when i attended the utilities the san francisco put stoolies commissionpublic u. what are these bonds being issued? the san francisco public utilities commission has an a plus rating. it should be stated to us what our readiness and. these other things we want to ando.

we have had some adverse impacts on our roads and utilities all over the city. if you go on the internet, but you don't get an analysis. then. >> thank you. >> public comment is closed. for me, it is not bad deal in terms of content and added debt to fix our streets. i know that there is risks as well as doing this work that could be even more costly and i know that we have had huge constraints on our budget.

this is helping us to do the work of the street surfacing and the street prepared. we are working towards improving our budget for the next fiscal year and all of these are heading towards a collision course. london been supportive of this measure today. >> -- i have been supportive of this measure today. >> i didn't attend and weapons. as an execution and delivery of taxable or tax-exempt certificates of persons a patient in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed

the national and dulles. item number0 lebanon, ore. support planning the 88 common knowledge to fund held sf development project. item and a triumph, -- >> we wouldn't repeal of the program. -- we will get an overview.

we are thrilled to be before you today. this is a real milestone in the program. the items before you are recording financing actions. this is a significant point in the program. thank you. >> this can develop approximately three years ago in a task force that was convened. the attempt is to take 8 current housing developments and operate this by the housing authority. the initiatives on balance will

rebuild all 2500 public-housing units on the distress site. also market rate housing. the program is a public-private partnership. we working very close partnership with the housing authority and the redevelopment agency as well as services funding from a broader array of partners and city agencies. the team has partnered with five private development teams and the developers for hunters point is represented here today.

we are working on a broad based fund raising campaign and to help with some of the non real estate actions. the opportunity presented to is the underutilization of the existing public housing sites. i'd just came back from chicago and had the opportunity to review how much of the public housing on their -- public housing there we have low rise

and poorly designed buildings in the first place on sites that really can accommodate much more vital use. this is generated are available in the unrealized portions of the side and so financing to replace the public housing unit. this is to create a housing ladder but also an array of opportunities and the additional affordable housing.

this of be at a slightly higher level. these are the 8 public housing sites, six of which are currently actively in development or pre development. these are the five sites across the city that are actively in development. these of the principles that can about from the task force. this is our moral direction is. i will not walk through all of them.

there is some question as to both the condition and as to whether this forward as a full stare down -- tear down. there is not the option 82 recapitalize or improve conditions. this is a combination of people, housing, community. this is about a lot more as we touched on than just the new shrieks, etc.. this is it is a tremendously

vital and complex initiative in the human capacity at the sites and buildings. we are putting some money in to support the social infrastructure. we have completed our third academy graduation at city hall last month which as been a very successful program. there is capacity building around the process of development.

the housing model provides a one-to-one replacement. also relocation and displacement and develops a range of housing. they will also build housing times that are indistinguishable from each other. the pie chart you see there represents the currently closed mix of housing. we aren't focusing city investment which is at the core of what we are doing. the board asked a resolution

committing $95 million which i believe is 20 years to the program. as importantly with the state of california and some federal sources. with $40 million that we have received in the states as well as $10 million for the redevelopment agency, this is

the leverage public funding. this is 6 financing from the department of financing and urban development. we have unsuccessfully done that a few times before. last year, we were close. while the state budget has not been necessarily rectified, the state dollars has. these are some of the existing conditions. you can see not only are the

conditions extremely poor but at their best. this site was poorly designed and for the housing residents. this is looking like a train wreck from above. here is an image of the proposed new plan. there is up to 800 units of mixed income housing. a real leader in terms of green building and the development program. this is a diagram of the

existing site and its connection with the surrounding community. phase one is moving forward with financing and this is moving forward now. lastly, a summary of the financing and which demonstrates the $75 million of development funds. this concludes my portion of the presentation.

we can talk more about the technicalities. we also have an except and extend for $30 million as the project proceeds. >> thank you. >> we are asking for parsley 38 million -- for $38 million to fund phase one and two. we cannot expect to issue this in 2012. as articulated earlier, need to have and commitment for the abilities commitment to this fund.

we have been working with the mayor's office of housing. they need approximately $1.9 million by the end of the year. this transaction is similar to the previous transactions in this scenario, we are leasing two aspects. we of also included certain other city came to -- city property. of the aggregate of the key is not sufficient to support the debt. and we expect to have approval

of the statement following the issuance and that point we will support an additional property. we have a reserve fund. these are all estimates. some might need to fund a reserve fund. this is a conservative estimate that allows you to support the program. with that, i would be happy to answer any questions. >> tables one and two on pages five and seven of our report show the funding sources and

uses. the total estimate a cost is $258 million. regarding the debt service based on an annual interest rate of 8%. total debt service of $82.1 million including interest payments of $46.9 million and the principle of about $35.1 million. on page 9 of our report, the real estate division had not finalized the estimated to value of the two police stations which would serve as collateral. not all of the funding has been secured specifically, there is a

question on a $20 million fund which has not yet been rewarded. for those reasons, we have considered approval to be a policy matter. the other items we consider to be a policy matter for the board. >> thank you very much, mr. rose. >> i should have added that we are assuming this should be taxable debt. in working with our lawyers, this might be tax exempt.

>> thank you very much. item number 11 is a confirmation. this is a program $38 million. let's open this up for public comment. >> i have been given just two minutes and i'm the only speaker. we have been following these for a long time. let's focus on what is there to be stated and not make statements that the housing which was built by the

department of defense, if we go to the jon stewart co., there are days when somebody got fired from fannie mae and they made a lot of money and someone is not respected. what he supervisors should do it is that you did not want property managers to be involved in huge development where they get millions of dollars from the state. they had a lot of money and john stuart employs over 1000 employees. what we need in the bay view is for local people to build those houses.

this would have been the opportune time for -- to come and speak on behalf of the constituents. this is an area where over 50% are unemployed. people i've been promised this, that, and the other. nothing is happening. we need you to put this back up. is there any other member of the public that would like to comment? a motion to move forward with recommendation in that passes

without objection. that is our agenda, is that correct? >> we are adjourned.

>> the board of education meeting is called to order. roll call, please. >> ms. fewer, ms. maufas, ms. mendoza. commissioner maufas: here. >> ms. kim. coip present. -- president kim: present. president kim: please join us for the pledge of allegiance.

president kim: first on the agenda, approval of board minutes from the regular meeting of september 28, 2010. we have a motion and a second. >> i move. >> second. president kim: are there any corrections? seeing none, roll call, please. >> ms. fewer. ms. maufas. ms. mendoza. vice president mendoza: yes. >> ms. norton. commissioner norton: yes. >> mr. yee. >> yes. >> ms. kim. president kim: yes. >> your ayes. >> while 100 days late, the state finally passed a budget this provides more resources for public education reflected in the governor's proposed main budget. however, i have to note that overall the state budget is based on optimistic assumptions

for federal assistance and other revenues. if these do not come through, we could all face the all foo familiar prospect of cuts again. in the big picture, this budget still leaves california nearly last in the nation in education funding and getting only 82 cents on the dollar of what we're supposed to be guaranteed. our financial and budget team members will be heading up to sacramento this week to hear the fine print as they try to decipher this budget for k-12 education and will make recommendations to me over the next few weeks in terms of how that will look and we'll bring it forward in the budget committees and the board. our approach is to continue to operate within the budget we set up in june. we went through the $113 million cuts and set out a vision of a two-year budget. i want to remind the board and public that when we adopt the current budget year, we we