Gonch. The departments proposed 216,282,082 budget is 1. 6 less than the mayors proposed budget. Our proposed recommendations recommended reductions to the proposed budget total 368,667. Of those, 265,717 are ongoing savings and 102,950 are ongoing savings. In addition, the b. L. A. Recommended closing out unexpended encumbrances for total generated savings of 481,25 481,259. Of the 291,577 in recommended reductions, 25 our understandi is we have agreement with the rec and parks department. Chair fewer mr. Ginsberg, do we have agreement . That is correct. I do want to thank the b. L. A. , in particular, juliet wilson, who worked with my staff, and in particular, kelly kirkpatrick, and severin campbell. Item number 10 permits the department to impose flexible pricing on guest berthing fees at our marina harbor. Its 30 days or less, and prime yearly used by regional and traveling boaters throughout the year. An example of the flex pricing would be a 2 current rate going to 4, and the 4 would be applied generally during the fall and early summer and early fall, when we have special events at the yacht harbor. The fee increase will allow us to provide Greater Service of events during high use. Item number 11 permits the department to apply flexible pricing at our specialty gardens and the coit tower. The plexible pricing would allow us to increase prices by 50 or lower prices by 25 only on nonresident adult fees. This flexible pricing would not apply to any residential fees or any nonsenior and new fees. The reasonables for the proposal is we want to ensure quality of service and quality of atmosphere at these specialty gardens and at coit tower. Increasing fees will help us manage or encourage attendance at lower peak times to spread out the attendance so that were not greatly impacted nor would the neighborhood around toyota tower be greatly impacted. Item number 12 permitted the department to apply a 1 surcharge on adult nonresident admission fees to the japanese tea garden. The funds will go into a Maintenance Fund to help repair the pagoda rehabilitation project. As many of you know, pagoda is falling into disrepair, and the cost of repair is estimates to be 1. Estimated to be 1. 5 to 2 million, and were working with a renouned Architectural Firm to rehabilitate the pagoda. Chair fewer thank you very much. So we dont have a b. L. A. Report on these items, so any comments, questions from my colleagues. I will just open this up for Public Comment, then. Are there any members of the public that would like to comment on items 10, 11, and 12. Fees, youve got fees all over the place. We just had a hearing at the beginning of the week where youre charging 1 a month. Come to find out, its 1 a year. Then, youve got fees that youre proposing for the crookedest street in the world. How much you going to charge tourists to go to lombard street. Youve got them for housing. Youve got fees for residents and nonresidents. Youve got fees for renting a brandnew studio apartment. Youve got fees you cut in front of me to get an apartment, and then, you want to charge people thats born and raised and worked in San Francisco and pay taxes, and when you get an apartment, either youre paying a rate of 3,000 for the same type of apartment, but if i sneak in the United States and come in here illegally, i can get the same apartment for 3 a month, 3 a month for the first months rent, and 3 a month for the last months rent, and 3 a month for the deposit. You think thats fair . You see anything on the a. M. I. Scale to say youve got to make this much money to be a tenant thats coming out of the Mayors Office, a member of the equal housing opportunity organization, and youve got to pay 3 a month . How about the salvation army. Youve got one that comes in here, a person that i helped. While in that shelter system, he got a brandnew apartment in a complex with a swimming pool, and hes only paying 100 a month. How do you think that makes veterans feel . How do you think that makes disabled people feel . Chair fewer thank you, mra for residents, not 5. Eliminating public hearings on price increases at these places. I absolutely am not opposed to the notion of flexible pricing, negotiatable at peak demand. There may be a way to do that with parameters and at least real notice, ideally, for the public to comment before theyre set in stone. One of the reason for raising or lowering the fees as written is the weather, so my question there would be whether the fees would go up today because of foggy weather or down today because of foggy weather or up last week because of 90 days, or lower them. So because of those reasons [inaudible] chair fewer thank you very much. Any other Public Comment . Public comment is now closed. President yee . President yee so for rec and park, i wasnt reading it completely the same way as mr. Gollinger was stating it. These fees, is it up and down on a daily basis or maybe we want to change it for the next year. Thats one question. And then, the other one is that is it common practice in other place to s places to have sort of a dual pricing for residents and nonresidents . Thank you very much, president. Let me start with the first one. Its many cultural attractions across the country do have pricing for residents and nonreces nonresidents, and thats a policy that we have here in San Francisco. And in a sense, the cost per visit is subsidized by nonresidents who view the attractions. You have to view this in the context because all of our attractions are quite inexpensive. Our fees are written into the park code without much flexibility to make adjustments over time, and its one of the reason that mr. Gollinger notes in the park code, the last time the park code was written, it said 7, and the park code does allow for some cost of living adjustments every year to all of our fees, so after a while, these things grow stale. So this legislation actually provides a modicum of flexibility to increase prices and to decrease prices. The point of that is to incentivize behavior, and the people surrounding the attraction have a happier experience and the customers have a happier experience. Mr. Gollinger made some valid points about the legislation. Wed be happy to do it today, write an amendment that would write a 60day notice to make change in the price that would need to be approved. You incentivize behavior so that not everybody shows up at coit tower at 5 00 on friday by having a gap when its most expensive to visit and lease expen expensive to visit, and thats set by you. So i would be comfortable amending the legislation that says there would need to be a 60day notice for any increase. There should should be, and we agree to a notice period for any increase within that flexible pricing range. President yee i would support the amendment. Chair fewer supervisor mandelman . Supervisor mandelman yeah. Yes, a request for a hearing on the gig economy and uber and lyft, and i think this is not that. Supervisor mandelman what we do not want to have is a situation where somehow the city and county of San Francisco is seeing high volume, and then, the rates shoot up. We want to be tech savvy and efficient, but i dont think we want to be as tech savvy and efficient as the private sector. We agree that was not our intent, and i think mr. Gollingers concern about a couple of sentences in the legislation are reasonable. And i would support the amend requiring the 60day notice period to make sure and to make it fully transparent that that is not our intent and that would not be permitted under the legislation. We would, however, again, like to be able to make the prices lower without that notice period. Chair fewer sure. Any other comments . Questions . So mr. Ginsberg, i actually would like to see something that is actually more isnt as arbitrary as maybe weather. So for example, i am not opposed to the fees being increased, as you know. I do think, though, that when people are planning a trip there, and especially these are tourists, these are not San Francisco residents because San Francisco residents already have a reduced fee, and seniors and youth, right, and children. So i think what i would like to see in this amendment is more of a plan that says that it is not just up to the weather or your discretion for the day but maybe its not an arbitrary. So maybe just as a suggestion, during the months of may till sept th september that the prices would surge, or certain holidays, that you would see. I just think that 50 days, especially for tourists this fee is just going to impact tourists, is that correct . Yes. Chair fewer especially for tourists, i would say its better to have a plan by day or week so that doesnt change. People visiting San Francisco are taking advantage of the cost of everything. In the summer months, there is a peak season and there is a nonpeak season. And i think you have done some research on when theyre on peak seasons and when theyre on nonpeak seasons. Valid point, and i think ultimately, our plan would do that. And i think a lot of your concerns, for starters, would be addressed by the lengthy notice period. I think we would like a little bit of i really want to get a little bit away from the word surge. Chair fewer okay. I wont say surge. What do you want me to say . Increase . Its just some flexibility in pricing. I want to remind the board were very unique in the way that we tie the price of cultural attractions to legislation and that theyre embedded in the park code for years and years and years. It does make it cumbersome to sort of adjust to market conditions, to changes in the facility, and its hard to come back this is a lot of process just to get here today. So i think that yes, i could supervisor, there would probably be a peak season, but were also interested in using data to understand what days of the week we have the most amount of traffic and visitation, and what days are the least. So i think and i dont think we could bake that into the legislation itself. I dont think so, because i think those will change a little bit over time. Chair fewer so i actually think that this is something that i think your legislation says that youll come back to the board in a year with a report, is that correct . If it says that, im happy to do that regardless. Chair fewer it says the department shall provide an annual report to the budget and legislative analyst on the fees. Mr. Ginsberg, i hate to be so inflexible with you, but i think that leads to a little uncertainty, also, and i think people like to know what the fees are when they come to San Francisco, and whether its raining or not. I think youve done studies on which you see more rain, and how much vehicles you see. Youd like to leverage out the attendance days, and i understand, but i dont understand why we wouldnt be able to set it, rec and park, these are the fees, and this is the day, versus rather than it could change in 60 days. I dont think were going to come to agreement on it at this meeting here, so what i would like to do is actually make a recommendation to pass a positive recommendation for item number 10 and continue item 11 and 12 until next wednesdays budget and finance committee, which is the 26th. And i know mr. Ginsberg, we have worked very closely in the past, and our relationship is collaborative, so we can continue this until wednesday. Sure. Chair fewer okay. Madam clerk, id like to make a motion to send item 10 with positive recommendation oh, im sorry, did you have a comment . [inaudible] could i make one point of clarification, and obviously, well do whatever the committee wishes. One with the japanese tea garden, one is flexible pricing, and the other is pagoda repair. Theyre obviously separate, but your call if we could provide flexible pricing to provide a little bit more comfort on the parameters . Chair fewer mr. Ginsberg, it is only continued to next wednesday. All right. Chair fewer so im respectfully asking for your patience. Sure. Chair fewer thank you very much. So i am making a motion to move item 9 item 10, so we can move the item out of the board with a positive recommendation and 11 with positive recommendation to july 16. And then, id like to move to continue item 10 to june 26. President yee with regards to the continuance, i assume you want something to happen in between . Chair fewer so i think we can have some language that amends it that im assuming that mr. Ginsberg will also speak to other members of the committee for input, too. President yee sure. Chair fewer okay. Thank you very much. Can i have a second, please . Supervisor mandelman. We can take that without objection. Again, mr. Ginsberg, thank you for all your work and your staff, too. I so appreciate it. Thank you very much. And then, mr. Controller, would you please take note of the committees intention to accept the b. L. A. Recommendations for this department. Thank you very much. Im going to take a Little Something out of order. I see we have our treasurer, jo jo jo jose cisneros, here, so mr. B. L. A. , would you give us your report before mr. Cisneros gives us his report. I would be happy to. The departments proposed 41,937,466 budget for fiscal year 2021 is 610,053 less than the mayors proposed fiscal year 2021 budget. Our recommended reductions to the proposed budget total 274,050 in 1920. Of that in recommended reductions, 36,578 are ongoing savings, and 237,476 are one time savings. This would still allow 5. 7 increase in the departments fiscal year 1920 budget. Id like to thank the Budget Office and the Mayors Office for their time, and we are in agreement with the budget. Thank you for your time. Chair fewer thank you. Can you take note of the committees intention to approve the budget for this department. Lets have our Health Services up now. Oh, im so sorry. Apologies. Could we have a b. L. A. Report. Yes. The departments proposed budget for 1920 is 4. 6 more than the original fiscal year 201819 budget of 11,632,022. The departments proposed budget for fiscal year 202021 is 486,387 or 4 more than the mayors proposed 1920 budget of 12,1 12,172,648. Our recommended reductions to the budget total 82,420. And of that 52,000 are ongoing savings, and the rest are onetime savings. This would still allow an increase of 3. 9 of the departments fiscal year 1920 budget. Our recommendations to the proposed budget total 62,605 in 2021, theyre all ongoing savings and none are onetime savings. That would still allow an increase of 3. 5 . Our understanding is that we have full agreement with the Health Service system. Chair fewer hello. Welcome, miss yant. Hello. Abbie yant with the Health Services. We are in agreement. Chair fewer thank you very much for your service. Id like to take out of order our Public Libraries. Could we have librarian Michael Lambert come up. Could we please hear a report on our Public Libraries oh, im sorry, madam clerk, can you please call items 13 and 14. [agenda item read] [agenda item read]. Chair fewer thank you very much. B. L. A. Report, and and is there a b. L. A. Report on items 13 and 14, also. We do not have reports on items 13 and 14. Chair fewer okay. Well just hear about the budget. Thank you. The departmented proposed 173,808,645 budget for fiscal year 1920 is 13,196,155 or 8. 2 more than the original fiscal year 1819 budget 201819 budget of 118,612,490. The proposed budget for fiscal year 202021 is 4. 6 less than the mayors proposed but jess of 173,645,808. Our recommended reductions total 24,500 in fiscal year 201920. Of the 424,500 in recommended reductions, 306,700 are ongoing. This would still allow 7. 5 increase in the departments fiscal year 201920 budget. We also have recommended reductions for fiscal year 202021, and those total 547,000. Of that 547,000 in recommended reductions, 367,000 are ongoing saves, and the rest are ongoing savings. Our understanding is we have glee agreement awith the library. Cha chair fewer mr. Librarian, would you like to comment on the proposed budget . The annual grant award from the friends of the library allows the library to enhance the level of service we provide to the community. Were proud to have an enhanced relationship with the friends of the San Francisco Public Library. Our gift is structured with a mix of unconstructed support and drawdowns. Some of the highlights include 100,000 in Grant Funding for the summer stride program, 23,500 for programs at the main library, 25,000 for the one city, one book program. And id like to highlight this years title is there, there by tommy orange. Ultimately, this Grant Funding allows the library to fulfill our vision to foster shared experiences for a more connected community. I appreciate the budget and finance committees consideration of the resolution authorizing the San Francisco Public Library to accept and expend the annual grand award totaling 807,820 for f. Y. 20. Chair fewer thank you very much, and thank you very much to the friends of the San Francisco Public Library. Library staff appreciates this opportunity to present a recommendation to eliminate the punitive practice of charging overdue fines for library materials. As background, the library partnered with the office of the treasurer and Tax Collector financial Justice Project to study the impact of overdue fines on our community. The resulting white paper found that overdue fines restrict access to library services, exacerbate inequality and disproportionately Impact Communities of college, residents without college degrees, and residents already struggling with the high cost of living and poverty. The San Francisco Public Librarys mission is to provide free and equal access to public service. Leveeing overdue fines is antith antitheticcal to our missions. As you can see on this chart, 11. 2 of patrons in the bayview are unable to borrow materials. The fiscal impact on the librarys budget is negligeibl. Its worth noting the practice of collecting this revenue creates unnecessary conflict between patrons and staff and requires an inefficient use of staff time that would be better used on direct public service. With the boards approval, the San Francisco Public Library would join many of our regional and national peers who have already gone fine free, including berkeley, contra costa county, and san diego. Marine and i are more than happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Chair fewer thank you very much. Supervisor ronen . Supervisor ronen no questions, just excitement. I just wanted to let you know that how much i admire this work, and you know, both of yours and the treasurers office. It you know, the library is one of the last great benefits that you have for just living in the country and being able to access something so extraordinary and programs and any book that you can imagine thats ever been published, actually, and the fact that were working to constantly make it easier and expand access and eliminate punitive measur measur measures around our library is so extraordinary and i want to thank you very much. Chair fewer president yee . President yee in regards to fines, have there been any study that eliminating the fines in the length of time that books get returned . Absolutely. Theres been considerable analysis and lots of literature, particularly as this movement has gained momentum. Our partnership with the San Francisco financial Justice Project yielded a white paper. There was a yellow from the u. C. Berkeley fellow of Public Policy that did extensive analysis on this. It [inaudible] chair fewer i would like to say, i truly support this. This is progressive, this is forward thinking, and absolutely, this is what we should be doing. This is absolutely of the right thing to do. And i am of the bloef that tele majority of people want to return their items. Especially in my neighborhood. Are there any members of the public that would like to comment on these items . Mr. Wright. Public library, theyre not saying anything about their computer department. Ive been going to the law library and the Public Library well over 30 years. Thats one of the reasons im such a strong advocate in well over several different areas of law. Personal injury law, corporate law, the americans with disabilities act law, state law, federal law, criminal law, all these areas of law, landlordtenant law had to represent myself as my own attorney on 850 bryant street, and falsely charged and put in jail. Social security law. I put numerous people in Social Security by using their Library Facilities and getting people the benefits they need because of Social Security and lifetime security for the rest of their lives. And about the law library, theyre pretty modest, too. They pointed out how they give services to people who are economically disadvantaged, and they come there on emergencies when they have to defend themselves, but they also provide services to people who are members of the bar and also law students and paralegal students who come in there with their homework assignments and use their facilities, too. In fact, their budgets should be increased, and id like to see them open up seven days a week like they used to be when i was a kid and going into the law library all the time. I got into the business of going to a field trip to the Federal Building as a kid and been going to the court and the system ever since. This funding is provided by friends for programs that we have traditionally supported in the past, along with new initiatives, staff development, grants for Branch Libraries and innovative programs throughout the system. The friends of the San Francisco library is a Diverse Community of families, individuals, and institutions who love our San Francisco Public Library and work to make it exceptional. Our mission is to support. Strengthen and advocate for San Francisco Public Libraries. The l. P. F. , Library Preservation fund has been strongly supported by our citys electorate since it was enacted in 1994. And we are pleased that the hard work of the staff has brought about the library of the year by the gail Library Journal of 2018. We think that relationships between businesses, residents, community, and the library is one of the reasons why our library is so successful, and a beacon of recognition and generosity. Chair fewer thank you. Next speaker, please. Any other Public Comment . Seeing none, Public Comment is now closed. So id like to make a motion to move item 13 and 14 to the full Board Meeting of july 16. Could i get with a positive recommendation. Could i get a second, please. Supervisor mandelman. Can take that without objection. Thank you very much. Since were in agreement with the budget legislative analysts report, can you take note that its the intention of the department to accept the budget. Please. So out of order, lets take the war memorial. Dan gonchar with the budget and legislative analysts office. The proposed budget for fiscal year 20192020 is. 6 more than the original budget. The departments proposed 31,942,171 budget for fiscal year 202021 is 4,320,775 or 15. 6 more than the mayors proposed budget of 27,621,396. Our recommended reductions to the proposed budget total 44,933 in fiscal year 1920. Of those, all are ongoing saves, none are onetime savings. This would still allow an increase of. 4 of the departments fiscal year 1920 budget. Our recommended reductions to the budget for fiscal year 2021 total 38,702. All of those reductions are ongoing savings, and would still allow an increase of 15. 5 of the departments fiscal year 2021 budget. Chair fewer miss murray. Yes, supervisor fewer. Beth murray, war memorial. We are in agreement with the budget. Chair fewer thank you. Mr. Controller, can you please take note of the committees intent to set the recommendations for this department. And miss murray, a very happy retirement. Thank you very much. Chair fewer okay. Lets get the Arts Commission up here. Could we have a b. L. A. Report on the Arts Commission. The departments budget for 201920 is 22. 1 more than the original fiscal year 201819 budget of 22,941,493. The departments proposed 25,900,084 is 7. 6 less than the mayors proposed 20192020 budget. Our recommended reductions to the proposed budget total 109,281 in fiscal year 201920. All of the 109,281 in recommended reductions are onetime savings. This would still allow an increase of 21. 6 of the departments fiscal year 201920 budget. We also have reserve recommendations total of 6,213,000 in fiscal year 1920, all of which are onetime. We have no recommendations for fiscal year 2021 budget. Our understanding is we do have agreement with the department, but please correct me if i am wrong. We are in agreement. Chair fewer okay. Thank you very much. Mr. Controller, can you please take note of this committees recommendation to accept the b. L. A. Recommendation, please. Thank you very much, mr. Haney, good to see you. Okay. Can we get the office of economic and workforce development, and i believe we have mr. Joaquin torres here. Can we hear the b. L. A. S report here. Yes. The budget for this department is 26. 7 more than the 201819 budget. The departments proposed 70,033,820 for fiscal year 2021 is 17. 3 less than the mayors proposed fiscal 1920 budget of 84,731,821. Our recommended reductions to the proposed budget total 17,330 in fiscal year 1920. Of the 723,330, 251,594 are ongoing savings, and the rest are onetime savings. These reductions would still allow an increase of 16,539,007 or 24. 5 of the departments fiscal year 1920 budget. In addition, we recommend closing out prior unexpended encumbrances of 321,494. Of this amount, 221,494 are derived from general funds for total savings of 100,000. We also have recommended reductions to the proposed fiscal year 20202021 budget, and that those total 298,793. All of that of recommended reductions in fiscal year 2021 are ongoing savings. Our understanding is we do have agreement with the department. Chair fewer oh, we do . Thats correct, with one clarifying option. I believe when it was considerations were made by the b. L. A. Regarding the position for permit navigation for Small Businesses and cannabis equity applicants, it was listed that it was duplicative of the requests made by the office of cannabis. We do not believe that. They are a very separate function. We understand the concerns of both madam chair as well as the b. L. A. Related position. Wed be happy to come back in the following year as we assess demand and have Additional Data to support request for the position. Chair fewer thank you very much. Actually, that you requested two new positions, is that correct, in the permitting center . No, it was one position to support permit navigation through our office. Chair fewer and i thought there were two positions for cannabis. The other position is primarily to focus on workforce and first source requirements to ensure that cannabis equity am plants that applicants that have gone through our Training Programs can benefit through the cannabis industry. Chair fewer okay. So any comments, questions through the board . Yes. Supervisor mandelman. Supervisor mandelman well, maybe a little more slowly, explain the difference between the two positions. So what would one person be doing and what would the other person be doing . So one would be processing applicants, building on the success of our open n. S. F. Program to support all businesses through the Small Businesses through the permitting processing whether theyre working with the planning department, department of building inspection, fire, health, and on and on. The other position that chair fewer made mention of is a comment to support firstsource requirements to ensure that individuals have the opportunity to have first access to those jobs that are created in the program. They will be beneficiaries of Research Supervisor mandelman so these are not entrepreneurs [inaudible] supervisor mandelman these are people that are employed in cannabis businesses. That is. Supervisor mandelman so one position is for people that are trying to get into the industry, the other is for people trying to get approved the applications that they need. Theres about 121 locations. 200 applicants that are currently vying for them, and that role would support them through the process, in addition to other Small Businesses that would come to us for support. Chair fewer sir, because its my so its my belief, also, that your office has people that are assisting Small Businesses with permitting, is that correct . Thats correct. Theres one position that supports Small Businesses through the permitting process. Chair fewer and this position is solely for cannabis. A portion of its portfolio would be to support those 121 locations in addition to Small Businesses at large. Usually on average per year, its about 100 Small Businesses that could be supported by every one small position. Chair fewer so have we opened up any Small Businesses with equity for cannabis . I dont have that information, but i can get that for you. Chair fewer yeah. I dont think we have. You know we just put in place an Oversight Committee for the industry of cannabis. What were looking for is exactly this kind of recommendation if they feel that is required for the budget. I have a tendency, quite frankly, to agree with the recommendations of our budget and legislative analyst. I am looking for consensus on my board president yee . [inaudible] chair fewer okay. So im sorry, director, that we disagree on this position, but we note that your department is getting a 16 million increase, which your department is actually growing by 25 , and that is more growth than were seeing in other departments. Rightly so, you cover a lot of different areas over at workforce development, including citybuild, which i love. I am in agreement with the report, so i want it known that we are going to be agreeing with the reductions. Thank you very much. And last, we have the supervisors budget, and we have Angela Calvillo here. Mr. B. L. A. , would you please give us a report. Certainly. The departments proposed 17,554,197 budget for fiscal year 2021 is 285,467 or 1. 7 more than the mayors proposed 2019 budget. Our recommended reductions to the proposed budget total 25,000 in fiscal year 201920. Of the 25,000 in recommended reductions, 25,000 are ongoing and 5,000 are onetime. Our recommended reductions to the proposed budget for fiscal year 2021 are 20,000. All of the 20,000 in recommended reductions are ongoing savings. This would still allow an increase of 265,467 or 1. 5 of the departments fiscal year 2021 budget. Our understanding is we have full agreement with the department. Chair fewer oh, miss calvillo, do we have full agreement . Madam chair, we have full agreement, and we look forward to having all of your staff together with the actions of this committee. Chair fewer thank you very much. I appreciate that. So mr. Controller, can you please make note of the committees intention to accept the note of this department. Colleagues, so i have a little housekeeping here. Id like to make a motion to rescind the vote for item 3. I believe the b. L. A. Made a recommendation an amendment that we did not vote on and to approve. So could i have a a second, please, to rescind the vote. Supervisor mandelman, and to rescind the vote on item 3, we can take that without objection. Thank you very much. [please stand by]