trees is also very important. >> thank you. >> is there anyone else that would like to make public comment on this item? seeing none public comment is closed. >> commissioner arata. >> i had the pleasure of going and touring youngblood coleman ecialier this month. it's such a beautiful park. i don't know if you have been there but beautiful jew be. >> >> >> >> views and i know the courts are needed and i know we talked about painting and i don't know if this is part of it but i was promised it would be so hopefully we can paint the bleachers and the courts and like they said if it's done by august with the backpacks give away and i don't know if that is possible but i wanted to put that request in. also i wanted

to talk about the structures and there is the big kid swings and the slides and i would like to see younger kid play structures for the moms and with younger kids and i think that is much needed in the park. >> thank you. commissioner levitan. >> and i want to say why it's my pleasure to advocate for the grattan park tennis courts. i believe when we talk about rehabilitation about these areas and we have to keep all ages in interest and when we talk about soccer fields and that's great but let's not forget about our courts and play surfaces and it's a high dense congested beautiful part of the city but if you have been there any day of the week or anytime it's packed, so i think this is a great use of our funds and i look forward to seeing this finished. >> thank you. commissioner low.

>> it's march madness and i love basketball and in fact probably about 10 minutes ago by beloved cal bears tipped off and i wanted to say go bears and if they don't win my brackets are screwed. anyway i had the pleasure of visiting herz play ground and i always believe you should be able to run games free of violence, and i had the pleasure and phil took me out to herz play ground. they showed me where the project is going to be and i heard horrific stories of kids trying to play basketball and i think this will go a long way to improve that community's recreational opportunities and i am pleased to sponsor redoing building a safe place for kids to play hoops and i took it for granted

when i was a kid and i am glad to be part of this project. i wanted to note this came before the capital committee and we approved for recommendation for approval. >> thank you commissioner. seeing no other comments do we have a motion. >> so moved. >> second. >> moved and seconded. all those in favor? >> aye. >> unanimous. thank you. >> we are now -- as a reminder item eight is off calendar so we are item nine. the soma west skatepark and dog park. >> good morning commissioners nick [inaudible] director for the parks department. the item before you is an important step towards creating the new soma

west skatepark and dog parks. as you know we have four skate parks in our system. they're popular. if you had the opportunity to visit the new baboa skate park or at waler street and attest for yourself just how incredibly popular the sport has become and how important it is for us to fill that need so we're exciting to bringing forward this item and another skate park and fills the ever growing need to accommodate dog users in the city. the new or the proposed skate park and dog park would be built underneath the central free way at mission street and stevenson streets. this project came out of a very long community process really ging after the 89 earthquake. there was a significant dialogue whether the central freeway should remain

or torn down. eventually it was decided to market street there would be elevator freeway and beyond octavia and the citizen's community identified projects to be completed to mitigate the impact the freeway run through their community and both the skate and dog park were included as part of the cac's report to what would be beneficial uses. the city since that time have worked diligently to bring us to where we are today. in 2007 the department of public works began a capital planning process that included over a dozen meetings and workshops with various stakeholders regarding this project. there have been

countless interdepartmental meetings to coordinate between the office of economic work force development, the city's real estate division and dpw on this project and we have also -- they have also almost finished negotiating lease with caltrans for the lease of the space. as the park parcels are underneath the central freeway the city doesn't own them but we will enter into a 20 year lease for those parcels. the items before you are two fold. there is mou which i will address first and amendment to the park code. the mou is an interdepartmental mou between rpd, the real estate division

and dpw and outlining each agency's responsibility in the creation and management of the dog and skate park as well as adjacent parking lot that will be on the site but adjacent to the park and managed by the real estate division. rpd's responsibilities under the mou are essentially to maintain and operate the skate and dog parks for the 20 year lease term. there is an identified funding source for the majority of those costs. we estimate maintenance cost at $85,000 a year. we identified 66,000-dollar a year in funding so there is a little gab there, but our department feels given the importance of both of these amenities in our park system we feel comfortable in recommending that we move

forward despite small spending -- small expenditure short fall. dpw has been responsible for designing and will be responsible for building the park. design drawings are almost complete. you should have in your packet a copy of those drawings. hopefully to have it completed by the end of the year and real estate will be responsible for actually having the lease with caltrans and working with them to ensure that the city meets all of its responsibilities under that lease. before i move on to park code amendment i did want to speak about an issue that came up at the operations committee. some community members had

questions about security, not just for the two park parcels but also the adjacent parking lot parcel which is managed by the real estate division, but we'll be a parking lot for human agency vehicles. dpw has worked to ensure that parking lot is a secure facility. it will be a fenced and locked facility. only open and accessible to city vehicles, so for the most part utilized during city working hours. additionally the real estate division has a security team located at some of their mission properties which are about two ploks away and they're adding this to their routine route of spots to check in on to ensure there is no security problem there and doesn't

become a homeless encampment or another attractive nuisance and obviously we additionally have been working with the police department to make sure they're aware of these issues and they will be doing enforcement and checking in on these sites as well and real estate informed it's a similar plan they implemented at other parking lots in the area used by city vehicles and they are happy to report they're been successful in stemming the homeless tide and other things in the parking lot and while that responsibility ultimately falls to real estate and the parcel is managed by them i wanted to address the questions that were brought up at the operations committee, so the other item that you have before you is an amendment to the park code, and

moving forward on this mou it became clear were we to be responsible for maintaining a lease property not under our jurisdiction we couldn't enforce the code. our rangers couldn't go out to the site and cite violators of the park code, so we have brought forward an amendment to the park code that would allow the department to enforce the park code so that we can take advantage of the provisions that are relevant to the city parks. that amendment has been introduced by supervisor kim at the board of supervisors and we are hopeful they will approve it in the next month or so so with that background i would like to talk about a proposed amendment to the mou that you should all have

before you. at operations committee there was some questions about the certainty of the funding for the maintenance, the 20 year maintenance program. i think we're very happy to report with the mayor's office and dpw we reached a compromise that will have them pre-fund all of the maintenance into an account that is delicated solely for this purpose, so upon the completion of a project the department would receive $1.6 million and that is that $66,000 in maintenance funding for the next 20 years with certain escalators. we would receive that money up front. it's a dedicated account we would draw down over the next 20 years so we can make sure moving forward the funding is there. we have

-- we are still working with the controller on the exact -- with the controller and the mayor's office on the exact language of how that account would be structured, so we have asked for the commission to delegate the authority to the general manager to implement this amendment. i took the intention to ensure that our funding is certain moving forward for the next 20 years so with that i make myself available to questions that the commission has. >> let's go to public comment and we will see if the commission has questions. >> okay. i have one card. richard fong. >> good morning commissioners and good day to you mark. i was kind of looking this over and everything structural, even the

plapting of the trees and through dpw but there was one big flaw i was looking at. i have been through the various committees that the park has and the commission and the animals, the dogs there is a problem that comes up always. there is going to be athletic activity and dog play area so there is nice separation in the drawings which is good. the part i was bringing in whether fecal management, animal droppings. every time somewhere a dog is going to be running on the wrong side and a fecal mess or somebody throwing a bag away whether or not they pick up the fecal mess or not and i was for a long time trying to bring in

a platform idea and if you traveled in the orient and the dogs can learn to squat down and go in the hole and some unit with a septic tank underneath or something that would directly flush. i notice in the plans they're going to completely tear out the sewer but what are they able to put in in the same interest of people using restrooms and the facility and something that dogs can use? and that is one part. the other part whenever you have people throwing away dog droppings it gets all over. people have it in their cans. people toss it in there. some way it has to be better managed so the fecal

matter doesn't get all over and if you had a flushing and septic tank and better containers and facilitate people getting along there and the athletes and the skate boarders and the dogs don't always have a happy medium but i wish the project well. it's going to be successful but it's kind of small. if we can do this and disposing of fecal matters i appreciate it. thank you. >> thank you. >> is there anyone else that would like to comment on this item? seeing none public comment is closed. >> commissioner levitan. >> so just to re-cap. we had moved this to the full commission from the operation committee without recommendation because there were some issues that needed to be flushed out and sounds like the department has done that with them and that sounds good. i want to say i appreciate you have done

outreach regarding the security and there was a speaker that expressed about activities going on there so i want to be clear what we're voting on today. it's a two part resolution. one has to do with the mou with dpw to construct this and the second with the item before the board of supervisors related to enforcement of park code. the park code in that dpw property, but you mentioned something about the funding mechanism and i want to know if we need to amend what is before us? >> yes. you have a proposed amendment before you that would allow to finalize the changes to the funding mechanism. we ask that you move the mou as amended. >> okay, as amended. >> and the park code in the package. >> okay. so the resolution before us is as you want it to

be moved forward. no amending? >> yes. >> commissioner low. >> i got that. >> we're running net 19,000 a year and katie is going to financially engineer this and flank the 19,000 to cover. >> it's prefunded. >> 66,000 ; right. q. yeah. >> the policy decision was made that this would be available funding sources that this was a cost that the department felt it could incur in order to move forward with building these new park amenities that we believe are important to san francisco park users. i should mention -- i fail to mention in my presentation there are significant cost for leasing the parcels that we are not incurring. real estate is paying approximately i believe 10 to $12,000 a month to lease the dog park parcel and they

will be making an up front payment -- strike that. it's $12,000 for the skate park parcel and the dog park parcel up front payment of $2 million to essentially pay off that lease in advance. those are payments that will not be made by the recreation and parks department but rather real estate from other sources of funds and in light of the significant expenditure by real estate and then also the expenditures by dpw in creating and building the skate park a policy decision was made that we could incur a relatively small cost in the global picture of the -- in the total cost of building, designing and operating the skate park but 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