tv [untitled] April 17, 2013 10:30am-11:00am PDT
10:30 am
we recommend you approve the ordinance in item 4 - on page 13 of our report we point out that the department has previously collected $374,989 on personality from sold waste folks and we therefore make a recommendation to amend the ordinance to request the dpa submit an annual report so the board of supervisors knows what's in the fund and we recommend you approve the ordinance >> someone from d b.a. any
10:31 am
questions? >> i have reviewed the propped amendment and dpa should recommend it. >> thank you, mr. rows. i'd like to open up on public commit to item it through 4 >> i'm glad you've built this up you've built up the health budget up you've built it up-and-up and up and now your buckets solid. and it's still going to make it - give it all you've got. your solid as a budget rock and you give it all you got.
10:32 am
and a thank you, mr. paul son-in-law. anyone else want to commit? seeing none public commit t is closed. can we move the budget >> yes i'll move the budget. >> we can move without objection and now move the other items. >> item number 5 resolution approving the second amendment between the transportation agency and the powers for the center pursuant to charter section not to exceed to 5 hundred 3 hundred and 77 there's for the period of july 2009
10:33 am
through december 31, 2017. >> we have mr. kim. >> thank you i'm henry kim i'm here behavior of the board to execute this transit pursuant to charter section 118. this intuitive was authorized by an enter governmental services and overhead inspection and engineering services and traffic services for the terminal transit project. the second amendment is related to project management construction management and
10:34 am
engineering. this amendment was authorized by mta board by a resolution 13 - 118 and also at amendment on february 13th and this amendment is consistent with the previous adopted amendment by the board. so that's pa brief presentation that i'm happy to a answer any questions. thank you and a calling any questions on item number 5? >> okay. thank you very much. to our budget analysts >> members on page 17 we report that those specific types of services to be reimbursed to the mta are shown on the table and that's on page 18 of the report
10:35 am
and it's hone the total estimated costs are $2.1 million which would be reimbursed to the mta based on the services provided. we recommended you approve the resolution >> thank you very much any questions? >> seeing none? i'd like to a open this up to public commit >> step by step we're going to fix the transit system to step by step we're going to fix the transit program two. step one we give it this budget sum step 2 take away the transit budget blues. step four make the transit better than it was before. step 5 keep the transit system
10:36 am
alive. step by step going to get the budget approved. step by two we're going to fix the transit system, too. thank you very much anybody else? >> seeing none we're joined by committee and colleagues can we take a motion to move item 5 forward. okay. mr. clerk can you please call item 6 >> item number 6 resolution adapting guidelines for the establishment and use of the financial district on land for under the jurisdiction of the san francisco port commissioner. >> okay. thank you very much. i know we have brad benson and
10:37 am
10:38 am
so we're here to talk about proposed policy for infrastructure 49 districts along the port. this is a policy that the port has been working on trying to develop on the state level and now legally since 2005. and infrastructure financing district are a little bit like redevelopment. under a state law a city and county can form a subdivision to finance like new roads and
10:39 am
parks. and the method of financing is exactly how it was in redevelopment law the infrastructure growth can capture new growth for periods up to 45 years. and the difference compared to redevelopment is property taxes are divided into a number of recipients the state gets a property tax dollar and the remaining $0.10 is divided up between the school district and community college district. and under an infrastructure financing district typically the only increment that can be captured is the $0.65.
10:40 am
you can't capture the money it goes to schools or to the community college district. so it's property taxes can be used to a finance infrastructure through bonds or on a pay as you go basis. the ports are structured a little bit differently. redevelopment focused on providing affordable housing. by state law 20 percent of the increment must be spent on parks, bay assess and the remove of bay fill. as you know there's significant historic contamination along the port property. so in 2005 is when we first went up to try to develop the tool
10:41 am
and it was really based on the work that the director and cf o director did in the first 10 year capital plan. the plan says the structural financial plan is not in its operating budget it's instead the bag log of capital improvements needed to bring the port property up to compliance and this chart there's two charts the one on the top with the red and blue the red shows total need along the port which is above $2 billion and the blue
10:42 am
is the funding sources we've been able to identify. the chart below is a break out of the blue portion of the chart above. you'll see that i f did say major source we're looking to improve the water front. we've been legislativeing over time. that authorized you to fund the port property and it expanded the range of eligible use of tax increments with respect to the america's cup 80 to ask the
10:43 am
state if it would allow infrastructure districts to capture the state that quarter of property tax dollars that goes up to the state and 801199 the state approved our ability to capture that tax increment under certain circumstances. >> i want to provide a little bit of the background between the ports fund. the bureau ton act which transfers from state to city control requires that we maintain a separate harbor fund it's separate from the city's general fund. we've done analysis over time to look at property taxes and the
10:44 am
cost of city services on port property. there's a bit of a gap. there's some sources that are urban leashed and don't generate tax precedes. and there's a cost of providing city services in that budget. and we try and track that over time. there's a general prim the harbors shouldn't subsidize or excuse me. the general fund shouldn't subsidize those services. the improvements to piers and
10:45 am
seismic upgrades there in the capital fund also like along with historic properties listed on the national register. so as we are thinking about forming districts along the port property and the first proposed districts will likely be considered in 2014 so we're a ways away from requesting the styrofoam a districts. there would be a policy framework everybody sort of accepted there would be community oversight but those
10:46 am
structures don't exist so we're going to propose local districts to answer those issues. there are some just a few minutes properties where it might making make sense to include those ports particularly pier 70 but there's guidelines. we're suggesting that it's a policy decision for the board of supervisors when a district it formed whether to apply the port guidelines or the city's guidelines. next important we have to complete sequa. so we can't bring to you a set of without first analyzing the
10:47 am
improvements. any improvements we have should be consistent with the public tries doctrine the 10 year capital plan and that's making sure we're proposing policy that's been adopt. next, we suggest that those are major master plans redevelopment areas in many respects and there ought to be a burden on the city to show there's a economical he - and we should demonstrate where we collect property taxes we need to be able to assure
10:48 am
that the cost is covered by other taxes or you at least know what the financial trade offices are when your foreman a district. in those areas where we're able to capture the state share of property tax we would suggest the way that the states structured that ability was to say the states share could be made available in proportion to how much the increment we dedicated locally. we want to any other time the local distribution. number 7 on this slide is the key of what we sort of the heart of the policy. we're using tax increments to essentially purchase
10:49 am
infrastructure that is built by our partners. and it's private equity it's an expensive form of financing. developers earner an annual income of 18 to 20 percent we're suggesting here we decade the full amount to pay off that private equity as quickly as possible to be as efficient in financing those improvements as possible. we're generally using the value of port property to pay that developer return fda law has real constraints so we're using the portland value to pay developer return. there will be in the districts
10:50 am
literally hundreds of thousands of the dollars available after the infrastructure has been fined so in the year thirty there be significant amounts of funds available so the seawall will be funded as well >> thank you for your presentation just a question. could you walk us through an example of how this about be carried out on rapid, you know, reimbursements. >> yes. i actually have sort of the cost estimates for infrastructure investment in each of the 3 big projects that
10:51 am
are coming a little bit after this slide so when i get to those slides i'll talk about how the developer will justice the equity and then how we will buy the infrastructure. so we think there's a big policy call to be made about where the excess fund also the city seawall is beyond it's life so the city may want to make improvements to the city seawall. i'll skip over that. the p the p the pay increment will be
10:52 am
available. it's important that we have is a mechanism in place to be able to maintain the improvements. we're in this policy setting forth a process by which the f i ds would actually come to the board. you've established our intention that happened in the america's cup context. we would have to come back after sequa. we suggest and have gone to the cities planning committee to ask that they be the body it reviews specific infrastructure plans and that body includes d dw the public you utilities commission.
10:53 am
we would include mechanisms to make sure we get a fair price from our infrastructure partner. and finally, there's some strategic information we can clearly demonstrate to you that the port doesn't have the ability to build this infrastructure. we should leverage the city sources and have a public process. and the port maintenance advisory groups up and down the waterfront. so we do want public participation particularly when we're talking about funding public projects. finally, the nexus analysis i
10:54 am
told you about earlier we need a next us budget about how you the port is doing with relative to city costs. so i want to get into those examples you were seeking. these are the 3 main projects we're compensating. it's south of the ballpark 3 million square feet is proposed that sheet is coming to the board next month. and pier 70 we're looking approximately 3.70 million square feet. collective this is on the order
10:55 am
of $4 billion of public and private investment that's the way that the city is going to grow and in order to accumulate that growth we've got to have more infrastructure. we've done some analysis on the seawall transaction the giants bail park development proposal. and after the tax increment is revised we're looking at 13 i million dollars and estimated 2 had the $5 million leaving $10.5 million we're still figuring out the transit costs for that development. that that $10.5 million will be more than enough to fund munis operating costs to serve the
10:56 am
development. we'll get more involved with the sequa before we bring that to you. those are basically streets and sewer in major shore like that park. almost 5 acres. total cost of the infrastructure are over $100 million. and the ports partner which is a subsidy of the giants would initially fund that infrastructure with a compliance of portland vail, developer entity and get repaid. they would do it in phases. they're not talking about building the infrastructure all at once only recognizing that
10:57 am
the market will allow a advertisement of the portion of the border site at that time. i want to pause and say have i answered your question about how this is going to work? >> yes. at pier 70 this has got a more detailed sort of break out of the types of equity and costs. this is going to cost over $20 million we estimate about $40 million for the roads and utilities and there's another $30 million the sight is not sound so we need an additional
10:58 am
wall. so this is the funding for the i f d. and finally, the woirz project that has been approved by the board something like that $19 million a year that includes the tax increment in this case and we're going through the process of calculating the city costs but we think that will be a net tax gain to the city over time. so those are the port lands project. this is the area that includes the woirz proposed site seawall lot that 3:30. i'm going to flip down to the left-hand side of this slide
10:59 am
you'll see pier 48 which is a proposed sheet. and pier 70 is on the right-hand side of this chart. this is the site of the washington development of the voter referendum this november that is proposed for fta use. and those 3 piers are the areas where we can capture the state share associated with the america's cup. that includes my presentation. we've circulated those to the
65 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television Television Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on