Households. Most developers do not do that and this is an incentive for them to do it. This is providing a set of programs that are funded providing all the way for folks who were formerly homeless to folks who are middle income to be and stay in San Francisco. Any final comments, starchild. It sounds like peter is saying on one hand, well, no, it wont subsidize middle income people then hes saying there is a range all the way from middle income people all the way up to he doesnt say what the top range is. Theres a guy named jim reid who is a contractor here he built himself in his own back yard a single unit house that he built for 12,000, very small, designed for one person, getting somebody off the street, like 10 foot by 10 foot but it had plumbing, electricity, storage, everything someone would need to live a simple existence. 12,000, how much is it going to cost to build these, half a Million Dollars . They are not really affordable. Theyre not going to help those most in need of
Mixed income housing, providing some of their units are affordable to mixed income households. Most developers do not do that and this is an incentive for them to do it. This is providing a set of programs that are funded providing all the way for folks who were formerly homeless to folks who are middle income to be and stay in San Francisco. Any final comments, starchild. It sounds like peter is saying on one hand, well, no, it wont subsidize middle income people then hes saying there is a range all the way from middle income people all the way up to he doesnt say what the top range is. Theres a guy named jim reid who is a contractor here he built himself in his own back yard a single unit house that he built for 12,000, very small, designed for one person, getting somebody off the street, like 10 foot by 10 foot but it had plumbing, electricity, storage, everything someone would need to live a simple existence. 12,000, how much is it going to cost to build these, half a Million Dolla
Construction within a matter of months. That only was the down payment on that 1. 4 billion dollars worgts of renovation work, ada compliance work, and its going it take us many years to get through that entire list of work and is the next big investment we need to make. George, how would you like to respond . I would like to respond right now the current 2012 bond they are offering, they went to the neighborhoods very quickly without a good plan, they misrepresented what they were going to be doing in several instances, they went back to the inaudible and said the neighborhoods love what you are doing. I live in district 7, were getting only 2 Million Dollars. The funny thing about the 2 Million Dollars is that its going to like merced yet park and rec will not tell us anything about what theyre spending the money on. They are asking for blind faith from the voters. They are asking us to vote on the bond then they will tell us after weve voted what they are going to do with the money.
The 2012 bpbld was originally scheduled for 2014 and it has been moved up. About 41 percent of the 2008 bond, 73 Million Dollars, has yet to be spent. So were asking ourselves why now, why with so many parks, with so many problems are you coming to us when you dont even have the maintenance or operational people to maintain these parks . Its time for rec and park system to take care of the things that they build and not just continue to build things. Thank you. Thank you. So, matthew, my understanding is there is a current bond thats still in progress that hasnt been completed yet. Why do you believe that we should have another bond issue while we still have one thats in progress . Correct. Great question. The 2008 parks bond passed by voters in 2008, obviously, covered 185 Million Dollars worth of investments in the park system. That sbair bond is already fully committed for projects either completed, under construction or in the pipeline to be under construction within a matter of mo
Income home owners. This is going to go primarily for low and very low householders in San Francisco. That has always been the programmatic focus because you can leverage funding. We live in a high income market and that is exactly why we have an affordable sector in this city. When it comes it recreating redevelopment, thats a fallacy. Its about recognizing that redevelopment allowed a certain portion of money to be used for redevelopment. Its not about recreating redevelopment, in fact thats a closed chapter in history. Lastly the idea we are reducing the mixed Income Housing is also a sort of fallacy. There is a purpose to providing an incentive for developers to do whats called mixed Income Housing, providing some of their units are affordable to mixed income households. Most developers do not do that and this is an incentive for them to do it. This is providing a set of programs that are funded providing all the way for folks who were formerly homeless to folks who are middle inco