To view graphic version of this page, refresh this page (F5)

Skip to page body

Meeting Information


2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999  

held at City Hall rm 406 1 Dr. Carlton B Goodlett Place San Francisco, CA 94102

The minutes of this meeting set forth all actions taken by the Commission on the matters stated, but not necessarily the chronological sequence in which the matters were taken up

1. (ACTION) Roll Call
The meeting was called to order at 5:41 pm. Comms. Ricci, Grossman, Aramburo, Chuck were present at the gavel. Comms. Richard and Dupre arrived at 6:12 and 6:02 pm, respectively.
2. Public Comment on any matter within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Juvenile Probation Commission.
There was none.
3. (ACTION) Review and possible action on Finance Committee recommendation on Dept. Operating Budget for FY 2002-03
Comm. Ricci reported that the Finance Committee had just held its meeting earlier in the day to review the Dept’s operating budget for FY 2002-03, and after a close look at the documents and full discussion on it, is recommending the full Commission approve it.
Comm. Grossman commended Ed Lopatin andhis staff for doing a very good job in producing the documents being discussed here and heartily approved of how they constructed the priority list of potential cuts. Comm. Ricci added her agreement.
Comm. Hale noted the communication from the Youth Commission, which stated their concern for the shortness of time available for public input.
Comm. Grossman reviewed that representatives from the Youth Commission were at the Finance Committee meeting and had a very open and mutual discussion about the budget.
E. Lopatin reviewed the documents for the entire commission, as he had done for the finance committee. (see Finance Comm. mtg minutes for Feb. 19)
Main points were that the budget reflects a $1.2 mil reduction required by the Mayor. And a contingency budget consisting of an additional 10% reduction which may or may not be instituted in part or full (depending on the City’s overall revenue picture). The budget reflects no staff cuts nor cuts in community based programs. There is also a lower cost in energy use.
Lopatin spoke a little about the schedule for the budget this year, from submission to the Mayor’s office to community hearings sponsored by the Mayor, the Bd of Supervisors, etc. until the Mayor finally submits the budget to the Bd in June. He made the point that it will be through these hearings that the community will have the opportunity to make their concerns heard.
Comm. Chuck asked what the status of the TANF funds is. Lopatin said that as far as he knows the allocation will remain intact. He said they believe the allocation will remain the same. Comm. Arámburo referred to the previous version of documents that she received. She referred to the re- direction of TANF ranch funds to supporting the Ombudsman, and asked which vocational programs are ending. Lopatin said it was the photo journalism program that never got off the ground.
Comm. Arámburo asked if there was a cushion in the TANF funds to support the Ombudsman. Answer: yes. How can that position be kept past TANF. Lopatin said that the sunset of TANF in Oct 2003, and he doesn’t know if it will continue or at the same level.
Comm. Arámburo asked if Mr. Lowder of MCJC can be asked to come and talk to the Commission about TANF and the future of state/federal revenues. Lopatin said yes.
Comm. Arámburo was concerned for the reduction in maintenance for LCRS (given the already very low budget for doing grounds maintenance). Lopatin said that they think they can do with less. They will also try to save money on scavenger costs by recycling more. Comm. Arámburo asked if any of the maintenance tasks be done by YCD via giving the youth more hands-on work.
The CPO said that he’d rather the staff of YCD do the work and not the residents of LCRS.
Comm. Arámburo asked if YCD’s insurance would cover the youth who participate in their program. The CPO said he didn’t know.
Comm. Arámburo asked about the ROPP grant which ends 6/30. What does it currently cover. Answer: the contract with PAW at Robeson/Rivera. ($483K). The CPO said that at one point there were 3 funding sources for Robeson/Rivera; TANF, general funds and Bd of Corrections, but he couldn’t say which items this one source supported. Question: is there any funding from SFUSD for Robeson/Rivera? Answer: there is an in-kind teacher assigned there. What about taking Robeson/Rivera to Charter school status? The CPO said there is a possibility but the reality is that these kids are at Robeson/Rivera specifically because they weren’t having success in the school district. Comm. Arámburo drew the example of the Life Learning Ctr on TI, which went to Charter School and got picked up by the SFUSD, which is responsible for meeting the educational needs of these children.
As to the reductions for CBO contracts, Comm. Arámburo asked if AB 1913 funds could be used to subsidize the loss in general funds? The CPO said that AB 1913 funds will be reduced by $200K in the upcoming year. Starting next month the Dept will begin public meetings to discuss AB 1913 for 2002-3. He had no confidence that any new initiative could be included in the upcoming budgeting.
Comm. Hale asked what the deadline for expenditure of AB 1913 was. Answer: June 30.
Comm. Arámburo asked what the impact of no hiring of LCRS counselors will be, given the Job Corps program. The CPO said it wouldn’t impact LCRS.
Comm. Arámburo asked if the POs at CARC could pick up some of the caseloads of Prevention/Diversion. The CPO said that the CARC POs are not case carrying POs. He said there might be a re alignment of personnel within divisions, there may be increased caseloads, or there may just be service cuts. Comm. Arámburo emphasized the importance of working with the younger youths, and much more closely with CARC in serving them. This seems a logical connection.
Comm. Arámburo asked about the software (Lopatin said that the Dept recently purchased scheduling software for JH --for about $10K) which will help manage work schedules of staff.
What will the impact be in conjunction with reduction in clerical staff? Lopatin said that they will try to utilize a clerical pool rather than assigned division clerical support. Question: won’t the scheduling software have a function to expedite report writing? Lopatin said they’d be looking at that.
Comm. Arámburo repeated her request to have Mr. Lowder of MCJC come to speak in regards to what might be done in securing future revenues, and that the community children’s advocates might need to hear that.
She further referred to ’development collaborations’ and as an example asked why LCRS could not be a contract site for youth from other counties (paid to the Dept). She was aware that Santa Cruz does a similar thing.
The CPO said that when they get LCRS back to the place they want it to be, they will have enough youth to occupy it. They do not want to go back to a population of 60, more like 40-50.
Comm. Arámburo wondered whether the demographics supported that (with declining crime, detention). The CPO said there were 28 awaiting placement, in JH. Not every one of them are awaiting placement at LCRS, but a portion of them could potentially be placed there.
Comm. Hale commented that this discussion was a little off from the agenda item. Comm. Arámburo disagreed. Comm. Hale said that now that it has been raised, it can be continued in Finance and Program committees.
Comm. Grossman asked again for the Dept to assure that the Library program was not endangered. The Dept gave that assurance.
Comm. Hale expressed his concern for the reduction of counseling staff at LCRS. He also asked what qualitative impact the level 2 cuts will have on services. Is there going to be the ability to provide transition services to personnel affected in level 2 cuts (if instituted).
Lopatin said that if such cuts were instituted, and other depts do the same, there may well be individuals from elsewhere bumping current staff from this dept. This more likely would happen to administrative positions, clerical, engineer and custodial.
(public comments)
NTanya Lee of Coleman Advocates: commended the Dept for the budget not cutting support to community programs, and taking more cuts from administration. She was concerned over who had final power to determine which programs would be cut if it came to that. Will there be an opportunity for input.
She further said that with the loss of state and federal funds, the programs supported by general funds were precious and she would have been happier not to have seen any programs being offered as options for cuts.
Finally she wanted an explanation of the $175K from TANF that will supplant lost general funds. Comm. Arámburo also had this question.
Liz Jackson-Simpson explained (as she did in the Finance Committee) where some of the TANF funds were and how they could re-allocate some of it to these other programs.
Nicole Derse, Youth Commission, read the statement from the Youth Justice Committee (document posted as supportive doc on website).
Comm. Grossman explained the different role of counselors and mental health workers in Juvenile Hall, and agreed that mental health services were needed.
Comm. Arámburo asked about public input for level 2 cuts.
Lopatin said that the Dept has not yet developed any criteria for selecting the programs for cutting. He said that the Mayor would not be concerned for how those programs were selected.
The CPO repeated what had already been said about the Dept not having had developed a set of criteria for making the possible cuts in programs, but will have a series of steps that include discussion with the community over what would be best. They will probably do that within the next couple of weeks to see what the providers themselves project to be the impact of such cuts on their services.
Comm. Hale commended the Dept and their efforts to produce a budget that reflected community concerns for program cuts, and that the Commission was pleased with the results. He encouraged community organizations that have concerns to come speak with the Commission at any time; that they were ready to listen.
There were no further comments so discussion was closed.
Comm. Ricci moved to accept the recommendation of the Finance Committee to approve the submittal of the Dept’s FY 2002-3 budget to the Mayor. Upon a second, and voice vote, the motion carried unanimously.
4. (DISCUSSION) Announcements, requests for future agenda items.
Comm. Arámburo asked to have Mr. Lowder (MCJC) report on the larger picture of federal/state support for such programs and invite the Youth Commission to attend that meeting.
The CPO invited those from Coleman Advocates and the Youth Commission to submit whatever suggestions they have for how to consider doing the program cuts if need be.
Comm. Hale commended the LCRS staff on the Family Day event.
Comm Richard announced that at the request of youth at LCRS, he bought some footballs and flags for their use.
5. (ACTION) Adjournment
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:43 PM.

                              Minutes adopted Feb. 27, 2002