action the board so. gmajority of appeals where land use. permits were the next largest categories. you of held half of those -- the remaining matters were pending by the end of the year or withdrawn and. you can have a map of both property appeals throughout the city, and i think the map shows a fairly disperse area. in addition, the board spent a good chunk of time on revision.

i want to thank you for when you contributed on that. the board passed those and helped to fine-tune and create efficiencies. we also tried to reduce and the issues. there were 38. we have eliminated about a third of those. there is some work needed by other departments and some of the project sponsors need to take action, and most of the others were which pending -- with pending issues. the board undertook a variety of issues to improve access to

members of the public who have limited english speaking capabilities. we also have an organization but provides over the phone who translations. i feel we are capable of coverihelping just about anyoneo walks through gone doris. -- walks through the doors. we have been continuing to work on a database that will report on cases and also to create electronic notices on the board's decisions. gooi am hoping to have been bacd up and available to the public.

moving on to the budget, the board did face another challenging year. wheat ended with a deficit in -- we ended with the deficit. we did generate a surplus in our filing fees, but that is a small portion of the budget, and while a 6% revenue shortfall is not wonderful news, it is an improvement over prior years. i hope we continue to move in this direction and find the ability to generate revenue and this year and going forward.

it was pretty clear early on we needed to take some measures to reduce expenditures. we cut salary. we also were able to reduce some costs of processing of appeals, and we were also able to increase utilization of the work order. the board reduced expenditures by 13%. the current budget, we generated just over 30% of projected revenues so far. it is still difficult to see how

this will carry us through the rest of the year, and we are aware of how to limit expenditures where we stand. we will continue to develop electronic methods of tracking and sharing the board's work and to continue to review and updates all of the resource materials to provide as much service to the public as possible. >> i have an interesting note as far as when you were going over the 10-year cycle. good reason look at when filing fee increases occur and whether that impacted the number of

cases. -- we should look at the number of filing fee increases the darker and whether they impact the number of cases. i believe there were two increases in those years. >> i know since i have been on the board there was one increase, and most of those have not been increased for well over a dozen years. the surcharges have been adjusted on a more regular basis. >> this is very well done, but i am curious. this is a map of the city, and it states that fewer of appeals are filed in the southwest of

the city. does that area happen to appeal less? >> i do not know where it is spread out through the city, and i can certainly look into it. >> this is well done. thank you. >> i just wanted to commands director gold seen on thispreset illustrates a well-run agency, and you are doing a great job. i am particularly happy to hear about the increase in accessibility with translation services and website organizations. it is great news and a great way to help us help the public, and you have done a fantastic job.

it was challenging to try to revise some of our rules. i thank you for your patience with the process as well. we need to ask if there is any public comment. simenon, we need a motion to a except its. -- seeing none, we need a motion to accept it. >> so moved zeroth. it is such a fabulous report, we all would like to make the motion. >> on that motion to except the report for fiscal year 2010- 2011.

[calling votes] of the vote is 4-0. the annual report is accepted. >> there is no further business. we are adjourned.

>> i'm melissa griffin, i write about city politics and a member of the league of women voters. i am here to discuss a proposition g, voters will be faced with on november's valid. -- ballot. proposition g would increase the sales tax rate by 0.5% for a total tax rate of 9%. this would only happen if the state does not increase the sales tax by either 1% before november 30, 2011 or 0.75% before january 1, 2015. the city would pass a tax increase to pay for public

safety programs and the other half for programs for children and seniors. the city will start collecting this additional sales tax on april 1, 2012. it would apply for 10 years. prior to july 1, san francisco had the sales tax rate of 9.5%. the city decreased by 1% when it allowed to expire. san francisco only gets a fraction of this 8.5% sales tax. 7.25% goes to this day, the city receiving about 1%. -- goes to the state, the city receiving about 1%. i'm here with -- thank you for being here. please tell us why you are in

favor of proposition g. >> i believe the low income children, seniors, firefighters, and police officers are worth half a cent. it will restore funding that was cut from these programs. proposition g " restore $30 million so the children will have a better start in life and a better chance of succeeding in high school and college. >> san francisco has one of the highest sales tax rates. are you concerned that the passage will affect our tourism or adversely affect the economics? >> i am not concerned with that at all. tourism accounts for 40% of the revenue. it will still be lower than the

sales tax prior to july 1 of this year. >> my understanding is that it will be eliminated if the state raise the sales tax within the next year. in light of that, palace of the city is able to plan, budget, and expect those revenues if it passes. >> that's a good question. it is about local control. they can decide where their tax dollars go, in light of lack of leadership of politicians in sacramento, but we are not counting on that type of leadership occurring any time soon. it would be helpful that the politicians will listen to the need of san franciscans and act accordingly when they enacted the next sales tax. up next, we will be talking with an opponent.

i'm here with howard, former chairman of the san francisco republican party. he is an opponent of proposition g. thank you for being here. why should voters vote against proposition g? >> in this age of high unemployment and high high unemployment -- of high unemployment, a regressive sales tax will hurt everyone. just to give you an idea, in 2000, the budget was $4.2 billion. in 2010, the 2011 budget is 6.8 $3 billion. that is more than the budget -- $6.83 billion.

that is more than the budget of any other states. if you look at the way city hall is, there is over 100 commissions, boards, advisory boards, so on and so forth that overlap. they can combine a lot of them and save a lot of money. >> in light of the fact that this tax has already been proposed, it recently expired. how can you see consequences as a result of increasing the sales tax just .5%. >> it takes money away from the people that needed them most. if you are an upper-middle-class person, it won't harm you. but on lower end, it does harm you. that is why we should not pass if.

>> proponents say that we have to do this to offset the tax at the state level. how do you propose that the city deal with the extraordinary budget cuts that i've come from the state? >> proponent to are mostly public employees and employees of nonprofits will have you believe the sky is falling if they don't get this raised. if they go back to 0 base budgeting, do good budgeting, good management, they have plenty of money to run the city. >> we hope that that was helpful. for information on ballot measures, visit the web site of the league of women voters at sfvotes.org. early voting is available at city hall monday through friday 8:00 a.m. to 8 5:00 p.m.

8:00 a.m. to 8 5:00 p.m. if you don't vote early, vote on