minutes . >> chair bustos: i will close public comment. commissioners,may i have a motion for the minutes ? >> i move the minutes be accepted as red. >> chair bustos: thank you commissioner scott. may i have a second ? thank youcommissioner bycer. madam secretary, please take role . [roll call vote] mister chair, the vote is 5 aye's. >> chair bustos: motion carries. madam secretary, please call thenext item . >> next is the regular agenda, authorizing a personal service of contract with field monroe

lap associates for financial advisory services related to debt administrations support for a amount not to exceed $120,000. discussing and action resolutionnumber 22 2021 . >> commissioners, oci utilizes the services of a financial advisor working on ongoing administration portfolio and as our previous contract will expire at the end of this fiscal year, staff proposes approval for a new contract and the approval of that new contract with the recommended firm so john from our finance team will present this item. john. >> good afternoonchair bustos, members of the commission . as the chair pointed out this

item approves the contract for fieldman rolapp associates for financial services.next slide please . just as background, oci i as a complex $922 million portfolio which is comprised of seven separate tax allocation bond credits which means different revenues are pledged in different ways for certain tax allocation bondsand all this has to be tracked aberrantly . it also treats community district credit. the administration of the portfolio includes financial modeling, business maintaining tracking systems and issuance regulatory reporting compliance and investor agency relations. a financial advisor or municipal advisor with different term promotes

expertise and analytical tools and market knowledge in support of these functions. current regulations in fact require that financing proposals be presented to the financial advisor rather than directly to issue were made which means if an investment banker sees some financing or refundingopportunities , the current regulations are not allowed to prevent the cost and we will not see that unless it is presented tothe financial advisor. next slide please . ocii purchasing policy authorizes staff to select a contractor from the city approval and in this case we issued an rfp for financial advisoryservices to all the firms in the city at a board . all firms submittedproposals . we put together a evaluation comprised of 2 ocii staff and

one office of public finance staff fromthe city . fieldman rolapp associates was selected based ontheir california tax allocation bond experience . that experienced the qualifications and competitive pricing. next slide please. the contract is for a three-year term. the reason is considerable time investments required to very ocii's portfolio and policies and its importance to maintain consistency overtime . not to exceed amount of the contract is $120,000. services will be provided as needed and they will be paid from property taxrevenues . next slide please.

ocii staff recommend the authorization of this personal services contract with fieldman rolapp associates for general financialservices in an amount not to exceed 120,000 dollars . next slide please. at this point i'd like to introduce a representative from fieldmanrolapp associates . adam's arabian who is a principal of the firm and she or i will be available to answer any questions that the commissioners might have. >> you john, good afternoon commissioners. we are very excited to be in front of you today and very much appreciate the opportunity and look forward toworking with you to answer any questions you may have .

>> chair bustos: thank you. madam secretary do we have any speaker cards or anyonewishing to speak on this item ? >> members of the public who wish to comment on this item should call 415-655-0001 and enter access code 146-922-8863 followed by the #and the #again. press star 3 to be placed in the queue. any members wishing to comment on this item leaves press star 3 to be placed in the queue. and we will provide a few moments forthem to call in . ... it does not appear that there are anymembers of the public .

>> chair bustos: seeing no request i will close public comment and turn to my fellow commissioners for any comments and i want to remind the commissioners this is an opportunity for you to ask any questions during this period but when we do get timeto vote , we would ask for an up or downvote so i'd like to start with commissioner scottany comments orquestions for this particular item ? >> commissioner scott: no commentsor questions at this time . >> chair bustos: thank you . vice chairrosales, any questions ? >> vice chair rosales: no questions orcomments, thank you . >> chair bustos: commissioner brackett, questions or comments ? >> commissionerbrackett: non-áspeaker1á thank you. commissioner bycer. >> commissioner bycer: no questions or comments . >> chair bustos: thank you for the presentation.

if i could have a motion to move this presentation. >> commissioner scott: i would like to make the motion to move the contract with fieldman rolapp and associates financial advisory services related to death administration for a term of three years not exceeding 120,000 . resolution 2221. >> thank youcommissioner scott and may i have a second ? >> i will second. >> thank you commissioner rosales. madam secretary pleasetake role . >>please announce your vote when i call your name, commissioner brackett . [roll call vote]

>> book is 5 aye's. >> chair bustos: motion carries, please call the next item. >> next is the agenda item 5 seed authorizing anoption agreement for f4 partners llc . a delaware limited liability company in lockport, other project. discussion and action resolutionnumber 83 2021 . madam interim director. >> thank you. commissioners as you are aware staff as seen issues with the development team for the housing project for quite sometime in december of last year this proved an extension to our agreement which now expires june 30 . to date we have not yet been able to agree to terms guarding the project but earlier this month we provided a revised proposal for the housing program. due to the complexity of the project additional time was

needed for staff to evaluate the proposal so the item before you is a limited short-term extension for 90 days to allow time for that evaluation . also from our housing team will present this item and representatives from lines as wellas mercy housing are here to answer any questions you might have . >> thank you. >> good afternoon, i'm kim also, development specialist from the ocii team.next slide please. the request is authorization to enter into a third amendment of theoption agreement with or transit partners . the amendment would provide a short-term extension to september 30, 2021 to allow adequate time to complete negotiations on affordable housing program and report back to the commission with a recommendation . if the commission finds the program acceptable the number of would seek an extension to

allow time to finalize the disposition and development agreement for the project. next slide please. a quick overview of the presentation today, i'll provide background on theoption agreement and an overview of the project as currently proposed . the housing program and community health benefits and talkthrough the proposed action next that's . next slide . >> it's located on the northern portion of the site of the former temporary translate our main and to the planned extension. next slide. a bit of background. block 4 was sourced to f 4 transit partners composed of urban pacific and goldman sachs as a condition of the joint powers authority or tg pa for sale of parcel asked to the same entity in 2016. the agreement established a parcel at affordable housing

obligation would be satisfied with the construction of off-site low market rate units on block four. due to financing constraints that structure was modified earlier this year and parcel f will now instead pay and interlude before affordable housing.proceeds will be used to fund the midrise affordable project at block four on loan fromocii . overall block for his plan for a mixed-use mixed income residential project . it's important to note ocii must ensure a minimum of 35 percent of all new residential units in the redevelopment project area will too low in. it has long been intended block four would serve balancing parcel ability sufficientto meet this application . next line. a brief history of the option agreement. the option was approved in 2016 was amended and extended the

commission approved the term sheet or the project as well as the selection of mercy housing as the affordable housing partner for the project. the commission approved 12 month extension in 2019 and in 2020 the date was extended due to force majeure related to the pandemic and the commission approved anotherextension . theoption expires at the end of this month . option establishes a land price of $45 million that acknowledges the final price would be determined based on a valuation process once the development program is final. our negotiations have been based on the nonbinding term sheet approved in 2018. gpo points included increasing the hype from 450 feet to 501 feet and a substantial affordable housing program or a nine percent overall affordability aswell as a community benefits package . next slide please.

the project as currently proposed would provide 685 units split between 100 percent affordablemidrise project, mixed income tower and rental units, power condominiums and townhome condominiums . in addition the project includes retail large portion of the community serving retail offered at a discounted price. bicycles will be provided large crowd area. and the developer will also construct streetscape improvements on all four sides and build up the intersection between block for and block three-part. next slide please . these are a couple of renderings of the proposed project. theschematic design package is still under review of the design is highly developed . the image on the left shows the project from the south looking at the front facing the block three and then on the right is that perspective with the entry

to the midrise on the left of your screen and the townhome goes below on the right of your screen. next slideplease . since the approval of the term sheet lines has prepared a designs preference and staff developer and mercy housing have been working to prepare dea. this marked the developer shared financial model to the project and at that time they did the 49 percent portability established in the term sheet was not financially feasible and the project is only feasible with a lower level of affordability 39 percent. which is the minimum needed to meet the overallproject area affordability . in addition to reduce affordability heinz has stated the project cannot sustain any payments for the laugh. this assertion is supported by a verysponsored agreement . since receipt of the developer's model oci i engaged our consultants for financial review of the direction of the

rejected the proposal at 39 percent affordability sought affordability 49 percent in accordance with theterm sheet . the developer submitted by proposal june 4 with a total affordability of 40 percent . next slide please. this diagram provides an overview of thehousing program as currently proposed . the shorter building bracketed in blue is a 100 percent affordable midrise project . this will be led by mercy housing financed with a more typicalaffordable housing structure including no income housing tax credits . the portions in the tower side market rate condominium units so they are located in the upper thirdof the tower . and the lower two

funding for sba capacity study andfunding for block three park maintenance . in the term sheet the development committed to prepare and implement a plan for certificate beyond the typical ocii marketing plan. mercy has provideda draft notice that mercy will be this effort for the midrise and heinz for the tower . the preliminary plan identifies strategies to tour the units, neighborhood toursand the use

of social media and dedicated websites . developers are working to refine this plan with ocii staff and a plan will be presentedalong with adea or future consideration . as noted, the current proposal was received by ocii on june 4. staff has not yet had an opportunity to thoroughly reviewthat proposal . we recommend approval of a limited extension for september 30 two staff along with sensory irvine whose contract is also on the agenda to complete a thorough reviewanalysis . staff would return tocommission for the final proposed housing program . at that time we would see commission authority and finance distention determining the appraisal process and finalize the dda andschematic design . next slide please. the staff presentation andi'm happy to answer any questions you may have . i'mjoined by representatives

from the design team . we have allie stein legal counsel cj quickly and from mercy we havedoug shoemaker and william hope . >> thank you kim. madam secretary, do we have anybody from the public who wishes to speak on this item ? >> at this time members of the public should comment 415-655-0001 and enter access code 146-922-8863. press the pound, pound and press star 3 to submit your request to speak. if you are already on the phone and would like to submit comments freeze press star 3. i will allow thepublic a few moments to comment .

... mister chair, it does not here there are any members of the public wishing to see one okay. you will know for a commissioner ocii. bycer season. >> commissionerscott: you mentioned around the competitiveness of this project , can you explain was, with the initial proposal be competitive more are you saying that the others will notbe competitive something else we need to change the ? >> is not necessarilya flaw in the design of this .

is a larger moreambitious project .unfortunately it used to be that physically you would pay borrowing with low income housing tax used to be over persuasion projects that i get this funding situation has changed the landscape is now a competitive situation that's become all affordability of visions as they currently stand really higher costs projects that would eat larger pieces of the allocation was doug shoemaker mercy project has been involved in the effort to address this on a statewide . if you want to comment where we are with this. >> thank you commissioners.

ithink that's exactly the challenge that's in front of us . the project requests a lot of tax-exempt bonds but to get a tax exempt bond in the way kim described you have to apply for 50 percent of the project cost more or loss less so the more bond you need, the bear area only has 50 million on an annual basis and a project like this might have a bond request in the 80, 90, even 100million dollar range . with the two things can is referencing change, this one would be washington change the rules on our way to states. in the sense you wouldn't have to apply for 50 percent only 25 percent doing so would literally hold bonds of the project that you can move

through that program is peace is that the owners put forward a little dollars to fund projects that would have wanted bonds outside of that program so that is expected to alleviate some of that demand but the demand is overwhelming, even just among new construction projects. kim said it perfectly. what i would say aboutthis project is given the timeline , one would have a reasonable person might believe that we would be in a different place by the time this project gets financed and there's a likely success that demand would change by that time but either staff or icould guarantee that because that's the challenge . i would think with the timeline

for this project there's a reasonable beliefthat we could get it funded . >> chair bustos: so that's funding necessary for this project to move forward? >> it's not necessary at this moment. a significant portion of this project is funded with the four percent tax creditand the nine percent tax credit allocation would be too small . we really do need something i can do4 percent tax credit . if something new arose that would enable us to go full resident and fund the project differently obviously you could substitute something but at the moment that the tool that is most available to us for that and i know that the staff commission have talked about different funding solutions to reduce dependence on this program but i think that yes,

you can answer it. >> i was asking if that was information within the presentation that was new to me so i wanted to make sure i understood .i guess part of why i care about that is i want to see every unit of affordable housing built sothat we can get built . and you know, i think i'm new to the commission sincethe last time , this issue. i'll share some comments and maybe get acouple of questions and their . i think first off i would just say i'm inclined to improve this as part of a trust act i know mercy housing is the housing over so i will. . i will say that i am disappointed to see the decrease in total housing units and even more disappointed to

see the significant decrease in a formal units inthis project especially when you know we every possible unit we get . and it's really representing a significant downgrade in my mind the initial conversations that were happening in 2015, the initial proposals announced in 2018 so it's just you know, i think when i heard about the 49 percent, that was the number that stood out to me as something we want to obtain . i guess for the developmentteam , i wonder if you could comment and i understand we had a pandemic you understand the projects in zone two that would have necessitated 49 percent affordable percentage in this project are no longer in the line.so i was wondering if you could comment today on what

has changed materially that would need a major reduction in total units in this project? >> did you want to go ahead an respond on that ? >>, this is dan ezra in san francisco. commissioner i think you reference like all of the major challenges that have gotten us where we are today. we've been working with staff very closely for many years . to address these challenges which frankly like the issue are not unique to this project. they are just things that certainly black for its scale and face . i think one that you didn't mention's construction costs which have been challenging in sanfrancisco . certainly since 2018 and in particular since 2016, we have

an independent cost consultant escalation at 15 percent since 2018 and over 30 percent from 2016 so that you burn for any project to bear. then you have the acute but nevertheless the impacts of the pandemic where you have vacancy rates have tripled. rents are down you have 20 to 30 percent industry of trance a. condo prices are down so those are just global challenges looking up housing pipeline, that reflects the fact that this is not something unique to this project projects have moved forward especially in the last segment from years prior and this is reflective of that challenge. on sort of a blockfor specific note , i am extremely thankful to the staff and their

collaboration and their team to try to have a all options on the table type of approach to addressing these issues and gettingto the feasible project . the proposal that's recently developed delivered that we work through with staff on greater detailwith balance the district requirements as referenced . still partially it's a reaction to changes that have happened in thedistrict now that would allow us to do that overall percentage . it will deliver a significant increase in the overall number of housing units from what we initially embarkedon in 2016 as well that we are proud of . not to mention these incredible projects and community benefits to thecity of san francisco .

so we are committed to continue to work through our proposal with staff get back to you as soon as possiblewith the best product possible in this case . >> chair bustos: i appreciate a lot of the things that have changed in terms of materials that have increased over time. when i think about condo prices today, san francisco's grand reopening you know, i am confident cities are going to be bouncing back pretty strongly. i understand the that might be projected a year from now may be different from when this project iscoming online and we try to sell those units . i think that issomething i'm trying to think about . i guess i am okay with the 90

day extension and i figure there's diligentwork done with you all in staff to work through this .i guess though a few things that i want to make sure we see when you all come back to us in time in august or september, hopefully everybody gets to take a couple of days off now that we are in summer and reopening. one is the decrease in the percentage of housing, 49 percent to 30 percent . it's just a little too coincidental for me the minimum number in both cases that require. when we havesuch a big need in this community . i need to understand why we need to go from a number that was the minimum required to meet the transbay requirements for affordable housing percentage but now there's the new minimum because these projects aren't panning out.

that to me is top of mind. and i guess also to understand what has changed so substantially in those calculations.i understand construction costs, there could be other things pandemic related . but i'm pretty confident that you will be able to get what you are looking at for downtown real estate again in the future. i just want to understandwhere that's coming . let's see. i also would want to make sure. i know that i'm not commenting much on the evaluation ithink that's important to consider . i think most importantly, how do we get the maximum units number of affordable units so both of those are really

important . i know those are things i want to make sure our consultants are validating but i want to make sure in our next presentation the assumption you all are making is front and center so we can have a look at the assumptions and determine as a commission the right assumptions and if we agree with those assumptions as something that we think should dictate or be the boundary of what this kind of project is. i would also like to say it would be good tosee some options in the housing program . if we believe rentals are not where there is opportunities andthere's more opportunities and condos , should we get more affordable units if we increase the number of market rate rentals? i want to understand a bit about how those things could be considered such that we can

maximize our affordable unit count . just turning a couple of two-bedrooms into studios to makemore money units does not solve this problem for me either . it's important that we have a mix of units that support i think all of our neighbors who regardless of their income group or family income. i'll turn my comments and questions there but i would appreciate staff bringing this to collaboration. >> chair bustos: thank you commissioner bycer. i'd like to go next to commissioner brackett . >> commissioner brackett: no questions. >> chair bustos:commissioner scott . >> commissioner scott: thank you chair bustos. i echo what commissioner bycer just shared and i to show the

disappointment withthe decrease and yet i understand what you're saying . i understand and am happy to hear that you are committed to work with us through your proposal and to look and see within these 90 days what more you mightbe able to do and how . i just also would say changing the studios, it doesn't really fix it . with the need so great and the demand so great for housing. families wantingto be families . so i do agree with the 90 day hearing your findings when you return.

>> chair bustos: thank you commissioner scott.vice chair rosales . >> vice chair rosales: thank you chair bustos. i am also disappointed we are not going to belabor that point . i was present when we first started these conversations to the developer so i need just like my fellow commissioners for the next round of conversations with us more clarity and certainly transparency with respect to the reasons behind the change. i to understand construction costs but we just can't say construction costs are higher, labor is more expensive and just leave it at that. i'd be interested in understanding these numbers that are cited, 15 to 30 percent highersince we started talking about this . i'd like to understand that better . i too need more time to half staff look closer that we are

fully informed and can come to a correct decision. the other point that i'd like to emphasize is on the cop outreach program, i appreciate the gestures of developers and the agreement of the developers and all the community that if it's that we did talk extensively on some of this though on the cop outreach i'd like to see even if it's in conceptual form what the innovative strategies are. because this is an opportunity that we can't miss. we can't miss and i think there's commissioners that can inform the effort to ensure that these strategies are effective. it could be innovative but it might not be as effective as folks think so i think having the bike in at the commission

early on and guidance of commissioners onhim of these strategies would go a long way i think for me . if in fact we are looking at feweraffordable housing units . i don't have any additional questions. i just wanted to provide those comments. >> chair bustos: thank you vice chair rosales. i'm thrilled that the staff has come forward because the currentproposal is pathetic . and i'm hoping that we have time to take a look at what really is happening. this is san francisco. this is probably the last piece of property that can be developed in downtown san francisco. so to throw out numbers of cost construction going up by 15 to 30 percent then by reducing even the price tag of the property 100percent does not make any sense . i am really hoping that the

next time we see this that it is a lotbetter than what i see now . and i think the other fellow commissioners have expressed their disappointment but this is pathetic. so i'll support more time, but ... anyway. thank you commissioners for your comments and your questions may i get a motionto move this item forward , item number 5c ? >> vice chair rosales: i will move the item. >> chair bustos:we have a first andseconded by commissioner scott . please take a role . [roll call vote] mister chair,

the vote is 4 aye's and 1 nay. >> chair bustos: madam secretary, please call the next item. >> 5 be authorizing a third amendment to the contract of century urban llp, a california limited liability company with a contract about by $53,000 for a totalnot to exceed $160,000 for financial analysis and real estate advisory services . transbay discussion and action resolution number 24-2021.

madam interim director. >> thank you commissioners and as was discussed staff will be evaluating the block going forward and having services will be helpful inthat endeavor . so the item before you is an amendment to give us more budget authorityand time . and as well as room for any other financial advisory groups that we may need inimplementing our obligations . paige held her will testify on the item. >> good afternoon commissioner . my name is paige held her, i'm development specialist with the state department purposes for ocii. next slide please. so the item that is before you today is item 5 be, seeking authorization for the ocii executive director to enter into a third amendment to the

psc urban llc. this amendment will increase the contract budget from $97,000 to $160,000 and extend the contract term beyond june 30, 2020 12 the date on which the total contract is extended or terminated earlierby contractor . slide please. as was discussed, ocii entered into an action agreement in 2016. the option agreement was entered into with the developers that is now september. because ... next slide please. because of the option agreement, ocii entered into a personal services contract between century irvine provides financial analysis advisory services for the negotiation.

and july 2020, ocii received the first amendment to the psc c contract term by one year and increase the budget from $45,000 to $76,000 to continue to provide services at ocii. december 2020, ocii received an amendment psc to increase the budget to $97,000 to allow century irvine to hire a construction process estimate for the project next slide please .since approval of the secondamendment , history irvine has reviewed the developers to call financial models their appraisal. construction costs create sensitivity models to help with staff assess ways to optimize affordability. next slide please.

staff is requesting the authority to enter into a term limit to increase the budget by $63,000 with not to exceed an amount of $360,000. moving forward we expect the third amendment to allow injury irvine to allow fighting to support the negotiations or the project to maximize part affordability to agreed-upon economic admissions. the request by century irvine has beneficial budget authority for services asneeded . nextslide please . and that includes that presentation. our main finance is a principal at the firm and includes marsha blackburn was vice president. all that is on the line today tohelp answer questions you may have .

>> thank you page. madam secretary, we have the one fromthe public wishes to provide comments . >> anyone who wishes to provide public comment should call 415-655-0001 . enter access code 146-922-8863. press pound, pound to enter the call and rest áthree. we are already on the phone and would like to submit public comments please press star 3 now. allow for a few moments. mister chair, it does not appearthere are any members of the public . >> .no requests to speak we will close public comment and i will turn to my fellow commissioners for any comments or questions you mayhave

commissioner scott . >> no questions or comments at this time. >> commissioner bycer. >> thank you, thank you for running this and i absolutely agree we want to make sure ocii has its own analysis conducted by this project. my ask would be that the amount that we get to see the analysis from the consultants as part of our package and in a few months time. and withthat report , assumptions were made by the developer and the explanations as to the assumptions made for the consultants would suggest the alternativeassumptions . and i don't know how staff

feels about that so wecan make the most informed decision about how to move forward . >> thank you commissioner. commissioner bracket. >> of viewpoints of clarification. so our original contract for professional services in 2017 were for 45,000. >> that's right. >> since then we've done two other amendments raising up to 76,000, 97,100 60,000 which represents a 355 percent increase we are incurring as ocii in order to get these financial projections from the developer. >> that is correct. we add all costs under the option agreement are by the

developer. >> thank you. no further questions. >> chair bustos: thank you commissioner brackett, vice chair rosales . >> vice chair rosales: i have no questions orcomments . >> we have in front of usand amendment , may i have a motion for number 5d. >> motion to approve the contract forprofessional services $450,000 >> you commissioner, i have a second . >>i second . >>. >> chair bustos: there's a tie between bycer and scott. thank you. vote seconded by commissioner bycer. please take role. >>. [roll call vote]

>> the motion carries, madam secretary call the next item . >> the next item of business is publiccomments on the agenda items . >> chair bustos: madam secretary, do we have any speakers to providefor this . >> should 415-655-0001 and enter the accesscode . press the pound and pound again. press 146-922-8863 to be placed in a queue. if you are already listening my phonepress start if you like you submit your comments . we will allow a few minutes for them to call in.

>> mister chair, it does not appear there are anymembers of the public and to provide public comment . >> chair bustos: hearing no requests to speak iwill close public comment . please call the next item. >> the next order of business is item 7, reports of the chai . >> chair bustos: there is nothing to report, please call the next item. >> next order of business is item 8,report of the executive director . >> thank you madam secretary. the only item i have to report is today are your 2020 was rude before the board of supervisors committee and was moved forward with a recommendation to the full board for request. >> chair bustos: thank you. madam secretary pleasecall the next item . >> the next order of businessis

item 9, and matters . mister chair. >> chair bustos: any commissioner have any question they need to bring up ? >> i just want to thank the commissioners for just being so diligent and mindful of the work that's before us and what we want to do for the community and for the people of san francisco and i just want to thank you publicly forall . madam secretary. >> commissioner bycer: if i could i would move my, i was making you dizzy. i would move my computer to showyou the sheet for me which is glock nine project . it will be 4:10 trying to do the straight commission day and two weeks ago there were cranes lifting entire apartments in place. on this project, modular housing i think today there's

40 of these modular units in place . my commissioners if you have time next time that they are installing these units that you come take a look . it's impressive to see entirely built studio apartments left it on to a crane and construction workers puttingthem in place . watching those units go in and how fast it happens i think is really impressive. it made me reallyhappy . it's part of how a project like thatcomes together . >> that's greatnews . it's always good to see when things are being especially with our commission the fact that we are agency dust so many buildings of things that you see all that come intofruition . so. >> where is that again? >> it on baker street next to the publicsafety building . so staff wouldn't mind sharing the next item, i have the next

one from the organization formerly called cat. i encourage folks to come the next day. i think it's in a couple of weeks for the nextinstallation unitunits i encourage people to see the process . >> chair bustos: that's race . great. hearing no other questions or comments, please call the next item . >> the next order of business is item10, closed session . the next order of business is number 11, adjournment. >> chair bustos: fellow commissioners, wewould need a motion and a second to adjourn only i have a motion ? >> commissionerscott: i moved to adjourn the meeting at 2 pm .