ownership this year generates almost $6 million. we take in another 1.3 for short time permits and the district is generating over $7 million a year just from the properties and the three biggest you can see are 1235 mission, 1440 harrison, also leased to the city and the fifth and market property which is where nordstroms is. okay. in may of 2007 the board of education asked that we convene a surplus property commission that went through all of its steps, and -- i apologize, about six months prior, and in may the board of education declared certain properties actually as surplus at that time, and gave certain flexibility of up to 20% of the district property in its

aggregate so every time we identified a surplus property in the future we didn't need to reconvene the entire committee all over again. okay. so these are the 10 properties that originally showed up on the list and let's see what's happens to those properties in the last six years so the former pacific heights new cominger high school building at jackson which at one point in time there were people that saw it as a potential housing site was reopened as the sf montessori elementary school. it's now no longer considered sush plus. the bond program has spent a lot of money renovating that building as a classroom building. the childrens' center on cook street is occupied by our early learning staff and they are exploding and moving

to another building in the bay view so that is an expanding enterprise and no longer surplus and this next one is occupied by the creative chart hart and the gateway middle school and that site is no longer considered surplus. the former florence martin cdc on 1155 page in cooperation with a long-term strategy working with at that time supervisor mirkarimi and others to produce some additional child care in that neighborhood was leaseod a long-term lease to a french american school. they have demolished the existing building there and they're building a new early learning center on that site and that property is no longer considered surplus. 700 font boulevard you can see in

the photograph the school is gone. one day san francisco state may choose to build a classroom on that site. the district sold the site for 11. $1 million to san francisco state. it was sort of one of the last transactions or last events of the out going president of the san francisco state and carlos garcia as he was ending his term as superintendent. these next two properties on mission and connecticut as supervisor kim pointed out are part of a three party transaction with the mayor's office of housing spear spearheaded by commissioner fewer and commissioner mendoza and will trade the mission site

for a affordable housing site and on connecticut for another project in turn for parcel e and where the superintendent is and finally the last parcel was 1340 bush. i was never sure why this one was on the list but it's essentially the play ground for redding elementary school and we lease the garage and generate $100,000 from the parking garage so if you look at what's left i want to give you some sort of -- a brief glimpse of what we're looking at now, what we think is in our portfolio so what is left we have the hunter view park, and the former bee site at 200 middle point road. it's a

vacant building and we can make that part of the redevelopment going on and not just for malcolm x but for sf hope above and we are in conversations with them trying to make something happen. i think the staff agrees that this isn't a property we are concerned about leveraging for revenue but for the good of the community at large. the former principal center school and actually the former francis scott key on 42nd avenue is kind of a bad tooth in a neighborhood that is not getting -- the neighborhood is getting better and the property is actually getting worse so this is where the principal's union currently has its office. we moved the principal school out to a real building because we didn't feel

students should be in a site like that and we have no desire to put money into that building so the goal is leverage that site -- the highest and best use according to a financial analysis for housing. obviously it could be a small school site if we chose to do that. there are private schools in the area that see it as a place to build a play ground or athletic field and no decisions have been made but that is clearly on our portfolio list and there is a high desire from t supervisor of the district and from neighbors that see it as blight in the neighborhood and i don't blame them and you see a photo here and it's intensely built up around it mostly single family homes and duplexes and

there's our property right in the middle. moving on to number three obviously seventh and loton which is currently open space. we know there are people in the neighborhood who will fight to the death to keep it open space. we also know in talking to many people in the city that it's actually a prime site for housing right beneath the met center, right in a place where good things could happen. it could take fairly dense housing and still maintain some open space as well. the city under the surplus property act also has the right to take it as a public park at fair market value. we had decision wts city and so far they're not interested in adding another park site so the options are many. we have conversations around some that would like

this to be the edible school yard like the one in berkeley. we've had conversations with some of our tech partners like zinga about creating a farmville universe at this place because of the open land so there's lots of ideas ranging from crazy to real and right now we know it's empty and we sell christmas trees and pumpkins, so and by the way there is a deed restriction on this property. when the city gave us this piece of land in exchange for some other things and commissioner wynns knows i know when that was about 15 years ago the deed restriction limits this property to development for uses for educational purposes, so for anything else to happen we would have to be working with the city to lift the deed restriction.

and that gives you a aerial photo of the lot at seventh and loton. if you go forward if we successful make the property exchange with mo for the three parcels i described we will actually own a really large parcel at the heart of civic center both on mccallister and franklin and now the parking lot. it would be great if we were able to purchase the site that was a boys and girls club. that wasn't an option for us. we know that lot has very high value, both as a parcel -- [inaudible] should we want to at some point in time tear everything down and build a new, and we also know that the lot

behind 555 franklin has several potential key uses and one is to maintain parking either grade below or on grade and build, up to eight stories which theoretically if we were to construct the school of the arts on 135 van ness we need a new home for the business finance budget prop h offices. we could build an ad min center above. we could also do that plus three floors of housing, and we could strictly do housing so i think there's a wide range of options there and i think there are a lot of people, developers and others in the city that would be incredibly interested down the road in partnering with us making something happen at that site, and all of this is just sort of coming about now as

we're sort of acquiring -- hoping to acquire the land and that transaction has yet to be scheduled for action by the board of supervisors but we hope it comes to you soon and finally one other parcel that i think has some serious potential is if we look at moving the school of the arts to 135 van ness we're looking to carve out the 170 fell lot as a building that is prohibitively expense testify remodel as a school but might be attractive to the members of ballet or the conservatory or the jazz community as student housing or housing for visiting guests artists or for that matter use on floors one, two, three on fell we could sell the air rights there for a housing

development so i think there are a number of options available for us there that weren't sort of part of our collective thinking a year or two ago, and new ways at looking land have kind of broadened our horizons, and that's the decision i think that we probably shouldn't make until we determine we're ready to move the school and we have set in stone exactly what the premise of that project is. okay. so that kind of concludes where i am -- where we are with surplus property. i think it's probably not as exciting as the grand jury when they keep sending me stuff expects to find, but we're awake and working on it, and the days are over where we're not taking our properties and the value and revenue that we could generate

from it seriously so with they will conclude and be happy to answer any questions. >> thank you mr. golden. thank you for the comprehensive presentation. it's good to get a relook -- at least from my perspective i know the board of education has probably seen this many times but to see where we have come from over the 12 years with surplus property. i have a couple of questions and then i will open it up for comments and questions from the rest of the committee. first, and i can't exactly remember where this was and on the surplus property or list or examined by the boe about the site and i know there were conversations about the current [inaudible] campus and it's a huge site and a lot of it is open space and i know there was a grade issue with that site but what is the status of that site? >> okay. so that -- i mean that potential is still there, so right now the current strategy

would be if all the cards fell into place would be to relocate the school of the arts to 135 van ness. we are currently investing a fair amount of money into the macktier campus and going to take a number of years to make it happen and we don't want the students to have a heating system, not have lights that work and for all of the time to make that happen and we think the campus even in soto moves to 135 the academy is going strong. we expect it to grow. we expect to colocate another school there because the campus will be great and we think soda will use some of the things there no matter what because there will be a black

box theater, and auditorium and a number of things that could be coshared so the prospect of liquidating the entire property doesn't look realistic in a long-term horizon or would i recommend it. the potential that exist and what we need to sell a lot of the sloping for us as a school is not usable land but to a developer who is already paying a fortune for land in san francisco a slope on land is no big deal so we recognize there are probably several hundred units or more of some serious development potential that's there. >> and you know it's good to see kind of the other sites that you're considering and i have a list of the principal site and

it's concrete other than the loton and considered open space by the neighborhood and i am glad about that as well. and i am curious from the school district's perspective and maybe it's not just a question for mr. golden and consolidating staff and i don't know if we have staff at cook middle school and the bay view and doesn't help the staff members collaborate and given that you have have those sites and are there conversations about consolidating office space rather than obviously building a larger office and with a private developer and there isn't a slush fund for sfusd to do that. >> so the answer to that is yes if you remember when --

actually when i first came here in 2004 superintendent ackerman had consolidated a lot of -- i can't remember the name of the hi tech. [inaudible] >> but the goal was to move them and we saved $800,000 a year by doing that and we moved them into cabrillo and since that time there has been an expansion of personnel both in special needs and early learning and that has dictated spaces? the district. a lot of the needs to be in other -- it doesn't work to be all together. they actually need to be i

think in locales throughout the city but i think one of the solid goal that parcel to consolidate those all in one place. how all that comes about i don't exactly know but for starters we know there are several hundred people at the budget office and the facility office and in finance that need to go somewhere if soda is unavailable. the mayor's office would like to see eight story there is so i think there is a number of options. >> thank you. i apologize and it was an oversight on my part. i meant for the mayor's office of housing to be here as well.

it's a joint select committee and we shouldn't have the school district presenting on one single item and i apologize for that and beginning of the year and we will make sure they're present for the committee meetings and the last point i want to make and on the resolution the school board passed in 2010 i would like to see that one of the goals was to leverage district real property assets for revenue that will aid the general fund, but also opportunities to close the opportunity gap which i think is one of the thinking behind 1950 mission that affordable housing is one of the opportunities that is a gap between students and our school district so i hope to see that in future presentations as part of the thinking with surplus property so i did want to open it up to comments or questions from our members if there are any? commissioner

norton and then commissioner wynns. >> thank you. i just want to thank you for the presentation. i mean a lot of this information i'm aware of but to see it all collected like this is really, really helpful and partly just to help you dispel that kind of disconception that we have tons of empty properties lying around the city so i really thank you for that. i guess i want to explore a little bit the seventh and loton discussion a little bit moamplt i think i heard you just say to supervisor kim that site could accommodate -- did you say hundreds of units of housing? >> seventh and loton. >> [inaudible] >> oh the sota site. >> [inaudible] >> i think seventh and loton actually could accommodate -- >> about 120. okay. >> yes. >> and i mean i know when this comes up we sort of talk about

the neighborhood opposition to this, but it does seem like given -- i mean what is happening in the city right now and just the that there does seem to be so much agreement on the need to build more housing whether it's market rate, affordable -- a mix. people disagree what it should be but everyone agrees we're not building enough housing in the city but this seems to me that we have a responsibility to really explore. i mean both as a board of supervisors, as the board of education to really say this is a prime site in a prime neighborhood, residential neighborhood near transit. it just would make sense that we move on that. >> and i couldn't agree more, and it's interesting every single time we have a hearing that mentions the word "surplus property" this is the only time that 14 neighbors haven't come

out that their desire is this to remain public open space forever so that will take some partnerships and a brave developer who wants to take on that fight but i think we would be anxious to partner with somebody on that. i would love to have olson step up and take that one. >> i agree. >> commissioner wynns. >> thank you. thank you mr. golden. first of all i think it kind of goes without saying but we should make sure all of the members of the board of education get a copy of this as well as maybe on the website or just as part of our public outreach. there are a lot of people interested in this subject so i think this very cogent and clear summarizing visual presentation would be helpful to us in our -- and maybe we make sure that all of

the members of the grand juries opine -- no, i thank you for the work that has been done. i think actually one of the most interesting things is to see the status of things that were on our surplus property list because as mr. golden said the process is so long and complex and somber some we need to do that to have the discussion, have things on the surplus property list and go through the committee process, et cetera, et cetera, and even at at time at slow to no growth in our population to see just within a few years the educational uses of these properties should give us pause to think about balancing our obligation to use the public resources as well and for the advantage of the public and also be cognizant all the

time that schools' needs and the district's needs are going to evolve over time, so that's interesting, and then i wanted to -- like following up on commissioner norton's comments talk a little bit about the properties that are left, and i think that we really do need to do a lot of community discussion and talk to the mayor's office to -- not only the mayor's office of housing but to the board of supervisors and others and think how we want to have the public discussion about these things, so for instance seventh and loton was part of a previous lond trade with the city, not so much to our advantage, and so the restrictions on this property i mean actually at one time years ago we had -- which i have available. i don't know if you have ever seen it. were you here -- we have a conceptional

design for housing at the seventh and loton site which was meant to be rental housing for teachers, and so the discussion about whether educator housing is a educational purpose and with a small group of people in a room wondering if we could get money for this and i think that's the discussion we need to advance. we have people that are saying -- at that time to me it seems there was interest in the community from this item and other sites and having additional preschool sites so that was at least one group of people was. it would be acceptable to them if we built a child's center site, an early

education site that we would call it now and i think it's important to work with the community to engage people and discussions that take into account -- for instance the fact that high rise buildings have been built in the area and the character of single family housing has changed significantly since that time and we should difficult talk about it and also this doesn't take into account and this picture doesn't include that piece of property continues to the south, and is open space that belongs to the water department as i -- >> it's a community garden. >> yeah, it's also -- in other words we should talk about the whole thing when we talk about community uses for open space, et cetera, what the impact might be, and this is a little facetious of course, not having a site for a christmas tree lot

or a pumpkin patch and use it for something else but i think it's a good example how -- now, we have a commitment to and some kind of infrastructure for actually working with the city on these kinds of issues whereas before we talk, they talk, and we weren't doing things together and there are some things, and the same thing is true at the mac tire site and the soda site and the areas that are under utilized as well as our athletic field there at the high school are part of a major open space that the city has, so we ought to talk how we could use those things and the same is true in the old day when is we talked about the possibility of building housing on the open hill sides along bos worth there were far fewer houses on the up side across the street of that

hill side and whereas now they're filled with residential units, so i would welcome, and i think with the experience that we now have staff -- we have staff that -- yourself and others that could be talking about a way that we could do some kind of collective or partnership discussion with the public about the future of those kinds of sites. >> yeah, and just to follow up on that if the school of the arts is going to come to fruition at 135 there will be partnerships with the city and public and private that need to be forged because there will be some landmark issues. there maybe some environmental issues, and the city and the school district may have to partner together to be able to overcome what could be some fierce

advocacy in certain areas to make the whole project come to be, so i think it's kind of an important relationship. i think deputy superintendent lee and olson ly are trying to make this transaction happen. i think in the end -- i forget who said it, but i think that deal -- i think came out primarily because at that time commissioner fewer had the strength of will to force a solution, and i think that it was time and we were ready for that. we spent a lot of time on too many options, so there's a lot of work in each one of these steps to happen. even at 555 and parcel lee i think the

potential to go higher potentially so they're all new territories to work on in the city. >> if i may just finish up i wanted to say something about those sites. one thing you need to take into account is the under utilizing of the mccallister building, the older building on the site and i think we should consider that. maybe we can make some -- talk to some architects and tell us what could be done on the site, and the same thing -- and lastly i want to make one comment i am hoping that we -- i remain committed to the idea that we need to provide access to housing for our employees, particularly for teachers if we're going to remain competitive as to having teachers be able to come here in the future which we will definitely need, and i think that -- i am hoping that we will continue now having done thi