redevelopment agency, but a non- profit public benefit corporation. the board has authority to approve or disapprove of the appointments. it is subject to the contract in budget authority of the board. it comes to you to approve if it were to amend these agreements. that act, in essence, like an agency of the city. he will have to gear up and change some of its role. the development, it could do that in various ways. right now, how it works is, the contract basically to provide the development expertise. we can rely on the redevelopment agency or the planning agency department. any agency that has that

expertise. we do that in the infrastructure development and those agencies that are involved in doing the same work. supervisor mar: this is my last point. we provide quite a bit of transparency. all of the numerous hearings you have done, he raises this as he supports the project, still kind of doing his best. i tell -- know jane kim keep raising the issue. you'll get above the base affordable housing. any local maneuvers, is that going to be specifically written in a way that we can see

what we argue in fact a 30% or higher? but i could talk about the mayor of's commitment. the elimination of redevelopment, it is a robust tool. these economic projects as well as affordable housing, we saw the governor come very close to 11 a redevelopment. it is a bill that is still up at this stage. they put forward a compromise bill that will diminish the amount of tax increment available to our redevelopment agency to carry out these projects. let's and francisco, it is unique in the way that it can generate or capture 65 cents of the dollar to put back into these development projects. the bayer shares all of our concern that we have to change

the law to make housing available use. and also put it a requirement. the redevelopment has to look at affordable housing. the mayor is definitely committed to that. the board is also talking to our state representatives to figure of the best way to introduce that to the various stages of legislation that are before the state. i could just assure you that the mayor is committed to making those changes. >> my understanding is that there is a controller report and a budget analyst report that should be coming? i think it is eight, nine, 10, and 11. >> and we anticipate a report. it will be issued later this week. >> let me think that the black

about and to stay this long. it is several hours of this hearing as well. the key for your endurance and perseverance as well. the key for their great presentation as well. >> there will be evident to some of these. >> if they could just explained a little bit of the dodd substantive amendments that you prepared for today? >> from the city attorney's office. i think each piece of legislation before you today does have an amendment that makes technical corrections to various references. some bill legislation has reference to the redevelopment plan which is a logger part of the approval structure. there are technical amendments

to a call the legislation to address the same issues that have changed in terms of the project approval process. there were pieces of legislation that you have amendments. they are not substantive, but i will bring them to the attention of the committee. there are changes to the special use district. the first what is on page 42. that is why the -- it was previously a process for submission that an applicant would make and it was discretionary to submit the documentation to the planning department.

the change now would require a submission application to go as well as the planning department. >> a couple of the changes are just changing the word "plan" to "agreement." >> those are some of the technical changes that were made to reference the correct documents. to drop the references to redevelopment plan and instead use "project." the other change to the special use district that i wanted to bring to your attention is on line 49. beginning on line 10, he used by the planning commission, the legislation before you have to show the the both of them and

the applicant could appeal the decision. this change in the light knowledge merely indicates that they could do that independently without having to go through the ownership secure requirements that would apply for other conditional use elsewhere in the city. it was just to clarify the intent. that is page 49, 11 and 12. >> the other amendments are for the subdivision code item. one of them is primarily along the lines that you had just mentioned. beginning on page 11, there is a reference here indeed hot definitional to plan documents, but now that there is not a redeveloped plan, will modify that definition to refer to the project had project documents. those changes you will see on

page 11 beginning line 23. and going to page 12 through lines 5 sx. there are amendments throughout. the other changes would bring to your attention is the definition of transportation infrastructure. this is the infrastructure that will be required that will be public infrastructure. we're just in the fighting the kinds of scenes that would be done in terms of the mta type infrastructure of the islands. the one item that was added to that list of items was operator restrooms. supervisor mar: any other questions? is there a motion? supervisor cohen: we do items 2-

12 to the full board. supervisor mar: any objection? >> mr. chair, the items 8-11 lead to be referred to the budget and finance committee. supervisor mar: i see that. with the exception of items 8- 11, also without recommendation. >> of the of that does need to be approved. >> can we accept the bid without objection? supervisor wiener: i will be supporting the motion. that motion, at least speaking personally, should not be interpreted in the project. i do support this project.

i remember moving to san francisco in may to 97, in reading about the treasure island development and following it closely over the years. well before i was on the board of supervisors. i of the the process has been extraordinary and evolving every level of government between toyota and the halls of washington d.c.. i cannot think of a project that has been more thoroughly thought through or more thoroughly designed. when you look at the seismic precautions in the transportation plan, and everything else, the changes that have been made in response to different concerns whether it is hall reservation or affordable housing. we're disappointed by the governor's decision to live in a redevelopment. it has been a flexible process

throughout, i think this process is very strong. nothing is certain in life. there will always be uncertainties about the future. i am quite supportive of this project. >> without objection, thank you. is there anything else before us this evening? >> there are no further items. hong >> of the meeting is adjourned, thank you.

>> we're going to get started now. thank you. good afternoon, everyone. welcome. we have commissioner maufas with us. supervisor avalos. [inaudible] thank you. madam clerk, could you read the agenda for today? yes. can you speak into the microphone? we can [inaudible]

>> it is 110443 [inaudible] >> thank you. i think we have city staff that is going to present for us today. our city librarian. >> good afternoon. first and foremost, you are probably wondering what this is all about. i am very proud of the fact that today, i spent part of my day at argon elementary school to read poetry to youngsters from first graders through fourth graders, and i had the pleasure of having the general manager of the recreation and park department join me for that, so it was terrific. i mention that because it emphasizes the relationship that we established with the school district in terms of forging a very strong relationship, but

today, i'm also here to ask for your support and endorsement of our literacy -- information literacy program that we have. in a nutshell, we are wanting to have 100% participation and ownership of a san francisco public library card for all kindergarten and first grade children. we have begun that effort by having the great collaboration of all the 500 classroom teachers literally issue out the applications. we will be reporting that back to our library and staff so that we begin by emphasizing the importance of having every youngster had a library card. we went before the library commission. they endorsed it unanimously. also had the pleasure of having great support at the school district. they also passed a resolution, but i am really excited about

being here today because it emphasizes that relationship between a school district board as well as the board of supervisors. i wanted thank the great support we have had from the school district from superintendent garcia. they have worked with our staff, and i want to introduce our lead staffers from the library side. our deputy city librarian, our chief of children and youth services, so again, i just ask for your support of this. it really is important to have the policy -- policy makers and stakeholders understand how important it is for us to serve our youth. last year, we had 81,000 children receive library instruction at our neighborhood libraries. half of those are in the elementary area, so again, we want to continue the important

portion, it does, to making sure that in san francisco, we have a policy-driven initiative to endorse everyone having a library card. thank you. and we are here answer any questions you may have on the program. >> colleagues, do you have any questions? commissioner norton, please. commissioner no.: i just wanted to thank the library -- commissioner norton: i just wanted to thank the library. my daughter was so excited to get her first library card through this program here also, a wanted to thank you for going too far gone today. i was there as well. it was wonderful. -- a wanted to thank you for going to argon.

supervisor avalos: i just wanted to apologize for not giving our books back in a timely manner. i guess i am wondering, how do we help families, let them know -- lessen the stigma they might sense. it could be a barrier that is there. >> absolutely. one of the things we take great pride in, we're still working on this, is eliminating barriers to access and checking out materials. i do not know if anyone is aware, but we do not have funds for children, so any of those can be returned readily, no questions asked. but we want to encourage youngsters and families in particular to excess materials and books and borrow as many as they want. i think that it is an ongoing effort to make sure that we work with families as well to use

different language, different approaches to folks that may not be familiar or have a tradition of the free public library we are so accustomed to in this country. i did not know if that answers your question. >> pretty much. we are well aware that there is no fine, but we are still late. >> you and i have to have a conversation about that. commissioner maufas: it is good to see you again. i just wanted to acknowledge that i have visited my local library at bartlett and 24 with my granddaughter, who is just an infant, but at my surprise, rediscovering the library myself, but also, when i pulled up with a stroller, there was already a line of strollers for folks in my neighborhood who already know about the many activities that are available there for young families.

i just think that this is such a great introduction to the library again, i have rediscovered my local library with my granddaughter, which i, sort of thought that she needed to be around kindergarten or first grade, but that introduction to reading and activities and visiting the library can happen much earlier, and i am very excited to be able to go with her on a saturday or thursday afternoon when they have those programs. i think that is a great addition the i had never experienced at the library, but i can also share that with my granddaughter and tell my own child that there are programs there for young the ones before they get to school, but it is the great introduction into the library as a supplement and to school activities. so thank you very much. >> absolutely. to that point, we have a very engaged early literacy program. we have been working with child care providers, head start, and

you are absolutely right. it is getting to them for those early literacy skills before they go in for the formal education program. we have met with wonderful response from the community, but also, it has been a proven program that has had success, so thank you for acknowledging that. the other piece i want to mention is that we also have ancillary programs. we have a free museum pass that provides access through the library to about 16 different museums throughout the city and that in its first year has seen almost 85% capacity, and that is free for families -- residents of san francisco, so we are very proud of playing a part in the as well -- in that as well. >> thank you. i would like to now open up the floor for public comment. is there anyone who has any public comment?

when any member of the public like to comment? ok, public comment is officially closed. will you read the second item for us? >> thank you. >> it is item 110-471, and that is the budget update for fiscal year 2011 [inaudible] >> thank you. i think we have a staff presentation. welcome. >> good afternoon, everyone. i'm the director of budget

services for the san francisco unified school district, and we do have a presentation. this is my first time here, and i'm going to try to be at the microphone as well as try to get the slides moving forward. hopefully, we will give you a brief presentation. we have a powerpoint that was presented at our recent principles and administrative meeting for the school district, and it is an update of our [inaudible] very high-tech. on the budget situation, both for the state of california and how it impacts our school district. as you may be aware, in january, usually, the governor comes out with a proposed budget for the year -- the upcoming fiscal year.

which is what governor brown did sometime in january and projected a $26.7 billion budget deficit for the state and a proposal on how to bridge that gap. a crucial part of the proposal was to extend those temporary tax increases that have been put in place two years ago. if you recall, those were an increase to the state sales tax and the legal license fee and a couple of other items, as well as identify some cuts to be made outside of k-12 education. so he acknowledged -- the government acknowledged that education in the past has borne the brunt of most of the cuts every time the state had a deficit, and he made a pretty valiant attempt to keep these

cuts away from schools, k-12 education for the upcoming budget year, but a lot of it hinged on having these tax extensions approved, which would have meant having to slash three of the legislature approved to put the tax extension measure on the ballot in june and there being a majority of the voters approving the extension. as we now know, the legislature has fallen short of approving those tax extensions. time had run out on putting those extensions on the june ballot, and while the governor is still trying to convince some republican members of the legislature to support the tax extensions, at this point, the june ballot is absolutely not feasible. when we -- all school districts

heard the governor's proposal in january, we started preparing our schools for in a worst-case scenario which would involve a significant cut. the status quo scenario would be not funding and facing $19 for 88 funding reduction fundingfor ada funding reduction. the worst case would be $349 for ada cut, which for our school district translates into a little over $16 million. because now the june ballot for the tax extensions is no longer feasible, we are actually now looking at the worst-case scenario. many in the state are actually speculating that things could get even worse for education

than just the $349. how bad could it get? now, increasingly, there is talk in the legislature of an all-cut its budget, abandoning any exploration of potential revenue augmentation or increases. and all cuts budget would mean a $4 billion or $5 billion cut to education, which translates into $825 per ada instead of the current $349 we are facing. this would require a suspension of proposition 98, which would need 8 2/3 majority in order for the legislature to implement, but it has been done in the past, so we are not entirely ruling that out. if this were to happen, rules would likely have to change for

schools. we would be facing less talk about reducing the instructional time by a full month, making some currently restricted programs a little more flexible so the the district could have greater discretion in spending the money. removing restrictions on class sizes for kindergarten through grade three. and if this were not done, to mitigate this huge, devastating cut, many districts would require a bailout from the state, which pretty much defeats the purpose of cutting k-12 education. california schools have been in crisis for a long time, but things could keep getting worse. what happens next in sacramento? some speculate it is still possible to improve the -- approve the tax extension legislatively but not by voter approval, by the beginning of

the fiscal year, july 1. why is this significant? if the legislature can act on, at least legislatively, approving the tax extension and then go to the voters on a special exemption may be in november, it would still be considered an extension of taxes, and otherwise, if this was allowed to last, and then put on the ballot, it becomes a ballot to increase taxes, which, as we all know, nobody has an appetite for. in the meantime, economic changes could also cause a revision, of words or downwards. we're getting some numbers of tax collections from individual income taxes, which although it is up, it is by no means going to resolve this $25 billion gap that the state basis. the governor will release his next plan based on updated

revenue projections in mid-may. we all plan to attend that conference. considering the possibility of new taxes in current-year revenues. our school district plans -- we are currently facing our projections on the worst-case scenario, which is the $349 cuts is a reality. this is tied to the january budget that the governor proposed, and although there is speculation about a higher cut to education, there is currently no proposal out there by the governor or legislature, and all the advocacy agencies do not believe that we should at this