Rosenfield Decl. ISO CCSF’s Motion for PI; 

Case # 17-00485

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

DENNIS J. HERRERA, State Bar #139669

City Attorney 

JESSE C. SMITH, State Bar #122517 Chief Assistant City Attorney 

RONALD P. FLYNN, State Bar #184186 Chief Deputy City Attorney 

YVONNE R. MERÉ, State Bar #173594

Chief of Complex and Affirmative Litigation 

CHRISTINE VAN AKEN, State Bar #241755 

TARA M. STEELEY, State Bar #231775

MOLLIE M. LEE, State Bar #251404 SARA J. EISENBERG, State Bar #269303

MATTHEW S. LEE, State Bar #295247 

NEHA GUPTA, State Bar #308864 

Deputy City Attorneys 

City Hall, Room 234 

1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place 

San Francisco, California 94102-4602 

Telephone: (415) 554-4748 

Facsimile: (415) 554-4715 

E-Mail: brittany.feitelberg@sfgov.org 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United 

States, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

JOHN F. KELLY, Secretary of United States 

Department of Homeland Security, 

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, Attorney General 

of the United States, DOES 1-100, 

 Defendants. 

Case No. 3:17-cv-00485-WHO 

DECLARATION OF BEN ROSENFIELD IN 

SUPPORT OF CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO’S MOTION FOR 

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

Date: April 12, 2017 

Time: 2:00 p.m. 

Judge: Honorable William H. Orrick 

Dept: Courtroom 2 

Date Filed: January 31, 2017 

Trial Date: Not set 

Case 3:17-cv-00485-WHO Document 22 Filed 03/08/17 Page 1 of 9
 

Rosenfield Decl. ISO CCSF’s Motion for PI; 

Case # 17-00485

1 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

I, Ben Rosenfield, declare as follows: 

1. I am a resident of the State of California. I have personal knowledge of the facts set 

forth in this declaration and, if called as a witness, could and would testify competently to the matters 

set forth below. 

2. I am employed by the City and County of San Francisco (the “City”) as Controller. I 

have held this position since March 2008. Prior to my appointment to this position, I was the Deputy 

City Administrator from 2005 to 2008. Prior to that position, I served as the Mayor’s Budget Director 

for Mayors Willie L. Brown, Jr. and Gavin Newsom, for the period from 2001 to 2005. Prior to that 

position, I served as a Project Manager in the Controller’s Office (2000-2001) and as a Financial and 

Policy Analyst and as a Deputy Director in the Mayor’s Budget Office (1997-2000). I have worked in 

a variety of budget, financial planning, public finance, and general administrative positions during my 

18 years of work for the City. 

3. I am familiar with Executive Order 13768, dated January 25, 2017, and titled 

“Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States” (the “Executive Order”). 

A. San Francisco Relies On Federal Funding For Essential Public Services. 

4. San Francisco is home to about 865,000 residents and has a total daytime population of 

about 1,250,000. People who live in, work in or visit San Francisco rely on—in addition to other 

public services—law enforcement provided by the San Francisco Police Department; public 

infrastructure projects such as roads, bridges and public transit; and the availability of high quality 

emergency care from San Francisco General Hospital. Residents also rely on public health programs 

such as Medi-Cal and public assistance programs like CalWORKS. While San Francisco has 

benefitted from a recent economic boom, over 12% of San Franciscans live in poverty, and depend on 

public assistance to make ends meet and put food on the table. 

5. San Francisco contributes disproportionately to national economic growth and job 

creation. Between 2010 and 2015, San Francisco ranked second among all U.S. counties in percentage 

change in employment, generating over 125,000 new jobs, a growth rate of 28%. A significant portion 

of this growth has been in the technology sector, a source of high wage jobs with important multiplier 

effects and potential for future growth. 

Case 3:17-cv-00485-WHO Document 22 Filed 03/08/17 Page 2 of 9
 

Rosenfield Decl. ISO CCSF’s Motion for PI; 

Case # 17-00485

2 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

6. The State of California, including San Francisco, pays more to the Federal government 

in taxes than it receives in federal spending. In 2014, California residents and businesses paid a total 

of $369.2 billion in federal business and personal income, estate, gift, and excise taxes to the Internal 

Revenue Services and were the beneficiaries of $355.8 billion in federal expenditures. California 

ranked 38th among states in the ratio of federal spending to collections. 

7. In turn, San Francisco relies on federal funding to provide essential services and build 

and maintain public infrastructure projects. 

8. San Francisco budgets for a fiscal year that runs from July 1 to June 30. The current 

fiscal year began July 1, 2016, and will end June 30, 2017 (“FY16-17”). The next fiscal year will run 

from July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018 (“FY17-18”). 

9. San Francisco’s annual operating budget for FY16-17 includes over $1.2 billion in 

federal funds. As shown in Figure 1, below, this is approximately 13% of the total annual operating 

budget of $9.6 billion. 

 Figure 1 

Case 3:17-cv-00485-WHO Document 22 Filed 03/08/17 Page 3 of 9
 

Rosenfield Decl. ISO CCSF’s Motion for PI; 

Case # 17-00485

3 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

10. The vast majority of federal funds in the annual operating budget—approximately 

92%—support programs in the San Francisco’s Human Services Agency and Department of Public 

Health. Most of this funds entitlement programs such as Medicaid and Medicare, Temporary 

Assistance for Needy Families, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, Foster Care, and various 

child welfare programs. Only a small percentage of federal funds—approximately 3%—goes to local 

law enforcement agencies. There is no connection between the purpose of the funds and federal 

immigration enforcement for all or almost all federal funds received by the City. 

11. On top of the federal funds allocated in the annual operating budget, San Francisco 

expects to receive an additional $800 million in federal multi-year grants, largely for public 

infrastructure projects such as building bridges, roads, and public transportation investments. As 

shown in Figure 2, below, federal funds currently committed to San Francisco total approximately $2 

billion. 

 Figure 2

12. The programs, projects, and services described below are just a few examples of how 

San Francisco uses federal funds. 

Case 3:17-cv-00485-WHO Document 22 Filed 03/08/17 Page 4 of 9
 

Rosenfield Decl. ISO CCSF’s Motion for PI; 

Case # 17-00485

4 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

1. Human Services Agency 

13. The San Francisco’s Human Services Agency (“HSA”) provides critical services to 

San Francisco’s most vulnerable residents. It works with over 200,000 residents each year to provide 

needed nutrition assistance, income support, and child welfare services, among other support services. 

Approximately one in four San Franciscans is a client of HSA. HSA also manages numerous 

programs that serve young children and their families, older adults, and individuals with disabilities. 

HSA relies on federal funding to provide these services. 

14. For example, the In-Home Supportive Services (“IHSS”) program enables about 23,000 

low-income elderly, disabled, or blind San Franciscans to live safely in their own homes and 

communities. For some recipients, the IHSS program reduces acute health care and institutional longterm care costs that would otherwise be incurred by the state and Federal governments through MediCal. About 19,000 individuals work as independent providers for IHSS recipients. For FY16-17, the 

County’s IHSS program is budgeted to receive approximately $64 million in federal funds, accounting 

for nearly 40% of the program’s budget. Virtually all of these funds are provided as reimbursements. 

This amount does not include the approximately $200 million of federal funds that the State of 

California pays directly to independent IHSS providers. 

15. HSA also provides financial assistance and services to San Francisco’s neediest 

residents, including children and families living in poverty. For example, through California Work 

Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKS), HSA provides financial assistance, family 

stabilization, case management, vocational counseling, job readiness assistance, behavioral health 

treatment, transportation, and other services designed to help parents of low-income families meet 

welfare-to-work requirements, secure and retain employment, and become self-sufficient. 

San Francisco’s CalWORKS program is budgeted to receive approximately $58 million in federal 

funding in FY16-17, accounting for over 50% of the County’s CalWORKS and Welfare-to-Work 

FY16-17 budget. Virtually all of these funds are provided as reimbursements. 

16. HSA offers numerous other social services, including child welfare programs and 

services, early childhood care and education services, adult protective services and a County Veteran’s 

Service Office that helps veterans and their families receive benefits to which they are entitled. 

Case 3:17-cv-00485-WHO Document 22 Filed 03/08/17 Page 5 of 9
 

Rosenfield Decl. ISO CCSF’s Motion for PI; 

Case # 17-00485

5 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

17. In FY16-17, HSA expects to receive a total of approximately $286 million in federal 

funding. This represents approximately 33% of its FY16-17 budget. 

18. HSA directly employs nearly 2,000 employees. It also funds hundreds of additional 

jobs through contracts to service providers. Loss of federal funds would threaten many of these jobs, 

as well as the underlying services, that depend on HSA funds. 

2. Department of Public Health 

19. The Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital (“ZSFGH”) is a licensed general acute 

care hospital owned and operated by San Francisco’s Department of Public Health (“DPH”). ZSFGH 

has 284 beds and provides a full complement of inpatient, outpatient, emergency, skilled nursing, 

diagnostic, mental health, and rehabilitation services for adults and children. ZSFGH is the largest 

safety net provider in San Francisco and is the designated trauma center for the 1.5 million residents of 

San Francisco and northern San Mateo County. In FY16-17, ZSFGH expects to receive 

approximately $450 million in federal funding for Medi-Cal and Medicare patient services. This 

accounts for over half of the ZSFGH FY16-17 budget of nearly $840 million. Virtually all of these 

funds are provided as reimbursements. 

20. Laguna Honda Hospital provides a full range of skilled nursing services to adult 

residents of San Francisco who are disabled or chronically ill, including specialized care for those with 

wounds, head trauma, stroke, spinal cord and orthopedic injuries, HIV/AIDS, and dementia. In FY16-

17, Laguna Honda Hospital expects to receive approximately $160 million in federal funding for 

Medi-Cal and Medicare patient services, accounting for nearly 60% of its budget. Virtually all of 

these funds are provided as reimbursements. 

21. DPH also provides direct services through its primary care clinics, HIV/AIDS health 

services, mental health and substance abuse treatment, housing and homelessness assistance, maternal 

and child healthcare, and jail health services. 

22. Additionally, the DPH Population Health Division addresses public health concerns, 

including consumer safety, health promotion, and disease prevention. DPH also monitors threats to 

public health. 

Case 3:17-cv-00485-WHO Document 22 Filed 03/08/17 Page 6 of 9
 

Rosenfield Decl. ISO CCSF’s Motion for PI; 

Case # 17-00485

6 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

23. Overall, in FY16-17, DPH expects to receive approximately $800 million in federal 

funding. This represents almost 40% of the Department’s FY16-17 budget. 

24. DPH has approximately 6,800 full-time equivalent employees, and it funds hundreds of 

additional jobs through contracts to service providers. Loss of federal funds would threaten many of 

the thousands of jobs that depend on DPH funds, as well as the services that DPH provides. 

3. Department of Emergency Management 

25. The Department of Emergency Management (“DEM”) leads San Francisco in planning, 

preparedness, communication, response, and recovery for daily emergencies, large scale citywide 

events, and major disasters. DEM is the vital link in emergency communication between the public 

and first responders. 

26. One of the programs DEM administers is the Bay Area Urban Areas Security Initiative 

(“UASI”), which sustains and improves regional capacity to prevent, mitigate, respond to, and recover 

from terrorist attacks and catastrophic disasters. UASI funds training exercises and regional 

emergency management and disaster response. This program is funded entirely by federal funds. 

27. In FY16-17, DEM anticipates receiving about $25 million in federal funding, mostly 

supporting the UASI program. This represents nearly 30% of the Department’s FY16-17 budget. 

B. Federal Funding Streams 

28. San Francisco receives federal funds directly from the Federal government, as well as 

indirectly through the State of California and other pass-through entities. For FY16-17, 

San Francisco’s budget includes over $1.1 billion in pass-through funds, the vast majority of which is 

passed through the State of California. If Defendants nonetheless cut off federal funds to California, 

this could result in the loss of pass-through funds to San Francisco. 

29. San Francisco receives federal funds as payments for entitlement programs, as well as 

through grants. These entitlement programs include Medicare, Medicaid (known as Medi-Cal in 

California), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, 

Foster Care, and various child welfare programs. Medicare is funded entirely with federal funds. 

Undocumented immigrants are not eligible to receive benefits from Medicare and most other 

Case 3:17-cv-00485-WHO Document 22 Filed 03/08/17 Page 7 of 9
 

Rosenfield Decl. ISO CCSF’s Motion for PI; 

Case # 17-00485

7 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

entitlement programs. Approximately 80% of the federal funds budgeted for FY16-17 are for 

entitlement programs. 

30. San Francisco receives most federal funds—for both grants and entitlement programs—

as reimbursements. San Francisco is currently providing services and benefits that the Federal 

government has agreed to reimburse. San Francisco is also building major transit expansions and other 

public infrastructure projects, as well as running programs across a variety of San Francisco agencies, 

based on the Federal governments’ commitment to pay for these projects and programs. The Executive 

Order calls into question whether the Federal government will in fact reimburse San Francisco for 

these funds. 

31. Since the Executive Order issued, San Francisco has received inquiries from credit 

rating agencies about the impact of the Executive Order on San Francisco’s finances, given the 

importance of federal funds on the City’s provision of public services. 

32. The City requests a rating from credit rating agencies each time bonds are issued. A 

rating is assigned based on the security or repayment source, general finances, the economy, debt and 

long-term liabilities, and financial management. 

33. San Francisco's next bond issuance is scheduled for the first week of May 2017. If 

credit rating agencies downgrade their assessment of San Francisco, it will increase San Francisco’s 

borrowing costs and thereby reduce funds available for direct public services. 

C. Coercive Effect Of The Executive Order 

34. San Francisco currently faces the prospect of sweeping cuts in necessary federal 

funding. The Executive Order threatens not to pay San Francisco over $2 billion in federal funds that 

is money already spent by San Francisco, money San Francisco is spending today, and money San 

Francisco has reasonably relied on receiving. 

35. The concern about losing federal funds is so acute that the Board of Supervisors has 

established the Budget and Finance Federal Select Committee, a new committee that will consider 

issues related to the possible loss of federal funds as a result of the Executive Order and other federal 

action. This is the first new select committee that the Board of Supervisors has established during the 

last decade. 

Case 3:17-cv-00485-WHO Document 22 Filed 03/08/17 Page 8 of 9