will do that. >> why don't we do this? with regard to the budget analyst recommendations, if i hear correctly, number two, #4, #5 -- is that right? go ahead and three enumerate for us. >> i believe it is no. 2 and no. 4, and what you would request as to do is develop appropriate language to put in the agreement per your instructions, and you would be agreeing to the effect the assessment outside of the agreement, but it is something you do. >> the motion on items two and

four as described by this. >> thank you. can we take the objection to request that? the motion is passed. >> we still may come back to the other recommendations. i do not believe there is anyone else at the moment, and i do not think that because we continued this the public comment -- >> we have public comment on this item. >> i think with the latest bit of betting, i think the city has done to the utmost in putting forward the next plan. if possible, i think we could cross this, and before us is the

plan i would recommend goes to the full board of supervisors for tomorrow's consideration, and i think because of the elements of this plan and the fine work for the board of supervisors, the mayor's office common our analysts, etc., and by the public's contributions, i think san francisco stands to be the best contender for hosting the america's cup. >> great, and i want to thank the city as well for all the work that went into this agreement. also the comptroller's office.

this has been quite a way of putting together an agreement and negotiating with lots of participation from the media as well. i do not think that was the level of participation were bids are being made, no it was quite a lot of uncertainty for all parties involved about where we are going to get in the end. i am supportive, and i want to urge my colleagues to support this, and that is based on a proposal but has impacted the city and one i believe will be a net gain for the city as well. [applause] >> i motion that we advanced this to the full board with

recommendation. >> we will take five without objection. >> item #tune is a hearing. do you wish to file that item? >> 51, we can file. if you would please call item no. 1. good >> i just want to ask for an excusal of supervisor of front -- supervisor of burned -- elsburn. >> if you could call the first item? >> item #one affirmative on behalf of the city and county as owners of property over which the board of supervisors has jurisdiction, for those will be subject to assessment to rename the civic center.

>> good afternoon. is this going to show? is there a way to show the whole page? that is better.

bogne >> mr. clark, why don't you go ahead and call public comment? >> we are still in session. >> why don't you call public comment?

>> we have item one before us, so prior to a hearing from the city, we will have public comments. >> thank you very much, supervisors. the public library does not give money or a except money from the friends foundation. -- accept money from the friends

foundation. this is a library type issue, which is to say to divert funds just because a handful of rich people think they might then a set region might benefit. -- you think people might benefit. if people are complaining, it must be a good thing, but people like me can turn into people like you at the blink of the ira, and you will not realize it until it is too late. -- pulling of the eye, and you will not realize until it is too late. i am sure you have been told that the community benefit the district has a provision that any increasing taxes will be defrayed by contribution to community benefit district.

when every community benefit district find out they can get that, too, why do we have but another anti-democratic general fund set aside, which means that our democracy is pretty much out the window in favor of these specialized interests. it is as if we have taken our community and turned it over to quintessential special interests. let me talk about the virtues of the great depression. i am sure you have been told for the next 10 to 12 years this society will be suffering from another great depression. john f. kennedy asked, but -- ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country.

can you go to the citizens and say out of shared good faith we are going to ask our citizens for austerity and accept personal sacrifices? i do not think you can look people in the eye and say that under these circumstances. thank you. >> good afternoon. i am here to talk about community benefit districts. i happened to be the first one to serve just they make union square a district, and it worked, and how come we live in the most heavily used district in the city, which is the waterfront district, the financial district included, and we do not have the community district, and we need it desperately because we have homeless there. it is ridiculous.

it is filthy. there is no reason it should be that way, so we have to go through a community district downtown yesterday. it thank you. >> ♪ it is beginning to look a lot like christmas ♪ ♪ with parcells everywhere, and the thing that will make it ring is the budget that you green -- bring to every door ♪ ♪ it is beginning to look a lot like christmas ♪ ♪ parcels everywhere, and i hope you will be there and you will be with budget and you will care ♪

>> i am here to oppose the participation of the city in a community benefit district at the city's center. at the library commission, recently of representatives came to the commission and talked about what the benefits are for the community district, and his most vivid story was about how with great pride he or somebody else had accomplished something else quite wonderful. it was the removal of a woman who had apparently four years been sleeping after hours in the

south of market sidewalk in front of the business during closed hours. he talked about he and one of his ambassadors asked her to leave because he said she was not legally allowed to sleep there overnight. she went around the block and came back again she was asked again by the same person, and that had the great success of her not sleeping there again. it is very unfortunate, and it speaks to a failure of the city in its own departments to be able to do what is necessary to keep the heart of the city the way they would like, do have streets controlled by business

and not citizens. it is also anti-democratic. i have talked to homeless advocacy who also think this is a bad idea. there is a failure on behalf of the city to do what it ought to do. >> we will close public comments. >> good afternoon. my name is lisa, and i am the project manager. i am here to present a resolution to authorize the mayor to account balance on

behalf of the sedate and -- to count the ballots on behalf city and district of san francisco, where these will be subject to assessment. at this time, the proposed community benefit district boundary is in the balance phase. there is a hearing were the public will be able to testify. they insist that the board votes over the balance they have jurisdiction over. that is totaling $176,889. those represent 24% of the

district. even if the board votes on this tomorrow to allow them to count ballots for these parcels, that does not mean you have to vote yes. only if there is no protest will the board be able to take action on the establishment of the district. this does not require you to vote in any district. there is overwhelming support from city departments as well as city buildings for the proposed district, and we have spent the last few months going to the different commissions and departments affected by this

proposal to see what they thought, and i wanted to let you know the war memorial board has approved a ballot for the parcel that includes the opera, the ballet, and thyssen today we jane the ballet common end -- that include the opera and ballet. the rec and parks commission has voted their support, and you would have to vote for their ballots, and the city hall preservation commission has renewed -- voted on this, so there has been support of many of the city buildings.

i would be happy to take any questions you may have. unfortunately, we have to wait until january 4, so i've the end of public testimony, public testimony will be closed, and the department will open the ballots and count them, so they can provide support about how they voted. every parcel will be listed. we will let you know exactly what is the proposed district. >> i have a lot of difficulty with the city having such a large part of the property

ownership within the community benefit district, and the city can play a very large role since it has so much property within it. it can take it to be successful just on the city alone, and i want to make sure i am seeing a high participation from property owners outside of the city for me to really want to approve of it. the other concern is we are basically assessing this ourselves to provide services, and i know some of these departments are not going to be contributing and do not have a lot of flexibility in their budgets, so unless i see there is a really strong

recommendation from the non-city side of the ownership, it is going to be difficult for me to support on january 4. i think you have serious concerns. >> i think i can approve the city for disobeying. the city participation is not going to be the overwhelming factor in the passage of the civic center area.

>> of the community report for tomorrow's meeting? >> as a community report. >> then we have our last item. we have the settlement as well. >> item #4, various updates regarding the city budget. >> before we go into that, we will take one minute recess. >> ok. back from the break. mr. wagner, the budget director is joining us to share the report. >> thank you 3 much. -- thank you a very much.

i will walk through a of a brief high level summary of our deficit projection and the instructions that when got a couple weeks ago. the big picture is that on the revenue side we have some very modest recovery of revenues. i would tired -- categorize it more as a stabilization compared to the last few years. this is more stabilization then any indication we are seeing a sharp rebound in the fundamentals of the economy. we have anticipated we would start to see some flattening and some slow growth in our revenues.

we still believe that would be the case, but it is a modest growth during good at the same time, that is offset by a relatively steep loss in federal revenues we have been projecting the past year. on the expenditure side, i think this is the usual story we have seen over the past few years. this is driven by personnel- related costs, including benefits and in the exploration of one-time savings we used to balance the budget. we have a net loss of $86.4 million in general fund revenues, and that growth of $294 million in expenditures, and that gets us to our general deficit of $379.8 million in the coming year.

a couple of notes were the assumptions underlying that number -- we still have several items that are relatively large cost drivers that are uncertain at this point. one i would like to point out is the cost of employee benefits. we are still using last spring cost joint report for health costs. those will be updated in january, so we will get updated numbers on those, but the has the potential to create some swings to the good and the bad. we have got news it looks like a portion of our retirement will be going up compared to this deficit, so we will have some updates on that in january.

this assumes that we will retain the $21.4 million in projected current year's savings from the report, and it assumes we have set aside $30 million against state budget reduction. that is the same thing we use when we balanced the current budget. get on the revenue side, -- on the revenue side, we have some growth and tax revenues. the lines at the top of this presentation so the loss -- shobes loss that we have used to balance the current budget, and then the gain of our general fund reserves and are projected current year savings. on the general tax revenues, the

three revenues i have listed here are property business and property transfer tax. those are the three largest swings we have projected for the coming year. on property tax, this is another source. we are projecting modest growth during their there are a couple of -- modest growth. there are a couple of key pieces of information. we are trying to categorize the volume and value of those appeals, so once we have more information, that could cause some significant changes. we are watching that carefully and waiting to have better information. on the business tax side, we are projecting modest growth. i think this is more due to some stabilization rather than

anything that shows fundamental job growth in the economy. part of it is due to conservative estimates, but it looks like we will be able to see something news -- some good news on payroll taxes. property transfer tax is primarily driven by the ballot measure voters approved in the last election to increase the rate on properties above $5 million. there's also some growth in the volume of transactions for the coming year. >> what would you do to prevent the real estate tax? >> i believe about 30 of it is due to the tax increase. >> that is over half a year, to. >> the $30 million value would be over