provided to the district attorney's office. and there is an expectation that anything that was not necessarily spent will be coming back to the city. and so, we are talking about potentially a small surplus. and i don't understand how you are approaching the coming fiscal year in a budget deficit when you are starting from the beginning and you are operating at full staffing and what is budgeted at the appropriate steps and the appropriate benefits are to meet the needs of of course, the existing staff. understanding that potentially people retire and find other jobs and there are costs associated with maybe a pay out which from my understanding that has been accounted for. and but i don't understand, i

don't understand anything other than that. >> and i appreciate the points that you are raising. the concern that we have is that we are going into a budget that we know that if we have no salary savings, we would be at a deficit, right? i don't believe that that is a good business model. >> so it is salary savings. >> it is 270 would entail that as people leave, that we would not be backfilling certainty, two positions and whether at that time of year that will occur. and the one of the things that we try to do is that we try to perhaps reach an agreement that we met somewhere in the middle, you know, somewhere in the midway here and that was not possible. and the budget analyst refused to reduce... >> and we believe, that it is just not wise for us to say

that we are okay with this reduction, and understanding that it would be under funding or currents. >> mr. chairman, and members of the committee, you heard the district attorney state that he is acknowledging that a portion of our cut is correct. he is saying that there could be a compromise, we compromise all of the time with the departments. which you see, during this budget process. and the reason why we didn't agree is because our numbers back up what we are stating. but at the minimum, the district attorney is stating that some portion of our recommendations is correct. >> okay. >> so, let me suggest this. and we are do one of two things, we can have a roll call vote right now and on this recommendation, and then come back and i would suggest that we break for lunch and so the fire department can continue to work out the numbers. or we can go to lunch right now and supervisor breed, if you want further explanation from the district attorney office to

decide after lunch. >> just quickly, there is no, i mean there is no further discussions between the budget analyst office and the district attorney? they are just basically i pay this and you pay this... >> so supervisor breed, the case right now, i think that we have options that we can do and take the budget analyst recommendations at full and we can take it at half. and we can do something. >> i would like to take a break before we move forward with that. >> why don't we do this then, why don't we so we have time to understand what the budget analyst and the fire department, why don't we have a one-hour recess for lunch? and so we will come back at 2:15 and take up the fire department district attorney at that time. thank you. >>

>> good afternoon, welcome back to the meeting, and we are continuing with item 6 and 7, we have the fire department and other departments out, i will call the fire department first. >> good afternoon, chairs, and members of the committee, we have worked with the budget analyst and happy to have reached an agreement. >> okay. mr. rose? >> mr. chairman, members of the committee. chief, is correct, on page 16 of our report, where we had a total including the unspended and the recommend now is to reduce the amount by $703,648,

and in fiscal year, 1415, where we had previously reported 869,751, we recommend that you reduce the budget by 508,008. >> okay. >> and colleagues any questions for mr. rose or the chief? >> okay. seeing none, could i have a motion to set the budget analyst recommendations. so moved and we could do that without opposition. >> thank you, thank you, chief. >> thank you. >> oh, and excuse me, hold on, actually. and item number two we need to take public comment on? >> correct. >> yes. if there is any members of the public that would like to comment. could i have a motion to move forward to the full board with recommendation. >> we can do so without opposition. >> i am going dao fast here. >> is that the fire department supplemental? >> correct. >> and yes, as i understand it,

the department has concured with our recommended reduction of 19,894 dollars. >> could i have a motion to accept the recommendations on item two and do so without opposition and move item two as amended to the full board and do so without opposition. >> thank you, chief and mark. >> and last up we have the district attorney attorney's office and thank you for staying. >> good afternoon, committee members, we are still where we were before we left off. >> okay. >> colleagues, any further discussion on this item? >> okay. so there is a certain amount in dispute and a certain amount, mr. rose, could you clarify, there is an amount in dispute,

could you clarify what is not in dispute. >> we will take a motion to approve that first the >> actually it is $446 stsh 317 is the recommendation and that included the 270,638. and if i have done this real quickly, 175 stsh 680 should not be in dispute and 13, 14. >> somebody might want to check this. >> excuse me, 446,318, was

23638. >> so that will be 115,680 and then in 14, 15, take your time and we will get this right. >> okay. in 14, 15, it will be 100,344. >> yes. >> could you repeat the year one number? >> the 13, 14 number, i

calculated 115, 380. >> sorry. we are doing them over here. >> 175,680. >> and 100,344 is still correct on year two? >> okay. >> does that sound right? >> yes. yes. >> colleagues, could i have a motion to approve the budget recommendation of 175,680 in year one and 100,244 in year two, and we can move and do that without opposition and... >> commissioner, earlier to have a vote on that. and what we just cut out of the budget of 270,000.

>> okay. >> or, for the attrition savings? >> yes. >> mr. chairman, could i just... i would just like all of the committee members to know, on that 276,638. the district attorney office did propose to us that they can do without $100,000 of that amount or $170, 638. that is not my recommendation to you, my recommendation to you is still the same amount, but the district attorney office in negotiations with us, as with the district attorney stated today, we did not agree with the negotiation, they were willing to concede, $100,000 less which would have made our amount of 276, 038, 176,038. >> and so mr. rose mentioned it, mr. district attorney, if it was not the full amount, would there be a meeting of the

minds. >> yes, we did agree, to give off $100,000, now i am not sure, and i am not going to argue, with just the numbers are 270,638. and we will give back 100. >> okay. >> no, i get it, but there is $100,000. but we are willing to go for $100,000. >> okay. >> so they are willing to give up to make it $100,000 less, which would have been 170,638 instead of 270. >> what we will do is have a roll call vote on the full amount and if that does not pass we will have a roll call volt. >> supervisor weiner? >> or we could just come up with accommodation right now or either way. >> roll call vote? >> i think that there is a desire to have a roll call vote. >> it appears that we are talking about just 100 and

fiscal year, 13, 14, and nothing in 14, 15. >> no it is the same thing in 14, 15, the way that they agreed to 100,344. but we continue to recommend the additional 275,04 they said this they would accept a $100,000 less reduction, or instead of 207, 504, in 14, 15, 104,504. so they have agreed to a recommendation. it is not just the amount that we are recommending to you >> why don't we have a roll call vote on supervisor avalos motion to accept the full budget recommendations of an additional 270,628 in year one. >> on that motion. >> mar? >> aye.

>> avalos? >> aye. >> supervisor breed. >> no. >> breed, no. >> supervisor weiner? >> no. >> supervisor farrell? no. >> the motion fails. >> the motion fails. we have a separate motion supervisor weiner? >> i make a motion to cut $100,000. >> in year one and year two? >> yes. >> okay. >> and do you have... >> mr. chairman, monique and i am not sure that supervisor weiner that is not the proposal that mr. rose had just stated that he was... what he stated is that they were willing to cut the 170,000. >> no i know that there is a miscommunication and i heard that they were willing to cut $100,000. >> we were willing to cut

$100,000 for this fiscal year, 13, 14, under the 100,000 for 14, 15. >> i think that there was such some lack of klartty in the dialogue before but the motion to cut $100,000 from year one and $100,000 from year two. >> made the motion and could we do that without opposition? >> yes. >> okay. >> so moved. >> thank you, mr. district attorney. >> thank you very much. >> okay, colleagues. we are through with our departments and item 6 and 7. and at this point in time, we do have gone through item 6 and 7, so and we have schedule meeting tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. but we need to do some continuation and work here. so mr. clerk, just so to be clear and the state attorney, item one we sent forward to the

full board. item two, we sent forward to the full board. item three, we need to hold over until tomorrow, so i believe that we are going to go into recess with that. 4 and 5 not acted on and 6 and 7 will continue to tomorrow morning. >> okay. and so we have to action on item 6 and 7 and 3,; is that correct?? >> so, mr. state attorney? >> i believe that you want to take action on 6 and 7 to continue those to tomorrow. >> right. >> and then you want to take a motion to go into recess to reconvene tomorrow morning to consider item three. >> okay. so first colleagues, could i have a motion to continue items 6 and 7. >> so moved. >> tomorrow morning at 9:00 a.m.. >> i can do so without opposition. >> and then, mr. state attorney, is there any more detail that we need on this motion to recess item number three? >> the board's roll of order required that you take a motion, and identifying specifically which items will

be continued and then all of the other items the clerk will process as decided items on the agenda. >> so we will have a motion to go into recess on item number three specifically. okay? >> colleagues could we do so without opposition? >> okay. so moved. >> okay, mr. clerk, are there any other items before us. >> that completes the agenda. >> we are ajournd. >> chairman, we are recessed. >> sorry, we are recessed. >> thank you.

>> welcome to culture wire. we will look at the latest and greatest public art project. recently, the airport unveiled the new state of the art terminal. let's take a look. the new terminal service and american airlines and virgin america was designed by a world- renowned architecture's firm. originally built in 1954, the building underwent massive renovation to become the first registered terminal and one of the must modern and sustainable terminals and the united states.

the public art program continues its 30-year legacy of integrating art into the airport environment with the addition of five new commissions that are as bold and dynamic as the new building. >> this project was completed in record time, and we were able to integrate the artist's early enough in the process that they could work with the architect said that the work that is completed is the work that really helps complement and instill the space as opposed to being tucked away in a corner. >> be experience begins with the glass facades that was designed with over 120 laminated glass panels. it captures the experience of being under or over clouds when flying in a plane. depending on the distance or point of view, it can appear

clear for more abstract and atmospheric. the subtle colors change gradually depending on the light and the time of day. >> i wanted to create an art work that looks over time as well as working on in the first glance. the first time you come here, you may not see a. but you may be able to see one side over the other. it features a couple of suspended sculptures. each was created out of a series of flat plains run parallel to each other and constructed of steel tubing. >> it is made up of these strata. as the light starts to shift, there is a real sense that there is a dynamism. >> it gives the illusion that this cultures might be fragments

of a larger, mysterious mass. >> the environmental artwork livens it with color, light, and the movement. three large woven soldiers are suspended. these are activated by custom air flow program. >> i channeled air flow into each of these forms that makes it move ever so slightly. and it is beating like a heart. if-0 when as of the forces of nature moving around us every second. >> shadow patterns reflect the shapes of the hanging sculptures. the new terminal also features a children's play areas.

both of the market the exploratory n.y. -- exploratorium. the offer travelers of all ages a playful oasis. using high quality plywood, they created henches shaped like a bird wings that double as musical instruments. serving as a backdrop is a mural featuring images of local birds and san francisco's famous skyline. >> in the line between that is so natural, you can see birds and be in complete wilderness. i really like that about this. you could maybe get a little snapshot of what they are expecting. >> it is an interactive, keck

sculpture that is interacted with by the visitor. >> they are a lot about and they fall down the belt. it moves the belt up, and if you turn that faster, the butterflies fall in the move of words. >> the art reflect the commission's commitment to acquiring the best work from the bay area and beyond. in addition to the five new commissions, 20 artworks that were already in the airport collection were reinstalled. some of which were historically cited in the terminal. it includes major sculptures by the international artists. as a collection, these art works tell the story of the vibrant arts scene in the early 1960's through the mid-1980s's.

the illustrate san francisco's cultural center and a place of innovation that is recognized and the love throughout the world. one of the highlights is a series of three left tapestries. they are on view after being in storage for 20 years. these tapestries representing various gardens. from his years of living in san francisco. hydrangeas, chrysanthemums, and whilst dahlias in rich, deep shades as they make their way to the baggage area. they can access behind-the- scenes information and interviews with the artist through an audio to work. it features archival audio as well as interviews with living artists.

he can be accessed on site by dialing the telephone numbers located near the artwork or by visiting the commission's web site. the public art speaks volumes of san francisco as a world-class city with world-class art and culture. for more information, visit

rybody and welcome to the repeatedly scheduled meeting of the san francisco entertainment commission. tuesday june 18, 2013. black stone call the roll >> all right. we have commissioner (calling names)