at first we get our money back for putting our land value into this particular project and in the outyears we'll be able to use that revenue for o.p.p.er needs in the port's i.f.d. that means we can use that tax increment for public facilitieses that support the ports shoreline and we use that as revenue as well. we'll bring it back for questions and i'm sure adam and carly went go anywhere. >> good afternoon. director to beser. i'm adam van de water. you asked about our framework that we called the southern bayfront. we friended to you some time ago now back in january and may of 2016. but our office negotiates a number of development agreements both on public and private property throughout this sector. this is about a five-mile stretch of san francisco from mission creek to the brisbane border and we started this entire process some years back with the recognition that we are negotiating a future development but recognize there are already 36,000 people who live in this shaded yellow area and about 23,000 existing employees in this area. some of whom i recognize in the audience with us

costs with one-time dollars which would allow us to relieve some costs in the outyears of the program and could we reshuffle the dollars to essentially give us enough cushion that we can implement the program comfortably but have some cost relief in the out years? so that's the model that we're looking at and you'll see more on that in the next two weeks but where we are right now is that we think that we probably have the ability to make some of those changes as we're getting costs analysis in as part of the due diligence on the continued due diligence and the planning on the e.h.r. implementation. it does look like we could use more funding in the early years when we're in the thick of the implementation and that's where the tightness is in our budget so if we can program some dollars earlier that will give us a little bit more room to maneuver while we go through that intensive implementation period. and then we will need less contingency in the project once we get stagized and we go to our operating phase. so that's kind of the model that we're looking at to deal with that situati

some portion is spent for testing programs for future likely bond programs appearing in outyears of the city plan so by the time the bonds are coming to be sized, we have spent money on the testing and some of that can be repaid back to the city's general fund capital pot when we issue the bond, but that is sort of the process that is followed. and again, it's partly to the credit of this committee's oversight and capital planning committee process that that's done. and our bond sizing has improved. >> i'm just saying let's continue to set the bar a little higher and say the pre-bond stuff probably happened years and years ago and maybe no one was thinking about soil then and learn from our mistakes and say next time -- >> i think we can learn from our wins. the general hospital gives a lot of credit for pre-bond in keeping the project on budget and scope and that was 2008. this is a bond issue in 2016 and i think we spent over a million and a half dollars on prebond work but failed to do the seismic or soil in some cases. >> we don't know what we're building anyway. >> when the bonds w

approach makes budgeting balancing more seamless and allows for more accurate budget projection for the outyear. and regarding the constituent management system. we've included 185,000 after conducting a needs assessment for the constituent management system with board member offices. clerk of the board staff and i should give all of that credit to wilson ang. he has engaged with discussions with sales force and industry leader in providing customer relationship management, what we're calling the c.r.m., solution with whom the city has an enterprise agreement to evaluate the costs for configuration and implementation. the ongoing costs would be approximately $75,000 per year for software licensing fees, for contract management, technical support, security, a news leader, out reach and engagement component. there would be a one-time professional services cost for approximately $110,000 for architecture, data and set-up. they would work to issue a city-wide r.f.p. and procure a vendor for this xhoefm and there are no new f.t.e.s in our department in addition to no revenue changes. so, on to slide

we must make outyear improvements in our mandatory spending programs.trump, while he campaigned that he would not address that, that's something that i think he's got to work with his budget department and make recommendations on. stuart: if you were to suggest reining in a social program, the next time you're up for re-election your political opponent would demagogue you to death. he would say that you're starving children, that you're starving senior, that you're really hurting america, that you're not investing in america. that's what that person would say and, sir, that person has a fair chance of beating you. >> well, i understand that point, but you have an economy for the last ten years that's grown about 2% per year or less, and so economic growth is important. and we've had in our medicare program, for example, it's grown at about 6% per year. stuart: yeah. >> that's not sustainable. and we've not made the reforms either through the aca or any other way that are slowing that growth curve. and for me, for our future, for our grandchildren, innov

share with the committee your view of how nuclear here in the united states factors in in these outyears, whether it be traditional nuclear, or the advanced nuclear opportunities? >> thank you very much, madam chair. i think nuclear is a technology worldwide, which can provide electricity, uninterrupted. without emitting carbon emissions. but after -- it became a challenge in many countries to build new nuclear power plants. the challenge is not only there, the challenge is also in the financing part of the equation to build new nuclear power plants. and even some countries like in the united states where electricity demand is low, where the gas prices are low, where the renewables are growing, to find even getting the electricity generation from nuclear is a big challenge. unless governments don't take any measures. so for the new builds, in my view, it will be very difficult to go with the traditional nuclear power plants. small model reactors can provide the opportunity to address the project management risks and financing problems. so this can be a solution. if i go from -- and i bel

the cbo for the first couple years, which we think reflects reality, higher than cbo on a couple outyears. labor force productivity, the gdp numbers were less, but the capital numbers were four times what we expected. the capital investment, part of the tax bill you all voted for that we know we have to have in order to get the productivity growth. this is all part of plan, capital, investment leads to productivity growth, additional machinery, education and innovation. no downturn, keep in mind, all economic analyses are done like that, never know when the recession is coming. great recession now, we averaged over 3%. yes, we -- the depression in the middle of that. just about every period of time up until the 2007s or 8s, and we had that 3% even though we had dramatic downturns in the middle. >> but we didn't have a baby boom generation retiring as we do now. >> i look forward to doing this on the next flight home. thank you for your questions. >> end j ental lady from florida, ms. waszerman schultz. on the screen i would direct your attention to a tweet from the president that he wrote