obviously it's a policy decision for you guys as well. >> just a point of clarification vice president low. there were many people that testified on behalf of the skate park and produced compelling testimony this is under served part of the city that need this is activity. it was dismaying to us at that committee however that we run at that deficit but the overall policy decision was this was a good thing to support and move forward and hence here we are. >> i would augment a couple of things. we felt that the gap in funding for us it's a relatively small investment to add an important recreation amenity. we lack skate board parks in the city and within our purview and something for us to absorb and the way that the funding

mechanism is going to work with dpw funding the maintenance and in our accounts and i was informed there is an escalator that helps and interest on the lump sum and help close the gape a bit. i don't know if all the way but it will help so it turns out that the last amendment to change the way the funding is actually structured may result in more interest funds for us to help close the maintenance gap. >> commissioner bonilla. >> yes. i noticed that in this mou it does memorize the $66,000 operating expenses, but it doesn't memorialize the monies that rec and park will be responsible for. shouldn't

that happen as part of this mou? >> for give me commissioner i don't follow. >> yeah, we're saying we're going to incur these additional costs. yearly basis; right? >> yeah. >> shouldn't that be for future generations part of this mou, so that from year to year this liability or this responsibility is assumed by the department by future administrations? >> well, i think that while the exact amount of the fund suggest not outlined in the document the responsibilities that total to that $85,000 in annual costs are outlined in the document. >> right, but it doesn't -- it says that -- it mentions the

$66,000 but that's the extent of it. it doesn't mention -- >> that's the 66,000-dollar that dpw required and up front. >> right. but i don't see -- >> the responsibilities -- >> [inaudible] >> the responsibilities that we're required or we are committing to in the mou they're outlined there. we didn't do a cost estimate. >> [inaudible] >> we can include that cost estimate as an attachment but to be honest 20 years out i don't know that we have an accurate sense of the costs and it will be $80,000 19 years from now. >>i am thinking it gives the whole picture if we do that. if we don't down the road there is i think some questions raised

about incurring these liabilities on an on going basis. >> okay. we will include an estimate of the cost of the services the park will be providing as an attachment to the document. >> so that is part of your amendment when they make a motion with the mou, correct? >> yes. >> so they didn't have to vote on it. >> i really appreciate that. thank you nick. >> i just have one comment. i am delighted that the city's refunding this cost for 20 years but i'm surprised at it. is that because the board has a provision it can't commit a future board to obligations like this so we have to pre-fund it? >> you're on the right track, but this is an mou so this is not going to the board and we can't have future boards appropriate funds in a certain

way so this is something we could have them move it in the budget and have the board approve it before we take over maintaining and operating the facility and we would have the certainty that this funding source was in play the next 20 years. >> with that we're through public comment. i don't see anymore commissioner questions. can i explain a motion? >> moved. >> and seconded. >> moved and seconded. all those in favor? so moved. >> now we are item 10 which is general public comment continued so joshua, jeff and richard. >> thanks for waiting. >> no problem mr. chair. sorry for being premature in the agenda. i am executive director of bright line defense project.

we're a nonprofit community advocacy organization worked on policies to promote sustainable communities and one of the things that we do is target job opportunities through programs like the city's hiring program which park and rec is a successful partner in and promote wages and conditions that support and sustain working families and community work force. i have a letter that has the concern i want to kind of raise to the commission. i do want to thank the general manager handed me some information i think is going to be important for us to disseminate and we heard there are more and more concerns about the apprenticeship program with laborer which is successful. we have heard a lot of things and maybe not come to the commission's attention yet and the general manager gave me information and thank you for that and i look forward to learning more about the issue,

but we have an issue we hope is not a trend and treasure island develop authority and taking everything that you do with the apprenticeship program and wages and targeting the work force and when you issue private contracts for the same work. in this case landscaping and treetopping and all the maintenance of the public spaces and at treasure island we saw the great things for workers disappear. it hurts the community and hurts standards. this maybe going for the private contracts for the same services. again not to jump to conclusions and it's such a mesh there we needed to have public hearings and protests. it took a lot of time to get information from the staff and without jumping to conclusions what is happening with the contracts? are they

providing the right wages? . are your private contractors driving a race to the bottom for workers? at treasure island we found landscape workers paid less than minimum wage if you can believe that and in all cases across the board. not the benefits that you worked so hard to create with organized labor, the benefits community that is near and dear to our heart and outline of the issue. general manager gins bers is ready to step up to get the data. we need four years of certified one payroll and one of the companies and not to jump to conclusions and with staff and i didn't get the information but with the commission's help we are looking for all of this information and let's answer

the questions and we will report back to what is going on. thanks. >> thank you. >> jeff and then richard. >> good morning president buell, commissioners. i am jeff rocker and a nailtive san franciscan and five generations long and live on the west side of the town. i are here to talk about issues that are near and dear to my heart. we started a nonprofit in san francisco and help kids k-12 and small donations and work with infrastructure working with the kids. did a lot of coaching and not so much baseball but soccer but we are fully vested in our kids having access to

athletics. having the process open and fair to them and we run across something in youth baseball we're not happy with. a coach who have been for years coaching two teams in youth baseball has been removed from coaching with really no public input. you can what did he do? did he pick up a trash can and throw it at a umpire? no. did he push kids? no. he was talking about an after season tiewrnment and emails and the commissioners vote that's it. it's final. this gentleman cant coach. we have 60 parents fit to be tied. he coaches 30 of these kids. he came from the wrong side of the trucks. these kids respect him and he is very, very just -- i mean the kids are just crest

fallen and i am asking this commission to shoin a little daylight on what is it with rec and parks youth baseball? we got an email to show you. his decision is final. there is no one to appeal to. this is not what we want to teach the kids. if there is a legitimate reason that's fine. if we could have a discussion about it let's do it and show the kids this is the mistake he made. now if we're just going to treat them as disposable when they don't meet our needs and whims. i worked for rec and park and after school funds and under gm burns and robinson and i was told as an employee we're there to serve the public. our petty disagreements with somebody

doesn't quiz qualify them from participating in this. >> >> and it's like me getting an argument and you can't come to my park. sometimes we can disagree and have intelligent conversations. we don't have to take it out on the kids. give me 10 more seconds. i came here to head off. we talked at supervisor chu's office and come here and go in peace and try to make something happen here. that's what i am here for. i would love to entertain a discussion with the commissioners to come to a resolution to this problem. put the kids first. >> thank you. >> richard fong. >> i don't want to get in the way of all of you and your appetite getting close to the dinner hour, but i just wanted

to make more comments about animal control welfare. they're dealing with the issue of licensing, dog walkers, and when there was bob palaceo as commissioner and [inaudible] was here, the acting superintendent, a big fellow quite a while ago before he went south to bel air. what happens there was a discussion on whether or not such and such dog walkers would use the park facilities. the issue i want to bring it has to do with insurance, whether or not they have insurance. there was something about the grandfather clause. that wasn't voted on when it was before them but for myself i would think people with responsibility if

there is an accident that comes up a mauling or a dog fight there is insurance. it wasn't when they issue the permits and try to apply the grandfather clause so when it comes up again i will be present and i hope i would have the support of the commissioners. thank you sir. >> thank you. >> is there anyone else that would like to make general public comment on item 10? seeing none this item is closed. we are now on item 11 which is closed session. conference with legal counsel. anyone that would like to make public comment on item 11? public comment is closed. commissioners, we do need to vote whether to hold closed session so i need a motion and

a second. >> moved. >> second. >> it's been moved and seconded. so moved. >> okay. we now ask members of the public and staff to leave so we can go into closed session. (executive session).