i >> as i understand it, the department is not disputing the fact that they haven't -- there is an obligation to pay the pilot over 30 years. that's the 39 vpt .2 million. i said it is my understanding because this is a negotiating deal because otherwise they would have had to pay the pilot and they came up with the 32 million. we're not saying that the benefits aren't there.

what we said was it's a policy matter, that's why we didn't recommend approval because there was this gap of 7 million, which uc would otherwise have to pay over over 30 years, this 39 million. there was an appraiser that computed the net present value and this was compared and the department stated that this hearing today, the budget analyst report was accurate. i don't think there's any dispute about that. >> could you respond to that, to what mr. rose just said? >> the budget analyst report is accurate, there's tax payment agreement on the property, it provides for only two payments relative to housing and infrastructure because those are the covenants that run with the land. we believe it's a good deal for

the city and ocii for the reasons stated that are accurately identified in the report and materials to the boards. >> in terms of the 7 million, what do you think the city got in return for that? >> i think the city is getting affordable housing with no hit whatsoever. you see is paying that so that's -- otherwise property tax increments that would flow through [inaudible] that money will not flow for infrastructure and affordable housing. the totality of that payment now -- >> timing issue you're saying? >> yes. >> so the city is getting that and uc is getting to pay smaller amounts. that's what it gets in return for that? >> in return we're getting supportive housing built sooner, father mily housing sooner, parks for dog patch, getting sustainable streets. >> you see in return for what

we're getting for the events money [inaudible]. >> yes, under the pilot. >> that that was the deal that was worked out there. >> yes. >> okay. and are you saying that -- i assume that was a negotiation in terms of we'll agree you pay this 7 million and change less and in exchange, you know, we get the money upfront. that was a negotiation, i imagine? >> within the context o. payment agreement run wg the land, yes. >> and are you saying it ing it would have been -- there was no way that that could have as part of that negotiation that transit could have been reflected in this in any way. it's completely illegal, would have been vetoed by whoever in sacramento. is that what you're saying? >> paying transit, having a entity under the pilot pay transit, it doesn't -- in the

state's eyes when they look at the box of the contractual obligations and what's on the pilot doesn't fit within the box, but accelerating affordable housing, check. it fits within the boxes i' 've said you can continue to do. structure for sustainable streets, roads, parks and the upfront almost 20 years now to create the p line certainly with a billion dollar project. someone had to do the upfront work and there was no hit to the general fund in that doughnut hole in mission bay. the private developer did that first. >> and i know that you know that right now with what we're proposing in this area, even without the [inaudible] the t line is woefully inaid kuwait aid kuwait adequate to carry

what this project is proposing. i think it's great there was a collaboration in terms of getting the t built, but the t is not even in the same universe as what we need in this part of the city and that's why i hope and think and know you understand what the frustration is and we have absolutely inadequate transit to sustain and that leaves us scratching our head when this happens over and over again. i'm glad to hear the statement that it applies to i know that some developers have taken to the position that it doesn't, which doesn't sit well with me, but we have a problem so i hope you -- and i hope you can understand where i'm coming from, where i imagine supervisor breed is coming from in terms of our frustration

level here. >> supervisor breed. >> i just wanted to express my frustration mostly because -- i know you've been doing this for a really long time. i previously served on a redevelopment commission. i know how these processes work and it's one thing to study this stuff in theory and talk about it and go over process, but it's another thing to start to see it develop and see the impacts and see that we are not adequately prepared as a city to deal with such a significant development as it relates to our transportation. i think that when we have these studies we need to look at reevaluating them when the impacts start to take shape. this neighborhood is forming at a rapid pace, even though -- i mean, this is way before you and i even probably started

working for the city, but we're now experiencing the impact. well, i was in high school, but we're now experiencing the impact. we have a lot of challenges in the area and yes, we are planning to deal with the infrastructure, we are planning to move forward with the affordable housing, but what happens when all this stuff is done is people like this as a supervisor get the complaints about inadequate community service or inadequate services or resources or what's happening in the context of their area. as i said before one of the biggest challenges too is the fact that as soon as we build a new neighborhood, then there's all this attention and support for a new area at the expension pension of pense of the old area of the city. that's where my frustration is kicking in and the fact that we have a stat entity that's not obligated to pay taxes and that's hard to take.

i really think that -- i mean, i'm no business person, but i think we should be walking away with at least what potentially this obligation is as it relates to being a good partner within san francisco. we're trying to provide the begs service, the best support, the best infrastructure, the best neighborhood and they're going to be using this neighborhood and not be providing any financial support long term for it, so i think at least they should be providing the full payment in order to fulfill that particular obligation as a good community partner and working with the city.

>> any other questions right now? let's move to public comment. i have one speaker card. anybody else, please step forward. >> good afternoon, corin woods. i'm hear wearing two hats. re

wearing two hats. transporation -- yeah, we have a whole eastern neighborhoods of rezoning that isn't adequately funded for transportation impacts. we have the water front transportation assessment going on right now for mpa that will hopefully be able to pin down what our needs are. we have also, though, what the mission bay plan projected to be preexisting services that would be provided for mission bay including the extension of the 22 down 16th street. that was supposed to be done by the city 15 years ago. we don't have it yet. we're hoping to get it by the time the hospital comes. these were deals the city made

that were supposed to happen and haven't. these were deals for example for the ballpark. the city said you pay the property taxes, we'll increase the service. you can't turn around halfway through and change the deal. it'd be nice, doesn't work. getting the money now for the infrasfruk structure and parts, getting the money now for the affordable housing is a huge boost for mission bay and really important to move what is in a sense a dissolving project towards completion. thank you. >> thank you. next two years next speaker, please. >> thank you for hear thg ing this item today. we serve san francisco residents with placement

solutions and employers with hiring solutions. we strongly support ucss acquisition of block 33 and 5. and 35. we've provided employment services and now through uewd. as general manager of mission hiring hall i've had direct involvement in placing san francisco residents and i must say through ucsf and project managers i've definitely witnessed their support of local hire and equal opportunity for san francisco residents. ucsf implemented the community outreach program back in 2011 where we've led the collaboration and worked closely together with other cbo's in the southeast community to place san francisco residents.

residents on mission bay hospital, mission hall, block 25a. through this process we've connected with various employers and union halls to put people to work and establish relationships. it's not easy working with subtracts and union, but through this process it's been a pleasure. to date we've referred

>> we have our current employee population of 22,000 people over ooo 50 percent of them are san francisco residents so we would anticipate that in the future our employment will include few san francisco residents. >> you mentioned when we met earlier a significant number of mission bay employees were basically commuting within san francisco. >> correct. >> do you know what that percentage is at mission bay in

particular and what the total number is of employees? >> the 60 percent of our employees and personnel at mission bay take forms of trons transportation other than driving alone. they use our shuttle program, as well as bicycle, walk and use van pools, carpools, ride share, et cetera, to get to and from wo. rk>> i'm going to make a recommendation we move this item forward. this is a significant tax dollar amount and i do think that it warrants a discussion by the full board. >> so if you want to -- that's

fine. i'll say right now i'm not prepared to do that. i want to continue this item. i will just say i've been enheightened lightened discussion today. i'm more upset by the conversation in my office where i was told nothing was due here and that to me is troublesome. i want to know why there was a different discussion beforehand because i don't think that's appropriate to be talking to supervisors about something that's not the case. >> either option works for me so with that i'm happy to make

the motion to continue this item to the -- let's do to the call of the chair. if we can get the information by next week, but i'm not convinced we will. >> i'd like to continue this item to the call of the chair. >> okay, we have a motion to continue this item to the call of the chair. we have a second by supervisor mar. without objection, so moved. item number five. >> item five is to get a better understanding of -- >> this item was called for by supervisor wiener. >> thank you mr. chairman. just today, you may recall several months ago -- actually i think it was in neighborhood services and safety and we transferred it to budget, we held a hearing to review the overall budget of animal care

and control as well as its staffing levels. animal care and control is one of our basic municipal functions. this agency is our safety net for animals in san francisco. the agency runs a shelter that does not pick and choose which animals it act accepts. accepts any animal that is brought that.

this is a very important agency and we've not done a great job making sure it's adequately staffed. we heard in detail a few months ago about the needs of the agency and its budget shord coming. there are not enough, for example, enforcement officers to go out in the field and deal with animal welfare issues. the shelter itself, for a period of time, chosed. i think one or two days a week because it simply didn't have the resources to stay open seven days a week and it's incumbent on us to make sure the agency is adequately staffed. this is a city where we are passionate about all animals and we want to make sure our budget priorities and the resourcing of animal care and control reflect that passion. i know that the department and the city administrator have put forward a proposal that's detailed in the presentation

for a modest staffing increase around shelter services and veterinary services as well as officers out in the field. i think it's a very, very solid proposal and i truly hope the mayor will include the proposal as part of his budget recommendation to the board. with that, mr. chairman, i would ask that rebecca cats, director of animal care and control present to the committee. >> thank you supervisors, thank you for hearing this matter. i want to start off by renewing my offer to give any of you at any time a tour of our facility, a ride along with one of our officers to better understand what we're doing and how important it is to the residents of san francisco, both two legged, feathered, furry, you name it. and thank you supervisor wiener

came down recently and had a tour and picked up almost every animal he saw, had a chance to see the different variety of animals we were working with so we're going to go through a few different things, the agencies mandates, the demands coming our way and then adam will take over and talk about how the budget assessment was done, what -- and what we're looking at -- or what we've asked for and why. >> our mission and mandates, of course we're an animal welfare agency. we rescue, take in owner surrenders, we adopt out animals, investigate cruelty in other forms of neglect or abuse. we work on coexistence with wildlife, wildlife education, human education and are vieding mutual providing mutual aid.

you'll hear from friends of animal care and control and with fredz friends and with the san francisco veterinary medical association to provide low cost vaccinations, microchipping, we provide behavior and training programs, volunteer services, community outreach and we provide shelter for animals when their person can't keep them for some period of time, whether it's the result of a disaster because they've gone into some form of shelter, whether they're in the hospital, whatever it is, we'll take care of their animal for a short period of time in those kind of emergencies. we have a groomer on scythe and site and as i said human education. aside from the welfare pieces, we are a public protection agency and also a health and human service agency. public safety, our first and foremost prior ity calls would

be if there's a dangerous animal. investigating animal abuse it's an indicator of future abuse of people. we work closely with the police department on vicious and dangerous animals. we take bite reports, we do rabies quarantine, we took into diseases, disaster response and as i said, helping people who need us to care for their animals for a period of time so it's the whole range of services for humans related to animals, range of hup humans related to animals, but also for animals. over the past ten years we've seen an increase in the number of -- not calls. there have been peaks and valleys a little bit, but an increase in the investigations that come our way. investigations can mean anything like abuse, neglect,

dangerous animals, things like that. those kind of investigations take a lot longer than standard calls, which can be anything like a stray animal, animal in traffic, dead animal, things like that. but the calls for -- the matters involving investigations take significantly longer. it can be interviewing witnesses, gathering evidence, so on so forth, working with the da's office. so those kind of matters take significantly longer and we're seeing an up tick in those kind of calls. we have an administrative process where if we seize an animal from someone because we suspect abuse or neglect we have administrative hearings and try and determine whether or not the person should get their animal back and under what circumstances. all of those things take a significant amount of time.

our number of intakes have been relatively steady with some interesting trends in that we've seen an increase in the number of dogs coming in where we've seen a relatively significant increase in the number of cats and others being rabbits and bird and so forth have remained more steady -- >> can i ask miss kats d b -- -- i think you know i'm a cat person and i'm wondering why the number of cats is going down and being overtaken by the dogs. >> there has been significant efforts towards spay, neuter of cats. we have partners that do a lot of work in that way, fair

farrell cat caregivers. there there has been global warming. it's any number of things. we bereave believe the dog population has increased because of the economy because they're more expensive to care for, veterinary care is more expensive, we see more dogs coming to us with major medical conditions that their owners can't afford to treat them more with behavioral issues. the owners can't get behavior training for them so that's what we would attribute it to, just the costs and economic impact, people losing their homes, those kind of things. i believe that's why we're seeing the increase in dogs. of course the challenge that comes with in is that dogs require a lot more care on our end. they require behavior and

training, perhaps more medical resources, more space, require more -- it's more heavy lifting so even though or number of intakes has remained pretty even, the workload has increased pretty dramatically. especially when it comes to custody animals, we've seen a lot more people in need of us caring for their animals and those custody animals can stay longer because of what's going on so the person can be in jail longer than with expected. the person may be out of housing for some period of time due to some kind of catastrophe, a fire, whatnot, whatever it is. we're holding their animals for them. any number of reasons and those can be longer in terms of how long they stay with us which gets me to the next slide. our length of stay. we have seen that increase.

and for a couple reasons, and in the rescue community as well as in the business community such as that's really spiked our adoptions, but along with that efforts means longer periods of stay. also, particularly when it comes to dogs, cats and others as well, our rescue partners are struggling with -- they have the same challenges we have which are animals in need

of veterinary care, behavior, whatever it is, that there's a cost to it and they're con at stantly trying to fund raise and care for these animals so being our safety net, their anlt to anlt ability to pick up animals from us gets delayed. the expectation from the community is we'll do everything we can to save these animals and we are trying. that kind of goes to the information about where we are in terms of the services we're providing, but i -- if you have other questions i'm happy to answer them and certainly ly adam can speak to the budget issues. >> good afternoon. adam from the city administrator's office. just going to take a few minutes to walk through the process that we went through to develop the budget proposal