there's 15,539 of unexpended encumbrances, when you add that number that you mentioned plus the -- the 987,702, comes up to 2,200,541. -- and i commented to the committee that our savings recommended salary savings result in less than one third of one percent of your budget of 219 million dollars. >> supervisor farrell: can you clarify exactly what the amount in dispute is. >> the bulk of the amount that is in dispute, it is timely to point out on the last item that we refer to, the work of my chief financial officer who has been doing this for a while is right on the money. we can to you in april same we thought we would need 466 it was held because it was a question about whether or not that would be needed; we came within 19,000 dollars. the main point of contention -- at this point we would be willing to concede to a total of 627,329 off of what mr. rose and his staff is asking for. the bulk of the contention is the salary piece. we have a fundamental disagreement. we provided numbers and calculations over to the budget analyst office. we agree that we will be hiring people and hav

in addition, we recommend closing out prior year unexpended encumbrances which allow a return of 17,2 12 from the library preservation fund library special revenue fund and the etf request fund. together these recommendations would result in 557,83 2 savings in 13-14. our recommended reductions ~ total 5,7 34 in fiscal year 14-15. of that amount 497 34 are ongoing savings and 10,000 in one-time savings. that would still allow an increase of approximately 3.2 million or 3.2% and the department's 14-15 budget. and, again, they are not general fund reductions. as i understand it, the department concurses with our recommendations. >> thank you, mr. rose. colleagues, any questions for mr. rose on his report? supervisor breed. ~ >> the question i asked before, is it possible to use our general fund allocation and allow the budget -- allow the department to redistribute those reduction in funds to meet that particular need? >> is that a question for mr. rose? >> supervisor, if i understand your question, it's savings -- should the board make savings and reductions in this department's budget

we recommend closing out also prior year unexpended general fund encumbrances which would allow the return of 15,339 to the agenda fund. so, those two amounts combined result in a savings of 1,315,747 to the general fund in 13-14. and on page 41 i recommend the rep roeducks total a million 664,7 78.14 50 of that amount, [speaker not understood] are ongoing savings and 210,90 4 ongoing savings. these reductions would still allow an increase of 10,2 41,733, or 3% of the department's 14-15 budget. and we will certainly work with the department in the ensuing week and report back to the committee. ~ >> thank you very much. chief, anything else to add at this time? >> no, thank you very much. >> okay, thank you. up next we have department of emergency management, ann crone enberg. thank you for your patience here. ann is not next in line, went to pick up her grandson. so, we're going to get moving. >> also included would be item number 9. >> could you call item 9, thank you? >> item 9, ordinance amending the police code to transfer administration of the police emergency alarm ordinance from the

. ~ and on page 50 we note that we are also recommending closing out prior year unexpended general fund encumbrances which would allow the return of $625 to the general fund. so, together these recommendations will result in 78,181 savings to the general fund in 13-14 and for 14-15 our recommended reductions total 3,6 81 which are ongoing savings. would still allow an increase of 74,7 79, or .01% in the department's 14-15 budget. >> thank you. any questions in it sounds like, ms. crone enberg, you're in agreement with mr. rose. >> total agreement, yes. >> so, i see no other comments. mr. clerk, we have called item number 9 as well with this. so, can we accept the amendments by mr. rose and the budget and legislative office? colleagues, without objection, thank you. and, mr. clerk, do we need to act on item number 9? >> this item will be continued until friday for public comment. >> okay. thank you so much, ms. crone enberg. >> thank you, supervisors. >> so, next hep is our public defender jeff hadaji. >> do you want to see us next week or are we through? >> i believe we don't need to see you next we