good morning. everybody. thank you for joining us for

this meeting of the budget and finances committee meeting. i would like to welcome sf gtv for filming this event. >> city clerk: clerk items today will appear on july 22nd, board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you, madam clerk. we have a long agenda today after our budget season. madam clerk, please call item no. 1. city clerk: item 1: 140619: proposed annual budget and appropriation ordinance for selected departments - fys 2014-2015 and 2015-2016]1406191.sponsor: mayorproposed annual budget and appropriation ordinance appropriating all estimated receipts and all estimated expenditures for selected departments of the city and county of san francisco as of june 2, 2014, for the fys ending june 30, 2015, and june 30, 2016. city clerk: item 1: 140619: proposed annual budget and

appropriation ordinance for selected departments - fys 2014-2015 and 2015-2016]1406191.sponsor: mayorproposed annual budget and appropriation ordinance appropriating all estimated receipts and all estimated expenditures for selected departments of the city and county of san francisco as of june 2, 2014, for the fys ending june 30, 2015, and june 30, 2016. good morning supervise 1234. the ladies egislation today is for a future parkland. this is as you may know one of the parks and recreation department outstanding acquisition priorities. it's been on our roster pretty much as long as we've had a roster since the late 1990s. we are glad the time is finally right for the city to purchase the property. this is an image that shows the property. there are a total of i think actually about 12 parcels. some of them are submerge. the net land area is about a little over 2 acres. it's located between two existing parks and recreation owned parks. the india basin shoreline park and the indian basin open space used for shipping from the

1860s through the 1990s and it has a lot of historical significant significance for this community. it includes the land structure cottage which is one of the if you remaining buildings in the basin. the purchase of this land is a key component which is expansion and revitalization of this water front. the red parcels are the properties currently owned by the clinic which we hope to purchase it at this time. the orange parcels are known as 700. that land is owned by a private developer builtic. and parks and recreation is partnering with it. i will get into that more in a moment

for a very significant expansion of new public open space in this area. build ink is planning a new residential site but we want open spaechlts -- space. it's a great opportunity for a regional park. for the past few months, the parks and recreation department -- >> supervisors avalos? >>supervisor john avalos: a quick question. how long has that property been there around the ownership? >> i believe they have owned it for 10-12 years. i believe they were interested in housing but they found the bcbd regulatory requirements to be very onerous and there is environmental

contamination at the site and they found it would be in their better interest to sell the property and use it from the land sale for housing elsewhere. >> okay. thank you. >> so as i was saying for the past few months parks and recreation has been in partnership for the planning around the future of the open space. we are working closely with the strans parks alliance and the trust for public land and build ink. we also received a $500,000 grant, a private conservation area grant which will fund our process and design and public outreach for the public park development. in addition, the partnership may involve a potential land for some portion of their 700 site for some small portion of their

site that there may be interested in. it would net the same or greater amount of parkland for parks and recreation, but the purpose of that would be to optimize the size and the configuration and the continuity of public open space. in addition, the san francisco bay trail which is a regional project of the association of government bike trail that will eventually ien circle the entire san francisco bay. there is gain in this area and the park acquisition development would provide the opportunity to complete the important segment of the trail. the proposed acquisition at this time the city proposes to go forward with this by having the real estate division purchase and hold the property for a period of up to 24 months and then at the end of that period, rpd would acquire the property from real estate

through jurisdictional transfer. the purpose of structuring it this way is that it gives us time and flexibility to formalize and seek these partnerships to help develop the park in addition it will give us time to develop a concept design division parcel before we take up the land. at the holding period at the time of jurisdictional transfer, property would be paid for from the open space acquisition fund. and we have a memorandum of understanding between the parks and recreation department, real estate division and mayor's office of public finances which governs the purchases, the financing, the management of the property during this 24 -month period. initially the property purchase would be financed through commercial paper. and the parks and recreation commission will be voting on the memorandum of

understanding tomorrow. so briefly the parks and recreation has an acquisition policy that lays out criteria to help us with property acquisitions. the first is to acquire property loektsd in -- located in a high needs area and open space by the general plan is an area that has a high percentage of low income residents, seniors and/or children, high population density and high projections for expected growth in the next 25-30 years. this map shows a quarter mile and half mile radius around 900 in the site and the darker areas are higher needs. so you can see there are many areas of motion derately high to high needs of this area that this park would serve.

this just shows the surrounding neighborhood context. there are a few other parks in the vicinity. the second criteria is to acquire properties that have identified external sources of funding for acquisition for development and maintenance. in the case of 900. as i said we propose to purchase the property to open the acquisition fund and staff is currently looking into potential funding for development. there may be as i said an opportunity as part of this public private partnership with build inc. and it could potentially be something because it's a very large project included in the next general obligation bond for parks. we have not identified a long term funding for the park. that will be addressed during the planning phase in the 24 -month period before parks and recreation takes title. lastly the

acquisition policy to acquire property that support a variety of recreational uses. this is a very large site. it's very flexible. it's located right on the water and it has very spectacular views. the weather is very nice and provides opportunities for recreation for sunbathing, enjoying the views, it also offers a great deal of opportunity for active recreation. most water base, boating, kayaking, etc. with the completion of the san francisco bay trail, opportunities for walking, bicycling and lastly opportunities for natural habitat restoration, for the creation of wet land habitat and for wild life habitat. so the details of the proposed acquisition, the purchase price to the seller is $2.975 million. the city would be responsible for environmental

remediation. parks and recreation has commissioned a phase one and two site assessment which presents a broad range of environmental clean up where they consider excavating 2-4 feet. consider excavating the unpaved area. it will yield a range of cost estimates ranging from under $500,000 to up to $2.8 million. we are working on a more accurate remediation. part of a remediation estimates they like to know where you are going to build where so they know how deep the excavation is. we don't know that. we'll have that in the next coming months. we'll expect to ak isses the acquisition fund to remind ate the cost. since it's a legitimate related expense. in addition there is an opportunity for grant funding to the usepa, they have a

grant for fields program. we are well positioned to apply for those funds. this acquisition project has very strong support from the india base and neighborhood association as well as the san francisco parks alliance and trust for public land. the parks and recreation and open space advisory committee passed a resolution in support of the acquisition. although they did site -- cite some terms about the remediation cost. the parks commission passed a resolution in support of the purchase and the use of the open acquisition fund to reconfirm the paper notes that will be used to finance the purchase. so, inclosing, staff accepts the recommendation in the budget and legislative analyst report and we recommend that the board approve the resolution as amended for the acquisition

of 900 ns. thank you. >> supervisor avalos? >>supervisor john avalos: thank you for the presentation. i was able to visit this place a couple years back and saw it's potential especially linking the trail and you can see the gap and green space that is there. it makes a lot of sense. one thing to move forward with a thing like this, it's interesting there is probably an effort to have affordable housing at this site perhaps and as proposed can go to affordable housing. i'm actually, the trade off inform are me is to have affordable housing elsewhere is good. it's almost like a win win in that case. what i remember when i visited this site a few years back was that along -- there weren't sidewalks or bike lanes and

anything like that. it seems like this is an area of the city in addition to having this open space, there needs to be access to it and look in terms of overall what this term of the neighborhood neechltdz -- needs. this raises visibility and greater pressure for amenities. can you speak of other plans around this part in adjacent to there in this development of this park is also in context of greater work that's happening that you can point to? >> sure. i just attended a meeting as a matter of fact with build inc.. they were giving an update to city staff and they are really excited as are we with the collaborative and the relationship with the opportunity to create new housing and create neighborhood services, create a new development that really

is unique to and appropriate to the character of the india basin neighborhood. the folks in this neighborhood who have been advocating for the last 15 years for this to become a parkland. they want this on the map where it's a place where people come to see and enjoy the views. they actually want the retail new housing uses like artist live work space and things like that. so there is really i think a magnificent opportunity to have new development and the open space compliment one another and to really revitalize this part of the city. >> that's great, because some parts especially along eunice is desert. it's wonderful to see that it could actually

happen. thank you. >> colleagues if no other questions, we can move to our budget analyst report. mr. roads? >> yes. on the page 2 of the committee, the acquisition that the department has stated would fund the commercial paper amount used to purchase the pro the including interest payments resulting in total expenditures of 3, $126,000 and that is shown in table 3 of page 8. we noticed the acquisition has $9 million $149,000 that approval by board of supervisors for total estimated cost of $3.1 million would leave a balance of $300,000 in the acquisition

fund. we note the ak -- department has not separated funds in maintenance cost for the property. and going to our recommendations, supervisors i have some revisions based on discussions with the city attorneys office. regarding recommendation, our first recommendation regarding ceqa, as i understand it now, this has already been incorporated into legislation so there is no need for you to accept that recommendation. secondly on our second recommendation, we continue to make the recommendation that is requiring the approval of the final mou between the real estate department and the office of public finances and why -- a report from the mou

for the final board of supervisors approval from the proposed resolution. however despite the fact that we are making that recommendation, the city attorneys advises that based on timing he believes it's not necessary to amend the legislation. in other words that will be done prior to your final decision. again, we make the recommendations, but on the advice of the city attorney, we are saying not to amend the legislation and city attorney obviously is available for questions. our third recommendation stands as is. request a report from the parks and recreation department on the proposed use of 300 eunice avenue property and sale and exchange of a portion of the property at the owner of 700 eunice avenue

and estimated cost and sources of funds to maintain the property and undertake environmental remediation. we also recommend that you require that any future agreement to sell a portion of 900 eunice avenue to a third party or exchange a portion of eunice avenue of 800 had udson avenue be subject to board of supervisors approval and consider a proposed resolution as amended to be a policy decision to the board of supervisors. >> thanks, just to be clear in terms of your recommendations here, we have three recommendations listed on your report. which one is the ones you are actually still suggesting we go forward with today? >> actually, all, not the first one, but abc and it's a policy matter, but with respect to a, the city attorney is advising that

because it is his understanding as i understand it that as these actions will be taken before your final vote on this matter, it is not necessary to amend the legislation. so from that standpoint, although we continue to make the recommendation, you do not need to amend the legislation based on the recommendation of the city attorney. b and c, we continue to recommend that you do amend the legislation as we have stated here. >> okay. thank you, mr. rhodes. supervisor breed? >>supervisor london breed: thank you. i apologize for being late. i have questions about the purchase price and based upon what we have estimated for the clean up. i guess i'm just trying to understand where that money is going to come from and why are we doing this premium --

prematurely without the plan for this particular area. also it's my understanding there is a significant open space in the surrounding area. so, i just feel that this project in particular is a little premature and this question may have been answered but i'm trying to understand why we are aggressively moving forward with this. >> why don't i ask parks and recreation staff to speak. >> okay. john uptike from the real estate division can speak to this project. in terms of the remediation we have a number of estimates from the environmental report. we are working on refining the cost estimate and we have been speaking with the city attorneys office about use of the open space acquisition fund for a portion of the remediation cost. and given that the full value of the site is based on the

assumption of a clean site, sort of the difference between what we pay as a purchase price and the an appraised value can capture the environmental remediation. >> skews -- excuse me. i'm sorry. that's confirmed? >> yes. we have done that last year. >> okay >> although we haven't received browns field grant fund from the epa, it's strongly suggested by the folks at the epa that it's a great candidate to receive those funds. they have provided the consultants. they are really excited and want inform #20 #2ksh -- to see this project move forward and we are hoping the funds will be available as well. >> thank you, holy. john,

uptike. to give you a briefing on how we arrived at this. it's not unreasonable that there might not be a conclusive firm remediation number. that's often a negotiated element between buyer and seller. in this case it's no exception. however we do have as holy mentioned some robust to environmental site information. it gives us a good range for remediation. the first effort was to value the property, assuming no contamination and look at offsetting that price with respect to the contamination expenses. the evaluation was done by independent third party an appraiser. it reflected a reasonable assumption of development to the property far less than tenderloin housing clinic originally anticipated. i think it was a very good

reflection of the number of units that the property could yield in the future. it did not an attribute any value to any of the improvements. it did not attribute any value to the subemerged lots. we are only paying for the lots that are dry. although as you will note in the report about half of the property is actually underwater. so, we are not in a position where we are paying for anything that isn't of value. the conclusion of value puts us * at about $50 a square foot for land. i would say in san francisco, that's a pretty good price. the assumption of development is is approximately 86 units that the whole property could yield if it were a standard residential development. the appraiser looblgd at when this could had been because there would be entitlement process bass -- because it's

reflective of and the housing requirement they went through a entitlement process. there is a risk factor 245 -- that brought that price down. that brought it down by $3.5 million for the property assuming it was clean. then we looked at the environmental investigation and that there would be a reasonable buyer and seller and that's how we arrived at that net price of $2.975 million. i'm happy to address any questions. >>supervisor london breed: thank you. colleagues, i recall during last year when members of district 8 came before us regarding an acquiring a particular site there was a plan that community support. there was just really a lot more legwork done where it was clear that

it was appropriate for us to support it and move it forward. it made sense from my perspective to allow the funds to be used for that particular purpose. i think my biggest concern is once these funds run out, they run out until i guess in a couple years. i want to be very particular about how we spend them. i guess what i'm looking for is a clear understanding of why this project is moving forward in the first place without i guess what a real plan attached to it and community support, i guess that's what i'm looking for. >> so, to the question supervisor breed, i want to thank them for being here and i also want to acknowledge supervisor cohen ace office

is here. i want to give them the opportunity to speak. and assuming a project coming up next, i know supervisor cohen's office has been involved and supervisor wiener is also on the roster. >> supervisor thank you for the question. i know it's an important one. the acquisition fund, i know that you have to make these decisions very careful. this is as outstanding an opportunity for open space in san francisco as has come before you. this is one of the last pieces of available water front open space. it is part -- >>supervisor london breed: mr. ginsberg, can you tell me you plan to take responsibility of this property for certain from the department of real estate? >> yes. >> it will be under your portfolio? >> yes. and it's part of a lot of neighborhood planning that has gone on in the indian

neighborhood and perhaps cohen's office can speak about that. this is right at the hub of several other parcels of open space. we have the real potential to create what some people are referring to as a green crescent. other people call it the chrissy field of the southeast. several parcels of over space along the water front in a neighborhood that is transitioning at a time when the city is partnering to invest in housing and transportation and as density in creases in that neighborhood we have an outstanding opportunity before us to plan not just a park, but open space that really could become a signature park of the city's open space portfolio. >> one of the other things that i brought up the last time when we acquired property was the fact that we don't have sufficient park

controls, we don't have sufficient maintenance staff and with so many parks in my district and of course all over the city and the challenges with maintaining all of our park space and to increase continue to in accrues -- increase portfolio without clear defined money for it and clearly defined money sources to maintain it, i'm always concerned about the future and what that means to parks all over the city? >> i am too and these are very legitimate points. but i think for a while the parks and recreation took the position that it was never going acquire any additional open space because it didn't have the resource to take care of the open space that it has. it's perhaps a philosophical question. in my view we need to take the long view and these are decisions that you all just finish grappling with your budget and budgets come

and go and i will be here as long as i'm on this job advocating for more resources for more parks and open spaces because we need it. these are a hundred of your decisions before you today. we have the chance to actually increase and conserve open space and accrues the city's parks portfolio. and meet changing demographics and projections about growing urban density in this city. it's a really important moment for us. i think we need to take that risk. i think we need to have that conversation honestly about our resources that can match the real estate portfolio that we have. both of the parcels we have before you today and the acquisition that is part of a development agreement that i think you also have been considering do come with