city rebate is really wonderful, because we're one of the few cities that does offer a city rebate. i think we can make it more attractive by expanding this to documentary's and unscripted television programming, otherwise known as reality programming. the main thrust of this is we want to bring more jobs to the city and more jobs to the local economy. what happens is when these productions are shooting here, they do have a certain amount of people that stay in hotels. they use local production services, and they ultimately bring or exposure to san francisco, which helps bring more tourists. we would really like to expand this to documentary and unscripted television programming in order to attract more of the productions. we have recently had a number of documentary series that have called us and son are we eligible for your rebate

program? at this point we have not been. that was one of the reasons for considering adding documentary's to the rebate. we also have had more and more very high-budget reality programs interested in shooting in san francisco, some of which we got of some of which we have lost. one thing i wanted to point out for the unscripted reality programs, in 2008/2009 we had 26 unscripted tv productions with $720,550 in estimated budgets. we collected all thousand $300 and permit fees. in 2010/11, we had 33 of those types of productions $2,496,400 in estimated budgets. we collected almost doubled the

amount and permit fees. while the productions, they are coming in, they are spending a significant amount higher in money. we would like to attract that many here and have them spend it locally. the other benefit of this is that reality program is becoming more and more popular on television. this is a way to increase the exposure to san francisco as a tourist but you. one of the things i wanted to reads -- read to you before i close is a quote from mayor bloomberg of new york city. new york has a very high rate of television production. they have 23 prime time series shooting varied this year. in 2006 they only had nine. that is largely due to the rebate program. the entertainment energy --

industry greatest contribution is to make the image of an idea of new york is to make a living presence of the minds of people around the world. few other cities on earth have been celebrated more widely or memorably than new york. in that sense, the industry can be seen as a priceless marketing tool for the city, helping to draw millions of visitors and tourists each year to new york for the propelling -- for the propelling the economy and vitality. i would like to be able to some friends -- substitute san francisco every time you say new york. i think we can do that with this legislation. thank you. president chiu: thank you very much for the presentation. why do we go to the budget analyst report. -- don't we go to the budget analyst report. >> on page 6 we pointing out reducing the fees by $200 per day for phone production

companies that have production budgets of less than $500,000 would result in decreased revenues to the city of $440, an estimated reduction to the city of 1467 per year. it is pretty minimal. however, certainly we cannot estimate the amount of the potential increase revenue to the city as a result of the proposed reduction. regarding the film rebate program, also, the fiscal impact cannot be determined because they have not tracked document carries, docudramas and reality tv programs. however, the maximum cost to the film rebate program is 1.8 million.

so we have a recommendation on page 8 of the report. my understanding is the supervisor is proposing to extend that the rebate program, which expires on june 30 of 2012. our recommendation is that some time prior to the resumption of the rebate program that you amend the legislation to require a report from the foam commission to the board of supervisors detailing the objectives of the program. this would include the number of jobs. as you know, that was the purpose of the potomac rebate

program, that in return for reimbursing cost it to the city to the film production companies, that they would hire disadvantaged persons. we consider approval of the proposed ordinance as amended to be a policy decision for the food 0 -- board of supervisors. i will be happy to respond to questions. supervisor chiu: in clarification of what is before us. we're seeing a reduction of these four very small production that has a $4 million impact, and last week, allowing documentary's and unscripted shows to be qualified. this does not extend the program. >> this legislation -- our recommendation is that if the board decides to extend the program, that prior to that extension you obtained a report so the board is at least in a position to evaluate what has transpired and what the

benefits mean for the program. >>supervisor farrell: thank you. we're working with the film commission and ms. roberts on whether it would make sense to extend the phone rebate program. we're digging in and want to dig in to mention and understand whether it makes sense financially to contribute dollars to the program it is creating jobs that we intend it to and has the financial impact that we want it to. we're only looking at it does except for our city. what i would like to propose is that we amend the legislation to include this report that was requested, but actually what i would like to do is have it done on december 31 of this year. the legislation is set to expire on june 30 of next year. i would like to see that before it expires, that way we can

confront any of the issues and have time to evaluate whether make sense to fund this ongoing or whether it makes sense to terminate on june 30 of next year. i would like to offer that amendment to the legislation and have them advise the city attorney if it will be material. supervisor chiu: thank you, supervisor farrell. why don't we open this up for public comment? are there any members of the public that would like to speak to this item, item number one? >> good morning, supervisors. i have lived in san francisco for 59 years. i would like to speak in favor of this ordinance. i think anything that brings an income to the city is fine. basically another issue i would like to point out since today's agenda is only one item, since

this is the regular meeting of the budget and finance committee, considering ye there is only one item on the agenda. i have read in the paper recently that there would be some sort of consideration in regard to the city's use of participation certificates. i think this is a long overdue examination. in fact, one of the comments i heard was why it took a new supervisor to push that idea forward rather then the to so- called experience fiscal supervisors that never brought up the issue. hopefully this committee will consider the subject of participation certificates, because one of the favorite topics i follow, especially when i am back east, is the subject of voodoo economics. i have a feeling somewhere along

the line participation certificates might fall into the category, depending on whether you use them wisely or misused them. anyway, i think this ordinance is a step in the right direction, and i hope this city will use a very realistic approach to finding revenue, rather than trying to use the old federal system of class warfare. i do not think that will make our teamwork spirit and the better and san francisco, and i think it will hurt everyone's feeling, and all that ends up doing is everyone will. a finger at anyone saying it is your fault. thank you. supervisor chiu? thank you. and the other speakers at like to comment on this item? >> good morning.

my name is robin kincaid. i am a producer here in san francisco. i am the person that is dealing with most of these. bili can tell you the budgets he shrunk. five years ago i was getting 2000 for how summer. and of his $5,000. i am just as shocked as everyone else. the bottom line is how much money they are spending. we should all over the bay area. we're not shooting in san francisco, and we should be. we look at permits, police, and parking. oakland, i am there every week. literally. we use restaurants. we do not use hotels because

most of our stuff is local, but we do spend money in the cities. i am here to support the strongly. we really need this in the industry. it puts people like me to work. there are 50 to 60 people working on the show. that is a big thing. that is it. thank you so much. supervisor chiu? : thank you. any other speakers that wish to comment on this item? >> good morning. my name is catherine bloom. i am a location scout and location manager here and have worked on numerous reality shows as well, including the amazing grace, which if any of you watched the emmys last sunday night, one the category, which is a very exciting thing. they shot their final episode in san francisco in december of

2009. it aired in the spring of 2010, and they had at least 9 million to 11 million viewers for that final episode. it was shot entirely in san francisco. when they landed at the san francisco airport, they climbed up outside of the tower, and they continued around the city and ended up -- it was candlestick park. that is a lot of eyeballs seeing our fair city ensure we get off in a really positive, a good way. although we only shot for a morning, literally, it employed over 100 people locally. the ipad hotel rooms for a least a week before with a lot of people. take the money and run, which i

also worked on in january, have roughly 4 million eyeballs on the premiere episode, which was one of the ones shot in san francisco. it employs people like me who was a homeowner and -- in property-tax fair in san francisco. it keeps our business alive. employes people within the industry, which we have had so much attrition in the past year that it is unfortunate we of lost rental houses, talented people, crew, and etc.. the more information we can get, the more talent we can keep in the war industry we keep here, the better it is for the entire area of san francisco. every frame that is ever shot you should consider as a great for getting peace. thank you very much. supervisor chiu: and the other

members that wish to comment on this item? he none, public comment is closed. supervisor mirkarimi. -- seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor mirkarimi: to our reality film enthusiast, i think you have a prospect by considering a reality tv shows for the board of supervisors of sentences go. i am surprised the one has picked up on that yet. [laughter] i am curious because i have been on the board enough to track this discussion that somehow we incentivize by a rebate program. i am not so sure i'm sold on the idea, although i do support the idea that that is what breeds and more film production and more interested to see if francisco. in the report that is being

talked about that we would like to get at least some sort of progress, what i would like to see is recommendations beyond what a rebate program will do. new york is also very cost prohibitive. it also enjoys a different stature. it has historically. of being that place where production and t d was born in movies as well, too. san francisco has always been in salary to about relationship in the united states. i do not know how we have become a symbol rebate program. i think there has to be other answers to the larger question, and i have not ever really heard the drill down of what the answers are. >> well, you know, we are working on ways to bring productions here, because our

incentive will not be the only thing that brings them here. one thing is we're working on a real to distribute to producers that shows you francisco, not just the icon stomach as everyone knows what we have here, but we're trying to sell the city as all the other things that we have here. we have the mission. we have things that could also double for paris. with things that could double for new york. we're trying to not just focus on the normal reasons why people come here. i do think when you're talking about new york being cost prohibitive is they do have a very strong state incentive. it is a 30% tax credit. they also then have an additional 5 percent tax credit for new york city. they also have three police

officers -- free police officers. they do not charge for police. ours are were $100 per hour minimum. that is $1,200 per officer. so it is comparatively very expensive to shoot here rather than new york. you -- the new york also has a $300 -- sorry, i am doubly down on my words. they have a $300 per project feet and rss $300 per day. really the cost to make a difference. i think that is also why the production has jumped so much in the past were 2006 they had nine television shows there and now have three. they are really using the tax credit to their advantage. unfortunately we do not have that.

in california we have the 20 percent tax credit. it is used of the first day it opens up. it's a lottery system. they only have 1 million. i would have to get back to you on the exact number of with the allotment is per year. no one else of the eligible for the rest of the year. new york is always accessible and so is louisiana and illinois. it really does affect us, because right now every producer i talked to, they say i used to be given a script, and let's say it was a beach in hawaii, are will figure out how i can shoot that in louisiana and get their tax break. a lot of it is the numbers. if ever runs incentives went away, it would be wonderful,

but we are competing with other states that have such high incentives that are really taking productions away from us. >supervisor mirkarimi: that is my question, because new york is a trophy city coming in san francisco is its own. it is probably one of the most objective -- majestic in the country, if not planet. but i am wondering is do we change the rules or how our approach is in order to figure out a way that makes us more competitive, because the track we have been on since i have been on the board is about rebates, and i have not seen the field but i think people have been hoping for for quite some time, and maybe we will learn something new with the progress report. the question is we're going down this road. we have experimented with the rebate program, a least what is politically palatable or not. are there other incentives or

other tricks to the trade that as a city we may want to consider? for example your comment about the legislature. that has never been a robust discussion here of the board of supervisors about us deploying assets and the state. it is hard for us to imagine that we are competing with another county in california that really has no use for the $1 million lottery or whenever the summit may be. i think that deserves a more thorough discussion and one that i would very much welcome. i am hoping we are not the capital of reality tv. sorry. i would like to believe there is an intellectual role, cultural role because of our great diversity and ethnicities in san francisco, that we are able to portray some of what makes san francisco's smart city through

the entertainment industry and not dumbed down san francisco, but also be economically competitive in this industry, too. >> i think we do attract a wide variety of productions. reality is one of it. since january we have it in an hbo production. the shot here for budgets. they were in production for six months prior to that. they spent a lot of money here. we have sherry with james franco. we had rob lowe but just in a shooting here. we are attracting futures. we of a huge documentary community in the bay area, and i think that is one of the reasons we want to extend their rebate to them to help bolster that kind of work here and show we

support that as well. we are not just about reality. one of the things i have done since i started last december was created a vendor discount program in the city, and that right now we have 85 merchants who are offering discounts to production as an additional incentive, because i realize we cannot rely on the city for everything. what these merchants have agreed to do is offer discounts of 10% to 30% off of services for productions that use them. we have 14 or 15 hotels that are offering 10% to 30% off. we have restaurants that are members, production companies and post-production services. car rental agencies and entertainment venues or when they're here and not working, they can go to alcatraz, go to the wax museum.

they have lots of different discounts that we're also trying to use to attract production. we can get them the discount code for them when they're cutting the cost to make it more affordable to shoot here. >> thank you. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. supervisor chiu: thank you. i do support the amendment. i think the support to get the report before the of them expires. in particular i am very interested in terms of the number of residents that have been employed due to the rebate program, and of course to the economically-just a bid to presidents, because we talk a lot about how this will help hire folks in san francisco, and i think we really want to see that number in that report if we

want to continue the program. i do support these amendments as put in. by one comment was something that i brought up to you earlier. to examine if we want to lower fees even more for production. i do not have a number, but i know that a lot of folks come here with budgets much less, like under 50,000. i do not know what the break point would be, but i the family but to encourage people to file permits with the city, because i know most of these folks probably do not at all. if we could make it even easier for those with budgets that are incredibly small -- i do not know what that number would be. the one question i had that i was not able to ask before is in terms of the $200 fee per day

for commercial and web video -- now the fee will be even less. if commercials and corporate media have budgets under 500,000, will they write the fee is double? >> i guess we will have to wait and see. i do not have an answer for you on that. i do not know what the increments would look like, but i want to make sure we encourage people to get permits and the city. i did submit to you all in the

report that i gave them prior to today's meeting about the economic impact of filming in san francisco, and we started a new report, because we always get reports from programs that participate in the rebate program about how much money they spend here, that was not being collected for everyone else that shoots here. we now have a new form that we have put in with the permit after production we asked them to give us a spend and what they -- with their spending is and what the numbers they're spending look like. all we do not always get those back, we are still tracking them afterwards and tried to get these numbers. we did look at the numbers, and as september 1 with 53 percent

of their productions giving us the economic impact report, we have had an eight-month, 1144 local san francisco crew hires quirky 7142 days amongst all of them. they have hired 533 local san francisco i cast members. the total estimated productions and has been $23,340,000. and do think the productions that come you're making an impact in hiring locals. these numbers are to san francisco-based, and they are also hiring people from oakland, berkeley. we're not counting them and our numbers. these are just san franciscans

had been hired. this is spending in the city of san francisco. in my mind it is pretty impressive what they're spending here. i think it is a real important business in san francisco. supervisor chiu: thank you. supervisor farrell: thank you for those numbers. when we for started talking about the legislation early in the year there was a focus on getting the information in the data behind everything as opposed to a growing numbers out there. there was a great point about not just about the rebate, but what other things to cities do? perhaps we could work together in terms of this report and if it requires a separate report, then to look at it with the comparative analysis. i think that is a very healthy thing to be