% of the budget. is will now review the changes. we recommended for fiscal year 13-14 and 14-15 budgets. ms. landis? >> good afternoon, supervisors. deborah landis, deputy director at the board of supervisors. i have been asked to review the proposed budget changes that we have in our draft budget for fiscal year 13-14 and 14-15. as you can see, we have found some significant salary savings with the step adjustments from the third aid positions that were added in the current year -- excuse me, 12-13 budget. they're all added at top steps to the budget. and we are able to see some step savings there just under $2 80,000. so, that is definitely our largest change for the proposed budget for next year. to give a little bit of background each year's budget begins from the biggest budget. so, that's the current year budget plus annualized changes. for example, new positions added part way through the year or -- and those positions would have an additional cost the next year when they're annualized. also fro

my preference to have it as a priority for the budget, but that being said i think during the budget process last year a majority of the board members did vote to make sure that third a was in there and we budgeted it, it was also included in the second year budget as well. so, i would actually say that to be consistent with the budget we would want to include the third aid in the budget. >> yes, that was actually thinking about a fourth aid. just kidding. a third aid, i think that's the right way to go. i'm actually very happy with our decision last year to do that. so, we can continue that as part of the baseline. that will be great. >> okay. finally, the committee supporting the draft budget salary [speaker not understood] engagement position, can you just explain to me a bit how many folks are there at the moment, kind of what the trajectory has been on hiring, and how you're paying for it? >> thank you. currently there are three positions in the youth position. there are two that are filled probably in a year and a half ago, we removed the salary from the third position. the posi

>> so i will talk in terms of the budget. pam talked to you although it is part of the next group. >> part of the next presentation. >> if it is okay. >> but, yeah if it is part of the next presentation if that is okay with the public comment, there then we will answer those questions. with regard to the budget maybe you can. >> over the years, we have been funding starting several years ago, i mean that the individual who came up is correct that in the last grand jury report that was done on dbi one of the things is that we need to address technology and we have been doing that over the years. the funding is already existing within the budget, so to be able to talk about it a lot is some what redundant. but we have money set aside and sufficient funds set aside for the permit tracking system. we are doing a project that we are sharing the funds and we have sufficient funds set aside for upgrading all of our servers and putting them in a room that they can exist and be best taken care of that includes working with hsa and plan

why don't we go to the budget analyst's report? >> madame chair, supervisor avalos, on page 8 of our report, we point out that as shown in attachment 1,the wholesale customers total principal and interest payments to the ing over the 25-year term. we also point out that although the proposed $362.3 million [prao*-epl/] payment would cause puc to forego future interest earnings, through 2014-2013 [#34*-rbgs/] the wholesale customers have the right to pre-pay the balance owed on capital assets under the existing water supply agreement. plas reed recommend [tkwhra-eubgsz/] puc has submitted amended legislation to the committee on page [#1-e6/] our report. first of all we recommend that you approve the resolution for the approval and execution of the wholesale water revenue pre-payment and collection agreement. and we also [r-eplts/] that recommend that you delete line 10 and 11 on line 2 and replace it with "see administrative fund, the fund shall be maintained from july 1 2013 through the termination date of the wholesale water revenu

newman from the budget analyst office. as mr. kim has indicated, these funds were placed on reserve last april when sfmta came forward with proposal for issuing revenue bonds. and at that time, recently prior to that, the board of supervisors had approved the large motorola regional agreement that was a 12-year agreement with motorola to do a public safety regional data communication and radio communication system. and at that point, when the mta was coming forward, they raised a number of questions about how the sfmta project fit in with the regional motorola project and other city departments. there was a request to take a look at this and coordinate the efforts. as mr. kim has indicated, coit has looked at this and on october 18th recommended that the budget and finance committee release this reserve. we are therefore recommending approval of the release from the $1.6 million on reserve for the sfmta's radio system replacement project. however, i would also note that on october 18th, the coit also approved several other

the senate, no budget. . so what we decided to do was take a piece of legislation from tremendous minority, the no budget budget, no pay, legislation, to add it to this so we can get to discussing this nation's fiscal house, which is not in order, madam speaker. we should defeat this motion to recommit, it's premature, prejudging a budget that does not yet exist. so let's get rid of this motion to recommit, be serious about this short-term extension so we can make sure we have the debate we deserve. how are we going to prevent a debt crisis? how are we going to balance the budget? how are we going to have growth and opportunity in this society? how are we going to save medicare? how are we going to make sure we can pay our bills and stop the government living beyond our means? how are we going to secure a future for our children and grandchildren. that's the debate surrounding the budget. this is premature, it applies to a budget that hasn't been written yet which will be written on a baseline that doesn't exi

the second thing is since ryan issued his budget a year ago, the congressional budget office who does the forecast of what the deficit will be, that you have to shrink to get to balance, cbo has changed its forecast. it is more optimistic. it now forecasts $750 billion less in deficits over ten years, with no changes in policy than it did a year ago. so ryan is going to take advantage of the fact that the amount by which you have to shrink the deficit to get to balance is smaller than it looked like a year ago. the third one is interesting. remember, ezra, in ryan's budget a year ago he took credit for all the savings in medicare that are in the affordable care act, then he and romney disowned them. i bet they're right back in budget like they were last year. he will do all of those things, and then on top of them he will have huge cuts in, as you said, the part of the budget that is everything other than defense and everything other than entitlement programs, where education and environmental protection and food safety is. and the advantage for him there is he just lowers the total d

they are being paid for within the project budget so it's not increase to the project budget. we recommend approval. >> thank you very much colleagues any other questions? seeing none, would like to open up for public comment. any members of the public wish to comment on item number three, please step forward. >> hello. good morning budget and finance. are you really happy here in this hospital rebuild of general hospitals the game? [singing]. ♪ you try to talk it over but the words just go and fade. on this lonely hospital road you gave searching but not finding, hospital understanding anywhere. i think you're lost in a general hospital masquerade. you try to talk it over but the words just go away on the city clouds of gray. searching but not finding hospital understanding anywhere. i think you're lost in a hospital masquerade. lost in a hospital masquerade. budget wise. >> thank you mr. paulson. any other members of the public wish to comment, speak or sing on item number three? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> i like to say that's probably one of the toughest song

we have taken a very close look at the budget and we have looked down some of the traditional budgets and there has been a consensus that biomedical research is important. we have increased our biomedical research in of look at areas like medical research. we of the research into technologies that will make us the most competitive countries with the technology of the future. we put money into basic research. we have to have a comprehensive research agenda in order for us to be in place where the president says we can out of eight other countries. it has been an area of historic strength in the u.s.. today, we spend more as a country on research than anybody in the world. there are certain aspects that don't happen in the private sector alone because there is too much risk and to many experiments and things that are not going to become commercially viable, but need to go to the process to get that out there. we have a tissue -- a history of transferring from government funded research to private sector development and we have tried a budget that will continue what we think is the best

s rescore of the president's submitted budget. the president's budget is coming late. the administration has not said when they are going to submit a budget, so we don't know when c.b.o. will have the opportunity to score it. usually takes about three weeks to score it. then you get your final baseline with what you normally write your budget. so that's the issue here. timing. but since c.b.o. will give us their newer baseline, we call the january baseline, in february, that gives us something to start with. >> and i read an article the other day that says one of the things that resulted as -- has come about is the result of what we did january 1, i guess it was, was that we should not be having arguments about baseline. that we hope that's been cleared up and that will be a useful thing going forward. i know it is a difficult thing for you to explain and me to explain sometimes to people, but i just want to applaud you all for what you're doing and want to thank chairwoman miller for coming. and mr. brady, it's always nice to see you. thank you very much. i yield back.

s rescore of the president's submitted budget. the president's budget is coming late. the administration has not said when they are going to submit a budget, so we don't know when c.b.o. will have the opportunity to score it. usually takes about three weeks to score it. then you get your final baseline with what you normally write your budget. so that's the issue here. timing. but since c.b.o. will give us their newer baseline, we call the january baseline, in february, that gives us something to start with. >> and i read an article the other day that says one of the things that resulted as -- has come about is the result of what we did january 1, i guess it was, was that we should not be having arguments about baseline. that we hope that's been cleared up and that will be a useful thing going forward. i know it is a difficult thing for you to explain and me to explain sometimes to people, but i just want to applaud you all for what you're doing and want to thank chairwoman miller for coming. and mr. brady, it's always nice to see you. thank you very much. i yield back.

>> it will have to be part of the budget conversation. what we know is that we're implementing a number of software enhancements. so this is going to certainly be changing the way that people work in our department and gross receipts tax will also be part of that. as we see that need, we'll be returning through the budget process. >> in terms of your staffing, you have the treasurer/tax collector with a ton of different taxes that you currently collect, fees that you currently collect and none of those are necessarily changing. where your big changing is from the payroll to the gross receipts and you have a number of staff that i imagine are currently in the payroll side of the calculation and they would continue to provide that service for the time being as we phase out one system to another? as part of your thinking, with staffing levels moving forward, how do you imagine sort of the phasing in and out of one division or purpose to the gross receipts? >> well, for our taxpayer assistance, for our auditors, for your investigations, for ou

budget every year. we haven't seen any solutions offered by the president on how to get the budget balanced, pay down the debt, and no budget in four years. we need to figure out how to grow the economy, how to get opportunity. and if we have a debt crisis like they had in europe, everybody gets hurt. that's what we want to avoid. >> last week, senator schumer said, we'll do a budget. >> great. finally. it's been four years. >> but this is what he said has to be in it. >> you're going to need more revenue as well as more cuts to get the deficit down. i've talked to leader reid. budget claire murray. we're going to do a budget this year, and it's going to have revenues in it. and our republican colleagues better get used to that. >> so this is still a fight between how much spending cuts and how much taxes. the president got his -- >> well, simpson 3w0-bowles sai let's get rid of the high tax rates. the president doesn't want that. you had $1 trillion in tax increases with obama care. new tax increases at the beginning of this month. and now they are calling for even more tax increases, and they are not c

but those bills were not the budget. shell versions of the president's budget put forward by republicans, designed to fail. they were not budgets this he were just politics. republicans did put out their own budget plan in the form of paul ryan's path to prosperity. but bipartisan bickering resulted in no progress there, either. part of the reason our government has been able to survive without a budget is because of something called continuing resolutions. which are essentially an extension of the existing budget. so it is not true as many of you enjoyed tweeting me, that the u.s. doesn't have a budget. we just haven't had a new one in some years and that is a bad thing. it's also not true that obama's budget got no votes, because that wasn't obama's budget. the sad truth is that we do not have a budget in the united states, a new one and there are consequences for that, not the least of which are the dozen or so close calls with government shutdowns in the past few years. >>> plus, those continuing resolutions, they're

this is just the base discretionary budget. the second line is what it would have been under the original sequester. the third line is what it would be now under the revised sequester. so i'd point out to you a couple of things. in fy-13 you see that the amount of funding dod would have is higher because the sequester is not as deep. but in fy-14 it's actually lower. this is part of how they paid for the delay in sequestration. so the total, um, reduction in sequestration i showed you at the beginning was 24 billion -- half for defense, half for nondefense. how did they pay for that? because this was supposed to be a deficit reduction bill. they said, well, of that 24 billion, half of it's going to come from this change in the tax cold, something they're doing -- tax cold, something they're doing with roth iras. the other half they're paying for by reducing the budget caps. they reduced the budge p caps two billion in the security styled, two million in the nonsecurity side for fy-13. in fy-14 they're using the other definition,

i think that very much supports the budget request. and i think that in general terms, that the commission should not acsaid accede and probably not make additional requests for funds, but note there is additional work that could be done with other resources. and hey, i will continue to say if there is a need for a cut, i think we should reevaluate the cost of being on sfgovtv and reserve those funds for only those public hearings like the mirkarimi matter last year which were of great public concern. i think tonight's meeting is a good example of why we don't need to be on tv. sorry. i would also note that some of the programs that the commission runs have fees that don't fully cover their costs, and i have said many times before, whether it's the consultant program, the lobbyist program or other things, that we should either set fees to cover the full costs or at least know what the full costs are, and acknowledge that we are supporting those programs, with general fund dollars to some degree. and where there are differences try to le

so that is the schedule for the upcoming budget cycle. just want to start with a high level overview of what the mayor has given his guidance for the upcoming budget cycle. this is issued a few weeks ago. i wanted to highlight a few of the major things in that document. so, first,? b, projected its shortfall for the city's general fund at just over $129 million in fiscal year 13-14, and just over $2 $263 million in 14-15. this is current revenue assumptions across all city departments. these shortfall figures were much, much higher in about a year ago, when -- a year and a half ago when the city first issued its first five year financial plan document. and over the course of that time, through some revenue improvements and cost saving adjustments for ongoing solutions the city has managed to bring that shortfall projection down to where it is today. there are still many uncertainties that exist, such as the continued slow and steady growth of the economy, continuing cost escalations for employees health and retirement costs, the state budg

okay. >> i'll take up the 43.254 million is the estimate for the phase two budget. i think why the costs are so high, i would ask kim to give more details, i think that it's a combination of the large site, the cost of reconstruction, and the maritime improves required for the operation and then having many other parts including security a very robust security program, major public access improvemnt and is a two and-a-half acre park and it's all of those thing that get you a hundred and senior and 11 million-dollar project and so that is my answer for why it's so expensive. >> okay so am i reading this bronchbecause the request is for one 25 million. >> yes can you describe why it's more than the actual budget? >>> yeah, when we came back i think last time we were up here in front of the port commission, one of the other projects came into be on our contract. that was the american's cup infrastructure improves on some of the other pier and is that is $14.7 million. so when we come back to talk about the increase for turner, we have to consider that it's on top of tha

today it's 26% of the state budget. t's soaking up every dollar or almost every dollar that would go to higher education. as a result, students around the country are wondering well, why are my tuition fees going up? it's because of washington's medicaid program requiring states to make decisions that soak up money that otherwise would go for colleges and universities. in our state of tennessee, 30 years ago, the state paid 70% of the cost of going to the university of tennessee. today it pays 30%, and medicaid is the chief culprit. now, everyone knows this. i mean, the president's own debt commission has told him this and suggested a way to deal with it. 40 or 50 of us on both sides of the aisle have been working together, meeting together and having dinner together, writing bills together trying to come up with plans to do it. senator corker, my colleague from tennessee, has developed a bill which i am his prime cosponsor which says over the next ten years we have found a way to strengthen medicare and other entitlemen

we'll be looking at the budget that comes forward with a lot of interest. so thank you very much for all of your work. do we have any other items before us? >> that completes the agenda. >> before we adjourn i want to take the time for everybody serving with me on the bmx committee. budget and finance committee and thank the mayor's office and of course victor. with that, thank you all and we are adjourned. [ gavel ] >> happy holidays to everybody. great. good morning everybody. happy holidays. we are here today to announce the launch of a three-month state wide out woach check 'n go borrower who may be entitled to significant restitution and charge and fees they paid on their loans this program is among the terms of an agreement that my office that this offs nailed in 2000 search. that lawsuit charges check and do with a represent a bank scheme which skewed the annual interest rate of 36ers and in fact chex and go carry rates as high judge 400%. our cement requires check 'n go requires them to refunder 4.3 also million dollars but it only requires a recent

the white house. i want to get very specific. this budget is a down payment was one of the things i believe you said yesterday. a down payment on mortgaging our future. it exacerbates the problem, it doesn't actually solve it. i want to talk about part of your testimony on page 6. "to stay on a path for sustainable deficits -- that seems like an oxymoron to me. we are paying $600 million a day just in interest. i would appreciate at a future date to please try to find -- try to define sustainable deficit. to the average american and to me, it doesn't make sense. we have no sustainable deficit. you say on the order of 3% of gdp, we make tough choices to identify more than a trillion dollars in savings. two-thirds from spending reductions. where does the other third come from? as i understand it, it is from tax increases, is it not? >> i'm happy to answer all questions. >> just the last one. >> the net savings come from a lot of provisions but a lot of it comes from the provision that would pay for the alternative minimum tax. that would reduc

>> so the way the budget process works is you have cash that comes in the door, but you have to have dget appropriation. so we have excess cash that's above and beyond what we assumed in the budget but we need budget appropriation to spend ut i, which is what we're asking for. little on the workload side, what we are seeing is a backlog of permits associated with this revenue. so what we're asking for is permission to spend this money is we can address the backlog. if we don't have that permission the backlog just sits there because we don't have the resource to fund it. also, our revenue actually sits in the general) nú fund. so basically when the fiscal year closes out, all that cash -- it's a little complicated, it would basically refer to fund balance but the city is not allowed to spend it for non-planning activities so what would end up happening is the mayor's office would take our general fund away from us, and this would supplant the general fund that we have. >> commissioner moore: thank you for explaining that because it's the philosophy of use it or lose it. so it goes aw

we are currently on item seven, discussion and possible action on the proposed budget. >> that is to keep you all awake. >> yeah, the air-conditioning is on. >> is there anything that we can do about that? >> you are trying to kill me. >> it is a conspiracy. >> can i go ahead? >> go ahead. >> you can go ahead. >> deputy director of administrative services. today is the first meeting of the 13, is 14, and 15. proposed budget, i have what i hope is a short presentation. so i think that i can talk forever about this budget, but i am want to thank a couple of people, i want to thank our acting finance director gale for all of her work on this and she may be if you come up with some mind-bending kinds of questions, she has all of the facts in her head. and i also want to thank acting director huey and the other two directors ed and dan for working with their staff and turning around their requests so quickly. let me do a little bit of the way back machine. and this, the city went to a two-year budget last year. currently it is a what we will call a ruling budget, which means that we are no

the budget game turned out to be very popular though; we had over 800 submittals. also submittals in spanish and chinese as well. the premise of this game was a participant would go to the site and would have a gauge a counter that would show the amount of transportation revenue that we expect to have through 2040. the participant would make choices about how to invest that revenue in operations and maintenance, street maintenance, walking, biking, signals, capital expansion projects. the participant could choose whether or not they wanted to add additional revenue, raise taxes or fees in some way, have additional revenue to their budget and they could see what additional investment could be afforded if they made that choice. this is a summary other groups that we reached. i would note that we did ask for volunteer information about participants' zip codes, and incoming demographic information. only about 55 percent of the participants actually gave us that. what you are seeing here is a map of the 55 percent of the participants who did give their zip code noting ab

they have yet to pass the budget. it's time for them to get to work and pass a budget. >> families' budget, local governments' budget, businesses' budget, the federal government ought to have a budget. the senate hasn't passed a budget in four years. that's wrong. we have a fiscal crisis in this country. it's hurting our country and guaranteeing that our children and grandchildren have a diminished future. we can't do that, we can't keep on spending money. we know a debt crisis is coming. not a question of if, but when. pass a budget to fix the problem. the house has acted. we need the senate to join this debate so we can start debating the solutions about how to fix our fiscal crisis instead of debating whether there is a fiscal crisis in the first place. >> i will take a couple of questions. >> speaker boehner, the next deadline is the sequester. what does the house plan to do on the sequester and have you had any conversations with the president or harry reid so far? >> i have not. the sequester is going to go into

the goals is not to have a balance budget, the goal is to have a budget that balances in ten years. les which is e s we have a -- government that the american people are with us on this. and they're just reconsequencessing because they're worried about having a fight over the debt ceiling right now they would rather have a fight over the debt ceiling. i don't have a problem with that. i need to hear that commitment and what we've been asking and they're going to be asked again today at the conference meeting to make the commitment that we're going be on a path to balance in ten years. and if they're willing to fight with us on that, i think i can stand for that. >> thank you. we talked a lot about the 10-year balance -- [inaudible] what specifically does that mean. replace the cuts with other cuts or are they just going let the sequester take effect? what is your understanding? >> the number is 9 eu7 with the -- 9874 with the sequester. it's sticking to that number letting the sequester take effect or replacing the, you know, the cuts and military and other programs. with other cuts

, which is a two year budget, as you recall, we do a two year budget every year, so this is the second year of last year's budget but we have to do a budget from fiscal year 13-15, i wanted to remind you that as you heard last week through the supplemental appropriation, our fee revenues are anticipated to be much higher than we budgeted for this fiscal year and we will see that 3% volume increase in our applications, we are anticipating volume levels to be the same, i'm trying to be a bit conservative and not assume the same level of growth next year so we're not assuming more revenues, but we are being more conservative in our projection for next year and not assuming the same strong growth that we had last year. so, this does propose to increase staffing levels by about 8fte next year and 9 in the fiscal year 14-15, and we will focus on a number of updates from the historic preservation and general plan, transportation analysis, communications and public outreach which are some of the programs that we like to fund with this additional staff. with that, i'll turn it over to ke

the budget --. >> sorry can i end up just for a moment you might want to switch the camera off. the search. okay. . >> so face so phase one is fully funded and $800 million from the c o c and so 36-point the phase one budget is fully ponded for phase two we have 39.42 secured -- not secured but identified that includes the geobond the 2012 joe bond the northwest east blaysa has been a long public act park included in the water front use plan and then we went out with the bon want voters were aware that these would be a source that the bond would support that park and we are proposing issues of 2.2 million for phase two and 8 million from the operating funds and 7.3 will be repaid by a passenger facility charge and this is a per head charge that we would assess on passengers. san diego and seattle have both put in p s c's to retain very many and so it's anywhere between two and $6 per head and it depends on the life that we want the repayment between nine and 30 whereas ask so the lower the charge, the locker the fee and the lower the charge the higher the fee and so we also have