were under budget there. as of the end of fiscal year 29 -- 2009-2010, but they had done in -- what they had done in coordination with us was figure out how to spend that $2.3 million over the life of the cbd. a copy of how they allocated those funds is a part of your packet. this is their current fiscal year budget. they plan to spend $6.3 million. as you can see, they are carrying over $722,000 in net assets from this year. they are planning to definitely raise five% from other sources. -- 5% from other sources. the final note is to improve

fundraising efforts. we just reviewed the mid-year report, they are definitely on track to meet all of their budget goals, as well as their fund raising for this year. if you have any questions, please let us know. supervisor chu: just taking a look at the budget projections for the current year, you have shown roughly expenditures and revenues at $3.3 million. in the upcoming budget year it looks like it will go down to a relatively steady state. the major changes that i see are simply on marketing, branding, and the pvc line? >> with regards to the fund- raising requirements, do you get -- supervisor chu: with regards to the fund-raising requirements, do you get the sense that we will meet pfeifer

sense in this year? >> caffey, could you describe more of the fund-raising efforts? >> this is obviously something that we are aware of. we have a grant application that we are submitting today. obviously, we think that we will. we also have reconstituted our fund-raising committee and are working on the plan for next year, so we are 100% confident for next year. yes, we think we will come very close. supervisor chu: you are anticipating being on track in the coming year? >> very close, if not exceeding it. correct. supervisor chu: what are some of the areas where you are expanding fundraising? >> a great question. we are applying for a community challenge grant today to focus on street space improvements. we are really looking at

different marketing efforts for how we can raise additional funds. we have been speaking with a major corporation this year, though i hate to say, for a grant -- i do not want to jinx it. we are looking at marketing opportunities. we are launching a neighborhood web site, as i said earlier. there will be small advertising space on their for neighborhood businesses. we are looking at ways to generate revenue through those, as well as marketing activity. those things are all under way. supervisor chu: thank you. for organizations like cba cbd to be able to tap into a community challenge grant, in my mind that is not a good connection as they are meant to address and deal with smaller organization neighborhood type projects.

if you are already getting an assessment of $2.7 million, it doesn't seem it should be the intent of aid community challenge grant to augment the budget. i hope that is not a red line on your fund raising component. >> we do not want that to be. we have a project that fits neatly into that criteria at this point. which is why we made the decision to apply. supervisor chu: thank you. let's open this up for public comment. i have two cards year. [reads names] >> hello, my name is richard smith. i am speaking in favor a yerba buena community benefit district. by barbara and i are rental

residents in the neighborhood. we are pretty active in the neighborhood and volunteer our time in the district. currently, i am serving as a rental representative on the board of the community benefit district. we choose to volunteer our time because we have seen the district -- difference that makes in terms of making the neighborhood safer, cleaner, and the identity work going forward. so that people will know where this place is. and we see the work we are doing, volunteering, as making a difference. so, we love our neighborhood, there for seven cisco. thank you for your support. supervisor chu: next speaker, please. >> my name is lawrence lee. i work for one of the nonprofits

in the neighborhood. i am extremely proud of what we have been able to accomplish in the last two years. in the treasurer, and i can tell you that we have some very hard- working committee members. the balance of the time users and evening users, cultural institutions, of visitor services -- to be able to take in the needs of all of those constituents, serving those needs and having a hard-working crew that is pretty much in line, that is a great accomplishment. so, with at that i ask that you approve the annual report. supervisor chu: are there any other member -- members of the public that would wish to speak? seeing no one, public comment disclosed. supervisor kisupervisor mirkarie

someone who can answer this question on the challenge grant process? some one from oewd? thank you. >> lisa paggan. supervisor mirkarimi: i think the chair person said something that was very important and i wanted to explore this. is there a policy that actually distinguishes in hell cbd's were able to buy ford community challenge grants, as opposed to neighborhoods that to c havedb 's? -- that do not have cbd's? >> many of these cbd's do not

have budgets for capital improvements. many of them have maintenance budgets so that they can maintain over the life of the capital improvement that improvement. others might have more money, such as yerba buena. i understand the competition for grants. they do not all have the same type of budget. the challenge grant program sets its own criteria for how they select. so, we would have to ask them what their criteria is and how they disperse their grant funds. supervisor mirkarimi: in very basic terms from where we sit, you could see that potentially with varying degrees of strength, they may have more of the wherewithal and the ability

to secure transplants. whereas communities that do not have cbd's do not. i am probing to determine if this might merit some kind of protocol, potentially, or a ground rule, so that the process is made to seem that much more fair. i can think of a number of neighborhoods that are not ready for these and may not what one. yet, they would love to compete for community challenge grants, capital or non-capital oriented. i am wondering if this is something -- it has been referenced that it is something we should explore in terms of setting up particular guidelines. we do not want the unintentional of fact of the big fish dominating the playing field where the little fish are not getting any bites.

>> without any statistics on who the challenge grants are going to, we could not say if they were going disproportionately to one neighborhood or another. our office would be happy to talk with the challenge grant program to make sure that there is a balance in fair competition, which i am sure that there is. they applied. they did not necessarily get the grant yet. i want to be cleared supervisor mirkarimi:. this has not -- i want to be clear. supervisor mirkarimi: this is more of a general issue. >> i would be happy to provide more information. supervisor mirkarimi: all right, thank you. supervisor chu: just a quick follow-up question, lisa. you had mentioned that many of the supervisor mirkarimi: pot -- many of the cbd's do not have a

capital budget. is that a legal restriction? >> each one has its own management plan. . some districts do not have enough funding for certain projects in their original plans, so they apply for a grant in those cases to supplement their assessment budget. many districts spent all of their money on maintenance. so, they have to fundraiser for streetscape improvements. but that is not every district. each one is different. supervisor chu: so, there is possibility for improving and larger -- approving a larger capital budget? they would have to change their management plans? >> correct. many of them have to -- many of them require all of the votes to

do so. supervisor chu: so, it is onerous? >> if they wanted to substantively change the plan. they are currently allowed 10% changes per year, per budget category, providing some flexibility to meet needs overtime. a drastic case would require voting by those who are assessed and by the board of supervisors. supervisor mirkarimisupervisor a concern surrounding the equity of how it gets spread amongst organizations. if you do have that conversation, it would be interesting to see who the beneficiaries are. supervisor kim: my apologies for being late. i was actually with another cbd. i know that district 6 has the

fortune of having many of the cbd costs that are formed in the city. there are seven total? eight community benefit districts? >> 12. supervisor kim: i think that roughly seven or eight are in district 6. and i do hear from residents. it is mixed. we hear from residents but these are services that cities should be able to provide other realm. on the other hand, a sense of grant -- break from this for the enhanced services in the area, led by folks that live and work in that neighborhood. one of the things that i appreciate is the higher level of engagement that stakeholders have in shaping the future of their district. two things. one, how does the city work --

one complaint i have heard is that the city may reduce its services from level of services it has given before. how do we work to make sure that the city continues its service? >> in terms of dtw? supervisor kim: i get it. i do. i just want to make sure that we do not lower services in the area. >> we work closely with the department of public works on baseline services to make sure that they are still doing what they are supposed to be doing. if there are complaints, cbd should be informed. they can work with us so that we can have a meeting with dtw. supervisor kim: i imagine that it is hard to gauge baseline services.

>> we have a lead of what they are supposed to do in every district. so that they pretty much do what they are supposed to do. supervisor kim: the second thing, i would like to echo my colleagues concerns over the community challenge grant. i was not aware that part of the 5% was city dollars. i would consider that additional fund-raising dollars. on the other end, about what to make sure -- i would want to make sure th there is not geographical and equity. -- the iniquity. needs that are not even at the table, as the organizations need to apply for these grants. i concur with my colleagues. >> each management plan says that they have to raise five% about said services.

it does not say that you cannot go the city. of course, 95% comes from property owners. they definitely need to be creative in terms of going for those services. -- sources. i want to remain at -- remind the supervisors that most of cbd's do not have the size in terms of a budget thatyerba buena has. they are definitely looking at all of the sources they have. because so many want to do streetscape improvement, community challenge grant is just a viable source for that kind of work. supervisor kim: and i do appreciate the work of cbd's. i have worked a lot with north market and central market. i appreciate their ability to organize small businesses,

partners, what it means to improve the neighborhood and partnering with community-based organizations as well. sfgov.osupervisor chu: were they other questions? supervisor kim: supervisor mirkarimi: -- the community -- supervisor mirkarimi: the community development grant is taken from the payroll tax? >> i am not aware. supervisor mirkarimi: does someone there want to verify that? i am pretty sure that that is the case. while that is and on down, my gut is that it does. it comes from the payroll tax. coming from the percentage that is correct. >> the new name for the

neighborhood beautification program as established by the voters, it allows businesses to check a box on their business tax return and, rather than going to the general fund. supervisor mirkarimi: right. right. i am curious. has there ever been any assessment? any kind of assessment? on the advent upper cbd's in san francisco? in terms of what services they are able to provide? beyond baseline services provided by san francisco city and county? any kind of evaluation? >> not to my knowledge. i do not recall any kind of

evaluation. supervisor chusupervisor mirkars still a relatively new concept in san francisco. yerba buena will likely have unanimous support, but i am hoping to segue into another conversation in the near future, some day. between districts 3 and 6, what is the total number of cbd's? >> just in district 6? supervisor mirkarimi: district 3 and the district 6. >> that would be roughly seven. supervisor mirkarimi: where did the number 12 come from? >> that is because i work with 12 of them. the last two being ocean avenue and city center.

would it not be true that those who have the larger budgets with the orientation towards capital improvements? >> working with it the community, for many of them capital improvements have come up as something important to property owners. in terms of the work through, it has come up as something they would like to have. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. that answers the question. i appreciate it. supervisor chu: thank you. the item is now before us.

supervisor mirkarimi: motion to accept. supervisor chu: we have a motion to send forward that we are sending forward without objection. thank you very much. can we returned to item number one? the item has already been called. >> good morning, supervisors. i apologize for being late to the meeting. this item was our attempt to help some constituents in our community the 48th avenue is a very steep hill, graded with steps.

there were hand railings that allowed pedestrians to hold them on the way up the steps, bolted into the sidewalk many years ago. no one in the there is no record of and if they were not permitted or i accepted the unveiling of the westernmost side of the street was knocked over at that time. many seniors bid on the side of the street sidewalks are often the responsibility of a property owner, as we know.

this party to the sidewalk did not have any tenants that benefited from the rambling most of the elderly residents actual bid bid up the hill. and it is not the participation of so that they can safely go. the idea was to at least assist them in trying to waive the fee. because that property owner not only would have to pay a fee to d p w to put up a railing, but there would be an additional

encroachment vp in some funds that put up the railing without the owner's consent. just to clear and typically it is the referral of phillips with note was ability for installing are braille. >> correct. supervisor chu: the property owner has no responsibility to put in railings, just maintaining the sidewalk. you are trying for a partnership between community members to fund-raising and install the railing and the motion of support before us. waving the city's requirements

in terms of the fees. >> correct. supervisor chu: the involvement of the city would be allowing it to go forward as long as neighbors, etc., were able to raise that money. >> correct. supervisor mirkarimi: pddpw, you have spoken on this before. something to add? >> a couple of points of clarification. the request for annual requirement under the law. a way to give annual assessment. would still require the f attend opinion -- should we see this?

the department does not have a position as it relates to labor assessment. it is left to the board in this case. this segment of 48 avenue is what the department has identified as unimproved right- of-way. it has not been constructed to city standards. therefore, for fronting property owners are responsible for the maintenance of the median space. weekend. supervisor chu: thank you for the clarifications. are there any members of the public that wish to speak? seeing none >> here are some grs

showing you what some people make. and this is what other people make a lot more of. nell, on board. i wanted to tell you ♪ climb every mountain, for every stream, fix up balboa street with some green ♪ supervisor chu: thank you very much. are there other members of the public that would wish to speak on item number one? seeing that, public comment is closed. is the remote -- motion to send it forward? i have a motion. sent forward with recommendations.

[laughter] done without objection. thank you. item number four, please. >> resolution authorizing the mayors -- item number four. resolution authorizing the mayor's office of housing to expend soma community stabilization funds in the amount of $120,000 to provide grants to nonprofit organizations for: 1) a soma community coordinator to coordinate and focus community participation related to the development of 333 harrison; 2) assistance in reassessing and refining the soma community stabilization fund strategic plan; and 3) a union journey- level instructor to provide employment training for soma residents. supervisor chu: thank you very much. >> in the administer of the fund from the community development division. before i begin, i would like to

point to to an amendment to the proposed resolution. if you could take a look at the proposed resolution before you. the amendment is a resolution authorizing the mayor's office of housing to expand community stabilization fund in the amount of -- it should read $100,000 instead of $120,000 -- to provide transport by and about -- relation to the development of 333 harrison. and then there is another, lines 14 through 17 on page 2. we would like to strike those lines. added per the request of the original grant the unions and union representative on