we will soon come before school starts, have another review of the budget based on the state budget once it is passed, including if it is passed just as we expect now and the revenue looks the same. we will review that. you will report it to us. commissioner fewer: a clarifying question. if we did the opposite, if we decided as a board to look over the budget, and we change the allocations from certain departments to another department, that could also take place after the adoption of the budget. >> thank you. sorry about that. public speakers have two minutes each. come on up. state your name and go ahead. >> my name is oxi and i would like your undivided attention. my poem is called "the word." i see all of you taking your time, sipping her coffee. you already have their education. achieve your job. the ones after will suffer. no way to back them up with summer school. that is too expensive. we don't have the money. why not donate it out of your pocket. you can afford nice suits and perhaps a car. i must have got on the wrong agenda. there is no way you can take your place. failing gra

according to senator portman, who used to be the nation's budget director, the congressional budget office would say that if congress did this kind of dollar-for-dollar reduction for spending every time a president asked to us raise the debt ceiling, we'd balance the budget in ten years. and here's another one: the "wall street journal" reported yesterday that because of these spending cuts, the discretionary part of the budget, which is about 39% of the entire federal budget, will grow over the next ten years at a little less than the rate of inflation. if we could control the rest of the budget so that it would grow to anything close to the rate of inflation, we would balance the budget in no time. and balancing the budget is exactly what our goal ought to be. i did it every year as governor of tennessee. families in america do it every day. it's time to balance the government's books and live within our means. these spending reductions are an important step, but they're just one step and no one should underestimate how difficult the next steps will be. these spending cuts do almost noth

i am the mayor of's budget director. i appreciate your time inviting me here to speak with you on this measure. what i am here for today is to ask your support on behalf of the mayor for a proposal that he has submitted to the board of supervisors with the intent of placing it on the ballot this coming november. the essence of the proposal is that as you all know, the state sales tax rate effective july 1st declined by 1% bringing the tax rate from 9.5% to 8.5%. this was done over the objection of the governor. we would like to get the sales tax at the existing rate. we would like to offset some of the deeper cuts that were on the table absent that extension and the extension of some other revenues at the state level. as this discussion was playing out at the capitol in sacramento, in the mayor's office, we were developing the mayor's budget proposal and looking at some of the proposed cuts that were on the table and ultimately made the decision that the uncertainty about what was going to happen in sacramento and what th

page 46 of the new budget booklet. i noticed that on page 46, on the proposed budget for 2011 and 12, there were some words that were changed and i could not figure out why they were changed. the revenues went up. it was not by much, but it went up by $300,000 or so. i do not know where that came from. the expenses went down i guess $2.50 million. i am just curious. where did we cut? and there is i guess the revenue -- these numbers below would be related to how you answer it. there is one more question. at the bottom of the page, if you could explain -- at the bottom note, there are benefits cost increases and for low savings. in the june 14 document, you have put $5,368,000. it was reduced in this document to $2,687,000. i want an explanation of how that happened. that is on page 46 and i have questions on two other pages. >> before you start, could i point out one thing? i just wanted to say that the first reading document that the vice president is pointing out -- it is true that there were some different figures tw

[applause] they were all the members of the budget committee. but again, i want to thank each and every one of the members of the board, because we worked really hard. at the beginning, in january of this year, we all faced a $380 million deficit, and we all went to work. particularly, our office had to lead. like i say, we were on first base. and i wanted to thank so many other parties in this great city of ours for coming together. because the board of supervisors and the mayor's office, we knew we could not do this alone. the city budget reflects so many values of our great city. whether it is departments or community-based agencies or whether it is neighborhood groups, we all had to put our focus on and make sure that this budget would be balanced in the right way. so i want to especially thank all of our labor unions in the city for coming together this year. they were fantastic, and they were obviously very forthright in the things that they represented. particularly, i want to think, especially, the police officers and the police officer a

the budget process that we go through. the folks through the congressional budget office that try their best to do the work but the rules under which they determine whether or not something costs the federal government and this nation something or whether it saves are so distorted that you can't get to the right answer. one cannot get to the right answer without structural change. and that's where the balanced budget amendment comes in. and so today, what we did in the budget control act is not all that any of us would have liked. in fact, the numbers are relatively paltry when you look at them compared to how much money this government spends, but what is true about this act is that it will allow us in this house of representatives and in the senate right down the hallway to say to the american people, we hear you. we want this government to be held accountable. and the best way to do that is by passing a balanced budget amendment to the constitution of the united states. my friend from arizona comes down this evening to h

on the budget side, the budget control act makes a difference in the budget outlook. ficits over the next decade by about $2.1 trillion because of the budget control act. that is a very substantial amount of money, even by the standards of current -- the current federal budget. so i guess that is good news. i think the challenges that remain, though, are very large. part of that is that a very big chunk of those savings from the budget control act have not really been worked out yet. they are rising from instructions to a deficit reduction committee and a fallback plan, but there is not really a set of policies that the members of congress have all agreed or even the majority have agreed to in specific terms. so that is still a challenge ahead for the congress to decide just what policy changes it wants to use to achieve those savings. the cutbacks in discretionary spending through the caps are more specific. we have specific levels set by law, but the actual appropriations to meet those levels have not been decided upon. we have a proliferation near the end of the bud

in this 18% of the budget, that is where the cuts will hit. and with the phase 1 required cuts, or title 1 cuts, in combination with the cuts under title 3, you have essentially a 15% cuts from the 2011 march c.b.o. baseline. now understand that baseline for 2011 is a very low baseline, much lower than 2010, much lower than 2009. it takes us back many years earlier. you already have a very low baseline and we're going to cut 15% more out of the core programs supporting the success of our working families, supporting the success of our smallest children, supporting the success of our college-bound children. this is not the path that builds a stronger america. the third factor is that while our children in head start and our children headed for college and our citizens seeking job training are going to take these blows, the wealthy and well-connected don't contribute one slim dime. some of my colleagues have argued, well, you know what? there are some of those programs invented in the tax code that actually help the middle class. my colleague fr

replace the balanced budget -- so we placed the balanced budget amendment in two separate pieces of legislation, passed them through this body, sent them to the senate, only to have president obama and senate democrats to allow them up for a vote. either up with of them, they refused to vote on them. in both instances, president obama's cricks to the process were threats to veto both plans, sight unseen. mr. speaker, i wish i could just get this one question answered. if nothing else that they would answer, i wish the squad mrgs would answer one question. what is it, what is it that the president and democrats find so radical about a balanced budget amendment? this is something that 49 states have and every family in america has to have sooner or later. a simple balanced budget amendment that says we cannot go into the debt in an infinite way that threatens not only our children's future, we talked about how this threatened our children's future and i will tell you, being the father of two little twins that are going to have their third birthday before long, that has great pull in my soul that

for example the education budget is around 100 and the highway budget is around 40. nine hundred forty billion dollars will crowd out tremendous portions of the good things we would like to do with taxpayers' money. instead of being able to improve our infrastructure or do other things that we think could be good we will be sending that money to debt holders abroad to pay them back for the money they loaned us that we have been spending now. $0.40 of every dollar we spend this year will be borrowed. that is a situation that is very real to us but it always felt we have a responsibility to be honest with our constituents and we are going to need to raise the debt limit to. it places too much risk on our economy to not raise it. we might as well be honest about that. we have got ourselves in a fix and will have to be raised. i want to share some thoughts why i am uneasy about legislation that is before us and what will not be able to support it. i have been warning for months that we are heading into a situation where we have a last-minute, 11th-hour bill and the senate

he is quite to talk about the politics of the budget -- he is going to talk about the politics of the budget deal. let me say a few things about the agreement. it is helpful to think about it in three distinct parts. it raises the debt ceiling, which was the point of the whole thing. in the history of the country, all of these agreements raise the debt ceiling. this time, which two other things -- if we reduce the deficit, crucial, and by far the most complicated, and an third we agreed to have a vote on a

the isa control and design the budget in the first place.that's a recipe for this functionality. >> heritage.org. my last commercial for the day. go read report for yourself. >> we have hit the noon hour, and a fortunate we will cut off the question she. thank you very much for being here, and please join me in getting the a warm round of applause to the panelists. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> in a few moments the latest economic forecast from the congressional budget office. >> the congressional budget office says unemployment will remain above 8% for the next few years, and economic growth will be relatively slow. cbo director doug elmendorf spoke with reporters for a little more than an hour. >> good morning. thank you all for coming. i'm doug elmendorf, i'm the director of the congressional budget office. this morning to cbo released this summer update to our budget and economic outlook. i'd like to briefly summarize the report and then my colleagues and i will be happy to try to answer your questions

we go to the board with our first meeting of our budget next tuesday, which is the 14th. we are developing our budgets based on flat funding, based on the governors may revised, the court he has stipulated. the assertion that he will avoid cuts to education as to the extent possible. unfortunately, there is still a level of uncertainty until the budget is actually signed. when we had to act on making our deadlines for certificate layouts, which were very quickly around the time that the governor signed -- or rather the may revise came out, we noticed approximately 147 certificated -- 199 paris, and 100 classified employees. since then, we have back 84. the 1099 #has been reduced to approximately 100. are classified --hr folks are still working on the classified list because it is all based on seniority, and that will eventually take out at some point. but regardless of the flat funding, it still represents a cut to the school district. as i mentioned, about 20 cents on the dollar, which is why the rainy day reserve is so critical for us. we are obviously extremely indebted

every budget that we have gotten in the past couple of years has been budget to pay it for the ongoing maintenance of the system, maintaining the system. we will do the best we can to separate the two out for you so you get an accurate picture of how much it development opposed to ongoing maintenance. >> can i suggest, this is not as comfortable that we do not have information on what the budget is. we have been asking about this for months and this is part of what the hearing is about. we expect to have this information. i am sorry it is not here. unless anyone else has a different answer. >> good morning, supervisors. eileen hearst. i have been co-chair of the justice council since the reorganization effort in i do not know exactly how that happened except, during that time, we had four police chiefs, three public defenders, 3 digit attorneys, the three heads of adult probation, but only one sheriff. i think i was kept there for purposes of continuity. i do want to address supervisor chiu, your remarks in the beginning. the report that you're holding up is three pages of harvey rose,

. >> the other thing i want to say in terms of next year's budget, the first reading of the budget for the bird -- for the board of supervisors occurred yesterday. it was unanimously approved and the second reading will be on next tuesday. the budget will become effective -- technically there is a budget right now, but it will be effective on august 1st. >> thank you. >> an update on proposed legislation. >> the only update we have -- our presenter be best to it, the legislation going before the boot -- before the board of supervisors and august. the amount of money involved in our lean cycle is $222,000. we do expect to receive that money on the tax bills by next april. that will be revenue for next year's budget if people pay their property taxes. on the legislation, i passed out the organizational chart and i wanted to bring to your attention some of the things that happened in the budget cycle for this year. the first one you can see is the 941 position which was deleted by the mayor's budget analyst. we also had to positions deleted by the budget analysts. they were vacant positio

the balanced budget amendment might take any form and might be waived. that seems a little ridiculous but the definition doesn't hold us to any standard. us to any standard. i want to hold to the standard

the president. i will acknowledge a budget voted down 97-0. in the tenth year, that one-year interest would be $940 billion. that, for example, our education budget is around 100. our highway budget is around 40. $940 billion will crowd out tremendous portions of the good things we would like to do with taxpayers' money. instead of being able to improve our infrastructure or do other things that we think could be good, we will be sending that money, much of it, to debt holders abroad to pay them back for the money they have loaned us that we have been spending now, because 40 cents of every dollar we spend this year -- really 42, i believe -- will be borrowed. so that is a situation that's very real to us, but i have always felt that we do have a responsibility to be honest with our constituents, and we are going to need to raise the debt limit. we just have to. it places too much risk on our economy, i think, to not raise it. we might as well be honest about that. we have got ourselves in a fix, and it will have to be raised. but i want to sha

we have an amendment according to the budget analyst's recommendations. recommendation will be to send the item to the full board with recommendations. thank you. next item please. >> item 5. resolution authorizing the san francisco municipal transportation agency to amend an expenditure contract with cypress security, llc, to add an additional $18.7 million to continue security services for an additional three years. supervisor chu: thank you very much. on this item we also have ms. hoolihan from the mta. >> good morning again. this is a three-year extension of the existing contract we have with cypress security. basically, under our first three years, our total expenditure was $14.3 million. under the extension of the three years, this includes an 88 cent per year cost of living increase. the total rebuy amount of the contract is $32.9 million. this is including additional services, which is video data assistance, which helps us poll video the after hours when there is a crime-sensitive case with sfpd, allows us to that mobile tunnel patrols, additional

we went along with that as part of the budget negotiations. will also see in the next iteration of this schedule, code enforcement is going back and along with that, every year, we pay 2% of our budget to the comptroller's office for oversight on the controller's office. this year, they have a project that will involve code enforcement and all of the enforcement, housing inspection and part of that is to review the number of inspections and see if there is room for improvement. they will be starting that very soon and that will be completed this year. that will go along with code enforcement improvement program. that's all i have. >> you might want to take a look under permit services. on the bottom, right at the bottom there, i believe some of these should be under tom healey. also, i would like to know why the packed meeting was cancelled this month. we have a lot of people called who were unhappy about that. >> we put out a response and we did not receive any, so we canceled the meeting. >> is that normal procedure? >> yes. >> commissioners

, the main focus of our budget today. lice, if you could begin with, i realize it's too complicated to ask you to do a full primer on the deal, but a short explanation. even though there's been a lot of explanation, some of them confusing, especially to nonspecialists like myself in terms of exactly what happened over the next four to five months of the current deal. >> raid. well, i think first it is important to say, how did we get here? we got through this dreadful, awful, outrageous process with an artificial crisis, namely the debt ceiling. and nobody who cares about the u.s. government can be proud of his performance. at that moment it was brinksmanship and irresponsible and it's hard to think of words -- adjectives that are strong enough. but i do think we have a new opportunity now to solve the real problem and that this deal might be the first step towards a positive resolution. what did it do? not as much as its critics from both sides often imply. it cannot discretionary spending for the next 10 years at approxi

this ordinance is recommended by the budget and legislative analyst. supervisor chu: anything in the controller's office would like to add to the presentation? >> we are just pleased with the cooperative nature of putting this forward. controller's office is prepared to take on this responsibility. supervisor chu: supervisor kim? supervisor kim: i was curious about the history of this legislation. it says that this was antiquated. how long ago did we put this legislation into place? >> i believe near 2000. supervisor kim: what was the thought process behind the ability of departments to report this on a daily basis? or what was the intent of this legislation originally? >> i think when the government code was initially written, this was essentially for it if you had a cash tail and you had extra at the end of the day. when cities had much less complex financial operations, it made sense that all the money being funneled into the treasurer would account for that. given that we operate in a different environment now, this change, which is authorized by th

defense budget far outweighs the state budget, a 10-1. we know the we also are going to have to put the coin everything on the table -- put everything on the table. >> that includes development. >> i'm not saying that we should be exempt and that education and health care here at home should bear all the cost. i am saying that as we look at everything that is on the table, we have to try to do a reasonable analysis of what our real needs and interests are. it is easy in a political climate, which i know something about, as leon does, to say look, foreign-aid -- if you go out to the american public and ask what the easiest thing to cut in the american budget is, they always say foreign aid. you ask how much they think it is in the budget and they say 15%-20%. you as damage they think it should be, and they say 10 percent -- you ask how much they think it should be, and they say 10%. we know there is a case to be made. the military has always had overseas contingency operations the go to the kinds of investments that have to be made in place

we comprised 1% of the discretionary budget. what we have done over the last 2.5 years was long overdue. we basically said we are a national security team. we are all on the american team. by that i mean that we have civilians who are in the field with our military forces in areas of conflict. we have civilians in the field on their own in other dangerous settings without our military boots on the ground. we are trying to enhance the coordination to achieve our national security objectives. one of the goals that secretary kates and now secretary panetta and i have is to make the case as to what national security in the 21st century actually is. it is the strongest military in the world that has to be given the tools to do the job we send it out to do. it is our diplomatic corps which is out there on the front line all the time trying to deal with very difficult situations but to the betterment of america bus national interests and securities and it is our development experts that with another face of american power who are trying

i am not as familiar with the state budget as the local budget. i think the state budget to any casual observer is absolutely broken. it will take radical changes like what the governor is proposing. when the state government gets fixed, whether it is redevelopment or some other local important piece, san francisco will get hurt. there is no way to fix that problem without hurting san francisco and every other city and county in the state. the state has been far outspending what it should. it will come home to roost in the next couple of years. >> was talk about the city's economic development and whether we are on the right track. if we are not, let's talk about the right steps to take. >> i think we're on the right track. the key is recognizing it. san francisco decades ago was home to the fantastic manufacturing industry and specialized service industry. we have to think of san francisco 30 years from now and try to prepare ourselves for the new economies. i do think biotech will be a key piece. information technology, can we be the hub of that?

welcome to the regular meeting of the budget and finance committee. the agenda was noticed with five members of the committee, but because we passed the budget yesterday, the true committee for the budget finance committee is now the three-person committee comprised of myself, supervisors kim and mirkarimi. mr. young, do we have any announcements? >> please turn off all cellphone. please submit your speaker cards to myself if you wish to speak. if you submit items to the committee, please provide them for the file. supervisor chu: thank you very much. please call item no. 1. >> item #one. ordinance amending the san francisco administrative code sections 12r.5, 12r.7, 12r.16, 12r.17, 12r.18, and 12r.25 to -- enhance the office of labor standards enforcement's enforcement of the city's minimum wage ordinance by clarifying agency access to places of employment -- require a policy to resolve complaints or initiate enforcement actions within one year -- raise the penalty for employer retaliation -- impose a penalty for failure to post minimum wage rates --

franks, has presided over the shaping of a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. i certainly favor the one offered by bob goodlatte and marked up in the judiciary committee, it took three full days over a couple of weeks trying to find the time to get this to work out. i want to express, mr. speaker, that a balanced budget amendment that's written by someone who doesn't believe in a balanced budget amendment probably isn't going to yield the result we all want from that amendment. and the worst case scenario would be the drafting and passage of a balanced budget amendment that would be the constitutional equivalent of pay-go. you could draft a balanced budget amendment that would say, thou shall balance the budget and not put provisions in there such as a cap on g.d.p. or supermajority required to raise taxes or supermajority required to raise the debt limit. and if it were just the barest of bones, the bare minimum of the definition of a balanced budget amendment that could be a balanced budget amendment that would allow the majority of the house of representative

and welcome across town peter little on the brink of bankruptcy time is running out for the american budget deficits failure to raise the debt ceiling could have catastrophic consequences not only for the u.s. but for the entire world how can piling on more debt begin to solve america's fiscal woes. and. discuss america's out of control debt situation i'm joined by martin henican hong kong he's an associate director at the tike group in cambridge we have jeffrey frankel he's a professor of capital formation and growth at the harvard kennedy school and in new york we cross to joe weisenthal he is a deputy editor at the business insider all right gentlemen this is crosstalk that means you can jump in anytime you want but first let's have a quick look at america's debt mess. going broke going for broke wanting selfhood asked if the l.s.o. fourteen point three trillion dollar debt ceiling is lifted by need me on the lines of course that the u.s. is on a federal budget so how do original money lives public debt at more than fourteen point two trillion dollars and rising by four wheeler and all o

i want to put this on the table for us as a structural budget issue. i think we need to get to a point where all the teachers to teach in classrooms, who were special ed teachers, should be in the school budget, even if they are whatever -- the fact that we are the county office of education should not mean that we have to see all the special ed teachers in a centrally allocated budget. men because it distorts our own perception and the schools perception, and in fact, it reinforces the program, and the more they changed that, -- the more they change that, we need to find a way -- if somebody tells us we still have to be responsible for the county budget, that does not mean we could not have something that recognizes that during your -- recognize that. that ought to be part of the model, to get all the people who worked at school sites recognized in the school site budget, so sometimes i hope somebody can explain how we can do that. >> that is an interesting idea. what was it a it gave school staffs? >> i heard the dog at the conference breyer -- confer

the budget control act changes that. by the end of the decade it will be about 21.5% of the size of our economy. it is comparable, come close to the shrinkage of the economy under president reagan in his first in his eight years in the white house. truth of the matter is this doesn't go far enough for conservatives. you can't cut far enough or soon enough for members of congress like myself because we just believe this country is so deep, so dangerously deep in debt. but with this vote today, tonight we cut out the same amount of spending the president put in this government in that ill-fated failed stimulus bill. and later this year we get a chance to vote another cut in this government equivalent to the size of obamacare. we start with two strong cuts reversing and strengthening the size of government. in this bill we achieve 2/3 of the discretionary cuts included in the ryan budget in the past prosperity that the republicans , the house members believe in. someone goes, the senate passed a budget and agreed to 2/3 of y

a report from the budget committee. goo>> they gave it a positive recommendation. >> the resolution in? >> i am trying to figure out how long it is. i am just saying there are health concerns related to this. not only environmentally concerns, but issues about that and impacts of cleaning, and they refer to the task force and the work of has been done in sand francisco unified, and be it resolved it is the policy of the board of education of the board will approve only those approved for use in a education and classroom cleaning as soon as possible. they will do everything to make sure unapproved products are kept out of classrooms and they will transfer to the bleached- free chemicals. they will receive standardized training, and be a further resolved they will establish a green cleaning oversight committee with representation for facilities and maintenance, student nutrition, early education, special education, and others to help develop a comprehensive implementation plan by january of 2012, with a target of full tran