If an intersection is not marched is it still a crosswalk yes did you get it right great job one more before we go on whats one of the best things to do to avoid collisions . You can it take a breath Pay Attention and slow down city streets are crowded and chaotic so seeing everyone every single everything is difficult heres a test how many times did the white team pass the ball . If you answered 11 youre correct but did you notice anything else also be aware ever youre surrounded and remember that is easy 0 miss something if youre not looking for it heres some basic principles driving near peep e people from youre drivers seat it is difficult address our mirrors to reduce blind spots people on bicycles maybe be in our blind spot give yourselves plenty of time to react look out stay on the road from building to building not just curve to curve check driveways and behind parked vehicles for people that enter our path turning vehicles are especially dangerous important people walking and collisions often occur when vehicles are making tunnels when you turn remember check for people using the crosswalk before starting youre turn watch for people on bikes traveling in the ongoing direction always check our mirrors and blind spots patience pays off take a moment to make sure youre clear while it might feel youll save time by driving fast or turning without checking you wont save driving only adds a few semiautomatic to our trip a collision can cost you, your job or someones live heres important things to remember all crosswalks are legal and pedestrian have the rightofway people cross the street anywhere children and seniors and people with disabilities are the most vulnerable think city strits give buses and streetcars a lot of the space or people returning to catch a train dont block the box this creates dangerous situation for people walking how are forced into moving traffic and people bicycling out of the bike lane and people on bikes most city streets are legal for bicyclists even without signs people biking can fall in front of you provide a safe amount of space when passing someone on a bike a minimum of 3 feet is required by law in california and people on bikes prefer to be in the bike lane in for the this is often to avoid accidents give them room people on bikes will stay away from the traffic or watch out for open doors whoops that was a close one expect people to go to the front of the light and pass on the right a tap of the horn maybe useful to make youre preservation known but avoid using the horn it may saturday night be someone vehicles anybody right turns are especially dangerous important biking always approach right turns properly signal early and wait for people biking through the intersection move as far to the right to people on bikes can pass on the left lets try a few more questions who are the most Vulnerable People on city streets . Children . Seniors, and people with disabilities why do people on bikes ride close to travel there to avoid car doors what is one of the most dangerous situations for people walking and riding bikes . Turning vehicles and what can you do to make sure that everyone is safe in any situation . Thartsz stay patient and alert and, of course, slow down parking and loading a vehicle on accredit city streets is a challenge weather parking and unloading always check for people in our mirrors and blind spots and on the drivers side with our right turn right hand this causes you to look 40 on your left for bicyclists when passersby exiting the vehicle make sure about opening the door know where loading zones are if not loading zones available use side streets never stop in bike lanes or traffic lanes. Bad weathering and visible rain and fog or low lighting make it hard to see youre vehicle is likely to slide or loss control in eye i didnt controls and create issues for people walking and biking they tried try to avoid pulled and umbrellas and construction get slippery for people the safety thing to do in conditions whether wet or icy or dark slow down and drive more carefully remember going fast may on this save you a few semiautomatic but speeding may cause you a life or youre job people walking and biking are Vulnerable People can be distracted or make unsafe decisions as a driver the responsibility for safety lies with you a collision could mean the loss of our life or youre job and dealing with the legal implementations could take years or an emotional toll if someone is killed in a crash help us achieve vision zero and everyone can use the streets safely. Thank you for watch and following the important driving tests your remember were counting on you [gavel] good morning everybody and welcome to the San Francisco board of supervisors budget and finance Committee Meeting for wednesday, july 13, 2016. My name is mark farrell of chairing the committee. Im joined by katie tang and to revise or aaron peskin and john avalos. I want to thank the clerk of the committee as well as sfgov tv for covering the meeting today. Mdm. Clerk any announcements . Yes. [reading code] thank you very much. Colleagues, we have 24 items to get through today. We will get started mdm. Clerk would you please call items one and two together. Item 1, [reading code]. Item number two, [reading code]. Thank you very much. These items are sponsored by supervisor peskin so i will turn it over to him thank you chairman farrell and committee members. Thank you for hearing this item. Previously it is that before you for one small amendment pursuant to the Capital Planning committees recommendation and i would like to offer that amendment. By way of background, some quarter of a century ago in the wake of the earthquake, then supervisor tom shade offered a 350 million general Obligation Bonds for unreinforced masonry building loans and here we are 25 almost years later and much of that money remains unspent. This measure would be purpose and broaden the obligatory of those funds to allow for the acquisition improvement and rehabilitation of at risk multiunit residential buildings. The Mayors Office of housing and Community Development made a suggestion, which i will offer as a amendment which will require one special meeting of this committee and i appreciate your indulgence mr. Chairman for accommodating that. Specifically, on page 4, line 14, we would like to for the cpcs unanimous recommendation, strike the words, equal to, and insert, the words, no less than so that it reads, Interest Rate no less than one third of the citys true cost. In other words, the city could on the Affordable Housing side of the program charge more than one third of the interest if Properties Cash flow correctly or the nonprofits that are seeking those monies have the ability to pay a higher Interest Rate. Okay. So supervisor peskin reason i see ms. Hartley is here from the Mayors Office of housing and Community Development and i dont know what they call your department anymore but public finance. Okay. Supervisor peskin has made a motion. Second . Moved and seconded. Will entertain that after Public Comment it before we do that mr. Rose can we go to reports for item 1 and two . Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, supervisor peskin, supervisor avalos, on page four of our report, this pertains, i believe, to what you were just referring to. Under the existing market Rate Loan Program and Affordable Housing loan program for market rate loans, the Property Owner pays the full amount of the principal and interest cost and for Affordable Housing loans the Property Owner pays the full principal and one third interest cost and the city pays 2 3 inches cost. Therefore, the expand allowable use of the opposition general Obligation Bonds could increase the citys expanded allowable use of the proposition that are offered general Obligation Bonds cost for Affordable Housing, but its not expected to impact the citys property tax rate of other twoway 06 property tax rate base budget however, as i understand it the committee is just considered amending that those provisions. We also note according to the Mayors Office of housing and Community Development depending on the additional work required by the proposed program, the Mayors Office of housing and community bauman may need to add one additional fulltime equivalent staff to administer the program and on page 5 our recommendation consider approval of the proposed resolution and speed is to cement his opposition to the San Francisco voters to the policy matter for the board of supervisors thank you very much mr. Rose. Any question for budget analyst at this time . Or staff . With that will open up to Public Comment did anyone wish to comment on items one or two today . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. [gavel] so, we have a amendment in front of us. Emotion than to accept supervisor peskins amendment as earlier stated its been moved and seconded. Will take that without objection [gavel] colleagues, any questions or comments or a motion to approve the underlying item as amended no. I will make a motion to send four items one and 212 special budget Committee Meeting, i believe. Is that what we need to do . So date to be determined, may be monitored we can continue these items to the call of the chair all right. So ill move to continue items one and two to the call of the chair as amended okay. Moved and seconded. We can take that without objection [gavel] thank you supervisor peskin mdm. Clerk please call item number three item number three we can do item 3 and four together. Item number three, [reading code]. Item number four, [reading code]. Thank you very much aye. Colleagues, both these items are in front of us in terms of their two different current sales tax proposals in front of us today. That i know will be part of our discussion here. I just want to say for my perspective, why think everyone working on these issues over the past year, plus. Its taken a lot of work both in terms of city staff, in terms of members of the board of supervisors, but also organizations and individuals outside of city appeared i would think everyone in this regard. I think theres some obviously wrote a letter to go here before we get one or two of them out of city hall into the voters in november. I will say, i will certainly be supporting item number three. Im certainly supportive of item for as well. I think was only ones obviously only one of them will end up getting out of city hall. There will not be to the november ballot. Just as a reminder, august lee, the budget we passed out of committee the other week was based upon a threequarter cent sales tax is something im fully supportive of. I think both the dual issues of supporting additional funding for transportation in the city of San Francisco, as well as the funding for Homelessness Services as well, i think is critically important to longterm sustainable funding for both these issues that are very serious issues here in the city of San Francisco an incredibly important. Ill be supportive of those. So, with that, colleagues, supervisor avalos thank you. I have to at least called up together so we can do some amendment to item number four, which is the transportation tax of the half syntax dedicated solely to transportation and transit. Essentially, what i want to do is recommend we passed amendment that would align both the transportation sides together. This would align the amendment today, would align the transportation expenditure plan that is in item number four, with that of the Charter Amendment that is at the full board of supervisors. And we have people from the Transportation Authority to are here to explain what those with the expenditure plan would be. We talked about it yesterday at the Transportation Authority, but now we have the actual amendment here that is before us. We had come together as a board, the mayor, Transportation Authority, and representatives from transit advocates from around the city on basic structure for what we would put in the expenditure plan back when we first introduced the Charter Amendment and a threequarter cent sales tax. Theres been a little but of Movement Since that time to make sure we can ask a gold in greater structures for affordability and to how we would anticipate changes in revenue coming in and thats what thats whatwill explain here. Good morning Maria LombardiTransportation Authority at all keep this very brief the supervisor avalos said. The proposed changes to the half cent sales tax are to bring it in alignment with changes made to the Charter Amendment. Of course just on the transportation side. The main three changesall just enumerate real quicklythe first was an adjustment in the projected revenue additional increment of funding. That increment in order to address the affordability and equity type images was put evenly between the muni Transit Service and affordability Category Division zero st. And complete streets category. Thats the six category percentages. The Second Amendment was related to a trigger that would allow the sfmta eight to flex its capital money from category two towards category one for operations. Thats meant to be activated on bad Economic Times to prevent service cuts. The last significant adjustment that were making to the charter is the double trigger related to the servicing category which is the category receive some of the funding. The first two triggers have to do it, if you funding is secured for street resurfacing such as vehicle license fees or the existing prop k transfer tax is reauthorized, that is the board of supervisors and the mayor ability to we allocate the servicing i locations to the other five categories. So were not over funding street resurfacing. Theres also a third trigger related to street resurfacing that says in year 2027 the board of supervisors or mayor could decide if priorities of change or funding available they could similarly reallocate funds from street resurfacing two other categories. Theres other technical and cleanup changes related to the transportation sales tax such as estimating the total amount of revenue for each category. Great. Thank you just to confirm, with the triggers and the expenditure plan theyd nearer each other in this measure the half cent sales tax. Absolute your will would get funded in the sheer category are identical great. Thank you. After Public Comment i like to recommend this moves to the full board. We can then recommend both for [inaudible] its fun. Thats what i would ask the motion for shortages speaker this memo is for item for only . Okay kid with similar provisions in item 3 item 3 is basically the threequarter sales tax and then the Charter Amendment the company sam is that right, okay this measure martyrs that Charter Amendment with expenditures and triggers thanks very much. Okay. So, with that colleagues any questions or comments . We will open it up to Public Comment on items three and four. Would anyone like to publicly comment on item 3 or four . Please, step forward district for residents in opposition to this item. It is a little confusing because it seems like they were both looking forward im a but the chamber of commerce has stated their 400 million in tax increases on this ballot alone. Sales tax increases disproportionately affect low income people and people on fixed income. So, when i was going to recommend for the sake of consistency to put both of these two on the out side by side but since only one of them is core to move forward and im not sure which one, that kind of changes. Just to end by quoting the legislative digest on this item number four, and i would quote, the Transportation Authority has received. 5 of the combined rate since 1990 prop b superseded by 2003 prop k. The tax imposed by this ordinance is additional to the existing taxes and would increase the transportation of the combined rate to 1. 00 . Thank you okay thank you very much. Anybody else wish to publicly comment . Good morning supervisor. Im here on behalf of supervisor weiner who cannot be here at this. He just asked that i come and thank everyone for their efforts about the Charter Amendment and on the dedicated extended to plan in particular. Its been a long process with a lot of input from both the mayoral staff, city staff, your offices, and the advocates community and i think we come to a good place and i just want to express supervisor weiner support for where we are where the money for transportation is being allocated to and thank you all for your efforts. Thank you mr. Cretin. Anybody else wish to comment on items three or four . Public comment is closed. [gavel] colleagues, theres a amendment proposed here for item for. What i understand though that item will have to be continued because theres a amendment. So, what we could do is if we are going to entertain a special meeting, what we can do is continue to that to the call of the chair and hopefully we can schedule it in august to be discussing these at the same, the board of supervisors. So, first, tonight entertain a motion to amend item number four as been discussed . That wasnt my understanding. I do not realize this was going to be up substantive amendment. Andbut i was hoping they could both go forward but i want to be clear about that. We have mr. Elwin talk about that. Whether we can actually make this amendment and move it to the full board . , one city attorneys office. Ive not seen the actual text of the amendment but from the description it does sound substantive. Which would require a continuance. Supervisor avalos we were relatively lengthy agenda. Oddly we will then get through we can suddenly wait until the techs comes through in a definitive opinion it would rather do that . That would be great. We can hold off on moving forward. Would like to do is keep them altogether. No, no. Thats the intention of everyone. So regardless. Supervisor tang one potential idea i know we do usually have to continue all items for a week if they have any sort of amendment its an initiative or ballot measure. If we do hold a special meeting on monday can we do a Committee Report on tuesday . On item 4 i think that would be the idea. I think that would probably be the right right, exactly supervisor avalos can we move forward without now and then with a commitment to do that full intent to do that . 50 get it on the calendar but we will work towards that. If thats the case all make a motion to amend item for as supervisor avalos stated, and then for item 3, send that to the board of supervisors with a positive recommendation, and then for item 4, send that to work continue to the call pitcher as amended and then will do without later. Okay we will have a special meeting of the budget Committee Meeting on monday and have that in the Committee Report thats the full intent it again and have not the calendar yet on mission were able to do that but, yes, thats what we will do. Ive no attention to the discussion at the full board without them being together with that, weve a bit about on this motion by supervisor tang we can take that without objection [gavel] thank you, colleagues. Mdm. Clerk please call item 5 item 5, [reading code]. Thank you. Barbara hill fromto speak thank you, barbara hill assistant general message manager for power. The natural license agreement with at t for outdoor antenna systems is before you for approval. What are outdoor antenna systems . Welcome i the picture here if sfgov tv could bring up the slide . So, you can see what kind of equipment we are talking about. This equipment consists of a lowpower antenna connected to fiber optic lines that, then, are connected to the carriers public. The purpose of these facilities is to distribute Wireless Network coverage enhancing wireless cellular and data capacity. And providing benefits to San Francisco. Why are we before you . Well, back in october of 2014 are Commission Approved the Streetlight Program license program could include a master license agreement, terms and conditions, and authorize our general manager at the puc to execute those master license agreements after approval of the board. We have brought 34 to you already. Master license agreement to the board already. This one is with at t. It has a 12 year term as have the others and it will generate in excess we are estimating inaccessible 1 million and hence, we are here seeking your approval. This slide gives you a quick overview of the master license Agreement Terms and conditions. I just want to highlight here for you on slide five, that the puc is envisioned to be the electricity provider for all of these City Program Services good we are encountering some difficulties with pg and executing that intent. Pg e is challenging a right to serve electricity to the city program without us making cost prohibitive and unnecessary investments in additional electrical infrastructure. I just want to note that because that could affect the pace with which we pursue the program and the revenues that are associated with it. So, the puc and public works Work Together on this program. What you see on this slide is a quick review of public works responsibilities to site and construct oversee the construction, of the facility and then this next slide reviews with the pucs responsible bizarre. We work with planning on the ceqa aspects and the aesthetics of the program, but really were looking at technical review purposes or impacts on our street lights that system we own and for electrical interconnection. The program as it exists provides multiple benefits to the city and to the puc. City benefits are listed here. You can see, it is really around the issue of enhanced wireless coverage for the public and for City Services providing an expansion of the Fiber Networks that provide public benefits. The licensing component of this utilize nation of our city streetlights allows us to generate some revenue from the program as well. Along those lines, we are projecting here with the revenue estimates are for the master license agreements. You can see both for at t and for the other carriers, these are low and high estimates. Youre getting a range between almost 20 million and was 40 million a year over the 12 years. Our actuals, so far, for both the onetime fees and the annual recovering revenues are shown here on slide 10. You can see for at t, so far weve just collected some of the fees. We are not seeing any of the license components showing up as a revenue yet because we have not executed that agreement. Its pending your approval. That am happy to answer any questions you may have thank you. Supervisor tang thank you for your presentation i was just wondering if given these are all on the light poles, theyll all look like the photo that you showed us . Primarily, yes good we have not seen all of the configurations. But were getting a lot of cooperation together with planning and the carriers to be very sensitive to what the aesthetics of this program looks like. If you have Something Like this outside your flat window on the second floor commit really matters. We understand that. So do the carriers and so weve had a lot of success in getting good cooperation from the carriers to keep the size and the look of these as streamlined and small as possible. These are the ones going on michaels like this i think that something most of us ugly would not notice when were walking down the street was also helpful for the nearby residents. We certainly have received many complaints from residents about the design and the bulkiness of some of the installations. I know some of them for different purposes. Now, when the city enters into agreements like this with the various carriers, does it mean that it may also reduce the amount of insulation that say, maybe of different sizes or shapes or more intrusive for the residential neighborhoods . Yes. These would be instead of a larger cellular tower type installation. So, these augment the system and allow for improved Service Without having to add the more traditional cell towers that youre familiar with. Okay. I would just say that for me personally, i do prefer it when our City Department can find our existing City Infrastructure to work with the carriers on these types of installations that look so much less intrusive but still serve the various purposes that obviously, they need. For all of us. So, i though it, yes, the city can enter agreement like this would avoid a lot of the conflict we see with the neighbors where we really as the city dont have a lot of say in terms of where they can go and what they look like and so forth. So, i appreciate this agreement for us here today thank you supervisor yee thank you. Its almost off followup of supervisor tangs question. In regards to the placing of which polls you might choose, i am just curious, if the polls run in front of somebody sounds and they really object, what is therethe process further to appeal . So, it goes to the standard of appeal process for permits like this. Its my understanding its before planning. So far, we have managed to avoid and locatei should say, through the collaborative process with the carriers hearing from residents, we have been able to locate these facilities we are we are not running into conflicts that end up in a full review. So, so far so good. Wethe kind of feedback im hearing today is very helpful to us because when the carriers here you express these concerns, they take seriously when we say to them, you need to work with us so that we dont have conflicts coming to the planning, coming to the board through the review process. So, its very helpful to hear the kinds of feedback and questions you are asking me so we can reflect those in our conversations with the carriers. We have so far received a lot of cooperation with them and relocated facilities to different locations when we encounter this dissatisfaction by residents. I appreciate your answer and its really helpful that weve had this program somewhat and i have not heard any complaints yet, but thats reassuring to them i want to support this new ask thank you. Supervisor tang just one additional question. I think it said that we would have access or puc wouldve access to about four strands of fiber so, per installation on each. What does that get us as a city . In such a buildup of Fiber Network network further. I will use the City Services that utilize that Fiber Network it were looking for opportunities to incorporate that Infrastructure Improvement in this program rather than having to separately fund and implement it. So its incremental improvements on the citys Fiber Networks as used for various Communications Needs for the city. Okay. Colleagues, any further questions the one mr. Rose can we go to report for item 5 yes mr. Chairman and members of the committee. On page 11 of our report we know but over the 12 year term of the postmaster license agreement the estimated revenues payable to the sf puc from at t and thats not including the onetime fees would range from 13 Million Dollars for 250 street light pole licenses, two 24 million and that would be for 500 street light pole licenses, and that shown in table 4. Again on page 11. On page 12, if you combine this three existing agreements youve already approved with this proposed agreement, then the total estimated revenues range from 19 million to 39 million, and that shown on table 5, on page 12 of our report. The report on page 13, supervisors, consistent with the previous board of supervisors policy we recommend you amend the proposed resolution specify that all revenue generated from the proposed master license agreement with at t will be appropriated to the sf puc Streetlight Program in the annual probation ordinance subject of course to board of supervisor approval. We recommend to approve the proposed resolution as amended okay. Thank you very much mr. Rose. Puc, any issues with these recognitions . No issues with the recommendations. Thank you we will move on to Public Comment supervisor tang no. Public comment anyone wish to comment on item 5 . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. I will go ahead and move this amendment by the budget analyst and to move it on to the full board of supervisors moved and seconded. Taken without objection [gavel] mdm. Clerk please call item 6 item 6, [reading code]. Thanks very much. We have our puc as well to speak on this yes. So, i come here before you today to ask for your consideration of a resolution concerning the proposed acquisition of a easement by the city to its Public Utilities commission located at kansas and marine streets for fair occupies of 13,500. The easement is required to facilitate the construction and maintenance of sewer improvements related to the sf puc stewart system Improvement Project also known as sf it. I want to show you briefly what were talking about. The area highlighted in pink is the area of the easement area were looking to acquire the gray bar is the sewer project area. Our construction crew indicated that while the puc owns this property and has access to the construction area from the south, this is so narrow that construction crews can turn around so we need to find an exit. An exit route to marin and kansas street. That required the purchase of this easement. The easement is 2525 marin. The fair market Purchase Price was based on an mai appraisal dated dated on august 25 and in summary, through this resolution we have the board of supervisors to approve and authorize the acquisition of the easement, doc and incorporate findings of the conveyance of this easement is consistent with the citys general plan, and it by 30 policies of city planning code section 101 dot one. In approve the purchase and Sale Agreement and authorize the citys director of property in or the sf pucs general manager to execute the documents make certain modifications and take certain actions in furtherance of this resolution. Thank you very much. Colleagues, any questions be one we will move on to Public Comment. Anyone wish to comment on items six . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. [gavel] colleagues no other questions or comments . I make a motion to send items six to the full board with a positive recognition moved and seconded. We can take that without objection [gavel] mdm. Clerk please call item 7 item number seven, [reading code] thank you very much. Mta is here. Good morning supervise. Steve the with sfmta. It is the agencys desire to establish a prevailing wage and Employee Retention requirements for our coin collection and counting contract which is currently in its final year of initial fiveyear term. There will be 26 employees that work for circle that are impacted and with families are impacted by this requirement. There are some employees that have been working, doing this for 17 years and on average have been working there for 10 years. So we urge you approve this thank you very much. Colleagues, any questions be one mr. Rose your report on items seven, please . Yes mr. Chairman and members of the committee, on page 17 of our report we report that sf mtas actual average annual cost for the circle agreement 3. 8 million between fiscal year 201213 and fiscal year 156 into based on increases reflected on the table shown on page 17 of our report, the sf mta estimates the proposed ordinance would result in increased cost of approximately 750,000 in 201617 and based on the average annual editors of approximately 3. 8 million, that would represent and 18. 8 increase. In addition, based on projected future hourly wage and benefit increases, sf mta is to make the proposed ordinance would result in an increase of 913,000 for each extension year of the circle agreement. There are five extension years. That would be an increase of 24 more than the current average annual cost of the sfmta. On page 18, we report that by requiring prevailing wages and transitional employment and retention of prior contractors and employees, it is possible that the city would receive the reduced number of competitive bidders in the future, which could result in increased cost to the city. Thank you mr. Rose. Colleagues, any questions be one supervisor yee mr. Rose, in regards to your last comment, is it possibly getting a fewer number of bidders, what is the rationale for your conclusions . We state, as i stated, supervisor, it is possible. We are stating that because if the existing contractor, witches start out, if paper opposed competitor to circle has to retain employees, we dont with their Business Plan is that that could impact this omission of a good. It is possible that would inhibit him up in our professional judgment that could inhibit his omission of a big we dont know for a fact but we are saying it is possible. Is there a response that from mta . Would you agree to that . Supervisors, the budget analyst statement with regard to the competitiveness is possible, but also when we establish a prevailing wage, that sort of sets the Playing Field level with regard to the cost of employees. So when we go through our process, will be evaluating heavily on companies experience with regard to the service. So, thats a possibility but also the fact will be leveling the Playing Field financially also would spur interest from companies that feel that their experience is equal to circle. Thank you. Okay. Colleagues, any further questions do and we will move on to Public Comment. Anyone wish to comment on this item . Good morning supervise. Teamsters local 665. I just wonder give you a little context regarding these employees. Many of these 26 employees have been working at minimum wage for almost 2 decades. Many people believe or have believed in the overall public that they are city employees, but and, in fact they are not get their contracted employees could just that on to the last point of the budget analyst nmda spoke about about leveling the Playing Field, the size of the contract based on the prevailing wage we believe will be increased as was talked about so that anyone who would be bidding on this contract would understand with the wage rates would be and the employees would then be taken care. Were very strongly in favor of this. We appreciate supervisor weiner for bringing this board and working on this. We appreciate the mta for the work they did to bring this forward and we are in strong support and appreciate your Budget Committee taking consideration for these employees. Although, few they play in Important Role in coin collection for the mta which is an important and often times difficult work. Thank you thank you very much. Anyone else wish to comment on item number seven . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. [gavel] so, againnot again, but im really happy that mta is moving forward with supporting prevailing wages for our workers and i like to pass this out with positive recommendation to the full board okay. Moved and seconded. We can take that without objection [gavel] mdm. Clerk call item 8, please item 8, [reading code]. Thank you very much. This item sponsored by supervisor avalos so ill turn it over to them thank you very much. Chairman farrell. This item was one i had originally introduced for consideration last year. When i introduced this last year it was the tax that was dedicated to be with to use for expenditures that were aligned with her raid program specifically on expanding transit, housing, and [inaudible] i thinks since then have made it a general tax so [inaudible] this is a tax that would go on utility users. The 2. 5 of the total bill for parts of their that are billing ringing and nonrenewable electricity and natural gas, this a carbon tax. Essentially, thats how its been crafted to be able to charge additional or nonrenewable sources that in the Carbon Dioxide that contribute to Global Warming and climate change. And the way this tax is structured but if your overall tax bill, say, you get complete electrical power from nonrenewable sources can receive natural gas, and your total bill is 100, this would be 2. 5 2. 50 additional on your bill. That is not a lot of money, but we are also crafted this measure so that those who are in the clean power sf program, which is just being launched them when not be subject to the tax on the electricity side. So, if you are receiving even the copper cents nonrenewable, that is part of the light Green Program in our clean power sf program, you would be exempt from paying the tax on the electricity side. If you are receiving your part of a care program for low income people, you would be exempt from the tax as well. As well, you would be exempt from the tax on the side of natural gas. Overall, this measure is to raise about 18 million a year as we see more people join the clean power sf program, which will happen in waves over the next couple of years, we will see the amount of money diminish from the electricity side, but beside on natural gas that this tax will also be on will remain fairly constant as people continue to use natural gas in their homes. I expect theyll be phased out eventually. What i wanted to do was to have this at the board with all the other tax measures that we have been saying consistently, i want to look at all our tax measures together so we can decide as a body, what our ballot looks like and i am noti do not want to look about with all these different measures. So, this one i want to get in a discussion but ill be making my decision on the overall measures we see moving forward and if theres consensus on good im not clear that on this one but i want to make sure we can have a discussion of the full board. So, after Public Comment, i would be interested in seeing getting a motion to the full board okay. Colleagues, any questions or comments at this time . We will move on to Public Comment. Anyone wish to comment on item 8 . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. [gavel] supervisor tang thank you supervisor avalos for your willingness to be, i guess, conscientious about all the different revenue measures before us. Pending for our november ballot. So yes im very interested in having a discussion holistically as well. Im going to move forward item 8 to the full board with full recognition we do have a conference of discussion. I will move it forward. My recommendation would be without positive recommendation only because, for me personally, it is a general tax and i know that there has been some discussion about this being used towards some type whether street maintenance or installation of trees, which i would support but because it is a general tax it is a little bit more tricky. So, for me personally, i would recommend without recommendation to the full board but obviously interested in see what my colleagues have to say as well i would just say for my perspective thats fine did i think of a holistic conversation its no problem. Id be happy to support that. Supervisor yee i so we want to move this to the full board so we have that discussion. I wouldve preferred that its a positive recommendation, but if the both of you want to support it just to move to the full board without recommendation, ill make it unanimous okay. Is that a second then . Moved and seconded. We can take that without objection [gavel] mdm. Clerk call item number nine, please item number nine, [reading code]. Good morning supervisors. Underneath martinez airport finance director. This item is for the approval of an interdependentexcuse the Intergovernmental Agreement between San Mateo County and the city and county of San Francisco to the airport commission. The proposed agreement would allow the airport to reimburse San Mateo County a proradish care for the cost of Public Safety dispatches to the airport. The reimbursement amount is not to exceed 1 million for a fiveyear period. That would be retroactive to july 1 2015 emma and last through june 30, 2020. Under the proposed agreement, San Mateo County would also share with the airport half of the collective transit occupancy tax from the operation of the new Airport Hotel currently under development. This arrangement of the sharing of the Hotel Room Tax would last until either the airport receives a maximum of 8 million about work through june of 2029, whichever occurs first. The agreement was approved by san mateo board of supervisors on april 12 2016. The budget analyst recommends approval in i be happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much. Colleagues, any questions . Mr. Rose Committee Report lease for item number nine . Yes mr. Chairman and members of the committee, on page 21 of our report the bottom of page 21, it is not known how much that cost of the 911 emergency call dispatch to the airport will change over the term of the agreement, but the cost of the airport will not exceed 1 million or the five years under the terms of the proposed agreement and could be less. If that cost and 91 emergency do not increase from the 1415 levels. The source of funds would be the airports operating budget subject to probation approval of the board of supervisors. On page 22 of our report, we state that San Mateo County as the department indicated, will share 50 of the first 16 million in hotel taxes collected from operation of new hyatt hotel. Thats expected to open on july 1, 2019, and with the airport has received the 8 million through a combination of hotel taxes and Aviation Fuel tax, all hotel taxes thereafter will clue to the San Mateo County and is shown in table 2, page 22 of our report, airport staff project the total hotel tax for the first 10 years of the hyatt Hotel Operations we proximally 34 million and we state that assuming the hotel is ready for occupancy around july 1, 2019, models economic shot in the year 2022 reduces room revenues the airport will receive the maximum amount of 8 million in hotel taxes sometime in 2024. We did make one recommendation on page 23, and that is to amend this resolution for retroactivity to july 1, 2015. We recommend you approve the proposed resolution as amended thank you very much mr. Rose. Colleagues any questions for budget analyst . We will move on to Public Comment did anyone wish to comment on this items you seeing none, Public Comment is closed. [gavel] i will move this item with the amendment and is a positive recommendation. Second moved and seconded. We can take that without objection [gavel] mdm. Clerk please call items 1022 together, please item 10, [reading code]. Item number 11, [reading code]. Item number 12, [reading code]. Item number 13, [reading code]. Item number 14, [reading code]. Item number 15, [reading code]. Item number 16, [reading code]. Item number 17, [reading code]. Item number 18, [reading code]. Item number 19, [reading code]