ms. miller, it is good to see you again. thank you also for all that you do. ms. miller, many other people who criticize the question of tax incentives for retirement saving argue that they are for the wealthy. they say these laws favor high-income people. in your experience and research, do you find this to be true? do you have any ideas as how we can further increase participation among low and middle-income workers? how can we make it easy for people to save for retirement? >> that's a very good question. i think if you look at the retirement savings incentives, first of all, there is a cap on compensation that can be considered. and it's a 250,000. so when we hear a lot of talk about, let's cut incentives for people making over $250,000, i can't help but think we already cap it. you already can't include compensation over $250,000. so -- and that's also when you're testing for nondiscrimination. so somebody might make $1 million, but when you're comparing their percentage of pay in the plan to the lower income person's percentage of pay, you use the $250,000. s

ms. miller. if you had to identify the greatest impediment that the government puts in place to either the employer or the employee for setting up a flexible, responsive retirement plan, what would that be? mr. vanderhei? >> i'll focus on the responsive part of that. one of the major improvements we've had in this the retirement system in this country, certainly since 2006, is the increase adoption of automatic enrollment and automatic escalation of contributions. for a variety of reasons, a number of employers have adopted a safe harbor approach. this automatic escalation. which unfortunately currently has a maximum cap of 10%. i think if you talk to most financial planners, they would say that in addition to what the employer is probably matching, perhaps 3%, you need, especially for employees start this process late in their careers, something more than just a 10% contribution per year. i think if there were ways for employers to decrease not only the contribution rate from perhaps 3% to 6% or

ms. miller. >> yes, thank you. but we were talking about baby boomers for such a short timeframe, i think one thing that you should do is when you look at tax reform, keep those catchup contributions and their because as a baby boomer i can have had a lot more conscience of how much you need to save not but it's too late. it would be very good to keep those options there. looking further down the road, it is important to engage younger people and not a monica moment and not a escalation are critical. but i also thing we need to look more and eat delivery of things. we are all very supportive of all sorts of disclosures. when people don't necessarily look and we could approach people more something that is in iraq to come it would be easier to plan and for them to get engaged really would like you to enable more electronic delivery. >> research on, i was reading in "usa today" they are talking about where they are at in terms of 60%, an enormous number that are just reliant on social security and

ms. miller, could you please call item no. 1? clerk miller: item number one, a planning code for eating and drinking establishments definitions and controls. supervisor mar: the sponsors are supervisors wiener, olague, and chu. supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: thank you. tate day -- today before the committee is something long overdue, with dysfunctional eating and drinking controls. this simplifies the planning could, with 13 different definitions, reducing that number to three. either a full-service restaurant or bar. this is a piece of legislation that allows new businesses to start and allows existing businesses to adapt to changing demands instead of micromanaging them. this legislation is neighbor and friendly. it maintains and even strengthens the carefully tailored controls for the city's various commercial corridors to ensure that they remain unique, balanced, and neighborhood specific and that vacancies will be filled in those neighborhoods. the legislation's would make the city controls more flexible, allowing for

ms. miller, mr. fried, congratulations i think are in order. ms. miller. >> this is similar to the previous item which is once again the mou. we thought the program would be launched by this time so the mou had a term date which we're beyond now so we want to extend it until june 2013. chairperson campos: great. thank you. another one-year extension. any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. motion by commissioner avalos, seconded by commissioner olague. if we can take that without objection? item 8. madam clerk: item no. 8 is public comment. chairperson campos: any member of the public who would like to speak on any item within the jurisdiction of lafco not otherwise on the agenda. seeing none, public comment is done. item 9. madam clerk: item no. 9 is future agenda items. chairperson campos: colleagues, any future agenda items? any member of the public would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. last item. madam clerk: last item isa, jowrnt. chairperson campos: meeting adjourned. thank you, everyone, a

ms. miller? >> i wanted to add to what barbara was saying. the first is the schedule. in addition to the proposed contract with shell that will be before the board, the sfpuc has also been working on hiring a marketing consultant to start the program, and that process has been ongoing, and i think the timing to select a consultant is within the next few months. they have been working on that as well. one other thing about the timing on the may 10. that date may slip. due to some of the issues that barbara was talking about. i just wanted to be aware of that. we will be in contact with you prior to that to talk about that, but it may. chairperson campos: ms. miller, i am also aware of the fact there is a conference going on may 10, where a number of advocates may not be available at that time? >> that is correct. also part of the process is sfpuc has set monthly meetings with a stake holder group, and that came out at the stakeholder groups, that there is a may 10 conference that many of them will be attending, so that may be another reason for postponement, in addition

ms. miller specialized in employer sponsored retirement programs nearly 40 year opinions third, welcome mr. bill sweetnumb a principle at the law group in washington, d.c. he served as benefits tax counsel at the george w. bush treasury department. fourth, we'll hear from mr. david john a senior research fellow in retirement security at the heritage foundation. mr. john published and testified extensively on the improvement of retirement security plans. finally, we welcome randy hardic from a parder in at from davis d hartman llp in washington, d.c. mr. hardic is an arisa and regulatory compliance specialist who maintains a practice focused on advising employers and institutions on retirement and savings issues and he is testifying today on behalf of the american benefits council. thank you all again for your time today. the committee has received each of your written statements and they will be made part of the formal hearing record. each of you will be recognized for five minutes for your oral remarks. we'll begin with you and you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. chairman,

ms. miller? >> thank you. i'd like to focus on the employer side of this. i think it actually ties into the individual, too, in that when you're talking to a small employer it really isn't that confusing. if you pull somebody that's not thinking about retirement plan and say here's this, this, this, but if you're actually talking to an employer saying do you want to put in a retirement plan you are saying do you want an i.r.a. based plan or one that has a trust that your employees are more likely to leave the money in? if you put your money into a 401(k) for them they can't pull it out right away. if you put it into a simple plan they might run off with it. you're drawing those distinctions. and then you're really talking about how much can you afford and what would you like to do? and this is where i get concerned about the proposals for individual savings in that right now we have the $5,000 i.r.a. limit and then you can go up to, you know, $10,000 for a simple plan and then you can go up to $17,000 for the individual deferral in a qualified retirement pl

ms. miller's contract. we're looking at full budgets and everything else with it. but we are not going to look to extend any extra money than what has already been allocated. we do need him, it is good to have his services available. the sfpuc has asked to bar him, so out of cooperation, we have authorized that. commissioner campos: why don't we open it up for public comment? any member of the public that would like to speak on this item? public comment is closed. motion by commissioner avalos, seconded by commissioner schmeltzer. without objection. thank you. call item eight? >> public comment. the members of the public may address us for informations within the jurisdiction and are not on today's's agenda. commissioner campos: any member of the public that would like to speak on any item not on the agenda, please come forward. three minutes. >> eric brooks, san francisco green party and our city. commissioner olague, the other commissioners will have heard this a couple of times already. i want to say in public for your benefit. another issue that organizers and

miller is our clerk. >> please silence all cell phones. items acted upon today will appear on the may 8 agenda, unless otherwise stated. supervisor mar: thank you. ms. millioner, we have six items before you -- miller, we have six items. please read item number one. [item one read.] supervisor mar: thank you. colleagues, as you recall, this item was heard at the last meeting and then amended and approved, and then we heard testimony at the last meeting that it's been continued to this meeting. it's a simple measure that would allow more attractive store fronts along the make merchant corridors of the richmond district and i strongly urge your support. in addition to the small business owners and others that are supporting this effort, it was also supported at the planning commission, where an amendment was made to also include another measure that supports small businesses by limiting lot mergers, so that smaller merchants have more of a say in the process. so, colleagues, if there are no questions, let's open this up for public comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to speak on item number one? seeing none, public comment is clos

ms. miller, we will call -- have recalled items five and six together? we have called them. supervisor winner. adis >> thank you, mr. chairman. today, we are considering legislation sponsored by amica as well as supervisor kolodzola updating the article that i have not been updated in decades. as a result of passage of time and changes in practice as well as the adoption by the voters of the proposition j. and updating is necessary. this legislation has been subject to no fewer than 25 public hearings. today being the 26 public hearing. last year, i made a number of proposals for making articles 10 and 11 even better by making them more inclusive of impacted communities and by crafting local applications -- or requiring the craft of local applications of the national preservation standards to the san francisco unique urban environment. this is an important opportunity for our city to step back and discuss our historic preservation and fit into our complex and wonderful environment. we recognize it is important to have history while we change and evolve and grow. articles 10

ms. miller. the president's 2013 budget proposal includes a proposal capping certain individuals itemized deductions to 28%. and the exclusion and deductions under the proposal include the exclusion or above the line deduction for pretax employee contributions to defined contribution plans and contributions to traditional i.r.a.s. ginn that the tax break for retirement savings is a deferral, not a permanent write-off, wouldn't limiting deduction on the front end, but not when the amount is distributed result in double taxation, and what are your thoughts on how the president's proposal would affect retirement savings rates and also on small business owners decision to set up or maintain retirement plans for their employees? >> i appreciate that question. i was very disappointed to see retirement savings included in that proposal, because you're right, it would be double taxation if you have someone who has -- because this is a deferral. so if you have someone who is at a, you know, 31% marginal r

ms. miller you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you chairman kim, ranking member levin and members of the committee. i am judy miller chief of actuarial issues and director of retirement policy for the american society of -- more than 8000 members work with retirement plans were for employers about is their primary focus is plans for small business. t. key features distinguish retirement tax incentives in the code, the deferral nature of the incentive and the nondiscrimination rules that make employer-sponsored plans very efficient at delivering benefits across the income spectrum. unlike other tax incentives come incentives for retirement savings of our deferrals. they're not permanent exclusions. and employer paid health and if it are excluded from income where mortgage interest is deducted this amount will never be taxed. the traditional retirement savings account no income taxes are paid on contributions when added to the account of the same contributions are included in attackable income when the amounts are paid from the plan. in other words, every single dollar that is exemp

ms. miller, you would still be able to hear amplified sound kind of on the other side of the room. i live off fulton street and i know a number of the neighbors are saying it's so loud you can hear it inside your place. so it sure sounds like 50 feet is a very lenient requirement. so i'm hoping that we could look at other ways to reduce the amplified sound so it's not disruptive around surrounding neighborhoods around golden gate park and other spots, too. but it sounds like 50 feet is a pretty large area, and that could allow noise and tour bus that's are way too loud, i think. >> and if i could respond to that, because i actually had exactly the same reaction that supervisor mar did around the 50-foot requirement. and there are two things of note. first of all, there is a state law on this area. and for the local jurisdiction, like san francisco, to actually make it shorter than 50 feet could potentially create some issues. but just as importantly and perhaps, patrick, you could speak to this. i do understand that there were tests that were done by your department and tom, who ma

ms. alisa miller. >> please silence all cell phones and electronic devices. documents should be submitted to the creek bottoms acted upon it will appear on april 24 board of supervisors agenda less inert -- otherwise stated. supervisor mar: thank you. in the two items. >> item number one, ordinance amending the sidewalk with of golden gate avenue and redwood valley. >> i do not have a presentation. actually, this is the location for the new puc headquarters building. 525 building gate. -- 525 golden gate. it was a suggestion from staff members at dpw, we were requested to widened sidewalks to improve pedestrian safety. we also included the pg&e vault underneath the sidewalk. we do not wanted encroaching into the street. on redwood and polk street supervisor mar: street mar read what is the alley between mcallister and turk? >> yes. if you have questions, i am available. >> si no questions, let's open this up for public comment. is there anyone from the public who would like to speak? please come forward. it is a maximum of three minutes. you'll hear a tone 30

ms. norton? >> mr. miller, i think it would be important for the committee to know as far as you know or prps ms. brita or anyone at the table may know whether or not what with efind in region nine has metastasized to other parts of the agency. i think it's fair to say there was building up over time something of an abusive culture, a region apart. but we need to know whether this culture has spread to other parts of the gsa or whether you believe that it is essentially a region nine issue. >> that's exactly why the acting administrator is doing a top to bottom review so we will be able to answer that .question rather than intuitively come up with an answer or speculate. one of the reasons of doing a top to bottom rer view will be to answer that question. is this an isolated region nine issue or do we have a larger issue agency wide. we believe the review where we're looking at facets of gsa will be able to answer that question. >> mr. miller, have you seen any evidence outside of region nine? and are you, in

ms. miller you are recognized. >> thank you. i am judy miller, chief of the retirement policy for the american society of pension professionals. we work with employers of all types but our primary focus is small business. two key features distinguish that from other plants. they are efficient at delivering and come across the spectrum. unlike other incentives, retirement savings are deferrals. they are not permanent. when mortgage interest and deducted, and they will never be taxed. with a traditional tax, no income taxes are paid when they are added to the account. but they are included in taxable income when paid from the plan. every dollar exempt from tax now will be subject to tax in the future. since most of those are outside the budget window, looking at the expenditure for retirement plans overstates the cost of this incentive. new estimates show that a better measure for define plans is more than 50% less than the estimate over five years. as you consider these issues, this is a deferral. that amount to romney you might t

miller. and ms. johnson, am i reading you right, that you -- you -- you seem like you -- i watch your expression. it's like -- and this is what it seems like you're saying. you don't have to tell me. but it seems like this really miss pisses me off. not that you have to be here, but you've got these people who did these stupid things, did these greedy things, and i'm just pissed. but i was not in a position to control it. and i'm not trying to excuse you. i'm just trying to get to the bottom of this. >> i appreciate that. i appreciate that, congressman. and i think that i alluded to what i do think is one of the issues that i would certainly welcome attention to, and that is to be sure there is leadership in place in these organizations and they aren't left in interim status too long. it's a very large, complicated organization, takes time for a person coming in to learn the organization. i was lucky, i already knew a fair amount about it. but i can the leadership aspect is a pretty important part of

ms. brita very bravely stepped forward and brought this attention to the ig. the ig did a preliminary report, issued that report back to mr. miller. who did you submit this report to? >> administrator johnson. >> and who did the administrator give it to? >> ms. brita was well. i'm not sure who she gave it to. i don't know the exact nature of the list, but i believe she gave it to mr. peck and regional -- >> mr. peck, did you receive a copy of this? >> i'm sorry, could you say again what it -- >> did you receive a copy of the western regions conference oig intermim alert report on investigation into potential fraud, waste and abuse. >> i did, yes, sir. >> and did you receive it in a timely fashion somewhere around may of last year? >> yes, sir. >> this gets to a bigger question of the culture in gsa. if somebody stepped forward, a whistleblower stepped forward and alerted to the ig to an issue and the ig came back and issued a report on investigation into potential fraud, waste and abuse, why then would you have a dispute with ms. brita and martha johnson and recommend somebody to get a bonus at the end of the year? >> mr. chairma

ms. norton. >> mr. miller, i think it would be important for the committee to know, as far as seymour or perhaps mr. and three for anyone who may know perhaps in region nine has in the past to other parts of the agency -- i think it is fair to say there is holding up over time something of culture or a regional power. but we need to know whether this culture has spread to other parts of the gsa or whether you believe it is essentially a region not an issue. >> ms. norton, that is precisely why the unit is straighter has decided and is committed to doing a top department review so we can answer the question i've been intuitively, but then it are respectively. one of the purposes of the top to bottom review will be to answer the question. is this an isolated region nine issue or do we have the literature issue agencywide clicks i would leave that the review where we look at all facets of gsa will be able to answer the question. >> mr. miller, have you seen any evidence outside region nine and in light of what yo

steven miller, deputy commissioner at the irs, ms.ina olson, national taxpayer advocate, the honorable george russell, inspector for tax administration, and james white, director of strategic issues. we think each of you for being here. we have had a chance to review your testimony, and we appreciate you spending that. it allows me to go through and make a note of things i want to get to during the time we have. we do appreciate having that in advance. if we could try to state to a five minute window, that would be great. and then we will come back for questions. commissioner miller, if you'd like to begin. i apologize. if i could ask all four of you to stand, i need to swear you in. if you could stand and raise your right hand. do you solemnly swear and affirm that this testimony that you are giving this committee is the whole truth and nothing but the truth? thank you. all four witnesses have affirmed the oath. >> my name is steve miller. deputy commissioner of the revenue service. i appreciate the opportunity to testify today and u

ms. johnson resigning? is . >> to the best of my recollection, no. >> mr. miller, you said earlier in your testimony that it was i think abnormal -- i don't recall the word you used, but it was not the norm -- >> unusual. >> unusual, okay, thank you. so why did you provide this preliminary information? >> i provided it to the administrator may 3rd, 2011 so gsa could take steps to prevent future waste. >> okay. and i'm reading from ms. johnson's written testimony that was submitted today. we finally received the -- excuse me. let me back up. you had written, ms. british shared these findings with four of us in may, 2011. and you name the four people who were in that meeting, and according to your testimony, you were part of that meeting. is that -- >> yes. what i'm referring to. >> in your line of questioning with the chairman, at the beginning of this hearing, you had stated, quote, i was aware of a powerpoint slide deck, but i did not see it. yet in your written testimony, and so maybe you want to clarify, you said ms. british shared these findings with the four

ms. brita is alerted to this 17-day junket to the south pacific. she alerts mr. miller. mr. miller alerts you. and yet he's still allowed to go on it and his wife, their birthday trip? you don't see a pattern here? a pattern that you've been aware of for the last year and a half. but you took immediate action. that doesn't sound like immediate action to me. they went on a 17-day trip to hawaii, guam, saipon. and then in march this year, last month, a four-day visit to hawaii again, four-day trip to napa for the executive team meeting. $40,000, excluding travel expenses. and you took immediate action? you got a recommendation from the i.g. get a handle on it. you got a new administrator. get a handle on it. what immediate action did you take? >> first of all, congressman, i did not know about those trips. i knew that the i.g., as he has said -- >> you knew about the nine preplanning trips and the vegas trip, did you not? >> i learned about those last may, yes. >> you heard -- no, no, no. you're under oath. you heard about them when? >> i learned about the vegas trips -- well,

i would be more than happy to answer any questions. >> thank you, commissioner miller. ms. olson? chairman platts, ranking member towns and members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify today about the subject of the tax gap and tax related identity theft. both of these issues present challenges to tax administration. regarding the tax gap, the irs recently released and that the tax gap of 385 net tax cut estimate of 385 billion in 2006, and decisive this estimate is understandably attracted considerable attention. there are many causes of noncompliance including difficulty understanding and complying with the law, inability to pay due to financial hardship, and deliberate and sisters -- understatement of texter i believe the complexity of the tax code is responsible for considerable portion of noncompliance. as i've repeatedly recommended in my reports to congress, if you'll simplify the code, while you're working on that and i'm ever the optimist in that regard, that there are other steps that can be taken. first, the irs should be given the resources to subs

miller? >> thank you very much. my apologies for being late to the hearing. i want to thank ms. woolsey for finding the opening statement and sitting in the claire for that moment. mr. main, thank very much for your leadership at msha and thank you for your leadership in response to this tragedy, and in rebuilding the resources at msha so we don't have to go through this again, hopefully of again. i want to read, you mentioned, read from his court distribute, mr. gary mae, a back and forth with the u.s. attorney's office, and the question is, mr. mae, while you were at upper big branch mine was there a practice of providing when inspector were comes to the mine? answer, yes. question, can you tell us from beginning to end how these warnings were communicated? answer it would start usually someone came through the guard shack. there would be a phone call and it would be announced over the radio, "company on property." from that point it would be received at the office. from the office, call underground, let them know we had "company." skipping forward in this discussion, question

ms. emmerson will be allowed to participate in today's hearing, and without objection, so world. all will have seven days to submit their opening. we now have the honorable brian miller, the inspector general of the general services the administration. we have ms. martha johnson, a former administration official to the general services the administration. mr. jeff neeley is with public services in the pacific rim region of the general services administration. mr. michael robertson is the chief of staff at the general services administration, and mr. david folate is the deputy commissioner of public buildings service at the general services administration. pursuant to our rules, all witnesses are required to take the oath. would you please rise and raise your right hand to take the oath? do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the old trick, and nothing but the truth? let the record reflect that all of the witnesses answered in the affirmative. please take your seats. in order to allow time for discussion, testimony will be limited to five minutes. some of you have written statements, some do not. in either case, you

miller. what took so long since briefing administrator johnson and ms. brita in may 2011? >> chairman mica, we investigated a number of individuals, we interviewed individuals, we turned over every stone, and be every time we turned over a stone, we found 50 more with all sorts of things crawling out from under it -- >> but you never, you never published a report. but in june after providing that briefing to ms. brita and administrator johnson, you -- somehow the gsa chief, mr. robinson, michael robinson yesterday who was before ogr committee informed kimberly harris, the white house counsel, about the investigation going on. were you aware of that? >> i was not aware of that. >> you were not aware of it. it was interesting that back in may you advised administrator johnson to get a handle on regional administer orer neely, this was in may, administrator neely's travel, is that correct? >> chairman mica, i did brief administrator johnson on the interim report -- >> but did you, did you tell them to get a handle on his travel expenditures? >> i told the regional administrat

miller, you are the inspector general. how long have you been in that job? >> congressman, i was confirmed by the senate in july 2005. >> 2005? between 2005 and when ms. johnson's office alerted you, were you ever aware of the fact that excess spending and raucous behavior and perhaps inappropriate use of resources was going on in the agency anywhere? >> we always look for that, sir. >> i'm talking about this kind of conference. this happened in new orleans and at some other locations. did anyone ever bring to your attention or did you discover independently this kind of thing was going on so that you could intervene to prevent what is sadly came to a crescendo here? >> we rely on gsa employees to tell us. we did not have hot line complaints about this conference and i do commend the deputy administrator for bringing it to our attention. >> she did that at the direction of the administrator? >> that is my understanding. we have the administrator here. >> i'm asking you what your understanding was. but she acting alone or at the direction of martha johnson? >> i view the deputy administrator as the alter ego of the administrator. >> although you have b

miller, you are the inspector general of gsa. how long have you been in that job? >> i was confirmed by the senate in july of 2005. >> between 2005 and when ms. johnson's office alerted to, were you ever aware of the fact that access spending and raucous behavior and inappropriate use of resources was going on in the agency anywhere? >> we always look for that, sir. >> i am specifically with talking about this type of -- this is not the first time this has happened. it happened in new orleans, it happened in other locations. did you discover that this kind of thing was going on? it came to a crescendo here. >> we rely on gsa employees to tell us. we did not have hot line complaints about this conference. i do commend the deputy administrator for bringing it to our attention. >> she did that at the direction of the administrator? is that your understanding? >> that is my understanding. we have the administrator here. >> i am just asking you what your understanding was. >> idea the deputy administrator as the alter ego of the administrator -- i view the deputy administrator as the alter ego of the administrator. >> the first time was when susa