All right. Good morning, everybody. Welcome to the budget and finance Committee Meeting for november 2016 i want to thank derrick and phil jackson and Nona Melkonian more covering the meeting im supervisor mark farrell and joined by supervisor tang and joined momentumly by supervisor yee mr. Clerk, any announcements . Completed speaker cards and documents to be included should be submitted to the clerk. Items acted upon today will appear on the tuesday november 15th board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. No Board Meeting on november 8th. Thank you very much mr. Clerk item one. The sale of the revenue bond not to exceed 200 and 40 million for the purpose of providing financing for the acquisition and construction of a development of 200 and 99 family project for low income persons or households located on 1601 mariposa carlene street and 4 wisconsin we have the Mayors Office of housing to speak. From the Mayors Office of Economic Workforce Development im here to present a resolution for moopz not requiring the repayment of bonds this approves the public noticing the city pursuant to the equity and financial responsibility the approval are granted with the project inundocumented, however, in this case they were bifurcated to allow the project to participate in a special project so while the board adapted a policy in june of this year we are requesting additional request here from matt from related california and on mohcd we would like to thank you for your consideration today and landmarked to our support for this followup with that ill conclude and ask for any questions. Colleagues, any questions. Anyone wish to comment on item number one seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Colleagues no budget Analyst Report but harvey thank you i make a motion to send it to the full board with a positive recommendation. A motion by supervisor tang and seconded by supervisor yee without objection mr. Clerk can you call item 2. The Library Commission for over due fees from january 3rd, 2017. Thank you very much all right. We have the larger than mr. Herrera. Good morning, supervisors very pleased to be here city librarian and to introduce michael that mr. Give us information i want to emphasize this program has been important folks who are not able to check out materials that about quality the last time the programs was in 2009 we are that successful and hopefully, this 6 week program will be more successful in helping us not only to reduce the obligation but like i said bring back folks to be able to use the program im going to turn it over to michael. Thank you, louis and thank you, supervisors we appreciate this opportunity to share information about the libraries afghanistan nest program it is nearly 8 years since the last Amnesty Program it is once again seek to forgive the fees that accumulated on the accounts it will be consistent with the Amnesty Program to seek to cover the materials 29 thousand plus patrons with billed items on their account all told one and 6 thousand plus items in our collection that we would like to recover those in a bill status even more importantly interested 2, 3, 4 welcoming back the librarian patrons for the services for the 5 thousand aprons that owe over 1 plus we want to eliminate the barriers to assess and week back our residents that are for going their Library Privileges because of unpaid library fees one and 50 thousand patrons with some account balance on their records that stand to benefit from the amnesty the library fees amnesty allows the staff to if anything any items returned during the 6 Week Campaign in january 3rd and to consensus on valentines day to have the impact on the Amnesty Program and wave the obvious balances for items due past due this will allow us an opportunity for 15 thousand residents to have their services restored and excited about the robust Amnesty Program and the greater impact to welcome back our patrons the potential fiscal year impact of offering an Amnesty Program will be net positive when considering the recovery and exceed any overdue revenue loss we have the racist rate of return in the amnesty caption and wave 15 thousand and 77 thousands dollars in overdue fines when we consider the value of Library Materials well recovery we estimate between 24 and one and 207 thousands overall and appreciate the board of supervisors consideration of the resolution authorizing the library to establish a fee Amnesty Program for over due materials in 2017 and more than happy to address any questions. Thank you very much supervisor tang. I think this is a Great Program youre bringing back and not really a question but when that time comes if you want to spread the word and let our offices know well let the constituents know. Absolutely thank you very much for your support. A great idea. Supervisor yee. Im curious seems like the last time we were successful. Yes, sir. And that was. 2009 the question is why has this taken seven years to do this again is there a particular reason thats a great question. I think the library tries to balance not going to the proverbial well, two often and being good stewards of community resources, however, were overdue and it is time to offer this program again. Okay colleagues, any questions or comments. Okay anyone wish to comment on item number seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Go ahead and make a motion to pass this out of Committee Full board. Without objection. Thank you very much. Mr. Clerk item 3. A resolution approving the construction and financing plan for the city and county of San Francisco for Treasure Island and project areas. Okay. Colleagues we have a request to continue on behalf of the sponsor and from tida first move on to wish to comment on item number 3 seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Colleagues, can i have a move to continue this to the call of the chair. Okay actually specifically to the budget meeting for november 16th. Motion by supervisor tang and is seconded by supervisor yee without objection mr. Clerk. Item 4 the administrative code to change the citywide Available Fund for the director to expend the fund by appropriation ordinance. Thank you very much ms. Hayward from the Mayors Office of housing to present. Good morning chair farrell and members of the board i see that supervisor peskin just came in i dont sure. Okay. We thanks ms. Hayward joined by supervisor peskin the sponsor im going to turn it over to him for comments. Thank you, mr. Chair is a change to the administrative code which would change the number of selfappropriate funds that in this years budget total cost one and 75 million and these are selfappropriately category 8 funds the proposal before us to change them into category 4 where theyll not selfappropriate but appropriate by the board of supervisors specifically this would apply to the Inclusionary Housing Program which in the 20162017 budget is about one and 13 million jobs housing and linkage in the current budget is 43 and a half million dollars, the expedited condominium conversion market octavia at approximately 5 million and eastern neighborhoods at 3. 3 million and the 97 prop a housing bond repayments 20 but one and 75 million as a matter of policy this board should take back the power of the appropriation as to the use of those fund and ill be happy to answer any questions you may have. And hear from mohcd. Okay. Colleagues any questions right now. All right. Mayors office of housing good morning are chair farrell and supervisor peskin and members of the board im Sophie Hayward from the Mayors Office of Economic Workforce Development and thank you for the opportunity to present this morning. I just would like to quickly provide an overview of the housing funds in the way their appropriated in order to put the category 8 or this protective in context as you may know our housing portfolio is comprised of pubically Affordable Housing unit as well as pubically fund inclusionary unit our dollars go to support the Affordable Housing as well as preservation of existing Affordable Housing but also preservation of rentcontrolled units through our Small Sites Program this snapshot of our full budget and it illustrates the variety of Funding Sources that we bring to the Table Including impact fees which are parliamentary the subject of this legislation category 8 selfappropriately program those made up 32 percent of budget but have quite a while other sources including federal grant and from the Transportation Authority and the Housing Trust fund we appreciate and the state grants and other sources we do this to make this as diversifies and large as possible lets see i want to go through to talk about the 3 ways that is appropriated like i said the impact fees 32 percent of the budget is selfappropriately they have defined used although their selfappropriate can only be used for the production of Affordable Housing we have the Housing Trust fund the last contract of those sources are approved through the annual budget process the committee is familiar and other actions for other sources that we have grants, development be all the time and payment and bond revenues that are approved through the actions of this board so what are the category 8 Fund Supervisor peskin went through the impact fees and each of those funds or fees has its own set of defined uses preliminary the production of Affordable Housing in some cases use the fund for acquisition or rehab of the unit and the eastern neighborhoods and the market octavia fund have a goodic funds as well we feel strongly at the mohcd that preserving our flexibility to deploy the subset of our fund is critical in order to stretch our local dollars as far as possible when we build our Affordable Housing so as you may know we also access state and federal government sources per our funds and diesel with the state level with the tea cap and the Cap Trade Program and multi if i may housing and federal sources for veterans and Homeless Fund each one of the individual program hazard its own regulatory requirement and own specific timeline requirements what that means just to put it into context of the specific programs there are time we need to move quickly to subsidize the fund for access to outside resources for 1036 mohcd received 2 million in state funding that was great a last minute application and we got the grants, however, that money was only available through reimbursement so therefore we bridged the funds using inclusionary housing for the project and we submitted for reimbursed we replaced that with state grant Fund Important for the eddietaylor it received 10 million month cap trade that cap trade has strike deadlines projects need to be shovel readily mohcd bridged 5 million to move the project in order to meet the start deadline and we saved that 5 million of the it project revenue from the 5 m project when that money bottoms available two works how have weve quickly uses the selfappropriation authority to maximize our ability for state and federal money to stretch the dollars further and ill say that we are hopefully, this avoids politicizing the funds on the next slide a map of the distribution of projects it is not perfect we would like to see our project distributed throughout the city and more projects in more areas as you may know every project goes through an extensive public process we would hate to see additional process slow the delivery the of Affordable Housing across the board if this legislation were trying to sort but 0 the problem solving a concern is transparency owl suggest our projects as as you may know familiar with go through on extensive Public Outreach from beginning to end this includes peer review within our office of review funding they go through Environmental Review and entitlement review before we release an rfp we have a process there is a Public Engagement process after the developer has been selected through an rfp goes to Loan Committee and commit the fund thats the point when we commit the Predevelopment Fund and often acronym the entitlement process thats a snapshot how we feel the flexibility of our portion of our is important im available so for questions and kate hartley from rec park. Thanks ms. Hayward a few questions and whoever the appropriated person to talk to i take our comments when you think about the funds are appropriated walk you through through the process you go through. What does that look like and how long dont it take and so forth. Good morning, supervisors our process is filled with Public Outreach and oversight one example 17 and fulsome a jurisdictional transfer from puc and in collaboration with rec and park those were public processes and involved board of supervisors approval the rec and Park Department had to apply for fund which it did there was ongoing Public Outreach throughout the process to build the park in addition there was extensive negotiations with cca about the catch baseline on site and in 2013 we selected a developer that was again, a very you know pubically advertised process with Extensive Community outreach and 17 and fulsome the board of supervisors has approved that rezoning process it is Going Forward with the Planning Department we were able to provide 2 million and prosecute Development Loan activities after the public process and work through the loans committee and now the developer is getting ready for financing applications at the state that will be very sharply circumference subscribed the bond fencing the vehicles we have to leverage city funds we obviously city funds cant pay for everything with the minimum square feet of unit to operating cash flow minimum to the minimum ratio that you have to have and theres 1, 3 and 15 were a wash in oversight and repeatedly appear before the board and the Planning Commission to get our projects 3r5u6d will well be back for a bond issuance approval like we do today and ground approval process a long process with extensive outreach and every single one of our projects has should supportive of similar process attached to it and take the central is freeway parolees the designation of those parcels in terms of use and the occupancy was established in the early starting in 2000 with Extensive Community outreach no. Well be able to fund those with inclusionary fees and the market octavia funds weve been doing outreach for 16 years on those parcels so we know from Extensive Research in the last month or so weve had the institute and the very Economic Council as well as fooumd levying office said the more regulation on projects the more extensive because expensive because it takes longer were trying to remain the urgency we know as we look at in our neighborhood there are People Living on the street and add costs and funds didnt serve those people well. Okay. Thank you i have similar questions supervisor tang. Thank you for that he overview i think what you said is absolutely what i feel we cant build the Affordable Housing projects we certainly want them to be faster and more Cost Effective in San Francisco for my question through the chair to supervisor peskin trying to solve again, i mentioned in previous conversations on similar topics we see a majority of those mohcd projects even before this board especially through the and i suggested that if we really care about transparency we should deeper dive and look at it and read through the agendas and our legislative packet they come before us im trying to figure out what it is were tyler trying to see. Through the chair let me first of all, the power of the appropriation is one of the fundamental things that the board of supervisors legislative branch of government doesnt on an annual or bio annual with twshts it is the opportunity for the board to have highlevel policy oversight relative to that all important function no other to the best of my knowledge category 8 funds of this size or magnitude that is not subject to appropriation by this body as far as entrepreneurial process is not a process in as far as no object body yes little pieces but seminary as no oversight body ill actually submit whether it is Senior Housing under one administration or homeless under the Previous Administration i think this is the opportunity for this board as a policymaker to check in on an annual basis to really have a souptonuts high understanding of where the policy is going have our input connected to the purse the budget in as far as no commission over this agency and very little oversight internal process is not a public process i think through the power of appropriation we can give mohcd the flexibility at the need i mean, we, appropriate chunks of money to act quickly we had a hearing about bmr unit not too long ago the mohcd had great amounts the flexibility bye yet two of the wlor units were foreclosed and lost their bmr status this is an opportunity for us to have that level of oversight thats profiling e pricing what the checks and balances are for not like a tiny fund for the muni drivers bombards this is one and 75 million bucks in the current fiscal year we should have a highlevel appropriate oversight thats what im trying to get at. Through the chair to supervisor peskin ive given there are so many pieces of legislation that comes before that body through the board of supervisors through the he think that is where i just dont understand why we also need to bring this particular piece to us and so one of my suggestions might be that having mohcd potentially report it out to the board of supervisors or Budget Committee you know kind of their plans for the year how theyre planning to use the selfappropriately funds we get that policy conversation up front that is something i havent run it by mohcd but in terms of if i want to global perspective that might be a venue it gives us that i guess that weirder perspective. Through the chair ill submit the following yes. The board of supervisors has to approve this bond or that Land Transfer but it is all done on a piecemeal basis no policy oversight that is precisely another way of going about that as well as the reality is the reason departments come before this body on an annual body through the appropriation process because we have the power of the purse and absent that we can have a little bit of showandtell but the reality that hadnt happens for many years and the reason the board relinquished the power of the purse in the appropriation funds thats why we should send this to the full board. With all due respect i feel mohcd is one of the departments that probably weve seen the most amount of legislation through this committee and again, if there is another way to package the information so have a more global conversation up front ill recommend that i see thats not what supervisor peskin or what would satisfy that desire but i think given next week and the pending measure m what that means in the potential oversight over not only mohcd but oewd theres a lot of these kind of proposals and flux so i dont know how for example, this particular measure will dovetail with measure m maybe through the chair. Prop m passes would that commission have the oversight over those funds. Sophie hayward from the Mayors Office of housing my understanding the Language Society with prop m any expenditure will be reviewed by the commission and the commission will make a recommendation for my expenditure regardless of amount of funds if im not mistaken. Thats correct as the case in any Commission System the power of appropriation is one of the fundamental underpinning of what the board of supervisors does how we relinquish that in this case i dont know but that ill 134i789 to supervisor tang through the chair that the place for the board to say mohcd as a matter of policy we think that you should be building more Senior Housing and less singlefamily homes and vice versa if through the budget process thats the policy document that we as elected members of legislative branch of government get that level of policy not before us when they say hey, this is what we want to do and we have no influence over it if we want to do our jobs we were elected to do the best way through the annual process of budget i dont think that is cumbersome it works for all departments with incredible amount of underneath it works for the Police Department and the department of health up think a fundamental underpinning of what we do and take that responsibility back i dont know originally why the previous board been this way for many, many years gave up that power but time we given the magnitude of 24 crisis take that power back. Supervisor yee. Thank you appreciate this discussion im listening to you i guess the argument and so forth and it is one of these things ive heard this discussion enough in other areas and see what is the role of the board versus the Mayors Office i guess im listening to an argument where i believe that supervisor peskin is correct in this were asking for the board to really play a role in the appropriation issues it is one of the things okay. If from the argument is in the case of staff putting for politics you, you can is that about everything lets have a board that appropriates anything or to me not both ways as a Good Government either one way or another ill tend to argue what ive seen anyways in the last three or four years the process does work especially with our good chair leading the process in the budget and that we had debates at the annual appropriation of the Budget Discussion at the board level i dont see any fair of that it wouldnt work for this particular case. I would add one thing mr. Chair this is about accountability this is the opportunity that the board has to say did you meet our tarts . Did you do what you said you were going to do thats in the annual budget process with a host of functions in the City Government we say boy maybe we should have appropriated more money to a different thing youre doing a better job or not appropriate when youre doing 0 worse job thats what the budget process is for and how the branches of government keep each other in check and hold the departments accountability weve advocated. Let me ask a question do you spend the selfappropriately funds at random it seems like a lot of the comments are a check on what youre doing but a chance to faub kate hartley first of all, the funds themselves are defined that sets the priorities, secondly, we pursue the factual needs of the city documented and the consolidated plans for housing in San Francisco that is required by hud thats a body of work that is very good researched and documents the needs and we pursue the goals of the plan we take the money available to us we leverage that money as well as we can and follow the prescriptions that are attached to the funds by geography and income, eligibility by new construction and rehab and go get additional money that had has its own requirement my fear not following a well documented researched statement of need per the con plan and fitting that into the overall housing goal we could get an appropriation approval say for predevelopment from one board of supervisors and then two years later when were ready for gap funds the board might say weve changed our mind dont want to fulfill the obligation instead of single single families we want theyre with Regulatory Oversight and need the commitment and the ability to pursue the con plan and cant have the risk of midstream not having the additional appropriations approval from the say that results from a change in the board. Okay. Commissioner tang. I mean, i would say that given this discussion you know, of course, i believe in transparency and, of course, accountabilities but dont believe in layering on requirement for the sake of open that well have more transparency or more affordability i feel we have at our disposal projects list in the queue we can ask mohcd for any given time and things a available to the members of the board i believe that switching this category of funding it comes back before the board of supervisors instead of providing for accountability b will slow down the process who knows as ms. Hartley said whoever which board has different sets of clarity who know; right . We have seen how long those projects take in fact, to my recollection the discourse in San Francisco it is taking too long and too expensive this is not something i can support given we want to build more Affordable Housing and we want to build it now colleagues, any questions or comments anyone wish to comment on item number 4. Okay seeing none, Public Comment is closed. I would say say i appreciate the dialogue you know, i would very much society my name are supervisor tangs comments the last thing to slow down the Affordable Housing in San Francisco i know that some of us are billing willing im not and sensitive to the Affordable Housing shouldnt be a politicalized process it is to some degree and making it more is a step in the wrong direction and harm the residents in the city were trying to serve so i appreciate the discussion around the boards budget process and share the Budget Committee im well aware but certainly dont want to make that a political process anything from my perspective well do to potentially slow down the building of Affordable Housing is a step in the wrong direction for our city and especially given the potential package of prop m and the impacts it might have personally this is not ready for discussion but ill see what my fellow commissioners have to say about that. Supervisor katie tang. Thank you so i think in light of next tuesday and he measure pending i want to motion to continue this item. Until at least after the election. Okay okay to a date to the call of the chair how would you like to do it. To the call of the chair that would be great. Okay. You want is roll call vote supervisor peskin a comment no reinforcement so a motion by supervisor tang to to the call of the chair and supervisor yee without objection mr. Clerk, is there any additional business to come before this body . There are no more items mr. Chair. Thanks were adjourned
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.