. that if he really wants the proposal, he will come and speak to us directly. i am not prepared to move on anything until and unless that happens. i was shocked by many things in this proceeding. i do not know the other parties negotiating with this party, but i would certainly be interested to see the same person working with me is now representing the people that eventually got the deal. i do not really see that happen very often. there are very clear guidelines in terms of how you can interact with different parties. i imagine the parties are looking into the legal questions raised by that. in any event, i think there is basis for denial, but i also

think there is a benefit to that, and if we do go down the road of continuing, that there is truly an effort and willingness to negotiate and to deal with the community in good faith. i think that is all the community is asking for. thank you. supervisor wiener: thank you. i of a few comments. i think one of the issues i have worked on very extensively is preserving and improving san francisco; righ's night life. i worked very hard on this. i was part of the study that showed what it contributes to the economy. i have been very vocal and raising questions about the western some of plan, because i think it will undermine night life around 11th street, so i am

absolutely passant about having great night life. as a gay guy who has been going to get barsay bars, before i wa, i am completely passionate. i also -- all of these different bidders and suitors who wanted to take this over and keep it as the eagle, i stepped up and tried to help each and every one of them. i spoke with them on the phone and try to help them. i do not know why it did not work. i tried to help mike lee on, as did supervisor kim. it did not work. i did it. i have worked very hard to keep it open, and to give it to stay

as the eagle, and sometimes we want to view ourselves so powerful that we can make things happen, and this is one of the frustrating experiences where you try and think you have influence, but you end up having a lot less influence that you actually have. with that said, we are in the situation we're in, and i will support the motion to continue the motion to september 10. we will give the new owners time to do our reach for the information that has to be gathered and come back to the committee so the committee and board can make an intelligent decision about the liquor license transfer. i want to know that as the new owners, and i said this last week, i stepped and a little bit of a cow pie here, because there is a history, and people have been very angry at property owners.

they actually took their liquor license out of the premises with them. i think they have not done anything wrong. there were timing issues, and there have been comments today that i think have been unfair. community are reached is extremely important. i am confident and request that that start happening immediately. we will work closely with them on this. i also want to note that even though there have been a number of comments today about gay vs straight ownership, and believe me, i am a huge bolivaeliever i owners of bars and nightclubs, but that is not before the board, and nor would it be legal before it to be before the

board. we can cannot -- we cannot condition a liquor license based on whether their oy're gay or straight. there are very defined standards around transferring a liquor license. i think there has been some unrealistic expectations in the community about what is within the parameters of the board's determination about that. i just want to make sure this license is held to the same standard, and that includes community outreach. i think it makes sense to have more time to do that. it should be the same standards. with that, i will support supervisor kim's motion. supervisor olague: i will support supervisor kim's motion also.

september 10 is right after the august break. i am not convinced there will be a lot of time for the things that need to happen. supervisor kim: i am happy to amend the motion to september 24. supervisor wiener: without objection, the man is amended. supervisor kim: i think the process is incredibly important, especially in a neighborhood that is already saturated with a group license, and there are a number of things i will consider as we move forward as the type of businesses that are intended to be as part of the neighborhood. just for a little bit of context, and any census tract it is suggested there are only seven alcohol-serving but years, but there are 33 here. i think there are a number of questions that i will have certainly in terms of what the

clientele and security plan and the type of business you plan to move forward, just so you also know in terms of the area, this part of the city has more than doubled the crime that is considered a high crime area. it is considered high crime with 215 crimes. this area has 559 reported crimes. i think i will really need to see a strong security plan, and also, an important part of safety is absolutely community outreach. you want to know the neighbors that you will be residing with. want to have good relationships with them. that is part of preventing crimes as well, knowing the community will be a part of, so i think that is absolutely essential. i want to confer with supervisor wiener. i have a number of concerns regarding the transfer it

solves. we're more than happy to provide a list of folks that you can do support to to get feedback from, and i am looking forward to what may become before us in september. super wiener: thank you. one quick follow-up on the saturation issue, which is always an important concern. it is my understanding the people always had a 48 liquor license for decades and decades, and as we have continued dialogue, i just want to picture people understand that the saturation argument. it is challenging to say that it is saturated show we should not have a 48 for these owners, but we should bring the ankle facea. i want to make sure we have that in mind. supervisor kim: i am not saying

i would not approve because of saturation. i represent a district that is saturated. i do not think that is a saturation itself, but when there is liquor-serving businesses in the neighborhood, there is a higher level of standard, and you want to ensure that there has been a lot of outreach and security plan. supervisor campos: i totally agree with you, and i completely agree with what supervisor kim as saying. i think saturation is a consideration, in the context of looking at how the proposed operators are interacting and connected with the community is a key consideration in terms of looking at the overall public welfare. unless they are committed to actually working with the neighborhood and community, i think that we could very well decide it is not in the public welfare to provide a licence in

one instance. i do think, connected the players are to the committee is an important consideration, and i am sure the something that all of us will look into. supervisor elsbernd: seeing the weather and on the list, with a motion by supervisor kim to continue this matter to september 24, 2012 meeting of this committee. can we take that without objection? that will be the order. any other items on the agenda? we are turned. -- are adjourned.

>> hello. welcome to "culturewire." we are here today with bay area artist jody chanel, and we are here to see the plaza where your piece has just been installed.

>> i have been doing large-scale paintings in the galleries and museums, and the idea that in the future, i could do something that would hang out a little bit longer than the duration of the installation the kind of appeal to me. i quickly found out about the san francisco arts commission school and realized there was a pre-qualified school you had to apply to, so i applied to the. >> how long did it take you to develop this work for the plaza? >> this was a fast track project. design development was about a month. >> let's look at the beautiful mural. i have never seen a mural created on asphalt. >> the heat of the asphalt, a new layer of asphalt. then, these wire rope templates that were fabricated for the

line work get laid down and literally stamped into the asphalt, and then everything was hand-painted. >> maybe you could talk about some of the symbolism, maybe starting in the middle and working out. >> [inaudible] the flower of industry. >> it is like a compass. there's an arrow pointing north. >> within the great bear consolation, there are two pointed stars here. they typically lead one to the northstar, otherwise known as polaris. so i thought it has a layer of theme. >> let's talk about some of the other elements in the peace. we are walking along, and there is a weather vane. there's a sweet little bird hanging on the side. what kind of bird is that? >> [inaudible] the smallest of the gulf

species, and it lives around the bay area. >> you want to talk about the types of flour patterns that you send? >> [inaudible] around 1926 or so by the dahlia society. >> what is this bird here? >> that is the california quail. >> coming up here, we had a little blustery theme. what is this area here? >> this is supposed to be the side view, the expense of the golden gate bridge. >> there it is. >> there are really beautiful elements of architecture still around, i would say that it gives that feeling over to the work. >> what are your hopes for it?

>> that in a way it just becomes part of the area. i think it is starting to have that feeling. people utilize it. they sit and, and have their lunch and play on -- they sit and, and have their lunch and play on that -- they sit and come and have their lunch and play on it. just for it to be part of the neighborhood. that is my hope. >> is such a beautiful addition to our public art in san francisco. thank you for joining us. it was nice to meet you. and thank you for telling us about your beautiful mural. thanks for watching "culturewire."

supervisor farrell: good morning and welcome to the special meeting of the government audit and oversight committee meeting on monday, july 30, 2012. i am supervisor mar farrell, chaired the meeting. i am joined by board president david chiu, and we will be joined momentarily by supervisor scott wiener, who was filling in today for vice chair supervisor sean elsbernd. i would like to thank the clerk of the board, victor young, and the members of sfgtv you're covering this meeting. nona and john. >> please silence all cell phones and electronic devices. completed speaker cards sent copies of documents should be submitted to the clerk of the items acted upon today will appear on september 4, 2012 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. supervisor farrell: ok, thank you, mr. clerk.

right now, we have supervisor wiener as sponsor items one and two. he is stuck in an endeavor committee. he will join us momentarily. we're going to take things out of order. call item 3 first, and then we will go to item number four. >> item number 3, resolution authorizing the director of the mayor's office of housing to executive level operating subsidy program grant agreement with mercy housing california xl to provide operating subsidies for formerly homeless single adults at the arlington hotel for the time span of august 1, 2012 to july 31, 20207 in an amount not to exceed $9,354,007. supervisor farrell: city staff? >> good morning, supervisors. project manager with the mayor's office of housing. according to the san francisco

10-year planning councils report published in 2004, san francisco had 15,000 homeless persons living on the streets. of those, 3000 were identified as chronically homeless. this presentation is about an important component created to address the homelessness issue. the local operating subsidy program, which is an operating subsidy granted to affordable housing providers who house and provide services to formerly homeless persons and families. the definition of chronically homeless has evolved over the years. moh, along with human services agency and the department of public health use the following definition -- homeless includes any individual or family living on the streets or in abandoned buildings, living in emergency or domestic violence shelters,

other emergency and transient situations, hospitals or for the programs, institutions, transitional and/or substance abuse treatment programs, as well as those at imminent risk of eviction. the report identifies the chronically homeless population has that segment of the homeless population that consumes most of the annual homeless budget comprised of city, state, and federal resources. it also went on to state that permanent supportive housing, where housing and services are linked, have been proven to be the most effective and efficient way to take chronically homeless persons off the street. san francisco has its own successful version of permanent supportive housing in the form of the department of public health's direct access to housing program were units are targeted specifically to house homeless persons in the city's

system. the program is regarded as a national best practice. in 2004, a goal was set to create 3000 new permanent supportive housing units over a 10-year time span in order to provide housing and services to chronically homeless. development in san francisco is very expensive, and no one would dispute that pitted the former redevelopment agency and the mayor's office of housing are two key agencies in providing capital funds to create and rehabilitate projects to serve, among other populations, homeless persons. as part of the city's effort to address the problem of homelessness, the mayor's office of housing, in 2004, began prioritizing the development of nonprofit-owned and operated permanent supportive housing. because the residents of such housing are unable to pay enough

rent to offset the cost of operations and maintenance, the operations of such a deeply affordable housing much rely on other forms of revenue to operate their buildings. examples of these other subsidies are the section 8 program, mckinney shelter plus care, mental health services funding act operating subsidies, hud 202 housing for seniors, and hud 11 housing for disabled folks. however, the demand for these subsidies far outstrip their availability. consequently, the city may be able to plumb the capital improvements, but the project would not be feasible because the housing provider would not be able to demonstrate to competitive resources that provide funding in the form of tax credit allocation or reduced rate financing or conventional lenders who provide construction financing or investors to also

provide capital to build that the project is feasible. local operating subsidy program was created to support building operations were the tenant rent payments and all other forms of resources coming into the product decked are not enough to cover operating expenses. where there is a gap, loss pays the difference through multi- year grant agreements which are subject to annual appropriations. so this is a slide about the typical tenant rand company -- contributions. for a typical homeless single adults, the average household income if he or she is on disability is approximately $800 a month re. rent famous standard is typically 30% of household and come. however, for the dp hh unit, the

city is providing more intensive services including tenant care. tenants are required to pay 50% of their household income as rent payment. even requiring the higher rent payments, it would still not be enough to cover the full operating costs which services the unit, which could range from $6,000 to $12,000 per unit. the local operating subsidy program ensures that a homeless person can be taken off the streets or out of the city's emergency care system and housed and provided services, even if he or she has a zeroing come. -- zero in come. now what would like to talk to you about the process for the local operating subsidy approvals. eligible projects are permanent supportive housing that have been approved by the city-wide affordable housing loan committee which is made up of staff from moh, directors for

moh, the department of public health, and human services agency. most staff prepares 30 pages plus evaluation that reviews and analyzes all components of the project, including design, construction, and/or its rehabilitation, as well as the operating phase. this evaluation is then presented to the loan committee for review, comment, discussion, individual approval. moh issues the first permanent supportive housing notice of funding available to provide capital funds in 2004, initiating construction or rehab of 300 units in at three different projects. those projects you have probably seen, because we had board of supervisors' action on them. the first was hotel ethics committee chp-sponsored project with 84 units targeted to single

adults. then arnett watson at 650 eddy, 83 units, 36 targeted to single adults and 47 to families. then bishop swing, which is an ecs and bernal-sponsored projects. 135 single adults of the building. these three projects were all 100% homeless population. however, we also do mixed populations. 10th and mission is a family project that mercy sponsored. 135 units. 44 targeted to homeless families. currently under construction is 11 84th, another mercy-sponsored project. 150 units with 25 targeted the homeless. eligible contracts unless projects must contract to provide services that are

reviewed and funded by dph and hsa. they go to the access points, giving the city the ability to prioritize those individuals that have long histories of heavy use of city services. the first loss disbursement is made -- once approved, it is made when the building is placed in service. thereafter, disbursements are made at the beginning of each fiscal year after the city's budget is approved. the loss program budget is monitored by both the service agencies, as well as the mayor's budget office. local operating subsidy creates an operationally feasible project that is then able to leverage other state, federal, and private funding. and i think i mentioned that in

order for other resources to consider our applications eligible, we have to show that it will cash flow for a time span of 20 years, and that is where the subsidy comes in. it is the city's intent that, to the greatest extent possible, other non-city resources replace lost assistance whenever such resources are available. recipients of losp must agree to work diligently with city staff to identify and obtain other potential operating assistance if and when it becomes available. we just recently had one of our projects, veterans comments, move off the local operating subsidy list, because we were notified that the city and county of san francisco not 200-section 8's, so the project will apply for 60 of the vash

section 8's, and it has been awarded 15 mckinny, so all the units will be supported by other federal subsidy. the next slide is going to show your numbers the plan called for the creation of 3000 units. moh has identified 2958 units targeted to homeless that we now have in our pipeline. although with the dissolution of the redevelopment agency and a significant reduction or elimination of local, state, and federal resources, our pipeline has been slowed over the last few years, making progress slower for bringing new units online. in 2012-2013, we expect to have 1250 units subsidized by the

local subsidy program and 17 products with 111 units targeted to families. by 2017, losp will subsidize 1450 palomas units. -- homeless unit of the next chart is a new operating subsidies which ranges from 6000 to 11,000 per unit per year. building types include sro's or multi-bedroom apartment units, as well as population, single individuals versus families that very, which causes buildings to operate differently. that is why there is such a range in per unit subsidies. moh staff gathers monitoring information from annual reports, and this information includes specific operating data. we are just beginning the process of going through the information to fully