mr. mirkarimi has made major contributions to the cause of sunshine in san francisco. we owe him our gratitude for that. i also want to echo her -- her -- echo -- earlier, you were talking about ms. wong. i have always found her demeanor to be professional. >> thank you. >> good morning, supervisors. i am the eyes president of the haight-ashbury neighborhood council. we polled our neighborhood members and brought it to the board, and there was overwhelming support. anyone tried to be involved in government politics, policy knows what a nightmare it is. quite often, certain departments will have a vested interest in making sure certain groups and do not know what is going on. this should have been implemented years ago. our organization overwhelmingly supports this. we cannot wait to have this happen. >> next speaker please. >> good morning, supervisors. director of the neighborhood parks council. i am happy to represent the council today in support of this measure. as a community-based organization, we encourage the city to continue improve public access to city notice

mr. young. supervisor mirkarimi. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you, mr. chair. as you indicated, we are continuing our hearing from last week. i want to say in advance our strong appreciation to the city family in working around the clock in order to produce the kind of analysis that we just did not have the ability to have a thorough vetting of last wednesday. thank you to the budget analyst's office, controller's office, economic analysts and all of the city family. as we had well indicated in last wednesday's hearing, the plan for the northern waterfront, in order to strengthen oured by to secure the rights -- our bid to secure the right to host the america's cup is substantial improvement. it has been amazing that based upon time lines that have been imposed upon us and how the city family has been able to marshall i think the resources to together in order to try to put forward the best bid we possibly could. the bid that is under consideration now on the northern waterfront is, we think we believe, the best that the city can do. and that we think by moving

supervisor mirkarimi: mr. torres, please. and feel free, colleagues, if you push the red button, i will be able to see you. >> thank you, mr. president, commissioners. i am disturbed by your testimony because, to me, it speaks volumes about a very unseemly nature of a corporate giant conducting itself in this matter. i have three questions i would like to ask directly. the pressure you have given us indicates customers who opt out may be prohibited by pg&e from re-entering the marine clean energy for three years. under what authority are the authorized to do that? >> this is a provision that pg&e requested be included a, cpuc mandate. it is referred to as switching rules. basically, there is a requirement after the statutory opt out period, if they choose to, they may not return to the program for a three-year period. >> this was a regulation passed by the public utilities commission? it will be overturned, obviously. >> yes. there are a lot of things. our position is that the three- year rule should be eliminated. many of ou

supervisor mirkarimi: what would you like, mr. campos? supervisor mirkarimi: we should make -- supervisor campos: we should make it clear that it will be litigated not only under california, but that the venue would be in california. that would be my suggestion. i also worry about -- if you look at section 10.6 of the agreement, and i think there are, by the way, other similar provisions that worry me along the same lines -- section 10.6 deals essentially with a security plan, if you will. let me just -- 10.6 as currently written says that in consultation with and subject to the approval of the authority, the city shall develop no later than march 31, 2011, and thereafter implement a plan to address reasonable safety and security measures. the thing that worries me about that provision is that whatever the security plan is, no matter how reasonable it may be -- it has to be approved by the authority.

mr. chairman, we have a quorum. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. >> [roll call] >> we also have a quorum. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. please read item three. >> item 3. opening remarks and discussion of expectations for the joint meeting. supervisor mirkarimi: who wants to talk about expectations? [laughter] how about we just say that this has been an event will an exciting year in 2010 and we very much appreciate what lafco, local commissions, and p u c has taken together toward the activation of our goal to be alligator. i want to thank everyone here for their leadership and do diligence, particularly for the two departments to do one thing that is certainly unprecedented, that is banding together with other jurisdictions to send off the interest that had been threatened from the last election, proposition 16, with regard to our extracurricular intentions. we are learning how to navigate around the rfp process for the prospective bidders. i recognize that that has done been easy, since this is un chartered, both for the city and

commissioner mirkarimi: mr. campbell, welcome. >> before i get into the next steps, i wanted to highlight those that were not aware that last tuesday, there was a hearing on issues related to cca. nancy miller was there as well as commissioner mirkarimi. the committee was interested in what legislation might be helpful to promote cca in california. the issues raised were related to some of the challenges you have all heard here, like putting some real teeth into the laws that would -- the law says that pg&e should fully cooperate with cca. there should be some legislative changes to really compel them to cooperate, and what that would mean. we talked about some of the existing rules about benefit fees and the application for energy efficiency. participating customers are creating a subsidy where they are paying for benefits that accrue to the investor-owned portfolio and their energy supply portfolio. it was a well attended hearing, and the senators were very receptive to what they were hearing. a ton of she wan

to my left, ross mirkarimi. mr. young, can you share with us your announcements? >> please turn off all cell phones and pagers. if you wish to speak during public comment, please fill out a speaker card and turn it into myself. items acted upon today will appear on the board of supervisors agenda on december 14, 2010 unless otherwise stated. supervisor avalos: thank you. colleagues, today is the last budget committee meeting of the year. it has been quite a year, and it will be quite a meeting, i'm sure, especially with the america's cup discussion. that, we will probably get to, for those of the waiting in the audience, probably about 12:30, 12:45. since we have a long meeting, i expect a short break after that to get to the latter items on the agenda. could you please call item one. >> item 1. ordinance appropriating $2,385,068 of visitacion valley infrastructure fee revenue from the visitacion valley infrastructure fund, including $2,169,200 in the public library for the visitacion valley branch library project and $215,868 in the department of public works, fo

supervisor mirkarimi: mr. campbell? did this matter come before the puc commission? d not appear supervisor mirkarimi: you are aware -- you know, it did not. supervisor mirkarimi: you are aware of the meeting this friday? >> yes. supervisor mirkarimi: why was this matter brought to us now when it was not released or analyzed by it their own commission coming out this friday? >> it is just the way the wheels work, as i am learning. i had sought to get those funds released several months ago. so that we would be in a good place. i was thinking along the timeline of what be expected to have back on november 3. as you know, the negotiation process is 1 maketh, if the last round was any indication, is a 60 hour per week effort. i wanted to make sure that i was being prudent and that funds were released in advance. there were many questions from the budget analysts office. it has taken two months to get here. we had thought this would be handled previously. supervisor mirkarimi: understood. i appreciate the fact that in this go around we have companies like shell, tempura,

we are joined by supervisor sean elsbernd and ross mirkarimi. mr. young, could you share your announcements? >> please turn off all cell phones and pagers. if you wish to speak during public comment please turn in a speaker card to myself. items after today will appear on the board of supervisors meeting on december 7, 2010 unless otherwise stated. >supervisor avalos: thank you. we have the city that the attorney here. good to see you. please call item one. >> item 1. resolution authorizing the director of public works to execute an amendment to the professional services agreement for the design of a new public safety building under the earthquake safety and emergency response bond program to increase the not to exceed amount from $3,997,600 to $17,205,152. supervisor avalos: very good. representative from dpw? >> good morning, chairperson of love, supervisors. project manager of dpw, responsible for this project. i want to take a few minutes to explain this better before you this morning. this is for the architect- engineer agreement, and modificat

commissioner mirkarimi: thank you, mr. president.what is before us today is a revised bid that really in unprecedented time we have seen practically almost a rare consensus of the city's elected family coming together and doing its best to marshal its resources in putting forth the best economic plans to secure the hosting rights of the america's cup. this body, the board of supervisors, immediately seized opportunity. when we knew mr. ellison had won the cup, we passed a resolution unanimously, from their ensuing war negotiations, and this according between the mayor's office, members of the boards, the city family, and bmw oracle. the first terms that were designs on the central waterfront was just not economically feasible. really, to everyone's advantage, even despite the very unorthodox kind of negotiating environment, because of the rapid time that we have had due to parameters that have been imposed upon us to come up with clear-cut answers, we now were able to see i think what was a smarter proposal so that the assumption of

supervisor mirkarimi: mr. chair? supervisor avalos: no questions. ok. thank you. that was on both items? >> that was item 5. i would be happy to it inwith item six. supervisor mirkarimi: both were called. >> that is the -- another one of those grans we are the fiscal agents for. it was for $34 million. there no match. this grant is more specifically targeted on terrorism and law enforcement. out of the $34 million, san francisco is going to get about $9.5 million. that funding is allocated for things like the police department, come stat, crime lab. there is money for medical analysis equipment in case we need to identify path generals like anthrax, things for the fire department. there is money for disaster service workers and things like that. the grant will fund two deprant management positions at the department of emergency management that we are going to detail. these positions used to be work-ordered from the controller's office, and we were advised to fund it direct l from this grant. additional money goes for equipment planning, training for four courses, e

supervisor mirkarimi: mr. bentsen. >> and the special projects manager representing 14. i wanted to address supervisor avalos's questions from the hearing. and to talk a little bit about the jobw impactwwwwwwww ofwwwwww that displacement -- and to talk a little bit about the job impact of that displacement. that have the overhead display? that is too small to read. what i will do is hand copy members of the committee and talk to the slide instead. essentially, we're talking about is the 19-29 sheds, and pier 28. these are all industrial warehouse sheds. most of the tenants in 19, 23, 29, 28, at 26 our warehouse -- are warehouse tenants. the activity that is going on in those areas is storage activity. there are a few smaller maritime tenants who are in the processing business. we would try to relocate them to our fish processing facilities. there are a few office tenatnnts in piers 26 and 28, includeing ideo, a lease just before the board of supervisors. it would endeavor to relocate all of the tenants that would be displaced either too poor property or to provide -- we