it is the opposite, isn't it? >> yes, i am sorry, your absolutely correct. they do file with them, others do not. supervisor alioto-pier: i do not understand why. people go to the ethics department to find out all sorts of things -- i do not understand why we would not just keep them there. >> that is section b1, those are people that need to list for 700 and two other f.x. forms. the sunshine ordinance declaration and to give it up training declaration. all those people must file all three separate things with the commission. department heads of those state entities only need to file form 700, which is why they are broken out in different sections. i'm sorry, they are listed on page 7 between lines 10 -- supervisor alioto-pier: i see

it. >> i apologize. looks like we are deleting things, but we are moving them around. hopefully, next time it will be more clear. supervisor alioto-pier: thank you. >> and i do realize it is a quite lengthy document. we do have many agencies, here in san francisco. supervisor campos: great, thank you. why don't we open it up to public comment. we have the director of the arts commission. >> thank you, supervisors for letting me speak on this item. i am here specifically to speak on behalf of the change to section 3.1-140 which addresses the arts commission. one of my responsibilities as a

public servant is to bring information to this body of unintended consequences, sometimes of action, and i'm sure sometimes this body did not intend to disenfranchise a segment of the citizenry from participating in shaping the culture of public policy of the city. yet, that is in effect, what happened last year as a consequence of moving the arts commissioners from a category 2 and in the disclosure category to a category 1. with that change, individuals of significant net worth were required to reveal all of their assets, not just assets that might deal with any possible conflict of interest directly related to their participation in the arts commission. at that level of higher reporting, these individuals of significant net worth felt that

these individuals could not to dissipate on the arts commission and immediately resigned. we lost three individuals from our commission when this change took place. i just want to say, this city really values its principles of access and equity. i am sure this body would never intend to pass any law or regulation that would create a barrier to participation of any citizenry. you would never consider, for instance, that if you wanted to be an arts commissioner, that you have to pay a significant feat. that would be a barrier for entry for parts of the population. yet, this change for the increased reporting, we have created a barrier for participation for individuals in the city. supervisor campos: thank you. any other member of the public that would like to speak? let me say, to that point, i

appreciate and understand where the commissioner is coming from, but i will respectfully and vehemently disagree with that. i think there is no barrier to participation created here. if these individuals want to participate, all i have to do is provide the information and comply with rules. to me, that is good government. the more transparency we have, the better it is. i think good government requires a level of transparency, and i think that is what this is about. i respect and understand the perspective. supervisor alioto-pier? supervisor alioto-pier: i will take the opposite view and completely agree, that the requirements that have been opposed -- imposed on arts

commissioners are essentially a barrier to participation. i would like to look at some of the changes made on what we have in front of us today and i would like to ask for a continuance. i will not be voting on this item today -- not a week-vote -- just to the call of the chair. supervisor campos: is there a timeline by which we have to act on this? >> under state law guidance, every local agency is supposed to endeavor to complete this project by the end the first one would be the first week of december, of course. it could be done as a committee report. supervisor campos: why don't we do that in an effort to address the concerns that have been raised? thank you. is there any other member of the

public who would like to speak? public comment is closed. actually, we have a motion to continue. can we do that to the call of the chair? we will put it on the next available. we can do that without objection. is there any other business? >> no. >> great. the meeting is adjourned. thank you to supervisor alioto- pier and to anyone who is watching.

supervisor avalos: good morning. welcome to a budget and finance committee. my name is john ablow. we are joined -- avalos. we are joined by ross mirkarimi and sean elsbernd. mr. kirk, please go ahead with the announcements. >> [clerk announcements] supervisor avalos: item #one

please. -- 1 please. >> item 1. resolution fixing prevailing wage rates for: (1) workers performing work under city contracts for public work and improvement; (2) workers performing work under city contracts for janitorial services; (3) workers performing work in public off-street parking lots, garages, or storage facilities for automobiles on property owned or leased by the city; (4) workers engaged in theatrical or technical services for shows on property owned by the city; (5) workers performing moving services under city contracts at facilities owned or leased by the city; and (6) workers engaged in the hauling of solid waste generated by the city in the course of city operations, pursuant to a contract with the city. supervisor avalos: thank you. representative from the department? >> good morning, supervisors. this is the annual setting of the prevailing wages for the

crafts of labour that will be done -- performed for the city. this is in accordance of charter section 80.7, and various administrative sections -- code sections. supervisor avalos: thank you. i recognize there are a number of contracts that were referred to which included prevailing wages. my main question is, the wages become different as those contracts changed here every year -- year after year. that is what we provide the prevailing wage as? >> we provide them as mou's, the kind of labor, as well as the labor determinations as given by the department of industrial regulations.

supervisor avalos: thank you. mr. rose, if you could share your report. >> the prevailing wage rates are set forward in our report. our recommendation is a policy matter for the board of supervisors. supervisor avalos: thank you for your presentation. we can go on to public comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. okay, without objection. to the full board with recommendations. mr. young, please call item no. 2. >> item 2. resolution approving the issuance of water revenue bonds and water revenue refunding bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $600,000,000 to be issued by the public utilities commission of the city and county of san francisco; affirming covenants contained in the indenture pursuant to which the water revenue bonds are issued; authorizing the taking of appropriate actions in

connection therewith; and related matters. supervisor avalos: thank you. we have various representatives from the puc. >> tottery strong, general manager, cfo. we are here as part of our quarterly bond sale. since we last visited you, we sold bonds in may for the sewer system, in may -- june for the water supply system, again in july for the water supply system. every time we come before you for the file and record as well as reviewed by the public utilities commission, is about 700 pages of bonding and funding documents. this is your high-level review in the brief, in addition to the documents that are on file with the clerk and commission. we have issued $2.2 billion worth of bonds over the past couple of years, specifically

for the water improvement system plan. that, along with sorbonne sales, and sales for the new headquarters building, we have sales of $400 million of estimated debt service costs for ratepayers for the next 30 years. we have done that because we have been fortunate beneficiaries of what has been record low borrowing rates in the u.s. economy for tax-exempt and build america bond financing. we come to you today because the american recovery and reinvestment act is scheduled to sunset the bill the american bonds. dependent upon how congress acts or does or does not renew the program, a window could potentially close for municipal issuers on december 31. we would like to be able to capture one more quarter's worth of savings in order to do that.

for today, it is a similar size to our other quarterly sales, up boards of $600 million for the water system improvement program. we have gone to the sfpuc commission and got approval last week. we come before you this week. the next week there is a resolution. we are continuing our plan of content -- competitive bond sales. bidders are allowed to bid on our bonds. if we sell a combination of tax- exempt and taxable bonds. they have to buy everything or nothing, so they have to put in their best and lowest bid from the outset. we do not do that on the electronic markets, so you can watch it in real-time bidding. the closing is slated for the middle of december. the hybrid structure includes tax exempt and build america bonds. we looked at the price of those

together to make sure the combination of those two bonds are the lowest cost to ratepayers to lock in the cheapest cost and cheapest financing we can. funding for the water improve the system program, they are long-term assets that are part of the program. we are looking at 40-year debt. to give you a flavor, we have been selling bonds recently, july and june, getting 3.7% total interest cost. that is 3.7% effectively over 30-year financing. this gives you a frame of reference for every percentage we are lower than the 5% model, which is a prudent planning model for a double a highly rated utility, such as the public utility commission, here in san francisco. for every% under 5, that is $23 million in savings for every

$100 million for road. that savings occurs over 30 years. as much as we can sell now at the lowest rate, the better for ratepayers. the financing overview also included in your report and summarized in the budget analyst report, financing authority is an under proposition e. this is consistent with your earlier ordinance reviewed in the past. the comptroller continues to keep any budgetary appropriations on controllers reserves until funding is actually in the treasury to spend. we will be capturing what we think might be the last bill the american bond that ms. paley's -- ms. allen is can claim through congress. -- municipalities can claim through congress. the documents were pretty lengthy, but in summary, about

$0.83 of each dollar goes to construction costs and work. again, we fund capital interests for three years on average. we are also required to fund in- cash debt reserves, and that is the case since 2008. our credit now is basically equal to or higher than most assuredly companies and bond insurers. when we offer bond buyers the potential to have the option to purchase insurance, they had not done that because of sfpuc's high credit rating. the forms of agreement are the usual ones. there are 10 of them primarily. the commission resolution, preliminary official statement. we would then make updates on that based on our financial statement.

the 10th, 11th, and potentially 12th indenture, every time we have to issue bonds. the official notice of sale, intent to sail, bond purchase agreements in the event that the markets turned south and then we have to renegotiate a sale. we do not anticipate that. company agreements. escrow agreements. that is the key highlights. with that, i am happy to answer any questions. i would like to thank the budget analyst for their report. >supervisor avalos: great. thank you. it is great to hear the work of the puc, especially on maintaining and achieving a high credit rating. it goes very far with so many projects, but with the others coming up as well. mr. rose, if you could share

with us your report. >> mr. chairman, members of the committee, i would point out on page five of the report the estimated debt service for this issuance is $1.3 billion, that includes the $600 million of subject principal and $720,000 -- $720 million of interest, average annual debt service over a 40-year period, $42.2 million. we recommend you approve this resolution. supervisor avalos: thank you. supervisor mirkarimi? supervisor mirkarimi: just to echo, a good job. supervisor avalos: let's go on to public comment. seeing none, public comment is closed. >> i believe there is an

amendment that needs to be posed? supervisor avalos: on our desk we have an amendment on the whole. >> on page 3 row 10, there was a clarification to make a number, the digit 6 instead of five. only wrote 10, page 3, change that digit to make it consistent. i think that is the only edit. i do see one additional edit provided by the city attorney's

office. it is again to provide consistency with our other financing documents. on page 6, provided on rows 6 through 8, proposition p requirements to cover said cost with oversight committees, nothing shall preclude the commission from paying the fees associated with oversight costs of the revenue bonds committee from any legally available funds other than the commission. this is consistent policy. we would plan to and would always plan to fully fund what is the least cost funding source for the oversight. but i should mention as well, every time we meet with the rating agencies as well as potential bond investors, they are very thrilled that the san francisco government has an independent comptroller's office that does their audits, and oversight committee that does their audits, the additional scrutiny of the budget analyst.

they consider that a credit strength as well for the public utility as we sell bonds. thank you. supervisor avalos: ok. supervisor mirkarimi: continue the motion as amended. supervisor avalos: as amended. a very good. >> this will be recommended to the full board next week. that completes our agenda. supervisor avalos: we are supervisor avalos: we are adjourned.

so are you going out tonight? i can't. my parents say i have to be home right after work. ugh. that's so gay. totally gay. ugh. that is so emma and julia. why are you saying, "that's so emma and julia"? well, you know, when something is dumb or stupid, you say, "that's so emma and julia." who says that? everyone. announcer: imagine if who you are were used as an insult. there are so many ways that the internet provides real access to real people and resources and that's what we're try to go accomplish. >> i was interested in technology like video production. it's interesting, you get to create your own work and it reflects what you feel about saying things so it gives

perspective on issues. >> we work really hard to develop very in depth content, but if they don't have a venue, they do not have a way to show us, then this work is only staying here inside and nobody knows the brilliance and the amazing work that the students are doing. >> the term has changed over time from a very basic who has a computer and who doesn't have a computer to now who has access to the internet, especially high speed internet, as well as the skills and the knowledge to use those tools effectively. . >> the city is charged with coming up with digital inclusion. the department of telecommunications put together a 15 member san francisco tech connect task force. we want the digital inclusion program to make sure we address the needs of underserved vulnerable communities, not communities that are already

very tech savvy. we are here to provide a, b and c to the seniors. a stands for access. b stands for basic skills and c stands for content. and unless we have all three, the monolingual chinese seniors are never going to be able to use the computer or the internet. >> a lot of the barrier is knowledge. people don't know that these computers are available to them, plus they don't know what is useful. >> there are so many businesses in the bay area that are constantly retiring their computer equipment that's perfectly good for home use. computers and internet access are helping everybody in the community and people who don't have it can come to us to help with that. one of the biggest problems we see isn't whether people can get computers through programs like ours, but whether they can understand why they need a computer. really the biggest issue we are facing today is helping people understand the value of having a computer.

>> immediately they would say can i afford a computer? i don't speak any english. how do i use it. then they will start to learn how to do email or how to go back to chinese newspaper to read all the chinese newspaper. >> a lot of the barrier still is around lack of knowledge or confusion or intimidation and not having people in their peer network who use computers in their lives. >> the important thing i learned from caminos was to improve myself personally. when i first came to caminos, i didn't know anything about computers. the second thing is i have become -- i have made some great achievements as an individual in my family and in things of the world. >> it's a real issue of self-empowerment where new immigrant families are able to communicate with their families at home, able to receive news and information in their own home language, really become more and more connected with

the world as well as connected even inside their local communities. >> if we value the diversity of our city and we value our diverse neighborhoods in the city, we need to ensure that they remain economically viable. equiping them and equiping residents in those areas with jobs that will enable them to stay in san francisco is critical to that. >> the important thing that i see here at caminos is it helps the low income community, it helps the women who wouldn't have this opportunity otherwise. >> the workers with more education in san francisco are more likely to be able to working that knowledge sector. where they are going to need that familiarity with the internet, they are going to find value with it and use it and be productive with it every day. and half of the city's population that's in the other boat is disconnected from all that potential prosperity. >> we really need to promote content and provide applications that are really relevant to people's lives here.

so a lot of the inspiration, especially among the immigrant community, we see is communications with people from their home country but we as much want to use the internet as a tool for people to connect within the local san francisco community. >> i think it's our job as public educators to give them this access and give them this opportunity to see that their efforts are being appreciated beyond their immediate reach. >> you have to blend this idea of community network with computer equipment with training and with support. we can pull all that together, then we've got it. >> it's as much about social and economic justice -- in fact it's more about social and economic justice than just