from the beginning, because it is more, it is a better approach to do the economics of scale when you put loans together from the different cities. but, we also felt that a national movement is important, you know? and we have cities actually, and i got some of thefm written down here all over the country that are considering this, seattle and new jersey, and minneapolis, baltimore, and new york city, is actually considering it and just, the other day, someone from tacoma washington and an elected official called me. and so, what we want to do is build a movement a national movement so hey, you know, this is something that we are in together, and we want to correct. and the jpa will also protect and kind of put up a veil and a protection for the city and for the city and so it is the jpa

itself that is the entity that is acquiring the loans. and that and of course besers as i mentioned there is endemnification from the private partner and we will work out the details so everybody feels comfortable and it is clear that the type of approach that we use in them, and there are two types of eminent domain, a straight and a quick take. >> this will be the straight take and which means that as you take the acquire, a preresolution of, i forget what it is called, a resolution to acquire the loans. the charge will take a look at that and determine in his or her view, whether or not this will go forward, so actually the quick take will have it take it off the bat and if it turns out that someone sues you and oh, the court says that you are wrong, you know you have already taken it. but with a straight take you

are not even allowed to take it until the legal matter is determined. and we have, we have strong legal backing, we have actually a labor law firm that is backing this. and we believe that we would win, but even if we didn't win, and in terms of the legal matter, and the only cost that would incur to the jpa would be the cost of attorney fees for, you know, those who sued us which would be the big banks. >> so and again, this is part of my... and so the jpa and endemnifies and who funds the jpa. >> the jpa is the start up costs will come from the private partner. >> and unidentified today and private partner?

>> and that entity and we are working with a private partner but it could be any partner, they are the ones who will assure that the start up costs occur and cover all costs and i mean that the city, and our city has not had any and we have put up a website that took a few hours of staff time and that was it and that this is called mrp and it could be anyone but they are the only entity that we know of, and i think that there is others that are considering playing a partnership and i think that it was raised by supervisor avalos that there was a no*p pro-visit that wants to play a role in

this. >> so, it is really a no lose for the cities the way that i see it. >> thank you, thank you for being here. >> so this is a resolution urging that we go into negotiations for the gpa and it will be another matter before us and within that will be the conditions of how we enter and provisions for that and we have the guideline language here, that seeks to protect the city to make sure that the jpa will be a different entity from the city and that the private partners will be a part and the acquired mortgages acquiring and put in the conditions that will make it a voluntary program that will alleviate, and the trust that the homers might have and on the past history in san francisco where

imminent domain was used. >> and to me, the real issue of deciding on an ultimate program, and would be later on. but i think that it makes a lot of sense that we look further, keeper into this process by going into the negotiation and later at that time we can approve. and so i don't have other speakers here who are part of this, if you want to ask the city attorney and staff they are here and available for that. but i thought that i would go into public comment. and at this point. >> do you have a question? >> sure. so just a few things, i think that we will we can go into closed session before we vote on it the full board, to have a decision with the city attorney and we appreciate the comments about the legal questions and so forth and i think that i would like now the board of supervisors to have a chance to

hear from the city attorney and hopefully from the controller's office to be able to... and i see here from the department wants to hear about our questions or comments as our staff and for the city of san francisco. maybe, if we can address it now or talk about it next week in closed session and i think that there was a comment and i have heard this again, getting up to speed on this issue and about the zero impact on our credit rating or call it our financial kind of picture towards the lending agencies or what have you. and is there anything that you want to comment on right now and kind of our perspective in the city and again, i am happy just to defer until later. >> and thank you, on the essence of public finance and we have explored this issue and we will be happen whery to comment further for next week, but we do want to highlight that poet potential for concerns as it accesses the rating, and whether it will impact the ratings or not i

doubt that and i do know that the city is a frequent issuer and it is in the market over five times the year, and they are short term or a long term and we are able to use the competitive process and so this could mean, reaching over to negotiated sale and these are the potential impacts as well as cost of going. understanding ta we have a huge capital program with the huge financing, and upcoming financing in the coming years. >> but i will be happy to respond in detail next week. >> okay. >> thank you, and perhaps... >> i am sorry. >> just a question on that. >> just in terms of the threat of you know, harming our bond rating or our ability to get the bonds, is that based on something that is mechanical in the market? that we do this? and by chain reaction, that something happens or there is actually decisions that are made that are more political that would seek to prevent us

from going forward? the program like this, because it may essentially threaten the way that business is done, and the way that things are according to wall street, investment banks and bond companies? >> you know, i believe that the city has had the benefit of going competitive for all of the transactions and we also had the benefit of lower interest rates and the competitive interest rates and even when compared to the similar ratings and i understand that the banks that would otherwise feed on our bonds could potentially be impacted including investers who are the investers of these types of securities and so as an issuer, and in the investor community, there is potential that there will be a premium because it is the same that you are going after that are buying the bonds and so they could respond by higher interest rates. or the way that you know, but we don't know what that impact will be. >> right. >> we are a frequent issuer and

so it will mean doing a competitive still, at least will be challenging because you will need to establish a communication with the invester to kind of differentiate on what the impacts are or not, but there is the potential of interest only cost. >> and the complication between the investors could also keep the cost down potentially. >> yes. >> because we have such a high volume of bonds and issue that, you know, we are for the business and for. >> and that could be true, too, but you are also limiting the universe of your competitors and the banks who will be on your bonds. >> by them choosing not to participate with us. >> correct. >> we don't know that for sure, whether they will choose not to participate they just might say that they don't want to participate with us. >> got you, and we also have mr. lee, the director of mayor's office of housing and i

had one from the conversation with mr. olsen lee about the potential for this program, and we include the mayor's office of housing in this because we believe bas we are talking about home ownership and housing and in the program and within the mayor's office of housing and that is not surprised and we have this role, and also mentioned in this res daoution, and the mayor's office of housing has not initiated this program, and so, i am not sure what you have to say about it, but you are here to share your viewpoints and i am more than interested in hearing them. >> thank you very much, supervisor. we did talk briefly about this resolution and i come before this body expressing my concerns about going forward

with the jpa i smair some of the concerns about the role in the financial markets. we have a good working relationship, we have gotten awards from the affordable housing program and a variety of things and we have gotten concessions related to the national underwriting and that has really benefited our affordable housing, and i don't know what the effect of participating in the jpa might be if all of the lenders say that we are not going to treat san francisco special, we are going to treat you like every community and you will get the same deal, that will impact us.

as nadia said these in the market for general obligation bonds of a variety of bonds in tens of millions of dollars and that is a lot of money, 25 baseless points on my transactions is a lot of money and it just means that either we lose the access to the borrowing, or we actually just pay more to accomplish the same thing, because you know, we are no longer getting the san francisco discount for that. we don't know what the impact will be, if we are going after the same lenders who were asking favors from are we going to get the same sort of favored

nation status? this item came up and understanding that it was schedule before the board and we received a bunch of information about the joint powers authority, and sort of the size of the problem that we got these excel spread sheets and things like that and lifting and you know a lot of individual addresses and loans and balance and things like that. you know, what we do know, and we don't know, and we have not had a chance to look at, you know, those individual loans, and they have at hs to verify those questions of values, and clearly a lot of those loans are in the southern part of san francisco as we anticipate. but the other part of you know, looking at data is that you know, we looked at what is the foreclosure rate? and looking at those loans that were in default in the south

east and southern part of the city and we found 12 loans, 12 loans that are currently in default. so, you know, this is one of the problems with this tool is that it is an extremely blunt tool and in terms of taking all of the mortgages and then, you know, all of the mortgages that are under water for whatever the purpose, and within that sort of list of mortgages including the ones that are far in excess of what the amounts in terms of whether it is our first time home buyers program or the people who are income qualified to be assisted by our program. and if it is a broad, broad you know, it is a broad, broad tool. and actually it is a very blunt tool and it will cover, all types of mortgage and including mortgages that are at least identified on that particular spread sheet that are at the current values are in, or somewhere in over one million dollars, and the question that

we would have is, you know, because of such a broad tool, is it better? to do something as we did in 2013, which is to really focus the housing counseling agencies on the individual mortgages? and you know, we are prepared to, you know, take that list of mortgages, that was provided, and basically, contact every home owner on that list... >> and you had in doing that, i mean that you have numbers of the actual loans that have been modified and have you seen, actually a change in that from when we had our peak foreclosures that we have seen that happening? we did make investments there. >> i can't give you the numbers of how many actual loans that were modified and you know, we did reach you know, 225 home owners, and... >> we actually provide having the prop c funds in addition to what we provided before to

housing council needs. >> absolutely. >> and we have tracked what has been modified. >> i don't have that information at hand, supervisor. but i think that you know the question is you know, having gone through the eminent domain process, you know, when we acquired it the first time that the city had gone through or at least the agency had gone through the process in 20 years, it is not an easy process and it was a very complicated process and it ened up taking a long time. and and the questions of the council and the questions of the associated experts and the dueling appraisals and the testimony and the jury trial and ended up paying, unfortunately, the jury to decide what the true value is. and it was much higher, than what we have anticipated and so

we have concerns about this process, and about whether, the eminent domain process will actually result in loans that will be affordable, and because we have the concerns about the process, and we really prefer to go forward to work with the individual homers to see what we can do with the home owners. >> the mayers of the housing does not work with the individual home owners and you send off. >> and the authorization and the housing counseling agency to do that work and you know the trap that is being done and just rolling the prop c funtd to do it and we don't have a sense of what to come to us and we are going to have the full board next week and we are going to report to us what is actually the achievement that we created in doing loan modifications.

>> okay. >> if we could, we are going to have it in the full board and if you do your best in this x amount of time to see if these groups could have the stats and success and so forth that will be helpful for the discussion. >> mr. olsen, i would like to ask you about currently besides providing funds for agencies that do counseling, what programs have you created to support home owners who are distressed, you know, within the mayor's office of housing? because i have asked you about it a number of times, and you obviously will get back to me on that and i wonder if you made progress. >> again, those and what we have done sxh what we have done and we will continue to do to reach out to these home owners and take advantage of the resources that are out there as it results to loan modifications, when we first... >> when that person who does and reaches out to the

individual home owners. >> again, as you correctly pointed out. we have contracts with housing counseling agencies and the housing counseling agencies work with the lending institutions to take advantage of the programs that are out there and including the home modifications programs, and both at the state level and the federal level, to actually receive a write down of the existing mortgages. and that is, you know, approach, and it could result in significant savings to the home owners, provided, that one they can support an existing mortgage. and so, >> we are not doing the principle reduction and that is different. >> and the modification. >> this is similar. >> not exactly. >> not exactly. >> we are getting different interest rates and what will be great when we do report on the work that the mayor's office of

housing getting your loans modified and you can talk about how they have been modified as well if there has been influence into the principles of reduction, they will be great to see, and i would commend you for it. and if there have been real, you know, drastic changes in interest rates, i will love to see that as well. but i am sure that there were some changes in interest rates in length of loans that will be worth while to present when you come back. >> will do. >> thank you. >> okay. so, why don't we go ahead and go into the public comment, i don't have any cards, but people are welcome to approach the podium, unless there are cards here, and didn't and i call you by name. do you have cards? and if you want to speak and you don't have a card, you are welcome to line up over by the windows and the television set by the wall. and thank you. >> okay, hansen lee, sheryl mccare, and ed donaldson, susan

harmon. >> my name is ed donaldson and i would like to describe myself as a recovered counselor and i think that what the finance team here said that what olsen lee said as well, it really speaks to the fact that the banks will be pissed off if we do this and not expressing me concern for the home owners, and the other thing that was not expressed was the apthy that is coming out of the mayor's office and has been coming out of the mayor's office of housing in regard to the 4500 homes or over that have been lost to foreclosure, 25 percent at best, of home ener whose go into default will get a loan modification, half of those people will redefault and so in essence, 87 percent of the people who go into

default will not get a loan modification. who are some of the people? the folks that are sitting here tonight, many of which i have worked with in the context of the fsdac when i was there and also in the context of ace and i have seen the seniors, 92-year-old gentleman who just recently passed away. i am on the phone with the bank, and the bank says there is nothing that they can do for them. where is in guy supposed to go? the whole decision around mother brown's kitchen and the need for a homeless shelter is being driven in part by this foreclosure issue. currently, upon the banks own admission, and their data that they provided there is about 2,000 delinquent mortgages many of which have not had a notice of default filed. we have resets that are coming up over the next 2 to 3 years. there is going to be modifications that we said and

we are talking about billions of dollars in modification and i will provide that data at the next hearing, thank you. >> my name is hansen lee, and i am private citizen and although i work with the ace and i have very glad that i am talking to a supervisor which is elected official and i am so glad that i am not talking to staff members that are not, and that are not, the question or responsible to the voter and it seems to me that the staff to say that we want to go to a party but let me pull the wool over my eyes in case that they say that i may have a better vision therefore, they may

train me differently. you, me as, a before the people of the bank close on me, and what they come in and give me a solution, is we either kick you out or you continue paying 6 percent rate, interest rate. so, ace helps me in the sense of we settle with them, but a bank wanted to do nothing about decreased rate and so in a sense, this banker to me, i call is a thug either want to take my house away or say that you work 24 more years for me at a 6 percent rate. and that is bank, that is what we deal with now and that is what we deal with without the city government stepping in and now we will have a sister city, and set a wonderful program for many years of a delay and it is a delay. and it is many of our member

are suffering. and which is the tax payers, that live here, they just don't want to move or be forced out of the city and by the name of progress. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker please? >> my name is lori salin i am not an economist and i am not a harvard graduate but it seems pretty clear that if our mayor can afford to sacrifice the taxes to the city, from twitter, that he can afford to pay a higher and he can find the money for a higher cost of bonds and it seems like a pretty flusy reason not to do this. i just want to say from my experience, the people who have gone to these agencies whether it is for help, the tenant's union for help as renters or owners and help with

foreclosures and they get no satisfaction, there is not much that can be done and so that is not an answer to the current problem. thank you. >> thank you. >> my name is sheryl meeker and i work with ace. and who is aself organized group of home owners who are trying to keep the foreclosures away from themselves, i want to thank the supervisors for considering this resolution, and it, and i think that it is one of the few things, that will make a difference in keeping our city diverse, and we can see that we have had an increasing amount of black flight... and you were talking about the statistics, and that decreases the diversity, and the value of our culture, and and people who are being impacted it, these are my friends and neighbors that i that i try to work with in ace.

and it is, it is terrible to be to have your home at risk. and the numbers show is that people's color and older people are more significantly impacted, have been more impacted by this recent economic situation that is caused by the banks and this is ongoing, and the best thing to do is to create a solution that does make a difference and it could make a real difference, this has, something to keep in mind, kind of the multiplier effect and i am an aerist. art spaces are at space, renters are at risk and small businesses are at risk and this is all part of the rollover effect that this housing crisis has created. and so, thank you for considering this resolution. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please?

>> i am susan harman and i am working with the bank institute and we have been promoting this idea for several years now, and we worked with the county of san bernidino when they were close to implementing it and they were intimidated by the banks and the real estate agencies and the mayor is starting to use this wonderful tool, and they have not joined the jpa and i feel that they

will, once san francisco has the courage to do that and we will only take one and i think that there will be many cities who will be eager to do this, the tools that are out there to save the home owners are not being used and everyone heard about the settlements that the attorney's general solved around the country, and that money has been siphoned off by states, and specifically jerry brown here, and it has not gone to modify principles at all. and the solution to the finance director's problem without the bonds is to start a public bank which san francisco is well on the way to doing, i hope. and so when we can raise, and when we can raise our own money, we will not be so dependant on wall street and

the predators there that prey on all of us, i surge you to pass this resolution, unanimously, thank you. >> thank you, my name is jenny jordan and i am with the group called wild woman and we have been picketing the bank of america for three years in front of our mission street between 29th and you know, and in another country where i forget now, latin american country where a woman went out every day and is still doing it mourning the dead, you know, and many people were truly affected by this. and it was an actual act of racism. and as a white person, i want to say that is what is out there. and i mean that it comes definitely down, and they went out to get these people, and