Tax increment for this tax purpose so weve built approximately close to 1,000 today, but about 6,000 still exist, so its the obligation and funding stream. If the city were to accept the obligation, it would have to identify a funding stream so it would be unwise for the city to accept the obligation without a source of funds to do it. Okay. I think i have some more thoughts on that, but thats not part of this resolution so well move on to other questions. Can you just also explain again sort of the separation of the income stream from mixed use property that is are being transferred . What does that mean . So disillusion laws provides for an ability for the Oversight Board to make a determination that if you had a mixed use as sets bra Oversight Board believed it was not a benefit to the community and it was a benefit to the taxing entities to separate that out in order to keep the revenue from the non housing youth, it could take those actions. In our particular case, the as setses t
Additional head room in that tax increment for this tax purpose so weve built approximately close to 1,000 today, but about 6,000 still exist, so its the obligation and funding stream. If the city were to accept the obligation, it would have to identify a funding stream so it would be unwise for the city to accept the obligation without a source of funds to do it. Okay. I think i have some more thoughts on that, but thats not part of this resolution so well move on to other questions. Can you just also explain again sort of the separation of the income stream from mixed use property that is are being transferred . What does that mean . So disillusion laws provides for an ability for the Oversight Board to make a determination that if you had a mixed use as sets bra Oversight Board believed it was not a benefit to the community and it was a benefit to the taxing entities to separate that out in order to keep the revenue from the non housing youth, it could take those actions. In our par
Powers authority. If we could get the projector going i seal ill show you what it looks like today. Staff is requesting authorization hard and soft costs for a turnkey delivery of the realigned off ramp and the total cost is estimated to be 2. 833 million which includes hard cost, project reserves, Construction Management services and other construction support costs as detailed in the table attached to the staff memorandum. Zip since the project will not bid until early 2014 is awarded Contract Price will not be known until the spring of 2014 and the staff will provide an update to the commission at the time, but we need an agreement now prior to the issuing of those bid documents. My staff is also proposing a somewhat different approach to contracting policy in this agreement, as explained in your memorandum. Traditionally the former agency such as the department of public works when entering into contracts like this off ramp. For the remainder of the amount of the contract we are ac
If you have any other comments and again mr. Chin or commissioner arsy if you want to come back up and any other questions or comments otherwise we will wrap it up. Thanks supervisor. Just one thing i wanted to say and you mentioned city build on the work force side we are exciting about city build and the role pat mulligan can play and the department of the environment and we have them here and there is capacity and infrastructure with cal and rich at the department to be really supportive so i wanted to add that component and everything is set and ready to go and were excited about the potential moving forward with the program. Supervisor mar. I did want to ask if rich can elaborate more on how this is legally defensible given the changes at the federal and new changes at the state level and how this is privately financed as well . Sure supervisor mar. So as i mentioned and supervisor farrell also alluded to this, the statements from 2010 from the federal Financing Agency were statem
Would be unwise for the city to accept the obligation without a source of funds to do it. Okay. I think i have some more thoughts on that, but thats not part of this resolution so well move on to other questions. Can you just also explain again sort of the separation of the income stream from mixed use property that is are being transferred . What does that mean . So disillusion laws provides for an ability for the Oversight Board to make a determination that if you had a mixed use as sets bra Oversight Board believed it was not a benefit to the community and it was a benefit to the taxing entities to separate that out in order to keep the revenue from the non housing youth, it could take those actions. In our particular case, the as setses that are mixed use, we believe there is a benefit to the community, including the residents of the Affordable Housing and benefit to the taxing entity to preserve these developments as intact units because the lease revenue of an Affordable Housing