other commissioners, thank you for joining us as well. we have 25 individuals today who are sacrificing a lot of personal time, sacrificing their own family's time away for night meetings, a lot of reading of paperwork, a lot of public engagement. we also have some 15 different bodies that you'll be appointed to today. and, so, it is my pleasure to welcome you and to suggest to you that i personally appreciate citizens of san francisco stepping forward to help us manage this city. it never is ever about one office. it's not even about two offices. it's about how we conduct ourselves to reach out, engage people in the public to help serve our city. your ideas, your engagement

with us, you're aligning where we want to go to make the city a greater city is really the essence of managing a city. and i've learned that in many, many years of being a public serve ant, being an advocate to make sure the city represented its own diversity, of using that diversity as our strength, and going forward each of you are being asked to serve on extremely important commissions and bodies that i fully, fully respect. from fire, to transportation, to people handling billions of dollars in retirement, to our arts, to our health, to just getting permits out so that we can help people be success in this city. all of you are part of that. i just happened to address several hundred people this morning at a breakfast to talk about the health of our city. and part of that discussion was not just the health care

programs that the country is heading into. it's also health means are we doing everything right for people? are we building strong communities? are we building neighborhoods? are we giving people the foundation in which they can invest to create a family, that they can have hope for their kids? all of you are part of that agenda, and every decision that you make and the people that come before you want to feel the hope and the foundation that this city has. and, so, i want to thank you, each and every one of you, in your various capacities that you will take on, that you help us be a better city, be a more compassionate city, a city that will help me build more affordable housing, create more jobs, sustain the job situation that we have, to make it ultimately a city of hope for everyone. that is why we emanate our name

of the city of st. francis. we have to be of hope to everybody. not just in america any more. we're a city of immigrants as well. so, your commissions also have to have a viewpoint that we are a world class city and we are a city that everybody, the whole world looks at to establish what are good economics, what is fairness and equity, and what is excitingly ip ~ innovative as a world class city. thank you for stepping up. if you would now stand up, i will provide you with the oath of office. and if you'll please say each of your names individually as i begin. and then at the end, you will jointly say that the bodies that you are about to be

appointed to. please repeat after me. i... i... [speaker not understood] >> do solemnly affirm >> do solemnly affirm >> that i will support and defend the constitution of the united states and the constitution of the state of california >> and the constitution of the state of california >> against all enemies foreign and domestic >> against all enemies foreign and domestic >> that i will bear true faith and allegiance to the constitution of the united

states >> to the constitution of the united states >> and the constitution of the state of california >> and the constitution of the state of california >> that i take this obligation freely >> that i take this obligation freely >> without any mental reservation >> without any mental reservation >> and for purpose of evasion and that i will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which i'm about to enter such time as i go to office of... >> [speaker not understood].

>> [speaker not understood]. >> art commission. >> for the city and county of san francisco. congratulations, thank you very much. [cheering and applauding] >> thank you. thank you, everybody, for being here.

we are celebrating the glorious grand opening of the chinese rec center. ♪ 1951, 60 years ago, our first kids began to play in the chinese wrecks center -- rec center. >> i was 10 years old at the time. i spent just about my whole life here. >> i came here to learn dancing. by we came -- >> we had a good time. made a lot of friends here. crisises part of the 2008 clean neighborhood park fund, and this is so important to our families. for many people who live in chinatown, this is their backyard. this is where many people come to congregate, and we are so happy to be able to deliver this

project on time and under budget. >> a reason we all agreed to name this memorex center is because it is part of the history of i hear -- to name this rec center, is because it is part of the history of san francisco. >> they took off from logan airport, and the call of duty was to alert american airlines that her plane was hijacked, and she stayed on the phone prior to the crash into the no. 9 world trade center. >> i would like to claim today the center and the naming of it. [applause] >> kmer i actually challenged me to a little bit of a ping pong -- the mayor actually challenge

me to a little bit of a ping- pong, so i accept your challenge. ♪ >> it is an amazing spot. it is a state of the art center. >> is beautiful. quarkrights i would like to come here and join themtest. >> good morning, everyone and welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors for june 24th. i'm mark farrell. i'm joined by supervisor and the

vice chair and others. i'd like to thank the members of the sftv for according this as well as the clerk. mr. clerk any announcements >> yes, please silence all cell phones and other documents. all documents shall be submitted to the clerk. all items will be on the agenda >> thank you, colleagues we have one item. and from the department of technology. so mr. clerk call item number one >> the ordinance to retroactively accept the grant from the national science of foundations and ordinance 9645

to accept the position at the department of technology and a okay good morning. i'm ken i'm representing the department of technology. the national science foundation awarded to the san francisco the grant to cover the costs of mr. chris intergovernmental science technology office. the amendment provided that all direct costs including salary and fringe will be reimbursed and this is to accept this agreement in the expenditure of the funds >> colleagues any questions? and a okay. we don't have a budget analyst report so we'll

move on to public comment. that i public comment? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues can i have a motion to move this item to full board >> okay without opposition. mr. clerk call items 23 and 3 >> item number two the appropriation for all expenditures to the departments of city and county of san francisco as of may 31st for fiscal years 2014 and 15. >> item number 3 the salary owns for fiscal years june 2014 and 15. >> okay. thank you mr. clerk. >> colleagues we have the beginning of week two here and a number of departments first up our assessor report.

>> we tampa last week and talked about where we plan to go. over the week

w d. >> good morning todd director of the office of workforce have meant. we're in all the time with the budget analyst recommendations. i want to thank our cf o for working together over the past week >> okay. thank you. >> any questions. okay. can we go to the report and on page 12 our recommended rescues are together with the un

- they total 55978 in n fourteen >> colleagues any questions for mr. rose? and a okay. thank you mr. rose. colleagues any other questions for the department >> i'm sure they'll all go like this. colleagues can i have a motion >> so moved. >> okay. so moved. we have our planning department welcome back >> good morning john ram with the planning department. we are in agreement that there would be i think the number $360,000 in cuts. i also just wanted to mention

the policy issue that was placed the budget analyst report. we're taking the steps to have you approve the numbers of positions that are not funded to allow the flexibility in the coming budget noois the money does come in. it would allow us to hire people more quickly coming presumably if the funds don't come in. that is the intent of doing that it's our experience that the hiring can take 6 months that gets us favor behind >> any questions. >> mr. rose our report please. mr. chairman and members of the committee own page 20 our recommended reductions are 229 and in fourteen, 15 our

recommend reductions are 369. >> any comments? >> yes mr. chairman and members of the committee on page 20 of the report - 23 of our report we continue to make the same recommendations that the policy recommended we're have 9 new positions that are not funded. we consider that to be a policy decision and we recommended they be 10 year positions >> okay supervisor breed question? >> specifically for the amount that's recommended to reduce is not a part of the general funds enemy correct? >> you raised this question last week and mr. rosenfield is

here to respond. the committee has already discussed those are general fund reductions >> thank you. >> supervisor breed this is really a choice for the committee to make. of the $350,000 that has been requested. $240,000 can be taken as a general fund reduction. but the balance of those r is a choice to make the reduction in a way whether you take is in a reduction of the fee revenue and the savings wouldn't flowback through the general fund >> based upon this committees inquiry we strongly recommended

i take it for a reduction. >> and i'd like to make a motion that we take it as a general fund reduction completely. >> okay. why don't we do that on the - actually let me ask mr. city attorney i want to make sure we decide the policy can we talk about the oppositions. i assume we can approve those but can you clarify your recommendation >> my recommendation is that they - there's two things before you mr. chairman as i understand. one is our recommendations that are not a policy on page 20 and supervisor breed has made a further you amendment that be a

general fund expect for the one half of fund. the policy recommendation on page 23 they are stating it's somewhat unusual for a department to request new positions where there's no money in the budget for them but the department wants to expedite so when they're able to get the funds they can higher the positions right away. first of all, we're saying it's a policy that's up to you to decide whether you want to approve the recommendation but that you want to approve the positions we ask they be limited positions so we're saying for the term of respected project for example, if the project lasted for two years they should be limited for two years ago as opposed to creating new ongoing positions forever

>> are all those positions project based? >> the way their currently proposed they're not limited tenure but we've hired i 15 people because of the economy and those are all limited tenuous u you are i'm hoping those won't be. it's hard to define them as a project because they're working on the environmental reviews as part of the private projects come in the door >> but if you don't have limited tenure they'll be buried in the budget and we wouldn't call them out again basis the committee has approved them for permanent positions. >> i would say that two years gives us flexibility so long as it's notes 6 months.

>> two years is fin. >> can i ask the department to talk about the safes inform the general fund or simply general fees and a thank you. in the decision we did with the budget analyst offices those are fee reductions. there's a capture of policy issues. one it simply that the department is in the position now where the developers and fee pairs are paying for all activities save 10 percent. in past years it was thirty percent and there was about 70 percent of the departments budget that was being paid out of fees and it is in terms of our actual have meant preview. we've been reduced substantially

they're paying for streetscape work and the park program. i think there's a serious policy issue whether that's appropriate. i know that community members are concerned about the prospective that the developers are paying for all our with work. i will say that our general proposal is actually thirty percent loerp than last year's allocation. so we're taking a a bigger cut than the mayor's office has asked us but we want to justify the non project work we do >> supervisor breed. >> my thing is broken so i can't push in - but i want to know the problem with the - and

a we're doing streetscape work like on third and there's a lot of other work that is not directly - we don't charge a fee for and i think there's a prospective that the developers are paying for the projects but they're paying to review their projects. >> so i'm trying to understand i don't think i've gotten a clear answer to justify why this shouldn't come from the general fund allocation. what impacts it's not clear, you know, whether or not there would be, you know, a significant impact to our department if we

choose to allow it to move forward as

. >> supervisor wiener. >> question for if we take this as general funds as a general

fund savings does that have an impact on fees in the department. >> it will likely have an impact on fee not this year because our revenues are strong but in a few years we'll have to increase the fees. >> we have not increased fees in four years. >> i understand and support the desire to take, you know, to try to take savings to the general fund so we can reallocate those funds to our prioritys but i don't think i'll be supporting the motion. >> okay. so we have two issues

before us one the actual supervisor breed made a motion again, i appreciate the comments and more than anyone i appreciate the need in terms of general fund revenue here but i krir with supervisor on this item. so why don't we have a vote on supervisors breeds motion to accept the budget analysts recommendations for the general fund >> on that motion (calling names) the motion passes. and on the policy matter in terms of hiring personally - mr.

ram i appreciate our comments come back and having the tenure positions to two terms. i appreciate why you're doing this it is unusual but especially in the have meant world i understand the hiring plans but if you come o come back next year we'll have scrutiny that these are passing. so can i have a limited term for two years >> okay. up next department of technology. mark welcome back >> good morning i'm mark director of the department of technology. first looked like to thank the analysts katie for a productive

process with collaboration and i'm glad to say we're in agreement with the analysts this morning a >>