the five main threshold criteria, and these would be the criteria that would determine when an ifd would be appropriate, are listed on this slide, and i thought i walked with them. we are suggesting that these tools be limited to areas that have been rezoned as part of an area of land for development agreement, and that are also located within what we call a priority development area, which is an association of bay area government designation, which is essentially an area that is close to transit and that is planned for more housing. this designation, which is regional, moves that area of in terms of priority for regional, state, and federal transportation infrastructure funding. one of our strategies is to leverage any ifd monies we have with outside sources. supervisor mar: can you give examples of areas that are designated for housing and transit? >> san francisco has more than any other city in the region. they are sprinkled throughout the area, which i believe now is nine counties. the majority of them are all long bart -- along bart or caltrain lines. sort of along the corridor. th

if an ifd is created, at some point in time, somebody has to craft what those items look like to bring them to the board, so who has that administrative duty to figure out which projects are being expensed, where the ifd monies are going, so regardless, there has to be some kind of project management. >> there is something that, frankly, i do not remember what the acronym stands for. recreation and park, dpw, another, they meet regularly on the infrastructure projects, and right now, that agency group informally is doing exactly what you're talking about. they are looking at each project. they are looking at the individual infrastructure projects proposed in the area plan. they are deciding which deserve to be developed in more details schematically and in terms of structure drawings, and it ultimately are deciding which agencies will head of the project management. i would suggest to this committee -- will head up that project management. i would suggest to this committee that be refined and clarified, because this is a multi agency and multi disciplinary process, but who has responsi

remember an ifd has never been done in the state of california. we would be the first city to implement one, which is exciting, but it also means we have to figure out some of the rules. it is not an independent entity. it does not have its own board. the board of supervisors manages it. that is an important point. we have a choice as to how we allocate the increment. one is to flow into a special fund managed by the board. the other was to have it flow by default into the general fund and have the board at every annual budget decide how much it wanted to appropriate to the ifd. either way, we have an accounting mechanism in place that tells us how much is being generated. either scenario, the board would retain full discretion over the money. you do not lose control of the enough once the board commits to the bond issue, of course, some portion of that would be committed to the interest payments. other than that, the decision of when to stand is this board's decision. secondly, that we leverage the outside moneys with that increment, and that wou

remember an ifd has never been done in the state of california. we would be the first city to implement one, which is exciting, but it also means we have to figure out some of the rules. it is not an independent entity. it does not have its own board. the board of supervisors manages it. that is an important point. we have a choice as to how we allocate the increment. one is to flow into a special fund managed by the board. the other was to have it flow by default into the general fund an

otherwise, presumably, every neighborhood would like to have an ifd, and pretty soon, all the cookies in the cookie jar would be gone. we were proposing this as a smart growth carrot, a reward to neighborhoods that have been willing to accept growth and change, and it is essentially a social compact. the city saying we will prioritize a portion of our future tax increments to be reinvested in the very neighborhood that has accepted growth and change for public facilities that supports that destiny. parks, sidewalks, transit, bicycle improvements, and the like. the term we used in the planning field is building complete neighborhoods. this is a way for the city to show its commitment towards that. it has the advantage, of course, that it can be used to supplement existing impact fees. your previous item dealt with the issue of impact fees. we never seem to have enough. so this is a way for the city to contribute to that. to the laudable goal of building better streets and parks and transportation infrastructure. supervisor mar: thank you. >> item two, if you look -- criteria two, excus

why are we proposing the use of an ifd/ this is our effort to make the proposal real. we as a city proposing ambitious plans, most of which are severely under budget. the pilot -- would provide that missing gap between what the impact fees can pay for and what remains. in this case, about $15 million. in sum, what we would like to see these used for are a smart growth carrots. all line to bring that important for structure. in addition, we hope to leverage more money from inside of the city. the these could allow the city to come bring more to the table and get more in return. if used strategically, they could jump-start the private investment in neighborhoods and exhilarate the -- and accelerate growth. this was sent a signal to private investors that the city is serious about providing the infrastructure that was promised. the if we are successful, they could see this as a framework for fiscal planning when we do the next land use planning. we could do an analysis concurrently with our review in our public outreach efforts and give the public a clear sense of what mo

my primary concern with an ifd in any diversion -- and any diversion is just to protect the general fund, because we have major shortfalls coming up. these are actually very real impacts to many of our residents, whether we're talking about service cuts or other cuts to our service operation. these are things that we have to consider with every approval of tax increment dollars, whether through redevelopment colleague to another place or an ifd. so this is a serious consideration for me. one of the reasons i will be supporting this package going forward, however, is because i do believe there are good parts to it. part of this process is going to have the discipline of understanding with the ongoing maintenance need of this project will be. this is very important to me, and i am very pleased to hear the private developer come and speak about the commitment to make sure that the rincon hill is paid for by that finding, as this is crucial. however, i do still have some concerns that i hope the department or the office of economic work force development and others will be able to address fo

if an ifd is created, at some point in time, somebody has to craft what those items look like to bring them to the board, so who has that administrative duty to figure out which projects are being expensed, where the ifd monies are going, so regardless, there has to be some kind of project management. >> there is something that, frankly, i do not remember what the acronym stands for. recreation and park, dpw, another, they meet regularly on the infrastructure projects, and right now, that agency group informally is doing exactly what you're talking about. they are looking at each project. they are looking at the individual infrastructure projects proposed in the area plan. they are deciding which deserve to be developed in more details schematically

otherwise, presumably, every neighborhood would like to have an ifd, and pretty soon, all the cookies in the cookie jar would be gone. we were proposing this as a smart growth carrot, a reward to neighborhoods that have been willing to accept growth and change, and it is essentially a social compact. the city saying we will prioritize a portion of our future tax increments to be reinvested in the very neighborhood that has accepted growth and change for public facilities that supports that destiny. parks, sidewalks, transit, bicycle improvements, and the like. the term we used in the planning field is building complete neighborhoods. this is a way for the city to show its commitment towards that. it has the advantage, of course, that it can be used to suppleme

redevelopment, ifd's can only be formed by a vote, and it is only by two thirds of the voters within an ifd or by another manner if there are fewer than 12 voters.

redevelopment, ifd's can only be formed by a vote, and it is only by two thirds of the voters within an ifd or by another manner if there are fewer than 12 voters. this represents a smaller pool of folks. obviously, either approach could be taken. for practical reasons, we think it would be advantageous to concentrate on commercial or vacant properties. cuff -- we would like to use non city resources. i think, most notably, those at the state and federal level. four, this is a specific input from our public citizens, stakeholders. we also like to require procedures to help the city agencies prioritize implementation of the infrastructure. as you can see from rincon hill, i think we are all interested to hear from residents what they view is important in helping the city decide which projects. and then finally, this was a direct recommendation from supervisor cohen, malia cohen, essentially reporting back on how is the ifd doing and how are the monies being spent, and that seems practical. that includes the summary of both ifd's, in general, the rincon hill ifd, and what we think will make t

this is a much more onerous process launching a redevelopment area of the and it is launching an ifd,. the governor's office and the state in general is concerned and their perception is about the misuse. the advantage is that there is a lot of insurance policies built- in. under the beneficiaries, there is an automatic aren't out provision so their financial interests are automatically protected. the state would like that because it would protect public health and schools. we are bringing down the range of progress can be funded. on the other hand, we are also and powering the board. who has the final answer? >> the sunnis the question. -- that is not in easy question. together with the capital planning programs and the department and the budget office, but we are looking at how we can better organize the citizen input process and out agencies processed the public infrastructure. to be frank, it is not clear right now. but then we have an opportunity to experiment and figure out what is the best method for constructive feedback but there is no formal process. there is not a multi-age

every approval of tax increment dollars, whether through redevelopment colleague to another place or an ifd. so this is a serious consideration for me. one of the reasons i will be supporting this package going forward, however, is because i do believe there are good parts to it. part of this process is going to have the discipline of understanding with the ongoing maintenance need of this project will be. this is very important to me, and i am very pleased to hear the private developer come and speak about the commitment to make sure that the rincon hill is paid for by that finding, as this is crucial. however, i do still have some concerns that i hope the department or the office of economic work force development and others will be able to address for us. one is a deficiency question from city planning. i would like to get some more information. second of all, in terms of the incineration, if you want to reiterate that, i am not interested in creating a said the redevelopment agency. that is not something i think would be in the best interest of the city, and i would like to see how we p

ifd. either way, we have an accounting mechanism in place that tells us how much is being generated. either scenario, the board would retain full discretion over the money. you do not lose control of the enough once the board commits to the bond issue, of course, some portion of that would be committed to the interest payments. other than that, the decision of when to stand is this board's decision. secondly, that we leverage the outside moneys with that increment, and that would be something strategic. there is a requirement in newly rezoned areas that we do this, to ensure that there is a prioritization process for how the money is actually get spent. we do not have a formal cac on rincon hill, although there is an active association, and we will communicate with them. along with supervisor cohen, looking at criteria so we can report back to this board presumably on whether our projections for the ifc have come true, and that will allow us next time to do a better job. that is the extent of my presentation. any of you have questions? supervisor mar: no, it does not look like there

ifd in the state. this week i also wanted to share an ordinance introduced that would amend the planning code having to deal largely with restaurant controls and increase the maximum size for small self service restaurants and the minimum size for large self service restaurants and it would require that certain other provisions including removing a prohibition on on site food preparation in retail coffee stores. that will be before you within 90 days for your consideration. >> thank you. commissioner moore. >> could you answer for me on the legislation will that help in clarifying conflicting code language which we have talked about a lot? we have so many restaurant definitions, whatever they are all, that makes it difficult and not really sensitive enough for the issues in front of us. will this particular legislation help with that? >> we haven't received it for analysis but it appears it will simplify and ease some of the processes for these types of restaurants. it does not decrease the number of definitions for restaurants but staff will be reviewing it and it may be part of our recommendation whe