down is supervisor peskin. Later, supervisor yee will be
joining us. I'd like to thank
sfgovtv for their assistance in helping us broadcast today's committee meeting.
Madam Clerk, do we have any announcements?
>>Clerk: yes. Please silence
any cell phones and other
electronic devices.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you very much. Could you please call item number one.
>>Clerk: item number one, ordinance appropriating 225,000 from the general reserve to general city responsibility to
provide grants to businesses in chinatown that have suffered economic losses due to unanticipated delays in
construction of the central subway project.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you
very much. Supervisor, do do
you have any remarks? >> thank you for hearing me
today. As we are all aware and have heard plenty about the central subway project, at
least as it relates to the chinatown station at the
northern end of the line has
been delayed by some ten months after years of construction
along the corridor, and there
are quite a number of
businesses -- small businesses on rock stockton street in chinatown
that have suffered mightily, and are going to continue to suffer.
I know that everyone was looking forward to opening, but the opening is going to be
delayed as the mining at
stockton goes on. I along with representatives
from the sfmta and my office and representatives from the office of workforce development have been meeting with those
impacts merchants and their
stories are really quite heart
wrenching, and to that end, I took this extraordinary step
because these are pretty extraordinary circumstances,
but in the intervening months, since I introduced this measure, there have been a number of very, very positive conversations between my office
and the office of economic and workforce development, and I
think that we now have an
agreement that will provide for
some relief for individuals and
businesses in -- in the
affected area to be able to pay
for rent and wages, direct support that they very much need, albeit, in an amount that, quite frankly, is a token amount given the losses that they have suffered, but I think
it shows the city's commitment
to -- to these individuals in this extraordinary circumstance. And to that end -- and I don't want to put words into the
office of economic and workforce development's mouth,
but I think we have found an equivalent amount of money that
can be spent or largely spent on direct assistance to these businesses, and I want to thank
joaquin torres and the mayor I
don't remember -- mayor's office for their willingness to
work on this. This is not the only part of the central subway
that has had impacts, and I'm glad that this is part of a larger package that Mr. Torres and his cohorts are taking
along other parts of the cohort
at union square and at 4e th and folsom, all the way down to the southern terminus.
So with that, I know there are many members of the public, and I want to thank the individuals
who have long suffered these
construction impacts for their patience and for their willingness to come out and testify this morning and share
their stories. Colleagues,
when you hear them, you'll hear of massive losses over the
course of now five years,
having to layoff employees,
having to struggle to make rent
and having their income that
they rely on, less than half of what they had prior to construction, so with that, Madam Chair, perhaps we want to hear from Mr. Torres, but at
the end of this, based on my understanding with Mr. Torres
and melissa whitehouse, I will
make a motion to -- or I'll ask that you make a motion to table this item.
>>Supervisor Cohen: all right.
Thank you, so we will hear from
Mr. Torres, and then we'll hear from the budget
legislative analyst's office,
and then we'll table it. >> certainly. It's a pleasure
to be here today, and in
response to supervisor peskin's comment does
comments, as it relates to the
central subway project, we've
very happy that we've been able
to support our merchants that have been affected by this extraordinary circumstance of disturbance, and we're very
happy to be working with our
china down residents in this process. Moving forward, if there are any issues related to the administration of this program, we'll be immediately coming
back to sit down and work with the supervisors on how this is working out. I know we've been working with
mayor lee, and we're very happy
with this resolution.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you, Mr. Torres. Do you have a
question, supervisor yee?
Okay. Mr. Torres, there are in
some other questions for you.
>>Supervisor Yee: first of all, I'm glad that we worked out, hopefully, a resolution,
and I'm just curious, in
regards to the funding source, that was set aside for a
variety of reasons for the project itself, is that where the funding source is coming
from? If not, where is it coming from?
>> certainly. I'll have
melissa whitehouse respond to that. >> it will be coming from the
project budget, and about
350,000 will be coming from mta operating budget.
>>Supervisor Yee: so the 225,
where is that coming from?
>> that will be in the 350,000
within the mta's operating budget.
>>Supervisor Yee: okay. appreciate it. Just want to
say thank you, supervisor peskin, for bringing this issue up. I know it's important to the merchants that's been impacted, and we've talked
about this over and over again.
It's probably, all of this us
sitting here in our own districts have had similar situations where the business corridor was impacted over a long period of time, and hopefully, going forward, the city can figure out, or we can figure out some way to help those businesses that were impacted in the future because
I think it's kind of -- kind of difficult to ask businesses to
just say well, don't worry; you know, when everything's fixed,
I'm sure your business will go up.
>> certainly, and if I
-- >>Supervisor Peskin:
certainly, supervisor yee, any business that has been impacted
across the city, we in the workforce development have the
same commitment to maintaining relationships with merchants in that process. We can support them in a variety of way in that process, whether it's
queening and holding markets accountable, we will absolutely
be there and be responsible to
you and your constituents in
supporting them.
>>Supervisor Yee: thank you. >> thank you.
>>Supervisor Cohen: well,
thank you very much. Miss Campbell.
>> good morning, chair cone and
members. The ordinance itself does -- [Inaudible] The ordinance itself does not fit out criteria or procedures
for awarding funds to those businesses, but as I understand the office of economic and workforce development will be working on that, and we consider this to be a policy matter.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you very much. All right, ladies and
gentlemen, let's go to public comment. Is there any member of the public that would like to speak on item one, please
come up here to the podium. You'll have two minutes to speak. No need to go the long way.
You can just go this way, yeah. Perfect.
>> hi. My name is raymond
hong. I'm at 800 stockton
street. I own my business 23
years, since the subway project
started, I lost a lot of
business. Over 30 to 40%, and I have really suffered for a
long time now, and I'm worried
about chinatown, too.
We setup a display with the
products, and I hope the business does not close down,
and I hope the city can help us to get back to the business.
We lost a lot of parking space.
A lot of dust around, noise,
and before my wife is working
with me together because she
lost a business, and now, my wife had to go back to work. And I'm only one in the
business. We suffered really,
really, very bad.
>> thank you, raymond.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you,
Mr. Hong. Are there any other members of the public that would like to speak at this time? Please come on down.
Why don't you get in line so that the -- when the next
person speaks, we can just cue up and move quickly. The floor is yours.
>> hi. My name's J.C., and I'm
on behalf of 1074 stockton
street, ching chinese medicine
and therapy. Since they start
the construction for the
central subway, we layoff employees already because we
don't have enough business for
our massage business for -- not
enough customers, so we have to
lay them off, and they've been going or for unemployment. And the noise makes our customers unhappy, and they say
it's very difficult to find parking, and the streets that always blocking, and sometimes,
it takes much longer to come to us. Sometimes, they will say that they cannot make the appointment, so they have to
cancel because a lot of streets
have been blocking and on
construction, so they --
they're having such a problem and saying it's very difficult
to go into chinatown; they're kind of disappointed because of the construction. You take so
long, and they're not happy.
So sometimes, we have meeting with our persons in chinatown, and they've been saying about
the same thing: it takes too long, and they're blocking too much street, and they're taking
off a lot of parking space, and
we need parking space for
customers. Otherwise, our business is suffering and
suffering too long, so we hope -- please, that the
government can help us to -- to go over at this time and have
the project done soon. Thank you.
>>Supervisor Cohen: next
speaker -- next speaker, please.
[Speaking foreign language]
>> hi, supervisors, judy lee representing district
supervisor 11, ahsha safai,
helping to interpret for the
merchant located at 883
stockton. He used to have only eight employees, now four, and he's being charged about $8,000
due to this delay, and...
[Speaking foreign language]
>> this year's wait is too long
for him, as it is costing a lot
of revenue for him.
He's asking for a very speedy
opening timeline because he
can't wait anymore.
>>Supervisor Peskin: and Madam
Chair, I just want to thank
Miss Lee for filling in at the last minute. >> any time.
>>Supervisor Cohen: hi, next
speaker, come on up.
>> hi. My name is hing sam. I
opened restaurant in chinatown
for 41 years, but now, because
of the -- construction on
the -- the construction on the property, they take too much time already. First time, they
put in a sidewalk. They already took too long to be
done, and then, the second time was January -- I mean, July. I think it was July. Now, they go in December. I don't know when this is done, okay?
They make my business go down
almost half, so we cut a lot of employee already, okay? Now, we just waiting for close up.
I don't know what's going on.
what does ct do for us? We
have all the signs up there,
and sure would be nice to speed
up for you guys. Thank you.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you.
>> now, chair cohen wanted me to read you something real
quick, translated in english. Is that okay?
>>Supervisor Cohen: I believe
sam already gave his public comment. >> this is also representing
jennie harris studio, as well.
>>Supervisor Cohen: okay.
>> who cannot be present today.
>> okay. Please read it.
>> we file a petition of complaint against the road work projects operating by the city of san francisco that are bringing negative effects to our businesses. We all know that running a business is increasingly difficult to san francisco due to the high costs
and employees' wages, terms, rent, and other relative costs, while we are all struggling to
adhere to these changes to
survive in our respective businesses, the road work
projects are undoubtedly aggravating to our environment. These include the sparse amount
of street parking, the increase
of parking violations, the
hazardous dust in the air, the extreme noise, the strong odor
of building materials, the
traffic going down a very busy street is -- street, and the
lift goes on. All of these prevent customers from coming into this area. San francisco
is known as a busy and exciting destination, but this circumstance has caused a significant decrease in foot
traffic, and this is mostly evident during the summer season. Our businesses are currently at the risk of loss
and even worse, closure. Therefore, we are highly requesting the city of san francisco take or difficulties into consideration and sign an appropriate solution immediately. We can wait, but
our businesses cannot.
[Speaking foreign language]
>>Supervisor Cohen: I'm sorry, is there another speaker?
>> supervisor cohen, there's
also an audio recording from a merchant who's not able to be here today. May the recording be played?
>>Supervisor Cohen: okay.
Let's go to the folks that are here that would like to speak on this item, and then, we'll
go to the recording.
>> thank you, supervisor cohen.
>>Supervisor Cohen: is there
anybody else who would like to
speak today, please come up.
[Speaking foreign language]
>> this is the ha king herbal
merchant located at 1801 stockton.
[Speaking foreign language]
>> so this mer whant, located at 1027 stockton, started in
the year of 2008, and started having this kind of business in 2010, and then, the project started, which is hurting her
business right now.
[Speaking foreign language]
>> so on August 29th, 2015,
there was a flooding in her
business from the project that
costed her about $30,000 in damages, and right now, hasn't
received any refund for her damages. She's seeking help
for these damages and costs.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you.
>> okay. My name is sulin
sulin chong at 1000 stockton.
>> this is Mr. Chong at 1000 stockton.
[Speaking foreign language] >> now, this merchant understands that this project
has to go through, and starting in 2016, he and other neighbors also heard that the city was
funding about 225,000 in support of city funding to the merchants, but to him, it's not enough of the damage and costs and the delay for his business
to run, so hopefully, he's trying to see what the city can
do to expedite this process. >> thank you cope .
>>Supervisor Cohen: all right. Are there any other members of the public that would like to
speak on this item?
[Speaking foreign language]
[Speaking foreign language]
>> now, Mrs. Muay wei is
located on 1041 stockton. This project has put a lot of pressure on her business, as
she used to have six to seven
employees, now cut down to two to three. She wants a more definite ending date for this project as soon as possible,
because this has cost a lot of
damage and costs to her business.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you,
are there any other comments?
>> thank you, and after the
speaker, my staff can play the audio of Mr. Siu that's on that phone.
>>Supervisor Cohen: okay. Are
there any other speakers?
>> supervisor cohen, I believe there's an audiotape from one
of the merchants, so I need
anybody other than Mr. Wong to
play it. >> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen and supervisors. My
name is edward, and I have the
business in chinatown more than
32 years, since 1985. Because I bring my voice to this city, I would like to tell the city
what I'll suffered, I have so
far, and the essential sub sway spilling on it. And the essential subway since
the project, I've been losing
business of 50 percent.
Before, four employees, I've
cut down to one, and two part-time. Why? Because my
clients don't come to chinatown anymore. They don't like the construction, and they can't find parking. They're not interested in doing business anymore with us. Okay. There's all the problem,
and I believe the city has been
doing ten years -- ten years,
the planning, research on this
essential subway. Now, we have a lot of
complaints -- and not only me,
also, from the -- our merchants. They're using ten
years to study, they're doing this -- this essential subway.
Now, they're talking about a
delay, another ten months. This ten months, this is more suffering for us. I hope the city is not putting
another dime in the late processing. They should be
receiving a penalty. All the workers should pay the penalty because they delay the work. If they delay the work and the city not do anything, that
means the ten year study, planning, they did all the
research on it, it's totally
telling us the city is doing the worst thing.
I don't know, so I hope that someone can telling me what,
how this can be done, okay? Thank you very much, I hope
this council can listen to our statements. Thank you.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you. All right. Are there any other members of the public that
would like to come and speak on item 1?
>> I thought it was over. Hello. My name is ace, I'm on
the case. I just came from
down stairs from a meeting where my supervisor didn't show up. I want to show a parallel --
and I'm supporting that, I guess you should get that. But in return, there's other communities just like yours that have businesses, and I'm witnessing in the fillmore, and getting no assistance from the
mayor. We had the mayor come
in 2011 on a walk-through the fillmore. Right after he left,
all our black businesses closed
down, so what's good for the gas -- I'm trying to tell you,
if it's good for you all, he should. Even though we don't
have nothing in our community, he should revisit -- and this time, I'll walk with him and let him know what happened to the merchants up and down the field no more.
Now, I'm here saying, and strictly saying I'm supporting
you all, and ed lee did a good thing, but I want ed lee come back to the fillmore and do what he said he was going to do
before the fbi got on him in 2011. Yeah, I'm telling the truth,
and nothing but the truth, so
help ace God.
Now, we've got a commission
that don't give a darn about
us, this committee had the rare opportunity, a rare opportunity
to help us out, when newsome left, and the budget deficit
was 500 million. But now, the
budget is 10.1 without a black -- nowhere mentioned in
the budget? What's going on
with that here in the city by
the bay, where everybody thinks everything's okay, but they're going to listen to what ace got
to say, because I got kids, and
my kids got kids, and my grandson got three kids, so
that makes me papa, so I have
the moral obligation --
>>Supervisor Cohen: any other members of the public that
would like to speak on item 1? All right. Seeing none, public
comments are closed. Supervisor peskin, what would you like to do?
>>Supervisor Peskin: thank you, Madam Chair, and I would also like to, at this point,
put some words in Mr. Torres's mouth, which I wanted all of
the merchants that are here to know that Mr. Torres and the office of economic and workforce development will do
their level best to get these payments on you the
payments out and work with you by the end of this calendar
year, if not sooner, so that
should all be rolling out in
the next month or two.
>> supervisor peskin, I echo
your sentiments, and that is my intention.
>>Supervisor Peskin: with that
said, I think this ordinance has served its purpose, and i
would respectfully make a request that one of you make a
motion to table it here. >> motion. >> second.
>>Supervisor Cohen: so moved.
We can table that without objection, this is to table item 1. All right call item number 2.
>>Clerk: item number 2, resolution approving the third
amendment to the revenue agreement between san francisco
public works and J.C. Decaux
san francisco L.L.C. For the
automatic public toilet and
public service kiosk program
extending the contract term by 90 days, changing the
termination date from October
17, 2017 to January 15, 2018.
>>Supervisor Peskin: this is
the second time that the existing contractor, J.C.
Decaux has been at the meeting.
At the last meeting, I asked if
you would extend the 60 day
contract to 90 days, today, I'm
asking you to continue it from
# 0 days to 120 days. I think
Miss Dawson May have some questions after the rfp, but I would like to make some
comments after Miss Dawson
makes her to continue it from #
0 days to 120, and then -- >> I didn't bring this up the last time around because I figured we needed a little bit more time to negotiate the contract, but because we're asking for an extension, and it
was mentioned in the bla
report, I did want to find out
a little bit more about the 2015 rfc process, seeing that
the rfp lacked clairity, and the city had to reject all the bids, so you know, I'm guessing
that it's unrelated to why we
have to extend the time now and renegotiate and so forth, but I just want to get a sense of what happened in 2015, and then, to the extent they are
able to share with us, what are sort of the direction that
public works is going with the
ongoing negotiations right now,
and what, I guess, the city is kind of hoping for -- to get out of the contract this time around, but again, I know you May have some sensitivities
around what you're trying to do at this moment.
>> thank you, supervisor julia
dawson, from public works. Just to say, we are in agreement with supervisor peskin's request, and we are
also happy to extend approve the 120
day extension instead of the 90.
To answer your question, we did
issue an rfp in 2015, and we received three proposals, and those proposals were so different it was clear to us they didn't understand the content of the rfp, and so rather than try to analyze thee proposals that really weren't comparable, we rejected all
bids, and reissued the rfp, and
then ran the process again. We
received several proposals at
the prebid conference, but then, we only received one submittal at the end of the day
from the rfp -- from the second rfp. Part of the confusion laid
around the planning code requirements. There were some
voter approves initiatives
after the original agreement back in the 90's, and so i think many of the advertising proposers didn't understand the terms that they needed to
operate under, and the second rfp made that much clearer to them.
In terms of negotiations, what I can tell you is that we're very close on business terms,
and so really, the greater
conversations now are the regulatory reviews that must
take place, in particular
sensitivity around historic
districts. There are many of
them around the city, both significant and historic areas, and some of the furniture tends to lie in those historic areas,
so part of the combinations wants to make sure there's enough listening around the community, enough refinement on the design, and to complete the business terms, so it's really for all of those reasons that we are requesting for the original agreement to be extended slightly, but I can
assure you that the terms that
we will be bringing forward to you with the new agreement are
far more favorable to the city than the current agreement,
which dates back to the mid90's. >> thanks, and perhaps I'll follow up separately just to
find out some of the differences the public might see because of the new contract, but I won't do it here because you're still discussing terms with the company.
>> I'd be happy to respond to
requests from you or your staff any time. >> thank you. >> mm-hmm.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you, supervisor tang, and thank you Miss Dawson.
Let's go to the budget
legislative analysts for their report. >> yes. As we noted in the
report, there would be revenues
to the city of about $95,000 in the extension. That would be moreover the 120 day extension. However, this doesn't account what the differences might be
under a new contract once it is
negotiated, and we recommend approval.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you very much. Let's go to public comment. If there's any member of the public that would like to speak on item 2, please come up and do so. All right.
Seeing none, public comment is
closed. Thank you. Supervisor yee?
>>Supervisor Yee: I'll go
ahead and make a motion to extend the contract from 90 days to 120 days, and to bring it back to you in a week.
>> we'll table that motion, and
we'll bring it back when?
>>Clerk: that would be the October 26th budget and
finances committee meeting.
>>Supervisor Cohen: okay.
We'll take that. Item number 3, please.
>>Clerk: ordinance amending the administrative code to require the controller to include in midyear financial reports to the board of supervisors and mayor information regarding the over time expenditures of the airport, department of emergency management, fire department, police department,
department of public health, public utilities commission,
public works, recreation and
park department, and sheriff's department.
>>Supervisor Cohen: all right. Supervisor yee?
>>Supervisor Yee: yes. I want to thank you for continuing
this from the last budget and
finances committee meeting.
It's been known that certain
departments rely on over time to meet the department's needs. While it is understandable under certain circumstances, the board of supervisors does
not have a real choice when the
departments come before us for authorization since much of
this overtime had already been expended. After several conversations at the budget and finance committee about this issue, I
felt it would be prudent for us
to be proactive in monitoring
these expenditures before
spending supplementals even come before us. The ordinance before us today would require
the controller to include in the midyear financial reports
to the board of supervisors and
mayor information regarding
overtime expenditures of the airport, department of emergency management, fire department, police department, department of public health,
public utilities commission, department of public works, recreation and park departments, and sheriff's department.
I hope that this early notification, too, will help us with flagging departments that are spending down their
overtime budgets too quickly in future fiscal years, so we can
help prevent having to expend funds unnecessarily. I would like to invite anyone from the controller's office to share a few words at this
point. I see that ben's not here.
>> I'm michelle ehlers from the
sheriff's office, budget controller's division. We are
happy to include information --
>>Supervisor Cohen: May we try
the next mic? There's a little feedback there.
>> we'll be happy to include this information in our up
coming six months report.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you. All right. Supervisor yee, I
appreciate that. There is no legislative budget analysts
report for item 3, so we will go to the public to see if there's any public comment.
All right. Seeing no public comment, the item is closed. Supervisor yee, would you like to make a motion?
>>Supervisor Yee: sure, I'd like to recommend this with a positive recommendation to the full board.
>>Supervisor Tang: all right. We will call that. Madam Clerk, would you please
call items 10, 11, and 12 together.
>>Clerk: yes. Ordinance approving a development agreement between the city and
county of san francisco and fc
pier 70 llc for 28 acres of real property located in the southwest portion of the larger
area known as sea wall lot 369
or pier 70.
Item 11, resolution approving a
disposition and development
agreement between the port and
fc pier 70, and for 28 acres of real property located in the southeast portion of the larger
area known as sea wall lot 349
or pier 70, and item 12, resolution approving the memorandum of understanding between the port and other city
agencies regarding interagency corporation and adopting
findings under the california environmental quality act.
>>Supervisor Tang: after years
of development, the pier 70
project has evolved into a clear vision to reintegrate and restore a 28 acre site into the fabric of san francisco
creating an active and
sustainable neighborhood that recognizes its industrial past. For those of you that have not
been out to the project site,
the defining feature of pier 70
water front is frankly that there isn't one. At least there isn't one that's accessible to the public. You see for decades now this
area has been fenced off, it's been inaccessible to the public, except for those who
had the misfortune of having
their cars towed and had to go retrieve their car, but people
from the bay had no opportunity
to experience the water front and the beautiful neighborhood, so this project that we are discussing today brings access and connection to a piece of the water front that has never
been accessible. Beyond
access, the project also
delivers $750 million of public benefits, which includes
affordable housing with 30% on-site affordable. It also
has a package of transportation
improvements and funding. There's workforce development,
rehabilitation, open space park. This project also
accounts for sea rise projections. It's a fantastic project. I'm excited about
this. You will be hearing more
about this project from our presenter, and as outlined in the development agreement for
your review today, so I'm incredibly proud to -- proud
that we're here, and I want to acknowledge all the parties that have been involved in this process. This includes the mayor's office of economic and
workforce development, Miss
Sarah dennis philips, the
ports, elaine benson, planning
department, rich sucre. I want
to recognize my staff, sophia
kitler, as well as yoyo chan.
If I've missed anyone, I apologize. Colleagues, you should have a summary of amendments. I've passed them out to you, and the changes include -- I'm going to read them into the record so the folks at home can be
familiar with these changes.
First, it changes the interagency cooperation
agreement and the disposition
and development agreement supporting documents. I want to call out specific changes
with regards to the dda, exhibit b-5 around the transportation program. These changes were carefully
developed in collaboration with the neighborhood in potrero
hill, specifically, the potrero
hill boosters, as well as the dog patch neighborhood
association. Shout out to vanessa. I she
ee vanessa, and there will create strong neighborhood enhancements, and
create a direct access to the neighborhood.
Of also want to shout out to
jl eppler, and mta for working
with us in this effort so we can move this project forward
collaboratively.
There's also some nonsubstantive amendmented for
the da ordinance, but because
of the publicly scheduled piqua
hill item, we can't take action
on the amendments, but I hope
colleagues that you'll take
action on them when they come
before us at the next meeting.
And now I'd like to bring up
elaine ford, jack sylvan from
port city, and supervisor the port.
>> I am elaine forbes, director of the port, and thank you
supervisor cohen, for your
expertise on and leadership on this project. Most importantly, it's a very
big day for the residents of the dog patch neighborhood and the southern water front.
Today is the culmination of 70
years of imagining pier 70, and
a very deep and sustained
planning effort. We forwarded
this to you for recommendation because the project fulfilled the vision of our project master plan which we created
with the community from 2007 to 2010. For those of you who haven't
been to pier 70, this project will be truly transformational.
Right now, it's an assembly of
red tag, historic resources, really, just deep, deep maintenance, and disrepair, and
it will become an telephone active and
sustain able neighborhood, and
called out the shipyard, which played an important role in our
history and will play a big role in our future. The san francisco bay is a
really incredible, creative, restoretive natural resource, and the residents of the bay area will finally achieve that through this project. This has been a collaboration with of course our development partner,
city, state, and regional partnerships. This big project
has been planned in a way that carefully supports and improves the neighborhood, and that's
not an easy task. The public benefits package is very strong. We are grateful to our
sister agencies for an
exhaustive effort, oawd, the
city planning, public works,
sfapc, and the mta. Building a new neighborhood right really requires intensive collaboration and coordination,
and we've gotten just that. We
are also very proud that the siqua appeal has dropped last week, and we can move forward with public consensus, and I'd
just like us to pause for a moment and reflect how unusual that is for a project of this
size in san francisco. Finally, we are excited to
bring this level of a project
to the water front. We're
talking about 650 million in public infrastructure alone, and that will address some very
serious deferred main nance,
and we have a proposal to
address sea level rise port wide. So thank you for your support
and leadership today. We will together transform this place and give it back to the community for a place it deserves. I'm very proud to be
up here, representing work of
many many staffers over many, many years. I'd like to turn
it over to sarah dennis philips
of oawd. Thank you.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you. >> brad benson from the port.
Sarah has asked that the
presentation go first, and
she'll come just afterwards.
>>Supervisor Cohen: sure. No problem.
>> jack sylvan from fourth city.
>> good afternoon, commissioners, chair cohen.
Thank you so much for having us.
I am here on behalf of forest city. We're really, really
pleased to be here at this
point. We're pleased to be implementing this as soon as possible. This has been a
culmination of a long and comprehensive community outreach process that has been
ten years in the making, from
when the port started the pier
70 master planning process in 2007, selecting forest city through a competitive
solicitation in 2011, to where
we are today. Long the way, we have done everything that we
have been able to think of to
incorporate diverse perspectives and invite stakeholders into the process, whether they're from the neighborhood, whether they're
interested in specific issues
or they just happen to be at
events at the site.
In 2013, the board of supervisors did actually
endorse a term sheet for the project, which subject to
adjustment of heights and
public benefits via a subsequent process, that I'll talk briefly about, continues
to form the under lying concept and overall business structure
with the port.
In 2014, pier 70 became the first project to comply with proposition b, which required projects on port property that
are seeking a -- an adjustment
to heights to go to voters.
73% of voters supported the project that effectively is what you have before you today,
with the robust public benefits
program of 30% affordable housing, nine acres of new
parks, new artist studio space,
and a truly mixed use project,
with the addition of the ability to increase the height
level from 40 to 90 feet, which did not take effect at the
ballot measure. It actually
takes aat the approval of the development plan, which
includes these public benefits.
With really what's been a lot
of support from supervisor
cohen's office, a great group of neighborhood stakeholders
who have worked side by side
with us, we believe that we put
in place a foundation to create
the great future place that
pier 70 deserves to be once again. At the core, that
really is a mixed-use plan with
residential at the heart of the
site. Local retail, pdr space,
art space, a new water front,
all oriented around revitalized historic buildings that are connected to the water front by
this network of new active,
open spaces.
In terms of development program
between the 28 acre water front
site by forest city will develop and which was the
subject of the ballot, and the substance of properties that
are owned by the port and pg
and e, the overall special use
district contains 2300
residential units, 1.2 million square feet of commercial office, and 650,000 square feet
of space that could either be residential or office, depending on what the adjacent
site conditions are on the -- the decommissioned power plant
and the open air switch yard. This reflects an adjustment to the amount of office that could be built that was negotiated
with members of the community
and led by supervisor cohen's office.
The neighborhood will be -- the dog patch will be reconnected
to the bay for the first time in more than 100 years, with the location of a post industrial water front park
that really reflects the character of the historic
district. That revitalized
shoreline will be transformed
to accord date sea level rise
while truly providing a unique
san francisco experience, and
importantly book marking the site, in building 12, we're
referring to a maker's market
hall, potentially, with a small
grocery, and out at one of the prime water front sites, an
arts facility of up to 90,000 square feet, in which we
envision the state of the art replacement studio space for
the noonan building community. More than half the site is designed to be for the enjoyment of pedestrians, and this includes like what you see
here, a narrow walkway between
two of the historic buildings.
Part of the vision includes
keeping existing structures and
using them in unique ways to
keep the authenticity of the
district, and new buildings
will complement the adjacent structures, subject to the planning guidelines that the commission has approved, and this will allow visitors to
experience the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries all at the same
time. So that is he aa
's a -- kind of a high
level presentation that the committee heard on monday, and the public ben I didn't tell
and fiscal and economic benefit
that the port and oawd will
talk about subsequently, so happy to answer questions at the end and thank you for the opportunity to be here.
>>Supervisor Cohen: all right.
Thank you. Next presentation.
>> good afternoon. I'm brad benson, director of special projects for the port on behalf
of director forbes and the port's pier 70 team. We're so happy to be here today. Supervisor cohen, we really appreciate your sponsorship of this item and
the help in resolving the siqua appeal. I'm just going to run
through the -- hold on for a moment. I'm going to get an overview of the project. I'd like to start with some updates about what's
happening at pier 70.
It's a busy place today. Pier
70 is a 70 acre site. You have a project involving about 35 of
those acres here today. We
also have -- I'm having trouble with pagination. Sorry about that.
The pier 70 shipyard has been
operating for over 100 years.
We're in a short hiatus now
while we're seeking a few
foundation for the site. This
really is a maritime history of the site.
Last year, the supervisors
approved the orton project
including the 20th street his
toric core. These are very big contributors to the district,
and we expect full occupancy of
the buildings by 2018, and due
to the generosity of the
voters, we plan to open the
first six years of the park in mid2018. Of course to make room for all of the development, we do have
a number of tenants at pier 70 that we are working with to
relocate for the site to allow
for construction activities to begin.
The last use committee is considering three companion items. The land amendment, the special use district that jack spoke of, and a public trust exchange that must also be approved by the california
state lands commission. Now, to a brief overview of the public benefits in the project.
This is a very strong public
benefits package. There are
planned 470 units of affordable
housing, meeting the 30%
requirement of proposition f.
This'll be accomplished in two
primary ways. One, residential rental bmgs
buildings at the site will have 20% includetional housing, and then office buildings will generate affordable housing
fees to fund development of
three 100% affordable buildings on-site.
Director forbes spoke of sea level rise. The port is much
more aware of this than we were in 2013. We're very happy that
forest city is taking an aggressive approach. They'll
be raising the site from four
to 8 feet across the site to dale with 66 inches of sea
level rise. The project also
includes special taxes and tax
increments to fund future sea
level improvements, along the
port's entire 7.5 mile water
front. We've worked closely
with oewd and the san francisco
municipal traffic agency to develop a safe street grid with
bike access.
They trail extensions -- a very
robust train management
program, including passes for
residence dens, and
approximately 45 to $50 million in transportation sustain ability fees to support new neighborhood supported improvements in the dog patch
and adjacent areas. The project will support economic access and diversity
with a 17% local business
enterprise goal, and $1 million in funding for city build and
tech sf, as well as 30% local hire.
We expect nine acres of new, open space, which will really
serve this growing
neighborhood, and retail and light industrial uses,
including 50,000 square feet of
pdr space to support local manufacturing.
Jack spoke of historic
rehabilitation. There are
three significant krbsing
resources, buildings 3, 12, and 21 that will be rehabilitated to secretary standarded. We'll have site interpretation across
pier 70, and we really love the
idea of retaining the building 5 frame over 22nd street. We'll have community facilities, including on-site
child care at two locations
with 50 slots each, and $2.5 million towards a
community space in the adjacent
dog patch.
Finally, since term chief 4,
we've done a really good
outreach to the noonan artists
to provide relocatable studio space.
We expect $260 million in horse son tall cost in three phases of development. The biggest
phase, which we expect would
start in 2018 would be $140 million. This is parks,
streets, wet utility infrastructure serving the site
and the rest of pier 70.
In order to implement that
utility infrastructure and new streets, we have before you today an interagency cooperation agreement. The parties to that include public works and the san francisco
public utilities commission, along with the port and a number of other city agencies. Public works will be
responsible for streets and new mapping to create new
development parcels. Puc will
be in charge of water, waste
water, awss, power, and stormwater. The main transaction document
in front of you today is the
disposition and development agreement.
This governs the rights and responsibilities of both forest city and the city acting
through the port.
Under the dda, forest city is obligated to build that infrastructure that I spoke of a moment ago under a schedule
of performance. If they meet
that schedule of performance, they have the right to takedown development parcels at fair
market value under either 99
year leases or for sale in the
case of condominium parcels. The port is obligated through
the attached financing plans to
repay forest city through a
variety of sources that I'll describe. There's also a development
agreement before you today. This vests development rights.
This was approved by the
planning commission. It -- it means that city standards for how development progresses
won't changeover time, and the quid pro quo under state law means the project has to be developing a higher level of public benefits than would be provided under existing zoning,
and that is definitely the case here.
Attached to the dda are the
master lease. This is
whereforest city will have site control to do construction, and then, from the master lease,
we'll move into verse cal disposition and agreements for
individual buildings or rehabilitation. The main public financing
mechanisms for the project are ifd, infrastructure financing district pros. This is in the
form of growth and property tax that -- that with your authorization, the project will
be able to capture to pay for public infrastructure and public benefits.
There will also be an
infrastructure revitalization
and district over the hoe down
yard. That will generate pros for affordable housing.
In addition, we will propose,
probably in early 2018, the formation of community facilities districts. These
are special taxes in addition
to property taxes to fund things like the arts building
that jack mentioned, site wide maintenance of the public
realm, and sea level rise improvements.
We expect total special taxes
to generate $60 million in
today's dollars for future sea level rise improvements up and
down the water front, so it's a good down payment on that big
future project.
The project is really self-contained. It's designed to protect the general fund and
the harbor fund. The developer's obligated to put up
the initial funding for these improvements and be repaid
through land value and cfd and
ifd proceeds. I think you'll hear from the controller in a moment about
the fiscal and economic benefits of the project. We
see a net $8 million benefit to
the fund, and that's largely
because of the maintenance
funding that is provided here. Significant financial benefits
to the port that I'll go over.
17,000 construction jobs,
11,400 now permanent jobs, and more than 2,000 residential units.
So the bottom line for the
port, looking in $2,017, we -- we expect the developer to
spend $122 million and earn a
profit of $94 million, and the
port to receive $102 million over the next 120 years.
That's in today's dollars.
In addition, we see $24 million
for other pier 70 improvements,
and a total 170 million in sea level improvements.
So we think this is a good dale
for the city, and we look
forward to your recommendation. Thank you.
>>Supervisor Cohen: hello. Okay. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else? I thought there was one more. Hi. >> good afternoon, supervisor.
I'm christine maher from the port. Just a quick order of business.
We do have some substituted supporting documents that we'd
like to put into the record today to replace some of the documents that you did receive
last week in your packets, and
it's -- it's a rather large
stack that I have over here for you.
We did include a cover memo that summarizes the changes to each of those documents.
>>Supervisor Cohen: all right.
Thank you. Is there a budget
list and analyst's report? >> we actually issued a separate report on tuesday of
this week on this project, and
I want to point out, on --
starting on page -- I thought I
had it here. Page 10 of our report, so we reported specifically on the development and disposition agreement that's before you
today, but we do want -- there's clearly a large number
of actions that the board needs to take to move this project
forward, and there's some --
what we consider some pretty significant pieces of legislation that have to do with project financing that are still not before the board of supervisors yet or are still
pending, and that includes the
sale of parcel k, which is a port owned property that's going to be designated for market rate housing, and the pros of that sale are part of the financing plan for this
project.
There's also the hoe-down yard,
which is currently owned by approximating P.G. And e., but the board has
not exercised its option
legislating that option.
There's going to -- which will be necessary for -- for
property tax increment and issuing bonds against property tax increment.
There is a plan for new infrastructure and property tax
on the hoe-down yard, and then, the
the formation of community districts.
On page 12 of our report, we
showed the -- what we estimated
the $672 million project public financing -- project financing
for the improvements of that, and so to significantly hear
the $34 million are moneys that
have already been spent by forest city for the
entitlements. This was between 2011 and 2017, as forest city was obtaining the entitlements on the project. Forest city is expected to sort
of front the equity for the
beginning of the horse son tall infrastructure over the three
phases of the project. That's 252 million.
The goal of the port, in our discussions with them is to actually use project funding to
pay down any equity that forest
city is investing in the
project, as Mr. Benson pointed
out, there is an 18% return on investment on the balance of their equity contribution.
To date, on the 33 million, our
understanding is about $18 million is already accrued in terms of forest city's return
on investments. The other thing we wanted to point out is the project does
include three parcels of 100% affordable housing. This would
add to about 327 units. The project itself is looking
to be able to generate about $83 million toward the financing of these affordable
housing units, but that will leave a gap that will need to
be filled of about $89 million. Now, not all of that will be
city financing, but there will need to be more funds to be able to complete the affordable housing component of the project. And then, finally we talked about the project risks, and the biggest risk is that project generated financing won't come in on the schedule
that's sort of anticipated in
the financing plan. Any sort
of delays basically delay the project. And we think that's a fairly
significant risk at this point.
And then, there is ae also the risk, I think especially when
you talk about the infrastructure financing
district, and the infrastructure revitalization district, these are new forms of debt that we don't know, in terms of how financial
investors will be, in terms of
purchasing bonds.
We consider this to be, obviously, a policy matter for the board of supervisors, but
we do recommend amending the resolution to request annual reports on the status of the project and status of financing
for this project.
>>Supervisor Cohen: all right. Thank you. Let's go to public
comment on this -- on these three items. If any member of the public that would like to come up at this time, please
come on up to the podium.
Pull the mic down.
>> good afternoon. Supervisor malia cohen, nice to see you,
and board of supervisors.
My name is vanessa okino. I'm
a supervisor for the dog patch association and as being a
board member and resident of
dog patch over 14 years now, I've seen so much growth, and
it's exciting that pier 70 is building this amazing project,
and here's why. As you know -- May know why I encourage you to support this project, many have
said there's housing, 30% of
that. We need it, like, now,
so this is great.
Also, I'm an artist myself, of
many other things, but arts, there are very fee w affordable
spaces in this city for artists, and this project
addresses that reality. It has a very significant resource at the noonan building that is being replaced with a new building with improved resources, and increased
affordable spaces for local artists.
Pier 70 is also creating spaces
to help belster the local entrepreneurs in the city. Not only have being assess to the
water front, but as well as it's going to bring jobs into the community, so folks that
live in m dog patch, potrero
hill, and bay view can really
have a life in pier 70. >>Supervisor Cohen:. Thank you. Anybody else, come up. >> thank you. I'm here in
support of pier 70, and wanted to show my enthusiasm for the
project. Cast is a nonprofit
in the process of cultural
place making, to keep arts and culture here in san francisco.
Arts and culture play a unique
role in our city's history,
economy, and culture. To mitigate the issue of
artists leaving, we bring
together public and private
sector organizations to secure long-term permanent space in
urban centers. With support of san francisco and the vision of funders and business leaders,
we have supported our first two
projects with stablizing two
centers and providing permanent affordable art spaces. Our long-term plan is to
develop more, including several thousand square feet. We've had conversations for the past several months with forest city and the port of san francisco about the potential
for us to develop and lease up
to 90,000 square feet of art
space in pier 70, which we
believe will be an opportunity
to build something truly unique along the water front. We're excited to join the
community in the dog patch. As
you May know, the noonan
building space will be replaced
on-site at pier # 0, and the
plan is to rehouse this space
within the fewerture arts facility.
We think it will be a July for the strool water front neighborhood and the city of
san francisco. Thank you for
allowing us to lend our enthusiasm for the pier 70 water project. >> okay. If there are any otherment coulds, please light up. >> good afternoon. I'm mary
Mckee. I'm one of the noonan
building artists, and there are
about 40 of us out there today.
This building has been an
artists enclave since the 1970's. It's home to many, and many of us in the building have been
working in our studios for more than 20 years and have closely followed the project development. We have been very
active in advocating for the retention of artists and small businesses in the noonan building. While we're
devastating that we're losing or building, we are very
pleased with the commitment to
forest city to not only provide
replacement studio space but affordable replacement studio space. Most importantly, forest city has committed to
building permanent below market studio space that will be
available to the artists who come after us and will face more difficulty in finding affordable studios, and for those of you that haven't been
out there, I'm going to give a
little plug. The weekend of October 28th and 29th, come out
and see pier 70 in its current state, so I very much want to speak in support of this project and am looking forward
to it moving forward. Thank you.
>> bill blackwell, local 38,
plumbers and pipe fitters.
You're lucky, everybody's at a conference, you only get one of us.
We're very much in support of
this. Hope you guys are in support of it. They're very
interested in local hire, and doing everything the building trades does for local workers.
Please support this.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you. Seeing no other members of the
public, public comment is
closed. So thank you for the presentation and the hard work to everyone that's been
involved. I would like to take -- ma make a motion to accept the amendments from the -- supervisor yee?
>>Supervisor Yee: I have a few questions.
>>Supervisor Cohen: sure.
>>Supervisor Yee: yeah, I want to thank everybody that's been involved with this. This seems
like a -- it's been a long process, and a lot of work put
into this, and I want to especially thank our -- my
colleagues here next to me who
has -- seems to be taking up a
strong leadership role in
having all these different
things that will be beneficial,
not only to -- to the new residents and people working in the office buildings there, but probably to the neighborhood,
also, but I do have a few
questions, just for clarification. The playground -- or the park
was stated it would be turned
over to the port commission, is that correct?
And then -- and there's two
questions related to that. With the -- would the playground also be turned over to the port commission, and
then, if so, for both of those, who experience does the port commission have in sort of
maintaining these things? >> thank you for the question. There are going to be nine
acres of open space in the --
in the project. The port has a
very extensive network of open space today, both in the northern water front and also in the southern water front.
You May be familiar with the
park at pier -- heron's head park at pier 96.
The port has gardeners. The
port also contracts with those
that support maintenance up and down the water front.
In this case, it's going to be generating maintenance funding
estimated at $2.8 million a year to maintain these parks, and also the public streets and public rights of way. That
could be through a third party contract, that could be through the master developer. What's important is that there is funding available for it, so we expect these parks to be
maintained at a very high level going forward.
And he also had a question
about the playgrounds, I think?
>>Supervisor Yee: right. >> so the playground is also
going to be on the hoedown
yard. It's owned by pg and e. We haven't purchased that yet,
but we have to find a current
operation spot for the location right now.
It's located in a really nice
spot near the three 100 unit
family housing site, so the families have nice access to the park.
It could be that that is
maintained by the rec and park, or the port, but that decision hasn't been made and won't have to be made until the board finally exercises that option
to acquire the hoedown yard, so when we come back, we'll be clear about who will be maintaining the playground going forward.
>>Supervisor Yee: appreciate that. In regards to these
large developments, I ask this question pretty consistently, and especially we're anticipating that there be families with children and so forth.
Have you -- has the project
reached out to the -- the san
francisco unified school
district to see what they think
about accommodating more stupts. >>
>> -- students. >> so you're asking what the
schools think of this or whether or not there's capacity
in the school to handle this growth?
>>Supervisor Yee: right, because I'm working with
developers and they're making sure that there's space there to build a school. >> no, the office of economic and workforce development has been working with the planning department to do outreach to both city agencies and I
believe the school district, as well. Sitting from my port seat, I
can't -- I can't speak to the specific analysis that was done with regard to the schools, but
we will -- since this item is being continued, we'll come
back with an answer on that and -- so yes.
>>Supervisor Yee: I appreciate that. Sorry I sprung that
question on you.
The one last piece, the tdm
that you have in your
presentation, was a nice piece
of benefits for -- for people
that will be living there, so
you have things like, I think
clipper cars and shuttles and
so forth.
I'm just curious, like, is this
something that's going to be
paid for for to infinity or is it time sensitive? It's one thing to say yeah, we've got all these great benefits, and we'll give it to you for one year, and after that, it
doesn't happen or nobody's supporting it.
>> first, I want to go back to your school district question,
and then, I'll ask carly payne
from sfmta to come up and answer your last question.
I'm told that environmental impact analyzed the environmental impact on the public schools, and there was
found to be no impact, so
carly, do you want to... >> good afternoon, supervisors.
Carly payne, sfmta. To answer
your question about the amended transportation demand
management program is for the
life of the project, so in perpetuity, so there is an air quality mitigation measure that was part of the environmental
review that required a 20% reduction in auto trips generated by the project,
compared to what would otherwise be seen according to the modelling analysis, and
that that 20% reduction should
come through a transportation
demand management program, and so the response management and
their consultants have developed a plan based on how
best transportation management measures work should achieve
that goal ongoing, and so the
plan has elements that are
incentives, like you mentioned, or ongoing programs, and so
that plan will continue to live on.
There is a key feedback mechanism in the plan that says
there will be reporting out on
how well it's achieving the
reductions and if -- if what we
know now does not hold true, there will be revisions of the
tdm plans, so adopt either a different or more aggressive of
the same measures so that it's
also -- while it lives on, it's also a living document, and
will be dynamically updated
over time. I hope that answered your question.
>>Supervisor Yee: no, it really does. >> okay.
>>Supervisor Yee: I actually appreciate the effort of the developers.
Can I -- I'll say one thing
about the -- the eir, in terms
of how they measure things like
whether or not the residential units will have any impact on schools. I think we always make the mistake that -- and maybe they take this into consideration, but it seems like when they do
measure it, it looks at one in
isolation, and yet, I know for
supervisor cohen's district, there -- this is not the only
project around that's going to be developed, so I'm just curious, you know, did we
actually take into account the
cumulative effect of all these
different projects? >> thank you, supervisor for your thoughtful questions, and the staff that was able to answer them, I appreciate it. So we need to continue this
item to October 26th, the budget committee. These
amendments need to sit, so we
will see you all back on October 26th. I'd like to make a motion to continue these
items, items 10, 11, and 12 to
the October 26th meeting, and we can take that without objection. Thank you. Okay. Madam Clerk, let's go
back. Please call items 4 and 5 together.
>>Clerk: yes. Resolution authorizing the general manager of the san francisco public utilities commission to execute agreement with motorola solutions for the purchase, installation and maintenance of
a land mobile radio system for
an amount not to exceed 10.9 million, and with an anticipated term to commence
December 1, 2017 through February 28, 2027.
Item number 5, ordinance appropriating 6.8 million water enterprise fund balance to fund the installation of a new water enterprise land mobile radio
system in fiscal year 2017-2018.
>> I'm here to talk about the
fpic land mobile radio replacement project.
>>Supervisor Cohen: all right.
Thank you.
Is it salmon or solmon. How do
you pronounce your name? >> salmon, like the fish.
>> okay. You ready to go? It's all yours.
>> okay. Currently, we use a
high band city system that dem, department of emergency management currently operates.
A lot of people use that.
Power enterprise, our customer service bureau, and some of the the enterprise who supports the fire department.
As you know, the pem is replacing that system now, and
the groups in the puc will continue to use that system.
We also have a low band radio system that's exclusively used
by water enterprise, and it
spans seven counties of nrn california, which water enterprise operates in. However this system has a lot of problems. It has incomplete coverage of our operating territory, it lacks necessary,
easy to use features, including -- and also, it lacks
features like gps, so we can
know where our staff is, and it lacks portablity features also, so it's not a portable radio system that you carry on your
belt. The system's unreliable
for daily use as well as disaster recovery communications, and that has a lack of useful features, and the system's at the end of its
life and needs to be replaced. So in January of this year, we
issued an rfp to replace the enterprise low band radio
system and with an eye on
costs, we're open to different options that met the functionality that we were seeking that we need. So the first thing is we needed
a fully turn key system, and is t needed to be a trunk system, meaning, the user doesn't
select a channel to talk on,
the system will do that for them.
The system is an analog system,
which is older, antiquated technology. It needs to cover the seven counties that water enterprise
is located in. And I mentioned cost. It needs to be cost effective, so with an eye on
that, we're open to many options including lease, lease to own or purchase, and we want
a system that will stay in good working order during the life
of the use, so we're looking
for system warranties and post implementation support.
So we received three proposals,
and the department chose the
motorola system for the
following reasons: it is the system that we're looking for.
It is a modern system, so it's based on the project 25
standard, which is a mutual aid standard for public safety
groups to talk across multiple jurisdictions.
It is proven technology, and it
will -- it will be -- we're
going to continue to use the
city system for waste water, power, customer service, and some local water, and we'll use -- what we're doing, actually, is extending the city system to be used for the rest
of the water enterprise, so we're not only interoperable with the city system, we're part of the city system, and because we follow standards and
they follow the same standards
and mutual aid partners, we can
talk across the city and to mutual aid partners. It's important that we have priority on the system, so during daily communications and disaster situations, that the system's not too busy for us to
use, and we're going to have
dedicated channels and so we won't have a problem there.
And in fact, we asked for two channels in the proposals, and
we're getting four with the new system because of efficient use of the spectrum, so it's really
important that the system is licensable, that we can get the spectrum to build the system on, and we have that guaranteed with the proposal. And we also have guaranteed coverage maps with the proposals, so if there are
problems with coverage when we're testing the system for acceptance, motorola has to fix
it, and it will be -- we also shefd very high quality
communications, and that's natural with the system.
So the sec will own the system, and that includes radios, dispatch consoles. They will
own the towers, they will own the backbone network that supports the system, and we'll
also own the sec licenses, so we can continue to operate the system after the ten year period.
With the system we purchased
24-7 brake fix 24
24-7 brake -- break fix from motorola, and also, we
purchased hardware and software
upgrade every two years, which keeps the system up to date for its life.
So for the cost of the system,
it's capital cost of $9.121 million, and overal,
we'll
we'll pay maintenance of 9.6 million.
It's cost effective because of
the competitive bid process and
we're looking to fund the #$.1 million of capital costs from three sources. We have a
project that will fund
2.3 million of it, and the sfp
you see, capital budget.
We have 3.7 million in our operating budget, and we need
an additional 4.1 almost from the water enterprise fund balance. The maintenance balance of
about $1.8 million will be paid
out over the water enterprise operating budget over the next eight years, so we're asking
you to approve an ordinance -- [Inaudible]
For a total of $6.818405
million, and authorize the sfupucgm to authorize into a ten year contract to purchase
and maintain a turn key radio
voice communication system for
an amount not to exceed
110.9 million. Questions?
>>Supervisor Cohen: no. >> I need to follow up on what Mr. Salmon said. What's
before you now is approving the 10.9 million contract between puc and motorola, and then an
preparation of 6.8 34I8 million from the water enterprise fund balance to partially fund that
contract, and on page 9 of our report, table 2, it sort of
shows the proposed financing of
the project. We did make a
recommendation to amend the
proepttion ordinance. We recommend an proepttion of 4
poipt 1 million. The balance would come from the operating budget, which I believe that
puc has greed with, and otherwise, we recommend approval cone well, thank you very much for that, Mr. Salmon. Any members of the public that would like to speak on items 4 and 5. All right. Seeing none, public comment is closed. Supervisor tang, how about we
make the bla amendments, accept
them, and then, we'll send this to the full board with a positive recommendation.
>>Supervisor Tang: all right. I will do that, and I think item 5 needs to be sent out
with a committee report, as well.
>>Supervisor Cohen: all right.
Welcome back, Mr. Peskin.
Just in time, we're going to
call items number 5 and 6 together.
>>Clerk: ordinance
appropriating $6.8 million water enterprise fund balance
to fund the installation of a new water enterprise land
mobile radio system in fiscal
year 2017-2018. >>Clerk: -- [Inaudible]
In an aggregate principal
amount not to exceed $286 million. >> I'm here today with two actions to provide funding with
ongoing compliance for critical environmental improvement for
our water system program. The
actions are to provide an
increase in our water revenue
bond, appropriation of 1.6 million.
In terms of background, the program consists of 83 projects
to secure and enhance water reliablity in the bay area. In
order to move forward with construction of the project,
the puc had to negotiate a series of permits with state and federal agencies to
mitigate the program's environmental exact
environmental impacts. Those permit both require
initial mitigation as well as
ongoing monitoring of the mitigation, and the permit
requested today is to permit
the requirements 2.2 million to private vegetation --
>>Supervisor Cohen: Mr.
Sandler, I'm going to interrupt your presentation. We're familiar with it. I'm just going to jump into our
presentation, if that's okay. >> okay. That's fine.
>>Supervisor Cohen: something for you to consider, do we
expect to make any increases to
the water revenue bonds, the
bond's issuance in the near future in. >> no.
>> okay. Thanks. I like that.
I've got one more 230r you.
Are there any anticipated
mitigation efforts around whtsp
that we should expect to fund in the future.
>> well, we'd have the ongoing mitigation and monitoring requirements that would be part of our regular operating and capital budget.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you. So there's no dollar figures or anything that you want to discuss or share with us
today -- no surprises is what I'm asking. >> no surprises.
>>Supervisor Cohen: all right. I like that. No surprises
unless there's more money. >> yes.
>>Supervisor Cohen: all right.
Let's go to sever in. >> what's before you is
amending a prior ordinance.
The board previously approved
bonds, and they're scheduled for this winter. This would
add $12.6 million to the issuances of the projects that
Mr. Sanders discussed.
The one thing we want to say is
puc does do ten year financial
plan. The water revenue bonds
are paid by the rate payers, the actual expects increase on water rates to cover these
bonds and other costs are 11%
in 18-19 and 10% in 19-20, but
we do approve approval of the ordinance. >>Supervisor Cohen: colleagues, I'd like to make a recommendation that we send
this to the full board with a
positive recommendation. >> and as a committee report
for both items. So moved.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you. We'll take that without objection. Thank you.
All right. Moving on, we have item 8.
>>Clerk: item number 8, resolution authorizing the
controller to enter into the
10th amendment of a software license and support agreement between oracle america and the city and county of san francisco to extend the
contract term through November
30, 2022, and increase the
maximum expenditure by 4.4 million. >> I have a very brief presentation here for you today and happy to answer any questions. What's before you
today is a contract extension
for our human capital which is
our hr payment system. It's reaching its ten year mark
right now, so briefly, the
overview of the contract is
that it's up on ten years in
November, and we're asking you to extend it. This is part of
our very large investment in peoplesoft, which now runs all
of our hr, our payroll,
benefits, finances,
procurements fully integrated. As well as all the under lying
provisions and requirements of
our 60 various bargaining contracts, if you have any
questions, I'm happy to answer them.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you, and I believe supervisor tang as a question.
>>Supervisor Tang: I believe
we've renewed this every year
since 2007, and I'm not asking
this for me, but for the board because it's brought up every time we have a contract
extension with oracle. If you can explain why we're partnering with oracle about this, but I know the answer to this already, but people are asking about open source systems, so if you could answer
this already because I know it will come up. >> all good questions, so in
this case, we've directly
negotiated with oracle with the
admission of a competitively
bid process for capital for our hr and payroll systems. With respect to open source, whenever we look at new application needs, we look at
all possible activities. We put out a competitive proposal
request, and so we'll evaluate at that time. Our current
systems are relatively new, as
you're aware, and have an existing useful life as you see
here of at least another 15
years, so to put this in
perspective, when we last implemented a new system, in this case, a closed source
system, it was about a $38 million investment. Any type of a system, closed or open is
going to have a very large investment up front, so what we're asking today is a continuation of still a very
useful, high functioning fully
customized system that is the
economic -- economic best
approach at this time. Thank you.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you,
supervisor tang, and Mr.
Todd rystrom. Okay. We are going to go to public comment on item number 8.
Seeing none, public comment is closed.
Let's go to the budget legislative analysts.
>> yes. This contract has been
amended 14 times over the past ten years. The contract amount
currently is $8 million, which
is below the flesh hold for
board of supervisors approval.
The board would approve a four
year extension rather than a one year extension. This will
result in a cost savings to the
city to do the five year extension, and we would
recommend that you make that approval.
>>Supervisor Cohen: supervisor tang, would you like to send
this to the full board with a positive recommendation.
>>Supervisor Tang: I will make
a motion to send this to the
full board with a positive recommendation. >> okay.
>>Clerk: can we please send the committee report.
>> Madam Chair, if we could do a roll call with that consistent with my past votes,
I'd like to dissent could.
>>Supervisor Cohen: the motion
it to move to the full board as
a motion, the committee report.
>>Clerk: [Roll call.]
>>Supervisor Cohen: all right. Thank you very much. It moves forward through the system. All right. I believe this is
the last item, item number 9.
>>Clerk: item number 9, resolution approving and
authorizing the execution of a
purchase and sale agreement
with the buddhi foundation for
the stale by the city and
county acting through the san francisco public utilities commission, to buyer of
approximately 84 acres of
improved real property for $3.3 million.
>> we come here today with my
colleague, brian morelli to ask
for the abrofl of the sale of a
ranch in sonoma california that we purchased in 2013. The
ranch is approximately 84
acres. It is zoned agricultural. There are two
residences on the rank. -- on
the ranch.
We acquired this property as a
approval of the new irvington tunnel project. This project
was a component of our multibillion dollar water system improvement program. The purpose of the project was
to install a 3.5 water
transmission tunnel in alameda tunnel.
>>Supervisor Cohen: 3.5 million?
>> 3.5 mile. I have to put on
my glasses.
>>Supervisor Cohen: okay. >> in 2007, we purchased an easement from the prior owners of the property, they did not
give us the length of the temporary construction easement
we wanted, and in 2013, they
were unwilling to extend the term of the temporary construction easement because they wanted to sell the property. They thought our easement would hinder them from selling the property, so then, they offered to sell the
property for us -- to us. They wanted approximately $4
million, and we ended up
purchasing it for $3.7 million. So the new irvington tunnel
project was completed in September 2015. In December of that year, our executive management declared that the property was not needed for utility purposes anymore, and I received
instructions to sell it.
In close collaboration with the
city's real estate division, we
sent out all the notices required by california and san francisco law.
We received no letters of interest at all and
particularly from housing
sponsors or other public
entities. We noticed 29
housing sponsors. So then, through the city real
estate division we hired collier's, which marketed the
property for a year without a
nibble. We started to get in
bids, then collier's called for offered this May, and in July,
we accepted a bid from the
buddhi dharma lien guo
foundation. The offer was 3.305 million, and it was
determined to be the highest
responsible offer. This offer
is above the app praisal, raisal, so we will net a profit after deducting all of the costs, and all of this will be used to support our revenue funded
capital programs. We will safe
almost 6,000 permonth in maintenance costs. We have an on-site property manager because there's livestock, and he maintains the presence, and
we also have a handyman.
And that is offset by a small
amount of rent that the on-site property manager pays. Then finally, I want to show
you a picture of the property
blessed by the monks, and I'm very happy to answer any
questions that you May have.
>>Supervisor Cohen: thank you. I appreciate that. Let's go to
the budget legislative analysts.
>> yes, the actual purchase
sale to the new buyer of 3.3 million. It's above the app raised value but below what the puc did pay for the property. The puc did indicate
there was a savings in terms of the construction project by being able to access the property for the construction
of the new irvington tunnel.
There will be a net savings of
about $70,000 a year, which is currently the caring cost of the property for puc to hold the property, and we do recommend approval.
>>Supervisor Cohen: so thank you very much. Colleagues, let's see, are
there any questions for Miss
Russell? Supervisor peskin?
>>Supervisor Peskin: I was -- this May be a question for the
city attorney, but I noted in
the bu jet lemgs laytive
analysts -- budget legislative
analyst's report, that the original was not subject to approval by the board, and I
was wondering why that was.
>> because purchased below $10
million --
>>Supervisor Peskin: I don't think 99 # is what governs. I
think chapter 28 is what governs.
>> deputy city attorney john
givner. It May be that current chapter 23 didn't apply at the time of the purchase. I can look into it and get back to you on -- on why there was no
board approval of that.
>>Supervisor Cohen: all of our
sales go to the board, but for
some reason, or ur purchases do not, under 10 million.
>>Supervisor Cohen: right. We will have to get to the bottom of that.
Supervisor peskin, would you like an answer when they come to the full board.
>>Supervisor Peskin: sure, or if the city attorney wanted to get that to us offline, that's fine, or I'll ask it at the full board. I don't have a problem with the acquisition,
and I'm looking up chapter 23
right now, and I'll figure it out.
>>Supervisor Cohen: all right. As you look it up, we're going
to go to public comment, see if there's anyone that would like
to speak to item 9, the public and sale agreement. All right. Seeing none, public comment is closed. Supervisor tang, I want to see if you have any last minute
comments or remarks.
No? Okay. Well, I'd like to move this forward to the full board. We don't necessarily
have to send it with a positive recommendation, supervisor --
>>Supervisor Peskin: I'm fine with the --
>>Supervisor Cohen: okay. Well, I'll make a motion to
send it to the full board with
a positive recommendation. Without objection? Rt will. Without objection. Madam Clerk, is there any other business before this body?
>>Clerk: there's no other
business before this body cone conthank you, ladies and
