-- for the city and county of san francisco. congratulations. thank you very much. [applause] thank you, all. our class of commissioners for 2012. 14 commissions. thank you very much. welcome to the regular board of supervisors

meeting. i'm supervisor chu, avalos, our clerk and we have jennifer low and scott wiseman. madam clerk, any announcements? >> yes, please silence cell phones, electronic devices. complete cards and copies of documents to be included as part of the file should be submitted to the clerk. item acted upon will be on the october 23rd, 2010 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you very much. would you call items one and two. >> resolution approving issuance of -- up to 502 million of the san francisco plan bonds. * item 2, ordinance appropriating 543,200,0030 of proceeds for sale of bonds to the airport commission for fiscal year 2012 * 2013. >> thank you. for this item we have kathy weiner from the airport. these came before the budget and finance last

week. we made a change to the dollar amount. for that reason we had to continue these to allow for public comment. to ms. weisner to items one and two, resolution approving issuance is 502,200,000 versus appropriation at 543,200,000. so i'm wondering if you can explain the difference. >> yes, chair chu, supervisor kim. kathy weisner. * it is my understanding the airport has prior approval on a previous sup taition that would provide the difference. i'm joined by the business finance manager at the airport. if you have specific questions about that. i also understand it is addressed in this difference and the previous approval is addressed in the budget analyst report. >> we want to make sure that is the correct amount for appropriation or issuance versus appropriation. >> it is. >> thank you. to the budget analyst s there anything else you

would add to this? * >> thank you. madam chair, supervisor kim, only that we recommend approval. >> thank you. why don't we open these up for public comment? are there members wishing to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. we have a motion to send these forward with recommendation. we will do that without objection. thank you very much. item 3, please. >>the clerk: resolution authorizing the office of contract administration to enter into fifth amendment between the city and san francisco and en pointe technology sales. >> thank you. would you call items four and five. >> item four, resolution authorizing office of contract administration to enter into fifth amendment between city and county of san francisco and xtech to 67,890,000.

item five, resolution authorizing city office of contract administration to enter into third amendment between city and cct technologies contract limits to $34,460,000. >> thank you. for these three we have bill jones. >> good morning, supervisors. bill jones, office of contract administration purchasing. today i'm here to request your approval of these three resolutions for amendments to the technology store products contracts with computer land, en pointe and xtech. with your approval these will increase contract not to exceed limits, extend term by one year to december 31st, 2013 and update standard contractual clauses. the requested increases are

for computer will have an, 9,970,000 to 4,463,000. to en pointe, 15,660,000 to not to exceed new amount of $54,150,000. for extech, 16,400,000, not to exceed 67,890,000. oca calculated these requested increases based on average expenditures from january 2, 09 to july 2012 and extrapolated the end of the new contract term as december 31st, 2013. we included a two-month contingency. short background of the technology store, it is a program that provides departments with prequalified vendors which provide a wide range and

variety of i.t. products and services at competitive prices and in a timely manner. the vendors were selected through a competitive process. the original contracts were approved by the board of supervisors by resolution in december 2008. the contract terms starting january 1st, 2009 was for three years with two one-year options to extend. one option to extend has been exercise and current term ends this december 31st 2012. this is made up of amendments before you and a micro setaside program. vendors compete within the technology store. these are requirements contracts, meaning they are available to city departments on an as-needed basis. the contract value is an administrative cap, not a commitment by the city to spend that amount. rather departments may

order from any of the vendors using departmental funds that have been improved by the board of supervisors in the budgetary process and certified by the controller. oca intends to conduct a new competitive process for the technology store in 2013 and to develop new contracts to replace the expiring contracts prior to the december 31st, 2013 term. given the estimated values, oca would be returning to the board of supervisors after that process with resolutions to seek its approval for new contracts over $10 million. i'm available for your questions, supervisors. >> thank you. just as you mentioned, the contract has two abilities or two times we can actually extend the contract. this will be the last of the two. >> this will be the last of the two. >> was oca planning to do and will plan a new rfp process? >> definitely. we plan that for 2013 so new contracts would be in

place. >> thank you. why don't we go to the budget analyst report. >> thanks. madam chair and supervisor kim, as you know, all of these increased expenditures are subject to board of supervisors appropriation approval. we have reviewed the calculations of the oca. we concur for increased amounts and recommend you approve resolutions. >> thank you. why don't we open these for public comment. are there members of the public who wish to speak on item 3, item 4 or item 5? seeing none, public comment is closed. do we have a motion to send item 3, 4, 5 forward with recommendations? >> yes. >> we have a motion to do that. we can do that without objection. item 6, please. >> item number 6. resolution approving and authorizing an amendment to the lease of the union square garage. >> thank you very much. we have both from mta on

this item. >> thank you, supervisors, for hearing this item. what is before you is an amendment to the lease of the union square garage or uptown corporation between recreation park department and the uptown parking corporation. it is required because, as you know, the mta redeemed the outstanding revenue bonds on four of our nonprofits. and as part of that redeeming that the prior leases were no longer effective. so we have to enter into a new lease or as two of the garages have chosen is enter into an advisory capacity, not a lease. out of the four nonprofits, two of the nonprofits will no longer continue to have a lease structure but uptown, which includes center stockton managed by the mta and union square will continue to have a lease. japan center, which did not

have outstanding debt also wanted to continue a lease. so this amendment before you gives us 180-day window to come back to you with a new negotiated lease without the bond debt service but bond issues associated with that new lease. we be back before you along with recreation park department in 180 days from the board of supervisors approval for you to approve a new lease with uptown corporation as well as japan center. so i will be happy to answer questions. i think the budget analyst did a good job about summarizing. we agree with the recommendation and have sent you revisions to both resolution and the loose to have a termination -- 180-day termination rather than a month-to-month provision, so we are okay with that. >> okay. >> last, i want to say there is somebody from uptown, if you have questions for the uptown corporation. >> thank you. i see we have representatives from reck

park here. >> katy is here too. >> additional comments from either department? why don't we go to the budget analyst report on this. >> madam chair and supervisor kim, the uptown parking corporation is reimbursed for actually cost to manage the union square garage and is shown in table three on page six of our report. the corporation management cross of 135,600 in fiscal year 11-12. that is included in the 2.6 million worth of operating and management costs as shown in attachment one on page ten of our report. on page seven of our report we point out that on june 9th, 2011 the controller issued a report which found that leasing garages to nonprofit corporations is unnecessarily costly to the city. that is further exexplained on page 7 of our report.

page nine our conclusion is given controller's june 9th, 2011 report finding that uptown corporation -- uptown pamper incorporation would be the only nonprofit corporation whose bonds were redeemed, which would continue in its current role of managing city-owned garages and that the mta and rpd have decided to move forward to negotiate a new lease with uptown park corporation for the union square garage and that the estimates of annual savings are 102,600, if the mta managed the union square instead of uptown parking corporation. for all those reasons we consider approval of this legislation to be a policy matter for the board. we do recommend that you amend the resolution to impose that 180-daytime

limit as ms. sinali has indicated. >> thank you very much. i believe the 180 days is 180 days counting down from the time when the board passes the resolution is that correct? >> yes, supervisor. that is correct. >> why don't we open this up for public comment, if there are no questions. are there any members of the public who wish to speak on this item, number six? seeing none, public comment is closed. so we have an amendment that would impose the 180 days. the amendments are before us. basically in the front it talks about that the uptown parking corporation to continue lease for period not to exceed 180 days. and of course that is also reflected in the text of the legislation on page two, lines 8 and 9. also to add, not to exceed 180 days.

on page two, line 22, to also insert the same language, for a period not to exceed 180 days. let's see. finally on page three there is language on line three and four so it reeds lease and create new advisory body to replace corporation within 180 days from the date the board of supervisors approves the proposed lease amendment. finally, just to read into the record on page four, lines seven through nine will have an additional further resolve that reads further resolve the board of supervisors authorizes an amendment to term of lease amendment for period not more than 180 days from the date lease amendment is approved by the board of supervisors. okay. do we have a motion to accept those? we have a motion to accept those. we can do that without objection. to the item as amended. do we have a motion? okay. we have a motion to forward the item as amended to the board with recommendation. we can do that without objection.

thank you. item seven. >> item number seven, resolution authorizing the san francisco department of public help to accept expended grant in the amount of $747,833. >> thank you. i believe we have nicholas moss. >> good morning, supervisors. i am nicholas moss, the director of clinical prevention at the h.i.v. prevention section of the san francisco department of public health. we are requesting an approval of accept and expend of cdc funding for year three of the stop study, a three-site research study in new york, north, san francisco, comparing two laboratories for detecting acute h.i.v. infection in community-based h.i.v. testing programs. * >> thank you. can you speak a little about what the required matching funds would be, if any. >> no required matching funds.

>> you are not hiring additional staff from this. >> all staff that are working on the project have already been hired. >> does this have a budget analyst report? it does not. why don't we open this for public comments. are there any members of the public who wish to speak on item number seven? seeing none, public comment is closed. do we have a motion? >> motion. >> we have a motion to send the item forward, we will do that without objection. thank you. >> madam clerk, are there any other items before us? >> there are no further items before you. >> thank you. then we are adjourned.