whatever we end up doing with the inflation increase and construction cost. we delay the integration of mission bay with portrero hills, bringing that area together, which is one of the great things the study will achieve. we delay the funding sources. we don't have the e.i.r. in place, we can't go out and get funding. it's a great idea to be mad at a problem, but the implement and solution we're proposing here is not a good one. we need to continue the process, analyze the problem, and make a fix. the fix is not delay, and i'm going to withhold money and i don't like it. vote no on this resolution. thank you. >> chairman peskin: thank you, sir. next speaker, please. >> commissioners, ron miguel. the last time i came before you

was chair of the r.a.v. study, and i appreciate your acceptance of it. i'm here to speak strictly on the resolution of item 11. it's my understanding that what has to be done or should be done in the process would be for the comptroller's office to conduct an evaluation of the tjpa's management delivery, star perform a review of alternative oversight and governance models, and that those studies be put before you in order to go forward. chronicle was nice enough to quote me at the end of the article in today's paper, and basically what i said is, i would not like to see this project derailed. that's an understatement. and i like to see it start up again in at least six months, but not three years. the previous makers have

mentioned the fact that we have to move ahead and not delay it any longer than necessary. that necessary is very true, and i thank president peskin for considering that. you don't go ahead with the same people who are under question until those questions have been decided. and, again, please not three years. >> chairman peskin: thank you, mr. miguel. next speaker. >> first of all, best way to take care of this confusion were documents haven't been presented to you pretending to both negative and cash flow of the project. i believe it would be ideal if this board, when calling a hearing, not only pertaining to this matter, but any other matter, is to instruct the respondents to supply documents

pertaining to both positive and negative cash flow, so you can pinpoint exactly how much progress is being made and how much debt is being made. and as far as this overrun extension and more time to complete the project, the developers got nobody to blame but themselves for that. the developer knows how long it's going to take to complete a project, and it should be a protection clause in there to protect the city if the debt line is not met by the developer, any additional expenses must be paid by the developer. now, about this beam, this might be an exception on the grounds that the organization that fabricated this beam might have used materials that didn't meet the american society of testing materials is concerned. that's probably why that beam is defective. but the developers got nobody but themselves to blame when

they don't meet a deadline that was targeted on a contract that they bid for and claimed that they would have the project completed at a specific date. you got nobody but to blame but yourself for that. now you want to spend more money, and as a result the city's supposed to pay for it. and you're getting a $260 million loan on top of that, plus interest, you got nobody to blame but yourselves for that. >> chairman peskin: next speaker. >> good morning, chair peskin, commissioners. my name is bruce agad, chair of the tjpacac, member of the community working groups and board member and transportation rep of the south beach recognition bay association. first i'd like to thank chair peskin for moving this resolution forward. this is an example of good governance, which is so much

appreciated. with that said, until the d.t.x. is completed, both caltrain and high-speed rail will use 4th and king as their northern terminus. with additional ridership associated with caltrain e lin 2 and high-speed rail in 2027, the station and neighborhood won't be able to safely and efficiently handle the anticipated volume of passengers, residents, workers, and visitors without major infrastructure and station improvements. this is problematic from both a passenger and community perspective, and a basis for this it recommendation. to have the d.t.x. completed by 2027, i would recommend that we move forward with the items identified in the resolution in parallel with continuing the 30% design.

if it's determined a different oversight and governance model is identified and preferred, plans could be made at that time to transition this work to the new structure. thank you. >> chairman peskin: thank you. next speaker. >> good morning, i'm peter strauss, i'm on the board of the san francisco transit riders and also working with the friends of d.t.x. there are a number of us down here on item 11, and i think you'll hear some differences in the particulars we're recommending, but what we're all saying, i think, is that we recognize we acknowledge the need for you to exercise your due diligence over this project, but at the same time we all agree that the schedule and momentum for completing the downtown extension must be maintained. one month ago i stood here and tried to remind you that we all bemoan the latest projects at their completion, but whether it is housing or transportation, it is at the beginning of the project that we have the most control, the most ability to

exercise delays in project momentum and ultimately project delivery. i would urge you to consider alternatives to a shutdown, such as you did with construction management of the transbay transit center, for instance, you might consider asking mohammed to have his department review invoices and task orders while you conduct your due diligence rather than shutting down the process at this point. at any rate, i very much urge you to consider how best to maintain the momentum of this project as your due diligence proceeds with minimal impact on the critical path for project delivery. thank you. >> chairman peskin: thank you, mr. strauss. next speaker. >> commissioners, i'm jim haas, i was a member of the r.a.b. working group, and as some of you recall, i appeared a number of times over the last decade

about this project. and, of course, we were reaping what has -- what we sowed long ago by not paying attention to it. the basic problem was that the first executive director kept the project and the agency under wraps. she asserted it was not a city agency, and she did her best to keep the city out of the project, as some of you are well aware. including the mayor at the time. and so, you know, a lot of what went on occurred because nobody knew what was going on. there's an old expression that says, a power deserves scrutiny, not gratitude, and i think that your desire to change the bureaucracy around is not as important as developing a way to scrutinize what is going on. to open it up to the largest extent with technical and public

involvement. so along with my colleagues worried about the time frame, i, too, would like to see some of the work continued and would rather than six months, 90 days to figure out if you're going to change the bureaucracy around, and please don't try to construct something that needs new state legislation and all that sort of thing that would take years, because it's important that we have a finished plan with the engineering and the environmental work done, even if we don't have the money to build it, because if we have that in place, then we're going to have a better chance to get the money to build it. so scrutiny, in my view, is the most important thing that should be looked at in the next several weeks. >> chairman peskin: thank you, mr. haas. next speaker, please. if there are any other members of the public on this item, if you line up to my left, your right. >> i'm bob finebaum, the president of save muni. we are very definitely supporters of the downtown extension of caltrain.

we agree with the r.a.b. study, which had a timeline that showed this project could be delivered with caltrain coming to the transbay center at the end of 2026 or beginning of 2027. but it cannot be delivered if you halt the funding. this is a separable matter, ladies and gentlemen. on the one hand is the governance side of it, which the comptroller and the t.a. staff and others can weigh in on, but on the other side is a strictly technical matter, which are the engineering drawings for the 30% design of the d.t.x. that should go forward in parallel with your discussion

about the govern, and i think that if you adopt the resolution as it's stated, you should add one other organization to the review, and that would be the coroner's office, because clearly you will be killing the d.t.x., thank you. >> chairman peskin: thank you, seeing no other members of the public, we'll close public comment. let me ask you a question relative to some of the speakers. phase two, downtown extension, estimated cost is? >> $4 billion. >> chairman peskin: and that does not include grade separations? >> does not include grade separations. that's based on a 2016 cost estimate, supervisor, and we've been working with staff on funding to update the cost estimate after we do the 30%

design. >> chairman peskin: and grade separations are worth over a billion dollars, $2 billion? >> based on the r.a.b. study. >> chairman peskin: so we're looking at a project that's north of $6 billion. is that a fair statement? >> as we currentliest mate. we would need to do some more assessments and establish a program based on that, and that's the allocated previously for us and discussion today. our focus is the $4 billion, not the $6 billion. we have a billion dollars in starts and another billion in local and other funding, and we're looking to have discussions with high-speed rail and caltrain on passing a facilities charge for folks that would use the trains from the 4th and king station and to a

transit center that would also generate approximately $2 billion over time that we can -- >> supervisor, the reason i'm asking these questions, i want to make it clear that this project is not fully funded. we're all committed to getting it fully funded, but i'm saying that by virtue of the fact that -- and let me associate myself with some of the comments, which is one commenter said the right time to get it right is at the very beginning, and so this kind of is the very beginning, albeit we've already allocated over $50 million. and the whole notion that this is just engineering work actually engineers work as instructed, so transbay was designed -- the terminal was designed by engineers, but we could have given them very different instructions and had a building that cost a lot less money and didn't crack, so i

agree that this is -- let me also associate myself with the comments of the individual who said that the agency was not very transparent, didn't work with the city and county of san francisco, and that's precisely why having a governance structure that is willing to stand up to that kind of a culture, i think, makes imminent sense at the front end. this is not designed to be -- by the way, the only tool that we have to fix this is money, and my fear is, if we give them continued money, then they will continue down their same old path. i realize that, again, this didn't happen on his watch or not entirely, but the notion of having the city comptroller conduct an evaluation of tjpa's management and delivery of phase one and having our own staff come up with governance models that would be ant thetical to that kind of veil of secrecy and

lack of oversight is precisely what we will get if we withhold money, and i hope that we can do it in a handful of months, but we finally have their attention, and i think it would be fool hardy to not use that leverage while we've got it. with that. >> i want to clarify a couple of things, there is a change of leadership at the tjpa, and you're aware of that. i started two years ago, i've been transparent with all our stakeholders, including executive director chang and her staff. they are embedded in our team. we have biweekly meetings with them, we have peer reviews together. for me, it's been a matter of oversight, a matter of importance resource that i have available for me that i've been using. so, just to, you know, just to be fair, the organization has changed and is changing and i've mentioned before in front of this board that moving forward with phase two, this would be a

collaborative effort with all the stakeholders, including m.t.c. and caltrain. i do support your call for the san francisco city comptroller's office to conduct an evaluation of the management and delivery of the transit center. i think that's fair. i think it's valuable to have that, because it will give us valuable lessons learned that we can incorporate for phase two. i also support the efforts to review alternative oversights and governance structure. we welcome that effort. we welcome any effort to strengthen the t.g.p. organization, but we recently added high-speed rail to provide us the strategic leadership that we need to deliver phase two, so currently we have numbers from the city and county of san francisco, two members on the board from the state of california, one is high-speed rail and one is caltrans. we also have caltrain and transit. having said that, i'm sure my

board will welcome any ideas to enhance the leadership of the board. having said that, i think we can all do these things in parallel with moving the 30% design so that we're not incurring any delays. and more importantly, not losing any opportunities for funding. we are losing funding opportunities. we had a very good funding opportunity with s.b. 1. however, we did not have the environmental document approved in time, so we lost that opportunity. so i think moving forward in parallel, in cooperation, will enable us to stay on schedule and capture any funding opportunities that may arise, as well as satisfy your concerns on the project. thank you for giving me the opportunity to address this. >> chairman peskin: thank you. any comments from commissioners? commissioner tang. >> commissioner tang: thank you. and i definitely hear your comments, but i think from this board at least, or this body, you know, i think that there has been a lack of confidence on a

wider scale, and so i think that at this time we would feel -- i would feel comfortable moving forward with such a resolution in terms of this authorization until, i think, that all of us can feel more confident in how it is that we move forward. there has been a lot that's happened in the past, and so if there are future updates where you can restore that level of commitment to us, i think then we would be more than happy to move forward more funds. so, i will be supportive of this resolution. >> chairman peskin: thank you, commissioner. are there any other questions or comments from commissioners? seeing none on item 11, a roll call, please. >> clerk: motion? >> chairman peskin: is there a motion to move item 11, seconded by commissioner brown? colleagues on that motion made and seconded, a roll call, please. [ roll call ]

we have final approval. >> chairman peskin: thank you for that, colleagues, and is there any introduction of new items? seeing none, is there any general public comment? mr. wright. >> yeah, i want to speak up about the matter close to millions of dollars that's being spent on bicycle paths that's located on treasure island. i believe some of that money should be spent on testing the

soil materials that the youth and lessons and adults, as well, that's going to be using this path to test the soil, which i believe is contaminated because a lot of that soil comes from the hunter's point naval shipyard. and also, this demonstration pertaining to contracts and taxes, you've got a differential treatment that you're applying to taxes. you want to tax certain organizations, and then you turn around and don't tax the corporations that's a multitrillion, billion dollar organization and you're applying taxes to companies that's head is nowhere as far in their area of profit as the high-tech companies. it's not fair. you can't have a situation about one company but not enjoyed by another. i spoke about that company called chariot, where they just

have an employee that was killed by a negligent driver. they came in here and made pleas to be excused from paying payroll taxes and highlighted by the m.t.a., and yet they cannot be exempt from payroll taxes, because they get along with the m.t.a., but yet you turn around and exempt the high-tech companies from payroll taxes, giving them a break. they don't need a break. since when does a mul multi trillion, billion dollar corporation need a break? the people that need a break is the people that's most vulnerable, who you campaign and say that you want to help get situated in the city. >> bob finebaum from save muni. well, you've done the wrong thing, but i hope you realize that what you've also done is

criticized and commented about the tjpa board. the tjpa board is controlled by the city of san francisco -- >> chairman peskin: so, i don't want to interrupt you, but in as far as item 11 has been discussed, this is general public comment, so if you want to make general public comment, you can, but you can't talk about something already on the agenda and we had public comment on. >> this is general public comment, because the tjpa board is controlled by the city of san francisco and by adopting that resolution, you are also adopting a vote of no confidence on the tjpa board. you should realize that. >> chairman peskin: thank you for those comments. seeing no other public comment, public comment is closed, and the t.a. is adjourned, but please stick around, because we're going to reconvene as timma for one item. >> clerk: timma board meeting will start in five minutes.

[ five-minute break ]

>> they tend to come up here and drive right up to the vehicle and in and out of their car and into the victim's vehicle, i would say from 10-15 seconds is all it takes to break into a car and they're gone. yeah, we get a lot of break-ins in the area. we try to -- >> i just want to say goodbye. thank you. >> sometimes that's all it takes. >> i never leave anything in my car. >> we let them know there's been a lot of vehicle break-ins in this area specifically, they target this area, rental cars or vehicles with visible items. >> this is just warning about vehicle break-ins. take a look at it.

>> if we can get them to take it with them, take it out of the cars, it helps. good afternoon, colleagues, and welcome to the most exciting part of our day today, the board meeting of the treasure island mobility management agency. please contain your excitement. our clerk today is alberto quintanilla, and i'd like to take a moment to thank felix and charles at sfgov tv for broadcasting our meeting and ensuring it is available online. mr. clerk, do we need to take roll? >> clerk: yes. [ roll call ]

>> chairwoman kim: can you call items two, three, and four together? >> clerk: items two, items three, item four, approve the minutes of the june 26, 2018 meeting. this is an action item. >> chairwoman kim: thank you, colleagues, this meeting is somewhat apropos after our deep dive and discussion into congestion management and mobility management in our sfcta committee meeting, and this is really our first foray into introducing a mobility management program on treasure island, and create a revenue source to fund a brand new ferry

and bus service, as well as autonomous shuttles to policy frontiers related to tolling and equitable access. earlier this month i joined my colleagues who represent districts that border the 180, i'm sorry, the 80, the 101, and the 280, and we, along with our san mateo policymakers, traveled to los angeles to study the experiencing with tolling and another context that of freeway express lanes. we toured and learned about l.a.'s decision-making approach for the 10 freeway, which was experiencing heavy congestion, as well as generating harmful emissions in the neighborhoods adjacent to the 10 back in 2012. and i want to thank supervisitors mandelman, ronen, cohen, for attending this trip.

we also learned it's as much about congestion as the health of our residents. the world health organization estimates up to 80% of residents around the world are caused more than 3 million premature deaths worldwide every year, and so it's important for us to address air quality. at this time i want to open up for the executive director's report. director chance, who is shaking her head. >> thank you so much. i'll submit that online and forego the verbal presentation. >> chairwoman kim: thank you. the clerk has also called an action item, approval of minutes. are there corrections to the minutes or comments from colleagues? seeing none, we'll open up public comment for items 2, 3, and 4. seeing no public comment, public comment is now closed. colleagues, can we take action on the item? we have a motion from commissioner fewer, second from

commissioner yee, and let's take a roll call on this item. >> clerk: on item 4. [ roll call ] we have final approval. >> chairwoman kim: and the item passes. mr. clerk, can you please call the next item? >> clerk: item 5, approve a three-year professional services contract with hntb corporation in an amount not to exceed $250,000 for conceptual system design, operations oversight, and evaluation services for the treasure island autonomous vehicle shuttle pilot program. this is an action item. >> chairwoman kim: this was heard at committee and is incredibly exciting. it will be the first time our city launches or pilots an

autonomous shuttle program here in san francisco, and so this is just to begin the design operation oversight and evaluation services. we have mike tan here if anyone has any questions or comments. seeing none, we'll open up for public comment on this item. seeing no public comment, public comment is now closed on item number 5. mr. clerk, can we do same house, same call? >> clerk: motion and a second? >> chairwoman kim: sorry, we have a motion from commissioner yee, a second from commissioner peskin. >> clerk: we can take it same house. >> chairwoman kim: same house, same call. mr. clerk, can you call items 6 and 7? >> clerk: item 6 is an information item, item 7, public comment. >> chairwoman kim: colleagues, are there any new items you would like to introduce today? seeing none, public comments on items number 6 and also general public comment at this time. seeing no public comment, public

comment is now closed for item 6 and 7. mr. clerk, any other items before this board? >> clerk: item 8, adjournment. >> chairwoman kim: seeing none, this meeting is adjourned. see you all at 2:00 p.m. >> president cohen: good morning, ladies and gentlemen. welcome back to the budget and finance committee. my name is malia cohen. to my right is supervisor sandra fewer, and to my left is

supervisor cakathrin stefani. mr. clerk are there any announcements? >>clerk: yes. items acted upon today will appear on the november 13 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise noted. >> president cohen: all right. thank you very much. want to thank jessie larson and matthew ignaio for their assistance today, and again, our clerk today is mr. victor young. mr. young, could you call items number two and three together? >> item 2 is 200 million of special tax bond series 2013 a and b for financing related to the transbay transit center project in 201819. item number three is a resolution authorizing the issuance and sale of one or more series of special tax bond for the city and county of san

francisco community facilities district 2014-1 in an aggregate amount not to exceed $2 million. >> president cohen: thank you. colleagues, we will continue these items to the call of the chair. mr. deputy city attorney, do we need to take public comment on this? we will take public comment on items two and three. seeing none, public comment is closed. we'll continue this to the call of the chair, mr. young. >>clerk: yes. items 2 and 3 are continued to the call of the chair. >> president cohen: thank you. please call item four. >>clerk: item four is an ordinance amending 01000 which set aside certain property in margaret s. hayward playground for the combined emergency communications center at is 011 turk street. >> president cohen: all right. thank you.

is there public comment on item four? all right. seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, i'd like to honor the request of the rec and park department. they've asked that we continue this item one week to the date of november 1. we'll take that without objection. thank you. item -- item 1, please. >>clerk: item number 1 is a resolution authorizing and improving the lease of a portion of the equipment room at zuckerberg san francisco general hospital with g.t.e. mobile net of california, limited partnership at a monthly base rate of $5,000. >> president cohen: so this item was continued from last week's meeting. it was a a lease from the city to verizon to ensure that there's adequate cell phone coverage inside sf general.

we've heard items like this before with lease to ss to othe providers. i understand that this lease is not an immediate candidate for 5-g, and that technology is not yet available to us. however, at&t has announced that its 5-g infrastructure is going to be rolled out in the early part of 2019. verizon and others are developing their launch plan across the entire nation. this is a five-year lease with two five-year options to extend, and at the end of the lease, the patients with the -- the patients and the workers of sf general and those that are also working in building 25 will be using subpart technology. can you tell us what subpart technology is? >> so right now, the current d.a.s. will handle up to 4-g standard.

5-g is extended into the micrometer spectrum of the band wa wave. >> president cohen: i want to make sure that zuckerberg should be in the head, not the last. they are in the life saving business, and i think they deserve to have access to the most up to date technology. i have a few questions for, i think -- i don't know. are you eric schafer? >> i am. >> president cohen: when will 5 d-g -- 5-g infrastructure be available to the city, and how will this d.o.s. help provide this to the city.

>> d.o.s. was originally designed for police and ambulance radios. the current transmitter's deployed through zuckerberg operate at that building, so it would have to be improved at that transmitter level as well as the verizon box going into those transmitters. we would be working with the city and the vendors to develop what that system would look like. >> president cohen: do you know what that needs to happen for the investment to become a reality? >> right now, it's still in the test phase. they're putting small pockets around and doing that. whenever we start talking about infrastructure and improvements in nascient technology. if we were to put in every

possible technology, it's got to prove itself and bear itself out. linda garrule over at the city's technology, she looks for the infrastructure to start within the city in about three to five years. >> president cohen: okay. what role does d.p.h. play in the selection of the vendors that are going to be providing service to public health facilities. >> so again, the d.a.s. is primarily for radio communications. as far as vendors coming in offering services, we would be ubiquitous. we would provide services to any carrier, as patients coming into sf general would have any carrier. >> president cohen: okay. thank you. colleagues, do you have any questions?

>> okay. i just want to make sure, as we're moving into this 5-g territory, i just want to make sure that institutions that serve poor, indigent, immigrant people are not being left behind and that they also have access to high quality technology. thank you. we'll go to public comment. any member of the public that would like to comment on item number one, please come forward. all right. seeing none, public comment is closed. i'll make a motion to send this to the full board with a positive recommendation, and we will send this as a committee report. we'll take that without objection. thank you. all right. moving on, item 5, please. >>clerk: item number 5 is a resolution authorizing the director of real estate to authorize a lease extension for the real property located at 759 -- 755 and 759 vanness

avenue, term commencing upon approval by the board of supervisors for a monthly base rent of approximately $45,000. >> president cohen: thank you. thank you, mr. penny, for being here today. colleagues, there is an item. it's a fore-lease extension for the department of public health for parking. d.p.h. has been in the space since 1981. it operates its t.a.y. program as well as its hiv program. maybe you could tell us, mr. penny, about the 95% operating value and what that means. >> good morning. my name is enrique penny. i'm the director of real estate, we negotiated the rate for this extension, and based upon the research that i've done and that

of my transaction team and also research that is available on costar, we've determined that the $45 persquare foot is 95% of market rate for properties of a similar nature in the nair. we just did a study of 13 comparable -- i'm sorry, 12 comparables in the area, which is a -- within a quarter mile of this particular location. the average of those comps was $43.98. this rent rate is $40. >> president cohen: so what you're saying is that we are getting an excellent bang for our buck. >> we are, indeed. >> president cohen: all right. i appreciate that. are there any other details that you'd like to present to this body? >> no. i would just point out that there is a rent escalator. it escalates annually by the

consumer price index, but that escalation is bracketed, no less than 3% but no more than 5%, so there are no big spikes or surprises on either side. that's all i have for you unless you have other questions for me. >> president cohen: i don't have any questions at this time. colleagues? what we're going to do is take public comment. public comment on item 5. is there any member of the public that would like to comment on this real property lease extension? all right. seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you. let's make a motion to approve and send to the full board with a positive recommendation and we can take that without objection. item 6, please. >>clerk: item number 6 is a resolution retroactively authorizing the police department to accept and expend a boating safety enforcement grant from the california department of park and recreation. >> president cohen: thank you. thank you very much. this is sponsored by kathrin

sta stefani, is there any remarks that you'd like to make? okay. thank you. good morning. >> good morning, supervisors. my name is patrick young. i'm with the san francisco police department. i'm the grant manager. today we're asking for acceptance of the 2018 boating safety and enforcement grant award from the california department of parks and recreation division of boat and water ways. the grant funds will be used to upgrade the navigation and safety equipment on two of our moose boot vessels, and it enhances our ability to locate and recover evidence, property or to locate drowning victims that are subsurface.

funds will be used to purchase two personal watercraft with a transport trailer to replace two of our ageing personal watercraft in our fleet. just for a little bit of background, the sfpd marine unit is the primary marine unit for san francisco and it's responsible for enforcing the 64 square nimiles of shoreline, an ferry and cruise ship terminals. with this grant award, we'll be able to extend the useful life of our two vessels and provide our marine department with updated equipment. >> president cohen: do you know how often the police department uses these marine vessels? >> it depends upon the type of incident.

they do use -- they do have multiple vessels that they're -- that they have a choice of using. as far as specific numbers, i don't have it on hand. >> president cohen: how many marine vessels do they have on hand, including these new ones? >> i'd have to check back. i can get you that after -- >> president cohen: all right. so this is an accept and expend gran oriente for the purchase-- for the acceptance and expend grant for two new watercraft? >> it's for two new watercraft to expend the useful life. >> president cohen: and you're the -- >> i'm the grant manager. >> president cohen: okay. does that conclude your presentation? >> yes. >> president cohen: all right. thank you. we're going to take public

comment on these items. if there's any member of the public to make any comment on this, please come down. seeing none, public comment is closed. i'll make a motion to move this to the full board with a positive recommendation. items 7, 8, and 9 call together. >> item seven is approving airport automated lease between new zoom l.l.c. with a minimum annual guarantee of is $50,000 for the first year of the lease. item number 8 is a resolution approving the terminal two specialty retail concession lease number five, lease number 18-0156 between express spa and san francisco and national l.l.c. and the city and county of san francisco for a minimum annual guarantee of $145,000 for the first year of the lease.

item 9 is a resolution approving the expedited travelers services lease 10-1089 between al claire l.l.c. by the city and county of san francisco acting by the airport commission with a minimum annual guarantee of $1.5 million for the first year of the lease. >> president cohen: mr. young, thank you very much for reading that. we've got kathy widener for the san francisco airport. these are ones for vending machines, one for express spa, and one for clear, which surprises shuttle services. >> correct. the airport is seeking your approval for three retail releases with new zoom, express spa, and all clear. as chair cohen just mentioned, new zoom will operate specialized vending machines

throughout the airport. express spa will operate a wellness center and spa concept in terminal two, and all clear offers expedited traveler services for checkpoint access throughout all airport terminals. the new zoom and all clear leases both have initial rental terms of five years with two one-year options to extend and express spa has a rental term of two years with no options to extend. all vendors will pay the minimum guarantee or percentage rent based on total revenues. over the term of the leases, the airport will receive at least $9.265 million based on the annual guaranteed rent. the budget analyst has reviewed the terms of the lease and recommends approval, but i would

be happy to answer questions that you may have. >> president cohen: i have a few questions. given all clear is a unique lease, skb it doesn't go through the competitive bid process, how do you determine the value of the lease? >> it does go through the competitive review process, although they are currently the only provide vendor that offers this service. the t.s.a. does have a similar service in precheck that is basically front of the line access after they've done the screening process, so we do have something to compare it against in terms of services. do you mean rent? is that what you're asking, how we determine the rent? >> president cohen: yes. >> i believe it's based on the previous -- we had an agreement with them before, and they operate at airports around the country, so it's competitive based on what they are charged at other airport for the same amount of passengers, how people they can enroll.

>> president cohen: okay. so how do we determine the revenues? >> the airport received a percent -- either the minimum annual guarantee or a percentage of how many memberships they're able to offer. >> president cohen: so is it by the number of passengers using it on a daily basis or a number that sign up for a trial? >> it's either -- it's either the minimum annual guarantee or the number of passengers who use the all clear service at s.f.o. >> president cohen: and the minimum number of guarantee, is that -- was that -- how does that come about? >> i believe, and i will clarify this for you, but my understanding that it's based on our previous experience with all clear and on the same services that they provide at other airports. it's worth noting that the minimum annual guarantee is not -- we're not expecting them to pay that. in the past, they've paid on the percentage based rent, so it's a

greater amount, so the minimum guarantee is lower than what we actually believe we will receive. >> president cohen: i see. so all clear is a vendor with the airport. >> yes. >> president cohen: is t.s.a. precheck also a vendor? >> precheck is a service that is offered through the t.s.a., although you do pay to enroll in it, it's not a vendor at the airport. we don't get rent from them, we don't have an agreement with them, it's all through the t.s.a. >> president cohen: all right. and what's the distinction between the two? >> one is a private company and one is part of the t.s.a. process that you go through. their rates are relatively competitive. they're about the same. i think it's about $150 a year for each. t.s.a. does certify all clear. they wouldn't be able to offer the service unless they weren't

certified by t.s.a. it's just a choice, it's a different company than t.s.a. >> president cohen: all right. thank you. colleagues, are there any other questions for oothy widener? we're going to go to public comment on items 7, 8, and 9. seeing that there are no members of the public, i'll close public comment. i'll make a motion to send that to the full board with a positive recommendation. >>clerk: yes. items 7, 8, and 9 have been -- >> president cohen: pardon me. i totally forgot about the b.l.a. report. i'm so sorry. let me make a motion to rescind the action that we took on items 7, 8, and 9. we do that without objection. thank you. and my apologies, please. >> good morning, chair cohen and members of the committee. the proposed resolutions approve

leases between the airport as landlord and three tenants as miss widener explained with new zoom for auto mated re-taylor vending machines, with express spa, l.l.c. as a wellness concession for a term of seven years, and with all clear l.l.c. as an expedited travel service for a term of five years. between late april and early may, the airport received five proposals for three leases. separate three member panels reviewed the contract for each r.f.p., and you can see the different competitors and the ones that were chosen. as miss widener explained, there was only one proposer for expedited travel services. that is all clear, l.l.c., which is the only company that provides passengers expedited

access through security checkpoints. table two on page 18 of our report outlines the terms of the proposed leases. the new zoom l.l.c. vending machines is for a term of five years, with two one-year options to extend, and a minimum annual guarantee of 150,000 with increases to that minimal annual guarantee based on c.p.i. or the greater of the -- minimum annual guarantee or percentage of gross revenues. the second lease, express spa, is for a term of seven years. there's no options to extend. the minimum annual guarantee is $145,000 or the -- and -- so the airport will receive that or the greater of that or the percentage of gross revenues. and finally, all clear, l.l.c., for a term of five years with

two one-year options to extend with a make up mum annual guaranteed rent of 1.5 million. the airport would receive that or the greater -- the airport would receive that or if the percentage of gross revenues is greater, then they would receive 12.5% of gross revenues. under that, the airport would receive -- so between the three leases, the airport would receive about 1.8 million in minimum annual guaranteed rent in the first year and at least 1,925,000 over the next year in the annual terms of the lease. the airport does expect to receive the percentage rent which would exceed the minimum annual guaranteed. the breakdown of the minimum annual guaranteed rent received by the airport without c.p.i. adjustment is shown in the chart in our report and would total $965,000 over the terms of the leases, and we recommend

approval of the proposed resolutions. >> president cohen: thank you. and my apologies for skipping over you earlier, as well as the other item, item 5. all right. thank you for your opinion, and colleagues, i don't think that influences or changes our decision either way. we are in agreement. let's send items 7, 8, and 9 before -- to the full board with a positive recommendation. before we do that, let's take public comment again on items 7, 8, 8, and 9. seeing none, public comment is closed. all right. i'll make a motion to send to the full board with a positive recommendation. all right. thank you, miss widener. mr. clerk, please call item 10. >>clerk: item 10 is a resolution authorizing the public defender to end into an agreement with bob cat

photography, l.l.c. >> president cohen: do i have a representative from the public defender's office? welcome. >> good morning, supervisors. jeff adaci is in the middle of a trial today. he just started a murder trial, so he asked if i could come and perhaps answer any questions that you might have. >> president cohen: no problem. so this is a resolution allowing the public defender to appear in a tellievision mini series. the public defender will receive approximately $15,000 perepisode, and that money will be used to support local organizations that seek to reduce juvenile crime in low-income neighborhoods. i think that this is a pretty straightforward matter. let's go ahead and take public comment. i don't know if you have any questions. simple agreement. okay if there's any member of

the public that would like to comment on item ten. seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you. so let's -- i'll make a motion to approve and send to the full board with a positive recommendation. all right. colleagues, thank you, mr. gonzalez for being here. this motion is passed unanimously. thank you. >>clerk: i believe we need to go back to item one as we are unable to send it out as a committee report today. >> president cohen: yes, mr. clerk. that's correct. i'll make a motion to rescind the vote on item 1, and we'll take that without objection. thank you very much and reissue to send to the full board with a positive recommendation, and we will take that without objection. all right. is there any other business before this body? >>clerk: that completes the business before this body today. >> president cohen: all right. thank you. we're adjourned.

- working for the city and county of san francisco will immerse you in a vibrant and dynamic city that's on the forefront of economic growth, the arts, and social change. our city has always been on the edge of progress and innovation. after all, we're at the meeting of land and sea. - our city is famous for its iconic scenery, historic designs, and world- class style. it's the birthplace of blue jeans, and where "the rock" holds court over the largest natural harbor on the west coast. - the city's information technology professionals work on revolutionary projects,

like providing free wifi to residents and visitors, developing new programs to keep sfo humming, and ensuring patient safety at san francisco general. our it professionals make government accessible through award-winning mobile apps, and support vital infrastructure projects like the hetch hetchy regional water system. - our employees enjoy competitive salaries, as well as generous benefits programs. but most importantly, working for the city and county of san francisco gives employees an opportunity to contribute their ideas, energy, and commitment to shape the city's future. - thank you for considering a career with the city and county of san francisco. >> good morning. good morning,