that if passed by voters would dip into your existing baseline. so with that said, i don't know if my colleague has any -- my cosponsor has any remarks, i will be happy to hear from all of your community members from all of your -- >> supervisor safai: supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: this is a tough conversation to have, and i think just having the conversation is very important whether it was the hearing that we held at the government audit, an over sight committee where you could start to see the magnitude of this over time. and it's also, i think important for virtually every one of these charter amendments aren't put on by popular signature. they're put on by six or more members of this body. and they're all for extremely laudable uses. whether it's early childhood education, whether it's for our ageing and adult population. and of course these are always uses that are under tremendous pressure: housing, libraries, recreation, parks and open space. but to set aside is the easy way out. the tough way for elected officials to go is to a

it's also relative to the baseline. may 24, they scored the american health care act as passed by the house. 23 million fewer people with health insurance after ten years does that sound about right? they made the obvious conclusion that when you substantially cut federal funding on healthcare low and behold i think you came up with the obvious congress version you were criticized and i think that iss unfortunate. after trying to throw tens of millions of health insurance by republican colleagues took a look at taxes in the united states. the legislation that was finally passed would add more than $1.7 trillion to the deficit when interest costs are includ included. am i correct in saying the analysis determined that the legislation is that a fair representation? they after day and month after month. november 8, cbo estimated the effects of repealing the affordable care act or so-called individual mandate so they estimated the change would increase the numbervi of peopley 13 million within ten years and increase premium

not a baseline. they were originally included in the charter amendment and the amendments proposed by supervisor tang will remove them from the charter amendment. that's the war memorial, fine arts, and academy of sciences. >> great. so -- that's jus

not a baseline. they were originally included in the charter amendment and the amendments proposed by supervisor tang will remove them from the charter amendment. that's the war memorial, fine arts, and academy of sciences. >> great. so -- that's just a point of clarification or do we need to read it into the record saying they're part of the amendments. >> just a point of clarification for the members of the public who are here. >> we have a motion on the floor to accept the amendments as proposed and to this charter amendment overall. and to continue the item to the next meeting on january 24th. >> yeah. >> okay. seconded? without objection, the item is ordered. clerk, any other items before us today. >> that concludes our business for today. >> we are adjourned. thank you everyone. ♪ today. >> (clapping.) >> i've been working in restaurants forever as a blood alcohol small business you have a lot of requests for donations if someone calls you and say we want to documents for our school or nonprofi

the problem is that with the march baseline if you compared to the most recent baseline in january there would have been no additional uninsured. that would have gone away and we would've been left with 8 million, 4 million dropping medicaid or bridge and 4 million on employer. i can understand without a mandate why people might lose employer coverage. why would people drop premeditate? just vote in terms of the estimate work 2026. 15 million through the 22 million. again, 7 million would be excluded because yorty update your estimate that there would be nobody losing coverage on the individual market based on your january 2017 baseline. so that leaves 15 million people. 22-7. 15 million people are losing medicaid. now again, you can say people are going to drop basically free coverage because there is not an individual mandate. it makes no sense whatsoever to me. it makes no sense. so i had a conversation, one of the most frustrating i had ever had with -- and that i asked for the cbo and their latest replacement piece of legislation to break up medicaid expansion versus medicaid and yo

compare your coverage estimates with your march 2016 baseline, but because you also have a new baseline, why don't you put that as an alternate scenario? the response would take two weeks. you have the baseline chilling 19 million people uninsured on the individual, 19 million under the senate will. -- senate bill. 19 -19 is zero. why did you refuse to provide the american people the information that would not have been freaking them out, where we could have looked at this analysis and gone, 8 million people losing, 4 million medicaid. we are probably looking at four. why didn't you provide that alternate scenario? >> it is not clear that the alternate scenario would have gotten the different numbers that you suggest, let me put it that way. they are changing the baseline -- they're changing the baline d two effects, because the emiumsere higher while the covera was lower. we talked about the 15 million drop in medicaid. that is really, most of that is not a decline in medicaid but the legislation and did the expansion of medicaid, so those were people who primarily do not have medicaid

we're also working with the baseline. but so far, we've already had a lot of impressive impact. the first one the partnerships. amazing partnership with the good food purchasing, they've been a valuable resource, not just the help they've provided, but connecting us to other organizations nationwide. we're learning that we're able to leverage as a large school district to leverage our power to encourage our vendors to make changes and provide commitments to us. and that we see this as an opportunity for kind of a start of a movement. we're the second one and that is the opportunity for change. and that the more people that join on, the more people that will be aware of it and the more companies will start to make the commitment. thank you very much. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. any questions? none. ok. great. so thank you. next i'd like to introduce women's policy director at the department of status of women who will be presenting on the human trafficking task force and exploring good food policy. >> thank you for calling this hearing. i wanted to connect the dot and show ho

our baseline -- that is in our current language. so, it is not new. this is something the mayor's office felt strong about during prop b and there are baselines that look different for different departments all over the city. there's a lot of them out there now. our baseline is such that we are expected to absorb our own salary cost increases related to salary. so, that would stink if our baseline were not increased by what is a modest amount that barely keeps up with the increased cost of government. i just wanted to let you know what is out there. it is still being discussed and debated. it is certainly possible that that could end up on the ballot. >> president buell: thank you. commissioner mazzola. >> commissioner mazzola: just to two questions. i'm assuming the fiscal year is june 1st to july 30th? >> right. >> commissioner mazzola: is that realized in the budget? >> it is not really a significant revenue generator that would make derek's top line. we would do it more to provide increase enjoyment to the community and my recreation staff is inte

the information we share on the baseline evaluation helps institutions set goals, make shifts and measure progress annually. as i mentioned, they adopted the program in l.a. in 2012 and they accomplished quite a bit in a short period of time. 28% meat reduction that has led to significant carbon and water savings. at the same time, the district began purchasing better meat. including issuing $70 million in contracts for chicken produced without antibiotics. redirecting the food dollars to local producers led to the creation of over 150 jobs in the district supply chain and helped to improve the working conditions and live of over 165 truck drivers. with better wages and improved benefits. we have been working with oakland school district since 2014 and this past summer they earned the highest level of achievement with four stars in the program. not only has oakland's transformation led to benefit for students, the local economy and the environment, but they've done this while reducing per meal costs. our partners at friends of the earth documented over this two years, student participatio

and we will change a baseline if we see those. we will try to detail it in a budget outlook report. >> i appreciate your work and i yield back. >> hanky, ms. schakowsky. it's going out to georgia, mr. ferguson. >> thank you, mr. chairman. dr. hall, thank you. i want to thank you for taking time to come to my office. i have taken you up on that offer and it is, i would encourage other members of the committee to spend some time with you and your staff in their offices, or in your office, really talking about the process. process. and i want to thank you for the responses that you gave me. i found it helpful and look forward to continuing that. one of the things i want to go to, i want to get back to process. if you could, go back and pick a five year window in the budget process, okay? it doesn't matter to me what it is, let's go back ten years, 12 years, 15 years. and look at the estimates you made in year one and what they actually turned out to be ten years later, and do that to the second year and thought another ten years, thi

and children's baseline growth.e the smallest pieces of the pie, they are making a bigger percentage than years past. represented 5% of the expenditure growth, and now it's 11%, and that is largely driven by the massive cost from the state cost shift. >> great. drive into a couple more of those cost drivers. so, one thing i've been thinking about a lot, and talked with the committee last year, we started noticing it, about our structural deficit in the out years. this is what the financial plan has allowed us to do, to look forward into the future and see problems on the horizon. and you can see from the chart, taking the fourth year of every report since 2011 that our offices have issued. and it's showing you that in 2011, the year for projected deficit was above 700 million, and came down several years in a row. and in 2014 when we put out the report, we had halved the structural deficit. brought revenue and expenditure closer in line with each other, which is really great. and then a period of extraordinary growt

. -- at the president's direction, we have created the first of its kind global baseline for all throwingries to cooperate with the united states. every country in the world must meet minimum requirements to share counterterrorism data, improve identity document security, and more. or face consequences. with this state department we have worked successfully with almost every country in the world to reach this. it has improved both u.s. and international security. the handful of high-risk nations that don't report -- that don't comply -- we continue to work with them to reach the baseline. a proud history of were coming those who want to visit or become a part of our republic. this will not change. but, we will not tolerate countries who refuse cooperate with us. -- be clear, these restrictions have nothing to do with race or religion. this is about information sharing and knowing who, as an individual, is coming into our country. last month, i also announced security requirements for the 38 countries and the visa waiver rogue ran. -- visa waiver program. -- within countries globally. as a

our baseline is that nafta will stay in place although with some changes. we think this actually gives it a little bit more of a push to hold that. another thing to take into account, president trump mentioned some interesting, going back to tpp. there, given that the administration had just put some tariffs on i guess washing machines and solar panels, affecting china, particularly china, and other asian economies as well. you know, getting involved with tpp it might be good to have a few more allies in the region. >> your baseline scenario is that we will stay in nafta. what if we don't? is that going to be good for the u.s. economy and workers or not? >> we have written about that in the past. we do see the baseline that we do stay in nafta but again it's up and down here. we see that if indeed the u.s. pulls out of nafta all three countries will be hit, keane de, mexico and the u.s., u.s. the least. but what we can expect is yes maybe some factories will come back to the united states. but that lost competitive edge that we think that the u.s. gained fr

that report includes cbo baseline budgetary projections. cbo is also required by law to produce a formal cost estimate for nearly every bill approved by a full committee of either house or senate. those cost estimates are only advisory. they can but do not have to be used by to enforce budgetary rules or targets. moreover, cbo does not enforce such bug tarry rules, the budget committees do. third, cbo produces a lot of work each year. for example, last year the agency published 740 formal cost estimates. provided technical assistance to congressional staff. as they developed literally thousands of legislative proposals and amendments. and published many reports about the budget, economy, and many issues. nevertheless because of limited resources number of estimates and an analyses that cbo falls short of congressional requests. moreover, we must balance our commitment to respond quickly to the congress with our professional responsibility to release estimates only when kwaumt is high enough. fourth, in order to provide congress with the hig

set-a sides and what the impacts are on the general fund as well as on other set-a sides or existing baselines if new ones are add. i think there is a lot of education around this issue. because sometimes budgeting matters get complicated. it's been a great experience trying to explain to everyone what exactly this measure does and how it relates to the rest of the city's budget. with that said, we certainly heard from folks that they wanted more time to chime in on this. at this time, i'd like o continue this for discussion on the -- like to continue this for discussion on the november ballot. i don't know if we table it or discontinue it. >> deputy city attorney. >> deputy city attorney john jon givner. if you table it to the chair, it's best to amend the date as supervisor safai did with the charter amendment so the clerk doesn't file it after the march deadline. >> per that recommendation, i'd like to amend the date like supervisor safai did on the m.t.a. measure so our intention is to continue the discussion as it relates to the november ballot measure. but of course, as i said last time,

as you can see, many of you work hard in your fields, care a lot about your work and all of your baselineses that you helped get on to the ballot and successfully reflect the value that all of us share in your work. i want to acknowledge that. we as solemakers, when we're -- policymakers when we're budgeting, we have to make really difficult tradeoffs that i think, you know, members, if you care about the libraries, you don't have to make the tradeoff. if you care about children funds, you don't have to make the tradeoff. we do when it bad budget times, we're forced to decide whether we close the homeless shelter or increase the baseline. that puts us in an unpopular position. but this is a dialogue i think is worth having. with that said, i look forward to the conversation. this is not the only measure or only tool i think to address our budget issues. i know many people are working on a variety of things to address our city's financial health in the future. this is not the only thing. in fact, i don't think this does very much. with at that said, colleagues, i'd like to ask a committee m

baseline to baseline, pack 12, here is jared has, gesturing hosting arizona. they like him on the chalkboard. pinkertons, from deep second half putting them in command. but arizona does not lose to stanford. 15 straight wins coming in. close range, they came back and took the lead late. stanford down 2, had a chance to get one. got a good look, but no sir. 14 strength arizona escaped. >>> cal tonight, on bobblehead night, welcome to arizona state, five minutes left, sun devils streaking downcourt, from the corner and as they quiet the crowd, arizona state 81-73 the bears losing six straight in a row. >>> look at this lonely university of pacific fan. tigers in white, hosting st. mary and is still by the tiger. a jam on the other end, leading but too much time left. once they lockton, forget about it. he úman down and in, scoring 32. st. marys won its 14 striking. >>> the square was willing in santa clara, hosting gonzaga who lost a st. marys taking it out on them. inside, bouncing back 75-60. >>> case keenum and the vikings are one win away from hosting the su

well usually political debate precedes from a baseline of common facts common assumptions and common knowledge and then from there you can have a political debate about what the country should do where to go from from here but usually that requires this kind of common baseline of of you know sort of received wisdom of information that everyone shares in this case though you know that there's just there isn't that shared base of knowledge because it's not just trump but a large percentage of his supporters the so-called base in the republican party who support trump are looking at alternative sources and they are basically discounting everything that they see on c.n.n. or read in the new york times or in the washington post and it's kind of impossible to have a sort of coherent political discussion about where we go from here when not everyone agrees what the what the facts are and i think it's really posing a huge problem for democracy and one of the places we saw that was earlier today in senator jeff flake speech where he talked about the necessity of truth for a functioning democr

and then lastly, what can you do is if you take that rate 3.5% and compare it to our baseline projection it shows you how far off we are and how much progress we have to make to live with that constraint and that's the number down here in row 25 so you can see we've got our baseline projection is about 878 and we're seeing if we stick to that 3.5% we should be at 842 and that means we need to make up $36 million and that continues each year roughly at that same level in to the future so that says to me is generally speaking, that should be the order of magnitude of what we should think about in terms of restraining our spending and increasing our revenues if we want to live within that constraint and most likely that will be something along the order of if this projection the city's projection stays looking relatively like it is, that we'll probably be the level of reductions that will be asked for some order of magnitude by the mayor's office. so those are big numbers but they are not that far out of line with the reduction targets over the past few years so again our year two target th

we can see that we have a strong baseline. right now we are still trading over 10,000.will happen in the next week. we will see other corrections, let's not long-term, fromt all the investment banks, hedge funds, is going to flow into cryptocurrencies in the next month. we are going to see a lot of action. what do you expect on the regulatory front? this seems to be an area of the market is focused on more carefully. there will be more regulatory imposition. south korea seems to be on the front edge of this. other central banks moving in line. is this an area that could cause concern? how do you model future regulation? regulation generally speaking is a good thing. regarding ledger, we do not talk to regulators. we are selling security solutions. it is about infrastructure, so we are not talking to the and regulation does not affect us directly. we do not have risk due to regulation. we see more and more countries bending rules, and having the framework allowing to invest into cryptocurrencies. it will help the global markets trust,rward, to add more and in the long-te

food service director approaches us and we perform a baseline evaluation to show them where their food dollars are going, how the purchases align with the set of standards and at the same time, a local multi-sector coalition mobilizes to ensure that the institution's priorities are also the community's priorities. with the support of the coalition, the center assists them with goal setting, incorporating metrics into policy and requests for proposals, and contracts and we measure the progress annually and evaluate successes. at the heart of the program is our standards, which i'll explain. we brought together leading experts from across the country in each of the five value categories. the standards which point to certifications like u usd a organic. they're expected to make change in each of the five value categories by sourcing a certain amount of food. like certification for green buildings, an institution -- there is a basic baseline minimum that an institution is expected to hit, but we inspire institutions to score better and better across the criteria. this slide provides a basi

a food purchasing program that addresses the workplace that has baseline standards that support the safety and fair compensation of food chain workers is a positive and necessary step in the right direction. good morning. i'm here representing prevention institute. we're a national nonprofit based in the bay area dedicated to advancing community health and health equity through community based prevention. i am also a registered dietician and do a lot of work looking at the quality of nutrition standards and nutrition policies. often discussions of healthful food are reduced to focusing on nutrients and nutrition, when in reality, nutrition is just one facet of what makes up healthy food, because healthy food must be produced, transported in ways that sustainable, equitable and just. many local governments are working to use the power of the purse to shift food systems toward healthier food. in my experience, the good food purchasing program is the strongest model of standards that account for the full spectrum of ways that our food system can be designed to support the health of people who

that's two years from the tax bill will be a toy dog deficit based on the seabed baseline. but, of course, congress isn't than adding to to the deficit with this tax bill. we already know for certain, almost for certain if there's interest passing it is actually package and in dramatically increasing the defense and nondefense capstan, so-called sequentially for there is tough for offsetting abortion but those would most likely be well into the future and if you read most press reports it sounds it will be phony or nonexistent. let them add in the sequestered and disaster relief. assuming $100 million of budget authority a year, which i think is a conservative estimate if you read some of the articles yesterday. it looks like they're looking for more than 100 billion of sequestered relief. that takes a little while to trickle out but even with the trickling out by 2019, next year, we will have trillion dollar deficits just bypassing sequestered and disaster relief. there's more on top of that. remember how in 2015 we had the past act that would and all tax extenders? no lon

or $500s another 450 billion between the policy and the baseline. they were measuring it to the baseline, tax extenders rolled over every year. our view is you should measure it to what the actual policy is. we think there will be over $1 trillion of growth. i do think it will pay for itself. mr. rubenstein: you are projecting growth at 3% for the next 10 years or so. sec. mnuchin: it is actually but we door two -- think we can get to 3% or higher. mr. rubenstein: but if you fail, you have a 2.2 or 2.3 which would be higher. sec. mnuchin: by definition. it will never be higher again. worst-case scenario it is 1.5 trillion less half a billion. mr. rubenstein: there were no democratic votes for the tax bill. did you try to get their votes? sec. mnuchin: we did. andad a series of meetings the president hosted several i partisan meetings. we have several democrats live with us on air force one to their home states. from the beginning, the democrats sent a letter to the president and copied me and made very clear on what their conditions were. there was

they are scamper at the baseline, counter—punch, and we will see the longest testing rally. in mind, and how much a grand slam title will have weighed on both these players are possibly minds, that this could upset one of the more than the other? it will get type two was the end of the match. wozniacki, in the end, she got very touch trying to close out her match. she suffers possibly more than that halep. it will be interesting to see how she copes with it. it is such a huge opportunity. you cannot not be that you cannot knock the offensive. i think somehow both of them have had match point against them coming through. they are grey fighters, but to me, halep, just the favourite. —— great fighters. the british paralympic champion sabiha denies that she is cheating the classificationsystem will stop the fight and world champion has to will pause he, but it parliamentary hearing in october heard that the father of one of the team and says she was benefiting from competing in the wrong category. she get a reaction to the claims. the wrong category. she get a reaction to the cl

couldn't get the dream act passed, then you know there's something structurally wrong with just a baseline. if you just think about it you are providing the leadership to come up with the balance where you'll produce a bipartisan solution. as associate is consistent with the principles which i think were important for us to fulfill the promises were made to the american people, and we can provide certainty to the daca population and shame on anybody for getting caught up in words, the wall, for example. when we have the opportunity to provide a solution of keep your objectives into something good for the daca population then i think we should. >> thank you, tom, very much. you are right when had a%. >> thanks for bringing us all together. i mentioned to you in september when you first meet announcement about daca that you can tremendously gets to the american people. it's been 20 or since a vote on immigration. i think that is passed to become law. immigration issues a very hard, very emotional but there's been no deadlines of time congress starts work on, there were, for for a while and t

isn't a top up it's a baseline it redefines the first thousand euro you get every month everyone would get money whether they're rich or poor but their regular income everything on top of that would be taxed at the wealthy would pay more taxes than they receive in basic income you'll be eyes or redistribution of wealth or both the model various as a society we urgently need some form of redistribution of wealth if everyone received the basic income that would open up new ways of figuring that out with you and you're underestimating human selfishness. may be but the idea that we're all ruled by selfishness is very strongly embedded in our society because it justifies our capitalist narrative. what we're seeing now what we see happening to the environment is calling that into question maybe i am underestimate to human selfishness but we have to find new rationales new narratives to live by many say digitalisation and globalization will cost so many jobs that we'll have to rethink things could be part of that. as a. cynical point of view i'd say it's going to be a huge challenge bigger th

we will work with other major education benefactors to organize resources to reach our baseline goals of being the highest percap at that of public pupil spending. >> do we have any statements from the commission or the board, commissioner haney, commissioner merase? >> thank you for bringing this to the board. nothing could be more important, and i'd ask that all names be included in moving it forward. thank you. >> thank you. miss casco, remember to add all the names to the resolution. perfect. with that said -- [ inaudible ] >> and we will do a roll call vote, please, miss casco. >> clerk: thank you. [ roll call. ] >> clerk: six ayes. >> thank you all. section l, board member's reports, standing committees. do we have any updates? commissioner sanchez and commissioner merase, then commissioner cooks. >> rules and policy committee will be meeting january 8th at 6:00 p.m. >> commissioner merase. >> commissioner walton, i'd ask your indwulgs. we had a very rich meeting on ad hoc student assignment, and because we do not meet monthly, i wanted to alert my colleagues to some very import