Management services delivered through tide and dps brings support of services. Im joined by staff in case you have specific questions. Budget Analyst Report goes over the increase of rental and return but i want to know table 3 did a nice job of showing the net expense. The annual amount per tenant, which i think is probably the most important number here, is 16,967 for delivery of this support of the housing environment. So happy to answer any questions you might have about this item. Thank you very much. Why dont we go to the budget Analyst Report on item 8. Good afternoon, chair chu and members of the committee. As mr. Updike said, this is the option to extend first of two tenyear options of master lease of star hotel, serving 54 clients. Under the lease the first year rent would increase by 3 . Annual adjustment based on cpi that would range from 3 to no more than 6 . Fiscal year 2012 and 2013 costs are 388,256. This is included in the dph budget. We recommend approval. Thank you v
I think its been outstanding. The level to which our residents have beening a gaouing to participate in the discussion versus outright saying we are against the project, we will not participate and oppose at all costs. I think that speaks to the level of respect and dedication people have both to their neighborhood but also to the city as a whole. So i think there are a lot of great things moving forward. I think the design is beautiful. There is a great architect in place. I think warriors have been great in initiating this outreach process with the neighborhood. You know, rick, i think you have been a great spokesperson for the warriors and i appreciate your ability to listen and engage in that feedback. We havent always seen that with developers that come i want the city. Of course i have concerns. It is a very expensive site. Another wouldnt cost 120 million but i understand the city wants to rehabilitate pier 30, 32 at some point. Some project will go in. That is the expectation a
Service. Additional service, in order to actually meet the graduation requirements. So they are offtrack. So i just wanted the committee to notice that the light green section means that they are missing one or more classes, but if they miss one or more classes, come 2014, they wont graduate. That is what offtrack is because of the graduation requirement. I think we had a different graduation requirement before. We had the credits you had the credits, but you met the classes. This you could graduate. But this is specific course work. And so what concerns me is that if we i mean we should be considering them as offtrack also, because half of the semester is already over and so they have a year and a half to make up one class or could be two classes. So they will need extra services and we should be budgeting for those students. That is the only reason i mention. It thank you. Thank you, commissioner fewer. I think you will see is that we label them ontrack credits, but missing benchmark
25th, 2012 meeting of the city and county of San Francisco, city and School District select committee. My name is david campos and im the chair of the committee. Were joined by choice president chiu, commissioner hydra mendoza, commissioner sandra lee fewer. My understanding is that the other members of committee are en route. The clerk of the committee today is victor young and we want to thank the following members of sfgovtv staff, Michael Freeman and Jennifer Lowe for covering the meeting and we thank the members of the public and staff who are at the meeting today. With that, mr. Clerk, if you could please call i. Item no. 1. Hearing on the implementation of ag course requirements in San Francisco unified School District high schools. Thank you very much. And this is an item, hearing request that was actually requested initially by supervisor carmen chu. Commissioner fewer, do you want to Say Something . No. Thank you. And i will now turn it to chris of the San Francisco unified S
Supervisor kim a question to the City Attorney. Of these amendments substantive . You can act on these today and forward to the board. Supervisor avalos. Im fine with the new rule, 3. 61. I have a question for the clerk on that one. It seems like as a legislative aide who work on the developing of agendas they are readily shared in advance. I have not been a part of how these agendas come up; has there been an issue where Board Members requested an advance copy of the agenda and was not able to get that . That seems to be to be pretty Standard Practice to get agendas out when requested. Supervisor avalos, from time to time there have been problems with supervisor requesting the chair to provide them with versions of the agenda perhaps before it is finalized so they could know what is on that document to be prepared for the items that could come up. It is i think the new rules, 3. 61, the supervisor indicated that he realizes it would not be a binding agenda. Traditionally we dont appro