none of the conflict, we will review any contract for services provided or any other golf course operators and the city attorney has advised us that we can proceed. >> was it the city attorney's recommendation that you take the extra step of transparency? >> yes. they did not feel it was required, but thought it was advisable. >> we to have public comment. -- we do have public comment go ahead and start.

>> my whole speech is on there. >> just start and they will. >> i am back again to bring to your attention the issues on the overhead having to do with conflicts and i would like to read what the issues are. the city attorney has not resolved the problems i brought up. we have a possible commingling of purchases that are going to go through the pga tour to tournament players. let me start with the beginning issue. they are romancing -- have contracted for a managing agreement. but to use the space for office and that classes -- second, they are reimbursed for all of their operating expenses. that is where one of the

problems comes in. the bills come in and they could be for any thing, including golden gate park. they will provide backup personnel services and accounting. on this side, it's a requirements -- it is a requirement to provide those services. the whole point is they teach children. they do not run businesses as having their own staff. the fourth item i want to bring to the staff is that first services are reimbursed directly. it is a direct relationship. that is where the problem comes in. on the tax forms of 2009, which are the most recent available, they received $254,000 for this reimbursement. this is not penny ante stuff. we're talking about a major relationship.

to go back to the last point i want to make, they use these offices to provide services to the first tee. will this space be used to operate golden gate park? the relationship is they do not have the staff to do the work and we are now getting into them providing services going to another entity and the question is, do they intend to use the services for the golden gate park police operations? >> if they are going to continue to be -- golden gate operations. the corollary to that is if they continue to work through this agreement, are they in

violation with the city? the issues that have been addressed have not addressed these very serious problems. we have multiple overlying agreements. this has to be looked at seriously. i recommend you postponed until we get all of this straightened out. i'll be happy to leave you the forms weren't talks about things. this is dead serious. thank you. >> is there anyone else who would like to make public comment on this item? public comments is closed. >> let me ask, generally speaking, if i understood correctly, you were satisfied that there would be a separate entity operating at golden gate park, the separate corporate entity being set up.

and you are taking further steps that are not legally required but suggested by the city attorney to ensure transparency? >> absolutely. >> thank you. the third redundancy would be the city attorney approves all leases before they can be executed. that would be our third failsafe. >> thank you. >> just to reiterate, this rsvp did go out to bid. through your selection panel, were there multiple bids? >> there were. >> you went through the process and decided to award it to the first tee. you have run all of this through the city attorney's office? >> absolutely. >> thank you.

>> we have concluded public comment and it is in the hands of the commission? >> i will entertain a motion. all those in favor? hearing none, it is unanimous. thank you very much. >> we are on item number nine, the ocean beach parking lot celebration of the life of a warren hellman. >> i'm be acting director of property management. we brought last month to you and i am approving or road closures and amplifying sound permit for the public celebration of the life of warren hellman. it has been a public item that has moved quickly and we are back today to ask for an amendment to the amplified sound permit. quite frankly, there were too many great musicians who wanted

to perform and i think we are in a position where we could not say no to people who have been coming out for over a decade to perform at the festival. the item before you would extend the amplified sound per met on sunday until 6:15. it is currently 5:00. the department feels strongly this is acceptable. we would have had concerns had the events occurred in helmand hollow. since it is in the ocean beach parking lot and it is a well lit area, we are confident it is acceptable given that sunset is about 5:51 on sunday. additionally, we are requesting the sound permit be extended to allow for a limited and periodic sound check between 10:00 and 5:00, just to allow performers

to test equipment. this is standard for a concert of this size. things have been moving so quickly that it would have been included last month. additionally, before i submit myself to any questions you might have come i know there were questions about the operating plans and specifically about crowd control measures. when we were considering it, the original idea was that it would be in a tent and it would have a capacity of about 8000 people. now the space is more open. there are not going to be -- viewing the music will not be limited to the people inside the tent and it will be open access and we are concerned about keeping the number at 8000. it will be shut for overflow and

we have worked extensively with the san francisco police department to develop security so that in the event more than 8000 people turned out, the venue can accommodate that for a safe event. >> is there any public comment on this item? >> entertain a motion. moved and seconded? all those in favor? hearing none, it is unanimous. >> we are now on item number 10. the recreation and park department for 2012 and 2013 and 14. >> good morning, commissioners. i am here to ask for your approval of the department of fiscal year 2012, 2013, and 2013

and 2014 budget submissions to the mayor's office. i am pleased to tell you this morning we have been able to balance the budget in both years, primarily through the use of additional revenue and the budget includes no layoffs or service reductions. as we know, this is the first time the city is in beijing in a process for general developments. we will submit a budget for both fiscal years and the numbers on the slide have changed over the past six or seven weeks. the city has amended its general fund deficit projection for next year and of the year after. the budget challenge the budget is solving for is $3.7 million.

i do want to note while we are submitting a two-year budget, i fully expect we will be back before the commission next year, discussing the budget and making changes to that budget, based on better information about revenue and expenses. even though we will be in a two- year budget cycle, we will be revising the second year. it is not set in stone. as we have gone through the budget balancing process, we have tested these principles and kept them in mind. we have actually come up in the course of conversation as we have been making trade-off decisions about the budget. they have definitely guided our decisions.

we have done out reach about the budget and proposed solutions. we have had to community budget meetings. we have been to the commission, of course. we had a positive staff meeting about the budget and we have been talking about with park advocates, particularly with the parks alliance. i presented the budget last week and we do in fact have an e-mail address citizens can use to send us suggestions for revenue enhancements or budget reductions [unintelligible] next year, we need to work more on the electronic tools we use

for budget out reach. we have focused on revenue as the primary solution for both fiscal years. you can see for fiscal years 12-13, of the $3.7 million we're solving four, $3.1 million of that will come from enhanced revenue and $600,000 will come from expenditure savings. how in the next year, of the $3.1 million reduction we face, we will solve 2.4 million through revenue and $650,000 through expenditure savings. the details of the proposals are as follows. we are projecting to budget $1.4 million in increased revenue at the stadium. this includes ticket and

advertising revenues as well as the fact that we expect to receive approximately $2 million in playoff revenue in the current fiscal year and have asked the mayor's budget office to give us credit for that unexpected revenue coming this year over the next two fiscal years. we expect to generate $800,000 in additional revenue from concessions and leases. this includes a big things and small things and things such as additional revenue from food carts, the teagardens', and the parking garages. at the end of the day, talking to the mta about the parking grosz revenue projections for next year, the numbers they submitted to me -- instead of

showing a significant reduction, face showed a slight uptick we will see how that plays out. we are also proposing changes to the fees that golf course. in particular, we would look at making changes to pricing at harding park and at sharp park and implementing a pricing model similar to what we currently have at harding. we hope to generate $100,000 from that change next fiscal year. the next year, and the 13-14, we are relying on a slightly different set of revenue solutions. we propose taking a million dollars from a long-term lease

we have with the public utilities commission for parking places that civic center. there's about $1.5 million left on the least day of a less and we are not going to rely on that next year. presumably, half a million dollars in 14-15. it the concession and least numbers here assume we would see 2.5% growth in concessions and leases. we project another $0.5 million from the stadium primarily through tickets, concessions and advertising. finally, we are proposing to implement a new fet model for the recreational programming, one that is used by a number of cities across the country.

it would be a model involving cost recovery for the cost of the programs we are offering. right now, we have programs to recover as little as 10% of what it costs to actually put on the program. while we do not think for a majority of our programs we would ever be close to 100% cost recovery, we think even if we could be in the neighborhood of 30% to 40% cost recovery, that would go some way to generating extra revenue for the department. we do feel strongly, however, that the cost of our programming should never be a barrier to participating in that programming. we would anticipate as the cost for programs go, so what our scholarship program. i just want to note that last fiscal year, we gave away $0.5

million in scholarships. year to date, we have given away well over $400,000. by the end of this fiscal year, we expect to be well over $500,000 in scholarships given. i would like to remind you that for any fee proposals, staff will be back in front of the commission was fully fleshed out and detailed proposals for your separate approval and we would expect for golf and recreation proposals to be in front of you in april. we have about $600,000 in expenditure savings in each of the next two fiscal years. this comes from a handful of proposals. the first would be at some slightly additional attrition or

delayed hiring and the budget of about $185,000. as we discussed, we are restructuring be aquatics division. this is something that will be implemented in the current fiscal year but it is not in the budget. in making these changes in the budget, we saved about $170,000. we will take the savings and apply them toward our budget challenge. we are continuing to find philanthropic support and have been fairly successful at this over the last 18 months or so. we have a halftime gardner being paid for through a guest and we have in the past couple of months received a guest to support a full-time gardener at the polo field in golden gate

park and we expect while not an overwhelming amount of money, we will be able to continue to generate some revenue to offset operating costs over the next couple of years. we are proposing to make changes and run a pilot project that would reduce our garbage costs. we have a park service area manager who has made a proposal to me for changing how they collect garbage. we think they can reduce the amount of service that would generate about $50,000 savings next year. if the pilot is successful, we would anticipate rolling it out to all the parks service areas in the next fiscal year. finally, we remain focused on reducing our workers'

compensation costs. we are focused on providing temporary transitional work to employees who are eligible, who have been injured and are eligible and we believe if we continue to push that and provide it wherever possible, we can save another $50,000 on our workers' compensation budget for next fiscal year. as we have been working to balance the budget, we have been making changes to implement new policy initiatives in the coming fiscal year. among these proposals we are looking at 412-13 are adding a third gardner apprentice class that would be expected to start in december of 2012. with this third class, we would be up to 20 apprentices total in

our program. we are proposing to increase parked patrol and accountability in the budget. we are proposing to take some of the additional revenue we are going to generate from our new recreation fees structure into needed recreational southeast -- salaries that allows us to increase the amount of programming we are providing. we're also going to implement what the park superintendent has dubbed the custody and release program, which is basically the creation of a pool of as needed staffing of custodians to allow us to make sure our bathrooms are clean and open and this happens as we have posted on each of our public restroom

doors seven days a week. we were able to create this program and a way that is cost neutral to the budget and we have moved resources around to create this new tool. finally, we have increasing use of the scholarship program and we are setting ourselves a target to increase participation by at least 15% in the next fiscal year. >> could we go back one page? >> could we get the power point up, please? >> one more. there you go.

i'm happy to see the apprenticeship program. that is great. you answered one of my questions -- i did not know what a custodial relief program was. the increase -- increasing park patrol capacity and accountability, what is that about? >> one of our most fundamental responsibilities that we have is to keep the parks safe. we have very limited parked patrol resources that do not allow us to actually allow us to adequately cover the to under 20 neighborhood parks and golden gate park's and we have obligations at candlestick for 82470 -- 24-7 basis. that unit has suffered from lack

of resources and the lack of leadership and support, it is a unit which has, because it is a 24-7 operation, it's a unit that needs more accountability and oversight. right now, we have paid memory -- right now, our field staff hard doubling as supervisors and it's not a model that is working. we want to have the administrative head reporting and that would allow us to put more park patrol capacity in the field and do a better job with fiscal accountability and budget issues.

>> so there would be a new person as administrator? >> the proposal is to add a park patrol manager. it's a managerial class and that would allow us the classes that are doing the administration work and that the whole purpose is to manage the unit effectively. to add a little bit of public safety. >> how many park rangers do you have? >> we have about 18. >> 18 full-time employees? >> they operate on a 24-7 basis. it is a very large and critical function in the department. it is one that needs supervision during the day and during that evening.

>> 18 people, even full-time, is very small. they don't even carry guns or have any kind of deterrent. >> de enforce park code provisions and have uniforms and radios -- today and for sparked code provisions that have uniform set radios that enable them to retain their own public safety. they do not carry guns nor is that a proposal we would support. >> but safety falls on police, does it not? day and up calling the police. >> correct. -- they end up calling at the police. >> correct. some of our newer captains are a working partnership with the san francisco police department and that has never been better.

we are working on training our own park patrol officers which has never been done. the way are owned park patrol has been instructed to call for support was to call 911. >> are you looking at expanding the force? give them the size of the parks that we have -- >> the steps we are taking i think accomplishes two goals. it actually adds to our overall capacity but most importantly improves professionalism within the unit. would we like to see more parked patrol? yes. i would also like to see more garden and recreation staff. these are the challenges we face. as you know, the recent study concluded that our operating budget deficit is about $30

billion. this particular panel of community stakeholders' felt it was appropriate. we would need to add to our operating budget by eight a total of $30 million. those resources would go toward gardening, custodial, and structural maintenance staff. we are doing what we can but the resources we have, but this is an important step along without we've recently gotten from s f p d. i'm pleased to report the honda unit that belongs to the san francisco police department is -- has moved downtown into golden gate park which has helped add to our public safy