projector please. >> good afternoon. the item in front of you for your consideration today is the adoption of the updated debt management policies and procedures. these policies set forth the guidelines and parameters for how we should issue and manage our debt in accordance with legal regulatory requirements and the three best practices in our respective debt issueance needs. the goal is to do this in a sound and transparent manner. as a regular issuer of debt, we already have debt policies in place. it's always recommended, such policies be refreshed giving the ever changing municipal bond world,

as well as our own changing needs. several changes have been made, such as provide flexibility and guidelines on how we sell our bonds and adding certain compliance procedures. besides our review process, these have been reviewed by the controllers office and the city attorney's office. the value of having updated debt policies /tkepl demonstrates to our [inaudible] this lends credibility to the sfp you see from a management standpoint and will be viewed as a -- in fact, next week

charles pearl and i will be traveling to new york city to a national bond investor conference where we'll be presenting this to past and perspective purchasers of our bonds. we hope to tell them we have updated policies in place. with that i'll take any questions you might have. >> it's stated in the memo that this was recommended by the government finance officers association. who are they? >> they are a very large industry association of government financial officers. >> they have the best practices recommendations? >> absolutely. this is one practice they highly recommend. and many of the large issuers throughout the country, particularly our peers in california, have such debt policies and we've had them in

places for a while. we should be updating them as conditions change, requirements change, so this would be an update to that. >> so you are a member of the association in >> yes. we're very actively involved. >> mr. president, he was on that board for many number of years. >> do they give a star of accreditation or what do they provide us by -- >> i'm not aware of that maybe. >> no certification process. >> no. but we do already receive their excellence awards. >> that's what i was referring to. >> why do i have to push you guys to toot your horns. >> we do. thank you for doing that. >> exactly. >> in fact, when we go to this

invester conference we will publicize that. >> we do toot our horn. >> thank you very much. any quick comments on that? there being none, -- moved? >> so moved. >> second? any public comment on the motion. there being none, all those in favor say i? opposed. motion carries. item number ten. >> item ten. improving for potential revised contract amount of up to 10, 309,800.

>> any questions? any public comment? motion to approve. >> so moved. >> approved and seconded. all those in favor signify by saying i. opposed? motion carries. item eleven. >> recommended that the board of supervisors approve an easement to pge to pge and for its fair market value following approval by the board of supervisors. >> good afternoon. i'm real estate director. do you have any questions? >> that was pretty -- is there a motion? >> so moved. >> moved? >> second. >> seconded. public comment. there being none, all those in favor say i. opposed. motion carries. thank you.

>> thank you. >> i no, no, thank you. item number 12. >> authorize a general manager to execute the four professional services and agreements for an amount not to exceed 5 million dollars each and with a duration of 14 years per agreement. >> all right. welcome. any questions the commission may have on this item? >> i just had a quick question on the duration -- 14 years seems like a long term. >> it is a long term duration is what these contracts will be used for is to provide supplemental report so it is that long periods of a time so when you're established habitat it takes a long time to grow and get the characteristics to

provide that habitat. long term investment. this is a pool of contractors that would get individualed task orders and we have provisions for performance like many of our other contractors. >> when you say provisions for performance, if there is a finding that something's not going right, do we have the ability under the contract to invalidate the contract? >> yes. we do. >> we do? /tho provisions are in there? >> yes. termination for con convenience. >> so that's within the purview. so it could turn out not to be 14 years if there are problems. we do that with a lot of the grants we issue. >> or if the firm starts to change its business or if people leave the firm. whatever reason. >> i just wanted to make sure we had that out of the way. all right, public comment.

motion to approve. >> so moved. >> moved and seconded. >> all in favor say i. opposed. motion /kraeur carries. item number 13. >> between the sfpoc and the san francisco local agency formation commission and authorize the general manager to execute this amendment of four years. >> so you discussed the mou that it was expiring and this is necessary for us to continue our relationship with lafco. there was no comments or questions at the march 25 meeting so we're now bringing it back to you for approval at this time. >> okay. so... >> there's no cost? >> no. don't believe so. is there? i don't even know. >> there is no incremental

cost. it's only a time extension in this case. where was she noted as the -- she's the new mike campbell if you remember him at all. he was community out reach manager and he left. yeah, we just hired her and wanted to make sure she'll be around. >> public comment? being none, all in favor signify by saying i. opposed. motion carries. all right. i guess we're down to closed session. >> closed session item conference with legal council pursuant to government code

section 54956.81 and san francisco administrative code 6710 d-1 and id might note that the state legislature provides the brown. >> is there a motion to [inaudible]. >> so moved. >> moved and seconded. all those in favor signify by saying i. >> let's move to closed session. any public comment. we're back. we have an

announcement. [inaudible]. is there a motion regarding whether to disclose discussions during closed session? >> motion not to disclose. >> all in favor say i. opposed. then would you just articulate what we decided and -- >> on item 16 the commission approved the settlement with the regional water quality control board in the central valley for 51,000 dollars. >> any other business? meeting's adjourned. could have done this by phone.

i'm the president of friends of mclaren park. it is one of the oldest neighborhood community park groups in san francisco. i give a lot of tours through the park. during those tours, a lot of the folks in the group will think of the park as very scary. it has a lot of hills, there's a lot of dense groves. once you get towards the center of the park you really lose your orientation. you are very much in a remote area. there are a lot of trees that shield your view from the urban setting. you would simply see different groves that gives you a sense

of freedom, of being outdoors, not being burdened by the worries of city life. john mclaren had said that golden gate park was too far away. he proposed that we have a park in the south end of the city. the campaign slogan was, people need this open space. one of the things that had to open is there were a lot of people who did a homestead here, about 25 different families. their property had to be bought up. so it took from 1928 to 1957 to buy up all the parcels of land that ended up in this 317 acres. the park, as a general rule, is heavily used in the mornings and the evenings. one of the favorite places is up by the upper reservoir because dogs get to go swim. it's extremely popular. many fights in the city, as you know, about dogs in parks.

we have 317 acres and god knows there's plenty of room for both of us. man and his best friend. early in the morning people before they go to work will walk their dogs or go on a jog themselves with their dogs. joggers love the park, there's 7 miles of hiking trails and there's off trail paths that hikers can take. all the recreational areas are heavily used on weekends. we have the group picnic area which should accommodate 200 people, tennis courts are full. it also has 3 playground areas. the ampitheater was built in 1972. it was the home of the first blues festival. given the fact that jerry garcia used to play in this park, he was from this neighborhood, everybody knows his reputation. we thought what a great thing

it would be to have an ampitheater named after jerry garcia. that is a name that has panache. it brings people from all over the bay area to the ampitheater. the calls that come in, we'd like to do a concert at the jerry garcia ampitheater and we do everything we can to accommodate them and help them because it gets people into the park. people like a lot of color and that's what they call a park. other people don't. you have to try to reconcile all those different points of view. what should a park look like and what should it have? should it be manicured, should it be nice little cobblestones around all of the paths and like that. the biggest objective of course is getting people into the park to appreciate open space. whatever that's going to take to make them happy, to get them there, that's the main goal. if it takes a planter with flowers and stuff like that,

fine. you know, so what? people need to get away from that urban rush and noise and this is a perfect place to do it. feedback is always amazement. they don't believe that it's in san francisco. we have visitors who will say, i never knew this was here and i'm a native san franciscoan. they wonder how long it's been here. when i tell them next year we'll get to celebrate the 80th anniversary of the park, >> good morning, everyone and welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors budget and finance subcommittee meeting for april tenth, 2013, my name is farrell and i will be chairing and also joined by avalos and mar and the vice

chair is out sick today. i would like to thank the members of sfgtv for covering this meeting today as well as the clerk of the committee mr. victor young. mr. clerk, do we have any announcements? >> yes, silence all cell phones and electronic devices and complete the speaker cards and any documents to be included as part of the file should be submitted to the clerk. items acted upon today will be on the 16th april, board of agenda. >> could you call item number one? >> item number one, resolution approving the acquisition of 30 aviggation easements from the various property owners of the san mateo county required for the san francisco international airport's notice insulation program.

>> we have john up dike director of real estate. >> it is the approval of the acquisition of 30 avigation easements within a certain noise insulation program, run by the san francisco airport in san mateo county and so the item seeks your approval of those easements as well as the findings relative to the general plan of conformity. this is a long-standing program as outlined very thoroughly by the budget analysts that has been in action for over 20 years. and this is a really a case of a bit of catch up with some change in ownership where the airport has approached new owners within the area, where they are eligible for noise insulation and in return for a

easement which provides a senator to the airport that there will be no restrictions for the flight path that effects their homes and brings the decibel levels to a more manageable level in the homes. and the pricing here, the easement itself is a no-cost easement and of course the program related to the homes that are improved as a result of the easement and this is a federal funded program for the federal aviation administration, they provide 80 percent and 20 percent is in the fund that is approved for the airport as noted in the analyst report. one item that i would like to call your attention, we do want to make a slight amendment and if i could have you turn to page 2, lines one through five, where in we referenced the director of planning letter of general planning of conformity and we did fail, however, to note that we also seek and will

provide an amendment for mr. young, to provide the adoption of findings that this project is exempt from the review under class one and so we would like to make that amendment. >> okay. >> happy to answer any questions that you might have and i am also joined by the colleagues from the airport if you have any questions about the program as a whole. >> thank you, mr. up dike, we have the budget report. and thank you. >> mr. chair, and supervisor avalos, on page 5 of our report, we point out that it is shown in table two, the total cost to complete the sound proofing from aircraft noise in conjunction with these 30 avigation easements acquired by the airport from residential property owners was $1 million $494,924 as shown in table three on page 5 and the airport

has paid $324,000 or $861 or 29.1 percent of the balance of the costs of $1,489,240 will come from the federal agency, it was previously appropriated by the board of supervisors and we recommend that you approve this resolution. >> thank you very much. any questions? >> i would like to open it up to the public. seeing none, public comment is closed. >> okay, so we have a motion to accept the amendment as proposed and we can do that without objection and a motion to move item number four to the full board without opposition, as amended. >> mr. clerk, could you call item two.

>> ordinance waving the fee required by the public works code for the temporary street space occupantcy within a certain designated streets in the city and county of san francisco on saturday may 11, and saturday may 18 rkts 2013 as a part of the small business week sidewalk sales. >> this is something that i sponsor along with the majorty of the board of supervisors and part of the small business week that is coming up and the tradition in the city and county of san francisco and it is great for the residents and community and also our small business and so i want to thank you for being here. >> thank you. supervisor farrell and avalos and thank you to supervisor farrell for sponsoring the legislation this year. small business week is may 13, to the 18th and this is our 9th year. and sponsoring this office, and sponsoring the sidewalk sale,

or the sidewalk incroachment and this is the 7th year. and the theme is shaping our communities and so, our neighborhood commercial corridors are very much a part about our small businesses, shaping our communities. and so, we have provided information in terms of just which each merchant corridor the number of blocks that will be participating and needing this sidewalk encroachment fee waiver and the cost and i am happy to take any questions and just really want to express my appreciation to the board of supervisors for continually supporting this fee waiver for the merchants. >> thank you. >> no questions? >> thank you very much. >> at this time we will open it up to public comment and anybody want to publicly comment on item number two? >> seeing none, public comment is closed.

we move item two forward for recommendation to the full board and we can do so without objection. >> mr. clerk, could you call item three? >> item number three, resolution approving the issuance of the tax exempt obligations by the kaeft enterprise development authority in an aggregate principal amount not-to-exceed $9 million finance and refinance various capital facilities owned by the progress foundation. >> we will hear from the controller's office of public demands. >> good morning, members of the budget and finance committee my name is (inaudible) and this approves the tax exempt of interest and it is a refunding of prior obligations for savings. and the resolution acknowledges that the public hearing was held by our office and should we have any questions on the project itself there are representative to answer the

questions. there is no fiscal payment for the city and the city is not responsible for the repayment on those. >> thank you for the clarifications. any questions? >> we will open it up to public comment? does anybody want to comment on item three? step up. okay. public comment is closed. we move to item three forward with recommendation and we can do so without objection. >> could you call item four? >> resolution urging the retirement board of the employee retirement system to divest from the publicly traded fossil fuel companies. >> okay. sponsored by supervisor avalos. thank you, this is a resolution that i have the co-sponsorship with supervisors eric mar and breed and i want to thank them for their support and this has come from a lot of organizizing that is happening in the bay area nationally around climate change and i want to thank 350.org, climate nexus and the

student groups that have been working on this resolution and the divestment strategy around the nation. and it is a critical time that we really address immediately, the needs of curbing climate change in the nation and around the world. to start off i want to talk about some of the math that is involved. it is easy to get kind of bogged down in the science of climate change but there is super math that we can boil this down to. the scientific consensus is that global warming f it exceeds 2 degrees c, it will have catastrophic consequences for all habitats across the globe. almost every government has agreed through the copenhagen accord and we have raised the temperature by 0.8 degrees c which has caused more damage

than scientists expected. the sea ice has declined by a third and the acidity of the ocean has increased by 30 percent and we are seeing dramatic climate events that happen every year. to prevent 2 degrees of c of warming we can burn no more than 656 giga tons of carbon dioxide and that is a billion. fossil fuel corporations currently have 2800 giga tons in their reserves, so comparing 565 to the total reserve is 2800 giga tons and that means that we need to keep 80 percent of the current fossil fuel reserves in the ground. if we do not do that, we will see the dramatic increases in temperatures and we know what will happen if that happens. we currently are using about 31 giga tons of carbon every year. at our current pace we will

burn through the 565 limit in 16 years, meaning in 16 years we will have raised the earth's temperature by 2 degrees c, and if we go on beyond that we will be raising the surface temperature by much more than that. clearly, action needs to be taken. and divesting from fossil fuel is not just the moral thing to do it is physically responsible, as the impacts become more severe, the governments around the world will be forced to act to restrict carbon emissions. the valuations of the stocks are largely based on the reserves, the current valuation do not account for the risks of future regulations, a recent report by the bank argues that they are limited to burning one-third of their reserves they could lose up to 40 to 60 percent of their market capitalization, and the effects of climate change become more severe, the stocks will become riskier and we question whether it makes sense that we tie our

retirement benefits to the fossil fuel companies as we see in a much more and more, uncertainty in the fossil fuel market. divestment is growing, as a growing movement being led by a lot of college students. i am sure that there are many in this room today. students with more than 300 college campuses across the country are pursuing divestment including san francisco state university the university of san francisco and uc berkeley in the bay area, four colleges have enacted the divestment policies they are the college of the atlantic, sterling college, (inaudible) and the mayor of seattle is p pursuing divestment, vermont, and it is co-sponsored by 25 state representative and four senators in the state of vermont. divestment is the important compliment to the climate work and others