Same thing from oakland or tracey even. It is hard. You have got to ask yourself what keeps them going year after year to commute, to lose family time . To work in San Francisco and the answer for me is hope. I have seen San Francisco voters our government rise to the occasion time after time. We had prop a and prop g commitment to educators that we supported them. Prop a and e was the same. Everything you just heard about the collaboration with the union, city government, School District, all of you, it is the same. That hope that people are determined to keep us here keeps us going even when we know we are sacrificing our lives to come here every day to work with these children. I want be to thank everybody who is working on this, and who is going to push it forward. Thank you. I hope you will forgive me for using my notes. I want to thank the board offed. The mayor, my siblings and the voters who prioritize by voting for prop e. I want to state that i am lisa and i have lived in San
All right. Ladies and gentlemen, good morning the meeting will come to order this the regularly the Budget Finance Committee excuse me board of supervisors budget finance subcommittee im supervisor cohen chair of this committee and to my left is supervisor katie tang and to my right is supervisor yee and our clerk mr. John carol and linda wong thank you jesse larson and phil jackson from sfgovtv so for assisting us today madam clerk, any announcements . Devices. Completed speaker cards and documents to be included should be submitted to the clerk. Items acted upon today will appear on the may 2 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. Thank you very much call the first item Revenue Bonds or commercial placing the total Principal Amount of San Francisco International Airport subordinate commercial paper notes for any lawful airport. Thank you id like at a call kathy from the airport to make a brief presentation on this item. Good morning chair cohen im kate hartley with the
Ask the question is because the resolution was because there were some last minute text to say we strongly urge the city to include resident concerns and Community Process in their final disposition plans. Thats part one. Part two is getting back to kind of the commentary that i just had that yes, i do think that we need we here, the commission, obviously here as the community is concerned, we have written commentary that was heard today and verbal commentary today and what we need to do is formalize again that collaboration with the city so we can create a public process around final disposition. I think people saw on their november 25 date, that date is sort of a soft dead hraoeub. Deadline. It says we know in the future what needs to happen. Theyre transferring to the city for government purpose, or we need to sell it. Weve got between 12 to 14 months with first sort of soft date in there all the way out to 2025, i think was the final date i saw on some of these documents to say we
Difficult to apply a new use restriction on it because the state would look at that as us trying to purposely reduce the value. I think i the reason i asked that question is because i feel the garage parcel adds to the value of the enter social center itself. So if it can be sold to someone who is doing rental on another lot nearby and they choose to buy that garage and then they say this is only for residents or for this particular use, but not necessarily for the heritage center, i think that would lower value of the commercial parcel in heritage center. I was wondering if we could enjoin the two in some way that would enhance the value of both. Maybe not today, but i think before i mean, we are approving these plans essentially kind of fuzzily. Theres any number of ways to negotiate a sale. I wonder if thats something we need to talk about today or something we can be i think the fair market value is i think to answer your question is that we would have to were just saying generally
Let me finish the two parts to that question. The first part is the reason i ask the question is because the resolution was because there were some last minute text to say we strongly urge the city to include resident concerns and Community Process in their final disposition plans. Thats part one. Part two is getting back to kind of the commentary that i just had that yes, i do think that we need we here, the commission, obviously here as the community is concerned, we have written commentary that was heard today and verbal commentary today and what we need to do is formalize again that collaboration with the city so we can create a public process around final disposition. I think people saw on their november 25 date, that date is sort of a soft dead hraoeub. Deadline. It says we know in the future what needs to happen. Theyre transferring to the city for government purpose, or we need to sell it. Weve got between 12 to 14 months with first sort of soft date in there all the way out to