>> commissioner willie adams. commissioner kimberly brandon, commissioner kounalakis, commissioner doreen woo ho. >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor say aye. item two public comment. >> public comment is closed. >> item four executive session. >> so moved.

>> we are now in executive >> madam secretary. >> the commission has recessed. closed session and we will be going back into closed session after the open session. but we would like to disclose that the personnel item agenda item 5a, the commission unanimously approved the appointment of diane and byron. >> congratulations. >> i would like to move that we reconvene open session. >> so moved. >> pledge of allegiance.

i pledge of allegia nce, to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> please be advised use of cell phones, pagers, electronic devices are prohibited. chair may record removal from the meeting room for ringing of or use of cell phone or electronic device. be adviced a member of public up to three minutes to make public comments on each agenda item. item eight public comment are not listed on the agenda. >> is there any public comment? public comment is closed. >> item 9a, executive director's

report. >> good morning. president adams, vice president brandon and members of the commission it's afternoon. members of the public and port staff. the first item is i would like to acknowledge that our new cfo is here. she has joined us. a big welcome to katie. katie has several decades of city experience and coming to us from the rec and park department where he has helped the recreation and park department. very skilled personnel manager. her team is upset with us. very happy to have her join the port and senior leadership team. welcome to you katie.

next item is to acknowledge the bethlehem shipyard museum photo exhibit. our building from april 14th through may 4th. this is an exhibit on history of the 1906 great earthquake and fire. it's put on by the bethlehem shipyard museum in partnership with the san francisco museum. the exhibit will be located in our lobby at pier one. will be accessible to the public from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. the exhibit exhibit of historic photograph and videos of the earthquake and fire and recovery efforts. the bethlehem shipyard museum is not for profit organization established by retired staff at pier 70 in the central water -- water front. this is a great opportunity to

learn about 1906 earthquake and consider the city's vulnerability to future earthquakes. you can learn more at http/bethlehemshipyardmuseum.or. this is a saturday. architectural heritage will hold annual fundraiser at landmark number 167. will be from 6:00 p.m. to midnight. this year the theme of the 50 year anniversary of the summer of love. landmarks from the ash berry neighborhood. this is unique opportunity to enjoy san francisco history. it's a black tie affair. the heritage mission is to preserve and enhance san

francisco's unique architectural and culture identity. heritage is a significant waterfront partner to us and has a collaborative relationship on preserving port property and planning issue. i encourage the public to take a look at it and attend. now i like to present the port's proposed reorganization further advance our strategic planning goals and objectives. good afternoon given. the port is a very successful port. we have a great diversity of uses. our waterfront draw over 24 million people to it every year. for a variety of activities. we manage 600 leases over our 7.5 miles of waterfront property. the richness and diversity of

experiences with general public faces makes our waterfront unique. to make and keep the waterfront great requires that our port staff have a broad set of responsibilities to promote maritime commerce and preserve and enhance the waterfront. today i will discuss with you a proposed reorganization that i will make to help staff achieve our goals and to help staff achieve goals in a way that is more effective and efficient for us. we have a strong foundation of planning effort that drives our goals. in february of last year, we adopted our 2016, 21 strategic plan. which articulates our vision for delivering our port modern day mission. this plan has seven strategies and 42 objectives. we have 245 employees working to

accomplish this aggressive agenda. in addition to our strategic plan, we have the waterfront land use plan which is a tool that provides for the long term vision of how we are to use portlands. and our capital plan. which is an expression of ports property needs and funding sources. together these planning documents help guide us in what's most important for the waterfront and how to achieve our goals. we have more responsibility than staff. that's what the teeter totter is meant to convey. i've conducted review of our internal communication and organizational structure and measured up aggressive agenda. the goal is to harness

considerable -- we are a largely successful organization that operates in concert with its mission and excels in many areas. but the department does have more demands than staff resources and staff struggles to prioritize work and feels pressure to do more with less. there are key improvements to our organizational structure that will improve our ability to meet our objectives more effectively and ease pressure on our staff. the reorganization i am proposing has three key goals. one that are integrate the business units. create a strategic framework and asset development and management and broaden the planning division essential services. this is a reminder of our strategic plan that has clear mission and vision and seven key

goals. all seven goals that has a focus on the fundamental goals that relate to the business units of renewal, economic vitality and stability. the current structure which has been in place for several decades, has property management in three divisions in organization. real estate, maritime, planning and develop. each division has specific goals for the use of port property. the result has been tremendous. we have over sick hundred leases -- 600 leases. we have caused the investment of 250 million in private investment in port facilities sense 2006. these are notable accomplishments. however, because the business units are separated, they do not operate under one unified strategic framework. the structure results in a business model with three

distinct and separate business units with different goals and objectives a all impact property. this also results in staff working on separate assignments reducing opportunities to collaborate. staff has self-directed integration and has moved over time to integrated approach to property in asset management. the result is better use of our property. more diverse in public serving. this is in contrast to the 1997 land and water use plan. but turn to private development partners from most major upgrades to port property. increasingly the port is under taking major development and leasing efforts on its own accounts. this includes cause ship

development, pier nine, jamestown project, pier 29, alcatraz landing. as an example, i'm showing you the james r. hermann cruiseship terminal which is one of the most maritime projects. we have special events and parking being a major source of revenue. a real estate activity. we have funding sources, variety of funding sources causing the project and a public park, 2.7-acre public park that a geobond paid for that was managed oof our planning division. in this maritime project, you see the success coming together from planning development maritime. i'm proposing integrated approach to asset management.

staff has begun to do with great success. this proposed change would include a senior deputy director a chief operating officer. you noted that. will be mr. byron. development staff will be reassigned to real estate position. we'll have a stand alone planning division under the direction and leadership of diane. this is hard to read organizational chart that amy and i will provide to the commission and public for further review. basically what you are seeing here is the mayor and the port commission and myself reporting to the port commission, director office that includes the chief freighting officer. the chief operating officer will be responsible for maritime real estate development. i will be responsible for him finance and administration, engineering maintenance and planning. under the centerstructure the business units are integrated

and reporting tot chief operating officer. the benefits here are enormous. we can innovate asset development and management and streamline business processes. leveraging talents in each division for unified end for our property. the planning division serves a very critical and important function for our department. the planning division will support our business unit in addition to development to real estate and maritime goals. will focus on emerging issue like sea level raise, water transportation and will continue to deploy the high etcetera standards of stakeholderrer engagement. there is much work ahead for the

planning group. in proving the port public realm in protecting its historic resources engaging the public for the update to the waterfront land use plan and working through policy frameworks and regulatory agencies and state lands, etcetera. this is a trial period. i'm appropriating -- i'm proposing this reorganization today. we'll fine tune based on how it works and come back to you in february with a formal proposal for reorganization through the budget. we may find additions that we like to add here or subtractions if it's not kuwait working -- quite working well. the staff is working today to meet the port's modern day challenges. i'm here to answer any questions. >> is there any public comment

on the executive director's report? any public comment? public comment is closed. >> port commissioner's report. >> nothing to report, thank you. just congratulations to our giants winning opening day yesterday. >> i want to read a letter that was sent to port commissioners. fyi for the public. this is from ron courtney san francisco businessman. this is a letter sent to all the commissioner. there's a serious problem on the embarcadero from pier one to pier 35 unlicensed food vendors. they have no health permits, collect no sales tax, pay no rent to the port, pay no payroll

taxes, no sales permit, no insurance requirements and no real estate requirements. if this is not stopped now, there will be a proliferation of food vendors by some. sincerely ron courtney. 4 san francisco businessman. >> this is an area away coordinate with the department of public health and police department. it is an area we had enforcement activities. has been persistent problem. we'll double down on that efforts this area. >> quickly, colleagues what happened since the last meeting. i got back yesterday. i went to singapore. i got a tour there, singapore has a second largest port in the world. had some meetings with people about what they are doing in singapore about sea level rise. what they are doing about earthquakes, infrastructure. one of the thing i like about singapore, they have a lot in

common with san francisco, cruise ship and ferries. ferries is a big way to get around in singapore. from there i attended a conference in perth, australia with labor unions. i went to the port there to see what they are doing in the port of fem free mantle. back -- they also have a lot as far as ferries and stuff like that. australia is a very beautiful country. on the political front, they just had a big political revolution in their country where we have like here, we have democrats and republicans. there they have labor and liberals. liberals are republican and labors are the democrats. they have a big revolution there. now the democrats are back in power. they have a lot of situations where a lot of foreigners are coming in from indonesia and other countries taking the work of australians.

they are fighting australlians to do the right and to do work in their own country. just want to tell you what's going on there. i met bill shorten who is the opposition. he will be like the nancy pelosi. he's running for prime minster. he came out as a labor movement. some of the things they're working on is coal mining. trying to have greener and be more environmentally correct. they are very interested what's going on here in america. one thing that they take pride in is that several years ago, they had a woman she was the first woman prime minster of australia. i met her. she did really good job. she really got attacked hard by the right wing and basically her own party did her in. i aid in america, lot of people were pulling, women, especially

for hillary clinton. we never had a woman president in in england they had two women prime minsters and in australia. maybe one day in the states we will have a woman president. that's my report. thank you. >> request approval of lease number l16159, port of san francisco and 26,901 feet office feet. subject approval of board of supervisors. >> good afternoon. my name is elsa lamb. i'm the commercial property manager for the port of san francisco. i'm here to request approval to enter into a five year lease with idolp under lease number l16159. ido is award winning global design innovation consulting firm. they focus on designing product

and are highly sought after after a design thinking firm. they are credited for many of their designs, one of the ido is dining apple first occupancy limitation is 208. the use is a continuation of existing and related uses and therefore not a project that subject to review by the california environmental quality act. ideo is seeking a five year lease with a right of first offer. the rental rates for the lisa

conformed to the parameter rent schedule approved by the port commission. because rent revenues under the term of this lease will exceed dollars the lease will require approval by the board of supervisors and charter section 9.118. at the end of the term, the tenant shall have a one time right to submit a written offer to extend or renew their lease. should the rent exceed $1 million for the extension period then we would have to come back to the port commission and to the board of supervisors for approval again. the port is required to obtained substruct roof and walls of the premise with the exception of the doors, windows and a staircase and ramp that is located on the westerly side of the facility which the tenant is required to maintain. the tenant is responsible for utilities, maintenance and

repairs. this lease achieves the goals and objectives of the port strategic plans by one promoting economic vitality. by maximizing asset value and stream to the port. by creating stability. by increasing port revenues and retaining diversified tenant base that will perform economic cycles. ideo is a tenant in good standing pursuant to the port commission policy. port staff recommends request approval to enter lease with ideo. thank you. >> so moved. >> second. >> is there any public comment on 10a? being none, public comment it closed. commission kounalakis. >> you said the number of staff that they have here.

can you say again? >> the premises is actually the occupancy load is 208. they do have all the -- offices in alto. they have met the maximum. >> are there any issues of concern so far in terms of how they've been as a tenant? >> they've been a wonderful tenant. they're a model tenant for the port of san francisco. >> a model tenant for the port of san francisco. that's all the questions i have. >> commissioner brandon. >> thank you for the report. can you tell me, what is the rate of their current lease? >> the rate current lease is just below the current one now. little background, they are

operating under two separate leases. what we've done in under lease is combined both leases into one. they are just under the parameter rent approved for this last year. so this is why we're actually renewing their lease so they can be parameter rent and stand their lease. >> parameter rent is that the lower medium? >> at the low end. >> why is that? >> it's actually -- i can't remember what the low end is. they're a little above the low end >> what is that based on? >> i'm wondering why we're not bringing them to market? give them the opportunity. >> you referring to the current

lease or the proposed lease? >> i was asking about the current lease and where they are. then with the proposed lease, i ask two questions. i think right now she's referring to the current lease. , proposal. >> so the proposed lease will bring them a little up from where the minimum is. that's historically we've given them 3% increase. at one point, they may have not reached the current rent but it's been negotiated. >> given the opportunity that we have now, why aren't we trying to bring it to market? >> it is within mark. >> it's the lower end. is there something wrong with the building? >> no. there's nothing wrong. >> okay. >> the one thing that is coming up is the seawall resillency

project. they would have preferred to have the 10 year lease. because of the project, up to five year lease. which is why they have the right of first offer. >> maybe you can tell me what the rent parameters are for this space. >> under this current lease that we're trying to negotiate? >> no practice the parameters are. not what we're offering them. what the parameter. >> unfortunately i did not spring that with me here. >> i'm not quite sure i seen a right of first offer. what is the term of the right of first offer? >> the right of first offer allows them to make us an offer. that is based on rates that they -- they have to be within the approved parameter rent. they have to prepare the terms for us. we have to then negotiate from that point on. they are preparing a letter of intent on their part to say, this is what we like to renew

our lease with five years, ten years. >> okay. >> i think what we're hearing, i assumed that these were kind of predetermined by staff what the rates are. on the newest person. this is the first time i've seen one of those explicitly. the question is, end of their lease, they want to renew their lease. how do you make the decision of what the appropriate rent increase for a lease renewal is? certainly, everything in san francisco seems to have gone up. housing prices gone up. i assume that special space and office space is going up too across the board.

when you sit down and say, their lease is up, they want to stay. what is the fair -- >> typically i will look to see what other tenants are paying if they're within the same rental rates. we'll compare to see if their similar in nature as far as what the space that they occupy negotiate from there. basically what the market will pull out there. >> do you look comparables that are not within the port? >> we have parameter rates that are set every year that will be reset again this july. this deal basically is in those commissioner approved parameter rate.

>> for last year. >> for this year. these are the current rates that are in effect for us leasing property. this is actually complete parameter deal. only reason it's here before you because it achieves a rental revenue of over a million dollars which it goes to the board of supervisors. which is unusual because it's parameter deal. we bring it to you because we have to bring it to the board. >> to reiterate what mark is saying, you all approve parameter rate schedule for the entire year. it set market rate. real estate does quite a bit of analysis to say what comparable properties across the street are valued at. we hire a broker. they help us and we set the rate. you approve them. if we lease space within those parameters, typically they don't come to the commission. here the value of the lease is

north of a million dollars which requires board of supervisors approval. bringing it to you before we bring to to the board of supervisors. i think the question commissioner brandon is asking, within that parameter band, why did you pick just north of the lower end? why note hire in the parameter rent schedule? can you help us understand the rate you're proposing? >> yes. because we're trying to look at all the other tenants are paying within the same area and same use. trying to keep within that area. of course, because this is five year lease it will go up. there's 3% annual increase every year for this lease. >> you set a rate within market approved by commission but it's on the lower end of the scale because it's consistent with other port lisas?

>> -- leases? >> yes. >> this is actually the parameter for this particular property. it's one of the higher parameter rates. >> why don't you tell us what are they currently paying and what will they pay under this lease? so we understand the dollars. >> we need that information. >> the current parameter -- the lease deal that this is under is $3.15 a square foot. >> a and b are lower. >> right. that's a different parameter. these are among the higher rates for this type of shed space that we have at the port. if you look at the entire port.

>> i guess my concern is that -- we have current tenant. we love to keep our current tenant. we like to bring them closer to mark than just at the low end of the parameter rent. i know that we make the parameter rent range because some spaces are better than others. if this is a class a space and we're giving them close to low parameter rent, that doesn't make sense. if we're doing it based on other tenants. we have tenants been here 40 and 50 years. >> this isn't office pace. it's class c office space at best. it's shed space that's been studio space. this is market present for -- rent for this space. when you set parameters, you set

parameters for market rents. our parameter rents are market. >> can i build on this a little bit? go ahead commissioner katz. >> we have who hold this over. i don't think we have enough information. i will let commissioners have their say. i want them to be happy and have all the information. i know some stuff you didn't bring. i think it's important to have everything here so we go through and we clearly understand it. >> one will be what is the parameter rent range that we have? is it five cents or 25 cents differentials. i like to have that information. second, maybe i misheard this, this doesn't seem to be a pursuant to any renewal in terms of the original lease. this is actually a new lease.

there's no reason to say that, since we gave them a 3% rent increase last year, 3% this year. it's irrelevant. it's not based on a prayer lease. this is a new lease. we start negotiating fresh out. it's not giving them the benefit. we appreciate them being long term tenant. the question i have, are we comfortable that given our parameter rent that we've approved that it makes sense to give the lowest end of that parameter versus the middle or higher end when it sames like just because other tenants are paying less, we trying to get everyone up to market rate. that's our obligation here. we have other factors. it seems to me if we've come up a parameter that's market rate, why not negotiate at the higher end of that parameter. hich isn't all that tie high.

>> can i make a comment? i know you feel like you will going through the motion to come here because it's over a million dollars. i think the rationale of a lease comes to us and board of supervisors, it is to have another set of eyes to look at it and see whether it is in interest of the port and the city. i think we need to go back and answer these questions so we understand fully what we're approving and not view it as a formality that we have to go through. i don't want to over state your case, it does feel like you're little bit saying, these are parameters. why are you asking all these questions. it's because it's a sizeable lease and we should be taking careful the city's assets and port asset because of the size. we should be looking at it carefully instead of having that independent review. >> also, the right of first offer. i think there has to be some

terms associated with that. i don't think they can come back and give us whatever they feel is appropriate at that time. >> it's not even an option. it's basically because they're a good tenant and good tenant in standing. a tenant we like to keep. we would entertain them to give use first offer for the space. >> at current mar market value? >> the right of offer we give it to the highest offer but they have a right of first offer. it doesn't entitle them to the property. >> does that mean like now we would put it out to bid and whoever offered the most for it, we would then let them -- how does that work? >> if they vacated, it will be vacancy. >> they would be to give the best offer. but there will be no other offer.

>> i think this is an example. there's 600 leases in the portfolio. we do not competitively bid leases when they come up. if it's a tenant in good standing and pay us market rate which the commission sets annually. we do need to understand what the tenant is paying now. we need to understand the range of the parameter rents and we need to understand why you settled recommending this particular rate in the band of parameter rent and to understand that that reflects the fair market value the prompt. -- property. there's more information that the commission need. >> we look at rent schedules it's a few months before the new one is set up. the market changes from time to time. we should just check what the -- it's not detailed research we should check the other side. we shouldn't be comparing leases

on port authority. we should be comparing to the market because of the size of the lease. >> we're going to hold this over colleagues. director forbes, this thing need to be reworked. you can tell the commissioners have a lot of question. >> what was the expiration of the lease? >> there's two leases being combined. one is on month a month hold over and the second is on a five year term. >> by asking to hold over, there isn't an issue? >> it's not an issue is it, mark? >> no, there's no issue. it's on month to month. >> make sure we understand. >> thank you. we look forward to seeing you next month. item 11a request approval of 66

year lease portions of a south basin and nonexclusive license for pile supported areas adjacent to west of the south bain. in connection to downtown ferry terminal expansion project all located generally between the ferry building pier 14. >> this is an action item. we're seeking approval for two long term property agreements for the downtown ferry terminal expansion project. 66 year lease and companion license agreement. in terms of i will be presenting, it's pretty straightforward. i will provide an overview of each agreements. i won't be getting into lot of detail about the project design and so forth. we did cover that last fall.

we had -- we were here twice. once with informational presentation on a project foll followed by approval of the construction lease. those two documents will govern property rights or their ability to construct the project. these two documents the lease and license agreement provide me with property rights needed to operate the ferry terminal facility upon completion of construction and furring strategic plan which you had presentation on last fall. beginning with the lease, this slide shows diagram of the lease area. i don't have a pointer. this is basically what we called a south basin. south of the ferry building between the southern edge of

ferry plaza, which is behind us here. and extending southward towards -- all the way to the pier 14 break water. then the western edge of the box is basically -- thank you -- basically where the port gates are. there are three gates. first one is gate e. it was built along gate b in the north basin. which you can't see here.

built by the port and operated and maybe takenned by the -- maintained by the port today. then you have two new gates. gate f here and gate g. here's rendering of the lease area. this is a view looking south. if you were standing on this floor of the ferry building down at the southern end looking down on this area. this is what you would see. you'd see in the foreground gate e. the existing gate. then two new gates f and g. you can see in the background, the pier 14 break water. key provisions of the lease

agreement. this is a 66 year lease. it includes about 300,000 square feet of water in some area and 21,000 square feet of floats and gang ways. under this agreement, we own, operate and maintain these facilities. in exchange for not only building but also operating maintaining and being responsible for all cost associated with maintaining these facilities, the port will not collect any rent or landing fees. however the port may charge a fee for vessels. continuing with the lease and focusing on gate e, the agreement calls for basically control of gate e to be transferred from the port to

rita. the facility is in need of refurbishment. they're going to be coring 80% of the cost for that refurbishment. today the port is responsible for 100% of that cost where we take it as service and refurbish ourselves. in terms of the fiscal impact of this arrangement for gate e, it's positive outcome for the port. weest pat -- we estimate operating gates b and e, it will amount to savings $125,000 a year for the port. just to mention gate b, it's not part of this project. it will continue to be operated and maintained by the port.

we have discussed with them and it does contemplate the potential for gate b to be similarly transferred from the port to rea in the future depending on funding availability and port needs. switching now to the lease agreement. you have diagram here of the lease area founded by the red. to orient you. this area here where i got the cursor as you know today, there's an open water basin doctor. we call it the lagoon section. there will be a raised new plaza. then you have this area that runs in front of the three ferry

gates. i should mention, regarding gate e, gate e will be relocated slightly eastward of its current position so that it lines up with the new gates and then so that promenade area in front of the gates can be expanded from what it is today. i should also mention that you got there today, we have pier two, it is now public access. that would need to be demolished as part of this project to create the water area. you see the agriculture building there and agriculture building is not part of this project. the port does hope to renovate

the agriculture building in the future. this project contemplates that. we'll talk about little bit more in a moment. the license agreement runs concurrently with and with the lease. as long as lease is in effect, the license will be in effect. they need both. the license area includes 38,000 square feet of new supported promenade and please areas. for passenger, for passenger circulation and access to and from the ferry gates. then very importantly, i think for emergency staging. so that's part of their mission. that's the e and wita and the

entire facility, the license area is designed, engineered and will be built to central structure standard. the idea being that in the event of a major seismic event, the facility will continue to operate and they can stage evacuees in that license area particularly in the plaza area. continuing with the license. the port upon application of -- completion of construction, the port will take over ownership management and maintenance responsibilities for the license area. the port will be responsible for all the costs associated with maintaining that area. we've estimated those costs at about $75,000 a year for labor. that's not net new cost to the port. port has cost today associated with the area and those costs

will be absorbed by existing resources. i mentioned that it's a nonexclusive license. there are other uses that will take place in the license area. in particular, we would like to see farmer's market expand to the plaza area. our permit allows for unlimited basis. on a trial basis for us to do that farmers market and other special events. it will be reviewed after two year period and potentially expanded and to allow for more frequent events. then, skip to one of the bullets. another use is the entire license area is public access areas. it will be -- we think it will be an area that is very popular. very desirable. people can go there and enjoy their lunch and enjoy the

views. so that's something very important. finally, this license agreement does allow for potential adjustments to the boundaries of the agreement or license area to accommodate adjacent projects. i mentioned agriculture building, which we would like to renovate in the near term as soon as we can. the seawall project. if needed, we will come together with wita and work that out. that'that basically concludes my presentation. i need to point out two changes to the resolution. on the second page of the

resolution, which is page 8 of the staff report, there are two paragraphs that need to be struck. just simply 38ed i. -- 38, deleted. top of age 8 it's a paragraph that appears on the bottom of page 7. we'll delete that paragraph. about in the middle of page 8, there's a whereas clause that begins, whereas any motion to approve that is another redundant clause. it's redundant that one that appears second to last whereas clause. we're going to strike that part. just a little clean up there that i need to let you know about. we have here today representatives from wita.

we're here to answer any questions. we're seeking your approval of both of these documents to allow this facility to be operated long into the future. and excited to reach this point. thank you very much. >> entertain a motion? >> so moved. >> second. >> is there any public comment on 11a? is there any public comment? seeing none. public comment is closed. commissioner woo ho. >> i want to understand on the last picture, those are just three new? the last picture you showed us, the last slide? >> this slide here. which is also on the title slide. yes, this is a view.

e, f and g. >> i understand we're not asking for any -- how much will they be investing in the project? >> the project is correct me if i'm wrong, $65 million of investment. >> can you come up plaza? >> construction cost of the project $65 million. over all cost is $79 million. >> if we had nonwita vessels. they can come to any of these? is it restricted to certain piers?

>> they can come to any of these facilities. wita will charge them a fee that the agreement is explicitly allows them to charge a fee to cover their direct costs. then the port is able to charge a fee on top of that. >> other question is, you say on one of your slide ownership of control is transported from wita. >> other two will be constructed by wita. >> you're saying down the line, when they are constructed, then we'll transfer ownership. >> we'll never own those. currently we own gate e, f and g do not exist currently. we need to give them control of gate e which we currently have.

>> gate e we are going to come up with 20%? >> correct. >> that's roughly -- >> that's roughly about $300,000 based on a total project cost for of $1.5 million. >> that is currently in the capital budget? >> yes. we have that funded within our capital budget. >> okay. thank you. that's all my questions. >> commissioner katz. >> asked a couple of questions. this one little more ewill be ration in terms of the use of the license on a nonexclusive basis. logistically how is that going to work. water taxes will be allowed to have landing here? >> the lease is an exclusive

area. wita has exclusive rights to the lease >> it's not exclusive to land side but on the piers it's exclusively for wita? >> correct. they do have the ability to -- they decide they want to allow landings of nonwita vessels. which could include water taxi. i'm not sure these facilities would be appropriate for that. 0 or designed for that. they could do that. they would be able to charge a fee to recover their costs associated with those landings and the port can also charge a fee. >> then, just as we talk about sea level rise, that has

somewhat been accounted for here. as we found the projections of sea level raise -- rise has changed since first provided to us. i have to confessed i thought they were overly ambitious at the time. has any thought been given to floating piers? >> the project is designed to allow for some adaptation beyond the sea level rise measures that are built into the project. which includes building that new please and the new promenade structures. three feet above the current elevation. it will adapt the gang ways and the floats and the connections

to the land in the future depending on what happens to sea level. >> just add to little specificity what he said. the project is designed for, expected life of 50 year life. which brings 2070. it needs to go about another foot above that. that takes and is handled by a curb on the promenade which is 12 inches tall. the gates could be adjusted upward. the site enjoys some protection and there's a break water and part of the impact sea level ride is the wave action.

yes, it does take into account the possibility to adapt for further end of the future than 2070. >> thank you for the presentation. can you give me an example of a nonwita vessel? >> sure. dinner cruise, run by horn blower for example. if for some reason they wanted to use these facilities they would have the ability to do that. >> what is a wita vessel? >> i might have mike come back up here. [laughter] they have operating operating agreements with blue

and gold. those will be considered wita vessels. i believe they have vessels they operate by their own agency. i will have mike explain that a little bit better. >> largest newest vessel in the bay. it's a term we defined in the lease agreement. any vessel owned by wita or a vessel leased by wita that's in wita surface. it, boats we owned or leased through a contract operator. >> gate e, what is the current revenue? >> i didn't bring those exact figures. i can tell you, i mentioned in the presentation that we currently have negative net

revenues to the tune of about $125,000 a year. revenues that we do collect are less than the cost that we incur associated with that facility by $125,000. >> for gate e. >> for gate e and similar situation with gate b. the two of them together, the net loss or the net subsidy is $250,000 a year based on a five year history of those cost in revenues. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioner kounalakis. >> this is really exciting. i see in the staff report, there's expectation construction will start soon? >> yes. in fact, these occupants have been approved by the wita board as of last thursday at their board meeting. this is the final approval

needed. i mentioned the construction lease and the llda which have been approved by both agencies. that was done in the fall. construction is expected to begin i think construction fence you'll start see going up this weekend or monday i think. then construction can begin probably three weeks after that. we do have a ground breaking ceremony scheduled. hopefully it made its way on your calendars for thursday may 11th. >> that's really exciting. i do have some questions for you. it's really mostly just related to the costs that we may incur and what the responsibilities of the port are. there clearly will be a line. i'm looking at the public access map. it kind of shows the perimeter pretty clearly.

all of those purple areas, are they going to be maintained by wita over time? >> are you referring to the license agreement? >> i'm referring to the license agreement. but then the map that i'm using is the one in your handout. >> within the license area, shown in the staff report, in the presentation, also in the staff report as wita exhibit b, that's all pile support of deck that will be constructed by wita. they have responsibility for certain sort of ferry terminal specific improvements that will be located within that license

area. that includes the -- i didn't show it part of the presentation, i think you can see these canopy structures. i've got a slide here kind of depicting the canopy structure. panels on top and they'll be used for weather protection for ferry passengers. they may have signage into them. those will be maintained by wita. there's a potential for kiosk to be located. like ticketing kiosk to be located within the license area. that -- otherwise the port will have responsibility. it will basically be for cleaning, pour washing for trash removal. >> in this public access areas

where you have the grand of plaza and east promenade, all those areas in terms of maintaining them keeping them clean, that's the responsibility of the port? >> correct. >> do we have any estimate then of what all of this is going to cost us with the huge increase in pedestrian use of these areas? >> we did estimate basically of the number of labor hours. number of person hours it would take to perform the various duties associated with maintaining these facilities. trash removal and cleaning of the surfaces. there's a small storm water drainage planter area that will be need to be watered. we estimate number of hours. we worked with tom carter to

kind of come up with how many hours and what does that mean in salaries. it's estimated about .5fte. 20 hours a week. >> in terms of the delta what it cost us now versus what it will cost us later. hard to believe it's just 20 hours of work. you're going to have people waiting in line. maybe going to be more trash. you've got this amphitheater. they will bill amphitheater and pieces break and things need to be repaired. aren't we going to be responsible fixing that? >> we will be responsible for example the sub structure. yes, beyond the warranty period of the improvements, we will be

responsible for making repairs should they be rared. this is going to be designed and built to state-of-the-art central structure standard. very high quality materials. >> there's no estimate done what the ongoing maintenance of all of these things will be built that the port will be responsible for? >> beyond sort of operating the impact on the apriling budget -- operating budget, we estimate $75,000 a year. that's not all net new costs. we haven't tried to estimate what happens if something gets broken. we don't expect that to happen. over the life of the agreement, yes, the port will incur some costs. the port incurs costs today associated with this area. >> it's not amphitheater.

>> it's a raised plaza. i'm not sure it could call it amphitheater. you have seating steps that you can sit on to enjoy your lunch. but it's flat. it's a flat please structure with steps on two says. >> the granite plaza, will we control the use of that for special purposes? >> yes. we will be able to as i mentioned. to program it occasionally for special events for farmers market. we have limitations on the number of events we can do. that will be the port's discretion. as long as those events do not interfere with wita ability to

operate the ferry. >> okay. it will be really exciting to see all the construction beginning out there. >> good presentation. i remember the last one you gave, changed from cruise terminal last year. maybe somebody from wita can come up. i agree with the commissioner kounalakis. this is going to be a full time job. 20 hours a week. we'll have all kind of people down there. this is not a part time down there at that plaza and keeping up the may not unanimou maintenance. don't you agree? >> we do know. we have an estimate? we work with tom carter to perform an estimate. we're subsidizing to the tune of $250,000 a year. the new cost we're taking on are

substantially less than our current subsidy. i know that's not a perfect answer. we have new big belly trash cans that will alert us when they are full and not full. we have scheduled trash pick up. which is very efficient because we know in those trash containers are open. we sweep before there's anyone out there in the we hour. we sweep in the morning and evenings. that cycle will not change. we haven't done estimate of the capital cost of the facility in ages over the amphitheater. the question that commissioner kounalakis was asking about. we do estimate operating pensions half fte. >> would you like -- is there anything you like to interject? this is a project with the port and wita work hand in hand?

>> absolutely. thank you president adams and commissioners. i'm excited to be here today too. can't wait for construction. we've been working on this for eight years together in partnership. the way i look at it, we're taking what you started here and we're going to construct the next phase of it. really take responsibility for that water side for that ferry side that financial responsibility by upgrading and refurbishing gate e which needs it and needed for years. then expanding on it and taking responsibility for managing and maintaining and rehabilitating. it's a true partnership. we really appreciate your executive director of forbes and all of your support over the years. we're excited to -- this will be the hub of our regional ferry system expansion services. we already operate alameda,

oakland and services here and look forward to expanding to treasure island and possibly redmond city and berkeley and other places over the years. thank you. >> napa. >> i had a question. i appreciate all of the discussion on terms of the amount of increase pedestrian traffic. since we're refurbishing first. what the plan for terry -- ferry traffic. since we know the number issue in san francisco is traffic. congestion. when will we see some relief as more capacity comes on with ferries and how many more people will you take on? i imagine it's in phases. this project is in phases. >> it all depends on how quickly we're able to roll out services.

>> at least your estimate. there's lots of approvals. what you terms hope to achieve. >> we currently carry 10,000. and another 20. it depends on which year you're talking about. >> when will we start to see that release? >> once we build the facilities. >> what's the schedule for construction and completion? >> for the new terminal? it will happen over the next two years. >> okay. if we get progress reports, i suggest you give us fill us up. so we can seat the benefits coming to the city. we're all excited. this is something we look forward to. it would be nice to say that

we're seeing how that contribution that come through the increase ferry service. >> our first new ferry service is from rich monday -- richmond. that will be the first add of service that will come into san francisco. that's going to start nexu next summer for fall. it will depend on how much money we have and can put together to expand terminal in other places. >> how much of your federal money that you referenced in your deck, how much do you still have to secure? >> we have the full funding to build this gate f and g. >> colleagues anything else? >> no. just that i am just so excited to see this come under

construction. it's really going to change the face of this party of the water front. it's it will allow more people who want to get around by ferry to do so. i was here after the game. we walked down to get something to 8 at the ferry building. there was a long line of people waiting to get on that alameda ferry. there was no shelter. they didn't know. i said to my husband, it's the line probably moves fast. if you're at the end of t you don't know if you're going to get on. increasing the capacity for more people to know that it's a reliable mode of transportation for them. one of the things that i've been hearing, there's not -- the way that people are looking at dealing with traffic in san francisco is not about

increasing capacity on the roadways. you really can't do that. it's about finding completely different alternatives for how people get around the bay area. there used to be a lot more ferry traffic. even 50 or 60 years ago in the bay. than there is now. it's a really pleasant way to get around if you're not a person prone to sea sickness. it's really a way that people used to enjoy getting around. it's just wonderful under utilized opportunity but with this project, it can really have the ability to entirely change the way that people are moving from different parts of the bay area and to do it in a way that is really pleasant and find is beautiful. i think it's terrific. i certainly rely on our executive director's assurances that relative to incurring

additional cost for the port, this has been examined and it's clear that there are cost savings for us associated with it. so thank you. whatever additional new kinds of costs fully understood and we're prepared to take them on. again, thank you for being here for the great presentation and i look forward to being there for the big ground breaking. >> the 11th. >> colleges anything else? seeing none. thank you. colleague all in resolution number 17. aye, resolution 17 passes. >> item 12 new business. >> i have jotted down that we are going to schedule for down the road progress report on ferry ridership and capital improvements. for the next calendar, ideo will be continued and real estate

staff will provide more detailed information about the current rates, parameter rents, schedule and will provide validation for the proposal based on market conditions. that's all i've got. >> i move to reconvene in closed session. >> second. >> all if favor say aye. >> aye. >> oppose. we are now in closed session. thank you. >> i move to reconvene open session. >> second. >> all if in favor say aye. >> all if favor say aye. >> opposed. >> i move to adjourn. >> public comment. >> motion to adjourn. all if favor say aye.

>> opposed. we are adjourned 5:35. >> good morning, and i'm sitting in on edna is no longer on the dos commission and sarina is on vacation and so i am going to sit in as an interim. and i think that we need to formalize that in some way and i am going to take the guidance from the secretary. with he need to open a nomination. >> all right.

>> correct. >> and i nominate commissioner sims to be the interim president for today's meeting. >> i second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> thank you. so roll call? >> vice president is excused, itani. present. >> loo. >> ow. >> here. >> roy. >> here. >> interim president, sims snchlt >> present. >> please note that executive director is present and we are asked that all phones and electronic devices are turned off. >> thank you, next is approval of the agenda for today's meeting, i understand that there are a couple of changes if i am correct, we are deferring the consent calendar, is that? >> right. >> correct. >> we should vote for the agenda to be approved first. >> with amendments?

>> yes. >> all right, so i need a motion to approve with amendments. >> so moved. >> second. >> open to discussion. >> is that appropriate? >> you don't have to do that. >> don't have to? >> do we have to make the amendments. >> yes. you have to make the amendments. >> so we are going on to propose that we eliminate or defer the consent calendar and we are also going to defer the commission officers nomination for object sus reasons, because of absences today. >> so all in favor of the amended agenda. >> aye. >> second. second. >> opposed? >> approved? >> yes. >> and all right. passed. >> and now it is time to look at the minutes for the february meeting. we have a motion to accept them. >> so moved.

>> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? >> passed. >> all right, we are on and we are through all of the complicated stuff. >> reports? director? >> good morning. >> yes, it is on. >> good morning commissioners, so i just want to start by saying that i just got back from washington, d.c. last night i was at the national association of area agencies on aging board meeting as i think that you know, i am the alternate to california for the board and banks from la is the board member. and so we go together to these meetings and represent california. it was an interesting time to be in washington. and i think you know a lot of what we at the board meeting and then at the policy briefing

which i attended for the last two days, we talked a lot about you know kind of what is the aappropriate for advocacy at the national level, given all that is going on right now. and really, we focused on holding the line on things like the older americans act and really advocating for the importance of medicaid for older adults. and so i was fortunate to have tom nolan with me, he is fantastic and has a lot of great connection and it was really, really helpful to have him there with me and we visited a number of office and our local offices and some that were other california offices as well. but we focused on ours because of course, people like to hear from their own constituents and so we were able to go to visit with jackie spears office and we visited her staff together, but yesterday, tom was able to get a meeting with her, herself after i left. and we visited with anna eshu and because i was there with my

colleague, also we visited diane finestein and she popped in for a few minutes and we got to see herself and not just her aids. and then after i left, tom met with linda primus is who is the key person who works for nancy pelosi. and so we covered quite a bit while we were there about getting the words about importance and we know that they are supportive of the older americans act and of medicaid, i think that it always helps for them to hear from us and remind them that older adults are a huge part of their constituencies and so it was, you know, it was a little bit mixed because there is a lot of uncertainty right now about what the federal budget is ultimately going to look like as you all know. and so, a little bitter sweet. but certainly, i think that it is important work. and i just brought a couple of copies of the policy priorities

for 2017 that n4 a puts out every year and i don't have enough copies for everybody and i can get copies if you are interested and i have three right here and i can get some more for you. on the state level and i am fwo going to defer to dan if you have specific questions. there is a battle going on between the counties in the state about what is going to happen with the ihss, effort and we don't have a clear picture yet about what is going to look like, but dan is spending like it has become a second job for him to go to sacramento and fight for this, because it has huge impacts on the county, and you know, if the mle completely goes away without another solution and so dan, if you want him to talk about specifics, he can do that, but it is still in play. locally, i guess most important thing that has happened is that we have been working on the fund

of the 6 million, allocation and as you know we have 6 million of the new money in the budget to allocate and we have an over side and an advisory committee and the department together we have been working very hard to figure out the allocation process, and plan, and so, i submitted a plan to the oversight advisory committee i guess a month ago or so, and they have been kind of playing around with it and they asked us to come up with different ideas which we did, and they compared those ideas and ultimately voted on monday to go ahead and recommend to us, the plan that we originally gave to them. and i think that you know, what we were thinking about is dividing things into six buckets, and trying very hard not to come up with brand new ideas, because you know, we are going to have this whole community needs assessment that is going to happen over the next two years and we are going to be finding out if we need to develop brand new programming or what. but at this point, we think that

it is really important to get this 6 million dollars out the door and we know that there are seniors and people with disabilities that need that and need those services and we know that there are providers who are hoping to get money into their budget so that they can serve more people. so, we divided it into six buckets. care giver support, and kind of innovative community service centers and activities, and housing retention, and legal services and financial planning and nutrition and wellness, and support for veterans. and in addition, actually what they did is they voted to recommend to us that there are two plans, and so, one of them includes a cost of doing business line item, because we think that if we are adding new programs in, we are boeing to have to find a way to fund them in the future, i can go into

detail on any of these, and so the care giver support is for the respite and then also for a new data base, that is a resource directory for care givers and the service, and the community service centers and activities are funds to develop new and expansion models of our existing community services and so for instance, if we have an issue where most of the people who are attending our senior

centers are 70 or older. we are hoping that the senior centers could find a way to build a pipeline of younger seniors that can come in and maybe just by expanding their hours or doing something different. but utilizing the buildings that they already have. we are also needing to add transportation there. and probably there could be some food added. there as well. because when you bring the people together in a center you need to have some of those things to get them there and keep them there. housing retention is for the housing subdy and that will increase the current budget that we have for subsidies by 580,000, in one model, and around, 500 in the other, and legal services and financial

planning and one of the things that we have is that we have through the older america's act we have legal services for seniors and a lot of our legal services providers are serving people with disabilities who are under the age limit, and they don't have a way to fund that and we really want to make sure that there is parody there and so we are looking at adding in attorneys so that or attorney physicians so that they can serve younger adults with disability and we are also looking to respond to do more of the recommendations from the lgbt task force, and one is for planning for the population and legal and life planning, and for lgbt people as well. and then, moving on to nutrition, and wellness, we are looking at a pilot to develop the linkage between positive nutrition status and out comes for chronic illness and we are looking at supporting technology at home, and which is there is

actually several models out there technology at home and one of the things that we know from other places one of which is when i visited the netherlands is that there are a number of models where people learn to use technology particularly with tablets. and then there are able to interact in ways that they can't understands whether they are home bound or don't get out as much as they used to. and we know that the senior isolation is a huge issue and isolation is a big issue for the people with disabilities as well. and so the technology and there is really innovative technologies out there where the people can remain, engaged in the community and so when we start thinking about health and the people tracking their own health out comes and all of that and it is really hopeful for them to have all of the technologies and the knowledge around that so that they can do that as well. and then we are looking at health promotion to continue a diabetes program for older adults and adults with

disabilities as part of that as well. and then we are looking at a bucket for veterans and we have the county veterans service office. with he have focused on doing some of the work with the veterans through the office on the aging but we really wanted to make sure that we made a clear statement that we are expanding programs for our older veterans and veterans with disabilities in san francisco. and so there is a bucket for that. and i can have brig et send this out to you, so that you have copies, and if you have any questions, feel free to contact me. but i will be submitting this to the mayor's office, this week. >> yes, i do okay, the veterans office, how many people, how many workers are there now? today? >> well the veterans so this is -- this funding is not for the veteran's office itself. this funding is actually for community based organizations, so there is a couple of different things, one of them is

that we would add to the meals the meals that we currently have for veterans in the veterans housing sites and then in the other it is that we have worked with some of the veterans organizations who are very interested in having connecters at the veterans housing sites. so that they can help to the people get service and we are seeing a lot of times what happens in those sites is that the people don't know what to trust and so that they don't actually accept service and if there is someone on the site that who help to make sure that they get linked to the services that they need that they will be successful in staying in the home safely, that is what i am talking about right now. we have how many staff do we have in the veteran's office right now? >> positions? >> we have 7 positions in the veteran's office right now. they are not all filled, unfortunately. >> you have six buckets and then you have one bucket pay some attention to the veterans. how many people do you expect to

hire to in this office? how would that veteran's bucket >> we are not going to hire any more people, these dollars will all go out to the community based organizations. >> oh, so i see, there is no place in those ma'am, no. >> not with this money, no. >> not with this money, we have the people in dos for the service office but this is specifically money for the community based organizations and i also want to say that we are just also not serving the veteranwise these dollars, there are veterans in all of our programs and so we no he that we hope that they are getting services in many different ways, but these dollars are specifically to go to these organizations that serve veterans so basically you have this $6 million for the next budget, right? >> correct. >> and you are not going to hire not one single new person. >> not in dos. >> not in dos. >> no. >> these are for the xhupt based

organizations >> i see for the non-profit. >> right. once we do that and that is when we will figure that out, right? but we are just saying that we want to get these dollars out in the community and we know that the communities are effective at serving their populations and so we have to go through the whole process. i have one more last yes, and this year, 6 million next year will be three million and that will be nine million? >> that is right. questions from the commissioners. and the 6 million dollars, in six buckets are they.

>> we have gone through a lot of exercises to figure out what the best way to do this is. and we based it both on the democratic side but also using all of the research that our planning team put into, putting together well our planning team of one, put into the needs assessment, and you know, so we are using that data that we currently have to make good decisions about where we put our dollars, and we are thinking about with which bucket what would be meaningful and so we are not split out evenly at all, we are thinking where will it be the most impactful in each of these areas? >> it will be allocated according to the needs that you folks have done? >> that is right. >> that is right. >> thank you. >> and the other questions, and for, for the nutrition, and the oneness and so are we introducing like the health medicine into this process? >> no, i think that we are just

looking to one of the things that i think is important with all of our programs and we are going to be doing this with all of our programs. but it is looking at the impact of what we already know works. and but really being able to measure it. and so, we wanted to just introduce that element into our nutrition budget. our nutrition portfolio. i didn't hear the mention of memory care or any cognitive priority in the six buckets, does it fit somewhere. >> well, it fits in a few different places and certainly it could fit, if it certainly fits in the care giver support and that is where we see a lot of the need for i guess more support and the care givens are

struggling and working with the people with dementia and they need the resource and so that is one thing that we have put into the care giver support and also the respite and we know that all of the programs are adaptive of serving people with dementia and it is something that we will be looking at with the community needs assessment and we know that we are going to have a growing population. one more question, so the money will be given to the non-profit agency that we have been contracted with. >> no, there will be no rfps and we are trying to work out that now, but our contract office assured me that we will have to have the rfp for some of these things. >> okay, maybe not all of them. >> okay. >> but yeah.

>> thank you. >> i am pleased to be in this chair, but we will honor peterson of the human services agency. this is super bitter sweet for me and everybody in this room. because martha is incredibly special to us and has provided support for dos for i don't know, how long.

many, many years. and she has been, but she has been here for 14 years, right? and so before i talk about martha, i just really want to recognize the budget team from hsa. derrick, don't, yeah. derrick. everybody else from the budget team here, or you guys, stand up for a minute. >> i think that everybody knows that it is part of the human services agency and we are really, really fortunate to have a greadministrative team and th work under dan and without their support we would not be able to do the things that we do. and sometimes we don't see what they do sometimes it is sort of invisible to the people in the public but without their support we will not be able to do

anything right, let's put it that way. so martha, i want to read a little bit about what the people have said about you, but i want to just talk about our relationship, because we have worked very closely together. and i think that almost since we merged or maybe right when we merged and martha knows so much about our budget and she has not been hesitant to say to me that does not really work. and shi also has been really, innovative with trying to figure out ways to support us. and so if i say to her, gosh we have to find money for this thing, this $20,000 here or $20,000 there, how can we make that work? or is there some creative way that we can do this? she is always, always, been able to figure it out. she says that she does not know the budget to the penny, she is like no i don't, but she does. and you know, it is such and it has been such a great pleasure to work with you martha, and it is really sad for me that you are leaving. and at the same time i am so

happy for you. because i know that you have been looking forward to this for a long time. i want to read what your colleagues have said about you, and you have to bear with me and listen to it. >> for 14 years, martha has been a part of the san francisco human services agencies incredible budget team. as the lead budget analyst for the department of aging and adult services martha has worked closely with the staff across the programs that made the significant contributions to the department's work and on behalf of the senior and adults with disabilities. her support has made it possible for the initiative and sure we have adequate resources for the ongoing, programs and able to effectively meet the needs of our clients, on both the professional and personal efrl, her positive and authentic generous nature signs through, she has developed, the strong relationships with the staff and managers at dos as well as our partners in planning, fiscal and the contracts in community and helped us to work together as a team. she always is willing to pitch in and help out even with the

task and projects that go beyond the budget realm although her work is primarily focused on numbers and funding amounts her dedication is always, evident, and martha is thinking about the clients that we serve and helping us strat guys best. >> and so, maybe your other colleagues said that you were brilliant, and you have a fantastic way of remembering wherever dollar is used. why it has been moved. and you have this incredible institutional knowledge, which is true. like we have the joke about the fund. >> you always answer the phone and you always call back immediately and you respond with patients and kindness and try to help. and if you don't know the answer to something you figure it out. really quickly and get back. and you are a variable library and program related knowledge.

your amazing. you are super friendly. you always know how to make something work. and you are a true team player. somebody that we always want on our team. so, thank you martha. we are so fortunate to have had you and i don't know if some of the commissioners want to say anything, but i know that they are grateful, i know that they have been able to call you as well any time that they need anything, so any way. thanks so much and good luck to you. >> and i guess that i should give you this. thank you all so much for this honor, i want to say that i am the one who is grateful to have been in this role for so long and to have met so many wonderful people and i can't say enough about i am going to miss all of you so much, so thank

you. >> next on the agenda is the report from the advisory council. >> good morning, commissioners. good mortganing commissioners i presenting this report for leon

schmid our president who could not be here. the advisory council, proceeding the council, we had an executive committee meeting much of it devoted to internal matters for the advisory committee such as the number of times that the people can attend and possibly the new members but it was also decided that in the future, we would have, and the advisory council would have a retreat. dates are not specified and we just discussed further areas in which we would be like to informed, especially the housing for seniors the issues to people with disabilities. so all of us well, not all of us, were present and absence were mcdonald who was ill, paric, russo and warren. and concerned with expressed about mr. mcdonald and

discussions of ways to reach out. and or if he is ill, the need to row place him. >> guests included melissa and the das, legislative lee a response, rick apple by, and we approved the february 15th minutes, and correcting the names, and spelling. president schmid presented the council with a gavel and a block and a book of rules of order. and he introduced melissa, and i didn't think that they were that disorderly myself. >> and miss mcgee gave a summary of the first meeting, on february 24th of the fund over the committee because this was a meeting in with march.

and the discussion was at 6 million, will be available and on march 6, eas presented it'sal location, proposal for the moneys. spending the review which is now completed and the program evaluation of anything that happened will be built into any proposal. >> and in the future, the over seat advisory council will formulate the by laws and we have and you know the first of monday of every month, actually that has been changed to the third monday of every month, and at 3:00 in the 5th floor, conference room at 1650 mission. and of course, the public is always welcome and it is

important to be there. our news secretary is alegra, and she talked about the members getting in the application to review their participation in the advisory council. and everyone has done so now except for cathy. and some concern was expressed for cathy's health and it was decided to contact her. juliet, has turned into her application to fill the district three seat appointed by eric peskin. and miss fortunani is going to visit the offices of the remaining supervisors to urge them to make nominations in districts one, 6, 8, 9, and 10. and reported that the commissioner of aging nominating committee has moved all of the appointments and applications. but they are still looking for

replacements for who is i think, very ill. and just will not come back. and she will address this stipend situation which is a technical matter. director mcfadden, she is visiting and supervisor's office. and talking about dem graphics and services. within each district, and the aaa plan is due may first and it needs to be approved by the council. and the plan is to make a presentation in april. which will be a couple of weeks. and approve it in may. and it was noted that april third and fourth is the national association of areas council meeting which director mcfadden has reported on. and there is a national conference in august, director remind td the members that if we make the comments as individuals

we are not speaking for the entire group or the department and that is presents ourselves as such. rick the captain of the des training to be on may 12th, at mission hall on the lgbt demen shall care given project hosted by the alzheimer's association. and our advisory council member patty, gave us a summary on friday, december, 17th meeting on the elder abuse which she attended. and miss lauren who chairs the joint legislative committee or co-chairs it will make a report later. so i will leave that part to you. and the council moves seconded and unanimously passed to send a letter urging retention of funding in a coordinated care and initiative. and the plan is to meet with

senators warner and ting and to send it to the subcommittee in the hel and this human service to continue this funding. i move that we send a letter to pelosi and sphere, and the healthcare act, which needed to consider, the equity and funding in healthcare, and federal funding for medicaid and the council who seconded unanimo unanimously, regarding the healthcare act and rick app le be, drafted a letter on this subject and we are pleased of course, with the merp healthcare act in it's present form did not pass.

also allowing the bicyclists to roll through stops and we discussed the need to oppose this legislation because of accidents and near misses, with the seniors and adults or the people with disabilities. and it makes traffic unpredictable. if you don't know where someone is coming toward you on a bicycle is going to continue or not. and the council moved seconded and passed this proposal to send a letter in opposition to this legislation, bill, 1103. and this letter also was variably drafted by mr. app elby. if you wish i could submit copies of these letters. on site visit and patty, and visited and reported on the heights, neighborhood center, and a month to month, sign up sheet was passed around from the

member and the site visit reports. and for the lgbt task force, marcy, reported on the legislation, and establishing a california state lgbt bill of rights, that supported by the state senator weiner. mr. app leby also sent a level to the city attorney in the ethics commission after the request of james to clarify the authority of the aging advisory council and to endorse or oppose legislation independently. and there was an announcement on the presentation this coming thursday of the director of homelessness and supportive housing. i think that i perhaps i skipped this part that the delegates from the advisory council to the

oversight and advisory council for the dignity fund and include myself and marscy, and befery tailor. and then i will show after that we adjourned. so would you like to ask any questions? >> questions? >> thank you very much. >> you are welcome. >> now we will have a report from co-chairman diane law ens on the joint legislative commit. >> good morning i will be fairly brief, although in your minutes there will be a long list, thanks to mr. apple by of all of the legislation that we are tracking but i will summarize quickly what the big buckets are. so there was no action items from february meeting. and we did not meet in march. so there was no reports. so i have combined the two together. and again, at the state level, california is looking at healthcare.

given the program on our own, but there is no clarity around it, and i reported that if february. and there is still no updates but we will keep tracking that as we move forward. and obviously healthcare as she said and as you will see in the list of priorities state wide, and from director mcfaddin's report, it is going to be an ongoing issue that we will be tracking them and watching this current year and we are continuing to work on our meeting with the local representatives. a subcommittee was formed by myself and mr. apple beto put together the talking points, commissioner al recommended that we identify five key areas which we are still working on when we meet with our local representatives we want to have a cohesive plan and our top five priorities so that we can use their time and our time to the best. so we will probably have a little bit more to report in the next month or so. we are continuing to work on the bylaws and bringing in an alignment the advisory council,

and the commission, and the joint legislative committee. and so that they are clear. and where we are not clear, we are gain some clarity. so those are have been sent to the city attorney, and as mrs. lori mentioned, commissioner james who attended our meeting recommend that had we also send those to the ethics committee or commission so that we are make sure that we are in alignment and so that we will continue to report on that as we move forward. as of our meeting two weeks ago, we had heard nothing back from the city attorney. so a new business, there is still uncertainty at the federal level around the various programs and healthcare, while the american healthcare act was defeated there is ongoing work. there is no additional impact on the older americans act. but now we have some direction moving forward from the director mcfaddin's meeting in washington and so we can look at that and in light. and again, also, the funding to

the coordinated care initiative, and so as we mentioned, as mrs. lori mentioned, we did send a letter of support for retaining that money and funding moving forward and that has gone out. and the day that we met, there was the assembly budget, subcommittee on health and human services met and we got the minutes that were shared with us following the meeting. and all of the items that impact our areas of interest, adults with disabilities and older and seniors are all on hold. they are, and they have moved forward. and they have been put were held open. and so moving for ward and so we will continue to track them and they didn't say no. but they didn't say yes, either. and there was on one issue the

funding for the california senior legislature and they asked director with chl to develop a funding plan to insure it's survival and until the tax revenue can come up to make csl self-supporting again and on the city level, we got a report on a hearing that is supervisor yee held regarding the department of age and adult services audit and the services to seniors and adults with disabilities. and director mcfaddin had responded and discussed dos services athe that hearing. parks and rec also described their senior programs. hearing was well attended and there was a lot of community input. and we are tracking a number of bills and again, thanks to mr. apple, by the chart that you will see in the minutes is thanks to him and most of the legislation resolves around

alzheimer's and alzheimer's care supported by the alzheimer's association and other groups and housing, health issues, and as mentioned by mrs. lori, senate bill, 162, excuse me, senate bill, 219 is state senator weiner's bill on the lgbt long term care bill of rights. and we also were seeing requests again for increases in sfi benefits and burial benefits and care giver, tax credits and a number of things that we discussed last session as well. so we will continue to monitor those and if there are any in particular that you want us to look at, in more detail, please let me know. >> questions from the commission? >> we just like to say that i am tremendously encouraged to hear that the csl funding is in discussion until the bridge until the tax funds are available.

thank you. >> thank you. >> long term care koor nading council, good morning. >> good morning. >> mark burns and the executive member and i am here your april representative for your march updates, like everybody else in the city, we are spending a tremendous amount of time trying to process and divine the impact of all of the state and federal legislative and executive actions that are occurring. and understand how best to turn those back into policy recommendations. for the past several months we are engaged in revitalizing the process of bringing the ideas from the work groups off to the full council and then forward into the budget asks into the board of supervisors and mayor's office and we just finished our first round of this new policy process, and it worked wr well for us and we are actually in front of the budget this time and i hope that next year to be further in front of the budget process and we identified three

priority and they are in terms of inpriority number one, we are from our housing work group, we are seeking housing subdies for 200 seniors and people with disabilities and 100 of whom are currently housed but experiencing housing insecurity, and another 100 who are currently homeless and also from the housing work group, we are supporting the retention, pilot which is designed to revitalize the workforce among the workforce program where they are having a difficult time attracting and retaining workers. and then, the third budget priority from our hiv and aging work group is a grant to ucsf's golden compass program which is a medical clinic for aging and hiv population and it is specifically developed the social service programming within that clinic. thank you. >> thank you.

>> thank you. >> tech report. >> i don't see cathy russo. so we will pass that today. case report? >> our board has been busy prepare and continuing our advocacy campaign, we are in the midst of collecting upwards of 3,000 post cards which we will be delivering to the city supervisors as well as the mayor, which will take place over the next four to six weeks.

along with the e-mail campaign. we also have the board has been actively ramping up strategy with the two new board members how we can improve and increase our advocacy, so that we can better support our member agency and our con ststituents and the seniors and the younger adults with disabilities in san francisco, so that our advocacy is really a year round effort. two of the steps that we have taken thus far is representation on budget justice coalition. which is across the board coalition of agencies doing advocacy work. and then also we have a board member who is attending the dignity fund coalition meetings and the oversight meetings and

will also have a representative on the service providers organization which will be, or which is in the process of being formed. and so, very busy, and good stuff coming up. what questions can i answer for you? >> questions from the commission? >> very clear, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> >> and we will have a report of someone of a brief report from the nominating committee commissioner? >> good morning, and as mentioned earlier, by commissioner sims we will table the nomination for president and vice president until a future date. can i have a motion to reappoint the advisory council members dr. marcy etelman, hammon, heinz., and parini and smith? >> so moved.

>> second. >> and motion has moved and seconded. and are there any questions? >> second. >> any questions from the or questions or concerns from the commission? >> any questions or concerns from the general public? no concerns? all in favor. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> all opposed? >> the motion carries. >> thank you very much. >> general public comment? >> hearing none we will move to old business, none, new business? prepared for new business. >> item a. requesting authorization and modify the grant agreement with the institute on aging for provision of the community living fund during the period of july 1, 2014, to june 30, 201 # 9, in the amount of $50,000 for

a grand not-to-exceed, 23 million. and introducing carry wong. >> good morning, commissioners. director. and so i am here to please and i am here to present about the grant modification for the living contract, and in collaboration with the mayor's office on housing and community developme development. so a brief background, in july of 2015, collaborated with dos on the institute of aging for the health and medical consultation to survey the real time life care needs of residents in five res denial care facilities for chronically ill and here after i will call them rcfci in san francisco. and i will use this expertise with the community living model and in the focus to focus on the level of care assessments and

the community of care transitions to determine that the required level of care as well as the potential support systems when they transition in the community. and so the results of the report summarized the level of care assessments as well as the tenants that were moved to a lower level of care and fl by, freeing up the spaces continuing these assessments we will support the individual choice and optimize the resources in the rcfci in the units that we and that what we have there. and now in collaboration, with the dos and ioa will conduct level of care assessments, in rcfci residents. and we will be identified by the rcfci, facility managers for the potential candidates that could move to a lower level of care. this includes recommendations for the type of housing. wrap around services and transitional care, management to reduce institutionalization post placement.

>> in in addition, ioa will provide the base line assessments for individuals that are prioritized on the cd's new plus housing weight list. historically there was not a lot of movement on that weight list, for many reasons. and mohcd revamped their housing wait list based on the 2014, five year plan for the housing wait list and one of the changes of this was to include a base line assessment to help and inform and facilitate a placement and this is only, with no case management services for this for the wait list assessments. >> they will provide the funds for the work under the contract. and it is not utilizing any of the clf current summarize the presentations if you have any questions? >> from the commission? >> yes. >> and the funding will be a

completely by the city and county and you are going to serve the 26 patients and so there are there will be the funding is from mohcd, and it is to provide the level of care assessments, for two populations. one is the rcfci folks that the people that are living in the facility that can move out and this is for 12. and there is the plus housing weight list, and they are doing a base line assessment of 14 people. what they might need to match with the housing needs that they have. >> so the total number of patients will be 26? >> yeah. >> and the city is spending approximately 3000 per person. no, 2100.

>> yeah, the total amount is 55. the 12 clients that we are doing the transition for, the rate is 3750. and then for the 14 clients that are under the plus housing and under, 357. >> thank you. >> the total of 50,000 and then for the whole piece. >> other questions, motion to accept? >> so moved. >> motion to approve. >> second. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> aye. >> opposed? >> thanks, motion passes. >> thank you. >> and item b, requesting authorization to renew the grant agreement with the family care giver alliance for the support

program of during the period of july, 1, 2017, through june, 30th, in the amount of 415,000, and plus a ten percent for the total grant amount not-to-exceed, 456,000 introducing monte muno and i i think that i need a motion to accept. >> so moved. >> second. >> good morning, commissioners my name is chamino and i am a program analyst and we seek your approval for i one year contract extension for the family care giver association. and the family care giver association in collaboration with three subcontractors, and self-help for the elderly, provide assistance for the san francisco residents who are in formal care givers through the quality home care and support groups and counciling and xhund education. >> respite care, a brief period

of rest. they can help with inhome personal care and heavy house or yard work and super vice out of home care programs. or even over night care. and we request your approval for this grant extension and i am happy to answer any questions that you might have. >> questions from the commission? >> yeah. just wondered that is the different, activity that you fund three different agencies. >> correct. >> one of the activity is the care giver support group, how come self-help does not have this activity. >> i will call alia up to help to answer the question. >> good morning, commissioners, and director mcfaddin. >> i am the director of operations for the care giver

alliance and the question that you asked. commissioner lu, is that they self-help but because of the flat funding for nine years now and they use other funding outside of this contract to support that group. this is their contribution to the program. >> thank you. >> any other questions? >> i will be recusing myself. >> all aye. >> opposed? >> carries.

announcements? >> commissionersvy one, and that is that the next meeting of this commission, we will be presenting the area plan up date for your approval. it is that time of year and we will be reviewing the up date. >> before i go to general public comment i would like to invite dan to come and maybe just give us a quick up date on this state discussions around ihhs. >> as you know, the ihhs program

is referred tos athe mant nens of effort funding plan. and since 12, 13, fiscal year, 1213, and what that says in he sense in the county point of view is that there is a fixed county contribution which is increased every year by 3 and a half percent. and it is further increased if a local public authority negotiates a change in wages and benefits and over the years since the moe went into effect, there have been a number of actions between counties and states to further define what is covered and not covered. by the mle, and we have established that inflationary increases in medical costs, for provider benefits, is not something that triggers a change in the moe. and that local and state minimum

wage changes are not something that triggers a cost in the mle. and that change is in federal and regulations or the entertation of the federal regulations like those who have led to the over time payments for ihhs workers. do not trigger a change in the mle and that the state policy changes that cause increases in costs do not change. they are the most, the most significant of which is the restoration of a 7 percent cut in hours that was made during t swarts neglecter administration, and so this has been a funding mechanism that has been beneficial for counties and it is part of the cci or the coordinated care initiative and engabling legislation, requires the director of the department of finance at the state level to make an annual determination of

the cost effectiveness of cci and if it is determined to be not cost effective, to end the program. and that happened this january. in the governor's budget. and the biggest impact to counties in that, was that the ihhs mle was ended by that action. so what that amounts to is the 623 million cost shift from the state to the counties. because it returns the funding of the ihhs program to it's pre-cci rules. which in essence were that counties would cover, 35 percent of all wage and benefit costs that are non-federal. and that they would have an administrative allocation and within the administration allocation would cover, 15 percent of the cost and over the allocation would cover, 50

percent of the cost. and so counties were as you would expect, shocked. and fell collectively that they would have a very, very, hard time absorbing those costs. and the speaker of the assembly, responded to that, and made a proposal that was meant to be a compromised proposal. and what it said in essence was that the ihhs, mle would be increased by $623 million dollars. but it would be kept in place. and so that would give the administration an increase in county contributions for in the budget year. but but, having it be an mle going forward would hold down the increased for counties, and part of the speaker's proposal

was a reaffirmation that the collective bargaining would be handled at the state level. and so counties responded to it and they felt there was an obligation. the important part that i left out is that the speaker said that if his proposal went into effect, a fund would be kree alted at the state level, which would in essence pay the $623 million dollars. and that would being reduced in the growth of in 1991, realignment revenue and that is why it is impossible to describe it simply. so 1991, realignment revenue is

a stream of the sales tax licensing fees that come to counties to pay for a number of different things but among them are the county sheriff and the caseload cost and they have grown state wide at 100 million dollars a year give or take. this would be funded with 523 million dollars of internal borrowing at the state level, and in the second year it would be funded by 423 million of the internal bore ring at the state level and what it did is that it said, and the continued to be

diverted to this fund, and until it was big enough to cover the full costs and on the annual basis and then after that, it would be used to pay back the borrowing that happened. and in the speaker analysis took about 15 years and so by the time that it was fully paid back would be 15 years. and so, the sales tax growth would be diverted for that purpose during that time period. which means that no sales tax revenue would be available for the public health growth or mental health growth but it would be available to cover so the counties had a number of objections some are technical and some are directed to those

points. and basically they said, we don't think that this mechanism works at this level. that would cover the full, and there is a negotiation going on between the counties represented by the association of counties and the administration represented by the state department of finance to see if they can't get to a place where on the rebasing of the mle but keep the structure primarily in place. that is where we are today. and from a timing point of view, i

think that everybody would like to get this agreement wrapped up in about two to three weeks. because that is when the governor needs to be revising. and it is a tight fiem frame and a lot of people are giving a lot of time and energy for this and so the conversations are happening every day. >> >> thank you, what is the and there are two different estimates on that and one is a county estimate and one is a state estimate and they are relatively close, and the county estimate is the impact in the year will be $40 million, and in the state estimate is that the impact in the budget year will be about 36 million. >> thank you. and other questions from the commission? >> yes. >> we are talking about ihhs, that is the home care workers,

right? >> it is the whole ihhs. >> okay, well that is so much money of the home care worker gets on the federal money so much of it, the state money. and soy much of it is the money that can you tell me roughly, percentage wise, how much is the federal government giving or dollar and cents of before i asked that question, maybe i can ask you, how much is the san francisco home care workers getting in that, for per hour. >> and so, at the present time, the san francisco ihhs workers are receiving the minimum wage, which in san francisco is 13 dollars an hour. and it will go to 14 dollars an hour on july first and then to 15 dollars an hour the subsequent july first. >> plus the healthcare right? >> also, for the vacation money,

there is not vacation money, but there is no health and dental. >> how much are we subsidizing now for the city and the share of the home care workers? >> so the city under the moe has a contribution, 80 million and they will grow by 3 and a half percent so let's call it 82 and a half million or so. >> okay, at this time, before they increase, and they are getting $13 an hour and the homework workers and how much is of the city is putting in? a couple of dollars in >> roughly? >> so the city share and so the federal share is now under the affordable care act.

54 percent, and i think that the county share comes out to about, 20 percent, so the state would be whatever the difference is. >> 260 or something. >> yeah. >> and 20 percent of the city. thank you, thank you. >> any other questions? >> thank you. for this spur of the moment up date. any other public comment? >> if not i will entertain a motion for, so moved. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> aye. >> okay.

>> ladies and gentlemen the chairman has called the meeting to order. please, turn off your electronic devices. and please rise for the pledge of allegiance. >> [pledge of allegiance] >> commissioner turman i like to call roll call turman here, mazzucco present, marshall present, dejesus is excused. tran