today is tuesday november 5, 2013. this is the meeting of commission on community investment and infrastructure. >> please call the roll. >> commission members please respond when i call your name. commissioner ellington? commissioner mondejar? present, commissioner darshan singh, absent. rosales? absent, all other members of the commission are present. >> vice-chair rosales has informed us that she will be here aren't 130. she's absent

for now. >> the next scheduled committee meeting is on the 19th. b announcement of prohibition of sound producing electronic devices during meetings. please be adviced that the ringing of and use of cell phones pagers and similar sound producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. please be adviced that the chair may order the removal from the meeting room of any persons responsible for the ringing or of use of a cellphone, pager, or other similar sound producing electronics. public comment on non-agenda items members of the public may address the commission on matters that are within the commission jurisdiction and not on today's calendar. each speaker shall have up to 3 minutes to make pertinent public comments unless the commission adopts a shorter period. it is strongly recommended that members of the public who wish to address the commission should fill out a "speaker card" provided by the commission secretary, and submit the completed card to the commission secretary. 1234

1234 >> the next order of business is unfinished business. we have no items. the next order of business is consent and regular agenda. we have no items. the next item is 5 a: item a: authorizing the issuance of tax allocation bonds for the mission bay south redevelopment project area in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $70,000,000, and approving and directing the execution of an indenture of trust, and a bond purchase contract, and approval of other related documents and actions, mission bay south redevelopment project area. discussion and actionn resolution no. 52-20133 page 3 of 3 bb update on the status of hunters point shipyard local contracting and construction workforce hiring; hunters point shipyard project area. discussionn cc final workshop on the long-range property management plan pursuant to section 34191.5 of assembly bill 1484 'redevelopment dissolution law'". discussionn dd workshop on the streetscape master plan, signage plan and major phase 1 application for candlestick point; candlestick point and phase 2 of the hunters point shipyard project area. 1234 madam director. >> thank you. good afternoon.

thank you for joining us. commissioners, and for the public, as you are aware one of the major proof projects there is several enforceable obligation in place for the participation agreement including it's tax allocation pledge agreement that includes the city as a party and the developers as a third party beneficiary requires the success or agency to finance infrastructure bonds for the purposes as described under the opa. here today to describe the proposed bond structure a little bit more about the enforceable obligation and the timing and next steps and moving through and the review with respect to the state department of finances, there is another step that we'll be coming back to you with. with that, i would like to ask the

director of finances and administration to walk you through. >> thank you very much. i'm leo director of finance and administration. i'm pleased to bring before you today this proposal which is to sell up to $70 million of bonds for the mission bay south project area to reimburse infrastructure cost. the developer has already spent over this amount and is waiting to be reimbursed based on the agreement. what we've attached with this resolution is the proposed form of bond indenture and bond purchase contract. the bond intent -- indenture would be a contract which we can demonstrate that the bonds coming in would be handled and maintained and the terms under which the bonds

are called. the bond purchase contract is a three way contract between the redevelopment financing authority, the success or agency and the underwriteers for the purchasing of these bonds. the bond authority has been by the same redevelopment agency and the redevelopment financing authority and with the automatic succession of these bonds, the ocii commission would be able to reconstitute the refinancing of this authority. the reason why the financing authority is a party to this contract because under the terms of various state guidelines it cannot do a negotiated sale but a financing

authority can. if you want more explanation for the reason behind that, i can leave that to the attorneys. it has been the recommendation of the financial visors on this deal that a negotiated sale is necessary in order to get the best terms for these bonds because of a special status of the success or agencies and the fact that this is the first in fact new money bond deal under the terms of redevelopment dissolution. it requires a lot of education of potential investors as to why they should be competent with interest rates as coming into this as a new entity. we have been advised that a negotiated sale is the way to go and we need to do it through the financing authority structure. this means

you will get another chance to review these documents and the proposed sale. the reason we are coming today with these documents here in a form and getting you to approve the form of these documents, there will be a chance to change the final bonds, it allows to move it to the board approval and get to the department of finances where we need to ultimately get approval before we get it to market. it's the chicken and egg because we can't get it to the board of appeal until we get to market. then we'll come back for approval of the financing authority of the bond purchases agreement plus approval of the pos, public offering statement. that will have the terms that the advisors believe it's for the market at that time. you will get another chance to review

these documents. this allows it to go to the oversight board and the department of finances. now our regional budget this year including $58.6 million. we believed that was the amount at the time we prepared the budget was possible with the bonding capacity. that was north and south. it was $35 million for the south and for the north another $23.6. since that time there has been corrections in the role that shifts evaluations from the north and south that resulted in an increase from north and south and with the market conditions, we felt it would be safest. it's expensive to go to market. it would be safest to in accrues the capacity up to $70 million. that would be under the most favorable market conditions at least a percent

from where they are today. i wouldn't want you to be surprised when it came before you and it was only $60 million and even less. it could be down to $50 million. this could give us the authorization to go up to $70 if rates were at a favorable point. the spending authority however on our latest roster is only $40 million. at the time we were preparing that we weren't anticipating this level of bond capacity. that would mean if the department of finance approves that $40 million we can issue bonds for $70 million and put the remaining proceeds under the following roth period if that's what we have left over. the other part of this resolution is to actually go to the board of supervisors

because the bond issuance needs to be approved by the board of supervisors and the budget we only asked for approval of $58.6. to get the $60 million it would require us to go to the board of supervisors to get approval for the bond capacity. this would also direct staff to prepare that resolution for the board of supervisors to increase that. so, if i mentioned this would be the first to our knowledge new money bonds. there have been refunding bonds that have been approved by success or agencies but were not aware of new money bonds. this is probably the strongest pledge agreement that we have that will make it easy for department of finances to approve it because of the requirements in the agreement with the developer with the issue of bonds and the tax increment is fully pledged for

this purpose of infrastructure and issue bonds when it's available. so, in order to check in with department of finance, we did have a meeting a few weeks ago to make sure that they felt comfortable with the process we are going through. we knew they wouldn't prove it on the spot. they did agree that this process was appropriate and these kinds of documents putting forward through you and the oversight board and there was every indication that they would look positively at this request going through to them. so, i will introduce the team members that we have present in a moment. but with the assistance of our financial advisor, we conducted an rfp for underwriteers, the management dell arose an and company and at the recommended writers for this deal. they were on this pool already and authorized pool for these types

of activities. the attached resolution would confirm that recommendation. we also under the executive directors authority we did an rrp. you approved initially the bond council with steve mall with his firm. at that point we also selected self disclosure council bill lofton and he's here today. so just before i introduce the team, the next steps will be that if you approve this resolution today it will go to the oversight board next week and if they approve it, it will go to department of finances. hopefully it will be sooner to offer their concurrence with this bond sale. and we are also

waiting for the approval authority on the rocks to expend any proceeds then we can finalize it and get it to market. we are going total board of supervisors to increase the authority up to $70 million. with that i would like to point out the finance team members that we have in the audiences. bond council we have steve mall khan, joe watson, bob gamble and from the underwriteers jay chasmsky and della rosa. and that, i or the team would be happy to answer any questions. >> do you have [inaudible] laughed >> thank you so much. before we

move on to commentary from commissioners, is there any public comment on this item? i have no sticker cards. do we have any public comment on this item 5a? okay. >> good afternoon, doctors jackson. i'm sorry i was late coming in. i'm not here today to be disagreement to anything that you are to do. i'm here to ask that you and the audience and those that are listening when i go to the store on the streets people stop me and thank me for coming and supporting their community. and i have never asked anything of

anyone. but what i'm asking for all of you today to pray for me as i pray for you. pray for your neighbors, pray for the seniors, pray for our youth and pray for the city. today will be the last time that i will come before this committee. the only thing that i would like to say is that when the infrastructure committee was set up there was laws that was passed. one of the first laws was that those programs that was under the redevelopment agency back in the 50s and 60s be completed. i would like to say that i have came, i never missed a meeting of redevelopment. i went before

redevelopment to talk about my church that was built in 1958 and when the role was built in oak dale, they built it flat. water, when it rained went through the building. redevelopment was supposed to put that church on the hill on the parking lot. that never occurred. we were here before the mission bay and anything else. i would like for you all please, please, don't forget that redevelopment started in 1968 in bayview hunters point. and the work that was supposed to have been carried out has not, has not. i don't feel as though i need to continue to

come before this board any other board to plead for you all to do the right thing for bayview hunters point. thank you so very much and you have a blessed day and don't forget, pray for me and i will pray for you. i have been under the weather and bless all of you. >> thank you. any other comments today? thank you miss jackson for coming today. sorry you are under the weather. okay. questions on mission bay bonds? start. mr. eleven son, thank you very much for your presentation. i think it's pretty clear. there is a list of expenditures that the commission wants to see it for

mission bay south. my question is more of a might be a little bit too detailed oriented. i noticed a role that i hadn't seen much before in my history of reading bond indentures was for a redevelopment consultant. bond indentures will have often different roles laid out for different types of parties. this one seemed to be specifically for the purposes of having a consultant who would write a report if there is a property that may affect the tax revenue available to repay the bonds. i wanted to ask you, can you expand on that role, am i correcten my reading of what that role is supposed to be and also is there an rfp process or did you think it was going to overlap with the financing team? >> well, i believe we can use

our existing fiscal advisor as the redevelopment advisor consultant. you are right, if anything inside that can impair the ability to repay the bonds such as for example the sale of a large parcel of land from a taxable entity to a tax exempt entity that could materially reduce the amount of tax increment to repay the bonds, we would need to produce a report from the independent couplet -- consultant that would show that we have the covering, the capacity to have more than one and a quarter or more than that what was necessary to repay the bonds. so, i'm not actually sure how if our current arrangements with consultants if this would to happen in the future how this would work.

>> it's my, i don't think we need to elaborate on it now especially if it's no the a need at the moment but i wonder, i wanted to ask as we go into this phase of every 6 months when we do this roth for the foreseeable future, we have a property plan and i wanted to make sure that roll that they are closely trying with that. >> we include on every rops for financing for this kind of thing and for other kinds of reports that are sometimes needed on bonds. this is not a very expensive process. it shouldn't cost that much when it needs to happen. >> okay. thank you very much. anyone else? >> yes, i want to know that increase of $11.4 million, why

wasn't it done at the same time? >> at the time that we prepared the budget, we didn't realize how large the assessed evaluation would come in from the mission bay south when the role was publiced. at that time that was the amount. it was actually $35 million. >> at that time you didn't know how much was going to be increased? what was reason? >> well, it was based on the roles at that time and the interest rate at that time and we had not actually we hadn't engaged a consultant to do a more detailed calculation. it turned out to be low. but $70 million is actually now that we are coming back, this is a very optimistic number. so i would be surprised if we reached the full $70 million. if rates went down, it would be possible. it could be in the 50 or $60

million range. this will determine how much we can issue. >> okay. >> miss mondejar? >> this is a question of the resolution for the memo from the director. the bond issuance is really based on or pursuant to the mission bay south opa. i was wondering if we can get a copy of that and i couldn't find anything under opa. i'm curious since it's tied to opa. i'm asking because i was involved in another project where the opa was tied to the bonds and there was items there that i wanted to look at. if that can be provided to me. i know we have another opportunity to look at this.

>> i certainly can and i believe there are links on the website. at anytime anyone can look at these documents. >> we can provide you the copies and point you to the relevant sections which is the financing plan and the separate tax allocation pledge agreement. >> okay. thanks. >> okay. commissioner? >> i just want to know what are the interest in all this? >> we had a range that was looked at and i believe, so the current, you never know until you actually go market to see how the market views your risks. but, there was, our fiscal consultant looked at a quarter percent rate and looked

at what would happen if we get a rate that was a full percent lens lest than that. even that with over $60 million based on other assumptions would maximize the bond. >> i asked the same question a few months go that anybody can buy the bond, including us. >> yeah. >> yes, publically issued bonds and the rate is a blended rate. >> right. you might want to consult someone before a commissioner would buy the bonds. >> i think we've already discussed this. i this i the answer is yes. okay. does anyone else have any questions about these bonds? please don't leave it to me. i used to

work in public finance. i'm not going ask. do you all understand the whole financing authority structure? okay. great. do i have a motion for they resolution 52-2013. >> i move. >> is there a second. >> please call the roll. >> [roll call vote taken] >> ellington, mondejar, the vote is 4 ayes. one absent. thank you very much. call the next item. item 5 b: update on the status of hunters point shipyard local contracting and construction work force hiring hunters point shipyard project area. you'll

>> commissioners, this is a continuation of an item that was on the previous calendar and you asked it to the cal endar on item. those are subject to our development agreements and our equal opportunity policies that are components of those phase one and phase two development agreements. the purpose here is for the staff and for the developer and it's consultants to really report on the progress, talk about the lessons learned so that we can continue to either meet or exceed the goals. i would like to ask the project manager for hunters point to present this item. >> thank you director. good afternoon, my name is -- project