what de think? >> i will have another bite. >> sounds good. >> that was fantastic. let's start with you. >> i had the fried mac and cheese, and twinkies. i wanted to get something kind of classic with a twist on it. >> it was crispy. >> i will admit. >> want to try fieried mac and cheese? >> was that the best twinkie? >> would you say you had the

winning male? >> definitely. >> no. >> you are the "chompion." clair has won. you are the first "chompion." >> they know it iwas me because i got a free meal. and check a map on -- check them out on facebook. take a peek at the stuff we have cut. to get our -- check out our blog. i will have

>> good morning, welcome to the regular meeting of the budget and finance committee and welcome back from the legislative research, my name is carmen khu, i'm joined by supervisor kim, our clerk is victor young, and we have jessie larsen, mr. young, do you have any announcements for us today? >> yes, please turn off all phones and electronic devices, [inaudible] shall be submitted to the clerk, items will appear on the september 11, 2012 supervisor's agenda.

>> please call item 1. >> i'm 1 is administrative code section 2a .173 to authorize the airport commission to enter into leases with entities providing aviation support services without competitive bidding for term not to exceed 10 years. >> thank you. er >> good morning, members of the committee, i'm kathy widner with the san francisco airport, it is seeking an amendment to section 2s .73, the proposed ordinance would amend the administrative code to authorize the airport commission to enter into leases with entities providing aviation support services to the airlines without undergoing the competitive bid process for a term not to exceed ten years. this change would allow the airport to provide lease space to the businesses that

currently provide support service to our airline tenants, the aviation support services are defined in the ordinance, they range from the servicing, keening -- cleaning and provisioning of the aircraft to the inspection and ?aint nans of an aircraft, the handling of passengers and baggage and loading and unloading of passenger baggage, it includes grant support services and check point screening and it states that all the services i just listed but also says but are not limited to these service and is the airport agrees with this suggestion. i just want to clarify that we're talking about businesses or contracts specifically between aviation support services and the airlines, these are not contracts between the companies that i've talked

about and the airport specifically. if the airport were to offer these airport leases through a competitive bid processes, the only qualified party would be the one chosen by a particular airline to provide this service, making bidding a competitive bid somewhat impractical. currently the airlines either sublease space to these aviation support services or ask the airport to provide space under a permit. the proposed change would increase the airport's ability to plan long-term for these bases and it would give the airlines a little more consistency in their planning as well, knowing for a specified amount of time, these contractors that they have selected would have airfield access to provide these services. i would be happy to answer any specific questions you have however. >> thank you very much, why don't we go to the budget analyst report. >> madam chair, members of the

committee, debra knew man from the budget analyst office, as ms. widner mentioned, we have made an amended proposed ordinance to remove the language but not limited to on the specific servicing so that you would be only waiting the competitive bidding for those specified support services. i would also note that without the competitive bidding, the rental rates for any leases between the airport and the aviation support services would be set by the airport's approved summary of airport charges, these are the current -- these are very close to the current charges currently being charged, the airport currently estimates receiving about 13.5 million dollars in annual revenue from these support services which would be continued and with the amendment, we indicate that approval is a policy decision,

it would waive the competitive bidding procedure. >> thank you very much for the report, why don't we open this item up for public comment, is there any members of the public that wish to speak on item number 1, seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, do we have a motion to accept the budget analyst recommendation and to authorize the clerk to make those amendments? okay, we have that motion to amend and we can take that without objection and to the item as amended, can we send the item forward with recommendation, we'll do that, thank you. >> item number 2. >> ordinance providing revenue and property taxes at a combined rate of 1.1691 on each 100 dollars valuation of taxable property for the city and county of san francisco, san francisco unified school district, san francisco community college district, bay area rapid transit district and bay area air quality management

district and establishing pass-through rate at 0.0810 cents per 100 dollars of assessed value for residential tenants pursuant to chapter 37 of the administrative code for the fiscal year ending june 30, 2013. >> thank you, i believe for this item we have jamie whit >> mr. witikur. >> this is for fiscal year 2012-2013 to a combined rate of 1.1691%, this was lower than fiscal year 2011-2012. since california voters approved proposition 13 in 1978, the base property tax rate has been set at 1% of the assessed property values, i have a slide on the computer that shows the historical

property tax rates for san francisco on the overhead. >> would you plead display the overhead. yes, the tv will provide it. i believe it's a computer display? there we go. >> thank you. >> so, you see the prop 13 base tax rate is 1%, and the 1% base property taxes benefit the city and county of san francisco, san francisco unified school district, city college of san francisco, the bay area rapid transit district and the bay area air quality management district. the amount above 1% of the override rate represents the rate that's needed to collect funds to pay debt service payments for voter approved

general obligation bonds this fiscal year. the next slide i have is a comparative tax bill for typical owner occupied home that was valued 500 thousand dollars at 2011-2012, there is an inflation cap of 2% in 2012-13, the inflation rate is 2% and the increase property taxes would be approximately 104 dollars. this ordinance also sets the years pass-through rate of residential tenants, if you have any question, i'd be happy to answer them. >> thank you very much, just a quick question for you, in terms of the tax rate, the tax rate as a whole is slightly decreasing, in terms of the experience that a property owner might experience, it

might go up because the assessment value may have changed, is that correct? >> yes, that's correct, because of inflation. >> the budget analyst? >> madam chair members, of the committee, on page 2 of our report, table 1 indicates all of the current fiscal year and proposed fiscal year tax rates and debt service, and we recommend approval of the proposed ordinance. >> okay, thank you very much, why don't we open this item up for public comment. are there members of the.public that wish to speak on item 2. seeing none, public comment is closed. we have a motion by supervisor avalos, we'll do that without objection. thank you. item 3, please. >> item number 3, resolution approve lg port commission

lease number l15150 with ammunition llc, a california limited liability company for office space located at 10 lombard street, road house two, in the northern walter front with a 52 month term. >> thank you. >> members of the committee, i'm mr. cruise, this is a four year and four month lease that would generate a little over a million dollar for the port. i'm here to answer any questions if you have. >> supervisor kim? >> thank you, seeing that the budget analyst has broukt up the competitive bidding issue, i think it would be helpful to go into a little bit about the history and the process aof why they think this is a good thing for the board to approve given

that's it's a competitive process. >> i can address that, ammunition llc is going to approve this in consideration for that amount of work, we're going to waive about 110 thousand dollars of rent, certainly a net improvement in the port's balance sheet. that's one reason. the other reason is annually, we do a survey of commercial rent rate ins the area that are comparable, for this particular building, we determined that the market was around 2 dollars to $2.50 per square foot, in this case, ammunition is paying effective wait of $2.67, for those two reasons, we feel this is a good financial opportunity for the port, more generally speaking, that rate survey process that i mentioned a bit ago, that is how we execute

leases across the waterfront with the exception of retail leases for say parking lots or restaurants, those are the only leases that we competitively bid, all the other leases just for the practicality of managing the 7 miles of waterfront that we have are according to to these rate surveys. >> is ammunition a current senate, this is not a renewal, this is a new contract? >> yes. >> and i'm curious as to how you found ammunition or how they found the port. . er i can get that information to you. >> thank you. >> thank you, why don't we go to the budget analyst report. >> through the chair supervisor kim, in response to your question to mr. cruise,

ammunition llc currently subleases port on office space at 4100 sam sung street, they've been doing that since 2007 and then they entered into these negotiations with the port. just to reiterate, ammunition's net effective rate in the first year of the lease would be $2.67 per square foot per month which exceeds the minimum rate based on the port's minimum rate of 2 dollars to $2.50, however, because the proposed lease is not subject to competitive bid process which is required under the city's administrative code, we have indicated that the proposed resolution is a policy decision for the board of supervisors. >> thank you, supervisor kim, did you have a question? >> thank you, why don't we open this item up for public comment? are there members o*f the public who wish to speak on item number 3?

seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, do we have a motion to send this item forward with recommendation? we do, and we will do this without objection. thank you. item 4, please. >> item number 4, resolution to authorize the exercise of a ten year option to extend the master lease of the 14 700 square foot building at 124 turk street for the department of public health for contract service providers to provide housing to homeless individuals. >> good morning, chair and supervisors, my name is martha bail, i'm here to seek approval for a ten year option to extend the master lease between the department of public health and 124 turk street, the landlord to have cam lot hotel, it's provided for a ten year option to extend the lease, the cam

lot hotel, it would run through to july 31, 2013, the monthly rent from beginning august 1, 2012 is 34 thousand 665 dollars per month or $2.36 per month, it is an increase of the last year's rate, the master lease does provide for annual cpi adjustments for a minimum of 1.5% to a maximum of 5%. also with me is mark truck who is a sdrekt tor of housing and urban health and the department of urban health should there be any questions. >> in terms of your budget, the budget that was recently passed, does it reflect the increases in rent? >> yes, it does. er >> why don't we go to the budget analyst report. >> because the proposed lease

would be retroactive to august 6, 2012, we recommend an amendment on the proposed resolution to make a retro active start date of the august 1, 2012 and to approve the proposed resolution as amended. >> thank you, why don't we open this item up for public comment. are there members of the public who wish to comment on item 4. seeing none, public comment is reed. do we have a motion to adopt the recommendations to authorize the clerk to make those change and is to send the items forward with recommendation to the board. we'll do that without objection. item 5. >> item number 5, ordinance waiving the fee in public works code section 724.1b for temporary street space occupancy as part of the ocean avenue arts and cultural festival on september 15, 2012. >> this item was brought to us

by supervisor avalos, do you have any comments? >> this is an annual event that we have every year, it brings people together from the community, it doesn't have a great deal of resources to cover the cost of the fee itself, yet the benefits of having the event really help attract people to businesses and assure people of what services are also available in the community and i would like to see if we can approve this ordinance to have the festival have its event this week.ing >> we do not have a budget analyst report with this. are there any members of the public who wish to speak on this item number 5? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, do we have a motion on this item? okay, we have a motion to send the item forward with recommendation and we will do that without objection.

okay, item 6. >> item number 6, resolution authorizing the director of the risk management division of the office of the city administrator to amend its contract for insurance brokerage services with alliant insurance services to increase the contract value by 7500 000 for an amount not to exceed 17 million pursuant to san francisco charter section 9.118. >> thank you very much. >> thank you madam chair, matt han son, w the office administrator, the item before you covers approximately 12 plus billion dollars in values for city property insurance as well as insurance for the fine arts museums and some builders risk coverage that we have for public construction. the original amendment that was asked for was reduced by the budget analyst recommendation.

we believe that our original amount was appropriate, however, we will accept the reduction because it does cover the current cost. our estimation for the current year is that there will be additional coverage requested by both the fine arts museums and departments that we were unable to value at this point, however, it just means we'll be maybe back in front of you sooner than later this year. we are able to cover the basic business with this amendment and again we are available for questions should you have any. >> thank you very much. why don't we go to the budget analyst report. >> madam chair, members of the committee, the estimated budget for the agreement between the risk management division and alliant from july 28, 2011 through july 21, 2013 is

approximately 15 million 26 thousand dollars, which includes budgeted expenditures of 14.5 million, 14 million 426 thousand, plus we have added a 500 thousand dollar contingency for unanticipated insurance needs, the art exhibits, construction projects and other events that are not yet known, we had discussed this recommendation with the department, therefore, we were recommending that the proposed not to exceed amount by 1.5 million be reduced, i'm sorry, by 1.9 million from 17 million to 15.1 million, that would provide all of the budgeted amounts that are in the department's budget for the next fiscal year plus july, 2013, an estimated amount, plus an additional 500 thousand

dollar contingency to cover unanticipated events. >> thank you for the report. i should have mentioned earlier, we do have a new city attorney, so i do want to welcome john gid ner, he is taking cheryl adam's place, i do have a question, given an amount that is lower than the original 17 million dollars, if we made that change, it would be non-substantive, correct? >> yes, that's right. >> thank you. why don't we open this item back up for public comment. are there must be members of the public who wish to speak. seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, do we have a motion to accept the budget analyst recommendation and then to send the item as amended forward with recommendations? okay, and also to authorize the clerk to make that amendment. okay, we will do that without objection.

thank you. can we call item number 7 through 12, please. >> item number 7, resolution approving the 28th amendment to the treasure island south waterfront master lease between the treasure island development authority and the united states navy to extend the term. number 8, resolution approving the thirsty seventh amendment to the treasure island land and have you beening khur master lease between the treasure island development authority and the structure master lease between the treasure island development authority and the united states navy to extend the term. item number 9, resolution approving the sixteenth amendment to the treasure island marina master lease between treasure island development authority and the united states navy to extend the term. number 10, resolution approving the eighth amendment to the

treasure island child care master lease between the treasure island development authority and the united states navy extending 2 term, and item number 11 and 12. >> i -- >> thank you, madam chair, members of the committee. >> just one moment, supervisor kim? >> i realize that when is before us today is several master lease amendments along with the cooperative agreement modification, but i think given the media attention currently and of course the e-mails that we've been receiving from constituents in our office given the concerns around the navy clean-up of raid yol logical contamination and the navy has recently disclosed that there are areas of radial con tan nation, i believe if we could add rez that issue first if possible.

i know there's been a number of concerns since the navy's meeting on august 21 with the advisory board meeting, so i was hoping as director that you could touch on those issues prior to going into the summary of the lease amendments. >> sure, i will turn to michael time off who's in charge of the development side of things. >> good morning, michael time off, treasure island development project director, to supervisor kim's point, i think we are all aware of the recent reports and findings of the navy regarding raid yol logical contamination and i want jou to know our staff is willing to address any questions that are raised by residents and tenants as well as by the public and to do that in an accurate and timely manner, to that end, we are working with the navy and scheduling a follow up meeting

in september to be held on the island in the evening to address any questions that were raised at the navy at the restoration advisory board meeting. it is important to note that by law and by contract, the navy is responsible for all clean-up on treasure island including raid yol logical clean-up, this is true today under the co-op and the master leases, according to conveyance committee, the knave i have i clean-up process is separate as well as the development project going forward. i would also like to point out that the navy's environmental cleanup and the contamination on treasure island is not what is like found in the country on all navy military bases, the

navy's clean up is cleaned up under the compensation liability act with direct oversite by the state's department of toxic substances control and with respect to raid yol logical control and protection, the department of public h*ement, dtfc has gone on record saying that based on currently available information, there's no human health risks to working, and visiting treasure island, and if there were an issue, they would be aggressive in looking at that, the department of public health went out to treasure island and conducted surveys and scans independent of the navy's investigation of the girls and boys club, the daycare center and community housing partners, facilities and one of the areas that's been identified as having potential raid yol logical contamination, all scans of these areas showed no raid yol

logical contamination, wipes also showed no signs of radiological contamination, staff has asked cdph to go out and conduct additional surveys and investigations separate and apart and independent of the navy's investigations of all areas that were identified by the navy in their draft report by being potentially contaminated by radiological material. i do want to stop there and talk a little bit about terminology. the navy's draft report identifies 9 new areas on treasure island that are raid logically impacted, that is a term that's used by the regulatory act sis and the navy to mean that these areas have the potential for being contaminated by radiological materials, it does not mean that contamination has been found, it also does not mean that there is