Will have transfer tax above what we projected in the report on what we see in the current month to date. Under our reserve provisions, 75 of that goes, is deposited to reserves. There are other offsetting revenues that we would also want to be mindful of. Im trying to think of theres a few that kind of, i have my eye on. One is sales tax, one is interest earnings, kind of like a sleeper revenue, but we assumed pretty substantial growth in that, so i dont know where we are going to end the year with that. So, possible news to the good thats easy to know about, and mindful of things that go the other direction. Thank you. The shortest possible answer as always, we do a review of revenue assumptions, the change in may after the revenues that we use to balance, or proposed the balance the mayors budget and a report the next couple of weeks. Thats those additional revenues are in consideration for this budgeting of this fiscal year, is that correct . We are in the process of reviewing whats changing in june, and well have a report for you on that by the time, before you complete your deliberations. Whether theres good news or not there depends on kind of all of this analysis of the next couple of weeks. Okay. I would like to include that in our deliberations, quite frankly. So, we can hear that report when its available, that would be great. Thank you very much. Any other questions for Controllers Office . If not, thank you very much. Appreciate that. Lets hear from done, the budget late legislative analyst. Good morning, chair fewer, members of the committee. Dan gonesure. Harvey rose is the budget analyst, i dont want to take his position away from him. A brief presentation on the budget overview report, with released on monday. We started this report a year ago just to give the board kind of an overview of what we are seeing in the budget. So its high level, details in the reports next week, growth, the fact that the budget growth overall is faster than the growth in population of the city as well as inflation rates in the local economy. Table one, the budget has grown by 37. 2 over the last five years, and the average annual growth rate expenditures was 8. 2 . That compares to the population growth of 2 over that period. And the Consumer Price index for the San Francisco metropolitan area was 3. 4 . Similarly, general fund growth is also faster than population growth and inflation. The annual growth rate and fund budget expenditures, 7. 4 per year. Position growth in the budget, and the average annual growth rate of positions overall during the fiveyear period, 1. 9 . In the fiscal year 201920 proposed budget, positions are proposed to grow by 610. 72 fulltime equivalent positions that represent 2 growth from the fiscal year 201819 budget. And we also looked at not just the number of positions, but the spending on salary and Fringe Benefits, and saw that budgeted salaries and mandatory Fringe Benefits have grown at a higher rate than the actual number of positions that have been added. Total budgeted salary and mandatory Fringe Benefits grown by 25 over the last five years, from 4. 5 billion to the 1920 budget, shown on table three, on page three of the report, and compares to 7. 7 growth overall over that period in positions. Similarly as shown in table four on page four of our report, general fund salary and Fringe Benefits have grown at a, 27. 9 over fiveyear period, a bit faster than the 25 overall. And we noted that a large chunk of that i think is faster growth in mandatory fringe for general Fund Positions versus overall positions in the city. General Fund Position growth, as i am, the mayors proposed budget in 1920 increases the general Fund Positions by 300. 57 f. T. E. S. Largest increases in general Fund Supported positions in fiscal year 1920, police, 73 positions. Human services agency, 64 positions. And Administrative Services with 45 new general fundsupported positions. We also reported briefly on salary savings as we have reported previously, City Departments spend from 2 to 3 less in general Fund Salaries and mandatory Fringe Benefits than budgeted each year. In 1718, over 30 million, and 45. 5 million on table five on the report. The projections are further refined closer to the end of the year, but what we had as of june 1st. We also reported briefly on the discretionnary general fund. So, the citywide General Fund Budget is increasing by 10. 5 , from 5. 5 billion in the current year to 6. 1 billion in the proposed fiscal year 201920 budget, and after set asides and base lines, 3. 6 billion in discretionary general Fund Revenues in 1920. We also briefly reported on budgetary reserves as you have also heard from the Controllers Office. These reserves include the rainy day reserve, the general reserve and the budget stablization reserve. According to the majors budget book, 459 million at the end of 1718, 9. 2 of general Fund Revenues, and projected to reach target levels of 10 of revenues during the current year. We also reported briefly on the impact of the november 2018 ballot propositions. Programs in the department of homelessness and Supportive Housing to be funded by proposition c, impose a half percent gross receipts tax on businesses with revenues above 50 million to fund homeless programs. Out of this legislation, its held up in litigation, the board adopted additional legislation to allow companies to waive the rights to a refund if proposition z is deemed unconstitutional, in exchange for 10 credit on their taxes on those funds paid under proposition c. I just want to make quick clarification in this section, in our, the top of page six, the second sentence says that the proposed fiscal year 201920 budget includes 110. 3 million expenditures with proposition c waiver revenues, and transfer from the general fund. In fact, 20 million is assumed from the proposition c gross receipts waiver, and the remainder is advance from the general fund if proposition c prevails in court. In the we did report briefly on the eras surplus allegations. It includes additional reimbursements for excess contributions to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund in the amount of 251. 81 million. As shown in table seven on page seven of our report, the mayor proposed to spend the majority of the discretionary on Affordable Housing, homelessness, childcare facilities, vision 0 and Emergency Response equipment, among others. Just briefly on the use of onetime funds to balance the budget. As you are aware, the fiveyear financial plans notes the growth is not to match the expected expenditures. 154. 4 million in Prior Year Fund balance as a source of funds. Onetime fund balance allows the city to avoid shortterm deficits, over the longterm the structural deficit continues to increase. And finally, we did report briefly summarizing the boards Budget Priority areas and the proposed budget, and as you know in april and may of this year the board adopted three resolutions, and the citywide Budget Priorities adopted by the board include resolution 22419, covering homelessness and Affordable Housing issues. Resolution 224. 19, Behavioral Health priorities, and resolution 26219, covering cleaning green streets, Small Business support and increases for nonprofit workers and that concludes my summary of my report. Im available for any questions. Great. Any questions for our him . Seeing none, thank you very much. Appreciate that. So, before we start our departmental presentations, i think madam clerk, would you remind us, i know you called item number 6. Would you call it again so we are going to take that department out of order. Thank you. So, mr. Wright, we have not finished those items yet. We will have Public Comment after we conclude items number 3 and 4. Now we are going to hear item number 6, and we will hear Public Comment after we hear a presentation from item number 6. So, please, madam clerk, read item 6. 20192020 office of the Community Investment and infrastructure, operating as Successor Agency to the redevelopment agency. We have with us nadia sesa, and the director of the office of Community Investment and infrastructure. Madam clerk. Set the timer at five minutes. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning, supervisors. My name is nadia sesae, executive director of Community Investment and infrastructure. I should profess its a separate legal entity while under the legislative authority under the board of supervisors and the mayor. So, with that, due to we have three areas, at completion, provided 22,000 new housing units, approximately 30 of those will be Affordable Housing, 14 million square feet of new commercial space and over 400 acres of parks and open space. Our goal is to increase San Franciscos housing supply and support a diverse, equitable and inclusive city. This fiscal year we are expecting to complete major infrastructure. Chase center would be completed this fiscal year, 1920. Headquarters, four buildings, and three medical buildings in mission bay. 250 room hotel on block one in mission bay. Start construction of the folsom Street Construction project with public works the project manager, and also pursue or stack design on open space in transbay with public works being the project manager as well. Working with our developer in Candlestick Point to do the redesign of Candlestick Point and get some approvals and then at the request of some of our Development Partners in mission pay and transbay, looking at entitlement for office space, hotel and residential units. Most will be coming through the board in the coming year. And high level for Affordable Housing, focus on the last item in fiscal year 1920, be in construction and development for over 4,300 housing units. Of that, 30 will be affordable. Our budget is 640 million, with majority of that from prior period authority because of the amount of time it takes to deliver these capital projects. 182 million from fund balance, major source of funds, property taxes. Expect to issue bonds of up to 40 million, and developer payment is also a source. Majority of expenditure will be for Affordable Housing, approximately 45 , and 42 of the budget would be for infrastructure and reimbursements for, to develop infrastructure expenses, Community Development and work force, and majority of our portfolio, debts as we fund these programs. Year over year change is 104 million, and this is due to decreasing issuances and slow down in our spend down on existing affordable loans, partially offset by increase in property taxes, and the uses due to the timing of developments, so that reduces our loans as well as infrastructure on mission bay, which is slowing down, because its the most mature project area for you. Theres no change in f. T. Count, we have four positions vacant and in responding to the request from our chair, we have also included Performance Measures. We expect to complete 1,114 units among the various project areas, expect to complete 11 open space and we expect to meet opportunities for local businesses and workforce, target 30 of contracts throughout that year. With that, im happy to respond to any questions. Colleagues, comments, questions . I believe this department has no changes in total f. T. E. S. They use no general fund dollars and also your expenditures would decrease by 14 in Affordable Housing loans and debt payments as you are in a winding down phase. Any other questions or comments . If not, Public Comment. Any members of the public would like to comment on number 6. Seeing none, i make a motion to move this to make a motion to move this to ok. Open Public Comment. Mr. Wright, two minutes. Public comment, City Attorney is here, talk about redevelopment, im going to show you how you are not following your own rules and regulations and how you discriminate against the most vulnerable people, homeless in the street. Rules and regulation, b of section 33413, the Community Redevelopment law, at least 15 of all new rehabilitation dwellings, units developed in the planned area by public, private entities or persons other than the agency, affordable to housing costs to persons and families. Very low and low and moderate incomes. Not less than 40 of the dwellings required to be available at Affordable Housing costs to persons and families of very low and very low moderate income shall be available at Affordable Housing costs to very low income households. You are not following this rule. This is the mission construction, you price fix and you price gouge by means of taking that 40 of the pie and making the lowest income of the 40 , 2 of a. M. I. , 36,300. You take 10 of it and make it 55 , which is 44,400. You take 4 , and make it 90 , which is 92,650. Then you take 17 and make it 96,850. Then you take 7 and make it 150, which is 121,050 a year. Now, since when does people making that much money supposed to be part of a low income and Affordable Housing . Thats why i want you to sue jay kim and the San Francisco giants for pricefixing because they financing it. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Wright. Mr. Wright, thank you very much. Mr. Wright, thank you very much. Would you actually address mr. Wrights questions about the affordable levels that this, this Affordable Housing will accommodate on a side bar conversation . Thank you very much. Any other Public Comments, seeing non, Public Comment is closed. I make a motion to move this to the board supervisors meeting of july 16th. Positive recommendation. Could i have a second . Seconded by mandelman. Take that without objection, thank you very much. And now lets get on to our department hearing, first one up is our City Attorney, mr. Dennis herera. Please set the time for five minutes. Im joined by the managing attorney and chief financial officer. In a nutshell, we are your lawyers, provide Legal Services fo every City Department, board, agency. Assist in drafting legislation, objective legal advice in the city so Decision Makers like you did make decisions on a common understa understanding of the law. Defend all legal claims and lawsuits and negotiate and recommend settlements for your approval and draft all legislation. As you well know, San Francisco, as a city and county, is unique in california. Run the gamut to hospitals, must span every legal specialty and practice area. The good work by our attorneys and staff has led our office to be recognized as one of the premier public law offices in the country. For fiscal year 201920, the proposed budget for the office is under 92 million. That is about 6 million or 7 higher than our fiscal year budget of 86 million. Three main factors in the change to our budget this year. First, mandated salary and fringe benefit increases. Two, increase rent on the office space, and higher litigation expenses. We are right sizing the litigation budget, not kept pace with inflation. Funds for ediscovery, allows us to transfer and search large amounts of evidence digitally. Our litigation budget covers things like expert witnesses, investigation work and other litigation costs. These are investments that pay dividends down the road in the form of better legal outcomes for taxpayers. The only increase to our staffing is the addition of three positions. Two attorneys and a paralegal, to deal with protecting San Francisco rate payers interest in pg e bankruptcy and the feasibility of acquiring some of pg e Power Distribution network. Pg e situation is unique and has the potential to profoundly impact all in San Francisco. Our view is this up front investment in staff is needed to ensure the city receive payments and services owed by pg e and to support reorganization approaches that protect the interests of the city. As the city evaluates whether to acquire pg e facilities that serve San Francisco, substantial legal and political work need to be done. If the city proceeds to acquire pg e assets, my office will present and support acquisition proposal. Additional demands on the office include upholding the rule of law and protecting San Fran