rose for the work of your office to help us achieve even more cost savings. it is important that we are able to make these changes with the way our deficit is running. my question is related to the census and the inmate population of the jails. how is that? i know a lot of inmates were released after the problem with the crime lab. "since that time, is that remaining stable? is that fluctuating up or down? >> the census is starting to come up somewhat. we are still at a 24% decrease from prior year. we are at 1685 today and we normally would run about 1800. it is starting to creep up. the sheriff anticipates we will be near 1800 by the end of the

calendar year. chairperson avalos: colleagues, any other comments or questions? if we could open this up for public comment? it is for item six. we will close public comment. supervisor mirkarimi: motion to approve, as amended. chairperson avalos: we will accept the budget analyst's recommendations without objection. to the full board with recommendation. madam clerk, if you could please call 7 through 9. >> item 7, resolution adopting findings under the california environmental quality act guidelines and sentences go administrative code chapter 31, including the adoption of a mitigation monitoring program, related to the funding of the cesar chaviez source system

improvement, directing the clerk of the board of supervisors to notify the controller, and authorizing the public utilities commission to expand a grant in the amount of $477,900 from the u.s. environmental protection agency. chairperson avalos: that was separate from the other items? >> yes. chairperson avalos: great. a representative from puc? >> my name is betsy tan. this resolution adopts ceqa findings. we came to you in 2006 asking approval to accept the grant. at that time, you did approve of

us to do that. that was with the exception of having us come back after we completed the environmental review. we are here today because we have completed the ceqa approval for the project and are back to ask for your approval to extend this grant. we are excited to move forward with this project which would minimize future flooding in the caesar chavis -- caesesar chave area. >> this resolution would simply approve an expenditure you authorized of $477,900 in grant funds from the u.s. epa. those funds would reimburse the puc for a similar amount from waste water revenue bond fund money, which the board of

supervisors previously appropriated. we recommend you approve this resolution. chairperson avalos: thanks, mr. rose. public comment on item 7? no public comment. motion from supervisor mirkarimi for approval. that will go to the full board with the recommendation. if it could call items 8 through 10. >> item 8, resolution authorizing the san francisco fire department to enter a 10 year agreement with the presidio trust to provide fire and emergency services to portions of the presidio under the trust 's jurisdiction, with the trust reimbursing the fire department for those services under the agreement. item nine, resolution authorizing the fire department to enter a 10 year agreement

with the national park service to provide fire and emergency medical services to national park service areas within san francisco, with the park service reimbursing the fire department for those services, and to accept funds provided by the national park service as reimbursement for services. i contend, resolution approving the hiring of permanent career civilian federal firefighters displaced by the closure of the national park service fire station in the presidio, pursuant to the authority granted by california government code section 53280. >> happy birthday, supervisor mirkarimi. the three items you have before you today constitute approximately an 18 month process. i know supervisors elsbernd

and alioto-pier have been very concerned. this will be a value added for anyone who lives or works in the presidio. we have with us mr. jeff dice and mr. mike savage to talk about their support for these resolutions as they move forward to this body and the full board next week. i would also like to acknowledge recently retired deputy chiefs of the administration, so passionate he is here today to help present the item and answer any questions you might have. we are asking today for you to support and approve the contract and the accept and expend grant for the presidio trust and the national park service. the third one, which we can get into greater detail, is the fire

department working with civil service is proud to bring over some of the federal firefighters. 12 will be h2 firefighters. three will be paramedics. basically, we will be able to provide fire and medical services in to the presidio. the contract will begin october 1 this year and run through september 30, 2020. i would like to ask the retired chief deputy to provide more detail for you. chairperson avalos: thank you. can we still call you deputy chief? welcome. >> thank you for the opportunity to speak on behalf of this. i want to give you a little bit of history. the project started 18 months ago. the presidio fire department and national park service had an engine and a truck inside as well as administrative staff in

their area. that started in 1994 when we took it over from the military base. over the years, they had some issues with staffing. the deactivated the truck company along the line. that said, the late credit milton and the late dennis o'neil contacted the san francisco park department to address how we could help them. over the last 18 months, we have gone from providing an ambulance to all the services of the department. this contract is an all risk service. we provide all-gold rescue, all ambulance service, and all fire service. the initial term of the contract is from october 1, 2010 through

september 30, 2020. with that contract -- that is a 10 year contract with 35-year extensions. they want to proceed. -- with three five-year extensions. they want to proceed. this runs through december 30, 2011. that is for 4.3 to $5 million. -- $2.32$4.325 million. that schedule will be adjusted each year which allows you to recoup any costs to the fire department. if we notice that there is an overage for one year, there is a

maximum amount of payment from the national park service as well as presidio trust. that money is not lost. that is carried to the four years and can be picked up as review the contract. we not only came up with these estimated numbers -- we look at the cpi. it is around 3.3% to 3.5%. we feel comfortable with the cap we have. it meets the needs of the federal government and the city and county of san francisco. for implementation, it was approved by the fire commission. we would go to the full board for approval on august 10 and would like to be able to make final job offers to the fire

personnel on august 25 and start the academy on august 30 and have them on the streets sometime in october. we recommend that you approve this today. i would be happy to answer any questions you might have. chairperson avalos: thank you become a deputy chief. thank you for your work. -- thank you, deputy chief. think you for your work. i know there were years spent developing this relationship. thank you for your effort and work on that. i know you wanted to be here to see if all your efforts come to fruition. it is important to note that. mr. rose, share with us your report, please. >> let me start by stating that

makes to you, which i consider to be a policy matter, is that it is possible that because that would be incurred by the fire department would exceed the fees that are going to be reimbursed by these two agencies. we consider this to be a policy

matter for the board. there would be no incremental increase whatsoever. the reason why we say this is a policy matter is because as you know by hiring these 15 firefighters it would be outside the normal civil service rules and regulations. for that reason, we said it is a policy matter. we will respond to any questions. supervisor mirkarimi: i have a question for the controller, if i can aim toward mr. rosenfield. i am extremely supportive of this. i do not see why the city and county would not support the subsuming of the presidio. it is a smart move and it seems clean with very little downside. as the relationship goes with the controller, you and i have talked about this in recent years. is this a presidio exempt from paying certain taxes? >> ben rosenfield, controller. that is correct. specifically, the buck act prohibits the city from assessing a payroll tax for businesses located within the presidio. we do collect taxes from different activities that occur in the presidio based on the but act and other federal legislation. specifically, given our current business tax structure, we do not assess business taxes.

supervisor mirkarimi: i am trying to understand for future focus that there may be a demand for more services warranted. it raises a question about us being able to help support the demand for those services, yet there is someone of an uneven -- somewhat of an uneven relationship with revenue being generated. a hope in the future we return to the idea of being able to cultivate a more even relationship by those businesses that exist in the presidio. i do not know if that is entertained in this discussion or not, or really has a relevant relationship. the presidio is probably one of the most crime areas of real estate and area where people would like to be established. i can see huge demand exceeding

current capacity with the fire department out there. >> it is a question for the department. i think as the intensity of use in the presidio increases in future years, the contract before you will need to accommodate the fire department's response to a growing residential and commercial mix there. supervisor mirkarimi: i am confident the third apartment will constantly be able to move forward with current staff, but i think we expect the presidium to grow in certain numbers. that might tax the capacity. it would be nice if we were able to even out the revenue generation as we would expect citywide. this is really the last straw for you, deputy chief. i am glad you are here. >> i hope it is not the last hurrah. [laughter]

supervisor mirkarimi: in this chapter. >> to get back to the question you asked, that was all in our consideration when we developed the contract. we know we are not going to be getting any revenue or tax revenue base from the properties out there or businesses out there. in the contract, that is why it is estimated to a newly increase each year, with an accumulated annual rates increase. we will try to serve it today and still go the development route. we feel comfortable with that. when we started developing negotiations, that was taken into consideration. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. good move. chairperson avalos: deputy chief, if you could discuss what is the difference between the

presidio trust, in terms of the maximum annual agreement fee, and verses -- reverses -- versus the national park service. another is a different function these entities have. -- i know there is a different function these entities have. >> we were hoping we would be able to negotiate one contract, circumstances providing, since we are providing the same service to both agencies. but since they are separate federal agencies they have separate requirements. we negotiate overall the fee of $4.30 million. they came back to us and told us what their payments were going to be. that distribution was decided from their standpoint, the federal government. it was not decided on hours. we just figured out the fixed price combined, and move forward

from there. to tell you what one pays 70% or whatever it might be, that would be a question for the national park service or presidio trust. chairperson avalos: but the total combined fees on an annual basis is what you were trying to achieve and was provided by the federal government. >> that is correct. chairperson avalos: thank you. we can open this item for public comment. any members of the public that would like to comment on these three items, 8 to 10, please come forward. >> my name is jeff dice. i am the chief operating officer at the presidio trust. we look forward to the day when the san francisco fire department can provide service to us in the presidio. the last 18 months we have dealt with the sentences of our department. we have developed a strong

relationship and look forward to continuing that. -- we have dealt with the san francisco fire department. chairperson avalos: great to hear it. thank you for your comments. >> my name is mike savage. i am the representative from the national park service. to get to your point about the allocation, the majority of structures on the presidio are under the jurisdiction of the presidio trust, about 5.5 million square feet of space. that is the major structural fire protection responsibility. san francisco fire has traditionally provided responses to national park service plans in the rest of san francisco. we welcome being a part of the san francisco fire department family. we look forward to working with the staff. i have met many of them to discuss the details. i am confident in being able to

work collaboratively with them, moving forward. we appreciate and embrace the opportunity. chairperson avalos: if follow up question. you said the fire department has jurisdiction over other aspects of the golden gate national recreation area? >> historically, the san francisco fire area has provided response for areas like ocean beach. they help us out down there. that would continue. the presidio is the one station that is being looked at right now, because we are having to eliminate that station. san francisco fire will come in and operate out of that station. chairperson avalos: no other work is changing, in terms of the relationship with the fire department? >> correct. the presidio is the big change. chairperson avalos: any other member of the public would like to comment on these items, please come forward. if not, will close public

comment. supervisor mirkarimi: motion to approve with recommendation. supervisor elsbernd: there is an amendment for item 10. if we could adopt that item. and then send the items forward with recommendations as amended. chairperson avalos: we will take that without objection and move all forward with recommendations. madam clerk, please call item 11. >> item 11, resolution approving a loan agreement between the city and county of san francisco through the municipal transportation agency and the metropolitan transportation commission for $22 million of congestion mitigation and air quality improvement funding to be repaid by the san francisco municipal transportation agency over a five-year period with parking-related revenues. supervisor mirkarimi: i brought this forward. this funding for the sfpark

pilot program would offer updated parking structures and real-time information where parking is available. this will make san francisco and national leader in adopting the next generation parking technology that is more efficient. the sf mta is moving aggressively to become a world leader in parking management to help achieve the overall goals for transportation, specifically for improving customer service as well as reducing congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. the metropolitan transportation commission has offered to loan $22 million of additional federal funding. the funds would be used to purchase equipment that would require approximately $3.50 million to operate in maintained

and would generate approximately $10.10 million in revenue, for a projected net increase of approximately $6.60 million a year. it would extend parking management in san francisco from 25,000 meters spaces to 16,000 232,000 meters spaces, replace parking meters with a new parking meters, and add parking sensors in the pilot areas, including leaders of motorcycles bases. another incentive is to expand the bike parking in part areas to help reduce parking demand. it would update the warehouse transactional system to accommodate additional major spaces and signing at all garages to reflect park branding, improved customer services, and small-scale pilot projects to encourage car sharing. it is our investment to better the parking management in a way

that would better addressed a renewed structural deficit. chairperson avalos: there is no one from mta to present? >> i am happy to answer any questions you might have. chairperson avalos: let us hear from mr. rose on the report. >> the only thing i would add is that under this five-year agreement the payments to the mtc would be made on an annual basis, the repayment of the $22 million loan. there would be required to pay interest on the loan balance in the final three years. there would be no interest in the first two years. there would be interested in the last years. on page 4 of our report, as shown in the table, the estimate is that sfmta estimates a net

revenue increase of $6.70 million over the first five years of their operating fund, if you implement this proposed san francisco park program. that would be net of the repayments to the mtc, including the interest payments. we recommend you approve this resolution. chairperson avalos: thank you, mr. rose. in your report, you estimate of additional 6 pi $5 million annual net revenue -- $6.50 million annual net revenue. how confident are you we will achieve that level of revenue? >> we did not do a detailed review of that estimate. it looks reasonable to us and we reported it to you as represented by the department. but i cannot say with certainty

that that will be achieved. chairperson avalos: for the department, how did you come up with that figure in terms of revenue? are you working to assure that is what you are able to achieve with your pilot program? >> american samoa revenue estimates were meant to be very conservative. -- those revenue estimates were meant to be very conservative. it makes it easy to pay even with credit cards. it takes into account the projected decrease in parking meter related cetacean revenue, making it easier to pay and having longer time limits. people will pay more at the meter but likely get your parking tickets. the net result is a small net increase in overall parking meter related revenue. chairperson avalos: a follow-up question. generally, we are major failings. the revenue that comes from that

location or generally across the city -- more from the citations or from the coins or cards that get deposited in those meters? >> very roughly, the citywide average is approximately $1,600 per meter per year in corn and card revenue and approximately $500 a year in citation related revenue. supervisor mirkarimi: per major? >> per meter. chairperson avalos: $500 a year? >> that is correct. supervisor elsbernd: the estimated revenue -- does it assume the extension of parking meter hours or sunday parking meters? >> it does not. supervisor elsbernd: it does not, ok. chairperson avalos: i am kind of surprised to hear that $500 per meter is what the average is, knowing that i have been dinged

at major's quite frequently -- at meters quite frequently. supervisor mirkarimi: i think we owned a couple of meters. [laughter] >> that is a turbo ratio. the purpose to increase meter revenue of giving fewer tickets. we really want people to pay at the meter and reduce the number of tickets we give overall. we do not make that much more money as a result, but our driving customers should be a lot happier. it also reduces our administrative burden of processing and dealing with protests related to that number. that is another area where we can reduce our costs. chairperson avalos: do you feel you will be lowering the cost for citations, or the number of citations? you still have a lot of vagueness -- uncertainty, perhaps -- about what the actual ve