Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Process Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Budget committee hears BLA, controller and mayor's office on reforms to timing, transparency and add‑backs
Summary
In a broad Dec. 12 hearing, the Budget & Finance Committee received recommendations from the Budget & Legislative Analyst and the City Controller to make the budget process more transparent, set early board policy priorities, and reform the add‑back process; the Mayor’s Budget Office generally agreed but warned that moving the mayor’s proposed budget to May 1 would be difficult due to late-arriving labor and revenue data.
The Budget & Finance Committee held a full hearing Dec. 12 to review a pair of reports — from the Budget and Legislative Analyst (BLA) and the City Controller — and to solicit the Mayor’s Budget Office’s response on ways to strengthen San Francisco’s budget process.
Amanda Guma of the BLA presented findings from a survey of 23 peer jurisdictions and five years of local fiscal data. The BLA reported that the city's general‑fund revenue grew from about $3.3 billion to $5.8 billion since FY 2011–12 and that the city's unassigned fund balance and overall reserves have grown substantially. The BLA noted San Francisco's two‑year fixed budget is uncommon and recommended several options including an annual BLA overview report, earlier board policy‑priority setting, and shifting more department submissions to May to spread work out of the June crunch.
Controller Ben Rosenfield said stakeholder surveys highlighted strengths (schedule management and public participation) and repeated concerns about transparency and the 'add‑back' process by which the Board reallocates savings at the end of the budget process. Rosenfield presented data showing a marked increase in small add backs and urged the Board to adopt clearer policy priorities early, improve stakeholder education and consider redesigning the add‑back mechanics to make allocations more strategic and transparent.
Melissa Whitehouse of the Mayor’s Budget Office said the mayoralty largely agrees with the recommendations but cautioned that moving the mayor's formal proposed budget from June 1 to May 1 would be operationally difficult because key information (labor contracts, the controller’s revenue update and the governor’s revised budget) often arrives in mid‑ to late May. Whitehouse recommended earlier submission of policy priorities by the Board and suggested using May hearings more productively and considering more departments on fixed two‑year budgets.
Community groups in public comment urged more time for Board review, more transparency for district set‑aside add backs, stronger public outreach and a renewed focus on revenue options and equity in allocations. Chair Cohen said the committee will continue work on implementing improvements in early 2018 and moved to file the hearing; the motion passed without objection.
Next steps: the committee said it will work with the BLA, controller and mayor’s budget office to develop near‑term and longer‑term reforms, including ways to make the add‑back process more transparent and to adopt early Board policy priorities.
