i raise this because we are involved in a number of the community programs, and i realize there are a lot of impact on some of the current proposals, but what i'm here to talk about are what is already going to happen as a result of the loss of stimulus funds. i realize that it is -- a lot has been said about our inability to offset reductions from the federal level, but what i'm here to raise awareness about is the fact that it is actually the stimulus fund that mitigated cuts at the local level. what is going to happen this year is as a result of the fact that we have budgeted, based on the fact that we have funds available, this coming year, we're looking at probably at least 1000 less youth employment opportunities for this city alone. that is only taking into account some of the larger programs in

the city, and i think we can all agree that among some of the smaller programs, we are only going to see even additional declines. i have here a summary of what i'm talking about. i think it is imperative that as we continue to have -- as this budget process moves forward, we think about what reductions were already made. i have this year to leave for you all today. thank you. supervisor chu: thank you. are there other members of the public like to speak on this item? why don't we close public comment? we have two items before us. supervisor chiu. supervisor chiu: i want to thank our chairwoman as well as members of the public that have come up to testify on behalf of this resolution. i have spoken to many service

providers around the community, and the cuts we are facing this year i think are nothing like what we have faced in prior years. i've often said that in recent years with the budget, we have had to cut to the bone. this year, we are going to have to be cutting bone. the news we are getting from the federal government is incredibly bleak. i have a feeling that all of us will be supporting this resolution. i certainly urge that and i urge all of us to work with community members, particularly the folks that came here today, to get the word out to folks that these cuts are unacceptable and hopefully asked representatives in congress to fight for what we need to have happen here. supervisor chu: thank you. do we have a motion -- supervisor kim? supervisor kim: if we are taking co-sponsor ships from supervisors, i would love to [no audio] supervisor chiu: i would be

happy to be added as well. supervisor chu: do we have a motion to file item two and 2 cents item 3 forward with recommendation? okay, without objection. thank you. item four please. >> item four, a hearing on monthly overtime reports discussing the five city departments using the most overtime in the preceding month. supervisor chu: thank you very much. this item -- we will be scheduling overtime reports for current year expenses in the subcommittee. i apologize. this will be at our subcommittee meetings in the future. the controller will give a presentation on this item. >> good afternoon, supervisors. each month we issued an overtime

report on the highest earning city departments in terms of overtime use and then slice the year we issue a more comprehensive report. we issued to the most recent report on march 1st and i can provide a couple of snapshots from it. generally speaking, the city overtime spending and the current year is projected to remain below the peak from several years ago but has inched up in the last year. we project overtime spending of $132 million across all departments. this is $12 million up from the actual from last year. to provide some longer-term context, three years ago the city at its peak spent $167

million in overtime. we have seen a significant increase in overtime spending. we are still projecting to spend approximately $25 million less on overtime for a reduction of about 17% from peak. we have had a significant drop- off for two years and we have seeing a modest increase during the current year. in terms of hours, which is not necessarily the same thing given what is going on with wages, we project that 5.6% of our salary hours will be paid as overtime and that is down from 6.6% three years ago. again, up modestly in the current year. as we have talked about before in this committee, we are really talking about five city departments which accounts for about 80% of spending across the

city. the five largest city department's account for 88% of overtime spending. within those departments, we see increases in three and decreases in two verses there actuals from the prior year. the mta is projected to spend approximately $5 billion more. public health is under $2 million more and that the fire department, approximately $6 million more. those account for the majority of the increase that i talked about that is a $12 million increase, those three departments. the other two large overtime using departments show a decline during the current year versus actual spending last year.

the police department is expected to spend a million and a half less than this year. the sheriff's office to spending approximately 1.5 million less on overtime than they did last year at this time. we have seen a mix of trends that consume the overtime expenses for the city. the mta, fire and police are all a absorbing their overtime expenditures within budget. dph and the sheriff's department are anticipating meeting a supplemental to cover some of their costs. some are overspending but absorbing this within their budget. that is the case for three of the five.

the board placed a cap of 624 hours per individual per year on overtime use. this has an exemption in it. as of this point of the year, 74 employees have exceeded that cap. 70 have exceeded it -- have received an exemption. the majority of the employees are in the fire department or the mta with a three and the sheriff's office. i'm happy to answer any questions that the committee might have. >> just a couple of points of clarification, you mentioned the five overtime departments, the mta, fire, police, they will be able to cover the overtime

budget within their overall budget? >> that is correct. >> we're not expecting any supplementals? >> that is correct. >> these are two departments that are not -- observing anything within their salary line. >> correct. >> do you know when they will be coming forward with a supplemental and what those values might be? >> i don't have the values with me right at the moment but the supplementals will be coming forward within the next couple of weeks. they are currently being drafted. sheriffs are about 6 million. the health department is in the teens. the supplemental general fund will be backed by hospital revenues as we have seen for the last couple of years.

>> given the actions that this board has taken, what is in our general fund reserve? >> a good question. i don't have that number off the top of my head. there is a budget $25 billion fund in the current year. i believe the board approved a supplemental corp. -- appropriation. these accounts for about $5 million leaving the balance of approximately $20 million in the current fiscal year. >> we have spent about $5 million of the 25.

one last item, on the numbers that are currently exceeding the 24 hours, there are 74 that exceeded but only 70 that received exemptions. what happened to the other four? did they not need exemptions? >> anyone that exceeds requires an exemption and this will be a new process. there are occasions where someone pushes over the cap and an exemption is not sought or received in advance of that happening. >> thank you. why don't we open this up for public comment. are the members of the public that wish to speak on item number four? seeing none, public comment is closed. if there are no further comments or questions, can be taken action to file the item? without objection. mr. clark, do we have any other

items before us? and you, we are adjourned. good d

gentlemen. i want to call to order the meeting of the entertainment commission for tuesday, march 22, 2011. do you want to call the roll?

secretary: sure. [reading] commissioner roja and meko and perez are not present, but we do have a quorum. president newlin: ok, we go to public comment, where members of public comment may address the commission on items of interest to the public better within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission. you had two minutes. ok, any public comment? seeing none, what i would like to do, commissioners, is, as you know, we are at 7:30 having a combined meeting with the commission, so i would like to call the items out of order and take the action items that we have so that members of the

public do not get stuck here later than they have to be, so you said two were dropped, jocelyn. which ones? secretary: correct. commissioners, we're going to call item five. is that correct? 5, hearing and action, so item b and d have requested continuances until april 12, and so, i guess i would like the commission to make a motion to that effect. president newlin: ok, with someone like to make a motion to continue items c indeed -- and d? secretary: commissioner meko. oh, do you want to have public

comment? president newlin: do you have a comment? >> yes. good evening, commissioners. i live in san francisco, and i came out tonight expecting these items would be heard, so if i could have a couple of minutes to talk about them, i would be happy to come back on april 12, as well. president newlin: ok. >> sean manchester was my neighbor, and we were next to the bar, and he and his wife used to live on the street, as well. they were very nice neighbors and also very responsible operators, and also another. so i just wanted to speak in favor of chamber and look forward to being able to visit it at some point. the beat box is in a space that has been an ongoing challenge,

although in the last couple of years, it has spent more time closed that it has opened, which i do not think is good for anyone, so sometimes last year, i think there was a dialogue with my neighbors, and we welcome that, and i was hoping to be able to come here tonight and say that we had done sort of the preliminary sound check, so we could go in and say, "hey, we are actually ahead of you, " so i am surprised to see on tonight's agenda, and the last dialogue i had with him was back in january, and i was checking on progress -- assuming that all of their soundproofing issues were taken care of, and a real sound check is actually done, i have had someone in my house one time in the 7.5 years that i have lived on norfolk street. i look forward to having the beatbox open, as well as some of

the other venues in the neighborhood. so i would just like to underscore that i would like to actually have a sound check for when it actually opens and starts providing entertainment. i certainly do not want that to be an onerous process, because, as i said, that particular spot has been a money hole for some time. i do not know. it has been months and months, so i would consider their permits to be actually abandoned, so thank you, and i look forward. president newlin: ok, thank you. the first item, a hearing and possible action regarding applications for permits under the jurisdiction of the entertainment commission, item a. secretary: i have to go back to finish this. we have a first and a second.

[reading roll] president newlin: a, morgan, david, chaps bar, 1255 folsom, billiard parlor, mechanical amusement devices. >> it is hard to say. this is to add a pinball machine at this type-48 neighborhood bar on folsom. the applicant applied mid february. it is open until 2:00 a.m. each night, and as you can see, this is an accessory use, and the approval has been recommended with some conditions. kevin is here tonight, too, i think, introduce himself, as well as speak to any that might have questions.

staff is recommending a conditional grant. come and say hi. >> good evening. i am kevin, and i have been a permit officer for about 10 years, so i have some history. any questions you have, i hope i can answer them. there are some issues that i think we're going to be taken care of, and we are just moving some of the cabinets or some things to make space for the pool table and pinball machines, and everything seems to me to what standards would be there, so we do not have any objection as long as some of the equipment in the area is moved so that the pool table can be used freely. president newlin: ok.

thank you. are the applicants here? come on up and introduce yourself. >> good evening, president, commissioners, staff. >> stephen. >> so this is pretty straightforward. commissioners, do you have any questions? do you have anything? >> i just want to address the permit officer's comments. things are taken care of. they have been taken care of or will be taken care of. president newlin: ok. vice chair joseph: the one that deals with minors, you are not letting them in anyway, are you?

ok. commissioner meko: they take less than 25% of the space, and they are not the point of your business, just an added feature to improve your business. you are not opening a pool parlor or a pinball house where anything like that? ok. so it is really a minor consideration, so long as you do not have it lined up with this. president newlin: any public comment? >> hello, again. i am -- henry mandel.

these gentlemen are also my neighbors, and i have also been to chaps many times, and i look forward to visiting again and using these machines. personally, i think it is a big bureaucratic to allow bar owners who want to do something like this to come and vote for a hearing, with all due respect. president newlin: 80. ok, any other public comment? seeing none, but call the motion? commissioner meko: move to approve? commissioner: is that for the things expressed by the police officer? commissioner meko: sure. secretary: can i do same house, same call? president newlin: absolutely.

ok, item d, rendezvous note -- rendezvous tapas -- item b. 2080 van ness. separate terry mcauliffe -- secretary: the applicants intend to serve american cuisine and have a lounge, served as tapas, which are small plates, and it is listed from 5:00 p.m. until midnight. it will be open until 2:00 a.m. every night. there will be deejays and possibly live entertainment. there is a liquor license. it is listed as pending, so i do not have anything on that, but

hopefully, inspector falzon is here. planning indicates this is a continuation of a permitted to existing use. the san francisco police department no. station has recommended its approval with a condition, including stopping entertainment at a certain time, the installation of surveillance cameras, and that it be maintained as a bona fide food restaurant. there is a letter and signature pages requesting that the applicant be required to meet the neighbors on a quarterly basis for the first year of operation. the letter requests a permit, although that is up for your discussion. i know the applicants are here before you, as well as their representative. again, this is a spot where we had quite a bit of trouble, or

we did, a few substantial corrective actions, and these are new operators that we are hoping will improve the neighborhood. with that, staff is recommending the grant this permit, it i know that there are some here who are interested in speaking with the commission, as well. >> i have the proprietors of this establishment here. the name of this lounge is a bar/lounge, and tapas restaurant. it is located near pacific, and i believe there are 96 seats. mr. gor and mr. lwin have

another restaurant which does pretty well. in terms of outreach, on march 1, we held a meeting with the interested neighbors. we actually had a printed noticed that was sent out. i apologize, i do not have any year. i got from the planning commission a list of interested parties, and in that the tichenor neighborhood, we send out a notice to them. -- and in that particular neighborhood, we send out a notice to them. -- sent out. we have had discussions with her. she was at that neighborhood meeting along with duncan, the captain, officer gallagher, the permit officer for no. station, a couple of officers from the alcohol licens