Supervisors continue budget items after debate over contracting out janitorial and security services

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors on July 8, 2008 voted to continue for one week two budget-related items that would have let the city move forward with private contracts for janitorial and hospital security services while speakers warned the actions could force deeper program cuts if adopted.

The matter began when the board considered Item 17, a resolution concurring with the controller's certification that janitorial services can be performed by private contractors at a lower cost, and Item 18, a similar resolution for security services at San Francisco General Hospital, Laguna Honda Hospital and city clinics. Supervisor McGoldrick moved to continue both items one week; Supervisor Mercarini seconded the motion, which passed 9-1.

The continuation followed an extended floor debate about the city's general fund reserve and the budget trade-offs that would follow if contract approvals or other proposals left less money available for programs. Controller Ben Rosenfield told the board the mayor's proposed budget assumes a $25 million general fund reserve and that, given current holds and contingencies, about $5 million would be available for supplemental appropriations today. Rosenfield said part of the reserve is on hold pending litigation and an assumed transfer that the board had not yet approved.

Supervisor McGoldrick urged the continuance and warned that if the contracting items passed the board might have to remove "$5,000,000 out of a lot of the programs that people care about," naming services for people with AIDS, youth programs and senior services as examples mentioned on the floor. Controller Rosenfield cautioned that two pending supplemental appropriations likely to go to the November ballot total about $3 million and that other contingencies could further reduce the practical availability of funds.

Opponents of contracting on the dais emphasized the potential impacts on city employees and services. Supervisor Daly urged the board to vote rather than delay if members opposed contracting, saying the board should make its position known sooner rather than later. Supervisor Ellsburn asked the controller to explain how much of the reserve was free for appropriation; Rosenfield answered that litigation holds and assumed transfers reduced immediate flexibility.

Action: Motion to continue Items 17 and 18 one week (moved by Supervisor McGoldrick; seconded by Supervisor Mercarini). Roll call recorded 9 ayes, 1 no; outcome: continued one week.

The continuance preserves time for further negotiation and for budget committee follow-up. The board indicated it would revisit the items at the next meeting, with supervisors saying they planned additional discussions about which programs would be cut if the city had to cover savings through service reductions rather than contract approvals.

Items related to the same budget package and additional supplemental appropriations were discussed elsewhere during the meeting and remain pending before the full board.