>> the assessor did request an increase from $175,000 in temporary salaries to $300,000 in the current year. reason was 7 positions currently being paid by temporary salaries will be moved to regular status and do not need to be paid by temporary salaries. also, there is a bit of a difference of opinion about the clerical positions. the number of positions in the budget matches what is in on the chart, and my understanding is since they are paying clerical, temporary has some what to do with the department of human resources connecting classification studies so that they have not been hiring permanent into those positions, but there are permanent salary is attached to those positions. that was some of our consideration. i also think we have a difference of understanding about the supervisory level about the principle real property appraiser.

they do actually vary from about 68, and adding on these new positions, including one additional principal real property appraiser -- they do actually vary from about six to 8. supervisor chiu: thank you for your presentation today. the column you have a run revenue lost due to proposed cuts -- the controller certified that these are moneys we can expect to see if week with dispositions, right? or am i mistaken? i just want to get a sense of how certain these revenues are based on what level of staffing we have. >> given the level of staffing proposed in the mayor's budget you have before you, we have certified an additional approximately $10 million in property tax revenues used to balance the budget. certification -- we do not

endeavor to try to tie different portions within the package. it was more a review of the whole band of component pieces of it, so these numbers are somewhat different than the probably moresecondly, the lange difference that occurs between the u.s.s.r. and those of us predominantly working -- the assessor and those of us working predominantly on the income-tax. i imagine the numbers you have before you -- is our property tax monies that go to bart and the community colleges and other special revenue bonds. that may be part of the difference as well. supervisor chiu: thank you. >> you see not only our ability to produce the amount of revenue

promised, but to exceed that. while there are cuts -- it appears to be a modest cut. what we have been able to do in the past is to do tenfold for each of those possessions -- positions. do you really want to give up $5 million, $10 million, $20 million that we are putting on the table. we have exceeded our budget expectations. we completely agree that the comptroller -- controller's desire to be accurate, at times conservative, because we would never want to be wrong in the other direction. this is why we are fighting for our planned. this is a plan that we believe will bring in the money for the city and we are defending accurately our assessments.

almost all the commercial properties in the downtown area are coming before us. hundreds of millions of dollars for reassessment. we are trying to defend those numbers accurately. supervisor chu: thank you. with regard to the temp salaries, how are we in spending that down? >> we have managed to spend almost all events. we had an unprecedented level of the peer review, and that pretty much totally exhausted its. supervisor chu: thank you. ok, colleagues, and interested in hearing your point about.

given that the budget does assume a certain level of revenue, having made investments in positions, i think that is something we should consider, if we were to look at the impact on our revenue numbers, but should we take these cuts? i do think with regard to our supervisor wrote -- supervisory position, i would be willing to support the continuation of that position. what i would say though is, given the budget analyst has recommended the later hiring date of some of these positions, i would definitely agree with that. i do not think there is any way we would get anybody in those positions by the july 1st timeline, and probably october is more realistic. those are my thoughts. one other option is to reserve a part of these positions, given that the information from the assessor's office.

colleagues, thoughts? supervisor chiu? supervisor chiu: i am open to the possibility of putting a portion of these on reserve, to understand what the time lines are and what these successes are of the current team. we will see where that goes. we are all very sensitive to how all -- how much we have to take all the cuts that we can, but also we do not want to cut off our nose to spite our face, and this may be important incremental dollars that could be significant for revenues. i am open to putting some portion on reserve. supervisor kim: i think i am in general agreement. a thing which should adopt the amendment, pushing the -- i think we should adopt the general amendment, pushing the positions to october 1.

i would like to see more on the difference between the budget and the legislative analyst in our office. there are a lot of services we want to restore. i also want to hear from the assessor's office. if it is going to be bringing more revenue to our city, i do not want to jeopardize that. supervisor chu: thank you. if i could make a recommendation after hearing the comments from my colleagues, what we will take -- i think there is no disagreement -- the interim positions. we will not allow the positions to start july 1st, we will begin as october 1. and rather than taking the budget analyst recommendations, we will leave those open at the moment and place a budget committee reserve on those

items, pending the department coming back to the committee with information. would that be fine? ok, we can do that without objection. thank you, mr. reporter. surry. -- sorry. the next department have here is the treasury/tax collector. [laughter] >> good morning, supervisors. we are here to report to the budget analyst office. we reached an agreement. i do not have the number in front of me, but it totals $110,000. we will proceed with that amount. >> madam chair, members of the committee, actually, our calculation is 121,001 $32.

the changes -- we had $188,000 and we are reducing that to approximately -- on page 47, the temporary salaries, where we recommended a cut of $30,000, we are actually increasing that. i am recommending you reduce that by $35,000 instead of $30,000. however, on page 48, i completely and withdrawing a recommendation were there was a savings of $72,000. those are the two changes. i believe we are in agreement with the department. supervisor chu: if i understand correctly, on page 47, there is a recommendation for $30,000 reduction in the budget analyst is recommending a $60,000

reduction? >> $5,000 increase. that $30,000 would go up by just $5,000, not -- yes. supervisor chu: again, on page 47, there is a $30,000 reduction. instead of a $30,000 reduction, the budget analyst is recommending a $35,000 production. and you are withdrawn the attrition savings? >> that is correct. supervisor chu: any comments? with regards to the $120,000 or roughly -- with regards to the close-up of the projects? there's about $17,000 -- >> yes, we are in agreement with that. supervisor chu: colleagues, given that there is agreement, why don't we take action to except the $121,000 -- accept

the $121,000 recommended? can we do that objection? ok, thank you. >> thank you, supervisors. supervisor chu: next department is the controller's office. >> supervisors, last week we agreed into accepted the cuts for our department. leftover, we have the policy issue for this week, the office econimic analysis. -- economic analysis. without this position, we would not be able to complete that work. this is a major effort, to complete an overall of the city's general revenue base. it has been studied in different times in different ways over the

last decade, and we have yet to find a solution for the payroll tax system toward a more stable, economically-efficient payroll or business tax system. we do anticipate it is going to be a complicated project for the coming year, working through outreach and process, but also perhaps more challengingly, getting through the house. we envision working. president chiu and the mayor, who will work us through the process, realizing the impacts. analyzing the impact on the first set components of our economy and industry. we think this will be a very

important project. supervisor chu: thank you. our budget analyst, i believe, articulated. >> madam chair, yes, i do not have any further comment. the policy recommendation is on page 56. i would be happy to respond to questions. supervisor chu: thank you. colleagues, to recap, we did take the budget analyst recommendations and the $84,000 in project close out, so the remaining item is the policy recommendation of the budget analyst with regard to the economist. from my perspective, given that no we are going to be heading into -- given that we know we're going to be heading into complicated conversations around tax structure, i think it is worthwhile to have an economist. their proven very helpful in these policy items over the year, and i am open to this.

supervisor kim: at this time, i am ready to support the department position. while not completely in agreement, i believe our business tax reform will be an important policy issue, and i agree we will need extra hands to help support that. is a really heavy lift. also, thank you for the amount of work provided to the board of supervisors this year. the work has been at very high quality. supervisor mirkarimi: i agree isupervisor kim. i think the controller's office and ted egan have had a breakthrough in determining where are the next steps in this business tax reform.

i think the controller's office performed well in a short time. i appreciate that lead up to hopefully a much more well- prepared period that this budget can support. supervisor chu: thank you, supervisor. given the comments i have heard, it is my understanding this committee would be supportive of the additional support to the office of economic analysis, and in that situation, do we have a motion to not take the budget analyst recommendation? >> we do not have to take any action, madam chair. supervisor chiu: i want to quickly echo our colleagues. you do a lot of this work. we know it will be a very complicated set of analyses, and i really want to thank our

controller and our economist for the work they have done already. supervisor chu: thank you. thank you, mr. controller. >> thank you for your support, supervisors. we appreciate. supervisor chu: moving on, the next department is a general city responsibility. i believe the outstanding item we had was the neighborhood transition funds of $300,000. >> madam chair, members of the committee, on the last item, we do have one alternative suggestion on page 64 of our report. the committee has already taken our recommended reduction of $24,000 on this item. $300,000 or remain, which we consider to be a policy for the mayor's transition plan.

we ask that the board of supervisors consider placing the funds on the budget and finance committee reserve. it would not be a board reserve. it would be reserved we are suggesting as an interim policy. supervisor chu: thank you, mr. rose. i understand this is an item the mayor has put in, so if you can elaborate a little bit on that? >> madam chair, members of the committee, in the mayor's -- i am the mayor's budget director. i am happy to answer any questions you have on the budget analyst alternative recommendation. i would have a little bit of hesitation about that, as i am imagining how that would play out, create a situation where you have a new mayor organizing and administration and seeking board approval for a staffing

plan. i understand the logic of that suggestion, although i could imagine it creating a difficult situation for both the board and the mayor. with somebody coming in and trying to argue their staffing plan from the board. that would be my one thought on that. supervisor chu: thank you. supervisor kim? supervisor kim: i appreciate that the mayor's office did come in to chat with me on this. i understand the $300,000 for the fund. i would still like to hold off on the final decision until we see the full budget or where we are at in a couple days. we have tremendous services that i know many of us are fighting for for our city. i would not want us to be put on reserve to the budget committee 's position, because i think

this would be an awkward position, and i and trust that the controller's office would make sure the mayor's office is appropriately extending the fund's. i would like to back a couple more days to evaluate it in relation to other things. supervisor chu: thank you, supervisors. actually, i would agree with you. i would not want to put that on reserve pending approval of how the gets spent. i think it would be wise to hold off on taking action on this. perhaps we can pass through this general responsibility. at least the $300,000 project balance. ok, next department. city administrator. >> good morning, madame chair, members of the committee. in the brown, acting city

administrator. -- aimee brown, acting city administrator. we are still not in agreement as to the recommended cuts of $10,065 for animal care and control and to address the reasons as to why we have not been able to reach agreement, i would like to call up the director of the department of animal care and control, rebecca katz. >> good morning, supervisors. i understand that the budget analyst's office recommended additional positions and salaries for some other departments. unfortunately, there was a recommendation for reduction of $10,000 for animal care, supervisors. the reason we are objecting to that -- we are running a very

lean operation, as you know. we are 24/7, 365-days a year operation. we have calls for emergencies, calls for aggressive animals, people in harm's way, i injured animals, cruelty cases, and so on. we also house in our facility 24/7. we provide round-the-clock care. nonetheless, despite operating like public agencies or a hospital or, dare i say, like a jail, we do not have supervisors throughout the day. we have one supervisor for each division. the supervisor is called on on his days off, when he takes a

vacation, at night to make decisions that range from whether or not to provide treatment for diseases such as potential rabies infections, to determine the care of the animal, and he provides advice at all times of the day and night. the budget analyst reports suggest we could reduce the standby pay for him by asking him to carry a pager or department-issued cellular phone. the pager challenge is when he receives a call, he needs to be able to answer the questions immediately. these are frequently life or death decisions for living beings. as far as the department-issued sell fun goes, that would be a challenge -- cell-phone goes,

that would be a challenge. it is asking a lot of an employee to be on call, to deal with as much as he does as often as he does. further, another such device was not working one weekend. those of you who are former attorneys like ibm -- -- like i am, it is challenging. i think he goes above and beyond in his responses. he currently has incurred a significant amount of compensatory time. he is nearing his limit for vacation time. he rarely digs of. those -- he rarely takes of. those accruals will increase, and we will be forced to pay him out of time, which will be more costly than what we are paying. i am happy to take questions. supervisor chu: thank you. mr. rose?

>> madam chair, members of the committee, our total recommended reduction for this department is $200,236. the dispute -- i would like ms. campbell to briefly respond. >> the recommendation is specific to an understanding said wide -- citywide, and employees on standby can receive 40% of their rate of pay and receive a pager or cell phone or 25% update. the concept is they have to be near a location of a telethon to be available. gradually the apartments are moving away from that and providing -- departments are moving away from that and providing a cellular phone.

it is understood city-wide that everyone will be provided a pager or cellular phone and be paid a portion of pay. we do include the cost of the cellular phone in this recommendation. so as not to impair the ability of the individual to respond. supervisor chu: supervisor mirkarimi. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. said the $10,000 difference the department is asking us about, is that in the making of this cellular phone? where is that $10,000 coming from? >> it is actually $10,000 reduction in premium pay, and then we have recommended that you add $750 for a cellular phone.

it is a net reduction of $10,065. again, as ms. campbell stated, it is to implement the existing provisions of the mou. supervisor mirkarimi: and so, ms. katz, on the question of the $10,000 and us not being able to find that, what would happen? what would be the consequence? >> the supervisor would not take on a department-issued cellular phone. rather he would be at the shelter more frequently to respond to emergency situations, and in which case he would either approve compensatory time in excess of the mou provisions for which he would be paid out, or an assistant supervisor would fill his positions for other duties, and they get paid at time and a half. for some odd reason, the mou

that covers the supervisors and assistant supervisors requires that the supervisors get $1 more per page. . they are paid pretty similar. we would ultimately end up incurring greater cost to the department. supervisor mirkarimi: i know this is a negligible amount in the scheme of things. am i hearing from the department head brown that this is something we should correct on the $10,000? >> it would be our desire to have that restored if possible. i defer to director katz for how she thinks it is most efficient to run her department, and i am sympathetic to the 24/7 demands put on the employees of for department. thank you to the budget

analyst, and this is a fairly negligible amount -- it would be my request that you restore that if possible. supervisor chu: thank you, supervisor. we have heard from the budget analyst and the department on this item. the budget analyst has recommended $215,000 worth of cuts, and the department is requesting that the $10,000 not be taken. if we are in agreement with the department, we would still be taking to a hundred $5,000 worth of cuts. is this committee ready to act on this item? supervisor mirkarimi? supervisor mirkarimi: i am sympathetic to what director katz has said. i think animal welfare has been taking a number of hits over the past few years. i would be more than happy to be the dissenting voice on this recommendation. supervisor chu: thank you,

supervisor mirkarimi. one question for the department -- is the department in agreement with the other cuts? >> madam chair, yes, we are. supervisor chu: yes, i would be supportive of supervisor mirkarimi's position. perhaps we can make a motion or take action on the $24,900 in budget closeouts and accept all the recommendations from the budget analyst except the $10,000 for the animal control section? can we do that without objection? ok, we can do that without objection. thank you very much. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. supervisor chu: the department supervisor chu: the department of technology.