about the adjustments to this measure. i want to thank the community labor coalition that came together to support the revenue generating measure that we have before us. i want to thank the business groups in san francisco and the mayor's office for the great work of bringing them together and bringing the adjustments we proposed to this measure that has gained their acceptance and work in a flexible way that we can move forward that will raise revenue in the city. a want to thank you for your flexibility. i want to thank jobs with justice, san francisco rising, the council of community housing organizations. this measure will complementary -- be complementary with our housing trust fund. part of the revenue that will be generated will be looking at ensuring we have a steady stream of funding for the housing trust

fund. i want to thank supervisor or president david chiu for his work on this. our first discussion has -- as supervisors, changing the business tax structure came after the 2009 budget and we worked together with the controllers and mayor's office at how we would get this done. there was a lot of doubt we would be able to come up with that agreement and i think that is based on the great work and the collaboration in city hall that we were able to come to this agreement here today and colleagues, i will make a motion to table my item and to move this amendment as a whole and that would trigger an automatic continuance to next week to hear this item. i am proud and honored to introduce this and i want to thank my co-sponsors, most of whom have come on board with this measure, supervisor kim, supervisor olague, supervisor

mar 4 co-sponsors of of this measure as well. this is a great way to grow the economy and make sure we are meeting our need for government services to support the economy as well. supervisor mar: did you what the controller to speak before we turn it over to other colleagues? >supervisor avalos: that would be great. if you want to share the things that we have missed. >> good afternoon. supervisor avalos touched on the key points in the amendment that is before you. changes to the gross receipts tax rates and the changes to the registration fees and revenue targets. there are more technical amendments that do a number of things. the measure now to the men that contains an annual reporting

requirement for a five-year period from the treasure and city economist running implementation. secondly, there is further clarification of what constitutes non-taxable receipts for certain types of financial service income. third, there is further clarification of treatment of past [unintelligible] for purposes of the tax. there are final adjustments to the phase in and phase out formulas in the legislation. lastly, this minor language and definition changes throughout the ordinances. that provides a high-level summary of the amendment that is before you. president chiu: thank you. i want to join supervisor avalos and mayor lee in thanking all the stakeholders that have come together for this business tax reform that has been literally a decade in the making. the reform that will incent job

creation and economic development. we did meet in 2006 wking together for a -- to think about how we would bring about reform like this. this is at a time when i served on our small business commission and as we knell for the better part of the last decade, the business community has asked us to reform the tax system that is only in the san francisco system that asks 10% of our businesses to shoulder the burden of this particular tax. this is an item that i campaigned on in 2008. i want to thank the comptroller's office in 2010 for working with me to promote an initial cut at business tax reform and appreciate the work that has been done. it has been six months since we asked our city economist and your staff to work with us to go through countless iterations of what we have arrived at.

hundreds of meetings with the business community. in addition to thanking the stakeholders that supervisor avalos had thanked from the progress of revenue coalition. i want to thank the various leaders within the business community and the representatives of dozens and dozens and dozens of companies that have worked with us to really find to and the legislation that we have in front of us and i want to thank everyone for keeping their eye on the prize. i know there are some among us who would have preferred less revenue to be in this measure. others would have preferred more. i want to thank all sides to join together on the reform measure that i think is a compromise that reflects the best sense of that work. and i appreciate that the four revenue measures will be consolidated into one measure. i ask for support, particularly in reflection of the work that

this represents over truly a decade of discussions and ask for your support. supervisor kim: but want to thank the time to thank -- i want to take the time to thank president to and the mayor's office to -- chiu anmdd the mayor's office for working together. many of us have been talking about this for years. i remember when i first started hearing about this issue in 2003. in that mayoral campaign. the conversation about how we tax our businesses, ask the businesses to invest back in the city and whether payroll tax is the best way to do that. receipts is a much better and stronger model in terms of as a method of asking our businesses to invest back in the city. we will be generating revenue from this measure.

there are a number of reasons that justify that. our need for infrastructure, whether it is open space where schools or public safety and supporting our small businesses as well. we're hoping that revenue will go toward building a much stronger sense francisco. the housing trust fund and gross receipts tax measure are peas in a pot and i see them as being key pieces in living together. we will have a wide coalition supporting both of these measures and i am excited and proud to be campaigning for these measures. $13 million of this gross receipts tax will be going toward affordable housing and also homeownership loans for families making 120% of ami and below. the housing trust fund was [unintelligible] in order to gain support for additional revenue for

affordable housing and that will be carried through by the gross receipts tax measure. these measures and the rec and park bond complete its strong balance for san francisco and i hope our city will pass all three. thank you. supervisor campos: i do want to thank the members of this board who have been working on this for quite some time. in particular, president chiu and supervisor avalos and mayor lee. i want to thank the controller who has spent a lot of time with his staff. i think is a positive thing whenever the city elected family to use the term that mayor lee uses from time to time, comes together. as i indicated in the prior item involving affordable housing trust fund, i certainly do not

want to be in a position where we let the perfect be the enemy of the dead. but i do believe that we have to ask certain questions whenever a proposal of this magnitude comes forward. this is probably one of the most important votes will have. as a board of supervisors. there are a couple of questions that raise questions for me. in terms of process, it is a good idea any time a vote of this magnitude takes placethis o that we have of awful and in- depth analysis by the budget and legislative analysts. i think that we have always benefited from this separate, additional review. my understanding is that there is not an analysis by the budget -- and i know that we will not be voting on this today.

mr. rose will have some information on what this very significant proposal means in terms of the changes that this entails. i support the idea of moving away from the payroll system. i think that this this incentivizes the job creation and i am not certain what i will do with this proposal. i know that a lot of work went into this. i am grateful that we have some time before the final vote before the proposal is taken, when this final vote comes before the board, that i can get to a place where i am is supportive of this matter. when i added to the proposal

for mr. avalos, i believe this proposal that was put forward by the supervisor is a modest proposal, and in addition to meeting the level of funding that was put forward. the approach is to have to measures, for the gross receipts and another that creates a property transfer tax to pay for affordable housing. i remain concerned that and we have the measure that tries to deal with two problems, the solution does not do enough for by the row of them. if you look at the numbers from where we were when the

litigation happened, as a result of that litigation, the city lost $25 million per year beginning in 2000. if your account for inflation and adjust the numbers, for us to get to a place where we make the city come back to where we were, we would talk about injecting into the system $33 million worth of revenue. this proposal would bring in 28.5 million and the affordable housing measure is approved and all of us who are supporting this -- you are talking about 13 million going to affordable housing. in reality only thing that would remain is about $15 million that would remain for the general

fund to be used by the city. this is important to the staff and i think that this is a good thing but i wonder if this is enough. i do hear the words that president chu said in his comments. with the proposal of this magnitude you will not have the opportunity to change this for some time so you want to make sure that this is done right. i look forward to engaging in a discussion to learn more about the specifics of this proposal. i appreciate the threshold of $1 million, this is a good thing for small businesses but i have some concerns about some of the fees that are included in what is being proposed. i like by comparison with

supervisor at the lows, where he was trying to do with this proposal to correctly charge smaller businesses last money than fees than the current proposal. we have to make sure that we do everything that we can to extend the revenue so we don't place to hide a burden on small businesses, and i appreciate the threshold, and comparing these proposals, and comparing the proposal before us, the original proposal that a better job with these concerns for small business. i want to have a better understanding of how this will impact individual industries. today there was a report based on what the chief economist has

indicated, that some industries, as a result of this will be paying less money in taxes. i don't know if this is the case -- if this is accurate, but i would like a better understanding of that. restaurants will see a 20% reduction in the taxes that they pay, and i don't know that this is a good or bad thing. i know that in the restaurant industry we have an issue that remains unresolved, the issue that in many restaurants you have businesses charging customers for -- to pay for health care and a lot of the money is being pocketed. this may be the right approach in light of what is happening.

and tech companies will be reducing their tax burden by five-20%. i don't know if this is the case but i look forward to hearing more about if the numbers support this. one thing we should do is make certain we have enough revenue to address all of the concerns and the needs that this city has. there are many positive things brought to the city and county of san francisco, but with the positive has come challenges. one of them is the impact that the tech industry is having the route the city. i will use the mission district, where i can see that the fact that you have a lot of workers coming in, and many of them are doing well

financially, it is impacting the cost of living. in a separate discussion it was reported that the average monthly price of an apartment here in san francisco has risen 12.9% since last year, and this is now 2007 hundred 34. the average price of a home in san francisco is $725,000. as far as these companies are impacting the cost of living in san francisco, i can see the policy benefit with gross receipts -- because they're impacting affordability to connect the two of them. but the $13 million for affordable housing that would be provided -- is this sufficient to deal with the magnitude of the problem before us?

those are the questions that i have. i remain open to supporting this measure, and i think it is important for this board, with the mayor, to speak with one voice and i look forward to that conversation between now and when this comes back to the board of supervisors. i am is still supportive of the measure that was introduced by supervisor of the los. i hope we get to a place where we can have some of these questions addressed and i can be supportive of a larger measure. i look forward to hearing this from my colleagues. >> supervisor? >> i want to appreciate -- his remarks -- especially when we look at the changes in our economy and how these impact the

communities. this is something that i was partnered with on the ground, organizing the community response to what was happening in the late 90's and early last decade. this was very powerful, and the changes that we see in this city demographics, and so many friends or families i know who have left the city, and gone to the east bay. this is something that we explored at the revenue coalition to report this measure. we affirmed that these are the conditions that many of us experienced and are experiencing again, and we thought that also, we wanted to look at not just generating revenue, but also how we do the business tax structure, we would tax

something different, with a much more progressive -- with the changes that we see in san francisco. we go into this eyes wide open. the supervisor does remind me about this -- there is a real estate transfer tax and i have this right down to the department of elections, i will be pulling that back. they had one measure going forward. i want to keep my commitment with pulling my name back from the real-estate transfer tax, so that we can go forward with one measure this november. >> supervisor?

>> thank you. i want to thank them for being able to work out a compromise, with one tax measure going to the ballot. i respect the views of supervisor campos, because it is important to ask questions but i want to stress -- and this is similar to the housing trust fund. everyone has a perspective and likes some things that others may not. this is tempting to stand on principle and say that you will go forward with what you want to do. the mayor could put forward the revenue-neutral measure, avalos would have the revenue enhancement measure and we would have the transfer tax.

they would take the parks fund down with them. what has happened here has been a very mature and collaborative process among leaders in this city to don't agree on everything and have some strong philosophical disagreements. there is a very strong measure, raising more revenue than some are comfortable with. but it gets the job done. i am a appreciative of this effort and what they have put into this. i look forward to supporting this. i hope that the supervisor gets the answers to his questions and he supports this -- supports this as well. >> i want to say that my comments are not meant to take anything away from the work that

has been done. and i don't think that whatever happens has to do with maturity. this is about the substance of what is before us. i look forward to this discussion, and again, i think that, to me, this is one of the most important matters that we will be deciding on. this is something we have spoken about for years, from the moment i was elected we were talking about the need for more revenue in the system. we want to make sure that we do this the right way. this is how i am trying to approach this. >> unless there is further discussion, i think the order of motions is the motion to amend, and continue. supervisor avalos -- do we take

this to ammend without this -- there is no public comment on this. we will have comment next week. with regards to item 21, is there a motion to table? is there a second? seconded by weiner. roll call vote. >> cohen? >> aye. >> ellsbernd? >> aye. kim? >> aye. mar? aye. olague? aye. weiner, aye. avalos, aye. campos, no. president chu, aye. supervisor chiu, aye. 9 ayes, one no. >> with regard to item 20. because avalos made this, item

20 has to sit for a week. a hearing next week to be scheduled at 2:30. could i have a motion, by chu and avalos. motion to continue to july 31? can we do that without objection. it is continued. with that -- madam, clerk, the in memoriams? >> adjourned in emmory of the following individual, mr. patrick ryan. >> madam clerk, is there any more busineses? >> that concludes our business. >> ladies and gentlemen, we are adjourned.

>> there are kids and families ever were. it is really an extraordinary playground. it has got a little something for everyone. it is aesthetically billion. it is completely accessible. you can see how excited people are for this playground. it is very special. >> on opening day in the brand- new helen diller playground at north park, children can be seen swinging, gliding,

swinging, exploring, digging, hanging, jumping, and even making drumming sounds. this major renovation was possible with the generous donation of more than $1.5 million from the mercer fund in honor of san francisco bay area philanthropist helen diller. together with the clean and safe neighborhood parks fund and the city's general fund. >> 4. 3. 2. 1. [applause] >> the playground is broken into three general areas. one for the preschool set, another for older children, and a sand area designed for kids of all ages. unlike the old playground, the new one is accessible to people with disabilities. this brand-new playground has several unique and exciting features. two slides, including one 45- foot super slide with an elevation change of nearly 30 feet. climbing ropes and walls,

including one made of granite. 88 suspension bridge. recycling, traditional swing, plus a therapeutics win for children with disabilities, and even a sand garden with chines and drums. >> it is a visionary $3.5 million world class playground in the heart of san francisco. this is just really a big, community win and a celebration for us all. >> to learn more about the helen diller playground in dolores park, go to sfrecpark.org. >> the things commission. the meeting is called to order. we'll start by taking the role. >> commissioner studley. >> consumer hayon.

>> commissioner renne. commissioner liu is excused today. the first item on the agenda is public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the aendda that are within the jurisdiction of the things commission. >> thank you very much, commissioners. and, of course, the public library don't give money to the friends of the library nor accept it. it has been since march 26 that this things commission has had a regular meeting, nearly four months, virtually a third of the year. it is like leaving the city unguarded this is a disgrace, especially in view of the grand jury report. i distribute to you through your staff a flier reminding you that july 13 was the one-year anniversary the letter to mayor lee that the pren