we must revisit the structure that you have outlined and provided for. >> this provides for a new successor commission to be created that would have the narrow focus to implement these winding down enforcable obligations. the work yet to complete mission bay, transbay, as well as hunter's point shipyard candle stick and the necessary replacement housing obligations as a product of the urban renewal days, those are still obligations, those 6700 units are still obligation to complete and ensure is funded and exist in the framework of these enforcement obligations, the legislation provides for consistentcy and continuity with the actions that you authorized in january to take all necessary steps, this new

redevelopment success or agency commission would take all required steps to complete the surviving obligation and that includes any preparation for the obligations of payment schedules that would be resubmitted that remains intact. the governor approved the four appointments to this body and other seats. >> this board continues in its role. its sole purpose is to provide a check and balance and to be sure that those are true obligations and that the obligations are spent and paid down. over time, these obligations will dwindle to none. as we know, these long-term affordable housing obligations,

these are 20 and 30-year projects we are not yet complete. in addition, the commission, this ordinance authorizes that commission to select an executive director and handle all personnel matters, including the labor agreements. and the employees as we work through the process that mis kelley outlined. those former redevelopment employees who on february one became employees of the successor, agency and continued as employees of the city, as successor, through june 27th, they are so-called rclass employees, the legislation as a result of the separate entity status under 1484, this legislation acknowledges that those employees are in fact employees of the separate successor agency. and those liabilities whether those are the pension liabilities, calpur liabilities those are the schedule of

obligations that the state reviews, every six months. and we fortunately in san francisco, are first to recognize the obligations, the payment schedules, not one of the hundreds of line items were disputed by the state and that is the good work of city and the constant transparency operating under the box and the rules of the state law. so the employees, again, are employees of the successor agency, and the legislation acknowledges that. the delegation authority that you previously gave to implement these surviving redevelopment projects that is also provided for within the body of this legislation. >> i think that we have got i will turn it over to any questions. >> thank you. >> colleagues any questions? >> supervisor cohen. >> thank you very much. colleagues, thanks, again for hearing this item today as a committee as a whole. and i would like to thank the

staff for their presentation. thank you so much. and i just wanted to reiterate a couple of things, i am a co-sponsor and will be supporting this as it is drafted with the amendments that will be discussed by supervisor olague. >> not yet. i am just warming it up for you. okay. >> just warming it up for supervisor olague. which clarify that any material changes to redevelopment plans or community benefits will come back to the board of supervisors for reconsideration and so this is an important mess sure that they want that they would like to see. so we are reiterating it. additionally it makes it clear that the board of supervisors will still review and approve the successor agencies and your budget. the scope of this new commission is significantly

narrow. its role will be to carry out the implementation of the project of the board of supervisors has already approved. i know that there are conversations about the structure of these appointments particularly, whether they should be appointed by the mayor or the board of supervisors and i imagine that you have conversation about that. >> i am comfortable about carrying forward the structure about the redevelopment commission where the mayor nominates and the board of approves or rejects them. >> the major projects under the jurisdiction is one that they have spent decades building. projects that have significant amount of private funding. and supervisor that represents a district that is overlayed with project areas, i believe that we need to move as quickly as possible to pass this

ordinance so that the projects waiting for consideration and approval can move forward and that we are as consistent as possible with the commission structure that we have previously had. >> mr. president? >> thank you. >> thank you, supervisor cohen. >> comp os. >> thank you very much, mr. president, i want to thank, staff for the presentation, and all of the work that has gone into this matter. i do have a question to the chair. the section of the health and safety code that governors how this agency works, actually provides for this board of supervisors to actually serve in the capacity as the governing board of this agency. and i don't know that that is necessarily the way to go. but one of the comments that you made that the head of the

agency made was this issue of checks and balances and the concern that i have is that under the current structure that is being proposed by the ordinance, the mayor would basically get to a point all five of the commissioners to this agency, sure that it would be subject to review and approvele by the board of supervisors, to the extent that we are talking about checks and balances why not have a split appointment structure? you know the board like i said could exercise its authority to simply, have the board serve in that capacity or have the board appoint all of the members of the commission, but why not, you know, strike a balance, you know, in terms of checks and balances, and have a situation where both the mayor and the board of supervisors in conjunction make the appointments. it would seem to me that that also allows for this board to become even more invested and more engaged in some of the issues that deal with the

agency. so i am wondering if there are any thoughts around that issue? >> is there staff that can answer campos questions? >> in response, i think city administrator and cohen have laid out the box in which we are operating really starts from the state. redevelopment is dissolved and gone. state dissolution law prevails and the sole purpose and the narrow focus of this body is to complete these surviving projects. it is imperative given the level of affordable housing delivery to thousands of units that would be delivered in these major approved projects. the jobs that would be generated as a result of not only construction, but permanent jobs that would be

generated. it is well over in the tens and tens of thousands. we know that redevelopment does have a long history and past. this is not the redevelopment of the past. its sole focus is this narrow box to implement. the redevelopment commission of the entire structure was appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the board through the vetting process. to have the five members to be appointed by the mayor and confirmed through the board's process. it is imperative, given the confusing and changing nature, literally, every day we get new guidance from the department of finance in order to respond to their request, in order to honor our commitments to these communities and these private invest tores and the structure has worked in the past and one that will allow for operational efficiency to sure that this board and the will of this board because each of these

projects have gone through and been debate and gone through this process through this board's legislative process and through a long, storied community process in each of these communities, decades and decades of work. that the proposed structure would insure that that gets done. >> thank you very much. >> and i understand the comment and i appreciate the perspective. i am still not sure how a split appointment structure would get in the way of that. that is what i am trying to understand. so, any way, thank you. >> colleagues, any other questions to the city staff? >> we have supervisor olague. >> i do have to mention that i am receiving a lot of concerns from, you know, constituents who even though we know that it is a new day, don't really believe it, right? so i just hope that we do have

some kind of i guess, every few months there is going to be a report back, what type of oversight would we have over the oversight body? the chair, tiffany for the record. the oversight body is kind of in a box and i appreciate supervisor it would have helped to have a chart or some kind of a flowchart, the oversight board, i do not at this time. the oversight board has a narrow focus and box. it is solely now, as required not only by 1484 but by direct confirmation and guidance from the state department of finance that has been issued that requires us to have this separate body that solely has this responsibility while there are, it is the responsibility to the taxing entities.

they are public noticed hearingings for that over site board. the over site board may invalidate this payment schedule. it has not. given the nature and composition, and of that board. this state is it constantly seeking for us to wind down our activities. so that the nature of the state provides that state statutory authority. your oversight and you will over see the activities of the proposed successor commission and all activities through supervisor cohen has stated through approval of the budgets and then there is that separate check that the state department of finance has required that the oversight board again reviews that. >> thank you. >> colleagues, any additional

follow up. >> seeing none, why don't we open it up to public comment. if there are members of the public that wish to speak on this you, if you could please, line up on the right-hand side of the chamber and why don't we hear from the first speaker. each member of the public will have two minutes to speak. >> members of the board of super vicers, ray heart. i have heard some questions regarding oversight and those are the concerns that i really had. james and i have been coming to this board of supervisors and to the library commission for a long time now. talking about the fact that the private public partnership between the san francisco public library and the friends has been turned over, completely with no oversight by the library commission or the library. they spend million and spend millions in the year in the names of the citizens in this city. the library commission and the lie braeer an come before the

public saying that they are doing a wonderful job and now we find out through the public record requests that they have no idea whether the statements they are making have any truth at all. none. >> the chief financial officer of the librarian singleton has admitted that she has no idea about $5 million that has been given to the branch library improvement program which they have nothing to up sport. they don't know what it consists of and they have nothing but a number. an imagine narry number as i have mentioned before. and when this was a redevelopment agency, i took some comfort in knowing that the state was going to do a final audit to determine what was going to happen and we know that there have been cases in the state where the redevelopment funds have been founded to be expended illegally in millions and millions of dollars. and now, i have a funny feeling you are going to turnover to

this... jimmy rigged agency and you are going to advocate any responsibility to really see if that money is being spent for what it was supposed to be spent for. i have no confidence in you, and i really question why any of the citizens in the city would either. >> thank you. >> next speaker? >> >> i'm cathy alalulo. >> i live in district four, home owner and also a business owner in west portal. >> we have owned our home for 37 years. and i found out about this rv situation. >> excuse me ma'am, this hearing is for the ordinance of the success or agency to the development agency. we already had a hearing on the

rv legislation. >> we will not be able to provide that. >> next speaker. >> my name is willie radcliff, i public the newspaper and i am a general contractor and developer. and this is an opportunity for the cities for the redevelopment agency to be run favored by the men of the city and not just a few elite developers that wind up with all of the money. so i really want to see the board of supervisors make sure that they appoint at least half of those people so that we can be sure that people from our neighborhoods wind up serving in the redevelopment agency, we have never had anyone from bay

viewpoint serve on the board. at this time our community is organizing and we are going to not going to tolerate with what happened with the last redevelopment agency cutting us out. we want to do development in our own area. we have set up to raise money in our community involving our people to make sure that this won't happen. and so, we would like for the board of supervisors for the people that have been left out. tell me one... (inaudible) in the city. especially on the redevelopment agency or any other program that you see. so we are demanding this time, that we be able to do development in our own community and one of the main things that we are looking at is the street car... (inaudible) we are demanding the right to do that and demanding all of that money but also raising our own money to help do it. so we are looking for the board of supervisors to look out for

us. because what we have been getting coming from the mayor's office we are left out again. >> that is all that i have to say, thank you. >> thank you. next speaker? >> thank you. >> jackson. you know i have a lot to say because i have been dealing with redevelopment since 1968 in my community. and i would like to say in 64 it was started over there in fillmore and the fact that it is coming to be a change, now, you supervisors has a responsibility to be over what is happening here. you should be up wanting people, yourselves, because you see, maybe and don't rush me, ab 26. have not been adhered to in bay view, hunter's point. you see i have been going to these meetings for the oversight committee a lot of

the time. they are canceled. they are canceled. >> i want to see someone from fillmore on that board. bay view, hunter's point and the mission. because we have been shared out. because i do not understand that my community, the pack committee was disbanded no funds was given to them, but i found out later, that i don't know politics was being played and guess what happened? >> the group over there and visitation valley got an office. what happened to my community? >> we are the ones that have been hurt all of these years. but, it don't seem as though we are going to get anything about it unless you commissioners, make sure that at least you like the gentleman said, you vote for at least half, you should be doing over half. the mayor should only have one and you all have the rest of it for this commission. thank you very much. >> and i do thot want to be on the commission i want that known. because i'm almost 80 years old. i want to make sure that

everything is done right. thank you very much. >> thank you, for that important clarification. >> next speaker? >> my name is dianne wesley smith and i am a member of the black human rights leadership council of san francisco. first point that i would like to make is under the redevelopment watch, as the city's african american population declined from 88,000, 11 percent of the city's population in 1990, to 48,000, six percent in 2010. the proportion of american african felony arrests rose from 45 percent in 1990, to 55 percent in the 2000s, with little variation over a decade. this is under the redevelopment's watch. contract compliance has been blai tantly disregarded. we have been left out in bay, view, hunter point's residents as employment opportunities.

we ask that any member of the new oversight committee, first of all, we ask that our board of supervisors, have some account ability and stand up and accept some responsibility for the oversight committee. but i also request that there be three members from bay view's hunter's point and i am asking for three because we might get one. but definitely, i am asking for three. so, two would be fair because we are largely impacted. we request that the commission not be comprised of any former redevelopment agency employees, because what is insanity? insanity is to do the same thing. we are going to take the same employees and expect different results? no more... still no citizen participation and no contract compliance. checks and balance that is what we ask for, check and balance, it cannot happen if we practice

insanity, we have 30 or 40 years to go and we are talking about the future of our young people and including the residents of bay view hunter's point now. >> next speaker? >> good afternoon, my name is robert woods. i have been in the community since 1972, i started out as a model city employee there on the mayor's staff. i have seen the community through good times and this is by far i have seen this is the worst that i ever have seen the community. when was the last time that any of you have been on third street to check out the walking dead? you have ignored the community, there is no jobs, there is no job training program, there is

nothing there that gives them hope. now, you are sponsoring an organization that i was here in san francisco when western addition got ran out. the same thing will happen under this same agency if you don't make changes. i'm not saying that the agency cannot operate, but when you are still sporting old redevelopment agency policies, and you ask us to trust you with these old policies, and i'm saying, we won't trust you under these old policies and under the old transfer of individuals from the redevelopment agency over to

the mayor's office of housing. it hasn't worked and it didn't work then and i don't see it working now. but i will say this. we are willing to work with anyone, but we need people working out in their community and please that you will know what is going on out there as far as employment and people working. it is a crime. san francisco the leading city in the country, and yet, you treat your people bad. and that is... that is not good. that is not good and this is what hurts. >> i have been around the country many times doing various things, but never have i ever... >> thank you very much. >> never have i ever seen a group of people walk back the

graveyard whistling. >> thank you very much. next speaker? >> good afternoon, supervisors i'm john elbing i'm president of the taco group and i am speaking over my three decades of experience in the redevelopment. i have my letter here of the distribution. >> the name of this new agency is incredibly awkward and you can make it better. that is a small thing, much more important is a full record of all of the assets we are talking about transferring to this new body. it may not just be the three remaining project areas or the housing, the agency had other substantial assets in the gardens that are still there and also at issue in dissolution, i cannot tell reading this document whether

that whole complex with the gardens and that property goes to the new entity or does not. in addition, there are quite a few outstanding, loans and agreements with commercial properties in the old project areas, there was an addition, that need to be monitored and enforced and sometimes amended. it is not clear what is the disposition of those contracts and those loans and other assets. that needs to be spelled out and if it is going to be with the new agency it is important and if it is not we need to know what is going to happen to it. >> having only five commissioners for such a range of geographic area of the city is not sufficient. you will need seven just to have balance and appointments from the several project areas, especially in urba buena is included. i suggest that you add to one each appointed to the two supervisors from those districts. ones that are south in the

market adequately represented? never was. finally, the cacs and pacs that used to exist and still may exist are not referenced in this document. if you leave those... >> thank you very much. >> next speaker? >> good afternoon, we were here in january so say that you had given away vast and broad powers over land use over all of the areas not just the ones that are enforcable obligations we were told that is not the case. fast forward a few months to the transbay hearing where we asked you to amend the parking requirements and you told that you had no land use authority and that you had given it all away. i don't see anything in here that is taking back the land use authority. that is dualy yours and that of

the planning commission and planning department. >> we created a department with the split appointments and this is the run around that. keeping all of the land use authority not only for the land development areas where there is an enforcement obligations, bay view, industrial triangle where there is no enforcable obligations. but it is an end run around the will of the voters. we ask you to take back your land use authority and clarify in this ordinance that the land use authority will rest where it is supposed to rest with the planning department and commission and the legislative land use will rest with the board of supervisors. you were told that you could amend the plans but not design for the development documents. whether you have looked at the plan there is nothing in them. all of the subnative controls are in the design for development documents. those can be changed without limitation by this. successor body. which gives them land use control over the vast areas of

the city. o, you know, i am kind of disappointed that we are here. we had this conversation around the transbay and said, again, maybe we gave away too much. let's sort out of land use authority question before we reconstitute this thing and kick the can down the road but here we are with the same body with the same powers is before you today. we ask you to take this back and put the land use authority with the planning commission and give us the narrow oversight that it is supposed to happen. not this, very, very broad authority that you mistakeningly gave in january. thank you. >> next speaker? >> i can be graceful. >> hi, my name is corin woods. i chaired with mission bay, citizen's advisory committee which has survived even though we did not have anybody to advise. we are looking forward to