Okay, thank you. Could you please call item number 1 . Item number 1, resolution authorizing the execution, sale, and delivery of a housing revenue note in an aggregate Principal Amount not to exceed 28,500,000 for the purpose of providing financing for the construction of a 121unit affordable multifamily senior Residential Rental housing project, known as bayview Senior Housing; approving the form and authorizing the execution of a funding Loan Agreement and a borrower Loan Agreement; providing the terms and conditions of the note and authorizing the execution of a regulatory agreement and declaration of restrictive covenants; authorizing the collection of certain fees; approving modifications, changes, and additions to the documents; granting General Authority to city officials to take actions necessary to implement this resolution; and ratifying and approving any action heretofore taken in connection with the note and the project, as defined herein. ~ housing. Okay, thank you very much. We have ms. Mcnamara to speak on this item. Good morning, chair farrell, supervisors. I am pam sands, project manager in the Mayors Office of Community Housing development. Resolution before you this morning is for the issuance of bond proceeds to pick up a Construction Development related costs for bayview Senior Housing located at 17 51 carol avenue. The sponsoring Team Includes mccormick and bayview Hunters Point multipurpose senior services, inc. , as the owner and general partner. Wells fargo will serve as the limited partner in tax Credit Investor and citibank [speaker not understood]. Bayview will be 121 plus managers unit comprising 117 one bedroom units four twobedroom units. All units will be targeted to households more than 50 of area Median Income and 23 will be set aside for chronically homeless seniors. These transactions are conduit financing which do not require the city to pledge repayment of the bonds. We anticipate closing the bonds in mid february. The project is slated to begin construction shortly thereafter and complete construction in 2015. Here with me today is a representative of the development team, [speaker not understood] freeman with Mccormack Barrett and salazar. We appreciate your support and that concludes staffs presentation. Thank you. Thank you very much. Colleagues, any questions . Okay. Mr. Rose, do we have a budget Analyst Report for this item . Sorry, i dont have my notes in front of me. [inaudible] do not have a budget Analyst Report. There is no fiscal impact on this matter to the city. Thank you very much. Okay. At this time ill open it up to Public Comment. Anybody wish to comment on this item . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. [gavel] colleagues, can i have a motion to move this item forward . So moved. We can take that without opposition. [gavel] mr. Clerk, can you please call items 2 through 12 together . Item number 2 item number 2, resolution approving a mills historical property contract, under administrative code, chapter 71, between john moran, the owner of 1772 vallejo street burr mansion , and the city and county of San Francisco; and authorizing the planning director and assessor to execute the mills act historical property contract. City and county of San Francisco ~. Item number 3, resolution approving a mills historical property contract, under administrative code, chapter 71, between pacific heights, llc, the owners of 2550 webster street, and the city and county of San Francisco; and authorizing the planning director and assessor to execute the mills act historical property contract. ~ city and county of San Francisco. Item number 4, resolution approving a mills act historical property contract, under administrative code, chapter 71, between 1019 Market Street properties, llc, the owners of 1019 Market Street, and the city and county of San Francisco; and authorizing the planning director and assessor to execute the mills act historical property contract. ~ item number 5, resolution approving a mills act historical property contract, under administrative code, chapter 71, between Brian Jackson and thomas ranese, owners of 3769 20th street, and the city and county of San Francisco; and authorizing the planning director and assessor to execute the mills act historical property contract. ~. Item number 6, resolution approving a mills act historical property contract, under administrative code, chapter 71, between adam spiegel and guillemette broulliatspiegel, the owners of 50 carmelita street, and the city and county of San Francisco; and authorizing the planning director and assessor to execute the mills act historical property contract. ~ item number 7, resolution approving a mills act historical property contract, under administrative code, chapter 71, between amy hockman and brian bone, the owners of 66 carmelita street, and the city and county of San Francisco; and authorizing the planning director and assessor to execute the mills act historical property contract. ~ item number 8, resolution approving a mills act historical property contract, under administrative code, chapter 71, between elise sommerville, the owner of 70 carmelita street, and the city and county of San Francisco; and authorizing the planning director and assessor to execute the mills act historical property contract ~. Item number 9, resolution approving a mills act historical property contract, under administrative code, chapter 71, between adam wilson and quyen nguyen, the owners of 56 pierce street, and the city and county of San Francisco; and authorizing the planning director and assessor to execute the mills act historical property contract ~. Item number 10, resolution approving a mills act historical property contract, under administrative code, chapter 71, between jean paul and ann balajadia, the owners of 64 pierce street, and the city and county of San Francisco; and authorizing the planning director and assessor to execute the mills act historical property contract ~. Item number 11, resolution approving a mills act historical property contract, under administrative code, chapter 71, between karli sager and jason monberg, the owners of 56 potomac street, and the city and county of San Francisco; and authorizing the planning director and assessor to execute the mills act historical property contract ~. Item number 12, resolution approving a mills act historical property contract, under administrative code, chapter 71, between adam wilson and quyen nguyen, the owners of 66 potomac street, and the city and county of San Francisco; and authorizing the planning director and assessor to execute the mills act historical property contract ~. Okay, thank you very much. I know we have some opening comments from supervisor wiener. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Today before us are 11 mills act contracts which is actually very exciting because for the first time, maybe ever, were starting to see Small Properties being able to participate in the Mills Act Program. The mills act is a state law that allows certain Historic Properties, particularly landmarks in Historic Districts and others, to enter into a maintenance contract with the city, basically agreeing to specific forms of improvements and maintenance to maintain and improve the historic integrity of these Historic Properties in exchange, the Property Owner receives a tax abatement. The contract is a 10year contract and it can be renewed over time. In San Francisco, we have had very, very few mills act contracts and almost none in terms of smaller properties because that process was so cumbersome and expensive and unpredictable and so forth. So, last year i authored legislation that this board passed unanimously to streamline our mills act contract process to set clear timetables with the Planning Department and with the Assessors Office and to make it easier process for people to participate in. We passed that earlier this year. So, we now have what i believe is our first grouping of smaller properties coming forward with mills act contracts as part of our annual mills act process that the legislation created. There are and im very excited to see this, seven of the contracts are in the newly created Historic District immediately north of duboce park by this board unanimously created earlier this year. One is in the liberty hill Historic District which is in my district, two are in supervisor farrells district and one is in supervisor kims district. I want to thank the Planning Department and the Assessors Office for working together to bring these contracts forward. And, colleagues, i ask for your support on these contracts. Okay. Thank you. We have director ram here. Thanks for being here. Thank you. Good morning, supervisors. Thank you very much. Thank you for having this special hearing today to hear these items. The majority of the applications that are before the committee today, as supervisor wiener said, were are in the duboce park landmark district which was designated this summer, and that is why were here today on kind of a late time of the year to have this hearing because that district was not created until late in the summer. And after the designation was processed, we were processing the applications for this legislation on a kind of compressed schedule with the Assessors Office. Your action this year will allow the Property Owners to see the tax benefit next year rather than having to wait another year in the process. So, i do want to thank supervisors wiener, farrell and kim for sponsoring this legislation today. I also want to thank the enclosetionv, clerks office, budget analysts office, assessor carmen chiu for work erg with us in such a time tight frame to bring this before you. The mills act affirm the citys commitment to preservation. It is the only financial incentive available to owners of landmark properties. As supervisor wiener said, its a property tax incentive in exchange for a specific 10 year maintenance plan. And the board does have discretion in every single contract that is in front of you. It has been demonstrated over a number of years to be an effective preservation tool to help owners offset the cost of maintaining these older structures. And it has been used in many other cities in california. We, in fact, are behind other california municipalities, some of which have hundreds of contracts in place. In recent amendments proposed and sponsored by supervisor wiener, streamline the process making it cheaper to get into this process and less cumbersome to actually go through. So, as a result, recent designation of the due poems contract, there are 10 contracts before the board which is the most the city has ever proposed at one time. With that i will turn it over to susan parks of the Planning Department preservation staff and shell go over with you some of the details in the contracts that are in froth of you. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, one thing, because mr. Ram just noted there were 10 instead of 11, hes right. Item number 8, 70 carmelita street, that application has been withdrawn. When we ask, ill be asking that we table item number 8, 70 carmelita. Thank you. Good morning, supervisors. Susan parks, Planning Department staff. The items before you today are 11 mills act historical property contracts. Four of those were submitted to the Planning Department on may 1st of this year and 7 were submitted on september 3rd of this year. As a reminder, in october 2012, the board of supervisors passed amendments which were authored by supervisor wiener to the mills act legislation. These revisions made the application process quicker, cheaper and more predictable. As part of the landmark designation for the do you duboce park designation, september 3rd mills act deadline was established. Each property before you today has been locally designated under article 10 or 11 as either individually significant or contributor to a district. 7 properties are contributors to the duboce landmark under article 10 of the planning code. Two properties are individual city landmarks also designated under article 10 of the planning code. And one property is individually designated as a category 2 building under article 11 of the planning code. Each Property Owner filed an application to enter into a contract with the city. The property tax included are singlefamily residences, one flat and one commercial property located in the mid market. This contract can be revolving contracts that are renewed annually. Each Property Owner has outlined a Rehabilitation Plan with the in conformance with the secretary [speaker not understood] and has been approved by the Planning Department and the Historic Preservation commission. 10 of the 11 applications before you today are expected to receive a property tax savings for the 2015 tax year. One application that demonstrates no tax savings is not to be considered as the Property Owner has withdrawn their application. Two applications required an exemption. As the Property Values exceeded the 3 million residential threshold and the 5 million commercial threshold. The Historic Structures report for both properties outline the substantial amount of work be conceded and necessitates the need for the preservation incentive. On behalf of the Historic Preservation commission, the Planning Department recommends approval of these mills act contracts in conformance with the hpc with recommendation for approval. On october 16 and december 4 of this year. The applications were approved on the basis but all were complete and had proposed with appropriate and consistent with the requirements established by the mills act. Supervisors, were submitting to you revision to the last two resolutions that incorporates the budget analysts recommendations, that the approval these proposed contracts authorizes an exemption to the mills act historical property agreement eligibility limits. Budget analyst also recommended that an annual report be provided next year. Both the Planning Department and the Assessors Office are happy to provide this report by june 30th of next year that will detail the overall Mills Act Program and not just the contracts before you today. This reporting mechanism has not been included in the revised resolution. Im available to answer any questions you may have about this mills act application or the mill act program. Representatives from the assessor and Recorders Office are also available if you have questions regarding the property tax valuations. Property owners for 17 72 vallejo, 1019 market, and 2550 webster are also available. Thank you. Okay, thank you very much. Good morning, members of the budget and finance committee, chair farrell, supervisors avalos and wiener. Thank you very much for hearing our items today. On behalf of assessorrecorder carmen chiu id like to say a few quick words. Id like to thank you for the opportunity to address you today. Im joined by my colleague and our chief of [speaker not understood] matt thomas if you have specific questions about any of the valuations. I want to also start by acknowledging the hard work of the Property Owners for these mills act contracts and for their commitment to Historic Preservation. I want to also acknowledge and thank supervisor wiener for his leadership, supervisor farrell and supervisor kim for all of their hard work and the fine work of the Planning Department under director rams leadership. Id like to also thank and recognize the budget analyst for putting together their report in such a short amount of time. So, thank you. As you all are aware, our office is charged with preparing an estimated assessment value for mills act applications so that you may understand the Financial Impact before taking action. Our office received 11 applications from the Planning Department and as mr. Ram mentioned 8 of which are historical contracts duboce park landmark district and the Old Commercial property contract is for the property located at 1019 market. The budget analyst has all of our officess calculationses and matt thomas again is here to answer any questions that you might have. Thank you for the opportunity to address you this morning. Okay, thank you very much. To be clear, weve just been handed is this two amendments or resolutionses . These are two amendmentses to the resolution for 17 72 vallejo and 1019 market. Okay, got it. Thanks. Okay. Colleagues, any questions for staff at this point . If not, mr. Rose, can we turn to your report, please . Yes, mr. Chairman and members of the committee. On page 48 of our report, we state that approval of the proposed Historic Property agreements for the 11 properties would result in estimated reduced property tax revenues to the city in fiscal year 1415 of 152,129. An estimated reduced property taxes to the city over the initial 10year agreement periods of a million 52 1,290 and thats shown in table 23 on page 48 of our report. ~ the budget and legislative analyst also notes that estimated property tax revenues over 10 years is a calculation of the possible impact of the mills act Historic Property agreement and under the provision of the mills act Historic Property agreement, the property must be reevaluated each january 1st to determine the taxable mills act value for that year. Estimated property tax savings over 10 years that will change based on adjusted assessed Property Value and property tax rate. So, therefore, the estimated property tax reduction to the city over 10 years could be greater or less than the million 52 1,290 shown in table 23 on page 48 of our report. On page 49, we report that the total estimated reduction in property tax revenues to the city in fiscal year 1415 will be 85 4,869 when you consider both [speaker not understood] for the existing six Historic Property agreements which were previously approved by the board of supervisors and the 152,129 for the proposed Historic Property agreements. So, our recommendations are on page bottom of page 50 and the top of page 51. We recommend that you amend the resolution as i understand it, this has already been amended by the department, that is the legislation that you have before you. We recommend that you amend the resolution and thats file 1404 63 [speaker not understood] authorize an exemption to the mill Historic Property agreement eligibility limit of 3 million for a singlefamily residence, and then our recommendation number 2, we recommend that you amend the resolution and again as i understand this has been offered by the department, and thats file 1305 06, to specify approval of proposed Historic Property agreement modify exemption to the mill act, [speaker not understood] eligibility limit for 5 million for commercial property. We also recommend that you amend each of the 11 proposed resolutions to request that the director of property submit an annual report to the board of supervisors, mayor controller and budget and legislative analyst that details for each property with an existing Historic Property agreement, the original date of approval by the board of supervisors of the agreement, the annual property tax amount under the Historic Property agreement, the percent reduction in the annual property tax amount due to the property agreement, the reduction in annual property tax revenues to the city, and conformance of the property to the provisions of the Historic Property agreement. And finally, we consider approval of the proposed resolutions as a medved to be a policy decision for the board of supervisors. ~ amended thank you, mr. Rose. Colleagues, any questions for our budget analyst . Okay, seeing none, thank you. We will move on to Public Comment. Is there anybody who wishes to make Public Comment on items 2 through 12 at all . Come on up. Everyone has two minutes. If anyone else wishes to speak, please feel free to line up. Good morning, members of the committee. Mike bueler with San Francisco heritage. And it is extremely gratifying to see this number of mills act contracts coming before you today. Heritage has been involved from the outset in efforts to streamline the proposed legislation starting with the duboce park landmark district where this issue and really historic lack of access to Mills Act Program benefits really came to light. We are pleased to work with supervisor wiener and the Planning Department in crafting the legislation and we applaud supervisor wieners leadership as well as the Planning Department and the Assessors Office to bring these contracts before you today. As for the two properties in supervisor farrells district, i have personally toured both the property at 25 50 webster street as well as 17 72 vallejo, and i can assure you that both properties are extraordinarily significant and also in need of significant repair. The mills act property benefits will enable those improvements to be made to the property. Both Property Owners reached out to San Francisco heritage well over a year ago to discuss their properties and ask for our recommendations for making improvements as well as accessing incentives that are available to them. Heritage strongly recommends that you endorse the resolutions before you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Is there anybody else who wishes to comment on those items . Okay, seeing none, Public Comment is closed. [gavel] colleagues, do we have a number of recommendations by our budget analyst, first to specifically amend items number 2 and number 4 per the legislation we have in front of us as well as kind of an omnibus amendment for all these items. Can i have a motion to approve all the budget Analyst Recommendations . Motion by supervisor wiener. We can take those without opposition. [gavel] do we have any comments before the okay, the underlying items as amended 2 through 12 . Well, first i would make a motion first to table item number 8. Thats the 70 carmelita resolution that has been the application was withdrawn. So, to table item number 8. Okay, we have a motion to table item number 8. Can we take that without opposition . [gavel] so moved. And then for the remaining items 2 through 12 minus number 8, to move those forward as amended and as Committee Reports with positive recommendation. Am i correct its 2 through 12 . Yes, it will be 2 through 7 and 9 through 12. Okay, thats the motion. Can we take that without opposition . So moved. [gavel] mr. Chairman, these items will be recommended as amended as Committee Reports to the board of supervisors meeting for tomorrow, december 17th. Perfect. Thank you, sir. I would like to request the Department Submit the revise or amended resolutions to me by 9 00 a. M. Tomorrow morning. Okay, mr. Clerk, can you please call item number 13 . Item number 13, hearing to consider the annual review and approval of the board of supervisors annual budget guidelines for the departments budget for fiscal years 20142015 and 20152016. Thank you very much. We have the clerk of our board, ms. Angela covy here to report on the item. Thank you [speaker not understood]. Allowing our item to be placed on this agenda today for review. I am before you today to receive the committees budget guidelines for the board of supervisors budget. The department will provide the draft budget to the committee in january. ~ where we will propose recommendations that youll hear today as well as any others that i may hear from the committee. Ill take a moment. I have six quick slides that we can review. The first slide is the expenditures by category for the current year 1314. As you can see, the largest expenditure area is staff, making up 75 of this years budget at 9. 7 million. The breakdown by nonpersonnel serve as at 21 of the budget which is allocated primarily to the budget and legislative Analyst Services in addition to the citys cafr. The next slide is the expenditures by division. Its a relatively small department, so, its based on the committees direction over the years weve sought to mostly efficiently deliver the chartered duties and functions, maintaining the boards legislative record, providing Public Access and compliance with the open meeting laws, providing resources to the 11 members of the board, and the administrative and operations necessary to support the board in its official duty in addition to the Sunshine Ordinance Task force, the aab, the youth commission, the local Agency Formation commission. This slide shows the budget by Division Within the department. The Supervisors Office account for 52 or 6. 6 million of funding. The office of the clerk of the board is 24 or 3. 1 million. The budget and legislative analyst 16 at 2 348. ~ 2 million. [speaker not understood]. Youth commission is at 2 for 300,000 and the Sunshine Ordinance Task force at 1 at 100,000. Expenditures by category a the committee knows, the city has moved to a rolling twoyear budget. This slide shows the 13. 2 million Budget Approved last year for fiscal year 1415 allocated by expense type. As you see, expenses are allocated primarily to staffing followed by contract expenditures. The divisional indication from the current year is holding relatively constant. A special note is the assessment appeals board. They experience work load changes based on the economy. As you know, a recent recessionary period, the appeals have gone up. And during that period a backlog what created. To address the backlog, as you know during last years budget, a Clerk Position for evening hearings was funded as project funding for fiscal year 201314 and 1415. This position was filled in november of this year and we expect to have it continue through fiscal year 1516 when the backlog is anticipated to resolve. The 27aiing for the evening Clerk Position will be removed. That will be a reduction of 109,000. Aab expects the number of appeals will continue to decline and it projects a 50,000 decrease in revenue to our departments budget in 1415 ~. This slide shows budgeted and actual revenue from the appeals to illustrate the peak year and [inaudible] and the reduction since in revenues from appeal filings. And now for my final two slides. It is a list of items that need to be addressed in the new budget. First, to reiterate, there will be a decrease in revenue. So, the general fund will be requested to offset that decrease. Second, the department has selected harvey and Rose Associates through a competitive process and we are nearing finalizing the contract negotiations. Mr. Roses group has proposed a contract hourly rate increase as the contract rates did not increase from 2010 to 2013. At the committees direction in january, i will make a recommendation for a cola increase in the draft budget and will work with chair farrell on that proposal. Third, i propose increase funding for bilingual premium pay and legislative assistant premium pay as required through ifpte local 21s mou. Some of the legislative aides regularly provide stern says of english use [speaker not understood]. They are entitled to bilingual premium pay in addition. The department expects that more legislative aides will become eligible for the legislative assistant premium in fiscal year 1415 and 1516. This will add approximately 25,000 to the departments budget. The job class changes in the clerks office. As the committee may recall, i have made several changes throughout the years. Some positions weve downgraded as weve seen high profile retirements and as weve hired new staff, weve hired them at a lower classification and now that theyve had that experience we are moving them through the process. And to create a ladder in the department, we are now moving those positions up to their original classes. I will be requesting upward changes in two positions in my office, our accountant position from a 16 52 to a 15 64, and our 81 16 legislative calendar clerk to an 81 18. This request is based on a review of job duties and selection of the appropriate class with dhr. These changes will increase the departments budget by approximately 44,000 in salaries and benefits. And fifth, the board of supervisorss budget includes membership in the following three associations. The National Association of counties, the National League of cities, and the California State Association of counties. Currently we are sharing those expenditures with the enterprise departments. We understand that the California State Association of counties has raised their fee by an additional 40,000. I will work with the committee in january to discern whether or not the committee is interested in funding that increase in the departments budget. Second to last, information technology. The Department Needs a new file server at a cost of 14,000 and maintenance for our aab, online system, which phase 1 is completed and we are now moving into phase 2 and were on target for that project. We will need an additional 24,000 for that project. And finally, other recommendations by the committee, im happy to work with the committee as well as members of the board over the next several weeks to ensure that further guidelines that the department is interested in seeing be placed in the budget is, in fact, prepared so that when they bring it back to you in january, it will be close to being complete
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.