tv [untitled] November 4, 2012 5:30pm-6:00pm PST
5:30 pm
health, nurse practitioners, and not just for homeless people and not just for the residents, but part of the city's clinic system. >> so tom waddell will answer as well. >> i'm corin buchanan department of public health. tom waddell will stay open as an emergency site, but the main operation will move to this site. >> thank you. let's move to the budget report pled guilty rose. >> mr. chair and members of committee, on page 8 of our report, we have a table 1 and that table shows that the kelly cullen community will receive subsidies for 172 units at an average estimated subsidy of
5:31 pm
$601 per units, per month, that is for the 172 units and over the 15-year term of the agreement as you can see in table 5, the total estimated costs are $18,475,118 and they are general fund costs as miss campbell has stated. we recommend that you approve this resolution as consistent with previous board policy on other similar agreements. we also recommend that you request that the department of puck health report to the budget and finance county full board of supervisors on the findings from the new york university study on housing and health outcomes.
5:32 pm
and i really just want to reiterate or add a couple of points. this demonstrates something that we all know about homelessness and this is the important link with health. so we're really proud to have put together this project with clinic on the ground floor. second, the social innovation fund grant that miss ely referred to was a hypercompetitive national competition of which there were only four recipients and so we're really pleased not only that the project was deemed worthy to win the competition, but also that it will bring resources that will directly reduce the amount of money that the department of public health has to pay for the project for services. it's a two-year grant
5:33 pm
with a potential for a three-year extension. and then finally, i just want to highlight that this project is a partnership in the most genuine meaning of the term. at tmdc is maybe on the title and we are the owner, but it's generally a community asset of which we are merely the stewards. the department of public health, the mayor's office of housing, the state and federal government and many other parties came together to bring the project to fruition and it would not have happened with anyone. thank you. >> thank you very much. if there have are no other members of public, we will close public comment. supervisor kim. >> i want to say had you appreciative of the project and it's exciting and it's a beautiful, beautiful building and it will be great to see
5:34 pm
this finally opened by the end of the year, is that right? to be permanently supportive housing and a public clinic space for dph. i know to speaking to the staff at tom waddell, they have been looking for a space that is more conducive and welcoming to our most vulnerable residents and patients and think it's greater that they have a welcoming site right in the heart of tenderloin at the y. i had an opportunity to go on a tour with don flak so i'm happy to move this forward with a motion to approve and also as a committee report. >> we could take that without objection. also before we actually i gavel down, i would like to get a tour of the site to work that in the next month or so. it would be great and i know
5:35 pm
it's a great milestone for our city that this project is coming to fruition. so we'll approve that. send it forward as a committee report with recommendation. [ gavel ] thank you item no. 3, please. >> item no. 3, resolution retroactively authorizing the department of environment to spend a grant in the amount of $2,977,000 from the california public utilities commission through pacific gas & electric company to continue with an energy use and demand reduction through energy-efficiency program in the city and county of san francisco for the period of october 15th, 2012 through december 31, 2012. >> mr. rodriguez, welcome. >> thank you, guillermo rodriguez, department of the environment. the department is requesting the committee's approval to
5:36 pm
accept and expend a grant in the amount of $2,977,000 from the california public utilities commission through pacific gas & electric company to continue an energy use and demand reduction through energy-efficiency program through the period of october 15 of this year through december 31 of this year. it working cooperatively with pg&e and additional funding is being allocated to the city to accelerate approximately 450 businesses and multi-family projects totaling about 3 million megawatts in savings. the savings of the 450 projects is significant just to give you an example of what 3 megawatts of savings equivalent to running 3,000 san francisco homes for a year. so these 450 projects are important. a few
5:37 pm
examples of the project certainly include familiar places at&t park and the fresh fish market at geneva is one of our projects. pacific supermarket on 2900 almaine is a project. the catholic charities building on 1948 ocean is a project. we have some large projects like the palace hotel. we just heard tenderloin housing clinic is one of our other projects and conrad house is a project. the examples of the type of work are really very individual to each site, but a lot of it is for commercial office
5:38 pm
laguardias, commercial overhead lighting and a lot of it is changing their lighting for a new led project. in addition, there is lots of several kind of therm projects or natural gas projects that are included. in this next round. the last time i came before this committee there was an interest in understanding better our geographic representation of where historically the department has provided incentives and i provided the committee members -- and if i could have the overhead. this represents the example of the various programs that the department has had throughout the existence of these programs. the bulk of our programs are for commercial, and large multi-family housing units. and gives you just a sense of the projects and where they have been throughout san francisco. not only have businesses and residents saved money from
5:39 pm
these programs and we have had the positive benefits on the environment in terms of greenhouse gas reductions. but in some of the contractors performing the work, also employee local folks here in san francisco, are able to continue that program. we estimate about a little over $20 million that residents and businesses have saved. instead of writing a check out on a monthly basis they have been able to keep that here in san francisco. and it's been a very positive aspect. the department wishes to recognize pg&e for their help in expediting this process, so that we can complete a lot of this work, this calendar year. i urge the committee's acceptance of the grant and my colleague ann kelly and myself are here to answer any questions. thank you. >> great. thank you for your presentation. this item does not have a
5:40 pm
budget analyst's report. so we can go on to public comment. and seeing no member of the public come forward for public comment. we will close public comment. thank you. and colleagues, can we have a motion to move this forward as a committee report to the november 6th board of supervisors' meeting with recommendation? we'll take that without objection [ gavel ] ment i. no. 4, please. >> i. no. 4, ordinance amending the san francisco business and tax regulation code article 12a by amending section 906.5 to priest the payroll expense tax exclusion for small business net new payroll for years 2012 through 2015 from terminating in event that the voters of the city and county of san francisco pass a gross receipts tax. >> thank you victor. we have legislationoff aide to supervisor farrell, catheryn stephanie, welcome. >> good morning, supervisors,
5:41 pm
cathery stephanie, lengthiest aide to supervisor farrell. what have you before you is clean-up legislationings that follows our payroll tax exclusion legislation that was drafted before the gross receipts ballot language was finalized and submitted. so it was originally drafted and legislation will actually terminate upon passage of the gross receipts tax prior to the end of 2012. of course that is assuming that proposition e does pass on november 6th. this legislation before you amends it, so it no it longer terminates november 6th and allows the exemption to remain in effect for tax years 2012-2015. if the gross receipts tax does pass, the city's payroll expense tax would phase out from tax years 2014 through 2018 and ted is here to explain how the facout is going to work with the exclusion. as you recall the purpose of the payroll tax exclusion for small businesss is to create
5:42 pm
and increase the number of jobs within the city and county of san francisco. by providing an incentive for small businesses to create new jobs. the legislation before you today will allow that to happen by keeping the exemption in place through 2015 as originally intended. there are two recommendations in the budget legislative analyst's report that supervisor farrell is fine with. we also have an additional amendment that ted egan is here to explain, lines 14-16 and i have copies of that. again, mr. egan will explain that why it's necessary to calculate the base year payroll tax with the phase-in and exempting. so if i could give this to victor. with that i would either ask that you go to the budget legislative analyst or to ted
5:43 pm
egan. >> why don't we go to mr. egan first and then to the budget analyst. mr. egan. >> good morning, supervisors, ted egan, controller's office. the effect of this legislation will really be to bring the exclusion brand new in line with the way other payroll tax exclusions would be treated in the event that the gross receipts tax passes. effectively what that means is that the incentive will remain in place, which is to say businesses will be able to exclude growth in their payroll expense up to $250,000. through 2015. however, because the payroll tax rate will decline, as the payroll tax is phased out, the value of this incentive to businesses will decline at the same time. the amendment that miss stephanie refers to is one that
5:44 pm
changes the language on lines 14-16 of page 2. that language really pre-dates the idea of the phase-out of the payroll tax and the gross receipts proposal and if it was not changed it would basically prevent many if not most small businesss from ever taking advantage of this exclusion. what it would really do is say that that in order for a business to take advantage of the exclusion, their actual payroll tax liability would have to increase from one year to the next even though the rate was going down. so in 2014, that would mean that a business would have to grow its payroll by 10% before it could start to take dollar 1 of exclusion by 2015, that number is unknown. but it could be 25% before that number is -- before that threshold is reached and the business could take advantage
5:45 pm
of the exclusion. it's my understanding and this is not a recommendation from our office, but it's not my understanding that is not the supervisors' intent with the legislation. i was merely asked to draft alternative language, which you have before you. >> okay. thank you very much. we'll go to the budget am, analyst, mr. rose. . >> [pwha-eus/]ed on the current payroll tax rate of 139 5% as you know the controller's office had previously estimated reduced payroll expense tax revenues at $2 million annually from the net new payroll tax exclusion. so that would be a total reduction in city revenues of about $8 million over the four-year period of the exclusion. under the proposed ordinance, the estimated reduction in city revenues would be $7.3 million
5:46 pm
over the four-year term of the exclusion. if the voters do approve the gross receipts tax proposed under proposition e. we also point out on page 7 of the report that the office of the treasurer and tax collector is working with the mayor and the controller's office to identity funds to pay for an estimated additional one-time programming and related costs, which are needed. they are estimated at $55,000. we consider approval a policy matter of the two recommendations that we have is to amend the proposed ordinance and this is for clarification purposes as to the intent. if a person is exempt from filing a payroll tax, the regulations code 6.9-2 in the base year, the person's base year payroll tax shall be $150,000 and the purpose of
5:47 pm
calculating this exclusion. and with my recommend that you amend the proposed ordinance to require the issuance of a report to the [pwra-urpbgs/] committee of budget and finance committee of the board of supervisors and assessing the effect of the exclusion on job creation and payroll growth along small businesses that apply for the net new payroll tax exclusion. we consider it as amended as a policy matter for the board of supervisors. >> i'm just wondering what supervisor farrell as position on the first recommendation, you are in accordance with that? >> is he fine with both of those. >> thank you. this item we can open up for public comment. and seeing no one here, but us chickens we'll close public comment. just some words on this. i actually did not support this ordinance as a stand-alone ordinance, looking at the exemption first of all for small businesses earlier this year.
5:48 pm
i know that that actual ordinance was anticipating a gross receipts tax that could go to the ballot. we hospital yet drafted that gross receipts tax. i did not approve -- i did not vote in favor of. it i think i was the one person for voting against it. my reasoning for doing that i didn't want to do one exception to our current business tax. i didn't want to do that, but i'm actually going to be supporting this measure today, because i see in context of an actual gross receipts tax measure that is going to the ballot. that will be overall changes to the gross receipts tax if this measure actually now relates to that directly. and i can anticipate what the actual structure of the gross receipts tax is going to be in relation to this measure. so i will be supportive of this going forward. knowing that it's in relation to the whole business tax in
5:49 pm
general. since we are actually going to be ignoring, i guess prop e will pass or not we'll know next week and it makes sense to move this forward to the full board. so i can accept the moving this -- i was contemplating whether i was going to move it forward ways committee report or not. but i think that given certification of the election could happen sooner than later, i think it's important that we move it forward to the next board meeting. so i will be okay with that, to doing that. we have recommendation from budget analyst can we get a motion to accept those. >> motion to accept amendments. and then motion to move forward as a committee report for the november 6th meeting of this item. >> so moved. >> we can take that without objection. [ gavel ] . >> did we also make the amendment that i put forward with ted egan, the language? did we also make that amendment or did you make that amendment, i should say? or you did just
5:50 pm
make the amendments from the budget analyst? >> we made the amendments from the budget analyst. the first one seems to be already in the ordinance or is not? >> that adds additional language. ted? >> i believe that the piece of piece of paper replaces lines 14-16 on page 2 of the ordinance. >> okay, i'm just reviewing that right now. thank you.
5:51 pm
so let's rescind the vote. colleagues. >> motion to rescind. >> we'll rescind the vote. >> motion to amend the ordinance as articulated by miss stephanie. >> okay. and we'll take that without objection. and on the underlying ordinance, moving forward as a committee report, to the november 6th meeting with recommendation, we can take that without objection: >> so moved. >> thank you. >> that completes the agenda. >> we are adjourned.
5:52 pm
5:53 pm
with couples and dog walkers. both have a significant force. a refreshing retreat from urban life. the romantic past that meander up and down the park under pines and eucalyptus. hang out in this environment and you might see butterflies it, fennel, and then the lines. -- dandelions. is ada accessible. public transit is plentiful. we have conquered the steps, we have watched the dogs, and we have enjoyed a beautiful view. this is a place to take someone special on a romantic stroll and
5:54 pm
enjoyed a beautiful look out. welcome to corona heights located in the heart of this district. it offers a view of the downtown skyline, the bay bridge, and the east bay. it is one of the best kept secrets in the city. it is hardly ever crowded. on any given day, you will run into a few locals. , bought a 37 bus to get there without any parking worries. for legged friends can run freely. there is also a patch of grass for the small box. >> it is a great place. it is a wonderful place to have these kinds of parks. that dog owners appreciate it. >> take time to notice of the wildfires that are on the grassland and keep your head out on the lookout for hawks and
5:55 pm
other bird life. be sure to take your camera and be prepared to take a view of the city will not forget. it has a beautiful red rock formations. you could watch the sunrise over the bay. this is another one of our great lookouts. we are at mount davidson. 928 feet. this is the place for you to bring someone special. to not forget that dogs and enjoy all of the pathways and greenery that surrounds you. it provides a peaceful oasis of open space and great hiking trails. the spectacular view offers a perfect place to watch the sunrise or sunset with someone
5:56 pm
you love. >> it is a good place to get away from the hectic life of the city. come up here and listen to nature, i get some fresh air. that view is fantastic. >> where sturdy shoes. hikers get the feeling of being in a rain forest. mount davidson is also a great place to escape the noise and the bustle of the city. take the 36 bus and it will drop you at the entrance. it is quite a hike to the top but the view is worth every step. this is the place to bring that someone special. golden gate park's largest body of water is an enchanting place.
5:57 pm
is a popular spot for paddling around in boats, which can be rented. created in 1893, it was designed for these your boating -- for leisure boating. it is named for the wild strawberries that once flourished. there is also a waterfall, two bridges, and trails the climb to the summit, the highest point at more than four hundred feet. you can catch glimpses of the western side of the city that make this hilltop a romantic look out. for public transit, i take the n train. the lad the ad -- lake is ada
5:58 pm
accessible. watch many ducks, swans, and siegel's. -- seagulls. it is a great place to stroll and sail away. many couples come here to take a ride around a lake, going under the bridges, passing the chinese pavilion and the waterfall. for a quiet getaway, making for a memorable and magical experience. located on 19th avenue, this growth is the place to where you're hiking boots, bring the family and the dog because it has so much to offer you and your loved ones. it is a truly hidden gem in the city. the park is rich with eucalyptus trees.
5:59 pm
long paths allow you to meander, perfect for a dog walking in a wooded environment. >> i enjoy the history. the diversity of nature that exists in such an urban city, concrete streets, cars, we have this oasis of the natural environment. it reminds us of what the history was. >> there is a section for dogs and plenty of parking. transit is available on the 28 bus to get you very easily. the part is ada -- park is ada accessible. it is also a natural lake. this is your chance to stroll around the lake and let the kids run free. it also has many birds to watch. it is a place to find
117 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
SFGTV: San Francisco Government TelevisionUploaded by TV Archive on
