two -thirds of our children are consuming sugar beverages many it's higher in adolescence than any other age group. more 20 percent of adolescence are consuming over 500 calories per day. our most vulnerable children which is our racial minority and less educated and poorer families are likely to increase their risk. >> sugary beverages, a child's risk in obesity rises nearly 60 percent. when kids decrease the number of sugar sweet and bevenlgs that they drink, they lose weight and their over all health improves. sugary drinks increase bone density,

headache, anxiety and loss of sleep and less nutritious diets. this is a problem that we can fix and this task is a step in the right direction. thank you. >> thank you so much for testifying. and everyone else for testifying as well. a really great group of folks from communities, health care doctors and from other cities. thank you. mr. chairman, it looks like we have some comments from colleagues. >> thank you. >> supervisor cohen? >> thank you very much, forgive me for just stating the obvious. i want to recognize the girl power that's behind this initiative. the strong female advocates from the doctors at the nurses to the research and the legislators. this is pretty impressive. so excuse me for stealing a moment

just to highlight the obvious. fellows, i just wanted to point that out to you guys. >> supervisor avalos? >> i just wanted to say thank you to supervisor mar, supervisor wiener and cohen for bringing this forward. this hearing comes out of a lot of work done by people who are really concerned about public health and looking at real solution for public health. i want to thank the budget analyst for their work on this as well. i am fully supportive of going to the ballot with a measure that could create a disincentive for sugar sweets and beverages and a program for our communities and neighborhoods and schools and look forward to that approach and will have my support as we move forward. i have two kids

who i try and -- they occasionally have a sugary sweet and beverage but i really limit that greatly and when it comes to tooth deck -- decay. they have a dental appointment tomorrow. i hope they pass with flying colors. i want to thank you for your work on this. >> thank you supervisor avalos. i wanted to also quickly wrap up by saying that a lot of the materials used should be very helpful from the mother jones chart of the drinks and the huge sizes to the tooth decay and liver slide that i'm going to immediately show that to my 13-year-old when she has the urging and even the feelings in her brain as the doctor mentioned to purchase a sugar

beverage and the consequences to our public health and to children's future health whether they are going to be healthy or have serious chronic diseases. i also want to say the science and data as crunched by the great folks from the budget analyst office and pediatricians is i -- eye opening. others mentioned other areas we need to look into and i would like to work with the budget legislative analyst to work on focusing on a little bit more and i really appreciate the data so that conservative to 48 million to 61 million if we add on fatty diseases and oral health and if we show other impacts we'll

show it's much higher than that and showing other impacts on children. perhaps if we can look more into other data and studies for the future. i also wanted to say that mr. smith and miss guma looked at other cities. we are trying to draw the best experiences and suggestions from not only dr. riter man in richmond and gale mclauk listen and el monte in the san gabriel valleyey to look at suggestions to help better craft policies in our cities. i also want to say that disparities that christina gupta are bringing awareness to our very critical areas and the maps showing that it's a citywide problem. but again, the funds as we come up with

one proposal for the battle we are looking very carefully at targeting in the most appropriate and effective ways to communities that are the most that face the most health disparities. i also want to say how to report shows how urgent the report is before many of us and hope we move as quickly as possible because there is nothing more as local legislators as the health of our children in our community. i want to mention that the nation of mexico's focus on the environment cause by harmful drink companies and junk food companies is critical but our measure is a very modest one that is focusing on the harm created by that environment and really targeting it to physical activity in and out of school and healthy nutrition and education in our communities. the advertising is going on in the environment that's created by big soda and sugar sweet and

beverage companies is overwhelming. it's about $1 million spent and it is targeting adolescence for energy drinks or young children to develop these addictions to liquid diabetes in a can. ours is a modest weigh to tip the scales to improve the health of our children in our communities. with that i wanted to thank everyone for speaking and let scott wiener as well make some closing remarks. >> thank you. i want to thank everyone who came out today. i think like i said at the beginning, the facts and the science are on the side of implementing effective policy here in the form of sugary beverage tax to fund nutrition,

physical activity and health programs. our job is to make sure the public understand those facts and that science. i think today was a very very important step in putting that information out there. this will not be the end. i know we are going to be doing a lot of work in the coming months to make sure that public awareness is high and remains high because that's how we are going to take tangible steps to address this public health epidemic. thank you. >> thank you, and thank you to chair ferrel for giving us so much time on this item. >> thank you, supervisor mar, wiener and avalos, do you want to continue with this call? >> i want to continue this to the call of the chair. >> can we take this motion without opposition? >> okay. mr. clerk, we are going to take one quickly because some people to have

leave on this one, item no. 4 and then we'll go through the regular items. >> the clerk: item no. 4. 131141:[public employment - amendment to the annual salary ordinance - recreation and park department - fys 2013-2014 and 2014-2015]1311414.sponsor: mayorordinance amending ordinance no. 160-13 annual salary ordinance - fy2013-2014 and fy2014-20155 to reflect the addition of two class 5502 project manager i positions 1.0 ftee in the recreation and park department for the implementation of the recreation and park department's capital improvements. fiscal impactt11/26/13; assigned to the budget and finance committee. >> the clerk: item no. 4. sf 41234 thank you, can you call item no. 3 as well. >> the clerk: item 131140:agenda[appropriation - recreation and park department's capital improvements - fy2013-2014 - $10,029,670]1311403.sponsor: mayorordinance appropriating $10,029,670 including de-appropriating $3,176,558 of 2000 recreation and park facilities improvement bond capital projects; appropriating $36,401 of 2000 recreation and park facilities improvement bond proceeds; de-appropriating $3,000,000 of 2008 clean and safe neighborhood parks bond capital projects; and appropriating $3,816,711 of 2008 clean and safe neighborhood parks bond proceeds interest earnings to recreation and park and neighborhood park contingency funds to fund capital projects within 2000 recreation and park facilities improvement bond and 2008 clean and safe neighborhood parks bond approved projects and program parameters. fiscal impactt11/26/13; assigned to the budget and finance >> the clerk: sf 31234 okay. we have daun from parks and recreation.

>> i'm here to provide a brief presentation on the supplemental appropriation request for two general operation bonds. the 2008 parks bond. these request i would like to say represent good news. these are funds that we've been able to free up through both responsible management being lucky from the bidding climate and from undertaking financial improvement management from the bond funds. this is a way of background, the 2000 neighborhood obligation bonds were approved by voters for $200 million. those funds were approved without restriction except that they may not be used in golden gate park. they were used with $110 million to leverage roughly about $3 hundred million in grant funds and deliver over 80 projects.

that is to deliver projects across the city. one of the hamilton school projects and the completion of the capital project we really began to set about trying to clean up the 2,000 bond programs. with all of those grants we want to make sure that all expenditures were appropriately accounted for and funding sources were used for what the intent was provided. we took a year 1/2 long process working with the department of public works who i would like to thank and acknowledge for all of their hard work to culminating the 85 projects. in the 2,000 bond there was little in the way of the kind of accountability measures for 2008-2012. you have literally pennies under the couch trying to gather up. some of those projects are small, there would be a $5,000 and some medium

$275,000 and another project for a little over $800,000. we try to gather those funds up and put them in one master project. they remove things from smaller projects which makes them difficult to spend because we have to come to the board every time we go to an appropriation authority and they can propagate for the purposes. we have we have had about $5 million left in the bond but through the requisition reconciliation there is about $5.6 million. there is money that has been locked in smaller appropriations over the years that we are trying to gather into one master project. with

those funds we would like to work with our stakeholdersers and would like to work with a menu of those options with the january or february meeting. there is a couple of criteria that we have to be aware of when we think about spending these funds. one of the funds generally are constrained and they can only be used through capital expenditures. we want to focus on closing our existing funding gaps. i think many of you are aware that the bidding climate has turned from being 2 years ago extremely beneficial for city capital projects to being very competitive, we are seeing bids

coming in 20 percent higher than we originally thought. we would like to use these funds that close project gaps caused by this. i want to point out a number of life preservation needs coming up. one example is a civic elevator project allocating funding for this past year. as we started do that elevator project, we thought that there would be some water intrusion but there may be a stream underneath that we stumbled into and we saw just like thousands of gallons coming in and we have to do an emergency contract and now we have to rethis i that project. things like that. landslide is going to require more funding than was appropriated and a number of other projects that we like to use these funds for. third, these are old bond dollars. this bond was approved in 2000. for us to be

contemplating $5 million is not enough. we can incur arbitrage fees which is levied by outside agencies when an entity has taken too long to spend their go bond dollars. so because are that we are focusing on projects that are shovel ready and trying to get into contract a sap and for construction cost. part of that is for their approval. in appropriation do not prevent us from spending any money from any eligible capital expense but in allows us to have the expect ability in how we manage the funds.

from the 2008 bond, we have both been lucky and good, i think. we have been very good in our over all management of the go bond program and that has resulted in project savings from many projects particularly again from the first half of the bond implementation when there were bid savings and also the recent project where again just there have been minimal change orders and we manage to come right in before the bidding climate turned to our disadvantage. we have $3 million and interest accrued on the bond. that is about $6.8 million that we need. we need those funds to be able to move those projects forward as they are currently scoped. >> so as i said we want to address the unforeseen

escalation of regulatory requirements and the overall commitment of the clean and safe neighborhoods bonds that we would deliver those 12 neighborhood parks that we call by name and ordinance. this is consistent with the ordinance language. lastly we need staff to deliver these projects. there was voted funds and we'll have basically added another 60 percent to the financial value of our portfolio and also increased our work load by another 25 percent in projects. right now i have a staff of nine and they are already managing 8 projects each. ths

they already have a full plate. you can do that but you can see what happened in the beginning of the 2008 bond program where there were delays for getting that program off the ground because it wasn't staffed appropriately. we are trying to learn from those lessons. the staffing shortages were affecting our impact to get these projects going. we are asking for a project manager one position, permanent exempt positions. no general fund impact and they are even off budget. if we were to wait to do these positions to do the budget process, i wouldn't have anybody on hand until october of 2014. that would be a full year after we passed the bond. i think in a 5-year bond program, that is an extraordinary delay. that is the basis of our request today.

so with that, i am happy to answer any questions from the committee. >> colleagues, any questions, supervisor wiener? okay. that was remaining. >> okay. colleagues if no questions at this time. why don't we go to our budget analyst report, mr. rhodes if you will. >> mr. chairman, supervisor winner, the sources of the proposed $10 million appropriation are summarized in table 3. that's on page 20 of our report. on page 21 of our report we note that of park improvement funds of the capital committee that these funds would potentially be used for 1 $1.8 million leaving

remaining unidentified projects under the proposed supplemental would be appropriated to the 2008 project to be allocated by the parks and commission. below on page 21 we say on 6.8 are to be reported to the capital planning committee that these funds would be used for approval for 4.3 million for dolores park. 800 thousand for the playground and for the beach los angeles. supervisors i would note if you appropriate these funds today it would be strictly up to the department of recs to make the allocations. with regard to the

dispositions being requested for the department manager 1 position and each in fiscal year 13-146789 for the additional annual salary $238,000 for both positions. the total on going salary and benefit cost is approximately $321,000. all the positions would be taken from bond funds and they current have eight project managers and 110 projects to manage which rpd indicates is not sufficient. however, as of our report, rpd does not provide enough information, existing staff assignments, comparison with other bond projects, staffing and the need for the requested two new positions to meet this

work load. the bottom line is these position had not been justified. we are not negative on the positions but anytime the department requests positions we need the information to report to you to determine whether or not that has been justified. our recommendation are that you an approved the supplemental ordinance and continue the proposed annual salary. we didn't say continue to the budget. all that we are saying is continue it until we are provided with the information that will justify these positions. specifically, continue the proposed annual salary ordinance filed 13-1141 for the pending rfpd existing staff assignments comparison with other bond projects and staffing for the new positions to meet this work load. in fact, as soon as, if they give us the information this week,

we'll be prepared for the next or maybe two weeks2 weeks. well, in january, that's right. the next meeting would be in january. we are certainly prepared to report within the six 6 months of the budget. debra newman who prepared this report, i will be happy to respond to any questions. >> thank you. on the information of the two salary positions. i guess i was hoping to get it resold -- resolved in the last 2 days. >> i think there is a little bit of a disconnect from the timing of where the material, the budgeting analyst office was given notice which i think is very appreciative of the work of that because of the supplemental and reappropriation the funds is a critical item. i think we can provide the information that mr. rhodes is asking for. it's

not much different than what i just verbally relate to you but we can provide that information to the budget analyst. >> given this is an ordinance it won't be approved until january. we are not going to have a massive holiday timeline here. colleagues, any questions or comments? supervisor avalos? >> it's not for mr. rose, but thank you for your report. i have comments or questions about one of the sources of funding, the appropriation of the car born and it's actually that it's not on here is actually a pretty important moment in the car born history. we have many of the documents that we've been trying to get

together to assure that the car born is ready for the capital project and raising money for the car bar and we have to raise all of those documents have to be ready. we have done the review and potential tax credits for new market tax credits and we have a new executive director who has great experience. tim who is here and has great experience and capital financing. so we are really excited about how we can move this project forward. i have concerns about there being the appropriation from this project and i know that the rec's and parks commission can decide that the uses side of this appropriation can cover the car barn but i would feel we are most comfortable to keep fund for the car barn for the

projects. i think there is some work remediation work that is in the soil. i think there is some work on the roof that needs to get done and some design work that i know is eligible for the original park bond that is for uses sides of these funds. i would like to see if we can we have could actual put on reserve an equivalent amount of what we are deappropriating for the car barn for the carbon that is determined by the recollection and park and car born staff and help looking with my office of course, but that can be on community refrj for a later decision to be released when the plans are in place for the

car barn. i want to make sure what that is for those funds. >> supervisor, i think it is a policy decision for the committee. i think our request is that, our preference would be the controllers office reserve, whatever allows us the most flexibility and the quickest turn around. it's taken us a while to get here. we want to make sure we get this done as soon as possible. i think we have been working very closely with geneva car barn and to identify some linkagible. there is a leak k roof that we need to think about in terms of preserving the acid over all and remediation work and again va carbon has services so if we were to use gee oh bonds fund

we would need to do an ordinance to provide us with the ordinance. those are the three eligible types of spnd turs that we are talking about with them right. no they are working to price those two items and if we have that our hope to be able to prethose all the together with the items we are thinking about. it is a decision for the committee, i think one of the thing we would like to previous is the ability to present altogether the different tradeoffs associated with these $5.6 million. while these funds were in geneva car bonds and the city does have a number of upcoming unknown life safety projects. the rim fire has left us with unknown capital liability. we have as we said the land slide and other projects we are continuing to price. i think

the reserve is better for us than to continue the full appropriation appropriated with car barn. >> i was considering just the appropriating or deleting the deappropriation of the $838,000. so i feel like budget committee reserve does make sense and, you know, i want to see this project go forward. i have made a commit about geneva car barn and keeping the money for the geneva car barn is as well. we have staffing in place now help with the campaign. it's a great amount of money to raise for that. what we have in place is already here and makes so much sense that we keep the reserve there for the car barn pending further plan. i would like to keep it in budget committee reserve. when it comes to possible ordinance that waves the requirements, i

think in this case that we have a designer that's done a lot of work in the car barn and that current designer and continuity, that project makes a lot of sense to me. i'm willing to support and get my colleagues to support to get that kind of waiver as well. >> thank you, supervisor avalos. colleagues, any questions. okay. at this time we'll open up to public comment. is there anybody from the public that wish to comment on items 3 or 4? please come up and step you the to the microphone. >> good afternoon, my name is tim worth and i'm the new executive director of the car barn. i appreciate you taking this up and i want to acknowledge and thank supervisor avalos for his continued leadership on the car barn. it's a project that most of you know about that's been around for a long time and