be used to back fill ongoing expenditures? >> in years were the rainy day reserve is triggered, which is revenue is declining versus the prior year or versus the prior year peak, it allows the mayor and the board to appropriate money from the rainy day reserve equal to half the ballots in the reserve, and that money is explicitly intended to be for any purpose, including operating budget costs. supervisor kim: ok, thank you. >> this defines what discretionary revenue is. we tried that out to the charter. secondly, it excludes that that results in general fund savings or is backed by non description area revenue sources. we did not want to find ourselves in a place where you

would be forced to make a poor business decision as a city because of the 3.25% cap. if we had a cabin in the city but had the opportunity to buy an office building where the debt service we incurred from the debt would actually be cheaper than what we're currently paying to the private landlord, we did not want to close the door on that artificially with the policy. we believe this exclusion avoids that circumstance. we talked to supervisor farrell about this, and he is working with our office on the legislation. he is comfortable with it. that concludes my brief presentation. i would be happy to take questions. supervisor chu: thank you. it's good to the budget analyst report. >> on page 9 of our report, we noted file a 11-0999 would codify in respect the

expenditure of nonrecurring revenue is only for nonrecurring expenditures, which we fully support, resulting in -- for example, that will mean expenditures upon capital improvements and equipment, but this would result in a demolition of the board of supervisors options for three appropriating savings achieved by the board of supervisors. i am talking about during the annual budget process for addax and restorations. we do support the principle of the expenditures of nonrecurring revenues to be applied to non- recurring expenditures. on page 11 of our report, continuing on that same file, while file a 11-0999 provides a precise definition of selected nonrecurring revenues, the ordinance provides an open-ended

definition of nonrecurring expenditures, leaving room to interpret the proposed future expenditures that would qualify as a nonrecurring expenditures. in addition, the proposed ordinance does not provide the board of supervisors with an opportunity to dispute the interpretation of what is and what is not a nonrecurring expenditure. in the event that the board of supervisors wish to object to the classification of certain nonrecurring expenditures would be to make a one-time suspension of the provisions of file 11- 0999. and that would be on a two- thirds vote. of the board of supervisors. our recommendations are on page 12. as i stated, at the controller's definition of nonrecurring expenditures are open-ended. therefore, we recommend that you requested the controller to amend the file to find

nonrecurrent expenditures as the six expenses listed in the proposed ordinance. by striking other uses that do not create liability or expectation of substantial ongoing cost, including but not limited to. that would be page seven, and lines 8 and 9. the controller disagrees because it is possible they will identify additional nonrecurring expenditure is besides the six included in the proposed ordinance. we consider approval of filed a 11-109, we proposed changes in from the existing rolling two- year budgets. the board of supervisor reviews the budgets every year to a fixed two-year budget would reduce by the board of supervisors every two years of the policy decision by the board

of supervisors. the trigger threshold for reviewing the second year of the fixed two-year budget, the file has been proposed its budget costs or revenues are projected to change by more than 5% the second year and that we also consider approval of that 5% trigger to be a policy matter for the board of supervisors. let me emphasize that in general, we're fully supportive of the controllers financial policies. however, since there are different -- there are significant changes to the whole process, we consider approval of the three pros to ordinances as amended with our suggested recommendations to you. and the others and the proposed resolution as amended to be policy matters to the board of supervisors. supervisor chu: thank you.

to clarify with the city attorney, with the amendment as a whole be substantive or not? it would not be substantive. ok, thank you. let's open this up for public comment. if there are members of the public who wish to speak on items nine, 10, 11, or 12. please come forward. >> right at the onset, for those or at home, on matters like this, we need three minutes. but as has been the custom recently, some despicable chairs just give us two minutes, and that is uncalled for, especially in san francisco. having said that, i have listened to the narrative that the controller gave and shed some light on, and what i would like to say is that in the last five years, we see an erosion of

the legislative branch. we know that in 1996, when willie brown was the mayor, he clipped the wings of the city administrators. so right now, for all practical purposes, we have the legislative branch and executive branch. our only saving grace is the budget analyst and the comptroller's office. and hopefully the mayor's office and the budget office will somehow help the constituents of san francisco. was it pains me is that in our shelters, we do not give our people, not even a bed to sleep. we have poor people that are given a sheet, while the so- called representatives are talking about a rainy day fund. if the san francisco unified school district has a problem, do not rely and our city every

year for a rainy day fund. that is not called for. what we really need to do is to be compassionate and not allow our indigent population, our poor population, to be sitting on a chair day in and day out, for months, when we need to give them a bath. i have two seconds, may i have it? [bell rings] supervisor chu: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning, supervisors. [unintelligible] i think that certificates of participation should not be used to pay for maintenance.

i also think that attaching cop's to the discretionary budget is wise. however, the funds are designated for health purposes, and money for this fund should not be used for other unintended purposes. please continue to use the tobacco fund for public health purposes for which it was originally intended. while the 3.25% spending cap is theoretically a very good idea, the city will continue to fill a discretionary fund with principal and interest payments will be on 3.25%. the 10-year capital planning committee reports evidence of the 3.25% being maintained, and it clearly shows that from 2017- 2018, 2021-2020, the percentage

will go as high as 4.1%. the discretionary fund is variable. departments are seeking to change the amount. a two-thirds vote of the board of supervisors will allow this, but i also believe the current board history will show that the board of supervisors will use cop's to replace general obligation bonds and it will prove to be irresistible to san francisco's financial community. i've received 85% or 6%. thank you. supervisor chu: thank you. >> hello. my name is debbie with the san francisco command services network peter i am here to speak against the proposal for

nonrecurring revenue policy. this represents yet another set aside that will hamstring the city's ability to maintain import and services during difficult economic times. the city has already taken steps to restrict the use of one-time funds with the budget stabilization reserves and the rainy day fund. there's no reason to tie the city's hands further. this is predicated on the idea that key services might be disrupted in future years. if we use one-time funds this year. but that ignores that one-time funds have prevented disruption every year by saving safety net services during the recession, a time of greatest need. today's child care discussion was a perfect example of how the process can work without this kind of policy. we have a need. we have some one-time funds. we have an honest discussion about it. then we decided we're going to support it, even though we are reluctant because there may not be money tomorrow. in past years, we have seen $43

million in restorations. this current year, we do not need to pass the policy to be able to do those kinds of restorations. we had $16 million restored a few years ago. that was the last time nonprofits got accustomed doing business increases. it has been flat-funded ever since. for health and human services funding, how can we argue that one-time revenue should not be used when we're talking about saving lives? a starving man does not turn down a bowl of soup because there might not be sued tomorrow. there's nothing wrong with using one-time funds to maintain service for the vulnerable san franciscans during difficult times. the save money, and would be more costly to the city of we close them and try to rebuild them later. in essence, all money is one- time money. we take grants all the time. then we talk later about back filling when it expires. that is fine. we do not need a policy. i urge you to reject this as it -- recommendation. it is knack for san francisco. supervisor chu: thank you.

are there other members of the public who wish to speak on these items? seeing none, public comment is closed. if i can ask the controller to come up again. you have got the amendment as a whole. did we get copies of that? >> i believe so. you should have copies in front of you. supervisor chu: yes. so these are not substantive in nature that the city attorney has confirmed -- they clarified the interaction between the rainy day reserve in the budget stabilization reserve, clarified the effective date, and for the debt management policy, defense discretionary revenue but also excludes debt that results in general fund cost savings. colleagues, can we take those amendments without objection? that will be the case. colleagues, on the underlying items?

do we have a motion to send the item forward? i just wanted to address a couple of things. i know we did have public speakers who spoke on the debt management policy. i think it is wise for us to set forward a debt management policy. i want to thank supervisor farrell for his leadership on this topic and item. i think the amendments we have made, with regards to excluding debt that resulted in general fund cost savings, is something that is good and allows us to have flexibility on the issue with regard. with your direct to limiting the one-time expenses, i want to thank the analyst for the recommendation. however, i would be supportive of moving the item as is without that recommendation. the reason is that i think that as we go forward, we may find nonrecurring expenditures that we might not have anticipated. so i think it is prudent for us to allow for that flexibility to be they're going forward. finally, with regards to the

nonrecurring revenues, it is a very limited definition of what non-recurring revenues are, at least in this policy as stated. given what the policy will look like, i am covered it by the fact that we're not saying that all non-recurring revenues can be -- prior year fund balance would be counted. we still have the ability to spend, as you have seen, if history is to show itself again, $100 million on anything we want to, ongoing not. it is really only the incremental value that is the nonrecurring revenue that we are defining. not only that, take the example of last year's budget going forward, we were still able to do very much in terms of making sure that we met it but was able to deal with a lot of the community concerns. i think we will still be able to address those issues. i think this is a step in the right direction. i think the definitions of nonrecurring revenues is limited in nature, so i think it is a

prudent action for us to move forward. one more note on that, i think helping to do this will create a more stable budget. something i have heard over and over again is how terrible it is to come back here-after-year without knowing if they will get their service is cut or contracts cut. i think to the extent that we can create a more stable budget, it helps to prevent those big operational swings that we see that have a huge impact. so i think this is a good step. supervisor kim: thank you. i appreciate these proposals that have come before us. i want to concur with your comments. i appreciate the controller taking the time to answer a lot of my questions are around the nonrecurring revenue policies, which is where i had the most concerns. not because it is a bad policy. it is great policy. but, you know, you never know how budgets are going to look like in the future, and you want to have the flexibility in case of emergencies.

but i do appreciate having an outlook of our last 10 years as sort of a base of what we might be able to look at in the future and i appreciate the limited nature of how we define non- recurring. we will be supporting these proposals moving forward. thank you. supervisor chu: thank you. do we have a motion on the floor to send these items forward? supervisor mirkarimi: i will make the motion. i want to underscore one of the public comments. i think the call pyeatt was important, not to go unnoticed, as long as we do retain the latitude and discretion, so that we have that ability to allocate, even when this is not a pre fixed budget. it is important to maintain the flexibility, and i absolutely appreciate that remark. so i will make a motion. supervisor chu: thank you.

supervisor mirkarimi has made a motion to send items nine, 10, 11, and 12 as amended forward with recommendations. we can do that without objection. thank you very much. are there any more items before us? >> that completes the agenda. supervisor chu: thank you so much. we are adjourned.

>> we have much to discuss. i am looking forward to getting started. we are honored that the mayor of san francisco has stopped by. i am very pleased to introduce him and give him a few minutes. he said he only needed 45 or 50 minutes. [laughter] i am kidding. here is the mayor of san francisco. please join me in welcoming him. [applause] >> good morning, everyone. welcome to san francisco. i want to thank all of you for being here. i have two more weeks to say this. let me say it clearly. welcome to the world series champion city and county of san francisco. it is a great testament for web

.0 to be here for the eighth time. it is your decision to bring this back every year for the last eight years. it just goes to show and prove we're leading the world in technology. san francisco was ranked the no. 1 annual growth for high-tech jobs. this growth is not slowing at all. last week, i welcome one company to their new headquarters on howard street. the least 90,000 square feet of space to tech companies that plan to employ over 600 employees. this is just the tip of the iceberg. according to a recent real estate report, there are 40 technology companies all currently looking for 2 million square feet of office space in san francisco.

to put this in perspective, this is the equivalent of four trans- america. midst of space. tech companies employ over 20,000 employees. i am committed to ensuring that san francisco remains at the center of the tech industry. that is why i have created the central payroll tax exclusion. i signed it on stocks. i reached out to check ceo's to understand what more we can do to help. i have also committed to a wholesale review of our tax policy to develop more equitable alternatives that do not punish job creation. we are working hard to find other ways to interact with technology. our city is the first in the nation to pass open date up

legislation. san francisco has been a leader in allowing the community to create over 60 applications based on this day to. over the summer, our department of technology hosted hackathons and resulted in the creation of 23 apps in created over 10,000 hours of civic engagement. i want to present a challenge. we are a consent -- congested city. into the years, we will host america's cup, -- in two years, we will host america's cup, one of the largest events. over 500,000 people visit the city on any given day during that time. one of the complaints i hear the most is that people get their cars towed away when their part in the wrong place. it can cost $500 and leaves them with the worst taste in their mouth. they were here to celebrate

something. i want to challenge you. find me a solution. let there be some hand-held device that can warn somebody that their car is about to be towed. we can save a lot people having disappointment in their lives. we will work on the data to release it. you can go at it and help us to resolve one of the biggest problems we have, that is sparking any towaway zone. can you help us to do that? [applause] all right. by insuring the san francisco business policies encourage job growth, and by staying at the forefront of ideas like open government, i am confident that our city will continue to be the place where entrepreneurs, innovators flock to us as a place where you want to start your business, stay, and grow.

i want you to know that we want you here to start a mistake, and grow. thank you for holding the summit. we appreciate your presence. stay here and keep growing with us. [applause] >> i am really looking forward to getting a text when i am about to get a ticket. i get a lot of tickets. step back here and we can take care of that. [laughter] thank you very much. ♪ >> hello, and welcome to the department of elections right choice voting instructional video.

it is part of the department of elections right choice voting outreach campaign and is designed to educate san francisco rig franciscoht choice voting. today we will learn what it is and who is elected using this voting method. we will also talk about with the ranked joyce l. looks like and how to market correctly. finally, we will see how the ranked joyce voting process works and to you an example of an election using ranked choice of voting. so, what is ranked joyce voting? in march 2002 san francisco voters adopted a charter to implement ranked choice of voting, also known as instant runoff voting. san francisco voters will use it to elect most local officials by selecting a first choice candidate in the first column on the ballot and deborah second and third choice candidates in the second and third columns

resect to do -- respectively. this makes it possible to elect local officials with the majority of votes. more than 50% without the need for a second runoff election. in san francisco, ranked choice of voting is for the election of members of the board of supervisors, the mayor, sharon, just -- district attorney, city attorney, treasurer, this is a recorder, and public defender. ranked joyce voting does not apply to elections for local school and community college board members. number the election of state or federal officials. ranked choice of voting does not affect the adoption ballot measures. when voters received their ballot, either at a polling place or an absentee ballot in the mail, it will consist of multiple cards. voters will receive cards with contests for federal and state offices, as well as for state

propositions and local ballot measures. for ranked choice voting contest, voters will receive a separate ranked choice ballot card. it will have instructions to rank three choices, which is new. the ranked choice ballot is designed in the side by side column format that lists the names of all candidates in each of the three columns. when marking the ranked choice ballot, voters elect their first choice in the first column by completing the aero pointing to their choice. for their second choice, voters selected different wind by completing the arab pointing to their choice in the second column. for their third choice, voters elect a different candidate by completing the arrow pointing to their choice. voters wishing to vote for qualified write-in candidate can write it in on the line provided. and they must complete the arrow pointing to their choice.

keep in mind, it voters should select a different candidate for each of the three columns of the ranked choice ballot card. if the voters elect the same candidate in more than one column, his or her vote for that candidate will count only once. also, a voter's second choice will be counted only if his or her first choice candidate has been eliminated. and a voter's third choice will be counted only if both his or her first and second choice candidates have been eliminated. we have talked about how to mark the ranked choice ballot. now let's look at how ranked choice of voting works. initially, every first choice vote is a candidate. any candidate that receives a majority, more than 50% of the first choice to vote, is determined to be the winner. if no candidate receives more than 50% of the first choice

votes, a process of eliminating candidates and transferring votes begins. first, the candidate who received the fewest numbers of first choice votes is eliminated from the race. second, voters who selected the eliminated candidate as their first choice will have their vote to transfer to their second choice. there, all the votes are recounted. fourth, if any candidate receives more than 50% of the votes, he/she is declared the winner. if no candidate receives more than 50% of the vote, the process of eliminating candidates and transferring votes is repeated until one candidate has a winning majority. now let's look at an example of an election using ranked choice of voting. in this example, we have three candidates. candidate a, b, and c. after all the first