to contribute the amount to kaiser until we had a contract with them. so it would be a very tenuous agreement at best. >> i did want to add then, i'm fully supportive of supervisor farrell and other folks that require transparency that reach at the state level in a draft of 2015. i feel we have to make a strong stand today and that's why i'm moving to continue this item. >> one comment was around we can just continue with kaiser. i want to be very clear on a few perspectives. maybe from our controllers office, without

a contract, how would we get billed and how would we pay? what do we even pay? >> mr. chairman, members of the committee, without a contract, the controller has no authorization to pay. in fact, we would not pay if we did not have a contract. we are correct in that area. we have the ability to continue an existing contract but that would need to be amended and an approved to continue beyond the plan year. >> okay. and at the same time in time, if it wasn't agreed to to be continued or amended, we would not pay, but at a certain point we'll be charged if they continue to provide health care for our members.

>> a contractor does not have the authority to provide services to the city without a contract. and so, the contractor in this instance would take that chance or that liability upon itself. we could not authorize the services to be provided without the contract. the contract is the mechanism by which we make an agreement with a vendor to provide services and to issue payment and to purposely not have a contract would not be an option. >> okay. so come january 1st, kaiser, if they provided service it would be complete risk of non-payment? >> that's correct. >> unless we amend the current contract. >> we would need the agreement of the contractor. >> you don't think that maintaining the health care for 40 thousand people in san

francisco is not incentive for doing that? >> that is a question of the contractor. >> i would think that it is. >> it's not just amended the contract. we need to know what the rates are now so the rate guides are sent out by this month. it's not just a question of waiting a few months to see if they are kicked over in the contract. those rates need to be figured out now. it's unfortunate that they have not been successful in object obtaining a rate from kaiser now. from where we are now in making such a decision the legal consequences in doing so unfortunate that kaiser has backed itself into a corner or for whatever reason because they set rates at a statewide level because they feel they can not move for the city

without negotiating with other compliant. that's basically my understanding of why kaiser is not going to move. i could be wrong. if you are going to make it a decision of this import where you are seriously looking at telling the health service system to just come back with a blue shield rate and to get rid of kaiser, that type of decision is something that just requires so much planning and so much i think both actuarial work and other considerations that it's very little time to do that. >> thank you. i do want to acknowledge your work on the health service system board as well as the work from health service system. i think it's really incredible to look at how we obtain cost over the years over the work of miss dodd and your staff. that's

been remarkable to see. i do understand that we have had huge increases on the blue shield and blue cross side over the past decade that were well above and beyond what kaiser was and also says a lot about blue shield and blue cross. now we are looking at increases that kaiser is proposing and not backed by data. we are seeing increases that now it's kaiser's turn to say it's okay to have increases. i don't think that makes a lot of sense either. we don't like increases that are high period. i would be supportive of continuing to the chair and maybe we can get something worked out in a week in terms of getting information that backs what kaiser is

doing. i would be happy to hear this at this time. i don't know if i would support it or not. i think another step in the process is actually hearing it again in committee if we have data from kaiser, great, that could give me a sense of what i would really be open to voting for and i'm willing to go forward for the next week without blinking. i want to thank people from the public for being here, people from the union for being here. i was very happy to see is that local 21 leadership were in the mood as well. that's representation of many workers and employers of san francisco. that's very helpful to kaiser and very significant that folks from those unions were here. i would back supervisor mar's motion to continue to the call of the chair. >> okay. if we do that, that's fine. just to be clear, i will

calendar it for next week. again to remind my committee members, to remind kaiser and the whole service staff, we have a full week. if we don't have it to vote, we are not going to pass it out. this is very real. this is no longer theoretical. this becomes very practical for thousands of people. so supervisor mar, any comments? >> i want to thank the kaiser reps being here and hope there is some dialogue with hhf. i think it's important for transparency and data to back up. >> a motion to move this without opposition? so moved. blah mr. mr. clerk,

please call item no. 8. accepted and expend grant hilltop park lasalle and whitney young. >> good afternoon, supervisor, i'm with the parks and recreation capital division. it's to make improvement to hilltop park. it's located on the south side of the city. the land and corporation with the department -- hold on a second. >> ladies and gentlemen, can you please keep it down. >> the spring of 2011, the public trust and land led a series of public workshops to

develop an exceptional proposal for hilltop park for a statewide grant to fund improvements by that process by that community. in spring of 2012 the state awarded $5 million. the states department started preparation in the design construction agreement with the land to allow to accept the plan and design a construction of the project. the agreement included the $110,000 to improve the management cost for the parks department and environmental review process. the parks and recreation will grant the proposal and require accord with the restriction of the

property. the department will maintain and operate the park at the public space for a period of 30 years. property restrictions of this nature has been in place for many years for state and federal funding programs and was recently formalize this process. the department recommends to accept this project. i'm available to answer questions about the grant agreement and i have a representative from the trusted land regarding the process and proposed improvements. >> okay. thank you, colleagues, any questions. thank you very much. we'll open this up for public comment. anyone wishing to make a public comment. move forward. can i take a motion to move it? we can move it

without opposition. >> please call item no. 9. >> the clerk: agreement san francisco municipal transportation agency commercial paper program not to exceed $100 million. >> good afternoon, we sponsored this commercial paper program. it's pretty exciting for us. we are examining authorization for a hundred million dollars for needs. as part of that we are asking to approve 5 different documents to support this commercial paper program in issuing a paid agreement and

dealer agreement, fee letter and commercial paper note offering memorandum. the mta board has an approved this item and it's subject to your approval. it was issued and the bank won the bid. there is a reimbursement agreement that covers ir -- letter. the overall fee for the program we expect it to be $600,000 a year. the rates are favorable for us. at first year about a hundred million dollars, with $600,000. the hundred million will be used to finance the

projects for capital projects in the mta. for example subway, procurement and other needs. the budget analyst did a comprehensive report. so i won't repeat the information of that report. but i'm happy to answer any questions. >> colleagues any questions. >> can you call item no. 10 with this? >> the clerk: agreement tax exempt and taxable lease revenue commercial paper certificates of participation not to exceed $100 million.

>> thank you. director of public and finances of the controllers office. this legislation authorizes an increase of about a hundred million from $150 million to commercial certificates of participation. we are also asking that you approve the form of documents as it relates to the reimbursement agreement as well as letters of agreement and we are asking that you allow the city agencies to access the program as an example, the port of san francisco, is a smaller agency and does not have the resources to implement their own program. also, we would also ask that as you know the program is set up such that the board has to approve the long-term financing to set up the program. we ask that you allow the use of the program in the event of

emergency on the section 3.100 for the city to access that program for the capital needs for a disaster. by way of background, the city's existing program was $100 million. we utilized about $80 million. the board has 80 million cop and we have saved about $4.2 million in a few years since the program is up and running. we have $760 million that we would use this program for. it is 45 basis point. and it's very low and attractive compared to the

fire program when we started which was about 125 basis point. the cost of issuance is approximately $450,000. the fee of $620 million. the program is working as we anticipated. we would like to increase it as we are moving along. because it's a lease back to back transaction. we have to have an equivalent value to procedure cure this program. we need to get the lowest cost. that's it. i will be happy to answer any questions you have. >> thank you. colleagues, any questions. i know this is something that i have sponsored. this is going to have a significant impact to the tune of millions of dollars a year for the city's general fund. thank you. no questions.

can we go to your report for 9 and 10? >> yes. i show in table 2, estimating the cost $362,000 resultings in the cost of a million 990. we recommend this resolution. we strongly support this legislation where you can use commercial paper at a lower interest rate than long-term bonds. regarding item 10, on page 55 of our report which is shown in table 4, the annual fees for the additional service

is resulting in a total cost in subsequent years. based on analysis which was prepared by miss say, as shown in table 5, this refers to what you were just speaking to. if $160 million were utilized for paper over the next few years, the city would an a savings. we recommend that you approve this resolution. >> thank you. colleagues, any questions? let's open to public comment. no public comment. public comment is closed. relatively dry topic compared to before. can we have a motion to approve items 9 and

10. item passes. mr. clerk, please call item no. 11. >> the clerk: item no. 11. multifamily housing revenue bonds 1100 ocean avenue apartments. not to exceed $19, million. >> good afternoon, i'm filling in for the project manager kevin who was called away. so before you is an issuance resolution to issue $19 1/2

million in bonds for a project that is between mercy housing corporation. the project consist of 70 units of affordable housing for families and transition age youth. all units will serve households. 25 units will have transition age use, who are transitioning from foster care or are at risk to not making transition to adulthood. the process consist of -- the mayor's house is approving of this project and

the community supports. we anticipate closing the bond transaction at the end of august and the project is slated to begin construction. we are available to answer any questions if you have any. that ends staff presentation. >> okay. colleagues any questions. okay. we do not have a budget analyst report. we go to public comment. any public member wish to comment? >> i have a request to amend legislation to remove -- before the boards signature. mention the clerk of the board. a >> okay. what would the amendment be? >> generalally she does not

wish to have the department use the fax for signature. she wishes her signature to be wet signatures. i can make that amendment. >> okay. i assume that is acceptable . >> i thought we had caught that. we were notified of that change. we usually always get wet signatures anyway. >> okay. then colleagues can i have a motion to amend our clerks comments and the underlying item sent to the board with no opposition. please call item no. 12. >> the clerk: accept and spend grants state reoccurring grant funds department of public health 2013-2014.

>> good afternoon. this pertains to $20 million worth of grants as well as contracted services. these grants were already included in the budget you considered last month. these particular grants require explicit resolution from the board for acceptance and expenditure. therefore we are bringing this resolution forward for your consideration. i'm happy to answer any questions you have. all the information is provided. >> thank you, colleagues, any questions. seeing none. public comment? seeing none. public comment is close. >> please call item no. 13. >> the clerk: item 136789 accept and expend grant

pedestrian and bicycle projects >> thank you very much. >> good afternoon supervisors, transportation finance analyst from dpw, the proposed would authorize dpw to expend grant funds for pedestrian and bicycle project for 2013-2014. each county receives those funds. each county's local transportation fund. article 3 of tda of portion 2 percent of that quarter percent tax for bicycle and as well as

pedestrian street and road development projects. those funds are allocated and under article 3 to the non-bay area counties. as done in the past, they are joint with the county wide applications. mta process using these funds to repair the city streets and the remaining for preliminary and various sites throughout the city that have been selected in conjunction with the mayor's office. no matching funds are required. i'm here to answer questions. >> any questions from my

colleagues? >> supervisor mar, looks like bicycle coalition have a say in what types of capital projects are going to be chosen by the mta and looks like the dpw is self explanatory. but i wonder how the projects are chosen? >> my understanding is that the project selected for the tda article 3 grouping is basically from our capital investment program. when we developed the cip we sought help from the coalition from the bicycles coalition and they have the idea of the projects in the cip and we did get a resolution support in bic in may. do you have any further questions?

>> i guess it would be great to see a list of the proposed projects suggested by those community and advocacy groups. i don't know if those materials were in our packet unless they are still being developed. >> there is a list of the projects that we intend to go forward with. >> i see regional bicycle sharing pilot, bicycle parking, bicycle parking coordination and 4 and 5. if i can get more details on that it would be helpful. >> okay. if you can get a list of that? >> yes. thank you. >> okay. any further questions, comments. no budget analyst report. public comment. no public comment. >> supervisor mar, do you want

to pass this out. we'll move it without further opposition. >> mr. clerk, any other items? >> the clerk: the committees the items. >> thank you, we are adjourned. he is

>> can we all rise please for

the pledge of allegiance. of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all mr. president, i'd like to call roll (calling names) mr. president, you have a quoru