Transcripts For SFGTV BOS Budget And Finance Committee 52516 20160607

San francisco board of supervises budget and finance Committee Meeting for may 25, 2016. Im mark farrell and clar and joined by supervisor katy tang as well as jane kim. We will be joined by norman yee and scott wiener. Want to thank lichbda wong and jessie [inaudible] Charles Kremenak from sfgtv. Silence cell phones and leck trainic devices. Documents should be submit today the clerk. Items will appear on june 7, board of supervises agenda unless otherwise stated. Colleagues we have a lengthy ajendsa. Item 1, resolution approving agreement between state and city combined city project including pedestrian safety, transit impruchbments andue fillty upgrades. Shannon karen from San Francisco public works. Im here to seek approval for public works to intr into agreement can caltrans to 19th avenue. This project features pedestrian and transit curb extensions as well as water and sewer infrastructure improvements. The project extends along 19th avenue which is state route 1 from [inaudible] to lincoln way. The agreement is prerequisite for caltrans. The agreement specifies the responsibility of the city and caltrans in executing the project. The city is the implementing agency fraall phases of the project. Caltrans is responsible for providing Quality Assurance and permit after accepting the plans, specifications and estimate package, the right of way certification, fundsing certification. No funds are exchanged. Public works order march 21, 2015 dweckter of public work recommends approve the agreement to sign the agreement on behalf of the city. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much. Any questions. Moouv to pub lic comment. Anybody wish to comment on item 1 . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed like to send iletm 1 to full board with positive recommendation motion by supervisor tang and second by supervisor kim without objection. Item 2 resolution approving the one permanent easement to mu deso for 35 thousand paid by jwgmic heny to bide nl a portion of mchenry avenue. Thank you very much. Good morning. My name is tony borto the assistant real estate director of San Francisco Public Utilities commission. The action before you have is a resolution a easement to modesto paid by jwg mchenry. In addition the resolution also reflects adoption of several funings include ceqa findings, a findsing the conveyance and respect to code 23. 3 the find thofg sale of ineasement through a Competitive Bidding prauls is impractical. The resolution authorizes the director of property or general manager to execute and modify agreements in furtherance of this resolution. I want to justthere isqul i have a drawing that shows what we are talking about. This is mchenry avenue in modesto. These lines here mark the pucs right of way boundaries. Under subservice the puc has 3 High Pressure water lines and under ground voltage lines. The area is in question is the squiggling box. It is the area the developer needs to expand and widen mchenry avenue. When the city of modesto approved this development which is here and here, they required the developer to widen mchenry avenue. They need a little of our right of way to widen the highway. Sfpuc staff and caltrans and modesto reviewed and approved the plan for street improvements includes a subsurface bridge to protect the pipeline. July 14, 2015 the San Francisco Public Utilities commission authorize said agreement for the sale of the easement. Modesto city manager executed this agroument and the city of mu odesto accepted the improvements and an agreement with caltrans. Jwg mchenry provided an appraisal dated in 2014 and updated june 4, 2016 fair market value at 35 thousand. The appraisal was approved by the cities director of real propertyment we ask the board to adopt this resolution and the related findings. Thank you very much. Colleagues, any questions for the puc . Okay, seeing none move to Public Comment. Anyone wish to comment on item 2 . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Entertain a motion . Move with positive recommendation to full board. Motion by supervisor yee and second by supervisor tang and take that without objection. Item 3 resolution [inaudible] authorizing the director of Mayors Office of housing [inaudible] Allocation Committee to permit the revenue baunz in a principle amount not to exceed 50 million 455 fell street. Item 4, [inaudible] no cost for aumgz of 6 months until december 31, 20s 17. Thank you don lusty, senior project manager. Before you today are two resolution related to financing and ground lease for new 100 percent affordable fomly Housing Development located at 455 fell street also known as central freeway parcel o in hayes valley. The first resolution is bonds [inaudible] authorizing the city to submit a application for bond financing not to exceed 56 million used for construction financing. The second resolution authorizes the city to enter into ground lease where the project is built. Provides the terms for ground lease that includes 75 year lease term with extension option for additional 24 years annual rent of 10 percent of fair market value determined by a Third Party Appraisal with annual base rent payments structured as 15 thousand annually and the balance payable to the extent proceeds a available from project cash flows. Approval of both resolutions is required for the [inaudible] bond application [inaudible] june 14, it is important to note the baunz are financing obligations which dont require the city to place any money to repay the bond. Briefly, the project will be located at 455 fell as i mentioned earlier. Will be a new 100 percent affordal rental Housing Development in San Francisco hayes valley neighborhood to be financed with tax ex. Bonds 4 percent tax credits and [inaudible] state department of housing and Community Development and [inaudible] funds from the federal home loan bank, a permanent mortjudge and funding from the city. The development will consist of 180 family units earning betwoot 40 and scith percent of ami included a 30 percent set aside for formally homeless families. To be built on the largest remaining freeway parcel, the project is owned by mercy housing and San Francisco Housing Development corporation and include 1200 square feet of retail space on the ground floor, a large central landsscape court yard, roof top open space, community garden, office space for Supportive Service and on site daycare. Provide housing for low income families and formally homeless. We are available to answer questions. Thank you very much. Any questions on 3 or 4 . We move to Public Comment. Anybody wish to comment . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Like to make a motion to send item 3 and 4 for positive recommendation we take that without objection. Item 5, resolution declaring intent the city to [inaudible] directorf Mayors Office of housing and Community Development to Submit Application to Allocation Committee to permit issuance of moorejudge revenue bond not to exseat 140 million for 2070 folsom street. Item 7, [inaudible] locate td at 2070 folsom street thank you very much. Mayors office of housing and Community Development is back. Good morning supervisors. I am ann romarrow project manager. I will present resolutions related to financing and option to ground lease of family Housing Development in the mission located near 17th and folsom street. The first is tax exempt bond which authorizes the silty to submit for bond finances in a amount not to exceed 140 million. The second resolution authorizes the city to enter into ground lease with city owned parcel where the project will be built. Mission Economic Development agency and chinatown Community Development were selected to develop the city and it is ideal for housing, it faces south to a park under construction on 17th and folsom. The project includes up to 139 units of Affordable Housing over ground floor using facing the park and include 20 percent set aside for homeless or at risk transitional age use. Also includes a hub on the ground floor that include license childcare and youth after School Programs and services, Leadership Programs and ground floor cafe with public restrooms. We request approval to authorize the skity to apply for the bond allocation and will return to the board to requestissue the bonds in late 2017 when the project is ready for construction. The bonds a conduit finances only. Apply to the the bond allocation the developer must demonstrate site control which is achieved by a option to ground lease the site. The option leads to the ground lease with Standard City terms. That is the term of 75 years with extension option for additional 24 years and annual rent of 10 percent of fair market value with base rent in the amount of 15,000 a year. The project will provide needed Affordable Housing for families and homeless transitional age youth in the mission with ground floor uses and recommend approval. We have representatives from the sponsor here if and center questions for them. Thank you. Colleagues, any questions . Okay. Seeing none open up to Public Comment. Public comment is closed. Motion to send the item forward . Motion to pass to full board. Motion by supervisor yee and second by supervisor tang. Item 7, resolution declaring intent of the city to expenditures from proceeds of future bond indetedness and Mayors Office of housing and Community Development to submit a application to california debt limit Allocation Committee to permit the issuance of rez sidential bond not to exceed 225 million. Item 8, declaring intent of the city to [inaudible] submit a application to the california debt limit allocation city to permit the issuance of residential bond in amount not to exceed 240 million for 1601 mariposa street. Thank you very much. Good morning, my name is adam cray and Bond Program Manager for housing and Community Development. Here to present resolutions for two Affordable Housing projects. These resolutions authorize the city submit a application to california debt limit Allocation Committee. When bonds are authorized they will be issued as conduit debt and nolt require the city to pledge funds to repay of the bonds. The first project 5th and howard consist of 263 below market rate units and 100 percent affordable and mixed income building located at 921 howard street. The below market rates units serve those not earning more than 50 percent ami. The second project, will be 299 one unit mixed Income Project located at 1601 mariposa. 60 units serve very low income house holds and a portion will be reserved for houses earning no more than 40 percent of ami and the balance is reserved for those earning no more than 50 percent ami. Both of the projects the sponsors plan to submit an application to the california debt limit allocation within 4 weeks. Here is representatives fraup tenderloin development and [inaudible] on behalf of the sponsors like to thank you for the consideration and look forward to your support for the very important projects. Thank you very much. Any question for staff on 7 or 8 . We move to Public Comment . Anybody wish to comment . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Motion to move forward item 7 and 8 to full board with positive recommendation. Motion by supervisor tang and take that without objection. Is there a second . Second by supervisor yee without objection. With that, call item number 9 please. Hearing on the cities financial position and requesting the mayors budget director and budget and legislative analyst and controller to report. Okay, thank you very much. This is a item colleagues we have as a standing item and dont have anything to work on this week so we will continue this. Continue to the call of the chair but will take Public Comment. Anyone wish to comment . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Motion by supervisor tang and second by supervisor yee without objection. We will do a few out of order, calls item 1214. Item 12, ordinance appropriating 207 million to mta for transportation projects and equipment. 13, resolution authorizing the sale issuance and execution of one or more series mta Revenue Bonds in amount not to exceed 207 million. Item number 14, ordinance appropriating approximately 6 million oo support Planning Design and outreach for Capital Improvement projethwith Golden State Warrior [inaudible] thank you very much. We have [inaudible] good morning, thank you for hearing these 3 items. Item 12 and 13 are related to the next sear as of Revenue Bonds which we are seeking approval of the ordinance and resolution. We propose to seek approval of 190 million fund, lightrail vehicle procurement and [inaudible] mission bay Capital Improvement. The fund is 190 million and 1070 mill ynl for lightrail, 48 million for van ness bart and [inaudible] Capital Improvements. The lightrail vehicle is one of our largest projects and we vavariety of Funding Sources to help fund the new lightrail vehicles. The Revenue Bonds are a portion of the Funding Sources and same is true of van nessbert projth. I want to thank you debia newman from budget analyst, did a great job summarizing the bonds. Dont want to bore you details s, so if you have questions happy to answer them. Any questions right now . Okay, mr. Rose can we go to your reports, please . Yes, mr. Chairman and members. On page 7 of our report we report that the estimated total debt service over 30 years is approximatelyim on item 12the Debt Services is 385. 4 million of which 178. 4 is interest and 207 million principle. The bonds will add between 11 million to 16 million in debt service. On page 8, we note that the sfmta will repay the bonds from gross annual revenues which total 626 million312 thousand in 1516 and that is table 7 on page 8 of the report. We recommend you approve the proposed resolution and ordinance. Regarding item 14 , on page 13 of our report we note that according to the Controllers Office when the warriors purchased the 11 acres from sales force in 2015 the sales transaction generated 3, that results in 3 million 50 thousand to mission bay fund. 350 thousand for sfmta increased base line for total 3. 4 million so that one time transfer provides the source of revenues, 3. 4 million for appropriation for arena Capital Improvement for fy 1516 and that is shown on table 1 of page 5 the report. Sales tax and gross receipts tax totaling approximately 2, 310 thousand are projected to be generated for construction the warriors areney in fy 1718. 270 thousand is base line allocation from the sales and gross receipts tax revenues. Provide a total source of revenues [inaudible] and again that is shown on table 1. All of the revenues in the supplemental if they are not generated by warriors sale tax and gross receipts tax is the city general fund would fund a difference so want to note that is a possibility. On page 14 of our report, over 5 year period as shown in table 2 on that page 14, even with the anticipatedgeneral funds contributions to transfer taxes and construction gross receipts taxes and sales taxes, the sfmta will face a revenue shortfall of 34, 508, 573. Sfmta anticipates funding the sort fall through Revenue Bonds and that was the prior item that we just reviewed. As shown in file 6604 and 160465. Request approval not to exceed [inaudible] which includes 35 million of mission Bay Transportation Capital Improvement. The 35 million in the prior item would funds this 34. 5 million projected shortfall. We note according to the the report from the direct of transportation, sfmta will be able to deliver Transit Service to the the warriors project, sfmta can not guarantee future finding for the Transit Service to the warriors project. Accord toog the director of transportation, sfmta supports the warrior project understanding the city, Golden State Warriors and sfmta dont expect adverse impact associated with implementing the Transit Service plan and Capital Investment to support the warriors project and recommend you approve the ord nnss. Thank you. Any questions on items 1214. Seeing none we will open to Public Comment. Anybody wish to comment on items 1214 . Seeing none Public Comment is closed. Any questions or comments at this time . Like to the make a motion to send forth 1214 to full board with positive recommendation. Motion by supervisor tang and second by supervisor kim and take that without objection. Item 10 and 11. Item 10, budget and appropriation ordinance appropriating all estimates received and estimates expenditures for departments as och may 2, 2016. Item 11, annual salary ordinance proposed budget and appropriation ordinance for selected department as of may 2, 2016 for fy 201617 and 2017 to 18. Colleagues these are departmental budgets we started to hear. We will go through a number of them now and start with department of environment. We will not do that. We will move on. Is retirement here . Jake huish . Come on up. Mr. Rose, we want to go to your report . Why dont you let the department go first and well comment. Good morning. Pleasure to be back here. We have reached agreement with the Budget Analyst Office related to adjustments they are recommending to this committee on Department Budget and would like to take the opportunity to thank the committee as well as Budget Analyst Office and mayors Budget Office for supporting the budget for us to fulfill or mission and with that, happy to answer question. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman and members, now im referring to the separate budget analysis report on the budget. On page 42 of the report we note that our recommended reduction to the budget total 616, 503. Still low a increase of of 6. 5 percent in fy 1617 budget. The budget total 576, 097 in 1718. The reduction uzalone increase of 161, 335 or 6 10 of a percent. The department concurs with our reductions which is shown on pages 43 and 44 of our report. Glad to answer any questions. Thank you mr. Rose. Colleagues any questions for mr. Rose or huish . Thank you very much. Colleagues can i entertain a motion to assessment these budget Analyst Recommendations pending Public Comment . So moved. Motion by supervisor tang and second by supervisor yee. We take that without objection. I want to make sure as we start budget season this is the first one we do this appropriately or is there another method . John gibbener, today we take comment on item 10 and 11 and recommend the committee take the motions but not vote on them until after Public Comment and when Public Comment is done adopt. Okay. Fair enough. Madam clerk motion to resend the previous motion to resend. Motion by sfr visor tang and second by supervisor yee without objection and entertain a motion to accept the recommendations afterPublic Comment. Thank you very much. Department of the environment here yet by chance . No problem. My apologies for the timing error. Debbie rafael department of environment and are pleased to say we are in agreement with budget analyst recommendation and accept their changes. Thank you very much. Mr. Rose why dont we go to your report. On page 2 of the report the recommended reductionspage 18 of the report, sorry. Our recommended reductions to the budget total 102, 633. 1617. 92, 918 are on going savings and 9, 750 are 1 time. Allow increase of [inaudible] or 6. 9 percent in the department 1617 budget. [inaudible] all those monies are on pm going savings and as i understand the department concurs with our recommendation, and any further questions or comments . Thank you for coming to agreement. We will entertain that after Public Comment. Next we have bbi. Am hui. Good morning supervisors. Tom hui director of Department Building inspection. We are in agreement with budget analyst. Thank you for them to work with us closely on this budget. If you center any question we can answer it. Thank you very much mr. Hui. Mr. Chairman, members on page 11 of our report our recommended reductions to the budget total 4, 393, 815 in 1617. Of that amount 4, 324, 815 are on going savings and 69,000 are 1 time. Total [inaudible] all of which are on going savings and as i understand it the department concurwise recommended reductions and details are shown on pages 12squaen 16 of the report. Any questions or comments for dbi or budget analyst . Okay, thank you very much for being here. Good morning Megan Wallace from port of San Francisco and we are in full agreement with the budget and legislative analyst recommendation. This is going smooth. Mr. Rose can we get a report, please . Yes. On page 21 of our report our recommended reductions to the budget total 505, 208 in 1617 all are ongoing savings and allow increase of [inaudible] to 23 percent of the 1617 budget. The bulk of that are Capital Improvements that is quhie you see a huge increase in the budget. In addition we recommend closing out prior year unexpending incumbences of 95, 185. Those are on page 23 of the report. Regarding fiscal year 1718 the recommended reductions to the budget total 528, 504 all are on going savings and department concurs with the reductions shown on pages 22 and 23. Colleagues any questions . Thank you for being here. Up next we have our library. Madam clerk, would you call item 22 out of order . Item 22 ordinance appropriating 7. 6 million for general reserve for Public Library and [inaudible] fiscal 1516. Good mornling supervisors regarding the fy 17 and 18 budget we reached agreement with budget analyst and want to thank [inaudible] mr. Rose. We agreed with the reductions proposed. Thank you very much. Mr. Rose can we go to your report, please . Mr. Chairman and members, on page 25 of our report our recommended reductions to the proposed budget total 680, 277 in fy 1617. 664, 527 are on going, 15, 750 are one time. The reductions allow increase of 6, 421 [inaudible] 5. 1 percent in the budget. We also recommend that 1, 772, 592 for Property Leasing on Budget Finance Committee reserve pending submission of a proposed lease it come back to the board of supervisors to budget and finance committee. For 1718 the recommended reductions total 664, 527. Of that amount all are ongoing saichbings and reductions allow increase of 4, 339, 085 or 3. 5 percent in departments 1718 budget. As i understand it the depermanent concur with the recommended reductions. Thank you very much. Supervisor tang. Just a quick question, curious what is the facility near 805 bryant . The purpose is [inaudible] operation jz moving some of the items and collections we have at books hall to a space that is much more adequate and will house our mobile outreach. It will bethe idea it is long term . Yes. We are looking at long term lease. Thank you very much. Item 22 we will consider. Mr. Her era i want to speak separately. Can we approve that now . You can. Thank you very much supervisors. The next item the Library Commission unanimously approved a resolution asking we request to appropriate 7. 5 million from fy 16 general reserve that go thooz payment of our debts associated with the issuance of lease Revenue Bonds. Some of those we use to partially support the completion of Library Improvement program. The supplemental appropriation will reduce the debt at 28 million from the original bond amount of 34 million. We work closely with Controllers Office of Public Finance and indicated the library can refinance our current debt by reducing the prisple and estimate Interest Rates to 2. 6 to 3. 7 percent to the original sale which was 5. 6 percent. It is all good fiscal management to reduce that debt and the long term savings approximate from 14 to 16. 7 million. The bond term is for 25 years and end in 2034 but this will reduce the timeframe so ask for your support approving that appropriation and refunding. We also have jamie curuben from the Controllers Office of Public Financing to answer any questions. Why don we go to the report from mr. Rose. We totally agree this is the best interest of it city to refund the future refunding of these lease Revenue Bonds. On page 40 in table 1 the department on the Controllers Office of Public Finance anticipate savings as the director mentioned. [inaudible] we recommend that you approve this ordinance. Okay. Thank you mr. Rose. Colleagues, any questions. We move to Public Comment for item 22 only. Anyone wish to comment on item 22 . Good afternoon. Peter war field. This was presenteds a prepayment of debt service to save money and there was no mention about brooks hall moving or mention of another facility as i recall. One the issues with the library is distrunkz of the entire west wing of the 5th floor where the bound magazines about half the collection was housed and the removal to brooks hall so there can be a lurbing and Literacy Center placed there which we said could be placed in any store front or Office Building and not as a core function of the library housing the libraries collections so im completely taken aback that now those materials are going to be moved even further away then brooks hall which is basically the underground area in the civic center. I think the lack of public process here is very problematic. It is something that will have something to say about on the overall budget issue, but the idea that collections will be moving further and further away when the literacy and Learning Center functions be in any location in the area of the library or not is very very problematic. It is real dismantling of the library as a library. Thank you. Thank you very much. Anybody else wish to comment on item 22 . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Motion on item 22 please only . Like to move to full board with positive recommendation. Motion by supervisor yee and second by pr visor tang without objection. Thank you very much and thank you to had city library for being here on their budget. We move up next to the airport. Good morning. Cathy wagner with San Francisco airport. The airport is in agreement with budget Analysts Recommendations and we would like to thank mr. Rose and our analyst mr. Low for their work on the airports budget this year. I am happy to answer questions and joined by the airports budget drether if you have specific questions. Thank you very much. Any questions . Mr. Rose can we get a report. Page 2 of the prort the recommended reductions to the budget total 3, 142, 122 in 1617. These reduction allow increase of 38, 589, 602 or 4. 2 percent in the 1617 budget. 1718 total [inaudible] of that amont 1, 501, 726 are ongoing savings and [inaudible] these reductions would still allow increase of 31, 664, 116 or 3 percent the budget and understand the department concurs with the reductions and shown on pages 39 of the report. Any questions . Okay, thank you very much to the airport for being here and up next we have Public Utilities commission. I see mr. Kelly here and team. Good morning. Harlan caly general manager of San Francisco Public Utilities commission and we too are in agreement with the budget analyst and just want to thank them for coming and listening to our stories and working out a win win for everybody. Want to thank them. Okay. Mr. Rose, go to your report, please. We can hear about the stories too if you want on page 29 of our report, i will go over each Division Within the puc, the first is bureau remed reduction to the proposed puc budget 541, 884 in 1617. 419, 884 are on going savings and 122,000 122,000 are 1 time. Hetch hetchy reduction toletal 1, 189, 381 and of that amount 1, 125, 597 are ongoing, 63, 734 are one time. Regarding the water enterprise the reduction to the 1617 budget total 908, 930. 712, 811 are ongoing. Regarding the waste water enterprise recommended reductions to the proposed 1617 budget total 1, 273, 673. Of that amount 1, 225, 805 are on going savings and [inaudible] overall for 1617 the reductions total 3, 913, 818 which allow increase of [inaudible] 1. 6 percent in the 1617 budget. On page 30 of our report for fiscal year 17 hrf 18 the reduction for puc bureaus total 410, 685. Of that are amount all are on going savings. Hetch hetchy and power, recommended reduction total 991, 139 and of that amount 745, 180 are ongoing savings and [inaudible] one time. Regarding the water enterprise our recommended reductions total 959, 632. Of that amount 825, 610 are ongoing savings and [inaudible] water enterprise reduction total 965, 384 all ongoing savings. Recommended reductions total [inaudible] 60, 600, 821 or 6 percent in the budget and understand the department concurs with our recommended reductions which are shown on pages 3140 of our report. Okay. Thank you mr. Rose. Colleagues any questions for the budget analyst or our department . Okay. That is all we have for our item 10 and 11 budgets so we will open up 10 and 11 to Public Comment now. Anybody that wishes to comment on 10 or 11 in our departmental budgets . Parter warfield exectesk director of libraries users. I sent the supervisors last night and delivered a letter concerning the libraries testimony at the last budget and finance Committee Meeting last wednesday. The library has proposed changes only in the pucklic forum you provided, there was nothing at the Libraries Commission or no discussion what so ever as part the budget or any other fashion and that is something that we are very sensitive to. We ask you to ask questions at the very least and perhaps reserve that amount until a proper process can be done at the library can with regard to hours. In general i have to say we are always in favor of more hours, more access student the public, but hours are not potatoes, there are hours the citizens said they wanted consistently to the library through all the surveys and testimony and that is evening and weekends. The library made no clarity to your committee orally or in the presentation materials as to whichwhat the hours will be that are changed nor what existing hours are and there was no process what so ever. I would say also proposition d which made the library rich requires a specific process and have a copy of proposition d which i can give to you and that has not been fallowed either. That is because the library has consistently chinched library hours. The last time they ignoreed what the public said and tried to cut every evening from 9 to 8 oclock and saturday mornings. We fought that and they had to retreat. This should not be imposed unless there is a proper process. Thank you. Any other members of the public who wish to comment on items 10 or 11 . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Colleagues we have departmental budgets for 10 and 11. Unless the City Attorney corrects me bhaut we like to do is take a motion accepting the budget analyst rmd recommendations cuts. All departments in agreement and forward 10 and 11 to the Board Meeting for july 12 of this year 2016. Through the chair like to make a motion to that effect so 10 and 11 adopt the budget analyst recommendation and send to full board with positive recommendation. Motion by supervisor yang and seconded by supervisor yee. July 12. We take that without objection. Would you call 15 and 17 together . [inaudible] the hetchy [inaudible] authorizing the issuance and sales of tax exempt power Revenue Bonds in principle amounts not to exceed 32 million. Item 17, ordinance appropriating approximately 158 million of hetch hetchy revenue and water Revenue Bonds for Capital Improvement program for fy 1617 at 65 million and 2017 to 18 at 93 million. Thank you, the puc is here 250 speak. The next 7 itemsitems 1520 relate to capital funding. All the proposals were vetted in the Public Meetings with the commission as well as Public Meeting with Capital Planning committee. Item 15, 16 and 17 relate to hetch hetchy water and power. Item 16 and 17 relate to 2 year capital appropriation and funding authorization for the next 2 fiscal years for hetch hetchy water and power totaling 158, 125, 130. Happy to answer any question. Thank you. Colleagues, any questions or comments . I think well go to Public Comment for those items then. We wanted to harvey. Mr. Rose. Madam chair, members of the committee, on page 19 of our report for these items, we note the descriptions of the projects are included in the attachment on 23 of the report. On page 21 as you know supervisors the power bonds are repaid from the sfpuc hetch hetchy power enterprise revenues generated largely from the sale of electricity. Sfpuc charges different rates to customers, the airport and sfpuc pay rets set by pg e. Others play different rates shown on table 4 of page 21 of the report. The sfpuc adopted new rates for other city departments increasing the rates by 50 cents per kilo watt hour shown in table 4. On page 22 i will revise our first recommendation. Instead of aminding file 160473 to specify that the sfpuc submit future legislation to the board of supervisors we recommend that you amend file 160473 to require the sfpuc submit report to budget and finance committee on sale of the bonds and recommend you approve file 160473 as amended and 160470 and 160475. Thank you very much. Colleagues, any questions . Comments . May i just make a comment that the increase to power rates was a half cent, not 50 cents. Okay. We will move to Public Comment. Anybody wish to comment . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. We have a bla recommendation for the legislation. Any comments or questions from the puc on the recommendation . No we are in agreement with the recommendation. Colleagues, unless any questions or comments or objections we entertain a motion to accept the budget analyst recommendation and move forward. Make a motion to item 15 to amind the puc submit future legislation for future sale bonds and approve 16 and 17 all with positive recommendation. Motion by supervisor tang i believe item 15 is hearing. Okay. Could we then motion to file item 15. [inaudible] whats that . Would you like to release the reserved funds . Let me triple check here what we are doing. On 15 is release reserves. That is part of the legislation supervisor and recommend you release those monies. Those are mitigation revenues. I resend my motion. Item 15, lets go first with motion to release 2. 7 million reserve. Motion by supervise rb tang, veckd by supervisor yee and take without objection. Number 15 be filed . A motion to file 15. Take without objection. Item 16 and 17 and apologize i forget the budget analyst recommendation applies to but to amend so the puc comes back before us with legislation to approve future sale of bonds. That is item 16, correct . Just clarify that supervisor tang, it is file 160473 and instead of requiring separate legislation to report back to budget and finance committee is our recommendation. Okay. Great. So, what harvey said for item 16 and move forward item 16 and 17 with amendment with positive recommendsation to full board. Amend items 16 and move forward 16 and 17 with positive recommendation . Correct. Thank you everybody. Motion by supervisor tang and second by supervisor kim without objection. Call items 18 and 19. Item 18 ordinance appropriating approximately 2 272 millions from bonds water revenue and [inaudible] Public Utilities commission [inaudible] 150 million and 201718 122 million. [inaudible] other form of indetness by Public Utilities not to exceed 265 million to finance the cost of various capital Water Project benefiting the water enterprise. Thank you very much. Items 18 and 19 are similar to what you just heard item 16 and 17. They relate to 2 year capital appropriation and funding authorization for water enterprise totedling 272, 233, 620. The items were vetted in 5 Public Meetings and Public Meeting of Capital Planning committee and happy to answer questions. Any questions . Mr. Rose can we go to your report . Yes. On page 27 of the report we note that the descriptions of the proposed projects are included on page 29 of our report. On page 28 of the report we note according to the 1617 Financial Plan plans a 10 percent increase in water rates in 201617 and 7 percent increase in water rates in fy 201718 to cover the water enterprise operating capital costs. The sfpuc estimates the average rate water bill will increase brie 4 in 1617. Again by another 3 in 1718 from 44 to 47 in fy 1718. Again, we have the same recommendation that we made on the first item. We revice to report to budget and finance committee instead of separate legislation and recommend you approve the files as amended. Thank you mr. Rose. Any questions . Any comments on the recommendation . We agrie with the budget analyst. Move to Public Comment. Anybody wish to comment on item 18 or 19 . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. We have recommendation by there budget analyst. Comments, questions, motions . Motion to send forth to full board with positive recommendations. Item 18 and 19. With budget analyst recommendation. Motion accepted budget analyst recommendation. Motion by supervisor tang and second by supervisor yee without objection. Item 20 and 21. Item 20. [inaudible] control board [inaudible] waste water revenue [inaudible] item 21, ordinance authorizing issuance and sales of tax exempt or taxable waet waster revenue bond in [inaudible] Public Utilities commission in principle amounts not to exceed 1. 1 billion to finance the cost of various capital waste Water Project benefiting the waste water enterprise. Thank you very much. Eric sandsler, 20 and 21 are similar to the legislation you heard with respest to waste water enterprise. Two year capital appropriation for the next 2 fiscal years and funding authorization for those capital appropriation and total 1, 112, 601. That concludes the presentation. Assume you are okay with the budget analyst recommendation . Any comments . On the bottom page of 34 of the report we note that the proposed projects are included on page 37 of the report. Page 35 the sfpuc bills for water and sewer bill. The average is 86, 40 is water and 46 is sewer. According to the 1617 to 2526 Financial Plan the puc plans 7 percent increase in sewer rates in fy 1617 and 11 percent increase in sewer rates in 1718 to cover the waste water enterprise operating and capital cost. The puc estimates that the average monthly residential sewer bill increases by 4 in 1617 and by 7 in fy 1718. We have there same recommendation thatd you amind file 60471 to require the sfpuc to submit report on budget and finance committee on the sale of the bond. We recommend you approve. Seeing nobody for Public Comment, it is closed. Like to make a motion to approve item 20 and 21 to amend with budget analyst recommendation and send both to full boret with positive recommendation. Take those without objection. Colleagues, we arewe blew through 21 items in a hour in 20 minutes. We are going to go into recess until 4 30 p. M. Where we will have a joint meeting with Youth Commissioners so with that, we are okay, welcome back from recess. We are ought our regular scheduled boferd supervisor bijt and finance Committee Meeting. Thank the Youth Commissioners mpt supervisor yee and are not here. Call item 23. Item 23, hearing to receive update on San Francisco Youth Commission policy and Budget Priorities for fiscal year 20162017 and 20172018. Thank you madam clerk. We have the Youth Commission here to share their priorities. Welcome and thank you for spending the time and putting together your packet. Want to welcome you up to make your presentation. Good afternoon Budget Committee u , thank you for having us. Ill jillion lieu. Our charter duty to present to the budget and finance committee the Budget Priorities this year. There are things we have been working on this year and things we hope for the Youth Commission working on next year and into the future. Ill present the first Budget Priority which is investing in education and engagement of young voters. We would like to thank you again for sharing the chamber with us in the first youth xhirgz board of supervisors joint meeting and voting this into the november 2016 ballot. So, as you all know i wont go into history explanation of what vote 16 and this priority is, but briefly go over updates such as 16 and 17 preregistration opportunities [inaudible] work as poll workers in the june and november election and School District and board of education promises to step up the [inaudible] crimulum and stuntd registration efforts in public high schools. Our recommendation is we hope that vote 16 passes this november even if it does not we hope the board and mayor lee encourage voter par tisitation especially in 16, 17 and young voters which are historically low voter turn out. Partner with the School District registering students to vote and exploring opportunities and supporting already existing efforts to allow 16, 17 year olds to vote or encourage them to vote such as Youth Empowerment [inaudible] created in the Youth Commission and you may have seen this speak in the cojoint meeting. They have done a lot of work to get the initiative where it was. Theyprinted two different leaders to Community Members and work behind the scenes and like to thank them as well. Moving to commissioner lee recollect on the next priority. Thank you for having us today. Im commissioner lee, district 4 commissioner and our second priority is engage youth and Community Benefit agreements and Community Benefit districts so the Youth Commission has championed youth choice while investigating the [inaudible] better support youth, we hosted a town hall and returned with a wide range of asks, there were about 20. We thought there was no better way to encompass young peoples perspective than having a youth representative sit on the citizen advisory committee. So, our next priority results from one of the most popular requests of the town hall that i mentioned earlier and that is more Work Force Development opportunities especially from technology communities. Some of the companies have already done work in the area however, Work Force Development is a priority. In the 201415 fiscal year [inaudible] had 30 percent more participants that expected so we met with office of economic and Work Force Development to see how well we can work with private Sector Companies to create more Work Force Development opportunities and they told us a lault of these companies are willing to work with us so we want it take advantage of the Many Technology comps companies in San Francisco. Ill pass it over to the next commissioner. Good afternoon budget and finance committee, thank you for having us, my name is [inaudible] from district 10. I will present priority 4. We ask the board of pr visors invest alternatives to building a new jail. Last year the full Youth Commission we supported to not have [inaudible] a lot of youth came out to the hearing we had from Youth Experiences who experienced parents of incarceration and how that directly impacted their lives. We came to the conclusion to oppose the detention center. So, for there is adult young court which is established in the process of last year 2015 where from the ages of 18 to 25 year olds are accepted into the program. This excludes homicides, gang and gun violences offenses also. This is a way to invest in the youth and give them another chance which is a great way and alternative also. We want the city Capital Investment to reflect the values of young san franciscan responsible for paying for jails and jails would cost a lot of money. Recommendations we ask the board of supervisors invest to alternative [inaudible] considering there are a lot of youth in the jail population. And also we provide need services for non detention settings and include minuteal health, job placement, educational resources. And as for the priority 5, we ask the board of pr visors also include services for [inaudible] incarceration is the most Adverse Childhood Experiences and there are [inaudible] so, we have 3 areas so one is time of arrest. There is a department general order 7. 04 which is the Police Commission [inaudible] which is just Police Officer making sure there is [inaudible] when is a parent is being arrested if the child is present. Also visitation policies so communication barriers are a challenge with children with incarcerated parents have so we ask that support is also [inaudible] visitation. [inaudible] county jails. We had met with sheriff hensy committed to supporting this. Finally, School District support. Sfusd has committed to support children with incarcerated parent and implementing a [inaudible] for our recommendations, we just ask that there is expanding and training of department general ordjure ask it is actually implemented and really follow through and continue to advertise and evaluate [inaudible] support communication between the parent and child and the School District [inaudible] focus School Districts and yeah, just helping them out. And ill move to priority 6. Good evening supervisors. My name is jeo vona sotey and district 9 Youth Commissioner. Increase service and support for Homeless Youth and declare 2017 the year of recognizing Homeless Youth. So, nationally there are about over 300,000 Homeless Youth. We have recommendations to solve this problem. The first is declare 2017 the year of Homeless Youth to know Homeless Youth are not bad and erase the stigma they are run aways. We want to dedicate staff to help Homeless Youth at the new department of homelessness. We also want to revisit the Youth Homeless count because if you see the numbers from the different reports there is a lot of variances which the numberswe get a better system for that. Our next priority is to fund and complete the transitional age youth housing plan and [inaudible] there are approximately 8,000 youth in San Francisco and to combat this issue in 2005 mayor newsome created a National Transitional Age Youth Task force to help the city support the youth and create a housing plan. It is supposed to be completed in 2015 with 400 units but there was a lot of neighborhood opposition and the recession happened so there want time and money to make the units. And there are 730 unit that need to be identified and our recommendation is we complete the goal of 2015 housing plan and that we make a new one to make sure there is enough housing for everyone with the current numbers. We want to plan budget for the on site supportive needs of tay and Supportive Housing and address tay housing. We want promote learn wink the tay population so they know their rights and can have things like Credit History and yeah, all that stuff. Thank you. Thank you very much. So good afternoon supervisors. [inaudible] current chair thof Youth Commission and one of 6 appointees. For priority 8 we ask the may rs aufs and San Francisco boardf supervisors look into had expanded youth fund and allocation for tay services. The childrens funtd was expanded with 73 voter approval. The Childrens Fund received additional funding and as a result after school and Youth Programs have been implemented but as a consequences we have not seen the same amount of allocations for tay services, so as our policy recommendation and as our recommendation to all of you is that you look into the different possibility to expened the Childrens Fund to reflect the amount of tay services needed within the city and we see a proportional amount of tay funding allocate d to the same amount of age groups funded under the Childrens Fund and other allocations. Thank you. Moving to priority 9. We also ask the board to insure there is respective relationship with sfpd and youth in general. The Youth Commission has met with the Police Commission and as paresult of that there is also the mou which willthe relationship between ross and the School District. The only recommendation we have, there is ongoing relationship with sfpd and youth and ask there ask deescalation and training strategies youth can interact because you have been protested when alex neito and mario woods shooting this year and present at the youth forums hosed by [inaudible] and also the Police Commission. So, for priority number 10, we ask the mayor and board of supervisors to look fl to methods for implementing successful [inaudible] as you know, 12 n is a administrative code policy since 1999, but for reasons for better or worse, we have seen it is a severely under funded mandate. In 2014 the Youth Commission and supervisor avalos held many works groups to see what the issues were particularly with 12 n and from the conversations held it was noted that what really need today be implemented is funding. Money city departments that primarily serve use such as dpys and jpd would like a tracking system that identifies lgbt youth and see the Different Services but the implementation isnt what we expected or ask in the years past so like to see this policy revisit and see for ways city family can come together and have successful implementation. So our 11th priority is continue support for free muni for youth. As you know the Youth Commission is working for a long time to make sure free muni is accessible for all youth and we have seen really good improvements in the ridership of youth with less fair evasion and using clipper cards so we want to make sure this stays on the budget. Yeah, so we are grateful for support of the board of supervisors and mayor and google and want to ask you guys to continue supporting it and to commit to keeping the funding. Thank you. For our 12th and final budget and policy priority, we ask the mayor and San Francisco board of supervisors continue to support city college of San Francisco so it is open and accessible and democratly run. As many knhoe, city college has been under attack for accreditation and caused a mount of concern as this caters to a lot of under represented communities. Most recently after an injunction filed by the City Attorney, dennis her reaa the institution was granted a two year period to come fl to compliance after a debate between [inaudible] decision and Many Community advocates that advocateed for the college not to be closed. The college is under a 2 year period to come into compliance and ask that the board to continue for ways to continuely support the city college of San Francisco. As a result of the accreditation crisis many student have dropped out of the college. The enrollment dwidled. Many people were not happy to see the democratly elected board of trustees chs revoked but recently put into place and ask to continue to keep an eye on city college for potential future debates which it is accredited and open access institution. Thank you. I like to thank you again for having us and i hope that we continue to work on these priorities with you further and if you have questions or comments about any priorities. Thank you very much. Colleagues. Supervisor tang. I just want to thank you for all the time you put into this incredibly detailed document. I look forward to reading the supporting Details Behind your Budget Priorities and it is helpful for all of us to hear exactly what your priorities are for the upcoming fiscal year so want to thank you for that. This is really great. I aults want to acknowledge the Youth Commission. This is one of the most impressive presentations i have seen and really comprehensive and touches on the important ish oo as we are facing in the city and talk about at the boferd supervisors. I also you know, something that i would love to see in terms of priority 9 working with Police Officers, i would love to figure a way to get nor San Francisco student into sfpd. It is good job but we know residents that grew up here can serve the communities better because this is their city and they are familiar with our diversity. Now that we have ethnic studies and lgbqq studies in the high schools are getting the education they need beyond the communities they live in so love to the work with the Youth Commission to figure how to recruit more San Francisco youth residents especially young people because that is important getting more of our residents in that department. Finally, i love to come speak over the summer about the city College Proposal to make City College Free for all resident and love to have the Youth Commission support on that through the luxury housing real estate transfer tax. We can be the first city in the country to make City College Free for all residents and it is a Important Institution as many of you know and would love to be able to get your feedback and thoughts on our proposal and how we can make it work administratively so many student from your persfecktive perspective and what you are hearing. Let me echo the comments. Thank you for your hard work on a monthly basis. Thank you for your presentation. To lily, in the back you cant hide. Thank you for being here for all yourheard work. Thank you everyone and look forward working together in the budget season and having the conversations as we go forward. Okay. If colleagues no other questions or comments why dont we open up item 23 to Public Comment. Anyone want to comment on this item or sing about this item . Good afternoon budget and finance committee. [singing] when the lights go down in the city, and the sunshines on the budget bay, wont you may it better for the Youth Commission today. They really need your help. Wont you help them with college free, okay. The budget has magic you know the money has it and suddenly the school youth turns into gold filling up their lives with golden budget, coming their way today. City goal finger, the city with the midas touch and it has budget too. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else wish to comment on sing on item 23 . Okay, seeing none, Public Comment is closed. I will reopen Public Comment. My name is Jessica Williams and a youth advisory member for larkin street and work for transational age yulth for San Francisco. I attend San Francisco State University and the only reason im able to attend this university is because i live in tay housing and one of the main reasons i live in tay housing is because i cant affords to live in San Francisco. With gentrification and all the things going on in San Francisco a lot of transitional age youth whether we are student or do vocational jobs, whether we are working diverse jobs we need spaces to live and are here and want to give voiz and rise the voices of lgbtq youth in San Francisco especially transitional age youth. I want you to consider everything the Youth Commission has done and appreciate the work and also want to emphasis if you can look over more in depth the Affordable Housing for transitional age youth because without it people like myself would be on the streets and just because i cant afford to live in San Francisco or live in San Francisco and attend San Francisco state doesnt mean people like me dont deserve to be here but there isnt space to be here now and you have a opportunity to create the space. There are radical orgners creating space and you can be a part of that movement as well. Thank you. Thank you very much. Anybody else wish to comment . Okay. Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Thank you everybody for being here today. Colleagues can i entertain a motion to file 23 . Motion by supervisor tang and second by supervisor kim. Any other business in front of us . No, mr. Chair. Okay, thank you everyone, we are adjourned. [meeting adjourned]