>> this is one place you can always count on to give you what you had before and remind you of what your san francisco history used to be. >> we hear that all the time, people bring their kids here and their grandparents brought them here and down the line. >> even though people move away, whenever they come back to the city, they make it here. and they tell us that. >> you're going to get something made fresh, made by hand and made with quality products and something that's very, very good.

♪ >> the legacy bars and restaurants was something that was begun by san francisco simply to recognize and draw attention to the establishments. it really provides for san francisco's unique character. ♪ >> and that morphed into a request that we work with the city to develop a legacy business registration. >> i'm michael cirocco and the owner of an area bakery. ♪ the bakery started in 191. my grandfather came over from italy and opened it up then. it is a small operation. it's not big. so everything is kind of quality that way. so i see every piece and cut

every piece that comes in and out of that oven. >> i'm leslie cirocco-mitchell, a fourth generation baker here with my family. ♪ so we get up pretty early in the morning. i usually start baking around 5:00. and then you just start doing rounds of dough. loaves. >> my mom and sister basically handle the front and then i have my nephew james helps and then my two daughters and my wife come in and we actually do the baking. after that, my mom and my sister stay and sell the product, retail it. ♪ you know, i don't really think about it. but then when i -- sometimes when i go places and i look and see places put up, oh this is our 50th anniversary and everything and we've been over 100 and that is when it kind of hits me.

you know, that geez, we've been here a long time. [applause] ♪ >> a lot of people might ask why our legacy business is important. we all have our own stories to tell about our ancestry. our lineage and i'll use one example of tommy's joint. tommy's joint is a place that my husband went to as a child and he's a fourth generation san franciscan. it's a place we can still go to today with our children or grandchildren and share the stories of what was san francisco like back in the 1950s. >> i'm the general manager at tommy's joint. people mostly recognize tommy's joint for its murals on the outside of the building. very bright blue.

you drive down and see what it is. they know the building. tommy's is a san francisco hoffa, which is a german-style presenting food. we have five different carved meats and we carve it by hand at the station. you prefer it to be carved whether you like your brisket fatty or want it lean. you want your pastrami to be very lean. you can say i want that piece of corn beef and want it cut, you know, very thick and i want it with some sauerkraut. tell the guys how you want to prepare it and they will do it right in front of you. san francisco's a place that's changing restaurants, except for tommy's joint. tommy's joint has been the same since it opened and that is important. san francisco in general that we don't lose a grip of what

san francisco's came from. tommy's is a place that you'll always recognize whenever you lock in the door. you'll see the same staff, the same bartender and have the same meal and that is great. that's important. ♪ >> the service that san francisco heritage offers to the legacy businesses is to help them with that application process, to make sure that they really recognize about them what it is that makes them so special here in san francisco. ♪ so we'll help them with that application process if, in fact, the board of supervisors does recognize them as a legacy

business, then that does entitle them to certain financial benefits from the city of san francisco. but i say really, more importantly, it really brings them public recognition that this is a business in san francisco that has history and that is unique to san francisco. >> it started in june of 1953. ♪ and we make everything from scratch. everything. we started a you -- we started a off with 12 flavors and mango fruits from the philippines and then started trying them one by one and the family had a whole new clientele. the business really boomed after that. >> i think that the flavors we make reflect the diversity of

san francisco. we were really surprised about the legacy project but we were thrilled to be a part of it. businesses come and go in the city. pretty tough for businesss to stay here because it is so expensive and there's so much competition. so for us who have been here all these years and still be popular and to be recognized by the city has been really a huge honor. >> we got a phone call from a woman who was 91 and she wanted to know if the mitchells still owned it and she was so happy that we were still involved, still the owners. she was our customer in 1953. and she still comes in. but she was just making sure that we were still around and

it just makes us feel, you know, very proud that we're carrying on our father's legacy. and that we mean so much to so many people. ♪ >> it provides a perspective. and i think if you only looked at it in the here and now, you're missing the context. for me, legacy businesses, legacy bars and restaurants are really about setting the context for how we come to be where we are today. >> i just think it's part of san francisco. people like to see familiar stuff. at least i know i do. >> in the 1950s, you could see a picture of tommy's joint and looks exactly the same. we haven't change add thing. >> i remember one lady saying, you know, i've been eating this ice cream since before i was born. and i thought, wow! we have, too. ♪

>> the meeting will come to order. this is june 24, 2020. rescheduled budget and finance committee meeting. i'm sandra lee fewer, chair of the finance and budget committee. i'm joined by committee members supervisor walton and mandelman. our clerk is sandra wong. i would like to thank sfgovtv for broadcasting this meeting. madame clerk, any announcements today? >> clerk: yes, due to the covid-19 health emergency and to protect board members, the committee room are closed, however, members will be participating in the meeting

remotely. the media through video conference and participate in the meeting to the same extent at -- the each item on the agenda, and sfgovtv are streaming the number across the screen. each speaker will be allowed two minutes to speak. you can call (415) 655-0001, meeting i.d. 1451400281. then press pound twice. then you will hear the meeting discussions. your item of interest comes up,

star needs to be added to the speaker line. speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television or radio. alternatively, public comment in either of the following ways, e-mail to myself, the budget and finance committee clerk. and submit public comment video e-mail, and will be included as part of the file. finally, items are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agenda of june 30, 2020, unless otherwise stated. >> supervisor fewer: thank you, madame clerk. can you please call items 1 and 2 together. >> item 1, resolution designating el reportero, jasmine blue media doing business asthma rhna times, potrero view, world journal sf,

neighborhood outreach advertising for fiscal year 2020-21. item 2, resolution designating san francisco print media to be the official newspaper of city and county of san francisco for all official advertising. those who wish to provide public comment on these items need to call the number on your screen, i.d. number and then press pound twice. if you have not done so, dial star to speak. [inaudible] >> supervisor fewer: thank you, madame clerk. today, we have the office of contract administration.

>> good morning, supervisors. i'm going to start my presentation. good morning, supervisors. i'm with the office of contract administration. and i will be going over the term contracts for the official and outreach advertising services. in my presentation, i will be going over the background, the minimum requirements pursuant to administrative code 2.81 through 2.84. and the official and outreach advertising valuation and recommendation. background, in 1994, voters passed proposition j mandating the office to bid out advertising services annually per administrative code 2.81

through 2.84. the signature required to post notices of government businesses in newspapers that are locally published and printed. every year oca conducts the bids and awards recommendations mandated evaluation guidelines. oca processes the bidding and contract on behalf of the clerk of the board. the board of supervisors takes the official award by designating contract for the official and outreach advertising. the minimum requirement per the administrative code, official newspapers must print in the city on three or more days in a calendar week and have circulation of at least 50,000 copies per calendar week. for outreach newspapers, papers must print in san francisco on one or more days in a calendar week. and circulate primarily in one of the following outreach communities. lesbian, gay, bisexual,

transgender, african-american, hispanic, or chinese. for the official advertising, we received two bids, one from san francisco examiner and one from san francisco chronicle. chronicle, like in previous years, did not meet the requirements because they do not print in san francisco. for official advertising recommendation, we're recommending san francisco "examiner", because they have the highest evaluation score and is the only bidding meeting all qualifications set forth in the code. o.c.a.'s recommendation is based on the highest rate of bidder who met all qualifications as set forth in the administrative code. and for this contract, we're requesting $100,000 based on current usage. outreach advertising evaluation

received nine bids. four of those bids did not meet the requirements. and for the outreach recommendation, we're recommending potrero, bay area reporter, and potrero view. for this contract we're requesting $40,000 based on current usage. thank you. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. any comments or questions from my colleagues? i don't see anyone in the queue -- >> sorry, sorry. i didn't get a chance. if i may? >> supervisor fewer: oh. supervisor walton. >> supervisor walton: thank you so much, chair fewer. and thank you so much for the presentation. i do have a question as i look at particularly item 1, the publications in the neighborhood that they're focused on outreach to, i did not see vicitation

valley, little hollywood, bayview, spelled out. is there a particular reason for that? >> so we received s.f. bayview, but unfortunately because they do not print in the city, they do not meet that requirement, so we couldn't recommend them. i believe we outreached to 500 -- i'm sorry, 50 publications and so i can check on those if they, you know, received them. >> supervisor walton: my question is more specific to even if we don't have a necessary -- i'm not asking about a specific publication per se, but why those neighborhoods are not included in terms of being able to receive outreach? >> oh, because, unfortunately, per the administrative code, they spell out the evaluation, so really the crux -- the old in san francisco is a requirement that a lot of these papers now in 2020 can't meet. and i believe we're going to

expand on that. >> supervisor walton: just for clarity, we're going to fund publications but they're not going to provide to advise valley, little hollywood and bayview. >> these are the bids that we received, but i think she can expand on that. >> i think i also wanted to ask, what is the board's authority here? can the board overrule this and make an exception as we do for residency sometimes? are we able as a board to overrule considering that the climate is very sensitive. newspapers are having a hard time surviving here. is there a possibility that supervisors can actually overrule that? >> thank you so much, supervisor fewer. yes. in previous years, it is -- our office does recommend, but it is ultimately the board's

responsibility -- sorry, not responsibility, authority, sorry, to award if you feel -- if you choose to. >> supervisor fewer: okay. i think that's fabulous because i have a problem with the neighborhoods i represent. i have nothing representing the marina times does not represent us in richmond at all. and nothing for the sunset on the west side. i know there are newspapers out there, i think the -- [inaudible] -- anymore, so i'm wondering if you could actually -- i understand also what supervisor walton is saying about representation in their district when they have a newspaper there that has been published for a very long time and there is a region that depends on that information for bayview. i'm wondering if we could open

up the bid process again, maybe for another week or two, to include maybe some other smaller print newspapers, of course, neighborhood newspapers, like the richmond review and the san francisco bayview and also -- [inaudible] -- and then we can decide on whether or not we would want to make exception on the rule that they must be printed in san francisco. i would like to add the daily to that list, because i think they serve the residents of san francisco, the chinese leaders. and i think that probably supervisor walton would agree with that, since he has a lot of chinese leaders in his neighborhood, too. >> supervisor walton: and also, chair -- >> supervisor fewer: is it possible for us to open up the conversation again, just the process for the smaller papers,

to see -- and put the bid out again. give them another week or two to bid. and then we can reevaluate which neighborhoods of san francisco are being represented. would that be okay? >> no, that's definitely, we can do that. >> supervisor fewer: supervisor walton. >> supervisor walton: thank you, chair fewer. i would also include the sun reporter in that as well. >> supervisor fewer: yes. we would have to do outreach to those small newspapers to make sure they're aware. i see ms. cella in the queue. do you have something to add? >> yes, this is acting director of the office of contract administration. yes, to reiterate, we would be happy to reopen this solicitation, but to be clear, the procedure would be to reject all bids and re-advertise the

solicitation. i want to point out as florence mentioned, we did conduct significant outreach for the outreach advertising solicitation, the notification went out to about 50 neighborhood and community periodicals. it's possible that all of the periodicals that you've noted that we did some outreach to for the solicitation, they may have chosen not to submit a bid maybe because they did not meet the minimum requirements or because maybe the revenue stream was not -- didn't seem that significant to them. there could be many reasons they may not have bid, but that said, we would be happy to reject all bids and resolicit and we can provide a report to you before we bring this back to you. and just indicate which period cals we did do outreach to. once we make the recommendation, we have to follow the letter of the law.

we can only make a recommendation purr the administrative -- per the administrative code requirements and then it would be under your authority to expand or add any other periodicals that you wish. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. so your suggestion today is to vote no on item number 1, so we can reopen the bid again and then place the item on the agenda for the date after we have heard from, solicited from other publications, is that correct? >> correct. >> supervisor fewer: okay. i think it is important we follow up on item number 2. that is our main advertiser. so let's do this. seeing no one else in the queue, let's open up items 1 and 2 for public comment, please. >> yes, madame chair. operation is checking to see if there are callers in the queue. operation, please let us know if there are callers ready. please press star 3 to be added

to the queue. if you're on hold, wait until the system indicates you have been muted. is there any callers who wish to comment on items 1 and 2? >> yes, i have one caller in the queu queue. >> supervisor fewer: welcome, caller. >> hello, supervisors. my name is jay curran. thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today. i'm the publisher of the san francisco examiner. i just wanted to thank you for in the past awarding us this contract and i'm hoping that this year we're also awarded the contract. the san francisco examiner is printed here inside of san francisco. we have a press facility on evans avenue in the bayview and we employ 42 people at our press facili facility. and that comes with quite an

expense, but we are committed to providing jobs, you know, for people here inside of san francisco. we are the highest circulated newspaper in san francisco county. we out-circulate some of our competitors by five times the circulation on each day that we publish. we're very committed to providing local news coverage, 90% of our news is locally written and informative, important news content about city issues, public transportation, housing, and as you guys know, you know, our team does a fantastic job getting the news out. even through covid, we've been able to keep to our commitments on publishing the san francisco examiner four days a week. we are a free publication. very accessible to all the

residents inside san francisco. besides our home-delivered issues, we have 838 locations throughout san francisco to make it easy for the residents to get ahold of our newspaper and get the information that the city is trying to get out to its residents. and you know, again, we appreciate everything that you guys do here for the city. and we're here to support you. and look forward to another year of being a great partner. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. public comment on item 1 and 2 is now closed. i would like to make a motion to negative, we don't -- how about i do this, madame clerk? what if i vote -- we vote no on

item 1, it means we don't forward it to the board? >> i believe the appropriate motion should be to table item number 1. >> supervisor fewer: i'd like to table item number 1. could i have a roll call vote? >> on the motion, supervisor walton aye. mandelman aye. chair fewer aye. three ayes. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. i would like to give a positive recommendation to item number 2 and forward it to the board with a positive recommendation. could i have a roll call vote? >> yes. on the motion, walton aye. mandelman aye. fewer aye. three ayes. few ufa thank you very much. >> ordinance amending the business and tax regulations to permit the city attorney with the consent of the county recorder to allow or settle real

property transfer tax claims in excess of $25,000 for any amount up to the of transfer tax, penalties and interest paid that exceeds the amount of transfer tax, penalties and interest, using the value of the real property as finally determined by the assessment appeals board. if you wish to provide public comment, please call the number on your screen, with the i.d. number, then press pound twice. if you have not already done so, dial star, 3, to speak. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. >> supervisor fewer: today we have with us -- i see supervisor aaron peskin and his aide lee hepner, and the office is also

available to answer questions. the floor is yours. you are on mute. >> there we go. sorry about that. members, thank you for hearing this item. this legislation before you comes from supervisor peskin's office, it is essentially designed to streamline the process of issuing transfer tax refunds when they exceed $25,000. by way of background, transfer taxes are applied when there is a legal change in ownership and are based on self-reported property values. the city collected $368 million in transfer taxes last year alone. in 2015, the office launched a transfer audit program to verify and confirm assessed, one when

the legal entity changes own ownership, when it exceeds 20,000, and when it is without a sales price. since 2015, the city has collected $45 million in unpaid or underpaid transfer taxes. $4.5 million in the current fiscal year alone. taxpayers can look for refunds. those claims are adjudicated by the assessment appeals board. currently, claims that -- refunds over $25,000 require written approval by the city attorney and the board of supervisors. this legislation would remove board of supervisors' approval of these claims. of course, the board still has oversight in the context of litigation settlement and there is that important point of transparency when the board adjudicates these claims.

that is all i have. the assessor's reporter office is available to answer any questions that the committee may have. i have one technical amendment that i request and i can present that now. i have sent it to all of your offices. on page 3, line 6-7 to add the language -- which just escaped me -- plus statutory interest under section 113.2. i would request that amendment be made and i am available for questions as are douglas and holly. >> supervisor fewer: supervisor peskin, would you like to say anything? >> supervisor peskin: -- >> supervisor fewer: any comments or questions from my colleagues? seeing none, there is no b.l.a. report on this, so let's open it

up for public comment. >> yes, operation is checking to see if there are callers in the queue. operation, please let us know if there are callers ready. if you have not done so, press star 3 to be added to the queue. for those on hold, any callers who wish to comment on item number 3. >> yes, i have one caller in the queue. i will unmute them. >> i'm sorry, i think i'm -- i would like to be in the queue for item 14. >> supervisor fewer: okay. that is coming up, thank you. are there any other callers in the queue? >> madame chair, that completes the queue. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. i'd like to make a motion to approve the amendment. could i have a roll call vote? >> on the motion, walton aye.

mandelman aye. fewer aye. three ayes. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much, move to the board with a positive recommendation as amended? >> on that motion, supervisor walton? >> supervisor walton: aye. >> supervisor mandelman: aye. >> supervisor fewer: aye. >> three ayes. >> supervisor fewer: item 4, ordinance approving agreement between the city and millennium tower association for the sidewalk on the side of mission at the intersection of mission and fremont street and the side of fremont at the same intersection to allow structural upgrade of the 301 mission street high rise building known as millennium tower. members of the public who wish

to provide public comment on this item should call the number on their screen, i.d., press pound twice. if you have not already done so, please dial star 3 to line up to speak. please wait until the system indicates you have been admitted and you may begin your comments. >> supervisor fewer: so today we have with us the real estate division and charles sullivan, eileen mowi, and city attorneys office. >> thank you. good morning, chair fewer. supervisor walton, supervisor mandelman. i'm director of real estate. i want to share with you a screen view.

. supervisor fewer, are you still there, can you hear me? >> supervisor fewer: yes, i can. would you like the clerk to assist you? do we have a copy of the presentation? >> i have it here. there it is. i'm sorry. i just clicked on the wrong attachment. my apologies. i'm here before you today seeking your positive recommendation on an ordinance authorizing on easement deed and agreement between the city and millennium towers association. this easement implements a settlement agreement that was

unanimously approved by the board of supervisors by ordinance 7620. the conveyance of this easement is the city's primary contribution to the settlement. the settlement will dismiss and release the city from all claims with prejudice and with no cash payments by the city. the easement is for the surface and subsurface rights and the sidewalk on the southern side of mission street and the eastern side of fremont street as shown in the map on your screen. work to be performed by the h.o.a. is intended to prevent further settlement of the tower's existing foundation and may allow for the gradual correction of the tower over time. both the settlement and the easement are conditioned upon the approval of the state land commission which occurred yesterday. and approval of the court, which is anticipated in mid august. the easement will not go into

place and will not occur until these approvals are obtained. this concludes my presentation. as indicated, charles sullivan from the city attorneys office and other city attorneys and i are available to answer any questions you might have. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. i see no speakers in the queue for my colleagues, so let's open this up for public comment. i have a comment? my colleague? seeing none, let's open up for public comment on item number 4. >> operation is checking to see if there are any calls in the queue. operation, please let us know if there are callers ready. if you have not done so, please press star 3 to be added to the queue. if you're on hold, wait until the system says you have been unmuted. are there any callers who wish to comment on item number 4?

>> madame chair, there are no callers in the queue. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. public comment on item 4 is closed. i'd like to make a motion to move this to the board with a positive recommendation. could i please have a roll call vote, madame chair? >> yes, madame chair. the motion, supervisor walton aye. mandelman aye. fewer aye. three ayes. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. madame clerk, please call item number 5. >> resolution retroactive authorizing the department of public health to accept and expend a grant in the am of $2 million from the california department of health for participation in a program entitled funding for international acquired syndrome society for acquired imknow

deficiency conference. members of the public who wish to provide public comment should call (415) 655-0001. press i.d. number and then press pound twice. if you have not done so, dial star 3. the system will indicate you have raised your hand. wait until the system says you've been unmuted and then you can begin your comments. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much, the department of public health. >> good morning, can you hear me? >> supervisor fewer: yes, we can. >> i'm at the operation center so pardon mask. thank you for hearing this today. the state of california wanted to aid the 2020 conference and allocated to $2 million to do so. this was approved by the state

assembly bill number 74 and then there was a long process to get the funding to have the san francisco department of public health. as you know, the aids 2020 is conducted by the aids conference and we have been involved with the development of the program. and this year, it's unusual that it's in oakland and san francisco in order to address a regional aspect of h.i.v. and it's been a very amazing and fruitful partnership. the conference will be online. as you might imagine, in july. i think it's an amazing program. this funding will be used to pay for scholarships and conference fees to allow participants from all over the globe to participate. and there will be some program and logistical needs covered for

reaching women and girls and focusing on h.i.v. prevention and targeting other key populations. so we request your approval of the acceptance of this funding. i believe greg wong would like to add something at this point. >> supervisor fewer: yes. mr. wong? >> hello. my name is gregory wong. i am the analyst for the san francisco department of public health. we had earlier submitted a resolution to the board of supervisors and we would like to submit some amendments to the current resolution. the current resolution we had the word "international aids conference" on line 1, 6 and 13. we would like to insert the word 23rd biannual in front of the

international aids conference so it will match the legislation that allocated the funding for the international aids conference. on line 7 -- sorry, line 4, there was a word for california department of public health. we actually the california department of public health, it was changed to the california department of public health, so we have the past entity on identified. we have the word through on 7 changed to "to" and we inserted the acronym aids, to represent the word aids aids on line 12. we ask that the board of supervisors accept these

amendments. >> supervisor fewer: sure. that sounds great. okay. any comments from my colleagues? mandelman? >> supervisor mandelman: thank you, chair fewer. i want to thank all the folks from d.p.h. working on aids 2020. it's truly unfortunate that what was going to be this incredibly, i think, exciting opportunity to bring folks from around the world to san francisco and oakland has fallen victim to the pandemic, but i also want to thank you and partners across the globe for having done the work needed to make this conference continue even if virtual form. and i would be honored to be added as a cosponsor. thank you. >> supervisor fewer: that's great. i think we all concur with your comments. thank you, supervisor. any other comments, questions? if not, let's open it up for public comment, please.

>> yes, operation, please check to see if there are callers in the queue. if you have not already done so, press star 3 to be added to the queue. for those on hold, continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. if there are callers who wish to comment on item 5? >> i have one caller in the queue. >> supervisor fewer: welcome, speaker.

that completes the queue. >> supervisor fewer: item number 5, public comment is closed. let's take a vote on the amendments, please. i'd like to make -- to include these amendments, could we have a roll call vote, please. >> on the motion to amend, supervisor walton aye. mandelman aye. fewer aye. three ayes. >> supervisor fewer: make a motion to move this to the board with a positive recommendation as amended. >> on the motion, supervisor walton aye. mandelman aye. fewer aye. three ayes. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. can you call item number 6. >> resolution authorizing the office of cannabis to accept and expend a grant from the govern

office of business and economic development local kwelt grant funding program in the amount of $4.9 million for the period of july 1, 2020 through june 30, 2021 and authorizing the office of city administrator to execute the agreement with the governor office of economic. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call (415) 655-0001, put in i.d., and then press pound twice. if you have not already done so, please press star 3 to speak. the system will indicate you have raised your hand. wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. >> supervisor fewer: we have director rodriguez from the office of cannabis. >> good morning, everyone. good morning, supervisor fewer, mandelman and walton. thank you so much for having us here today. the timing, of course, is really

crucial. we are very, very happy about the state has identified a need with respect to equity and is affording that need statewide and providing assistance to local jurisdictions in this way. i'd like to briefly discuss the importance of the -- of this grant, including the need, which many of you already know our goals as well. you know, it was early this year, around march, when the application for this grant came out. and the turnaround time was really, really swift, but we do appreciate we're able to come before you today and get this through. the community has expressed a need for some time now for assistance, especially during the pandemic as many folks know, our equity community is really, really needing support, but unfortunately cannot access

federal support cannot access, the state support industry as a whole. we'll jump into the slides. picking up the next slide, please. so our goal is to reduce the barriers of entry with respect to the cannabis marketplace. for those who have been negatively impacted by the war on drugs, setting up a business is not an easy feat here in san francisco. it's certainly very expensive. there are a lot of hurdles, a lot of needs to assist in navigating the process. we want these funds to go to people in need, our everyday community, so they can cross the finish line and achieve the goals that our city had intended for this program. we're very excited about that. these funds are going to support technical assistance as well as equity community directly, so that they can be consistent in compliant needs for their businesses.

i mentioned a little bit about the need. there are just few resources available to the industry right now. this is one. and we are very appreciative of the state coming forward like this and recognizing that our program here in san francisco is deserving of $4.9 million. we are very, very thankful. it's because we took a lot of effort to see very, very supportive, essentially, of our equity community and these goals and they appreciate that and so have granted us -- awarded us the 4.9. one of the things we think is important in the process is engaming our community -- engaging our community around this discussion. we have done so with the oversight community and perhaps there are folks who may call in today. we have talked to them about their needs and how they would like the money administered and

with that, the executive director of the office of cannabis is going to speak to our community engagement. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. >> thank you, director rodriguez. so one of the things that we've done is had meetings with applicants listening sessions to discuss their resource needs. and informed our application and our plan for distribution of these funds. another thing that we did most recently in june of 2020, is have a conversation with the oversight committee where they provided feedback regarding how these funds should be distributed. it was important to hear directly from our partners who are contributing really important feedback about the process. so we've consistently reached out to them. equity applicants in the conversation have consistently expressed needs through meeting, calls, office visits and our

interactions with them primarily around receiving direct assistance, access to capital and support in finding real estate. one of the things we also wanted to provide you with is an update on the bradford grant. so we came before you earlier this year. some of that support was from the bureau of cannabis control. the bill sponsored by senator bradford allowed san francisco to apply for additional funds. we followed the administrative steps to procure those funds. they'll be directed to support regulatory compliance for the equity applicants. the office of cannabis applied for the funds in august of 2019 and received about $1.4 million. for the -- we come before today is from the governors office of business economic and development. the application was submitted on march 9, 2020 and on april 15. the office of cannabis was awarded about $5 million. the bill also has additional

reporting requirements. we're required to submit information on how the grants were expended and also that contains specific demographic data how the funds were disbursed. we'd be happy to take any questions from the supervisors. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. supervisor walton? >> supervisor walton: thank you so much, chair fewer, and thank you director rodriguez and your team for the presentation. i just have one question. what is the maximum amount that will be allowed per business? >> so that is something that we discussed very closely with the oversight committee. they are in the process of making that determination. right now they have made a determination specifically with respect to individuals who are sole proprietiers. these are people who went through the process by themselves. they made a determination that

those individuals should be allocated $100,000. they've also discussed the idea of redisbursement throughout the process. in other words, if they're unable to expend the full $100,000, that money will go back into a pot to be reallocated among everyone else again. so everyone going through the process should have south carolina -- access to this money. so far, they're going to be going back to the oversight committee in early august to get more additional information about other people in our equity community who are eligible to see what their amounts may be. we'll do the math. but so far the only specific target they've given us is $100,000 for sole proprietiers to start with. >> supervisor walton: thank you. i think that is a good amount of

support. my thing would be, do we have fire walls in place? obviously, you know we have folks who come into san francisco, who do a good job trying to -- figuring out a way to qualify as equity partners, but not really -- >> i hear you -- >> supervisor walton: -- intending to receive support. anything we're putting in place to make sure this benefits our folks in san francisco. >> absolutely. thank you for the question. two things. first, in order to be eligible to receive these funds, you have to have what we determine a viable application in our system for an actual business. you have to be in the process. you're not eligible if you're just a verified equity applicant. there is a reason for that. there is a lot of scrutiny as you can imagine for these

grants. we are very, very happy to -- long time coming, but with that comes scrutiny. scrutiny from the feds, from the state and certainly our own local scrutiny. so we created a program that is going to be compliant-based. the funds can only go to things that make the business compliant. these are not blanket checks. this is a very structured grant process. >> supervisor walton: thank you. >> supervisor fewer: yes. and comments or questions from colleagues? i also just want to say that i am thrilled about your using and going to the oversight committee and having them on the ground and can give advice. that is great. let's open this up for public comment. any members of the public that would like to comment on item number 6?

>> operations is checking to see if there are callers in the queue. operation, please let us know if there are callers that are ready. if you have not done so, add star 3. for those on hold, continue to wait until the system indicates you have been admitted. operator, are there any callers who wish to comment on item number 6? >> yes. i have three callers in the queue. i will queue the first caller. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. good morning, supervisors. chair fewer, supervisor walton and mandelman and to director rodriguez. this is chair of the oversight committee. i'm thrilled at the way that you guys are talking about the topics. it shows that you have been listening and definitely understand the urgency.

just like director rodriguez had stated before, none of our businesses in cannabis have been qualified to receive any federal aid during this pandemic, so we are still not being treated as regular businesses. and this money is super important for us to be able to bridge our equity applicants that are almost there, you know, and help them cross the finish line. so like i do support the approval of the accept and expend and i do encourage you guys to think about expediting these funds to our business owners. as you know, we're navigating through a very hostile real estate environment and so a lot of people's capital is spent on rent. even if they get approved, we're afraid that the operating costs or just to be able to get

running, like they might have issues, so as soon as we can get them through the approval process, the sooner we can get them up and running and paying taxes to feed into the coffers of contributing to society. thank you, guys, for your time. we really appreciate, again, your lens on the issue. thank you. >> yes. hello? hello? is it time for the comment? >> supervisor fewer: yes. >> okay. everybody, hi, supervisors, hi. how you doing? i hope everybody is doing good. i just heard your comment. my name is vanessa banks and i'm

a verified equity applicant that is coming out of the bayview hunters point, the reason i'm on the call, i need the oversight committee to be mindful that everybody that has been impacted by the war on drugs is not looking to be cannabis -- i'm not looking to be a dispensary. i'm not looking to be a cultivator. i'm looking to be an equity partner. but in the meantime, i have been developing a non-profit around the war on drugs, so we're going for education and the healing part of the aftermath of the war on drugs. please be mindful when you say helping just don't look out for people doing the dispensariedis look out for all of us. that's not my interest. i am working very, very hard to

be -- partnered with me to help me go to the website so i can get things going. please be mindful, i'm a verified equity applicant and i would like to be included in the budget, not as a dispensary, but or a cultivator. thank you, everybody. god bless. >> hello, caller? >> i'm here. >> please begin. >> sorry? >> yes, you may begin your comment. >> yeah, i want to make public comment. >> supervisor fewer: you have two minutes, speaker. >> hi, this is edward, original equity group. thanks you guys for setting this up and getting this equity grant

on this. i wanted to bring to your attention the, i would say, lack of urgency and the lack of seeing this as a crisis. supervisors, you all -- all approved the airport condition grant for $250,000 and you approved that in one month. it was introduced 5-19 and completed 6-12. now we're addressing the go biz grants, why do you not see the crisis same for equity grants as for the airport commission? is it because the amount is different? is it because federal scrutiny? the urgency needs to be on that same level for these folks. to you, supervisors, i want to make a point there needs to be expanded capacity for the office of cannabis so they can do their roles. they have special knowledge to get us through this process and they need to have the support of

the city to make sure share job and hours -- sure their job and hours are steady. we did miss out on a grant, $24 million grant from the board of corrections. we missed out on that because the office of cannabis didn't have the capacity. it's not their fault. it's the fault of the system that is not recognizing that we need to have that capacity so that we can apply for this. i expect there will be more grants coming next year. i would make a recommendation, supervisors, so that we can fast-track the rest of these equity grants so we don't have to have them stuck in committee unless it's absolutely necessary. the equity applicants need these funds. one more comment in this go biz, there are three allocations for r.f.p. i would like for you guys to start on some of those r.f.p. processes concurrently. i would like for us not to have to wait to get to the next stage

before we start the discussion on how the r.f.p.s should be shaped. >> speaker's time has expired. >> again, urgency is here -- >> next speaker. >> make a recommendation, supervisors so that -- [inaudible] >> are there any other callers in the queue? >> yes, i wanted to make a public acknowledgment. your two minutes starts now. >> i'm sorry? please begin your comment. >> okay, hi. i am an equity verified applicant in bayview neighborhood. and i wanted to acknowledge

supervisor walton and thank him for the acknowledgment of the fire walls or the protection on behalf of the equity verified applicant. thank you. >> thank you fort comment. -- for the comment. next caller? >> madame chair, that completes the queue. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. public comment is now closed. any more comments or questions from my colleagues? seeing none, i would like to make a motion to move it this to the board with a positive recommendation. >> on the motion, supervisor walton aye. mandelman aye. fewer aye. three ayes. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. and madame clerk, please call item number 7. >> 7, retroactive authorizing the office of the city administrator to accept and

expend hazard mitigation grant program funds in the amount of $294,000 and the federal emergency management agency through the california office of emergency services to support evaluation of city owned older concrete buildings for the project period from february 5, 2020 through june 7, 2021. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call the number on your screen, dial i.d. and then press pound twice. if you haven't done so, press star 3 to speak. please wait until you have been unmuted and you can begin your comments. >> supervisor fewer: today we have with us danielle from the office of the capital planning and brian strong is also available as well as --

>> good morning, supervisors. my name is danielle, with the office of planning in the city administrator's office. i'm seeking approval to accept and expend $294,000 in hazard mitigation funds from fema. to evaluate city owned older concrete buildings. the project is a joint effort between rpp and public works, because we have approved our project mitigation plan. in our recent update, will allow us to be eligible for the funds going forward. certain parts of older concrete buildings referred to as non- -- concrete buildings are concrete frame or wall buildings that were constructed prior to 1990s. the primary problem with these types of buildings, there is insufficient reinforcement in

the beams and walls that can cause failure and possible building collapse. we've seen this in chile, new zealand and mexico city. a detailed analysis is required to determine which of these buildings have been a larger inventory with the highest risk of collapse. san francisco's building is about 160,000 total buildings includes over 3400 pre-1980 concrete buildings and 116 of these are owned by the city of san francisco. some of the buildings include finance, african-american art and culture complex, the mission cultural center, fire stations, and animal care and control. the proposed project is to develop and apply sample screening, evaluation and rating program of city owned concrete buildings vulnerable to damage. newly developed evaluation tool for the building types. as a pilot, the program will

evaluate and analyze 10-12 city owned buildings that represent a variety of buildings. the public will inform a larger city-wide program of screening evaluation and writing to mitigate the work of all privately owned buildings across the city. thank you for your time. i'm happy to answer your questions. we have public works and r.t.t. available. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. comments or questions from my colleagues? let's open this up for public comment, please. item number 7. >> yes, operation is checking to see if there are callers in the queue.

>> can you please call item number 8. >> item 8, emergency ordinance to approval authority to the mayor's office of housing and community development and real estate division to amend certain existing leases regarding residual rent payments.

members of the public who wish to comment should call the number on your screen, i.d. number. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. >> supervisor fewer: we have m.o.h.c.d. >> thank you, chair fewer. committee members, supervisors. director of portfolio management and preservation to the mayor's office of housing and community development. i'm pleased to present for your approval item number 8, emergency ordinance delegation of authority to amend certain leases and agreements for affordable housing. the two action items before the committee today include, first, a request for an amendment to

the ordinance previously distributed to the clerk and also included in your packets. this technical amendment requires increased residual receipts to be used solely for affordable housing purposes in the city, specifically on pages 5, line 17 and page 6, line 16. the language requires that any greater portion of surplus cash shall be used solely for affordable housing purposes within the city. the second item for approval today is the approval of the amended emergency ordinance that would temporarily delegate approval to modify certain existing agreements and policies related to residual receipts for affordable housing projects. as a result of covid-19, affordable housing developments are experiencing significant operating deficits. decreased residential and commercial revenue is a direct

result of underemployment, unemployment, and business closures caused by the pandemic and economic recession. this is compounded by increased expenses for utilities, janitorial and supportive services, p.p.e., insurance and staffing. the combination of revenue losses and increased expenses along with the tightening of credit markets, affordable housing sponsors today face unprecedented challenges to manage their liquidity and remain financially solvent while maintaining operations at affordable housing properties in the city. in response to the pandemic, we're already implementing various emergency measures to protect san franciscans, to stabilize affordable housing operations and preserve the portfolio. these include residential and commercial moratoriums, loan

forebearance, and finally, the emergency ordinance before you today relating to increase in residual receipts distributions to sponsors to fund essential affordable housing purposes in the city. this would be effectuated by delegating approval to mohcd to amend certain agreements, to one, bring all legacy projects into conformance with the original receipts policy which generally allows sponsors to district one-third and -- distribute one-third and requires the two-thirds to be paid to the city. two, along a one-time hardship increase of the sponsor share of the residual receipts from one-third to two-thirds. doubling the amount they would normally get. finally, incentivize reinvestment by cross subsidizing projects with additional 2019 residual receipts.

re re -- reallocating the caps on these legacy projects will provide significant, immediate and ongoing financial support that positions sponsors to address operating shortfalls without the need for mochd to allocate subsidy to the project. the staff is recommending a delegated approval process to quickly stabilize operations of the city's affordable housing portfolio in response to the unprecedented challenges facing our city. if approved, they can leverage existing asset functionality to immediately deploy these funds to protect low-income households, continue to ensure they receive essential services and safe affordable housing. thank you fort opportunity to speak today about how our office is responding to covid-19. i'd be happy to address any

questions at this time. >> supervisor fewer: any questions from the colleagues? could we have a b.l.a. report, please? >> good morning, chair fewer, members of the committee, severin campbell from the b.l.a. to provide 60 days prior to the mayor's office of housing and community development to amend existing leases for affordable housing to revise the residual rent agreements within those leases. the leases that are impacted are shown on page 4 of our report. we estimate that the reduction in residual rent could be approximately $1.3 million per year if these leases are amended. we consider approval of the ordinance to be a positive for the board of supervisors, because it weighs the board's authority under the charter and

i'm available for questions. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. i see we have an amendment also that is -- that states that -- requires that any greater portion of service are retained by an affordable housing provider used solely for affordable housing purposes. and i'm wondering from our city attorney, if that is substantive or not? >> no, chair fewer, it's not substantive. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. let's open up for public comment. are there any members of the public who want to comment on item 8? >> madame chair, operation is checking to see if there are callers in the queue. if you have not already done so, please press star 3 to add yourself to the queue. if there are any callers to wish

to comment on item number 8, are there any? >> yes, i have one caller in the queue. >> supervisor fewer: welcome, caller. >> good morning. my name is tom. i'm the director of real estate development at the san francisco housing development corporation. and i have a brief comment in support of the proposal. i think it is outstanding that mohcd, given the circumstances that we're all facing which is unchartered territory, that they're getting ahead of the game, getting out in front of the problem instead of waiting for a possible tsunami of financial problems to occur. and so i commend the staff for their work and i am totally in favor of this proposal. that's the end of my comments

unless you have questions. thank you. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. >> that concludes the queue. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. public comment on item 8 is closed. i'd like to make a motion to adopt the amendment that i had just led. could i have a motion, please? >> on the motion, supervisor walton aye, mandelman aye, fewer aye. three ayes. >> supervisor fewer: i'd like to make a motion to move this to the board with a positive recommendation as amended. >> on the motion, supervisor walton aye. mandelman aye, fewer aye. three ayes. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. can you call items 9 through 12 together. >> yes, item 9, resolution approving the cares act community development virus program authorizing the mayor on behalf of the city to apply for,

accept and expend program entitlement from the united states department of housing and urban development in the amount of $10.9 million for a period beginning july 1, 2020 through june 30, 2023. item 10, accept and expend city cares esg program entitlement from the united states department of housing and urban development in the amount of $5.5 million for the period beginning july 1, 2020. item 11, resolution approving the cares act housing opportunities for persons with aids competitive coronavirus program and authorizing the mayor to apply for, the cares act funding from the united states department of housing and urban development in the amount of $159,000.

and item number 12, resolution approving the cares act housing opportunities for persons with aids coronavirus program and authorizing the mayor apply for, accept and expend the city's cares act and in the amount of $1 million for the period of july 1, 2020 through june 30, 2023. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on these items should call the number on their screen, dial the access code. and then press pound twice. if you have not already done so, please dial star 3 to speak. wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. >> supervisor fewer: today we have with us eric shaw.

>> good morning. i'm eric shaw, the director of the mayors office of community and development. items 9 through 12, requesting funding. the cares act was enacted to respond to the growing effects of the covid-19 public health crisis. it included supplement funding from the block grant, the emergency solutions grant and housing opportunities for persons with aids, hopwa. san francisco received the following awards in the first round of funding. $10 million, and supplemental funding. $5.5 million in supplemental esg

funding. $1.28 million in hopwa noncompetitive funding and $159,460 in hopwa competitive funding. we expect to receive additional rounds of funding as well as the state will be coming back to the board of supervisors for approval on the later rounds. we're proposing to utilize the first round of cares act funding in the following manner. entitlement in the amount of $3 million and one-time rental assistance to four organizations. catholic charities, young community developers. $7.9 million in operational support for up to 22 non-congregate shelters. for esg, all the funding will be directed to the department of homelessness and supportive housing where essential services and operations at emergency shelter sites. expansion of shelter operations

24-7. meals for unsheltered individuals. expansion of operations. hand-washing stations and mobile showers and personal protective equipment and supplies. for a hopwa noncompetitive provided for eight. case management, accessing essential services and supplies, rental subsidiesubsidies, meals personal protective equipment for people living with hiv/aids. all will be to provide subsidies, case management and assistance in accessing essential services. meals and personal protective equipment for people living with hiv/aids. we're recommending these expenditures based on the eligible use of esg and hopwa, they're alluded by hud. what we're seeing as the greatest need for housing

support to vulnerable populations. we ask that the committee recommend to forward these items to the full board. i would like to say that the supporting documents have one error that needs to be corrected. the funding amount for the catholic charities and eed are switched. finally, i'm happy to take any questions along with the director for community development. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much, director. do you have a power point presentation, or it was verbal? >> ma'am, just the expenditure schedules which were included within the legislative packet that was shared. not a power point. >> supervisor fewer: colleagues, any questions on items 9 through 12? done? okay, let's open up this item for public comment. >> operation is checking to see if there are any callers in the queue. operator, please let us know if there are callers ready.

if you have not done so, please press star 3 to be added to the queue. for those on hold, wait until the system indicates you ever been unmuted -- you have been unmuted. operation, is there any callers that wish to comment on items 9 through 12? >> madame chair there are no callers in the queue. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. public comment for items 9 through 12 is closed. supervisor mandelman? >> supervisor mandelman: i'd like to be added as cosponsor to 11 and 12. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. noted. seeing no comments from my colleagues, let's make a motion to move items 9 through 12 to the board with a positive recommendation. roll call vote, please. >> on the motion, supervisor walton aye, mandelman aye, fewer aye. you have three ayes.

>> supervisor fewer: thank you. can you read item 13. >> item 13, resolution approving a building lease agreement and sublease agreement each by and between the city and 833 bryant l.p. for the supportive housing unit for homeless households. 30 year term extension up to 10 years as a -- members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item, please call the number on your screen, enter the i.d. and then press pound twice. if you have not already done so, dial star 3. a prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. wait until the system indicates you've been unmuted. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. we have the department of homelessness and supportive

housing. also available for questions, anna and marissa from the controllers office. >> good morning, chair fewer. good morning, supervisor walton and mandelman. nice to see you all. this is the department of homelessness and supportive housing and i'm joined by my colleague and a whole team of people from the city, so we have a robust group of folks here to answer questions about this project. i'm going to share my screen and walk us through the slides. all right. try that one more time.

there we go. can folks see this? >> supervisor fewer: yes. >> wonderful. so the item before you today is a resolution for a permanent supportive housing project at 833 bryant street. in soma the resolution before you is a lease agreement for 145 units of permanent supportive housing for a 30-year term not to exceed just over $2 million a year. it also allows a sublease with mercy housing to operate the building and the tenant placement will be coordinated and traced. additionally are the resolution authorizes the controllers office through the office of public finance to provide the bond sale relative to the documents to this project.

i will just add to this slide that we've been working closely with the b.l.a. throughout the process and have an amended resolution that addresses the questions of the b.l.a. so i feel very confident that the resolution before you as amended should negate any concerns or questions that the b.l.a. had. and we can go into more detail about that during the b.l.a. report. just wanted to note that amendment is already before you all. this is the unique private public partnership. state tax credits and tax debt,

it is a newly constructed -- a building that is currently being constructed, there will be brand new construction for the homeless, individuals, 435, plus one manager's unit. the unique part is there is no city funding in the construction of this project. no city funding goes into the project until we're leasing it. no one needs an overview of the creases of homelessness. -- crisis of homelessness. i believe you're all familiar, but as you know, we have over 8,000 people according to the most recent count experiencing homelessness. 64% of whom are living unsheltered on our streets. additional funding showed that folks experiencing homelessness are aging and increasingly sick. and, therefore, require the targeted investment and support of permanent supportive housing

to exit homelessness. we know that p.s.h. is our most effective solution at ending homelessness and has long been central to our -- right at the core of our strategy for addressing chronic homelessness. district 6 has the highest concentration of people experiencing homelessness. and the city already operates over approximately 8,000 units of psh for families and youth and we're excited that this project is part of that portfolio. as i mentioned, this is a really unique project in terms of partnerships and in terms of financing. and i'm going to turn it over to review the details of the project before you. >> thank you, emily. good morning, chair fewer,

members of the committee, deputy director for admin and finance. so as emily was talking about, this is a unique project. one slide back, please. and i wanted to walk you through a little bit how it compares with how the city typically funds permanent supportive housing. so on this slide, you'll see how the project compares to a typical set aside unit in the mayor's office of housing and community development funded pipeline projects. it has enabled us to go at a faster pace than the typical mocd project, the total development time is less than three years compared to in excess of four years with a project. and the total development cost is approximately $385,000 per

unit. the last two supportive housing projects were in the range of 574,000 to 470,000 per unit per month. that included an upfront contribution in the range of $69 million to $30 million. so it compares favorably to our typical mohcd project. the department of public housing, in order to move quickly in responding to homelessness, typically works with a non-profit operator to lease privately owned buildings. these are usually older buildings that have not been remodelled or rehabbed. and the recent private leases we've seen are upwards of $1200 per unit per month. we have been able to negotiate the lease cost here based on the preferable debt financing to a

$1050 per month and that amount stays flat through the 30-year term of the lease. unlike a private market lease. it also offers the city permanent affordability, so we're not subject to the fluctuation based on market conditions or annual rent escalation with a private owner. this is brand new construction with much nicer units, with more amenities. so given the covid crisis, we're really excited to bring on more in-unit bathrooms where people have private baths and don't have to share bathing for health and safety reasons, as well as kitchenett kitchenettes. the project is leveraging the unique partnership here with the office of public finance. i want to thank my colleagues leveraging the city's credit backing for better financing. next slide, emily.

one more, please. an overview of the project. 145 units with the amenities i mentioned, there is onsite manager unit. 24-7 space for a front desk clerk and other amenities like a community room, laundry space, lounge and courtyard am --. so more about how the project was funded. homes for the homeless fund which is managed by the san francisco housing accelerator fund and rebecca foster, the c.e.o. is here joining us today available to answer questions.

started with $50 million grant from tipping point community. so it's leveraged with non-profit financing. 833 bryant is its inaugural project. the housing accelerator fund is providing the land at a cost of $8.2 million as well as bridge financing to allow the project to begin construction prior to city financing going into the deal. the project also includes a purchase option for the city to buy the land at the end of the lease term if it so chooses for a dollar. that will come back to the board of supervisors for approval if and when you wish to exercise that option. next slide. mercy housing is the project developer. they were selected through a competitive process by the housing accelerator fund to bel developer, building owner, future operator of the process.

mercy is entering -- has a grant lease with homeless for the homeless fund and will be the republic -- recipient of the tax credit. through the housing finance agency, they'll also be the recipient of the tax exempt debt to finance the construction. other details of interest in this more complex financing deal is the city is covenant here to pay the lease which allows for the project to benefit from the city's advantageous credit rating and get a lower price for borrowing. the operate and services costs are typical to other permanent supportive housing agreements that hsh enters into and will be completed closer to occupancy which will be the summer of 2021. again, no city funds are going into the project until after construction is completed. and based on how the financing is strurd, this $2 million lease

payment is not due until the spring of 2023. we have a couple of years to capitalize financing before we need to make a lease payment. next slide. >> i have advanced the slide. it hasn't caught up yet. >> i'll keep talking. there i go. thanks. again, the resolution before you has several components. homes for the homeless, which is the owner of the property, is entering into a ground lease for the land with mercy housing, which is the developer an construction lien. mercy will then own the

improvements and will lease the building to the city in order for the financing structure to work, the city will then lease the building back to mercy housing as the operator and overseer of the services provided there. i'll keep going through while we wait for the slides to advance. a few details about the real estate transaction and then i'll move to the financing more quickly. the proposed lease agreement is for approximately 61,800 square

feet consisting of the 145 permanent supportive housing units. the initial term of the lease is 30 years with option to extend for additional 10 years. the base rent is set at ceiling of 2.14 -- 2.014 million per years and if the financing of the bonds comes in more preferable, the city will be the beneficiary of that in terms of a lower annual rent payment. the base rent will be finalized upon issuance of the bonds and calculation of the debt service. it includes a sublease agreement where the city leases back the property to mercy housing to be the operator. the city will retain the authority to place people exiting homelessness through our coordinated entry system, which prioritizes those most vulnerable and chronically homeless for these intensive wraparound services.

finally, the future of michael kovrig michael kovrig agreement, the labbed -- the land and the acquisition is subject to future board of supervisors' approval. we'll walk you through it without the slide. i'll do my best. the overall budget is $54.9 million. that is a combination of $31 million in bonds proceeds, a permanent loan from the home for the homeless fund, about $1.2 million and then the balance is tax equity financing. the uses include related costs, 38.8 million for construction, other financing and costs for $54.9 million. and again, the city lease contribution is capped at $2 million a year.

with your approval and formal board approval, the project would go forward to have bond pricing for this deal in mid july. we've anticipated bond closing the last week of july. so we appreciate your attention given the short time line here. next slide. >> that's the end of the presentation. >> thank you very much. and as i said, i have my colleagues from the housing accelerator fund and the office of public finance if you have any questions. thank you so much.

>> madame chair, i believe you're on mute. >> supervisor fewe >> supervisor fewer: one second. >> thank you very much. >> supervisor fewer: apologies. can we have the b.l.a. report, please? >> yes, chair fewer, members of the committee, the proposed resolution approves a sublease between the city and 833 bryant street for the development of affordable housing. with summarized the lease terms on page 9 of our report and summarized the development cost for the project on page 11 of our report. under the proposed lease, the city would be committed to making $2 million per year in lease payments over the next 30 years to the project that would

then serve as service to debt on the project. there is also, as was briefly mentioned, at the same time a conveyance agreement that is being negotiated between the landowner and the city, which would give the city the option to purchase the land after 30 years for $1. we have had discussions with the department. there has been revised resolutions submitted to the board. and revised resolution, there has been a whereas clause added that would state that the city and landowner have agreed to enter into this conveyance agreement prior to execution of the lease. prior to concurrent execution of the lease. we still recommend that there be a report back from the department of homelessness and supportive housing to the board when that lease -- that conveyance agreement is executed and that report be included in

the legislative bio for this report. we considered the approval of this proposed resolution to be a policy matter for the board of supervisors, because it does the city to appropriate $2 million of general fund each year for the next 30 years. i'm available for questions. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. and did you -- so i think there are amendments that are going to be presented by the department, is that correct? >> yes. my understanding, they have submitted those amendments. >> supervisor fewer: okay. did you want to read the amendments into the record? >> i will -- i don't actually have a final copy of what they sent. i will ask someone to -- ms. cohen. >> supervisor fewer: yes. can you read those amendments into the record, please?

>> yes. i would ask my colleagues from the city attorney office to jump in should they need to correct me. looking on page 2 of the resolution, line 11-13, the amendment reads whereas the housing provider has entered into a long-term ground lease of the property with san francisco homeless for the homeless. land own of term up to 90 years. and then the additional amendment is on page 4. lines 15 through 22. and reads, consistent with the resolution and subject to the satisfaction by the housing provider of certain conditions, the housing provider securing certificate of occupancy from

the san francisco building of inspection for 145 residential apartments, one manager unit and program space to the director of hsh's determination that placement of tenants is ready to commence with a thorough h.s.h., the city coordinated system and, three, the director of h.s.h.'s determination that the event has been adjusted to reflect the project financing not to exceed $2 million -- per year. and then the final amendment is on page 5, lines 1-4. whereas the city and landowner have agreed to enter into a conveyance agreement prior to or concurrent with the execution of the lease agreement execution providing the city with the right to acquire the property

for nominal amount upon termination of the lease and sublease, the conveyance agreement. >> supervisor fewer: -- >> there is one final amendment. a strike through. page of, line 11 through 19, have been removed. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. so madame city attorney, are these substantive at all? >> no, chair fewer, they are not. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. so we're able to vote on those amendments today. okay. let's open this up for public comment. i don't see colleagues in the queue. public comment for item 13 is now open. >> operation is checking to see if there are callers that are in the queue. operation, please let us know if there are callers ready. if you have not done so, please

press star to be added to the queue. if you're on hold, please continue to wait. operator, please let us know if there are any callers who wish to comment on item 13. >> yes, i have two callers in the queue. i will queue the first caller. >> hello. my name is chris block. i'm the director of the chronic homelessness and the tipping point community. i want to express my gratitude to the development team, including the accelerator fund and the city families for working creatively to create a really innovative development. the streets of san francisco are telling us now more than ever that we need more housing now. and the only way to do that is to create housing faster and cheaper. bryant street is a huge step in that direction. and tipping point is excited and

proud to be part of this journey. i want to thank you for your anticipated support of the project and look forward to working with you in the future to create more developments like 833 bryant. thank you very much. >> thank you for the comment. >> that concludes the queue. >> supervisor fewer: public comment is now closed. i would like to first, before you vote on this, say thank you very much. i think that this is, yes, somewhat complicated of a deal, but i want to say thank you so much tipping point and to the housing accelerator it fund for making this happen and all the city workers that worked so hard on this. i'd like to make a motion to approve the amendment. could i have a roll call vote,

please? >> madame chair, i believe there is a amendment by the department and the b.l.a. would you like to -- >> supervisor fewer: yes. >> on the motion, supervisor walton aye, mandelman aye, fewer aye. three ayes. >> supervisor fewer: i'd like to move this to the board with a positive recommendation as amended. >> yes, on that motion, supervisor walton aye, mandelman aye, fewer aye. three ayes. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. can you please call item 14 and 15 together. >> yes, item 14 ordinance calling and providing for a special election to be held in the city and county of san francisco on tuesday, november 3, 2020, submitting to san francisco voters a proposition to incur bonded indebtedness not

to exceed $438.5 million to finance the acquisition or improvement of real property, 50% of the resulting property tax corrins to residential tenants, and collection of tax to principal and interest on such bonds and findings. item 15, resolution determining that the declaring that the public interest and the necessity demand the acquisition or improvement of real property. and adopting various findings. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on these items should call the number on your screen, then i.d., then press pound twice. if you have not already done so, please dial star 3 to speak. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you

can begin your comments. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. i'd like to also welcome supervisor ronen who has joined us. and i believe supervisor peskin, who has joined us also. today we have heather greens from capital planning and the mayor's office. we also have available for questions representatives from d.p.h., h.s.h., rec and park and controller's office. so ms. green? or supervisor? excuse me, first, supervisors ronen and peskin, would you like to say anything before we start the conversation? >> supervisor ronen: i'll save my remarks until after ms. green and ms. bruce. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. i wanted to say that phil ginsburg, the manager from rec and park has joined us also.

yes, ms. green and ms. bruce. >> good morning, supervisors. my camera is off, my connection is not stable enough to share video support. i will share my screen for presentations which should be visible to you now. so thank you, supervisors. glad to be here today. heather green, director of capital planning, city administrator office for the bond proposed for the 2020 ballot. thank you for all the input we've received from your offices and supervisor's offices to build consensus for this measure as we strive to meet san francisco's capital needs. here you have just a brief reminder about our capital plan spending and resilience challenges and san francisco are many and varied as you hear every day and with our capital program we strive to do the things we need to do, meeting our legal mandates, addressing

life and resilience needs and taking care of the things we own with our capital dollars first and foremost to address the many resilience challenges we face. including earthquake safety, climate change, aging infrastructure, the challenge of social and affordability that are pressing for us as a city. a little quick look back at the geo bond program. over $5 billion in bond approvals in the last 20 years, including the recently approved earthquake safety and emergency response measure from the march ballot. and the affordable housing measure from the november 2019 ballot. this shows a long view of the same data and it shows san francisco is not always successful at the ballot. we have worked hard to build voter confidence and trust that the city is being responsible with the issuance of general obligation bond debt and we're asking for authorization of

funds for work we can really deliver. the blue line here, this blue line shows where we introduced the first capital plan from the city. you can see below the line here, we did not meet the two-thirds threshold and following that introduction, we have more successful -- that introduced -- as we retire old debt and the city's assessed value increases, so the property tax rate does not increase above 2006 levels. you can see how successful we've been. the g.o. bond is different than the one approved last spring. this gives little context for that. we have multiple urgent fronts in the city. mayor breed asked that the administrator re-prioritize the bond program to reflect and address the mental health crisis in san francisco that we see on

our streets every day. and then more recently with the rise of covid-19, and the associated leap in unemployment, we see urgent need there to invest in shovel-ready projects and scaleable programs. we're trying to do all that with this bond. this is just a reminder about the planned g.o. bond program from the capital plan. you can see where we are november 2020, we had originally $255 million targeted to open space exclusively. this is what that looked like against the program's constraint here. you can see that program was fully subscribed by the time we got out to 2028. this is the program given the policy direction of the covid crisis for the current bond in the winter and spring staff worked to address the city's need with the bond.

and this breakdown is what went to capital spending committee and approved there. and finally, many productive conversations to understand needs and tradeoffs and the bond legislation here before you today reflects revised program, which is shown here. and this is what we'll be discussing in detail in this presentation. i'm joined by d.p.h., h.s.h., parks and rec and engineer from department of public works. they will talk through the priorities in the program shown here and then i'll talk about the context of the plan and the amendment before you. with that, i'll hand it over to greg. >> good morning, supervisors, chief financial officer of the department of public health. thank you for your time and considering this bond. as you all know, over the past

year or so, we've been moving in a direction of analytical approach to our behavioral health system to help those most in need on the streets. and through that process i've identified a population that is experiencing homelessness, mental health and substance abuse disorders along with physical health conditions. and identified of the 18,000 or so individuals that we encounter in our health system every year, about 4,000 with those three co-occurring conditions. and even within that group a smaller population of high users of the system and have very significant health needs that we have been working with our partners in the city, including the department of homelessness and supportive housing, to really focus our resources on

providing accessible and high-functioning services to meet the very high needs of that population. and risk strategy, as you all know, was discussed and resulted in legislation at the board of supervisors around mental health s.f. as we continue to focus on trying to meet the needs of this very high health -- people with high health needs, part of that strategy requires investment in our physical plan. and that would be investing in facilities where we could add capacity to increase access and flow in our system. reduce barriers to people that are awaiting services from the department of public health. and do better in serving that population.

and so what we've got contemplated in this bond would be the program that would allow us to increase our service capacity within the department, aligned with those strategic priorities of the board and the mayor in the city. and would include ability to use general obligation bonds for wide variety of needs that are aligned with that strategy. and could lock a hidden subacute treatment facilities, open residential and stepdown residential beds, long-term care facilities, including board and care, and other residential care facilities. psyche skilled nursing facilities. this would also give us the opportunity to invest in program infrastructure that would facilitate access and coordination of our services,

including potentially respite detox sobering facilities, behavioral access center that was contemplated in the s.f. legislation and improvements to our existing facilities. so all of this work is coordinated between the department of public health and our partners, including h.s.h., to really try to create a continuum of services and access to services that coordinates behavioral health, housing and other outreach needs. so we're thankful for your consideration of this and believe this would be an important piece in our effort to build out the system that we've envisioned in san francisco to address the crisis of health that we're seeing on our streets continuing today. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. >> and then ms. whitley will

speak to the homelessness capital priorities. >> good afternoon. deputy director of finance for the homelessness and supportive housing. as greg was saying, we've done a lot of work to coordinate our systems of care. whole person care initiatives to service those experiencing chronic homelessness or those ott risk of chronic hospitalizations. this would expand our portfolio to help fund the stabilization acquisition, construction of permanent supportive housing which has those long-term affordable housing benefits as well as onsite wraparound services for this vulnerable population. much like we've been able to pilot with state funding through the no place like home

initiative. this would also allow us to acquire existing permanent supportive housing buildings that are currently privately leased for that long-term affordability and free up the general funds to go back into those projects, or new projects. other eligible uses include, we've been doing very large expansion under mayor breed's leadership of emergency shelter and transitional housing so that folks in crisis have a place to go at night. and we're in strong partnership with d.p.h. and asking for your approval of this important funding source. thank you. >> thank you. this slide just reflects a level of investment in the proposed bond towards this program of health and homelessness greg just described, where our investment priorities were $207

million, include the capital investments just described. permanent supportive housing units, subacute facilities, residential stepdown facilities and long-term placement facilities like board and care and other residential care, psyche skilled nursing facilities, the behavioral respite facility, detox and sobering facilities and centralized behavioral health access center as an existing health facility. and the city has a behavioral access center currently. lease properties are not eligible uses of g.o. bonds, but should the city have an opportunity to acquire a new site, this would be eligible use for that. that is the important thing to keep in mind, we cannot pay for services with this, but we can pay for the physical grant to

enable access and facilitate that. in transition toward the recovery piece of the bond, a note impact of covid-19 emergency on our local employment picture. the data from a few weeks back from our city economist, published data tells us that the area regional lost over 500,000 jobs in april. that is 50% of the jobs the region created in the 10 years since the great recession. the san francisco san matteo region lost 169,500 jobs in april. we need to get people working, keep people working is with us and is expected to be for the foreseeable future. and the best way with we can do that in the capital world is to get funds to project with advanced planning and to easily

scaleable programs and the san francisco portfolio, those are in the parks department and public works department at this time. and so with that, i will hand it over to c.c. bradley from the parks department to talk about the parks piece of the bond. >> thanks, heather. good morning, supervisors, i'm stacy bradley in the capital funding division. i'm also joined by the general manager phil ginsburg and our general planning. parks provide many benefits essential to the well-being of our community, from exercise communities to spending time. access to park improves our mental health and physical health. we own 4,000 acres of open space with 3400 acres within the city limits. we operate a diverse array of

facilities, gardens, courts, athletic fields, golf courses. as part of our department strategic plan and aligned with other city policies and directives, our equity is a policy imperative for us. [please stand by] [please stand by]

>> 83% of adults find exercising at parks essential to mental and physical health. this bond will provide a much needed economic boost to the city for the economic impacts of covid-19 to provide work for construction and design sectors. an overview of the selection criteria. our equity zones are identified with data and the top 20% in the city with five minute walk or one quarter mile buffer. high growth for parks and neighborhoods where we expect residents to increase 40% or more in the next 20 years.

the assessment to analyze the infrastructure to analyze the parks. this was designed by the index developed by independent consultants on our deferred maintenance needs. this is multiuse facilities and community hubs for key gathering spaces for neighborhoods. one project addresses many users. playgrounds and those that can host large community events. hubs where the community activities create community and provide increased operational efficiency for the department. this covers parks with buildings. prioritized to improve the seismic resiliency and ensure safety for earthquake.

they provide community gathering spaces and function as disaster response during emergencies. as you recently saw with the emergency child care centers in the past couple months. we have project readiness. projects that have begun planning or design with community support and having projects farther along in the process means faster delivery. they have had the designs approved and are waiting bond funding to move forward. we are able to prioritize those with funds to supplement bond projects to allow bond proceeds to go as far as possible. this slide shows the criteria overlaid on the parks system. the parks have not received investments over the past decade with the last two bond measures.

we have needs throughout the system. we will prioritize projects. depending t upon success we intd to invest funds for programs. the projects start with the named projects. buchanan street mall was through a robust community process to reinvigorate the long overlooked community by creating an equitable and dynamic face and primary gathering space. a play ground, improved pedestrian circulation and memory walk. this is a curb to curb recreation center that will be twice as large as existing facility. one indoor court to two and maintaining outdoor open space

to include playground and landscaping and second floor terrace. a new rec center in coordinate with hope sf development to build a new recreation center and playground within door basketball court and indoor and outdoor amenities. next is bayview-hunters point to restore through remediating, enhancing natural habitat. it creates a healthy community with safer places for gathering and exercise and play and restoring access to the waterfront. we are developing a development plan with the community leaders to strengthen connections and provide community opportunities for hunters point. this is the plaza which

resolving a water issue. the main community driven design will provide more functional assess to the plaza for every day and special events while harnessing the symbolism in the neighborhood and city and region. the city-wide parks cover our largest city-wide parks golden gate park. recovery park is in the bucket to provide opportunities for physical and mental health, priority parks include crocker amazon, buena vista and improvements to chinatown park. sustainability program can fund climate work, modern

conservation and other improvements such as new spaces and incorporating urban agriculture. while we renovated many children's play area. the play sf program there is still remaining need for play areas not touched in 30 to 40 years. we can update the play equipment. we have community fund to provide opportunity for neighborhoods, community groups and partners to nominate projects. it enhances park identity and experience and leverages resources in the community. these provide the opportunity to be outside, explore and connect to nature. this would improve trails, implement erosion control.

community gardens are loved by many. it provides a place to connect to nature and grow their own food and gather with neighbors. thank you very much. i will behinding this presentation over. >> good afternoon. i am susan, the acting deputy director for infrastructure and see engineer. i want to thank you for the opportunity to speak. i am speaking about infrastructure needs. the city is responsible for over 1200 miles of streets, 50,000 locations for curb ramps, 371 street structures, nine plazas. in recent years the capital expenditures on these assets has been from the pay go program, general fund and gas tax funds. the proposed bond includes

$41.5 million for infrastructure, about one year of typical general funding. it would allow us to continue the ongoing programs in paving and street structures. the work is rapidly deployable. we are always designing and moving to construction on projects. when we delay expenditures for capital maintenance, in the long run it ends up costing more when we have to go in to do the work. this is a graph which shows the impact of expenditures on the condition of our paving. where we are now is at 74. the goal is 75 and stay there. that is what we have been funded at that level. the bond would help us maintain

that trajectory to 75 and stay there. this summarizes how we prioritize and pick work in each of the programs. we would propose to continue to use this process and work on the next projects that come up. for the repaving we use our pavement score, pci. we look at multi-modal usage if there is more than one kind of transportation, is the project ready, equitable geographic distribution and public inquiries. we have a curb ramp condition score. public inquiries are very important. geographic distribution, very important to get in put from disability stakeholders anchorednate with mod to review which ramps to work on each year. for street structures and plazas life safety is first.

trip and slip hazards, code violation, slope instability. level of deterioration. how frequently used the facility is, is there an option for other methods of getting back and forth? we don't have to have that particular asset. back to you, heather. >> it ask $41.5 million that represents about a year in what would have been recommended as a cash contribution toward these programs. given the budget cut time we are in and the deficit we are facing we will not be able to support this infrastructure without this

support. in the final addition there is a bond report that is important communication tools for the bonds and changes will be made there as well. that document is not before you for a vote. i will summarize the changes to that report which will be submitted to the file prior to committee vote at future meeting. we intend to adjust all members to match the program presented to correct the key treatment facilities and add a key treatment facility and transitional housing as eligible uses. it will rebuild and chinatown health clinic as eligible use for community health facilities section. as a priority. prioritize small scale repairs at existing facilities and

health services to vulnerable populations. we need to change it to reflect estimated allocations to transitional housing at $137 million of $207 million in the bucket. $60 million to mental health disorder. for flexibility to prioritize eligible projects as they arise. health and homelessness section. for parks again add adjusting all members presented in the ordinance. the language about eligible uses of surplus to reflect prioritization of jackson playground within recovery park and the narrative about those additional recovery parks. $1 million towards richmond senior park. $3 million for the south sunset.

$1 million to jackson playground and $3 million to chinatown park. that adds up to change from the bond program as approved at capital planning. we discussed the program is constrained. these are trade-offs envisioned for initial proposal 438.5. instead of $255 million parks bond in november 2020. we increased the amount of the health and recovery bond to accomplish that we took $150 million from the 2022 plan transportation and 33.5 from the planned public health measure. that program is against the

program constraint. not additional capacity here. we are trading off future bonds to keep the constrained. this reflects the revised program before you and further trade-off that has been made. you can see health and recovery now at 487.5, up $49 million. that will come forward from the 2028 parks reduced from 200 to 151. we have submitted to committee legislation with draft amendments that reflect adjustments to the eligible uses here described. i ask the committee to adopt those amendments. in conclusion look at the election deadlines for the bond measure july 8th is the deadline for budget and finance. july 14th full board and

july 21st for the second reading. with that our presentation is concluded. i am happy to take any questions. >> thank you. before that could we have the bla report, please, on item 15. >> supervisor, our report on item 15 is based on the lower bond amount 438.5. do you still want us to report? report on the 438. >> so the item 15 resolution before you would submit to the voters general obligation bond measure $438.5 million. we summarize the uses of those funds on pages 16 to 17 of our report. i will point out this does differ from the presentation that you just received from the capital planning committee. in terms of fiscal impact on the

bond measure of $438.5 million, the impact to a residential property with assessed value of 600,000 would be $62 per year increased property taxes per year. the bond priced at $438.5 million would be within the city debt limit and we consider approval to be a matter for the board. >> thank you, ms. campbell. comments or questions from colleagues? >> can i see slide 27 or 28 again.

it was the one that listed the recovery amounts filled out. >> thank you. i want to look at that. thank you. >> any comments or questions, supervisor walton? >> no, thank you. >> supervisor ronan and peskin. i wanted to personally thank you for all of the work you have done with this bond and also to thank andrea from the mayor's office. would you do anything to add, supervisor?

>> i am just here to help answer any questions and i want to thank you and your staff for working with us over the last number of weeks to make a number of important changes to do something that will be impactful for our residents. >> yes, i just wanted to thank everyone who has been part of these discussions. i think it is appropriate that we are raising the amount of this bond. we have to stop engaging in the biggest recovery period that was so sudden and unexpected. everything from health and recovery for our city and residents to making sure those park projects are done and provide that outdoor recreation we need to the work for dpw so we can free up some space in our general fund where we have to

close a pretty overwhelming hole. i wanted to appreciate the may mayors office and particularly andrea for being so open and easy to work with. heather green at the capital planning committee always so prepared and ready to explain every trade-off and decision. i could not be happier with this outcome that i feel really takes up part of the city and all of the really important needs into consideration. my appreciation to you all. >> thank you, for your work. supervisor mandell man. >> i want to thank everyone for the work on this. in particular, the mayor's office and departments and supervisors ronan and peskin.

i had a few modest additions around the types of facilities i wanted to see included around potential expansion of emergency, using this for sobering facilities and some of this for longer term locked treatment beds. ththe mayor's office was cooperative. i am glad to see that in there. these are extraordinary times and extraordinary bond measure a little bit for everybody. i think it is important that we pass this. i am a little worried looking at our future from the bonds planned for the future around not just parks but transportation, which has taken a hit, and waterfront a few years after that. i think was we move forward, i think we will think about revenue measures or ways to pay for those longer term

investments that we desperately need to make. i think transportation and our waterfront are going to be huge, huge capital needs to figure out how to deal with those. for now, i think this is a very good bond, and i want to thank everybody who worked hard to make it happen. >> supervisor walton. >> thank you, chair fewer. i want to add my voice. i want to say thank you to the mayor's office and supervisor ronan's office and all of the colleagues working hard to increase so we can address the service needs and needs of mental health and parks across s the city and being thoughtful to go through the process together. i would love to share this with our constituents and our community. it is important for them to see all of the great work that comes out in this presentation.

thank you everybody. >> thank you very much. yes. it takes all of us to pass it. any other comments from anyone or questions? seeing none. open up for public comment. can you please call for public comment on items 14 and 15. >> madam chair. checking to see if there are calls in the queue. please press star to be added to thadded tothe queue. are there any callers to comment on items 14 and 15? >> yes, there are currently 38 callers in the queue. i will queue the first caller.

>> good afternoon, supervisors. thank you for your time and service. i am jackie flynn, executive director of the randolph institute of san francisco. we serve thousands of families in district 10. we have been working extremely hard especially now to remain connected in our community serving those in need. whether it is dropping off food for housing, just to make sure folks are participating in their census or assisting folks on the call in line for important meetings like today because the phone line is busy. i have been texting to remind folks to try again. our community is resilient. we remain connected. i want to thank the general manager phil ginsburg that has created an opportunity for apri to work with rec and park and

the community and the parks alliance and trusts for public land to directly connect and draft the plan to build equity into every aspect of the india basin park from design to programming. over the last 8 months we have a community of 16 community leaders participated in building the equity plan for the project despite the impact of covid-19. thank you for your leadership. the city has a huge opportunity to consider the community first and build smart parks where technology in planning and design. build it for the existing community. i ask your support for the health and recovery bond. i want to continue be to invest in building healthier communities especially now in communities that have waited for so long.

in closing i want to let you know your video feed is a few minutes in delay from audio so if folks are watching they might be delayed. thank you for your time. i appreciate all of the work that has gone into this. >> with over 50 members organizations serving over 250,000 residents in san francisco. i would like to thank you for support to include the park in the health and recovery bond measure. it is thoughtful and fiscally responsible given the size and uses of the park. as you know the square is a central space for local

residents and tourists. [ inaudible ] it really fills the committee needs. we have little open space in chinatown. the pandemic has hurt us. lack of fresh air and open movement. this has for years been part of a larger public health plan and highlighted how vital quality open space in chinatown is. youth and parents participate in numerous meetings and given design since 2016. they all look forward to the chinatown for families. funding will not only create open space but provide long-term benefits. this project will create good paying jobs for local community with enhanced experience for visitors and support the

chinatown small business. thanthank you for including thin the bond measure. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. i am eric state take with the trust for public land. i would like to thank everyone for work on the 2020 san francisco health and recovery bond. we have the trust for public land to support safe and equitable access to parks and mental health visitors. the shelter-in-place taught us that parks and open space are critical to mental health, well being and economic recovery. this bond represents down payment on the continued need to invest in park equity in san

francisco. the trust for public land had a long standing successful history of partnering with the city of san francisco to create improved parks and open spaces based on deep and diverse community engagement. this will prioritize projects with central government services, support economic recovery and provide funding for behavioral health and our parks and rec creation so our local residents can get back to work to help san francisco recover. the benefits of parks provide multiple benefits. please support this by approving this for the ballot. we look forward to passing this bond on the november 2020 ballot. thank yothank you for your suppr parks in this beautiful city. thank you. >> i am a director of housing

and community infrastructure mercy housing. i am in support for the recreation center at hurts park and owned and operated by the recreation and parks department. it is a public private partnership with mercy housing and children's services. the $10 million will be matched by $10 million from a capital campaign led by the four partners. it will be part of the new neighborhood hub to be part of the revitalization to build 1700 new housing units. it has playground, pool and new

retail space for businesses and new community center with youth programs and neighborhood activity space. it is inclusive and family friendly and a place that inspires people to play and learn together in a common neighborhood. thank you for your support in investment in our youth and families. and for your support of the $10 million bond for the new recreation center. >> next caller, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am the park director. we facilitate hunters point collaborative and rec and park 2020 bond working group. i am calling in support of the bond which includes the projects

in district 10. we have seen over the past few months the importance that parks and outdoor space play in our community. they are safe for families and friends to gather and individuals to improve mental and physical health. i look forward to daily walks which involve the park side destinations. continued investment is greatly needed in the southeast sector within our city and has had a lot of park investment opportunities. therefore i hope the committee sees fit to approve this much needed bond. thank you. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon. i am jeremy chan, board member of the japan task force. i am calling to urge you to pass

this bond. it is a crucial gathering soace for the community. as member of the japan performing arts group i performed in the peace plaza. recently we hosted an arts event with the movement of black lives and supported by the neighbors in the fillmore. it is in need of critical repair. not only do the surface tiles have a washing hazard but water continues to leak below the plaza. that dates back to error in construction. the city sued to reach settlement with the contractor and the funds were never reinvested. this provides an opportunity to right that wrong. from the peace plaza has had involvement from hundreds of

individuals and community organizations. the design standards and shovel ready to begin. we have received approval from rec and park. for all of these reasons i urge you to support the peace plaza project. >> next caller, please. >> caller: i am john o saki, co-chair of the peace committee. i want to thank you for taking up this item. i want to emphasize that the peace plaza is symbolic of deep wounds in our community that have never healed. this city has to be accountable for evicting thousands of residents and businesses during

redevelopment on the very spot where the peace plaza was built. i think this project, i personally have been working on it over five years now. we have waited 20 years for a plaza that reflects needs and priorities of our community. this project will go a long way to healing those wounds to making things right, making up for the fact that our community is permanently displaced from the japan town area. i am here to urge your support for retaining the full $25 million allocation for the peace plaza. i thank you very much for taking up this item and for your support. thank you very much. >> next speaker, please.

>> caller: this is sophie constantine no. we are here in support of buchanan mall. we have been working with the community and we request you to play the video we have given you. there were a lot of gun violence so my mom didn't let me go. >> come on. we need your input. >> we are trying to do a project on buchanan mall. we are trying to have a project the community will be proud of. >> come here.

making a price for people to feel comfortable for playing and walking through. >> we set out to do the community that involved long-term residents. a beautiful activation. >> i want to know what you guys want to see. you are all here. you have a lot of people. >> right now that is the first step. show the community we did something so people could see what we have done and hopefully bring in more people to be part of it. >> the buchanan mall so we can

have your opinion on what you would like to see. >> my family is different because of cultural stuff. they meet up once a week. everybody should do that to get to know their community. everybody wants the community that comes out together. >> when we first started i felt like you. it was too big. >> thank you. next caller, please. >> caller: i am larry jones. 40 plus year member. i would give a shout out to supervisor walton and his constituents on the commit and

people that put in work to push this bond forward. i support the $10 million given to the playground in the valley for the public housing project. i want it known tha that it will save lives. over three to four decades we have been let down with failed bond measures and construction projects that were to uplift youth and people. now we have transformation in place. this bond will help insure we are recognized as a vibrant community and known for just negative things. we are on the rise over here. i appreciate all of the board's support. we are supported by loving people and there is loving families trying to support change. with the bond measure that change is very near, and i am glad to be part of this. i would like to thank everybody

involved. let's continue to push it through. thank you very much. >> next caller, please. >> caller: this is jr eppler, president of the boosters neighborhood. while i appreciate the priority given to jackson as recovery park i am asking for $10 million in bond as named project. not having funding for line item. there may be money left from another project. yesterday you received a letter from me on the reasons why jackson park should be named. i will talk from my experience as father of 5 year-old. jackson is central to the neighborhood. we can hardly access it. it occupies all of the open space. we want to play we have to keep our eye out for well hit balls.

it is old and in ill repair. the clubhouse which should be providing programs is under utilized and falling apart. the neighborhood part in the sense it is physically in the neighborhood. interestingly, jackson has become a neighborhood park during shelter-in-place. they can play freely. my family has picked up dinner from the restaurant and occupied physical distancing. we are able to see and talk to preschool friends. we watch construction workers building the units adjacent to the park to bring new neighbors to the neighborhood without any open space to serve them. when we go back to business as usual, we lose the park again. the renovation will allow it to become something to our own little area. that will take place in a reasonable amount of time with

reasonable certainty we need at least $10 million in funding. thank you. >> next caller, please. >> caller: good afternoon. i am a friend of jackson park. we have been working since 2013 to ensure that the jackson park renovation project is funded on the 2020 health and recovery bond. in that time friends of jackson raised more than $17 million from private sources and impacts by developers. we don't have an approved project design yet. that shows you how desperate we are for open space parks in our neighborhood. as you know, the east side of the city is undergoing thousands of new residents in the next few

years. we have never received funding for the parks as promised by the eastern neighborhood plan. funding the jackson park project we can take a small step to right this wrong. the criteria presented this morning will be shovel ready now more than ever the community is blocking seeks health and healing. shout out to phil ginsburg for including us for the social distance circle. 120 social distances are popular. when they are allowed no open space for us to gather. thank you for your work especially for increasing the park section of this bond. we urge you to name jackson park as a priority in the 2020 health and recovery bond with a minimum

allocation of $10 million. thank you for your support of this bond. >> next caller, please. >> caller: this is amy jones. good morning. i am for the elderly. known as the extended living room of our community, especially senior in the surrounding single hotel rooms with no living rooms no privacy and no open space. when you look up to these in chinatown, perhaps you have noticed they are pocket plans on the window sills and the fire escapes. those are our residents only

gardens. for the past six years the community engaged in the long but exciting redesign feasibility study that cost the city $2 million. it was thorough and the result reflects thousands of residents and park use earns in china town. we were looking forward to the project last year which did not happen. in the sessions for the new park we see a modern park with newly defined recreation and quiet space and clubhouse which functions for a wellness program, community meeting space where people gather and socialize. it will serve as cooling center when the heat waves make living unbearable. we can teach earthquake preparedness and serve as out

station for the many social services. we are doing all of this in the tiny room no longer functional and viable. supervisors we need funding for the new park now. we waited for many, many years for it. if this is not included this year, we may never live to see on you dreams come true. please support the inbe conclude in the november bond is long overdue. thank you very much. >> thank you. i would like to make a quick announcement. there are 32 callers in the queue this meeting will go beyond 1:00 p.m. the budget meeting will begin when this meeting is adjourned. thank you.

next caller, please. >> i am a resident adjacent to jackson park. i am looking out my window at jackson park. i see a vital san francisco park. it is used by many people. we have a number of children camps operated including reading, child care offered in another. this is something that i hope will continue after this period. it will only happen if we have the funding to renovate the park. we looked at parks and the space available that doesn't offer the space for people to play, to

relax and be outside. it only has a program. i would like to thank supervisor walton forgetting the $10 million for the renovation project. we do need a priority for this park. we have raised $17 million that can be leveraged for this renovation. it is a shovrel ready project because of that. i hope that you will make sure that it is on the bond. and that there is a specific priority for jock son park. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> caller: i am jackal better. i am a citizen of san francisco.

thank you to our public representatives working throughout this presentation. i am calling to discuss jackson park item 14 to share my experiences with jackson park. i grew up the city. jackson park is the closest park to my house and childhood memories and time spent with friends. after coming home from college, i was able to see jackson park for what it was. it is an under funded public space. rusty fences, dilapidated concrete and the difference between my view and the park was jarring. i was surprised to learn they have not received development since i was 2 years old. to reiterate in the time between jackson park's last funding and time there was time for a toddler to read, write and speak

english and serve in the peace corps in africa and return here to be on the phone call. that underscores the need for a named priority in the budget and receive a minimum of on $10 million. i will say please invest in the children that live here, the people here and jackson park. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> caller: hello. i am steve, executive director of japan town task force. thank you supervisor fewer, walton, mendelson on your support and hard work with the department of park and recreation. i ask for your support in the general bond, but particularly i would like to speak to japan town peace plaza.

it is a project we have been working on for a numerous amount of years. it is the process what we as a community have gone through most recently with eminent domain during redevelopment of 1960s and 1970s. previous to that was concentration camp in terms of peace plaza we regard as social, cultural, sacred space. we worked hard with due diligence in tropical storms of the reforms. we would like to have your support in terms of the long-awaited result to have that peace plaza shared with future generations of phan and i san f. thank you for your hard work. i ask for full funding for the

peace plaza. thank you. >> thank you. next caller. >> caller: i am a san francisco resident. i want to speak in support of the ordinance and the resolution. this bond is going to support the repair of the japan town peace plaza, and i support full funding of the $25 million for this project. it is in a uniquely difficult situation because of the structural challenges. it is a city park but it sits right above an underground parking facility, which is also owned by the city. it is desperately in need every pairs for safety reasons and this is, as you know an important cultural landmark for

the city. it is for the economic survival of small businesses and restaurants that be surround japan town and the fillmore. i wanted to just voice my support for full funding for this park. thank you. >> next caller, please. >> caller: hello i am bonnie doyle, a member of friends of jackson park since 2013. i am a resident of district 10. i am calling in support of jackson park. i am pleased to see that it is being mentioned as a recovery park. i would like to see it dedicated $10 million for our project. we have been working on it for a long