em. >> director lee. >> lee, aye. >> nuru. >> aye. >> reiskin. >> aye. >> harper. >> aye. >> and kim. >> aye. >> and as well tha, is five ayes and item eleven is approved. >> great. eare there any other items or announcements? that concludes the agenda for today. the meeting is adjourned. thank you. sa

>>good morning everyone welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors budget and finance committee for wednesday, september 10, 2014. my name is mark ferrell cochairing this committee. i'm joined by supervisor eric martin supervisor john close. we'll be joined momentarily by supervisor david campos i like to think the clerk as well as members of essays

gigi jennifer logan charles, neck madam clerk to we have any please sounds all cell phones [inaudible] items act upon today will appear on the september 16 agenda unless it otherwise stated take you." can you call item number 1 property management agreement for [inaudible] rental housing between the treasure island authority and the john steward company with the yearly base rent about approximate $600,000 thank you thank you. >> by way of background 1st of all after our rfp solicitation process was initiated in 1990 the authority that is [inaudible] approved a sublease development in marketing and property management agreement with the john steward company which was then subsequently

approved by you the board of supervisors. the original term was 7 years and over the years we've actually amended that original agreement 5 tons. under the 3rd amendment to the original agreement, schedule term for the original agreement expiration date was the effective date of the development agreement which was june 2011. but it has continued thereafter on a month-to-month basis. projects was directed to their solicitations for sublease and management agreement in march 2013 and issued an rfp this past march. the rfp was conducted in accordance with city office of contract administration and contract managing. monitoring division. a pre-bid conference was held in their 2 interested parties. that took a look at this opportunity. the deadline for the response is march 18 of

this past year and only one response was received. that's amended by the incumbent john steward company. john steward simitian was deemed complete, responsive and compliant by titus stapp and the cities contact monitoring division. the office of city attorney and the monitoring division both advised that in the case of only one response the authority did not need to convene a scoring panel. consistent with the terms of the rfp the project staff then negotiated with john stewart or sublease and property management agreement to continue its role on treasure island and the board approved the agreement in it its june meeting. john steward has provided exemplary property management services during the term of the original agreement. i have consistently demonstrated a strong institutional knowledge of the island and its environment and issues. they have played a

critical role in ensuring the efficient orderly process for implementation of a very complex residential transition and relocation plan. the continuation of john stuart as manager will provide will prove beneficial to treasure island residents and the authority and especially in light of the challenges ahead in implementing the development program the future relocation and the [inaudible] program. the proposed [inaudible] propose the same opens of the original contract. 556 units, the effective date will be that of one approved by the board of supervisors. the term is 7 years through june 2021. with an option for 3 additional years through june june 2024. the terms are consistent with the present schedule of the transferred the property which is with the present schedule of the transferred the property which is estimated to be march

2022. the base rent of john stewart will pay tiger is $632,000 annually adjusted. they also pay as a percentage of 95% what we call percentage rate 95% after all expenses are uncured. for their services john stewart what will receive a 3% of gross revenue not to exceed $400,000 a year. in addition, 5% of the percentage rate after all excesses are satisfied. all those terms are consistent with the original agreement. changes with the future agreement relates to bringing the agreement consistent with the terms of the contract since 1999 as of that includes -- it is 1st source hiring ordinance the sunshine ordinance conflict of interest, can't complain contributions and last week they will be required to pay

prevailing wages for any [inaudible] and alterations to the residential units. the project staff strongly recommends approval of the proposed new management agreement with john stewart thank you. any questions right now? will move onto our budget in all support mr. rose please >> yes mr. chairman and members of the committee supervisor campos has shown in table 2 on page 6 of our report type is estimated to receive 4 million borders 70,000 [inaudible] and base rent and 21,590,000 892 in percentage rate for a total of $26,295,351 and that's over the initial [inaudible] of the lease. at the same time the john steward

company is estimated to receive 2,547,000 824 in management fees and 1,136,000 360 in percentage rate for total 3 million 684 184 we recommend that you prove this resolution. >> thank you mr. rose. always any questions for ms. rose or a staff? will move onto bubble, and anyone with which to make up comment on public one scene on public, disclosed. colleagues have a motion to move this item for? motion by supervisor almost than we can take that without objection. mdm. clerk item number 2 is [inaudible] mayor's office of housing for legal services or companies to establish [inaudible] recreation sports expedited removal of [inaudible] i tell you what madam clerk when we start i think sponsors, dr. montauban we start with the other items when did you call number item 3 item number threes resolution with the contract between [inaudible] and andrews international to provide on

security services for any amount not to exceed approximately $29 million for additional three-year term with an option to extend for up to 3 additional years. >> thank you get my understanding is this contract has been on hold so be cabling are filing we have the mta to talk about it thank you to talk about it my name is chris [inaudible] dr. security investigation and enforcement of the sf mta. my purpose this morning is to come to advise you that andrews international asthma has withdrawn the bid for this contract. we are researching the reasons and would be happy to get back you with further information at a later time. as you know the current security contract ends at the end of this month and we will be seeking an extension with the incumbent [inaudible] security throughout time to go out and in again. if you questions of the events at the some >> okay thank you very much. i'll easily entertaining a motion to file this item table

beside him. mr. rose, do you want to give your report here or you can be modified if you want to just given the fact [inaudible] >> based that it's pulled supervisor mr. chairman members of the committee i don't have any further comments. we had recommended approval of this item but it's been withdrawn. i don't understand >> so will have to bubble, ted and i guess the one thing i would ask if you can mitigate backdrop is kind of what the status is and also what experts are in terms of making sure we do have someone up and running as soon as possible just it will do that as soon as possible >> thank you. open to public on anybody was to the public, and on item number 3? see none of the common is closed. colleagues have a motion to title item number 3? we have a motion we can table without objection. but the party called one of the back to number 2 with article this item. the main sponsor of this item is supervisor campos who is with us. so supervisor campos one or

i turn over to you >> thank you very much mr. chairman and i want to thank the members of the committee for considering this item. i'd like to begin by thanking hillary ronan at my office along with paul rodriguez within working on this issue and edwin linda. i also want to take this opportunity toimport work of our budget and legislative analysts fred bussard [sp?] and the rest of the team who have worked very hard to -- in a very expedited way to present a very thorough report on this important issue. i think that all of us have been hearing over the last few months about the crisis that our country faces as we have thousands of unaccompanied minors. some as young as 6 months who are coming to our

doorsteps escaping violence and turmoil in their native central america. i introduce an ordinance a few days back that in my view, would go a long way in reception in san francisco as the premier sanctuary city in this country. i honestly is an american had been really shocked to see some of the responses that we have seen in some parts of the country where people are actually organized to speak against these children. i think that we in san francisco have an opportunity to set an example for how our country should handle this issue. let's provide some historical context for what's happening. even though we are a country of immigrants there have been times in our countries history when we as a country have done the wrong thing when it comes to immigration. there are so many

examples in our history where we have turned our backs on immigrants, on refugees. whether it's turning our backs on folks who were escaping persecution in nazi germany and turning literally turning ships back to europe. whether it's japanese internment camps. there are examples where our country has done the wrong thing. i'm a democrat who supports barack obama and i'm sorry to say that i think that what he has done in terms of the treatment of these thousands of unaccompanied minors will go down in history as a terrible tragedy and it's going to be seen by historians, in my view, as a blemish on this president record. i think that we in san francisco have a

responsibility when our own country does something that is wrong and unjust to speak out against it. as i said earlier, if this were a country anywhere else in the world turning away refugees in the magnitude that our country is doing we would be going to the united nations and calling for sanctions against the country. this is our own federal government doing this. in response to this crisis a number of initiatives have been presented and we are grateful to the number of people at the state and local level that have come forward to provide some relief to this crisis. it was important for us though to make sure that as we figure out how to respond as a city that we actually have facts on our side and so we ask our budget and legislative analysts to conduct a study to

have a better picture of how grave this problem actually is. for the last few weeks, mr. bussard and his team have been going to immigration court. they have been meeting with attorneys who are actually working with these children. they've gone and talk to the kids themselves and the families to have a better understanding of the magnitude of this crisis. in the report that is now available to the public budget and legislative analyst points out that if you look at the caseload in san francisco immigration court the so-called rocket docket, that it would cost approximately $6 billion to provide legal representation to the more than 2500 children that are currently in that docket. the legislation that i

am asking that i'm introduced as before this body, asked for a modest $1.2 million of funding each year for 2 years so that nonprofit immigration legal organizations can hire additional staff to represent at least every one of those 2500 children that actually resides in san francisco. the estimate given to us by this report is that about 20% of the 2500 children in fact live in san francisco. today colleagues are going to hear from a variety of speakers regarding the need for this funding. i want to underscore a few points. 1st, if symphysis go about putting these funds for legal counsel donald is that other jurisdictions in the bay area will follow suit. the 2500 children that are currently in

san francisco immigration court on not just the responsibility of the city and county of san francisco. they are the responsibility of the entire bay area. 2nd, there been much talk about leveraging pro bono private counsel to address this crisis and let me be very clear. pro bono private counsel does have a role. we do need to have all hands on deck to address this crisis. but as you will hear, from folks including folks from the private barfly provided that legal help, the private bar even though it has stepped up to provide that assistance, it is not enough to address the crisis given the magnitude of the problem. the fact is that the attorneys at these firms who rely on the work and expertise of counsel at these nonprofits when it

comes to having the training, the expertise, the mentorship. unless we actually fund nonprofits to provide that support pro bono counsel cannot help in the way that we need them to. this budget supplemental is urgently needed to protect the basic rights of hundreds of children and families. i ask all of us to ponder, if our own children were in the same position how would we want them to be treated somewhere else in this country in this world. at a bare minimum, i believe we would want them to have access to due process. and the rights and protections that are accorded to the children by national and international law cannot be protected unless they

actually have an attorney. perhaps the most difficult thing for me is someone who shares a very similar personal experience with these kids, who came here undocumented as a child, was going through the immigration court asserting the rocket docket and talking to these kids and it's really hard to understand how a 4 or 56-year-olds can make sense of having a deportation order pending against them. i will end in there but i do want to show something i was given to me after i visited the immigration court. we are talking about children here. in some parts of the country you have kids as young as 6 months who are facing deportation. because they are kids the court staff are very kind and they

give them some things to do and so one of the things they do is they make sure that the kids have crayons and paper. so that they can entertain themselves while the proceedings go on. someone gave me some drawings that were made by these kids who are facing deportation and they can draw whatever they wanted. i'll make sure that i have passed them around. but what struck me was that so many of them drew a picture of the american flag. it's really heartbreaking when you think about it. i can tell you that for me as a young child the american flag represented hope and opportunity. it was and

remains a symbol for everything that's great about this country. it's really incredible to me that notwithstanding the treatment that this country has given them, that child draws an american flag. it's how they see this country. notwithstanding how we have treated them and i hope that we can symphysis go play our own little part in making sure that we do right by these kids and by doing right by these kids i think were doing right by ourselves and everything that we believe in. so, with that, i know that we have -- well actually i would provide an opportunity to my colleagues

and i want to thank the cosponsors of this supplemental supervisor mark, supervisor, was an supervisor he and their staff. i also want to thank other staff that have gone and taken the time to attend the immigration court to open up to my colleagues before we turn it over to public comment >> [applause] >> with the permission of the chair, if i may, i'd like to begin by asking the children who are here who have traveled a long way to be here. i would like to begin by giving them an opportunity to come up and

speak. >> there will be translation for them. >> don't be afraid. don't be

shy. >> good morning my name is

walter. i am here on behalf of the children to like me asking for legal representation and immigration court. i'm here because it is very dangerous and our country. there is a lot of violence and the lincoln c and we are here in the united states to be safe and asking for protection. thank you. >> good morning my name is

natalie. i'm here to tell you about what i suffered to get here to be with my mom. me and my sister, they did tennis in a place called [inaudible] -- which means like a freezer. when we were sleeping when other people were sleeping officers would kick them to wake them up.

in the freezer it was unbearably cold. it was freezing and we had to cover ourselves in aluminum foil. they did not help the children in these freezers like me. i am here to thank you all for giving me any other children an opportunity to get help so that we are not supported. thank you. >> [applause] >> good morning my name is

brian. i am here to ask for help with attorneys because in my country it is very dangerous. there many gain members. there is so much violence.in my country every day children are shot and killed were not doing anything but just walking on the street. they are shot and killed. this is because they don't want to join these gangs

and their children are joining the gangs. that is why i am here to ask for your help so that i don't have to suffer what others suffered including mothers. thank you >> [applause] >> good morning. my name is

william. i'm here to ask for your help with finding attorneys because in the course we have to represent ourselves and we can't do that and we need your help. thank you. >> [applause] >> if i can ask them a question. if they can say with their age is? >> 12, 7 >> 13 >> >> 10 >> 12 >> [applause] >>