Skip to main content

We will keep fighting for all libraries - stand with us!

tv   [untitled]    July 23, 2010 1:30am-2:00am PST

2:30 am
me and i surely wouldn't lie ♪ now i don't want property tax to say good-bye ♪ no i don't want it to say good-bye ♪ supervisor avalos: next speaker, please. >> district 6 neighborhood activist. of course he doesn't do studies on whether increasing funding for a park is going to create jobs or not, because those studies are almost impossible to tell one way or another. you know, it's one thing one way, one thing the other way. the fact is if this body and the city spends its money wisely and properly, it will create jobs and will be a benefit to the economy. if you do poorly, then you lose jobs. this idea that somehow in 14 years it's going to be a net job killer, well, that would -- the only way that would be the case is if the money was poorly
2:31 am
spent. you know, ronald reagan said taxes should hurt. in fact, of course, he was wrong. we try to design taxes that are bearable, that hit people who are the most able to pay. and as much admitted that this tax does that, it hits people most able to pay, it's bearable. when he said the that, was volatile, what was he saying? he said when people have a lot of money, when the money is moving around, that's when this tax kicks in. that's exactly what you want in a tax. i still think the city could save money by defunding the city comest's line item. supervisor avalos: thank you. any other member of the public who would like to comment on item number two? i will close public comment. [gavel pounded] colleagues, since the plan is supporforward all of these measo the full board i'm fine sending them without recommendation.
2:32 am
we could have a discussion there, where we'll give them our approval for the november ballot. so if we're okay to move forward without recommendation? without objection, very good. [gavel pounded] i'm not sure if president chiu is coming for his. want to go on to the parking one? i'll check in with his office. okay. let's hear item number three, please, madame clerk. [clerk reads item number three] supervisor avalos: thank you, madame clerk. we'll have a discussion of this at the full board as well. this was an item that. chiu presented last week. so he will not be here today to do that.
2:33 am
or his legislative aide? >> good afternoon, committee members. judson true from david chiu's office to answer any questions you may have. i apologize for not being here earlier? supervisor avalos: colleagues, any questions? okay, we'll open this up for public comment. any member of the public who would like to comment on item number three. >> ♪ elvira ♪ my payroll tax is on fire ♪ i need it lowered down ♪ budget money looks like heaven-stroke. ♪ money like payroll tax wine ♪ i sure want that payroll tax lowered to shine ♪ i got this budget feeling up
2:34 am
and down my spine ♪ as long as i know that expense tax is lowered down fine ♪ elvira elvira ♪ i want the tax down ♪ snow please fire the tax down ♪ supervisor avalos: okay. if there are no other members of the public to comment on item number three,we will close public comments. [gavel pounded] motion to move forward. colleagues? okay, without objection. to the full board without recommendation. and madame clerk, if you could mideast call item number four. [clerk reads item number four]
2:35 am
supervisor avalos: thank you, madame clerk. supervisor mirkarimi. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you, chair avalos. like the other tax measures, i look forward to continuing this discussion at the full board. i believe that we had, i thought, a thorough review over the last two committee hearings.
2:36 am
this of course is adding a 10% bump to the parking tax as well explained, i think, by the city's economist, economic analyst, as to how there would be various impacts, positive, and where our revenue would also be generated, upwards to about $17 million to $20 million. we're following on the -- on the lessons learned from proposition r, passed in 1980, the last time that san francisco had passed a parking tax, so 30 years ago, which was it was increased from 15% to 25% in 1980. interesting that all the same arguments that we've heard in opposition to the -- or doubt or concern about the current tax
2:37 am
that we're proposing are literally mirrored in the arguments in 1980 to proposition r, which is then placed by then mayor feinstein and supported by so with the ones expressed back in 1980. i have asked the treasurer's office if they could come and speak briefly for one thing. there has been assertions by a number of the parking garages that the city is not doing the job that it needs to do to try to recover funds from the
2:38 am
nearly 550 funds that exist. a want to keep in mind the reality. i have asked the treasurer's office to provide for me what the recovery strategies are and what the numbers look like. it has been asserted that there is upwards of $20 million of unrecovered funds and that have to be substantiated by an audit and to the accounting of where those dollars are. let's get into the precise math. >> think you. i am happy to be here to talk about the parking tax collection. i would like to address the questions that were brought up
2:39 am
and talk about the data that we have. that is something that we know about. i would like to show what is on the overhead projector. what this shows is that our audit practices. there are two lines here, the first is the fiscal year, the second is the estimate. the second column shows the actual revenue that came in. if you go over to this column, we had 107 hottest up -- audits of lots.
2:40 am
this compares to 5 1/5 to total. in the last fiscal year, we have wanted about a third. this shows the number of deficiencies that have no change. we had 39 of them. in 2010, we had 45 of them. about 75% or complaint with our parking tax laws. the next shows the deficiencies of less than $50,000. the next shows the number of deficiencies greater than $50,000 and there was three of those. the final line shows the number of auditors assigned to this area. they brought in about a million dollars in taxes, penalties, and
2:41 am
interest. >> that million dollars shows the audit tax deficiencies between 2008 and 2009 and then estimated for the current fiscal year, about a million years -- about a million dollars. there were about 180 auditive. is that correct? >> yes, that is correct. we are trying to audit every parking lot once every three years. we feel that we can on it every parking lot and make sure that we can recover the full efficiency. >> i am trying to close the loop on this, while the face of the debate merits the arguments on
2:42 am
all sides, i want to make sure that we close on the particular assertion if there is the and recovered revenue potential. if the war but is it about five other 50 or 600 and total in the city and county of san francisco and they have an audit function that is focused on 100-150 parking months per year bringing in a revenue of about 1 million per year, that is a different goal of $20 million that was represented. while we do everything we can to try to recover more funds, it
2:43 am
does not speak to the reality that if we are looking to generate greater revenue, will this parking tax the less necessary because there is revenue being generated elsewhere and it is not being recovered? well, it is not. this makes the original point about the taxes itself. if we are deficient, this is why the strategy should be seriously considered. 80% of this tax is generated. when the parking tax was tried several years ago, this did not receive the support of the mta for the executive director. we realize this is part of the taxes and the revenue generators. thank you to the treasurer's
2:44 am
office. >> if there are specific to upset anyone has about things and not getting reported, we have a hot line. you can make chips that are anonymous. we will investigate any that we will receive. >> how many parties have? >> i don't have the information. >> is it like one of those machines that will discourage -- distort your voice? >> it is the voice mailbox. >> i would like to open this up for public comment. >> good afternoon, supervisors.
2:45 am
we are from the mission district. i'm here to ask for us to reconsider because of the economy ecology. there is an increase of 10%. i would have to pass that on to the restaurant patrons. i did not go to college, i am not an economist. the restaurants are empty. people are already spending $15 and parking before they even get to the restaurant. all of the revenue generated will no longer be a part of the city's coffers. if people are not reporting, let's make it happen. maybe we can impose stiffer penalties for those who don't report. i was born and raised in the mission. anything to collect that tax, i am with it but i don't think
2:46 am
increase in the parking tax right now would be the best solution. if you take away 10% of my gross revenue, that would illuminate me. i went to washington to speak to creating new jobs in washington. 10% taking away from my gross revenue would affect 25 families. >> [singing ] i am driving too low taxes field. nothing to get hung about strawberry tax fields forever driving is difficult with eyes closed and when you are behind the wheel
2:47 am
what i'm trying to tell you, i would like a lower tax revealed. let me drive your car because i and dredging to lower tax strawberry fields you have a great tax deal nothing to get hung about, and strawberry tax field forever open bracke>> thank you. >> we have a different as you of what is going on in the industry. one of the statements i made
2:48 am
last week, i had to go look at one prosecution from the past 10 years. there are still many at the federal level. there's not been any kind of prosecution in this industry for money. some of them total millions of dollars. i was talking about $700 million last week. the settlement was a good deal. for the golden gate parking lot, what was reported was $5 million. the performing arts parking lot , a federal investigation noticed that there was swing shift revenues they're being lost entirely.
2:49 am
we are aware of other issues. there are lots sell the market. there are also workers paid in cash. we are asking again for strong good and clear enforcement. we want to come up with a mechanism that identifies parking revenue. we are being skimmed. thank you for a much. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. plan with the california parking company.
2:50 am
i am also with the san francisco parking association. last week, we talked about a $20 million shortfall and we will try to substantiate that. with that number came from, but three or four years ago, a nationwide firm that specializes in blocking such parking audits -- that specializes in parking audits. so far, he has collected over $15 million per year. the way he came up with the to $20 million was that he
2:51 am
extrapolated the number by taking the number of parking locations in san francisco, the average number of spaces per location, then he takes the rate per space. then he comes to an average location and an under reporting rate of 20%. so, we did a quick study of the parking locations of san francisco. we extrapolated what we can come up with as far as we thought should have been reported. we have 625 businesses, we have about 185 spaces per facility. the average ticket price is above $15. when we look at the generation
2:52 am
per year, this is about $424,000. this should be about 84 million. there is the under reported amount of about 20 million. i don't think the auditor knows exactly how to do this. there's no water the and on weekends. >> thank you. >> i would like to see the data. this sounds instructive. this is something that you can forward it to our office. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker. >> good afternoon.
2:53 am
she generally respond to the comments regarding the earlier tax measures in that we have not seen him stay consequences from that. i would agree that you cannot attribute all things that to one thing but there is a reality that we have to consider in san francisco that we are 70,000 jobs less. if you look at job growth in the surrounding counties, you will see job growth in those counties. we don't see that happening in san francisco. you have to have some of the suburban growth which is what we are not necessarily advocating for. there is not job growth. we are putting a greater cost of
2:54 am
doing business in relation to the surrounding counties and the the city. i would encourage you to keep those things into consideration as you deliberate. >> thank you. is any other member of the public that would like to comment? >> i am remembering when the parking tax was in effect earlier. i gather in the was no desire to include senior services. i would like to suggest that you checked the lawsuit that ended the parking taxes for senior services because that was a suit against the city which they were told that they could not charged taxed twice said they had to
2:55 am
illuminate it. the city attorney's office should have some reference of that and i suggest you check it. i think that taxing parking lot is better than taxing individual cars all over the city. we need a little bit more than a telephone number to get people to come in. if they did not see parking months reporting income, they would turn it in. >> thank you. we will close public comment.
2:56 am
>> i like to ask you all to review the same data. we want to be the most effective city in recovering those costs. i presume you will follow up. >> to be happy to do this. the king to propose legislation in the coming months are so, this titans' our ability to increase penalties. we are looking forward to working with the board on this in the future. thank you. >> and os that this would go to the board without
2:57 am
recommendation. >> a cave. that is the last item on our special. we can go to the first item on our regular meeting. this is about the appropriation to bring forward and to balance. we're looking at this for the move on it -- on expended funds. i will just read what is on here. the first part is 6.3 million in
2:58 am
the general fund balance which is really the real estate transfer tax. there is also related to that, an increase in property tax, a formula that goes towards the surplus in library and other fund balances, the real estate transfer tax that = $320,000. there's also the administration processing feed that is part of the supplemental and also the program for $103,000. >> this is the board of supervisors approval of the increased fees and the
2:59 am
assessment appeals which is associated with the programs which could draw down additional revenue. >> these will be going towards children, youth, and family services. also the department of aging and adult services. we would lexus to be able to fund it our restoration list. this is what we would need to do in order to troop up the restoration. >> buying support that list. thank you for helping to shepherd this. i just want t