About your Search

. that authorized you to fund the port property and it expanded the range of eligible use of tax increments with respect to the america's cup 80 to ask the state if it would allow infrastructure districts to capture the state that quarter of property tax dollars that goes up to the state and 801199 the state approved our ability to capture that tax increment under certain circumstances. >> i want to provide a little bit of the background between the ports fund. the bureau ton act which transfers from state to city control requires that we maintain a separate harbor fund it's separate from the city's general fund. we've done analysis over time to look at property taxes and the cost of city services on port property. there's a bit of a gap. there's some sources that are urban leashed and don't generate tax precedes. and there's a cost of providing city services in that budget. and we try and track that over time. there's a general prim the harbors shouldn't subsidize or excuse me. the general fund shouldn't subsidize those services. the improvements to piers and seismic upgrades there in t
money? the biggest resource for san francisco and property taxes, it's over $1 billion a year. and we receive significant revenues from the business taxes and sales tax and hotel tax as well as other local sources. also important to know that about one out of every five dollars that san francisco spends comes from the state and federal government. when the federal government does things like implement a federal sequester. that has an impact here on san franciscans. if the state budget changes, that has an effect here on us. it's important to know that we have control over some of our revenue but not all of them. the mayor shared with you our five-year budget outlook. and mentioned the first two years. this is the fourth chart over with the red and black. the red bars show you how much our expenditures are projected to grow in the next five years and the black bars. we project over the five years we will have 13% more revenue, it's a strong economy. and at the same time our expenditures are expected to grow by 25%. so the gap between the growth in expenditures and revenue is what creat
cover that. first the changes to the matrix on page 4 we've added ab 41 from san mateo, a new taxing authority to fund opportunities, authorizes sales tax to be voted upon within that mpo region. we are recommending a watch and we'll know better how it looks like it's going to go. this bill has bounced from natural resources to rules committee to local government. so it's been a bouncing bauchl -- ball. it's on a matrix and we'll be watching it and if it comes back stronger at a later day. we recommending deletion ab 680 had been a spot measure and amended recently to apply a state route which has no applicability to san francisco bay area for your policy so we are recommending taking it off the matrix. a recent amended measure is being recommend today add ab 738 on page 7 of the matrix. it tends to provide a liability shield for employees of agencies that are developing bike plans. it sounds like a much needed simplification. we need to take a look at the bill at more depth to see how it fares in its first committee and finally as a watch position we are recommending the addition o
70 percent of san franciscans. i'm talking to you as a instructor. i want you to use the parcel taxes to be used for that purpose. it says that the taxes will prevent layoffs and to provide affordable qualify education for citizens. this is what i'm asking you to do and your resolution is going to help do that. now i committed might have to pay $632 for the next 8 years to maintain the quality of the education and i'm asking you to help us see that those funds are being used for what's intend. as a teacher for over 26 years i've never seen this. for faculties and students are being ignored. i feel fine we're not just the ones who are being ignored. now i want to continue to help my students. i'm tooech too non-credit classes this semester and students are being negatively impacted >> so, please wrap up. >> i'm asking you in our resolution i said that the city college of san francisco is crucial to the committee and social development of san francisco. i'm urging you to affirm that by moving the resolution forward >> i'm a native of san francisco. i got involved with this movement b
paying taxes which are the law by the irs making transactions of a thousand dollars or more remember this applies to taxi drivers or anybody. i could give you some more if you are interested >> thank you. next speaker, please and a (calling names). >> herbert senior citizen at risk. i noticed the last meeting the conduct of the participants were incriminated upon. the question i would like to propose if a bicyclists had their my case lanes removed on the street there would be such outrage you would have to call in the tax squad. the thing about this the parking spaces are being defended by those people and its endsable. the fact is people only shop once a week in contrast to people they could be making a thousand dollars in a purpose and those parking spaces are always in demand and so to remove them is really very destructive. i feel the bicyclists feeling is today hope street tomorrow the world. it will not hamper bicycling at all also in respect to the accident bicyclists have been struck how many of them went against the red light. we have to statistics about that. and one thi
and county for the cost of those elections so the school is charged if there's a partial tax and those are based on the actual costs of the inclusion of the items in the ballot and the voting cards address so forth. for fiscal 11, 12 they charged $284,000 this was for the candidate. this was charging for the discounted rate and that number it one through 7. and the public i tilts commission also charges the community college 2 hundred and 407 thousand for the lease of the southeast community facility and however the city pays rent to the excellently for that the college pace 2 hundred and 7 thousand and the puc subsidies the power so the total cost to the excellently in the departments proximate $2.26 million in this past fiscal year on the second page. there's some detail on the elections in prior years it ranges between $20,300,000 depending upon the items on the voter pamphlet and the last item identifies money that the human agencies gives to the college and that amounts to about $2.8 million. so again, it's charges for services they're not in kind their actual services that are pr
of the tax exempt obligations by the kaeft enterprise development authority in an aggregate principal amount not-to-exceed $9 million finance and refinance various capital facilities owned by the progress foundation. >> we will hear from the controller's office of public demands. >> good morning, members of the budget and finance committee my name is (inaudible) and this approves the tax exempt of interest and it is a refunding of prior obligations for savings. and the resolution acknowledges that the public hearing was held by our office and should we have any questions on the project itself there are representative to answer the questions. there is no fiscal payment for the city and the city is not responsible for the repayment on those. >> thank you for the clarifications. any questions? >> we will open it up to public comment? does anybody want to comment on item three? step up. okay. public comment is closed. we move to item three forward with recommendation and we can do so without objection. >> could you call item four? >> resolution urging the retirement board of the employee retirem
for public land. san franciscans for fair taxes and better city services. yes on e, coalition of [speaker not understood] labor unions and tech companies. keep san francisco green. no on prop a, coalition of ecology, labor, business and environmentalists, major funding by [speaker not understood]. [speaker not understood]. rodrigo santos [speaker not understood] 2012. reelect supervisor david chiu 2012. protect our benefits, teachers, nurses, neighbors supporting eric mar for 2012 sponsored by san francisco labor council, san francisco labor council, labor and neighbors independent expenditure political action committee, building owners and managers association of san francisco political action committee, expenditures a.k.a. boma s.f. p-a-c ie. san francisco for women accountability supervisor opposing christina olague 2012. coalition for a safer california. committee on jobs, government reform fund. san francisco democratic county central committee. mayor ed lee for san francisco committee. coalition for sensible government major funding by san francisco association of realtors. san fran
will be increasing and decreasing on a budget. the first item is our prop k sales tax revenue. this amount was budgeted at 77.5 million, but as of january 14, we collected $2 million in sales tax revenue. we recommend we increase it by $7 million. then we have the corridor investment study. since the last budget we were able to obtain $81,000 and san francisco state university and general properties of the galleria. we anticipate spending about $63661 for the grant activity. in august of 2012 we were able to obtain a grant for $1.5 million. we will increase federal revenues and decrease other revenues by $251, 892 dollars. next we have the project, we are experiencing a total amount of $91,000 for next year. during the year we were able to obtain $434, 531. the treasure island mobility mansion, the item you just heard before, this item, we received a $500,000 federal grant from mtc. we will be spending approximately $64, 101 this year. this is the largest budget announcement. we are recognized $34.1 million revenues we'll be receiving from mtc. what happened is we anticipated this in the l
to the board of supervisors on board of supervisors file no. 130244 [health, business and tax regulations code - regulate and establish annual fees - cottage food operations] ordinance amending the health code, by adding section 452.1, to establish a procedure for regulating cottage food operations; amending the business and tax regulations code, by adding section 249.1a, to establish annual fees for cottage food operations; and making environmental findings. explanatory documents: bos file no. 130244 >> we have a presentation by richard lee dept. of public health. >> welcome >> i am not sure if you want to go through the document presented to staff last week or summarize. >> chair adams: summarize. >> this legalizes home kitchens were people can actually make food in their homes and sell retail to the general public which is totally different than what we are used to in environmental health. we actually have a lot of concerns about this regulation throughout the state; concern about the fact that people could make stuff at home which we don't have any control in terms , of how they are inspe
't notify people. first of all businesses are paying taxes so why can't we get all businesses from the tax rolls; secondly there are lists available to every neighborhood in business so it baffles me as a person who teaches direct marketing to uc berkeley . but they can't figure this out or take any suggestions for that that is extremely frustrating and part of the other problem is that they are doing a lot of their work out of the city. so for example when they do notify ,they are doing this out of hayward, and you can imagine that they would certainly hear this from me and they do and they promised they wouldn't do it again but so far we haven't had any other notification. so with the retail that we do have in the northeast mission we wanted to survive along with our pdr zone and at our meeting in the northeast mission we had quite it group from polk street came to our meeting a few weeks ago . and i guess the thing that startled us all is that we all have the same problems we all have the same complaints. we all have the same issues with the mta. i want to thank you so much for , our he
(sounds like), it will lay the and excise tax of one cent per fluid ounce of any beverage with added caloric sweeteners. the bill this legislation directs any money generated by the tax to childhood obesity ; prevention programs for the state of california the city obesity rates in california have more than tripled. obesity as long health applications including
enforcement. we'll be talking about that but you need those taxes the enforcements is a strategy to get to the process. the way i hope to approach this is to ask how many taxis and then a little bit of a side issue why is the sighed car not the solution. we ask ourselves that question, too, and we have an answer for you. then as the port structure there's a good solution we think are important and from there recommendations. as you know this is based 3 documents. i should review this is our general approach is to rely on multiple lines of studies. this is to get the local story and history it's difficult to get user voices so we use tourism hospitality and all the folks we talked to have their story. to reach out further we says drivers individualsly. in fact, a large sample was results by neighborhood. it was an informative reach. as economists we look at how it's structured. we look at other cities we have our model of taxi demand and we go out on the street so we did some extensive street observations. and you yourself have been looking at this for quite a while. we should start by d
are not final. they are due in april with property tax. so we haven't seen what that's going result in, but it typically we are on budget with that also. we'll know more next month. and just as a comparison between the previous fiscal year through march and this fiscal year it's 21.02 higher ant
have the overhead i want to show you may have seen that but this is the last issue of the united tax news letter with the picture of the mayor on the cover. i think he needs to be called out on this. because the mayor of this city as turned his back on - the city's own taxi industry and this regulatory agency by endorsing the operations of companies that are operating in the city unlawfully, unregulated, unlicensed. and for the mayor to do that i mean it seems disgrace full to me. those companies are providing uncontrolled competition. their numbers are growing day by day and the direction that is solution is taking of putting out more taxis to meet more of their vehicles to take back taxi share from us. i don't think that's going to work. there's a very influential article that goes back a few decades called the tragedy of the common sense where, you know, the farmers use a common area to grace their cattle and, you know, farmers this farmer puts another cow an and another farmer puts a cow on it and pretty soon that's their individual benefit to do it but the cows are staffing. we
hundred and 28 million and knowing in the 2008 clean and safe neighborhoods tax bond for the safety improvements repairs and renovations arrest after the bond we are currently completing last year in 2012 the citizens propped prospective b for 1 hundred and 55 million for san francisco clean and safe neighborhoods parks renovations and improvements. the original capital program budget needs at the beginning of 1999, was 4 hundred million. however, there are - there were - this was determined that it was not sufficient to be able to innovate all the facilities and office space sea as we see the development in that area. the funds at this point are $185 million as of march 31, 2013. i will bring you a little bit of background on how those 4 hundred million are not enough to innovate the repairs. in 2007 we the an evaluation of the 2 hundred parks and recreation centers and there's is program called come at the time the technology that the includes all the sufficient needs that we have. so it was determined after the statement the capital needs were 1 i pledge allegiance to the flag 7