Supervisors advance amendment to Children’s Services Allocation Plan after hours of public comment

Supervisor (item presenter) introduced an amendment to the Children’s Services Allocation Plan (CSAP) that formalizes committee compromises and lists proposed restorations and add‑backs, including $232,350 in general-fund add‑backs and a $1,000,000 allocation for a therapeutic foster care pilot. The committee sponsor said he requested the pilot and asked that the $1,000,000 be placed on reserve for 60 days pending presentation of an implementation plan.

The item sponsor said the amendment excludes several items previously removed from the children’s fund (including a baby bond and cultural vouchers) and restores targeted funding: $1,000,000 for therapeutic foster care, funding for the Ella Hill Hutch Community Center, expansion of youth workforce programs and $200,000 to restore cuts to agencies funded through the children’s fund. He framed the foster-care item in fiscal terms, noting institutional placements can cost approximately “$187,500 a year per child” and argued a pilot could serve more children with better outcomes.

Dozens of public commenters urged the committee to protect the integrity of the children’s fund and to allocate growth according to the CSAP. Andrew Russo, director of the San Francisco Family Support Network, said, “Reality is that 3,000 children still wait for childcare in this city,” and asked how the committee will remain accountable to community needs identified in recent assessments. Jill Roysen of California Lawyers for the Arts said a $10,350 restoration to a youth employment and apprenticeship program would place 25 more youth into jobs; she warned the successful pilot “will cease without this support.”

Advocates from the Family Budget Coalition, Edgewood Center, Coleman Advocates and the Citizen’s Advisory Committee echoed those themes: they urged that $3,250,000 of growth be added back to DCYF and allocated through a request-for-proposals process aligned with the CSAP. Kate Kalkstein of the Edgewood Center said the therapeutic foster care pilot should be coordinated with a broader foster-care task force process and not implemented in isolation.

Committee members asked procedural questions about placing the item on reserve. Budget staff noted that the committee had not previously reserved the item; the sponsor requested a 60-day reserve at the full Board if needed. After discussion, there was a motion to move the amendment forward with recommendation; the motion was seconded and the item was forwarded to the full Board for consideration.

The committee’s action forwards the amendment for full Board review; the record shows strong public demand for allocations tied to the CSAP and calls for targeted childcare and foster-care investments. Next steps: the amendment will appear before the full Board of Supervisors where the committee’s recommended reserve and any implementation plans will be considered.