years as well as the premium we have on the 5 hundred base points but the equity point is you know returns have been exceptional so i'll ask bob to make a couple of quick comments and answer any questions the board has. >> thanks bill i'll focus on a couple of interesting pages i go through those reports and say is there anything that jumps out first of all, to page 13 that goes through the clauses a set of stunning fabulous that was brought up international equity over the last 5 years the most disappointing on the list of 2.16 when you look at directly on behalf of it u.s. equity is

going set close to 12 percent there is a couple of things currency is worth about 4 hundred plus returns we didn't get we heckled back the exposure it would have add 4 hundred base points over the years now currencies are all over the place we united continue in the future the other thing the comparison of international versus the us is apples to apples it is e m so you can see the new developers developed a bit closer the u.s. and this comment was made we meeting met with the ceo from black box the the financial crisis so go into

the remaining non-u.s. development world was further behind when you got to 2011 you're looking at the u.s. economy or the u.s. capital market was lagging behind so we were prime to take off and in my opinion that is the excess return the other they know we did this is something that bill spearheaded they meet to discuss whether or not there are opportunities from a version to take advantage of this market and whether or not it make sense to europe allocations to the e m definitely the most disappointing i's non-market and adding to the non-u.s. again, the relevance between u.s. and non-u.s. has reached a point would you believe in capital

market versions that are in front of us from a capital market prospective those are the summary of my comments i'll let the rest of team jump in about their information. >> we don't quarterly information for the fourth quarter overall the market is down and the s&p is up and s&p was up 1.4 percent and developed market were 4 point plus percent and down e m is weak bounded back less than one percent down 15 percent for the year the weakness is about the economy in china chinese dollars were down and didn't get hit on currency the

global concerns weighed out the - that country was down 41 percent and over thirty percent due currency expanded 16 percent positive sectors were customer staples and care and i p respectfully and we can go into the manager information if you have any questions any comments on the market so most notably in the policy we had look at impact of 16 and the market not as much as we think but those government related securities both post negative returns not only for the quarter

bureau the 2015 and the high yield a negative 2.6 and down about 5 percent for the year we did see some diversity the market but the u cd and japan economy and finally come dots are up in the quarter as is opec failed to met the consensus. >> board any questions. >> colleagues, any questions. >> on this discussion item yes. >> please right now. >> on page 16 the private benchmark are you sure that's

right. >> yes. this is still the s&p preeflz. >> you're sure that number is reflective i come up with a significantly different would be the 5 hundred number. >> i know about the change and which column are you looking at. >> i will verify that thank you. >> anyone else? >> you're sure director. >> all right. >> commissioner, i commissioner driscoll i see the numbers are very close yeah. >> you know the answer to

that. >> they're very close. >> yeah. >> any other i don't think there are any other questions we're done thank you. >> yes. we'll take public comment at this time on item 7 seeing none, public comment is closed. last week to call item 8 >> discussion manager shaw supervisors this is as companion item just a quick kind of of comments we added don't mortgages managers to the international core equity port commission proefrm related they've gone through a tough times specifically the thirds quarter of calendar prior year very good core perform to discuss with them this is the longest serving equity managers we think their performance is

disappointing that is a long serving managers this is gm o tom co-sponsorshiper the portfolio percentage he's actually at our board for the interview when we first interviewed him hesitate retiring we're fortunate to a degree his portfolio i'd like to take the opportunity in a has been over 10 years will be taking over and to discuss u discuss that and we understand and have confidence the manager we have one removal for the two plus products again successfully a hired a new core plus managers those managers since termed into were under review for organizational concerns and added to the status since we've

gone through issues and feel confident we have the issues d that concludes the report. >> when are you meeting with. >> whom. >> haven't set and meeting. >> i'm curious about their performance you're right a long term relationship and their performance over the last. >> well the numbers the third quarter of 2015 there were two or three hundred points behind the beverage. >> we've met with them the last 6 months several times we haven't - we've been keeping in touch with their portfolios it is usually over weight they were a year ago before you i'm

not sure this is huge title. >> have we've seen any movement. >> i don't think we've had that much. >> our process. >> i saw them a week ago it was a merging market. >> it is not - >> i'd like to know too. >> big firm. >> yes. we'll give you details. >> commissioner driscoll that went into effect a year ago my general question is any puc pc going to comment am i missing something. >> (inaudible). >> i'm sorry you'll have to

come to the mike. >> are you part of panel or not neutral so are you part of the panel or not. >> he's sitting at the general meeting. >> less talk about the guardian. >> residentially. >> we review those with staff and putting the managers on the watch list and that's been around a link time and perhaps the best international manager has suffered over the years and lyft a couple of managers and it boils down to growth of assets a ton of assets and assets are the enemy of performance the long run in emerging market they've got a long emerging market

they've i can see they've process has innovate kept up with the market and we agree they should be reviewed it is painful they've been around and we've cut them back i think that requires a hard review that is basically what i seen the marketplace i'm curious another performance numbers if you are taking them out the portfolios you should look at that closely. >> we've mentioned the capital guardian. >> the other question for the consultant your opinion about any manage is useful but the general allocation the report about the failure it is a quarterly report anything else you want to tell you. >> bob has highlighted the

position of portfolio our close to our target if you look at the northern report on page little chart that nicely summarizes the risk position. >> i bind them over. >> page deae /* /- 21 and 22 our your performance extraordinary good versus our peer group in the top 10 percent at page 22 your risk positioning the portfolio on the 1, 3 and 5 basis the green squad car you see on the return basis on your

at top of chart our risk position is neutral that means relative to our peers h you had an equity exposure on the high side we think that positioning going forward bill talked about moving the portfolio a little bit to the left by taking the assets out of things like the equity and moving them into the defensive strategy doing more eunice talked about in terms of indexed income portfolio a more fixed strategy and defensive and liquid government core and more the private debt to look at the global banking market and energy we're cautious but we think is

that it takes time for the oil. >> commissioners a report you might want to reopen we're on the managers under review at this point. >> so we're on item number 8. >> i'm sorry, i meant he's talking about general portfolios performance that was item 7 item 8 is managers under review to the extent it should be limited to the subject with the managers under review. >> you've heard the council. >> we've talked about the managers under review. >> perfect, thank you. >> any other comments. >> yes. if you're going to make respect to the peer group know who is the top that may not be a relevant ground peer group so that peer group may not be a

useful thing i'm sorry, i was waiting to speak so this line of change that is the first time it happens like that. >> we'll make the adjustment. >> our oversight. >> commissioners any other comments nope go to public comment on item 8 item 8 any members of the public wants to comment seeing none, public comment is closed thank you very much staff appreciate our presentation could you call negligent number 11. >> item 11 an action recommendations to gadget city capital and the capitals there is a seat at the table now thank you. >> commissioners on we're very excited about bringing you our first country's specific strategies those two managers we

have gotten to know very, very well, now you've known one important gorgeously 7 or 8 years the two managers are respectfully outperformed by 8 and dwoo percent the one at 8 percent has done so with less than half the volatility of the benchmark and an equitable amount of comboikts haitians will walk us through the actual recommendation i am going to talk about the macro environment and a little bit think was managers if you think as an active manager you want to be involved is market like china we look at global growth depending on what

the high ends and low end numbers and 7 percent they think is going to grow over the nearby 5 years and a export driven old economy to an developer communed if you're good evening to be an active manager discriminations between companies that moved in the new economy and companies that are not an active manager has look at how the industries are set up didn't help you if you participate in the chinese market this is why we're excited about the china managers and look at the other manager on the ousted performance numbers we

see china a or the csi numbers this helped us with the two managers an outstanding comment both of the managers are chinese based but recommended the united states that is how serious they're taking the candidates so those are the teaches managers we want to participate they get governance and that's what allowed us to get comfortable they understand the needs and wants of the large institutional investor now to han. >> the sourcing you know the number of meetings are china based managers and on the

mainland and also, if you do that and actually walk through the recommendations and have the department with any d.c. in bringing this together. >> sure so we did a process and ends with the 7 managers based in china we narrowed it down to 7 bill and i had experience working with our prior employers investing in china and a number of investors in europe and have been active those are the top names that came up with the 7 managers when i spent a week in china you know by a zinc and shanghai we met a lot of side auditors and staff we felt

comfortable with the managers and selected two based on performance but we wanted high standards in terms of government compliance especially for this is important for china once we narrowed it to two we asked them for the research and have a more detailed memo we can't provide in open session but we can provide that offline. >> it is 15 or 17 managers that are here or in china before narrowly it to the 7 we thought that best from those 7 narrowed it to the two. >> yeah. we wanted to focus think global and mixed managers that are in china they're also a number of asset managers last week bierman and wilton and that are trying to get into dhiens

they have less experience their tracking is not as strong but we had discussions with them too. >> walk through the recommendation sure today, we'll recommend an have felt of the $200 million to two inevitability managers all capital and springs capitals they'll be part allocation within the public comboiktd those managers are based on in china which are stocks incorporated in china and shanghai and changes and treated the local currency those managers are deep knowledge in local market and excellent fracture records we see those managers also complimentary while contributing this is the first non-u.s.

participants last week bill said in the portfolio we think that china warrants two mandatory now the largest country country based on the gp d purchasing power authority and continues to cigarette out pace the development china is growing about 4 to 7 percent development market are growing 15 percent so the slowing growth will out pace the development market china is the second largest financial market in the world, however, they represent 34 percent is not the engineer comboekts and working with the china authority to change that the china have improved the market assess and the number of strategists will include china

if this was to happen we'll be institutionalal benefits theirs larger and the shanghai stock exchange opened in 1990 the market is young and in a position this is a great opportunities for that asset managers to add values and you'll see about to present all the criteria first recommend $200 million to the asset return it is a long product and pain equity more than 12 percent in returns on a 3 year alone basis and the investor focus on them with the 50 percent cash in a short time of securities to hem in times of slow markets and the capital stock this is the leader the

arena and they provide a good portfolio in 2006 started to manager the universities chief development and he is rartsd highly in china with the china international capital that is chinese. >> i'm sorry excuse me. in the interest of time give us the highlight we're about to lose quorum. >> you met dr. lee in march of 2014. >> so overall a great track record and numbers we go e note that the returns the memo using the standard funds fee structures and negotiating stable terms in terms of range like i said they're a climate more growth

and value and returning investor they have great exceptional performance and great benchmarks and the assault weapon is one of the strongest market we'll caution their backward is more their roots are in high net onshore this brings their - he started with stanford and spring with a high net individual, however, over time because of their strong development and changes to regulations in china they were able to have the clients and have a large base i spoke with one of the largest single clients today a major pension their comfortable with

the infrastructure in place and helped within of the first investors in 2012 and helped out the trading system and built out the infrastructure and their client service over times measles have been altered to and it was one of the farther managers the portfolio we do have to monitor them going forward they have significant institutionalal things over time we talked with the investors and think they have the appropriate descriptions in place over the next capture of years and they're focused on building out the institutional client basis that will help to diverse their a o l and asked them to do the due diligence and can you opine

on briefly and we'll agree with staff conclusions both of these managers usually for chinese managers are very institutional quality the backroom stands up to scrutiny we talked about with them those dialogues started last november we saw how's how those managers perform not only did they holed up by performed in a manner given the quality of the managers the more convert manager helping held up better than the more aggressive manager they're doing mandates by the way, we on the china certainly a good place it start from a short-term and long term prospective we'll agree with staff you ought to do it actively as opposed to an index

basis and the pros and cons on those managers are listed in the memo if you want to discuss dan was part of that team and can answer questions. >> any questions. >> bryan. >> maybe i'm missing something the returns for those few minutes are sort of buried the memo right no table last week, we normally have. >> yeah, yeah and. >> we were severely restricted enormous of their illegalness. >> we can. >> the non-restricted disclosure agreements and they have non-disclosure to the people i'm sorry can't he

furniture it but can't fiber fissure not for our intersection. >> and they did a great document with a lot of return analysis we could discuss that offline or - and we're okay in terms of the inception like like 2007 for both; right? but not individual years disclosed. >> that's correct. >> the volatility looks at lower than the the benchmark and yeah. it is significantly lower marginally lower. >> has the separation excuse me. is returns are very strong and

this is an informational on or about. >> what's the separation think is s&p. >> but that the 35. >> which is normal. >> 8.4 or 4 or 5 is really good. >> the separation was twice as u.s. public equity. >> in returns are aspire. >> yes. >> yes. >> the s&p are the same time period it is starting in spring of 2007 that is different. >> in china a wider returns of individual stocks that means the values of security is that much more significant. >> yes. those fees are high

for the managers for example, roughly for the active managers may be one base point is a high fee for a u.s. or international manager this this is 2 percent and 20 believe that was presented. >> with an and a half and 20. >> let's say. >> one and a half and 20. >> for example, the total return is 10 percent it is for a given year what amount of fees will be paid to the manager so let's say the total return of the portfolio is 10 of that how much is the manager given and we'll need to know the benchmark return. >> that is one and a half of $6 million. >> okay. >> you're so one nature percent so the gross return were 10 we pay one and a half and any

incentive fee is over is benchmark. >> what would that be. >> what is the benchmark. >> the benchmark and - the s&p three hundred for the years when the csi was outperform of 3 hundreds. >> a round number is a the benchmark give me an idea how many base points. >> we anticipate this manager will comfortably return 15 or maybe 20 percent of gross let's say the benchmark is 10 we have higher expectation but say it is 5 we'll pay one and a half on

the 15 now down to 13 and a half. >> construction is 13 and a half. >> we'll be paying lower than that part of negotiation that we can't say talk about in public so of the remaining 3 and a half if we pay 20 percent that is 70 base point they'll get 2.2 percent return we'll get 12.8. >> so the answer 200 and 20 base points. >> i hope they out perform i think that yeah obviously i'm a vocational and we should be moving to china i'm in favor i think the fees are high higher than any manager we are gaemdz with the public securities those

are not private securities previous comboikts are totally different and help with the financial provide staff all those kinds of things those are different i don't mind paying 220 but this is a public stock. >> their significantly lower than stated in the memo. >> i'm sorry. >> i want to thank you, my views their higher than any public securities manager and to concentrate. >> versus public securities i doubt we have any manager the public works that has so - i want to say what my verifies are in terms of this the high fees and the concentrated portfolios.

>> we want to say it is low and once the value and grow manager. >> i heard the presentation he read it fully i'm in favor he wanted to give pie point of view. >> duly noted. >> it's okay he has no more questions. >> first, i read this i said to myself wow. we want to do this and that is, i said to myself wow. page one didn't have what we're investing every investment on page one it says what we are into and i would like you to turn to page 11 that is how long it to where we'll be in $200 million

on the first one but two weeks to deploy $2 million but didn't say we're investing on page 11 of 11 the upper left-hand side it says strategy is an absolute return in china so right now i said that looks like a hedge funds to the teams are a hedge fund i'm a little bit confused simply going and buying 8 shares in the china market and get a license and this looks like a backdoor hedge fund. >> there only products we'll -

quietly pay the hedge funds fees buying stoppage. >> what attracted us. >> not what attracted i accept you support. >> these along these lines one and a half percent and one and a half percent over a stated benchmark are standard fees for china managers. >> and think page 11 under our overall rating has an a talked about the strategy return and very strong performance records will you walk me through their absolute return strategy so we know what that strategy is. >> see if i have two products

and an absolute return target is more than a 12 percent refinery the reason we call absolute it is called an enhancing strategy that is lower that's a great question areas and only targeting a couple of indexes overall with a track records with the return strategy it is not a true i think the way they termed it how at the termed it not a inadequately absolute hedge funds strategy but differentially from the index. >> spits the strategy we'll give them 200 plus million dollars what's the strategy. >> they're building china based a share stocks the a share stocks and to have

materially higher volatility than the ad r based in the u.s. than the 10 percentage etc. so it is locally based stocks that are trades only locally they're not traded elsewhere those base it is a con found market is the chinese chinese have a game letters mentality - they tampering of the downturn to buy good quality companies at lower prices okay. they tends

to own the more mature companies to dam egg the voluntary it's it draws it down of the return so this is a lower reflex a share strategy we expect to out perform >> and commissioner if you look at those are able to go into cash they can defensive las vegas protect the portfolios by going into cash. >> they don't go. >> they have the ability the guidelines to - >> over the existing. >> everybody what you're suggesting let me ask it definitely more day trading.

>> no, no. >> we have to thoughtful approach to cash they consider the evaluations and adjust the cash thoughtfully and existing e m managers some is restrictions think cash since i have much more ability 50 percent in cash. >> they referenced well highly regarded by stanford and other institutions we talked with the portfolio manager not the gentleman that we met with a couple years ago the ceo and the p.m. i know one local, national you know math statistics type contact an understated guy one of his colleagues bringing this

to our attention we think this is a premier manager. >> i just met him, i guess to our sentiment i lining like the minutes to reflect something very, very clear on this particular item staff can't talk about this in public when a particular question was raised i believe that's 100 percent wrong we have a vehicle in that body we can go into closed session and talk about an investment for the complete protection to have the free flow of information staff made a discernment this item didn't need closed session nothing confident on to calendar for us the dieshgz and be told we can't answer that in public is not the best interests of

this organization nothing should be withheld and i'll clarify the record the stalling didn't include public comboikts investment decisions as being available through closed session not staff that decided it was state law that required that recommendation because it doesn't pertain to alternative or private equity needs tobacco heard in open session subject to the non-disclosure we have with the two firms not a staff decision katie can back that up we were advise and staff was advised that the public equity investments don't qualify to go into a closed session under

state law. >> if this is the case it defies logic we can ask a question and told it is a slippery slope so say let's talk about that offline so when the discussions with one commissioner and another discussion with another expirations and at the end of the day to come back here to make a decision with several discussions that took place this is contrary to the whole purpose of the freedom of information of the free flow we're talking about $400 million being talked about we can't talk about that we shouldn't talk about anything. >> i'll point out to commissioner makras other point if this board today wants to take action i'll suggest that the motion just to engage those two firms and call a special

meeting at the end of the investment committee next week to votes own the dollars amount of investment the dollars amount was disclosed think page 3 because of the separate information not the title i suggest the action the board to approve engaging them and a special session next week on the announcements. >> can i clarify are we being told as a board this is information question can't have to evaluate that and not talk about some of the things during public sessions because from is a non-disclosure agreement. >> it says we'll not disclosure it to the public if it is the fwrdz it's - >> any one of us wants to look at this information we'll not be

able to. >> i believe those are the terms of non-disclosure agreement. >> question can't get to three or four with 3 people that fuss if we reach 4 then. >> it becomes a pub. >> de facto the public is left out of the discussion. >> we follow-up and provide information we don't have available this is information as a condition for us to even talk to these companies we were signed a non-disclosure agreement. >> maybe members of the board that have questions they can be sent to staff offline and maybe we'll circle back to the board. >> continued to a future

meeting. >> that's what all support. >> commissioner makras is a very well-taken point we should have public information. >> by delaying and pushing to the april meeting. >> well, i i guess it is march not april and i don't think that it does this would have happened with any manager we have had the same types of issues. >> i'm sensitive to the board members wanting information but the board. >> i think question to answer

t answer so you. >> this is a strategic dilemma. >> we can go back to the company and ask them if their okay to release that in a public meeting and bring it back from the non-disclosure agreement agreed not to disclose question went back and said what can question committed in the memo so an individual issues we can go back and see if we can provide that as long as the firms are amenable to us releasing that. >> i know julie want to finish my thought. >> let him fetish his thought. >> we all have questions we want to roll the today is. >> so we have a strategic

dilemma we ask the same public strategies we've been doing and get the seam results we'll have to change it and things will be different i personally have no concerns but maybe the board those of us that do maybe question should follow-up offline and come back with expirations of concerns that's another discussion. >> so i will support continuing it on that basis. >> thank you. >> i'll support continuance for a number of reasons this is placing the board in an awkward position and commissioner makras questions and the performance reference that was sent are they accurate you wrote those reports about do you believe their adequate and two do the numbers that staff

and any pc looked at i asked that it is a common problem not simply because you get outside of the united states but the data different countries have different laws about the data appealing they're just different so i'm trying to find out what kind of numbers do we rely on to come to the conclusion about the performance. >> you figure out who will answer that with the institution the united states who you got their names and other sources this is a reference check they have performance numbers are they willing and able to share what they've found out about those managers. >> okay. maybe they do or don't i haven't talked to them

but we're assuming that the other. >> is that always what about the quarterly report. >> we're going to pay them something this is a bigger issue i trust staffs report. >> we'll present the questions as far as historical performance what we can in fact, throw the non-restricted violation provide public if we're going to eye a custodian and when we go to inevitability managers i knew then the fees would be high their significantly higher than we're used to or a rate of return but because of supply and demand or they're able to charge

us i'm talking about the management team and a homicide points significantly higher than we're used to why. >> we are telegraph hill negotiating the fees. >> i hear we're hopefully continue it. >> how else to invest in schien it requires nor work they have to dig into the finances i was in their office they talked about the amount of work to verify the finances and most of the finances are not i know valid they work with the csr c and work with consultant companies and peers and have to valid daylight every number. >> you.

>> i'll ask my questions offline. >> fair enough. >> just really quickly i've seen managers in the u.s. they're extraordinarily high active managers and they're very unique in their performance in the end justifies that fee because their unique all of them does that. >> we have a similar fee. >> yeah. so at a same way. >> question invest with them in private equity and we are researching them currently. a public comboibt mandate that will be something like one or two >> at the end of the day look at the performance that

justifies that they do a lot of work only covering the 15 companies and may take an active role, etc. we need to come back and why are they different than somebody that does a different strategy you can do that and come back with that information. >> all right. so thank you we'll take public comment and entertain a motion to continue. >> public comment? all right. hearing none, public comment is closed. is there a motion to continue >> thank you very much there is a motion and a second and we'll take that without objection. the motion carries but want to note the commissioner meiberger is no longer here thank you call the next item. >> >> item 12 the c i o

report this is the reports let me ask the c i o we can accept this report as made and you certainly may madam chair requires we briefly just read out items 2, 3 and 6. >> last month the board approves an recommendation we invest over one hundred million dollars if they close only we get $50 million for the inevitability manager and the two strategies we asked for up to $60 million in december it closed loss month we this emigrate 17 millions and bravo that was approved in january and invested one hundred million dollars and got that. >> the 3 strategies that are allocated with the staffs

discretion was approved angulation up to one hundred million dollars we got $60 million we're pleased and finally, the d c m vulnerable china venture that was approved an investment of of up to $36 million and we emigrate $30 million i'm going to turn it over to the board for any questions. >> thank you very much is there a motion to - >> excuse me. >> discussion item thank you. >> thank you for your presentation. >> thank you. >> i want to say one thing. >> please. (inaudible). >> something i think we need to that about other managers and market including the stuff well, we've looked the reason commissioner in january we fell 10 percent that

has radical 10 percent since then it is back up. >> okay. okay yes we have one other item that was closed. >> yes. we have one. >> should have been recorded. >> oh, i'm sorry we're going back into closed session. >> a contract signed think february 16th. >> commissioners that will be recorded when the entire deal finished and closed out and that entire investment is closed. >> thank you, thank you. >> all right. thank you. >> let's take public comment all right. no public comment thank you very much next item please. >> discussion with the 1950 ii

people's we accept item 13 is that acceptable taking public comment on item 17 no comment public comment is closed. item 14 discussion with the items report. >> let's take that as well as accepted or submitted let's take public comment on that. >> all right. public comment is closed. on item 14 item 15 the presentation audited supplemental information for 2015-2016 colleagues i'd like to accept this report as submitted. >> thank you let's take public comment seeing none, public comment is closed item number 16 an action item approval of the terms of reference for the environment social and give the

e s c committee within of the co-chairs. >> this was passed last month, however, no public comment we need to reconsiderate that was one we needed - the discussion was already had we'll ask you to make a motion to approve and make sure we take public comment. >> let's go ahead and open up to take public comment anyone okay. no public comment thank you so let's take a motion to accept item 16. >> i move we this item. >> all right. thank you. >> the there is a motion and a second and we'll take that without objection. that item passes. >> mr. clerk could you call number 17. >> discussion item the executive director's report report. >> i have 3 things to report on first a reminder that

april 1st which is soon approaching our deadline for form 700 and the required training if it is necessary the second he wanted to report that we previously recorded on the request to timing cohen from the certain justices that worked for the city wanted to report this was heard in rules committee a week ago and it was i was supposedly they approved it 5 seconds before i appeared on the first reading yesterday and assume final reading next week that will change the existence of finally compensation. the plan it include in any compensation that a previous city employee earned under the judges report and 3 where we are

with protecting the lawsuit corridor we've completed a second round of attainments to folks not paid in their january pension checks and folks that included a continuation to have a split we've substantially come filed with the judge's order to pay the few weeks that were identified as post 96 folks some folks we're treeing to track down we talked about that folks that have died or retired members since 2013 and then we are on track to comply with the arey rely to the may 31st >> what's itself total dollar value. >> i believe 4 january and february the total has been

$44 million we don't have the final numbers that is distinctly higher than the 4.5, however, that estimate but this is assuming we paid july 31st, 2011, wear 7 or 8 most behind so the estimate for the $4 million or $46 million the most of benefits and that sounds like great. >> please. item number 2. >> this was for people that had vested benefits. >> we call them in active but vested their time not a process issue. >> okay. >> let's take public comment

on the item no public comment public comment is closed. >> and thank you, sir. >> could you please call item 18 retired board member. >> anyone on this ends public comment on the good of order none has public comment is closed. next item number 19 discussion item retired board member sxeb submitted a written report let's accept that and take public comment on the report all right. public comment is closed. closed session part two thank you, everyone we have one more item to go through in closed

session. >> is there a motion? >> i'll move we not disclosure our discussion. >> we were in closed session for item number 3. >> so, yes to clarify the boards motion to not disclose any of the investment decisions on the litigation to disclose that the board is authorized in pursuant litigation >> thank you. >> that's the motion i'll second that motion and we'll take that without objection. that passes unanimously we took public comment previously any more madam clerk, is there any further business before this commission? >> no, this meeting is adjourned thank you ladies and gentlemen,

>> good morning everybody. and welcome to the hamilton family residents and emergency center. thank you jeff for hosting us today. i can't think of a better place to do the signic ceremony for our voter, but i want to say thank you to your and your staff for working with us to end homelessness for a lot of families and continue to doing that work. today we are here with a number of departments that includes our obviously public health and fire department and emergency services, city administrator that helps me oversee the

10 year capital plan making sure our bonds are affordable, focused and do not raise property taxes as well as public works deapartment who helps oversee that very same goal and to a resident who lives right here who will talk about her experiences and the need for more healthcare and also more facilities in the city. as i said earlier, this today is a opportunity to sign legislation that the board has successfully passed with my support to place before the voters this june a $350,000,000 public health and safety bond for consideration. it is huge win for our residents because this bond seeks to protect-to make sure we have necessary improvements to our infrastructure and healthcare and

emergency medical services, it protects and expand melthal health suvs for those in need and particularly thoest on the streets. i will continue emphasizeing that we do this in a very responsible way. in all our bond and particularly the last decade we have been successful and made sure they do not raise property taxes while we do this and the reason we are able to do this is because we havetony year capital plan staff and assurance that we have sth facilities that we work together with the 10 year capital planning staff, that makes sure we only present bonds that reflect room in the bond capacity that don't raise property tax squz fit into that. that st. the magic, but it isn't magic for finance people, it is magic we can present new thing for people to embrace in

like the voter jz not have to raise property tax to get those new things mptd in this case i want to make sure people understand while we talk about the zuckerbering sf general facility we know we vanew facility that reflects the larger bond in the history of the city but we are also moving all those operations into the hospital as we speak, we are leaving a building that is not seismically safe and we are snot interested ichb demaunshing the bity. we are interested making sure the needs the public are reflected in the ongoing use of the 1970's era building we have ajaistant to the new hospital and how do we do nat? we need to make it seismically safe, we need to invite the services that we don't have in a new hospital as much as we have and

reflect the ongoing needs that we have while ongoing with the leadership of ourpublic health department has been the conversation we need more mental health facilities. this is where the judges are asking for more beds, the community asks us to take care of more of our mental health needs in the community and we want to use the facility we have and expand those services. at the same time, there is incredible need to make sure we work with our fire department because they are and continue to be the emergency response team that we have when ever something happens in the city. they have also informed us in addition to supporting more mental health facilities in the city, we need a ambulance response facility to

meet the demands we have. we find in the community based fire station squz the stations that house the ambulances not to have the facilities safe enough for the operation to expand and want you to know they are enthuse astic because more and more as our fire department and all of us are having a experience where knock on wood, we have less fires, we increase the calls for medical services and this is where i enjoyed work with our fire department to increase every facility that we have particularly the ambulance response and particularly the emt staffing that we increased over the last few years to respond to the ambulance calls and make sure we have that capacity. it just so happens that many the fire stations we actually have over all most a

$600,000,000 need to increase and make sure we have seismically safe fire hours and can't do tin just one bond and keep the promise of having the bond not increase property taxes so we do it in a way in which we can identify what is the most critical and respond tothat and this is what this particular $350,000,000 bond will do is help a number of critical fire stations particularly where we house ambulance squz make sure they are safe. we also want to make sure we respond to the ongoing need and i know media is here to talk about our ongoing efforts to house more homeless and make sure we have facilities that are transitional in nature as we struggle to rebuild and rehabilitation permanent house frg the homeless. while we do that the navigation centers are very success ful and people want more of that

and this is where we will take the opportunity to place another $20,000,000 of support effort here and know the voters get it when they see and have a opportunity to see our navigation centers that we know these are more than just shelters. they are gathering of all the support services we need to allow people to go back to their homes if that is their wishes so get the best service to transition them into permanent housing that we are building and we have places like hamilton and other places we are building but it takes time and a lot of money and we are do that bond after bond and done that with the $350 mill ,000,000 bond to find the land and make sure we build in an affordable way. we

have many more ideas but these are the at buttes of the $350,000,000 bond we place before the voters this june. we don't have a bond for november so this is critical to have it to the voter squz educate them on the bond. i'm happy to work with general hospital and public health department because they have #250i78 time and time again shown wrathe need is respond to need and authenthuse astic about the ways we built the navigation centers because pier 80 and 16th and mission are the examples of what woe can do more with public private partnerships we engage in into help the navigation centers become more than [inaudible] they are life savingsenters for people who shouldn't be living on our streerts and shouldn't be in tent

encampments. we want to take them out but want to do it the right way. we dont want to take people moving from corner to corner, we want to make sure they are taken care of and have long term solutions to them. even those that resist ourerts when they get into the the navigation centers they realize the humanity we do there is more than inviting in the long term. this is and will continue to say, this is the city of saint francis and never turn our backs in those in need. people come to our city or end up here for many different reasons without the social safetyinate net we are used to. we have the robustness in the neighborhood clinics and response and navigation centers and want to make sure you know our neighborhood

health clinics are touched strongly, all most $50,000,000 bond because the clinics need the capacity to help with mental illness as well and this is a theme that we are increasingly hearing and respawning effectively by talking with all the partners within the justice system or health system, the [inaudible] needs more facilities for this to happen, more beds and treatment centers and more professional care that our public health providers can provide, so i want to say thank you to the all the airjs that are here reflective of the bond program including the mayors office of disability too because they are out there helping us figure out not only facilities but services that we need along with public health. i have a

special guest speaker today, someone who is living here at the hamilton family residence, her name is precious sharia, she a single mother of 3 children 8 years old, 5 years old and 2 years old and the sureara family stayed at the hamilton famry residences for the past 4 muchckt months and needed the service of the emergency care. the good example of the kind of families we want to help but not just help. i know at some point in time when she knows her family is being taken care of, i know mrs. sharia will want to be part of that work force, the incredible workforce we are training people to get into the new economy on. let me introduce to you mrs. precious sharia. [applause] >> yes, sir. i lived here

about 4 months. the shelter took me in when i was on the street and called every day to get in the emergency beds. i finally got in and then once i reached my room up stairs it gave me to about june. my kids live in the shelter but they don't realize it is a shelter because they have good programs such as the children program, helping with the homework, they give a dj party on the roof and make it so fun by kids dont know they are homeless sometimes. i like the-they feed us 3 times a day so don't have to worry about that. the shelter has ups and downs, but most of all it is a plus because if it want fl the shelter i would be on the stroostreet and worry where my kids will eat or sleep or give them up. if i'm in the shelter my kids can

stay with me. in the streets i wouldn't permit them to live on the streets so probably would have gave them up. i'm thankful and grateful. people have their different opinions about the shelters. some complain all day but at the end of the day you have a place to stay and sleep and it helps you. i'm starbting chef school tuesday so i'm doing something with my life. trying to make something better and the situation. this is my first time being homeless and from the experience it will be my last because this helped me but i am glad i was homeless because it showed a different side of me i didn't know, the strengths and dpoles goals and think it helped me a lot. sorry. it had so many opportunities. they constantly post jobs or injrj you to do. you can only do so much. hamilton can only do so much if you dont

want to do for yourself. me, i'm taking a stand and doing for myself so i won't be here and hopefully i will be a chef so i can cook for the shelter or homeless program. i will give back to the community as much as i can, i voluntary also. i don't have much to say, i thank god and the thank the people that donate and make this place possible because i see the ups and very grateful and thank you. >> [applause] >> thank you precious and thank you for everything you are doing to improve your life and also take care of the children that you have. as i said for this particular bond, i want to make sure you know if i can simplify it it is 3 words, it about access to good care, it is about emergency response,

and about navigating and 33 word i thipgs are reflective in this. i just 79 to say our public health department is incredible partner reponding to everything that happens in the city and next for tim episteen who is director of sf children youth and families community behavioral health at our public health department to say a few words about how important the bod is to the care we want and access that we want people to have to our healthcare facilities. ken. [applause] >> first i want to say before i start speaking precious told us her cheern use san francisco general hospital mayor all 3 children use the hospital so the connections are clear between what we are doing today and our future and i want to thank the mayor and city for your support for this

incredibly important bod for the residence of san francisco. today this bond will improve and expand access to services and medical care and mental hemth care in the community and community clinic squz san francisco general hospital. it will prurfb or 24 hour psychiatric care that is so critical to the citizens of the san francisco to have a place to go 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. 14 community clinics will be able to build access to behavioral and minuteal health and substance abuse services in the clinics so when you see your doctor in the same place you can get the mental health and substance abuse. the funding will improve access and amountimately help us renovate and build a better and stronger system of care for the children, youth,

families, adults and other adults in san francisco. we know that there is a tremendous need for healthal health and substance abuse care and the mayor mentioned. we also know folks will better utilize the services when it is isn't stigmatized where they have to go to a different place for it. we hope public helths can partner with the cities to build integrated care and using the bond to expand the services. thank the mayor again and the city for your support and public health department is ready to move forward this with initiative. thank you. >> [applause] >> okay, well like i usually said it is time to go to work everybody and by signing this document it sigal ins we ready to talk to the public and got on with it. let's sign this so we

can start work on it. everybody come on over. [applause] >> >> >>.

>> shop and dine the 49 promotes loophole businesses and changes residents to do thirds shopping and diane within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services we help san francisco remain unique and successful where will you shop and dine shop and dine the

49. >> my name is neil the general manager for the book shop here on west portal avenue if san francisco this is a neighborhood bookstore and it is a wonderful neighborhood but it is an interesting community because the residents the neighborhood muni loves the neighborhood it is community and we as a book sincerely we see the same people here the shop all the time and you know to a certain degree this is part of their this is created the neighborhood a place where people come and subcontract it is in recent years we see a drop off of a lot of bookstores both national chains and neighborhoods by the neighborhood stores where coming you don't want to - one of the

great things of san francisco it is neighborhood neighborhood have dentist corrosive are coffeehouses but 2, 3, 4 coffeehouses in month neighborhoods that are on their own- that's >>[gavel] because good afternoon everybody and welcome everyone to the board of supervisors meeting march 8, 2015. mdm. clerk, please call the roll >> supervisor diablos, present. breed, present. campos, present. cohen be present, farrell, not present, farrell be present, kim not present,

mar, not present, peskin,, present., tang, present. wiener, present., yee, present. you have a quorum >> ladies and gentlemen these join us for the pledge of allegiance. >>[pleage of allegiance] >> mdm. clerk any communications? >> none to report >> any changes to the federal 2nd 2016 whether board meeting minutes? seeing none, is their motion to approve those minutes? moved and seconded. 20 past can we take that without objection? without objection the can we take that without objection? without objection the motion passes. can we take that without objection? without objection the motion passes. was meeting minutes will pass after public

comment unanimously. >>[gavel] >> let them cook please call the next item >> today's special order at to copy him is the appearance by our hon. mayor edwin lee. there be no questions omitted from the eligible districts the mayor may address the board for up to 5 min. >> welcome to the chamber mr. mayor. you have the floor. >> good afternoon supervisors and also to the members of the public. i did receive any questions this month but i'm going to take the opportunity to address our city's response to homelessness. i know that earlier today it was a media event calling homelessness a-quote, crisis. that event did not offer solutions. novo no new philanthropic partnerships. no new sites for navigation centers no path forward. but it did offer rhetoric. in my years

of public service, supervisors, never governed in search of headlines. i do believe in real results and i know that those who are homeless also count on him. back in december 3 of last year, i too, said homelessness and reached a crisis point them up but my response included substance. substance like 522 new units of permanent supportive housing in the last 7 months. expanding the national shelter modelmy administration created, the navigation center good ending chronic homelessness for veterans. a new 180 bed shelter at cure 80. 80. el niño shelters to cover 700 people thanks in the collaboration and cooperation of interfaith

council. helping hundreds of homeless people out of a public health emergency on division street and into shelter without having to make a single arrest. $20 million for a new bond funding for homeless shelters, creating a new courtney did on this department, a billion-dollar funding commitment with a goal of subsidizing 8000 homeless people by 2020. i've held several meetings with sec. julian castro and obama's homelessness director. last month, i led a west coast mayors funding effort to get more resources to solve homelessness. so much we agree on, but i believe we have a vigorous disagreement over allowing people to inject heroin and meth to literally destroy their bodies and their minds in a city funny sheltered

as some have proposed. we should, instead on expanding successful residential drug treatment facilities. look, we need to build more navigation centers and i share the frustration of those are critical of how long our efforts are taking to bear fruit. but anger does not help and cooperation that does. so, to those who are actually in interested in cooperating, genuinely willing to work together, we're great opportunity. in the 6 months since i've announced plans to double our navigation centers, i have received very cooperative responses from about 4 supervisors. you know who you are and i want to thank you. you've demonstrated your leadership for the people in your district and for the cities homeless population. my administration identified more than a dozen potential navigation center sites spread around the city and working

with the interfaith community and city departments with surplus land. today i'm announcing a new dedicated project manager. a partnership between our whole office and public works apartment with the sole focus of getting new navigation centers built as quickly as possible. we have already begun community meetings and what we hope will be our next to new navigation sensor sites. one year. 80 and one in the south of market area. 2 supervisors, who want to help solve this work with me , work with public works, work with the human services agency, and certainly, without public health department and at least 4 of your colleagues of already begun that work with me. work with us to get these sites community by in your work with us to make this happen. this supervisor's, is a true test of

our resolve and hope you stand with us in the months ahead as we build the centers, as we staff them up and as we give real help to our homeless people in need as they deserve. thank you. >> thank you mr. mayor. we will continue with our agenda. mdm. clerk, these read the consent agenda. >> item 1 through 13 are on consent. these items are considered routine. if a member objects and item may be removed and considered severally. >> seen-supervisor wiener >> i don't remove anything i want to make a comment. specific to item 10. the legislation we passed unanimously last week to increase the tobacco purchase agn san francisco. from 18-21. as you probably saw in the press >> supervisor wiener it'll be appropriate to remove it from the consent agenda to discuss it.

>> sp removed it >> so we will remove item 10 and on the remaining agenda, adam clerk please call the roll >> supervisor yee aye, avalos, aye, breed aye, campos aye, cohen aye, farrell aye, kim aye mar aye, peskin aye, tang aye wiener aye there are 11 aye >> the items are passed in the first reading and adopted finally passed and approved unanimously. >>[gavel] >> please call item number 10 >> item 10 and ordinance woman the whole code to bring it tobacco retailers from selling tobacco products including smokeless tobacco electronic cigarettes to persons age 18, 19 or 20 >> supervisor wiener >> i apologize for not

severing it to begin with. colleagues, last week we pass this important public health measure unanimously and thank you for your support. i look forward to passing again unanimously today. as you probably saw 2 days after we passed it, in an unexpected development, the state assembly passed pending state legislation to increase the tobacco purchase 8 221. it was unexpected because tobacco measures have frequently died in the state assembly that this is a wonderful step forward and the state senate will take up again this week. we don't know what the governor is going to do. i hope you will sign it. this is the kind of law where potential preempted by the state can be a really good thing. we are monitoring this carefully. we don't know what is going to happen exactly and when it comes to state legislation it isn't over till it's over to so, i like to move forward. i with this

legislation and if the state passes legislation we will evaluate whether our legislation is complementary or conflicting and then if we need to suspended or amended we will certainly do what is needed but for now i think it's important to move forward with this trendsetting legislation and i want to thank you colleagues for your support. >> bt. colleagues can we take this item same house, same call can we take that without objection? without objection the motion passes. e ordinance is finally passed unanimously >>[gavel] >> adam got go to our regular agenda. first item >> item 14 and ordinance to amend the planning code to require conditional use authorization for the removal many residential units whether authorized or unauthorized exceptions. units received prior planning or approval single-family homes demonstrably unaffordable or unsound and to amend the building codes require that notices of violation under the filing of an application to legalize an authorized unit in certain certain circumstances improve the planning departments

ceqa determination in making appropriate findings >> supervisor tang >> last week i do not support the legislation but since having more conversations with the planning staff i'm comfortable with supporting this today. i want to for the record state that >> thank you. see no other names on the roster, mdm. clerk, can we do a roll call vote on them >> item 14, supervisor yee nay, avalos aye, breed, aye campos aye, cohen aye, farrell aye, kim aye, mar aye, peskin aye, tang aye, wiener aye there are 10 aye and one nay with supervisor yee in the design >> the ordinance is passed

>>[gavel] >> item 15 >> item 15 resolution to authorize the opposite contract administration to enter to a multi-year contracts with golden gate petroleum to spy city to province with a renewable diesel for the term of april 1 to a multi-year contracts with golden gate petroleum to spy city to province with a renewable diesel for the term of april 1, 2016 to march 31, 2019 in the amount not to exceed $60 million >> rollcall vote >> item 16 supervisor yee aye, avalos aye, breed aye, campos aye, cohen aye, farrell aye, kim aye, mar aye, peskin aye. tang aye. wiener aye. dark 11 aye >> the resolution is adopted unanimously >>[gavel] >> next item >> item 16 a resolution to actively authorize the treasurer and tax collector to accept and expend a $315,000 grant from the mott foundation

for extending our reach and family engagement prekindergarten through college through august 31, 2017. >> colleagues can we take this item this resolution same house, same call can we take that without objection? without objection the motion passes.'s adopted unanimously >>[gavel] >> next item >> item 17 resolution to approve the agreement for coming storage and disposal of abandoned and illegally parked vehicles. in an amount not to exceed $65.4 million to march 31, 2021 with the option to extend for up to 5 additional years. dick supervisor avalos >> i want to recognize the budget committee further work on this measure. since the budget committee liberated we also had a hearing that was looking at fees and court fees and how they were impacting the working people. through that, we heard a lot about the towing fee and how much difficult it is for our people who are low income were struggling economically to be able to pay for the fee. how the inability

to pay for the fee could be 2 people losing their vehicles can not having the ability to get to work, which often is beyond public transportation, and putting them in i cycle with area are actually not able to escape poverty poor economic distress. so, idea makes a lot of sense that we look at paring back these fees. to actually make it easier for everyone to survive in san francisco during our economic crisis. in 2009-2010, the board of supervisors had all the fees of the city before street i recall in budget committee that those years having pages and pages of these that were ramped up in both years. i don't think we have actually is a city recovered and we actually have lower fees now that our city is doing better economically. so,

it makes a lot of sense that we actually have a real discussion about what we are trying to do with our fees. to actually recover costs. to bring more revenue into the departments. to curb behavior that we don't want to see. or to salvage resident. all of those things are things that happen and seem to be goals that we have as a city. it makes more sense that we have some clarity about those. idea makes sense to start soon, to start right away. we have before us the auto return administrative fee that is part of the whole contract we have before us today. to me, it makes sense that we give the mta a little bit more time to reassess these fees, still giving time to actually approve the contract before us before the expiration date of much 31st. so, i would like to see we can find some, a

lower feed costs that would stop residents much less than the weight of fee currently does. i realize that toe is there for people who actually have an infraction or break the law, but i believe all of us make mistakes. i have made mistakes and have my car towed in the past. it really hurts. i am doing okay economically depending on your point of view. there a lot of people were doing much worse economically. for them, a total would be devastated to their pocketbook and devastating to their ability to pay rent or stay in the city. i would like to come after a short discussion on this measure, motion that we continue this item to next week to allow the mta board to give us a better

sense of what the administration fee can be. that way we could save residence some money and economic distress . it could very well be the mta is not there for that of 4 board meeting next week, so we may need to be continued again i like to continue this for one week so we can have rated discussion about how we could save a lot of residence and san francisco economic distress. supervisor avalos has made a motion to continue its item one week to the media march 15 20 system. moved and seconded. supervisor kim >> i want to rewrite many of the comments made by my colleague supervisor avalos. we did actually cosponsor a hearing on municipal fines of which total away fees were included in that discussion. i think there has to be an overall conversation on this board as a legislative body to really

consider how we generate revenue to pay for government services, and what are the appropriate sources of revenue, and how do we charge our reverence for it. a $600 on average tow-away fee impacts are residence different. the penalize agent of that the impacts are residence disproportionally. for some of us, it's an incredible inconvenience for others, it hurts our monthly budget. for others, it is a decision between paying rent and buying groceries were getting the card you may need to get to work and to keep your family in order. i just believe-this is a comment i made back in june when i voted against the six-month extension of the auto return contract-pcs are just too high. this is a topic that came up in our budget subcommittee meeting in 2011 and 2012 where asked sfmta to re-examine our ministry to the that have gone up 150% since supervisor avalos

came on the board of supervisors. yes, there's a time and place in which we can look at examining increasing fees and certainly the recession was one of those times, but now we are doing well again in terms of revenue. again, i think more political question is, what is the proper way to pay for government services and how much do we charge for get i think the cost recovery conversation is one we've had with sf mta for quite a while. i was quite surprised to learn that in cost recovery that we include things like painting curbs and also a director salary in cost recovery. i don't think we have a consistent policy for how we charge cost recovery because the other times it came out is during the commuter shuttle bus debate in 2013, when i also asked at mta i did you come up with a dollar per stop we pick in that scenario sfmta kept it as affordable as possible. i'm

not sure salary was included in that cost recovery. it would cost recovery, let's have a consistent standard of how were going to do it. san francisco should absolutely not be in the business of impoverishing our residence and that is what we are doing by the singular mistake of telling their cars away. yes, we want to regular driver behavior. we don't want cars on the street on their street cleaning sticky john edwards clean and healthier, when we need to regulate traffic during rush hour. we have these rules in place for a reason. but, we also should not be in the business of impoverishing our residence percent either the states. nobody is trying to get the car towed. in fact, most people i talk to did not understand the fine, missed an alarm, most people are trying to follow the rules and then get slapped with a 6-$700 tow-away fee. i like to work with the sfmta over the next 2 weeks if supervisor avalos and peskin on the

ministry today which i think is exorbitant and certainly the increases we've seen over the last few years. i'm not sure they been justified. 2, i think we need to look at the number parking lots we are renting. this is an issue came up at our municipal last week. do we need to have 2 parking lots to store our vehicles? 3rd, but to look at the storage fee. for many residents come up with 6-$700 on the date the car gets towed is very challenging to do. we read some of the stories in the chronicle article that came out this morning. perhaps we should give more time to our residence to come up with the money and not charge them additional fees for the storage, which in many ways is the moment the car arrives on them i like to look

at a hardship program. we do have residents that simply cannot afford to pay this dollar amount. the city of chicago has managed to figure out what to do archer program. i know it's challenging. sfmta doesn't like to income means testing but i think we look at the chicago model is a variety of factors we can look at the people can submit as evidence that this a form of hardship. either prove that they live in public housing. that they're free and reduced lunch. better on food stamps. that the house was in foreclosure. i think there are multiple documents that can be submitted which is what the city of chicago does to prove this would be a hardship for you to pay could finally, i would just add we need to make this program as affordable as possible and still regulate behavior. i still think it is there in place for a reason. but i just don't believe that what we are doing today is right or fair in terms of us impoverishing residence. again, to pay for our transit system. i look forward to working with sfmta and my colleagues on reforming

the system before we both his contract and >> speeding up. i would like to associate myself with your comments but i also want to also add that one of the things you forgot to mention is the actual ticket that folks get, which adds to the expense of the towing fee. supervisor wiener >> i'm glad were having this conversation. i am very sensitive to the fees that are charged when cars are towed. the guard towing fees, when you look at the aggregate of what people are often required to pay, are quite high and is creed a hardship for a lot of people. i think it is a good idea to take a look at how we can lower these towing fees. colleagues from as your call from last year, my office worked for several years with the mta and with the auto return , really with the mta, to figure out how we could provide

relief to the owners of cars that are stolen and then towed. we had a situation where people who nothing at all wrong there, sadly stolen and dumped in san francisco and then towed and they may not find out where it is for days or even a week and all of a sudden they're hit with 1000-$1500 in fees and fines which could be worth more than the value of the car. some people would actually abandon their cars. so, we work closely with the mta, methodically in a way to provide relief to the owners of these towed stolen cars, and also to minimize the financial impact on the mta.. i want to thank mta for working with us. mta did work with us or grade period of years. it was in a last-minute request the contract came up. we worked for several years past and

resolution by this board we know our exact position before contract negotiations began, and mta listen to us and hurt us and came back with a really solid change could i have that multiple people approach me on the streets to think the board of supervisors and the mta for providing at least. my car got stolen and i today very large little to get it back. i appreciate that you guys do this. so, with that said, i am sympathetic to people get the car towed and then struggle to pay. i'm also sympathetic to the needs of muni riders, many of them who do not own a car in the need to have reliable transit service to get to work, to get to school, to get to the doctor. when muni is not adequately funded and when service struggles and suffers, there's a lot of people who do not own cars who have significant hardship. that's why, i, and i know others have focused extensively on making sure we are protecting the money that muni has poor

service, per bus operations, for rail operations, and increasing the amount that muni has. we know that muni has a structural deficit. we know that for the 2017-2018 fiscal year, muni already has a $25 million projected operating deficit. so, the choices we make here and the mta board makes in response to this board to reduce the towing fees, while that might be a good thing and something i could very very much get behind, that means money that will come out of muni operations, directly out of muni operations that means directly out of bus service, directly out of subway service, directly out of maintenance. that's exactly where that money comes from. i

want to make sure that we as a board of supervisors, when we are making policy choices like the very legitimate policy choice of trying to lower towing fees were not doing it at the expense of muni and we are actually paying for those choices. understanding that there are trade-offs when it comes to the decisions about what lowering towing fees. so, today i'm making a drafting request to the city attorney's office and the controller for a supplemental appropriation from the general fund to the mta to compensate the mta for any reduction in revenue that the mta experiences. that muni experiences, as a result of any towing fee change that this board demands of the mta. colleagues, we should be putting our money where our mouth is. it were put to make this demand, we should find a way to pay for it and not just take the money out of muni operations which so many of our residents rely. so, i've heard various ideas of what this reduction may look like. we ask mta to copulate with the cost would be good the high end of

the cost that we occurred would be $3.2 million per year and so, the supplemental i'm requesting is for $3.2 million as a general fund contribution to muni to make muni whole. of course, ends up being less than that i will adjust the supplemental to a flat the ultimate amount. thank you. >> thank you. supervisor peskin >> colleagues, when i first became a member of this board, the administrative fee on a toe was $25. when i left 8 years later, that had risen to $50. that was 7 years ago. it has, in the last 7 years, risen by over 430%. that is just, frankly, outrageous. while i do

understand that muni has a need for operations, i also note that we have attempted to create, abby some supervisors, flexibility in muni's ability to use certain fees, like the old transit impact development fee. today, the transportation sustainability fee, not just for capital, but also for operating. there are many ways that the mta can address this issue without soaking those 42,000 individuals who have their cars towed. i think the public policy questions raised by supervisor kim as to having a uniform policy, and by the way, 100% cost reimbursement come up is a very dangerous thing for the city and the mta and this body over things we

have control over, to do because if you are over the 100% mark, it is no longer a fee. it's an evil evil tax that has not been approved by the voters. i think out of an abundance of caution, should never put it at 100% good i think supervisor canady raises some very good questions. how can you justify an 87% administrative fee? how can you justify an 80% administrative fee. and the answer is it's loaded up with all sorts of things i'm including the cost of those toes from individuals who had their car stolen. that do not appropriately responsibly along their. listen, this new contract, which nobody has an issue with relative to the operator, relative to the rfp, both of to the new wat