uh economic stability.

And uh it you know, our workforce team provides both access to jobs, job seekers, training for job seekers, and employer services.

And it I think it is a fundamental uh component of our economic development strategy.

No, I 100% agree with the work that you do in the department being vital, and so I'm trying to understand how you're going to achieve goals and address unemployment rates and make sure San Franciscans are working when you don't have the staffing to be able to do that.

Again, Supervisor, what we are what we will be working on is really trying to find the the way to create efficiencies in the department if it means looking at our leadership team and finding out ways to provide more support, we're going to have to do that.

Um you mentioned high school certification initiative.

What do you have any information on that?

What that is?

Uh this is a program that is uh is something that we are looking at uh with DCYF and um SFUSD uh to again to to provide um a dual certification, a job training certification uh along with the high school degree.

So it's it's in a it's in the sort of conversational development stage right now.

I'm just gonna say, as someone who's been around workforce for a few decades at this point, um this is very disheartening in terms of not just the amount of layoffs, but actual people who actually are a part of your portfolio in terms of who and community gets served, the diversity of who gets served, and the diversity of the department uh it looks like.

And you don't have data for me, so I can only go for the from what I see that mainly folks of color are being laid off, and mainly folks of color are who serve the communities, or mainly folks of color are the population that you serve as an office.

Um that's disheartening, whether it's intentional or not, it's a fact, and that is very problematic for this supervisor that mostly people of color are being laid off from any city of department.

And so I just want to make sure that that's noted, and uh I hope that uh we can work to do something different because this is supposed to be a city that looks after diversity and takes care of its people.

And I I hope no one would want to be associated with just laying off people of color.

I mean, that that seems like something we all would would want to be against.

But with that said, I will call Supervisor Souter.

Thank you, Chair.

Um I want to um appreciate slide number two.

I think it's very interesting.

Um, I think we could debate all day if the agency that has workforce in their name and most people think of as workforce if 25 percent is the right number or not.

You know, I I understand that this work of workforce is embedded in a lot of other departments, um, but 25 percent feels low to me.

Um, and and that's uh I think a whole nother conversation.

But I just wanted to uh you know that was helpful for us to see, and I think um, you know, as we're going through this budget process, something like this to understand whatever topic at hand is to see what percentage is or how it's broken up, right?

That this visual is is really helpful.

So thank you for that.

Um I wanted to ask a question which maybe you know I think could be asked or should be asked of all the departments presenting today, um, which is about the impact of AI on your training programs and maybe our labor market at large.

And I know it's a a huge conversation and it deserves its own time, but um as you're thinking about how you segment all your different trainings here.

How are you embedding AI in here and where is it helping you in your workforce training and where is it maybe a threat to our residents and our our workforce in San Francisco?

I mean that is certainly a much larger debate.

Um, I I I think I am someone who is really bullish on the San Francisco economy.

Uh I think that we will continue to grow.

I think that AI is something that we need certainly need to understand, and I think for for the workforce development department, um we want to make sure that we're preparing future workers for the jobs that are going to be available.

So that is something that we want to always look at.

Um it is something that is certainly in consideration of as we look at expanding uh different training opportunities, different sector opportunities.

This is something that we we have a tech uh academy, so these are things that we want to basically always be looking toward preparing uh San Franciscans for the jobs that are going to exist in the future.

Um I'm not sure I can I'm I I'm don't think I can identify a specific AI program that we're using in our training, but it is certainly something that I um am happy to look into to see if our any of our providers are employing specific AI tools.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Supervisor Souter.

Supervisor Chan.

Thank you, Supervisor Walton.

Um Director Topia, uh you meant I I know that the high school certificate initiative and with DCYF with OEWD and with SFUSC, it's just in conversation in process.

Um but it's actually very exciting to me.

Uh you know, someone who is benefited from all these programs.

Um my question now is really related to the neighborhood equity where our city alignments.

Um in District 11 in particularly, we have you know a very maybe one of the most diverse uh district and the city, lots of Asian, black and also Latinos.

And I want to make sure that uh how um the alignment goal for neighborhood equity is continue to serve the goal that it's intended to.

Can you speak a little bit more about you know what is your strategy for neighborhood equity?

So I certainly think that the the combined job centers and and um looking at finding consolidating services in each of our neighborhoods is again an it will be an ongoing initiative of ours where we're providing um the the job center, the consolidated job centers across the city and deploying those so that we make we're making sure that we're serving people directly in the community that they live.

Yeah, I thank you.

I think um you know, from district 11 perspective, and I really look forward to continue to see more neighborhood equity in District 11.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Thank you, Supervisor Chan.

Just a couple more questions, Director.

I know we talked about this, but just curious to know as we're moving forward and we're in the budget process.

How many contracts are still pending or organizations not in contract?

Sorry, I'm how many contracts are still pending or organizations not in contract, but receive funding.

Um contract in place?

Well, uh so we uh I mean we're we're constantly amending contracts and updating contracts.

Um I'm not I I don't I don't know if I have an answer for that.

I I again I can get back to you with if we've got um outstanding contracts.

It is something I mean I you know these are things that are come across my desk every single day where we're providing we've got it we've got about 300 uh existing contracts or 200, I'm sorry, 200 existing contracts and about 350 amended contracts currently up and running.

Um we also you know expect with 235 again uh you know we once once we close 235 we'll have uh another round of uh uh entering into contracts.

So I I can I will find out for you if we have outstanding contracts that have not yet been executed.

When it more so aligns with my next question just about how we're doing on invoicing and reimbursement and this is something you and I have talked about repeatedly.

Um the answer is usually related to staffing.

Yeah.

We're laying off people.

Um we have increased the staff on the contracting team since uh since last year.

And we are now executing uh our contracts much more rapidly and and uh and also working more closely on with a lot more customer service support on uh uh executing on our um closing invoices and paying cut paying out the thank you.

Okay.

I don't see any more questions for director, so we will now call up representative from the human rights commission.

And I see Director Tobinio is here.

Thank you, Supervisors um chair and supervisor Walton.

As we get up the slide presentation, um we're happy to be able to share some information with you about our workforce development funding.

Um HRC currently deploys workforce development funding through three primary channels, opportunities for all and youth works, uh RFP 100, and our uh some interdepartmental work orders.

OFA and youth works are held under a single five-year contract through fiscal year 2028 with nonprofit partner Japanese Community Youth Council as our employer of record.

HRC also provides administrative coordination and direct staff support to OFF to the OFA initiative.

HRC uh is also issuing a total of 2.8 million dollars in grants to community-based organizations to support youth and workforce development each year for the a total of $5.6 million over two years.

We also maintain a number of partnerships with other city departments through work orders to augment youth workforce development.

Um examples of this include work orders to uh departments to support uh the city EMT program or to the public defender's office and district attorney's office to support youth uh internships or enrichment opportunities.

Next slide, please.

Uh as I mentioned, through our most recent procurement process, RFP 100, we are funding programs that are structured to deliver measurable workforce readiness outcomes, including college access and uh and pipelines, uh literacy and academic skill building tied to employment readiness, leadership development and job readiness training, career exposure and sector-specific pathways.

These investments are intentionally distributed across organizations with deep community reach, enabling access for populations not served through traditional workforce systems.

Next slide, please.

HRC is also proud to deliver meaningful and substantive workforce development opportunities through the Opportunities for All program, as the department has done since 2018.

And by design, OFA is meant to reach young people from all corners of San Francisco and all diverse communities of the city and focuses on youth that are less resourced and could use additional exposure to career exploration.

OFA with our nonprofit profit partner provides a quality pay pathway to engage in different professional experiences.

Next slide, please.

OFA participants are placed within a variety of city departments as well as nonprofit and private partners.

We are also shifting our strategy to create pipelines and pathways to city employment and pathways to other professional careers.

To that end, HRC is continuing to strengthen our partnerships with Department of Human Resources, City College of San Francisco, and many others.

You'll see here a sampling of some of the special cohorts we are running this year.

B2SF is a partnership with HBCUs, and this year we are uh focusing on placements in three key areas: public safety, behavioral health, and economic development.

Change SF is a partnership with UCSF.

It's a mental health career workforce development program for youth and young adults.

And we're excited to launch a new partnership with SFPD and DHR, uh next gen public safety program where we will expose youth to potential career uh careers and law enforcement.

Uh thank you.

Um I think actually go back.

Yeah.

Yeah.

You'll see here our actuals from 2526 compared to our projections.

In a response to requested budget reductions, we have proposed a $2 million reduction to the youth works program, but we don't yet know exactly what to what extent these numbers will change.

As they always change based on enrollment and completion of the program.

And we are in ongoing non conversations with our nonprofit partner to ensure that there is as little disruption as possible and we can continue to maximize impact of our services to youth.

Next slide.

And finally, as I noted previously, OFA is built to reach and serve youth from all corners of San Francisco and focus on the most underserved populations.

Here we show demographics from last year's programming.

Some of our highest participation numbers are from the Bayview, Visitation Valley, Excelsior, Ingleside, and many other neighborhoods across the city.

OFA interns and fellows also demonstrate a great diversity of language, ethnicities, and racial backgrounds, and uh OFA creates a chance for younger interns to learn alongside older peer youth.

Thank you, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Director Tugbinho.

My first question is do you have any layoffs that you have proposed?

We were asked to lay off five six positions in the department.

We have one position that is related to workforce development.

And I know that there is some reduction or proposed reduction to youth works.

What is what is that number?

Two million dollars.

And what was the rationale behind this?

We of course is not a decision that we want to have to make.

Um but in response to the direction to to reduce uh our budget, um we want to focus um our efforts, as I said many times in my presentation, on our most underserved youth and the participants of youth works um are placed in city departments, and so we feel that we can um make up some of those numbers through the uh the uh broader OFA program.

Um so we don't lose uh uh we don't you lose youth um through these cuts.

Do we have an idea how how many slots may be lost with the reduction?

Well uh I don't have the slides, but if you go back to yeah.

So yeah, last year um we had a total of 1500 um participants um in the broader OFA program, um and we're uh seeing here a total of uh 1330.

But um if you go down further in the the chart, you'll see that uh we also have uh new partnerships that would add on to that 1330 number.

And is is the two point is the two million a complete elimination of youth works?

As we understand it, uh the total funding for youth works is about two and a half million dollars, um and our proposed cut is two million dollars.

And any room for conversation or opportunities uh for we are um continuing to discuss with JCYC.

We have a meeting coming up with them later this week.

Um again, we're doing our best to make sure there's as little disruption as possible.

Thank you, Director.

Supervisor Souter.

Thank you.

Um continuing with those questions on youth works, um, so it looks like around 200 placements in that program.

Are if these if the full elimination of the program were to go through, I mean, are the do you have you know 200 youth that are already committed to something in the future that we're gonna be pulling the rug under them, or is this um you know are these active internships and placements that would be revoked?

Where are we in that cycle?

We're in the recruitment phase of OFA or of the summer internship program.

So uh we're we've already notified um JCYC that this cut um has been proposed.

Um so uh we hope that there will not be a great disruption with any youth that were um that have already been accepted to the youth works program.

But we are also at the same time making trying to make room in the broader OFA program for any youth works part participants.

But are we talking about folks who have youth who have been accepted for something this summer, you know, in a few months, or are we talking about next summer?

This summer this summer.

Okay.

That's that's quite quick then.

Um I mean, I think, you know, from what we've heard today, there's a lot of different um initiatives around from different departments for youth employment, but but getting getting you know 200 people potentially um moved around within a few months is is a lot of work.

Um, thank you, Director Souter.

I don't see anyone else on the agenda for questions or comments, so thank you so much.

And we will now bring up the people's budget coalition.

And I believe we have Gentel Laborento with race and equity as well as Elaine Villasper, Filipino Community Center, and SRO families, we have Psych Hong and Hu Ling.

And that's what I was given.

But if that is not who is presenting, please state your name for the records.

That'll be for the next hearing.

Ah, got it.

Thank you.

Ready when you ready.

I can't see without my glasses.

I can't see with my glasses.

All right, you're good now.

This should be tricky.

Oh, this looks like something.

Um, Supervisors.

Uh Chair Walton, I appreciate you in so many ways for calling this uh hearing.

Um Joe Wilson with uh hospitality house and also representing um the homeless workforce collaborative, want to speak to at least a couple of things regarding um OEWD.

So the we acknowledge that OEWD has an outsized role in the city's workforce development system and the foundation of much of the resources available for communities across the city.

So the uh proposed cuts, particularly to the job center portfolio have exponential effects across the city and as you've identified, uh probably concentrated in communities of color.

Um the uh early estimated uh cut of 200,000 potentially per job center could have significant uh far-reaching effects on the foundation of uh the city's workforce development uh system and uh result in fewer people served, fewer job seek seekers being served, and the additional effects on potentially compromising uh the parallel investments that the city makes in housing and behavioral health services.

Um at the same time, unemployment is rising, and I have to push back gently with uh the director's comment about the citywide unemployment rate.

One, we know full well that uh the unemployment rate has historically been underestimated, um uh not counting those who have exhausted their unemployment benefits and are no longer looking for work, people who are only working one hour per week are counted in the employed category, and those who are available for full-time work but can only find part-time work are also included or excluded from that uh count.

And so uh closer look at the total number of uh folks who are excluded from the traditional employment rate gives us a figure of closer to uh 12 percent unemployment in communities like the tender line.

And so uh we cannot afford to compromise or decrease those investments in communities like that and communities of color um are also overrepresented in many of the negative aspects, uh poverty, unemployment, homelessness, uh public assistance caseload are in the same handful of zip codes uh across the city.

And so we have the dual reality, frankly, of communities of color grappling with the realities of race and the realities of place, meaning that their life chances are dictated not only by the color of their skin, but their zip code.

And so if we want to uh increase our efforts um to solve uh those uh intergenerational problems, we have to redouble our efforts to invest in those communities.

So, yes, it's true that uh the recovery has not reached everyone, and I would go down to the last bullet point here of like you know, access to workforce services is an intrinsic part of economic recovery recovery for the city as a whole and communities uh across the city.

And it's the last and five.

Yeah.

So the city's workforce uh system depends on deeper partnerships with uh employers, community-based organizations, and job centers, uh job seekers, uh support resources and job options.

The workforce cuts not only weaken stability, uh, but again, they compromise the investments that we're making uh in other systems that are also necessary.

Um, and I'll just state the obvious.

Uh you know, to maintain one's housing, it's helpful to have a job and a source of income to keep a roof over one's head.

That's fairly obvious, and we know that.

And so uh the cuts that are often proposed, particularly to workforce development, have an exponential effect uh on parallel investments.

Uh I'd also make a couple of comments here of previous speakers.

The abandoning of the abandonment of the city's uh working families credit uh is a personal thing with me 20 plus years ago when I was working at Coleman Advocates uh helped lead the campaign for uh to create that local version of the earned income credit.

And I would push back gently against uh Director Smith in that New York City, which at the time where there are three examples of a local version of the earned income credit.

Um Denver, Colorado, New York City, and San Francisco.

New York City still has its local version of the earned income credit.

They also have a state level earned income credit.

So that argument is not uh sufficient enough to uh justify um you know retreating on that investment.

And I would push uh the department to strongly consider uh that decision.

It took place um uh last year when the general fund uh portion was uh eliminated, and now eliminating the program entirety entirely uh really restricts uh a viable option uh to draw down additional resources for families who are who are cash-strapped.

And also say that uh we have an opportunity here to look toward not only the future but the present in terms of those options that are increasingly limited uh for communities of color.

And I echo your sentiment, Supervisor, in that uh most of the burden continues to be borne uh by communities of color, people of color, places and people who are still shouldering the major burden of rebuilding after, frankly, the Great Recession, uh, which resulted in the you know the largest transfer of wealth out of the black community uh in multiple generations, and rebuilding from the COVID crisis, where those communities that were already underserved, already underwater, uh experience the higher rates of death, hospitalization, and um and poverty uh in terms of not being able to access uh traditional modes of health care.

And so we have enough proof to show us that we can do better, and we are obligated to do that.

Thank you so much.

Just a quick question, too.

Um as you all have been organizing and doing the work.

Have you had the opportunity to meet with city departments, with the mayor's team during this conversation right now?

To some degree.

Yes.

Not uh not totally satisfactory.

Um I also want to make it clear.

I think that departments like OEWD that have such an outsized role in the city's workforce development system, we should be investing more in those departments, not forcing them to make these painful and like it looks like targeted layoffs here.

I'm not accusing anybody of anything, but if the general population served our communities of color, we need people who look like the people we're serving.

We have Katia up next as well.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Sometimes it gets nerve-wracking coming up here, but I forget we're asking for our money.

So good afternoon.

My name is Katia Farilla with Latino Task Force.

Um on my slide, it'll be slide number five.

Um we're talking about immigrant workers, and we're talking about the immigrant uh in undocumented workforce.

Um I'm gonna show a couple of like a little bit of data there because I'm basing it off of some of the work that Latino, most of the work that Latino Task Force does, but also SFLPEC in collaboration with us.

Um, and nearly one in four of our immigrant workforce is navigating barriers to formal employment, which is overwhelmingly 94% of that Latino and often and most monolingual Spanish speakers, which are still expected to survive without action, access, protection, and stability.

And let me get my notes out.

Um Latino Task Force does represent a huge portion of the mission district.

Uh so it's D9, D 9, D10, D11.

Um, but we also serve anyone outside of that that's working or uh going to school within that district.

When we talk about workforce and economic recovery, we have to be honest about who we're talking about, and that's why I mentioned that.

Through our work, we have served over 1,200 workers in workforce programs.

Of those 94% being Latino, these are working age adults, many supporting families, many navigating language barriers, and many doing essential work that keeps this city running every single day.

And yet, despite their contributions, they are still facing systemic barriers to stable employment, legal protections, and economic mobility.

We see a population that are being left out of formal systems, workers who rely on ITINs, or without work authorization, and workers who cannot access traditional job pipeline benefits and protections.

At the same time, we are seeing cuts to workforce programs, cuts to job centers, which are a lifeline, and shrinking access to various services that are meant to create pathways to stability.

We are also seeing a growing divide and recovery.

While some sectors of the economy have rebounded, low income and immigrant communities continue to struggle to access basic opportunities.

In many cases, people are being asked to meet higher work requirements just to access basic needs, while the pathways to employment are becoming more limited.

What we're seeing isn't isolated.

This is San Francisco's workforce.

People are working, contributing, sustaining the city, but they're doing it without access to the very systems meant to support them.

And that should concern all of us because when we fail to invest in this workforce, we're not just failing individuals, we are weakening the economic foundation of our entire city.

We know what works.

We know that workforce development, when done right, creates real pathways to stable careers.

We know that culturally competent, community-based organizations are the ones best positioned to reach these workers to build trust and to connect them to the opportunities created.

But that works, that work does require investment.

It requires protecting and expanding workforce training, funding, not cutting it.

It requires recognizing that CBOs are not supplemental.

They are the essential infrastructure in the city.

And it requires a commitment to equity that goes beyond words and into real sustained action.

Because the truth is simple.

To close us off here, we want to echo once again that we stand in also in complete and utter solidarity with JCYC and the SF Youth Works cuts.

These are completely unacceptable to be abandoning our youth.

It's been a little challenging to hear that we may be able to serve the same number of people with a program that's getting cut more than 80%.

That that's not an accurate figure.

We are going to see massive reductions in this incredible program.

Additionally, the rumors around workforce development not being a priority for the city will continue to persist until we have the numbers and the funding to prove that it is in fact a priority for the city.

Year after year, the budget has been balanced on workforce development, in particular in OEWD.

We would love to partner with the city to show that this is a priority.

On June 1st, the workforce requirements for benefits are going to come into place.

The city does not have a plan.

They are not ready for this.

They are laying off workers in the departments who are going to need to do this work.

They are downsizing workforce development.

Thousands of people are going to be hungry, and it is going to be on San Francisco's hands.

We are allowing Trump to come into our city and make our people hungry, and we are not stopping him.

We are letting this through.

We are letting this happen.

We have a moral obligation to correct the mistakes on display here today.

We thank you a lot.

Thank you.

Topia, I do just have a couple of quick questions.

So just far as some of the data presented in terms of the figure being 2,000 per job center.

Does that match your data?

No, the the I don't know where that figure came in.

I think they just took an average of 200, 1.5 divided by what looks like seven and a half job centers would be 200,000 per job center.

That is not how these cuts are being proposed.

We have uh up to 16 job centers.

We have nine comprehensive job centers.

Uh and again, we are looking at cutting operational costs.

Um it is it is but while we retaining the services.

But I don't so the two, I'm not I don't know where the 200,000 dollars comes from.

We also are in the middle of the RFP process, so we will have better information once the RFP is closed out and we're able to make those awards.

Um we'll follow up obviously about this later throughout the process as well.

And then as you looked at because you were given directions to make reductions, as you looked at all the opportunities and opportunities available to OEWD for where to make reductions, what other areas did you look at besides layoffs and reductions to workforce services?

So we've we have looked across our entire OEWD portfolio and our uh particularly uh around uh programs that were sunsetting and um I'm I'm not sure.

I mean again, like we looked at we're the the cuts that we're proposing um are across every single division in the department, um, including uh just reductions of uh certain small business programs that uh are not necessarily um producing the outcomes that we are looking for, but we're it really is just across the entire department that we look we made that the proposal to cut the four million dollars in programs, one point five of which were a consolidation of job centers, and again, it's a consolidation of operational costs at job centers.

Thank you, Director.

We may have more questions, but now we are going to go to public comment.

Yes, we are now opening public comment for this item number one.

If we have any members of the public who wish to address this committee, and again, uh we do have interpretive services for those who uh who need it.

Um with that first speaker, please.

Hi, supervisors.

Uh my name is Marnie Regan.

I'm with Larkin Street Youth Services, Chair of the Homeless Emergency Services Provider Association.

I'm here to talk about the work requirements that start June 1st, about six weeks from now.

And what they mean for San Francisco's most vulnerable residents, people experiencing homelessness.

Work requirements are often framed as promoting self-sufficiency, but without access to job training, stable wages, or workforce case management, these requirements don't create opportunity, they create barriers.

Unhoused and unstably housed people need workforce programs, not because they're unwilling to work, but because homelessness creates structural barriers to employment that most traditional job markets and training systems are not designed to address.

As of June 1st, SNEP and Medicaid recipients will have to prove their working or in training programs at least 80 hours per month in order to retain food and health care.

People will lose food and health care, period.

This is inhumane.

In San Francisco, we already know the data.

Most homeless individuals want to work, and many have worked in the past.

What they lack is not motivation, it's support.

And for transitional age youth who are experiencing the highest rate of unemployment across the country, with which actually Ms.

Topier acknowledged in the budget town halls.

They lack experience and entry-level opportunities.

When benefits are conditioned on work, but workforce pathways are under-resourced, that results in deeper poverty, worsening health outcomes, and more people cycling through emergency rooms, jails, and shelters.

This is entirely preventable.

That's why we're urging the city to act proactively.

If these work requirements are the reality, then it's the city has a responsibility to invest in programs that actually make compliance possible.

That means low barrier paid job training, sustainable wages, and supported work programs, strong coordination between HSA, HSH, and OEWD.

We can choose a punitive approach that pushes people off life-saving benefits, or we can choose a smart, humane response and invest in pathways to stability.

San Francisco is always led with innovation and compassion, and now it's the time to do do that now.

Pair work requirements with real workforce opportunities, especially people experiencing homelessness.

I just have to mention in OEWD, RFP 235.

Considers it a pro qualification to find another funding.

Next speaker, please.

I apologize if I cut anybody off, but I am timing each speaker two minutes.

Next speaker, please.

And I mean, they were disgusted and they were kind of terrified.

If anything, there should be absolutely no more cuts.

We should be building up workforce and to keep the city healthy and keep the heart beating.

Thank you.

Thank you, Judy Saros.

Next speaker.

Good afternoon, Supervisors.

Thank you for holding this hearing.

Uh my name is Glenn Eagleson.

I work for Success Centers.

All the great work that has been talked about through the city departments, the vast majority of it is actually done through nonprofit agencies.

They're the backbone of the workforce system in San Francisco.

Unfortunately, uh the city's contracting and invoicing process with the city has been a chronic stain for decades.

I spent 10 years working with OEWD and ten years with DCYF.

This is not a new issue.

But we must wait three to six months to get into a grant agreement with the city, and then uh several months for an invoicing to be uh addressed.

And then every July 1, it's groundhog day again, and the whole process starts again, even if we have multi-years uh of funding awarded to us.

I ask that as we go into the budget season, will you please ask city departments what they're doing to expedite this process in the coming year and what help they might need.

Again, um, providing more support for their contracting and grant making process.

We love the work that we do, but we need your help in order to do it.

We're the face of the public workforce system in the community, and without us, the city doesn't have a workforce system.

Thank you.

Thank you much, buddy.

Next speaker, please.

Hello, supervisors.

Uh, my name is Alicia Flores, and I am a staff representative with IFPTE Local 21.

I represent the employees at OEWD that have been noticed for layoff.

And I'm deeply disappointed in the department's decision to eliminate our members' positions and programs that clearly means so much to the San Francisco community.

Um budgets are a reflection of priorities, and these cuts should not come at the expense of employees or programs, which we know will have a long-lasting impact on the city workforce and residents.

The mayor's decision to make these cuts and layoffs now is a choice, not a necessity.

Uh the city has a billion dollars in reserves and 120 million dollars set aside from the Airbnb lawsuit that was dropped and should be used.

At the same time, he has publicly come out against Prop D, which would publ uh generate $300 million for the general fund.

Uh so there is really no reason for layoffs to happen now.

And we urge the board to take action to stop the layoffs and save these programs.

Thank you.

Thank you much, Lisa Perez.

Before I call the next speaker, we do have a number of people in line, and uh we would be able to get to each speaker much faster if we didn't have to keep pausing for applause.

So if you like what you hear, hands up.

If you don't like what you hear, thumbs down.

But uh, we are trying to get through the speakers as quickly as possible.

And with that, next speaker.

Hello, my name is Batoul, and I'm here with AROC, the Arab Resource and Organizing Center as the primary case management social services staffer.

AROC is one of the only service providing organizations in San Francisco and in Northern California as a whole that does our work in Arabic and caters to the needs and experiences of the broader Swana community.

People depend on our social services that are at risk of facing funding cuts with this budget proposal.

The majority of our clients are of the most marginalized people.

They're low-income, working class, monolingual, undocumented immigrants, many of who are here alone with no support system to lean on.

San Francisco cannot continue to label itself as a progressive city that cares about the well-being of immigrant communities while attempting to cut that very community social safety net.

Myself and the people here urge you to revisit this budget proposal and save the funding for the organizations that are at risk.

Stand by the people of San Francisco and do what you are meant to do and protect those who need protecting with direct action and do not allow this budget to go through.

Thank you.

And thank you much, Patul.

Next speaker.

Hi, supervisors.

I'm here with San Francisco Youth Works.

It was previously I wanted to clarify the previously stated numbers.

Um we currently hire 250 interns in the school year and a hundred no, sorry, 150 in the school year and 250 in the summer.

Um, this budget cut would eliminate 80% of those internships.

It would mean losing 200 internships, 200 youth jobs out of 250 in the summer, and 120 out of 150 in the school year.

I think it's really important to maintain these positions for our young people, make sure that they understand the way that their city works.

Uh, we place youth in city departments.

And um, it is really shameful that we have youth here to fight the battles that adults have created.

So I wanted to introduce some of our interns.

Thank you.

Thank you much.

Next speaker.

Hi, I'm one of the youth leaders in for SF YouthWorks, and I'm here for my testimony.

And for me, I grew up with a single mother.

I started working at a young age, and it was always about money for me when it comes to jobs until I came to SF Youth Works because it gave me an opportunity to actually make meaningful connections with my mentors and actually feel like I belong somewhere.

And this employment opportunity, it's not just about like the experience, it's about like the pathway that is like having interns and young people go into city jobs that is actually making meaningful contributions to the city departments, especially within SF YouthWorks.

And for this budget cut, I really feel like it's not just about the money that you're cutting, it's also about the opportunity that you're cutting for the future youth and the future influences that your teenagers now would hold in the future.

And I would not like to see this budget cut getting in action because I would like to see my own interns going through the same transitions that I went through that helped me become a leader within my organization.

That I want to see my interns become a leader one day and take over my position and go through the same pathway that I went through and actually make someone of themselves.

And I would like for you to reconsider this budget.

And that is my ask.

And I also have a packet for the Board of Supervisors.

If I could hand this out in general.

Actually, if you could leave it on the trade by the television hall, be sure to pick it up.

Next speaker, please.

Hi, I'm Charity, and I'm I go to Ida B.

Wells High School in District 5, but I'm also a SF Youth Works intern.

The JCYC program that serves over 500 students is getting cut.

Cutting two million from our 2.4 million budget will completely decimate the program, cutting our number of paid internships by 80%.

These internships provide short-term benefits like helping families financially, opening a bank account, and long-term benefits like resume building, exposure to public sector jobs, interview preparation to San Francisco teens, aka the future of our workforce.

This program has successively served 7,000 San Francisco teens since 1999 1997.

This program has personally helped me grow in ways I didn't expect.

Programs like this don't just help financially, they help shape who we become.

And that's why it's so important to keep them funded.

And back to the violence prevention plan.

This program is the perfect way to cut down on that.

JCYC gives youth a safe place to go after school that they can get paid for instead of being outside in the streets or finding illegal ways to get money.

And I want this program to pack another 500 kids next year and for all the years to come.

Thank you.

And thank you, Charity.

Next speaker.

Oh, I also have a packet for you guys.

Hi, I'm Jayla.

I'm from IW Wells High School in District 5.

JCYC has been more than an activity in my life.

It has been a foundation for who I'm becoming as a young adult.

It gave me a place to learn to grow and to be challenged in ways that school alone can never.

This program has built confidence, developed real world skills, and found mentors who genuinely care about my future.

For many of us for many of us, this program isn't optional, it's essential.

This creates opportunities that might not exist otherwise, especially for young people who need guidance, structure, and support.

Cutting its budget wouldn't just reduce services, it would take away a space where growth happens every single day.

When you invest in a program, you're investing in people like me.

Our future is our potential.

Ability to contribute to contribute back to our communities.

Ending or weakening it doesn't save something valuable.

It costs something irreplaceable.

I'm standing here today because this program exists.

I hope future young people will be able to say the same.

Cutting 2 million from our 2.4 million budget would completely destroy the program.

Cutting our number of paid interns by 80%.

Since 1997, this program has supported 7,000 teens in San Francisco, providing a safe after school environment and helping violence and helping prevent violence.

Coming from Bayview Neighborhood, JCYC has given me a chance to earn money and support myself, which help takes pressure off my family.

It's also it's also a safe place where I've been able to work as an intern and staying focused on school.

It's hard to get a job without any experience as a teen in San Francisco.

But JCYC helped me build a resume, gain job training, and receive recommendation letters.

I've learned important skills like teamwork, time management, responsibility, and how to save money.

Over the summer, I enjoyed working with younger kids, and during the school year I worked with a culinary nonprofit at my school that experience inspired me.

That experience inspired me to pursue culinary arts in college.

Thank you.

And thank you much for addressing us, committee.

Next speaker, please.

Hi, my name is Evelyn Ramirez.

I stand as a soon-to-be graduate from UC Berkeley's Haw School of Business.

But I want to be very clear about something.

SF YouthWorks is the foundation of my career and my first introduction to the world of business.

Before SF YouthWorks, I was just a hopeless teenager searching for her first job amid a global pandemic.

Discouraged every time someone told me, you're too young.

You have no experience.

No one gave me a chance until SF YouthWorks did.

SF YouthWorks didn't just give me a job, it gave me access to knowledge, to mentorship, and to opportunity.

I learned financial literacy, soft skills, and how to navigate the professional spaces.

Things I was never taught at home, let alone both public and private high school.

A place where race, income, language, or background didn't define your worth.

A place where every young person has a chance to grow, to fail, and to try again.

Most importantly, SF YouthWorks connects learning to real world experience.

Young people don't just sit in workshops, they apply those skills at real job sites along real employers.

Now imagine stripping all of this away.

Imagine telling a young person you are not worth the investment.

Your potential doesn't matter.

Go ahead and figure it out on your own.

Cutting SF YouthWorks just doesn't just eliminate a program, it dismantles pathways across the public and private sectors.

It destabilizes families and communities across San Francisco.

It silences futures.

Board of Supervisors, if we are serious about investing in our city, then we must invest in our youth and in SF YouthWorks.

I stand here as proof of SF YouthWorks, what makes possible.

It would be a shame, an absolute shame to take that opportunity away from the next generation who are more than capable and ready for their and Ramirez for addressing this committee.

Next speaker, please.

I know that this program works.

There is a pipeline at JCYC where we start, and then where the kids end up.

Okay.

This is 11th and 12th graders.

So we're giving them the foundation.

We're starting the foundation here, and then we're sending them on to adulthood.

And then here I hear that there's gonna be no more San Francisco YouthWorks.

Don't work, don't eat.

Not only do we provide work, it's mentorships.

JCYC SF Youth Works, that's a home to a lot of the kids.

We're supposed to be revitalizing San Francisco, right?

That's what they ran on, right?

How?

Off the backs of the babies?

Really?

That's not how it should go.

And you guys all know that, so you know you know what you need to do.

This is not okay.

So more money.

This is a matter of equity.

Our members in Nuevo Seoul are taxpayers.

And we want the richest in the city to pay what they should pay.

Thank you.

Thank you much, Francisco Arrera.

Next speaker, please.

Hi, everybody.

I've been a San Francisco resident for the last 20 years.

During my first 10 years, I've held low wage entry jobs, dead-end jobs.

In the last 10 years, I've had the opportunity to join the non-profit sector.

I've had the privilege and honor to support, coordinate, operate, manage many of programs under the OEWD portfolio.

At mission hiring hall and the San Francisco Latino Task Force and the San Francisco Latino Parity Air Equity Coalition.

We support all people with employment opportunities.

Recent arrivals are San Francisco natives.

Today I'm looking around this room.

I see my former co-workers, I see my former colleagues, my mentors, my inspirations.

These last ten years I worked with long unpaid hours to ensure that many of these workforce programs are successful.

I've knocked door to door with my workforce brethren.

We're community job fairs and trainings and late-night town halls with this workforce, connected with San Franciscans, with each of them to vocational hope.

The workforce professional experience of all these individuals is what the city is at risk of losing.

They should have the opportunity to continue to serve San Francisco, to be able to guide, to mentor, to inspire the next generation of San Franciscans as they inspired me.

Thank you so much.

This work is deeply personal to me.

Not replicate the same layoffs we see in tech.

And I want to ground that in the work that I've been doing.

Under the city's workforce development legislation, 24 departments fund and administer workforce services.

They're supposed to function as one coordinated system, but that doesn't just happen.

Oh, Ed is tasked with coordinating that alignment and tracking those investments.

And that responsibility falls into within my one singular role.

My job brings visibility and accountability to the workforce system.

I've worked in this department for over two years.

Two months into my role, I co-wrote the city's workforce development strategic five-year plan as well as the one-year update.

I've coordinated over 45 working group and committee meetings to bring this plan into real work.

I've written three annual workforce services inventory reports and multiple system-wide analysis that track how investments across these 24 departments support unemployed and underemployed workers.

I am a weaver, I am a storyteller of this system.

I take what these departments are doing, what the committee is planning and what the community is asking for, and I turn it into a clear picture of whether this system is working and where our gaps lie.

And let me be clear that in my work, when I encounter redundancies, I do not cut them.

But thank you much for addressing this committee.

And before I call the next speaker, uh, unless you are in line to provide public comment, I do ask that you uh find a seat.

So those standing in the back, if you can find somewhere to sit, otherwise uh kindly line up for public comment.

Thank you much.

Next speaker.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Please the Lord.

Um, good afternoon, uh supervisor, and to our own um the life fold supervisor um district 10.

I just wanted to let you know who I am.

My name is Gwendolyn Jackson Fagan.

My mother was Dr.

Espanola Jackson.

Amen.

And she was a pioneer and baby hundreds point, evocating and chapin for local hiring, securing and mandatory enforcement local hiring policy for the San Francisco.

Her efficacy led the citywide standard, ensuring unions, jobs for residents, and benefit and marginalized communities, particularly through Silly Bill training.

You know, when I when I heard about the lay-off and all the work my mother put in, and she's no longer here, she passed away 10 years ago.

Now we have someone coming in to construct what she laid and she labored for this community.

It hurts my heart to know that her labor now is gonna be in vain.

No, it's not in her community that she labored.

If you don't know my mother, her name is Dr.

Espinola Jackson.

You can look up her in YouTube and you'll see who she she is and what she was.

Don't do that.

Please don't do that.

I'm here to represent her because that's the life she lived for all San Francisco's and making sure everybody have benefits to work and work hard.

Thank you for your time.

And thank you much for addressing us committee.

Next speaker, please.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

My name is Tyles Jackson.

I am a senior community engagement specialist with OEWD under the workforce strategies team who also received a notice of layoff.

Um here before you to make comments on the uh impacts that these um reductions of programs as well as the layoffs are making.

I also wanted to um make clear or help um executive director and out because she was asked how many uh what was the total amount of layoffs, OEWD.

So it was nine in the workforce, two in econ, and one for film SF.

So workforce is the department who was um impacted the most, as well as black brown and LGBTQ.

And I do like the uh little presentation that she presented before this board and how she outlined the work on the um workforce alignment board as well as our WISOF board.

So that board, um, both boards was staffed by the workforce strategies team who received the layoff notice, the majority of the staff who were received notices.

And when they say that the layoffs were based on uh efficiencies, that is the most efficient unit in workforce.

So if you say efficiency, then we should look at the people who makes the calls on who to cut, who targeted the workforce team, which is the COO, CRIZEA, who was brought on to workforce to be the person to align all of the uh departments under OEWD.

Thank you very much, Tys Jackson for addressing this committee.

Next speaker, please.

Next speaker.

Next speaker, please.

You will be able to just new letters in five workers.

Next speaker, please.

You're now preventing uh other public speakers for addressing this committee.

Next speaker, please.

Next speaker, please.

Next speaker, please.

This will work in act inviting uh production for program and lay off our all embarrassment on the land and ground community the tax.

Next speaker, please.

Thank you, Ms.

Seals.

Next speaker, please.

To be fair to the other public speakers in line, we must ask that the next speaker.

Address this committee.

Ms.

Heels Jackson, you are now present you're not preventing other speakers from addressing this committee.

Removality responsible for a human and next speaker, please.

Underline the building, the third job leaders and employees.

So my time and decision or decision maybe or question about how layouts is informated and why that would be more cardiac.

Thank you, Ms.

Seals.

And accountability.

So we're should review the impact reports and not.

I promise you this is not helpful anymore.

I promise you you are past helpful.

I promise you you are past helpful.

Thank you.

So if I call it protecting all of our communities, and then taking the cost of more cities by order.

Uh has legal uh legal name or like disparate impact.

And uh based on the data presented that disproportionate impact on uh protected classes like uh people of colors, immigrants, uh LGBTQ people.

So I wonder uh is any um anyone of you uh try to check with uh city attorney, for example, office uh to check on compliance with uh San Francisco Sanctuary ordinance that mandates not only uh protection from federal agencies but also equal access uh to services um regardless uh immigration status and uh government quote 111 35 that mandates equal uh access to services and uh whether like we don't have like more um uh don't uh whether we don't uh create more problems with the city, uh disproportionately cutting the services.

Um like okay.

To services regardless uh immigration status and uh government quote 11135 that mandates equal uh access to services and uh whether like we don't have like more um uh don't uh whether we don't uh create more problems with the city, uh disproportionately cutting the services um like okay, and I don't have uh contract yet with uh OEWD, but I want to say that for uh Ukrainian war refugees, this is like to find jobs, this is a disaster and call more investment in uh um specialized job services and uh that would help to get job for uh groups with specific needs like uh recent immigrants and thank you for your attention.

And thank you much for addressing this committee.

Next speaker, good afternoon, John Osaki, executive director of JCYC.

Um 30 years ago, we were approached by members of Willie Brown's mayoral administration to create a program that would expose young people to careers in city government in public service, and are instead of celebrating the successful implementation of that vision for the last 29 years, we are being targeted with a $2 million reduction of San Francisco youth works.

And there's a couple of points I want to just make sure are made that wasn't mentioned earlier today, and one is that young people are facing the highest unemployment rate disproportionately since the pandemic.

Young people, it's also been proven by research that youth employment programs are one of the most effective public safety programs.

And recently I want to share some encounters we've had with some alumni of this program because we've come across a young person who is homeless in high school, and this program helped her get back on our feet, get back in school, and last year she was completing a PhD in computational science.

And we've come across a young person who is leading community engagement and philanthropy for a tech corporation.

And recently we've come across a young lady who is currently serving as deputy attorney general for the state of California.

And what all these young people have in common is they have spoken out with passion about the impact that this program has had on its on their lives.

And what I want to do make sure that we do today is send a clear message to the young people who came here today, to all the young people who could not be here, that they are a priority for the city of San Francisco.

And I want to make sure we reject the proposed uh reductions to this program and let young people know that they are a value speaker.

And a priority for this city.

Thank you much for next speaker, please.

Good afternoon, back again, dress better professionalized.

But I am here speaking on behalf of the Youth Works Program.

Okay.

Being a part of the myor's youth employment and education program, one of the Youth Work Sister programs, I've learned valuable skills such as communication, money management, and financial literacy.

But the most valuable thing I found with this program was community.

A community that helps me build, that helps build you up into a person that you can only dream of becoming, giving not only personal one-on-one support with the youth, but also equipping them with the knowledge and skills to speak out, giving volume to their voice that can most of the time be diminished in society.

In a world full of poverty, war, and hardship, we are given a voice to speak for not only the needs of ourselves, but also having the eyes to care for others around us in the world as well.

And I could say this with full confidence, that without these programs, I would not be here, most likely becoming another statistic as a product of my environment.

Jobs give youth like me the experience to grow in a way that is beneficial to our future.

And with limiting of and with the limiting of funding to our organization, you are single-handedly limiting the growth of what the future of this world can be by cutting the opportunities given to us.

I hope that you see that this is something that's not only I am passionate about, that as there are other youth here backing me up along with this.

But I wanted to say this.

Thank you for your time.

And thank you for addressing this committee.

Next speaker.

Hi, good afternoon.

My name is Megan Whelan Escobar.

I'm with the California Domestic Workers Coalition.

I'm here um because just to talk a little bit about the domestic work industry and it as a critical workforce for the city of San Francisco.

About households in San Francisco rely on the labor of domestic workers.

The majority of domestic workers are immigrant women and women of color.

And in the city, they're primarily primarily Latino, Filipino, and Chinese workers.

I think all of us have a connection to care, whether it be because your family members are a domestic worker or provide care for your family, or you hire a house cleaner or a home care worker or a nanny in your own home to make it possible to be here today.

And unfortunately, historically, domestic workers have long been excluded because of a history of the legacy of slavery in this country.

They've long been excluded from basic labor protections, and today have the highest rate of minimum wage violations out of any other industry in San Francisco.

That's more than 5,000 minimum wage violations per every 10,000 workers in San Francisco.

And domestic workers lack basic workplace protections, including benefits, retirement savings, and paid leave.

In a recent study, 60% of domestic workers and in the city reported they do not have enough to meet their basic living expenses.

The programs that are set to be cut by this budget.

Um support our our neighborhoods that provide critical our neighborhoods and support our organizations that provide critical services in language and with cultural competency to both workers and employers that have resulted in wage recovery and improved employer compliance and have supported housing stability and food security for workers who are the backbone of this city.

Thank you.

And thank you much for addressing this committee.

Next speaker.

Hello, I'm uh Teresa Delales with PsalmCan, and I'm here for our workforce development counselor, PJ Eugenio.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

My name is PJ Eugenio, and I'm the workforce development counselor for SomCAN.

SomCAN is part of the People's Budget Coalition.

I see a lot of community members who need help with resume building, applying jobs, and also workers' rights education.

We are seeing a lot of our workers facing reduction of hours with low and with low hours, they are not eligible for health insurance.

When this type of situation happens, community-based organizations are there to make sure we support our community members.

We know that reduction of hours doesn't mean just mean less money.

To us, it means evictions, homelessness, and struggle to stay here in San Francisco.

CBOs make sure that our community members are thriving in San Francisco.

And thank you, Teresa Delales.

Next speaker.

Good afternoon.

My name is Zachary Friol with Somkin and the People's Budget Coalition.

Based on the agenda today, we are here to ask why the WD and OEWD and the CD in MOHCD are being cut.

It seems from the point of view of the mayor's office, workforce development and community development are not important to the city's economic recovery that the mayor likes to tout.

I'd like to ask you a question.

Who are we developing for?

Are we developing the capacity of black and brown San Franciscans, queer and trans people, immigrants, transitional age youth, and house people to have a well-paying dignified job, earn the income to have a roof over their heads, contribute to the local economy?

Because based on the proposed cuts, it seems that we are not prioritizing these workers as a city.

We also seem to not want to support the nonprofit in city workers that carry out workforce development and community development programs.

Every nonprofit grant slashed is a job lost, and the mayor says he will eliminate 500 city jobs.

All this while the police get a 14% pay increase.

I'd like to ask again, who are we developing for?

Does economic revitalization only extend to the AI companies in downtown?

According to Ted Egan, the AI boom is not producing a job boom for tech workers.

In fact, tech continues to shed more and more jobs.

So where is the job creation happening?

According to the Chronicle, it's in health care.

And yet DPH is cutting its training and workforce development programs created to get black and brown people, queer and trans people into healthcare jobs.

I'd like to ask you one more time.

Who are we developing for?

Because it doesn't seem like it's for us.

Thank you.

Thank you, Zachary.

So yeah.

Next speaker.

Hello, my name is Jason Wyman.

I am a small business owner here in San Francisco, and I am a member of the San Francisco People's Budget Coalition.

In a previous life, I was a site supervisor for my EP.

I have also worked uh frequently with different uh workforce development programs, either doing training or actually being one of the sites.

Um I ran a cafe for a while and we worked a lot with uh folks that were on probation and parole and getting them trained and working in cafes.

Uh I want to highlight that these workforce programs, especially these workforce programs that place workers within nonprofits and within small businesses, are not just benefiting the workers and the organizations.

They are also benefiting the nonprofits and the small businesses.

Uh it was crucial for the cafe to have additional support, and we got support thanks to the workforce development programs of San Francisco.

It helped us ensure that as a small business, we were able to keep everything affordable for our customers.

Uh it also goes a long way in cultural exchange.

I think this is something that isn't talked a lot about.

But the workforce programs are actual cultural exchange opportunities between different groups of people here in San Francisco that actually strengthen the city.

As uh a resident here, I've seen the joy come from people being having valuable work.

Uh people being able to put food on their table for their families.

Uh we're in a point where we need to decide what our priorities are as a city.

And I'd rather have pride that we're helping people put food in their table and keep their families housed than giving more money to um uh another line item that keeps terrorizing us.

Thank you.

Thank you much, Jason Lyman.

Next speaker.

Good afternoon, supervisors, and thank you, Supervisor Walton, for calling this hearing.

My name is Gabby Listana, and I am the chair and District Six Youth Commissioner on the San Francisco Youth Commission.

This past Monday, the Youth Commission passed a resolution urging the mayor and board of supervisors to reject the two million dollar budget cut to SF Youth Works, which would eliminate 83% of their budget.

This would result in over 80% of internship positions for youth being cut over both their summer and school year programs, along with staffing cuts to help keep this program running.

I've participated in youth works the past two summers in my youth the past two summers before that, and these programs have had a great impact on me.

As a low-income person, not only have I been able to earn money, but I've also gotten support in career preparation.

I've been able to explore a career in the public service sector.

Because of the experiences I had in this program in the fall, I'm going to college for political science and hope to work in public service in the future.

My experiences are not single, as over 90% of youth works interns come from low-income backgrounds.

Ultimately, youth works is more than just a job.

It provides stability and support for the future generation of leaders, especially those who may otherwise lack employment support.

The Youth Commission has hosted numerous public forums across the city where young people have expressed the need for more job opportunities, especially as unemployment rises.

To create a strong future for San Francisco, we must support the youth that will inherit our city.

That is why the youth commission urges the board to help us protect SF YouthWorks and ensure more youth like me can have access to internship positions and career preparation.

Thank you for your time.

And thank you, Gabby Lastana.

Next speaker.

Hello, supervisors, and thank you, Supervisor Walton, for calling this hearing.

My name is Joy Zan, and I have the honor of serving as the acting director for the San Francisco Youth Commission.

The Youth Commission is a chartered commission of 17 young people who advises the board and the mayor on all issues relating to youth.

And as Chair Laslana said, the youth commission passed the resolution urging the mayor and the board to reject the two million budget cut results proposal to SF Youth Works.

I have the resolutions over here, copies.

This is a 2 million out of their 2.4 million, which is 83% of their budget.

This will result in 80% of their internship positions eliminated year-round.

And it will also result in staffing cuts to the program.

And these are the people who are providing young people with the skills, the confidence, and the professionalism to be prepared for our workforce.

We didn't get a chance to see the stats for SF YouthWorks, but 90% of SF YouthWorks interns come from low-income households.

And just to give you a snapshot as well, there are over a thousand p young people who applied for summer internships to SF YouthWorks alone.

And if these cuts go through, we will not have those internships positions.

Some of these young people never had someone who believed in them, and it was SF YouthWorks who believed in them and believed that they can be somebody more.

The youth commission has been hosting youth forums throughout the city, and almost every young person we've talked to has asked for job opportunities.

We need stable job opportunities for young people, so the youth commission asked the board to help us protect SF YouthWorks.

Thank you.

Thank you much, Josh.

Next speaker, hello, my name is Michael Seiler.

Hello, my name is Michael Siler.

I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you today.

I run an organization that is focused on solving San Francisco's biggest challenges and bringing forward the next evolution of our city.

A lot of my work has to do with reinvention of downtown and storefronts.

I'm here today to save the job of San Francisco's superconnector, Mary Ann Thompson, who leads the Office for Small Business.

Mary Ann uh has opened up a lot of doors for me.

And she makes connections across business leaders, uh, brokers, uh the the business community, and uh she's critical in the role.

If anything, we need to be upstaffing her team and uh honestly cloning her.

It's it the the system shouldn't rely on a superconnector like her for it to operate.

Um I have a community side-on letter with over 50 small business owners, uh the Chamber of Commerce and other organizations who are in support of Marion keeping her job.

Thank you so much.

And thanks so much.

Michael Siler, next speaker.

Hi, um, my name is Rebecca Don Wu, and um I just wanted to comment on a few few different things.

Uh, one, um, I was in the shelter at Sanctuary um in the fall, and I was um got into an SRO in the uh tenderloin, Jefferson, um, which I'll be speaking on item number two about that.

Um don't I don't want to see any closures.

And um, but hearing a lot of this today, it's it's uh really brings up a lot of points.

First of all, when I was in the shelter, there were uh several uh women that I became friends with that went through the training program um for the chef program, and they successfully went through it and then got jobs, and it was really amazing to see that.

There are a lot of people who are very successful from these programs, so I'm I'm hoping there's no cuts to these.

Um I do I I would like a request that in the review of determining your um budgets and determining um what programs or what things need to be done, or requesting review from the city for that, that really take a look at the um the future costs in terms of if people are losing their jobs or people are um not able to get the help that they need, that what kind of how does that affect in terms of when crimes, things like that.

So, for example, also when the pandemic happened, there and there was the the um you know, a lot of shutdowns for businesses and things like that, is there's a lot of future costs that really have to be taken into consideration, and that needs to be analyzed by the mayor by the mayor, by the um different um analysis to really determine not just what's going to be saved from costs, but future costs that happen from people who are losing their jobs and suicides, things like that.

Um has expired.

Thank you.

And I have compacted much for addressing this committee.

Next speaker, please.

And before I start the time on this next speaker, this is last call for any members of the public who wish to address this committee regarding this hearing.

And with that, next speaker.

Hello, my name is Levanda Gray, and I am an employment coordinator with San Francisco YouthWorks.

I just wanted to come up here to talk a little bit about what makes our program so essential.

Um as a program, the support that we are able to offer not only our youth, but the mentors that work with us is such a big part of what makes us special.

Um we understand that there's not just one fit for every youth and make it our business to adjust as needed.

So before every session, every school year, every summer session, we meet as a team, we talk to we talk about what worked, what didn't work, how can we better support the youth?

Should we change this workshop?

What do we think?

How do we think we can better better support the youth and get them prepared for the adult workforce?

We put so much of our time and effort into building the youth up because we know how important it is for them to feel supported for youth that look like me and other people in this room to be able to step into city departments when they otherwise wouldn't have access to them.

It's so essential that we make sure that our program stays.

I want it to be the support that I got when I was in high school.

I wanted someone to tell me that I can do it.

I'm capable.

YouthWorks isn't just a program, it's a community, and cutting the program would be a disservice to the San Francisco community.

Thank you.

Okay, and thank you, Bavante.

And seeing no other seeing no other speakers in the queue, uh, Mr.

Chair Pro Tem, that completes our queue.

Thank you.

Public comment is now closed.

I don't see anyone on the roster, so I just want to start off by one thanking all the departments for coming in and presenting today.

I want to thank all the public for coming out and speaking.

Um I do recognize the fact that this is a tough position for all city departments as we go through this budget process, particularly the ones who uh are asked to make more cuts than others.

But I also understand the populations that workforce development serves and the needs that they have.

I do want to be clear with uh everyone that in my opinion layoffs are definitely not necessary in this budget cycle.

Number one, the deficit deficit has decreased from last year and to this year.

Um, and despite what we're getting from the mayor's office, who continues to talk about the five-year deficit, which is a billion dollars, we do not have a billion-dollar deficit here in San Francisco.

I want to be clear about that.

That is not the deficit we're working with for 2627 nor 2728.

And so uh I uh I do think that there are other ways for us to make sure that we recover and address the deficit without having to undergo layoffs.

Um I do also just want to say that if we are saying we're making an investment in workforce and we're serious about the work, then we have to be serious about making sure that the investment continues within the department.

But I think the most vital point in reality is a healthy workforce development system is in integral to fighting homelessness, to fighting crime, to fighting poverty, and without it, we're really gonna see every bad statistics spike up in San Francisco.

We are already seeing violence increasing in San Francisco as we look at last year versus this year, unemployment.

Those are the things that lead people to commit crimes, those are the things that lead people to be homeless, those are the things that promote poverty.

And so we have to make a true investment and workforce.

Um also just will end with I am always of the opinion that any cuts to youth programs are draconian, uh, particularly in a city like San Francisco, where wealth is tremendous, and so we have to be able to work together to do something about making sure that our most vulnerable populations and our young people are not negatively affected during this budget process.

And again, I want to thank everyone for coming out, and I will move that we now file this hearing.

I need a second.

Thank you.

And on that motion, remember Walton seconded by Member Chen that this hearing be heard and filed.

Member Sutter.

Soder I.

Member Chen.

Chen I, Member Wong.

Wong aye.

And uh Chair Patem Walton.

Aye.

Walton, I.

We have four eyes.

Motion carries.

Thank you, everyone, for being here.

Mr.

Clerk, would you please call item number two?

Yes, item number two is our hearing on family affordability in San Francisco and the impact of proposed budget cuts on vulnerable commit communities, low-income individuals, and immigrant families, uh, the role of community-based programs and services in maintaining housing stability, workforce participation, and access to essential services and the misalignment of current budget decisions with those commitments.

And as stated in the beginning of the meeting, we do have interpretive services available until 4 30.

However, uh, if we do open public comment after that end time, we have arranged for OCA to provide a translated transcript to our office, and it will be included in the legislative history file uh for archival.

And with that, Mr.

Thank you so much.

And at this time I will be passing the hearing over to Supervisor Chim.

Thank you, Chairman Gwatin.

Colleagues, thank you for having me join your committee today.

I want to thank the People's Budget Coalition and the Mayor's Office for being here to discuss this important topic.

It is especially important that we are considering any significant impact to the social safety net and the most vulnerable population that it serves.

The budget that we all agree to, it is our statement of our San Francisco value.

For me, for many of our colleagues on the board, and also for my constituents, ensuring that working families aren't disproportionately impacted, it's non-negotiable.

Represented in the proposed cuts at the are disproportionately impacted to District 9, 10, and 11, and disproportionate cuts to black, brown, and immigrant communities, in particular in to our Filipino community.

For many of us, community-based organizations have been a lifelong as a supervisor.

I have seen firsthand how this organization worked to stabilize working families in my district.

They provide low or no barrier access point to c and case management or trigger to those essential services through culturally competent and language accessible means.

Without them, I fear that we will see increased homelessness, job loss, and displacement of communities that have historically made San Francisco what it is.

It's also raises a question of what our cities long-term commitment to our community develop to a community development strategy.

I hope that today's hearing helps us better understand why this decisions are made were made, what we can do to offset anticipated impact, and how we can continue to support vulnerable population in our city through both short-term and long-term planning.

For today's hearing, we'll be having presentation from the People's Budget Coalition, Mayor's Budget Office, and Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development.

With that, I'll ask that the People's Budget Coalition come to the podium to begin their presentation.

Thank you.

Thank you, folks.

We're gonna get started with our first presenter here for our family affordability.

Thank you for having us here today.

Great.

Good afternoon, Supervisor Jean Tal Laborinto with the Race and Equity and All Planning Coalition to provide a bit of context that will give um that will help support some of the other speakers after me.

Uh we know this, but housing affordability is critical for families to not only be able to stay in San Francisco but to thrive.

Unfortunately, what we're seeing is the city continuing to diminish affordability, and that's reflected in the budget and in recent policy decisions.

As a city, we need to meaningfully and materially fund and invest in solutions that will keep our families rooted in San Francisco affordably.

Next slide.

A hotel housekeeper making 37,000 a year, a transit operator making 54,000, a teacher making 72,000, even a nurse making 87,000 a year, all struggle to sustainably afford to live in the city where they work, in addition to raising their families here.

This is a fundamental problem and can only be alleviated by investing in truly affordable housing.

Next slide.

Despite being touted as a main solution to the housing needs of families, the recently passed family zoning plan under our current housing element is not going to deliver the affordable housing our families need.

The plan will deliver only 10 to 15% of the units as affordable.

Our families need housing that will accommodate them.

However, the family zoning plan also encourages developers to build small units, and the requirements for larger units are insufficient.

One clear example of how the plan is failing families is the One Oak development, which now has a new developer and a new project proposal.

The previous developer had three bedroom units and on-site affordable units.

The new development, which is now utilizing the family zoning plan, has no three-bedroom units and no on-site affordable units.

The developer will pay a small fee to the city that will be used to help build affordable housing somewhere else.

This plan does not provide solutions and is only making it clear that we are not prioritizing families or affordability in our housing policies.

Next slide.

Just last week at the planning commission, all seven commissioners acknowledged this fact during a hearing on our city's progress towards our housing element and affordable housing goals.

Right now we have over 17,000 affordable homes currently in our development pipeline that are waiting for funding.

We need a commitment from our city leaders to move that affordable housing forward.

It's also not always about building something new.

We must also invest in housing preservation opportunities, which would prevent displacement and keep families in their homes more cost effectively.

Without intervening upstream of displacement, we'll be setting ourselves up for more costly interventions later.

We also need to invest in price-restricted affordable housing so our families can afford to live in this city.

This requires significant investment.

Significant investment takes money.

But the mayor has proposed to relinquish hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue that voters supported.

Giving up any money that could go into real solutions for affordable housing is working against the goal of making the city affordable for families.

Next slide.

All important aspects of keeping tenants and families housed.

We know these interventions work.

Yet, our city is actively retreating from these solutions.

The city controller's recent budget update shows that if the mayor's proposed ordinance to repeal Prop I passes, the city is on track to lose $390 million over the next four fiscal years.

To make this more tangible, there have been some high-profile real estate transactions that have been in the news recently, like the Trans America Pyramid, which sold for $691 million.

For this single transaction, the total transfer tax paid was $41.5 million, with Prop I accounting for half of that revenue at $20.7 million.

The mayor's proposal would mean that the city would lose that $20.7 million, and that money would instead go to the investment group that sold the building.

There's also the Russian Hill Mansion that was just sold for $56 million.

The city would be losing $1.6 million if Prop I is repealed.

Next slide.

Diminishing affordable housing, not only through the potential repeal of Prop I, the looming possibility of reducing inclusionary housing requirements down to 5%, and prioritizing policies that don't meet the needs of our families, only enriches real estate investors, continues to put our communities and families in further precarity, and directly works against what the city itself has committed itself to through the housing element.

We need housing that meets the needs of our families and communities, and we need to continue to fund the critical buckets that will ensure their stability.

I'm gonna pass it now to Andy with Farming Hope.

We had a change in speaker.

I'm stepping in for Andy.

I'm Jade Kizan with the Food and Agriculture Action Coalition towards Sovereignty, or facts.

Food security is foundational to family affordability in San Francisco.

Programs like CalFresh don't just help people buy food, they allow families to afford rent, utilities, other basic necessities.

The proposed HR1 cuts or the one big beautiful bill, one big ugly bill, however you want to call it.

We are looking at an immediate loss of income for thousands of San Franciscans and an increased administrative burden to qualify for benefits.

HSA estimates that around 20,000 cow fresh clients will lose exemption status and will be required to comply with work requirements in order to keep their benefits.

Expanded work requirements may also impact children's access to other nutrition programs like school meals, WIC, and summer EBT.

This means more families will be forced to make those impossible choices between food, diapers, formula, housing, you get the idea.

And we all know who will be hit the hardest: low-income households, immigrant families, and workers like the ones mentioned throughout this hearing who are already struggling to stay in the city.

In a place as expensive as San Francisco, the slightest reductions in food assistance can put a family into crisis.

But this isn't just about food security.

It's about the stability of our entire city.

First, let's talk about the economic impact.

Every dollar of CalFresh generates at least $1.54 in local economic activity.

When that disappears, it will directly affect neighborhood businesses, grocers, and local jobs.

Second is housing.

Research shows that food insecurity is one of the strongest indicators of housing instability, child welfare system involvement, lower test scores, and homelessness.

And third, we will see increased pressure on citywide services such as emergency rooms, public safety services, and already overburdened human services.

Next slide.

So what must San Francisco do?

The biggest threat to family affordability when it comes to food right now is the set of federal changes being implemented through HR1.

But there are actions we can take today to mitigate that harm.

We can stabilize households by protecting and expanding food access funding and investing in emergency supports that help people housed and fed.

Protect our local food economy by supporting small grocers and strengthening neighborhood-based food access points that people rely on every day instead of the big corporations that keep shutting down and abandoning our neighborhoods.

Finally, also coordination is critical.

The city should align with community-based organizations and philanthropy to ensure resources are reaching those in most need.

I know we've started this, but we can be much more aggressive.

Finally, we need a long-term food system plan.

San Francisco has been in emergency food situations before.

It's time we finally learn from those experiences and build a food system that puts us in a stronger position to respond to the next crisis, not just react to it.

Because if we don't act now, these federal cuts will deepen the affordability crisis of our families that they're already facing.

Now I'd like to pass it over to Elaine Viasper from the Filipino Community Center.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

What do we do?

The nonprofit workers serve as the workforce that provides the safety net to San Franciscans that are most vulnerable, right?

We're talking about unhoused individuals, immigrants, families, low-wage workers, elderly children and youth.

When we're facing budget cuts, we're saying that these nonprofit workers, what they're doing is that they're doing case management.

They are social workers, they're interpreters and translators.

They are service navigators, they provide child care, they are community advocates, they run campaigns, they are, you know, uh jack of all trades.

Um and they're doing this to support low-wage workers, low-wage families, low-income families, uh families at risk to be able to connect and get uh services and information that is necessary for them to uh overcome difficult life challenges, uh, overcome systemic barriers that are placed against them, or overcome traumatic, uh often violent situations that they are trying to uh face or flee from.

Um when we talk about the nonprofit workers, these are workers that are from uh the neighborhoods that they serve, right?

That that uh uh that they're they grew up in those neighborhoods, uh, and these workers um are not you know in a government building.

We literally live and work in the neighborhoods that we come from.

We went to the high schools that this that the youth um are coming are coming from.

Uh we speak the languages and we come from the cultures that we represent to our to our client base or to our community base.

Uh Prosperity Initiative 2020 uh had a survey in 2024 of 500 nonprofit workers.

Uh 80% they found of that workforce is people of color.

69% of those nonprofit workers are women.

Uh, 64% of those workers live in San Francisco.

Uh, and 52% don't make a living wage.

Uh, 40% have to have multiple jobs.

So what we're talking about when we're talking about the nonprofit workers, they are the people who are in this room.

They are the people who represent the clients and the community members who cannot make it here because they are working or have families.

So I wanna I you know, I want to talk about that in terms of equity in terms of you know what does the money that our nonprofits actually go to.

It goes to primarily the services and sec bear barely secondarily, the ability for us to continue uh to live and work and serve San Francisco.

Next slide, please.

And then who are the people that we're serving?

Uh an overwhelming number of the of the families that we serve are um have jobs uh and economic providers that are part of the service workers uh workforce.

Uh and when we talk about service service workers, we're talking about you know uh an industry uh that is a cornerstone or a backbone to the San Francisco economy.

Um many of these workers were heralded, you know, were were championed as essential workers during the COVID 19 pandemic, and that wasn't that long ago.

Uh majority of these workers are immigrants, they're monolingual or non-native English speaking, uh, and have children who are also going to school or growing up in San Francisco, who are age zero to seventeen.

Uh and many of them are sensitive status immigrants.

Um they work at industries that are at high risk for exploitation and labor violations, uh while they also receive the lowest wages in our city.

Uh if they are receiving wages at all, many of them face wage theft uh or non-payment of wages because they are domestic workers or restaurant workers or la day laborers, right, who are often uh the victim the victims of these unfair labor practices.

Uh and so you can understand that these service workers um are struggling, trying their best to make it survive in this city.

There is a workforce that is trying to help them uh you know succeed in that.

Um but you know, for for both of these uh workers, nonprofit workers and these service workers, uh, needing two or more jobs to be able to survive and to be able to maintain our lives in San Francisco is the norm.

Um these service workers need support services so that they can continue to live and stay housed in San Francisco.

Uh and programs like the ones that are provided by the California Domestic Workers Coalition, uh, like programs provided by the workers' rights community collaborative, uh, and many service providers like the one I come from, Filipino Community Center, uh, provide information, education, and advocacy when they are exploited when they are unhoused and when they need support from the government.

Um, but they don't know how to reach the government.

Um so I think the the last thing I want to say is that um I think the most beautiful part of uh these two types of workers, the service workers and um the nonprofit workers, is that it is a community of San Franciscans taking care of other San Franciscans, and that's what we want to continue, and that's what we're advocating for.

Uh next, I'd like to bring up Sandy, who is going to be introducing families from the SRO collaborative.

Saying we have a mama see me couldn't meet the dozen.

That's the one that's also fanbush.

Hi, supervisors.

My name is Se Kong Twan.

I am an SR.

Okay.

I'm an SL family and a new immigrant.

My family of six has been in Chinatown for less than a year.

I don't speak English.

And at first I didn't really know how to adapt to the life here.

Because of them, I was able to slowly adapt to life in America.

Without them, I wouldn't know how to manage with my language barrier.

This is one essa here.

After placing two beds, there's no room for a dining table, so often two of my children, they would have to eat on the bed.

In these difficult circumstances, nonprofit organizations have given us a lot of support.

For example, CCDC helps us address building issues, provide housing counseling, and assist with affordable housing applications.

So the family is unable to be here, but she really hoped that uh the Board of Supervisors can protect the funding for nonprofit organizations so they can continue to provide the essential services to families in the city.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That concludes our presentation, and I wanted to bring together the reason why we are doing this presentation here today in connection with these MOHCD cuts.

We have heard from many of the supervisors and we appreciate hearing from you that you will fight for your communities and for your district.

And we are here all together from all the districts represented here, from our immigrant communities in the mission to the tender law and to Chinatown to say it takes all of us.

It takes a network of CBOs and a network of services to wrap around our families and truly make it affordable here in San Francisco.

These services, each one layer on top of each other to fill an essential gap in the ecosystem of city services.

Each of these MOHCD services touches a family who is represented here, who is at home today, who is at work today with their kids, at school.

All of these services are required.

And so we stand here to ask you to fight not just for your community and for your district, but to fight for this city as a whole.

Fight for family affordability for all of us.

The presentation from Bib People's Budget Coalition.

And we are funding these pillars across it says eight plus departments, across nine that I count, and there may be more.

Um as we have mentioned in the budget process before.

Um the budget process is a year-long process, not to use the word again.

Um in fall, we set up our joint report tracking.

That's when we start to look at the status quo of what our current services cost and what that cost escalation looks like over time.

Um that's when we issue mayor's budget instructions on what sorts of um cuts and revenue solutions we will need to close that gap.

Um in winter we have department phase where the departments propose their budgets, what they would do on either a revenue or a cut side in order to meet that target and reduce general fund dependence and close start to close that gap.

And right now we are in the mayor phase where we look at the proposals from each individual department who necessarily operate in a silo and balance those proposals both from a budget balancing perspective, making sure that that the revenues match the expenditures, but also thinking about um what might have made sense in an individual department, how that balances across the city, how we think about we how we um affect particular communities, particular um community benefit organizations, how we affect particular um populations across the city, and so that is where we are right now.

And I think that I just want to really uplift that that is what is so helpful about this process.

Um it feels draconian, but what I am a big advocate of trying to get all of the proposed cuts into the department phase so that we can really kind of have a robust public conversation about what it means and and not just kind of rely on on budget office individual meetings, but kind of invite the board of supervisors and invite the community into understanding the impacts of cuts proposed and what the alternatives might be in balancing a budget.

Um I really want to thank you for having these hearings.

I really want to thank the People's Budget Coalition for continuing to push, um, as is their role.

Um we will be proposing a balanced budget in June.

I'm happy to answer any questions, um, but I would propose that we go to the departments first.

Thank you, Director Kittler.

Uh looks like we don't have questions for you now.

May I have uh Mo MOH CD, Deputy Director uh Sabory to share your presentation.

Thank you.

I'm making a surprise appearance.

I'm Dan Adams, I'm the director of Mo CD.

Um Thank you, Director.

Oh no, no, of course.

Happy to be here, though I wish it was under better circumstances.

It's always uh more exciting to talk about growing our programs, increasing our impact rather than proposed budget cuts.

Um but I did before I turn it over to our to Deputy Director uh Julia Savori, I did want to contextualize the conversation around cuts within uh a commitment that our office has to continuing to advocate to push forward family affordability affordability across San Francisco for all of our residents.

You know, we oversee a portfolio of nearly 30,000 affordable housing units across the city, many of which serve families.

We have 2700 units of affordable housing in construction right now, uh, which is a majority of the construction that's happening around the city in terms of uh multifamily residential.

Again, many of those are going to be units to support families.

Um we work closely with our housing authority uh on their administration of 16,000 vouchers, how housing choice voucher, uh, housing choice vouchers that support families again with a very uh wide geographic uh breadth to it.

And we remain committed, although we're going to be talking about proposed budget cuts to our community development work.

We remain committed to that work to our community development grant making across a broad scope of services and programs that support families, including uh eviction defense, legal counsel, housing stabilization uh, and other forms of services.

So, again, uh a difficult conversation to talk about uh diminishing budgets, but I did want to uh emphasize our our ongoing commitment to affordability and advancing that as a goal for the city.

And with that, I'll turn it over to uh Deputy Director Sabori.

Thank you.

Uh good afternoon, committee members and community.

Julia Sabori, Director of Community Development at Mo CD.

I'll provide a brief overview of the department and then focus on community development funding, the fiscal year 26-27 reductions and program impacts.

Mo CD supports San Franciscans across three primary areas: housing, homeownership and the below market rate programs, and community development, which includes grant making and service coordination.

Today I'll be focusing on community development and the associated reductions.

Community development funds community-based organizations that provide housing stabilization and other essential services.

These include a range of strategies in eviction prevention, legal services, service connection, and culturally responsive neighborhood based supports.

In fiscal year 26-27, approximately 100.9 million dollars in funding will remain across 11 grant portfolios.

The full scope of services supported through Mo CD's community development division includes both housing stability and the broader community stabilization.

For housing stability, important tools are deployed to prevent displacement such as eviction defense, rental assistance, and subsidies.

This also includes targeted supports like HIV housing services and subsidies, as well as housing services within affordable housing sites that keep people housed.

On the community stabilization side, these investments address the underlying drivers of instability by funding legal services, gender-based violence prevention, and culturally rooted community infrastructure like the cultural districts.

These efforts prevent displacement, stabilize households, and support community resilience.

Community development funding includes both restricted and unrestricted sources.

Restricted sources include federal programs and dedicated funds like the hotel tax and the SOMA Stabilization Fund.

The general fund is where reductions are required.

Total funding has fluctuated over time, largely due to one-time sources like federal COVID relief.

As those funds expired, overall funding declined.

The underlying trend reflects reduced flexible funding over time.

Because other sources are restricted, required reductions must come from this portion of funding.

The general fund makes up approximately 37% of the community development budget, so reductions to it has a greater impact.

This chart illustrates the same point visually.

Of the approximately 100.9 million dollar total budget for direct services grants, only about 37% comes from the general fund.

That limited portion is where reductions must be made.

All community development funding supports services in communities with the greatest need.

So unfortunately, reductions to this portion has direct impacts on those communities.

MOCD was assigned an 8.5 million ongoing reduction.

Because general fund resources are concentrated in the community development division, the proposed reductions are concentrated there.

Within community development, the proposed reductions are concentrated in three program areas: community-based services, digital equity, and capital.

Community-based services include 69 grants supporting nonprofit partners delivering stabilization services such as case management and service connection.

Community development funding is distributed across neighborhoods with the greatest needs.

As a result, services and the clients served are concentrated in those communities.

This slide shows the geographic distribution of clients served across all community development portfolios on the left, and on the right, it shows all clients served by the community-based services portfolios.

This slide highlights who we are serving across community development.

It shows the share of large families served across all portfolios as well as the community-based services portfolio for fiscal year 24-25.

Across all community development programs, about 18% of clients are large families.

It also shows that the vast majority of clients we serve are extremely low income, approximately 80% across all portfolios.

Digital equity programs will also be impacted by these program eliminations.

Digital equity provides free in-unit internet across more than 210 affordable housing properties covering approximately 20,000 units.

In summary, Mo CD is required to implement $8.5 million in ongoing general fund reductions as part of the city's budget process.

Because general fund resources are concentrated in community development, reductions are focused in that portfolio.

Proposed eliminations include community-based services, digital equity, and capital programs, which currently provide stabilization, digital access support to low-income residents.

Remaining community development funding and grant making will continue to support housing stability and tenant protection programs as well as other community stabilization efforts and essential services.

Thank you.

And I'm available for any questions.

Thank you so much again, uh Deputy Direct Test Saberry.

I do have uh a couple questions.

Did the department consider equity at all when determining this cut?

This budget, this budget process um was not about performance or determining racial impact or neighborhood impact.

It was about meeting a financial target, and it was around elimination eliminating that particular portfolio to meet that $8.5 million.

Okay.

So that means the following question.

So did the department conduct any equity study at all when it comes to, you know, I know we're meeting uh uh financial numbers, but all this services are impacting human life.

So, you know, has any equity study or any actual impact besides a number figure, like actual services impacting in people's uh conditions, like you know, our families condition have the department to into consideration of any any of those study from previous year.

All of these cuts will impact extremely low-income families and families of color.

Um and also given the fact that all of our grants and community development primarily focus on communities of color and low-income communities, any cut will impact those clients.

And the department knows that.

Correct.

Okay.

And were performance monitoring report used to evaluate grants ahead of the cuts.

No, performance monitoring is used for grant making.

We did not use it to make cuts.

Okay.

And I know that we are cutting a the instruction was a number, like we have to cut a number.

But was the decision made by the department also instructed, like, you know, what services to be cut, also instructed to uh by the mayor's budget office.

Sure.

Thank you, Sophia Kittler from the Mayor's Budget Office.

Um, so what we did this year is we worked in collaboration with departments during department phases and trying to identify what types of programs were not in their the kind of the core function of their service delivery.

And so one thing that we saw with Mo CD looking across their general fund portfolio and looking at the number of things that they do do, for example, immigration legal sport and aid, looking at their housing supports.

I think we we were really kind of trying to figure out what it is that is their core function and what was kind of supportive of their core function, but more of a strategic initiative and rather rather than kind of like the single core function that they do.

I realize I'm just repeating my the same words over and over again.

But we were looking at what is the reason for this department's existence, what are the things that we really needed to continue delivering that are strategic in nature, and then looking at the other strategic items and saying, all right, if we needed to cut something, what would it be?

And so that is, I think, where we worked primarily in partnership, but really pushing the departments from our office's perspective on what the um what the least core to their ex to their mission was rather than in an effort to protect the other things is the way I would frame it.

But yes, it was it was more us than them, and we don't like any of the cuts.

Thank you.

Hold on.

I I do have a follow-up question on that.

So I appreciate that you mentioned core functions.

So from the mayor's budget's uh office, are we are we coordinating between department to make sure that we're not cutting the same where uh from different grant portfolios because it's like core functions of most cd uh serving uh the low-income families maybe also a core function and that we just heard from the previous hearing that we are also cutting youth services, cutting you know, job and uh uh investment or workforce investment in our community, but it's also indirectly and directly impacting uh working families.

I yes.

So what the mayor's budget office does is kind of try and look across the portfolios of the entire city and understand how each of these individual cuts or changes um or strategic redirections have ripple effects, and that is what the mayor phase of the budget is.

We kind of try and do it with individual departments during department phase, and then we kind of try and fix and smooth and balance during the mayor phase.

Um I I want to point out the the March update reflected a 640-ish million dollar deficits, um, to Supervisor Wallace's point down from our previous projections, but still a quite a large number.

Um and we need to that that is for context something, it is more than 10% of the general fund.

Um and it is around 20% of discretionary funding.

Um, which means that we need to take really a really hard look at all of the things we're doing.

And then I think what the mayor has been trying to figure out is what are we delivering in multiple different places?

Not to say that like I don't think that there is any fat in our budget right now.

There are just things that we can't afford.

Um and so what we've been trying to figure out is what would have like if we if we are looking at these programs over here, what are we saving over here?

Not whether or not the thing that we have proposed for reductions was without merit.

It is not without merit, it is important work serving important communities, and I think what we are trying to look at is what we are saving by by um proposing those reductions.

Thank you.

And again, I just want some clarification.

I know that um uh it's really um that's a number, you know, 640 million, a billion, um that a number cuts, but at the same time, uh we coordinating with departments so that we are not uh cutting the same services that it's across different department.

So I just want to make sure that are we siloing or are we coordinating to make sure that we have not double triple dipping into life services that it's impacting our most vulnerable community in San Francisco?

Thank you for that question.

I'm sorry I didn't answer it more succinctly.

Yes, that is what we try and do in mayor's phase is understand um what communities we are affecting, what CBOs we are affecting.

We have new data this year that allows us to kind of see down to the CBO level rather than just that kind of the budget program level.

Um, and that is what we work through in mayor phase.

And then uh one more questions for you, Director Killer.

It's is there an oversight to make sure that all disc cuts are not being duplicated a cost like CBL and and programs that it's currently currently receiving funding from different departments?

Is there oversight?

Yes, is that of us um to make sure that we're not doing duplicate triple.

Yes, so that is I think that is um we have additional tools this year that help us do it within the mayor's budget office.

We've also convened um a number of uh granting organizations from across the city to kind of have routine check-ins to make sure that we are not duplicating the same CBO cuts over and over again.

Um and I think that that is part of the process that needs to run its course through June 1st.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, uh Church.

And just quick question for um our budget director.

Um because I'm having a hard time trusting the fact that we're not cutting across departments and really affecting the same populations when I know that the majority of the cuts we just saw from the hearing for workforce are going to affect people of color, people with low-income communities.

And the cuts we just heard from the deputy director of MOCD are gonna affect mostly people of color, low income communities, vulnerable populations.

How can we say we're taking into account that this is not burdening those populations across departments?

And we haven't even begun to talk about public health and other other departments yet.

Thank you for the question, Supervisor.

I don't mean to propose that communities will not be impacted by reductions.

And I think what we are trying to figure out is how are we?

I don't think we can be intentional about reductions per se, but I think how do we how do we be intentional about understanding the impact of what we are doing and making sure that it is not blind and siloed and that we are spending as much time with in community meetings, we are spending as much time in these hearings as kind of seeing like is there something that we missed?

Um should we be protecting a different should we be protecting what we have proposed cut instead of something else that we are protecting?

Um and so how do we think about what is remaining in the budget at the end of the reductions and making sure that that is meeting the service level needs for our vulnerable population as much as possible?

Um because I think the unfortunate setup of our general fund budget is that appropriately in good times we have invested a lot of money to frontline services to communities uh to last mile access programs and the services, and that is where our general fund disproportionately is.

Um and unfortunately, our it is we can only cut within the general fund.

So we are trying to do as many three-way revenue swaps as possible to try and minimize that impact, but that is where we spend our money, and so that is unfortunately when we spend less money where it is where reductions need to come from.

Well, I hope as we move forward through this process, you know, we get to a point where we are working to say no to some of these pro proposed reductions as we move forward.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Supervisor Chen.

Thank you, uh Chair Walton.

Um next question is are there any remaining grants in community development?

Yes, there's a hundred million dollars remaining for next fiscal year for direct service grants in 11 separate portfolios.

Okay.

And what is the long-term thinking around community development portfolios and the department?

Continue partnering with nonprofits and service the communities, those those who are most in need.

Okay.

So does the department continue to provide grant making in community development?

Yes, a hundred million dollars next fiscal year in 11 separate portfolios.

Um how does the family support and stabilization fits within the mission of Mo CD?

Um our housing side, our BMR program, homeownership program, and our community development is fully committed in supporting uh families, households, and communities of color who are extremely low-income, low income.

So uh from the departmental perspective, do any of this proposed it cut further or hinder the mission of MOHCD?

Less money makes us less effective, but it doesn't change our mission.

And how does MOCD plan to meet language access and cultural competency objectives without these grants?

Our commitment is unwavering.

We will stay committed to uh the language access policies and committed to our cultural communities throughout San Francisco.

Thank you.

I don't have more questions.

Thank you, Supervisor Chen.

I don't have any more questions.

Is or do we have any more departments reporting?

All right, let's go to public comment.

Thank you, Director.

Thank you.

We are now opening public comment for this item number two.

If you have any members of the public who wish to address this committee, real quick uh Clerk Khalipa, we are going to uh I'll make a motion to excuse Supervisor Sauter.

Need a second.

Second and on that motion by Chair Pro Tem Walton, seconded by Member Chen.

That we excuse uh Member Sauter for the direct for the balance of the submeeting.

Uh member Sauter.

Soder.

Hi.

Oh, yeah.

You're being excused.

Member Chen.

Chen, I.

Member Wong?

Aye.

Oh, sorry.

Wang, aye.

Uh Chair Pro Tem Walton.

Aye.

Walton, I.

We have three eyes.

Uh to excuse Member Soder.

Thank you.

Motion carries.

And yes, uh, we are now opening public comment for this item number two.

Um unfortunately uh we did have to dismiss our colleagues at OSEA has it as well after 4 30 in the afternoon.

Uh but we will take any uninterpreted comment here in this chamber in language, and uh we will be provided a translated document for inclusion to the legislative history file for this hearing.

And with that, uh first speaker, please.

Um again, David Bogac, Ukrainian Service and Cultural Center.

And uh so what I heard here that Mayor Budget Office decides uh which services are core and drug departments to eliminate eliminate others.

In doing so, it does not abuse its discretion because there is no discretion to abuse, as Justice Musk in Supreme uh court case said.

Uh budget shortfalls may not justify admin uh administrative actions that deprive people from services to which they are entitled by law.

So what we are hearing here is that administrative entity decides what people are entitled which services are like uh core, which are not.

This is contrary to the law.

And uh also about like non-discrimination, what I mentioned uh earlier about compliance with sanctuary ordinance and government quote 11135, because uh services provided by MOCD community uh community based based services.

Actually um it is requirement of the case law of like for non-discrimination uh for reasonable accommodation, they accommodate groups who otherwise have no access to services due to multiple barriers.

And if we cut these services, so we um uh cut actually like uh safety nets for these communities and remarkably that San Francisco currently files legal battles like SF V Trump to protect that safety nets, which budget uh which budget cuts eliminate.

So probably uh so I again call to check on compliance with all these budget cuts and this process.

And thank you much for addressing this committee.

Next speaker.

Hi, uh my name is Athena Caldas.

I'm born and raised in San Francisco.

I live and work in D9.

I grew up in D 10 and 11.

Um I'm here as the chief of staff of La Rasa Community Resource Center.

Um and I'm here to talk about uh family affordability.

San Francisco, as we know, has increasingly become one of the most expensive cities to live in, consistently ranked top ten in the US.

Um and as I've grown up in my lifetime for sure, I've witnessed my community, the Latino, low-income and hardworking community continue to be pushed out and displaced from the city.

Uh right now, while we're facing uh uh at the federal level and state level uh facing cuts that are targeting uh immigrant supportive services and programs like SNAP and Medicaid and eligibility loss for immigrants and Medicao, San Francisco is mirroring mirroring these Trump type cuts, um, which will devastate thousands of households across the city.

Um and right now, essential uh case management and social service cuts stand to work against immigrants, single parent households, working families, mothers, pregnant women, low-income, deeply poor households, LGBTQ plus, BIPOC, and many more vulnerable community members of this city.

La RSA Community Resource Center supports these households every day with immediate emergency assistance and vital case management, and we're able to do it in a culturally appropriate way.

Our work and that of all the other orgs here that will speak, bridge a crucial gap.

We help sustain these families with food, diapers, financial assistance, housing stabilization, and enrollment in services that will sustain them in the long term.

Uh I'm gonna move ahead and to say that these cuts violate sanctuary city ordinances and San Francisco's moral values and responsibilities.

So we need you, our elected officials to restore these MOCD cuts and any cuts that take away these essential services and essential jobs that keep our families sustained.

And thank you for addressing this committee.

Next speaker.

I'm gonna introduce one of our uh families uh who we serve at our org.

Good afternoon.

My name is Mohammed Hajab.

I have been living in the city of San Francisco for more than 10 years.

Uh I'm a father of three I'm a father of three kids.

Uh single uh income family.

Uh uh really the uh I hope the city of San Francisco help like communities like La Rasa's.

Uh food, uh uh helping uh for uh rent of you know the cost of living in San Francisco is high for uh uh I work as a uh uh security officer in uh in a downtown for like seven years, and then the cost of living in San Francisco is really high and people like La Raza community, they help uh like thousands of families in San Francisco.

Uh I hope the City of San Francisco pay attention uh to that and help them more uh than uh guarantee fund because we really need uh programs like this in the city of San Francisco.

Thank you so much.

And thank you much for your comments.

Next speaker, please.

Next speaker.

Fong Gunning.

Okay.

Hi, supervisors.

My name is Xiao Huan Jiang and I am an SL resident.

I am here today to urge you not to cut fundings for community organizations.

My daughter and I live in a small SRO.

We can only store our clothes under the bed, and there isn't even space for a desk.

Last week my neighbor who was drunk came into our room.

We were really scared.

This kind of living environment does not make us feel secure or safe.

We hope to have a safe space and a better environment for our children to grow up in.

We have been receiving help from community organizations to improve our conditions.

They have helped us apply for affordable housing, even though we have not been selected in the lottery, they continue to support us.

For me, community organizations are very important.

Without their help, I would not be able to communicate in English, apply for resources, or know where to go for help.

I'm here to urge supervisors, please protect funding for nonprofit organizations so families like mine can continue to receive support.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

My son is 18 and my daughter is eight.

My wife is the bread winner while I care for our children.

We work hard.

But it's very difficult to raise a family with high cost of living for families like mine.

Nonprofit are more than services, they are uh safety net.

A line, a lifeline, helping low-income family families to get access to the basic essential services.

For example, my family relies on community organizations for essential sport, from addressing building issues to accessing food, job training and employment of partial opportunities and understanding our tenant rights.

I'm here to urge supervisors to please protect and continue funding their essential services that support low-income families like mine.

Taking away funding from nonprofit organizations that provide essential services and resources to families to is taking away the critical support.

Many of us rely on to keep going.

We are not numbers.

We are real people.

We are real families.

Hi, supervisors.

My name is Che Hua Wu.

My family of five lives in an SRO in Chinatown.

I'm here today to ask the city not to cut any funding for nonprofit organizations.

The most important help I received was language support.

For many of us, language is a huge barrier.

When I was applying for affordable housing, I had to fill out many forms in English, but I don't know English.

So I wouldn't have been able to complete the application.

Hi, Supervisors.

My name is B.

Sen Xi.

My family of three lives in a small SRO in Chinatown.

Today I am here to ask for your support for nonprofit community organizations.

Please do not cut their funding.

Community organizations are very important to me and my son because they speak our language and truly understand our needs.

Chinese Progressive Association has helped us understand our workers' rights.

We provide child care support and other resources.

Again, please support funding for community organizations.

Thank you.

And thank you much for addressing this committee.

Next speaker.

Hello, supervisors.

I'm from CCDC and I'm actually going to be speaking on behalf of one of our housing counseling clients that was not able to attend today.

So I'll begin.

Residents are often dealing with property managers, ownership groups, and in other cases, legal representatives, all while trying to understand their rights and also other options that are available to them.

Without guidance, it can feel like they're going against systems that are difficult to access and even harder to challenge.

Organizations like Chinatown CDC plays a critical role in bridging the gap.

They help tenants understand the process, organize efficiently, and navigate situations that will utter otherwise be overwhelming.

These services are especially important for residents who face additional barriers, such as seniors, immigrant families, and low-income tenants who may not have the time, language access, or resources to navigate these systems on their own.

More broadly, housing counseling client clients and also our community-based supports helps to create more balanced and accessible process.

They ensure that tenants are not left to navigate complex and high-stakes situations alone.

Reducing or eliminating these services will leave many residents without the tools needed to effectively advocate for themselves.

Hi, my name is A Yu.

I'm an SRO organizer in Chinatown.

I'm sharing on behalf of my SO family, Yu Mao.

My name is Yu Mao.

Today I'm here to urge the city supervisor to maintain our current funding for the SRO program.

I live with my 10 years old son in an SRO in Chinatown, with almost no space for him to move around, play, or do craft.

He enjoyed them very much because at home there's no space.

And these activities give him a place to play and learn.

Without the SIO program, we would once again feel helpless and children would lose important opportunity for growth.

So I'm here once again to ask the City Booth supervisors to continue supporting funding for the SIO program.

Thank you.

And thank you for your comments.

Next speaker.

Hi.

I am a junior at Washington High School, and I'm part of Chinatown Alleyway Tours, also known as CATS, which is a youth program that's part of Chinatown C C D C.

And I'm here to ask to not cut our funding.

As a teenager that grew up in Chinatown from an immigrant family.

This program means a lot to me.

CATS is very important because it's a developmental program for teenagers and young adults for job readiness.

My experience with the program CATS has allowed me to improve on many skills, especially interviews.

As I was an interviewee for this program twice and was an interviewer for our next cohort.

These interviews taught me the preparation and essential skills needed for the process.

But being on the other side shows how prepared interviewees are and the time people put to be able to obtain this opportunity and later on see how they develop and learn from this program as I did.

Not only that, it's a program that helps youth to improve their public speaking, learning skills like public speaking and communication.

I'm now able to reach out to my colleagues and mentor without hesitation to plan out our tour and present to large crowds with confidence.

We're not just a youth program, we're a family that provides for our community and sharing our message and stories with the rest of the world.

As everyone has a story, as some of us, including myself, come from low-income immigrant families and some from SROs.

We want to express how much our culture and community means to us.

So I ask, please do not cut CATS budget so we can continue to help youths grow as people and preserve our community's history as well as build them even further.

Thank you.

Yeah, thank you.

Next speaker.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

I'm back up.

I'm Elaine from the Filipino Community Center, and I wanted to give a sneak peek of our budget advocacy points the next couple of weeks.

But you know, we're talking about the human uh the human aspect of it.

Uh and um I don't know, you know, that means that we can't serve San Franciscans, uh, the Filipino community of San Franciscans in any of the districts uh because that pot of money and that commitment from the government of San Francisco has only lived in this profile uh for 25, you know, or more years.

Um that is scary.

Thank you.

Thank you, Elaine.

Next speaker.

Hello, good afternoon, supervisors.

My name is Claire, and I'm also with the Filipino Community Center.

I'll be here to share today about one of the community members that we've been helping out.

Um her name is Athiji.

Uh she uh had moved into here to the United States in the last few years and worked for different care home agencies uh where she found herself um experiencing late payments, no payments from the agency.

Uh and then when she went to complain or inquire about her paycheck, uh her employer threatened to call ice on her.

Um so um at the G being new to the US, um fortunately at that time, like knew her rights and went to the um file a claim with the state commissioner.

Uh but on one of the calls on the investigation, uh, they use like a phone interpreter.

Uh and with the way that some of the phone interpreter services works, it's very literal and to the word and had to stop her like every five seconds.

Uh so in the in the investig in in the investigation call.

Um she actually got lost.

And I think the um from what she understood, the investigator told her, like, you know, if we can't understand each other, we might have to shut this, you know, close this case.

Um, luckily um had found FCC through like an online search, online search.

Uh, and we've been helping her figure out her her wage claims uh and also the immigration threat related claim.

Um she also has a son who recently migrated here just I believe like three weeks ago.

Um he's going to be entering high school uh and is you know new, trying to get more to know more uh to other get to know other students.

Uh and he really wants to do soccer, but to ATG's surprise, soccer programs are really expensive in the city.

Fortunately, we have our high school program that he is now in.

Um and then also her she because of the way that we've been able to help her, um, her sister who had experienced similar uh labor violations through different care home agencies uh is also now receiving help from us.

Just want to give an example of thank you for addressing this committee.

Next speaker, please.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

I am Silayan Kintanar, a Filipino caseworker with Somkan's Akbai program.

For twenty over twenty-five years, SomCAN has been serving the South of Market and the Greater San Francisco, standing alongside immigrant families, seniors, youth, people with disabilities, LGBTQ, the most vulnerable members of our community, and we serve them with care and honor to their language and their culture and their dignity.

Every day I work with immigrant families, and I'm here today to share with you what they are going through.

Many immigrant families can no longer afford to stay in San Francisco.

The gap between wages and housing costs is pushing families out or pushing them into crisis.

In the SOMA neighborhood alone, families in our community have already been evicted, displaced, and forced to leave the city they call home.

Housing affordability is family affordability.

When a family cannot afford rent, everything is at risk.

Employment, education, health, stability, and hope.

And for immigrant and newcomer families, access is everything.

Outreach is not an extra service, it is the front door.

Language access is not optional, it is survival.

Case management is not paperwork, it is a lifeline.

We build trust with families so they know that there's someone who speaks their language, understands their culture, and stands with them.

Community-based organizations like ours don't just provide services, we empower families and to reclaim their self-determination.

Um of all Filipino direct services.

Without community-based organizations and programs like Somkan Zahbai program, where will these families go?

And thank you much for your comments.

Next speaker.

Hello, supervisors.

Uh, my name is Ko La Konig.

I'm the chief policy officer for an organization called Safe and Sound that works to prevent child abuse and neglect.

Um we're also the backbone agency for 44 family serving um agencies who are the backbone for families and communities, making sure that they're able to live well and survive.

I was standing in line and listening to some of the other public comments, and I got really emotional because it took me back as somebody who is an immigrant who's undocumented for a number of years, and I'm it's unfortunate that the mayor's office isn't here because they talked about balancing.

And when I hear the word balance, I'm like, who are you balancing it on?

And sometimes balancing hurts.

Sometimes when you are balancing it on the backs of people, those backs can break.

And so when the deputy director from OCD talked about, she acknowledged that this is going to be hurting.

What are the numbers that she said?

My staff wrote me a very nice speech that I'm not giving right now.

She said it was um 80% low income, 18% large families.

43%, I think of Latino families, family serving organizations being cut.

She said, We're meant to meet a financial target, but these are people and these are people's lives.

And I know it's after five, but they still should have been here to listen to all of those people that are here.

So Sophia Kittler said that it is not in their core functions.

So if it is not in the core functions of Mo CD, then whose core function is it?

And are you gonna restore that money to what other departments?

The Department of Children and Youth Services, the DEC, where is it gonna go?

Whose core function is it then?

That is a question that I ask, right?

Because we are balancing, but we are breaking the backs of people.

Thank you.

Thank you much, Kilakonic.

Next speaker.

Good evening, supervisors.

Uh thank you for holding this hearing today on family affordability.

Uh thank you, Deputy Director Sabery, also for your presentation today.

My name is Gabriel Medina.

I'm the executive director for La Rasa Community Resource Center.

Uh we're a multi-service uh wraparound center since 1970.

Uh we do basic needs like food pantry for 900 families a week.

We do diapers for 500 50,000 diapers a year.

Uh we do you know, immigration legal services for over 100 asylum cases per year.

Um and but the heart blood of our services is our family resource center and our case management.

Uh you could ask anyone who's gotten rental assistance from us or anyone's gotten food from us, anyone who's gotten any type of service or immigration legal services, they would all tell you that they relied on the lifeline I've heard for case management.

Case management was really our first service as we started in 1970.

Um our programs are, you know, the parent support program is literally being cut, the parent support program.

The rapid response program, which is case management for families that have immigration cases, is being cut.

The Service Connection Emergency Fund, which is basically providing flexible financial assistance is being cut.

This is a program that's been replicated called the Stand Together Fund when when it came for the immigrant need in San Francisco.

That's been, you know, 10 million dollars will be raised for.

We've had all three of these programs for 10 years.

We have 10 years of experience at risk that we're going to lose if we cut these programs.

San Francisco has a big challenge to you know increase family affordability.

San Francisco has failed since 2020.

We've had a 15 percent reduction in the number of families with children.

So we we are failing, and we will continue to fail if we make these cuts.

Case management is the lifeblood sustainability of all of these services.

And MOCD, you know, these are affecting two-thirds of the immigrant population are these cuts.

And you know, in the last six months alone, we've seen sole source contracts for over eight million dollars go out out of nowhere.

That would replace the entire Mo CD budget that's being cut.

Where is this money coming from?

Thank you much, Gabriel Medina.

Next speaker.

Hello, I'm Teresa Dolales with SomCAN.

You know, these budget cuts across the board are directly affecting our communities.

At SomCAN, our services, tenants, workers, akby program, community support are wraparound.

They work together as one system to keep families living affordably, safely, and with dignity in this city.

When one is cut, the whole system is weakened.

And this is not just about programs, it is about workers.

The people delivering these services are now facing uncertainty.

If their jobs are cut, so where are they supposed to go?

Where are they going to find work?

You know, these are not replaceable roles.

These are people holding communities together.

And let's be clear.

Affordable housing, the number one essential necessity.

It's not being built at the pace we need.

Planning in the city must move with urgency at the same level of urgency given to luxury and market rate housing.

With upzoning, the potential to lose existing affordable housing stock is dangerous.

So what is going on in the mayor's office?

What does this administration believe?

Because it feels like San Francisco is being treated as a business.

But please, you must remember that this city is not a business conglomerate.

It is people, a living, breathing, interconnected community.

All of these organizations holding together the community.

We are also hearing that public sector jobs are being cut and shifted toward private interests.

And we are concerned that this same pattern may extend to community organizations.

We need to sit down with the mayor.

He must see us and hear us face to face.

Thank you, Teresa Dalas.

Next speaker.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

My name is Zachary Freel with Salmkin and the People's Budget Coalition.

I'm a nonprofit worker who advocates every day for genuine affordability because it directly impacts me.

I lost my housing last year, and I'm in low-income tenant who barely makes 30% AMI.

Because of my low income, most landlords wouldn't even consider my application.

The actions that the city is currently taking are actively harmful to low-income and no-income people in the city.

Mayor Lurie and Supervisor McMood's legislation to repeal the prop eye transfer tax will, according to the controller, cause us to lose at least $390 million for affordable housing over four years.

The TAC recommended to reduce inclusionary housing requirements from 15% to just 5%.

On top of all that, four permanent supportive housing sites will be decommissioned, and more than four hundred and fifty shelter beds are being eliminated.

And as we've heard here today, community support programs that keep immigrants, queer and trans people housed, employed, and fed are all being cut.

I've looked through our city budgets for the last ten years.

We can cut plenty within the general fund in a way that's equitable and racially just.

They would look at apartment near campus, but even the trip is option were way out of their budget.

Even a small studio apartment can cost like 2500 a month, which is unrealistic for most students.

Even share housing isn't isn't that affordable.

You might be paying 1200 or more just to share a room.

So for a lot of a lot of students, including myself in this story, living in San Francisco just isn't financially possible.

Because of that, a lot of my classmates end up living in the East Bay instead.

It was still expensive but more manageable.

The downside was to come a commute.

They would take part into San Francisco every day, which could take 30 to 45 minutes.

And then sometimes another bus or muni ride to get to campus.

I remember one classmate talking about how their whole schedule revolved around transportation.

They have to leave early in the morning to make it to class on time.

At the same time, there were another students who live in San Francisco and have a completely different experience.

They could walk home and didn't have to worry about commuting.

So even though everyone is going to the same school, the clause of living in San Francisco really create different experiences for students.

For a lot of them living in the East Bay isn't just a preference.

And thank you much for addressing this committee.

Next speaker.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

My name is Dan and I'm a student as well at San Francisco State.

I want to share what I'm seeing among young people my age.

I've watched my peers and my friends have to leave the city because their families are getting priced out.

They're moving farther out to places like Livermore and taking on long commutes every day just to keep coming to SF State.

They love this city, but for working families, support can feel hard to see or access.

So as we talk about affordability, I hope you keep in mind the young people and working families who want to build their lives here and help revitalize this city.

The question is what actually helps keep them here.

There's a real gap right now between what housing costs and what families can afford.

And in that gap, CBOs are often what help people from spiraling.

As someone who has seen the work of CBOs like some can up close, CBOs connect people to housing and jobs, support that many wouldn't even know exist.

I understand that budgets are hard and choices have to be made, but I hope you look closely at which CBOs and programs are making real measurable differences on the ground and make sure those CBOs are the ones we continue to smartly invest in, not just cut for the sake of cutting.

Thank you.

And thank you much for addressing this committee.

Next speaker.

Hi, Supervisor.

My name is Kelly.

I'm a community organizer with um Digital California Domestic Worker Coalition.

I'm calling on the city to fully restore funding for C DWC and other east central community services.

I'm here today to share the story of May, a Chinese IHSS worker, and this is her photo.

She worked leaning 247 caring for two bedwritten elders, cooking, cleaning and providing constant care.

Yet she go she got only four hours of sleep at night and was never paid over time.

Through CWC, we provide a free consultation in Mandarin and help her file a wage claim.

Her situation is urgent after leaving her job she suffers some workplace injuries and relies on shelter support in Chinatown, the same support that is also facing significant cuts from MOX CD.

If these reduction moved forward, domestic workers like May who lose pathway to recovered stolen wages and would be pushed closer to homelessness, directly undermining the mayor's priorities.

May asked me to share her words I hope my story shows that the government has a responsibility to protect domestic workers those of us who quietly and tirelessly sus sustain our communities by caring for elders and children.

I wish the mayor's office could stay and listen to these impactful testimonies.

These are real people whose lives are at risk and impacted supervisor and city officials I urge you to center domestic workers like May in your decision.

Thank you.

And thank you Kelly next speaker sorry I'm sorry songo son phone lingo see the lingos I some good single guys go to law fan goes to fang so if I didn't go to go in being five soon bulletum sit dakim the two moban fatam he got the guys and gung taigung satin food and gung you say a quick move some councillor If we could have the interpretation please hi everyone my name is Hao Soot.

I'm a domestic worker from Taijian China.

My husband and I live in an SIO unit in Chinatown in 2022 when I was working at a hotel my employer withheld my wages and even made me pay for more for my laundry expenses out of my own pocket.

At the time I felt lost and helpless it wasn't until last year through a friend introduction that I connected with the Chinese Progressive Association.

Eventually OLSC directly contacted my employer and successfully recovered my unpaid wages allowing me to re receive the compensation I rightfully earned without these free consultation services immigrant workers like us would not know how to file complaint with OLSE.

We cannot afford expensive legal service fees making it extremely difficult to rec uh recover unpaid wages.

Many of us would have no choice but to continue being exploited by bad employers it is because of organizations like CPA and CWC who provide essential services that low wage workers are able to stand up for themselves.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Hi, my name is Elizabeth Montiel.

I am a domestic worker in San Francisco and I'm a member of MOA and the California Domestic Workers Coalition.

With increased attacks by the federal government against immigrant communities, organizations in the domestic worker program under MOHCD, support workers to overcome fear, seek critical support, and access services that allow them to live and sustain their families in San Francisco.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

So thanks to this program these programs we feel protected and we have more knowledge about kind of what can happen in the workplace.

So we care for the most precious things in the city, you know, our families, our children, our elders.

And thanks to these services, I can also feel um protected and can live and prosper in San Francisco along with my other domestic workers in the city.

Next speaker, please.

The subsidy is for $1,400 monthly, which I gotta come up with the rest of the rent, uh, which is gonna be $548 monthly.

That total together is um $2,000 for a family of four children.

Um it is very uh sad that the apartments uh that we've been looking because you have to do uh housing search um is only affordable uh outside the city.

So technically me and my family are forced to move out of the city.

Um uh and in order to stay in the city, we've been doing housing search for apartment with one bedroom for a family of four.

So it is it is you know I'm grateful and happy to receive a subsidy, but I want you guys bring the attention to you guys to see the amount of money we getting in through those subsidies, and you know, it's not only my family, it's it's a lot of different more families, and I was told there is different buckets, different money from different buckets I'm receiving through a sub city through DB survivors.

So um and that is uh something that I also want to bring attention to you guys.

Um thank you so much and uh I love San Francisco.

I don't want to have to move out of my city.

Um I believe that my city is paradise, and I think about San Francisco.

And that's what it represents.

Thank you so much, Marita Selenius.

Next speaker.

Hello Supervisors, my name is oh this is my name is Veronica Nieto, I live in San Francisco and I have been a domestic worker for fifteen years.

I am now an organizer at MUA and the California Domestic Workers Coalition.

Every day my work supports um thousands of workers in San Francisco to learn about their rights and um enforce them and with increased attacks by the federal government against immigrant communities, organizations in the domestic worker program under MOHCD support workers to overcome fear, see critical support, and access services that allow them to live and sustain their families in San Francisco.

This program is important to me because there are still thousands of workers that we haven't accessed yet and who haven't learned about all the um rights that they are that are supposed to be honored um in San Francisco, and so please do not cut these essential services that enable our communities to survive and thrive here in San Francisco.

Thank you.

And thank you.

Veronica Nieto, next speaker.

Hi, Supervisor, good afternoon.

My name is Miguel Carrera, and I working for the coalition on homelessness.

So today I come to to asking supervisors to don't make any cuts, any budget cuts for the more vulnerable.

So my first thing I wanna ask in is uh we have a uh budget proposal this year.

It's about five hundred subsidies, two hundred subsidies is going to families and uh and a hundred is going to uh families who suffer domestic violence.

So fifty subsidies is going to families, and a hundred subsidies for tight, so youth, and uh and uh and and we need to prevent a hundred seniors who is going to be in losing the housing.

So the problems that we facing today, so the federal government is going to cut in uh 920 households or families.

So basically we going to funding only one tour of these nine hundred twenty twenty folks.

So we really need to invest and put in more money to preventing all these nine hundred and twenty people to going to losing housing in October this year, October 30 this year.

So the second thing I wanna ask in is about um it's about the the a hundred fifty-four beds that we lose from Dante and Monarch.

So from these 154 uh uh units that we lose and the mayor close up, we want we want to reinstall uh uh 10 families or 10 women's brennal with disabilities.

So the these uh these women's need to move them and and and permanent and stable housing, and we need to do something about this.

So the mayor already uh displaced these families or these women's, so we need to do something about this issue.

So when I talk about 150%, 150 subsidies.

But thank you, Miguel Carrera for addressing this committee.

Next speaker good evening, uh supervisors.

My name is Roberto Alfaro, the executive director of HOME.

Uh I am here uh just to talk about budget cuts for my agency.

Uh last year we were cut 1.5 million dollars from the city and county of San Francisco, that's 65% of our budget.

This year we're also facing cuts.

Uh and I want to uh kind of give a story about what happens when you cut programs.

Uh two weeks ago, a young man, uh two of our young men were hungry in our program, and we didn't have enough money to to buy snacks for them.

And so they decided to go outside to go get food.

And when they went outside, one of the young men was shot, and uh that young man came back into our into our agency, and uh we had to provide a life-saving uh uh first aid to that young man.

It was actually one of our program participants.

That program participant went to the listos program that was done at Poder.

They had a first aid program there, and that listos program was done by the fire department through Poder to our uh uh to our young man, and he was able to save a life because of the program and the services and the service connection that happened there.

Now, that young man is now going to be a war, he's gonna get an award by the San Francisco Fire Department for his work.

I want to explain to you that our services are not these are vital services that if you continue to cut and cut and cut and cut, homelessness will increase, violence will increase, and you will begin to see increased problems in the community.

You're already seeing a 200% increase in violence in the community already from the cuts for last year.

So I urge you, I urge you to please re-think these cuts from the mayor's office of housing community development.

These are vital programs.

You're cutting thousands and thousands, you're cutting eleven hundred jobs, is our estimate at the public at the People's Budget Coalition, 1100 jobs.

Speaks expect.

But thank you, Roberto Alfaro.

Next speaker.

Good evening.

Uh, thank you, Supervisor Chen.

Thank you, Supervisor Walton, for your questions.

Um, I think a lot has been said today, and there's so much more to say, but this podium is not the place, so I will focus on two things.

Um there was a commitment on the side of the mayor's office of housing and community development to continue partnering with organizations.

But as you heard, um, our analysis at the People's Budget Coalition is that some of these organizations are gonna die at the hands of these cuts.

And so who will you lean on the next time there's an emergency?

And the most recent example of that is the teacher strike.

How many organizations, my own, who doesn't receive any DCYF funding, pivoted to support those families?

Because truly, honestly, we are a network.

And if one gets cut, the rest have to pick up the slack, and that means a whole lot more work with a lot less funding, a lot less staff.

Um, that example with the shooting is a great example, right?

We need people who are on the ground, and we don't have enough city workers to be able to provide those services, so we provide those services.

Um the second point, um, and I'm I feel disrespected that the mayor's office has left the building, or at least these chambers, because all of these people are still here, all of them prepared well in advance to be able to be here and give their testimonies, and the least they can do is listen, because an approach of like proposing cuts to find out what it is that the impact will be is not a way that the mayor should be approaching our budget.

We have been reaching out since before January to be able to start to have this conversation, and we now we are in April.

So I don't think that the approach that is being taken um can really give them a sense before the budget is due.

And so I would implore you to apply pressure to be able to have those conversations and have a real like something that is beyond the paper.

They really need to understand what the fabric of San Francisco is and what the safety net is and why it needs to be preferred uh preserved.

So thank you again for your questions.

And I would say speaker's time has expired.

Next speaker, please.

Hello, thank you so much for having this hearing.

My name is Megan.

I'm with the California Domestic Workers Coalition.

I'm the interim director there.

We are the leading voice for over 300,000 domestic workers in the state.

And in San Francisco, we're made up of five domestic worker-led organizations and two domestic employer-led organizations.

And we've been working together in a collaborative for the past 10 years, implementing the rights of domestic workers in the city to provide resources and tools and connections to legal services for workers and employers to change workplace conditions, which is incredibly necessary in this industry.

And it's actually a program, the SFMOHCD program is what our statewide program was based on.

So San Francisco used to be a leader for innovative worker solutions and worker justice.

And now we're seeing the disinvestment in those programs across MOHCD and across across all these different programs and departments.

For domestic workers, because they work in isolation and behind closed doors of private homes, many are unaware of their rights.

And domestic employers also don't know that information that they need to comply with labor laws and to be fair employers.

That's why we have these programs.

And at the same time, both statewide and locally, home care attendants are projected to see more job growth than any other occupation because of the need for care.

Care for our families, care for our seniors, care for our loved ones.

And in San Francisco and in San Mateo, more than 6,000 home attendants are leaving the labor force or changing job occupations, more exits than any other occupation because of the low wages, the rampant wage theft and the poor working conditions.

And so when we think about the future of work in San Francisco, the future of this economy and who really bears the brunt of the economy and is the backbone.

Thank you.

Thank you much, Megan.

Next speaker.

Hi, I'm Rebecca Don Wu.

And I recommend that you request the review for the budget for for the cuts as and if it's following with the um with the uh city's intention and and cities um practice practices.

Um I also recommend that there might be some type of independent review, making sure that this is really sound um business economic decisions and that it is geared towards making sure that there's equity, making sure that there is um it looking at the cost of the um, like for example, the loss or moving of of people from tenderloin and or the the workers that lose their jobs.

So, what are the costs associated with that?

More people are gonna be needing um assistance and help because they've lost their jobs, so we have to calculate that in the budget in the fiscal budget.

Um be allowed, but I understand that, and I have compassion for the city, the mayor, and and you as well because of these hard decisions to make.

Um, and so I do have compassion for that, and I'm hopefully the people will have compassion for that because there are cuts that need to be made.

So, whether it's something I agree or not, it's um I understand.

The other thing is that I do also want to say is that again, please have some sort of secondary independent review because appears there's some inconsistencies here.

Um, and very lastly, um, when I was in the shelter, I had a case manager, Taylor.

Um, amazing.

I mean, makes me want to cry.

Just she worked with me when I cried, procrastinated, depressed, didn't want to do things.

She sat with me.

Application.

Speaker time has expired.

And SRO.

Thanks so much for addressing as committee.

Next speaker.

Thank you, supervisors, and thank you, Supervisor Chen, for holding this hearing.

It makes a really big difference for the community to be heard as a part of this process.

And MOHCD is saying that they have to cut 8.5 million, but to be clear, 13.5 million of CBOs have been notified.

We haven't been able to get to the bottom of those funky numbers, so we hope that you will be able to help us.

But there's something fishier even going on here, which is that they've shown in their presentation the MOHCD CD is returning to pre-pandemic levels.

Let's talk about that a little bit more and look at those numbers.

So we're reversing back to where we were about six years ago, even considering inflation when at the same time, as Zach shared, the law enforcement budget has increased by 30% over the past four years.

In that same time period, MOHCD's general fund budget has decreased by 10%.

This is abominable.

This is what we're talking about.

This is not the cuts need to be made.

I have in our it feels that our compassion is running low for the mayor's office making these choices.

Because at the end of the day, they are misleading the public.

That these cuts have to be made.

That is abhorrent.

The people of San Francisco deserve to hear about this and they deserve to have their say on how we balance this budget.

The ways to solve a deficit is you raise revenue or you make the cuts.

The mayor's office is deceiving us, and they're going to make these cuts, and people are going to die as a result of that.

Thank you.

Thank you much.

And seeing no other speakers, Mr.

Chair Pro Tem, that completes our queue.

Public comment is now closed.

Supervisor Chin.

Thank you, Chair Walton.

Um I just want to thank all the public commenter taking your valuable afternoon and come and share uh your experiences and uh and also your thoughts with us.

Uh the cuts share in this two hearings in this afternoon to me is not only very concerning, but it's also very disheartening because for someone like me as an immigrant and as also um a youth and a mom that actually is a beneficiary of all this city investment, youth program, um family services.

So I just want to share a clear message that I am committed to continue to uplift our young people, uh family with access and opportunity, and I'm committed to make sure that we continue to fight to protect the city's safety net.

Thank you.

Thank you, Supervisor Chan, and thank you to the public and for all presenters that came out and stayed with this day.

This is important conversations that we're having here in this hearing.

So I hope people are paying attention because as some people have stated, this is really going to determine where our values are here in San Francisco.

So appreciate all of you coming out.

Um with that said, I'd like to make a motion to file this hearing.

Okay.

That this hearing be heard and filed.

Member Chen.

Chen, I.

Member Wong.

Wong aye.

Chair Pro Ten Walton.

Aye.

Walton IBF three ayes.

Thank you.

Motion carries.

Mr.

Clerk, do we have any more items before us?

Uh we have uh no further business.

Thank you so much.

We are adjourned.

Thank you.