comptroller of staff and rec & parks staff. we rate 14 features in each park. it's a continual process to engage all facets of the operations to maintaining high appearance standards. you can see the slight decrease, but again, the score remains very high and the general manager did not warrant last year and this year that staffing is reduced as budgets are reduced and resources are diminished. it is going to be difficult to maintain these high scores, so it's a credit to the rec & parks that they are as high as they continue to be. this just looks at -- i'm sorry

-- above 90% in the green. 80% is in yellow and just seven parks are below 80% than last year, but that is very small considering in our initial year, -- i'm sorry -- 66 parks below 80%. >> this is the first report issued under the model we've reorganized to. you can see on this slide, the decreases that did occur, but i want to bring your attention to the 3.4% positive change. that happened specifically in low scoring districts. we have a new manager that applied really great action plans on two projects to

overcome persistent problems. all of the psa's remain over the 85% threshold. we hope to use the aggressive strategies used this past year to address other decreases that did occur. >this is a listing of the features. they remained consistent in scoring from the past year. all are above the 85% threshold and we have seen steady improvement in the playground ratings. as the general manager noted, has focused on restrooms to the public is clearly reflected. those scores on restrooms continue to rise. we are as high as 93%, which is quite incredible.

>> this slide shows the district scores and the high bar is the highest scoring district. the box is the lowest scoring district. the green is the average. this is our narrowest difference between our highest scoring district and our lowest scoring district. that speaks to the recommendations in the past to focus of a southeast portions of the city where there have been consistently lower scores. we've seen an increase in district 10 and 11 in those parks. just to see the gap narrowing ensures every citizen and every park user, and a matter where they are, are guaranteed an equitable level of service and that is great news. >> we always report on

cleanliness ratings. this is a variable element and depends of the time the rating occurred and how soon or late it occurred in relationship to custodial hours. and the daily changes in parts usage. you see the ups and downs and that draws our attention to one of the drivers -- the peaks here correspond to low winter months, when people don't get out a news the parks so much. i wanted to say again, as the general manager expresses, in this past year, we began making additional changes in an effort to continue encouragement of the department. we began giving it score reports to the service managers so they could expand their

opportunities to use resources strategically. the department instituted an operational line up whereby on each day, front-line staff get together and discuss department priorities, including part scores and create action plans to address the deficiencies. we have used part scores as part of the annual appraisal process for all operations staff. we are so serious about this process that we have reinvigorated our annual training process for a evaluators. we more rigorously apply the standards debt we use. >> and going to review the recommendations we have made for this year. one did not make it -- one was to rename this speedway and i can't believe my thunder was stolen, but next year. after they bison at helmut

hollow, it was kind of dry. the first recommendation to -- is to sf the park a valuation data to determine effectiveness and park maintenance activities. that is a differentiation from past years, which is to merely use it, because of the stuff that and taken within the division to use our data and the institutional lineups. these different structures are being put in place and now is the assessment of a is there receptivity on the staff line. that's exciting new recommendations. the second recommendation is to determine the key drivers of the valuation scores of the parties to more effectively manage park maintenance. that speaks to our resources in

happens at the parks. we don't know to what level -- if i put a custodian here, how does that affect things down the line? is there a key driver moving a score and if so, how can we best allocate those resources? the next is to revise or clarify standards and methodology entrain evaluators to improve the consistency of the violations. in general, we are seeing -- this is our sixth year of evaluations and we see people have been interpreting the evaluations in different ways. there is an opportunity to tighten the language and make sure everyone is going out with the same language and evaluating in the same context and that will make the scores more rigorous and robust. adopt a new model for scheduling compliance. this relates back to the proxy

language where compliance is part of our job to ensure staff are where they are supposed to be. the schedule was dynamic and evaluators do not have a dynamic way of looking at where staff should be and to ensure compliance. it's important to reflect the way people are being used and to see where they are. developed improved methods -- there's a huge amount of data and to make sure that rec & parks and controller are using the same systems to look at the same piece of information. it's about getting a i.t. resources and. we want to call -- resurfacing. we want to use the valuation data to plan for improvement for low scoring parks. given that there are a limited

operating dollars, what is the most important feature that rec & parks want to look at? how can we look at the strategic plan said the scores are all in combination -- maybe there is opportunity to decide this is not the opportunity to focus on the lawns, but instead, restrooms. the focus on restrooms in the parks has influenced the score and i think moving forward, how do we want to move force? >> from the department's point of view, we agree with these recommendations. we started right in on trying to make improvements to help these things along. we have turned around the time it takes in our process to get evaluation scores and the actual violation back to the

staff so when they begin addressing issues, they are not stale. we have begun more regular meetings -- to develop strategies to address the recommendations. to get a better idea of how the scores of very and evaluation differences occur, we have instituted a quality-control evaluation and will be having some of our top personnel got into a duel of valuation so we can see where the differences lie. we started a survey of our parks to make sure evaluators are actually there we have done a data check so that we know the scores being entered into the system are the actual scores people are doing in the field. we are also looking at how long it takes to do an evaluation. people take different times and we're going to make suggestions as to what the proper time for

a piece of property takes. as we begin to implement best grain maintenance practices, we will do this -- best green maintenance practices, we will do this of how we become a more green city. we're also trying to make this an easier process for every one of the 100 plus people involved so they are happy to get out there and do the work and can fit it into the rest of their maintenance day. thank you for your time this morning. >> i want to offer a very quick thank you to everyone for their partnership. i also want to mention the director of operations and the superintendent of parks. all of our parks services and rank-and-file custodians and gardeners who are doing the work and doing more with less

and they deserve a great deal of commendation for the results you have seen over the last few years. >> so be it. thank you very much. >> the what i am familiar with his park presidio boulevard. it seems to me for something like a boulevard -- if i'm thinking of the correct one -- is that the one on 14th avenue on both sides of the freeway? >> yes. >> it is 14 blocks and there is part space on both sides. >> that one showed a decrease of 16.9% according to your numbers. >> that is correct, but the thing about park presidio boulevard is is a cleanliness issue. there are trees and very few

elements. there are 14 elements in the standards. for a park with only one or two elements, those one or two elements can heavily skewed the overall property. >> that's my point. you look at the rest of your properties, it is unique. i'm wondering if this is something you can take out of your metrics and measure it to account for what exactly you have described. it does sku when you have one or two measures and it's not taking -- that -- it doesn't match with your other properties. huf>> i would like to comment on this point because it's an interesting one. >> the methodology -- it took a number of years to come to an agreement. we started in 2003 and the

evaluations didn't start until 2006. there are going to beat huge variations in the types of parts were looking at. many parks only have a few features, so those parks are going to have higher variability across the board. something we have talked about internally as looking at part types, and i think we could look at a more refined level of these types of features and let's compare them to each other as opposed to a grand list. that said, the grand list is important. >> you could scarcely in my mind call it a park. it's not really a part in the sense that you think of a part because it's very narrow, there's very limited activity that could take place, perhaps

just a dog trail -- a jogging trail. you have traffic on both sides, it's misleading in a sense to allow been with lincoln park and richmond playground and so forth since -- >> i think it's a fair point and we do spend some time thinking about how we can refine -- it's like baseball statistics. once you change the ground rules, the historical data becomes less relevant. there are some trade-offs and this is a tool in the toolbox. it's not necessarily the be all, and all. we visit a park four times a year. the department scores -- those for visits constitute 50% and

the controller's 1 visit constitute 50% because they are the control. but if the comptroller's office hits parker presidio on a bad monday when we have had challenges with a homeless encampment or letter from traffic and it's a low score, that's going to impact bat parks overall score. but i think there is enough data with enough parks that we are able to measure general trends. i do not get too terribly worked up by a score in any one given part in any one given quarter or any one given year. if we see an entire district airpark area diminished by a significant number of percentage points, that's cause for concern. we are able to make some good operational judgment out of the data we have. but your point thurgood and it would be worth at some point because we have similar

discussions about how to take this to the next level. >> no part score should stand alone, but the longitudinal data is where the information lies. anything maintained by the department is evaluated under our evaluation with the exception of what is classified as open space. once as one or two features, that constitutes a park and it's in our pool of evaluations. >> what this report suggests to me is that in order to continue to have these outcomes, we need to continue to make efforts and

actually make great strides, whether working with other departments in the city or however we do that, we need to continue to continuously bring more staff into the picture here. there's a huge infusion of man hours. there were many nonprofits throughout the city that benefited from those resources and unfortunately, when those -- when that manpower went the way, nonprofits were impacted very seriously.

to do this partnership -- we could continue to see those numbers godown. i want to thank the leadership of the general manager and staff in not dropping the ball and saying we have a reason not to do as well because we lost all is manpower. the department should be congratulated for continuing along the same line in terms of some of the efforts put forward to acquire additional man-hours here. i just want to say that anything we can do is a commission to encourage that, we need to try

to foster as many partnerships as we can. we've always known from day one that we do not have as much manpower as we need and we have a very severe shortage of staff in our parks and we need to constantly keep that in mind. thank you. >> a couple of things -- on golden gate park, section 2 and section 5 -- section 2 of fundamentals and the other with open space -- how did they achieve that level of maintenance? >> can you repeat that? >> section 2, under ornamental gardens and the other, section 5 under open space -- why did

they get such a low scores? >> i think we would have to go back to the raw a valuation data. -- the raw evaluation data. i'm going to guess here -- open space is a singular feature and is evaluated on cleanliness and if there are five pieces of trash or 10 pieces of trash, it is a failed. i'm going to assume that golden gate park is especially driven by the open space feature, especially because it is fast. >> that would reflect on what the general manager talked about. >> i am happy to go back and look at the raw data and give a more refined analysis of that.

>> if you look at ornamental gardens, one of our areas that's much more intensely maintained -- you either have that intensity with labor that's available or you don't. section two has a lot of our ornamental and high maintenance areas. you will see it there. >> thank you. >> for those not familiar with the sections, section 2 is the music concourse, heavily ornamental gardens. section number one is conservatory valley, also have the on ornamental gardening. section 5 is the meadows and helen paulo -- heland hollow. the two features of those sections are unique as well.

>> is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public, disclosed. this was discussion only. we are now on item 11, america's cup draft parks events operations plan. >> it is information only. there is no -- its only environmental stuff.

>> good afternoon, i ever made partnership and redevelopment office. and you're wearing two hats -- and at that as well as i have been working half time for the mayor's office of economic and work-force development of the america's cup project, so i am here in both roles and i'm here to present the america's cup parks event operations plan. just to give everybody a little context, the schedule of america's cup events fault -- calls for two types of events. in 2012, the world series events, august 11th through the 19th and august 27th through september 2nd. this is a traveling exhibition of races the america's cup authority and race management

are going to run the world, racing is smaller craft, 45 foot catamarans. they show up and it's a traveling road show with a common have wonderful events and an event village they create an race the boats near the shores of people can get a good sense of what their races are like and it's a great way to raise the profile of america's cup. we are excited to have them. ultimately, for the 2013 events, they will be building at america's cup buildings on peer's 27 and at 29, but that will not be complete in advance. in 2013, the full america's cup event will come here and that runs from july through september, so three long months. this is the from the bay

conservation submission package that it shows a rendering of what we think the america's cup village is going to look at -- going to look like. you are looking from the southwest. just to give you a little more context, there are quite a few documents produced and approval process is as you can imagine. the event the agreement was signed between the city and america's cup about a year ago, and late december 2010. we're moving forward for the federal parks are going to be hosting some of these events. as part of the advance, the city authority agreed to write a series of implementation plans. these are documents that discuss how the city will be addressing issues like transportation, that is the people plan. there is a the zero waste plan,

there is a security plan, there are about 11 or 12 of them. as the public outreach events unfolded, it became clear a parks and racec plan and shoulde included. so what this document is -- there are a few reasons we decided to do this. one, it helps coordinate -- there is a city park land being affected, state park land and federal park land. it helps to coordinate between ellis' jurisdictional agencies and discuss how the event will be managed across the board so it looks like -- it looks like a seamless event. we were approached by a few environmental groups concerned about the natural resources and how they would be affected by this event.

they wanted to make sure the city was taking the necessary processes to make sure everything was in great conditions. it is significant to note this plan is not part of the ceqa process. nor is it one of the mitigation monitoring and reporting program. it's not a really a legal document. so what is in this sparks and operations plan? i helped, through my role at the mayor's office, helped draft the city section. it talks about all the jurisdictions. it is a comprehensive list of the recreational and natural resources in these parks that may be affected by events. it includes everything from turf to parking to docks to

trees, everything we could think of that might be affected. and how would they be affected? then we think about different steps we could take to minimize impact, and then we talk about what we could do after the event to make sure that any damage that does happen is changed and everything looks just as good as when we started. there was a specific discussion about what sort of site inspections we may do. the city is used to hosting shorter events. what we do is have a site inspection before, and after the event, we have a site inspection, and then we can discuss how to repair any damage that is done, but as the event stretches on, we want to minimize the impact and make sure the city is well prepared. i have spoken to