Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the CBD Appropriation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee advances ordinance allowing dispersal of CBD special‑assessment revenues to three districts

San Francisco County Government Audit and Oversight Committee · February 26, 2007
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The committee advanced an ordinance to amend the FY2006-07 appropriation to disperse special‑assessment revenues to three business improvement districts (Fillmore Jazz, Central Market, Fisherman's Wharf/Portside). Budget analyst recommended approval and committee forwarded the item to the full board for final action.

The Government Audit and Oversight Committee reviewed an ordinance to amend the fiscal‑year 2006–07 appropriation ordinance to distribute special‑assessment revenues to three business improvement districts established during the fiscal year: Fillmore Jazz CBD, Central Market CBD and Fisherman’s Wharf/Portside CBD. David Noyola (Aaron Peskin’s office) introduced the item and said the change authorizes the city to disperse funds collected through assessments to the respective nonprofit owner associations.

Lisa Pagan from the Mayor’s Office of Economic and Workforce Development attended to answer operational questions. The budget analyst reported an informational breakdown of appropriations by district and recommended approval. Supervisors asked whether first‑year budgets and management plans would be provided; staff said the first year’s budgets are contained in management plans and that annual budgets would be presented at later public hearings. The committee asked that staff include copies of the management‑plan budgets in next year’s packet for reference.

Public comment on the item was not offered and the committee closed public comment. The committee did not record a formal roll‑call vote on the ordinance in the transcript; staff recommended approval and the committee advanced the item for consideration by the full Board of Supervisors.