waxman: madam chair. the chair: the gentleman from california. mr. waxman: i ask for a roll call vote. the chair: does the gentleman from request the yeas and nays? -- does the gentleman request the yeas and nays? the chair: i -- mr. waxman: i request the yeas and nays. the chair: all proceedings will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 7 printed in house report 112-54. for what purpose does the the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. quigley: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 7 printed in house report 112-54 offered by mr. quigley of illinois. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 203, the gentleman from illinois, mr. quigley, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois. mr. quigley: thank you, madam chairman and to the ranking member and chairman. my amendment would require that the g.a.o. report to congress the results of a study of health care costs in the u.s. as affected b

garamendi: madam chair, point of order. the speaker pro tempore: all member -- the chair: all members are roy reminded to address their comments -- are reminded to address their comments to the chair. mr. garamendi: thank you. the chair: the gentleman from wisconsin seek recognition? mr. ryan: i will. just, i think i still have extra time. so i'll yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from south carolina, mr. mulvaney. the chair: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. mulvaney: thank you. i want to speak briefly to a topic that was raised earlier tonight by my colleague, mr. ellison, from minnesota. and it's a comment that, a message that has been repeated several times tonight and was in fact repeated several times during the committee process, which dealt with the subsidies that we give to big oil. to oil and gas. i will tell my folks, especially my colleague from maryland, mr. van hollen, that i share the frustrations that you have with those types of subsidies. i also share the frustrations

madam chair. the july 21 deadline is quickly approaching her, and it's director is eventually appointed we will soon be left with an agency unlike any other, given the way this was written. for the first time there'll be a director who served a set term, has sole authority over the agency of its actions, and has access to hundreds of millions of dollars outside of the appropriations process. so it's a bad president. it would fundamentally weaken our revelatory structure by moving safety and soundness regulation of the backseat, when i offered earlier during the markup when this bill became law, was something that the prudential regulars water. they see what happened with oversight over the gses. they thought it was a bad idea to move safety and soundness regulation to the back seat. and, frankly, this bill takes a critical set by atlanta safety and soundness regulators to have a greater say in a sea of tb by lowering the threshold for a rule to be struck down. and i would also add, mr. scott raise

let's thank you, madame chair. -- supervisor mirkarimi: thank you, madame chair. thank you to everyone on all sides of this issue. this is not an unfamiliar story, struggling departments and chronic deficits for years in sentences go. department staff is tasked with doing the best they possibly can with a limited amount of dollars. this plays itself out in the kinds of budget discussions we have from year to year. sometimes it comes down to where our concerns lie, not just in the present, but the future. i had been consistently opposed to this feet. to say that we are not strong advocates for the rec and park desire to reach to dollars as spent, dollars that they should be able to generate for the programs near and dear to the hearts of our constituents. sometimes because some of these strategies are creeping, and they are not comfortable with the front door or the back door, or any kind of warm and fuzzy presentation that happens to suggest that this is just no other road to take and an inevitability. but a city like san francisco must take it because other citie

boustany: thank you, madam chair. i ask unanimous consent to submit letters of support of our legislation into the record. the chair: the gentleman's question is covered under general leave. mr. boustany: thank you, madam chair. of course, why we're here today is because the e.p.a. continued to push this effort to pass a national energy tax. it was tried through cap and trade over the last year and a half. that bill went through the legislative process and was defeated in a bipartisan way. this is not a republican or democrat issue when we're talking about preventing the e.p.a. from running millions of jobs out of our country. that's literally what's at stake here. believe me, as people look through the letters of support, as we can comb through the days of testimony that we've had on this over the last two years, this concept of the e.p.a. regulating greenhouse gases. madam chair, we're talking about a proposal of the -- by the e.p.a. that according to the national society of manufacturers would run three million jobs

supervisor chu: thank you, madam chair. to the budget office. there has been a strategy proposed for the sheriff's department, such as changing out the jail health services, perhaps outsourcing on a contract for a different security service for some of the buildings. is the mayor's office contemplating as? so we can be prepared for this discussion? >> we are not contemplating a geo health proposal at this point. -- a jail health proposal. it has been proposed by the health commission. a security proposal, so that is an option that is on the table. i know that the mayor is going to want to talk to all of you about that before june 1 and have that discussion. that is compared to the jailhouse proposal. you mentioned it was potentially more tolerable for a lot of reasons. number one, the way it has been proposed by the health department, this version of what they have sent to the commission, it would not involve any layoffs. the ip's at the clinics would be reassigned, and then it would release some share of staffing to be returned to the jail to o

. >> good afternoon, madam chair kim and supervisers elsbrnd and farrell, too. i come before you as a veteran, having served on it since august of 2006. twice i have been the vice chair of this and i wish to continue my service on the pedestrian safety committee, serving seat number four for the seniors disability organization. i first served this on the child advocate and school support organization, be it i represented the voice for injury promotion program through the injury prevention center of san francisco general hospital. that is no longer the aspect of my work. i do continue work through the brain injury association of california which i brought with me certificates which i can hand to you to share with the supervisors. and have also been featured in several publications and tv news representing my personal experiences, having been 10 years ago a survivor of a pedestrian collision in san francisco of which i effectively described to you when i came before you in summer 2006 in the rules committee then. you see an effective need in our city -- i see an e

>> no, madam chair. supervisor kim: there's nothing further, the meeting is now adjourned. >> please call the roll. >> [roll is called] >> we have a quorum. item #3, the use of sound producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. any person responsible for any similar sound producing device may be removed it from the meeting. when they are set on vibrate they do cause microphone interference, we ask that they are turned off. item #4, the approval of minutes. >> april 19. >> april 5. and 12th. >> [unintelligible] >> aye. >> i would like to welcome this afternoon caroline [unintelligible] ably assisted by our student advisory council secretary. thank you both for being here. but >> item #5, communications. that is it. item #6, introduction of new or unfinished been -- business. >> director brinkman has something, i think? >> two items. i think that we need to look at introducing more pilots before the november time line, which i believe is the eir of the market street plan. i do not want to l

>> no, madam chair. supervisor kim: there's nothing further, the meeting is now adjourned. >> i work with the department of environment and we are recycling oil. thank you. we can go into a refinery and we can use it again. they do oil changes and sell it anyway, so now they know when a ticket to a. hal>> to you have something you want to get rid of? >> why throw it away when you can reuse it? >> it can be filtered out and used for other products.

supervisor wiener: thank you, madam chair. so the $65 million is after the 10%? >> that is correct. supervisor wiener: so it is painful, unbelievably painful, and we're left with $65 million. about that is correct. -- >> that is correct. supervisor wiener: in terms of the not structural, not one time, the things we have relied on in years past which have cost concerns to outside rating agencies in terms of not addressing the structural imbalances, we have less options these years in terms of using those than in years past? >> i would say that is a correct characterization. some of the items that we have used have been one time in the past that are very big onetime items, and are certainly no longer available. the chief example is that last year we balance the budget with the hospital fee revenues and the remainder of the federal stimulus funding increases. those pieces together were over $100 million of one time revenues. those are gone and no longer available to us. there have beeother solutions that were one time savings that we were able to pull out that we have no longer availab

>> thank you, madame chair. good to see. the previous administration declared 10 help these centers and lathes responsibilities for each. when we spoke prior to your confirmation, you assured me the policy was no longer needed because tell -- nasa had 10 help the centers. we were promised the etdd program with the 2012 budget request. we are giving money only been told that a significant portion will be at glenn. nasa has a history of allowing the centers to fight among themselves and not a day goes by where i hear if nasa glenn will be getting a mission. instead of collaboration between and among centers, they want to encourage the competition. i have seen what happens when congress provides nasa latitude to shift funding. two questions on this issue. do you have a serious commitment to the goals of the previous policy of 10 healthy centers and the people who work there? second, how will you work with congress to detail a more specific plan for the 10 health centers? >> i have a very serious commitment to nine or 10 functio

supervisor wiener: thank you, madam chair. so the $65 min

>> no, madam chair. supervisor kim: there's nothing further, the meeting is now adjourned. >> i have 2 job titles. i'm manager of the tour program as well as i am the historyian of city hall. this building is multifaceted to say the very least it's a municipal building that operates the city and county of san francisco. this building was a dream that became a reality of a man by the name of james junior elected mayor of san francisco in 1912. he didn't have a city hall because it was destroyed in the earth wake of 1906. construction began in april of 1913. in december 1915, the building was complete. it opened it's doors in january 1916. >> it's a wonderful experience to come to a building built like this. the building is built as a palace. not for a king or queen. it's built for all people. this building is beautiful art. those are architecture at the time when city hall was built, san francisco had an enormous french population. therefore building a palace in the art tradition is not unusual. >> jimmie

supervisor campos: thank you, madam chair. first of all, i want to thank this committee for giving me an opportunity to weigh in on this by trying to provide more information to the city and county as we make these decisions. as was noted by mr. nutter, a report was commissioned by lafco. it took some time to have that initial report finalized. we had to go through a competitive bid process. once that happens, the vendor had two or three weeks to do a very quick survey on where we are all relative to other jurisdictions. we believe and i certainly believe it is important for us as we're making these decisions that we have a context for what is happening in the region and what we're doing in san francisco and how that compares to other cities. as was noted, there are some things, a number of things that came out in the report. one of them, which i think is an accurate statement is that indeed it verifies that there is a survey provided by recology. in terms of the extensive list of the service, and the results for the ratepayer

>> thank you, madame chair. good to see. the preous administration declared 10 help these centers and lathes responsibilities for each. when we spoke prior to your confirmation, you assured me the policy was no longer needed because tell -- nasa had 10 help the centers. we were promised the etdd program with the 2012 budget request. we are giving money only been told that a significant portion will be at glenn. nasa has a history of allowing the centers to fight among themselves and not a day goes by where i hear if nasa glenn will be getting a mission. instead of collaboration between and among centers, they want to encourage the competition. i have seen what happens when congress provides nasa latitude to shift funding. two questions on this issue. do you have a serious commitment to the goals of the previous policy of 10 healthy centers and the people who work there? second, how will you work with congress to detail a more specific plan for the 10 health centers? >> i have a very serious commitment to nine or 10 functioni

wilson. >> yes, madam chair. >> and now over to mr. fortenbury. >> thank you, madam chairman, for calling this hearing. we are called upon to help, and this has to do with the american taxpayer, and it is difficult for us to watch by and watch humanity be slaughtered before our eyes and the third is that we are a unique and exceptional super power, but in order to understand where we are now, we should look back a few short weeks when the united states was pressured to unilaterally pressured to implement a no-fly zone by this body, and when the french were willing to stop pontificating and put up their assets that allowed the u.s. to be a part of a coalition. i know that the scope and duration of this remain, but the scope will remain as to the robustment of the arab league commitment, and it was important to get that affirmation up front, and we need to know what assets they will put up. and libyan must be controlled and libya and north africans. and where is the commitment of resources? >> thank you so much. lastly, mr. murphy of conn

>> thank you, madame chair. good to see. the previous administration declared 10 help these centers and lathes responsibilities for each. when we spoke prior to your confirmation, you assured me the policy was no longer needed because tell -- nasa had 10 help the centers. we were promised the etdd program with the 2012 budget request. we are giving money only been told that a significant portion will be at glenn. nasa has a history of allowing the centers to fight among themselves and not a day goes by where i hear if nasa glenn will be getting a mission. instead of collaboration between and among centers, they want to encourage the competition. i have seen what happens when congress provides nasa latitude to shift funding. two questions on this issue. do you have a serious commitment to the goals of the previous policy of 10 healthy centers and the people who work there? second, how will you work with congress to detail a more specific plan for the 10 health centers? >> i have a very serious commitment to nine or 10 functio

supervisor mirkarimi: thank you, madame chair. before we hear from the budget analyst, i want to say that i am a big fan of moving forward with this lease. this was instigated based on dollars that were procured in 2007. the reason for this, participating the end of the -- the dirt -- the jurisdiction of the western division in japan town, where workforce centrally surrounded construction jobs and fast-food restaurants was coming to an end. there was really very little vision in helping people in that sector of our city to be able to find other jobs in the industries that they were oriented towards for 40 years. this was the first and is the first one-stop job training center that was co-run by city and goodwill. we put it in the epicenter of the western addition, right on gary and western. the focus, of course, with redevelopment, we did not know it would be eliminated. knowing that this was going to conclude in 2009 in the western addition, we wanted to start getting the people of our city in the western addition on livability a

wilson. >> yes, madam chair. >> and now over to mr. fortenbury. >> thank you, madam chairman, for calling this hearing. we are called upon to help, and this has to dowith the american taxpayer, and it is difficult for us to watch by and watch humanity be slaughtered before our eyes and the third is that we are a unique and exceptional super power, but in order to understand where we are now, we shou look back a few short weeks when the united states was pressured to unilaterally pressured to implement a no-fly zone by this body, and when the french were willing to stop pontificating and put up their assets that allowed the u.s. to be a part of a coalition. i know that the scope and duration of this remain, but the scope will remain as to the robustment of the arab league commitment, and it was important to get that affirmation up front, and we need to know what assets they will put up. and libyan must be controlled and libya and north africans. and where is the commitment of resources? >> thank you so much. lastly, mr. murphy of connect

. >> madam chair, members of the committee, debra newman. as she indicated and as shown in our report on page 4, table 2, the current lease with asi anna airlines is at a rate -- asiana airlines it is a result the $943,146 per year under the new lease. although the square footage would remain the same, the rental rate per square foot will go down to $21.40 so there will be a total of annual estimated revenue of $849,000 or a reduction of $94,037 per year. however, because of the airport's residual rate setting methodology that there will not result in any budgetary shortfall overall for the airport because the cost will be reallocated and rerecommend approval of the proposed lease. supervisor chu: why don't we open this up for public comment? are there any members of the comment who would like to speak on item number one? seeing none, public comment is closed. can we move this item forward with recommendation? we'll do that without objection. thank you very much. item number 2, please. >> item number two, ordinance appropriating $6,995,000 o

and thank you, madam chair. >> senator whitehouse, you ready? >> thank you, madam chair. i want to thank the panel very much for being here for their testimony and for their service, particularly those who have been prosecutors and u.s. attorneys and so forth, thank you, ms. leary. i just want to get your reactions to the news that has come out about the extent to which the cuts that have recently been agreed to have focused on victims of crime in the department of justice budget. and what your advice is to all of us to try to prevent that damage from having too much impact on the victims that, frankly, are prototypical innocent victims of this. and there's no reason that they should be bearing the cost here. but it looks like they will be. so have you had the chance to analyze yet how deep those cuts will go and to what extent they may affect programs and grants that support what you're doing right now? >> looking at me, senator -- oh, sorry. >> i'll go right down the line. but let's start with you. >> we haven't had a chance to do a full able lissy. i too read the artic

i urge my colleagues to support the bill and madam chair, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman -- the chair: the gentleman yields back. all time for general debate has expired. pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered read for amendment under the five-minute rule. no amendment to the bill is in order except those printed in house report 112-61. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report by a member designated in the report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent of the amendment, shall not be subject to amendment and shall not be subject to tchand for division of the question. it is now in order to consider amendment number 1 printed in house report 112-61. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas rise? ms. jackson lee: i have an amendment at the tesk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 1, printed in house report 112-61, offered by ms. jackso

>> no, madam chair. supervisor kim: seeing none, this meeting is now adjourned. thank you colleagues and members of the public. [meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m..] >> good morning, volunteers. good morning. can everyone hear me? yes, good, good. this is really exciting for me. this is my very first project connect, and i and the new director, so i look forward to getting to know each of you. just today, we want to thank you for your help. there's no way this project would exist without you guys. you are the lifeblood for this program, and that just want to thank you from the bottom of my heart. we had a couple of speakers who are here to support the program today, so the first one i'm going to introduce -- i'm not the world's greatest public speaker, so bear with me. first of all, let me start by giving thanks to a few different organizations that have helped out. one is trader joe's. they have given us bags throughout the years. next is san francisco food bank, one of the greatest assets that we have as well, so thanks to them. [applause] walden house and also a b

>> madam chair, i would like to say to the executive director, absolutely wonderful job. you took the skeletal framework as outlined in january. you nailed it on the head as what kind of concept, at least in my vision, of being a longtime san francisco resident, how proud i am of this moment. you nailed it. i want to thank you and your staff. >> question? i have one question. the reas

>> no, madam chair. supervisor kim: seeing none, this meeting is now adjourned. thank you colleagues and members of the public. [meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m..]

. >> madame chair, my name is -- the fee has more from the sandstones botched the sand dunes now to a site specific revenue generator. these are all excuses to taking it as a comments. the garden will turn into sand dunes. when they cannot get a fee for all, -- told the rec and park commission that we will start by charging non-residents. this was the starting point, not the ending point. remember the japanese tea garden that used to be free? now, less than 5% of all visitation is by residents. fees to access the comments are part of the privatization strategy under the cover of economic collapse caused by the corporations and the banks. the nonresident feed has excluded the visitors and 40% of the visitors based on the study which recreation and park to not tell you about. i urge you to vote against the fee ordinance. the city fired regular workers in 2009 and hired six-figure managers. thank you. >> i am a 26-year resident of san francisco. i was talking -- i was working as a unionized machinists. i am here today to urge you know against the tax on working people to go to the park.

>> madam chair, i would like to say to the executive director, absolutely wonderful job. you took the skeletal framework as outlined in january. you nailed it on the head as what kind of concept, at least in my vision, of being a longtime san francisco resident, how proud i am of this moment. you nailed it. i want to thank you and your staff. >> question? i have one question. the reason i'm fascinated with water taxis, and i know we have started to make a little bit of a dent in that, i a understand it is a requirement that they incorporate a water taxi and landing. i am not quite sure how encouraging that kind of transportation and use -- i cannot pick it up in any one of these points. it is something to throw out there. i think it is something we want to continue to do. >> yeah. that is a good point. they have entered into agreement for water taxi service. hopefully, it will commence this summer or this spring. i think the goal of the policy, we want to encourage investment in maritime activity. we don't want to preclude water taxis or any other type of commercial use.

if that comports with madam chairs the agenda about how you want to orchestrate us between now and the conclusion of the budgetary process, that is simply an initial suggestion. supervisor chu: i do not anticipate that we will be able to bring this item up before the budget process. we will get the position in the month of may. if i could ask for flexibility to continue that to the call of the chair, we will likely see that in july, but, i would imagine. supervisor mirkarimi: makes sense. motion to continue to the call of the chair. supervisor chu: i will be supportive of that. i know that currently there are not enough votes to move the item forward. but i want to make two points, very quickly, because i know many people are waiting to go. i know that we had talked about the issue of, if we were to impose a franchise fee, if it would be imposed on to the ratepayers. there are many conversations around the room, hypothetically, if that would be borne by the ratepayers. i am willing to be convinced that that is the case. i truly can but -- believe that there will be an impact. pochos to

. >> thank you, madame chair and members of the commission. we are following this closely, as you might imagine and we appreciate the comments about the cash flow and how that might work. i have discussed this at a time -- the staff memo says staff will return to you with their report in august and i'm wondering if the commission could return what that report and it is not lost in the french? president vietor: absolutely. could we make sure to calendar that for the august meeting? >> some wondering if that can be a calendar item as opposed to a written report? president vietor: unless there is objection. that's enough time, we don't need an interim? >> there may be specific items that come to you before them that relate to this topic. president vietor: any other comments on communication? next item. >> the next item is new business. does any commissioner have any new business to propose? president vietor: i would like to say happy world water day because today is world water day. the puc should be proud of the activities they have undertaken a

supervisor campos: thank you, madam chair. a couple of things about what was said in terms of the competitive bid process and the concern of what would happen. one of the things that was noted is that you never really know whether or not going through a competitive bid will result in higher or lower rates in the sense that it depends on the case. it is a case by case basis analysis 3 on the 95 jurisdictions that they looked at. on average, residential customer rates were actually lower after the competitive bid process was followed. that is not a guarantee, but again, the whole point of the competitive bid process is for us to outline the services that we want. the competitive bid, the request, can be structured in such a way and then you let the market decide and the company that can provide that service that you want at the lowest price, with other considerations, labor considerations and other allies, would get the contract. i do not necessarily think that we should be so afraid of having to go through that process. it is a