Transcripts For SFGTV Government Access Programming 20240713

Next item, please. Item nine is consent calendar. All items listed are considered to be retained by the San Francisco Public Utilities commission and acted upon by a single vote of the commission. No separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission or public rate ques quests. The matter will be removed from the calendar and considered a separate item. Commissioners, would you like any item removed . All foz, i dont. Okay. General public, any item remov removed . May i have a motion . All of those in favor . The motion carries. Next item. Item ten write approve modifications of the San Francisco San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Grant program and authorize a general manager to approve future modifications to the Grant Program. Commissioners, steve ritchie, this is an item to make some minor changes to the Grant Program rules. The first of which is to change the name of the program to the onsite water reuse program. Secondly is to expand existing requirements for brewery process Water Treatment systems. This is a new area of water reuse that we are getting into now. We have to make some tweaks there. There will be some minor editorial changes here. And the most important, item four, authorize the general manager consultation for the City Attorney to approve future modifications to the program that do not materially increase the obligations or liabilities to the city. We would recommend approval of the item. Any questions . Certainly going through the drought experience, everybody became more and more interested in opportunities for reuse. In the brewing industry we have had conversations with more than one where they have processed water to be used. Things like that. That is a significant source of water. They wanted to see what they could do in terms of becoming greener. We have talked with them about the ability to take processed water, not domestic wastewater. Treating that, in some ways, so they could actually reuse it in the process. Making beer out of it basically. Because, you know, some of the brewers are our customers in terms of water supply and wastewater because of the strength of the wastewater. Anything we can do cuts costs for them and gives them the potential to use that. They reprocess, its a way of reprocessing water that they use so it goes back into their system . Yes. It is all self within the brewery. Nobody is doing it yet. But we are in conversation. There are proposals that are moving around out there. At some point will it be something thats a part of something they do for business . Yeah, i think the longterm is to be part of the industry. Its just in its initial stages right now. Thank you. Bawsca you have a question, as well. I dont mind delegating a party for the general manager for a it didnt say anything about material costs and whether that would be required to come back, or if that would be delegated to the general manager as well . That would require to come back in terms of the obligations or liabilities. If we were taking on new obligations increase in the Grant Program, or liability issues that we were starting to face we would have to bring that to the commission. Okay. I would like to move the item. Second. Any questions from the public . Seeing none. All of those in favor . The motion carries. Thank you. Next item, please. Item 11. Ill adopt revised section g, Cross Connection control of the San Francisco Public Utilities commissions rules and regulations governing Water Service to customers and fomenting article 12 a of the San Francisco health code. Again steve ritchie. This is a lesson sexy, but very important of our business as Cross Connection control to make sure there nothing that affects the quality of the water supply a potential Public Health. This is modification of our rules and regulations to clarify rules for inspection requirements for new water surfaces to make sure that proper Cross Connection control is implement it there. Also Food Development of emergency Cross Connection response plan. Standard plan system means it is not a dual plum system, you can have Cross Connections in those trade we wanted to make sure that that was covered. People actually would accidentally cross connect between the water and wastewater system. That is something that can happen. That is why you have basically experts who work in the field to make sure they dont do that. And then a variance process is being added so if there is some reason that somebody would need a variance from the rules that that could be granted by the general manager. Again, only a Public Health is connected. This is a central part of our program. Would you explain Cross Connection to a second . Cross connection is where there is either an intentional, or accidental connection between a water supply, and some nonpolitical water or even wastewater. When you open up a wall, or you open up the ground there is all kinds of plumbing there. The potential to ms. Connect them, so that you are introducing not Drinking Water into the Drinking Water system always exists. We have careful rules to make sure that that does not happen. Thank you. Any other questions or comments . I would like to move the item. Second. General public, and any comments or questions . All of those in favor . Opposed . The motion carries. Next item. Item 12, approve two Resource Adequacy contracts for cleanpowersf executed by the general manager, between the San Francisco Public Utilities commission on Pacific Gas Electric company with a term of three years and total 26. 1 million. Approve the sale of r. A. Products to Pacific Gas Electric company and Southern California edison in an amount not to exceed 3. 5 million and authorize the general manager to seek retroactive approval from the board of supervisors for the r. A. Contract. Barbara hale, assistant general manager for power. The contract in front of you allow us to work towards compliance with the state of californias Resource Adequacy reliability requirements. These are standard Term Contracts utilizing standard contract form that the industry has accepted that has been approved by the board of supervisors. Happy to answer any questions you may have. Any questions . I move for approval. Thank you. General public, any questions . All of those in favor . Opposed . The motion carries. Next item. Item 13, approve form of Second Amendment to revolving credit and term loan and restated fee letter with state street bank and Trust Company to increase the Principal Amount by 100 million and extern extended the term by four years. May i have slides please . Hello again, richard morales, manager of sfpuc. Supporting the interim Funding Program of the wastewater enterprise. Real quickly, in terms of the background, the wastewater went from a Funding Program which is authorized in the amount of seven and 50 million over seven series. Supported by several high bank facilities. Primarily is for the issuance of commercial papers. The interim Funding Program primarily through the issuance of commercial paper provides lowcost interim funding of the wastewater capital program, which in todays market cost approximately 2 all in. Two of the interim programs, which you saw in the prior site, the 100 million state street Bank Facility, and the 100 milliondollar barclay Bank Facility expire later this month. With todays action, he would be approving a 200 million amended facility with state street bank with one extending its existing 100 million facility and replaces their 100 milliondollar berkeley facility. This transaction was included in the Capital Financing plan that was just presented to you earlier today. State street was selected after a competitive rfp procurement process with six a bank. Their proposal represented the lowest cost responsive proposal. The key terms or for your time and an annual fee of 0. 32 or six on a 40 per year over the fouryear term. An option to extend for an additional year, one additional year as long as the fee doesnt exceed 800,000. The bank was selected because of its strong ratings and credit this is my favorite part of my job, i would like to report that state street proposal is there fee is lower than the fees before it and berkeley has been charging for the facilities that are about to expire. By approving this facility we will be saving ratepayers about 100,000 annually or 400,000 over the term of the agreement. Today we are asking you to approve the agreement as shown on the side. I will not to read them. State street bank not to exceed 200 to Million Dollars for the wastewater capital program. 200 million for the wastewater capital program. Sets forth the disclosure question and answers that we now routinely present to the commission in order to fulfill the commissions disclosure obligations when it appears that transaction of this nature. In the interest of time, i will not go through each of these unless you want me to. Again, happy to answer questio questions. I would like him to go through some of them. Its a fast. Okay. Anyone in particular . Went on a pick some of the key ones. Why dont i pick some of the key ones . Obviously i talked about the competitive solicitation process. Once the facility is in place we will post publicly on this website which is a public website Offering Memorandum that describes and discloses the condition of the wastewater enterprise, and the puc and the bank because its very important. In terms of payment, obligatio obligations, they are obligated to pay commercial paper investors when payment is due. If for some reason we cannot, the bank then steps in to make payment. We then have to reimburse the bank later on. In terms of repayment source, repayment is for the net revenues of the wastewater enterprise. The next slide. How much a debt with the wastewater having closing . We are not adding any new debt we are just replacing the new facility. No addition of any new debt here. How will this emphasis this facility impact rates . Since i rates are estimated to go down by approximately. 02 per month for the average wastewater sewer bill. That is because it is a lower cost facility. What is the impact on the p. U. C. s credit rating, specifically the wastewater rating . The rating agencies did read this and our ratings were affirmed. Thank you. Any other questions . When are you going to execute this . On the 15th, next week. Tuesday. The berkeley facility is expiring on the 16th. I see. Okay. Any questions . I guess so. We have something in place of the rate wont change before that time . We have to replace the expiring facilities because we have an authorized program of 750 million. 200 million of which is expired. If we do not replace them i understand that. The state bank will be in place, i mean, we have something that keeps the rates the way they a are . What they propose to us, yes. Good. All right. Any other questions . Any Public Comment . May have a motion . Moved. Second. All of those in favor . Opposed . The motion carries. Thank you. Next item. Item 14, award a Green Infrastructure grant to the San Francisco Unified School District to design and if the project proceeds, constructive Stormwater Management features at Bessie Carmichael middle school located at 824 harrison street in San Francisco, authorized the general manager to execute a with sfusd with a duration of 20 years and in the amount up to 128,000. Do we have anybody presenti presenting . Thank you. This item talks about two elements, one is the design and the other is construction. It spoke explicitly to the design money being available presently. Is the construction money available presently . Yes, it is. That is already appropriated and ready to go . Yes. The issue there is ceqa has not been created for the project. All you can improve is disbursement of funding for design and this will actually need to come back to commission again. Wanted to make sure we werent inadvertently obligating funds that had not been appropriated yet . The answer to that is no. Thank you. Other questions . I move for approval. Second. To the public, any comments . Seeing none. All of those in favor . Opposed . Motion carries. Next item. Item 15, approve modifications to project number Southeast Water Pollution Control Plant r cwwsipse02. Control plant new headworks facility, to remove scope associated with conversion conversion of Bruce A Flynn pump station to an all weather pump station. We are asking for approval for the scope of the headworks facility, because we changed the scope we had to go back for environmental review. We got approval for adding on a new lift station at the headworks facility. We are deleting a tie into the existing pump station. We would need your approval before our contractor can advertise. When you say lift station, what does that mean . It just means that originally the design was bruce flynn is considered a wet weather pump station that was only used one wet weather. The original design was going to convert it so that we could use it for dry weather as well. But then we found there were a lot of problems with that. So, we are going to use build a new station that basically brings the flows into the headworks facility. The dry weather and flows. The pumps will be than they are at bruce flynn. What is left . It basically brings it down the sewer, and the Collection System and pumps it higher up into the headworks. Yeah, so the term lift is to lift from one elevation up to another. Instead of a pump station, they call it a lift station. It is essentially still a pump station. It is pumping from lower down and higher up into our headworks. Also, dry weather, during dry season we have a very small flow. System wise its about 70 million gallons per day, others it is 500 million gallons per day. Wet weather it is really important that these facilities come online because we have so much volume. In dry weather it is all yearround. Right. We were having problems using the wet weather pumps to pump such a small flow. We ended up going to a separate pump station. Thank you. Do we have a motion . I will second. Any Public Comment . All of those in favor . Opposed . The motion carries. The last item, please . Item 16. Authorized the general manager to execute a memorandum of understanding with the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency as part of the sfmtas Improvement Project for a total estimated cost to the p. U. C. Of 11,843,747. This action constitutes the approval action for the project for the purpose of ceqa. This item is to basically work out the agreement with mta, howard fong talked earlier about these joint projects we have with 15 or public works. In this case sfmta is replacing tracks. This first segment that we worked out to replace water mains and sewer, we are basically taking the sewer from under the tracks, and putting two sewer pipes outside of the track area. This just works out, how we are going to Work Together with mta taking the lead on construction. We have talked about the difficulty on some of these Large Multi Agency projects and how to keep them on schedule. Has not taught us anything as we put together this m. O. U. . It has. We actually went ahead of m. T. A. And we advertised our own construction project to replace sewer and water ahead of m. T. A. In this case, because they are taking out the tracks, we could not go of them. What we have learned is that we really need to do partnering, even within our internal city family. Normally we have partnering with the contractor. We have instituted partnering within the city departments to work out and iron out details of how we were together and if we have issues. Those are facilitated partnering sessions. Im trying what does that partnering look like . Basically team, the project team that is going be working on the project and identifying or being clear about roles and responsibilities and approval process for change orders, and just how to handle the disagreements that we may have and trying to keep on schedule so that we dont delay. Harlan knows as well. The general manager, kelly, participates in the van ness partnering sessions. He attends a monthly, at the director and general manager level. I think that is what has helped put van ness back on track. Well. [laughter] you know, i was a City Engineer for eight years. I mean, trying to put it, you know, so that we can dig wants and coordinate our work. That is something that we, you know, was trying to do. The challenges that m. T. A. , and may be public works, we want to make sure that we have, you know, experienced, skilled people that can actually, you know, really hold a contractor, you know, responsible for delivering these projects on time. Mohammed, who is at public works, and at the time, myself, we set up a structure to put someone in charge, because it was a structure they had before they had multiple people in charge, of the whole project, and then as we talk about sewer, they would have to come to us. If they talk about, you know, water, they would come to us, then if its any street work it would go to public works. There were so many, you know, cooks in the kitchen. What we did, i talked to mohammed is that we should have one person representing the city and report to our directors, we should have the contractor have one person that is responsible for making decisions. Since we got that structure in place we are making a lot of headway, before venice, for every day works, it was a two i was like how can that happen. You work a day, and your two days behind schedule for that day. We started getting involved, and now we are actually making progress for one day work. It is one day less off the schedules the way it is supposed to be. Right now we are working in front of city hall. I told them, you better make sure that you are in and out, especially if you are taking the parking where all of the, you know, supervisors you dont want to mess around with that. And then we helped higher construction manager, lance jackson, to actually run the citys team. I think he has been a great addition. So what we are trying to do is have that model on other projects so we can coordinate our work and make sure that the directors are involved so that, you know, there is so many agencies in the city that you are trying to coordinate. Is not reflected in the m. O. U. . The m. O. U. Does not talk about the partnering. We made out a standard practice. You know harlan talked about van ness and some of the specifics. The other issue i would like to bring up is that m. T. A. Doesnt have as much experience doing these Large Capital projects. They are relying more heavily now on public works during the construction phase. Okay. Thank you. How many years behind is van ness . Two years. Two years before going on three, i think its in a much better place than it was. Any other questions or comments . To the public, any comments . May have a motion . Second. All of those in favor . The motion carries. So, madam secretary, could you read the items for closed session . Yes. Item 19 is anticipated litigation as plaintiff or defendant. Item 20 is existing litigation, pacific bell versus the city and county of San Francisco. Twentyone existing litigation between joan frost and city and county of San Francisco. [reading notes] twentyfour existing litigation city and county of San Francisco versus Pacific Gas Electric. Is there any Public Comment on the items for closed session . May have a motion on whether to assert . Move to assert. Second. All of those in favor . The motion carries. We have reconvened from closed session. They announcement following close session is the following. Item 20 is settled. Item 21 settled. And items 2224 no action. May i have a motion regarding whether to disclose . Moved not to disclose. All of those in favor . The motion carries. Any new business to be heard . I would like to make a suggestion that the commission, and the entire body of the San Francisco Public Utilities commission sent flowers to francesca, in memory of her brother. Any further business . Seeing none. The meeting is adjourned at 5 09. Hi, im frank jorge golden go up a utility supervisor for the Distribution System i offer seizing see the personnel that install water maidens and water Carbon Monoxides ive personal proud to work with city and distribution place whether a fire or main break those folks come on scene and get the job done 3450r7b9 what time theyre here to take care of each other and make it so a safe and secure way i was encouraged to learn to deal with the services and breaks and i wanted to move into understanding how to do main connections one the great things that the sfpuc to move to different sections in if youre tdr in learning a different job you have the ability to move up i courage anyone to step out of their comfortable zone and work on a system as large as a our water system we started from one end and keep on going its a fascinating job and im going to stay here because ill never learn everything to learn about i came to the San Francisco Public Utilities commission as a San Francisco fellow. As a sf fellow i was in Financial Planning where i had the joy of working for a me. Part of the Financial Planning that sets rates. Amy is just incredibly kind. One of the most generous and goodhearted people i have ever met. Having her assume pe as as supes very helpful. This was my first job out of college. Amy supported me every step of the way. I felt like i can do this. I have a staff i manage. We have a complement that joins us once a year to help us. They give them the chance to learn financial matters. Amy would it is for an hour or hour and a half going through these complicated financial things with you, patient. I find my strength in sitting down and walking through the project, how can i help you . They appreciate that. It means that you are giving time to them. I hope or interns will be the new leaders. Amy made should be we were well trained. She gave me mangoes. I went home and ate them. The next day i said i like these. Two days later there was a crate, 3 36 manning 36 mangoes. She embodies Public Service in everything she does and the way she does her work. It was great having her as a supervisor. She is not in it forehead lines or awards. That is making me glad she is getting an award. The huge ilty, dedication and integrity and wisdom she brought, that is Public Service. My name is amy. I retired earlier this year. Before that i was the rates administrator. Good morning, everyone. This is october 9, 2019, regular meeting of the budget and finance committee. Our clerk is ms. Linda wong. I would like to thank those from s. F. Gov tv for broadcasting. Can we excuse supervisor fewer. Please make sure to silence all cellphones and electronic devices. Completed copies of any documents to be included as part of the file should be submitted to the clerk. Items will appear on the next minutes. Can you please call item number 1. Clerk lease amendment lexington lion San Francisco, lp 350 rhode island streetnorth 2,600,000 rent credit. I would like to make a motion petitioner this to be continued for one more week. Before that i will take Public Comment. Are there any members of the public who would like to comment on item 1, seeing none, that item is closed. I would like to make a motion to continue the item to october 16. Clerk item 2 is resolution retroactively authorizing the department of Public Health, Behavioral Health services to enter into a multiyear organized Delivery System Intergovernmental Agreement for Substance Use Disorder Services with the state department of health care services, in the amount of 171,714,918 for the term of july 1, 2019, through june 30, 2022. Thank you. I have been working on this contract for about 27 years. Please continue. The first thing i want to point out is that the contract is retroactive. The source of the retroactivity was we first received the agreement for our perusal on october 20. There are changes in the funding since the Crime Prevention Public Safety act of 2011. It involves them work through centers of medicare and medicaid services. Our services get back and forth before signed, so its not unusual that theyre slow. Okay. Having said that, not guilty 1922, all of the amendments to this will be retroactive to july 1st. So theyll all be retroactive contracts. Anyway, this contract is practically the same as it was last year. The big changes came two years before. Its really a pretty straightforward contract. Basically what it is is the rules and regulations and procedures for billing if one successfully follows those rules, you get paid whatever your legitimate costs were. So its delightfully straightforward. Okay. Colleagues, any comments or questions . Good morning. The board is being asked to approve a Grant Agreement from the state department of Healthcare Services for Substance Use Disorder Services. This is 171,000,000 grant. The city would be reimbursed by the state. The amount in each year is shown on table 1 of 57. 2 million. I think you probably know historically in each year of the grant is the state budget changes. They do come back for an amendment so the second and thirdyear amount could potentially change from the amount in this agreement. We recommend approval. Thank you very much. Any members of the public like to comment . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. This is moved to the board with a positive recommendation. Madam clerk, can you please call item number 3. Clerk resolution retroactively authorizing the office of the treasurer Tax Collector to accept and expend a grant in the amount of 962,892 from the California Student Aid Commission every Kid Counts College Savings Program for the office of Financial Empowerment kindergarten to College Program for conducting outreach to families and provide incentives for families to contribute to College Savings accounts for the period of may 1, 2019, through june 30, 2021. Again, eric mankey with the office of the treasure and Tax Collector. Im here to seek an approval for our office to spend 926,000 for the California Student Aid Commission. This funding will go to support the kindergarten to College Program. Just as a way of background, this was started in 2011 based on research that shows kids with College Savings for up to seven times more likely to attend college if they have a College Savings account. Since 2011 kindergarten to college has automatically opened more than 42,000 accounts for students when they begin kindergarten. Including we just opened 11,000 new accounts this year. The city and county provides 50 as an initial deposit into that account, and we use private funds to incentivize families to further save. The incentives work. Since the inception of kindergarten to college, families have saved 4. 6 million into those accounts. If you include the city funding we have a total of 7 million in those accounts. What this grant will do is allow us to continue to do outreach and continue those incentives. As you see, we are seeking retroactive approval. This is because being a state grant we didnt receive the information and the grant approval from the state until the end of may as the budget was closing. So we decided to hold off since we couldnt get it in our budget submission for 2019 and 2020. Thank you very much. Lets open up for Public Comment. Any members of the public like to comment on item 3 . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Colleagues, any comments or questions . Seeing none we will move in to the board without objection. Clerk item 4 resolution retroactively authorizing the department of Public Health to accept and expend a grant in the total amount of 2,300,400 from the California Department of state hospitals to participate in a program, entitled pretrial Felony Mental Health diversion, for the threeyear budget period of september 15, 2019, through september 14, 2022. Thank you very much. Good morning, supervisors. As is also stated, we are requesting the ability to accept and spend a threeyear grant from september 14, 2022, from the department of state hospitals that would Fund Services for those who qualify for Mental Health diversion. This is a Pretrial Diversion Program for those competent to stand trial on felony charges who also have a mental illness. This grant would fund intensive Case Management services as well as funding for stabilization rooms and a Behavioural Health clinician that would work in the jails to support evaluation for the courts to admit people into the program as well as expeditiously making refers into treatment. Of course im happy to answer any questions that you may have. Seeing no comments or questions, there is no b. L. A. Report on this. Are there any members of the public that would like to comment on item 4, seeing none Public Comment is closed. I would like to make a motion to move this to the board with a positive recommendation. Taken without objection. Thank you very much. Clerk item number 5 resolution declaring the intent of the city and county of San Francisco city to reimburse certain expenditures from proceeds of future bonded indebtedness; authorizing the director of the Mayors Office of housing and Community Development director to submit an application and related documents to the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee cdlac to permit the issuance of Residential Mortgage Revenue Bonds in an aggregate Principal Amount not to exceed 56,700,000 for 410 china basin street i am a senior project manager with the Mayors Office of housing and Community Development. The resolution before you will authorize an application for bond proceeds to pay for the construction and related Development Costs for Mission Bay Block south 9 and to approve the hearing that the city conducted already to comply with the federal tax equity and financial responsibility act. This project is located within the Mission Bay South redevelopment plan area and its administered by the office of Community Investment and infrastructure. The block 9 team is comprised of Bridge Housing and Community Housing partnership who have formed a limited partnership. The project will provide 141 units, including a managers unit, of affordable rental housing for formerly households. Units will be all studios and a portion of the studio units will be sized to accommodate inhome care support and medical equipment. The project will receive operating support through the local subsidy program. The building includes a large courtyard and adjacent community room, lounge, closed bicycle parking. The project also includes a Community Garden that will be operated by a nonprofit organization. This bond does not require the city to repledge the bond. If approved the sponsors will submit an application to the Planning Committee in january. We anticipate that well return to the board of supervisors in march of next year to approve the issuance of the bond. The project is scheduled to begin construction in june of next year and will be ready for occupancy in september of 2021. This concludes my presentation. Im happy to answer any questions you may have. Im joined by a representative from the development team. Thank you. Thank you very much. There is no b. L. A. Report on this. Are there any members of the public that would like to comment on item number 5 . Seeing none, Public Comment is now closed. Clerk resolution authorizing the issuance and delivery of multifamily housing Revenue Bonds in an aggregate Principal Amount not to exceed 26,967,500 for the purpose of providing financing for the acquisition and rehabilitation of a 67unit, affordable multifamily rental Housing Project located at 385 eddy street good morning. Im from the Mayors Office of Housing Community development. Item 6 is a resolution to approve of the issuance of the 28. 9 million in taxexempt bonds for the rehabilitation of an existing single room occupancy development. The issuance of the bonds will allow the project to be acquired and undergo a significant rehabilitation, which would include systems and unit work. There will not be tenants will have a right to return to those units. There will be internal relocation within the portfolio. The units will continue to serve hopefullies at the 60 line and below. We ask for the committee today to recommend approval of the resoluti resoluti resolution. And the project sponsor is here if you have any additional questions about the project. Thank you very much. Any comments or questions . Seeing none there is no b. L. A. Report. Any members of the public that would like to comment on item 6 . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. If we can move this to the board with a positive recommendation. Clerk item 7 resolution authorizing the execution and delivery of a multifamily housing revenue note taxexempt in an aggregate Principal Amount not to exceed 76,680,000 and of a multifamily housing revenue note taxable in an aggregate Principal Amount not to exceed 30,000,000 for the purpose of providing financing for the construction of a 167unit multifamily rental Housing Project located at 242 hahn street resolution approving and authorizing the director of the Mayors Office of housing and Community Development to execute an amended and restated Loan Agreement with block 6 housing partners, l. P. , a california limited partnership, for a total loan amount not to exceed 18,647,014 to finance the construction of a 167unit multifamily rental Housing Development for lowincome households. I am the senior project manager with the Mayors Office of Community Housing development. I am here to present on item 8. For item 7, the transaction fundamentals have not changed since the presentation was presented in april of this year. The issuance is still a conduit and financing. The project is in compliance with all city requirements, including prevailing wage and l. B. E. Requirements. Since then, the developer has secured a debt limit allocation from sidlak and with the cityidentified Financing Team, including a lender, equity investor, bond counsel, other attorneys and the citys municipal adviser. The Financing Team has met several times and pretend the package before you today. For item 8, this is to enter into a loan of 18 million. The block 6 project is the first onsite affordable Housing Development for sunnydaily hope s. F. The development adjacent to the site was completed construction last week. Were excited about that. And it will soon house families. Block 6 is going to consist of 167 units, of which 125 of them are public hufing replacement units. The other will be tax credit units and all of them are under 60 tax credit a. M. I. The 125 replacement units will be subsidied by project vouchers. Affordability is maintained at a 99year ground lease with the Housing Authority that continues to own the land. Construction closing for block 6 is expected at the end of november when the documents before you today would be executed. Blocks 6 construction will start soon after that with completion expected in december 2021. Here with me is the director of hope s. F. We will be glad to answer any questions you have about the project. On behalf of this project, we would like to thank you for your consideration and ask for continued support of the project. Thank you very much. Any comments or questions from my colleagues. There is a b. L. A. Report. Can we hear that. We reported on item 8 which is the 18. 6 million on gap financing. In terms of sources of funds, we showed that in table 1 on page 11 of our report, and then these funds would be used specifically for the nonconstruction costs, the Development Costs, for this project. The total project, as youre going to see here summarized is 148. 7 million including other sources of funds other than city funds. City funds total on page 12. They add up to about 129. 6 million. In terms of the policy consideration, we call out in our report that the perunit cost of this project is now about 890,000 development cost. The citys share is in table 2, which is 177,000. But the overall cost is 890,000. We consider this high. Weve seen over the years the housing cost construction has gone up. We do recommend that you request from the Mayors Office of housing a report back on the drivers of these housing costs. We are revising it a little bit to have the report back for december 9, 2019, to allow them to have the work. Otherwise we do recommend approval. Thank you very much. Are there any members of the public that would like to comment on item 7 or 8 . Seeing none, Public Comment is now closed. Colleagues, any comments or questions . Yes, supervisor mar. Thank you, chair fewer. I know theres a recommendation from the b. L. A. For a report to the board on with more explanation about the high the relatively high perunit cost of this project. I was wondering if you could touch on that a little bit right now. So in regards to the overall costs, one of the things we need to think about as well is the amount of city subsidy in this project. In general we see on average about 229,000 per unit in subsidies. This particular project which has infrastructure costs associated is at 171,000. So it is less than most of our projects in our pipeline. One of the reasons its so expensive is general, its a hope s. F. Project, the topography of the. Its very difficult because its sloped and they are grading issues. We also have relocation issues to move the residents on site to this new housing. Thats an additional cost. Were also building parking which is not something we would see on any of our infill sites. Those have assisted in keeping these project costs lower. Had there been other projects where the cost per unit is in a similar range of 890,000 . Yeah. Youll see it on other hope s. F. Projects. Youll see some of our projects that are higher density. We will put the reasons in our report. Thank you so much. I also have the same question because parcel q i think that was two years ago, it was dlsh 770,000 per unit and that was two years ago. Are we on a time constraint for this because i would like to continue this item and see a detailed charge side by side the expenditures and also why this is costing so much. You were just telling us very casually that topography, blah, blah, blah. I would like to see some of those numbers on why the cost is so expensive. I would like to make a motion continuing this item unless you have a chart with you today. I also think when we got a briefing on this and i looked at it with my legislative aid, it never mentioned the cost per unit which should have been included in a briefing to the budget chair and it was not included. Is there a time constraint on this today or can we pick up this item next week, as we are going to have a meeting next week . We can pick it up next week. That would be great. Lets take these items separately. I would make a motion to move 7 to the board with a positive recommendation without objection. Thank you very much. And i would like to continue item 8 until the meeting of next week. We can get a detailed breakdown why the cost is so expensive for this project versus another, for example, project q. If i can take that without objection. Thank you so much. Madam clerk, do we have any other business for today . Clerk theres no other business. Thank you. We are adjourned