Transcripts For SFGTV BOS Budget And Finance Sub Regular Co

team with respect to every single fire have stepped up to the plate not only in trying to find housing for the victims of many fires that have taken place but also working with my office the city agencies to prevent the fires and so i failed to mention that and i want to say that but i wanted to know that. i know for instance, with every fire, i don't know we would've been able to find housing for every one of those victims without the apartment association playing the role that are played and i know just now with the latest fire that they're playing an instrument to roll in and find housing for these folks. i want to personally thank the san francisco apartment association for the leadership ever knowing that the city cannot solve this on some to the private sector has a role to play mesa may have played a very important role. with that, mdm. chair, i like to continue this will to continue this item to the call the chair. >> if we can make a motion to excuse the supervisor. >> motion to excuse >> motion to excuse supervisor avalos. we can do that without opposition >>[gavel] >> supervisor avalos has a motion to move this to the call the chair we can do that without objection. i do i think the chief and fire department for being here today along with the department of the inspection the department of health is a noticeably a continued conversation look for to seeing the implementation of the working group recommendation as being blue ford on this important issue. thank you supervisor campos for calling for this him. . >>[gavel] >> mdm. clerk him please call the next item >> item 5 >>[reading code] >> so, my apologies. this item was called by supervisor campos. i'm handing the floor over to supervisor 10 couples on this important matter. >> thank you very much on be very brief. i want to thank folks for waiting did i know it's been a long day today but i call this hearing to determine whether the city and county of san francisco sources any products from taylor farms. let me say this. this company has engaged in pretty reprehensible treatment of its workers. it's a private company taylor farms, and manufactures industries prepackaged salads, sandwiches, fresh-cut fruits and vegetables for retail food service and deli segments. the company of the food service industry largest supplier of value added fresh produce. taylor found currently employs 7000 workers in approximately 2500 of those workers are members of teamsters local 890 in salinas california. in 2014, salinas workers ratified a new contract securing 11% wage increase over four years. including also stronger seniority protections and if it's another improvements. at the company's nonunion plants in tracy california, taylor farms that a large percentage of its workforce with workers from employment agencies. these so-called contingent workers are paid less than their direct counterparts. this despite the fact some of these workers have worked at taylor farms for many many years. in tracing 900 telephone works as employees intends have an organizing for union representation with teamsters local 601 after election in march of 2014 the national labor relations board impounded the vote investigated nearly 100 unfair labor practices by taylor farms. taylor farms responded to this by hiring professional consultants at a cost of over $800,000 in these consultants basically designed to correlate in methods to interfere, threaten, intimidate the workers from having a fair union election which is their legal right. the company permits essentially somewhat called a goon squad of antiunion workers free reign to her wrasse prounion workers. this has created a climate of fear and intimidation that has been intentionally created at the telephone plans. region 32 again as you know are being prosecuted taylor farms and stand agency or the series and numerous violations including terminating workers for union activities, spying on workers could in 2016. threatening plant closure, deportation. to partition many the workers may have questions about their legal status their immigration status. illegally interrogating workers and so on. that agency actually settled the case with taylor farms agreed to pay more than $267,000 in funds. i mean, this is to add numerous violations of health and safety codes, a chemical spill at tracy plant in 2015. and april 2016, cal-osha issued 26 site citations and $96,000 in fines. to taylor farms. the list goes on and on. you can't really make this all. yet, this company is engaging in something that you would think you would not see in this country could certainly, not in the 21st century. this is again just the tip of the iceberg. so, my feeling as a resident of san francisco as a supervisor of san francisco, that we as a city should have no business relationship whatsoever with this company. i want to make sure that the city and county of san francisco is not purchasing any products from a corporation that engages in such egregious anti-union and abusive activity. so, i know that we have here the office of contract administration i would like to turn it over to them so that they can present on the question of what if any relationship the city has good thank you. >> thank you. good afternoon. my name is whitney bagley and my principal analyst with the office of contract administration. i'm here today to present findings on purchases made by the city to taylor farms. the office of contract administration investigated both direct and indirect purchases from taylor farms and its subsidiaries. >> overhead, please. >> i have copies as well. as you can see from this slide, food purchases made from july 1 2015-march 31, 2016 totaled over $6.9 million. of those purchases, $19,827 were .20% went to products produced by taylor farms. those purchases have been through two primary vendors as the city does not have a direct relationship with taylor farms. the two vendors are us foods incorporated and sysco food services that supplied foods for the good honda hospital san francisco general hospital in the recreational parks department. so these are findings and i'm happy to answer any questions that you have. >> what i would say is simply i think it's great that were not directly purchasing from taylor farms. i want to applaud you and your apartment in the city for doing that. while i see that only a small portion of its .3% of total food purchases are coming from vendors that are purchasing from them so we are indirectly purchasing from them that i sort of feel that number should be zero. .3% of our total food purchases is still $6,966,000. so, i would ask that everything possible be done to make sure that we go with a more responsible manner and even that to me is something that i would don't want to see the city even indirectly buying from taylor farms. i think that's the only way that you deal with someone as irresponsible as taylor farms. >> thank you >> with that, colleagues i would like to open up to public comment did i know that there's a number people have been waiting no wonder thank them. i don't know if she's here anymore. sandy lee fewer, who is a commissioner on the board of education was here. m johnson, mike castro, but anyone would like to speak on this item, please, come forward and thank you for your patience. >> thank you members of the board. my name is mike johnston. i'm here on behalf of teamsters joint council seven. our leadership is currently at her international convention in las vegas they send you their gratitude for taking up this item. thus 20 as we represented 2500 workers at taylor farms in salinas and have had a good working relationship with them that. only nine are workers in tracy i try to organize with teamsters local 601 the situation could not have been more different. this really started as a unit but the workers came to us because of the horrific conditions in that plant, just talk a little bit about that. taylor farms has been cited in the last year for over 70 violations by cal-osha fined over $100,000 which is huge in terms of cal osha fines. after 20 workers including two pregnant women were sent to the hospital after chemical spill last year, when they started complaining about the fumes they were given paper taskmaster put on to defend against chlorine fumes. taylor farms is being invested by the california department of fair employment and housing for a legit harassment towards gay and lesbian workers. just a couple of examples. one day worker reported months and months of sexual comments and unwanted touching and groping by another worker. the only response by the company was to move that coworker to another work area of discipline at all. a taylor another day worker was punched by a coworker. zero discipline. and as you will hear, the companies also been cited by the national labor relations board for terminating workers who are exercising their democratic right to organize as a union taylor farms has run a vicious campaign against his own employees and tracy and we think it's important the city and county of san francisco take a stand and sysco and united foods need to two vendors that you purchase through our big customers of the tracy plans. so, if you told him that you don't want product from their and has an impact past the small percentage of your food purchases at that represents. thank you there much >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> again, i want to thank folks for weighting and the workers for being here. >> hi my name is that pastoral organize with the teamsters and web into the last two years and the stories i've heard one of the workers [inaudible] all the workers were coming were hideouts from undocumented workers [inaudible] and i was surprising. just from the heart had been able to spell undocumented workers at the plant. earplugs in everything from the vending machines [inaudible] you have to buy all that. >> you would buy from them? you would buy from them essentially spewing >> yes. the workers needed like earplugs they would have to go to vending machine. your aspirin, it looks like it if you gloves get what you have to buy your own gloves again. so those of the some of the stories i heard from sexual abuse some of stories i've talked to mike 85-year-old grandpa that [inaudible] indoors [inaudible] i don't think san francisco should buy anything from these people. thank you >> thank you very much. >> i'm going to translate >> thank you if you can speak into the microphone spewing >> my name is rodney l-i work at taylor farms in tracy california. i was ready to speak [inaudible]. i think i figured this is terrible how the company is been treating us that were. at work. to say they have the best product [inaudible] and may step all over his. not to allow us to form our union. i was trying to intimidate other people so [inaudible] everybody at the plan is scared.i think it's not fair that were not related what buddy buddies with somebody, they get to heaven they get the best spots in the company supervisors or assistant supervisor. when there's people that don't work there for years have not got a $.50 raise. we work hard in the company. we produce a lot of money for the company. he's not grateful. he just ups all over us. i'm very very mad. i do have the words but i don't want to say them. because all the people that are working there for years that got hurt for example this woman that got hurt, that afternoon one of her veins i guess in her head popped into this into the hospital and was she when the hospital she got a call from supervisors saying basically chill tomorrow and work were you don't have a job. somebody that works hard and see the supervisors on their phones doing whatever it were the ones working hard for the company. there's a lot more to say but i can say. he is very very disappointed. thank you. >> thank you. i know how hard it is for a worker, especially working with such a horrible company under these horrible conditions that the courage to come forward and speak good so i want to say to the workers that come here thank you for that courage. the point of this is to send a message that you're not alone in san francisco is with you. all fleet, because san francisco is doing that other jurisdictions will do the same thing.[spanish translation] thank you. any other person would like to speak ? i guess that concludes public comment. but i think that in terms of our contracts office, you can see that this is something that's pretty serious and that as much as we've made were in an okay place 02 to the size, for us, for my perspective, any amount directly or indirectly that benefits his company is not something i want to see and so that would be might ask. that we make sure that the number-it's not 0.3% but we spend actually 0.0. that's what i want to go. so, with that, colleagues, that's okay to actually continue to the call of the chairs that we can maybe come back and see how we are doing in the near future. i also want to thank the chief of staff hillary rowman was worked very hard on this issue. thank you for your leadership, hillary. >> thank you supervisor campos. i know they're doomed many more members of the public that want to speak on this issue. so i also do apologize were not able to hear everyone because this is incredibly important. everyone's voice should be heard. i'm happy to support and continue this to the call of the chair motion and i see that supervisor avalos is not as that so we can do that without objection if there's no further public comment and thank you for all the public were able to state the patient. will continue this item to the call of the chair. >>[gavel] >> mdm. clerk in any other items >> no other items >> thank you to everyone. this meeting is adjourned. >>[gavel] >>[adjournment] >> you're watching quick bite, the show that has san francisco. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> we're here at one of the many food centric districts of san francisco, the 18th street corridor which locals have affectionately dubbed the castro. a cross between castro and gastronomic. the bakery, pizza, and dolores park cafe, there is no end in sight for the mouth watering food options here. adding to the culinary delights is the family of business he which includes skylight creamery, skylight and the 18 raisin. >> skylight market has been here since 1940. it's been in the family since 1964. his father and uncle bought the market and ran it through sam taking it over in 1998. at that point sam revamped the market. he installed a kitchen in the center of the market and really made it a place where chefs look forward to come. he created community through food. so, we designed our community as having three parts we like to draw as a triangle where it's comprised of our producers that make the food, our staff, those who sell it, and our guests who come and buy and eat the food. and we really feel that we wouldn't exist if it weren't for all three of those components who really support each other. and that's kind of what we work towards every day. >> valley creamery was opened in 2006. the two pastry chefs who started it, chris hoover and walker who is sam's wife, supplied all the pastries and bakeries for the market. they found a space on the block to do that and the ice cream kind of came as an afterthought. they realized the desire for ice cream and we now have lines around the corner. so, that's been a huge success. in 2008, sam started 18 reasons, which is our community and event space where we do five events a week all around the idea of bringling people closer to where the food comes from and closer to each other in that process. >> 18 reasons was started almost four years ago as an educational arm of their work. and we would have dinners and a few classes and we understood there what momentum that people wanted this type of engagement and education in a way that allowed for a more in-depth conversation. we grew and now we offer -- i think we had nine, we have a series where adults learned home cooking and we did a teacher training workshop where san francisco unified public school teachers came and learned to use cooking for the core standards. we range all over the place. we really want everyone to feel like they can be included in the conversation. a lot of organizations i think which say we're going to teach cooking or we're going to teach gardening, or we're going to get in the policy side of the food from conversation. we say all of that is connected and we want to provide a place that feels really community oriented where you can be interested in multiple of those things or one of those things and have an entree point to meet people. we want to build community and we're using food as a means to that end. >> we have a wonderful organization to be involved with obviously coming from buy right where really everyone is treated very much like family. coming into 18 reasons which even more community focused is such a treat. we have these events in the evening and we really try and bring people together. people come in in groups, meet friends that they didn't even know they had before. our whole set up is focused on communal table. you can sit across from someone and start a conversation. we're excited about that. >> i never worked in catering or food service before. it's been really fun learning about where things are coming from, where things are served from. >> it is getting really popular. she's a wonderful teacher and i think it is a perfect match for us. it is not about home cooking. it's really about how to facilitate your ease in the kitchen so you can just cook. >> i have always loved eating food. for me, i love that it brings me into contact with so many wonderful people. ultimately all of my work that i do intersects at the place where food and community is. classes or cooking dinner for someone or writing about food. it always come down to empowering people and giving them a wonderful experience. empower their want to be around people and all the values and reasons the commitment, community and places, we're offering a whole spectrum of offerings and other really wide range of places to show that good food is not only for wealthy people and they are super committed to accessibility and to giving people a glimpse of the beauty that really is available to all of us that sometimes we forget in our day to day running around. >> we have such a philosophical mission around bringing people together around food. it's so natural for me to come here. >> we want them to walk away feeling like they have the tools to make change in their lives. whether that change is voting on an issue in a way that they will really confident about, or that change is how to understand why it is important to support our small farmers. each class has a different purpose, but what we hope is that when people leave here they understand how to achieve that goal and feel that they have the resources necessary to do that. >> are you inspired? maybe you want to learn how to have a patch in your backyard or cook better with fresh ingredients . or grab a quick bite with organic goodies. find out more about 18 reasons by going to 18 reasons.org and learn about buy right market and creamery by going to buy right market.com. and don't forget to check out our blog for more info on many of our episodes at sf quick bites.com. until next time, may the fork be with you. ♪ ♪ >> so chocolaty. mm. ♪ >> oh, this is awesome. oh, sorry. i thought we were done rolling. ♪. >> >> okay. good morning everybody. welcome to the san francisco budget and finance committee meeting for june 29, 2016. it's great to be back after budget season. i am mark farrell and i want to thank sfgtv. any announcements? >> yes yes. >> okay. so we have a decent amount to get through this morning so with that would you call item number 1. >> item 1 is an ordinance authorizing the recreation and park department regarding the funding and stewardship of a new park on the francisco reservoir site located between hyde and larkin street and south of bay street. >> thank you madam clerk. for the last five years i have been working with the neighbors and and recreation and park to turn this into a park, a project we voted on a year and a half ago and we have been working with the francisco park conservancy and made up of the four largest neighborhood groups in the area. the neighborhood stepped up and the project wouldn't be possible without their partnership and support. they have helped build a broad group of support of over 40 organizations that have been involved in the effort. they have commitments for the funding to maintain run the park in perpetuity and with their help we can turn this dilapidated site of concrete and fence to a area that the city can enjoy everyday. the puc agreed to turn jurisdiction over to the rec and park department. in the ordinance are four components in the next milestone in this process to build this park at the site of the old francisco reservoir and authorizes parking on the site and accept an in-kind grant for construction services and annual grants from the francisco park conservancy and for the future maintenance of the park. it authorizes rec and park to accept and expend grants from the francisco park conservancy in improvements in the new park and amends to be listed as a park and no alcoholic beverages can be consumed: the rec and park will maintain and operate the new parker will start. the project of the conservancy will administer and over see the design and construction and maintenance and operations of the park. next steps we will hold a public outreach meetings for the proposed design of the park. i look forward to being there hopefully at all meetings and start the construction capital and for park and rec commission for approval. colleagues this has been once in a lifetime opportunity that presented its in san francisco. as the population grows our need for open space continues to grow and we have a turn to turn this concrete and fence site into a place for residents and tourists to enjoy and i want to thank everyone that are involved. i am excited we're here today. we always want this to go faster but this is the right agreement in place. i want to thank everyone involved. i have speaker cards but this has been truly, truly a community effort from the neighbors and huge thanks to the recreation and parks department and i know we have staff here to present this on item as well. >> thank you supervisor farrell. good morning supervisors. my name is lisa brandon the director of the partnerships at recreation and parks department. i am thrilled to be here this morning to talk about the francisco reservoir's transformation into a park. i guess i want to echo supervisor farrell's words in really thanking the francisco park conservancy for their hard work, advocacy and stewardship to take the steps we're taking to transform this site into a beautiful park for all san franciscans, so on june 16 the parks and recreation commission voted to recommend that the board take actions we're seeking today which is approve the agreement between the francisco park conservancy and the department, to accept the in-kind grants for design and construction of the park, cash grant for park maintenance and grants for future park improvements and also to amend the park code to add the park to the list of parks with no alcohol can be consumed just for background the francisco reservoir is located between hyde and larkin street south of bay street and the site dates back to the 1860's when it was used for a reservoir for san francisco and closed in the 1940's when the near by lombard reservoir opened. sis reservoir is one of five site that's department has acquired or in the process of a quiring in order to continue the mission to preserve open space for all san franciscans. two years ago after years of advocacy by community groups the departmented entered into a mou with the public utilities commission to acquire the property with immediate jurisdiction over 12 years. as part of the process the group that became the ftc committed to funding of maintenance of the new park and this agreement say formalization of that commitment so preliminary development of the site is in process already. the fpc has developed a preliminary baseline and have a design team under contract. rec and park and fpc has done preliminary stsd of the site and the next step as supervisor farrell mentioned is to develop a final concept plan, a donor recognition plan and potentially change the name of the site to francisco park and all of the items will go back to the parks and recreation commission for approval potentially next spring so as this is the preliminary base plan that the group has been working on with input from the community, and you will see it contains a number of really important park amenities including a dog run, ada accessible pathways, a restroom and a site for potential childrens play area. >> excuse me. supervisor yee. >> excuse me. do you happen to have a handout for this and when i look at the screen i can't see much? >> sorry. i have one copy of my slides.. i believe jeff was making this them as well. >> why don't you give them to supervisor yee. >> sorry about that. i know the base plan is pretty small. >> . the public doesn't realize what we see on our screen we can barely see it. it's not over there. >> okay. sorry about that. and so the next slide is just anticipated schedule, and you will see that we're at step one, and the group happies to begin the more -- hopes to begin the more formal concept design development and outreach shortly, potentially later this summer or early fall and go back to the commission in the spring of next year, and hopefully have a new park in 2019. and then i just wanted to call out a couple of highlights of the agreement, so as i said before the agreement really formalizes and creates a long-term partnership between the francisco park conservancy and the department for the stewardship of this resource for the city. the term is for 20 years with ten year extensions possible up to 50 you'res. spc will fund development of the park with expected value $25 million. and then for the term of the agreement fpc will fund park maintenance of approximately $150,000 a year but that will be finally determined once the park design is complete, but the funding will cover one full time gardener, appropriate custodial staffing and supplies for the staff. and then rpd and fpc agreed to meet three times a year to review operations and maintenance and fpc plays an important role in ongoing stewardship and they will develop an asset management plan for the park and a landscape management plan for the park which really is a wonderful thing for the department because we're starting with these two plans before the park even opens rather than having to go back and develop them on an existing asset so this is a great opportunity for a long-term public private partnership on an important new asset for the city, and then lastly the action seeks to amend the park code section 4-10 which prohibits alcohol in 58 park sites or about a quarter of san francisco's parks and this rule is designed really to promote good park behavior and positive park activation. the park listed in the section of the park code includes sections of golden gate park, neighborhood parks from pine lake park to dubois park and in highly trafficked area like hayes valley and conrad square and fisherman's wharf. and so just to repeat the action items are to approve the agreement, accept the grants and amend the park code, and i just wanted to add as we take the next step in what surely is a long partnership with fpc we want to express our gratitude to this group their persistence, advocacy and stewardship and we really do look forward to preserving a beautiful part of san francisco where everybody can get out and play. thank you. >> thank you lisa and thank you to you for all of your hard work on this project as well as well as all rec and park staff. colleagues any questions right now for staff? okay. before we go to public comment mr. rose should we go to your report please? >> yes mr. chairman and members of the committee on page three of our report, the bottom of page three the francisco park and conservancy budget of 25 million for the new francisco park is shown in the table and that's on page four of our report, and we note that the francisco park conservancy will provide annual funding of $150,000 a year to pay the department's cost for one full time gardener and custodial staffing on a joint level. we report that the city's estimated cost under the agreement are $250,000 for environmental review, $180,000 for recreation and park project manager to over see the project so that totals $430,000 in general fund costs and the department estimates $10,000 for cost and materials and supplies related to park maintenance. on page five of our report we report that because future gifts from the francisco park conservancy to the recreation and park department could result in new costs to the city and revise the ordinance to require board of supervisors approval from the park and gift to the francisco park conservancy of $100,000 more and results in new outreach and management environmental review or other costs and consistent with the administrative code that requires board of supervisors approval of acceptance of funds in the amount of $100,000 or more and as i understand it funds have been provided in the budget for an additional $430,000 for the recreation and park department's budget and other budgets i believe, the mayor's budget, and that's through the -- and also including throughout board's reappropriation process which will go before the board in a couple of weeks, and this is consistent with prior board policy so we do recommend approval of the proposed ordinance with the amendment and the amendment -- our recommendation for the amendment is stated on page five and state then the proposed ordinance to require board of supervisors approval of the acceptance of future gifts from the francisco park conservancy $100,000 or more if it results in new costs of public outreach, project management, environmental reviews or other costs. i would be happy to respond to questions. >> thank you mr. rose. colleagues any questions for the budget analyst. supervisor yee. >> i'm not totally familiar with historically -- what the agreement was. i stepped in a few years ago when this was happening and i was supportive at the time, and so with the donation that we're talking about was it originally going to cover these costs or are these just new costs? >> yeah, these are more internal city costs in terms of ceqa review and a project manager to allow the rec and park department to work alongside the neighborhood group. original at the beginning it was about the construction and maintenance of the park itself and that's exactly what actually what the agreement is, the ordinance we're voting on today is agreement to accept funds from the francisco park conservancy to construct and maintain the park, yeah. >> thank you. >> okay. seeing no other questions or comments again i can't thank the neighbors enough and the community enough for coming together on this one. i know we have a number of cards. i will call them up in the order i have them and once your name is called. everyone will have two minutes if you like. [calling speaker names] >> good morning. thank you for the opportunity to speak in front of you today. i am a supporter of the park. i'm the president of the aquatic neighbors, one of the organizations that joined together to make up the francisco park conservancy. we appreciate your time and diligence on this and we fully support and you do too support this park. not only my members, the 350 of them that i talk online or in person everyday with. they're anxious to get the park going. we see people in the area asking what is this land and when will it be accessible to us? this is a public jewel that you will be given the public the city citizens and visitors alike to visit and hold in the public trust forever. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. and feel free to use either microphone if you want to use that one. whatever works. >> good morning supervisor farrell and tang and supervisor yee. i can't believe we're here today actually considering how long it's been, but i want to talk a little bit about tell hyde neighborhood center as i was unsuccessful in having the speakers that spoke so eloquently in front of the park and rec commission two weeks ago. tell high represents a mic rocosism of the neighborhood of the city, its diversity. they serve 500 up citizens who come there who are babies all the way to seniors, and so i decided to get all the people i have been speaking to about this -- i decided to say let's meet on hyde and bay and i'm going to show you what i have been talking about for the last five years so i hiked ken lee, who the former principal of francisco middle school and three of the managers that grew up in the programs and live in the neighborhood. they live in chinatown and north beach and we walked the interim of the park -- perimeter of the park and they couldn't believe the size of it because you can't see it at bay and i convinced them to come to the commission and what that would do for tell high and everyone else and that's what i wanted to say and thank you to park and rec and to you and margo kelly who is not here today, the indispensable margo kelly. >> thank you. i totally agree. next person please. >> good morning supervisors. my name is matthew tag and a resident of south city, and i used to work in and bay and hyde street area near the reservoir and some days i would walk up hyde street and it's kind of a lengthy work. it's very steep so i would take a break and enjoy the view for a bit and it was a great view and when i took a break i wondered why this thick plot of land and pit was there and always thought something could be done about it especially for the communities and people in san francisco, and so when i heard about the francisco park project it was something i could get behind and support and i really encourage the board of supervisors to approve this next phase and a great benefit to the community of san francisco, people around the bay like myself and even tourists alike. thank you. >> thank you very much. i will call the next speaker cards i have. [calling speaker names] >> good morning supervisors. my name is jo fiona and work with the elderly and here to support this francisco park project. as you know chinatown and the north beach area in need of public parks and open spaces especially for the underserved populations. we at supper for the elderly hope that creation of this new park will go a long way with approving that. chinatown is tourists -- the neighborhood where the park will be built in san francisco park. representatives have reached out to us throughout this planning process which we appreciate. we look forward to the many benefits the parks will offer to the seniors we serve. we strongly support the creation of francisco park and encourage you to approve this next phase of project. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker please. >> good morning. my name is frank dawkins and resident of brunel heights and a park advocate and express my support for the sis park project. i have seen many changes in the city, good and bad, but one problem that still remains is the need for green open space in a dense part of the city. to have this park available to the residents of san francisco and the entire bay area would be a great benefit to our diverse communities after decades of being a vacant lot now is the time to provide the community with this great public park. i am thrilled to see the neighborhood park be a reality. i have spoke on this many years and to have open green space for the city and those that visit the great city of san francisco i enthusiastically i support the creation of francisco park and encourage the board of supervisors to approve this next phase of the park project today. i thank you for your time. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good morning supervisors. my name is jan bloom and a board member of the francisco park conservancy. i received last night a letter from lisa franceon who is astonishing instructor of the advancement placement course for environmental sciences at galileo academy and i would like to read a portion of the letter and i will submit a copy of the full letter for the community record. "i feel that nothing can replace the hands on outdoor experiences for my students many whom had previous limited exposure to the outdoors. the main drawbacks to my current partnerships which she has extensively solicited throughout the city -- the main drawbacks are travel time and money. class time and class time that my students need to spend on a bus going to a site and the money to pay for all of the buses. because of these challenges i was thrilled when a group of planners in san francisco park project contacted me several years ago to discuss ways in which galileo students could be involved with the park. it's based on the conversations i've had with the sis park project it's sincere in wishes to incorporate hands on educational opportunities for youth in san francisco and the design built on sustainable land model incorporates native and drought resistance plant to attract wildlife and make ideal living laboratory for students to utilize and i support the francisco park project and look forward to working with them in the future for a strong environmental program and allow my students to explore the natural world within walking distance of their school." thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good morning supervisors. my name is nancy smith. i'm a member of golden gate autobahn society and here in this path to support the proposed ordinance. golden gate autobahn is a 501(c)(3) non-profit dedicated to protecting birds and other wildlife in their habit. we have been consulted early by the conservancy. >> >> to support the effort to develop francisco reservoir as a park and i am told one of the first volunteers on site was one of our members who conducted the first bird survey in november of last year. he is conducting additional surveys ongoing and i am told also they will be used as part of the planning process for development of this plark. as you know we all strongly need more open space given the increasing population and development pressures. francisco park is an ideal place to develop for all sorts of public enjoyment and also for wildlife development. people will see the benefit that restoration can bring. we encourage you to support the ordinance. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hello supervisors. my name is emily hair old and the president of the russian hill neighbors and represent hundreds of households and merchant members along the polk street corridor. >> >> and lucky that this property is within our boundaries. earlier this year we conducted a survey of families in the neighborhood. we had more than 100 respond. despite reports that families are fleeing san francisco more than 65 reported they want to stay and raise their children in the city limits through high school. quality of local public schools, affordability of housing, cleanliness and safety of streets are utmost importance but when we asked what russian hill neighbors can do to encourage a great environment to raise children in san francisco their overwhelming response that we should advocate our leaders to ensure this site is an open space for families, everyone in the community and visitors to the city to enjoy for years to come. that is why i am here today to reaffirm our steadfast commitment to the francisco park project and i ask you to approve the next phase of this project today. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good morning. this is a pleasure. when i first got up here to speak or spoke with you mark you only had two children. i think cane is going to be four this september. >> he will be. >> so this has been a while. good morning supervisors. my name is tina more oin and past president of russian hill neighbors and here for support of the project, the francisco park project. as president i was part of the initial advocacy for this park project. i am incredibly proud that four different neighborhood groups and associations came together to agree on a single goal. that is very rare in northeast san francisco as you know and making this park a reality in working together here today. this park will serve as a beautiful serene escape for communities across san francisco. i look forward to the ongoing collaboration efforts with the francisco park conservancy and other groups in the public process. i encourage the board of supervisors to approve this next phase for the francisco park today. thank you for your time. as an aside as i was leaving the house this morning my husband said you look like you're going to a ribbon cutting for the francisco reservoir and i'm a forward thinker and this is what i might be wearing when the sun is out shining and less time than we hope. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> hello supervisors. my name is chris and on the executive board of the polk board association and i am here on behalf of the board to enthusiastically support the project and our organization is a few blocks away from the project and you're aware there's not lot a open space in the neighborhood and we look for a project that will create open space and bring benefit to the neighbors and merchants and visitors to the district and i urge the board of supervisors to approve the next phase of the project today. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. next speaker please. >> supervisors i am john riso with the sierra club. we're a strong supporter of the francisco park project. as you know parks are an integral part of the city's infrastructure just as much as housing and transportation are and roads. our population is growing but our -- unlike the national park system our local park system hasn't been expanding and this is a rare opportunity to do just that to expand our park system. this is a great location for a new park. this area has very few parks per capita and we enthusiastically support it and urge you to pass the ordinance before you. thank you. >> thank you very much. any other members of the public wish to speak on item 1? okay. seeing none item 1 is closed. supervisor tang. >> all right. i would like to make a motion to adopt the budget analyst's recommendations such that future approval from the board is required if any gifts would result in new city costs and then approve as amended and send forward to the full board with positive recommendation. >> okay. we have a motion by supervisor tang and second by supervisor yee. thank you for everyone turning out for rec and park and the community and we have a long road ahead and we can do so without objection. okay. [applause] madam clerk would you call item two. >> item two is hearing on the mayor's sea level rise coordinating committee's sea level rise action plan including areas of policy and fiscal impact and budgetary need and requesting the coordinating committee to report. >> okay thank you. so this is item two and supervisor farrell is actually going to be taking off for a little bit so i will chair the rest of the meeting and there has been a request to continue item two to the july 27 meeting. can we do that without objection? >> i'm sorry. madam chair would you like to take public comment. >> okay. sorry. okay. let's open up item two to public comment. is anyone here? seeing none public comment is closed and now if we can get a motion supervisor yee. >> (inaudible). >> all right. so we will continue item two to july 27. [gavel] item 3 please. >> item 3 resolution approving amendment no. 1 to contract no. cpt 632 to purchase electric trolley buses with no change to the term of the contract. >> thank you. i believe we have staff here from mca. >> yes. good morning supervisors tang and yee. my name is gary chang. sfmta project manager so with your support in february 2014 we entered into a contract with new flier inc. to purchase 60-footer trolley vehicles known as the articulated coaches and to replace the worse performers in our fleet which are the other 60-footers and as of today more than 90% of the 60 vehicles are operating on the street collecting revenues and they're just a few more left going through various stages of commissionings and these coaches have been operating on line 14, mission, 49, van ness and 30, stockton and as expected the performance of these new vehicles are actually out performing the average trolley fleet in our current sfmta at least by double and anticipate that the performance will get better and newer equipment and system for the mechanics and operations and maintenance folks to get familiar with and right here i would like to point out a few key features of these trolley vehicles. for the public side actually these are all the low floor vehicles so the patrons no need to climblet extra steps to get on to the vehicle and has a low floor wheelchair ramp and favorable with the ada communities and with the new seating configurations and wider seats on the vehicle there and for operation safety on board it has the state of the art surveillance camera system and during the procurement cycle we're heavily working with the folks to get the ernommic concerns and for maintenance wise they have electronic doors and easier to maintain and come with the led lighting interior and exterior and set for life and lights last for 12 years and environmentally friendly too because we no longer use the florescent light bulbs and on board we have a computerized system and help to do the troubleshooting quicker for the maintenance folks and diagnostic works and this is the first batch of the fleet that has the air conditioning unit on it and i am sure over the weekend since they're hot days and the public do appreciate that. the item in front of you is seeking for your approval for the purchase of additional 33 60-footers and i want to take the opportunity and thank the budget and legislative analyst to do a very diligent and nice work reviewing the items especially during the fiscal year budget cycle. thank you so much. >> thank you very much. and supervisor yee. >> just a quick question. >> yes. >> you talked about the efficiency doubling and you named a few things in terms -- you don't have to change the light bulb, stuff like that. what else is part of that efficiency? how do you measure efficiency? >> yes. because within muni we have an index or mdbs mean distance between failure and for each vehicle we measured with how much miles it results as a recall and bring the vehicle back to the shop to do maintenance week and on the older fleet it's 2,000 with the new trolley vehicles we're averaging 5,000 but we anticipate the number will go up. >> great thank you and now we will go to our budget analyst's report. >> yes madam chair, supervisor yee on page eight of our report the budget for the increased contract amount with new flier is $55,498,285 and for the articulated buses and shown in table 2. we note that the 2017 price for each 60-foot electric trolley buses is 8% more than 2014 price for each electric trolley buses under the original contract as listed. we recommend that you approve this resolution. >> thank you and then would you also mind stating mr. rose just where the funds are coming from for the purchase of these vehicles? >> these are on page eight madam chair. it's proposition k sale tax funds of $11 million and mtc capital transit priorities in additional funding. we know there is a funding short fall. part of the capital priorities but the department says they would reprioritize other funds -- they would reprioritize other funds if there continues to be a short fall to purchase these buses. >> thank you. personally i really enjoyed riding the new buses so i look rolling more out to the streets so at this time i don't see other questions or comments so we will open up item 3 to public comment. any members of the public to speak come up up. seeing none. public comment is now closed. can we get a motion to item 3. >> move to the full board with positive recommendation. >> we can do so without objection. item 4. >> item 4 is resolution approving the cost reimbursement agreement between the port and for a term of 20 years or reimbursement of $5 million increased by 3% annually whichever comes first. >> thank you and we have the port here. >> yes good morning. still morning. good morning supervisors. thank you for the opportunity to present this proposed cost reimbursement agreement between the port and exxon mobile to you for your consideration today. this agreement represents a successful resolution of a long running environment investigation and remediation project in the fisherman's wharf area of the port. it's a solution that will reimburse the port and its tenants for additional costs that might be incurred during major or new construction within a given area to the extent that such costs are attributable to environmental risk management measures that are required. the agreement pertains to a small area approximately 28,000-foot square feet by levenon ort and jefferson and hyde streets and san francisco bay. beginning as early as 1913 this block and other property in the vicinity was leased to various oil companies, two of which are predecessors to exxon mobile for pelt trolium and operations. exxon mobile under a clean up order by the regional water board which in this case and remediated pet trolium to these activities. it removed pet trolium stuff possible (paused). however the water regional quality board requires the board to comply with the risk management plan and ensure that risk management measures to protect maintenance or construction workers and to protect the remediation during future construction are implemented. for example, additional health and safety planning and monitoring for workers directly expoationzed to soil and grand water within a limited area such as maintenance workers working in a below grade utility trench. additional health and safety measures maybe required. for future construction, none of which is currently planned or anticipated, but could potentially arise at some point during the 20 years of the agreement and should be designed to avoid or rer pair layer of reactive material placed under the short line as part of the remediation, and these kinds of risk management measures may result in additional costs to the port or its tenants while performing maintenance or new construction. the cost reimbursement agreement that is before you today establishes a mechanism through which exxon mobile would reimburse the port or tenants for such additional costs. the key terms include the following: the agreement defines reimbursable cost as those incur the by the port or tenants during maintenance or construction within the subject area which not incurred if not for the potential presence of residual petroleum in groundwater and the less is lesser of 20 years or at such time the maximum reimbursement amount has been reimbursed. the maximum reimbursement amount begins at $5 million and increase 3% annually and $8.7 million at the end of the 20 year term. the agreement would not release exxon mobile for liability of clean up required by the regional water quality board or any regulatory average s agency or procludethe port from seeking judicial remini and on port property. the agreement establishes a mutually agreed seven process for preapproval of reimbursements process for requesting reimbursement, dispute resolution and expedited process for emergency work. upon expiration of the agreement the port and exxon mobile will negotiate in good faith to extend the agreement or enter into a new agreement that accomplishes the objective ensuring exxon mobile's long-term financial responsibility for residual petroleum on port property. >> all right great. thank you for your very thorough presentation. any questions or comments? seeing none from the committee we will go to the budget analyst report. >> madam chair supervisor yee i would note on page 13 of the report we state there is no fiscal impact to the city and county of san francisco. exxon mobile is to reimbursement the port and tenants for the cost incurred to comply with the risk management plan. we recommend that you approve the proposed resolution. >> thank you. now at this time we will open item 4 to public comment. any members wish to comment on item 4 please come forward? seeing none item 4 is closed. [gavel] . can we get a motion for item 4. >> move forward with positive recommendation. >> we can do so without objection. item 5 please. >> item 5 is resolution authorizing a lease between the city and county of san francisco as tenant, and opera plaza, lp of office space located at 601 van ness avenue in san francisco. >> thank you. we have john updike here from the real estate department. >> good morning, still morning. john updike director of real estate. so this is request for approval of a lease for space at 601 van ness avenue other than opera plaza. it's for the human services agency. it's a five year lease with one five year option. the space is 8600 square feet rentable. the rate is 42 per square foot per year. the annual adjustments to the base rent were erroneously noted as 3% a year in the resolution. they were correctly identified in both the budget analyst and legislative report and the lease document capped at 1 dollar per square foot a year and actually a little less than 3% so we have a technical amendment they have provided to the clerk so we would appreciate your consideration of amending before passing this forward. there are no tenant improvements required in the space and what makes it unique that it is as plug and play as we could find in the marketplace. i will put on the overhead a look. so as you can see it affords a wonderful opportunity for open space cubicles in the center area on the top of the screen and offices to each side. data power -- exactly what we need. very little work to be done in order to populate the space. that is a rare find for us in a space of tremendous value to us. with that said when one looks at marketplace and compares this to the potrero to soma, soma west, other areas that we could go. as i understand there is question why civic center and why not outside? the market dynamics continue to change. according to the report from cbre now the van ness corridor is the least expensive place for us to seek office space, particularly better class office space, that's readily available that requires very little in the way of capital improvements. the differential is $10 a square foot for that space per year versus other areas of the city. to move to an extreme location such as bay view or excelsior it was felt and hsa is here to join in the presentation and programmatic that didn't work well and would add cost. this is going to be a filing intensive location for hsa moving primarily a number of their staff from 1235 mission street so first floor space was important or we would have loading and structural issues if it's on a upper level because of the intensity of the files and again it met all those needs. we're happy with this particular space and coincidentally the proximity to city hall and other hsa functions and really help them out. in terms of efficiency of space we're looking at 150 square feet per person so this will be one of our most densely populated spaces we have in our lease portfolio. we seek to be under 200 or 250 square feet so we're beating that metric considerably with this plan. mr. walsh is here if you have programmatic questions and we have the amended legislation for you as well. >> thank you. so at this time yes, i would like to hear more details from hsa in terms what will be taking place in this space. >> good morning. my name is robert walsh, the acting director of facilities and operations for the human services agency and i am happy to answer any questions that you have. >> so i read in the packet materials what's going on here but i am wondering if you could state for the record what is exactly going into the space? >> sure. first is the records management unit and the next is the med unit, a lot of eligibility work for our clients and the people that we serve and most of it will be document imaging and customer service to our staff who directly serve clients and things of that nature. mr. updike has said they have a lot of files that come and go quite often, so it is quite space and we appreciate the hard work they put in to find a space with suchacy access to a loading dock. that was such a big for us and the fact there is 24 hour access without additional cost is a great item for us as well and accommodate swing shifts and maximize the space. >> so i also noted or read that the reason why you were looking for another space is because the current location over at 1235 mission is insufficient so can you explain that? >> sure. so with the affordable care act we had to increase our staff to support all the new measures, and this location at 1235 is -- it might be our largest center for direct client services and it's just -- the space there has become a premium and we want to add as many people there to accommodate the existing people who come in and out, and this operation while it's nice to have it close to our existing facilities the majority of it could be moved off site but they are still leaving a little staff behind, and furthermore on that agency wide we have 2375 work stations available and depending on what the next fiscal year budget allows we're going to have over 2500 staff so as you can see there's a pretty big short fall from the amount of work stations and the amount of staff we're budgeted to have, and that obviously affects our ability to provide services, so that's why we're so greatly in need of space. >> okay. thank you. any other questions supervisor yee? >> you mentioned -- >> up dike. >> yeah. you mentioned that the office space in the other areas. going for $10 square foot annually. is that what you said? i don't know my numbers but -- >> sure. we looked at two different things supervisor. first we looked at comparable rentals to this space. we found with the help of brokers and appraisers six comparable rentals within recent proximity from mission to civic center areas. those comparables ranged from $40 a square foot on the low end to $66 a square foot on the high end. the low end property required substantial tenant improvements and when you do the math it's a more expensive venture before you today than the rate today at opera plaza and then we looked generally at the marketplace with a report from cbre which has the current rental rates in civic center on average at $51.87 and beating the average which is great but for instance the average in potrero hill is at 62. we're at 62 in soma west which is usually not a high value area. it's now a high value area -- >> i don't know. somehow i heard $10. >> that's the differential , right. >> my calculation here is $40. this is good. >> all right. why not we go to the budget analyst report now. >> madam chair, and supervisor yee on page sceafn our report we note that the net rent payments for the initial five year lease term total as listed in page two on page 17. hsa budgets pending before the board of supervisors include funds to pay for the proposed lease by all of the board of supervisors. we recommend that you approve this proposed resolution. >> all right. at this time why don't we open item 5 to public comment. any members of the public wish to speak? seeing none public comment is closed. [gavel] . if we could get a motion to amend item 5 and then send to the full board. >> okay. motion to amend and send the item to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> all right. we can do so without objection. thank you. item 6 please. >> item 6. resolution authorizing a lease between the city and county of san francisco, as tenant, and 200 paul, llc of office production and warehouse space at 200 paul avenue. >> hello again mr. updike. >> now it's good afternoon. john updike director of real estate. so this property is about the department of technology and the public safety division. you may recall four years ago we brought to the board for approval a renewal of the san francisco wholesale produce market and required 910 rincon the former location of the unit. they were temporarily moved to 1800 gerald from that location from the railroad tracks and have been there temporarily in anticipation of a final destination site. working with the department of technology staff closely we are pleased to bring to you this long-term lease agreement that solves the space needs into the future so this organization is responsible for 911 radio system, wireless data mutual radio system, microwave lengths and ambulance radio and vehicle locator systems and hospital radio systems and the fire station public address systems, radar in the boats and marine units so you get a sense. they have a wide ranging mandate. it's also a space that needed to be primarily industrial with some office, fairly unique search requirement. what we have before us today is a premise that is about 53,000 square feet under roof with another half acre of yard space. that is actually 9% smaller than the space they were in at 901 rincon four years ago so we took pains to find a solution that not expand the footprint but consolidating operations to make it more efficient. before you today is a ten year initial lease with a commencement date of january 1, 2017. the rent rate starts at 67,417 per month and about 15, $15 per square foot annually. that's what we call an industrial gross rate so we pick up the other costs beyond that base. it's highly competitive in this marketplace. frankly amazon was chasing the property and considered the owner suspect to go with us. i think we convinced them we will be here the next hundred years. >> >> i can't guarantee that amazon will be around for 100 years. i think they brought the story and the commencement date is important because it has free rent included and when we begin the tenant improvements on the property but don't pay rent until january 1 and a hard fought negotiated item and i want to reflect that because it's not really in the report before you. it required a lot of improvements and we acknowledged that and put together a outline detailed in the budget analyst report. just a reminder this has atypical improvements because we're mixing industrial and office uses and literally running a fire truck through the middle of the building and improvements and ventilation issues and safe space and sky lights so we have pleasant space for our staff and as well as resiliency so we have emergency power, cameras, alarms, a lot of high value stuff at that location so with that said i am joined with staff from the department of technology if you have other questions and no amendments to this one. >> thanks mr. updike. colleagues any questions or comments? okay. mr. rose can we go to your report for item 6 please? >> yes mr. chairman and members of the committee on page 21 in table two the total rent for the initial ten year term of the lease is as listed. as mr. updike indicated there are significant tenant improvement costs to the steacht the estimated cost of the improvements is six million dollars. the landlord will provide the city rent credit as listed so there would be a remaining net cost to the city for the tenant improvements of $5.9 million shown in table three on page 22 want report. funding is included in both the 17-16 budget and new funds requested in the fiscal year '16-17 budget. of course subject to appropriation approval of the board of supervisors. we recommend that you approve this resolution. >> thank you mr. rose. colleagues any questions for our budget analyst? okay. can we move on to public comment? anyone to comment on item 6? seeing none public comment is closed. [gavel] colleagues can i have a motion to move forward with a positive recommendation. >> so moved. >> moved and seconded by supervisor yee. we can do so without objection. madam clerk please call item 7. >> item 7 is resolution authorizing the mayor's office of housing and community development to expend soma community stabilization fund in the amount $635,000 to address various impacts of destabilization on residents and businesses in soma and reaffirming administrative support plan for the fund. >> good morning. i'm with the mayor's office of housing and community development and i here to request approval of $635,000 in expenditures in the soma community stabilization fund. . current request is fund a one time capital and infrastructure projects as well as a capital planning project. a little background on the fund, very brief. the som mafund was created in 2005 to mitigate impacts of new development in the rincon hill area and when the mixed use district was established. it is to mitigate impacts on affordable housing, economic and community development and community cohesion in south of market. in 2006 the community advisory committee or the cac was appointed by the board of supervisors. current members are allen, christian, tom, john, connie, and raymond smith. in december of 2015 they issued two requests for proposals, one for capital project and one for space improvement planning project. we requested three for capital and one for planning. after e viewing all proposals at the cac meeting they awarded fund to the south of market child care center for the capital project at the trans bay development center, a new child care facility located in a affordable housing development in the trans bay redevelopment area and proposal from the ark for its planning process to construct new housing units and new facility at their current location. a little background about those organizations. soma child care is non-profit that provides child care and education services to low income families in south of market. this is an important service in stabilizing the community and the soma child care center has a long history of providing services in the neighborhood. this grant will provide $400,000 to construct the new child development center in the trans bay area. the budget is 2.1 million and according to the proposal they would have an additional 622,000 to raise if the grant is approved but i believe since that proposal was submitted they have made more progress in the fundraising and maybe closer to their goal today. the ark is a non-profit that provides services to people with intktd url and developmental disabilities. the proposed grants of $25,000 would provide funds for construction of new housing iewptds in soma and new facility for the ark at existing location at 1500 howard street. the ark partnered with mercy housing on the projects pronon-profit affordable housing developer and spent on architectural and design fees for the project. in addition to this the cac allocated two $10,000 to sfmta to build a pedestrian cross light at intreivegz seventh and minute street and intersection has been listed as a priority by them and a high priority for many of the community groups in soma. the total cost of the light is 347,000 and sfmta will provide the funds required to complete the light. we're here to report on the administrative costs for supporting the fund. we spend just over $284,000 last year of fiscal year '15-16 to administer the fund. that's all i have and happy to answer questions. >> thank you very much. colleagues questions? mr. rose item 7. >> yes mr. chairman and members of the committee. we know according to the plan the funding to administer the soma community stabilization fund is 278673. that's for 16-17 and includes staffing and attorney fees for legal costs and advertising and shown in table five on page 27. on page 28 we note that the soma soma community stabilization fund has balanceace listed. if approve the proposed six 35,000 in awards on stable two the remaining balance in the soma community stabilization fund between as listed. we recommend that you approve this resolution. >> thank you very much mr. rose. colleagues any questions or comments? okay. we will open up to public comment for item 7. anyone wishing to comment? seeing none public comment is closed. [gavel] colleagues can i have a motion to send this item forward. >> okay. i will send this item to the full board with positive recommendation. >> motion by supervisor tang and second by supervisor yee without objection. call item 8 please. >> item 8 resolution authorizing the general manager of the san francisco public utilities commission execute of a memorandum of agreement with the united states department of the interior, national park service and yosemite national park comprehensive management of the watershed with san francisco regional water system in the amount not to exceed 25. $5 million. >> i am here on behalf of the puc and requesting a mou and allow to pay the park service for the valuable service they can provide for us related to comprehensive watershed management and security within yosemite national park. as you know hetch hetchy reservoir located within the park supplies 85% of the san francisco regional water system supply. specifically the mou outlines responsibilities of the puc and the national park service related to water protection and quality in the water and reservoir and watershed and the facilities within the watershed: puc entered into this agreement and extended last year for additional year of june of this year. the resolution before you authorizes to enter into a new mou and agreement term of two years from july 2016 to 2018 and not to exceed $12.5 million payable to the puc to the national park service. we're away of the budget analyst recommendation to reduce the not to exceed amount roughly by $170,000 and we're in agreement with that. i would like to thank you for your consideration and ask that you approve the resolution and happy to answer questions on the item. >> thank you very much. colleagues any questions? mr. rose item 8 please. >> yes on page 31 of the report projected and one five-year option to extends by the s fpuc to the national park service under the proposed ma are listed and that is $6.1 million -- and that is shown in table two of page 32 of our report and our recommendation as the department has indicated we recommend that you bottom of page 32 recommend that you recommend the proposed resolution to reduce the not to exceed amount of the memorandum agreement by as the amount listed and that's based on the department's submitted budget and we recommend that you approve the proposed resolution as amended. >> okay. thank you mr. rose. colleagues any questions? okay. move on to public comment. anyone wish to comment on item 8? seeing none. public comment is now closed. colleagues we have proposed amendments in front of us. supervisor tang. >> okay. i will make a motion to accept the budget analyst amendment to reduce the not to exceed amount by 173,000 and -- [inaudible] send forward as listed with positive recommendation to the full board. >> okay. motion by supervisor tang. second by supervisor yee. take that without objection. madam clerk please call nine and ten together. >> >> item 9 is resolution approving a second extension agreement between the city and county of san francisco accounting by the public utilities commission of the turlock irrigation district of long term power sales agreement replacement agreement by both parties, or june 30, 2017. item 9 is resolution approving a second extension agreement between the city and county of san francisco acting by the public utilities commission and modesto irrigation district existing long term energy sales agreement for the approval replacement agreement by both parties, or june 30, 2017. >> good afternoon. i am with the san francisco powers intr. i have a brief presentation. okay. the [inaudible] obligates the city and county of san francisco to supply excess hetch hetchy hour to the turlock and modesto irrigation districts and seek cost recovery for the generation or transmission of the energy. . the sfpuc entered into agreements with each of the districts. with modesto the last was approved in 2007 and with turlock in 2004. both expired on june 30, 2015, last year. last year we asked for a one year extension to provide us enough time to negotiate the terms and conditions for the replacement agreement. during that time period we had a lot of fruitful discussions which ultimately ended up in turlock proposing a new term which requires three way discussions with both the san francisco puc, the modesto and the turlock irrigation district on transmission options, requires additional analysis and further work so we're now before you asking for another extension june 2017 to provide enough time to address those new proposals and finalize our negotiations. >> okay. thank you very much. colleagues any questions or comments? >> just a -- >> supervisor yee. >> with this extension are you really anticipating that you would be completing this process with this extension or are you planning come back and have another extension? >> we don't plan to come back for another extension. we anticipate by spring of next year we will come back to the board for a final long-term energy sales agreement to replace the current one. >> okay. >> okay. colleagues any questions? okay. mr. rose your report on nine and ten please. >> yes mr. chairman, members of the committee on the top of page 36 of our report is shown in the table. during the 11 year period between fiscal year 2004-5 and fiscal year 2014-15 the sfpuc generated and sold the amount listed of express hetch hetchy power to the modesto irrigation district in modesto and amount listed to the turlock irrigation district. we recommend that you approve these resolutions. >> okay. thank you mr. rose. colleagues any further questions? seeing none we'll move on to public comment. anyone wishing to comment on these items? seeing none. public comment is now closed. colleagues can i entertain a motion to move these items forward with a positive recommendation. >> i will move forward with a positive recommendation to the full board. >> okay. motion by supervisor yee. second by supervisor tang. take that without objection. madam clerk call item 11. >> item 11. ordinance amending the administrative code to direct the san francisco 311 customer service center to develop a pilot program for expanding public notice of significant projects and permitting decisions in the city and areas of construction, and infrastructure repair work, public health and safety services and facilities, environment, and transportation. >> thank you. colleagues this is an item i introduced a while ago and want to thank my office for working on this. i hear from constituents frequently and send it outside of the district and their desire to know about projects that will impact the neighborhood or a new development project down the block, when the stop is moved to. there are things that people want to be notified all the time and i hear frustration that things happen in the neighborhood without them hearing about it. currently they have to request the information from respective city departments and if you don't know what you're doing it's a bit of a issue and not a fuller process. some of the city's notices are only available in person or through the mail and as we see in the innovation hub of the world i think we should do better as a city so i introduced this called the neighborhood noticing ordinanceact and have the chief officers create the notification system and one stop shop online for a resident that wants to better informed about the neighborhood. with this creation of this notification system we would bring access to san francisco's important decisions and projects into the 21st century and save significant resources over time and having residents noticed by electronic means and stop mailing notices. we have minor amendments that i understand from the city attorney is non substantive and we can push it out if the committee wishes for that to happen. after discussions with the staff and ensure the success of the program and the 311 to the city's chief data officer and with funds secured through the budget last year will hire an fte that will lead the project into creation and in addition instead of place replacing other requirements to make sure that those that don't have access still receive notices in person or through standard mail and the system will be created to maintain again under the direction of the city chief data officer. the centralized notification system will cover significant projects and permitting decisions in a few areas they think we all hear about frequently from the constituents. it will cover condestruction and infrastructure work. public health and safety projects and facilities and transportation. the other that rg teat date will be -- target date will be 12 months from the ordinance and city departments work cooperatively with the officer to provide the requested information and needed data forment ats and meet on a regular schedule and update the system frequently on time and reliable source of information for residents. again i hear it time and time again they want updated interaction and interface with the city government. i do believe it's our responsibility. we're doing a lot as a city government whether the small business portal or other things moving forward as a city and passage of this legislation and notification system hopefully we will move ahead into the 21st century and really modernize the interaction with residents and make life easier for them in the meantime. i want to call joy up for a quick presentation on the item and thank you for entertaining this item and jeff from my office for working on this the last nine months. >> thank you. good afternoon supervisors and i was going to start with a brief justification for it but supervisor farrell did such a good job that i will jump to the summaries. opportunities, to provide residents and businesses an easy way to know what is happening in the neighborhood and subscriesh to san francisco. summaries of approach. there are two aspect of the throgz allow people to electronically subscribe to notices in their neighborhood or -- actually designated geographic area as well as a summary website. we know people consume data different way and the approach is essentially publish the dat that meets our requirements and then repurpose an open source program called city gram and collaboration of code for america and jurisdictions. on the slide you can see an example of what it looks like to subscribe to a topic in a geographic area and to really roll this out and expand it more thoroughly as well as use existing technology in the city to leverage the website portion of it. a few more implementation details. scope, the topics per the legislation but also data has to meet our requirements which means it needs to be digital and machine readable as well as structured in a way that computers can read and consume it so as supervisor farrell mentioned we will use this to essentially staff an fte over the course of the year to conduct the user research and design. we believe in user approaches so we want to validate those cases. inventory and assess data notices for inclusion which the budget analyst provided the basis for the work. we need to flush out more details and automate data to the portal and consume it through city ground but other people to repurpose the data and additional services and of course develop widgets that can consume it and develop the website and estimating a year for all of that work. >> okay. thank you very much. again i appreciate you're working on this issue over time. colleagues any questions right now? okay. mr. rose can we go to report for item 11. >> yes on page 38 of the report we report that the chief data officer intends to hire one senior engineer salary and fringe benefit costs of 190,000 and $24 and report that the funding for this program was approved by the board of supervisors in the amount of $200,000 included in the department of administrative services fiscal year '15-16 budget. we recommend that you approve this ordinance. >> thank you mr. rose. any public comment? anyone wishing to comment on item 11? seeing none. public comment is now closed. [gavel] . colleagues any questions or comments? motions. >> all right. i look forward to this project moving forward. thank you supervisor farrell so i will move this forward to the full board with positive recommendation. >> with the amendment. >> yes. >> motion by supervisor tang and second by supervisor yee and take that we can do so without objection. is there any further business before us madam clerk? >> there is no further business. >> okay. thanks everyone. we're adjourned. [gavel]adjourned. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ hello and welcome to this presentation. i'm san francisco purrs since that time we've helped people clean up their criminal records. we created this to help you understand how this worked. we'll plan or explain all the steps. after watching this program you'll know what to expect after completing the process. hi, there are i'm deputy and i'm part of the clean slate team. the first thing we will need to know whether your despicable to have our convictions dismissed can't be on parole or currently charged with a crime or serving a sentence and it must be from san francisco. while your colleagues will get to know your circumstances there are 3 steps. getting the clean slate process started it simple you can get them done in the same day. first fill out an application and they can be opinioned on sf defender.org. next you'll obtain a copy of your rap sheet that's a rap sheet going 80 the hall of justice at 850 bryant street on the fourth floor. the bureau is open monday through friday from 8 to 5. it's located one block away from the public defender's office you'll need to bring our photo id. finally, there's your our own your rap sheet to the front desk. you'll receive a letter from 2 to three weeks explaining the next steps. let's review the 3 steps if that fillist the police stations and on your police station and 3 deliver our rap sheet and application $0.40 to the defender. it can help with financial aid for colleagues. i want you to meet a client who did the clean slate program he refunds a nonprofit literary series. please meet joe. peep at the clean slate program worked with me today, i i am an author of 3 books a husband and a father would you recommend clean slight to another person >> i would definitely recommend that. so, now you have a better understanding of the gibt address benefits of the clean slate program as well as highway to get started. let's hear some common questions. keep in mind those are general questions you'll you may be seated with an attorney who be provide more information based on our circumstances >> just to be clear i don't have to tell my employers will my ejections. >> yes. as well as convictions that have been dismissed. if someone runs a criminal background they'll see the charges but it's dismissed. you will be able to legally tell your employers person never convicted >> i don't to tell anyone is there a way to rears them. >> there's some cases you can. maybe you're arrested because police thought you were someone else. wound our arrest record is sealed you can say you were never >> if i wanted to clear my record if i was convicted of a felon. >> it is also known as a one letter officer the clean stating hit. >> may be able to get it raersz but if i went to prisoner you may quality for a correspondent certified document saying you're a lay abating citizen are. you had should be aware for some state jobs state agencies are allotted to consider our criminal history. those jobs are private security jobs health care workers and other careers involving the children the i can sick or elder. it will benefit you human resources here's some of the things clean slate can't do it doesn't prevent an old conviction to there the sense of a new criminal action. the court might connotes more sentencesif it been submit you can't own or polgs possess a firearm. if it bars you from carrying an firearm eclipsing our record won't change that. submittal doesn't rove a sex ejection. if you're required to register as a sex offender that process will continue even if your record has been cleared, however, other forms of royalties maybe eligible. we look forward to helping you move forward with your life ♪ ♪ so, now you know a little bit more about the program we encourage you to apply go the sf purifyi purifying.org or stop by any place for our clean slate program. our team looks forward to serving >> good afternoon everybody. welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors budget and finance committee meeting for wednesday june 29, 2016. my name is mark farrell. i am chairing the committee and joined by the vice chair katy tang and supervisor wiener and thank the clerk and staff from sfgtv for covering the -- meeting today. with that madam clerk do we have any announcements? >> yes mr. chair. please silence all cell phones and complete speaker cards and documents to be part of the file should be submitted to the clerk. items acted upon today will be on the july 12 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> okay. madam clerk will you call item 1 and two together. >> item 1 resolution determining and declaring that the public interest and necessity demand the acqusition improvement and accountability and conversion of "at risk" multi-unit residential buildings to permanent affordable housing and performing need the seismic, fire, health, and safety upgrades and other major accountability for habitability to be financed through bonded indebtedness in the amount not to exceed $350 million and item two is ordinance callng and providing for a special election to be held in the for proposition a. >> thank you madam clerk.y we know have speakers from supervisor peskin's office and controller office and well so supervisor peskin's office. >> thank you supervisor farrell and supervisors. thank you for your consideration of this item today and apologize that supervisor peskin could be here for the discussion this morning so i wanted to give a brief overview and context of the bond measure itself and the repurposing and we have some amendments that we would appreciate someone moving today. i understand that supervisor kim was prepared to move them and when she joins us hopefully we can do that so almost 25 years ago voters approved a $350 million bond measure aws theoried by supervisor tom shay which provided loan tiewntsd for seismic strengthening and retroactive mace ron ree buildings citywide. $200 million ion was approved and 156 of the funds repain. supervisor peskin's intent has been to expend the uses for the market rate tranche to include the acquisition and improvement and accountability of "at risk" multi-unit residential buildings and properties and allow non-profit affordable housing housing developer to convert them to permanent affordable housing through the acquisition and program. and scope would be expanded to include fire, safety and electrical plumbing upgrades and allow are if the preservation of at risk housing. these opportunities exist in neighborhoods where the city has experienced a disproportionate loss of housing and toin toin and knob hill and mission and other areas and a fire displaced many families. we of course, with a group of non-profit housing developers and staff to determine how the expanded loan program would be useful for the short and long-term preservation of at risk stock in san francisco. feedback from stakeholders for the program that made the program less usable brought forward amendments that supervisor peskin is introducing today. the original unb bonds loan program had modest praifz of the out of of the $156 million set aside $105 million remains. we are prose position amendments that would increase the capacity of the program and widen the base of potential users. this program would be allocated at interest rates equal to 1/3 of the city's true interest cost of the bond series and segment for deferred loans: program would continue to be issued at 1% beyond the city's true interest rate for the amendments for your consideration are intended to expand the uses of both funds within the overall umb program. in the first draft of the bond measure weed included a couple standard bond and transparency provisions that voters are accustomed to seeing but not included in the original 92 bond measure. i want to thank stakeholders and staff that hustled to put together a creative and usable and effective tool for the housing being do -- stock and all of our staff and all of who are available here for questions so thank you for your consideration and i will distribute copies of these amendments to you today. >> okay. thank you. supervisor tang. >> thank you. thank you very much for this presentation and i am really glad to hear that there has been efforts to repurpose this original go bond measure. i know that as was mentioned in the intro remarks that there has been less of an uptake on the market rate program given we charge 1% extra for the interest rate. there's also 1.5% additional bond origin eagz fee to cover mo hcd costs and i think this is a great intent but i want to make even for the market rate program there is the interest to use this, and so i don't know if you could further elaborate on some of the conversations you've had and what some of the ideas might be and the interest rate a loan and the origination fee are a deterrent. >> so might be a question for jamie to address as well but with conversations with the mayor's office of housing and oewd it sounds like the market rate program would be able to be utilized for housing projects or infrastructure, accountability. i know there was a project pier 70 that the mayor's office was able to use market rate funds so the anticipation is my understanding from oewd is that they will be seeking to put together a short list of projects that these funds could be used for. >> okay. but the additional interest rates would still apply compared to taking out a loan from a private bank? >> that's correct. >> okay. >> that's correct. >> okay. well, -- okay i look forward i guess to see this progress and whether it will be taken advantage of so thank you. >> thank you supervisor. >> colleagues any further questions? okay.in we have the mayor's office of housing. did you want to present on this item i understand? >> good afternoon kate hartley from the mayor's office of housing. we support this ballot measure and the seismic safety program with respect in respect to the affordable housing component and offers an interest rate which is a third of the cost to the city so for us it's fantastic. we've had great success over the last year with the small [inaudible] program and see the low interest low cost funding as something that will allow us to continue on to expand the program and to bring even more resources. last year we closed on 54 units on the small sites program and have another 58 in contract and another 70 on deck in the under writing process so there's actually a lot of activity and with that lower interest rate we will be able to replace the conventional debt financing that we use right now at 5.5 percent and provide loans at a point or one and a quarter or one and a half percent so we think it's really great, and given the amount of money available the pipeline that we have we would also ask the board of supervisors' consideration to help us properly staff this with another staff person dedicated to these projects so that we can get out there, compete in the marketplace, get the money out on the street and preserve more affordable housing so thank you and we're available for questions. >> okay. colleagues any further questions? supervisor tang. >> thank you. so the budget analyst had made a recommendation which i am sure -- or i guess someone other than mr. rose will speak to, but it was that the board of supervisors may want to consult with h mo dc and definition of which properties qualify for the loans and i don't know if that is in the works or agreed upon and whether it's an amendment you think we should take today? >> yes. we are definitely going to continue to work with them to further identify small site properties in particular in the various neighborhoods prioritizing the neighborhoods that they feel that need the most work so the ones that i listed and that work will continue, yes. >> okay. so do you think we should amend that into legislation or something you're doing? >> i think that would be the scope of work that happens outside of the proscriptive confines of the bond measure. >> all right. thank you. >> okay. with that should we go to the budget analyst report and then the controller's office office. >> mr. chairman, members of the committee debra new man from the budget and legislative office. as noted there is $156 million remaining in the market rate portion of the program. our report does not address the amendments that are being put forward. if it were only the market rate portion of the program we note there would be no net new fiscal impact to the city because that authorization has already been provided. rather this would merely expand the availability of those funds to be used for other projects. because when we were preparing this the office of public finance did not have many of the specifics. we cannot estimate the number of bond issuances, the timing of bonds or what the interest rates or related costs would be. however, for the market rate portion there would be also no additional levy on the property taxpayers to repay debt because they would be fully cost recovery within the cost. as you mentioned before the additional 1.5% loan o rejation fee and top of the interest cost. as you note there is no definition on the market rate side what is permanent affordable housing but my understanding is just discussed at the office of the sponsor will work with the mayor's office of housing and community development to come up with a definition. our recommendation it is a performance decision for the board. >> thank you. thank you very much. colleagues any questions for our budget analyst? okay.in the control office is here as well. >> go good afternoon. i am with the controller's office of finance and we agree with the preliminary figures and comments from the budget analyst office. one thing we wanted to point out is in regards to affecting the capital plan and the city's current general obligations under the go debt program we do estimate that the issuance of the below market rate loans would have a cost on the tax levy seeing that the tax levy is the pledge to pay back general obligation bonds. the bonds we would anticipate to issue would be first dedicated to the below market rate programs for these loans and would be sold in batches of $35 million a year at most which is a provision that was adopted in the 1992 ballot measure. this would be result in a net cost to the city after applying the loan payments that would be repaid by the loan borrows so there is a dollar impact to the tax levy and this would impact the capital plan. thank you. >> okay. thanks very much. colleagues any questions for our controller's office? okay seeing none we'll move on to public comment. anyone wishing to comment on comments one or two please? please step forward. >> good afternoon supervisors. peter cohen counsel on community housing organizations. we're support of this. it's a great opportunity at the right time and make efficient use of funds authorized by the voters and if you will are sitting unused and we could d put them into contex acquisition rehab is an personality strategy to complement the new construction particularly as seeing more of existing housing at risk of speculation and tenant evictions. this is happening citywide and the program that's mayor's office of housing and community development talked about couldn't come at a better time. also to note these program and other acquisition programs are mixed income and taking existing building and its income profile and trying to map and extend to the future so it gives a broad opportunity for folks in existing housing and making it permanent for a variety of income needs over time. i'm going to be very short here today but there's a few representatives that are here from different housing organizations that have been implementingly small sites programs and doing acquisition rehab that can tell you concretely about some of the opportunities to use these funds so again we thank you very much and hope that you support this going forward. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good afternoon. tracy parent. director of the san francisco community land trust. we specialize in the acquisition and rehab of small apartment buildings especially those at risk of being sold on the market to private speculators who have the cash available to come in, invest the money in the work that needs to be done and flip the buildings evicting the existing long time low income residents and reselling them or renting to higher income households. we support the expanded use of the bond program to include acquisition rehab of rent control buildings in need of safety and for low income people because this will achieve a triple community impact of not only improving safety but preventing the loss of affordable rent control units and eviction of long time lower income residents from the buildings. to give you idea of the opportunities we're seeing across the city i did a scan of the listing service and besides the two buildings that the land trust successfully required and renovated that were on the city's soft story retroactive list i have found immediate opportunities and two small sites in the inner sunset apartment buildings over garages. i have one 15 unit nblg cal hallow a neighborhood under scerved and one in the central richmond and one near north of pan handle so there is immediate opportunity to apply the funds across the city to help with the triple community impact. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good afternoon. my name is carolyn fang and the director of community real estate at mission economic development agency and we serve one of the highest impacted neighborhoods by displacement in our city and we focus primarily on mission district as well as the surrounding neighborhoods and as colleagues have pointed out as well as kate hartley from the mayor's office of housing and community development we have over 30 units within the mission district alone in the pipeline that are a part of this program looking to close and be acquired so the tenants are no longer at risk of displacement and looking at many more building this is year and within six month this is program just within the first six months of this year already saved close to 30 units in the mission so this program really does are a rapid success rate of serving tenants and of the buildings we're looking at in the mission at least three to four of the buildings were buildings that are currently listed asicizically needing retrofit and the owners were under the requirement to retrofit by 2017 to 2020 and part of the reason for selling the building they couldn't afford that along with fire sprinkling the building and we encourage the repurposing of the funds to help owners otherwise selling the building because of that requirement to the right owners and to the right owners are the non-profit owners and help the tenants stay in place. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> thank you supervisors. name fernando with the council on community housing organizations also urging you to support this very important measure. one of the things that it does it extends a lot of the work that this board has committed its to over the last few years, both in strengthening and funding acquisition programs including the small sites program that just rolled out a couple of years ago and now has preserved lose to 100 units throughout the city as well as strengthen our soft story ordinance and bringing buildings up to code and preserving them in perpetuity both as seismically safe buildings as well as for the tenants who are there and i want to reiterate a point that tracy parent made earlier about the triple bottom line that this will achieve. one, improving the safety for buildings throughout the city, two, preventing the loss of rent controlled housing and three preventioning the evictions of long time tenants. again thank you very much. we urge you to support this measure. >> thank you. anyone else from the public to speak on item 1 or two? seeing none. public comment is now closed. [gavel] . okay colleagues we have these items in front of us, some amendments requested by the project sponsor. they're non substantive so we can move them on? >> any amendment requires another hearing so you would continue to the next budget hearing. >> with that could i have a motion to adopt the item and move to the next budget and finance committee. >> so moved. >> moved by supervisor tang and seconded by supervisor yee. >> for clarification mr. chair move it forward to july meeting. >> yeah, the next scheduled meeting. motion and a second and we can do so without objection. madam clerk would you call item number -- the item sponsor here. okay. why don't we go >> >> [gavel] okay welcome back from recess from our regularly scheduled budget and finance committee meeting of the san francisco board of supervisors for wednesday 29, 2016. we just concluded items one and two and madam clerk please call three and four together. >> motion ordering sumbitted to the voters at an election to be held november 8, 2016 an ordinance amending the business and tax regulations code to increase the real property transfer tax from 2% to 2.25% on properties with consideration or all at least $5 million and less than $10 million from 2.5% to 2.75% on properties with consideration of value of at least $10 million to less than $25 million and from 2.5% to 3% on properties with consideration on value or at least $25 million and increasing the city's proamgdzs limits from the amount of tax increase for four years from november 8, 2016. number 4 is resolution reclaiming the promise of free higher education in the city and county of san francisco residents or working half-time in san francisco and by supporting educational costs for enroll students in receipt of state or federal financial aid. >> thank you madam clerk. these items were sponsored by supervisor kim and i turn it over to her. >> thank you chair farrell and members hearing this item. our office requested that the city attorney requested two ballot issues for us as a way to increase the general funds to fund bo -- potential issues to make san francisco better and i introduced legislation to do this very thing and generate funding to make san francisco the first city in the nation to make credit classes at city college free for all san francisco residents. it was important to me as we move forward that this proposal not unfunded mandate but have all the componentses for success. one ordinance of the intent to make community college free in san francisco, two revenue generating measure to make sure those profit or have profit friday changing san francisco and contributed to our luxury housing market may a little bit more to help project and improve our city and third, create an accountability measure that will create the financial vessel into we can place what we're calling our mansion tax ballot measure dollars with provisions that funds are respond responsibly and intended to make city college free as it was in 1983. the intent resolution today expresses the board's intent to fully fund the free college proposal with the revenue generated by the mansion tax which we're hearing today as well. i want to thank my colleagues who added their names on as cosponsors and support of this resolution. supervisor avalos, campus, mar, peskin and scpee recognize supervisor breed who is supporter for the measures as well. the mansion tax before us today is a modest real estate tax increase for buildings five, ten and 25 $25 million and above. it will we are doing a modest increase by quarter percent on each of the categories and creating a whole new bracket at 3% for cities of sale $25 million. it's worth noting in san francisco there is a mansion tax and 1% surcharge paid by the buyer of residential sales above $1 million. this proposal if approved will generate on average $44 million a year according to our city economist report that we could use to make life better in the city for the resentses whether it's affordable housing, muni, parks, public spaces and trees and libraries and other services we want and need and generating through times through this vehicle what we need to make city college free for all san francisco residents: the last component of the proposal is the free city college fund which the city attorney is the process of timizing today and serve as the actual financial vessel to hold the new revenue and include provisions to ensure that the money is targeted for supporting free city college for students for graduates of the public school service to seniors who are lifelong learners and parents and adults and nontraditional students going back to school to advance in their career or get their associate's degree and will serve as a reserve so understanding that the transfer tax is volatile on years that we have less we will have a reserve fund which will ensure we can continue to make city college free and on the years that we have an up cycle we can set aside dollars for the down years. education as all of us know is a key to upward mobility, financial stability and the tool we know work to help low income wage earners increase earning potential. we have learned on average that an individual who gets an associate's degree at city college makes on average slightly $10,000 above an individual with just a high school diploma. when we talk about affordability we often talk about affordable rent and home ownership. however, another key component of affordability in the city is to ensure equitable educational opportunities for folks to rise in their employment potential and earning potential. many of our low income communities have been decimated by the exploding cost of living here in san francisco and rapidly displaced out of the city and homes. we also understand that many have continued to work here and attend city college as one of the last affordable opportunities to attain higher education so we want to examine part time workers in san francisco as an option as well. i want to acknowledge the controller's office who is here and work closely with our office to my chief of staff ive lee and working on this proposal for the last seven months and to the groups that worked with this and crafted the initial proposal in terms how we would spend down the funds and what a free city college program would look like and recognize chancellor lamb and the board of trustees at city college for working with the controller's office and our office and ensure this mechanism will work into the long-term and disembers terms from city hall into city college. free college is one of the ways to protect san francisco for san franciscans and i understand we have many items to speak from the public on this item as well so of course want to take comments and questions from board committee members as well and i believe we also have a presentation from the controller's office and the city economist. >> supervisor kim it's you're item however you like proceeding or public comments it's your call. >> great. thank you chair farrell, so i will ask teddy again who is the chief economist to do a brief presentation on the study of this item. >> thank you and good afternoon supervisors. ted egan controller's office of economic analysis. we issued a economic impact report on item and i will return you through the report. transfer tax is all sellers of real property in the city pay and progressive tax and from 0.5% up to 2.5%. the proposed legislation is for properties over $5 million and raise the rate highest to 3%. it's a general tax used for any governmental purposes and approved by the voters like any tax increase. this is a table indicating the current transfer tax rates and the proposed rates. you will note that the rates only go up for properties sold in excess of $5 million. we estimated on the property sales for the past eight years in the city that this tax would generate in today's price bs $44 million a year. there is some variation in that during years where there's little turn over in property real property transfer tax is low. the additional amount of this is on the order of 5-10 million and in higher gleers excess of 70 million but average is $44 million a year we estimate. just touching on the fact that the bulk of this increase will come from -- we project will come from properties that sell for more than $25 million a year. for the most part this is properties that are not residential properties, certainly not single family residential properties but commercial office properties so our economic analysis focused on the nexus between the higher tax on commercial properties and the economic consequences of that particularly as they relate to impacts on office tenants. >> mr. egan if you could stop you there madam vice chair with a question. the last point you made -- supervisor kim described in this proposal refers to it and consistently referred to as "management tax." my understanding is that 90% of the revenue from this transfer tax comes from commercial properties not from residential properties and that's not an argument for or against the tax. >> >> one can reasonably support a tax and 90% is from commercial, 10% from residential but if my numbers are correct it's not a mansion tax. it's largely a commercial property transfer tax. >> supervisor we're not able to slice the transfer tax by the precise use of the property but only the price of the property. however, looking at what the most expensive single family residences in san francisco have sold over in the last five years relatively sold for excess of 25 twidle. i think it's fair to say the most expensive houses in san francisco would pay higher tax under this proposal. i think it's also fair to say that other large commercial properties would pay more under this proposal. >> so do you have any even estimate of whether the break down between commercial and residential? because the controller's office actually -- when this was announced by a mansion taxes we were informed it was generate $3 million a year because there's not that many homes that sell at that level but once it was clear it went to commercial property as well and the number went up to 30 million so could you give me some sense? >> i might refer to them and as done more work. with this i am just introducing the proposal as introduced. >> perhaps the controller's office could comment on that. >> supervisor, i am from the controller's office. i don't have precise figures here but typically the largest transactions are commercial particularly commercial office buildings, particularly in the $25 million and up range. i would be happy to go back and review our figures and get back to you. >> we're being asked to vote on this today and portrayed in one way. the controller's office told my office when it was introduced that 90% of the revenue was from commercial property so we're being asked to vote on this today and described in a certain way so i would like to have that information. obviously the controller's office provided us with that information orally so i think the office would i mjs have that information. >> i would happy to get it in the next few minutes. >> that would be great. thank you very much. >> thank you and supervisor wiener your question deemed that deem a mansion tax and includes large buildings and it's a real estate term and the substantive what what you're voting on is a real estate transfer tax as in the agenda. i think the campaign is a different question than before us today but we're asking for a increase in real estate property tax of buildings $5 million and that is what is before us today and ask the members for support of the item and proposing the funds are used and the resolution of the intent before the committee today and portion is to be used to make free college for san francisco residents. thank you. >> i would note that an office building is not a mansion under understanding of the english language. it's a mansion is a residence so again it's a transfer tax. it applies both to commercial and residential as i understand it. a significant majority of the revenue comes from commercial and that it is what it is but to characterize it as a mansion tax is just -- it's not accurate. >> thank you supervisor. again i want to reiterate that what is before you for a vote today is an increase in the real estate property tax of properties $5 million and above and nothing refers to a mangsz tax at budget committee today. that gets discussed during the process of a campaign but what is before the budget committee is a real estate property tax transfer tax increase. thank you. >> supervisor wiener to your question while i don't have a precise figure of break down of properties in excess much $25 million of residential and non residential our analysis believed it would occur through the impact of commercial properties and how the potential tax increase would affect the economy would lower the capital gain of seller of property would receive from the property. this would tend to slow down the sales rate of commercial and high end residential and affect the real estate in a negative way and reduce the amount a buyer would offer for the property and face a higher transfer tax in the future. because of this and because office tenants are sensitive to prices we felt it was unlikely the tax would be passed on all to buyers and large owners if they own a building and selling it in the city but may defer the sale and we believe they will brunt the tax and little of the tax will be passed on to buyers of large properties and particular the office using tenants. nevertheless we don't have the data to do that and ran modeling sales and too much of the tax would be tassed on to sellers. >> >> the net of all of that is a fairly small economic impact. we estimated that the $44 million tax would affect the city's gdp at most minus .. 1% of the city's economy. over a prent year period and some of the tax would be passed on to office tenants and raise occupancy cost in the city and make the city a less competitive place to do business and loss of 20-70 private sector jobs and .01 of jobs in the city and consequence of the fact that office tenants have less employment and contractors would hire more people because the revenue would go into the city coffers and generate an economic boost that partially offsets the economic harm of the higher tax. when the total job employment picture is considered private and public sector we projected this tax increase is a net positive, between 100 and 200 jobs and weighing the growth in public sector employment, the growth of private employment funded by the city versus private sector employment because of the tax. that is essentially the main highlights of our report and happy to take questions from the committee at this time. >> thank you. this is not the first time the board of supervisors has put forward a real estate transfer tax before the voters of san francisco and we know there was an increase that went forward in 2010 and authored by supervisor john avalos and in that economic impact report projected a losses of private sector jobs that would out weigh the public sector benefit through net losses through 2030. have we been able to study the imppact of 2010 to check back on some of the projections stated in that 2010 report? >> supervisor we have not retroactively gone back and isolated that new piece of legislation and the context of the economic changes since that time. obviously the city has a great deal of economic growth during that period so the effect of the tax increase which we protected would be very small would have been swamped by everything else that happened. we always try to project the economic impact if you pass the policy if you don't basis and we have i think if i recall correctly from the report we assumed a great deal of the tax, maybe 90% of the tax is passed on to office using tenants. we know more about the city and have more data about the market today so we don't think as much will be passed to tenants of offices in the city and consequently largely reduce the land value which has a smaller economic impact. that's the difference of the finding versus 2010 report. >> thank you very much. seeing no further questions or comments from budget committee members i wanted to allow -- i believe that we have -- i do know that the vice chancellor and administration is here today. i wanted to give him an opportunity to speak if he wanted to before public comment. >> madam chair for mr. egan another question. in terms of how much this additional tax is projected to produce, the range -- i know you have -- there's a bar chart but not exact numbers. my understanding and you said this in the report transfer taxes are one of the most volatile sources of taxation. this tax is not a special dedicated tax. i believe under state law it can't be so it's a general fund tax. whatever the proceeds of this tax will go into the general fund and will have to be appropriated by the board of supervisors and the mayor each year for whatever purpose any future board or mayor want to appropriate it for. this revenue is not legally dedicated to free city college or any other use. it's an annual budget appropriation, so what is the range? i know you may have to estimate but if you look back historically what we could expect with the ups and downs of the real estate market? >> last eight years have been very large -- a period of large ups and downs of the real estate market in san francisco but if i recall correctly and this is approximate. it's probably five to 10 million extra at the minimum to maybe 70-90 million at the maximum and again that is looking backwards. the future could be different but we estimated it's average of $44 million a year but significant fluctuation around that. >> right. so there could be a year that brings in $5 million. >> additional, yes. >> and up to $70 million more? >> yes. >> if there's a bunch of large commercial buildings selling for example. >> that's correct. >> and that's been -- my understanding is the annual projected cost of this program would be about $13 million. that's the number being conveyed to me. >> and we do have city college chancellor here to address that question. >> okay. i think it's just important for the public to understand that this money is not required to be used for free city college. the board and mayor will have to make that choice every year going into the future, and i know in an ideal world the good years would be put in reserve and pay for the bad years but that is not required, and it can't be required under what's being proposed, and so in a good year if get 40, 50, $60 million we could be -- i don't want to say "could be" but this is broad future boards and really responsible and into a special free city college budget reserve and that's the responsible thing to do but we can't require that so if the good years are spent on other things and we know in our budget process there are so many pushes and pulls to spend money on worth while programs and get to i bad year and only 5 million and honor the commitment to go into the general fund to pull non transfer tax money to pay for it and again it's an argument for or against but the reality so we're straightforward with the public. >> so in response to your question supervisor we're building a reserve into the fund and that vehicle is drafted by the city attorney today but the expectation by this commitment and voting for this resolution of intent to prioritize funding for city college is that every year on years that we vup years the board of supervisors will put into the reserves funding for down years, and that will be in a separated fund to ensure that we can make city college free for years into the future but we did want an annual disimbursment process to evaluate how this is going with city college and insure that the funds are properly spent down. this insures there are accountability mechanism with the city and city college to make sure that the program is working as expected and funds are spent down and i wanted to bring up the vice chancellor who is here today and how much this proposal would cost in today's numbers and to present on any other information that city college has. >> thank you supervisors. ron gearhart and the vice chancellor of city collegeof san francisco. i am here for chancellor lamb who is out of the office this week and appreciate our appreciation to supervisor kim's office and support and cosponsors of the bill. to answer some of the questions we view this obviously supportive but view this as really an instrumental effort as part of our enrollment management plan moving forward and restoring approximately 1/3 of the enrollment that we once had some five, six years ago, so in terms of our operations it's very much in our eye and mind's eye in terms of planning and appreciative of the support. related to the questions in terms what the projected costs may be. that's difficult to tell because that is really dependent on the participation rate, those that live and work more than half-time within the city and county of san francisco. there's various scenarios that the city controller's office costed out and extrapolated that we were involved in on the back end, but particularly my office was involved on the back end to formulate some of the modeling but right now it's difficult to tell because on the high end in the controller's office's memorandum there was a percentage there if 15% of the eligible population were to participate it would be one number and from our perspective while that's definitely in the range of possible that's probably at the high end in terms of in reality what may come forward, so you know i don't have a defined answer to your question in terms what the realistic or expected costs is. that is really dependent on the participation rate that we see as a result. >> do you have a range? >> well, in looking at perhaps what experiences have shown us in other areas of the country that have seen this there's one example where the particular college saw somewhere around a 10% increase in enrollment or partly attributed to that effort so that's one range or one example to perhaps draw from. again that's a different area of the country and different demographics. >> but in terms of the cost -- i'm asking in the range of costs? >> in terms of the ranges of costs right now approximately 80% of our student population come within the city and county of san francisco. based upon our 100% enrollments right now we're receiving about $13 million in student enrollment fees so somewhere along 80% of that in terms on the higher end. >> yes thank you. so because it was stated in the resolution on item 4 so i just want to confirm that roughly based on an estimate about 20,000 students with credit courses costing about $46 per unit, the estimated cost is about 13 million so that's a rough now point and time cost. >> yes right. >> and of course enrollment could increase. >> we are hopeful. >> we obviously hope so. okay. because i think at least for me it would be helpful to see you know some more fine tuning of the cost estimates because even though this is a concept that i know many of us support very much i would like to see more details on what it would cost to have city college be free so i know that the resolution is supposed to be more general in nature but if we could really work out some of the details get that before the full board that would be helpful. >> supervisor tang just so we can take sure that the questions are answered for you what specific details are helpful in learning? we know that currently they're generating 12.$9 million from fees from students and 100% of the student body today and 80% list san francisco zip code and in parts of the country made efforts to make it free and the maximum -- i i think the maximum was around 20%. >> >> 20%. >> so somewhat lowering that to be realistic -- perhaps quell our enthusiasm. >> okay. what other details would be helpful because we want you to get answers to the questions? >> for example the other part of the resolution states it's not just san francisco residents or those working at least half-time in san francisco so do we have numbers or estimates how many students would qualify under that, where the overlap is between residents versus those who are working part time? how would we verify that? those details would be more helpful. >> thank you supervisor tang. >> are there any urt questions for our vice chancellor? great. thank you so much for being here today. >> thank you. >> thank you for working so closely with our office on the details. we still have much to work out in terms of the mechanics, how the fund would work and will work with the chancellor as we do the actual funding vehicle that comes before the board in july so at this time through the chair i would like to open it up for public comment and i did want to recognize that we have the president, alyssa messer here and board of trustees yes and i believe you're the only trustee here. oh i'm sorry. right in front of me. trustee bridget avala is also here and i ask that you speak first and i will call up the rest of public comment cards. >> thank you trustee davila and for being here and the strong support of this measure. >> thank you. i want to say that the board of trustees feels strongly this would be helpful to city college at this particular moment and time. it's no secret what we have suffered over the last few years in terms of a roag accreditation and loss of 1/3 of our enrollment but not only that. i want to speak more personally about this. i am someone that benefited from a free community college and i was actually working at a factory when i got out of high school, and where my mother worked at and i was able to go to community college and on to uc berkeley and i think it make a tremendous difference in a lot of the students that could use free city college. one of the issues also is a lot of students on financial aid already have free or reduced enrollment and the problem with that is books and i also teach at san francisco state. that's my day job and i know what a struggle it is for books and other materials, the computer and everything else, so this would reduce a lot of that impact on students and make a huge difference. one last thing i want to say regarding the other part of this which is the so-called mansion tax. as a homeowner i am paying parcel taxes looks like i will be paying more taxes and i want to say this is one way to really spread this across the city for the benefit of all the residents of the city. thank you. >> thank you trustee. thank you so much for being here today. >> good afternoon supervisors. thank you so much for working on this important issue. not that long ago -- i'm sorry. amy bacharach trustee san francisco city college. not that long ago all public education in california was free. it was a time when we valued education and our educators when we recognized that an educated population was immensely beneficial to the entire community and our society and when our budgets reflected our priorities which is what they're supposed to do free public education is well known to be a cornerstone of our economic and progress as a civilization and today's competitive world there's no reason why the college which is extension of the public k-12 system shouldn't be free for all. if we want an educated population we must show that in the budget and priorities. i urge you to vote in favor of the future of this great city and yes to prioritization funding for free city college. thank you so much. >> thank you. and i see ms. messier and tim kelly -- >> just for a moment of clarification tim kelly is the president. i apologize. >> we know so i will turn it over to him first. >> thank you mr. president and my apologies. >> no problem at all. alyssa is the driving source in this campaign so i understand that and yes the modest increase in the mansion tax if you want to call it that or real estate transfer tax to have those who can afford it at the most to put into the cities and deal with issues of inequality in the city is critical and we're in support of that and the free city college campaign you know i have heard somebody say it was an idea whose time has come from an idea -- it was already here before. it's been here a long time and actually not just in california but also all around the country. i went to school for free when i first went to college in new york city and then had increases in tuition and we've seen this as a pattern that went on for years and we need to unravel that pattern and make it go back and a lot of people have been speaking about this. president obama talked about it, bernie sanders and hillary clinton have plans to make college affordable and the state of tennessee has plans and san diego has its plans and having city college -- having san francisco have its own plan that would be in its progressive tradition to make sure that we can get everyone to support and to go to college is critical. these proposals together mitigate against the growing inequality in the city and bay area and nation and we wholeheartedly support them and i want to thank you supervisor kim. >> thank you to the vice president and ms. mezier. >> thank you supervisor kim and thank you for the care and concern for city collegeof san francisco and is ongoing and you have stepped up for that and we thank you and thank you supervisor kim for taking the lead on this. there is two pieces of legislation and the resolution and the transfer tax and a perfect combination and we have a modest change in the transfer tax and on the 25 million raising a half percent. it's a progressive tax. it's an appropriate tax and do more than just fund this initiative to make city college free, much more, if we go up to 70 million in some years and that's a smart way to go for san francisco and additionally the free city college initiative is a smart way to go for san francisco and especially for our students because we know how much they're struggling and we know how hard it is to remain in san francisco take the steps to get an education and how many obstacles there are. this takes away some of the obstacles for them and making college more sebl for them and additionally and there is no doubt about this city college has lost enrollment over the last years because of this crisis and this is a way to step up and ensure that city college can return to its rightful size and once again serve all of san francisco so that's very important, and it would also be huge for san francisco in general so this is really a win-win-win-win-win situation where we could be making a tremendous difference in the lives of our students and their communities, in the lives of our community college because it's san francisco's community college and making that investment for our economy. it would be huge and then finally what it would mean for the state for the larger movement to make community college free? that would be amazing and thank you for your support. >> thank you and i want to recognize your group. when we first proposed the luxury real estate transfer tax back in december our office spent time how the funds could be used to make san francisco more affordable and equitable and a proposal and great use of some of the funds and again because there is flexibility and not a set aside and used for affordable housing, to fund important improvements to the city that so many of our residents depend upon. i see the next speaker in line and call you up and tim paulson from the san francisco labor council. [calling speaker names] >> okay. my name is san jose and jobs and justice. both my sons attended city college and i was on a board of education in action and i fell in love about city college and calling the important multirationale institution in san francisco. now i will read comments from charlotte hunt who couldn't be here and in the city college child development, a student, tenderloin resident and a mother. this is her message "because of the cost of living in san francisco i struggle to feed my family but can't get food stamps or support. this means that money spent on furthering my education is instead spent on food, housing et cetera. i attend child development class and funded by city college is great example of free education with child care that is much needed and i got eight other mothers to attend this class. expending -- expanding free education would allow for me and other moms to take classes that are not free currently and spend more money on food and child care while going to school. in closing please support moms like charlotte and give them hope for a future which they deserve. thank you. >> thank you so much. mr. paul son thank you for being here today. >> >> thank you supervisors. tim paulson and the executive director of the san francisco labor council and 150 unions in san francisco and we have some of the wildest democracy that you could have see as i am sure all of the supervisors experienced over the years but there's one thing that everybody is agreeing on whether or not it's the construction workers, public section workers janitors firefighters and the labor council is unified supporting this measure as we go forward. we know that the financing was a question whether we talked to you and i think we have a mechanism we could use to make sure that free city college becomes a reality so i want to remind everybody and saying we're excited about moving forward on this. this is something again that san francisco can lead the way on as we did on other piece of worker and citizen legislation in san francisco so i urge yes vote on both these items today. thank you. >> thank you. >> hello members of the budget and finance committee. my name is jal hand dro and here in speak of my union and make city college free. as we deal with the housing crisis in history and support the communities struggling to make ends meet and the government that, wos and listens to the people and city college was envision said a free service to nurrish and uplift the minds in our communities and we must continue to uphold that promise. i personally as an undocumented immigrant that graduated from high school didn't have the guidance or resources to go to college. had it not been for the community college i wouldn't be able to learn to navigate the complexities of higher education and apply for scholarships and gaining the confidence to continue studies and graduating with a bachelor's degree. today i stand here as a professional who is proud of what a community college offered me. making city college free will greatly benefit our working class communities and help to nowrish the young professionals of tomorrow. our union represents workers who are immigrants from communities of color and work class. 45% of our members' children that go to college go to public community colleges and 27% go to csu colleges. they rely on these services to continue the academic growth and making it free will greatly impact their lives and the lives that come from low income families. educating the present and future say public responsibility. let's make city liege free again. thank you. >> thank you so much. our former youth commissioner. thank you for being here. >> thank you jane. thank you supervisors for having me. as i am sure you know san francisco has the fastest growth inequality in the united states as well as the prize winner of having the most expensive real estate in the u.s. and i know the free city college and mansion tax will attack issue. as beautiful tourists came to the city the wealth and inequality could be more stark. i'm a success story and as a graduate and has a job and transgender and without support going to college was hard. if this plan was a reality then i could have gone back earlier and got my life back on track. i know that many undocumented and disabled and lgbt and those with barriers and accessing higher education continuing seeing getting a bachelor's degree much less than a masters a distant dream. i encourage you to support this legislation so we can support all of our students and residents. thank you. >> thank you ms. satillia. >> good afternoon. sfcc has been my second chance. in high school i went through a disconnection of my studies. that resulted into not being able to graduate high school on time and deciding i would enroll in ccff as i got my diploma and accepted into sf state. >> >> it has been one of the best decisions i made in my life. my professors care about my success just as i care about their well being. the community fighting against the genifz in the city is still present there. many of students we work attend there and it's vital to making it free and eliminate the struggles that students go through in the city of san francisco. if san francisco is rooted in being an equitable city that a free school suggest a big step towards that. thank you. >> thank you so much. >> hi supervisors. my name is thomas wright. i'm a city college student and i live in the tenderloin, and basically i just want to say that inequality is prevalent these days and i think there's more emphasis on making money that you know -- then like things like character and moral, ethics and things like that, so i think this would be a good thing for city college -- for san francisco to be -- take a leading role in this and by making the education free for opportunities for people who are lower income, so please support city college and the mansion tax. thank you. >> thank you mr. wright. >> hi. my name is duane with ko r scpe. i believe if we have free college classes the students can focus more on their studies than the financial part and i think they will be better achievements. i support it. thank you. >> thank you. why don't i call up the rest of the name cards that i have. [calling speaker names] >> thank you supervisors. i'm a community organizer with community organize partnership and our mission is help homeless secure housing and become self sufficient and that is crucial. for homeless individuals to be self sufficient we need the tools and resources to make that happen. poverty and inopportunity are barriers to achieving that pattern to self sufficiency. higher education is a necessity in gang stability and integrating with the community. we see educational opportunity as not only providing a pipeline to self sustaining employment but brings hope, opportunity and community to those that have been marginalized with the experience with homelessness. providing free city college creates that opportunity and hope and community and foundations towards achieving self sufficiency and improving the quality of life of formerly homeless populations and encourage support providing education to citizens in sang fran and strengthening our community and pass you to pass the real estate transfer tax and fund city college for all. thank you. >> thank you so much. >> good afternoon. my name is roger scott. i have been a teacher at city college since 1972 and have been on the executive board except for one missed election since 1974. i have come before this body on many occasions and this is probably the least controversial issue i ever addressed. i think splawt our backward mayor might be supportive of this issue. although i don't consider him of ally of affordable accessible education. it's been most of my life has been changed in a positive way from the opportunity to attend accessible and affordable higher education. i was a juvenile delinquent in high school, kicked out of school six times in five semesters yet i lived three quarters of a mile from texas tech and i was able to go to school there for $25 a semester and i had a bachelor's degree by the age of 20. i've been lucky to attend public higher education over the years, and i never had to take out a student loan, and for me it's particularly -- it's outrageous that our graduates of, recipients four year degrees owe $30,000 on average and roughly up to $90,000 and $100,000 in many o occasions. i urge you to pass both issues. i think they're a great step toward true democracy and without economic democracy there can be nor political democracy in my view. thank you. >> thank you so much mr. scott for being here. >> hello. i am a refugee from ukraine. after one year of studying in university in my native city i had to move because i am gay and it's dangerous to be gay there. gays are prosecuted. i like my studying and it was interesting for me to be starter day after day and now i want to continue my education. as a refugee i am not able to pay for city college and i don't have a good paying job and the main reason i can't ask for help me. they were religious and after my coming out they said they don't want such a son and don't want their son to be gay and it was a mistake to keep my allieve so i have to -- alive so i spend time paying for rent and college and food and books and instead i could time to study. i have a desire to study and to be a professional. that's why i hope i can make sure that city college is free. thank you. >> thank you so much for being here today. >> good afternoon supervisors and supervisor kim i want to thank you for your vision and leadership on this matter. growing up in a working class family i often would hear my mother say "if you have to ask the price you probably can't afford it" and i know that's rather simplistic, but as i reviewed the real estate aka mansion transfer tax i would be very perplexed thinking that this very, very modest increase of a .25% to .75% would provide serious hardship on any mansion, owner or significant commercial building owner. i think about how i don't dare ask here in san francisco how much it is to rent a modest one bedroom because again i know it's clearly out of my range. rents have increased between three to 400%. that i deem as hardship. when i think about the potential is and what the goal is for this fund -- where this new funding, free city college, i am even more inclined to support this real property transfer tax and i would like to think -- pause and think if the wealthiest amongst us would dare to ask "how much will it cost not to provide access to higher education?" well, then i would have the opportunity to answer in my mother's fashion "if you have to ask the price you really can't afford it." >> thank you. thank you for being here. >> cathy burric. i'm not sure i heard my name but i know i turned in a card. thank you for considering this really important issue. i have multiple relationships to city college over the last 37 years, and first i want to speak to you though as a citizen of san francisco and a taxpayer who wants to see my taxes spent to uplift the lives of poor working and middle class people who are neglected by many decisions that have been made lately in these halls. i understand the concern about business and taxing the wealthy, but i want you to understand that a 46-dollar fee for every unit is a terribly regressive tax on the students. when i was a student at city college in the 70's it was free and the only reason i pay taxes in the city is because city college was free at that time. it would be a terrible mistake to not take advantage of lifting the lives of the 99% -- not just the 1% in our city. we can't call ourselves progressive anymore if we don't pass the real property transfer tax and free city college. boston, l.a. and chicago are already looking at it. l.a. hopes to have it by 2017. boston i understand already has the form and i thank those really supporting it and i would hope our supervisors that tend to put business interests before the people that live here to change their mind about the tax. >> thank you very much. i will call the rest of the cards. i have two more. [calling speaker names] >> hello supervisors. jay chang from the san francisco association of realtors and represent the agents active in san francisco and here to talk about item 3, the transfer tax. we want to emphasize we don't have a position on the transfer tax because it doesn't significantly impact our members. less than 1% of the market is affected and one unit out of four years are impacted by the transfer tax. we want to clarify questions posed during the question earlier and provide data. according to the multiple listing service to answer the question the transfer tax would have generated $1.2 million from residential sales. out of $44 million projected by the controller that means residential properties only provide 2.27% of the revenue generated by the transfer tax which means that commercial properties are representing 97% of the remaining revenue. we present this facts and clarification just because we know that in the press it's been referred as a mansion tax. supervisor kim called it a mansion tax in the san francisco examiner but in fact gathers little revenue from residential property and should be a commercial or business tax. thank you. >> thank you very much. mr. shin. next speaker. >> i actually had a quick question. i submitted two public karsd for each item so can i give two items? >> no. we did combine items into one hearing so that's just one public comment. >> okay. got it. >> please speak on both items and we will restart the time. >> okay thank you. i guess i will start here since i have two minutes. i heard arguments come up and i want to address some of the and they stand out and the conversation about mansion and what it means. i feel that is a waste of people's time. i hope i don't hear that and voters are voting on the words of the measure. i i'm a student and going from class to class and telling students about the proposal and not using the world and describing it how it is and property is $5 million or more and students are asking critical and analytical questions and all students have ultimately supported it so i think we should give more credit to the vote toarz understand what they're really voting for and questions about fluctuations in the market and doesn't make sense and $44 million versus $13 million and the projected cost of the tuition and huge surplus and when there are lulls in the market we will clearly have enough money in it is reserve to counter that and there was discussion about the money not being. >> >> not being set specifically for free ccsf and of course it goes into the general fund but we know the program works and report back and we serve this many students and have this many et cetera and we get public support for the program and the voters will demand that the money be allocated in that way so it's inconceivable to me that a future mayor or board of supervisors would take that money away from free city because it's what the public wants and remind everyone this is a really important investment. city college is one of the main places to take esl classes and affordable school for stem in the bay area so the money is made back up when we create people for the market who can actually credibility to the city and to the economy so thank you. >> thank you so much for your comments. >> hello. my name is morgan russ and here with the living wage coalition and here because i am 17 and i i'm going to college soon and our higher education system? this country is a disaster. it is unaffordable and inaccessible to everyone except the uber wealth and he community college is a great option and yet when they can't go to college because it's expensive and graduate with massive debt then we're failing. we need to keep it accessible and affordable to everyone and as people said it's an investment and having a well educated population really does benefit all of us. thank you. >> thank you ms. russ. thank you for being here. >> supervisor jim lazarus san francisco chamber of commerce. certainly no one in the room disagrees with the given that the tuition in california never met the master plan on education from the pat brown era and should have tuition free university at every level of university and college in california. the problem is we picked a tax that's been raised twice in the last five years. seems to be an easy target because it's a tax on commercial building transfers. it's a tax that's volatile and it's trying to raise money for a good purpose, a purpose that this board of supervisors could fund from its current 9.6 billion dollars budget. there's half dozen tax measures pending. you have to choose i assume -- maybe you will choose them all but i don't think the voters will. over $400 million a year of new tax revenue on the table for placement on the ballot. which has the priority for this board and the voters? is this tax going to be a priority? certainly the purpose that you would like to see funded through an ordinance is probably a priority and like ammiano some years ago under writing and education cost of city college is a general cost of the city like under writing the school district's budget and let's get a measure and fund it before the normal process before this body. thank you. >> thank you mr. lazarus. >> good afternoon supervisors. my name is charlie gosh and work on governmental affairs for the association. i would like to echo the comments of the speaker before me and i came to speak on a housing tax, a mansion tax for city college and it's neither. this is a tax on commercial buildings which also include multi-family buildings which are residential buildings which have rents that are high enough and the way the taxes work they get pass by law and whether residential or commercial it will be passed and increase for the residents future or present. we are supportive of the concept city college in general but we don't believe this tax is appropriate and we feel if this debate is going to happen here we at least speak it on the way the ordinance was written and again it's a tax on multi-family buildings and rent controlled buildings and commercial buildings and the businesses that occupy those spaces and we would like to discuss the tax in those terms. thank you for your consideration. >> thank you mr. gosh and i am sorry i have one more speaker card. lee. >> that's me. >> oh thank you lee. >> okay. i took that budget home, that big thick thing home. went to a starbucks last night and it was cold and actually read the thing. i looked at all numbers and what struck me so much is consulting fees. there is one place where you're paying $800,000 to consultants to see if a project can work. why don't you do the project and if it bails use those funds to fix the project. the consulting fees is what is killing it is budget. you take away so -- in fact if mr. yee was going to buy a pair of $10 pants and paid five people each to see if it's the right pair of pants. that's ridiculous. if you take away the consulting fees you can transfer the budget to somewhere else. i mean how many consultant sults do you need to see if the project will work? think about it and over consult somebody and spending money used for other things right away. you might have one person to oversee it and if the project fails you use that money to fix the problem and then you got that much extra money in the budget that you don't have to spend paying someone $60,000 to be on a consulting board. i mean don't you think that's a bit much? i looked at that thing and one project and $800,000. come o you you could give that to the city college and they would be happy. think about the consulting fees maybe. come on. mr. yee dresses nice anyway so i don't think he needs help. you guys have a good day. >> thank you lee. i concur that supervisor yee dresses very nicely. >> hi. my name is terry madsen and i don't know how many other people when they got off of bart and you can walked through the hospitality center that is started outside of the public library and it's a coalition of people who are offering services and they had barbara shop and had food and clothing and socks but there is no free education and right next to city college and the sieving center city college campus, so it made me think about you can give fish but until you teach them how to fish people will need to get fish from somewhere else and we need to think how to educate people and i'm a city college instructor. i work in the community healthier program in the health education department and we did a survey 40% of our students make less than $10,000 a year. 15% make from ten to $20,000 and -- [inaudible] from 20 to $35,000 and 81% make less than $35,000 a year and 38 formerly homeless and 38% formerly incarcerated. we have six students have taken a introductory course at the san francisco jail and accepted into our program for august. they're going to get out of jail and they don't have any money. formerly incarcerated and homeless people don't have money. we're trying to educate themselves to be community health workers and work with the community like we see outside of the public library and the only way they can do it is with free education. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> good afternoon supervisors. my name is sue englander and instructor at city college and i would like to speak from the heart so first of all thank you so much for your previous support of city college and especially like to thank supervisor kim for proposing this extremely generous and important resolution. i always need to tell that you my heart is history and city college is in crisis and needs a new deal. the transfer tax like the new deal is not just well intentioned as many team have accused the visions that we have for society but it's a concrete solution to a desperate situation due to a deaccreditation crisis that the city and this college did not deserve. the old deal is inhumane solution cutting courses which means loss of courses for our students, less r loss of enrollment and state funding and the unwarranted damage from the accreditation debacle to accumulate. the new deal would be human and concrete and set city college up for success and class enrollment, elimination of student department, faculty support and a strong financial foundation. for increase the -- for increasing productive san francisco citizens who can compete in a very sophisticated job market let's vote yes on the transfer tax and its priority for city college and let's free city college. >> thank you ms. englander. >> hi. i am a student at ccsf and i just wanted to say that there is an epic struggle going on between two visions of city college. one is a down size corporate model college, just two year. the other our city college and our san francisco that is can.-14 but actually long-term for lifelong learners and for cultural enrichment and we had a fight nationally and locally so this free city college proposal it counters a piece of that and plays a huge role in that. that's not just about human capital development but human development for all of us and so i urge the vote for us on this proposal and also to reiterate the cuts that have been occurring. a vote no would also support -- unravel down the line again a push towards the 26% cuts to ccsf and the opposite that we envision is a thriving ccsf and increase enrollment that would pull in more students and pull in more classes and bring back faculty and rebuild the college to 100,000 students and this is what we envision so we urge everyone to support that and keep the students community in mind. >> thank you so much. >> hi. i will allen desouza and library and treasurer with the union. thank you for hearing us today and sorry for being late. i was working in the library and today i had a student who is dsps student who many years ago, 15 years ago i was serving across the street at the public library, and he was struggling then and he's made so much progress now at city college working now on language skills and job skills. these are the people who we would be helping and removing barriers from access to city college. another student today in the library was a mother with two children, one in a crib and one sitting by her and she was -- these students -- these are the students who need demolishing of access of fees are one of the biggest barriers coming to city college. i am proud to be a librarian, proud to be serving these students and many more students like them. there are other students out there who would love to have the opportunity but whatever their barriers are are unable and by passing the transfer tax we could remove the barriers and opportunity for them and make san francisco not only a place for education for students but thrive in the city. thank you. >> thank you for being here. you just just in time. are there any other members of the public that would like to speak on this item? i'm seeing none through the chair. >> okay. colleagues public comment is closed. [gavel] >> supervisor yee. >> thank you supervisor kim. first i want to thank the public for coming out and supporting these two measures and i want to thank supervisor kim for being the primary author of this. it's kind of interesting for me to listen to the public because so much of it could have been my story and in fact it was my story. back then when i was getting out of high school the city college was free and it helped me immensely professionally because it gave me an opportunity to actually continue from high school and go to a place where i could continue learning and at the same time for my situation and probably most of the people that go to city college you had to go to work and basically raise enough funding or money to support yourself, and that was the case. in those days when i was going to city it gave me an opportunity to save money actually so i could transfer over to cal eventually and pay for the housing and tuition and so forth, and even then -- want even then, but then there was actually much lower at cal and of course rent was much lower and it was very difficult to make ends meet when you don't have parents that can support you, and so what people are talking about today is even much more crucial that we give people opportunities for different reasons to go to city college whether they can earn enough money to pay just living today or to save up to continue their college career. this is one issue we're not just saying let's make it free and not have a funding source. there's been a funding source identified and by the way if more revenues come in we should be committed to fund other legislation that we should really take seriously that this support free city college. i am supporting both measures today. i hope we will be able to move it out of committee with a positive recommendation, and i also want to say that there's been discussion and we heard today that several people mentioned child care. well, there's a lot of students struggling to go to city college even with kids and a lot of parents out there that told me they can't go because not only it's very hard to pay for tuition, but they can't afford to pay for care while they're going to school, so that's a big issue for many people whether it's going to school -- even in high school it's a big issue, but it's an issue at city college and issue at san francisco state and all of public institutions in san francisco. supervisor kim and myself have been talking about this aspect for several weeks. i'm beginning to talk to the advocates out there about it. there's general acknowledge that child care is an issue starting from city college i mean it goes beyond city college and i don't want to slow things down and what you have for item 4 doesn't include language with -- issues on child care and i was hoping to get it in there so rather than slowing it down i made copies of some language they would like to have in there so what i would like to is first duplicate the file on number 4. okay. and then make amendments to it and continue the item so i will pass out my version and i can tell you where those amendments are they would like to put in, and basically starts with the whereas clauses on page four. i included a couple of whereas clauses. i will read it to the public "a significant additional barrier for children with young children to obtain hiroshima is the cost of early care and education for their infant and toddlers and whereas that additional funding shall support san francisco families with infants and toddlers in order to obtain child care early care and education -- it's on page four -- in order for families to enroll in school and whereas concurrently the critical time in brain development and lace the foundation for the child's ability to learn and develop language skills and interact washingtons. >> >> and whereas additional barrier for families and children to obtain education is the cost of care" and then on page five i meant to add a further resolve, and it reads "that the board of supervisors shall support funding needed to support san francisco families with infants and toddlers to obtain quality early care and education while families enroll -- what i wanted to put in there but isn't in there and add that to the language "families enroll in public funded schools and training or trainings estimated up to be $10 million per year." okay so that would be my amendment. >> thank you supervisor yee, and i have looked through these amendments. i think the whereas clauses make sense and they're certainly true that a child care is an additional significant barrier for parents who attend city college so i would support the whereas clause. my ask is and i understand you want to duplicate the file and is it that you want to keep that in file and move out the rlt resolution to the full board? >> right and move that and continue and flesh out the language for this. >> i see. my suggestion to move it out of committee and not duplicate the file i am actually open to both and do that and keep if in committee. with the further resolve the board of supervisors shall consider and examine proposals for needed support for san francisco families with infants and toddlers to obtain early care and education while enrolled in school or training estimated to be up to $10 million, but if you feel that language is not strong enough we can duplicate the file and keep your language in committee but i would feel comfortable with my proposed amendment moving to the full board. >> i think i could accept your proposed amendment. i also wanted to include publicly funded. >> okay. publicly funded -- >> schools -- publicly funded schools or trainings. in other words, isn't be private schools. >> to our city attorney john gibner. >> deputy city attorney john gibner. the whereas clauses -- if the committee adds those to the pending legislation wouldn't trigger another hearing in committee. adding a resolve clause -- depending whether it's targeted funding towards city college and that is all that was agendized today. if you want to expand the resolution as supervisor yee is proposing and having child care for children would require additional public comment and noticing which is i didn't believe the supervisor was proposing duplicating so that piece of it could be continued. >> question to the city attorney. in our legislation in one of the whereas clauses we did include that in addition to tuition and enrollment fees students face education related costs including room, board or child care cost such as transportation and taxation and supplies up to 3,000 annually so there is language about child care in the original legislation -- i'm sorry, in the original resolution, so this resolve would then trigger a continuance even though we do refer to child care cost as being a potential barrier of cost of attending city college. >> you know it depend whases you want to do. if the new whereas clause is really about city college -- >> just city college students. >> that's how i heard supervisor yee proposing. >> oh i misunderstood supervisor yee. i thought you wanted us to explore funding for city college students? >> my language kept at more general to say -- that's why i said publicly funded schools or training which includes probably big subset of city college students. >> but would include state and public schools as well k-12? >> mostly san francisco state because again if it's a barrier for students to go to city and get caught off and transfer one year from now and not able to go to san francisco state. >> i see. i misunderstand the intent. if limited to city college i am okay with the amendment coming in but if we expand to all students in all higher education institutions then i would prefer to duplicate the file and leave that in budget committee. supervisor wiener and then tang. >> thank you. so just so i am clear so -- we heard from city college before in terms of the projected costs for the free city college program as presented by supervisor kim is around $13 million maybe a little bit less than that, and now this amendment would add -- someone can correct me if i am wrong, another $10 million so it's upwards and pushing $23 million? am i correct about that? i know these are all estimates. >> i think i am duplicating the file and asking for amendments to duplicate the file, so i'm asking for a continuance for that particular duplicated file as amended and so we could discuss that piece of it on another occasion so i think we should keep our focus on the original file. >> okay. i totally understand. i'm just asking the question because it's proposed as an amendment today. i understand you're entitled to keep it in committee but increases the cost to 13 million approximately to 23 million. i look forward to that conversation. i am a huge supporter i think we should have universal or free or deeply discounted child care. access to child care is one of the most significant issues facing our city but a lot of people around the country and huge ramifications particularly for lower income, middle lower class and middle class people and workers so i think it's a bigger conversation so i am glad the intent is keep it in committee because this is a pretty significant change and significant issue. thank you. >> supervisor tang. >> i was just going to say and i think much of the discussion considered already but i would like to keep the resolution relatively as originally proposed because i think that what supervisor yee is trying to get at is really a larger issue that we have to work on as a city so again to make sure that especially because this is a policy resolution with the intent of being accompanied by the transfer tax increase just to focus on city college. >> thank you supervisors. so i would be supportive of a duplicated file that would be in budget committee to further examine funding child care costs for those that are enrolled in public higher education institutions. i concur with all the statements made. quality affordable child care is incredibly important and especially for the students working towards an associate's degree their ba or getting additional training in their careers so i would love to explore that concept at budget committee and support to duplicate the file and the amendments supervisor yee stated. >> okay. colleagues from my perspective i think overall free city college is something i would love to support and open to doing so. i think this dialogue here cemented my feeling this needs to be taken in the context of the larger budget as a city. to do it in a one off and tad amount to $13 million supplemental now or potentially $23,000,000.01 and perhaps it's the right direction to make but i think it should be done in context of the city budget from my perspective and i will say while i am not supporting it today i am open to the conversation and supporting this cause and free city college. i think there's a lot of merit to it and certainly child care and merit as a parent with three young kids and understand the concerns and supervisor kim. >> thank you chair farrell. i appreciate the comments that were made. i hope i can get colleagues support on passing this out of committee today with recommendation so that will be my motion to move this forward with recommendation on both items and what i would just say is that the fund to make city college free will be contingent upon the passage of the new revenue so we don't expect the city to fund this city college fund if this doesn't pass in november so trying to set aside from the current budget picture that only with additional revenue. second, i know a lot of questions and comments came up at committee from supervisor wiener about the committee whether this revenue will be used as articulated today. like many things in it is budget they're no guarantees that something will continue into infinity. in fact many things we funded recently through the budget committee process there's also no guarantee we will fund all of the things forever. with that being said the resolution that is before us today indicates this current board's intent to follow through on the fund and we will follow up with enacting the vehicle that will collect the funding if this real property transfer tax passes in november and also to set aside a reserve fund acknowledging that the transfer tax is volatile source of revenue than other sources of revenue which are more stable and ensure on down years we have the funding to make city college free again and i want to reiterate. we want this a year to year appropriation to the city college program and hold them accountable to make sure that the funds are properly spent down and achieving the goals and increased enrollment, seeing students really benefit from a free community college system, and we will be able to evaluate the program year to year. now i have supported set asides in the past but i know it ties the hands of policy makers and the decisions to make the city the strongest and heaviest it can be. this real property transfer tax. >> >> is to increase funding sources and keep the city more affordable and free city college is one of the strongest proposals we have seen so far coming to the commitment to make this a more affordable city and more equitable opportunity for everyone and maybe in the future after years of this program being in place maybe there will be a charter amendment proposal put forward by this board to ensure that this funding is dispensed for the city college board of trustees the way we're intending it through the proposal today and colleagues i ask for support and move forward both items with recommendation. >> thank you supervisor kim and again i completely hear how you're phrase tg and a separate charter method is a different decision but i understand why we're going about it this way. again whatever the cause for me and the context of the broader budget is where we need to talk about it. again i don't love it and set asides and authord and fair enough but needs to be in the broader budget conversation gardeners and police officers and other issues and i want it in that context and not one off situations and with the tax. generally i'm not a proponent of more taxes. i will support them and are doing so in november and when they're dedicated and companion measures and know when the funding is going and fund vehicle i am open to support but want to make my intentions clear today. supervisor tang. >> thank you and i will echo the concept of free city college is one that i support. i just wish that by the time we had gotten here we had all the details sort of tied up as much as we could for example and how are we implementing this making sure that the folks at city college administering this feel comfortable about it. how will we verify students are, wog half-time in san francisco and what does that really mean? seeing the full range of the potential cost if enrollment goes up for city college? what does it mean in the long-term for infrastructure if there is increase in enrollment which we hope for. i would have loved to see the companion financing piece and set up the reserve policy as well and i don't know what that entails at the moment so i am comfortable moving forward to the full board at this time but i would love to see as much of information possible by the time we get to the full board. >> supervisor wiener. >> so i want to associate myself with supervisor tang's comments. i'm a supporter of free community college and really moving back to a k-14 public education model. i think it's really important. you know the comments i made at the beginning were really not about lack of support for what people are trying to do here because it's a good goal and a goal they support, but more about the way that this was moved forward in terms of you know not really i think making clear to the public that this tax was not in any way dedicated. that it's an annual appropriation process because we're talking about situation where we are asking city college to make this change in terms of moving towards free city college, no more tuition, and yet we're not really giving city college any kind of long-term guarantee that the funding is actually going to be there, so we will see students coming into city college on the belief that there's no tuition anymore that they don't have to pay tuition and then if we have a downturn here in san francisco and if our budget -- if we go through one of our horrific budget years that we have unfortunately had to go through all too often making massive cuts to health and human services and parks and other critical needs and when that happens we know that simultaneously transfer tax will collapse because it always does and it's the most sensitive tax, so we could have transfer tax from this ballot measure that's not even sufficient to cover even half of the cost of the program, and then there will be a request that we take money out of other sources in the general fund to pay for it at the same time that we're faced cuts to homeless and senior services and park gardeners and all of the other things that are so important, so you know and then of course as i understand it when this was proposed there was no work done with the city college administration. they learned about it when it was being announced or shortly before that and fundamentally of course we know that city college has some fundamental financial problems that are really putting at risk the future of the institution. they're not about tuition but are about the inadequate teacher's salaries or inadequate funding for the institution around all the capital needs, so we have a pleasure that accomplishes or may accomplish a goal they think i support and a lot of us support, but does not get to the fundamental challenges facing city college, wasn't put together in a collaborative way with city college and presented to the public in an inaccurate way so i join supervisor tang of definitely supportive of putting this forward to the full board of supervisors but i think it's important as we go forward do it eyes wide open. >> supervisor kim. >> i will let supervisor yee. >> supervisor yee. >> i was going to make a motion. >> [inaudible] >> call the question, yeah. i tell you what. we will take them one at a time because there is duplicated file on item 4 unless you have comments speak your peace and we will go ahead with item 3. >> i wanted to one make comment. thank you chair farrell. in response to

Related Keywords

New York , United States , Mission District , California , Russian Hill , City College , Texas , Hiroshima , Japan , Hetch Hetchy Reservoir , Boston , Massachusetts , San Diego , San Francisco Park , Rincon Hill , Stockton , San Francisco , Ukraine , Turlock , Berkeley , Tennessee , San Francisco Bay , Modesto , Hayes Valley , North Beach , Spain , Chicago , Illinois , America , Spanish , Lisa Brandon , Tom Shay , Alyssa Messer , Peter Cohen , Gary Chang , Conrad Square , Jay Chang , Chris Hoover , Jo Fiona , Morgan Russ , Carolyn Fang , Francisco Puc , John Avalos , Sandy Lee , Frank Dawkins , Pat Brown , Tim Paulson , Raymond Smith , Mike Castro , Bernie Sanders , Ivy Mdm , Kate Hartley , Margo Kelly , Terry Madsen , Katy Tang , Robert Walsh , Thomas Wright , John Updike , Ron Gearhart , Amy Bacharach , Ken Lee , Tim Kelly , Hetch Hetchy , Nancy Smith , Las Vegas , Allen Desouza , Mike Johnston , Ted Egan , Whitney Bagley , Hillary Clinton , Roger Scott ,