but we had a vacancy in hangar three for a good part of the year. the net residential income will be a little bit below estimates, although, we recently had a resolution of an issue, a question with the assessor recorder's office on participatory property tax assessment that is going to allow the release of some funds that are being held in reserve. our expenditures will be within budget, but total expenses will exceed current fiscal year revenues, which was anticipated in our budget for 2019, fiscal year 2019. but we will be drawing upon prior year reserves to balance current year budget, and so there won't

be a payment necessary from ticb, to balance the current fiscal year budget. for next fiscal year, we have a total budget of roughly $17.5 million. 44% is for city agency costs or consultant services. we're projecting our next year's revenues flat from current year revenues. anticipating that although we were under our current year projections, both commercial and residential should rebound somewhat next year to stay close to our current fiscal year '19 projections. we are anticipating, though, that next year we will exhaust our prior year fund balances, and so this year -- next year's

budget does include a payment from ticd, up to $4.3 million to balance revenues and expenses. the d.d.a. provides that for up -- for the earlier years of the program, when our revenues exceeded expenses, that tida would save those funds for those years where expenses exceeded revenues, and then draw upon those and then beyond that time, ticd will be responsible for balancing our budget at year-end. i mentioned above that 44% of our budget are for development-related expenses, and unlike other programs where the developer pays public works directly or public

utilities directly for their support of the development activities, here those costs are flowing through our budget. some of the highlights -- other highlights for fiscal year 19/20, in terms of increases, we have an increase in funding to tima, and local match for the hillcrest southgate project that is expected to begin construction in the fall. we are adding two additional positions for tida's staff that we anticipate to help augment the development program support. as well as we have a -- we had the presentation at the march i.t. c. on period two, and so those maintenance costs for period two are also in next year's budget, and they're offset by

reimbursements from bata. approximately $2.1 million, most significantly the arts submission work order. we're not decreasing the commitment to the arts program, but because the work last year -- this current fiscal year did not precede as quickly as anticipated. our appropriations from this current fiscal year will fund projected expenses through next fiscal year. and then we are also eliminating one onsite employee through the department of public works, which will leave us with two full-time public works employees on the island. and then we also had been repaying, over a 10-year period, a debt in accrued utility service charges from p.u.c., and that repayment will be

completed this year. i also wanted to highlight all of the programs that are funded through our budget, in whole or in part, that serve the community on the island. our support of one treasure island and all of the programs that they provide, operating the ship-shape, and other programs. the operation of the ymca, which has freed island residents, and opportunities for island youth to participate in the boys and girls club camp mendocino program. as well as our island programs that are operated out of the ymca. we also support catholic charities organization of the child care facility on the island, maintaining the facility and providing

an operating subsidy to that program. we have a work order with d.p.h. for the on-island clinic services they provide, as well as residential neighborhood improvements we've done over the last few years in partnership with john stewart company, manager of the villages, the improvements to the playground at ninth and avenue of the palms, and a garden project that we're undertaking now, and we'll be having an opening for on earth day. as well as all of the traffic management during fleet week, fourth of july, and new year's eve, and we support via work orders with the department of traffic. in aggregate, these services are well in excess of a million dollars each year. and i think bears highlighting.

next steps in the budget preparation process, we continue to work with the mayor's office and g.s.a. finance to finalize the proposed budget, refining interdepartmental work orders and expense estimates, and we'll bring a final budget to the tida board next month for approval. the mayor submits her budget to the board of supervisors on june 1st, and over the month of june, the board holds hearings prior to adopting a final budget. i'd be happy to take any questions that you have. >> yes. thank you, bob, for that. i was looking at this yesterday, and i know you're -- and i guess the process is the budget goes to the board of supervisors, hypothetically, and then they can still make the final reduction of cart or

whatever. sometimes you don't get everything you put in there. is that the philosophy here? >> yeah. our budget tends not to base a lot of cuts or additions by the board of supervisors -- >> because they know we don't have -- you know, we are tiny. >> because of the d.d.a. agreements and the e.d.c.a., our funds are limited. all of the revenues are required to go back into the maintenance of the island and to the future development, and we don't receive any general fund support. so if there were general fund dollars involved, or if revenues from our programs could be directed to the general fund, that tends to be where more of

the adjustments that the board of supervisors have made. >> we're going to have to be looking for grants. again, i'm glad in this budget we have provisions for two additional staff, which is great because we know we are going to be increasing on that. but i was also looking at the job, the pre-apprenticeship. those two items, the city of san francisco are across the department. not only are we realizing at-risk youth, and using it to provide jobs for them on the island, more than any other project in this city, we're also contributing to the shortage of workforce. and everywhere i go -- and i've been attending meetings for the last month, where that is a consistent message coming from the mayor and everybody down there, that they would look the board of supervisors to see and

increase and want us to keep doing that because now we're supplying labor. we're providing opportunities. the mayor is calling in equity. and the workforce. so this budget here for me on that is timely. we're going to have to augment that so we can have this outgoing artist one of the most successful anywhere in the city. so we're helping to reduce recidivism, number one. and we're providing job opportunities, number two. and we're providing training, number three. and so we're doing everything. so all of this other development out there, even in the mainland now, we're in a position when they're coming on line, a lot of them, that we can move some of these people. the idea here is to be having it being so successful. since we are building the infrastructure now. that budget down there -- i was thinking that i would like to have some

meat in all of that. and then to find ways how we're going to alleviate the grant. a lot of the agencies who are not doing anything, as much as we are doing -- they have all this loot, and all of these other opportunities, too. so let's look at grants and let's try to justify that. if we justify that in a budget and it gets to city hall, we're in a position to our supervisors, and even the mayor, to be in line with what everybody else is doing, and say, hey, this is what we need. and we will have established that base line and we move forward. because every agency, they're all doing that now. again, i've been attending all of these meetings in which the messages are, i ee more and more and more of that.ore we get people from homelessness, we get them out into the mainstream. it will cost us less once we're able to provide them with the skills. and so that's the thing

that i've found. so we need to revisit that budget. commissioner light? >> thanks, bob, for sharing this. i have a couple of questions. so under, i guess, section "b" of the budget, the proposed budget, what is defined as "development professional services"? >> it's a -- the detail is included there. so we've tried to segregate the professional services that are provided either under contract to -- we have langon engineering and -- we have two contracts with langon engineering and one with acom, which are oncall services. so when we've needed to do storm water studies or

other work in support of the development program, we've utilized those contracts. and the second contract with langon is for their input on the environmental program. and their review of all of the navy reports. >> okay. and i do see that you've provided a fiscal year '19/'20, and also a '20/'21, over all, and i'm just wondering for this category of expense, particularly around relocation consulting services, whether or not we should anticipate for a larger increase. >> right now we're working with the b.u.r.s. on a

work plan we expect to be relatively stable. this next year we're going to do work to try to get people pre-qualified, and that following year would be really trying to get those people in a position where they would be able to purchase an affordable unit or be placed into an affordable unit. and then at the -- really, i think it will be the fiscal year '22 when the plow share's building comes on line and some of the first projects -- ticd projects that are continued on treasure island, and they'll have inclusionary for-rent units, and we'll probably see another uptake in our relocation support. >> yeah, because i think -- and i don't want to get into the details of what awrs is doing, but it seems like from very

recent feedback from the community, it certainly sounds like we should be, perhaps, in cresting i investinn more outreach to the community because there were a lot of comments at the last hearing about how even for members of the community that pay close attention, they still felt like they didn't understand their rights and the process. in fact, over the weekend, i was on the island, and i met a mom, that she is the single -- she is the full breadwinner for the family with six kids, and she doesn't have time to attend any of these meetings or outreach programs, where she has to take time off to go and attend. so i just feel like this might be the time to revisit whether or not we should be expanding the outreach component even more. because we're obviously not reaching everybody at this point. so that's my comment there. and then followup

questions similar to what linlinda had just discussed about the additional employees. can you remind us again what those two job functions will be, the two new positions? >> one will be a basic licensed engineer, architect level, support of design reviews and construction services. the second would be an additional manager position, working on some of the development compliance, and as we move to an operating agency, some of the -- with the new parks and other facilities coming on line, so it will be a broad support across all of our development areas of work. >> okay. i think i've heard some feedback that the permitting process

coordination with various other city entities particularly, perhaps the p.u.c., could sometimes use a little more coordination help from tida staff. is there anything in the budget that we need to look at increasing to make sure that we provide that coordination and service? because obviously the infrastructure is very critical to just getting the entire island ready. that seems like an important thing for us to look at. >> yeah. that is part of that manager position that i mentioned. >> oh, okay. >> that is, you know -- right now on the development side, we have myself, liz hershwaren, and this will allow more focus in supporting, as you mentioned, that review and approval of the permit sets -- is one of our main

goals because that's what keeps everything else moving. and so that -- i'll be talking a little later about this current subphase application, but we're expecting that subphase application to come in may. and one of our big goals for the next year is to make sure that we meet the standards set forth by the mayor's executive director, under mayor lee, which is to go from submission of that permit set to final maps and permits within a nine-month window. and by comparison, for a lot of reasons, not shortage of tida staff, but for a lot of reasons the initial subphase applications, it took three years to go from initial permit submittal to final permits and mans. maps. so doing that in nine months will be a big improvement.

>> yeah, it certainly sounds like it. thank you for the clarification. it is helpful to know that that management position is not just for c.a. or construction administration, but also pre-construction -- >> absolutely. >> and then, you know, my understanding is that i think the feedback is consistent that the assistance is perhaps not necessarily within tida's staff structure itself, but perhaps just coordination and motivating other after seeagenciesto work along our timeline. is there any benefit in perhaps including a budget for work orders from p.u.c., or other agencies, so we could provide additional resources to help them help us? >> yeah. those are under section "c," the interdepartment -- i'm sorry, exhibit "c," which is number two there. our services with public

works is -- >> do you mean under "operations" -- >> no. under b3, we have our engineering work order with d.p.w., which is almost $900,000, and three-quarters of a million dollars with p.u.c. and those are for development-related activities and reviews. >> okay. >> but -- and we are having conversations with them, you know, to make sure they have the resources available to make -- to conduct timely reviews. >> okay. great. i apologize, i don't seem to be seeing this right now, but what is our current year's budget for b2 and b3? is that listed somewhere in the exhibit? >> for for -- yeah. in exhibit "c," it's

three-quarters, the amount for the city attorney's office and engineering support are the same as the current fiscal year. >> okay. >> we have budgeted the last couple of years at that level, and they have not fully expended the work order, so we haven't increased it this fiscal year. but we do expect their costs to continue to grow. but in the past couple fiscal years they haven't fully expended the work order. >> and how much of that budget have we historically been expending? >> i want to say the city attorney's costs have run around $600,000. and public works costs have run about the same level, maybe a little higher. >> so maybe three-quarters of the way -- >> yeah. >> thank you. >> thank you. and we're going to need a lot of the attorneys now that we're getting into issues, questions regarding the d.d.a. and all decisions that were

made pertinent to the e.r., to the certification of, you know, the island's development. and also post-legal process that we had to go through, the supreme court and all of that. so i would suggest that even from now on in some of the meetings, that we invite the attorneys to hear, so they can start asking these questions for the public. commissioner? >> thank you. just a couple of quick questions. i guess there is nothing in the d.d.a., or our operating rules thanks for beinrules thatprevents us from g additional city money, whether it is general fund money or add-back from the supervisor's district. >> yeah, there is nothing that would prohibit that. if there was a specific initiative that the supervisor wanted to fund -- i'll just say an

after-school program, although we already have one, but if there is a specific need that the supervisor wanted to advocate for through the add-back process, there is nothing that would prohibit that. >> great. you set me up for my next question: in your opinion, was there any project or any area that you would have like to have seen additional resources available to either bolster it or to do something on the island maybe that we didn't do because we didn't have the money? >> um...well, there is always more you can do in a number of areas. director richardson mentioned the job training program that we've been doing in partnership with one treasure island. i think that's -- although it's not necessarily high visibility, it certainly, i think, in the bigger

picture, is one of the most impactful things that we've been doing. so, you know, more of that. the residents would always like more amenities or improvements in the residential neighborhood. so that there is always more that we could be doing. but we've tried incrementally, over the last several years, to continue to expand what we've been doing on the island. >> great. thank you. >> mr. beck, i'm concerned here in that the current fiscal revenues are less than than what we had projected. and that we will be, this year, anticipating that we will exhaust our fund balance that we have in order to meet and balance our budget. my concern is, you know, if we take basically the

fund balance, which is our reserve for this year, have we projected what is going to happen maybe and the next year, or do we do a five-year planning exercise? because where will the funds come from for any gaps in future years, since we will have exhausted our fund balance? >> yeah. under the terms of the d.d.a., ticd is obligated to make us whole as we move forward. so even as our revenues continue to drop -- for instance, two of our larger revenue locations are hangars two and three. as those are taken from our leasing program and turned over to, you know, the new grocery store and other services, if there is a drop in revenue

associated with that or a period of time where we're without revenue because space is being rehabilitated, those gaps in revenue will be made up by ticd. so the structure of our agreement on treasure island is that tida takes all of our commercial revenues, and we use that to support not only island operations, but development-related activities, like the costs of p.u.c. and public works. that would have otherwise been borne directly by ticd. in the later years of the program where our revenues no longer cover expenses, then ticd is obligated to make up that delta. but it probably would be a useful exercise -- and we've had some, you know,

internal conversations about -- for instance, we have many storage companies on the island, and at certain point we're going to need space for construction staging and contractor staging, and we may need to shed some of those commercial tenants. so we've looked at how that might occur over time. but we haven't necessarily translated that into the revenue picture. and we could go through that exercise, looking at how our particularily commercial revenues would be expected to decrease over time. >> i think it would be helpful, mr. beck, since we have some new board members as well, to do an overview, a comprehensive overview of the financing for the island. and the future development of parks, and open space

has to be maintained. it is all coming from some part -- one part. and what we use for some items may mean that that is less for others. it would be helpful, i think, for the board to understand the thinking behind the overall financing for the project on the island. so that we can be judicious in the way that we allocate those funds. >> i will do that. >> thank you. >> and treasure island,ye island,yerba buena, and we have city and county residents -- even though we have all of these restrictions on the funding, with the developer, putting in

certain times, but we look at the timeline of the development now, and we know either we're celebrating to get there, or certain things are not going to happen. back to the san francisco responsibility, also since we're dealing with san francisco residents, and, again, passionately looking at the calendar and looking at the needs of the those island residents tha that, as much as we can, commit as much research that the city is providing for the san francisco residents, the better we are. i attended a board of supervisors' meetings all of the time. and they get grants. and folks have come forward to say, hey, this is where. and so when they get the grants and they look forward and they might remember this project that they heard about, about nine months ago, whatever, those people come up and get the money, a lot of the non-profits.

so what i'm saying is, where we know we have the opportunities, let's justify that right now so they know we have these needs. they are very impressed by the job training on the island, and a lot of the resources that we are doing here -- they are thinking about it. so when it comes to the budgeting, let us put it in down there. and i also agree with commissioner shan, having a broader picture of the financing, this is the time to be doing that right now. because every year the city has their mandates and their goals. and we'r.and we're in devel, and we're doing this in phases. they don't fully understand the full conditions of what we have to grapple with here. we're doing the pre-planning to get here. but now this is a huge implementation, and so we need to tell them what the needs are and why we still have people that we can advocate. we can go to the board of

supervisors, and even our own supervisor, i thought we could give him certain things and say, go to your colleagues and bring the goodies back. he is ready to do that, but we have to justify that for them. so this is what is going on. i also want to talk about outreach. we have committed a lot of resources to outreach. and the support that is involved with so many outreachs in san francisco and on the mainland, they're giving, that we know. at the end of the process, two, three, five people will come in and say, they've never heard about everything you've been doing for two or three years. and the part of city i live in, we live that. what we have done and demonstrated here, and i kept talking about that on this commissioner -- we have a lot. you cannot tell me after 20 meetings, you cannot attend five or six or seven if your life depended on it. we're not going to make provisions for individuals. let's be clear about that.

everybody there has responsibility. we are providing housing resources that affect you and your life. we are providing meetings on the weekend, and during the week, whatever, and we're sending certified mail to you. you're being called. you received letters. we've exhausted all of that. there must be a time for the burden on you or your household to come in. that's what i was asking the director and the consultants. you need to, when you make your presentation, attach the log and let us know the true picture of this. out of all of the 200 plus residents, how many of them right now do you have their signature? every time they come in to you, you have them sign that they're present. so we are moving forward now. again, it is a given. people are going to come out in the townhall meeting, that after 21 jobs in the neighborhood, and you cannot come.

we have it on saturdays. that is the person who has not attended 20 meetings. they get that thing on their door to say this meeting is coming. i get that on my door, where i live in san francisco, all the time. but getting people to take the responsibility to attend those meetings. we need to identify those numbers that you have exhausted. we need to know that upfront. and we can tell you, this is what we've done to do this or that, and you have not responded, and that is it. so i'm very, very passionate about that because it happens everywhere, not just treasure island. it happened in bayview point, it happened in mission, and everywhere in san francisco where you're doing a public process. people don't pay attention. they don't care. they don't do anything. the rest of the people will step up. but for us here, we have to provide and protect city resources, and we also need to demonstrate that we have actually

conducted ou outreach to those people, and we need to be able to demonstrate that. any time when you go to the island, please attach all those meeting calendars. and then the subsequent ones. yeah, they should have the combination of people knocking on the doors, you have phone calls, and also registered mail, registered mail. whereby we know we have certified mail from the post office to say, we'd like to talk to you. we would like you to come in. and after that, we've exhausted everything. if that particular resident does not come, then that's their burden. and wherever we go from then on, we'll have to deal with that. and that'.and that's the wae courts will look at that. there have been instances of phra san francisco projects where people show up -- and it goes to court, and the court looks at the calendar.

and they say, wait a minute. i have a list here of 30, or 100 meetings in a year, and you cannot find 25% to show up here. there is no issue here. all of you residents got the same thing. did you not? and they say yes. and so why are you just coming in now? the city has to move and because, again, we have to make sure. that's just my take in there. commissioner, any other questions? >> yes, please. bob, just curious about the ticd , their responsibility to make our budget whole. does that only kick in after we've exhausted our reserves? >> yeah, that's after we have exhausted the fund balance. >> thank you. >> any other questions from the public, please? thank you. >> i'm just giving this to her. >> commissioners, no others? thank you. kate? >> item number seven,

affordable housing development pipeline. >> we have to be out of here by 11:00, so we are in time. >> good morning, commissioners. >> good morning. >> natalie batowit, affordable housing development consultant. today we're going to talk about the affordable housing development pipeline. and first we wanted to do a really basic reminder of the residential housing plan. and then discuss each phase of affordable housing, talk about the project generated revenue, as well as the gap funding, and then talk about the first projects. and the first projects would satisfy the replacement obligation. and that's why we're focusing on those first projects, five.

so as you know, the maximum allowable number of units on the island is 8,000. of those, the total market rate for both rent and for sale is 5,827. and then of those, 266 are on treasure island, and that's -- excuse me, yerba buena island. and the remaining units, representing 27.2% are affordable. of those units, 307, which is 5% of the total unit count, or 14% of the affordable housing count, but 307 of those units are inclusionary, and those are the ones that are developed by ticd and/or its affiliates. the remaining units, 1

1,866, are the authority units, those are the affordable units developed by non-profit affordable housing developers. so of those authority units, the 1,866, the dda states that the minimum -- a floor, not a ceiling, of the units, 435, are developed by qualified one treasure island non-profit development members. so, again, that's a floor, but minimally 435 of those units, which is 23% of the total affordability, are reserved for homeless households. the authority units are developed on 20 pre-identified parcels, integrated within the market rate developments. again, i know we talked about this last month, but one of the reasons that the affordable housing on treasure island is one of the best deals is town is

that land is delivered free, clean, fully entitled. on this map, you can see aust reall ofsee allof those re. and they're free, affordable housing. and we like that because it is baked into the plan. the first phase has eight parcels. you can see on the bottom, that's the two parcels we discussed last week at the tida board meeting on treasure island. and those are the first two parcels where land will be available. the second part, also within the green, is the land will be available after the current subphase application is approved and then the work is done. it is projected the earliest will be about two years that the land will be available.

after, you'll see that through the four phases, and each of the different phases is a different color, but through the four phases, you get 20 parcels. the majority are in phase one and in phase four. so one of the other things that's pretty exciting about treasure island is that because of the d.d.a., there are some baked-in funding programs for the -- that can be used for affordable housing. most notably, there is a $17,500 per market rate door contribution for affordable housing from the master developer. likewise, because of the i.r.s.d., the project gets tax increments. so of all of the tax increment proceeds that are generated, 17.5% is allocated to affordable housing.

also, like other parts of the city, there is job housing linkage fee that will be accrued once the commercial spaces are developed. and the funds that are generate franchise those fees, whefrom those fees,when te restricted to treasure island. and when we say treasure island, we, of course, also mean yerba buena island. so despite these generated sources, there is still a funding gap to fund the affordable housing outside of these sources. so while it is still the best deal in town, and while there is actually revenue available because of being on treasure island, it is still not enough. when we -- when the project was initially forgiving out what the gap will be, the thought

was -- and this was, of course, before delays and lawsuits and all sorts of things -- the thought was that the construction cost per square foot would be $220 a square foot. and now we're looking at 470 a square foot. meaning that between 201 1, it doubled the cost in hard costs. last friday you may have seen in the chronicle that san francisco had the dubious distinction of having the highest construction costs in the world. and the cost per unit, with free land for development, is generally averaging $750,000 per unit. so costs are going crazy. and even though treasure island has resources, it is still not enough. so some of the ways that

we can generate additional revenue are working on some logistics that have to be legislated with the i.r.s.d., to mam mo am amortizee loans from 40 to 45, and that makes a big difference, and that is state legislation. and likewise, there is advocacy that has started, but needs to continue regarding access to the licensing fee revenues, and those greatly benefit affordable housing on treasure island. on the flip side, those will positively benefit. as of today, there is some optimism. as we saw in the projects and the presentations last we will be righlastweek, the fif

affordable housing will use modular housing. they secured a $10 million veterans housing and homelessness prevention funding award. the catholic charities mercy housing project has submitted for a.h.s.c., and we expect to hear back certainly by june, and hopefully we'll have indication sooner. and if that is awarded, it will be $20 million for treasure island, of which $13.7 million will be for the affordable housing. not mentioned here, there are the state bond measures that passed last year with $2 billion, meaning there are more sources now than used to be. going back to our 2011 projections we lost other sources, such as hudd 202,

and we lost a lot of equity we get. so we've lost some and we've gained some. and this is generally. but one reason for optimism is the november bond in san francisco, and it's in the process of being worked on so it will go on the ballot this november, and that would benefit treasure island, as well as other non-profit affordable housing in san francisco. so moving on to what is the pipeline for the first five projects -- and, again, those first five projects would minimally satisfy all of the replacement obligations that tida has. and the first project, as you know, is what we just saw last week, from parcel 3.2, the source to plow share project, and it is reserved for homeless and low-income veterans, including replacement of

all of the source units on the island now. and the anticipated construction start is early next year. and they are in the process of trying to finish -- cover their gap through one additional state funding source. and if that works, if it is successful, there is no gap on that project, if it is successful. and this is the picture that you saw last week. the second project is what we also just talked about, the catholic charities replacement units being developed with mercy housing. that project totals 135 units, and it would be -- have general affordable housing, where income qualifying households will be eligible. likewise, there are some units reserved for non-income qualifying households.

if the funding award from the affordable housing sustainable communities -- if it is awarded, the earliest start would be the second quarter of 2021. there is a gap on that project. and it's $40 million. and those sources -- that googap is after tax credits and the funds, but before any project-generated sources would be attributed. and these are the same photos from last time. it is conceptual design project mapping. this is for the land that will be available in the near future. the second portion of the units that are available, still in the major subphase one, the first project within that would be to replace the existing community housing partnership units on treasure island.

and all those units are reserved for four million homeless families. and the earliest construction there -- and, again, this depends on available of bond or other gap financing -- but the earliest availability there would be 2023. the gap is estimated at $27 million. the reason there is a nuance here, about 9% credits, is because you can achieve a greater amount of subsidy with a 9% credit. 9% credits are very competitive, and 4% credits are much easier to obtain. the fourth project would be the combo project that you've heard about before, where parcels were merged. and this is ic4.23. and the total projected unit count was 160. this would be the replacement of the hr360 beds, coupled with a

non-profit affordable housing developer. and this will be another treasure island developer because of the hr360 units. there will also be new affordable housing units where income-qualifying households will be eligible, as well as units for non-income-qualifying households. the earliest would be 2025, and the gap, with estimation, is $64 million. and the fifth project is not designated yet, but this project would be needed in case there is anybody who has housing obligation on treasure island that hasn't yet labobeen housed through inclusionary or the affordable projects. so with these five

projects, tida's replacement unit obligation will be met. and the unfunded gap for these five projects is $170 million. this is, again, before project-generated funds are applied,but after tax credits, and one state source per project. and two parcels will be available in major sub subphase one, that could be developed as soon as funding is available. so the ability to provide 800 units on treasure island would actually be a significant impact for the affordable housing crisis in san francisco if funds can be achieved. and there is the pretty picture. >> thank you very much for that excellent presentation. so we have five minutes. commissioner shan and the other commissioners can respond for five minutes of questions. >> thank you very much for

that very comprehensive overview of the affordable housing program. i think it is great for us to be reminded of our initiative and, actually, our obligation to build affordable housing on treasure island. the rising construction costs, of course, are just having an impact on not only affordable housing, but also market rate housing. we're really in a crisis right now, not just in san francisco, but in the region. i'm really concerned that we have a gap of almost $170 million, that we have to find somewhere. and this is $2,019, and some of these projects are scheduled for later on, when we know construction costs rising at a 15% to 20% per year, as it has for the last few years, we

know that that gap is going to grow considerably. so i think it is really beholding to us as a commission, but also in concert with the city, the board of supervisors, the mayor's office of housing, to really think carefully, thoroughly, about how it is that we're going to fund that gap. because this is truly an obligation. the only reason why we're doing the development on treasure island and allowing the market rate housing to be built, is so that we can build more affordable housing. if we are not able to meet that obligation, then it would put, actually, the rest of the treasure island development, to make that not worthwhile. so it's a -- it's an initiative which is absolutely central to our

mission as the treasure island development authority. so i really would like mr. beck to have some thinking about this on a comprehensive level. i think that we've been waiting for these first projects to come up and to see how they are able to go forward. it seems like the policy of ccdc project is on its way, but it still has to get some -- in a competitive process, it still has to get tax credits and other sources from the state. is that right? >> the tax credits represents the competitive. it is 4% tax credits, and those are much easier to attain. but the remaining funding that they're applying for, the state program called m.h.p., multiple housing program, it is anticipated to be competitive for that, but it is a

competitive process. >> that's right. so it is not yet known whether we will get an award -- we hope that we will, but, again, we're hoping that that will be able to go forward. and then for the next projects, which is the mercy housing project, that, again, will have to go through a competitive process to try to get subsidies from elsewhere, including the tax credits as well. >> yes, and again, that is considered at the 4%. >> yes. the other thing is that the affordable housing bond, which mayor breed is hoping to place on the agenda -- on the election for november, what is the amount of that? >> the amount before it was 300 before, and now it has been increased, in the last few days, to $500 million. and so it has to pass.

and given all of these factors -- but it has to pass. >> there has been acknowledgement publicly about a portion of that, and it's not confirmed, but that one portion of it could be used for treasure island, but i think we need tneed to continue to advocate and hope that that happens. >> that's right. if there is a $500 million bond issue for affordable housing, again, treasure island needs at least $170 million for its program. so at least on the four -- on the first five projects. and not to say that we would use it for -- right now, but it is an element that we need to urge our board of supervisors to set aside for treasure island. in fact, it makes no sense

for the city in developing affordable housing, to realize that the units on treasure because we do, indeed, have the land already, and there is not the cost of acquiring land to build. that is a resource that we have on treasure island. and it should be used, you know, for affordable housing. and, in fact, it h should be a priority on these affordable units on treasure island to be funded through those subsidy dollars. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> i just wanted to emphasize, again, that the $170 million gap is before consideration of the project-generated revenues. and while the i.r.f.d. will be slow to build in value, the per-door contributions will be

coming in from ticd, and as though accrue, that will help us deliver these first five projects as well. yes, noted that both the revenues from the affordable housing bond, for other things we continue to pursue, like the vehicle license fee commitment, anything we can do to bring more resources, now resources, to the table we have to pursue with full commitment. >> yes. thank you. >> so the first question -- hopefully it is a simple one -- the available funding source that you have identified as the affordable housing and sustainable communities -- is that a source we can access repeatedly for all five projects? or is it just for the first one or second one? >> it's -- technically, yes, i think it is a state funding source, and i think there are considerations for how funds get allocated. so i don't think anything prevents more projects

from accessing the asic money, but i think there are geographic considerations that might make future applications less competitive, own even on the surface this application is considered very competitive, but we haven't heard yet, so i can't clarify in. but technically it could be available to other projects, too. >> it is really good to hear that the first project at least seems like we have a solid plan for it. it is concerning, and i have to echo the comments made before me that the rest of the projects are pretty uncertain at this point. and good to know that the ballot is increasing from 300 to 500 500; however, i think historically loot of his t of these ballot measures are challenged, and so i don't know that the timing would work out for our anticipated second or

third project. i just don't know how long these projects will take. i would appreciate, maybe out of a more general sense, maybe perhaps as a followup, what other funding sources we could look at just to get, like, a broad idea of what our options are, including the ones that, bob, you just mentioned about revenue sources from ticd, as well as licensing fees, all of that, perhaps just to have a percentage-wise conversation to start to understand, you know, how real is the gap? are we talking about 60% of the gap is really just very uncertain? i have no idea of that revenue source you cited would cover. maybe it only covers about 5% of the gap, which in that case we're in real trouble. i think my point is let's have a followup conversation to start really having a solid idea, a running list of sources that we can access. >> thank you. and finally, on the

matter, the $500 million bond, it's a do or die. and we need to put it out there, you know, for the city and county of san francisco. it is a do or die. so everyone -- everybody that i know, 100%, want affordable housing because this bond measure comprises senior housing, homelessness, disabled -- everybody has their parts in that. so we have that, $500 million, at least. it's not going to be the solution. but then at least we will have something that we can go and start begging for treasure island to have something in there. it is really important that everybody should be talking about that and bringing everybody out to pass that. it is really bad. depending on this state, they're still trying to get their act together. every city in the state is faced with this problem here, and some of them even worse than san