here at city hall which i coined as silly hall. it doesn't have to do with being laughing all the time, it means racism, discrimination, and all those other things. i put it under the category of silly. that is why i coined the name silly hall y'all. i have not been here y'all. i am trying to tell you all. i shed some tears. i look young, but black don't crack that much. [laughter] [please stand by]

-- air quality management district, 2018, climate protection program, pilot project october 1, 2018 to june 30, 2020. >> president cohen: what we have are two grants to the department of the environment. first is to -- $4.5 million to convert fossil fuel-burning trucks, medium to heavy, to more efficient, electric vehicles, to reduce air pollution along the freeway corridor. very good. i'm excited. and second for the pilot program expansion to improve refrinl ration maintenance and efficiency small scale food and beverage industry.

why don't you make a presentation to us and nice to see you. >> nice to see you. charles sheehan, department of the environment. i will take them in order. the california resources board accept and expend for $4.5 million. the grant funds will be used for 29 medium and 9 heavy-duty trucks that deliver produce from the sacramento, central valley and san francisco bay area. also to employ level 2 and current fast chargers. and it will be used to install 246 kilowatt solar array at one of the two participating produce markets in san francisco. in san francisco, this grant will produce a demonstration district for medium and heavy duty electric vehicles, an area with higher rates of air

pollution. i do want to point out that medium and heavy duty diesel vehicles are harder vehicles to electrify. and it will be one of the first zero and low emission vehicles on the market. so we're pushing the envelope a little bit with this grant. and we're always excited to do that. and it will improve air quality, not only in bayview, but our highly trafficked corridors within san francisco and regionally and will result, we estimate, in about 1,150 metric tons of co2 emission reductions per year. the department will conduct the work through existing staff positions and $400,000 will come to the department for over three years for us to work and administer the grant. the other $4 million goes to buy equipment, infrastructure upgrades, charging infrastructure, etc. i'll pause. we're asking for your support, but i will see if you have any questions.

>> president cohen: i think it's pretty straightforward. i don't have any questions. i don't see that my colleagues have any questions. budget legislative analyst doesn't have any questions. let's see if the public has anything that they would like to raise. let's go to public comment at this time. may i or are you going to continue? >> do you want me to do the next because you called them together? >> president cohen: yes, i'm sorry. please continue. >> the other grant before you is in the amount of $166,000. to give you context, small corner stores, restaurants, often don't have the bandwidth or resources to focus on the maintenance of their equipment, especially refrigeration units, only fixing them when they're broken. the grant funds will be used to help these small businesses main 10 and upkeep their old refrigeration units, reducing the environmental impact of the

refrigeration units. our grants will provide training, monitoring, compressor replacement, refrig rant itself and other equipment buydown. we'll deliver 25 upgrades through the grant and the department will conduct this work through existing staff positions through the end of the grant and we're happy to answer any questions on this one, too. >> president cohen: no questions here. any members of the public that would like to speak on items 6 and 7 on the grants from california resource board. seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you. i will move to approve these items 6 and 7 and send to the full board with a positive recommendation. without objection. thank you. please call items 8-26 together. 19 items. >> clerk: 8-26 resolutions authorizing contract agreements

between the city and following companies. california creative solutions, c.d.w. government, central computers, cct technologies, cornerstone, dynamite system inner vision, dynamic systems, enpointe, intervision, presidio, robert half and sialom, softnet and stellar, not to exceed $20 million, with options to extend. >> president cohen: we have daniel sanchez to present on the 19 items. it represents technology marketplace 2.0, which is a list of technology companies from which companies can contract with or buy services from.

before you get started, i want you to know that each contract has a maximum of $20 million. my first and foremost question is, do any of these businesses recognize our commitment to l.b.e.s, minority-owned businesses, women-owned businesses? could you speak to that? >> good morning. and, yes, we do have l.b.e. sub contracting goals under these contracts. they must have contracted 15% of the work to local business enterprises and also as part of the overall technology marketplace, we have a tier 3, the set-aside program, reserved for l.b.e.s and 43 companies in this pool. 21 of them are l.b.e.s. >> president cohen: great.

thank you. i'm glad i asked that question. you can go into your presentation. >> i'm accompanied by our director as well. so what i'm going to talk about today is history of the contracts. what the technology marketplace is. the goals of the technology marketplace. i will give you an overview of the selection process for the current 19 contracts and talk about the proposed awards. really briefly, the history of the contracts -- these contracts have -- are one of the avenues by which city departments are able to purchase services and products and they've been in place since the mid 1990s. it started off as a computer store. they've been as-needed contracts. every new version has come with improvements looking to help departments keep up with the quickly changing technology

industry. each version has grown in side and made several improvements to the process. first off, computer store. and then technology store. and then marketplace. and then toward technology marketplace 2.0. what is the technology marketplace? i know you are familiar with it, but it really is, an avenue by which departments can produce their i.t. and service needs. prequalified i.t. vendors, who have gone through a preliminary competitive process and have been awarded a contract, an as-needed contract, specifically for technology products and services, meaning there is no guarantee for money to contractors. they must go through competitive processes for each process or purchase they wish to be awarded and these are also maintained and established by our office,

contract administration. once they come to the pool, they issue competitive processes and solicitations and require a competitive solicitation for anything over $10,000 and oversees for c.f.o. the goals in the current marketplace and they will continue to be in 2.0. these are not in any order. there is no hierarchy. i will start off with city and technology providers. it's our goal to harness relationships, help companies harness relationships with vendors. and to meet their needs related to i.t. we want to have levels of services in the area of i.t.

we want to help departments be able to complete their mission-critical projects. we want to provide a variety of options to them in terms of the vendors' skills, expertise, offerings. the next is the third one, we want it generate the best technology. departments are going to hire these companies, so we want to be sure that they're able to maintain the best value. and by the best value, we're talking about the best combination of price, quality and efficiency. the final one, is what i mentioned, we want to increase vendor diversity and we want to increase the participation. we've want to make sure that l.b.e.s are part of it. and 21 out of 43 are, as i mentioned. and we want to make sure that there is competition, so departments will have the best quality, best prices.

it will be very current to how it's split up now. it's organized into three tiers. tier one, these are the contracts before you today. they're the large contracts, not to exceed $20 million as-needed contracts. and it can propose the product lines and the service categories. tier two can be modified $2 million to $10 million. >> president cohen: let me ask a question about the tierings. it looks like what you're able to do -- i want to make sure that i understand this correctly -- you are breaking it up into smaller, more digestible pieces that would allow l.b.e.s to bid on the projects. is that correct? >> yes. and the purpose of tier two is

to help companies grow and join tier one, the bigger contracts. >> supervisor fewer: do you have a list of measurable goals or is there equity framework that you are holding yourselves accountable to and the companies accountable to? >> we do have a -- let me see if i can find -- in terms of the goals, this is what our goals are. this is our overarching desire for what it will provide to departments. we use this three tier approach to help departments find the correct vendors that provide what it is they're looking for. they all have different skills and expertise and offer different product lines. we have organized it in a way for departments to come and find what it is they're looking for on a case-by-case basis. >> supervisor fewer: how do departments know that these are companies that hire locally or hire people of color or women? we know this is the divide in

the tech industry. >> we do have -- like i mentioned, we have 21 local companies out of a total of 43. and we also require that all these companies keep a local presence in san francisco, within the boundaries of san francisco. they have to have an office here, but we don't have a specific requirement as to where they hire from. other than our standard city terms, there is no specific requirement. >> supervisor fewer: if we don't use this as a lever to integrate and diversity and meet some of our city's needs of employment for the people that live here and high-paying jobs. i held a hearing on tech-sf

about who they're hiring and gender-wise and also by race. i think when we're talking about a $20 million contract or above, that this is essential that we look at this. that we use this as a carrot of something they want. i'm just saying that i -- i understand what you are telling me. i'm just saying that i actually think that we need to hold ourselves accountable to a framework of what we'd like to see and hold businesses accountable to our goals. they are getting money for this. we should be getting -- not just a service, but also a social good with it. and i get about the l.b.e.s, but when we're looking at small businesses in tech, looking at businesses hiring people of color or talking about hiring local people when we're talking about hiring women, l.b.e. is

very broad. and it doesn't really get to it. so i understand what you're trying to do. i just think that if we're not more direct about it or more specific and intentional, that the contracts of $20 million, again and again and again, i think, before us today, we have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 contracts that are not to the exceed $20 million. when i think about the money invested, we could be talking about hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts.

and i don't think that it has to be they hire 100% local folks or 100% of these people, but i do think that there should be a pathway for these individuals, that we're also trying to put to work, to oewds. they have a whole tech program that there could be a connection for us to work together on it. if i'm wrong, educate me on it. i'm with the work force council. i just think that -- you know, we talk about hotel jobs. we talk about entry level jobs at $15 an hour, but the question is always at the table, what's tech's role in this? are we pushing them to do more or at least guiding them to do more? so maybe it's not in your presentation, but if you could explain that to me, i think it

would be really valuable for our listening public to hear, too. >> i'm director of the office of contracted minnesota -- contract administration. i can tell you that our office supports what you are talking about. however, we're bound currently of proposition 209 that prohibits us from awarding a contract or providing any incentives or benefits based on rates and gender. so we are prohibited from putting in our contract incentives as a bonus structure that would award a contract to

someone that would hire more women or based on race, things like that. so what we've done as a city, is try to partner with monitoring and developed the l.b.e. program, which was once a race-and-gender-based program. it has evolved into a local program because of of the passage of 209. i can tell you, as our office, and i know it's something that's being looked at by -- in the l.b.e. program to see if it's time to go back and revisit the ordinance and so if re can incorporate race and gender into certain segments. i know it's being looked at as it relates to -- not to these contracts, but as it relates to a proposed project labor agreement for the city and,

again, this office would be open to that as well. but as the laws are written right now, we're not able to incorporate that into these contracts. i can tell you that breaking things up into tier 1, 2, 3, was done with the intent to try to get more of our local businesses involved and reasons we have to be more specific because they can go up to a maximum of $10 million. they will get their bid discount. when you get into the larger contracts, the current code does not allow the bid discount to apply. so we didn't want to consolidate the contracts, say, into one tier, because it would be great for the bigger firms, but it would make it really hard for the small and mid-sized firms to compete for those dollars.

and that's something that this office -- it would be easier for us to work with a smaller group of contracts, but we're talking on that work, because we know it's the right thing to do. and, again, i would fully support if we wanted to go back as a city and revisit the notion of trying to expand a program. >> supervisor fewer: actually, it's a plan that i am looking again at that and revising it. couldn't we do something to push them to -- that these are companies that are prioritized, we say, choose from this list, but that they're working also with some guidelines around our oewd work force task force? we're not saying specifically. we're not saying you ha of to hire this many of this or this many of that, but we are saying that we would expect that there would be a pathway or there would be -- i just feel like,

yeah, i know, 209 is horrible, but the thing is, if we don't broaden the door, if we don't kick open the door, even to the conversation of a pathway of consciously planting that seed into these companies, that you can't get money from us. look, this is what we believe in as a city and we expect you to believe in that a little bit also if you want to do business with us. so this is that -- i just want to know, how far can we push? and i think we should be pushing more. and i also wanted to say that all the national rhetoric about immigrants talking away jobs from people. immigrants are not taking away jobs from people. technology is taking away jobs from people. so we want to actually include a lot of people who, quite frankly, technology has taken their job. but they can get into technology

and this is the new job market. i would be happy to work with you on how we can actually make a pathway with oewd's work force, because when you look at the jobs that tech is able to place, those are living-wage jobs. in a hotel, hotel worker, other jobs, they're not living-wage jobs, but in tech, they are. i appreciate it. i just felt like hi -- i had to say it because there is so much money on the table. and there's an opportunity and i feel like we need to insert ourseou ourselfselvou ourself selves and part of the vetting process is the companies that are working with the communities, formerly incarcerated, people recently out of work, women who have been out of the work force, too, or people of color. these are -- so we don't have to say specifically about a race or

a gender, but we can say about aligned with work force development. i know i've gone on a long time and i also want to thank you for also having a special conscience around all this money that is city money earned off the backs of hardworking san franciscans. >> i'll be brief, but there are ways that we can push it a bit more, in the envelope, and be clear, too, with these contracts. these are large sums of money. i'm not going to tell you that they're not, but the processes that we're doing now, we basically prequalified the firms. so we're going to give these firms a contract today or at least i hope we approve to allow us to move forward, but there is no work yet. it's not until a department approaches our office and says, i need to do this project and

then we will work with that department and that department will still need to incorporate a process who of the firms will get the work. that process could incorporate some of the things you talked about, what are you going to do to partner with departments within the city to work with certain communities and things like that? that's really open and it's something that our office can work with your office and the other stake holders in the city to try to push the envelope. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. if there's an opportunity before they get on the qualified list that this is a part of what makes them qualified, i just think we should try to push it, but thank you. let's work on this together in the new year. thank you much. >> so really briefly, i'm going to talk about the selection

process and how we got to these companies. we issued an r.p.f. 21 proposals came in. 19 met minimum qualifications and were allowed to proceed to the stage where we looked at their proposal and they had to go through an interview process. we used a panel to score the proposals and they determined that all 19 were qualified and received the points and we selected all 19 of tier one contract of $20 million and these right here are those 19 contracts. they're 19 companies that offer a variety of skills, expertise and product offerings to city departments. together they provide with what

we hope to be, you know, anything they would need in terms of i.t. some of these are specialists. they specialize in a certain product line, but most are generalists, meaning they can do a lot for city departments. together we believe they are a robust and hopefully a fruitful group of products for departments to use when they have a need for an i.t. purchase whether it's services or products. any other questions? >> president cohen: colleagues, any other questions? none? okay. thank you very much. let's go over to b.l.a. >> the 19 pieces of legislation approve 19 contracts for i.t. services and products. each product is $20 million not to exceed. each is for three years, with two one-year options to extend.

the way these work is part of the technology marketplace, that city departments have funds in their budget appropriated by the board for i.t. products. if the products are less than $2.5 million, they can solicit competitive quotes from any of the 19 vendors. if it's more than $2.5 million, they have to go for a separate r.f.p. process. any increases that you saw, some contracts increasing $5 hundred,000 will have to come back to the board. we recommend all 19 resolutions. >> president cohen: thank you. we'll take public comment on items 8-26. if you would like to speak, please come. >> wow. 8-26. how many millions of dollars the city is giving away to tech companies? let me speak a little bit.

would have time, but i want the documents that you have here, because ace is on the doggone case. the thing about it, people say, ace, how can you do all this by yourself? that's the question i want to ask. the tech companies, have to drop a few hundred thousands and put it in our coffer so we can watch y'all and watch oewd. my name is a-c-e. i'm so flabbergasted. i'm appalled. even though y'all look at me and say, he has the audacity and don't even have the capacity. i do have the capacity. i've been monitoring the city for over 20 years, all by myself, with the help of god. and right now, hold up, you are getting into big figures here. you are giving away $20 million a whop. on the streets, $20 for crack like that.

you are giving away $20 million just because they techs. this is a new world, new era. we don't have no time for errors, y'all. so it has to be a mechanism from the community, from the constituents, that we monitor these people close. in order to do that, we need funding ourselves and that's why i'm introducing a group called community assistance service enterprise, case. and it will replace ace, because i can't do it all. i'm going to have surgery here, surgery here. i don't know how much longer i will be here, but with what's going on in this city by the bay, there must be activists that are going on. and i like, supervisor, what you are doing. but we need more than that to watch every penny and dime that comes from this city.

>> president cohen: any other member of the public like to comment on 8-26? thank you. public comment is closed. thank you. we're going to accept the b.l.a.s recommendation as well as the presentation from the department. thank you. we approve items 8-26, send it to the full board with a positive recommendation. supervisor fewer, thank you for your comments. without objection. thank you. okay. please call item 27. >> clerk: item 27, hearing to review the findings of the municipal bank task force and recommend implementation and strategies to improve transparency and investment and local control of san francisco finances and authorize treasurer and tax collector report. >> president cohen: thank you. we've got amanda free from treasurer, that will make a presentation. i would like to offer a few

remarks before we get started. first, i want to say thank you for hearing this item. as the municipal bank task force wraps up their work with the final meeting in january, office of treasurer and tax collector -- my purpose for calling this hearing, is to get -- get to a point in time, a check on the municipal bank. our city's task force report. i want to take an opportunity for them to provide their own input on what's being reflected. i am not going to be here for the final report in january. so that's why i'm calling the hearing today, so i can get an update on the status, framework you've been implementing. i would like to hear some comments from task force members, if you could reflect that in your presentation. in particular, i'm interested in three original questions.

what can and should the municipal bank do in san francisco? and i want a realistic picture of what we're talking about timelines. if you have numbers as to how much it would cost us to do, to implement this, i would love to hear what the figures are. how could we capitalize on such a program? and with that, i would like to turn it over to amanda freed from the office of the treasurer and tax collector. thank you. >> good morning, supervisors. thank you for having me here today to provide an update on our work on the municipal bank feasibility task force. president cohen, i just want to say -- we started working together in this building 15 years ago, i think, so it's an honor to be your last hearing that you call to present on this one.

>> president cohen: thank you. >> for brief background, thank you for the introduction. a public and municipal bank is a bank run and owned by a city, state or country. the idea for municipal bank in san francisco has been percolating around for decades. and there's always similar and parallel efforts on the state level and around the country. based on president cohen's request and advocacy, a task force was convened to look at the viability. the task force has experts from various fields. we have the green lining institute. california reinvestment coalition. we have attorneys that specialize in bank formation. we have the bankers in the public interest and beneficial state bank. we have several government partners as well. we began meeting in february.

as you heard, our final meeting is scheduled in january. i want to say up front that i recognize that the time frame has expanded from the last time we were here. we intended to have a final report in fall, 2018, and we issued a draft executive summary in august to build in ample time for feedback from the task force and the public. in december, we got specific, substantive feedback. this is very much a public process, a task force process. in order to honor the feedback we received and adjust the models to more accurately reflect the will of the toss being for -- task force and now have a final report. the task force has taken a huge policy question and dived into the details with tremendous amount of expertise and openness. we've had incredibly active members of the public.

you can see many here today, who weighed in substantively and constructively on each proposal. and i believe that the final report will be better for the deep public engagement. we will, of course, come back to this body to report on the findings. but i want to thank president cohen for calling this hearing so we can share our work to date and preview the questioning and get your feedback as we draft the final report. as you know, there's a robust body of work outlining the potential benefits of a municipal bank. for those wishing to get up to speed on this body of work, we've compiled a literature review, which is available on our website. and we've been, with the help of our senior analyst, been doing calls with other jurisdictions looking at community banking including representatives from los angeles, washington state, seattle, etc., but to date,

there's been little or no quantitative analysis for how much a bank would cost to create, run, or how long it would take to break even. so the treasurer has approached this process from a rigorous financial perspective. what you can expect in the final report is concrete financial models with enough specifics to guide policy decisions about whether or not to go forward with the bank. in order for each of you to determine if the bank is a good policy depends on what you would like to see the bank accomplish and whether the benefits outweigh the costs. there are a myriad of problems a municipal bank could be formed to address. in order to narrow it down, which was the first task we had as a task force, we listened at the hearings carefully to all of the ideas and proposals that came forth. and we asked members of the task

force to prioritize based on what we heard as all of you as members of the board and members of the public. once we had that master list narrowed down to five, we asked the task force to prioritize again using two different methods. in most instances, the rank was the same. affordable housing. small business lending. infrastructure. 1 and underbanked. cannabis. our staff took these general marching orders and spent time to identify lending models filling gaps in the marketplace. a good example of this is a financing mechanism for a.d.u.s, homeowners that don't have enough equity to get a home ebbing -- equity loan.

we have a look at products costs, financial predictions. the three primary scenarios are as follows. number one, divestment. two, reinvestment. three, a combination of both. the report will have the costs, benefits and outputs with one another and well as other communities, for example, existing expanded city programs. the goal is to have analysis with enough detail that policy makers and the public can understand what will need to be put into a public bank and what it can provide. an outline of what we think as of now is and isn't included in the models.

if there are priorities listed below the line that you would like to understand further or advocate for inclusion, i would love to hear your feedback. please note that the equal products and services of a bank necessarily change over time. we did our very best to model based on the priorities of the task force, but we also looked at many, many different products and services. if you don't see it here or you see it below the line, chances are good we thought about it, so let us know and we can provide more information. in addition to the models, there are a lot of big questions around bank funding and operation that the task force has tried to answer. capitalization. how much will be capitalized? where will the money come from? deposits? how much will the bank hold in deposits? break even. how long will it take for the bank to break even and what subsidy will be required and for

how long? what is the opportunity cost? in many cases, the task force has not been able to find sources of funding other than the general fund. we'll discuss the reasons for things the report. and, lastly, there are some real thorny, tricky questions around the bank's structure and governance. how would a bank entity be structured? would it be owned by the city directly? what is the tax status? how will the board be structured? and probably most importantly -- how can the governing structure keep it true to its mission while insulating a bank from politics? here you will see a timeline for the final report and what's to come and i hope that gives you a solid preview of what you can expect from us. we look forward to coming back before you with a final report and sharing our findings and recommendations with the board. thank you. >> president cohen: all right.

thank you very much. i have some questions i want to ask ms. molly about for the modelling. if you can go to the mike -- i want you to talk to us about different scenarios, reinvestment and combination, because i think it's probably the crux of the presentation. can you drill down a little bit more and share with us your insight and your analysis? thank you. >> sure. first of all, thank you for having us here and being such an advocate for this process and appreciate your patience. we really want to give it to the respect and time it deserves. we're looking at three main models. we have the divestment model, takes over the commercial banking. >> president cohen: into the mike, down closer.

>> this is the model most expensive for the city to pursue because the city's current banking relationships provide us with a lot of services that are expensive to replicate, but it's the model that for some people is the most salient. reinvestment is a model that focuses on community lending and community investment. this model is cheaper up front, but the lending will receive less of a return because we're doing necessarily below-market lending to spur investment in areas of concern for the city. the final is the combination model. and this will being doing both divestment and the banking functions with community reinvestment. so it's the slowest to achieve -- to break even because it's spending and significant costs to do citibanking services and receiving below-market rate.

>> president cohen: can you tell me some of the estimates. i heard along the line that there were staggering numbers. hold on. i want you to be respectful and not get too far ahead 7 the task force that hasn't signed off on the final report, so i want to say thank you for accommodating my request for this hearing, so thank you for honoring that. i'm very grateful. if i'm not mistaken, divest was $30 million? >> we did present some draft models to the task force. because it's a task force work product, we'd feel more comfortable coming back with specific figures once they've weighed in. each time we presented interim models, we've gotten substantive

feedback about interest rates and time frames and so it does feel premature to present those figures today. >> president cohen: all right. so you said something in your presentation -- i wrote it down -- commercial loan funds, that that sounds like it may be viable and tangible that we could see in the mid- to near-term future. can you expand on that? >> sure. the task force was really primarily focuses on creating a municipal bank and honor our charge the majority of our work to date has been looking at what it would take to create a municipal bank and how long would it take to break even, etc. we as staff recognize that for policy makers to balance the benefits, it would be helpful to give alternatives. one of the things we have spoken about at the task force and

anticipate having in the report is the opportunity in the interim, either as you work to develop a municipal bank or otherwise, to think about ways to structure the city's loan portfolio in a different way to become a commercial lender. it's easier administratively and doesn't require a bank charter. but it also does not adhere to the specific goals around divestment. so it is a different opportunity. >> supervisor fewer: yes. thanks for the report. i also think since the state of california doesn't have a public bank charter, whether or not -- and this new governor has said that he's open to a public bank. what what you are presenting today be dependent on if the state of california begins to

have a public bank charter? >> yes. setting up the bank requires some legislative changes at the state. and we've seen a lot of interest both in the cannabis realm and others about creating a pathway for a public bank charter. it doesn't exist right now, but we don't see it as a major obstacle. it's a legislative change that doesn't appear to have significant opposition, just the creation of the charter itself. >> supervisor fewer: so we could have a public municipal bank under the commercial bank charter? >> i think there are ways to creatively structure. the way we're framing the report is that it would be predicated on a change in state law to create a public bank charter. >> supervisor fewer: my next question was going to be, when we look at scenario 1, 2, 3, we would be able to do all of these things if we had a public bank charter. is that correct? >> we would need to have a public bank charter to do any of

those, yes. >> supervisor fewer: are there any scenarios that we can do without a state public bank charter? >> not of the specific models that we're showing. commercial loan fund wouldn't require a change in state law that i'm aware of, but any formation of a public bank would require that. b.l.a.s on your behalf did an excellent report that outlines that, so we will not rehash their analysis. it still stands about what legislative changes we'll need. >> supervisor fewer: so that's a state legislative change. >> correct. >> supervisor fewer: so state officials would have to champion that. got it. thank you. >> president cohen: i have a couple of questions specific to the slides, if we can go -- well, slide 2, slide for background information. i was wondering if you spoke with anyone outside of jurisdictions outside of san francisco, thinking of oakland, l.a., they've been articulating a desire, berkeley as well.

>> yeah, when we first started this work, we recognized that work was happening all over the place. so molly organized a monthly call for jurisdictions to come together and has been leading that call as an opportunity for jurisdictions to share their reports and what they're hearing and legislative changes. we've had a lot of robust changes with jurisdictions around california and also other states as well. >> president cohen: great. maybe i can hear from molly. maybe you can characterize for me what the conversation has been like on the call. how long have you been on the calls? >> they started last spring, so probably nine months or so. calls involve about 10 to 12 jurisdictions. we'll frequently talk about douche -- we'll talk about -- >> president cohen: are they primarily from the state of california or across the u.s.? >> primarily california.

>> president cohen: are they in the banking and finance field or a mix of everything? >> government officials, legislative staff to executive staff to consultants that are hired on. >> president cohen: anyone from the state treasurer's office? >> yes. we have a representative from the state treasurer's office that joins the calls and is very thoughtful and helpful. >> president cohen: who leads the calls? >> i do. >> president cohen: great. tell me about the calls. >> so the calls are wonderful. we spend a fair amount of time updating people on what the latest goings on are in various jurisdictions. los angeles just had measure b. oakland put out their municipal bank or public bank feasibility report. seattle put out a report. so a is aing -- significant amount of time is spent discussing. and we discuss legislation. so legislation that supervisor

fewer was talking about on the state level. we have a couple of people that joined from the state legislative bodies that can provide their perspectives. >> president cohen: in terms of the state of california -- scratch that, san francisco. we have legislators, lobbyists that are lobbying on our city and county's behalf in sacramento. have we indicated to them that this is a priority for us and we want them to be supportive or pushing the legislation that supervisor fewer referenced forward? >> yes the california association of treasurer and tax collectors has been active and we've been working on it and then we've also -- there isn't legislation put forward yet, but it's moving through the process. so we will be bringing a position to the state legislative committee, which i sit on, to put forward a position for the city and county. we've been waiting for a legislative sponsor and other

information to come. >> president cohen: have we contacted our representatives and asked them to consider sponsoring? >> we haven't, no. >> president cohen: so i'm thinking about this strategically, you know. we're moving as much as we can on the local level, beginning the conover -- conversations, building a coalition, but we need to also, i think, be smart and strategic about our friends and representatives in sacramento. so i would encourage you to reach out and brief senator weiner's office and our assembly members that represent san francisco. if you have any other time left over, do the entire nine bay area county legislative teams, so they're aware of how serious we are about moving this on a

statewide level and we would like to have their support and most importantly, i think, to the best of my knowledge, i don't know if they've been educated, but i do want them to know how much work we can do and it can happen within the first quarter of next year once the report is complete. so that we can get our representatives all on the same page. thank you. thank you for characterizing what the calls are. is there anything else? okay. thank you. my other question -- going back to what i was saying. so l.a. and oakland, we're talking. how does our proposal or our study or where we are in this conversation compare to the two other jurisdictions? >> i think to our knowledge, it will be the first report to present financial models. east bay report and other jurisdictional reports have done a good job of foundational analysis of potential benefits,

but we're trying to put some numbers to the ideas and show what it would take financially. where we could get the funds. how long it would take to break even and we're not aware of any other analysis that includes those models. >> president cohen: that's good. i think that's something to be proud of. that we are living up to our san francisco motto of being a leader and pushing ourselves. sometimes the conversations can be uncomfortable. these are huge numbers, long timelines, but i believe that in order for us to get there, we have to start today, even if the start is incremental. as you know, we've worked for san francisco for 15 years, so we've seen how things have started and they've snowballed and encouraged other jurisdictions.

i'm hopeful that you promote what we know and not be bashful about it, understanding it's not perfect, not a perfect analysis, not a perfect model. there are probably many things we didn't take into consideration or things that we overconsidered. but i think we should be moving in that direction if we're going to see public banking and municipal banks m popping up across the state. i think that's important. i want to go to slide 3, the slide that says, what's taking to long? good things happen to those that are patient. but i want to be sure that we're diligent, smart, not wasting time spinning wheels. do you feel like you're resourced? does this body need to provide more money in your budget? we have one woman operating the show. i was just saying, perhaps consider in the next budget cycle if there needs to be more money or a part-time researcher

or contracts that need to be entered into, think about that. the mayor's office gave budget directions yesterday, if i'm not mistaken, so think about that as we go early on to the budget priorities for this department. this is a great opportunity for -- i don't want to say finish his career, but it would be a complement to his career and the things that he's established here in san francisco. all right. what specifically -- if you could talk specifically about what the task force has requested you to model. >> sure. in the beginning, as i mentioned, we went through this prioritization and it's a challenging exercise, as the treasurer will tell you. anyone that comes up and talks to him about a municipal bank has a different idea about what a municipal bank is and what it can do. we knew if we were going to do

this financial modelling, we had to have concrete services of the bank and understand the skeleton to put some costs to it. we had to start somewhere. we had to do that. we had to look at products and services and model them. when we presented them to the task force and public, it was a public document. we got a lot of substantive feedback. number one, that the models were too small. the bank wasn't big enough. >> president cohen: that we were thinking too small? >> yes. that we were thinking too small and, i think, there's a -- i think there's a healthy tension between thinking big and pushing the idea forward versus practical implementation, step-by-step approaches. so those are two different ways to approach a problem.

and when we had that september meeting, we would like to see banks modeled that are bigger and do more and banks that are taking over the city's banking functions, commercial banking functions. so thinking about our portfolio that's contracted with bank of america and how can we take those services in-house. the challenge them for us was nobody has created a bank from scratch that can immediately operate at a scale we would need it to operate in in san francisco. so trying to figure out how much it would cost to create a bank that would do things to make sure we get paid on time, etc. so that took some time.

and i want to commend molly, because she spoke with everybody to large banks, small banks, advocates, partner banks, to figure out how to do this and how much will it cost? so that will be included in the final model. that accounts for some of the delay. >> president cohen: supervisor fewer, do you want to -- >> supervisor fewer: there is only one public bank in the country, bank of north dakota and they invest in everything that's horrible that we as san francis franciscoans would not invest in. but they work with credit unions. the credit unions in north dakota are strong and stable and robust. and i'm wondering, does this

model look at a shared sort of relationship with our credit unions? >> yeah. we have a member from a credit union on our task force. we've been working with credit unions in san francisco for quite a while. [please stand by]