tv [untitled] May 5, 2014 1:00am-1:31am PDT
to be looking into this program and looking forward to the outcomes. i know we already voted on the matter, but thank you eric brooks and some of the other advocates who have been working on this and full-speed ahead. let's get it going. >> okay. very good. let's go on to our next item. >> item no. 7, consideration and approval of the proposed lafco budget for fiscal year 2014-2015. >> jason fried lafco staff. in your package you have the proposed budget to do -- just as a reminder within lafco statute we pass a draft budget by may 1st and final budget by july -- middle of july, if i am not mistaken, june, i'm sorry. this is our chance to pass our draft budget and come back, unless there are changes that are suggested today drom come
back with this budget for final approval at our may meeting next month. the budget itself you will not see very many changes within it you will see minor changes, like non-personnel services a different line item that used to be under "other services and other departments." that they separate out now. so we have separated out in our budget to be more in line with the clerk of board office and how they do their budgeting. you will see an increase in the clerk of board salaris and benefits, because the contracts that the city and county has with the clerk staff last year did not have any increases. this upcoming fiscal year will have increases and so we'll have to increase our budget for that line item to pay for the great work that we get from the clerk of the board's office and all of the services that they provide for us in this purpose.
so you have seen an increase there. we did decrease the department of technology quite a bit. as it turned out we had a line item a lot higher than what we have spent on that in quite some time and what we'll need to spend on it next year. so we lowered that amount to mainly offset the increase in costs to that. so that is the thing that we have in front of you. we have been living our reserve budget for the past seven years or this is the 7th year that we have lived off our reserve budget. we had a hefty reserve with the mou with the sf puc and that is the bill that actually pays for that work. if you want, we will have enough in riche our reserve
in our one-year budget. some lafcos have a policy of what the reserve amount should be at minimum? and in some cases maximum. so we might want to in the future have that discussion, but the mou with the sfpuc will expire at the end of this upcoming fiscal year. so we won't have access to that money necessarily unless there is is an extension of that mou. but we should be planning and preparing ourselvess for it not to happen just to be on the safe side. so if that is at the discretion of this commission if it wants to give back allocated amount that is given to lafco or that the city and county and gives to lafco. under state statute once an estimate has been established the city and county or in this case the city and county of san francisco needs to give the exact same amount it gave in the previous year for the next year. they cannot reduce the lafco itself is the only body to
reduce the amount. we have accepted the money and then realizing the budget issue that we give the money back. i know that you serve on the board of supervisors and you are well aware of budget for the city and county and it's up to you that we continue that practice for this final year. one of the things i was talking with miss miller about, maybe we keep some of the money this year and not return all of it. we tend to spend $100,000 to $120,000 overall paying for the clerk's office and paying for other things that are done. like some of miss miller's time and this coming year, now that i am allowed to work on things outside of cca, i pick up costs with putting agendas together and adding up to $100,000 to $125,000 a year for staff and
clerk to do this work. so we could keep our reserve where it's at for i year. the choice is really up to the commission what it wants to do on that front. >> thank you. budget recommendation is that we approve the same amount as last year? >> yes. i would always recommend that we approve the same amount. the question is do you want return the same amount? as along as we are accepting the full amount we have that going into the future. if you said we're going to only accept $200,000 this year, our amount would be set and in the future we would have to go and ask for a raise from the city and county. i would recommend that we keep our minimum amount, but the question is do we return this year? >> okay. miss miller, do you have anything to add? >> just what the impact of that would be. because by returning it, we have no impact on your general
fund. if you don't return it, then there would be potentially a portion of the general fund paying for lafco's services. so that is the question for your budget committee members is we can take it all out of reserve? so there is no impact on the general fund. or do you want to allocate some of the general fund? i think our recommendation was this year to just do it like we have always done and take it out of the reserve and deal with the budget issues next year. >> okay. i would not want to have an impact on the general fund. >> right. >> we're hoping next year is a better year. >> that would affect the clerk of the board aspects of the general fund, correct? >> right. and quite frankly, i haven't had a conversation with the clerk's office with that impact and i would hate for you to do smidge on anything on that score without me talking to them first.
>> if we gave back a portion of the reserve, what would that enable us to do? >> we're not giving back a portion of the reserve, but giving back a portion that is set aside each year. our reserve account is our reserve account and i don't think staff is recommending that we give that back. >> right. >> the money that is allocated within the budget process, we have it down as $344,445 a year. we reserve the right to it in the future, but we're going to give that money back to the city and county, because we can continue to operate another year without having to accept the money. but that gives us the right next fiscal year or the fiscal year after this one to go and say we now need this money and we're accepting the money and unfortunately not giving it back because our reserve is depleted from a lafco
perspective. >> i'm fine to approve as-is? >> thank you. >> colleagues have a preference? >> i am fine with not accepting the general fund allocation and utilizing the reserve for another year as along as we have the ability to access those funds in the future. because it appears that the money that we have in reserve is enough to get us through this particular process for the coming fiscal year. so i am content with that. >> i just want to make one technical correction. you are accepting the money and then returning it rather than -- the way that you described it would mean that we actually lose our ability to have that right to the money in the future and we need to make sure that we protect those rights. so accepting the money from the city and county and immediately returning it to them for that. so that way we protect our rights to the money going into the future. >> yes. that is fine. >> i support that as well.
>> great. we can open this item up for public comment. any member of the public wishing to comment, please come forward. >> good afternoon again, commissioners, eric brooks san francisco clean energy advocates and grassroots our city and first on the mou on cleanpowersf with the sfpuc it's vital that we keep that money in play after next fiscal year ends. as i recall you have to check on this, that mou was done as sort of a thing to clarify, what the relationship was? so whatever the board of supervisors needs to do or staff, or the departments need to do, we need to make sure that that money has been allocated to cleanpowersf and we need to make sure that we continue to be able to spend it after the end of next fiscal year. also on the budget not really to do with the reserve or general fund question, but
actually making sure that you maintain in some flexibility, if we continue to get resistance from the commissioners of the sfpuc, we may find ourselves in a spot where we need to do some more expensive work, like site-selection and more detailed work that staff was saying that they did not contract enernex to do. if we're forced into a position that that planning work needs to be done, it's going to be more expensive and we need to be prepared for that. one other item that i will speak for on the green party and our city and also public net -- public net was the coalition that helped stop the earth link/google takeover. if that happens san francisco internet customers are going to be in a very bad place and it's definitely conceivable that public net will come to you and
ask to do a broadband study to create a public broadband system in san francisco. so please allow yourself a little budget flexibility in case we ask for that. we're hoping that you can figure that in. >> thank you. colleagues we have a suggestion on moving the budget forward, should we take that without objection? >> yes. >> without objection the item carries. okay. can you call the next item, please. >> item no. 8 executive officer's report. >> no report. >> okay. next item, please. >> item no. 9, public comment. >> okay, no members of the public wishing to speak on this item. public comment is closed. okay. colleagues, any future agenda items? >> madame chair i need to call item no. 10
>> okay. >> item no. 10. >> no future agenda items? >> public comment on future agenda items? >> just to recap on future agenda items we talked today about coming back on the legislative issue. >> yes. >> and also with an update approximately halfway through this contract with a briefing on where things are. >> miss miller, if you could provide us with a copy of the letter that is being submitted and review it with the chair before it is submitted to state legislature. >> i will review it with the chair and vice-chair and send a draft. >> great. >> thank you. >> thank you. any members of the public wishing to speak on future agenda items? >> eric brooks again, san francisco clean energy advocates and i'm wondering on the last item that you discussed, is it possible four you to authorize the chair to sign off on that communication rather than have another
in room 400 of san francisco city hall. city hall is accessible to persons using wheelchairs and other assistive mobility devices. wheelchair access is provided at the grove, van ness, and mc allister streets via ramps. wheelchair access at the polk street, garlton b, goodlett provide a wheelchair lift. assistive listening devices are available and our meeting is captioned and sign language interpreted. our agenda is also available in large print and braille. please ask staff for any additional assistance. to prevent electronic interference with this room sound system and to respect everyone's ability to focus on the presentations, please silence all mobile phones and pdas. your cooperation is appreciated. we welcome the public's participation during public comment.
you may complete a speakers card available at the front of the room or call our bridge line at area code 415-554-96 32 ~. when a staff person will handle requests to speak at the appropriate time. the mayor's disability council meetings are generally held on the third friday of the month. our next regularly scheduled meeting will be on may 16th, 2014, from 1:00 to 4:00 p.m. here in san francisco city hall in room 400. please call the mayor's office on disability for future information or to request accommodations at 415-554-. voice, or tty at 415-554-67 99. reminder to all our guests today to speak slowly into the microphone to assist our captioners and interpreters. we thank you for joining us
today. >> thank you. >> you're welcome. >> heather, would you do roll call, please? >> co-chair chip supanich? >> present. >> councilmember [speaker not understood]? absent. councilmember star laurel, absent. councilmember denise [speaker not understood]? >> present. >> councilmember harriet c. wong? >> present. >> councilmember roland wong? >> present. >> councilmember derek sardoff? absent. >> i'm sorry. [laughter] >> item 1, welcome, introduction, and roll call. item 2, action item: reading and approval of the agenda. item 3, information item: the 2015 - 2019 consolidated plan.
the 5 year consolidated plan is a planning document for san francisco's housing and community development investments and it builds on targeted stakeholder input including members of the disability community. presentation by teresa yanga, housing development director, and anne romero, project manager, mayor's office of housing and community development. public comment is welcome. item 4, information item: independent living resource center san francisco: towards full accessibility for all. this presentation will focus on the role of ilrc-sf as a cross-disability organization serving san francisco's disability population, and also touch on its upcoming move to a new purpose built, accessible location in july 2014.
presentation by jessie lorenz, executive director. public comment is welcome. break - the council will take a 10-minute break. item 5, public comment: items not on today's agenda, but within the jurisdiction of the mdc. each speaker is limited to three minutes. item 6, information item: report from co-chair supanich. item 7, information item: report from the director of the mayor's office on disability. item 8, information item: the paul k. longmore institute on disability and the ada's silver anniversary. the presentation will provide an overview of the planning process and solicit the council's feedback to promote and engage the san francisco disability community. presentation by catherine j. kudlick, director paul k. longmore institute on disability.
public comment is welcome. item 9, action item: co-chair elections. in accordance with the mayor's disability council's bylaws, article iii section 1, there shall be 2 co-chairs elected by the council to serve as officers. this election will select a co-he chair to replace the seat previously held by idell wilson. item 10, public comment: items not on today's agenda, but within the jurisdiction of the mdc. each speaker is limited to three minutes. item 11, information item: correspondence. item 12, discussion item: council member comments and announcements. item 13, adjourn.
>> thank you, heather. you may notice that the agenda is a little bit -- in a little bit different order today, you may have noticed during the reading. public comment has been moved to item 5 after the break in order to accommodate the schedules of our speakers. there will be plenty of time for public comment after the break. general public comment. of course, public comment after each presentation is welcome as well. all right, then, let's move on to item number 3, which is the 2015 to 2019 consolidated plan from the mayor's office and housing and community development. ~ mayor's office of housing and community development. >> good afternoon, councilmembers. teresa [speaker not understood]. we wanted to have this opportunity to seek public comment from the disability council about our upcoming strategic plan, our 2015 to
2019 consolidated plan. and i have a powerpoint presentation to help us -- guide our discussion. so, we'd like to provide an overview of our office as well as the consolidated plan document. also review the disability council's resolution from 2013 as guiding principles to our office and other financing related to accessibility in affordable housing. and would like to pose a few questions to the council and to the public and solicit feedback about those questions that will help inform our consolidated plan. thank you. so, an overview of our office. our office, along with the office of economic and work force development, also known as oewd, one of our primary functions of our department is to oversee four federal funding
sources. specifically, the community development block grant or cdbg, the emergency solutions grant also known as esg, the home information partnership, or home as we know it, and the housing opportunities for persons with aids, also known as hopla. our office uses cdbg home and hopla funds to contribute to capital financing of our affordable housing. right now our projected budget for housing ~ development in fiscal years 2014 to 2015 is approximately $70 million. it's a combination of the federal sources mentioned like cdgb home and hopa as well as local sources such as the housing trust fund. our current pipeline for affordable housing currently is approximately over 10,000 units. this is through -- probably over the next 10 to 20 years,
with 60% of new construction and 40% of that housing priceline geared towards acquisition and rehabilitation of existing housing. the five-year consolidated plan, what we consider our planning document for our housing and community development investments for the next five years, and it builds upon a participatory process such as stakeholders such as yourselves. and this meeting in particular is one of many meetings with topic or neighborhood specific stakeholder groups. i apologize if this is hard to read, but we will distribute this to the committee -- councilmembers as well as we can distribute it to the mayor's office on disability if they want to share it. scheduled to have at least full community meetings through the next coming months. the next one actually is next tuesday, april 22nd in the mission campus of city college. this is an opportunity to
provide another public forum to get input on our consolidated plan. and then the following one would be tuesday, april 29th, at kelly cohen community center at 220 golden gate avenue, and then the fourth one is at golden gate park on may 13th. again, we will provide this particular flyer announcement about community meeting to the council as well as the public should they choose. i wanted to do an overview of the council's housing resolution as articulating broad goals for our funding. we appreciate the resolution that your council passed and we will definitely be incorporating that resolution into like public comment and input into our consolidated plan. so, just wanted to highlight those particular goals just so that you know and the public knows that these are goals that we will be looking towards as guidance in our consolidated plan.
the first goal being additional funding sources for affordable and accessible housing be explored. i apologize, this is a summation of the specific goals. number 2, lower the minimum income requirements to reduce barriers and explore layering multiple subsidies to provide deeper affordability. number 3 is affordable and accessible housing should be dispersed throughout the city. number 4 is to maximize accessibility in new construction and rehabilitation. number 5 is explore the development of new permanently affordable efficiency studios as well as renovating existing single room occupancy buildings or units. number 6, stricter enforcement of procedures be developed for the maintenance of existing accessible features including elevators in single room
occupancies or s-r-os. number 7, the city pursue creative financial mechanisms to help property owners maintain existing accessible features in s-r-os ~ especially those with contracts with the city. number 8, include design features that promote and enhance the mental health of tenants. number 9, the percentage of newly constructed accessible units should be allocated for people with multiple chemical sensitivities. number 10, the city should pursue the development and maintenance of a single accessible and affordable housing portal. and number 11, the mayor's office of housing community development should consider community input mechanisms on policy discussions pertaining to permanent affordability of accessible housing in the city. with those particular goals in mind, these are the questions we'd like to pose to the
council as well as to the public. how would you prioritize the goals identified in the mayor's disability council's resolution? and i also wanted to point out that ann ra more he owe is not with me today, but brian chu is here with me and he would like to poseedth second question because it's service related to housing. i'm not sure if you'd like to take the first question and solicit input or pose both questions and get feedback. i'll defer to the council. i can at least read the second question while we're here. >> why don't you. so we know what's coming. >> sure. the second question is what are the greatest service needs of the clients you serve and what are the greatest gaps in service for them. again, we're posing these questions as a way to inform how we prioritize our investments for the next five years and prioritize what we
do. and with that. >> he okay. so, how do we prioritize the goals within the mdc housing resolution? any ideas from the councilmembers ~? councilmember sardon? there we go. >> there we go. so, in looking over some of the goals, co-chair supanich, i'm seeing that there's different categories we can use to prioritize which ones are the most important. one of the ones that popped out initially was number 10 the city pursue development and maintenance of a single accessible and affordable housing portal. that to me touches on information access, and that is one of the biggest key issues
that is preventing a lot of our community from being able to access and go forward with pursuing housing. and, so, that is probably one of the major goal to pursue and being one i believe could be pursued. other ones are disability specific. still are important as far as trying to categorize and prioritize these such as that one, pops out as being crucial. >> others? well, i have one. i -- you know, it's a bugaboo about the whole thing, the feuding. ~ funding. and we're seeing federal sources of housing funding decline rather -- well, regularly.