that is appropriate. we do have a few proposed special use districts that would overlay this area. you can see the dark line around the southern half of the plan area from harrison street to south of bryant street. we are calling that the south's, -- the south soma sud. we are saying that new development would need to be primarily commercial or have a major commercial or office component. as we discussed, this is an important area to grow the job base. it is difficult in terms of visibility to build office buildings on small lots. we feel that preserving the few larger lots there are is important to make sure we have space to grow. -- to grow the job base. that is the primary objective. the exact nuances of the triggers and requirements are to be worked out but that is the gist of it. the other area is an entertainment special use district between 4th street and sixth street. the key component of the west some a plan which is moving forward is to allow entertainment uses in this part of south of market is

that is the appropriations process. ith is all about putting the -- donald trump is not asked to pay one penny more. i urge a no vote on the rule and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the lance of his time. the gentlelady from north carolina. ms. foxx: mr. speaker, again, next week is 4th of july and we will be celebrating independence day and i would like to say i don't believe the job of the federal government is to provide things to citizens, but to preserve our liberty. and that's what next week should be reminding us of. house republicans are aware of the clear mandate the american people gave us. our charge is to reduce the crushing debt that our country is currently carrying. according to the senate budget committee, debt grew times four times fa faster than clinton or bush and amassed more debt than president bush did. today the national debt is over $15 trillion which amounts to nearly $48,000 for every man, woman and child in america. it's clear that without a change in leadershi

the house may also consider two additional appropriations bills next week. h.r. 5855, the department of homeland security appropriations act, sponsored by representative robert aderholt, and h.r. 5882, the legislative branch appropriations act sponsored by representative andrew crenshaw. chairman al rogers and the entire appropriations committee on both sides of the aisle should be congratulated for helping to rtore the open process of allocating and prioritizing the nation's spending. finally, mr. speaker, the house will consider h.r. 436, the protect medical innovation act, a very important bill for jobs and innovation inhe medical device industry and that representative erik paulsen has sponsored. the paulsen bill will be combined with h.r. 5842, the restoring access to medication act sponsored by representative lynn jenkins, and h.r. 1004, the medical f.s.a. improvement act sponsored by representative charles boustany. and with that i thank the gentleman and yield back. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for that information, and i want to make a comment t

proposed budget and annual appropriation ordinance appropriating all estimated receipts and all estimated expenditures for departments of the city and county of san francisco as of may 31, 2012, for the fys ending june 30, 2013, and june 30, 2014. item 2. annual salary ordinance enumerating positions in the annual budget and appropriation ordinance for the fys ending june 30, 2013, and june 30, 2014, continuing, creating or establishing these positions; enumerating and including therein all positions created by charter or state law for which compensations are paid from city and county funds and appropriated in the annual appropriation ordinance; authorizing appointments or continuation of appointments thereto; specifying and fixing the compensations and work schedules thereof; and authorizing appointments to temporary positions and fixing compensations therefore. item 3. proposed budget and annual appropriation ordinance appropriating all estimated receipts and all estimated expenditures for selected departments of the city and county of san francisco as of may 1, 2012, for the fys ending

we're trying to find the appropriate balance and how we mitigate risk based on developing the appropriate levels of information so that we know what we're getting into before we establish the baselines. we're very focused on delivering benefit and hitting our targets and i think we're making good progress. >> do you have schedule for the last three? you mentioned three that you are -- >> i'm sorry? >> the other three of the six that you said have not -- that are not baselined. when do you expect -- what's your -- with regard to those? >> we'd be happy to meet with your staff and go over each of the programs and where they are. >> all right. thank you. my time's expired. thanks. >> senator begich? >> thank you very much, mr. huerta. let me ask you a couple questions. one on avgas as you know. general aviation committee from my state, others, it's very important. the rural aspect of it. the epa issued an npram on avgas. weave heard a lot of comments. i'm sure faa has also heard a lot of comments. and our concern is, and as you know, faa is ultimately responsible for certifying the type of g

the board would still be required to appropriate the funds and you would do that whether it is the appropriation of pay as you go. >> much like we had, we would appropriate a certain level from the city? >> that is correct. that remains a discretionary act by the city. president chiu: 01 to follow up on a couple of points. part of what has been curious to many of us was the 50-50 split suggested by the port. i certainly appreciate the port has significant capital needs but i suggest every department in the city and frankly every district has significant capital needs. as our budget analysts point out, are capital planning committee had adopted guidelines that stated the port can obtain proceeds but if the project area included bonn court properties -- only the port properties should be retained to fund part capital projects. on this project, the court announced 27,960 square feet, 20% of this overall site. pat seems to be what the split ought to be. i think this is something we will have to think about. whether it is fixing capital projects or that great highway or other issues, we have to think

at the time, it was transportation appropriations bill. and in construing the context of clause 2, rule 21, the chair at that time indicated that what she was attempting to do is, we have a -- out of the highway trust fund, 2.8 cents goes to transit that yields a certain amount of money. she was attempting to roll off $26 million -- to wall off $26 million to go to specific transit projects. the chair in that instance specifically and i think correctly found you cannot mandate or limit the discretion of the secretary or other federal official, nor condition a you mandate that money be used in a certain way that's not con tell played by the law. as a matter of fact, on -- in section 1057 of the housemanule that we all revere here very much, it cites the indications where this has been considered before and the common them -- theme with all of them is that the person offering the amendment or the appropriations committee attempting to implement the policy was attempting to mandate action on the part of a federal official or mandate that mone

interim proposed budget and annual appropriation ordinance appropriating all estimated receipts and all estimated expenditures for departments of the city and county of san francisco as of may 1, 2012, for the fys ending june 30, 2013, and june 30, 2014. item number two. interim annual salary ordinance enumerating positions in the annual budget and appropriation ordinance for the fys ending june 30, 2013, and june 30, 2014, continuing, creating or establishing these positions; enumerating and including therein all positions created by charter or state law for which appointments thereto; specifyingcompensations and work schedulespositions and fixing compensations therefore. item #3. resolution approving the interim budget of the treasure island development authority for fy2012-2013 and fy2013-2014. supervisor chu: thank you very much. pour the next two weeks, and we will be deliberating on these house cleaning items. items one through three. again, these are basically the authorization, the ability for the city to continue authorization during the process carried over the budget for the

that is an appropriate standard.ver, we have the option when we get to the point of developing our recommendations of indicating if they meet a higher standard or level of certainty. if the facts warrant. for all those reasons, this seems appropriate to me. it is a fair question but i think our job is a little bit different. commissioner renne: i agree with you when you say we're only fact finders and if we were not required to make a recommendation, to the board of supervisors, i would be in complete agreement. if our recommendation is going to be predicated on a finding that the sheriff commit some act of official misconduct beyond that to which he pleaded guilty, then that is where i have my concerns. i reserve that as we go along. i just raise it. >> would either party like to address this issue? >> as the commissioners have gleaned from the filings we have submitted, thank you. i am sorry. i could hear myself. i thought i was transmitting. how is this? as the commissioners have gleaned from our findings, we see

even after the recovery act and regular appropriation, the c.d.c.as a wait list of 8,000 qualified homes that could be retrofitted for energy efficiency. demand is there and this is just long island. adequately funding the weatherization assistance program to meet this demand will have several positive effects on communities and the economy. it will reduce energy costs for homeowners, which is absolutely critical as these cost st continue to climb -- costs continue to climb. perhaps most important it will put local contractors back to work retrofitting homes to be more energy efficient. this means job creation in local communities. most recognized, that this is a time when washington must balance spending reduction with wise investment. if we all agree that this congress must do more to foster an environment of job creation, i urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. . the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from -- >> i m

i think it is very appropriate. i think even a floor or two is very appropriate. i also hear comments about not providing residences for middle families, but the amount of money that we are getting will appropriately find more affordable housing units elsewhere in the city where it is more appropriate. i urge you to support this project. >> i was outside when this walk- out happened. unfortunately, i could not walk out with them, so you are stuck here in my comments. this port is totally disrespected by the community. the fact they had to walk out says it all. all you have heard from is one special interest after another. it is embarrassing. i am embarrassed for my home town, like the last speaker -- before my home town. like the last speaker, some platitudes and some specifics. the height reason alone is enough to oppose this project. it is too high. you know the people of san francisco do not want their waterfront overbuild. -- overbuilt. i would also question storefronts. you have a bunch of empty storefronts along the street. is that what you want, like, down

and with appropriate leadership, if we found problems, we have been able to deal with them. >> thank you. i do have another quick question, and that is, what steps are you taking to live within the lower budgets that we're going to have across the board until we get the deficits down and the debt under control? what measures are you taking that would suggest that you could do things more efficiently and that you're doing the part for your agency? >> first of all, i'd like to thank this committee and the appropriate tors for the support they have shown the faa, but you have given us a challenge. and that is the need to do things as effectively and efficiently as possible. we have within our organizational embarked on a major restructuring. how do we minimize and find greater efficients? we have found savings. i think that's an important step. the other thing -- >> give me a couple examples. >> a lot of that is in technology systems. in general and administrative systems for the agency. technology benefits are huge in a large complex agency such as ours where we can deal with ensuring

and so, focusing on ensuring that we have the appropriate technology, the appropriately trained staff in place is something that we have to continue to focus on. >> you were asked a question some minutes ago about what you are -- what performance we might expect if there's less funding. can things get better with less funding? >> clearly, funding is essential in our ability to deliver the next generation air transportation system, and this committee and the congress have been very supportive of those efforts. but we in the agency bare the responsibility to do it as efficiently as possible and to ensure that we are priorityizing those things that deliver the with benefits for the users of the system. that is a conversation that we will continue to have. we are all in government, we all understand the fiscal challenges that we as a country face and the faa needs to be part of that conversation. >> the fa authorization that was signed into law this year. exempts some projects from environmental review, i think perhaps, senator thune was raising that question. the exemptation has been rai

we must insure that payments made on behalf of beneficiaries and taxpayers are appropriate. this information is especially helpful as congress assesses a series of special payment adjustments which are set to exspear e expire by the end of the year. we must review policies. i'm eager to discuss the view on how to better improve care coordination on ben fieficiarien the dual population. some of the past successes may be at risk. some of this is clearly necessary but i'm concerned that the unilateral actions to address this population's needs may undermine the protections guaranteed to all medicare beneficiaries. this is a critical issue to get right the first time and i know that med pack is concerned about it as well. thank you for being with us today. i look forward to your suggestions on how we can improve medicare and i want to congratulation and thank you for accepting an pointment. medicare is one of our nation's best programs. but it needs fine tuning and changing to keep it relevant. do iing so would dest nate them. the majority on them list on tight fixed in cucomes.

of the supplemental appropriation. we considered the approval of the fees to be a policy matter for the board of supervisors. supervisor farrell: ok. i would like to open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public who wish to comment? please come on forward, two minutes. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i would like to voice the same objection, like in item number one, for items 3 and 4. realistically, just look at who is sponsoring each item. you can kind of include in directly that is being heard in this committee. if we're gone to hold financial items in an audit and oversight committee, it is ignoring some pretty important matters in the city like why there are so many unsolved homicides in san francisco. i felt pretty safe yesterday at the police academy. but then i think most citizens have that same feeling i had yesterday standing there surrounded by officers. i think we should have that for a hearing that justifies this committee. if we're gong to have hearings like this in the future for au

suggesting the -- appropriate responses due them. go ahead, congressman. >> i appreciate it. you know, and unfortunately, there's division in america. i mean, there's, you just heard from that caller, there's divisiveness, and i like to consider this a family, friendly conversation and show that you have here each and every day, and you know, there are a lot of challenges throughout the united states and the last thing we need to do is point fingers and blame and to accuse others of things. this is the time we've got to come together and americans, republicans, democrats, independents, each and every one, and come together and push forward in a positive fashion, and lift each other up and not try to tear each other down, and this is -- >> what was this referencing? >> we've had a lot of press in the past about, you know -- i'm a businessman. former, in the real estate industry, and was involved in -- or accused, i guess, and we worked through some resolutions together. up know, multiple business interests involved and bank involved all that. it's all been reresolved, but, cou

i hope that we get to a number that is appropriate. i think that anything substantially lower than the $40 million mark that has been proposed by supervisor avalos would not be appropriate. i also think that as we go forward with a measure that makes sense, that we cannot lose sight of the fact that the affordable housing trust does require a property transfer tax. i think the one that has been presented as the right approach. i look forward to the conversation. i think that we as a city should be able to come up with a solution we can all agree with. i don't know that everyone will be 100% happy with what comes up, but i think we're in the business of making these things happen. i think we can do it. thank you. >> thank you. mr. president, seeing no other names, that and -- conclude brokaw. president chiu: thank you. let's go to public comment. >> this is an opportunity for the public to comment generally for up to two minutes items of subject matter considered by the board. please note that public comment does not allow on those item

if people want to expand beyond that, it is totally appropriate to do that. we have a number of speaker cards. [reading names] i do not know if we have and it would hear from the ethics commission, if there is something the ethics commission would like to say before we move to public comment. i apologize. before we go to public comment, if we could have someone from the ethics commission hearing >> -- ethics commission. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i actually do not have anything to say about this. we have not received a report, but we would be interested in looking at it. supervisor campos: thank you very much. with that, the folks that i called, and in addition, i have a number of other cards. [reading names] any member of the public who would like to speak, please come forward. thank you very much. >> first and foremost, i read the report. it was forwarded to me by a gentleman who is here in this room. my experience when i worked in the presidio as a congressional liaison, gave me an insight of the lot of the factors or the elements that should go into

can't receive an appropriation from the general fund. you'd have to change the law in order to have that result. >> so i think it's reasonable to expect that most of us will still be here in 2016. i certainly hope to be. so that threshold that you're talking about in the main social security fund, we're approaching with the disability fund. so whether we are acting or not acting, we are making some very conscious decisions on how we're going to handle this disability trust fund. and i suspect that the mentality of mentality of the congress at this point will just appropriate the money so that no one loses their benefit, but when you make that conscious decision -- aren't you making a much bigger decision at that point? >> in the past, when faced with the same challenge the congress has reallocated tax revenues from the osi system, the old age survivors system to the disability system. >> okay. >> so to tweak the vision of the total payroll tax between the two trust funds and thereby avoided making a difficult decision. >> thank you. mr.

now in the legislation that senator feinstein and i have in the appropriations committee, we separate these consolidated sites. these oar are -- we don't call them interim sites because there might always be something there on its way to a permanent site. but can you discuss why you and your recommendations separated the consolidation site from the search for the permanent repository and whether or not you think it's a wise idea for us to move ahead as the appropriations language says with identifying one or more pilot consolidation sites? although in the end, if any site were chosen it would have to be approved by an act of congress. >> that's an excellent question. i think that we found that the benefits of developing consolidated storage are so large in terms of taxpayer liability, of being able to collect material and to a smaller number of locations and return unused sites to more productive uses. and to gain experience with transportation at smaller scale so that we can build that capability that it makes sense to move forward with consolidated storage in parallel with not after

important issue, which goes to the very question of what is the role of government, what is the appropriate way for a capitalist economy to succeed because all three of us believe in the capitalist economy but how do we get that economy to function best and how do we deal with the market failures and the inequities which have left us with a stark contrast between the people who have a lot and the many who have very little, as well as the middle class which is getting very squeezed. we have a different sense about the vision for america. raspberry will argue that government regulations are bad for the economy and public investments harm free enterprise. democrats have a more optimist being vision. we believe that the economy works best when the government establishes the rules of the road, adopting sensible standards, protecting the middle class, promoting competition and preventing corporate abuses. we believe public investments in our country's future will pay off. we believe that educating tomorrow's workers, supporting entrepreneurs, new industries will grow our economy faster and better

the approach that supervisor wiener had set out, that would have been an appropriate one. that would have had the same conversation. we would have had a week to see if we could send this item back. supervisor olague had talked about a few things she was concerned about and she would have appreciated going back to the planning commission, including configuration of space and quality. i want to know -- this is areas that would be applied where places are not part of the density or density units were not part of legislation. this is areas where it is not necessarily regulated. their height and bulk requirements and requirements for open space tucson and light. some of these areas have unit mix requirements as well. i do not think that legislation would create a free-for-all. all this and you would not have 10 we could not have any. it would conform to the existing processes that have been set out. supervisor farrell: thank you. i have gotten comments about this from different neighborhood groups. it warrants more time. i will support supervisor wiener's motion today to send -

i don't believe that that's appropriate. >> well, maybe i made an assumption. maybe i was wrong. did you support the rescue of wall street banks? >> you know, i've never been asked that either. again, i was out of office. now you're asking. i think given the circumstances of the potential for a meltdown that would have been hard to recover, some support was appropriate. was therefore then the next step of adding regulations on top of regulations the congressman in his remarks made an interesting point, assuming that there was no regulation on the banks or financial services industries prior tore dodd-frank's passage, in fact, there was massive regulation. i would argue maybe enforcement was where the problem was, not the fact that we had a deregulated financial industry. so for a short-term solution to a problem that be had global implications, i think that was probably the right thing to do, but then to take it and add on top of this challenge that we faced massive rules that will take years to plymouth that creates more uncertainty and the probability of more unintended consequ

>> sir, it is not appropriate to split transactions to below a micropurchase threshold. if that is occurring, that is not a condoned practice. >> okay. what then would the vha do to stop that? >> monitor the action and ensure that -- look, every purchase card holder with a transaction below $3,000 is supposed to be monitoring that. they should be looking for any split transaction to remain below a threshold. that is an inappropriate action. and, you know, i would request taking that item for the record to research it. >> well, i appreciate you recognizing that, sir. we've got page after page of examples of that kind of thing. so i would hope that the vha would take that issue very seriously because we on this committee do. why are some prosthetic items purchased using far guidelines instead of section 8123? >> initiate the discussion. 8123 is not actually as much in conflict as it seems in prior discussion today. you know, within part 6 302-5, there is reference to other statutory authority. the question is under what conditions does the physician prescribe a specific pr

we don't believe this is an appropriate classification. they specified that management positions typically meant supervise staff and this is not a position that will be supervising staff. and the remainder, because this is a new program, we consider this to be a policy called for the board of supervisors because it will give the determination if they want this program. so that i understand the difference, -- the the understan supervisor kim: the understand the difference, is in addition? -- so that i understand the difference, is it in addition? of day. >> of the budget analyst recommendation represents a $16,000 savings to us. the department's alternative is a $200,000 plus addition. >> any colleagues have comments? >> de you have someone in place currently? i had a question about the interim exceptions. do you have someone in place this week that will be able to start on july 1? >> we have someone we have been working with. >> somewhat on his staff being paid part-time? thank you. >> we appreciate the budget analyst and the department ab

it still would appropriate billions of dollars and i would still oppose that appropriation but at least let's return that appropriation to 2008 levels to stop putting illegal immigrants up at hotels, to stop closing down websites that are free press. to stop spending enormous amounts of taxpayer money not solving our immigration problem. it's more important than ever that we balance our budget and end the deficit. we can start that by reducing wasteful government spending instead of increasing wasteful government spending. i.c.e. has failed to stop illegal immigration. let's not reward failure. let's not reward failure. i.c.e. has shut down websites without any due process. let's not reward failure. now, obviously, there are members on both sides of the aisle, myself include -- included, that want to address our broken immigration system and we should have a country that's zero illegal immigrants, not 10 million or 12 million, frankly the less i.c.e. does, the more like he we can eliminate illegal immigration in this country. all they do is contribute to it. my bill will reduce the fund

chairman, i thank the chairman of the appropriations subcommittee for yielding. let me at the very outset thank you for his leadership and cooperation in working through such a difficult bill at a biff time in our history. we are faced with a severe terrorist threat and restraints. reluctantly voted against the homeland security appropriations bill, but i want to commend chairman rogers and chairman aderholt for working to resolve the good faith differences we had and also, for instance, in areas such as state and local grants, increase them by $350 million, to increase by 50% the amount allocated to the highest risk areas in our country. programs such as the urban area security initiative, state homeland security program, port security, transportation security all was addressed in this bill. nothing as much as we want, but considering the realities we face as a nation, chairman rogers and chairman aderholt have done an outstanding job. come interesting a district which lost so many people on september 11 and still faces threats and where we every day quite frank