i wanted to make it clear that now we are at this critical year, that those funds be replenished. it did not equivocate that it was in the public record, they said it did not happen to the degree that it should have based on other capacity needs. with evidence that is not just anecdotal but very clear and absolute, we should do the right public policy action. in to make sure that this fund is made as whole as ccaan be. it is deserving of our support. because of complexities and important and critical ones, we should not discount and

dismissed the prior debates that took place over three years back at transferring the response and obligations to where we are staring at today. this is the way to reconcile its. supervisor chu: supervisor avalos. supervisor avalos: if the fund is that a very low about, it means a couple of things. some candidates that would consider running for mayor might think that they shouldn't because there is no funding. it also says something about what we value of about the financing program itself. if we keep it at a very low amount, we could have a very low fund that speaks to how we value what democracy is about.

i think we can do better than that. there are tradeoffs about doing it now vs. later. it makes sense to add value to the public financing program. supervisor chu: we have a motion on the floor to continue the item to the call of the chair. i will state my position that i don't support the supplemental at this time. the numbers are recurrent, you or conservative, and the supplementals are really meant for a shortfall. you can allow for a continuance and come back early enough to come and go with the problem. -- deal with the problem. we should watch and see how we are drawing down on the fund. we can always come back and reevaluate how we are going to

put money into the bank. and certainly, one other comment i'd like to make. from the perspective of an inclusive democracy, that is what the intent of public financing is meant to be. in observing the candidates that we have on the roster that will be drawing down $500,000, there are folks that can raise money. i know people will have comments about if this is really achieving the purpose, but i wanted to make a comment that all of the folks that are running our people that have raised tons of money before that able to raise money without benefit of public financing. it could encourage other folks to jump in, but currently, the roster candidates are not folks that are not able to raise. we can do roll call on that.

supervisor mirkarimi: no. supervisor kim: no. supervisor chiu: no. >> lost my place. sorry. mind if i start over? supervisor mirkarimi: no. supervisor kim: no. supervisor wiener: aye. supervisor chiu: no. supervisor chu: aye. >> the motion fails. supervisor chu: do we have an

alternative motion? supervisor mirkarimi: the alternative motion is the ordinance itself. motion to advance the ordinance with recommendation. supervisor chu: motion to send this item forward with recommendation. i will be dissenting on this roll call. supervisor mirkarimi: aye. supervisor kim: aye. supervisor wiener: no. supervisor chiu: aye. supervisor chu: no. >> the motion passes. supervisor chu: do we have any other items before us? >> that completes the agenda for today. supervisor chu: thank you very

much, we are adjourned.

>> thanks for coming today. we are announcing are temporary homeowner's property tax reduction program. this is what most assessor's up and down the state are doing. homeowners are reliable -- of all property owners are eligible for a temporary, 1-year property-tax assessment reduction if they believe or if we believe dave -- the assess the value has fallen above their market value, which means that the value would be lower than the market value. in general, homeowners who are eligible, chances are, they purchased homes after 2003. we do get applicants who have owned homes since 1995 or earlier. in general, anybody who is owned their home prior to 2003, they

are doing well, which is good news. chances are the market value is higher than the assessed value, meaning the property appreciate it. people we are able to offer little relief for, the sad news is, their homes have depreciated. there will be a little bit of relief for them. in general, last year, we saw 6400 applicants in comparison to four years ago when we had 248 requests. the form a simple. it is one page. name, telephone number, e-mail, and the address you are applying for. if you can give us sales in formation of similar types of homes, we do hope you can give us that. if you cannot come maternity leave blank and sign it. e-mail or fax it to us -- if you cannot give us that, leave

it blank and sign it. e-mail or fax it was. tenderloin downtown, south of market, mission bay, and south beach. those were many of the new high- rise condominiums that went in to market the last four or five years. we have seen a significant amount of depreciation in those areas. gaviria that has seen the largest value drop is -- the other area that has seen the largest volume drop is the outer mission, amazon, those areas have seen the largest percentage drop. it is where we have been hit hardest with foreclosures. we make sure that we take an extra look. we proactively have been reviewing every home that was purchased after 2000. even though we think eligibility is for people up to 2003, we review any homeowner who purchased after 2000. that was roughly about 15,000

homeowners. of that, reduced -- no one had to apply or call us. we did this on our own. we reduced 10,000 of those homeowners. roughly, you have 10,000 reductions that we did on our own. 1700 reductions were done through this application process. 5000 time shares is how you get to the 17,000 number. just to give you a comparison, it is quite a bit in san francisco. these are huge numbers, larger than the dot com bust. alameda and santa clara did about 1000 come a tenfold. -- 1000, tenfold. we are doing better than our counterparts in other parts of the bay area. i feel fortunate. the tax reduction was about 21

million in taxes that were not collected. 21 million in taxes were not collected. that is a significant number. it is out of a $6.5 billion budget. overall, the difference to the city is still rather small compared to what it meant to many of the other counties in other areas. let me stop there and take questions. >> [inaudible] >> 6462. of those, we actually reviewed only 4177. many of those were already reviewed. we have actively reviewed them. some of them were not eligible. >> [inaudible] >> anybody who has gotten a

reduction, they don't need to apply. we will look at it again. if you have gotten a reduction through an appeal or through our office, they don't need to apply again. they will be reviewed. they may want to apply because maybe they want to give us information we don't know. they are free to do that. that will be reviewed as part of that process. in general, they don't need to submit paperwork if they already got a reduction last year. >> [inaudible] >> well, i think because it is just flat, the market has not rebounded and gone up. we will probably see the same number of people deserve reductions last year. i think it will be comparable.

traditionally, an economic recovery is like a v. this is more like a u. we're at the bottom of it right now. my feeling is we are going to see, you know, a very unusual real-estate market in san francisco. it will be flat and not appreciate a whole lot right now. the number people who are eligible is probably similar to last year. i bet we will give about the same number of reductions this year as we did last year. it will not be that much different. >> [inaudible] >> anybody that was reviewed -- everybody in san francisco got a letter from us in july. they were told what their assessed value was. there were told that they got a reduction. if they got a reduction based on the letter, they don't need to reapply. what people do is we will review applicants. the deadline is march 31. all 17,000 who got reductions will be reviewed automatically.

everyone will get notified again in july. we will not talk to anybody prior to that. everyone else will be getting the standard notification in july. >> [inaudible] you review these every year. >> every year. the reductions we review every year. as the market appreciates, we may take their assessments up based on what the market value is. they may go all the way back up to the factor value. it may go up partially higher. obviously, that is what he would see. you would see a step over the years to include the appreciation based on what the market is feeling. right now, we are not seeing a whole lot of appreciation. chances are, the assessment will be a little bit different than last year. the original purchase applies

plus whatever the inflation factor was on an annual basis. in general, up to 2%. we had a negative inflation factor for the first time last year. everybody got a reduction last year. >> [inaudible] >> this year, cpi based on the final number we saw, is. 5% positive. it is still well below 2%. -- is .5% positive. it is still well below 2%. the economy is still rather flat. >> [inaudible] >> everybody who does not get a reduction will get a .5% increase in their assessment. that is just a proximate. it will probably be pretty close to that.

we can show you the website. we follow the same website. it is the state cpi. it is a tracking mechanism for the state. >> [inaudible] >> i think there will vote to finalize in the next month or two. i think the number is done. >> overall, when all is said and done, what is the amount that you're going to receive [inaudible] >> for reductions, it will really just depend on how much your property might have depreciated or appreciate id. some areas where maybe there was a 5% or 3%, the good news in san francisco, we have not seen a few drops we saw in other parts of the bay area, like solano,