madam clerk: [reading roll] excuse me, mr. president, we need to take off items 63. president chiu: my apologies. colleagues, should have mentioned that i would like for us -- >> we can continue it later. president chiu: if i can also pull item 63 for separate consideration. roll-call vote. president -- note madam clerk: [reading roll]

vierra a 11yes. -- there are 11 ayes. president chiu: those are passed. someone has been waiting to comment on this item, and i would like to ask him to come today. i would like to ask if you have anything to say. >> thank you. i was drawn to this meeting because this was on the agenda.

the board of supervisors, total support of this resolution that seeks to advance governor schwarzenegger, the proposition that would include a pardon for eddy zheng. i am spent nearly 40 years in the profession of probation. civic redemption. in my 5 plus years here in san francisco, come across and had the pleasure -- i have come across and had the pleasure to work with eddy zheng on behalf of you, so my support on this resolution comes based on my belief of the value of second chance and the example but eddy zheng sets for youth in san

francisco, by him korean a pathway for his own redemption, and he service for the young in san francisco, and it would be a loss -- by him setting a pathway for his own redemption. so i am just lend my support for this resolution and hope that it is advance. thank you. president chiu: thank you, and 84 being here. supervisor -- and thank you for being here. supervisor alioto-pier? supervisor alioto-pier: this would be a full pardon,

nonetheless, and i wanted to do due diligence, and i would be happy to support this. president chiu: supervisor mirkarimi? supervisor mirkarimi: i have participated and watched eddy, as well as many others, part of the city family in non-profit family, etc. his contribution is invaluable, and i am really pleased to see the way we are rallying around. i think it is an important message for governor schwarzenegger in the state to understand just how important this case is. -- and the state. president chiu: i think all of the co-sponsors for supporting that. particularly a chance that he

does not get deported. actually, if we could take a roll-call vote? madam clerk: [reading roll] there are 11 ayes. president chiu: this item is adopted. next item. madam clerk: the draft environmental impact report for a minimum of 90 days.

president chiu: supervisor campos? supervisor campos: thank you. i introduced this because we have a very controversial plan. they have actually agreed with our proposal with respect to the additional time, so i am willing to have a motion. president chiu: colleagues, any objection? without objection. please call item 63. maddon: clerk -- madam clerk: item 63 is four arguments for submitted for the 2010 election. president chiu: the dust has

settled on the items we would move forward, so i will ask that we can continue this next week so we can figure out who wants to write to various components and argument. it is my intent that the main proponents -- what i intend to do in working with the clerk's office is to have a version for us to consider next week, at which time we still have time for that to happen. so unless there is any discussion, if i can have a motion to continue, by supervisor avalos, seconded by supervisor mar, so this will be continued. item 64. madam clerk: item 64, a motion

directing the budget and legislative analyst to on this in the fiscal office of public defender. >> this board, the public defender's office, and the budget analyst, the budget, how it relates to the superior court budget, and i think that i mistakenly -- as a budget chaired deferred out of respect for the public defender. we do have openings in our budget analyst schedule this year, and i know that supervisor alioto-pier is moving forward to

look at children's programs in san francisco, and it seems that it may be a good use of our schedule to perhaps once and for all end the debate, the dance of what happens with the public defender's budget every year. there was a response this morning which talks about a review, and i would like to thank our budget analyst for staying around press to and to questions -- around perhaps to answer questions. how the budget analyst would differ from the reviews with the fiscal audits that the

comptroller's office has done. >> mr. chairman, mr. president, and members of the board of supervisors, a comprehensive performance of the defender would consist of reviewing the complete operation of the public defender's -- whether or not they were operating in an efficient manner. there is a difference. i would be glad to respond to any other questions. president chiu: supervisor

elsbernd. supervisors elsbernd: i do not think anyone has raised more issues than i have on this. tw reasons why i think this should be rejected. -- two reasons. truth is, there's been significant review. we have very limited resources. i think if we are going to use those resources, we should use those to focus on those departments that have not had any review. secondly, and perhaps maybe it should not be raised, but i think it needs be raised, there have been things quoted by members of the board that retribution needed to be exacted

against the public defender's office. i do not want to be a party to that. whether you agree or disagree with what the public defender has done, we should not disagree -- should not in any way exact retribution. we all know that is what this is. let's not disabuse our power for a sort of a political retribution. president chiu: supervisor campos? supervisor campos: one of the interesting things about being on the board of supervisors is you never know what is going to happen. chloé against this item in reference to the public defender, so anything is possible in san francisco. we simply say that i like audits.

but that said, i am not sure exactly why it is that this case we're focusing on the public defender. i think that it makes sense for us to look at the number of issues not only with the public defender but among the other law offices, perhaps. but i just do not see the reason to focus on it, so i would respectfully disagree with the author of this. i understand the spirit in which it is done. thank you. president chiu: supervisor daly? supervisor daly: let me respond to both with the same answer,

which is that for eight years, almost every other instance, i have sided with a budget analyst and his recommendations. when it came to the public defender, i come out of deference to the elected official, sided with the public defender over the budget analyst, 98 times up of 100. in terms of retribution, i think where this comes from is that is when you are politically aligned with someone, and supervisor elsberd, the administration, you oftentimes are deferential to them. there are party-line votes, and you see it in the chambers of the time.

who is where, but, typically, on the important stuff, you have a difference, and i am saying that i think i was wrong. and i am not totally sure that i was wrong in budget cycle of the budget cycle, but i think that a management audit would give some clarity as to who is telling the truth. you have an 80-page document from the public defender telling one thing, and you have a 20- page report saying something different. which one is right? they are both not right. i have never called it retribution. it is not to exact revenge on the public defender. i think we should have more honesty in budgeting. making a mistake and siding with the budget analyst.

i have had a relationship with him personal and political over the years. now u.s. realignment -- now you have realignment. we are seeing right now the opposite in terms of revenge being practiced by supervisor elsbernd. i made a mistake, and i think this board made a mistake in minicycles -- in many cycles. kaat disagreed with the head of the public defender's office. -- disagreed. president chiu: colleues, the item is before us. madam clerk, an roll call vote.

madam clerk: [reading roll] there are two ays and nine noes. president chiu: that is not passed. do we have any in memoriams today? madam clerk: yes, these people. president chiu: madam clerk,

could there be any more business today? madam clerk: know. president to:chiu: we are adjourned.

>> good afternoon, welcome to the board of supervisors meeting for july 27th. mr. president, all members are

president. >> can you please turn for the pledge of allegiance? >> i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> colleagues, you should have copies of the board meeting minutes, do i have a motion to approve? without objection, those are approved. madame clerk, are there any communications? >> items one through five are the consent agenda and it will be acted upon by a single roll call vote. >> colleagues, roll call vote on items one through five. >> aye. >> aye.

>> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> 11 in favor. >> those ordinances are finally passes. >> can you call items number6 and 7? >> these are the proposed budget an annual appropriation of perpetrating all estimates and estimates for the -- upper pretty all estimates for the city of san francisco. -- appropriating all estimates for the city of san francisco. >> colleagues, any discussion?

can we get a roll-call? >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> no. >> aye. aye. >> those finally passed. can we call the next three items? >> items 8-10, these are from the budget and finance committee without recommendation. item number 8, a motion ordering submitted to the voters of

arkansas to rise in an amendment to the real property transfer tax. item nine, an ordinance revising the payroll expense -- expense tax to establish a progressive tax rate structure. item number 10, this is an ordinance authorizing the ordinance amending san francisco business and tax regulation code for a parking ordinance. >> san francisco faces tremendous financial challenges as a result of the crisis. we have just recently closed a $483 million budget deficit. this is a brief respite for our financial health. we don't know what will happen. we will be able to see our full budget for this year.

the proposal for the deficit of next year, this is well over half a billion dollars. the year after that, the same. this is well over half a billion dollars. we have cut well into the phone. these are the things that make san francisco a unique place in the country. labor will give back $250 million in lost wages and benefits. these are significant sacrifices that labor unions have been making and members will be facing in order to continue living in san francisco and it will be much more difficult to put food on the table.

over the past year, the city has cut 64 million in the overtime and salaries. we have cut many services and the san franciscans around the city are facing higher and higher fees. we need to have revenue as part of our budget solution. that is what i'm proposing an increase in the real estate transfer tax. this increase is not affecting every day people who own single- family homes. this is an increase for property that is sold at a volume of over $5 million.

we also need to know as the city is cutting back on services, we have given back. we have to have revenue as far as the solution. i hope that you will consider this as part of our revenue solutions. this offers of important way to bring revenue to our city. >> thank you.

as i stated when a number of this, they take time to study the various proposals. i would like to have support for the transfer tax and i would make a motion to table the business tax proposal that i have put forth. the november ballot is a very crowded but we must make important decisions that garner significant support and consensus. the tax proposal that i put forth came out of many many months of research and frankly out of request that we have asked of our controller and the