is only placed by classroom modules with new housing and enhancement to the street scene. as you know all of these are and will be soon school district real estate. the jury is to investigate what is the status of these properties? is there any movement for change? and how many examples are below the radar? and how can we make a difference? there are previous grand jury reports and other reports prepared for supervisor mark ferrel for the supervisors budget. our investigation came up with these major conchugsz -- conclusions as stated in the report. the discussion and dialogue are generated to a wide audience. sheeping a bright light on district properties will face eat the

the kind of informed discussion that must take place early on prior to the give and take of any agreement moving forward. this is the basis of our recommendation of a consolidated web base data base to develop complete information about city properties and all city departments be able and expected to maintain properties on that. we were extremely pleased to know in that regard and the mayor's response is in full agreement that right to know that all publically known real estate and rot map and real information data base is in beta testing as of this july with full implementation with the the first quarter of 2013. we know that the administrative code will be maintained by the city departments in the same timeframe. the jury also noted

with pleasure in the response to the school district, it's acknowledgment of the importance of a comprehensive listing of property available to the public. secondly, the report concluded actions that led to guiding real estate must be reviewed in the lighted of current conditions. we recommended a review of the code to find further action to obtain optimal utilization including affordable housing. a directive property prepared to a legislative clean up with the board of supervisors and the mayor by 2014 to balance the needs for affordable housing. based on the demographics and

reports and the districts responses to our reports. we recognize the school districts takes a concerted review to this opposition. in order to hedge against unanticipated future needs. while we acknowledge this, the thrust of our obligations for the limits at the time of this remain dormant and utilized, a more aggressive pursuit of that revenue. as urged in the 2010 report commissioned for the schools at uc berkeley. lastly, the jury found that there are institutional barriers to decision making and recommended that specific entities within the city and district administration, be designated, authorized and charged with the review of property utilization and the preparation of plans for distribution of properties

where profitable and beneficial. we are happy to provide that the school district has been formally charged with the district property and will meet formally in the future. the city has vied for legislative clean up of chapter 23a will include greater authority upon the part of the director of property to ensure conformance by the property and outline the surplus and under utilized assets and there will be substantive discussions around the property status of the capital planning committee. in our opinion, this satisfies the spirits of our recommendations. so returning to our signing of what appears to be inactive city and school district access, we now know it's under way. school district

superintendent carranza, a school for the arts as part of the strategy for message -- major initiatives for all areas. a design for soda as and a preliminary funding figure has been developed. in the mission, we are now informed the school district property at 950 mission street will be part of the exchange of the mayor's housing. once this exchange is in place, we hope a time table for project's completion will be developed promptly. these are two excellent examples of an action that will have a lasting impact. or report was intended to help make that a forward and timely consistent part of timely and real estate management. thank you.

>> i would like to introduce paul change for a remark of soda. >> mr. paul needs no introduction. he's a legend. >> good morning supervisor cohen, supervisor tang and supervisor campos. i'm delighted to being here this morning. i appreciate the chance to address this committee about an idea whose time has finally arrived. my colleague tom walker has already laid out the reasons why optimizing the city owned real estate is important for the fiscal and economic health of this city. any decision it makes about it's property translates into something even more significant in terms of how it affects the lives and education opportunities of thousands of our city's young people. because of such high

stakes, the civil grand jury is very pleased and excited with the school district's response to our recommendation no. 6. which highlights the option of converting the historic school buildings at 170 and 135 van ness plus auditorium to a new campus for the school of the arts. we commend the school district, school board and especially superintendent richard carranza for his leadership and foresight to go forward with this project after so many years of set backs and disappointments takes courage. it is indeed an idea for years to come. what does the school district center say to the public? it's a loud statement to families who are uncompromising in their quest for a great education and

robust curriculum for their children. with this project they won't have to leave the city or attend a private school to get what they are looking for. it's a powerful message for our students to be ambitious to be the next jo jo ma, john legend or next jennifer lopez. >> but not miley cyrus. >> you notice i didn't mention here. there is a special place to be trained and mentored by ak accomplished artist. this project signals to the nation and the world that we as a community place a high premium on the public arts education and we recognize the universal benefits of promoting creative

expressions among young people around the globe starting with our own. we recognize, we understand the school district is a state agency with independent decision making powers, but we hope that board of supervise will take an interest with the progress this school district makes with it's project. we strongly urge board of supervisors to take on a positive role to seek funds negative -- funding necessary to bring the project to its fruition. it raises the $235 million needed to construct this new campus. the challenge is daunting but not impossible. it's going to require an unpress department partnership in collaboration among all the major stake holders. the school

district, city government, the entire arts community, corporations and private donors who believe in the notion that a world class city be built in the heart of a vibrant civic center historic district in san francisco. to make it happen it cannot be viewed as just a legacy project for special interest. it has to be everybody's legacy project for the sake of future generations. if we can achieve this, we will have a remarkable asset that invigorates and adds richness to the culture of our city. if we have the will and the means we can indeed create a new model for arts, education that will be the envy of the nation. thank you. >> thank you. okay. so next in

our program we've got a number of city departments that have provided response to this item. i believe we are going to hear from the mayor's office first and then we are going to hear a consolidated presentation by john and followed by the school district. why don't the mayor's office present. >> chair cohen and supervisor campos. my name is antonio guerra, an fiscal, john is going to present a consolidated city response and i believe we have representative from capital planning and we are ready to answer questions from the committee if requested. in general, we understand the desire for real estate is put to appropriate use. this

administration shares that desire. as mentioned in the city's response. staff discusses the use of city assets on a regular basis and always looking for development opportunities. in addition the city is looking as transparency in the reports. we have two mapping systems. one for information systems map by real estate. by 2014, members of the public already integrated into a mapping system by one stop shoj presented in a geographical format. finally, the jury recommend the utilize projects, any proposal which brought in utilized properties must be balanced with the needs for affordable housing in san

francisco. i'm happy to answer any questions now or after the presentation. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. another man that doesn't need an introduction. [ laughter ] >> good afternoon, chair cohen, members of the committee, director of real estate. i also want to thank the civil grand jury. it's been actually a great experience for me and my staff in taking back some of the concerns and issues they have raised and really highlighting and helping us moving forward with our strategic plans in the years. this is a document for real estate and i want to thank all of my colleagues at the various department for their support today. i will answer in i

questions you might have specific program areas. so, if in the interest of time sense we have a number of findings and recommendations, if it's okay with you i would like to follow along the mayor's response letter and just name the findings and recommendations and give you our response rather than going through and detailing what those finding and recommendations were since they did a great job in summarizing the reports. we start with the findings: finding 1 and there the issue as we see it in terms of our ability to take better care of our assets, the response is that we disagree, but the key here is that we are finding dilapidated assets that are is surplus or assume to be

surplus our inability to affect repairs to them in a timely fashion is a capacity just out stripping, the needs out stripping that capacity. that again is addressed in further in our responses in terms of better collaboration with the capital planning committee and real estate. so that we can better address and prioritize for both capital planning committee what those issues. and what the needs are. finding 2, response there and this deals with the transparency issue, but while we disagree with the findings, we do believe that we have in place an excellent peer review and

multi-departmental discussion process between real estate. many of the operating departments that have assets in them and the capital planning group and we have regular discussions of that. we are going to formalize that by presenting more direct information to the capital planning committee so that these issues are assets and their condition is not only discussed by capital planning, but is included in the capital plan as an item that goes to the board in their annual document. the finding 3, we agree. the surplus property ordinance which is a subject of feinding three is purposefully narrow. focus solely on affordable housing development, that was the genesis of the property ordinance. we do recognize it was taylored at a time trying to address a specific issue and we'll

revisit that which is appropriate today and that is what we'll bring forward on some legislative amendments in the future. finding 5, the next one, as part of our overall response, we definitely agree and i think that has been reflected in the grand jury statements that we are already making a great strides in changing the nature of how we addressed these properties. recommendation: recommendation 1.1 has to do with the mapping. here we are talking about the recommendation having been implemented to a great degree. if i may indulge we have the connection to the property information data base of planning on the internet. if we can go to the laptop on the

screen. thank you. what i have highlighted here is one of the more infamous blocks noted in the report dash 165 grove across the street from city hall where we have a vacant lot highlighted on the left of the screen where we have the garden. certainly a far better use than we had before which is a collection of trash, needles and other unmention abls. and adjacent, a billion which is vacant but which is occupied in

terms of an art display. there is no occupancy in the building because it is deemed an unsafe building. we are in discussions with how to move forward with a redevelopment of this half block. the other hafr half of the block is our headquarters. i want to give you information that is now available to the public by scrolling on to this map you can learn anything you want to know about the property. not just the address, information about the relevant planning documentation. you can look at the building permit status, whether there are complaints and i think most importantly, you can also see jurisdictions if you look at city properties, maps, jurisdictions and we thought

this was a really important new feature that we just added since the civil grand jury raised this to our attention and that is you look at the maps into city property, who do you call if you have a question about that property. you call the city. we have this information in a different data base. so we are moving over this information so that you can see specifically a department to contact. whether that's my department or a different department. so again, transparency and ability for the public to better engage public officials in seeing whether it's a graffiti issue or a concern they have. this is an example of how this is changing. continuing along recommendations. recommendation 1.2 speaks to the online

database properties. this will be implemented in the future by 2014. recommendation 1.3 #shgs similarly of the chapter 23 a code. this will be implemented in the first quarter of 2014. very briefly, i want to show you what we had produced and why we changed. so in prior years, the city to be in compliance with 23a produced this lovely book which contains every property the city owns, lot and block, historical cost, historical improvement cost, jurisdiction and the address. and we have produced this book annually. each year with a different cover with 99 percent

the same information. when amy and i started this, we thought it was old fashioned. we started to produce a book that i suspect arrived in your office and used as a paperweight. the map was desired the. we move the data on the these resources so you have realtime information. what we failed to provide were requirements. we are going to adjust 23 a so it reflects what we think should be provided what is useful to you and the public about our properties and we are sure to report on that information on a realtime basis through this geographic information system. recommendation 1.4. again, we

are going to implement this in the future. and this does talk about also again collaborate wth capital planning committee. speak brieflily recommendation 2 as well, this also involves the school district. but we believe that with in depth discussions with the planning committee which are open public meetings and this further collaboration of the staff level as well with the departments that have assets under their control, we do not need to react these committees. we believe it's the best tool to make the excellent decisions in how we invest in

these actions. recommendation 3, this requires further analysis. this legislative clean up issue will come forward in time, this is affordable housing question and finding the appropriate balance to encourage the departments to dispose assets while we have that tension if you will fiscaley, if they tend to dispose of assets, we have a different source. is there a balance that we can reach that perhaps further incentivizes departments to release assets to the city. recommendation 5.2, this recommendation had been partly implemented through those legislative clean ups

through 23a and we'll also continue to have collaboration with capital planning. another brief i wanted to note is what we have sdon gone through each department surplus property lested on the real estate website and included a picture of the property and planning about the property and finding many of these assets aren't surplus, they are right of way orren between two homes where there is a pathway that is surplus to the city's needs. we are a bit hostage to moving forward with deposing those assets. we are going to analyze whether there are some programs to encourage owners to work with us and take on ownership of those adjacent assets. it's not something in many cases that we can offer to the public. they have to be

negotiated settlements because they are very narrow properties in that category. happy to answer in i questions that you might have about this and i turf it over to the school district. >> thank you. >> school district? >> good morning supervisors. i'm david golden the chief operator for the school district. i'm honored to be representing the school district this morning. first of all i want to thank the grand jury, myself and at least probably 25 people at the school district met with them over several months. for those

of you who have been on this committee or this board for a while, this is the second or third time the grand jury over the last decade and i have been with them for the last 9 years, the properties and the pros and cons of why we don't rent, sell, make more money with our property. i thought sherman walker took away a lot of the thunder i was going to talk about with he is positive remarks. i was expecting to have to defend with more than a do. mr. change is going to be getting a phone call as soon as i leave the room. so let me just talk briefly. i want to take an approach that mr. up doug did which the school district is named in the

findings and the number of recommendations in the but we are not named in all of them. so we responded to those that pertain to us. it's been mentioned a couple of times that we are an independent state agency. we have very strong ties affiliations allegiance and working relationships with the city. it's a wonderful sort of symbiotic relationship that i think has only gotten better in the last few years partly because of supervisor mar and kim and campos that served in the school district and now moved on to city hall. i think who can be critical of us and yet understand our needs in a way that i think is fair for all parties. so to that end, i don't want to minimize in anyway the sort of the seriousness of the concern that while we are in the education

business which recognize we are sitting on 150 pieces of probably some of the most valuable land in the city and county of san francisco and never would have suggest that we sell the high school and capitalize on some of these assets because they are for the children and to educate our children. the way we judge value and asset is different from the economic real estate world judges a value of a piece of property on mission or on market or downtown san francisco. rate of return, capital investment, amortization those are key things when we are children learning in school. in that context, we have not had a

single empty seat. for the first time in a long time, we have more kids than we ever counted on before and we have a middle school bubble and we have things moving across the district and we need to be fluid and make fast changes. when the report says that there should be an adequately available inventory of our property, our response and part of that response is in response to previous grand jury and previous criticism, we actually know exactly what we own. it's part of our capital plan and it's on our web page, on our capital plan, it's readily available, it's a public document and we know exactly. we have fewer assets than the city obviously and we don't have