are usually refrigeration units that go in, open the door, pulled something out, and that is the primary driver in their energy costs. for many of the mom-and-pop stores and small restaurants, they either by these, they are released, or a manufacturer provides them to them. really, their control over that equipment is very limited what is essentially our pilot project does is to select a handful of commercial properties in san francisco, again, mom-and-pop stores and restaurants, work with them to switch out there refrigeration units to higher energy efficiency models and track the savings. if we can begin to build a case for these opportunities to establish more incentives and rebates, then our plan is to go back to the california public utilities commission, the california energy commission, and talk about changing

standards and code so that manufacturers who are producing these refrigeration equipment are producing higher efficiency units that small mom-and-pop stores can use in restaurants. in addition, we are doing a survey of the majority of the mom-and-pop stores and restaurants to look at actually what types of models and equipment they are using today, so we will have our outreach team going door-to-door in various commercial corridors, collecting this information, and helping us build a case for any kind of changes to the standards and those for energy efficiency going forward. that is the proposal that we are looking for your support on today. happy to answer any questions. supervisor chu: just wondering with this grant, how many businesses you think you would be able to pilot. >> on the first phase, we're looking at identifying 40 individual businesses that we're

offering the rebates to and actually install monitoring equipment to see what the savings are. we would do about 150 audits of the additional commercial businesses in order to kind of build our survey of what the type of infrastructure that san francisco businesses are using. supervisor chu: thank you. with regards to the 40 businesses that he would be able to offer the rebates for in the initial phase, is there a strategy around the types of businesses and the locations of the businesses? can you speak more to that? >> sadly. the strategy on the initial 40 that will be part of the rebate pilot is looking at those businesses we have already touched, or we have already gone in and done energy efficiency upgrades, so we have already completed that work, and looking at the kind of creating a model of what their overall energy efficiency is to see if the

refrigeration units, we can create a business case that if we had higher efficient equipment in there, we could reduce their overall pg&e costs down to a point that it is actually valuable for them to invest in switching out equipment. we are really looking at creating a formula and then applying the formula to the businesses we have already served in selecting those. supervisor chu: supervisor kim? supervisor kim: she asked the question i wanted to ask in terms of the targeted businesses. with the partnerships, where has that been correctly? >> the majority of the work that we have done in the past eight years has been city-wide, so we touched almost every district in san francisco with either of our energy watched program on the residential side as well as our commercial lighting program on the business and commercial

side. again, we really had a chance to really touch every commercial corridor in san francisco. in this case, since it is a pilot study, we do not have the resources to do the full on aspect. again, we're looking at identifying those businesses that would have a significant savings in their overall utility bill, to bring that down and really create a business case for them, and then ultimately, a business case for the california public utilities commission and the california energy commission to invest in a program like this statewide. supervisor kim: if i can make some suggestions. it is really important for me that we do outreach with our business owners that may speak other languages. our ethnic businesses. just because i feel like come in many cases, they are may be less likely voluntarily, on their own, to know about programs such as this. the smaller more savvy business

owners might be more likely to be educated on these green ways of doing businesses. i think that if you are able to select businesses through ethnic corridors and immigrant communities, you might have a higher level of penetration because those businesses can model for other businesses whether it is little saigon, chinatown, excelsior, portola, all of those areas. i do not know if you have the language capacity to do that work, but it would be great to see a couple of select businesses in those neighborhoods, particularly ones that serve our more low-income neighborhoods that may really need the savings in their energy bills. it would be great to see summer cabin in those neighborhoods. >> absolutely. supervisor avalos: i actually went on a merchant walk with the department of environment to do energy efficiency outreach, and i was actually very pleased to see that the outreach workers

spoke multiple languages, represented local communities in san francisco. we were on at geneva and the mission street area. every business there spoke a language other than english, and the outreach was great actually. i had conversations with people. now getting to the next level of getting commitments from merchants, like where the rubber hits the road, i think the effort was one that i think met some of the needs that we have with other languages in our neighborhoods. i was very pleased to see that. i know that outreach has been happening in other neighborhoods in my district as well. other languages are spoken as well as english. i think there is that capacity. getting to the next level of that commitment is where we need to make sure we can seal the deal, making sure we are getting businesses to actually bute and -- bite and make sure -- and make sure they are

looking at this energy efficiency. >> thank you for the recommendations. supervisor chu: thank you. i think it is important for us to reach out to various neighborhoods. d.o.e. has done a good job. the puc has gone on merchant walks before when we are looking at energy efficiency programs that are available for small businesses. but oftentimes, it takes a number of judges with organizations or small businesses for them to believe you are offering something in there is no catch up to it. i think to the extent that we can go out to some of these neighborhoods, even though they may not be part of the initial pilot, just to say we're starting to look at this and get that into people's heads, i think is also valuable. with regards to the strategy on the 40 businesses, i am imagining you'll be focusing on a restaurant businesses because of the refrigeration component, but there will probably also be

a focus on some of the larger establishments, simply because they might have more refrigeration needs or they might have higher, more intensive use of refrigeration and some of the very small businesses. in that way, you might be able to demonstrate a higher benefit to having energy-efficient models. is that sort of the case? >> in this case, we are really looking at the smaller businesses. in many cases, large businesses like safeway or large chain restaurants -- a supervisor chu: not those. a large orchestra versus a small one. >> we're looking at independent operators. that is a we plan to work with, so we will have the balance between the small and mid-sized firms. the other commitment that the department certainly will make is to capture the data in terms of participating businesses, both those 40 we're working with on the pilot, as well as on the survey, to make sure we have the

diversity in both geography as well as ownership and language. as part of our argument with the state, it is that they also have to put resources on the table so that we can actually go out and communicate these programs and rebates and services to constituencies that english is not their primary language for doing business. really capturing that that gives us the ability to convince policymakers at the state to provide resources for departments like ours to really make sure that we can go out and touch every kind of business in san francisco in a language that they can make business decisions in. supervisor chu: thank you very much. why don't we open this up for public comment? are there any members of the public who wish to speak on item number three? >> good morning. i sang this one that is small business commission. they liked it.

at the small business commission, they like this song. ♪ >> there's no business like small business like all business i know everything about it is appealing everything that budget traffic will allow someone you bring them some extra-out there is no people like small business people they smile when their budget is low and woke you bring them even when it comes to be about refrigerationrt you may be stranded out in the cold and so won't you give them in this budget now bring them some more budget do ugh ♪ supervisor chu: thank you. are there other members of the public who wish to speak on item 3? come forward. >> good morning. my name is douglas yep. i have lived in san francisco

for 60 years. i would like to speak in opposition to this ordinance. i think this is another example where government is basically making work for itself. i do not think pg&e as the time and effort to go into another program. it should take care of the pipelines that need more work. also, the cpuc also needs to reform itself, according to what i have heard. it looks like they need to take care of basic business rather than trying to expand. also, this ordinance has a section where you get the department of environment to hire another worker. i did not hear anybody mention that. i also would like to make a suggestion that the department of environment needs more work. first, they should help out on the illegal dumping all over the city, especially in bernal heights. secondly, why don't they take

care of all those eyesores that travel on wheels all over the city? that was supposed to be taken care of a long time ago. but you drive around the city all day, and all you see are these eyesores traveling around. so the department of environment needs more work, why don't you tackle those two? that should keep you busy for the next 50 years. thank you. supervisor chu: thank you. are there other members of the public who wish to speak? it seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, do we have a motion to send this forward with recommendations. we have a motion. we will do that without objection. item four, please. >> item four, resolution authorizing the san francisco recreation and parks department to accept and expend in grants administered by the gulf and state parks and recreation department in the amount of $4 million for the boeddeker park

and clubhouse project. supervisor chu: thank you. supervisor kim, comments? supervisor kim: yes, i ask for support. this is our largest park in the neighborhood and one of our densest parts. we have a lot of youth and seniors, a lot of residents in general that depend on this open space in this neighborhood. over the past couple of years, another has been a lot of -- a variety of different issues, structurally and others with the park. i know our residents are looking forward to the renovation so we fully open this park so it can reach the potential that it can in terms of contributing to a healthy neighborhood here in the tenderloin in neighborhoods. >> thank you, supervisors. i am actually open to answer any questions. i am -- philip from the transfer of public land is here. i wanted to recognize them any

supervisors work on helping to close the funding gap on boeddeker park. supervisor chu: for the sake of the public, can you do and overview of the renovations that our upcoming end of the proposed plans that we might see -- and the proposed plans that we might see when this is finished, especially serving our youth and children? >> it has significant improvements to the park. we have known that there has been surveillance and safety issues in the park. the new design includes a new 4300 square-foot clubhouse with greater visibility into and out of the park. and green building features. the established building -- almost net zero in terms of energy use. a area for children. a full-size regulation basketball court. an adult fitness area similar to the hayes valley playground, which is an extremely popular project. there will be a perimeter walking path for seniors to have

the ability to get out and walk inside the park. there will be a flexible stage in the performance area and an outdoor plaza for informal gatherings in the programs. we have been working, as you know, supervisor supervisor kim, with your office to work with the community benefit district, with several merchants and community organizations to help fully staffed the clubhouse. the goal is to have it open as much as possible, 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., and active it this -- activate this space is to begin within the neighborhood. -- beacon within the neighborhood. supervisor chu: i do not seek further questions from colleagues. we can open it up for public comment. thank you very much. let's open this up for public comment. are there members of the public who wish to speak on item number four? >> good morning.

my name is douglas yep. i will like to speak in approval of this item. the reason why i feel that way is i think this park should have been made bigger when it was originally planned. sometimes when i drive by it during the wee hours, i notice suspicious characters in the neighborhood. so i think that issue should also be addressed on a consistent basis once the improvements have been finished. i think some of the people there, in a certain sense, discourage use of the property during the daytime, so i think there should be more enforcement of whatever needs to be enforced. this way, neighboring residents can come to the property and use it more often. in regards to the park, i also think that there should be more publicity in the general neighborhood and to encourage people to use the park.

i see fliers and other publicity regarding other neighborhoods or their parks. i do not remember seeing anything about publicity for parks in the lower income neighborhood. so maybe a park and rec department should try to publicize these facilities in the lower income neighborhoods, rather than just publicizing facilities in the high income neighborhoods. thank you. [bell rings] supervisor chu: thank you very much. are there any other members of the public who wish to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. a quick question to jake. can you speak a little bit about the timeline of this project? when are you going to rehearse ground and went do expect to be completed? >> we are actually out to bid right now. we expect to accept bids in

june. go to the rec and park commission in june or july, a break ground in august or september. construction will be through the end of this year and all of next year. we're looking at opening in early 2014. supervisor chu: thank you very much. supervisor avalos? supervisor avalos: just a question about local dollars on this project that would trigger a local hiring requirements? >> there is currently no city funding above the we're complying with full local hire requirements as part of the process. supervisor avalos: thank you. supervisor chu: thank you. this item was heard, and public comment was third in the budget analyst report. do we have a motion to send forward with a recommendation? we have a motion to set it forward with recommendations. we will do that without objection. thank you. item five, please. >> item 5, resolution authorizing the acceptance and

expenditure of state transportation development act article 3 funds for various pedestrian and bicycle projects in san francisco in fy 2012- 2013, totaling $907,824, including $453,912 for the departed of public works and $453,912 from the san francisco and municipal transportation agency. supervisor chu: thank you very much. >> good morning. i am the new transportation finance analyst with the department of public works. the proposed resolution before you authorizes the director is dpw and the director of transportation's sfmta to accept and expand a total of $907,824 in transportation development act article 3, or tda article 3 state grant funds from the metropolitan transportation commission in fiscal year 2012-2013. for background on the funding source, the transportation

development act of 1971 earmarked a quarter percent of the general state sales tax for transit and created a local transportation fund in each county to receive those funds. the state board of equalization returns the general sales tax revenues to each county's local transportation fund according to the sales tax collected in the county. article 3 of the tda apportioned 2% of the quarter per cent sales tax for by facilities, pedestrian, street, and erode the dollar project. the funds are allocated by the metropolitan transportation commission annually and disbursed under article 3 to the nine bay area counties. dpw and mta are submitting a joint countywide applications. attached in the committee package are detailed budgets for the expenditures for dpw and mta. the agencies are splitting the available funds equally. and he proposes to use $453,912 for bicycle education programs

as well as bicycle facility engineering, implementation, and maintenance -- means. dpw proposes to use $226,956 to repair public sidewalks. the remaining $226,956 will be used for preliminary engineering, planning and design of curb ramps at various sites selected from a list developed by dpw in conjunction with the mayor's office of disability. programs designed with these grant funds will be constructed in fiscal years 2013-2014 using funds from prop k, the local have since sales tax measure to the metropolitan transportation commission does not require that counties provide local matching funds for this grant. we had mta and dpw programs that here that would be happy to answer questions from the board. supervisor avalos: thank you for

your presentation. i see others coming in. a question about the bicycle safety outreach and education programs. how are those conducted? i guess that is a question for the mta. >> yes, i will ask them to step up. >> i am with liveable streets at the mta. typically we take about 10% of the tda allocation and use it for a variety of ongoing activities, as well as new initiatives that we come up with. we have used them in the past to purchase bike lights or giveaways and also conduct bike education classes that the san francisco bike dollars in conduct for free. we have other ideas this year including a training video for muni drivers on how to interact more safely with bicyclists. it can be incorporated into the

regular minnie driver training. and an idea to do a mik-- a bike bell. the way. 10% of that amount is $45,000, so we'd stretch it as far as we can. but it is not a substantial amount of funding but we still rely on prop k to fund some of those activities as well. supervisor avalos: thank you. supervisor chu: thank you, supervisor avalos. are there members of the public who wish to speak on item number five? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, we do not have a budget analyst report on this item. we have a motion to send the item forward with recommendations. we can do that without objection. item six, seven, eight, and nine. >> item number six, resolution approving an amendment to the contract with an addiction,

research, and treatment, incorporated, doing business as baart for methadone maintenance services to $27,209,317. item seven, resolution approving an amendment to the contract with asian american recovery services for fiscal intermediary services by $66,510,8454 and an additional four years. item number 8, resolution approving an amendment to the contract with the apollo held st., incorporated, for retroactive claiming of aged accounts services by $3,675,000 for eight years -- for an additional four years. item number 9, resolution approving an amendment to the contract with triage consulting group for retroactive claiming of aged account services to $1,823,761 for eight years.

>> i am from the ph. i will be speaking on the first two. then it diana will speak on the second two. as described, the first contract is with the bay area addiction research and treatment. we called it baart. the second one is with asian american recovery services. i wanted to make a comment on the recommendations for these two contracts. both of them, the recommendation is around a concerted -- the contingency. the contingency process is and then that we implemented as a result of the board of supervisors citywide contract task force back in 2002, and this is specifically a recommendation in there that the department piloted in 2003 and then implemented in 2005 as a way of providing us to react more quickly and to improve contract streamlining and a the contract certification process.

the budget analyst has proposed changing the methodology, which i think their recommendation is a logical. i am not going to argue with the logic of it, but i will say that by as having the maximum contingency capacity, what that has allowed us to do is to react quickly to changes that can occur suddenly, especially program closures. recently, there was a very large program closure, and we were able to move the funding to another agency without a break in services. but because these dollars are so large, agencies cannot absorb and carry the cost of services prior to having the money in their pocket. they can do that a little more easily if it is already services they are providing. but if you're moving a whole program, and it is possible there could have been a break in services in that case. so allowing this full capacity

of the contingency is what has allowed us to have that flexibility. and i would just say, because maybe it is not clear, but the contingency is not something we can spend unless we actually have the money. like if you set up a bank account, you cannot start withdrawing dollars until you have money in the bank account. so if it is a contingency with 12% or 100%, the fiscal controls are here with the city already. the comptroller's office certifies the availability of funds each time we try to set up a contract. so i do not know what benefit it is to the city to reduce the contingency amount, but i know for the department, it will delay, i am sure in some cases it will delay contract processing. hopefully not, but it could possibly cause a break in services if we are moving

services from one agency to another. supervisor chu: thank you. >> i am the director of patient financial-services for the san francisco general laguna honda and community clinics for the department of public health. the two requests for your approval are two vendor contracts that we used primarily at san francisco general to have, in the past four years, assisted us in further collections from peers -- payers that may not have been identified at the time that we had the patience accounts processed -- the patient's

accounts processed through our patient accounting area. for san francisco general, our department has been allotted about $287 million, and this is two vendors that help support the continuance of furthering our collection efforts. the apollo specialty aged accounts are identifying retro medi-cals. oftentimes patients come our way, and we processing them forbes medi-cal -- for medi-cal applications which can take over eight months. they are able to use the retro accounts and be processed. they have been successful in their collection efforts to approve a our bottom line as wells