All right. Mr. Chairman item 14 closed session the mta meet to talk about this and the boards approved the case and no action on the other two cases item 15 for a motion disclose or not disclose the information discussed in closed session. Motion to notice disclose. Second and. All in favor, say i. I. The is have it. Were adjourned in memory of carla johnson. Thank you. Thank you mr. Chairman. Okay. Good morning everybody. Welcome to the San Francisco budget and finance Committee Meeting for june 29, 2016. Its 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 wouldnt 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 inkind 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 were 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 reservoirs transformation into a park. I guess i want to echo supervisor farrells words in really thanking the Francisco Park conservancy for their hard work, advocacy and stewardship to take the steps were 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 were seeking today which is approve the agreement between the Francisco Park conservancy and the department, to accept the inkind 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 1860s when it was used for a reservoir for San Francisco and closed in the 1940s when the near by lombard reservoir opened. Sis reservoir is one of five site thats 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 cant see much . Sorry. I have one copy of my slides. I believe jeff was making this them as well. Why dont you give them to supervisor yee. Sorry about that. I know the base plan is pretty small. The public doesnt realize what we see on our screen we can barely see it. Its not over there. Okay. Sorry about that. And so the next slide is just anticipated schedule, and you will see that were 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 longterm 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 youres. 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 were 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 longterm Public Private partnership on an important new asset for the city, and then lastly the action seeks to amend the park code section 410 which prohibits alcohol in 58 park sites or about a quarter of San Franciscos 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 Fishermans 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 thats 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 departments cost for one full time gardener and custodial staffing on a joint level. We report that the citys 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 Departments budget and other budgets i believe, the mayors budget, and thats through the and also including throughout boards 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. Im 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 were 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 thats exactly what actually what the agreement is, the ordinance were 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 cant 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. Im 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. Theyre 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 cant believe were here today actually considering how long its 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 lets meet on hyde and bay and im 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 couldnt believe the size of it because you cant 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 thats 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 its kind of a lengthy work. Its 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. Its based on the conversations ive had with the sis park project its 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. Im 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 nonprofit 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 youre going to a Ribbon Cutting for the francisco reservoir and im 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 youre aware theres 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. Were a strong supporter of the Francisco Park project. As you know parks are an integral part of the citys 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 hasnt 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 Analysts 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 mayors Sea Level Rise coordinating committees 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 . Im sorry. Madam chair would you like to take Public Comment. Okay. Sorry. Okay. Lets 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 60footer trolley vehicles known as the articulated coaches and to replace the worse performers in our fleet which are the other 60footers and as of today more than 90 of the 60 vehicles are operating on the street collecting revenues and theyre 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 were 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 theyre 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 60footers 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 dont 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 its 2,000 with the new trolley vehicles were averaging 5,000 but we anticipate the number will go up. Great thank you and now we will go to our budget analysts 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 60foot 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. Its 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 dont 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 Fishermans Wharf area of the port. Its 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 28,000foot 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 mobiles longterm 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. Its for the Human Services agency. Its 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, thats 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 didnt 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 its on a upper level because of the intensity of the files and again it met all those needs. Were 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 were 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 were 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 whats 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 its 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 its 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 were going to have over 2500 staff so as you can see theres a pretty big short fall from the amount of work stations and the amount of staff were budgeted to have, and that obviously affects our ability to provide services, so thats why were 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 dont 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 its 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. Were at 62 in soma west which is usually not a high value area. Its now a high value area i dont know. Somehow i heard 10. Thats 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 dont 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 its 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 longterm 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. Its 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. Thats what we call an industrial gross rate so we pick up the other costs beyond that base. Its 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 cant 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 dont pay rent until january 1 and a hard fought negotiated item and i want to reflect that because its 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 were 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 1716 budget and new funds requested in the fiscal year 1617 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 Mayors 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. Im with the Mayors 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 nonprofit 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 nonprofit 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 prononprofit 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. Were here to report on the administrative costs for supporting the fund. We spend just over 284,000 last year of fiscal year 1516 to administer the fund. Thats 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. Thats for 1617 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. Were away of the budget analyst recommendation to reduce the not to exceed amount roughly by 170,000 and were 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 fiveyear 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 thats based on the departments 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 were 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 dont plan to come back for another extension. We anticipate by spring of next year we will come back to the board for a final longterm 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 20045 and fiscal year 201415 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 well 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 dont know what youre doing its a bit of a issue and not a fuller process. Some of the citys 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 Franciscos 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 citys 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 dont 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 its our responsibility. Were 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 youre 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 1516 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. Were adjourned. [gavel] you. Well to the epic center are you ready for the next earthquake did you know if youre a renter you can get earthquake shushes well take to the earthquake authorities hi welcome to another episode im the chief resilience officer for San Francisco im joined by my good friends for the Earthquake Authority were at the el cap center for the city and county of San Francisco started in 2013 to get the community and talk about the risk we think about earthquake if usual great city youll see one of the demonstrates weve built the model home and i encourage other episodes well be retroactively retrofitting and showing you as Property Owners to employ you work for the california Earthquake Authority talk about your role and earthquake shirnls up think the viewers want to know if youre a renter or Property Owner how the insurance issues. Im the chief mitigation officer or c e a a Property Line funded pubically managed entity that provides earthquake shiners for one to four units and mobile owners to come down and renters throughout the state of california. What make the c e a deft. We work with 19 participates the insurer that sells you, your homeowner policy youre not obligated to buy it but you can buy a policy. Am i covered with Homeowners Insurance. No California Homeowners understand their Homeowners Insurance doesnt cover earthquake they need a separate policy if youre an shiners you can get the earthquake insurance policy. So explain why it is for the c e a is deft if a traditional insurance agency. Irreverent so in the 80s the state of california passed a law that requires any company that writes the policies to over earthquake insurance the homeowners are not required by commissioner cranshaw can bye there was so much loss they were going to stop writing the insurance policies for earthquakes they wanted to stop a serious insurance policy. Were talking about the homeownerships buying the earthquake shiners but 70 percent are renters whats my opposite. The option for renter the earthquake be Insurance Company is affordable i think people dont realize just exactly what it covers it covers damaged property but loss of use if you have to be under a building they have a quarter main that was broken as well as Emergency Repair if interests glass breaks in the carpet you need to be in our unit thats whether earthquake is important. Youre title youre the excessive mitigation officer for the state of california when i think of insurance i dont think about mitigation. So as part of Public Safety mission the c e a started to put aside mitigation loss fund 5 percent of invested income and when i joined the company 34 years ago we had 45 million to make a difference for moving and incentivizing and mitigation for California Homeowners to structure engineering a unique opportunity to cervical homeowners to help them to mitigate the equivalent. Whether an owner or renter i want to find more information about earthquake insurance where should i go. Earthquake authority. Com not only information about insurance but a calculated figures and as of january lots of deductible and 25 percent if a homeowner mitigate their hope up to 20 percent off their premium as an incentive for the work. What does mitigate the home mean. Strengthen, renovate, retrofit through a home particularly older to earlier codes and you put in adding streamlining maybe collar bolts to tie to the foundation or to the wall so it is braced to earthquake can be very, very affordable and really makes a difference. Thank you very much for being with us i encourage the viewers not only to checkout the Earthquake Authority but well talk about 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