City and County of San Francisco Thursday, October 11, 2012

>> and go giants. Congratulations to them and to

all of those of you wearing

orange and black in the chambers.

i want to thank the members of

SFGov tv who are working on this committee meeting.

And the clerk, Ms. Alisa miller.

I am joined by board President

David chiu and we will be joined

by committee vice chair sean elsbernd. do we have any communications?

>> please make sure silence all

cell phones and electronic

diveess, any documents

documents should be

submitted to the clerk.

>> Supervisor Chiu:   I just

want to thank the patience and indulgence of the chair as well as members of the public. We were not watching the celebration of the giants.

There was a signing ceremony

today for our u. S. Transportation secretary

announcing a grant to the subway project planned a few weeks ago

and we had some miscues but

we're ready to go. >> President Farrell: clarification, I was watching the giants.

Madam Clerk, please call items 2 and 3 together.

>> item 2 is a hearing and item

3 is a resolution.

>> President Farrell:   thank you very much.

And from the mayor's office, if

you want to come forward. >> hello.

My name is leo chee, budget officer with the mayor. Thank you for having this hearing and thanks to the

service for the grand jury for

your report on the arts commission. On behalf of the mayor's office,

I really want to acknowledge

that the arts commission has had

challenges in the past as we've seen in the controller's audit

in the past, but I also want to say that I'm very excited that

under the leadership of the new

director of cultural affairs, tom -- I think we have made a

lot of progress at the arts commission moving forward on the better systems, and management that we want to see at the arts commission.

So I do really want to recognize that in the report there is a number of findings and recommendations, and I'm excited

that the department has begun making progress on a large

number of them. In terms of the mayor's office response, our response is due on October 24, like the board we have some additional days but I

do have prepared the draft for the mayor's office.

So if you do have questions, I'm

happy to answer what I expect

that the mayor's office will

have as responses to our findings and recommendations

that require our response.

With that, I just want to also recognize that there are significant number of departments here.

I believe there are about 10 didn't. I don't know if they've been

able to stay, but they're also

here and available to -- in addition -- in responses that you have in your file they're available to answer questions. So I'm going to go ahead and

hand this off to tom biew canny

from the arts commission who

will give you -- the mayor's office responses are similar to the arts commission responses.

We agree on most of the items

that -- we have the same

responses in most cases. >> do you have any questions?

Can I ask for the civil grand jury I want to give they will opportunity to present first, if that makes sense.

If there's a member of the civil grand jury, I should have done that to begin with.

>> actually, that's very helpful. We appreciate the mayor's office

for providing a short and sweet response.

Just wanted, for the record, to

indicate me name is mario choy,

the foreperson pro tem of the 2011-12 civil grand jury.

Hank you for hearing this report

where there's smoke there's need

to strengthen the -- of san francisco's cultural legacy.

Before I turn the podium over to my colleagues who will present

the report about governance

issues, and whatnot, I wanted to

clear up some misunderstandings

about the comp position and work

of the civil grand jury, some of

which came out during the last

meeting of the government audit and oversight committees.

i know the supervisors here

probably know how the jury works

and what it encompasses so I ask

for your indulgence given the

fact that those who are watching do not.

The california constitution

state law requires a grand jury

to serve from July 1 to July 30 of the following year. In san francisco the presiding

judge of the superior court

empanels two grand jury, one

that's the indictment grand jury

and we the civil grand jury

report on matters of concern.

the citizen watchdog of county government, the civil authority

has authority to investigate and

viewt niez the conduct of business of county government as

well as the operations of

various offices and agencies.

The 19 of us, all citizens of

san francisco, determine which officers, departments, and

agencies the jury will investigate during its one year

term of office.

So during this year, we were required to make at least one

report of our findings and

recommendations for improvement. During these investigations jury

has authority to inspect and

audit the books and subpoena if

required civil servants who have pertinent information. During the course of the year

it's not unheard of for a grand

jury to put in over 500 hours of his or her time into the work of the grand jury.

So in order for a report to

become public, a minimum of 12 members of the 19 member grand

jury must approve to publish the report.

The report is reviewed by the presiding judge of the superior

court before dissemination. Departments have 60 days to respond while the board of

supervisors has 90 and the reason why we're here today. so with that I am going to turn

the modeium over to moreton rafael the chair of the investigating committee that drafted and published this

report and he will be assisted

by members of the investigative

committee including mark,

allegra, and jean.

>> President Farrell:   I want to thank you for your hard work

and for ever member of the civil

grand jury we know how much time

and effort you spend on what you do. It's contractually

critically important to our city. Thank you on behalf of the board of supervisors and everyone in san francisco. Thank you for your hard work.

>> thank you.

>> Chairman Farrell, President

Chiu, my name is mort rafael, and I serve as the chair of the committee that actually did the leg work to bring together the

information that we will present today.

I must confess, however, that

due to the reason that perhaps supervisor farrell was late, I

too was watching the ballgame,

and an awful lot of energy has

been expended on certain plays

that happened that were absolutely draining.

So please forgive me if my brain does not function as clearly as it should.

But I'll try to at least present

some of the highlights of our report, that will provide you

with at least our view of what's going on.

and I was particularly struck

with the comment that the representative of the mayor made

that progress is indeed being

made in the transformation of

the civil -- san francisco arts commission. We too recognize that there has

been changes but indeed we find those changes at the moment to

be very insufficient and we will characterize why as part of our report.

And I was cheering a lot so if

you pardon me, I'll just... At the outset, I think it's important to at least

acknowledge that arts in san francisco play a very

significant role in the way in

which the community responds to

the way -- to the activities of

being a citizen here.

I must say that we have spent

more money than almost any city,

on a per cap ta basis, we have

calculated we are most per capita spend city in the united states.

That's point one which will reflect the fact we are a community supporting arts.

We have introduced, as the first

city in the united states, neighborhood cultural centers,

as a reflection of not only dealing with art, but making

sure that art is focused in the neighborhoods. We really want our community to

have the opportunity to participate, to deal with, and

actually to become involved with art development.

recently the city has found its

way to make sure that at least

2% of every new construction in

city buildings is preserved for art. And this is kind of an extraordinary thing for a city

of our size to do.

As a result, we have a wide

array of lots of cultural and

artistic venues for people to take advantage of.

>> I wanted to let sfgtv, we have a powerpoint.

>> yes, we do.

But I'm not quite ready to use it yet but I will hit that button in just a moment.

Thank you for reminding me.

the reputation and promise of

the arts commission has been tarnished recently. And I think by looking at our

report and reading it, you get a

clear indication of how what was to be an extraordinary part of our art community has found

itself faced with a variety of challenges and criticism.

And as such, those criticisms and negative responses need to

be addressed by the community.

And the civil grand jury has a particular point of view, and

that is a citizen's point of view.

we have no axe to grind. We don't represent any government agency that is in the city. We're not representing people who are providing the services

of art in the city.

We just are looking at this as citizens.

And as such, we have gone to the

extent of reviewing all of the

criticisms that have been made,

and we spent a year learning and

evaluating, and actually preparing recommendations that

the rest of our committee has

agreed to adopt.

We are under the supervision of

the superior court, and as such,

we find that we take this

responsibility very seriously.

It's important to point out, as

was hinted, and mario's introduction of the grand jury

that no single juror can go out and have an interview with

anybody that is part of an investigation. There have to be at least two of

us, so that we can bring

together an honest, clear,

verified record of a

conversation.

We also must triangulate our

findings so that at least two sources have been made known to

us, that say what our findings are. And that we will go to the trouble of verifying each of these findings with the people who provided the information.

So we reinterview an awful lot

of folks who provided this information.

I'm not going to repeat all of

the various criticisms that have

come before you in the -- our report concerning the arts commission. But I think it's important for

you to sort of learn by yourself, by looking at our report as to who they are. It's a fairly broad section. Some of it comes from the public

in the form of newspaper articles, some of it comes in

the form of government audits

and sunshine task force. And it's important that you

appreciate the fact that these

bodies have found faults with

the art commission's performance

that have not been approached to

change dramatically by the arts commission itself for the future.

And I say this because the

commission itself is governed in

a way that I will speak to in more detail later.

But it's governed in a way that

sometimes does not account for public interest as much as it accounts for the interest of the arts community. And I think that that's a major

issue that needs to be addressed addressed. We interviewed more than 30

people, some of them several times, to clarify and verify

what we learned. The interviews covered the gamut.

We talked to members of the arts commission, both past and present. We talked to members of the staff.

We talked to a number of city department leaders, and their staff. We talked to a number of

grantees of the arts commission,

street artists, a nonprofit executives, journalists, we reviewed the city charter, the

police code, ordinances, the commission's bylaws, their

minutes, budgets, website,

publications, orientation

package for new commissioners, artists, sunshine materials,

just to give you an idea that we

really took this thing very

seriously, and went to a lot of

effort to sort of gain a clear

understanding of what the arts

commission's situation is about. In recent times, the President

Of the arts commission resigned,

and was replaced by the mayor.

The director of cultural affairs resigned and was replaced.

The deputy director position was

reinstated and was refilled. Two other commissioners were replaced by the mayor.

And that's a lot of smoke.

And so therefore we undertook

our investigation.

And now I'm going to turn to my powerpoint projection, if I can

figure out how... Thank you.

the most important preliminary

issue to be addressed is the

governance of the arts commission.

As you appreciate -- I think each of you have had lots of experience with organizational structure and behavior.

But I think you understand that

organizations tend to follow its leadership.

And even though there May be a

strong expecter, the governing

body presents a lot of overview for the executive to follow.

And the body that is made up of

the arts commission really sets

its tone, sets its direction,

and sets the way in which the

staff carries out its

responsibilities.

The arts commission was born in

the 1932 charter.

And I must admit, so was I.

so I can -- I was just sort of

acknowledging the fact that the arts commission charter and I were born in the same year.

It doesn't give me any insight into fact, but it gives me an

awful lot of insight into the

changes taking place since those 830 years.

>> President Farrell:   I would say you look better than the arts commission, according to you guys.

>> thank you, sir.

The 32 charter requires that the

commission itself is made up of 15 people.

And it does have an ex-officio member from the planning commission which is acknowledged.

But 11 of those 15 members must

be practicing professional

artists, four members are at large. Now, acknowledging

acknowledging

acknowledging the fact that 15 art professionals was required speaks to the fact at the time when there was no arts commission and a time where there was very little

organization in that regard, and probably very important to have

professional artists help to

characterize, organize, set

policy for this program. And, today, we believe that's still true, that it's important

to have professional artist overseeing the development of the programs, of

that the arts commission plays and providing leadership to that community.

But we really believe, based

upon our experience in watching the problems the arts commission

has faced and the way it deals

with those problems that it is insufficient to really manage

the the arts community in 80 years later.

Lots of things have changed, and

lots of art design program goes

along with that, and lots of

needs of the arts commission left abated because of the

makeup of the arts commission,

due to the 32 charter. Basically, the duties of the

arts commission are pretty self-evident. There's providing the leadership

that is necessary for the arts

commission to carry out its assignments.

They encourage art awareness in the community.

They encourage community participation. And they encourage the expression of art. They help local art groups.

And they help with government funding. That's a source I'd like to get back to later because I think

it's a self-diluted position

that they cannot try to find funding for their needs outside

of government sources. The library does it, rec and park does it.

It's an issue that is done very successfully by other organizations in government and it's something that I think holds back the growth and development of the programs in the community, and something

that really needs to be attended to.

More about that later. Specifically, they have -- the

arts commission have some very important rules and responsibilities.

amongst them are approving the

design of all public buildings, approving the purchase or

acceptance of all new city art,

accepting the responsibility for

maintaining and keeping an

inventory of all of the art that

the city owns, and promoting

neighborhood arts in the various communities.

And I'm sure the board of supervisors is somewhat familiar

with the arts commission, since

it apropose operates funds for

the arts commission to function.

Our report found significant

problems with the arts

commission meeting its charter responsibilities.

As I said, the 1932 charter

probably worked well in terms of

the makeup of the arts commission.

It doesn't do so now.

We talked a little bit about the changes that have taken place

over the last 80 years, and i think the board of supervisors

should also take a moment to

reflect on the significant

changes that have happened even during your terms of office

which make you think twice about

how you respond to problems.

Community priorities change over time.

The arts commission needs to be particularly sensitive to the public and its needs.

And what we find is, the way the

arts commission carries out its

role and responsibilities, it focuses on the arts

organizations that deal with the

programs, and we believe, at the

expense of dealing with community priorities and

interest, and it needs to have

amongst its members a larger

group to participate, in understanding and carrying out its role with the community, with the people that are actually paying for this, with the people that are actually set the arts commission into being.

And we think that that's an

issue that needs to be addressed

more aggressively by the commission. The commission needs to ensure

that best practices are employed

in terms of its management. and indeed, a lot of the

problems that have been

described by the audit reports

of the controller speak to that, and indeed the the commission is

trying to take some steps in that direction.

But over time, the commission

has allowed these reports and these criticisms to continue because the same problems occur

again and again and again.

And it is not the fault, necessarily, of the person who

held that responsibility as the director of cultural arts in the past.

Although one can claim rather

honestly that he made a lot of mistakes.

but indeed those mistakes were

not taken care of by the arts commission, over time.

And so they were allowed to continue.

A strong administrator is very helpful. A strong board is prime. That's a point I think that

needs to be understood.

So in effect, we think that not

only clearer priorities to serve the public need to be addressed,

but they need to develop ways to find funding for the programs that they -- and for the management of their

organization, that is now very

underbudget, even from our perspective. We think that they are understaffed. We think they're underbudget. But we don't believe they're doing much to attend to that.

And it's because they don't have

the kind of guidance and

attention that a stronger, more

broadly based governing body can provide them.

And it doesn't take much to make that happen we believe, and we'll talk more about that in a minute. We do believe that more community leaders are necessary

in the commission to raise its stature in the community and if

it does that it will find that raising funds from outside of

the government will be more available, that getting support from outside of the government

will be more readily available, and its interesting to note that

these comments are reenforced by other -- by some of the

people -- well, they will be reenforced by a past commissioner who serves with

great esteem in the cultural

arts affairs, and I hope you have an opportunity to read that as part of the responses. I'm not allowed to mention

names, otherwise I would.

So in summary for this portion, or this particular focus on governance, we believe that the

work of the arts commission is

too important to remain static,

that it is living under a

charter requirement that limits

its potential to be a much more significant organization in the

city, and we recommend

wholeheartedly that that change.

One way or the other. We recommend that a charter amendment be made.

If that cannot -- to expand the

board and to bring in a broader

scope but in the interim or instead of, an advisory

committee can be established, sphreppedz of can be established. There are a variety of ways that

the city can attend to this, and

I don't think it should be left alone, and should be addressed

rather quickly, to make the arts

commission a stronger

organization, in the community.

The problem that was most prominent in the beginning of

our term as members of the grand

jury dealt with the civic art collection. And just to put it in perspective as to what it is, in

a brief summary, it's considered

to be a $90 million collection.

It's supposed to have about

4,000 objects in it. However, its inventory has been

stalled, and the maintenance of

the objects in the collection

have not been maintained properly.

The charter is clear. The san francisco arts

commission is responsible to

maintain an inventory of all

artwork owned by the city.

Now this inventory has been in

the works for quite a number of years.

When we first started in

September 2011, we were told

that the inventory would be completed in 18 months.

In September of 2012, we were

told that the inventory will be

accomplished and completed in 18 months.

It's not clear whether or not

the arts commission really wants

to put a sufficient priority on

this responsibility that the

charter requires or not.

The collections manager was only recently hired.

The job has been vacant for five years.

On a number of occasions, we've been told how many people will

be assigned to do the inventory. That number has changed time over time over time.

And it's changed again in the

responses that we got from our report.

And I might add that there are

other responses that have changed from the material that was presented us that we

verified, but that's another matter.

>> President Farrell:   can I ask you a quick question. Obviously there have been lots

of changes, personnel changes. Have you had a chance to interact with the current staff? >> yes, we have. >> to your satisfaction in terms

of time and so forth?

Because obviously if we have new

staff they May have different ideas, hopefully stronger ideas, perhaps they're going to cure some of the past ills.

I want to ask your opinion on that. >> we have done that.

We do find a great deal of hope

that the new staff will make great strides.

And I think the morale that we have found as a result of that

has improved. However, that's not enough to

sort of stand on your laurels.

The structure of the board is wrong.

For the 2012 responsibilities of

this commission.

And we want to make that clear,

that that's our position, based upon everything that we have

learned in the past year of investigation.

>> President Farrell:   thank you.

>> the commission puts a higher

priority on matters other than

conserving the articles that are

part of the collection, for

maintaining the collection, for cataloging the collection, and

for exhibiting the collection. The collection, which should be,

is not a city attraction. I don't know if you knew about the collection before you walked

into this room, or read our report. But it's a big deal.

i mean it's $90 million, 4,000 things. They do have mention of it on their website.

They do have an iphone app but it's limited and incomplete and it really doesn't take advantage

to show off the importance of what it is. And that's something that really should be done.

and I think one can say that to

some degree, even for me

personally, before I joined the

grand jury, the arts collection

was a great city mystery.

The budget for maintaining the

art collection is unfortunately minimal.

It's budgeted for 75,000 for maintenance of the art collection, and we learned that

a good portion of that funding

is used for graffiti abatement. Which doesn't leave much money

to sort of help to maintain the

art that the city has.

and that really needs to be addressed. Most people in the art world

have told us that we've asked, that 1% of the value of the

collection is normally set aside for its maintenance.

Not an unreasonable number.

that's $90,000.

We recommend that the complete

inventory of the collection be

done quickly, and that the -- and that it continue in the future, that this not is a one-time shot. and as a result we have made a

recommendation that funding for

that purpose be made so that our

art collection is maintained properly.

>> President Farrell:   just to

be clear, 90 million dollar collection?

1%, 900,000. >> 12 times -- >> yeah, I'm glad I have my

colleagues in back of me on my

back here so that we can make this --

>> President Farrell:   we all need help here.

>> I do a lot.

So, again, I think it's

necessary to clarify the

ambiguity caused by the charter

and the -- I'm sorry. I misread.

I think, again, just to sort of reiterate, the collection really needs to be addressed and

attended to in a much greater way than it has been now. And I think, again, one of the other recommendations that we

made has to do with the

ambiguity that the -- that is

caused by the charter and the

administrative code, being at

odds with the maintenance of

the -- as to who maintains city

art on park and rec -- rec and park grounds.

The charter says it's the role of the arts commission.

The administrative code disagrees somewhat and says it is the role of rec and park to do that. And it would be helpful to

clarify that, and to make sure that the person -- the organization that is responsible

has the wherewithal to pay for

the maintenance of that art. Briefly, I'd like to talk about

the neighborhood cultural centers.

They were born in 1967, as I mentioned before, the first in

the nation for a city to develop

such things.

We have four physical buildings, as part of the cultural centers,

one in the western addition, one in the bayview, one in mission, and one in south of market. And we have two virtual centers that are located in the south of

market building.

The charter says that the arts

commission is to promote neighborhood arts programs, keep

them open, make them continually accessible, and have ties with

those programs, with the community. And annually the board of supervisors allocates funds to

maintain, operate, and provide

security for these cultural centers. and there is an obligation to

repair and to maintain them.

We were somewhat pleased that in

recent days the capital planning

committee have submitted a

budget which deals with this in some way.

And we just hope that those

kinds of funds for capital improvements to buildings that

are in great need to be

rehabilitated will continue, as

such as possible.

We recommend that the arts

commission find its way to engage local communities that

are being served by these cultural centers to develop

action plans for the funding of

them, both long and short-term,

for the operational stability of those organizations, so that

they can actually function according to the demands of the

charter and for the needs of the

community, and to provide safety

around those buildings so that

there is a good feeling that people can come and participate.

And I might just hypothetically

state that there were two

violent crimes committed in the bayview area.

And when police chief found about that through our report he indicated that he would provide

accommodations to increase the safety.

And we really appreciate that

response.

It's important for the continued

operation of the cultural centers that longer term or

long-term leases be arranged for

the tenants in those centers. Right now, they are very short-term. They tend to be a year.

and it's very difficult for the

tenants, that receive grants, to

operate for a year from the

city, and from the arts commission, to go about

developing adequate funding, because they are limited to a yearly contract.

and if you are a funder, you

would like a little bit more security, before you gave out a lot of money to an organization

that has multi-year requirements.

So we recommend, again, heartedly, that there be longer

term leases.

Now, about our report concerning

the street artists.

Interesting to know, proposition

"l", 1975, as a result of a

whole bunch of political action,

from 1972 to that point, by the

street artists who were -- who

developed a rather substantial political organization to deal with it because they were being

arrested for selling their art

craft work on the streets, without proper authorization. If it wasn't -- if you think

about this, for the street artists themselves to put this in a political vein, there wouldn't be a program that we're

talking about today, they would still be individually running around the city, training to

maintain and sell their stuff. So putting that in perspective,

it's important to note that

these are street artists when are making their living, selling

work that they have done by themselves.

And in that respect, these are

more entrepreneurial folks who

are -- some of them, it's their entire life support.

They don't have any other jobs. It's important to note, though,

that from the interviews and responses we have, there is very little interest, on the part of the commissioners themselves, of

the arts commission, to serve on

the street artists subcommittee.

They find that violations and suspensions of the certificates that the street artists are required to have take up most of the time of those meetings, and

there is no artistic interest

that they find that is attractive to them.

So as a result, the rookies of the board of the commission get

assigned to that, not very happily either.

But it's important because both prior past members of the commission and the commission

members that we spoke to, and

even some of the staff members, indicated that commissioners

don't like -- they would rather

serve on the art committees than

deal with art in the community,

and they don't find the arts -- street artist program to be that way.

And so it becomes a problem, in

terms of how this program is

seen by the commission, managed

by the commission, and how the

street artists ultimately are

treated as a result of that.

The street artist program is independent of the remaining budget of the arts commission. They get all of their funding

from the fees that the street

artists put in, and they are

managed in a way which suggests

that they are independent organization.

They don't have as much

communication with the

commission itself, as they had hoped to.

There was a liaison committee

that was established in 2010.

It lasted a year, was disbanded.

Again, speaking to the issue.

Street artists tend to be, in

our view, soul proprietorors, they're making a living at this. and the rules and management of it are around that issue.

It talks to budgets, it talks to

the space, and it talks to the

fact that the artists themselves, the crafts people,

have to prove that they are making the crafts that they sell. And that's all well and good,

but as a program in the arts

commission, it is just not given

the same kind of attention that

it deserves.

To show how independent it is,

even the legal expenses that

were used to defend the street

artists manager came from street artists fees.

And it suggests that it puts a

chilling effect on the voice of

street artists who want to complain, who want to get their

opinion made known to the commission. So it's an issue which certainly

needs to be addressed and changed. The artists themselves, the

street artists, are not a unified group. As anybody who has gone to

meetings that street artists are

present at, it's very political still. People have even told us that there's now a petition going

around to try to have street artists indicate that they don't

want to have the street artists program transferred out.

I don't know if there's a petition. We just heard this.

If you go to the street

artists -- if you go to commission meetings, they're

rowdy at times and there teems to

seems to be no connection between the street artist programs and other san francisco programs. It is a convenient location for

them but it is inappropriate to what that organization is trying

to do.

The grand jury went to a lot of

effort to try to find the best

option as to what should happen

to the street artist program, in

comparison to -- to -- taking now appear we discussed with several departments what

possibilities exist.

And after a lot of consideration, we agreed that

the office of small business is

the best fit.

It tends to the needs of the

sole proprietor interest of the street artist, and you can carry

that forward from there.

We think that the small business

office will provide experienced business management, as part of

its leadership, it will provide

certainly needed program discipline, and it will

certainly provide a better two-way communication system.

So we would hope that you would

agree with us that the small business administration is a

much better fit to house the

street artist program.

And the fifth and final issue

that we want to address is

rather an odd issue.

It's a contract that exists between the san francisco art

commission and the san francisco symphony.

And we find that to be a clear

violation of the charter's intent.

In 1935, during the ends of the depression or the continuation

of the depression, the

san francisco symphony was nearly bankrupt.

the city of san francisco, the citizens of san francisco, as

they have done in numerous

occasions, voted in a tax, an

add

add vel orm tax, a property tax

for the purpose of maintaining a symphony orchestra.

That tax now generates $2 million annually. We think that that's wise. Look at what happened to the san francisco symphony.

It's world-reimpound. Renowned. It has done everything that it was intended to be. However we uncovered a contract between the san francisco arts

commission and the san francisco

symphony, which is a four year

contract starting in 2010,

running through 2014, in which the san francisco arts commission gives the

san francisco symphony $2 million.

the san francisco symphony,

however, gives back to the arts

commission, 40% of that, or $800,000. There are no restrictions on the

use of that money, and there is no requirement or actual

experience in the last number of years, for the san francisco arts commission to use that

money to maintain a symphony orchestra. A clear violation of the intent

of the charter. The $2 million tax and the giveback are in the same piece of paper.

So one cannot say that they were

not meant to be coupled.

In addition -- and so we

think -- we recommend that this

situation be remedied, and that

the contractor, should there be

one, comply with the intent of the charter.

we also believe that doing that would provide great hardship on

the operating budget of the san francisco arts commission.

And we have no interest to do that.

But the charter rules in this case.

And so we've recommended several

ways in which that money can be made up.

there are probably countless

other ways, which I'm sure the crrl, the board of supervisors,

and other departments, can sort through, so that the arts

commission is not damaged irrep

rehably by -- irrep rehabbably.

we really are hopeful that that

can happen. There was another issue that

came up in that contract which

has to do with tickets. But since the arts commission

had made known to -- since the grand jury made known to the arts commission that there

indeed was this problem with not reporting properly the

disposition of these... The matter seems to be resolved,

that we've been notified that

the arts commission now properly

records and notifies how it

disposes -- sorry.

so in essence, in closing, I'd

just like to say that there is

no doubt that the reputation and

promise of the arts commission,

in recent years, has been tarnished, that the arts

commission has taken some steps to correct that, and they are to

be commended for that.

However, as I've been trying to relate, the arts commission

needs to expand itself, in terms

of its scope and number, it has

to refocus its vision somewhat

more on the community than just

art organizations that provide

programs, it has to ensure administrative excellence.

Now we do have a new leader in that regard. And from all intents and purposes, he's doing well.

But so was the previous

administrator, when he first started.

And it's the responsibility of

the arts commission to make sure, and professional artists

are not the best people to look

at budgets of administration, priorities of administration, to

look at how administration is

carrying out its assignment.

And the arts commission needs to

improve its stature to the community.

We have quite a number of world

renowned art and cultural organizations in this city. There is no reason why the arts commission should not be in that level.

they certainly have the capacity -- they certainly have

the responsibility to do that. And I think that speaks to the fact that they don't take care

of their own needs well enough.

So I think we have to find ways

of raising sufficient funding so

that the arts commission can

take care of its ongoing needs. San francisco, over the years, has shown that it takes a great

deal of pride in its cultural legacy.

it has continually taxed itself,

raised money for itself, put words in the charter which suggest that this is an

important part of their life. The commission needs to understand that, and carry out

its role in that realm.

and we would hope that the board

of supervisors can help it do that.

I'm afraid that what the mayor

is suggesting is that things are

going along in a better way, that nothing else needs to be done.

i think it's absolutely incumbent upon others to suggest that that is not sufficient, that the role of the san francisco arts commission is so significant to us that we really have to take bigger steps

to make it a better and stronger

and more grand organization. Thank you very much. if there are any questions, I

can call upon my come patriots

to answer them if I'm not able.

>> Supervisor Farrell:   thank you for the time and for

everyone's effort and your presentation.

You did a remarkable job up there for so long. We're going to hear from the arts commission now and I know there are other departments here, but I think everyone on the board, and I think in the

city would agree our arts are an

important part of our legacy and

also what keeps our neighborhoods vibrant and a great place to be.

Thank you for being the watchdog. Appreciate it.

At this time would the mayor office talk already but do we want to go to the arts commission unless I can give the arts commission another opportunity if they want to

have -- if they have any follow

follow-up comments.

>> thank you again.

Leo chee, budget director with the mayor's office.

i want to reiterate my thanks to the civil grand jury for your

work and your interest in

improving our city and the arts commission.

I did want to just summarize

some of the thoughts in the mayor's office about the report and the recommendations. i think we all agree that there has been challenges in the past and I think we're all in agreement that we're excited for the new director to continue to make changes. I think in the mayor's office,

we are confident that there is progress being made and that it will continue to be made.

I know some of the recommendations made involve changing the framework for how the commission should be structured.

And I think that over all, the

mayor's office would like to

maintain the existing framework

to the extent that we can, and to, you know, allow the changes

that we see the staff and commission making with a new head of the commission, with a new head of the department, and

a new deputy director.

We think that we're seeing the changes that we want to see

happen and we're going to

continue to see them. So --

>> Supervisor Farrell:   just a

question on that.

I mean the structure of the

commission itself, 7 being -- I understand seven being current artist and four being independent is that correct? >> I believe it's 11 that are current office and then four

that are at large with one ex-officio member. >> given what's going on historically, the fact there are

new people in there, terrific, awesome, let's give them their chance to shine and have all faith that they will.

but from a structural issue oily there have been legacy issues in the past.

Aside from the fact there's

logistics from the charter amendment so forth, leaving that

aside is there no desire to say

we should potentially look to amend this?

>> I think it was an interesting proposal that the civil grand jury put forward. I mean I do think that it's worth using the existing structure that we have now so that the commission can move forward.

15 is a relatively large number

of people for a decision-making purposes and there is an executive committee that deals with governance.

I think with the new head of the commission and certainly all of us in this room paying more attention to the work that the staff is doing and the commission's doing, I think we

can using existing framework to make progress.

So with that I just want to reaffirm the mayor's strong commitment to the importance of

art, and this department, art is such a rich part of our city and, you know, we are -- it's hard to hear negative things about work that we're doing. But I do think that we are on the right track.

So I'm happy to hand the mic

over to tom delaney now from the arts commission.

Thank you.

>> good afternoon, supervisors. Thank you for your time. And thank you.

I just want to start by thanking the civil grand jury.

I started in my role as director of cultural affairs on January 9 of this year and one of the

things that came first light to

me was there his there was an investigation by the civil grand

yir and that caused alarm on my behalf about what I was getting into.

But I think it was important for

me as to note that we live in a city where members of the civil

grand jury care enough about a cultural legacy in san francisco, that they took

the time and dedication to investigate, to meet with us in

great detail, and at great length, to investigate what they felt were some concerns at the agency.

I think as we've heard, the arts commission have been in a bit of a turn around agency stats.

We've seen a great change in our leadership in a number of our

policies and we're committed to following through with both the number of recommendations we see

here today but just in general

appear over all organizational improvement.

I mean to say we're very lucky

to live in a city where we are

among the highest in art cap ta where cities are making tough budget decisions and cutting the arts and at the state level, california is at the bottom of the 50 states in terms of funding for the arts. So to be in a city where the arts are as important to be

heard here at government audit

and oversight committee is a testament to the fortune we have to the commitment of arts and culture as a core value and part

of the core solution over all

challenges we face of the city and the celebration of the city. I think to start there I think

it's a great honor to serve in my role and work on some of these challenges ahead of us.

>> President Farrell:   just one question. San francisco does very well compared to other california cities but california does poorly to other states. The first finding we're asked to

comment on is that we develop

more than any other municipality in the u. S. Do you know where we stand in

there hasn't been a comprehensive analysis from what you've seen. >> yes. I want to clarify.

We were asked to either agree,

disagree partially, or disagree wholly by the instructions.

In terms of the cup half full or

empty when we disagree partially

you can interpret that as a green partially.

In terms of finding one, we just

do not have the teat before us.

There had not been a comprehensive data set.

We would wanted to have a

methodology to know what numbers

we are looking at. San francisco is in terms of per capita funding arts is one of the highest in the country which

is a great honor for our city.

So with that I want to speak on a high level of of what the role of the report will be in terms of organizational change and improvement at the arts commission and then I'll at a high level go through some talking points in each of the five areas that we heard about

in the report.

Upon receipt of the report --

good afternoon, supervisor. And so upon kind of going through the process and

receiving the report staff took considerable time reviewing the recommendations and the findings in the report.

We spent a number of management

meetings where managers of each program workshopped responses in

terms of what policy implications they might have.

Since then we have flushed out recommendations and brought them forward to the arts executive committee where we went through

every finding and every recommendation. Then the executive committee took it to the full commission

at the October 1 full commission meeting, to the full commission

then had the opportunity to dive

deeply as well and answer any questions, ask any questions of

me or of staff or of each other

in terms of the policy implications.

I think the most important next

step will be moving forward in a comprehensive community engagement and strategic planning process.

One of the things the arts

commission has faced is lack of articulated plan that was developed for and by the community at large.

So we are committed, and are in

the process of beginning a very comprehensive strategic planning and community engagement

process, that I think will address a lot of the issues

around community engagement for

instance in our cultural centers. One of the deliverables for that planning process will be a 10

year capital plan for all of the arts commissions assets including our four cultural

center buildings as well as the civic art collection you hear about in the report. We know for years we have struggled to find resources we need to adequately care for the art collection. This is a challenge throughout the city in terms of our capital

needs so we are similar in that

regard but I think a 10 year capital plan will be a great advantage for us in terms of planning and staffing and responding to some of the recommendations you see here. So we're excited to begin that process and have the community

voice involved and to help directing how the arts commission moves forward. So with that, I will go through kind of some high level

responses in each of the five categories. >> quick question.

It talked about civil grand jury talked about the concept or the

notion of finding outside sources of funding. And stop me if you're going to

already address this in your responses. But just wanted to get your temperature for it. you're new in the role or

somewhat new at this point.

Obviously we are still from a

budget perspective, challenging economic time as a city and will be in the foreseecial

foreseecial future.

I know a lot rely certainly on outside sources. how do you view that in terms of the arts commission and your assets?

>> I think that's a great

question and a very astute finding in the focus of this. It is a complex area. So the arts commission has a development director dedicated

to raising private resources. I think for a department our size we have been successful --

and I'm looking for the exact

number, but over the past five years, I believe we've raised

close to 4.9 million, from

federal funding sources, from the national endowment for the

arts, california arts council,

which is the last large fund,

and copartnered with a

partnership with the -- dedicated to raising funds.

Just this year we got 60,000

from the key pairing foundation

and that was coupled with some private donations.

We're embarking with another gallery which will be a fundraiser for art care.

So I think we have done a lot in terms of public-private partnership.

I think the challenge is we need to be cautious how much we fundraise at a city department

who also grants to our nonprofit arts ecosystem.

so we are a grant maker and our community of artists who struggle in this economy look to us to fund them.

And when we go to the private foundation sector that they also

go to, to ask for dollars, there's no way for them not to see it as competition because it is.

So I think it's a delicate balance about how we look to public-private partnership.

and I think there are unique ways in which we can fundraise and partner with the private sector to bring in new dollars that we wouldn't otherwise see

in the arts ecosystem but we

have to be cautious about how we

go about that so we don't tap

resources that are non-art programs. And as arts funding has

decreased we want to be cautious

that they see us as the grant-maker.

They would love to see greater dollars coming to them through city funding.

We want dollars that are in

non-competition to our non-profit.

So in the broader category of governance, some of the feedback in terms of the structure of the

commission and now I've developed a biased of nine months, 10 months on the job I really feel this is a structure, this arts commission governance

structure that built coit tower. This can work for us.

this has been a governance structure that has worked throughout the 80 years of the commission.

It has recently struggled.

We've seen some challenges. I'm committed to proper education of commissioners so when they come on board they get the information they need. I think the real challenge has been an issue of transparency,

of leadership, of communication between the director of cultural affairs and the commissioners.

And I mentioned in this a recommendation. The President And vice President And myself now have monthly meetings where we go through any

detailed level policy issues, we prepare for commission meetings,

we grapple with policy issues. So I'm dedicated to keeping that

line of communication open.

I think -- accountability.

How does a governing body establish accountability.

I've asked for a 360 performance review so commissioners are getting information about my performance from parties other than myself which will be important to assuring accountability. I think the commission is well

aware that there have been

challenges and on their watch they are responsible for the future of the arts commission. With these recommendations in

mind we're moving forward.

With the mayor's office we brought on two new commissioners, one is a chairman

and ceo of ymca, another is the

development director of the lgbt

center in san francisco, both come with business ak men. I think I need to address the issue of artists on the commission.

I want to be cautious we don't

promote the stereotype that

they're not good finance people. Our commission President Is an attorney who practice law, is now a professor at san francisco art institute.

So artists often have multiple

skill sets just like business

individuals or medical

professionals, doctors doctors can run businesses.

That's not to say we don't need it prepare commissioners well with the proper material and

proper orientation and we don't

need to look at the aggregate

skill set. The mayor's office has been a

great partner in discussing the

skill sets needed, and bringing the necessary skill sets to round out the 15 member commission. I'm confident we are on a

positive path for it in that regard.

In terms of other governance

issues, I think to just look at

the oversight function, we also have -- in terms of controller's review in November of 2011, I think there was a lot of findings in that controller's review about broader oversight

and I'm happy to report since then the commission has

completed successfully eight of the 12 recommendations made in that report which is a testament to how some of this new leadership and new systems in orientation and different ways in which we're improving our system at the arts commission are demonstrating change. I think we know there are a

number of accountability mechanisms like the controller

he a's office that will help us to build appropriate systems. So maybe I'll open it up to

questions if there are any on

governance and move on to the specific art collection. >> President Farrell: colleagues? >> on the specific art collection, I think we're excited that this issue has come to light.

The arts commission has been challenged historically.

>> Supervisor Chiu:   I had one question around the idea of

establishing a citizens advisory committee.

In government we have over 100 citizen advisory committees

which have an important purpose. Do you think there's a need for a second committee related to what it is you do?

>> I think the efforts might be best spent on friends of the arts commission, a fundraising body.

One of the recommendations I

thought was of value to us would

be a development of friends of the arts commission similar to friends of the library. I think a body that would have

an engagement, help build the

clout of the agency, community advocates and individuals that could help develop resources for the commission would be really important. I also think it's important that the arts commission continue to engage the community so that they use our system as a commission now in terms of

attending our committee meetings. We have over approximately four to five public meetings a month with the commission.

And so part of our reason not

agreeing with the citizens advisory committee at this time is we feel like there is a mechanism that is not perhaps

being used to its fullest capacity to engage the community

and to ensure accountability appropriate for the commission. So I think at this time I would

prefer a -- effort directed to the friends of the arts commission and how to better

develop those resources there.

>> Supervisor Chiu:   thanks.

>> so on the civic arts

collection, it is one of the arts commission top priorities. It has been certainly a work in progress. I think it's important to note that when we talk about

inventory, and I think there has

been confusion around inventory, inventory never ends so the art collection is a living body of art that moves from location to

location, from different city buildings.

Admittedly there is a backlog.

We have files that have not been entered.

When we speak about the 18 month inventory which is starting this month we are about to make an offer to an individual who will

come on board to help guide what

is a backlog of the inventory as

well as an updating of the database.

But have also, as noted, brought on additional staff.

Last month we brought in a new director of the art staff.

So a lot of challenged coo

keeping up with ongoing -- related to staff capacity as well as some of the resources

but it continues to be a top

priority and we working with rec and park and throughout the city to properly establish an mou. We are open to that recommendation. We have been meeting with my staff and rec and park staff to flush out the nuances of the

public art in different locations.

I think a successful example has

been rec and park commitment of 250,000 to the restoration of the murals at coit tower.

I think that's a sign of things

to come, an example of the type

of partner that is possible between city departments, the

type of partner the mayor is

stewarding and I'm committed to ensuring we have proper care for

our art collection.

>> two ments comments.

I appreciate and my constituents appreciate the quarter of a million from your department.

In the grand jury report your response states this recommendation will be implemented within a year and you are look being forward to

clarifying this vis-a-vis an mou.

Is this subject to public --

on -- not something that needs to come before the board? >> yes.

All major mous that the arts commission engages in go before the commission.

They go to executive committee.

the public utilities commission,

to define our relationship as well as our relationship on their new building and art contained within. That was herd at the executive committee of the arts commission. We took public comment there. Then that was moved to the full commission. Again another opportunity for public comment.

So again I think as we define

these mous they will be in the public and available for public comment and input. And I welcome that. I think it's important and I am so thrilled that we have dedicated citizens who care

about our cultural assets. Obviously I share that value or

I wouldn't be in this job and our staff are committed to building on recent successes but also to improve based on recommendations we've seen here.

>> Supervisor Chiu:   I appreciate knowing that and as

you are drafting an mou I would love when you have one that you

would present to the public send it to my office and let us know what the public schedule is.

I think I have constituents

within my district that would be interested in knowing more about that process. >> certainly.

>> Supervisor Chiu:   thanks.

>> so in general, the civic art collection is a top priority and will be an ongoing priority. We are in conversations with capital planning to prepare for this budget cycle.

On the capital front, while we

were very successful this past

year in obtaining a commitment

of comat investment in our four cultural buildings we are working with capital planning to

look at the 2% in art enrichment model.

There is 5% in that legislation dedicated to use for conversation. It has been a challenge to use

it because it is bound to a three year timeframe so we are looking at ways in it which to work with the bond attorneys to find the appropriate care and

resourcing for the civic art collection.

I kind of have been talking about it as a social security

fund for the civic art collection. While we can't use those dollars

to pay right now for existing work, we're hoping to find a way that the current dollars could

pay for those works that are now in need.

We're committed to looking for a policy that will be long-term

and make sure the art collection

does not find challenges that

way face today. The cultural centers we are committed as landlords to the

cultural centers, and while we know that as landlords we have

not always been the best landlords, especially in difficult financial time, we are very pleased that between the

mayor's office of disability and the capital planning committee

we have obtained over $3 million for significant capital improvements at all four centers. I think these improvements in the next two years will address

what it is the civil grand jury here is identifying are some of the challenges.

These include new roofs, new ada accessibility, security issues, and I think we're thrilled to

partner with our cultural center

nonprofits to implement these

capital ploossments over the next two years.

The cultural centers -- the six cultural centers, we meet monthly so we hear their

concerns at the staff level. And then at the commission level, the community arts

education and grants committee oversees all of the performance of the cultural centers to their grant agreement.

we just heard their end of year report and heard significant public comment about the performance of those nonprofits

to the grant agreement, ensuring

free and low cost access to all

of our cultural centers.

That said, we also plan, in the community engagement and strategic planning process, to engage the community more broadly in terms of future

planning for those centers.

We have also begun conversations and have actually had significant conversations with the city attorney's office about lease agreements.

I agree that I think a longer term agreements lease agreements would benefit our cultural centers.

We know they can not be longer

than 99.9 years. The lease agreement has to tie to a grant agreement. To have a tenant in that

building there needs to be a dedicated revenue source for them.

Our cultural centers rely on the grants that are made to them. We will need to consider the term of the lease agreement with

what we can offer in terms of a grant agreement.

We're looking at agencies like

dcyf that offer multiple year

leases and I hope we can find a

happy medium between a longer term lease agreement in

alignment with what we can offer. we're also interested in supporting our cultural center tenants in terms of their accessing private dollars. So any way our staff can support

them as they look for lease hold improvement dollars we're

committed to doing so.

Moving on to the -- >> before you move on I want to have I guess a brief discussion

on the cultural centers.

From what I've seen in my four

years funding to the cultural centers have been challenged

approximate of we want to

rebuild our roads, parks, playgrounds and schools, it's

often hard to find money on the capital side.

just taking capital issues for a moment have you thought about other sources?

You talk about public-private fundraising. Do you have a budget of exactly how much you're looking to raise for all these different centers? >> yes.

So we have a lot of different assessments that have been done both in the past and in recent years and those will be the basis for the 10 year capital plan that I spoke of.

So that plan will then define the specific prioritized capital needs for the cultural centers

over the 10 year period and put them in order of priority.

Right now the assessments stand

not in context to one another or in context to the needs of the

civic art collection so the goal

is put them in concert with one

another in terms of resources. I think we're committed through

the art care program but also in partnering with the private sector and I think capital improvements is a great opportunity.

i've recently met with some sill

an throw piflghts who have been involved with the friends of the arts commission about capital needs in the past so I think there's great opportunity in terms of bringing in private dollars to supplement what we might find through capital planning.

I think again a lot of

traditional fundraising model,

naming rights, as we move through challenging check times

so we will have to grapple with those issues saying a corporate

individual who want to make a large capital gift but would

like the recognition to be named, those would be the issues

that we would look at in strategic planning to make sure

we build the greatest amount of access and greatest resources

for our capital improvements but doing so in a responsible way. >> earlier this year we worked

with your office to pass some loosening of restrictions around

the 1% art fee that comes from

construction of buildings downtown.

is there a way to tap into that money? >> absolutely. We're in the process of developing draft guidelines for

the public art trust in the c3 district in those parcels that

were added in recent legislation. Thank you to the board of supervisors for your support of that and to President Chiu for your leadership on that. I think it will be a great opportunity. We're meeting with both the

nonprofit art community as well as doaverttle.

We are discovering geographic restrictions, and their interest

in seeing those dollars going in proximity to the development but

there is great promise for that

to be a resource in those geographies and for programming

of the nonprofits in the c3 and who would service the c3, but

also hopefully for our cultural

centers located in those geographies. >> for members of the public who

May not be aware, we have had

for a number of decades that requirement for new buildings 1%

of their buildings cost used to be required to go to essentially

lobby art, art that physically exists on the premises of one of these buildings.

What we did earlier this year was loosened the requirement so that money could go to the arts

within a geographic range fairly

close to the downtown c3 area.

from my perspective, if there

needs like this that we need to

and are I would be open to further amending my legislation to do that but I hope we will see additional dollars getting out to community based organizations and these cultural centers. >> certainly.

The legislation allows it to be used for capital investments in terms of activation so there is

a lot of flexibility in how those funds can be used.

I'm hopeful it will be a new source of funds for nonprofits and in general art capital across the city.

>> Supervisor Chiu:   a final question on the operating side of the can you recallal center budgets. how do you think about balancing the needs of day-to-day

operations or year-to-year

operations for cultural centers versus other as pecks of your budget?

>> the cultural centers -- could

I ask, is that for the cultural

centers, their grant agreement?

>> Supervisor Chiu:   yeah. >> so we work with them on an annual basis.

currently it's an annualized grant where they set up a

management performance plan where there are goals outlined

for the year ahead.

The grants are unrestricted and

are not project specific.

We feel in order to keep the centers -- this is one of the few sources they have that are not project specific but we hold

them accountable for those mpp deliverables in terms of goals and outcomes.

We're in our monthly meetings looking at those now to determine if they're appropriate

and how can we perhaps develop

more smart goals or attainable goal that we can at the commission level have clear method for accountability. What we're hearing is we want to have a clear structure so that everybody, the culturessal center, nonprofit tenant and art commission is clear on expectation but there is also a

structure for accountability at the community level in terms of everybody who has access to those buildings in the community locally that those buildings serve.

>> Supervisor Chiu:   thank you.

>> moving on to the street artist program, just to

address -- you know, we're

making -- we've responded to the recommendation of the -- of the artist program and we would propose it remain at the arts commission.

it is not our purview to decide

that but we heard loud and clear

from street artists with a 40 year history with the arts

commission and who at two points

in time, one a couple of years

ago and now, signed a petition, I believe two years ago it was

over 200 signatures, who felt they wanted artists overseeing the making of their work, that

it was critical as arts people that the oversight function

needs to be by other artists who

understand that craft and the

artistic value to that.

Most definitely these artists are entrepreneurs. we celebrated their 40th anniversary this year.

We helped develop banners out of

our own general fund dollars to

publish the street art programs

and banners throughout the city, our communication staff not

funded by the street artist fee supported that through broad marketing and got great props for the program.

i think we're very open to partnering with the office of small business to improve the program and services we offer,

in terms of supporting our

artists as entrepreneurs. I like to think of the street

artist program as precursor to

the do it yourself movement and I think san francisco should be

proud of our street artists that

founded this program and I think

the grand jury accurately points

out there is not a united front,

there are many diverse perspectives but it is important

to note while there be have been

52 street artists referrals to the sunshine task force came from approximately five street artist. If you look at the total we

serve that is less than 2% who have expressed dissatisfaction with the program.

So I want to make sure we emphasize there are a lot of street artists happy with the services of the art commission that feel we have been responsive to their need.

This isn't to say we can improve. we can do better.

Our director has shown great leadership. I've met with the office of small business and would be open

to looking at ways to improve

those entrepreneurial services that the -- might be able to provide. >> it was unclear from the documented whether you disagree with moving the arts program to

the office of small business. It sounds like you do. >> yeah. We disagreed with that recommendation in stating that

we would not implement that recommendation.

Although I believe that May be other parties involved in that

final decision but it's our perspective that the street

artist would best be served by

continuing to be governed by artists. Unless there are other questions on the street artist program I

will move on to the symphony fund.

So on a high level, the arts

commission hasline pleased to have partnered with the

san francisco simple thoan since 1935.

I think it's a landmark that san francisco voted to institute

a municipal symphony. In close advisement with the city attorney's office, we believe we are in complete compliance with the charter and the law.

The path-through, the earmark like we have for the police department, the municipal

earmark from the charter goes

directly to the san francisco

symphony in it's entirety

resulting in 12 community

events, symphony events including dolores park and other parts of the city. And the gift that is received by

the arts commission from the

san francisco symphony is in compliance with the admin code

or the arts commission's ability

to accept gifts under 5.100 of the city charter. So and it's our feeling that

that is a great partnership and

it is the gift is greatly valued and supports our general fund program including community

education in our grants program so the arts commission is very grateful and we believe based on the city attorney's advisement that we are in compliance with the charter and with the law on that.

>> we can certainly ask the city attorney about that if we want

to in a bit.

So they submit back 40% I know it's not necessarily the same pool of money. I guess the response is if they didn't do that going forward you could always ask the board of

supervisors for a supplemental appropriation. Sure every department could do that all the time.

But I mean how does that relationship work?

Is it an assumed, an unspoken given that that's the dollar amount that you're going to receive from them?

>> we currently have a four year mouf.

That mou was brokered prior to

my arrival but it was I believe signed and approved in the fall of this past year.

so the current mou outlines the next four years. It's my understanding that historically there have been different conversations in terms of outlining what the agreement would be. That mou is drafted in close

concert with the city attorney's advisement.

>> okay. So, again, just from your perspective, in terms of the charter language and specifically dedicated to maintenance, you guys are complying with that.

>> I feel that the earmark fund

that goes to the symphony

produce -- symphony events, the dolores park concert and others and we partner to kind of advertise those to the public and to distribute tickets to

those events, and I think that the gift is greatly appreciated from the arts commission in terms of the support that it

offers us for our unrestricted use in terms of supporting other community arts.

Many of those programs include musicians and artist and so we're able to grow our capacity

both through our cultural civic grants programs because of that gift.

>> okay.

>> so with that, I would just

conclude to state that, again,

we're very appreciative, I think

my coming in, in terms of the transition period that the organization, this has been a

great way to dive deep on a number of policy issues.

We've agreed with a number of the recommendations in each of those areas of how to improve as an agency. I'm committed to ongoing improvement.

I'm open to ways in which I can

be more accountable to the public and board of supervisors

and make our staff available to the public when there is opportunity to invite people to our meeting.

I would love to see broad community -- and at the full commission level. So I appreciate your consideration of the findings and recommendations and your support as we move forward to kind of solve some of the challenges we see here and

championing a new day at the arts commission.

>> President Farrell:   well thanks for your response and your time and I guess welcome and look forward to working together for sure in times to come. And any questions? All right. So thank you very much. I know there are a number of other city departments that were present before and I know we had a delayed start so I don't know who is left. But if there are folks that are

left that want to come speak, we see you there. Anyone, I will offer you guys the opportunity if any

departments want to speak. I'd say line up like public comment but why don't you come on forward and we'd love to hear from you. thanks.

>> regina, office of small business. Good afternoon. I just wanted to make a note

that our office was asked to respond to a recommendation that the street artists program move

over to the office of small business. While in discussion with the commission in our office, we don't think it's within our purview to make a direct recommendation in terms of that, that that is a decision-making matter for either the arts commission for or the board of supervisors or for the mayor. But to state we think that should that decision be made that our office would be appropriate place for the

program to land.

i do, one, because these are, as noted in the grand jury's report, these are individuals,

who are sole proprietors, and I

think just because we're not an arts organization does not necessarily mean that we could

not manage a program that has an

arts focus.

in addition to that, with the small business assistance center, and that we do see

individuals who do come to our

office, who are interested in operating in the areas where the

street artists program now resides, but these individuals

are more appropriate for peddlers permits, and there is,

I think partly a need to sort of

maybe take a look at a comprehensive view in terms of

street artists program and the peddlers permits.

It is the view of our office that where the street artist program does reside that there

are some individuals who are operating under the street artist permit who are more

appropriate under a peddlers permit program.

But that said, we'd be also very happy to work with the arts

commission to enhance that program, provide some support that they need as well. But just wanted to let you know that should a decision be made

that we would -- we would be

fine with having the program

under the office of small business.

>> President Farrell:   thank you.

Anyone else? >> good afternoon, supervisors. I'm just going to speak on behalf of the public safety

because they mentioned about the

incident around the opera house. The police department agreed with the recommendation, and the san francisco police department will work with the arts commission, and with the local cultural centers to ensure the security of those using these

centers as well as -- facilities and buildings and surrounding areas.

By working in collaboration with

stakeholders sfpd will take an active role in developing an

action plan to address crime and violence issues in and around

the centers. Concentrated effort will be made

to those centers situated in a

high crime area, in resources

including but not limited to, foot patrols in immediate area whenever possible.

Current around the opera house there's an officer who has a dedicated foot beat.

He's there at least five days a week. That's his area. The community knows him and he knows the community. Interact with the community members as community partners,

reading programs, mentoring

programs, seasonal event and celebrations.

Deployment of regular assigned offices to community assignment. That's to make sure that these officers and the community know each other so we don't have officers who are not familiar with the community that they serve. This will establish key community partnerships by having the same officers assigned to

these areas each and every day.

This assignment -- assignment of district captains as a primary

point of contact for the cultural centers, getting to the top person so they will know his or her captain and the captain

will know and is responsible for what's going on in their district. Thank you.

>> President Farrell:   thank you. Any other departments that came

to speak, and are still around? Want to come up? Okay.

I do have a few follow-up questions.

i see Mr. Givners here.

There's questions around the legality of the contract with

the symphony upon and I don't

know if that's something you

looked at before, but want to ask the city attorney's opinion

on that because there seemed to

be contradictory comments about

the legality here.

>> john givner, deputy city attorney.

Our office has advised the arts

commission that it can accept a

gift from the symphony under the charter provides that it can accept gifts.

And of course other city laws provide that the arts commission, like other city departments, can accept gifts.

And that the use of those funds

has been appropriate. Within the arts commission's legal authority.

>> President Farrell:   okay. So we're good.

thanks very much. And then I see severance here

from our budget and legislative analyst.

Is there anyone from our -- here. I did have a question around I

think for me to the civil grand jury's comments around art maintenance being more appropriately categorized as an operating line item.

To me that makes imminent sense. But if someone else wants to

talk about that.

>> brian benson with capital planning.

So the funds for art maintenance

are at least -- of funded

through the capital budget process. They're intended to be supplemental but mostly general

fund dollars anyway. So they're approved by the mayor and board as it is. So whether or not they're categorized in the department's budget directly in that process are through capital planning. and still coming from the same fund source.

Regardless of which area it's sort of managed during the process I think capital planning has an interest on the maintenance side because

maintenance impacts renewals and capital improvement in the long-term. I think there has been

responsibility from the responses from the controller

and us but to me it's --

>> President Farrell:   so you'd have no problem with that.

>> I think process-wise, we'd

prever it and our response we'd prefer to see its under capital

planning but those funds are intended to be supplemental to what the department can -- through its own operating responses.

>> Supervisor Farrell:   thank

you very much. Any other questions, colleagues? All right.

I want to thank everyone who has

presented and talked about -- and especially the civil grand

jury for all of your hard work. Obviously you put a lot of time and effort into this. I want to thank the different department heads that are here and those that are no longer here for coming out today.

So before we get to our resolution and what we will adopt, I'd like to open this up for public comment. If there are any members of the

public that wish to comment on this item, I have a number of cards.

i will call you up to speak but otherwise if members of the public want to line up, you can

come up one by one.

Everyone will have two minutes.

Michael adaro, paula dattish,

bruce jesse, jane blotchy, and richard rothman.

Sorry if I butchered any of

those 2345eu78s. Forward. Everyone will have two minutes. Please line up on this side of

the room.

>> hello.

Mike adisaro, former past Chairman Of the liaison committee for the street artists

program and I would like to play a small clip.

This is from 1972.

>> President Farrell:   sf gtv. We've got it up.

>> the only thing we can do -- we're caught as bill has said

divn the between the parks department and the board of

supervisors and the -- for 30

days, at this time of the year,

christmas time, when many of the artists depend on the christmas

sales with no legal place to sell detion ig naitd by the

board of supervisors we can only advise that the artists go back

to the street and sell on the

street in a form of protest.

I cannot in full conscience

certify and take 20 per quarter for people for licenses when

they have no place designated where they May function. We are going to act within the law. I worked out --

>> unfortunately with two

minutes I have to cut mayor alioto off. But that was phase one of the

street artist program. We're in phase two right now

with the arts commission and we've seen mismanagement and negative. I have a background in business.

I was a manager of many body shops, and what I've southeastern in this street artist program is absolute neglect of best practices. They don't know what they are.

I would suggest one thing, I'd

like to say is, in their last district two, they say that the

street artist make $4 million a year. That's what we earn.

Well if you take 400 members and

divide it into $4 million,

that's $10,000 apiece. That's under the poverty level.

we pay the arts commission $300,000 so we are under the poverty level. It has to be changed.

And I support the change to the small business organization. Thank you.

>> President Farrell:   thank you very much.

Next speaker come on up.

>> I submitted a statement to you guys get it?

>> President Farrell:   speak into the microphone. >> did you get it?

Did you read it?

Paula davis. You read it. Okay.

I'm a living testament to the mistakes of the san francisco arts commission. I'm an artist. I've been my entire life. I've sold on the streets of new york and san francisco since I've been 15.

Without a permit, and with a permit.

My troubles began in 2008.

I was told by howard lazar, the director of the street artist

program to call his number, 415-252-2583 to see if there was a quorum for a meeting.

I did, and when I called that

number some wom paeked up the

phone and said paula you're

going to jail or sing gospel music to me. I don't know. I was calling the city

attorney's office and kathy

barnes, thank God for her told

me to follow up with a paper trail which I did. I sent an e-mail documenting this and never once got a response from anyone.

I eventually got my permit back. There was no factual basis for

it to be denied and at the appeals level I got it back. Some time later, about a month later, I was arrested. I was accused of stalking someone at the arts commission

who I never met at a date in

time when I wasn't even in it san francisco.

Her name was evelyn russell, and

apparent secretary there. This was the same woman who was picking up lazar's phone. I spent 45 days in the san francisco county jail and

when I was there, I was noticed

by letter, after I was arrested,

that the phones were rolling over. I spent another two years in

criminal court there, mostly commuting from the east coast to make court dates. There was never a hearing. The woman never showed at hearing.

There were probably 15 people on

call, nick -- from the sheriff's department, kathy barnes, a lot of people.

It was a well-known fact that

the phones were rolling over.

>> President Farrell:   thank you very much.

Appreciate it.

Next speaker.

>> I'm peter warfield executive director of library users association.

I consider it highly offensive that the chair is giving us two minutes and not three as required by the sunshine ordinance. That's required under the sunshine ordinance for public comment and there's only five or six people here making put. First of all I'd like to say

that the chair -- and I'd like to ask for three minutes.

The chair did not apparently get

an answer as to what the symphony money was being used for specifically. It seems the answer for that question was it's legal.

But not what the use is. I certainly think the chair might ask for more specifics

about what that gift is providing.

with respect to the grand jury's recommendation, let me just over all say that in general I agree

with many if not most of the recommendations and the findings, but there's one recommendation that I think is

quite toxic and that is until

the grand jury has reviewed of

what the fends of sfpl has done

with the money keeping 90% of what they have received for themselves and giving 10% to the

library they should be very cautious about recommending the setting up of separate

organizations for the supposed

support of the -- any organization whatsoever. There are many other problems

with the friends, for example the supervisors agreed with us,

not to fund our rfd. This was before your time, Mr. Chair.

The friends fought the -- wanted

the outsourcing of work for the library, which we worked to keep

in the city, and the supervisors agreed with us on that.

with respect to the obstruction of the grand jury through lack

of getting documents and phone calls returned we've certainly experienced that.

We also got five, between

December 11 and April of this year, we got five unanimous decisions from the sunshine

ordinance task force, about illegally obstructive things that the arts commission had

done with respect to sunshine, and with respect to understanding of what was going on there.

There's a great deal more to be said.

In general the grand jury's findings recommendation should be agreed to.

Do I have three minutes or not?

>> Supervisor Farrell:   two minutes like everyone else.

Thank you very much. >> thank you for the hearing.

My name is richard roth mafn and

I give tours at coit tower but I'm only speaking for myself today and not city guides. i want to talk about the

frescoes because they're unique

in the city's treasure. They're painted on walls that

are response -- the frescoes are responsible by the art commission but the buildings are

owned by other city departments, rec and park, the zoo, the schools, city college, and public health.

and the big problem is communications. And I'll repeat that again, communications.

The murals were closed in the 60's for repair.

In the late 1990's my wife and

I, with the help of the art commission, brought the attention -- the art commission

did a two volume report. They fixed the murals.

they put in barricades to fix it up.

Go ahead 20 years again, and the

same problem again.

The same conserver who ront the

report in the early 190's wrote the report and one of the

recommendations was an ongoing inspection report which never happened. I think what is needed is an advisory committee to make sure the departments are communicating. And supervisor elsbernd's department we have the mother's

building that needs in dire condition, and part of the

problem is the two departments aren't talking.

There's another mural in

district 11 that needs fixing up. So I think so I don't have to

work on this in 20 years forward, that there needs to be

some type of body where the two

departments talk to each other,

and I think this citizens advisory committee, where the departments could come and talk,

make sure the vendors following

their duty, and making sure we

don't have ongoing problems with our murals. Thank you.

>> President Farrell:   thank you very much.

Next speaker please. >> hello.

my name is jane blachly and I'm

the daughter of one of the coit

tower artist, and I have a few

comments to make here.

One is about the problem of the traffic that has been going

through, regardless of some of

the recommendations. I have a letter that was written

very recently by the head of the

coit tower, john dillen jer and

he states in it that he himself

saw people walking through, and

touching the murals, even using

their car keys to point out. And no one was there to do anything about it.

there are no guards, there are

no cure

ateors, none of the museum

type personnel to direct the public on proper behavior. And that is one of the main things that I think should be brought up and done something

about, as soon as these other things.

and I don't know if the department, that we're discussing here, will any of

them be doing that. It seems to me that what has

been said is that everything is operating along pretty much as

it should the way it is.

And no one has gone into any of

the physical kinds of things

that are recommended and need to

be done, and that should be done as soon as possible. So I'm just trying to bring

something like that forward.

And I have gotten also a letter

from bruce jesse, whose father was a muralist as well on the second floor of the coit tower

and he brings up a very good practical point that the arts

commission would be able to have

a gallery such as other museums

and galleries, where there are

charges for admission, and where sales could be allowed, since

they are allowed to do that.

>> President Farrell:   thank

you very much. Next speaker.

>> hello supervisors, my name is

john -- I am the current manager

of the street artist program at herman plaza and I was also manager last year.

I was one of the respondants to the grand jury report.

i want to touch on a few things. First of all the finding that

most of the funds -- increase

due to the cost of defending the program manager from violations of the sunshine ordinance from

the street artists, I gave this packet earlier.

You will see in here that since

2008, 57,314 was paid or charged

to the street artist program by five people to go after the program.

Of that, 57,000, 38,700, that's most of it, with the city

attorney, 18,600 was to our program director. so that's wrong.

That assessment is wrong.

My second package here I came here for the full blessings of

the street artist program. There are 400 of us.

We were able to speak to 260 street artists.

of those 248 voted again for second time, in four years,

leave the street artists program alone. Keep us in the street under the art commission.

Do not move us, do not privatize us. I come here with full support of

the street artists.

I'll give this to the grand jury. 248 people signed. These are the community that you're supposed to be representing. These are the people who are

street artists, artists and entrepreneurs. Leave us alone.

We're happy where we are.

It requires a change to the charter which it's a serious issue too. i'm running out of time. Thank you.

>> President Farrell:   thank you very much.

Next speaker.

>> good afternoon, Mr. Chairman,

supervisor elsbernd, john gull

gullenner, the chair of the coit tower effort.

it is 78 years old born after

the arts commission charter was created and the murals painted the following year.

I want to thank richard rothman

for championing the preservation

of the coit tower mules and he

and city guides for literally

being up there week after week, showing people who had no idea what they're looking at, what it's about, what san francisco has.

And jane blachly whose father

has an oil painting.

There are four or five oil paintings.

Her fearlt's painting is a good example of what's missing at coit tower.

There is not a tag next to her

father's painting saying who painted it.

It's fallen off years ago.

We want to pay attention to the grand jury's report

recommendation which blame a dysfunctional dynamic between rec and park and the art

commission that we hope the board will help fix.

as to art funding -- get zero

funding for the coit collection.

Not 1% of what coit towers brings in, and the proposal

under the new concessionaire

would bring in about 6800 a year under the new concession for coit tower meaning the entire value of the 27 pieces of art

there is worth 680,000 in total. Think about that.

You think what's built at coit tower, what's painted at coit

tower is worth just 680,000?

I think it's more. After communication we urge the

arts commission to reconsider

engaging the community in a new forum.

what's existed hasn't worked a advisory committee would be a

way for the public to point out problems, help fix them and a way for rec and park and the

arts commission to talk more regularly. The fact that things are as broken as they've been we know

they're trying to fix them but engaging the public in new ways would help a lot.

>> President Farrell:   thank you. Any other member of the public

that wishes to speak?

Seeing none, public comment is

closed. Again, I want to thank everyone for coming out, especially the civil grand jury and those

members of the public who had

strong feelings one way or the other. At this time the board of supervisors, we've been asked to

respond to a number of the findings and recommendations of the civil grand jury.

And so what I thought President

Chiu I know will be back

momentarily but what I thought I'd do was run through one by

one about the ones we been asked

to respond to and give the recommendations as we run through those. And I'm going to take this subject matter by subject matter

as opposed to just findings and recommendations.

So finding one, the city through

the sf arts commission and gfta devotes -- in more generous amounts than any other municipality in the united states. I think the answer there is

because the study hasn't been

completed would be -- guess agree partially. We're proud of what we do but we don't have the actual data to support a strict finding right

now so that would be my recommendation. and tom, I think you've heard a lot of great comments, not only from the civil grand jury but department heads and public comment of things. And I think some of our questioning that would be great

to see going forward.

So that would be my recommendation. For finding number one.

For the recommendations, I'll take recommendations one through three almost together here.

This is talking about increasing

the number of commissioners, the at large commissioners,

establishing a citizens advisory committee, or a nonprofit organization that talked about

tom talked about a friends organization. Again, we have a few ways we're

able to respond here somewhat restrictive. What I'm going to suggest is

that our responses that this

requires further analysis I think.

I know tom, being somewhat new in this role and it's great to

hear that the civil grand jury

obviously thinks highly of the current staff and is hopeful of what will happen in the future.

i suggest as you evolve in your role, that we get feedback from you about what organization you

think would be best to support kind of ongoing either

governance structure of the organization.

So as the civil grand jury knows to increase the number of at large members that is a charter amendment, requires going to the voters. That's something I am open to looking at going forward for sure. But the first election that would be would be next November. So we have some time in the middle here to come back and hear from tom and see how things are going. So I'd like to proposes

recommendations 1 through 3

require further analysis.

>> can you hear me? Under the state rules, you would have to actually provide some

more specificity on sort of how that analysis will be conducted and the timeframe.

>> President Farrell:   so when

I suggest in six months to have

the director come back, and

provide an evaluation, and -- of

all of those potential options, and I would like to hear from

tom after six months going forward. Would that be sufficient enough?

>> uh-huh. >> sure. i'll go along with six months. And I'm not going to be here in six months but I would say I think a charter amendment is

something I would completely disagree with. I think there would have to be a lot of things that would fail

before we would take a very extreme step of trying to amend our charter in this regard.

I think that's a lot longer away

than six months, but six months study is fine.

>> President Farrell:   all right. Sounds good.

To the civic art collection

section, finding no. 9, the

civic art collection is a vast

assemblage representing a substantial cultural and financial asset of the city and

county, I would fully agree.

Finding no. 10, promotion of the collection -- attraction of the city is limited. I'm going to suggest we partially partially disagree. It could be a lot more but I suggest with the funds that are available that the arts commission is doing what theg.

And I think a lot of civil grand

jury points I found in my first year and a half of the board we receive a lot of things we'd

like to do but it is based upon funding and resources that we

can't do everything we want so I

suggest we partially disagree but that means we are partially agreeing with it.

Finding 13, the inventory and cataloging function is dedicated

to a single staff member and two interns which is insufficient.

My understanding from the arts

commission is that there's

actually one -- registrar, a

full times collections project manager, part time collections programs associate, as well as a number of interns.

So that's a different staffing factually so I suggest we disagree with that one. Finding 18, that the art

maintenance is more property

operating than exal cost which is day-to-day responsibility of the arts commission.

I would actually agree with that 100%. To me maintenance is an

operating item. and therefore I would also agree with finding 18

finding 19 that it treated

as a capital expense by our city government.

Recommendation no. 8, that human

and material resources adequate to -- >> Vice President Elsbernd: can I ask a question of the staff on maintenance and capital there. I agree with the theory that

supervisor farrell is putting forward but in the budget game that happens every year, and the capital dollars that are available, isn't it more likely they're going to have a better

shot at getting money if it's appropriated as capital? Because operating costs are going all over the place.

capital costs not so much. Wait 'til you get to the mic.

>> of think some of the wording here whether it's an operating

cost or an operating expense, a

capital cost, exal expense, from

a funding perspective if it's coming from capital planning

we're going to defend it and we

haven't increased it in the last few years. >> Vice President Elsbernd:

what do you mean defend it? As a priority because we are focused on long-term funding.

>> Vice President Elsbernd:   I guess I was thinking there's more money available for this kind of capital work than looking at the operating pot of money. >> not a lot there.

>> Vice President Elsbernd:   so

that would be my one concern.

I agree with the theory.

Supervisor farrell is right on that.

If the end game is to maintain better characterize it as capital. >> for us as well I think in

terms of staff work, having the different departments come to us to talk about their maintenance on a regular basis makes our jobs easier in terms of looking

at the larger issues of renewals

and replacements of things. Having that dialogue is useful to us just process-wise. >> Vice President Elsbernd: out of curiosity to the grand jury was that argument presented

to you? Now that you're hearing this

your end game is not to be specific about characterizing money your end game is to maintain the art. Do you agree that to best maintain the art we should

forget about the term of art operating in capital and who should call it capital if our

end game is improvement of the art?

No audio:  . >> Vice President Elsbernd: you're going to have to come to the mic.

No one can hear you. i thought this would be an easy yes or no. I want to avoid theory.

The point is practical, where is the money coming from?

>> be honest, is our response.

>> Vice President Elsbernd:   so

bite off our nose to spite our face.

Let's be honest but we're not going to be able to fund it?

>> I hope you would be honest. >> Vice President Elsbernd: we're honest.

we're saying it is operating but we want to fund it. Don't you want to characterize

it as capital so we can fund it? >> I'll let you think about that. >> Vice President Elsbernd: okay.

>> President Farrell:   mayor's

office, do you want to comment?

>> leo chiu with the mayor's.

I would say the maintenance cost -- you can see at the technical level the maintenance

is classified in a maintenance

subobject that is classified as maintenance.

We are able to make sure as a

city we are funding renewals and maintenance at a bare minimum level. we can make sure that we are at least doing an adequate baseline amount of maintenance that's happening in the city.

Certainly departments can choose to allocate additional parts of

their budget for additional

operating costs. Thanks.

>> President Farrell:   all right. We can maybe come back to that

one in a minute here.

>> I want to make sure I missed it. On finding 17 was there a response to that?

>> President Farrell:   sorry, thank you for catching that. The maintenance budget for

collection grossly inadequate to the task -- I would agree. Suggest we agree.

>> okay. >> Supervisor Farrell:

President Chiu just walked in.

We talked about the categorization of the maintenance here.

Do you want to change it? >> Vice President Elsbernd: no.

We'll leave it as it is. Better to be honest than to maintain.

put that on the grand jury's head.

>> President Farrell:   all right. We will move on here.

Recommendation no. 8, human materials resources adequate

task be devoted to the rapid

completion inventory and

cataloging of the collection, this recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be

implemented in the future and i

know the arts commission is currently interviewing

candidates for positions solely focused on inventory so that

would be the recommendation. No. 9, redesignate maintenance

and conversation of the

collection as a -- rather than a capital budget item, I will

agree with that.

And no. 10 --

>> for no. 9 would agree to that. Is that what you guys --

>> President Farrell:   this is derivative of the same argument.

>> Vice President Elsbernd:   is there a controller here?

you're not supporting what the controller is suggesting. >> correct.

>> Vice President Elsbernd:   I

agree with the controller. >> so we can change.

There are three members here.

>> Vice President Elsbernd:   I

would like to practically fund this. This is public record everybody knows what we are doing but we

want to achieve the end game of maintaining approximate. >> from my perspective I would be more comfortable supporting the controller's response.

>> President Farrell:   so you would like to change -- hold on

let me make sure we're clear on this, change recommendation

no. 9 to not -- will not be implemented.

Finding no. 19, and no. 18 as

actually disagree. >> okay.

Would you reflect that.

>> finding 18 and 19 committee said disagree and recommendation

9 will not be implemented.

>> Supervisor Chiu:   we disagree and defer to the

controller's response to those answers.

>> President Farrell:   we won't take roll call on that but I

would have voted differently. Recommendation no. 10 --

>> Supervisor Chiu:   maybe we should do a roll call. That's fun. >> President Farrell: recommendation 10 redirect and dedicate a million dollars over

two years of the grants for the arts hotel taxed on a one time

basis to fund the inventory maintenance storage et cetera of existing art location located in the city and airport and other city properties. I'm going to say this will require further analysis during the annual budget process.

So that's going to take a longer timeframe but that's something

we're going to have to look at

in next year's budget. And the same would be said for

recommendation no. 11, regarding

designating hotel tax for -- so forth. I suggest that also would require further analysis based

upon next year's budget. And apologies, also for

recommendation no. 12.

That is designating hotel tax funds 1% of the value of the

collection on an annual basis. I think that's something everyone would agree to but

again we are in a restrictive capital and budget environment

and it is competing priority with everything else and I think

it is incumbent to look at

everything at a wholesale kind of wholesome way during the budget process and we will do that. >> on this one, this will not be implemented or this requires further analysis --

>> President Farrell:   further

analysis, no. 12.

no. 13, clarify ownership and --

on rec and park property.

My understanding the sf r

commission is currentlying working with rec and park to

make that happen so it will be

implemented. Complete an arts commission rec and park agreement to ensure compensation for maintenance of

art in city parks adequate to

support that task and that's recommendation 14. I hope that happens. That is not under the purview of the board of supervisors.

That is a rec and park/arts commission thing so that's something that the board is not

going to implement.

Finding no. -- now we go to neighborhood cultural centers, finding 23 that the arts commission has not given support

and maintenance of the cultural centers of the priority the

charter requires. I understand the comments.

i think they could get a lot

more support.

I r recommend we disagree partially.

And similarly for finding 24, regarding not having addressed long-term funding, stability and

safety needs of these cultural centers. Thank our police department again for come forward. Obviously it is an issue that

people are aware of but I think

tom in your work, and -- work and rebecca with capital planning I think is going to be

a big part of this so I'll say

we disagree partially 3-6r7b8g9s one clarification, there is little nuance between disagreeing partially and agreeing partially. I think we ought to be providing more support and maintenance of our cultural centers and doing a

better job of addressing

long-term stability and safety needs. With the work being done, from my perspective, whatever we can do do move that agenda forward would be very helpful.

>> President Farrell:   agreed. Then recommendation 15, for the

arts commission to hold public hearings about the cultural centers and their funding this is from the board of supervisors

perspective that won't be implemented that is under the per view of the arts commission. Sounds like a good idea but I trust there will be comment about that at the arts commission itself and something

I hope you will look into.

>> Supervisor Chiu:   if I could make one point on that. If the arts commission feels differently about holding public hearings on this topic I have offered to the arts community to do a hearing at the board. Do you think it's appropriate if

the arts commission wants to do

it at your forum, let me

community let me know if we want additional discussion on that.

>> President Farrell:   finding 27, the district attorney has

failed to respond to sunshine complaint, we're not in a position to agree or disagree. That's under a department that

we don't have purview over the district attorney's office.

so I'm going to --

No audio:  . >> President Farrell: understand that. I know a number of department heads or department

representatives were waiting for but for the board of supervisors

that is a different department under a separately elected head

so we're going to -- we can't

respond to it I would say so I suggest we disagree with it

because to a degree I think it's

something we're not able to do. For recommendation 17, to move the street artist program to the

office of small business, personally I think there was a lot of great comments and reasons why and we heard from the street artists that there seem to be a majority support not to do that.

My suggestion will be to say that this requires further

analysis and ask our rs

commission to look into that and whether it's wholesale

supporting it or there were some suggestions.

I want to thank the head of our small business office coming out

to look into if it's either a

wholesale change or some form of working together there is merit

to that so that's what I would suggest going forward. >> Vice President Elsbernd: let me say on that, again one of these things that will happen down the line. I would be -- I would be thrilled to see that happen. i was around when the office of small business was created. This was never intended to be a part of that.

I think it would start to pull

away from the initial -- and I would hate to see that office of small business commission expand to the point where that core

mission in any way gets threatened.

>> President Farrell:   that sounds right. I think I would agree with that as well. To be honest with you I think the notion of working together with the small business office

and whether it's pulling on

their resources to aid you seems the right direction but I want to give you the ability to do what you think is best in a number of months.

>> Vice President Elsbernd:   if

i could comment on that I have a slightly different perspective

on the office of small business

in that they're underfunded and

I agree we wouldn't want to disfract from the focus but I

think that office should not be underfunded and needs to have more resources because it is

very difficult for a lot of businesses to access all the different bureaucracies that we have.

So I want to say I definitely appreciate I guess what was written to us from the office of

small business and in the future I think it's appropriate for that office to expand to actually remove redundant bureaucracies in other departments but I do think it's

probably a longer conversation just given how many departments there are that impact different

aspects of our small business community.

>> President Farrell:   okay. >> can I clarify, this will not be implemented or it requires further analysis?

>> President Farrell:   further analysis. >> then you want them to come back in six months.

>> President Farrell:   that would be great. We are mandated to have them

come back in a certain time timeframe. Let's do that. Recommendation 18, the attorney

response to sunshine complaint 11023. Again this is something that's

not going to be implemented by the board of supervisors. That's a separate -- for the district attorney and has been passed on. Ta's not something we're in a position to control.

Then we get to the symphony fund. I know there was disagreement here. Appreciate the civil grand

jury's comments.

I heard your comments, and thank you to the city attorney and

also the rs commission for

talking about it.

finding 34 for general operating

and gallery exhibition expenses

they rely on public funds

designated for symphony

orchestra. Again I'm going to bow to the judgment of our city attorney

who I know has looked into this.

And disagree with this and that

the maintenance of the symphony

orchestra is being handled appropriately.

Finding 35, I will agree with. I think we should agree with

that the arts commission has chosen symphony as beneficiary of those funds. Finding 36 that the arts commission without legal or

practical recourse, if the

money's revoked, the 40% is revoked, understand the comment. Again, practically speaking I have to disagree because they

can't come forward for supplemental appropriations.

I hope the doesn't happen.

But practically speaking I will

disagree with that.

the manner in which the arts commission funds its operations

by giveback donations creates at

least an appearance of fiscal improprietary and -- the intent

of the charter.

I mean I could go with partially

guess agree but I do disagree with that. I understand the appearance but i think by the letter of the law

everything is above board. I appreciate raising the issue,

if you will. Colleagues I don't know if you have any comment but I would suggest disagree with that.

And then finding 38 about the

funding of 600,000 would agree with.

recommendation 22, that the arts commission symphony agreement comply with the intent of the charter and full amount of

revenue go to symphony operating dispenses.

My understanding that is being implemented.

And then recommendation 23 to

redirect the hotel tax funding

money, tax fund money allocated

that is go to I think require further analysis in the course

of our budget process.

So that was a long list colleagues.

Any comments, questions, additional thoughts?

All right.

seeing a motion with those findings? >> resolution as amended. >> seconded.

>> so we can do that without objection.

Again, I want to thank the civil grand jury for your work on this. You highlight issues that would not have been brought to light otherwise.

Again, understand that we may agree, disagree, or understand

that we are constrained by certain budget issues that make

us kind of punt things down the line until next fiscal year but I want to thank you for your work on this. This is a great report and I

know we will see you in a few

weeks on other items as well. Thanks for your help. we can do that without objection. >> what action would you like on the hearing?

>> President Farrell:   table

item no. 2, and we can do that

resolution with full recommendation. All right, Madam Clerk, can you call item 1.

>> a motion revising the priorities of the budget and legislative analyst 2012 performance audit schedule.

>> President Farrell:   thanks very much.

We have -- from our budget budget and legislative analyst office.

>> good afternoon, chair fairly, farrell

and members of the committee.

the purpose is to reassign priorities to what have been approved to the board of supervisors by a motion.

We are completing the audit on professional services contracts

for dph and sha. We have committee the final

report to the departments and are awaiting their response and will have the final report submitted to the board the week

of October 22. However the way the audit motion

was set up blark