colleagues, any questions. >> okay. mr. rhodes can we go to your budget analyst report, please. >> mr. chairman, supervisor mar on page 39 of our report we report that attachment 1 to our report which we prepared summarizes the types of contracts leases or operating agreements required to pay for prevailing wages with respect to bargaining agreements and labor unions, the amount of allocated wage increased compared to 2013, and the amount of 2014 and compares to 2013 and finally the proposed prevailing wage raise themselves. we know any increase as a result of the proposed prevailing wage rates depends on future contract bids and which results on higher rates. there are such potential increase cost to the city cannot be estimated at this time. inform are that reason we consider this approval of the decision be for policy decision for the board of supervisors. >> at this time we'll open to public comment? anyone wishing to comment? is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed.. >> we can do so without opposition. thank you very much. at this point wei go back to the beginning. please call item no. 1. >> the clerk: item no. 1. lease terjs agreement literacy for environmental justice. l 13816 eco center. resolution authorizing the mutual termination agreement between the port and literacy for environmental justice for lease. >> we have carol here to speak. >> good afternoon, this is regarding the termination of the ports lease with literacy and environmental justice also known as ledge. the lease is a small eco center at the heron's head park for land in 1998. it was awarded a 10-year lease for 2300 square foot of unimproved land for the eco center. that ran from 2007 to december 2017. design and funds constructed the eco center completed in 2010. ledges lease included rent to 2500 in rent andesite preparation cost. at completion of the construction, the value of the prepping cost exceeded the total amount of rent that would have been paid to the port over the 10-year term of the lease. the eco center never generated any center for the court nor was it anticipated to. as for staffing and any other organizational changes at led, let seeks to focus it's operations and vacant the eco center and terminate it's lease with the port. under the terms of the lease, results in eco center reverting to the port and $68,000 in fees and deposits. the operation and maintenance cost associated with the eek oh center also revert to the port and we have a plan to assume those obligation primarily using the port staff and existing operating budget. in october, the port commission authorized staff inform a board agreement. that agreement is on file with the clerk with the board. terminating ledges lease authorizes the port to lease the eco center to a new tenant that can operate it with it's original intent which it was an environmental education center and public access to in enjoyment of heron's head park and about building practices and san francisco bay environment. the port has solicited lease proposals and received responses from two qualified potential tenants. with board of supervisors approval and of the proposed lease termination, we look forward to managing the eco center building and look forward to seeing a new tenant operating with full available assets. >> thank you. any questions. supervisor mar? >> thank you, and the budget analyst for the history of ledge and literacy for environmental justice and the great project of developing this eco living classroom. i'm really sad to hear about the financial difficulties of the organization. off line i would love to hear what the two organizations that have in the interest in the site to make sure that it serves it's environment justice and sustainability purpose that it was built for. thank you for that. >> mr. rose, could we go to your report? >> yes, members of the committee, as shown on page 4, we report that the literacy on justice that also reported this that the total credits of $53,000 that increase that they would have to pay. there's no rent paid by lej to the port. they have already paid the port the required $5,000 security deposit and removal fee for a total of $68,000. we recommend you do prove this resolution. >> okay. anybody wish to comment. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> we can take that without opposition. mr. clerk, please call item no. 2. >> the clerk: item no. 2: resolution approving the jurisdiction transfer of real property comprised of portions of block no. 0785, lots no. 030, and 0 # 3 in the city and skoint of san francisco from the real estate division to the mayor's office housing and community developments for 4, 584$584 million to commence following board approval. >> this is acquired by the city from cal trans under a cooperative agreement in 2001. this is about two-thirds of an acre in size. we have disposed in the budget analyst report in total including some along the way generating almost $47 million that returns back into some projects under those conditions. this project is subject to a 50-year lease with 49 years in options and those are suggest to sf usd and was held by sf usd inherent by the city of a new landlord acquired the property from cal trans. the interest in the property has been determined to be the amount noted here for 4.5$4.5 million. one is what was the rent projection to be paid for this school district lease over the parking lot and how it's discount to present value. that's $2.3 million of that value and what is the property worth at the end of the lease term in 62 years and how we revert that back into present day. so you add those two together, that's where that number comes from. the $4.584 million. the transfer would occur from the real estate department to the mayor's office of housing community development. the revenues which will continue to accrue as for such time which we'll talk about this precursor to. those revenues will continue to accrue to the mayor's on housing and community development and will offset some transaction cost which we have anticipated shortly. i want to refer now to the budget analyst report and recommendations of one of which was that we provide you an update an action taken boo i the school district last even. that we unanimously approved the subsequent transaction that this teams up between the school district and affordable housing object two sites, 1950 mission and connecticut in exchange for this project. that's the reason for the original transfer to execute the next agreement. that next agreement will come back to this body and board of supervisors for approval. one of the recommendations was regarding amending the legislation to have a contingency. we would respectfully suggest given the item with respect to the next transaction. we'll return to the board. it falls under section 9-1-18. you will see this next people of legislation come forward. it helps facilitate our final negotiations to clean up this item moving jurisdiction of the property to the mayor's office of housing. i will be happy to answer any questions and olson lee is here as well to answer any questions. >> just to be clear, the recommendation from the budget analyst basically to have it be contingent upon the the agreement with sfusd is not something you would prefer not to happen. >> we would prefer not to happen. >> thank you. supervisor mar. >> let me say that i listened on the roo radio to the very emotional meeting last night to the huge turnout from the communities face displacement and speaking out for the really wise transient and affordable housing and a wonderful show of communities coming together to work on making sure that those benefits of communities are there. when i was president of the school board mark sanchez and i as board members worked hard to try to develop ideas and communities serving ideas for that site. it seems the school district is stuck and many of the advocate last night don't want market rate housing the quote solution for the school district. this is a win win for the school district and the city. i know there are still some issues that the teachers union and whether it's supporting teacher housing and future rental subsidies that we work with communities to ensure that whether it's work force housing and definitely teacher housing to help teachers not being displaced. i did want to say that i'm very happy that the leadership of vice-president sandy feuer of the school board and commissioner mendoza led to a unanimous decision. i know other board members raised issues and i'm glad that lee and the other issues of the mayers out office of housing come to mixed use projects like 1950 phoenix high. i still call it this. i think this has come full circle and a positive win for affordable housing in our city. the hundred units of affordable and housing is very rare and hopefully the start of many other projects like this. employee housing and work force housing is incredible for this city and using to work with school district employees and school district on different projects is a good point whether custodian or maintenance workers or safety workers and other measures have looked at. this is a great opportunity to address how land is used in the best interest of not only neighborhoods like the mission, but also for employee housing as well. thank you so much to olson lee and for you for bringing this great proposal forward. >> thank you, very much, mr. roads, we do go to your budget analyst. did we? i'm forgetting already. it's been a long afternoon. >> yes, mr. chairman, on page 9 of our report. the appraisal determined the 2013-2014 parcel e considered the vacant land would be $37.5 million if the parking lease was terminated such that an approximate 5 story mixed use lease. however as reported and given an agreement on the parcel, the development of potential of the property is minimized at it's present value to $4.6 million. as a result the $2.9 million difference between the market value without the existing lease and the present value with the existing lease represents the value of the lease to the san francisco unified school district. on page 10 we report that the $4.6 million to be paid by the mayor's office of the community development for the subject jurisdictional transfer parcel would be deposited into orange county -- october -- oekt va, funds. recommendation, i don't understand the objection of the department. we want to see the board of supervisors be sure. they are going to accept the final agreement but i don't see anyway shape or form does anything to hurt the department. they bring it to the board, if the board is satisfied with the agreement, the board approves it. the recommendation is the san francisco unified school district, we recommend you propose the recommended enter into a finalized agreement to exchange comparable alternative properties for the development of affordable housing subject to approval of the board of supervisors as amended. this recommendation in no way shape or form delays anything. it simply an assurance to the to the boepdz board of supervisors that you get the agreement. >> okay. thank you. >> the department would be fine. as the -- let me introduce myself. olson lee, director of mayor's office of house. as director up dike said, this is a start of a complicated transaction. we are using this parcel plus additional funds to acquire 1950 mission and 1101 connecticut. both are transactions of this property or acquisitions of property which will come back to the board of supervisors. the department would have no objection if the agreement was presented at the time we were looking the -- entire transaction and bringing the entire transaction back. that would be the only concern. >> so ultimately as is you are okay with it? >> yes. as long as we can bring the agreement at the same time we are bringing the rest of the transaction. >> okay. the answer to any city attorney, any dispute over that? >> no. we are saying to amend it to the agreement. >> okay. at this point let's open up to public comment. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> let me just clarify, i know kevin and others know how urgent it is to develop projects and especially for housing trust fund to really kick start the development of much much needing affordable housing. you are saying you are okay with the budget analyst to recommend that we amend this as suggested to be contingent on moa to be on final agreement with that. you are okay with that? >> yes. we understand we need to get amended language to miss young very quickly. all right. can i have a motion to make the budget analyst. can we take those without opposition and the other line item as amended can we move that without opposition. congratulations on that one. mr. clerk can you call item no. 5, 6 and 7 together. item no. 5. the clerk: airport professional services agreement elevator maintenance serves not to exceed $11 million. item no. 6: airport professional services agreement escalator electric walk maintenance services not to exceed $17 million. item no. 7. lease airport amenities business services resolution approving the airport amenities business services lease between airport travel agency and the city and county of san francisco acting by through its airport commissions for a 7-year term with a minimum annual guarantee. >> you have a few items here. >> thank you, kathy with the san francisco airport. i will address no. 5 and 6 together. they are very similar contracts with testing repair, testing on call emergency services with airport escalate ors and moving walkways and the garage connectors and our air train stations. the airport currently has 170 elevators that would fall under this contract as well as 133 escalators and 43 walkways and 12 escalators and they currently are maintained and operated under the construction contract for terminal 2. but the addition of those pieces are contemplated in both the not to exceed amounts. the contracts would be with thesen krupp elevator and not to exceed an amount of $11 million. the agreement for the escalator not to exceed $17 million. they run through december 31, 2018. they were the result of an rfp process with receiving the highest scores on the different contracts. the budget analyst recommended approval but i will be happy to answer any questions. >> any questions on 5 and 6. do you want to talk about 7 as well. single family -- why don't you do that? >> item no. 7 is seeking your approval for a new lease agreement with travel agency to provide passenger and amenities for a full travel agency, luggage story, shower facilities and luggage services. the proposed least -- least is for the terminal and has a term from january 1st, 2014, through december 31, '20/20. the lease has a minimum guarantee rent amount of $180,000 per year or 50 percent of gross revenues whichever is greater. staff estimate based on the current lease the travel agency will pay the rent. the proposed lease was a result of a competitive rate for proposal process with companies attending the prebid conference but only the airport travel agencies submitting a proposal. it was found to be responsive in receiving 86 out of the possible points. the committee recommends approval. >> any questions. okay. mr. rose, can we go to your reports. >> on item 5, the budget, page 6 of the report for the proposed 5-year agreement to maintain the airport is $11 million. we recommend that you prove that resolution. on item 6, on page 3 1 of our report, the details to maintain the elevators and electric walks shown on table 2 of our report. rerecommend you prove the resolution. on item #8 -- item, excuse me, item 7. i'm sorry. on page 35, we note that under the existing and propose lease a t a is responsible for the greater at the minimum or annual fee of proposed revenues. the annual guarantee of $180,000 and that is a total of 1.2 million over the term of the lease. the minimum guarantee of $180,000, $113,000 more than under the existing lease. as miss lied ner has reported which exceed td minimum annual guarantee shown on page 3 on page 35 of your report. the estimate estimates it will continue to pay. we recommend you an approved this legislation. >> okay. thank you very much. any comments. at this point we'll open. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. we'll close those items 5-7. we can move for approval and take that without opposition. all right. mr. clerk. call no. 9. >> the clerk: accept and spend grant defibrillator and training. resolution retruax actively authoring the fire department to accept and expend a grant in the amount of 1771, 4216789 >> i'm here to present on the next item of the agenda to expend on the department 1, 771, 4216789 the firefighters grant award through fema for 41 defibrillators. due to cuts the department has not been able to replace many of the equipment because the department relies on so many general fund dollars. and this grant is crucial to allows the department to reinvestment to its equipment. in addition this grant will allow us to in -- increase the numbers trained and officer training in conjunction with our regional partners. the total amount of this project is $22.2 million and federal funding as well as the department match of $442, 855. these are already allocated in the department's budget with training allocations. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> any questions, colleagues? >> okay. mr. roads, your report. >> on page 44, we propose this requires a match of funds equal to 20 percent or total combined matching funds and that is shown in table two on page 44. on page 45 of our report, we note the department of fire