13-14 funding. supervisor chu: if there are no questions from the committee, let's open up to public comment. is there anyone that wishes to speak on items two, three, four, five? i have two names. >> i am the executive director and managing attorney of -- thank you for a long as to revive testimony during the hearing in march. recently, also to discuss with us the 44% cut in our cdbg funding. we are the only legal services agency that provides a safety net legal services to latino immigrant, low income

communities, and many of our chinese friends are the same, and the koran or low-income community. we provide cultural and legal services. we received so many people that come each year to our agency. we make sure workers receive their wages, that they get their immigration status to get work permits, and that the elderly receive their public benefits and do not get evicted. or all, we provide services to make sure people do not become homeless. recently, with this 44% cut, this would be devastating to our agency. in the past year, we had to survive many foundation counts. because of community support and your support, we have been able to get through the year. i am a new executive director. i just completed about a year and four months.

this will just be devastating, this 44% cut. fran indicated adjustments for next year but we are requesting your support. almost half of our funding we have lost. supervisor chu: thank you. next speaker. >> good morning, brenda franklin. thank you all for your consideration of these grant funds. these grants will truly help make a significant impact on the lives of the homeless family research at two of our programs. they will help us provide temporary shelter, support services, housing, and eviction prevention counseling, and intensive case management. to give you an example, recently, our rental assistance

department at compass connecting point served a grandmother who had custody of her 4-year-old grandson. she has serious health issues and had just relocated to california from out of state with her grandson. she contacted compass connecting point and was provided with crisis intervention counseling, resources, and referrals to other emergency services and our long time shelter. eventually, the family was given the opportunity to move into subsidized housing. however, a credit check showed there would be major barriers to moving into that housing. there was bad credit debt. her case manager asked the rental assistance project at compass connection to help negotiate those debts down to reasonable amounts. along with service providers, close collaboration with the service providers, and also case

managers, they were able to remove those barriers and the family was able to move into that subsidized housing units. so we want to thank you again for your consideration and extend an invitation for you all to come out and see our programs in action. thank you. supervisor avalos: thank you. next speaker. >> executive director of the it housing alliance. i am here in support, especially of the move of hopwa into the mayor's office of housing appear that will be an asset and really open up a program to a lot of really good staff and people. i am very happy about that. we are a grantee of the mayor's office of housing. a lot of times, i talk about how the 8 housing alliance can prevent homelessness or keep people house for just $75 a month, and the spectrum of services we provide, but right

now i want to humanize the work that the mayor's office of housing does, so at 10:00 this morning, i have a date data with 3-year-old triplets. the sheriff came to remove him from his home that he lost to foreclosure. it was sold. over the last five weeks, we have been getting stays of eviction every week. the judge told us no more. not even come back this week. i was able to secure a 3-bedroom subsidize student for that family. somebody else happened to be living there at the time who was over housed, so i found them replacement housing, got them moved, and this gentleman had no experience with poverty, so people do not know how to before. he did not know what ga was, hamp.

he had no idea of the services. we are paying for the moving deposit for these peoples housing. yesterday, the new staff at the property were confused. they told him he was not going to be moving in and did not qualify for the unit. i went into overdrive and called a couple of your offices. he is down there citing his lease and getting his key today. that is the kind of real-world work that the mayor's office supports, and i really thank you for giving me such a rewarding job. i appreciate it. thank you. supervisor kim: thank you. other members of the public a wish to comment on items two, three, four, five? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues. supervisor kim: motion to move forward. >supervisor chu: can we do that without objection? we will do that without

objection. thank you. item six. >> item 6. ordinance amending the san francisco park code, article 12, by: 1) amending section 12.35 to increase certain parking rates and eliminate the early bird rate at the golden gate park concourse underground parking facility; 2) amending section 12.20 to eliminate the requirement that the controller file a certification regarding cost recovery; and 3) adding a new section 12.49 to ratify prior fees and fee adjustments; and making environmental findings and findings of consistency with general plan. supervisor chu: thank you. for this item we have kate with the department. this item was on our counter last week. we made an amendment to the title to clarify and a lot for an additional continuance to allow the public to be aware of the hearing. here we are today with this item. >> thank you, supervisor. we are here this morning to ask

for the committee's approval of an increase to the parking rates in the parking garage that is housed in the music concourse in golden gate park. i am actually going to turn this presentation over to our executive director of the music concourse community partnership, otherwise known as mccp. mccp was possible for raising the money and constructing the garage, and they currently run it under a lease with the department. so i'm going to ask jan to speak to this item specifically. >> thank you. good morning, supervisors. i am the president and managing director of the music concourse community partnership. i am having some allergy issues, so please excuse my voice. as casey noted, the garage was opened in 2005, bill $36.5

million in philanthropic gifts, up $26.5 million in financing. the music concourse community partnership is charged with the management of the ground until it is turned over to the city upon repayment of the debt. we estimate that will be an approximate 2039. the garage was refinanced in december 2011 at $30 million. use of the 800-space garage has steadily increased after the museum opened up in 2005, and it jumped significantly when the california academy of sciences reopened in 2008. use is now level off, and has begun its decline. i have worked in the museum field for many years and i just

want to comment that this kind of attendance pattern is very common in museums and cultural facilities. after new facilities are built, there is an initial excitement, a leveling off, and then the attendance begins to decline. i would predict we are going to see an even greater decline in the academy attendants next spring after the exploritorium opens. our peak parking use is in the tourist season and much lower in the winter months. it has become heavily dependent on popular, special exhibitions/ . in the last year, we have found that the impressionists are hot and venetians are not.

we are a nonprofit organization. we do not need to make money on this. we do need to cover our debt service, staffing, our rent to the city, utilities, and insurance. our expenses are pretty basic. there is not a lot to trim. i would also like to point out, each year, right off the top $1 million of our revenues goes to the city for parking taxes. over the last year, as we have noticed, a longer-term trends in the decline of the revenues. we have taken steps to reduce the expenses that we can. we have done this through a reduction of the evening hours, in coordination with institutions and also labor reductions. however, currently, we are still not able to cover the expenses. this is clearly a revenue problem.

our revenues this year have come in at 20% off of -- to load our conservative estimates. at this time, we need a rate increase. -- below our conservative estimates. this will help us to build up our reserves during the winter months, so that we can carry it when there are no popular exhibitions. the rates were originally set by ordinance in 2003. there was a 25-cent cola raise in 2009, and a 75-cent increase in august 2010. in order to arrive at our rate proposals, we reviewed rates from mta garages and other private garages for around the city. we found a wide variety of rates ranging anywhere from about $3

an hour, up to $24 an hour. the most prevalent trend we noticed this year is that garages that were charging $3 for each 15 minutes are now charging $5 for each 20 minutes. so pricing is certainly on the upswing. we also worked with the mta director of off street parking to review a bivarious strategied to come up with our recommendation. so our proposal is to increase weekday rates from $3.50 an hour, to $4.50 an hour. we are looking for a $1 increase on the weekends, from fort dollarsto $5 -- from $4 to $5 an

hour. we have always paid at the performing arts garage just down the street, figuring that that patronage is similar to the patronage attending newseum functions. our daily maximums will remain the same at 25 and $28 for weekday and weekend. we have eliminated the early bird rate because nobody was using it. and our monthly rate will remain the same. if you have any questions, i would be happy to answer them. supervisor chu: this is a question, perhaps could go to either the controller or to the department. with regard to the history of this car rides, generally, paid for by issuing debt, a private fund-raising, to create the

parking garage. it is currently operating as a nonprofit organization that pays rent to be parks and recreation department and we receive tax revenue from that parking garage at the moment? >> correct. supervisor chu: when does the server to the ownership of the city? >> it reverts to the ownership of the city once the bonds or loans -- we went from a bond situation to a loan situation with refinancing. we are projecting the term of that loan to end in 2039. we would love to have the resources to pay it off earlier and give it to the city much earlier than that. right now, 2039 is the date. supervisor chu: with regards to oversight, we received a question from community members about a concern of oversight. there is concern that if we approve this, the comptroller's

office may not have oversight, that the board of supervisors may not have oversight. from my understanding, nothing would change in that process. the city, the comptroller's office would continue to publish things like cpi colas, making sure that all departments comply with those requirements. from my understanding, the comptroller's office will continue to have oversight to publish a fee schedule that would include the the within it. from my understanding, the board of supervisors will today to see these fees come to us during the budget process. is that correct? ok. great. why don't we go to the budget analyst report. thank you for your presentation. >> madam chair, members of the committee, on page 4 of our report, we point out, for a 11- 12, there is a projected

budgetary shortfall for the garage of $1.2 million. if you approve these rates, it would kick in in june and would provide an additional $93,000, still leaving a shortfall of $1.2 million. it has been reported to us that there will -- that will be worked out through deferred payments. city park serves as the parking garage operator under a management agreement. with respect to the $1 per hour increase for the weekday and weekend, we estimate that would generate sufficient revenues to recover costs for fiscal year 2012-2013, including the debt service. we consider approval of this proposed ordinance to be a matter for the board of

supervisors. supervisor chu: thank you. supervisor kim? supervisor kim: i appreciate the presentation on the music concourse parking garage rates. it makes sense that we make these changes, particularly because we are not meeting the debt service payments. i think this is appropriate. regarding section 12.20, a different policy question, i had an amendment that i wanted to propose. i support deleting this provision because i think sometimes it is necessary to charge fees for services or facilities that exceed the property's cost of providing those services, so we can help pay for other programming, but i want to highlight when we do this. it is equally import we ensure the board and public are made aware when we do have fees that generate a surplus revenue and have an explanation of how we spend those fees, whether it goes to the clubhouses and

programs for youth. that is a general sunshine that i want to propose. i want to read into the record the first line which is already in the existing ordinance. it starts with, no later than may 15 of each year, the comptroller will file a report to the border supervisors one, reporting the new fee schedule, two, identifying any fees that produce revenue which is significantly more than the cost of providing the services for which the fee is assessed and describing how such revenue is used by the city or department. i have given copies to members of the budget committee. supervisor chu: thank you. this is an amendment supervisor kim is offering to the attorney. with these amendments be sensitive? >> they are not. supervisor chu: i have one clarification question. members of the public asked about the ceqa items, the findings of ceqa in the

legislation. from my understanding of it, it is really just speaking to the fact that there is an increase in fees and would not require a ceqa analysis. correct? >> we did get back from planning a determination that the legislation is statutory exempt from ceqa because it is a fee. supervisor chu: is there anyone from the public that would like to comment on this item? eric brooks. >> good morning, supervisors. eric brooks, speaking on behalf of the san francisco green party. i want to thank supervisor kim for introducing the amendment. the context here, from the point of view of advocates for the public and park spaces being opened to the public without fees at all is that the original

legislation years ago that put the consumer price index increases on park fees in the first place is not good because we should be heading in the other direction, towards not raising fees and not having any fees at all. then for rec and park to basically have this style language in a measure that is about raising fees for a particular parking garage that would then take the controllers certification that consumer pricêykyky36y index feet raisest excessive, out of the process, is unacceptable. it is headed in that exact opposite direction of what the occupy movement has been saying, of what the activities were about yesterday, which is that more and more people are wealthier and will appear at the

top. they are paying fewer and fewer taxes or things like our parks. what we should be doing to fund the park system is taxing those people, real taxes, and funding the general fund so that rec and park does not have to scramble like this to find a clever ways to gradually raise fees on the 99% who already cannot handle it and need to be able to go to public facilities and public comments about having to pay anything, so that they and what the people can share those facilities without any barriers i would say, with regard to 12.20, it would be cleared to strike that section rather than amend it. supervisor chu: thank you. other speakers who wish to speak on item 6? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, i want to reiterate, this is increasing the fees for this particular time. it does not change any of the

oversight that the comptroller's office would have on fees. the concourse authority in the situation would still have to approve any changes to fees appear generally, the rec and parks commission would have to see the budget and any fee increases. this board would have to see any fee increases. there is no change in the oversight with regard to the increase in fees. i just want to make sure that is clear for us and for the members of the public. colleagues, we have an amendment, motion made by supervisor kim for the amendments she had read into the record. can we take that without objection? without objection. as to the underlying item amended. motion to send the item forward as amended. without objection. thank you. i would like to call one other item out of order, just to make sure we are being efficient. if we could call item 11. >> item 11.

resolution approving and authorizing the execution of the third amendment to the masters tournament agreement with pga tour inc. for the use of harding park golf course for certain professional golf tournaments. supervisor chu: thank you. we have, and philip ginsburg with recreation and parks. >> good morning, supervisors. in april 2002, the city entered into a master tournament everett with the pga tour to bring high- profile golf tournaments to harding park. the agreement has been previously amended twice, first in april of 2004, and then again in may 2007. this third amendment, which is before you today, simply address is necessary scheduling changes and possibly extend the agreement by one year. the current agreement as amended states the pga tour will hold six tournaments at harding over a 15-year period beginning

january 1, 2005. he proposed a third amendment increases the number of tournaments to date, with the possibility of an night tournament, if the president's cup is held again at harding in 2021. this discussion was initiated by the pga out of a request to change some of the scheduling components within the existing agreement as laid out. the result of negotiations and agreements before you will result we hope in net revenues from 2013 through 2021, ranging in net revenue increase of 5 under $21,000 to $1.2 million. the pga tour has agreed to increase their reimbursement rates for this and has agreed to make capital investments in harding. overall, we believe this is a positive amendment, a positive change to the second amendment. i do think it is worth noting, our relationship with the pga tour has been good in many ways.

harding is considered to be one of the top three courses in the united states of america. while we try to have these tournaments every couple of years at parting, which increases the courses profile, it also results in what is a world class experience for our everyday san franciscans who golf there the rest of the year. fees remain very affordable. the tournaments' themselves bring a significant amount of its economic impact to the city. the pga tour estimates the president's cup in 2009 brought $76 million worth of economic activity to the city. in just a couple of weeks, the u.s. open will not be on our course, but at the olympic club, where they estimate $150 million in overall economic activity, impact for the city. the -- there are different types of toward a mess that we have at harding. we have had a president scott,

which is perhaps the highest profile international tournament we could possibly host. those tournaments will be more expensive for us to put on because of the maintenance associated with us in hosting the tournament, but we have also recently started holding champions tour events, which are for their over 50 professional tournaments, where they have proven, i think, much easier to put on and produce. another net positive of the overall agreement for us is -- i think there are some representatives from the tour who are here to speak. the tour events raise money for the first tee. that is an organization that teaches life values through gulf. -- golf. since we started hosting tournaments at harding, we have been able to generate about $1.8

million for the first tee, which has a site at various schools. it is really an incredible mechanism to give kids who might not otherwise have an opportunity to be exposed to the sport, an opportunity to learn it and the values associated with it. the pga tour came to us to ask for some scheduling flexibility. we think we are presenting an amendment to you which actually increases the reimbursement rates for the department and for the city as a result of that, and brings more world class professional golf to san francisco. supervisor chu: thank you. let's go to the budget analyst report. >> madam chair, members of the committee, on page five of the report, we point out, under the existing master tournament agreement between the city and pga and rpd, to date, the net

loss for holding the golf tournament is $667,113, including $141,000 under the first amendment. $526,094 under the second amendment. that was the two tournaments with a balance of -- a balance of two tournaments basically breaking even where the department recovered its costs. on page 9 of our report, as shown on table for, under the proposed third amendment, from 2013 until 2021, based on the data that the rpd submitted to us, we estimate rpd