year, maybe one or two vacancies, but they pretty much will be on board, and that is their mission, to call every day, make every effort possible, work with school principals to make sure that they are falling through with the kids' attendance and reaching out to the community in terms of excused absences being not acceptable. other than, besides the child's educational interests in mind, there is this other fallout of not being able to capture the revenue for any child that is not present in the classroom. >> how much money are we losing on an annual basis when a student is not in class? >> we have averaged about 95% or leased in the last three years that i can recollect, and even a

1% by attendance -- both -- bump in attendance translates to about $2 million or $3 million roughly. if we increased by 1%, that would be an increase of 500 ada, and roughly with funding of $500 per, that is -- quickly, somebody, do the math. it is about -- i'm sorry, what? >> here is a calculated. $4,500 multiplied by 500.

in that ballpark. >> where are we with our attendance? 65%? 95, and site. >> 95% on average. >> ok, so we need to tackle and bring in that outstanding 5%, the outstanding 5% could be somewhere between -- $10 million or $15 million? >> 1% is about $2 million. 5% would be close to $10 million, correct. >> thank you. >> just add to that, i just actually went out to one of the superintendent zones and had a meeting with the attendance liaison there, and she is finding great success because

she not only works with the executive in the superintendent zone, she is from the community and knows the community, and that is one of the caveat is we have asked, and i think they are actually trying to get funding for her to work over the summer time where parents are less stressed about the day-to-day getting to the child to school but can be more amenable to a conversation about how we can help get the child to school, so just on that particular topic. i wanted to mention that, but really, i wanted to address my comments are around the uesf and advocacy and be very clear -- it is not our local legislators who are at fault. that advocate incredibly long andadvocate, long and hard around educational issues. it is those of us who are not in the area with the understanding

-- we know how important to the committee legislation as. if i was to say something -- it would be to those listening, and watching in the audience. talk to your relatives and friends, in california, to speak to the local legislators. those people have not come up through education, in their legislative and political past, did not get this. they did not have the tax extensions. the burden all across the state of california, they throw up their hands. i cannot understand how this could possibly be. i ask you to go to your

relatives and friends, and to address the legislators. address the people who are there. did this the other way though -- the with the other legislators to. >> another any other comments? >> i appreciate you have done, with the hard work of overseeing the budget, with a year or so of difficulty. it makes me so angry to see our children being shortchanged this way. at the state level and the federal level as well. we are in three wars, and the $40 billion that was cut from the national budget, there was no cut military spending, no

discussion about getting out of afghanistan, and who knows what will happen with india, and the other bases that we have all around the world. this is where the state of our society is. we are not caring about children and we need to. i will be supporting barack obama for his reelection. he came to san francisco a few weeks ago, and he left here about $10 million richer than when he got here. we have money here and this is going to the political process that is not able to bring the money down to the local level. i have children and a lot of the people in this room have children, and this is just mind- boggling.

we have to live with this. my hat goes off to all of you, who are struggling with this. it is very difficult to feel hopeful, but we are doing this for our children. >> if i may respond. i appreciate you sending this. this really struck a chord with me about hope. the very first time in the budget meeting, it was -- hope is not a strategy. we cannot depend on us. we have to speak with the vote, and i wanted to speak to that.

>> thank you for such a lively discussion and thank you for making this presentation. are there any members of the public who wish to make a comment? public comment is closed. can you read the other item on the agenda? >> that is everything. >> this meeting is adjourned. thank you all. president olague: good evening. this is a special joint hearing

between the san francisco planning commission and the treasure island authority board. before i take roll, if i can just ask everyone to turn off your cell phones, any pagers, any computers, anything that may sound off during these proceedings, we would very much appreciate it. roll call for the planning commission. president christina olague. >> here. >> vice president ron miguel. >> here. >> antonini. >> here. >> borden? >> here. >> kathrin moore? >> here. >> and mr. sugaya. >> here. >> president claudine cheng. >> here. >> larry del carlo. >> present. >> john elberling. larry mazzolla. linda richardson and honorable jane kim is not seated tonight. thank you. commissioners, the first category on this joint agenda

is public comment on agenda items where the public hearing is closed. and that's an opportunity for the public to speak prior to the certification or the commission's consideration of the certification of the final environmental impact report. that is the only item on this calendar that has already been heard in a public hearing, and the public hearing has been closed. so for all of you who want to speak on the certification of the environmental document, there are a number of cards, and they're all mixed up. so if the joint chairs would allow, i would ask for those who want to speak to line up in the center aisle. president olague: that is the preferred way of dealing with it. thank you. and just so the public can be aware, this will be your only opportunity to address

certification of the e.i.r. once the commission closes public comment in this category and they go into deliberation on the certification, the public hearing will be closed and your opportunity to speak will be lost. madam president? president olague: we'll take public comment tt -- at this time. >> and how much time? president olague: two minutes. >> the president has decided that she will allow two minutes per speaker to address them on the certification of the e.i.r. president olague: the microphone doesn't seem to be -- >> i'll turn it on. try it now. >> hello. good evening. my name is judy west. i have been a member of the citizens advisory committee to the san francisco public utilities since 2004, attempting monthly briefings affecting the city's water and sewer system. i became alarmed about the

treasure island project when i learned recently about the burden that's going to be placed on the p.u.c., which is not highlighted in your environmental review and yet, could seriously impact areas much larger than the subject redevelopment area. and so i want -- before that you conclude that this project will not have a negative impact on the conditions of the mainland sewer system, i would like to see that you review the scope of the proposed citywide sewer master plan and the sewer and water rates that are going to be required to pay for this. unlike the redevelopment agency, the p.u.c. is an enterprise agency and must generate its own funds from water and sewer rates to fund their operations, as well as upgrades to the system, including $125 million sewer treatment plan that's proposed on treasure island. san francisco is decades behind in repair and replacement of the aging sewer system below the ground on the mainland due to voter-mandated freezes on

water rates in the 1980's. the project sponsors are asking the city rate payers -- water rate payers to build an entirely new sewer plan for 8,000 new homes, when we don't have enough money to upgrade the system we have in the bayview, which deals with 80% of the city's waste water for hundreds of thousands of homes and businesses. it's the actual cost of the -- if the actual cost were paid for by the developers or by infrastructure bonds or whatever and then repaid by stimulating the local economy, these huge investments by the p.u.c. might make sense. but there's already conflicts about the amount of affordable housing required or other public benefits, such that there's no guarantee that city, the developers or the p.u.c., which is what i'm concerned about, is going to be repaid for this investment. [chime] president olague: i just wanted to clarify that this is the only opportunity to speak to the e.i.r. you will have an opportunity to speak to the project at another

time in the hearing. >> my name is dick millett. i'm a former president of the boosters neighborhood association. i'm speaking for myself. i just noticed in the little handout here, the project description doesn't address parking. it does talk about 8,000 homes, 500 hotel rooms, 100,000 square feet of office space. i don't believe the ridge can handle it. i don't think the ferries can handle it that don't exist. i question are we going to charge a toll to help out the bridge, which keeps going up and up, or half a toll, because they'll be using half of the bridge? i live in a neighborhood where we're studying congested parking and it's going to cost me $3 or $6 to move around

town. it cuts my ride in happen. are we going to do this with them? i think the plan is not well thought out completely, and i want to see that we have guaranteed transportation. we don't have guaranteed transportation in san francisco . all of these projects that we're doing, where we're increasing the density, we don't guarantee that we're going to have the transportation. thank you very much. president olague: thank you. >> good evening. my name is paul and i'm a candidate for mayor of san francisco in november of 2011 and i speak on behalf of the citizens of the state of california and object to the whole proceedings where the e.i.r. is being accepted or certified for acceptance, when the property and the title of the treasure island belongs to

the people of the state of california, not the u.s. navy. it was not the navy's to sell for $110 million and it's not private developers to develop. this is privatization of the public commons and i object to it. the value of one piece of property at 110 embark darrow is $6 million without any development. that's lands value alone. if you extrapolate that to treasure island, the property is worth $20 billion, that's b as in billion, 100,000 million. $6,000 million dollars. we sold this or allegedly tried to sell it to lenar for $110 million. this is a rip-off. the ownership issue has not been settled. title has not cleared. the privatization of our commons is something that is extremely serious, especially when it's for private gain. this is something that absolutely has to stop. the land belongs to the people

of california and i object to the consideration of the e.i.r. at this time on behalf of the people of california. thank you. president olague: thank you. >> good evening, commissioners and title board members. my name is gail gilman, the executive director of the community housing president buell: and a provider of homeless housing on treasure island for the last 10 years. . . i'm here tonight to urge you to approve the e.i.r. and also to understand that my comments extend to the rest of the hearing on matters of approving the plan. this is a great opportunity for the city and county of san francisco to create a green transit-first community that will have over 400 units of housing for formerly homeless families and to give those families an opportunity to integrate into a safe, state-of-the-art community and break their cycle of homelessness and poverty. as we all know, many of our

supported housing sites in san francisco are in disenfranchised and poor neighborhoods. this will be the first time that an emerging community will embrace individuals living in poverty and homelessness. this is an exciting opportunities as a stea and i urge you to support it. groups like community partnership have been working for over a decade in this partnership, in partnership with lennar and the treasure island developers. while i know there is controversy and there's always planning and these things move at a rate in san francisco that some might think is slow, i fully endorse this plan and feel that this is the time, particularly with what's happening at the state level, that we move as a community to secure this housing for homeless individuals and the hundreds of units of affordable housing that will be there as well. i urge you to vote yes this evening. thank you. >> hello, my name is louise

williams. i'm a local 22 carpenter and i want to approve this -- i want to endorse this project. it would create a lot of jobs, lots and lots of jobs. i am welfare to work. i've been working at least 12 years. and if it can work for me, it can work for a lot of people. and right now in our communities throughout san francisco, we are in dire need of employment all over. please, please push for this project to happen. thank you. >> good evening, president olague and commissioners from treasure island and planning commission, adrian siebe from carpenter's local 22, field representative. i have here tonight with me brothers and sisters from carpenters local 22. we have more downstairs. these are working carpenters. these are out-of-work carpenters, brothers and

sisters. we're all together in this. this is an opportunity that we need to take advantage of. opportunities come and go. the ones you don't take, you never know. this is an opportunity we have to put carpenters to work and local 22 would ask that you approve this e.i.r. and let us go to work. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is sue vaughn and i'm here speaking on behalf of the sierra club. the sierra club urges the san francisco planning commission to recirculate the treasure island -- the e.i.r. for the following reasons -- the project has changed substantially since it was initially approved by the treasure island development authority and the san francisco

board of supervisors in 2006 and then updated in 2010, and then changed also earlier this year. to the sierra club finds that the amount of allowable parking is far too high. residential parking should be no more than one space for every two units. and in fact, caltrans wrote a letter to the planning department yesterday noting that the san francisco-oakland bay bridge is already at capacity and no funds have been identified to undertake the multi-use project that would say lao people coming and going from the -- allow people coming and going to and from the island. the transit agency to the planning department dated august 20, 2010, notes that the project will create significant and unavoidable queuing at the approach to the bay bridge in san francisco. and the sierra club also poses a governance structure which gives the treasure island development authority and/or the developers complete civil

authority over a piece of san francisco land. for example, money that is gathered from parking fees and fines normally goes to muni, but in this case it will stay with the governing authority on the island. the sierra club also opposes the 17% decrease in planned affordable housing, which has now been limited to replacement of existing affordable housing only. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. my name is shari williams and i'm the executive director of the initiative known as tie-dye. all of our members have written letters of support for the treasure island project to move forward. that includes the boys and girls club, catholic charity, c.y.o., mission hiring hall, rubecon program, and walden house. and we're here tonight to support the project and every one of your votes tonight. after a decade of planning it

was, of course, very disappointsing that the governor proposed to eliminate re-development right at the time the project was going throughout approval process. this impacted the financing of the project, which resulted in the decrease of affordable housing units. this is hard, but the housing plan does have specific provisions to restore this decrease by creating changes to the state i.f.d. laws. even with the decrease, there are 2,000 affordable housing units in the plan, 435 of which are for homeless families and individuals. it will also create thousands of construction and permanent jobs for san franciscans, 25% of which are for homeless and economically disadvantaged people, with a priority to those who live on treasure island. the plan also includes significant opportunities for nonprofit social enterprises and joint ventures that employ and train people with various employment. some of these business ventures are in place on the island today and have provided an opportunity for low-income people to live, work and thrive on treasure island. this model of placing job seekers living on the island

will also assist in reducing the traffic impact on the bridge in addition to providing a stabilizing force for people who are rebuilding their lives. we sincerely hope you will support these efforts by approving the e.i.r. and moving this project forward. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners and directors. my name is mark connors. i am a rest sent of -- resident of treasure island and yerba buena community group. i'm also a member of the citizens advisory boards and have been civically involved for the past 6 1/2 years. i was also married there and led the campaign to safety chapel in the redevelopment, which was worked into the e.i.r. i fully support the proposed development of tiybi. for 10 years there's been much thought and planning that has led to a thought-out plan and at some point we need to move forward to the next step and i believe that time is now.

the development will lead to a better quality of life for residents and access to the benefits that rest of the city enjoys, things like grocery stores, entertainment, local jobs, affordable housing, etc. many of us have been waiting patiently for years on end now, some as long as 10 or 11 years for the project to progress and i encourage the board and the commissioners to adon't the revised e.i.r. so the development of the property can move forward. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners, board mess. i'm leon winston, chief operating officer representing swords to plows shares representing 2,000 homeless people we serve each year. we're a founding member of tie-dye. been working on this project, on bringing homeless programs and housing to treasure island since 1997 and have been providing housing there since 2000. we strongly encourage you to approve the e.i.r. and all the

items before you this evening. this is a wonderful opportunity for badly-needed housing. it will double the amount of homeless housing on the island in a community in which it will be integrated and out of the tenderloin, out of areas of the city where, to date, most homeless programs are forced to locate. it's hundreds of veterans in our program have reclaimed their lives over the last 10 years on treasure island and we look forward to additional weather opportunities as part of the tie-dye plan and once again strongly urge you to support the plan and all the items before you this evening. thank you. >> commissioners, board members, i'm steve cravill, executive director of tool works, an official enterprise dedicated to providing and creating economic opportunities for people of low income san franciscans with disabilities. i urge you to support this

project and every vote that comes before you this evening. tool works is a charter member of tie-dye. we have been on the island for 14 years. served more than 300 people in training and job placement. the contracting opportunities provided through tie-dye, treasure island businesses, the coast guard, and our fellow c.b.o. have further provided employment opportunities for this population. thanks. >> good evening, commissioners and board members. my name is renee smith and i manage women and children's services for walden house, a large behavioral house. this evening i am urging you to approve the e.i.r. and to approve all of the items on your agenda related to the development of treasure island.

walden house operates -- it is a women and children's substance abuse program on treasure island as well as transitional housing for women and women with children. over the last nine years we have been phenomenally successful with the program on treasure island and have re-unified many women with their children and additionally have gotten them employment and housing. many of the women would love to live on treasure island, however, have not been able to have that opportunity, and they tend to do quite well when they do. it also would be a great thing to be able to have them not leave the island to get employment and do a variety of activities with their families. so this is just a tremendous opportunity for homeless women and children and for all of the homeless population that tie-dye serves, and i encourage you, this is the time. thank you. >> good evening. my name is jeff, the executive

director of catholic charities, c.y.o., a member of tie-dye. and since about 20 pioneer families moved out of homelessness and into permanent support of housing in 1989, we have been there with them, supporting them. today we are supporting almost 200 formerly homeless families on the island. in addition, we run the child development center, where we have about 60 children of those families. i would encourage you this evening to certify the e.i.r., as well as approve all the other items that come to you this evening. i would ask you to consider the incredibly positive environmental impact of housing of formerly homeless families and the fact that hundreds of children now are graduating high school. the families are stabley housed. and this incredible community at treasure island has been living there for up to 10 years without basic infrastructure, without a supermarketth