environment it's truly . >> supervisor fewer: the meeting will come to forward. this is a special meeting of the budget and finance committee. i am supervisor sandra lee fewer, the chairman of this committee. i am joined by supervisor stefani and supervisor katey tang. supervisor malia cohen is excused from today's meeting. can we have a motion?

owe will do that without objection. today's clerk is linda wong. madam clerk, do you have any person(s) responsible for the ringing of or use of a cell phone, pager, or other similar sound-producing electronic device. items acted on today will appear on the october 16 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. madam clerk can you please call item number one. >> item number one, resolution authorizing the department of homelessness and supportive housing to apply for a grant from the california department of housing and community development. >> good morning, vice chair fewer, supervisors. i'm emily cohen with the department of homelessness and supportive housing. as the resolution title implies, this authorizes our department

to apply for the california emergency solution and housing program, which is a new state program to provide services to people at risk of or experiencing homelessness. this -- there's a total of $5.3 million being made available from the state, and san francisco anticipates receiving 1.6 million in the first rounding funding, and there will be two rounds of funding this year. we appropriates spending the funds in the following way: 1.5 million will be spent on supportive services for people in scattered sites supportive housing. we propose spending $50,000 on reentry costs, and then the remainder on administrative costs. >> supervisor fewer: let's open this up for public comment, is there any members of the public that would like to speak on this issue? seeing none, public comment is now closed. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor fewer: there is no b.l.a. motion. would someone like to make a

motion? >>clerk: public comment has already been opened and closed. would you like to open it up for public comment, madam chair? >> supervisor fewer: yes. we have one speaker at the podium. thank you, miss wong. >> the housing wong is the proposals that were indicated yesterday, because they were indicating some proposals yesterday that the -- that needed much funding to renovate and other remodelling on other properties. is that what this is in regard or is this the homeless situation to build more housing for that or is this for increase in taxes? >> supervisor fewer: i believe miss cohen can answer your questions after public comment is finished? >> okay. is this for the funding process because if not, i need to

elaborate how we're going to come up with a financing institution because it's of feasible importance to the project. >> supervisor fewer: miss cohen can actually answer those questions after your public comment has been completed. [inaudible] >> supervisor fewer: are you -- is your public comment completed, sir? >> no ma'am. i just want to get the -- [inaudible] >> okay. excellent. the importance to that is did you -- i'm here to resolve this corrupt government and corrupt society. the important thing is i will fund any project as long as it serves the purpose and it helps the project with what it's

supposed to. you've got to go. so the important thing is we build or we buying property to renovate it to allow the homeless to be living in it. which one is it? >> supervisor fewer: sir, seeing that your time is up, i'm sure if you ask miss cohen, she'll be happy to answer your question. thank you very much for your public comment. are there any other members of the public that would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is now closed. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor fewer: colleagues, is there a motion on this item? >> supervisor tang: i'll make a motion to send this to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> supervisor fewer: great. we'll cake that without objection. madam clerk, would you please call item number two. [agenda item read] >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much.

i believe jennifer calwart from the department of public health is here to present on this item. >> my name is jennifer calawart, and i manage the tobacco retail program in environmental health. i'm here to provide the approval for the california justice department proposition 56, a law enforcement grant. the grant award is approximately $1.7 million to cover our tobacco program enforcement and educational efforts for the next two fiscal years. just last month, the f.d.a. has called team vaping a public health epidemic, shining light on the increase in youth tobacco use. the funding will expand our enforcement with the san francisco police department

under 21 decoy department. in addition, the project will aid in the elimination of illegal sales of tobacco products at unpermitted tobacco facilities, as well as create a sampling procedures for unidentified tobacco products. through this, an administrative law judge will be activated. the department requires a more face-to-face interaction with the department to understand federal, state and local laws. therefore an increases outreach effort by our department will occur at 400 retailers peryear to provide improved educational materials and conduct compliance inspections. lastly, our department will develop and provide training at conferences and to rural northern california jurisdictions regarding our

enforcement and educational efforts and lessons learned. we look forward to the opportunity to expand our efforts to improve the health of san franciscans and to create transparent expectations for all tobacco retailers in san francisco. i'm here if you have any questions. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. colleagues, are there any questions? seeing none, there is also no b.l.a. report on this item. let's open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public that wish to speak on this item? seeing none public comment is closed. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor fewer: colleagues is there a recommendation on this item? >> i'd like to move this forward to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. we can take that without objection. [ gavel ]. >> supervisor fewer: madam clerk, would you please read the next item. [agenda item read] >> supervisor fewer: thank you

very much. supervisor tang, would you like to speak about this at all? >> supervisor tang: no. we have a representative from d.p.h. who can speak to this item. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. i think june weintraub from the d.p.h. is here to speak for this item. >> we apply to receive it every year for the past several years. it's to support part of our water to do water quality monitoring on our beaches. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. colleagues any questions? seeing none, let's open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public that would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. there is no b.l.a. report. would someone like to make a motion? >> supervisor tang: i'll move this item to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> supervisor fewer: that's great. we can take this without objection. thank you very much. madam clerk, can you please call item number four. >>clerk: item number four, item approval are you lugs master

lease between the treasure island development authority and the united states navy to extend the term for one year to commence december 1, 2018. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. i thank peter summerville from the developer's office is here. >> thank you. in front of the committee today is the annual extension for the lease with the united states navy, continues the agreement through 2019. authority staff requests approval, and i'm available for any questions. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. there is no b.l.a. report on this item. colleagues, do you have any questions for mr. summerville? yes. seeing none, let's open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public that would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. do we have a motion for this item?

>> supervisor stefani: yes. i'd like to move this forward to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> supervisor fewer: without objection, we can accept this item. madam clerk, please call item number five. >>clerk: item 5, item authorizing the municipal transportation agency to extend the contract -- with a minimum annual guarantee of approximately 32.3 million. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. i believe gail stein from the sfmta is here to present on this item. >> good morning, supervisors. this resolution would authorize a five year extension of the existing contract the city has through the m.t.a. has with incident section media. the contract is on exactly the same terms as the initial term. it was worth a minimum of $32,250,000 to the m.t.a. over five years and possibly more if the contractor sells more advertising. there's a 65% revenue shares.

the contractor has exceeded the minimum in each of the four years so far. i'm happy to answer any questions. i know the b.l.a. has done a report on this, also. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. supervisor tang? >> supervisor tang: thank you. i know it's in our information but maybe for the record if you could just state on you the contract has exceeded the max each year, what level. >> yeah. basically, permonth, we have an amount permonth, and if they exceed it, then, we get more than the minimum, so it would take the amount permonth and multiply it by 65%. >> supervisor tang: no. i was just wondering if you could state what level it's exceeded the mag each year. >> so they have exceeded the mag by approximately 1.5 million over the four year period, and they have exceeded it each year, and particularly, the year of the super bowl, which obviously, there were quite a bit sold at

that point. >> supervisor tang: thank you very much. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. miss campbell, can we please have a report from the b.l.a. >> good morning, chair fewer, members of the committee. severin campbell from the b.l.a. office. the original contract was approved by the board for five years through june 2019, so this examine accept -- exercise the first of two five-year options, beginning july 2019 going through 2024. again, as the question was asked and miss stein said, the revenues are either the minimum annual guarantee which is set in the contract itself not only for the first five years but also this extension option was already set in the contract or 65% of gross advertising revenues. the contractor has paid m.t.a. the gross advertising revenues over the first time years. it was about 1.5 million more than the minimum revenues. if the five-year extension is

approved, the m.t.a. would receive 32 million in minimal annual guaranteed revenues over the five year term plus an additional $1.6 million had showing in our marketing fees, and we recommend approval. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. colleagues, any other questions for miss stein? i have one. i'm wondering, do we have the option to eliminate the wraps on the buses? >> if we were, we would have to renegotiate the minimal annual guarantee. the proposal is to extend the contract as it is. any changes would result in a reduction in the minimal annual guarantee and possible a substantial reduction. >> supervisor fewer: has it ever been discussed eliminating the wrap from the buses? >> we understand we do have customers that don't like them. we have limited it to 30.

the contractor, there are months where they could sell more. for example, right around now with dreamforce and the holidays. generally, there are no more than nine or ten at a time, which is 1% of our vehicles, but yes. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. do we have a motion for this, colleagues? >> supervisor tang: i'll make a motion to send forth the item to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> supervisor fewer: we can take that without objection. thank you very much. madam clerk, please call item six. >>clerk: item six, resolution approving modification five to the airport with pgh wong-mck jv for a total term of june 11, 2015 through july -- i'm sorry, june 10, 2019 to commence

following board approval. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. i think we have kathy widener here from the san francisco international airport to present on this item. >> good morning, chair fewer, members of the committee. the item before you seeks approval for a fifth modification to an existing contract with pgh wong-mck jv for project management support services for the on airport hotel project. modification number five would extend the contract through june 10, 2019 and increase the amount of the total contract by $4.6 million. the airport hotel project consists both of the new grand hyatt hotel as well as some road and aircraft parking reconfiguration that's required to accommodate the hotel footprint. the hoe tel is expected to be completed by the end of 2019. the project management contract provides support services for both aspects of the project, including design management,

project controls, system testing, and cost and schedule controls. this contract is the result of a competitive request for proposals process with pgh wong-mck jv being selected as the highest ranked proposer. there is a budget analyst's report that does recommend approval, but i would be happy to answer any questions that you may have. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. colleagues, any questions for miss widener? seeing none, miss campbell, can i have the b.l.a. report. >> so this was originally awarded to the pgh wong-mck jv through a competitive process in 2015. it has not had to come to the board of supervisors previously because it's been under the $10 million threshold. the contractor has modified the contract on an annual basis. in may, they increased it to 9.9 million to allow time to come forward to the board for the approval of modification

number 15, which would set the contract at 14.5 million. our understanding is this should be the last modification to the contract. the hotel is -- project should be completed in 2019, and we do give a detailed budget for the $14.5 million, and we recommend approval. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. any questions, colleagues, at all? seeing none, let's open this up for public comment. public comment is now open. >> the indication on the airport and the hyatt to utilize the funding, the excessiveness of it again is highly inadequate. the important thing is we must understand 9.9 million and 5 million, so what we're looking at is a total of 14 million -- or 10.4 million -- or more than that, get out of here.

but the important thing is this -- i've got these idiots, and i want them away from me. i'm gregory williams, and i'm here to tell the board today i'm going to reform this government. i want the money back into my land. i want their name off of it. somebody put it there, and i cannot get access to it. and i don't want to utilize the maritime law to profile civil litigations or terminations, including international litigations. but i need it done today. i can't get access to it for 11.5 years, and there's nothing i can do. so i want this body to make sure that the banks of federal reserves, embassies, counties,

will get my money back to me. that will make a good undering of who we are going to utilize in the financial institution whether it's attorneys, management or anything in regards to the financing. so i'm ordering that this is did you happen today, immediately. and in regards to the funding for this project, we're going to put that project on hold. we have more important projects and concerns in regards to san francisco -- [inaudible] fewer fur thank you very much. your public comment is now closed. any other members of the public that would like to speak? public comment is now closed? i'd like to move this item to the board with a positive recommendation. we can take that without objection. madam clerk, call eyes number seven. >> authorizing the department of

the environment to submit applications on behalf of the city for grants offered by the california department of resources, recycling and recovery for which it is eligible. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. i believe that we have charles sheehan from the department of the environment to present on this item. >> thank you, supervisor. charles sheehan. i'm the public affairs and policy manager at the department of the environment. the resolution you have before you today is fairly straightforward. it allows the department of the environment to apply for grants for which we are eligible for from the department of -- from california's department of resources, recycling and recovery, more commonly known as calorie cycle. we routinely -- cal recycle. we apply for a lot of grants, including solid waste cleanup, container and bottle recycling grants, and so we have an

ongoing relationship. some of these grants require yearly applications that we apply for each year. and so periodically, cal recycle asks us for updated resolutions to reafirm our authority to apply for these grants, and that's why we're here. we're working on a mobile recycling pilot grant, and that is mostly complete, except they're waiting for an updated resolution, which is why we're here. i'll take any questions if you have them. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. colleagues, do you have any questions for mr. sheehan. there also is no b.l.a. report. let's open it up to public comment. is there any members of the public that would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. i'll make a motion to move this with a positive recommendation to the full board. take that without objection? thank you very much. madam clerk, can you please call item number 8.

>>clerk: ordinance retroactively authorizing the office of the treasurer and tax collector to accept and spend a grant for the financial justice project and amending the annual salary ordinance to provide for the creation of one grant funded position. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. i believe we have amanda freed from the office of the treasurer and tax collector to present on this item. >> good morning, supervisors. this is an ordinance to accept and expend 415,597 from the laura and john arnold foundation. this grant award is to support the treasurer's financial justice project to develop a fines and fees reform. fines and fees serve as consequences for breaking rules or help us underwrite our costs, but for low-income people and particularly people of color,

fines and fees can become predatory. they can push people in a hole they cannot climb out of. but thanks to you, they eliminated these fees that were high paying for people but low gain for government. the impact of this legislation was felt almost immediately when the court greed to write off debt for 21,000 people. cities and counties around the country are clamoring to learn from our experience. this grant will help us help other cities follow our lead. government should be an equalizer of opportunity and not another driver of inquality. thank you for your consideration. >> supervisor fewer: thank you for your presentation.

there is no b.l.a. on this item. i have one question for miss freed, really. too. so this $415,000 plus is for one f.t., is that correct? >> it's to support the program over several years and includes one f.t.e. >> supervisor fewer: okay. so my question is what happens after this position when the grant is finished? >> typically, grant funded positions are treated like exempt positions for three years, and at that time, the position is over. >> supervisor fewer: okay. and so there is funding for this for the next fiscal year? >> correct. >> supervisor fewer: okay. thank you very much. there is no b.l.a. report. can we have a motion? >>clerk: madam clerk, can we please open it for public comment? >> supervisor fewer: thank you, miss wong. i'd like to open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public that would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is

now item. may i have a motion. >> supervisor tang: i i'll make a motion to send item 8 to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. we'll do that without objection. madam clerk, are there any other items before us today? >>clerk: no, madam chair. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. the meeting is now adjourned. >> my apartment burned down 1.5

years ago in noba. my name is leslie mccray, and i am in outside beauty sales. i have lived in this neighborhood since august of this year. after my fire in my apartment and losing everything, the red cross gave us a list of agencies in the city to reach out to and find out about various programs that could help us get back on our feet, and i signed up for the below market rate program, got my certificate, and started applying and won the housing lottery. this particular building was brand-new, and really, this is the one that i wanted out of everything i applied for. and i came to the open house

here, and there were literally hundreds of people looking at the building. and i -- in my mind, i was, like, how am i ever going to possibly win this? and i did. and when you get that notice that you want, it's surreal, and you don't really believe it, and then it sinks in, yeah, i can have it, and i'm finally good to go; i can stay. my favorite thing about my home, although i miss the charm about the old victorian is everything is brand-new. it's beautiful. my kitchen is amazing. i've really started to enjoy cooking. i really love that we have a gym on-site. i work out four days a week, and it's beautiful working outlooking out over the courtyard that i get to look at. it was hard work to get to the other side, but it's well worth it. i'm super grateful to the

mayor's office of housing for having this for us.

>> good afternoon, everybody. the commissioner will please come to order and the secretary will call the roll. >> commissioner bernal. >> present. >> commissioner sanchez. >> present. >> commissioner greene. >> commissioners please note i put a revised agenda on your desk. it has the consent calendar. the second item is the approval of the meeting of september 18. >> so let's take each one up separately. a motion for the minutes of

september 6 is in order and that was the joint meeting of the planning commission and the health commission and so i motion to approve. >> second. >> okay. are there any corrections to the minutes? seeing no corrections offered we will then vote on those. all in favor say aye. supposed? okay. the second is the minutes of the commission of september 18. a motion sin order. >> to approve. >> second. >> are there any corrections to the minutes? seeing none offered all in favor say aye. those opposed? the minutes of september 18 have been approved. thank you commissioners. i'll note there was no public

request. the item three is the directors's report. >> good afternoon, commissioners, craig wagner, acting director. a couple issues on the report to highlight. on september 22 the trump administration announced it will be proposing a new rule to change public charge policies that governor how to use public manifest to affect individual's immigration status. that could have some significant changes to the use of public assistance programs including medical so we're looking at that very carefully. the human agency and other agencies are examining the potential impact of response. we'll have more as that develops. as you probably heard, the

governor signed recently sb 1045, which is a bill to allow san francisco to allow a new type of conservatorship for those with health needs and we're happy about that. that's one thing the department and city had advocated for and we're in the process of working with our fellow city agencies to develop implementation policies and legislation that would go to the board to specify how that would be used. we have dispatched the ddm and police department deployed a team of four north carolina as part of the emergency management assistance compact team through the state. that is an effort to provide

support given that part of the country has been through and we're happy to do what we can there. on a state scan of shipyard parcel a there was an object where they were through 90% of the areas and it's called a deck marker and used on navy ships at a point in the past. there's no safety risk from the object. it's been removed and contained. so that process showed that the additional scan has been effective in identifying that and we're continuing to work with the other agencies and cdph involve in the ongoing work at this site.

i will leave it athat -- leave it at that in the interest of brevity. with that i'll submit the report. >> commissioners, questions to the director? >> from the shipyard parcel a, we've noted we will continue supporting and looking at the area. as recent news discussed the issue that it is so close to parcel a they thought it needed more scrutiny. what is our position of -- or

what is the department working with the state in regards to that? >> i'll have the doctor come up and tell us about that. >> good afternoon. so first of all, i do want to acknowledge the community residents and the environmental justice activists that have been advocating for testing. we know that after tetra tech did fraud on the shipyard, there was pressure to do scanning of parcel a. and parcel a did not have historical use of radiation. now the testing which was a scanning, hasn't found anything except for this one deck marker and the deck marker was outside and 50 yards away from any housing and underneath and the amount of radiation that was coming from the ground is a very

small amount. to give you an idea of how small the radiation coming out, you'd have to be next to it for 39 hours to get the equivalent of one flight to the east coast and because it was fenced off and no house construction, it was the other road, there was no chance of anybody being exposed. so what we're advocating is to continue doing the scanning because it's providing the reassurance to the residents that the area is clean and they've done all the outside areas and we're advocating they go ahead and do the inside areas on the surface. they're working out the technical issues. the california department of public health has also agreed to do desk swipes because people are concerned. and the last thing i want to point out that provides reassurance to us is if you think of parcel a being right here, it's right next to the shipyard right next to the shipyard, and people are

concerned, if there had been radial dust coming to parcel a, these instruments would find it. it's been completely clean. which means there is absolutely no activity and that provides assurance to the community there's nothing radio active coming over. these instruments are very sensitive. we're fortunate to have the health physicist doing this work for us. >> any further question on the director's report? thank you, acting director. four, general public comment. i did not receive any requests.

we can move on to item five. back from the planning committee. >> the finance and planning committee met immediately before this meeting today and you'll see the items approved on the consent calendar. the first is to the contracts report for october 2018 approved by the committee with one note on the last page the amendment to the contract was approved to extend the period of the contract and if there's anything that needs to be approved with regard to the level of funding that that will come back on next month's report. the other two items were approval of new contracts with afl, enterprises. it provides a pilot program to expand access to den tool care for children ages 0 to 5 working

both within the public health system and with private dental providers. the second was a new contract to provide professional consulting services by health center and both were approved by the center. >> thank you. commissioners, any questions in regards to the report? i would add to clarify that on the impact the system's request would be to proceed to extend the contract which is to request the exact amount be looked at again annual $4 million because there was a decrease of covered california. so when you come to vote for that the committee would then hear again if a modification was needed in order to align that to

more current costs. is that correct? >> yes. >> okay. >> with that we can move to item 6 which is the consent calendar. >> motion to approve the consent calendar. >> the committee has motioned to approve the consent calendar. along with the two other items for the new contracts. is there an extraction of any items off of that consent calendar including the contracts report and the two new contracts? i would like to point out that the new contract with the afl enterprises is one for training on dental practices. and highlight the move for children oral dental care will then be impacted with this

educational effort to dentists in san francisco including the private sector to be able to feel more comfortable in working with children. i think that's noteworthy because it's a brand new effort here in regards to oral health. commissioner green. >> commissioner: it says 0 to 5 but are we starting with children who don't have teeth is there something about the gum or jaw or is it for children beyond the teething stages? i'm curious when it said 0. >> it said 0 to 5. it's my understanding they're

talking about the early teeth that are potentially impacted by poor hygiene and lack of fluoride. someone else might be able to answer that. >> i'm not sure they're here. >> that's what i remember from the work i was doing. >> anybody else want to speak to that? >> could you please come up and speak into the microphone so the hall could hear what you were saying for us, please.

>> this is a preventive dental care initiative and our director would be happy to come answer questions. she's also the principle investigator on the dti. >> the original question is we're also talking about the 0 to 3 as being very important. >> doctor, can you say your name? >> i'm the director of ambulatory and health care for the network. >> dr. sanchez. just a comment and question. i don't know what the state of the art is now pertaining to children's dentistry but i know years ago the key pod models on screening and prevention was

done by the ucsf school of dentistry. many were recruit to work south of market where the kids have the major problems. a lot of immigrant of latin america and train at the general and in other places. when that dean left that helped recruit this unique team, most transferred to ucla where they were involved in these protocols working in east l.a. and other places. i know they had established a model, even come going to the health science campus colorado where pediatric a prime movement in that area. when i see our group is coming

from colorado i wonder if any of our people who were involved in setting up some of these things for the state of california and then moved to ucla and other parts of the nation, if this is part of their afterburner. the uniqueness of the program. we're a port city. kids come in from different places. some are moved in midnight and put into tents like the military. these kids need astounding training for those who take care of them. i think it's a really important protocol so hopefully we'll have unique outcomes on the prize being awarded and they're probably good but i was wondering if perhaps this is part of all that efforts that

went on in the school of dentistry to really focus on the needs of kids coming to port cities like san francisco and moving all over california and the nation. end of comment. >> thank you. i apologize to the commissioner. i kind of violated my own rule here. it looked like i just pulled that one off for discussion. i thought it was really important. just to conclude and respond it was a collaboration. it began the question in how we work with this in the state and

it's something of particularly involved with the minority and vulnerable populations. so we'll do that and bring a follow-up. so i'm sorry. because i don't extract it we still have the entire consent calendar. so it is the entire calendar. anyone who wants to officially extract any other items? >> so moved for approval. >> it is already moved. we're prepared for the vote. all in favor say aye. the consent calendar has been approved. thank you. >> thank you commissioners. there were no public comments. request item 7 is the draft resolution honoring barbara garcia and honoring her contribution to the san francisco department of public health. as the first of two meetings discussing the resolution. today's just discussion.

>> commissioners, we have a resolution before you and normally we have two meetings on it. as you know barbara had left us about a month ago from the department and the commission has asked we create a resolution to honor her life and the resolution is before you for further discussion and for final vote on the meeting of october 16. any public comments on the resolution at this point. questions.

if anyone would like to assist with working with hip or -- >> she doesn't have it either. >> i guess i do have one question, how's this overlap with the supervisors' resolution at the event honoring barbara? is this similar or different content? i heard this could be more inclusive and i'm wondering we do something different weather we shadow the supervisors or what would be most appropriate way to express ourselves? >> okay. so i have the assistance. we have the assistance of the executive secretary on helping

to create the "where ass" and the board of supervisors. as i see it, we tried to create how we in the department envision what she has done. i don't actually have the exact wording of the board of supervisors. >> did i get their copy of the resolution because i didn't want to make it identical but there is overlap due to large projects ms. garcia worked on and we broke out things specific to the dph so it has it's own personality and more in to the details of what she did here. >> as i read it, i would also say the supervisor's presentation listed about

every -- just about all of these including some in more depth perhaps. the other thought i would suggest maybe you want to look at is our director wrote an unbelievable acknowledgement of barbara garcia's extraordinary contributions an leadership which was sent out you may want to review and look at because it sort of puts it adds to what in fact the qualities were of her as a human being and as a leader. i was looking for it, as we all are, as i said i just got this now but it doesn't have to be a repetition of what's gone on but if there's four or five different characteristics we can highlight and take with the

professionalism and dedication. it's like areas that are everybody's been work on our lean and highlight for our five of those and emphasize those as her benchmark in settiunique standards and she put everybody in the same level whether one is here or there and left a fantastic institutional mark. again, i thought this is something you get from supervisors or whatever.

just something four or five areas. can we work on a "where as" in terms of then trying to outline some of the skills she had whether it's intergrit and -- integrity and so forth and i'll have someone work with you on the "where-as." >> one more, barbara as a director has probably gone threw more comprehensive evaluations by the commission since she came aboard. at then of all the reviews, the commission always wrote unbelievable comments pertaining to her achievements. i think if we looked at those

and look at what we acknowledge for her unique contributions i think it would give us the four, five or six areas we want to highlight as what in fact she gave to the city and this department as a leader who excelled. something like that. and other than that, that's all i can think about. >> some performance areas are in here but we'll double check to see if we've omitted any in the last many years she was with us as director. that's the purpose for this to be a document that comes from commission. any other comments at this time?

if not then we will have this back at our next meeting. if there are further comments we will add some of the additional information we can gleam working with commissioner sanchez and if any commissioners also have another thought, we'll try to incorporate that to have a final resolution available for us at our next meeting. was there any other public comment? >> no public comment requests. >> thank you. >> item 8 is the sfdph director of health job description and your one meeting to vote on the draft. we had the meeting regard to the public input for the description

of the director of public health solicitation. this he's now been incorporate the in to the document we have before us and to proceed with the department of human resources, we will need your approval. the time lines are stated here. the staff has worked very word with the wording and the public's concerns along with those the commission has in terms of priority. i would ask for a motion for approval. >> so moved. >> second. >> are there any other discussions? any public comment? >> i've not received any request for public comment. >> okay.

so there's no public comment. it has been motioned for approval and seconded. are there comments in regards to the motion? if not we'll proceed then to the vote. all in favor say aye. those opposed? the description for the director of public health has been approved and we will move forward with the solicitation of interest on the part of applicants. thank you. >> thank you, commissioners. item 9 is the 2016 public health and safety bond update. >> mark primeau. good afternoon. the last time we reported out on the bond was at your june 19 meeting. at that meeting commissioner

chow incorporated a baseline in the schedule to show current activity and then the previous quarter's activity. so joe chen joining us tonight as well will go through the schedules and show you how the projects are compared against the baseline. i'll give an overview on the bonds and talk about the expenditures and turn it over to teri to talk about the accomplishments. some of the major projects in construction at zuckerberg as well as the clinics and joe will go over the scheduling.

so this is just the chart we've been showing for several quarters showing the first bond sale that occurred in january, 2017 and the portion of the $176 million or $150 million broke joan down by program area. this is just the high-level version of the 272 portion of the bond that was $350 million bond in june 2016. this shows you we're spending just under $30 million of the $146.5 million which is a little under 17%. we should have been spending higher than that. one thing that slowed us down and teri and joe will get into it is the vast number of the enables projects to make room for dialysis and public health