people who want to be there, but the challenges during the daytime. it seems like we have a strategy of putting more restaurants in there. during the day i think a lot of them are serving a lot of customers. the foot traffic is bring them in the volume that you would hope, and this retail is robust. if there was going to be any message to walk away from this juncture, the renewal, is about what to do during the day to bring in the tourists, to get people into the fillmore. i not think we can't simply rely on nighttime activity to sustain the economic interest. >> one thing i will say is that we're very happy that the terrorists have accompanied it

-- i am the effect it -- i've been in the community for 31 years. i can look out my window and see the bus coming, and we have made a great effort to compose and put together a proposal, in which we try to create some sort of lasting monument or something in the area, or several monuments where this will stop because they are driving through the neighborhood. you have the lasting monuments, or the tourist stop for their pictures. this will help the daytime business. and other ideas we hope will emerge, in the future, is to make certain we have more

daytime business for people in the area. >> thank you. and is anything else to add? there is not anything else at this time? we will open this up to public comment. if there is any member of the public wishes to speak, you have to mets. >> i am simply appalled with ross mirkarimi. >> can you refer your comments to the committee? >> do i have a right to say that i am appaled at my supervisor? let's start over. i am ace and i'm on the case. ross, you start off giving him a bonus? two years on there? i do respect you, and this is

nothing personal today. i am the one who was there for the inception of this, but this was greeted by the redevelopment agency. i don't have time here and i will not waste my time. right now, i am up all with him getting up here. he was an opponent of this, when he was the chair person. i am here to tell you the truth today. this is not in the western addition. i am hurt right now. the truth is going to be told. and you can meet appear with the documents. this is not only in the western addition. there's a conspiracy in the community with no sense of community here.

there is no community in people out here. people got up here and spoke, i had to do this. he talked about the track record. the last one was because of racism. the talks about how they hired him, if this is going to be a community -- >> thank you. the next speaker? >> they hired you like a hired gun for them. >> don't play games in city hall. >> mr. washington, can you please let us continue with the meeting?

>> good morning, supervisors. in order to get greater community participation, i think that you are enabling legislation -- that the enabling legislation should mandate must comply with the sunshine ordinance. the city attorney has said that you are not subject to this ordinance, but i do not believe that this is correct. the task force has already given the opinion that the district is subject to this. you should mandate that all of this is subject to the sunshine ordnance. these to get grants from the city, for the funding. at a minimum, if the object is

to get greater community participation, he must mandate and comply with this ordinance. thank you. >> the next speaker? is there any other speaker who would like to speak? please come forward. please line up so that we can keep the meeting moving. thank you. >> good morning. i am speaking to u.s. treasurer of the fillmore district, on fillmore street. >> please continue. >> the financial and operational history -- as you are aware, this settles the financial and operational issues, and the current board has worked to overcome the

financial difficulties that we have experienced. i would like to share with you a couple of unresolved concerns. i speak regularly with property owners and some have expressed a concern about the calculation methodology, and the use of their tax dollars. how have these estimates been calculated? and how has the annual budget been used to make a difference in their everyday life. these properties represent the percentage of the board. this is perpetual and that the current board those for the future board members. we see this with the decision making and the resource use. i would ask for you to instruct fell more to do the following. taking the opportunity to hold

the election which allows all property owners to vote on the full commission, giving the board members a greater chance to affect this. they should hold property owner meetings, to discuss the methodology of calculating the subsidies, and how they have been different in the past. the transparency must be inclusive. >> thank you very much. is there anyone else would like to speak on this item? please come forward. >> i am the owner of the business in the fillmore district and i would like to talk about how i have benefited as a new merchant, because i

will be open for two years come july 1. why first came to this area, being new to san francisco, i have heard about this but i had never attended the meetings, although i was invited. i began to get involved as a merchant. and this began to become worthwhile for me. i know that we definitely benefit from everything that is put on by the marketing team, as well as the events but on by members of the community, they do this as well. as a merchant, we all benefit. i do sit on the board right now, but if we were to not have this, i did not know where i

would benefit from those collective efforts of the members of the community, and the members of the marketing team. where would this come from and where would i, as a merchant, a benefit? being a struggling business, in this economy, i find it very necessary to have something like this existing. i am the only one open during the daytime. do so the only restaurant that is open at 8:00 in the morning in fillmore. is this something you can control in this district? this is residential. people are living here. >> thank you very much. if there is any other member of the public wishes to speak, please come forward.

>> president chiu had to step out for the budget committee. actually, here he is. >> i am shiffaro, i have been running a business in the western addition for 30 years. i am the first jazz club owner. i was a person who was promoting the cdp. i saw this as a concept of assessment. but i have some issues. one of these is the assessment. this cannot be based on favoritism, or payment and things like this.

this is implementing the standard, and i would ask that before you push this thing, the standard methodology should be implemented. this is for the business owner and the property owner. i like to feel that i am not someone who is being taxed without representation. i am full the chair -- i am certain that the chair -- i nothing that this was transparent. i think that this should be the case and i would suggest that because this is legislation for a couple of major issues, that

you insist on having transparency in this process, and serious discussion on the assessment of the taxes. one thing i wanted to say. >> can you expand on the last thing that you said? >> there is also a problem in the position of the board. the original idea was that every facility would have one representative. there is a facility with three board members, and they only have one of them. the chairman of the board just said that he had a community member, but actually, this community member and the

position of the property owners -- the largest landlord has a couple of board members. and also, the property owners spent $2 million. i am a very active person in this. we need for them to show us who was writing the check. >> and is there any other member of the public to look like to speak? public comment is closed. supervisor mirkarimi: i want to thank everyone from fillmore and japan town. i want to remind the general public that this is not always created equal and that is why i have great reservations.

there was nothing that existed in what was a redevelopment area. this area had to navigate around economic challenge brought by the missteps of urban renewal. this allowed for people to engage redevelopment in city hall, this was on a process that seasoned people very well. i ask for omdb not to expect when you creat ee a cbd, everyone is first with the ability to run a meeting, the way that we do, and people who are able to become a partner and

a stakeholder in something are going to morph into someone who is, in reasonable with the democratic process. the community had several decades of trying to navigate will was not a very reasonable process with dealing with the upheaval in japan town. this is why i asked the mayor's office to try to move this to provide the escort of services, improvising, to help people to become self-governing. i think that this is ok, for the first few years. the people who have been there and those on that right now, they had struggled to figure out the right person and how to work together. i saw other challenging and complicated conditions. now they have stepped up and

they have demonstrated great progress in the ability to partner together in a way that seems to demonstrate that they are able to become more fluent in the governing body. no. 2 and this has always been my expectation, that this should comply with sunshine. if this means we should go to the ordinance to look for an amendment that requires them to comply, they should do this. there should not be another even practice with not complying. this is something that we will pursue. the third thing is the methodology. the city has to explain this calculation to the people. this appears to be

disproportionate because the cdc looks into who pays what for this proportion of what they are being taxed. it is incumbent upon the administration to be able to explain to everybody why this is fair, even though they may perceive this as not. i think the city and the administration needs answers. they need this more clearly. there is something that caught my attention. i do agree with the public comment, what have been noticing lately. this is not the fault of anyone with the conspiracy in mind. well i believe it is that it is an even further to the multiple representatives in one location.

i would like to see each representative from single lots. it turns out that we have a few people from the same business who might be residence or owners, or somebody else. this begins to restore everything and i will correct this. i will look to be amending this, before the full board. i want to say that for us to have this conversation five years later, lessons have been learned. and i will not demean the good work of the people who have taken their volunteer time in order to help expand this concept. this is not like any other cbd. most have a timespan of 12-15 years when i put this on its training legs, this ia reduction of its

time. seven years is half o fwhat most cbd's are. i will support this with great confidence. >> if i may, i think one thing that ihope we can do between the time that this comes or goes forward is to look at the issue of the make-up of the cbd. i don't know if we can condition the resolution on the promise that you can't have the representation more than one individual from a specific business. i think making this clear may be one way. i would ask you work with the city attorney to put this in the resolution.

i think transparency is very critical. the fact that this ordinance is not legally required to comply, this is not mean that the authorization of the creation -- that we cannot issue compliance with the ordinance. this is something else but i would ask that you consult with the city attorney to see if there is a way that we could condition this as part of the approval, compliance with this ordinance. i do not know that there is anything that precludes us from requiring us to comply with the sunshine ordnance going forward. those are a couple of things that maybe, you can look into before the comeback to the board of supervisors.

>> great. and are there any other questions or comments? we have a resolution in before the committee. there has been indication as the kinds of changes that we would like to see as the matter comes before the board. a motion by farrell with a recommendation. thank you to everyone wh ocame out -- who came out on the matter. >> can you call item six? >> a hearing on the debt structure and the non-voter approved debt. >> this item has been introduced by supervisor farrell. he and his staff have spent time working on the item. the floor is yours. >> thank you, chair campos.

and thank you to everyone who is here for this hearing. i want to thank the city attorney's office and the mayor's budget office, and the budget and legislative analyst for coming out today. one of the reasons i ran for supervisor last year was not only to help the small business grow in the city, but also fight for sound fiscal policy in san francisco. when i arrived here, i spent a lot of time with the members who are here today looking into the infrastructure, and the debt is something that came to be concerned. the 1.3 $6 billion that i mentioned, this is a little bit of a misnomer. we have hundreds of millions of dollars of debt on the books, most in the form of certificates

of participation. this is something i had not realized and something i want to talk about, publicly. in particular, i was wanting to talk about debt and what we do when they defeat the bond measures and how we promote the projects otherwise, and how we look at how we review the debt that we have on the books for the ongoing maintenance operations and capital expenditures. i want to thank everyone for coming out here today, and what we will do, a number of people come up. we will talk about the overall that structure, the city attorney's office will talk about the legal framework, and also, we have the issue about the lease revenue bonds in san

francisco. and how we define them, and how they impact the other debt. and we have the comparative analysis with other jurisdictions. the budget office will talk about this, and the other topical issues we have dealt with for years in city hall. and that will help us to go about that for years to come. thank you, chair campos. i would ask the comptroller's office. w e will -- we will chat about the debt structure. >> in temrs orms of the $1.3 billion, do you have this breakdown? >> thank you.

i would say i want to thank the supervisor for bringing this item forward. it is important for us to think about this issue, just looking enduing brief research on the internet, there are dozens of countries that actually have debts that are lower than $1 billion. this is a lot of money when you think about the city being in debt to a certain level. this is an important issue and i am have you brought this forward. >> good morning. i am from the office of public finance. i would like to give an overview of the debt portfolio as it stands today.

>> the following page outlines the debt portfolio as of may, 2011. if we have about $2.60 billion, in -- of debt. $1.40 billion is the general obligation bond. -- certificates of participation, with the san francisco redevelopment agency. and we have revenue bonds of $6 million. the general obligation fund -- this is a required two-thirds vote, and this is a 60-1 votes with the majority.

these bonds are approved by the voters. this shows up the shields and the constraints with those different categories for the general obligation bond. we're currently at 0.94%. this also creates another limitation. we have this at the 2006 level and we are currently below this. we don't have a mandate but we do have a policy, requiring that the stays below 2.5 in the general fund. >> just to be clear, we're well

below the capacity to issue these bonds. these are big numbers we're talking about. but we are well below what we could issue at this time. there is a 5% assessed valuation. >> we are below 1% right now. >> can you tell us about the other cities? i do know they have different variations, and this is very robust compared to others. we have a large volume as we have heard from the rating agency. this is below market capacity.