>> it does make sense. >> i think we did call. it didn't show up. >> we're waiting for -- >> we had public comment. we can talk about it. president o'brien: public comment is closed. next item. >> new business? commissioner adams: i would like to bring about, during the first public comment about the food trucks, i am hearing from my district and from other districts, the issues with the food trucks. if we can have somebody here from dpw, i know we will be

discussing it any permit committee as well. i know there is a difference between getting permits on public land and private land. it is interesting in just the last month, i am hearing a whole lot of good and bad with the food trucks. if we can get a presentation in the future, somebody on that permitting process. >> is not just dpw. -- it is not just dpw. if you want the permitting process on private property it's dph and planning. commissioner adams: you have three different -- >> dph is involved with both. dph is involved with both permitting processes.

but for private property, they get the -- they have to do deferral to the planning department stating that through the planning department process, the truck has authorization. for dpw, they are the final permit operator, but the operator has to show that they have their dph permit. commissioner adams: i like when they have the food trucks at golden gate park or civic center plaza. those are great and wonderful. i am hearing negativity about down at fisherman's wharf, castro, other neighborhoods. there seems to be no public input on whether the private or public space and i would like to address that. >> i will be happy to -- we

might want to get this through the permitting committee. there is public input definitely on the public property. there is mailing and noticing that is new to this permitting process. president o'brien: members of the public can participate and sit in on the permitting committee's meeting and listen to presentations. that is pretty important. i think we should get -- at least allow people that expressed some concerns. >> i want to follow up in regards to the presenter. i was there as part of the supervisors' meeting. there is some follow up that the supervisor has committed to. we are waiting for dpw to provide us with information

before we move forward with a follow-up. in regard to the concerns that we are expressed, they are taken very seriously. supervisor wiener is continuing on with hearing their concerns and looking at ways to address it. before -- needed some fact finding and data information about the number of permits, where they're being applied, that kind of thing. that is being done at this point. commissioner clyde: i have a few items for new business. public safety, sf travel has reported that local people already know there is a significant uptick in street crime over the last few months.

tourists are reporting harassment and employees are seeing more aggressive behavior. there has been significant deterioration in the public safety, particularly late at night. we need to look at ways to reverse this trend. if one of your employees is murdered on a cigarette break, you might be thinking than is a little bit more than just of the mission or just the neighborhood that you are in. i would like this commission to get a briefing on public safety for small businesses and see what we can do. the nature of aggressive panhandling has gotten -- people are more aggressive. it is all disturbing, but to see it increase in the midday hours, the afternoon hours, to see people of any age or ethnicity jumped for their stuff, frankly,

you know, i just have some questions about resources. i have questions about planning. i would like to hear something in the future. >> can i comment on that? i think that would be interesting to do a joint commission meeting with the police commission on this issue. my perspective is that one of my businesses is right across the street from the police station. literally across the street. the police presence is so minimal, the whole police station is like a fortress so it has little to no impact on even the small business is right next to it, let alone blocks away like where the cook cgogot

shot. more specifically, i had had a case where i stopped someone from shoplifting and was waiting for the police to come. they took too long. the shoplifters got away and i ended up following them from a distance. to the bart station. i got to the bart and kind of held the bart train so it couldn't go. the police showed up. then the suspects who weren't suspects were arrested. i purued through the da's

office, they made the decision that they did not have enough proof to pursue any arrest or conviction. that showed me very blatantly where we stand as a priority for the city and for the district attorney's office. in that particular shot, i have had people and staff hit, from things at, you name it. they say, can we call the police? i say it is pointless. >> we are concerned about the safety of our employees. we are concerned about the safety of our patrons and the viability of our businesses. at some point, yes, we have to

talk to them. if it would be something that we can discuss -- >> i assume it is happening all over the place. >> it is. business people in chinatown has just given up. it is part of the cost of doing business. there is no consequence. that is number one. the second thing that has come to my attention is this to work charges being three times the cost of water for businesses. i think we need to discuss further or go into some depth about adjustments for that type of rest fronts, bakeries, salons, the type of business. if we get more sophisticated water cleaning technology, the sioux were tax is predicated on the usage. grease is being captured and

resold. we're putting water saving technologies into our businesses. the water revenue goes down, the sewer tax goes down because they raise the rate. we have a catch-22, consumption declines, revenue declines, so what does the water department do? it raises rates. we are being penalized year. what i would like to investigate further is, our small businesses paying too much? are we subsidizing mcdonald's, those larger users? are we subsidizing them? are we paying too much? how do you slow down the rate of increase in the still make the investment in the infrastructure that we need? we just had a large rate increase in stores, we have

businesses looking to move. that is how this came to my attention and why i would like to put it on the agenda. we have a bakery that wants to expand in our district, but when they find out what these two were the and the charges are, the ongoing charges, this might make san francisco not attractive to them. and again, another reason to move out. i would like to look at this issue from a small business perspective. street cleaning and public own property, the city has been very aggressive at looking at the conditions of the sidewalks. replacement of the sidewalks, squares, cleaning them, they're quite aggressive about it. i did a walk and surveyed city property. i would like to know if the mta and the housing authority as well as other city agencies are

applying the same standards to their property. when i look at the condition of the sidewalks in front of public housing, i am not seeing that. i would like to know from the city that they are making the same investment that they are asking the small business property owners to make as well. my final new business is looking into a locally owned bank. there is momentum at the state level to create a state-owned bank on the model of the bank of north dakota. this is a bank that works for depositors and would invest in california. or if it would be possible to do for san francisco to follow the same model. a bank that earns money on its investments made in san francisco or by san francisco might be worth creating. they perform is practically

impossible, it is controlled by lobbyists retained by the industry. landing at the local level is very challenging. local bankers have lost almost all discretion. decisions are made thousands of miles away that our defensive in nature while solid investment decisions evaluated on their own merits are passed by, ignored, or basically stalled out of existence. this is a city that is so wealthy. it controls billions of dollars. pension fund, bond fund, why not look at creating our own bank and keep the competitive funds for our own needs. that concludes my new business. commissioner o'connor: wasn't the bank of america originally called the bank of san francisco? the bank of italy, right. >> they are laying off 30,000

people. president o'brien: that closes that item. >> item 21, adjournment. >> i move. >> i second. president o'brien: the motion is passed without objection. >> welcome to culture wire.

we will look at the latest and greatest public art project. recently, the airport unveiled the new state of the art terminal. let's take a look. the new terminal service and american airlines and virgin america was designed by a world- renowned architecture's firm. originally built in 1954, the building underwent massive renovation to become the first registered terminal and one of the must modern and sustainable terminals and the united states. the public art program continues its 30-year legacy of integrating art into the airport environment with the addition of five new commissions that are as bold and dynamic as the new

building. >> this project was completed in record time, and we were able to integrate the artist's early enough in the process that they could work with the architect said that the work that is completed is the work that really helps complement and instill the space as opposed to being tucked away in a corner. >> be experience begins with the glass facades that was designed with over 120 laminated glass panels. it captures the experience of being under or over clouds when flying in a plane. depending on the distance or point of view, it can appear clear for more abstract and atmospheric. the subtle colors change gradually depending on the light and the time of day.

>> i wanted to create an art work that looks over time as well as working on in the first glance. the first time you come here, you may not see a. but you may be able to see one side over the other. it features a couple of suspended sculptures. each was created out of a series of flat plains run parallel to each other and constructed of steel tubing. >> it is made up of these strata. as the light starts to shift, there is a real sense that there is a dynamism. >> it gives the illusion that this cultures might be fragments of a larger, mysterious mass. >> the environmental artwork

livens it with color, light, and the movement. three large woven soldiers are suspended. these are activated by custom air flow program. >> i channeled air flow into each of these forms that makes it move ever so slightly. and it is beating like a heart. if-0 when as of the forces of nature moving around us every second. >> shadow patterns reflect the shapes of the hanging sculptures. the new terminal also features a children's play areas. both of the market the exploratory n.y. -- exploratorium.

the offer travelers of all ages a playful oasis. using high quality plywood, they created henches shaped like a bird wings that double as musical instruments. serving as a backdrop is a mural featuring images of local birds and san francisco's famous skyline. >> in the line between that is so natural, you can see birds and be in complete wilderness. i really like that about this. you could maybe get a little snapshot of what they are expecting. >> it is an interactive, keck sculpture that is interacted with by the visitor. >> they are a lot about and they

fall down the belt. it moves the belt up, and if you turn that faster, the butterflies fall in the move of words. >> the art reflect the commission's commitment to acquiring the best work from the bay area and beyond. in addition to the five new commissions, 20 artworks that were already in the airport collection were reinstalled. some of which were historically cited in the terminal. it includes major sculptures by the international artists. as a collection, these art works tell the story of the vibrant arts scene in the early 1960's through the mid-1980s's. the illustrate san francisco's cultural center and a place of innovation that is recognized and the love throughout the world.

one of the highlights is a series of three left tapestries. they are on view after being in storage for 20 years. these tapestries representing various gardens. from his years of living in san francisco. hydrangeas, chrysanthemums, and whilst dahlias in rich, deep shades as they make their way to the baggage area. they can access behind-the- scenes information and interviews with the artist through an audio to work. it features archival audio as well as interviews with living artists. he can be accessed on site by dialing the telephone numbers located near the artwork or by

visiting the commission's web site. the public art speaks volumes of san francisco as a world-class city with world-class art and culture. for more information, visit

>> hello, welcome to a regular

meeting of the budget and finance committee. my name is current two. i am joined by supervisor kim. supervisor mirkarimi will not be joining us today. the clerk today is victor young. we have mark and bill from sfgtv. >> please turn off all cell phones. if you wish to speak during public comment, please provide a speaker card and turn them in to myself. if you present any documents, please include a copy to the clark. items acted upon today will appear on the board of supervisors agenda on center 20, 2011 unless otherwise stated. supervisor chu: thank you very much. supervisor mirkarimi has requested that we recusing. we can take that without objection. call item number 1. >> resolution authorizing an increase in the assessor- recorder's base recording fee for recording and indexing the first page of every instrument, paper, or notice from $3.10

dollars pursuant to california government code section -- section 27361(a). supervisor chu: thank you. this is brought to us by supervisor kim, and the ss r is here. >> good morning, supervisors. i would like to thank supervisor kim for carrying this legislation. it is fairly simple. pursuant to senate bill 676 in 2009, it allows us to increase the fees for the first page that we file on various documents up to $10. that fee, which is currently $4, would be proposed to be increased to $10. this would allow us to cover greater costs. we estimate currently that the fee, the cost to process these papers is about $24. at this point, with this new fee, we would be recovering about $10 for that.

so it would still be about a $14 subsidy. this puts us in line with other counties. alameda county charges $18. after we add in all the other fees in terms of access, indexing, social security feet, and the fraud protection fee, the fee goes up from $11 to $70. this is in line with alameda county, which is $11 -- $18. santa clara is $18. san mateo is $15, but they do not charge a frothy. i would be happy to take any questions or to walk you through any concerns you might have. supervisor chu: thank you. the clarification is that we have an amendment of the hole that would change the basic record number from $3 to $4 -- that was just a simple typo? >> madam chair, it was just a

change in reference to the existing fee. so it is not a change at all in the fee and does not require any kind of continuance. supervisor chu: in terms of the cost recovery, it costs us about $24. even if we increase it to the $10 rate, we still would not be the full cost recovery? >> correct. supervisor chu: thank you. if we do not have comments, why don't i go to the budget analyst report. >> madam chair, supervisor kim, the assessor estimates that this proposed base increase $6 to generate approximately $1.2 million, resulting in a total estimated annual base fee revenue of a little over $2 million for reporting documents. -- fort recording documents. supervisor chu: thank you. it's up in this up for public comment.

do any members of the public was to speak on this item? aca none, public comment is closed. colleagues, can we take the amendment as a whole? >> yes. >> we will do that without objection. supervisor ken, did you have any comments? supervisor kim: no, just that i was glad we brought this up. i am glad we could raise some of our fees closer to what it costs us to put this together. supervisor chu: thank you. the item has been an amendment, or an amendment of the whole has been accepted. to the new document, there is no continuance required, and we can take that without objection. thank you. item number two, please. >> item number two, resolution approving and authorizing the execution of modification number one of lease and use agreements l-10-0081 with cathay pacific airways and evicted for lounged

in the international terminal of san francisco international airport. supervisor chu: thank you. we have a member of sfo. >> the airport is seeking every approval to our existing lease with cathay pacific airways. the airlines wishes to expand its current square footage to include any additional exclusive space in the international terminal so that they can build a passenger lounge. cathay pacific airways currently leases 2,616 square feet of the exclusive use space and 631,000 square feet of a joint use common use space in the international terminal. the proposed modification would allow for an additional 5664 square feet of exclusive space so that the airline can build a passenger lounge at their sole expense. improvements associated are estimateto