we will continue to work with others at the produce market. whiteford to getting unemployed san franciscans -- we look forward to getting unemployed center distance back to work. >> my -- my name is a.c. ♪ ♪ and i've been on this case ♪ ♪ i've been working on a case with a lot of conspiracy ♪ ♪ i'm here working on the transfer of the tea -- dtis. they need to be here working on

city hall. ♪ right here in city hall ♪ it gets so silly ♪ i'm here to show you something that has never been shown in san francisco. i have three website that we want to launch of that will show ♪ who is in control right here in san francisco ♪ ♪ we have a mayor right now -- this budget procedure, you will

see me here and you don't even have african-americans on the bottom line. you're talking about all these department heads. department heads here in san francisco need to be examined. i'm calling for a federal investigation here intemperances gough because of her politics. my name is a.c. and i will be on the case. chairperson chu: thank you. are there other speakers who wish to comment on item number five? the none, public comment is closed. >> i want to extend gratitude to mr. rose, and especially to the produce market corp. and the folks who came out to speak today. i believe the concerns raised by our budget analysts have been added -- adequately addressed and i urge your support. supervisor avalos: this is

actually a pretty exciting thing to be coming before us. i see there is economic benefit. i am curious about why there was not actually analysis from the comptroller's office about the overall economic impact that the wholesale food market would have. it seems that since it is a major economic engine and we are talking about going to a major lease, is there anything in particular that might determine when we will see such a report? >> dispatches, frankly, does not lot -- rise to the level of materiality of the bigger impact reports. the role of items that we use is the annual change in economic activity equivalent of $10 million or more. this is not rise to that

threshold. >> is that role in our charter, or is that what you determined? >> is part of the rules that we developed in consultation with the board years ago. each week, legislation is introduced to the board and we flag things as likely to trigger a report or not, and impose that on our website. but we do that each week. supervisor avalos: thank you. i am curious to have that information. but we can see that there is economic benefits drop the city. gregg's and there are times that the board has requested that we produce even a cursory economic impact report on legislation below $10 million, but as ever -- absent that request, that is the general will we operate within. chairperson chu: i want to thank

supervisor cohen for bringing this to us and for her leadership on this item. i would like to be added as a co-sponsor as well. supervisor kim: i do want to appreciate supervisor cohen's work on this, because i believe that the pdr industry is very important for the city to support and encourage. it is often complicated to do so. there were a number of questions that came up from it because it was a complex deal. but i do think it is important for us to look at city property and surplus property to see how we can continue to support pdr and these types of industries. i know that has come up before in our conversations with both sf made and other types of manufacturing here in san francisco.

we have lost some of those jobs in the past couple of decades. i look forward to more conversations around issues such as this. the only thing i would say is that as this continues over the next several years, i do think we will continue to build on local hiring. maybe i will talk to supervisor cohen's office about this. we can maybe work to increase those numbers. that would be the next step in this development that i can see. thank you. chairperson chu: do we have a motion to send this item forward with recommendation? we have that motion. we can do that without objection. thank you. let's return to item number four. we have already called that item. is the mta here?

>> thank you, supervisors. sorry for being late. what is before you is a proposal to authorize an extension of agreement for parking county related services not to exceed $4.6 million beginning august 1st, with the option to extend the term for an additional four years. the dollars associated with this project and where we are with the project, they have done a good job. there has been a reduction in the annual amount for this contract. it is the additional card processing and wireless communication fees that have resulted in this we had significant attention on the rfp, but we only had one

responsive bid. the other bidders failed to bid. they documented a couple of reasons. one is, they were having trouble finding partnerships required in the rfp. an san francisco specific requirements are so significantly different from other cities that they felt they were not able to produce those requirements. the mta board did approve this agreement am happy to answer any other questions you may have. chairperson chu: thank you. budget analyst report. >> but we point out on page 3 of our report that if you compare the existing agreement with the proposed agreement, there is an increase of $959,000 or 11.5%.

however, as ms. boros stated, if you take out the additional services in the agreement, there's a slight decrease in the agreement. this agreement was made through a competitive process. mta has realized an average of $31.3 million in parking meter revenue collections between 2000 two-three and -- between 2002-03 and 2010-11. we recommend approval of this agreement. >> let's open this up for public comment. any members of the public that wish to speak? >> yes, my mother, grace murray, a check for 111. when i was little, she was a

meter maid. and i used to seeing ♪ lovely recaps, meter maid ♪ ♪ where would that be with our view ♪ ♪ standing by a parking meter ♪ you are going to greet her ♪ she's going to take the money away ♪ ♪ oh, where would we be without you ♪ ♪ you worked hard every single day ♪ ♪ this is the last meeting of the budget and finance before you go on a break, so i would like to be the first to give you ♪ a ticket for a -- an airplane ♪ ♪ your groin on the fast plane ♪ and i'm writing you a letter ♪ ♪ you will be on a fast break

♪ you will be getting it to get -- you will be getting a ticket to ♪ ♪ and going away ♪ >> -- chairperson chu: thank you, walter. i will close public comment. do we have a motion on that item? thank you. i will take a motion to rescind items one through three so that supervisor kim can border on those items. we can do that without objection. and on items one, two, three, do we have a motion to send those -- to rescind those. thank you. item number 6. >> contract cs914 for construction services jacobs and

incorporated. where are authorized to increase the agreement by $1.5 million for a total agreement amount of $26 million. chairperson chu: thank you. we have juli from the puc. >> this is an item that pertains to a consultant agreement with jacobs engineering group. it is one of multiple agreements for the water improvement program. it was awarded in 2008. it has a value of $25 million and a duration of four years, 10 months. budget analysts did an excellent job of describing the scope and the reason why an amendment is needed at this time.

the main reason, actually, is that we need additional services to help us address archeological and paleontological discoveries at various sites under a critical pipeline that we're building. at one side, we discovered a human remains and it was determined to be most efficient and cost-effective to tunnel under the area. in summary, we are seeking your approval to increase the agreement from $25 million to $26.5 million, a 6% increase. the projects will be completed shortly, so we do not seek an extension of the agreement. there are also some related items to the findings.

i will be happy to answer any questions. chairperson chu: thank you. budget analyst report. >> on page 3 the request of $1.5 million additional, we do recommend that you approve this resolution chairperson chu: are there members of the public who wish to comment on this item? item number six. >> ♪ here comes the clean water again ♪ ♪ reining in my head like a memory ♪ ♪ i want to dive into your budget ♪ ♪ is it raining which you ♪ budget, make it good ♪ make it good ♪ like you should ♪ city, make it good ♪ like you should. -- like you should ♪ ♪ and i hope you make it clean

♪ and make it like a dream ♪ to flood a million streams of the motion ♪ ♪ and you can make it might be clean ♪ ♪ and make it like the best water dream ♪ ♪ to flood a million streams of the motion -- ♪ of -- ♪ with this motion ♪ chairperson chu: seeing none, -- seeing none, public item is closed. >> item number 7, the city will contribute funds up to $9,000 to

acquire the nallen range and conservatory easement of which the city will be one-third partner and provide a permanent endowment of $125,000 for the conservatory easement and authorize the public utilities commission to execute document and take certain actions in furtherance of this resolution. chairperson chu: i believe we have tim ramirez. >> yes. i'm from the natural resources and land enterprise protection program. this one is at the top of the headwaters of the watershed itself at the peak of mount hamilton. because its does not adjoined the property we manage, the senate has agreed it will be co-

managed with grant county park. i will be happy to answer questions. chairperson chu: what we go to the budget analyst report. >> madam chair and members of the committee, on page 5 of the report, we report that the puc 's $866,000 purchase price, there one share for the purchase of the ranch, and additional costs are -- of the -- nolan range, and additional costs are $333,000. the puc would pay a one time $125,000 as an endowment fund to the nature conservancy to protect the construction

easement. and that would be in perpetuity. recommend you approve this resolution chairperson chu: are there members of the public who wish to comment on item 7? >> phil paulson, my father, he worked at central shops. it ♪ i should have listened to my old man ♪ ♪ i should have stayed on the on ♪ ranch man ♪ ranch man ♪ and all the science i don't understand ♪ ♪ is just my job every day of the week ♪ ♪ branch man ♪ ranch man ♪ ♪ i'm having daydreams about ranching ♪ ♪ in the middle of the afternoon

♪ ♪ and every night, you make my ranch dreams come true ♪ ♪ i'm having ranch dreams ♪ ♪ about budget things in the middle of the afternoon ♪ ♪ and every day, every night, every year ♪ ♪ you make my ranch dreams come true ♪ ♪ chairperson chu: thank you very much. any other members of the public who wish to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. public comment is closed. we have a motion to send this forward. the next item before us? >> adjournment. >> -- chairperson chu: thank you. we are adjourned.

commissioner campos: good morning, everyone. well,. my name is david campos, and in the chair of the transportation authority committee. i want to thank sfgtv for there service. madam clerk, could you call the

roll? >> [roll call] we have a quorum. commissioner campos: thank you. if you could call item two. >> this is an action item. commissioner campos: at this point, i would like to open up for public comment. seeing none, public comment is closed. can we take that without objection? madam clerk, can you please call item three? colleagues, i have a very brief report today. i would like to begin by

welcoming back our executive director. glad to see you are recovering, and we certainly have missed having you here, but we are appreciative of the facts that you are first and foremost taking care of yourself. we wish you the best of luck. i also want to take the opportunity to thank the amazing work of your staff, including the deputies, all of these senior staff for the transportation authority who have risen -- who have represented you very well. i want to thank them. in terms of my report today, i would think the most significant thing that this happened since our last meeting is the financial close on the public- private partnership for the second phase of the presidio

parkway project. i think it is important to know this is not just an infusion of cash from the private sector and the federal government into a project we all support. is actually the first project and all of the state of california that has gotten all the way to the finish line and put in place a t3 under sb 4. these are funds that the state of california would otherwise have to come up with at a time of severe budget crisis that has been very difficult for the state of california. i am delighted to be the first county in the state of say -- state of california to do this, to complete this second phase. i want to congratulate in particular our executive director and the entire staff for a job well done. thank you to commissioner

wiener. thank you, commissioner campos -- commissioner wiener, and your staff, and to my staff as well for all there work to support the project. on a separate item, there are discussions in the state budget that i think show possible signs for transportation ebay -- transportation. we are forecast to remain at $420 million statewide. this amounts to about $31.2 million here in san francisco for muni for this current fiscal year. that is a very positive sign. the department of finance says the revenues could even come in

a higher. the transit operations, they will see an increase in the state operations of funding. that is a very good thing, because as you know, one of the challenges we face is the lack of funding for day-to-day operations for muni. on a separate note, i also want to talk a little bit about high- speed rail, which is at a very critical juncture. to authorize bonds to match the federal bonds that have been authorized for the high-speed rail in the central valley. the governor has requested the legislature authorized the sale of another $1.1 billion to cover its share of the mou's. i want to thank commissioner wiener and his staff, as well

as the mayor's staff and my staff, for the work that went into this. it has been an interesting month. there is a lot of work that needs to be done in the next few months. i continue to work with my colleagues. be one thing i will add as we proceed with our work this summer is i know we will have a presentation scheduled for the next meeting on the project in two districts, including district 7 and district 5. the meeting next month will happen on a day that is probably one of the busiest, if not the busiest day for the board of supervisors. so, it would be my intention, unless there is an objection, to perhaps continue that item, that discussion to the following meeting. that promises to be a very long day here at the board of

supervisors. we do not want to have too long a county transportation authority meeting. those are my items for today. at this point, i would like to open it up to public comment, any member of the public who like to speak on the chair's report. yes? >> sometime ago, i read on the county website that we would have some comments of the chair noted so you really know what is happening at the transgendered bay -- transbay and so on and so forth. the information and materials are given here and you come to the meeting come up the

committee meetings, they do not go into the funds. we want something to the point, because once we get an idea of what is really happening, some of us, we have meetings linked to demographics, meaning for example, seniors in san francisco. we can discuss with them what is really happening. they will have input. they will come to the subcommittee meetings. they will come here, and they will speak. a lot of them have no clue why the millions and millions of dollars that are expended on his projects, and as chair, you can tell us just briefly -- even if we just take the central subway,

we really have difficulties understanding the juncture at a very critical time whether the moneys will be there. we have no idea. it kind of its mta involved -- gets and g-8 involved. you go to the mta meetings. they are just going to pull it out from here and make things happen. i say that because not everybody can come here and attended these meetings, but we do have a stupid people who understand a lot about transportation, and they need to get the right type of empirical data, not any thing in detail, but to the findings so focus meetings can be had among the constituents of san fr