is the estimate. the second column shows the actual revenue that came in. if you go over to this column, we had 107 hottest up -- audits of lots. this compares to 5 1/5 to total. in the last fiscal year, we have wanted about a third. this shows the number of deficiencies that have no change. we had 39 of them. in 2010, we had 45 of them.

about 75% or complaint with our parking tax laws. the next shows the deficiencies of less than $50,000. the next shows the number of deficiencies greater than $50,000 and there was three of those. the final line shows the number of auditors assigned to this area. they brought in about a million dollars in taxes, penalties, and interest. >> that million dollars shows the audit tax deficiencies between 2008 and 2009 and then estimated for the current fiscal year, about a million years -- about a million dollars. there were about 180 auditive. is that correct?

>> yes, that is correct. we are trying to audit every parking lot once every three years. we feel that we can on it every parking lot and make sure that we can recover the full efficiency. >> i am trying to close the loop on this, while the face of the debate merits the arguments on all sides, i want to make sure that we close on the particular assertion if there is the and recovered revenue potential. if the war but is it about five other 50 or 600 and total in the

city and county of san francisco and they have an audit function that is focused on 100-150 parking months per year bringing in a revenue of about 1 million per year, that is a different goal of $20 million that was represented. while we do everything we can to try to recover more funds, it does not speak to the reality that if we are looking to generate greater revenue, will this parking tax the less necessary because there is revenue being generated elsewhere and it is not being recovered? well, it is not. this makes the original point about the taxes itself. if we are deficient, this is why

the strategy should be seriously considered. 80% of this tax is generated. when the parking tax was tried several years ago, this did not receive the support of the mta for the executive director. we realize this is part of the taxes and the revenue generators. thank you to the treasurer's office. >> if there are specific to upset anyone has about things and not getting reported, we have a hot line. you can make chips that are anonymous. we will investigate any that we will receive. >> how many parties have? >> i don't have the information.

>> is it like one of those machines that will discourage -- distort your voice? >> it is the voice mailbox. >> i would like to open this up for public comment. >> good afternoon, supervisors. we are from the mission district. i'm here to ask for us to reconsider because of the economy ecology. there is an increase of 10%. i would have to pass that on to the restaurant patrons. i did not go to college, i am not an economist.

the restaurants are empty. people are already spending $15 and parking before they even get to the restaurant. all of the revenue generated will no longer be a part of the city's coffers. if people are not reporting, let's make it happen. maybe we can impose stiffer penalties for those who don't report. i was born and raised in the mission. anything to collect that tax, i am with it but i don't think increase in the parking tax right now would be the best solution. if you take away 10% of my gross revenue, that would illuminate me. i went to washington to speak to creating new jobs in washington. 10% taking away from my gross revenue would affect 25 families.

>> [singing ] i am driving too low taxes field. nothing to get hung about strawberry tax fields forever driving is difficult with eyes closed and when you are behind the wheel what i'm trying to tell you, i would like a lower tax revealed. let me drive your car because i and dredging to lower tax strawberry fields you have a great tax deal nothing to get hung about, and strawberry tax field forever

open bracke>> thank you. >> we have a different as you of what is going on in the industry. one of the statements i made last week, i had to go look at one prosecution from the past 10 years. there are still many at the federal level. there's not been any kind of prosecution in this industry for money. some of them total millions of dollars. i was talking about $700 million

last week. the settlement was a good deal. for the golden gate parking lot, what was reported was $5 million. the performing arts parking lot , a federal investigation noticed that there was swing shift revenues they're being lost entirely. we are aware of other issues. there are lots sell the market. there are also workers paid in cash. we are asking again for strong good and clear enforcement.

we want to come up with a mechanism that identifies parking revenue. we are being skimmed. thank you for a much. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. plan with the california parking company. i am also with the san francisco parking association. last week, we talked about a $20 million shortfall and we will try to substantiate that. with that number came from, but three or four years ago, a nationwide firm that

specializes in blocking such parking audits -- that specializes in parking audits. so far, he has collected over $15 million per year. the way he came up with the to $20 million was that he extrapolated the number by taking the number of parking locations in san francisco, the average number of spaces per location, then he takes the rate per space. then he comes to an average location and an under reporting rate of 20%. so, we did a quick study of the

parking locations of san francisco. we extrapolated what we can come up with as far as we thought should have been reported. we have 625 businesses, we have about 185 spaces per facility. the average ticket price is above $15. when we look at the generation per year, this is about $424,000. this should be about 84 million. there is the under reported amount of about 20 million.

i don't think the auditor knows exactly how to do this. there's no water the and on weekends. >> thank you. >> i would like to see the data. this sounds instructive. this is something that you can forward it to our office. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker. >> good afternoon. she generally respond to the comments regarding the earlier tax measures in that we have not seen him stay consequences from that. i would agree that you cannot attribute all things that to one thing but there is a reality that we have to consider in san francisco that we are 70,000

jobs less. if you look at job growth in the surrounding counties, you will see job growth in those counties. we don't see that happening in san francisco. you have to have some of the suburban growth which is what we are not necessarily advocating for. there is not job growth. we are putting a greater cost of doing business in relation to the surrounding counties and the the city. i would encourage you to keep those things into consideration as you deliberate. >> thank you. is any other member of the public that would like to comment?

>> i am remembering when the parking tax was in effect earlier. i gather in the was no desire to include senior services. i would like to suggest that you checked the lawsuit that ended the parking taxes for senior services because that was a suit against the city which they were told that they could not charged taxed twice said they had to illuminate it. the city attorney's office should have some reference of that and i suggest you check it. i think that taxing parking lot is better than taxing individual cars all over the city. we need a little bit more than a

telephone number to get people to come in. if they did not see parking months reporting income, they would turn it in. >> thank you. we will close public comment. >> i like to ask you all to review the same data. we want to be the most effective city in recovering those costs. i presume you will follow up.

>> to be happy to do this. the king to propose legislation in the coming months are so, this titans' our ability to increase penalties. we are looking forward to working with the board on this in the future. thank you. >> and os that this would go to the board without recommendation. >> a cave. that is the last item on our special. we can go to the first item on our regular meeting. this is about the appropriation to bring forward and to balance.

we're looking at this for the move on it -- on expended funds. i will just read what is on here. the first part is 6.3 million in the general fund balance which is really the real estate transfer tax. there is also related to that, an increase in property tax, a formula that goes towards the surplus in library and other

fund balances, the real estate transfer tax that = $320,000. there's also the administration processing feed that is part of the supplemental and also the program for $103,000. >> this is the board of supervisors approval of the increased fees and the assessment appeals which is associated with the programs which could draw down additional revenue. >> these will be going towards children, youth, and family services. also the department of aging and adult services.

we would lexus to be able to fund it our restoration list. this is what we would need to do in order to troop up the restoration. >> buying support that list. thank you for helping to shepherd this. i just want to ask your process question, if we want to amend or add to the list, i would for did this without any recommendation to the board. >> well, i don't exactly feel comfortable amending the list.

i could look at adding the question. it would trigger a hearing on this item again in committee before we go to the full board. this seems like where i would feel the most comfortable. i did not see this as the right way to go. >> i have information about amending the organist for $1.6

million. -- amending this for $1.6 million. do we do this together or separate. we wanted to advance this with the recommendation to the full board. >> supervisors, usually there are multiple ways to move what you're suggesting. obviously, there are not available sources for that property tax. if you amend up the supplemental, it has to be continued to a subsequent date.

just something to think about. >> i don't want to do that. >> alternately, we could prepare a supplemental appropriation for you to introduce shortly that could be considered by the committee in a subsequent meeting. >> this is part and parcel to the discussion. >> on tuesday, of course the board has the ability to amend the budget. you have the full budget before you. the only thing there is that the general fund reserve, you cannot reduce the general fund reserves in the adopted budgets given the policies that have been adopted. you can spend the funds throughout the years, this does

need to repeat annual. >> what if we were just to move forward to amend this now? >> that if we what you have before you is a supplemental appropriation. >> can we open this up for public comment? this is an item related to the appropriation to make sure that our budget is balanced. >> i wanted to encourage you to pass this. i have heard nothing but praise for this committee.

i have heard it from contractors and they want to thank you for your restoration. there were signs of all the tables talking about meals on wheels. hopefully, this will be done in a positive manner. everyone was overjoyed that the mills would continue. i am sure that you will be getting more thinks later. -- thanks later. i am sure you will hear more of that. >> thank you. >> i also want to thank you. i hope that you to restore the hospital beds. if you don't do this now, maybe

the next meeting. that is ok with us. >> thank you. >> [singing] please release the item. show the children and youth and their families that you care. please release the money and i know you will be there. they will use that and only frye and care. please release the money general fund. let it go. you will see how far they will go.

we will be in aware of how budget and finance really cares. >> we will close public comment. >> in know how we were perpetrating an expected property-tax is which would fall under the definition of one time. >> this is a very high property- tax.

it states that any requirements is not effective. that is circumstance we are and. although this is a revenue that we are perpetrating, that is really the result of the extremely abnormal month of june. that might have been required to deposit the stabilization reserve because you are eligible to withdraw.

>> we are allowed with the supplemental to take money from the general fund reserve. the reserve policy that applies year round, this does not apply to the budgets. >> the stabilization reserve and to transfer tax apply the whole year. >> that is not a budget specific policy. >> ok. colleagues, and motioned to move this forward. we will take this with the objection. okay. madam car, do we have any other items? >> no, mr. chairman. >> we are adjourned