Budget Season: Breaking Down the Deliberations
Each year, San Francisco’s Mayor proposes a budget for the coming two years, and it’s the Board of Supervisors’ job to decide what stays in and what gets cut. As part of that process, the BoS hears from all the city departments (for example, the Department of Public Works or the District Attorney’s Office), who present their spending plans. Supervisors can ask technical questions about these priorities, and in some cases, it can get contentious. After all, the city’s future hangs in the balance. These meetings are arguably some of the most important on City Hall’s roster, and yet the public rarely hears about them, because, well, how many people have time to listen to budget deliberations?
That’s why we’re doing the nitty-gritty for you by recapping meetings as committees decide what to include in the final budget. We’ll be watching the hearings to keep you informed and updated, so check back here for regular updates.
Budget and Appropriations Committee Hearings | June 23, 2023
Public Safety
The breakdown:
The Budget & Legislative Analyst’s office recommended cutting $1.4 million in overtime spending and $200,000 for TruNarc equipment from the San Francisco Police Department’s budget. Unsurprisingly, SFPD Chief William Scott disagreed with this recommendation.
Both Connie Chan, District 1 Supervisor and Chair of the Budget & Appropriations Committee, and Rafael Mandelman, District 8 Supervisor, questioned the San Francisco Police Department at length in today’s hearings. But Supervisor Chan’s questions were noticeably more direct, indicating she’s likely to agree with the Budget & Legislative Analyst office’s recommended cuts. Supervisor Chan questioned the necessity of having TruNarc equipment at every station, and expressed doubts that the police were budgeting properly for overtime. Supervisor Chan stated that she wanted to ensure that SFPD would be able to get results with the current command staffing levels, which is comparatively high for a city San Francisco’s size. Chief Scott rebutted this by referring to the Matrix Staffing Analysis—this analysis found that SFPD’s command staff level is justified and central command staff is needed to enact police reforms.
The bottom line:
Some public safety funding from Mayor London Breed’s proposed budget may be in jeopardy. Supervisor Chan had pointed questions for the SFPD about their need for TruNarc equipment and the ability of the department to safeguard their budget from overruns on overtime spending. Ultimately, Supervisor Chan continued the conversations to next week, and wants to reconcile the differences of opinion between the Budget & Legislative Analyst’s office and the SFPD.
District Attorney
The breakdown:
The Budget & Legislative Analyst’s office recommended $253,000 in cuts to the District Attorney’s budget. These reductions include $13,000 in ongoing savings—the rest are one-time savings. District Attorney Brooke Jenkins agreed with these suggestions, and this section of the hearing breezed by relatively quickly.
The bottom line:
Much like their previous Budget & Appropriations Committee Hearing, this hearing wrapped up with no difficult questions. District Attorney Jenkins agreed with the BLA’s suggested cuts to her department—cuts that don’t impact any critical public safety funding that TogetherSF Action is concerned with.
Budget and Appropriations Committee Hearings | June 22, 2023
The June 22 meeting was different from last week’s meetings, as the Budget and Legislative Analyst’s office (BLA) joined the Budget & Appropriations Committee Hearings to discuss their proposed cuts from each department. Here’s how it works: departments come up with a budget and present what they would like to see funded, projects for the next year, etc. The BLA then proposes adjustments to that budget, including cuts, and then those proposals are heard before the B&A Committee. Departments can protest before the Supervisors, but it’s up to the Supervisors to ultimately agree to the BLA staff recommendations, or take another course of action.
Urban Alchemy
The breakdown:
Supervisors appear mixed on a proposed second year of funding for Urban Alchemy’s street ambassadors.
Mayor London Breed proposed a $31 million contract continuation for Urban Alchemy in her proposed budget. District 5 Supervisor Dean Preston specifically attended the June 22 B&A Committee Hearing to advocate for more money for Urban Alchemy, and both District 10 Supervisor Shamann Walton and District 11 Supervisor Ahsha Safaí spoke in favor of the funding. Supervisor Preston seems to view Urban Alchemy as a model other city programs should emulate, with their focus on workforce development for justice involved people and de-escalation tactics for crises. In fact, Supervisor Preston spoke in favor of expanding Urban Alchemy’s working hours (street ambassador shifts currently end at 7pm) and potentially bringing the organization into a more permanent role within the city.
But District 1 Supervisor Connie Chan had a different view of the proposed Urban Alchemy funding, and seems poised to cut the contract and suggested ending the program altogether. Supervisor Chan asked pointed questions about funding for the organization, asking if Urban Alchemy should be viewed as a long-term program, or if San Francisco should consider winding the program down. Supervisor Chan also questioned whether or not this contract should be opened up with a Request For Proposal (RFP) from other organizations who do similar work.
The bottom line:
Two members of the Budget & Appropriation Committee (Supervisors Safaí and Walton), plus Supervisor Preston (who is not on the B&A Committee) are in favor of the Mayor’s proposed contract increase for Urban Alchemy. Supervisor Chan seems dead-set against it, and District 8 Supervisor Rafael Mandelman was silent on the issue. Ultimately, this item was continued to the next meeting on Monday, June 26—no cuts to Urban Alchemy’s contract yet.
Reallocation of Our City, Our Home/Prop C Funds
The breakdown:
Mayor London Breed proposed reallocating $60 million in funds collected from Proposition C/Our City, Our Home in her budget proposal. A compromise seems imminent.
Proposition C has specific restrictions on how money can be spent in each category (ie. housing, shelter, prevention, mental health); because of these restrictions San Francisco has collected Prop C money that will remain unspent if the Mayor’s reallocation proposal is not approved. District 9 Supervisor Hillary Ronen has been mediating discussions between interested parties to make something work. Supervisor Ronen said the groups she’s working with all have good intentions, and they’re close to figuring out a way that will push the city forward. Supervisor Ronen was hopeful that Prop C is working as intended, and said San Francisco is on the way to ending homelessness for youth and families, with the city making significant progress every year.
The bottom line:
A compromise on the reallocation of $60m from Our City, Our Home/Prop C funds is moving forward, brokered by Supervisor Ronen. District 1 Supervisor Connie Chan said they’re at a point where they “can work towards a ‘yes.’” This item was continued to Monday’s meeting—we’ll know what the compromise looks like at that point.
Budget and Appropriations Committee Hearings | June 16, 2023
Public Safety
The breakdown:
The Budget & Appropriations Committee asked the San Francisco Police Department about TruNarc equipment, police academy class sizes, recruitment, and hiring plans.
Both Connie Chan, District 1 Supervisor and Chair of the Budget & Appropriations Committee, and Hillary Ronen, District 9 Supervisor, had questions about overtime in the police department. Supervisor Ronen claimed that most overtime staffing was concentrated in San Francisco’s Central Station and downtown. SFPD Chief William Scott responded by saying that additional deployments had been added to the Mission (Supervisor Ronen’s district), and that these deployments had been helpful at reducing crime in the neighborhood.
The bottom line:
The San Francisco Police Department relies on overtime because the department is chronically understaffed. A big part of TogetherSF Action’s budget campaign is funding for law enforcement to reduce the need for overtime for SFPD. Mayor London Breed has included a number of these requests in her proposed budget—here’s a quick reminder of our asks for City Hall:
Funding to eventually meet the recommended number of 2,182 sworn officers.
Enough academy classes to meet that goal with new officers.
Enough police staffing aides to allow officers to answer high-priority calls.
Enough additional officers this coming year to make Operation Disruption permanent in high drug trafficking areas, including the Tenderloin, Southern, and Mission Stations.
Investment in personnel training and narcotics equipment to effectively close the open air drug markets.
Funding for a nationwide recruitment search with a focus on lateral hires to expedite hiring.
District Attorney
The breakdown:
District 1 Supervisor Connie Chan and District 11 Supervisor Ahsha Safaí were the only two supervisors to ask questions for the District Attorney’s office, but neither line of questioning was adversarial, and the entire department’s time only took about 20 minutes. Supervisor Chan’s questions were fairly straightforward and technical, and it seemed like she wanted a better understanding of some confusing budget items.
Meanwhile, Supervisor Safaí’s questions all revolved around retail theft, with questions about whether there was room in the budget for another attorney to handle retail theft cases, if there were ways to reallocate existing funds or grants to shuffle more attorneys onto retail theft cases, and if the District Attorney had a point of contact for businesses to reach if they had issues with retail theft.
The bottom line:
The Budget and Appropriations Committee had no tough questions for the District Attorney’s office, which is generally a good sign for a department’s proposed budget remaining intact. TogetherSF Action is primarily interested in ensuring that funding for narcotics attorneys stays in the final budget—from this speedy conversation, it appears that it’s safe for now.
Budget and Appropriations Committee Hearings | June 15, 2023
The Drug Crisis
The breakdown:
The Department of Public Health faced difficult questions on their handling of San Francisco’s drug crisis from District 8 Supervisor Rafael Mandelman.
Supervisor Mandelman grilled the Department of Public Health representatives on their priorities for solving the city’s drug crisis, essentially saying that the department has been picking low-hanging fruit by creating low-acuity treatment services like buprenorphine and opioid replacements, instead of focusing on high-acuity services like creating more intensive treatment beds. He also asked for an update on when the department would provide another Behavioral Health Bed Optimization Project report, detailing how many treatment beds San Francisco needs to create to meet its needs.
The bottom line:
TogetherSF Action has focused on getting more funding for treatment and step-down beds for people recovering from substance use disorder, and ensuring DPH is targeting the correct priorities is critical. We’re thankful Supervisor Mandelman is holding the department accountable—making sure limited funds are spent wisely is a key part of budget deliberations.
Street Conditions
The breakdown:
An increase in funding for two Office of Workforce Development programs may be in jeopardy. Potentially on the chopping block:
A $31 million contract increase for Urban Alchemy
Funding allocated for new park rangers
District 1 Supervisor and Chair of the Budget & Appropriations Committee Connie Chan and District 11 Supervisor Ahsha Safaí had tough questions for the Office of Workforce Development about a potential $31 million contract increase for Urban Alchemy, the street outreach team that focuses on cleaning streets and de-escalating conflicts downtown. Supervisor Safaí repeatedly questioned why so much money was going to a contract increase with Urban Alchemy, how many ambassadors the increase would fund, and took issue with the fact that the Urban Alchemy contract would largely benefit downtown San Francisco and not his own district.
The bottom line:
Urban Alchemy’s ambassadors have had a beneficial effect, with a noticeable impact on trash and open-air drug dealing on the streets they operate on. Having additional ambassadors, extending ambassador’s working hours, or moving into additional neighborhoods is possible with additional funding.
TogetherSF Action is making advocating for an end to the drug epidemic in San Francisco a top priority this year. Our first step? Flooding inboxes at City Hall. We need thousands of concerned San Franciscans to send letters to their leaders demanding they end open-air drug markets in 2023. Are you in?