. >> of the rfp. >> provision. >> provision. >> all right. it's points improperly moved and seconded for the rfp benefits be cancelled at this time is there comments or questions from the board. >> so for 2016 the rfp there is a one year extension? seems like >> we received yes - we received a quote for a one year extension but with the rfp so we'll continue to have coverage. >> conform. >> all right. other questions from the board questions from the public hearing none we're presented to vote all opposed by the same sign $0.19 we now down to item 14. >> item 14 action item follow-up on the national ppo i'm neil an actuary at the last meeting to bring the rates the u a to nicole but in the presentation as part of my responsibility i need to share that, and, secondly, it is very exciting that was presented last time the value of the promise by the health care the gadsby number has been reduced that's the actions taken by the board that was presented last week and as a point of contact as you listen to the presentation what are the rates for th

before they go out. >> absolutely the rfp drafts will be provided to the commission before published. >> the other question about the percentage of 83 versus 17 percent and 83 being rental and 17 being homeownership you know the prices of homes in san francisco are just going through the revolver and how can we do it so that more people are able to stay and more people are able to own their own homes 17 percent seems awful low because if we - i would hate for people to be renter when they have an opportunity to guy an affordable unit because an affordable unit now we know what the prices range do we have a sense in terms of buying homeownership. >> for purchasing it rangers from the 200 thousand to the upper $300,000 depending on the size of the unit and the income. >> as time going on in the higher - you know i'd like to see more homeownership opportunities for people especially, if we're trying to do outreach for people that are displaced to get them to come back to own part of the city how can we shift some of that to have more homeownership opportunity versus rental opportunities

commissioner bustos when we talk about the 6 rfps we'vealked to make sure u make sure there are local folks that are able to apply for some of those things i wanted to or hope we taking into consideration as. >> could you please speak into the microphone. >> no one said i didn't speak loud enough we talk about the rfps for the affordable housing being built you know we've said many times about wanting to make sure that local minority owned and women owned biz businesses or businesses around or evictions have been around and had an opportunity i'm hoping that the rfps are being created one of the things i've asked for awhile back even boise on the first ones being selected that they you know have a good track record with us in the city but also their nonprofit organizations that are part of it so i'd like to ask we highlight that in and be great if the commission sees the rfps before they go out. >> absolutely the rfp drafts will be provided to the commission before published. >> the other question about the percentage of 83 versus 17 percent and 83 being rental and 17 being homeowners

are there ways to tighten up our criteria for contracts or for rfp's, so we sort of do a double check for those kinds of issues? so we make sure we're asking the right question or specifying the right project? >> can i take a crack at this? i thought what i heard with the sole sourcing piece we will get to your issue. >> only if it's in the contract in the first place. >> that's right. >> yeah. so this may be a rhetorical question in the end, but it seemses like what is it einstein's quote the first step in the solution of the problem, is the definition of the question. so asking for the right things, when we continue tract seems like a good way to get what we want right? >> those rfp's, are thoroughly vetted. >> so it's an anomaly. >> and the staff work hard to make sure before the contract goes out. >> we're in safe hands thank you you. >> there is several policy decisions and each one of them i would have questions about. and concerned but i'm willing to move it forward. however, one of the things i would like to see is the performance evaluation piece i guess have been working on

commissioner bustos. >> are we're going to be loading this effort for this rfp? >> yes. this is an ocii project staff led effort is contact person on is rfp is benefit right there the process is the rfp is issued there's a presubmittal conference respondent have 60 days to put forward a proposal part of proposal is concept drawings by specific we don't want the respondent to spend a lot of money there recent a grand jury'sable amount if a big firm comes in not to hurt a smaller firm and august come back what a panel that is condone with the various agency to review the proposals in august at e n organization and predevelopment loan comes before you. >> we'll be leading this and not the mayor's office of housing; right? this is us. >> yes. >> keep in mind once is project is built once is project is built the land and comboeshlt of those affordable housing restricts once we complete is structure set the program hand it off to the city the howard's is mayor's office of disabilities requirements unfortunately under dissolution law to complete our obligations so to speak and

an rfp for a development project. where costs are short of unknown at the outset of the process, the developers haven't had a chance to do due diligence, costs could escalate over the course of the negotiations, the public could demand more public benefits. all of these things affect fair-market value, which is why we typically don't do an rfp on price this. would be odd in that we would be saying to prospective development partners that there is an anchor tenant that you must make a long-term financial arrangement with. >> that was my -- really, i understand and respect supervisor kim's view on this and frequently we would all be of unanimous mind on that, but this seems like a unique situation, finding this new location for teatro zinzanni and to go through that is not your normal type of deal, because as you said, we are saying this is the tenant. so i think this is a fairly unique situation and i'm prepared to support this. >> thank you very much. >> can i ask another follow-up question? did you propose to teatro

is the contract i'll sign for it we're envisioning go solar to encourage the customers and issuing rfps for controlled property we envision those as program compliant with annually going out to bid for additional supply so so routine and procured cycle in order to support the program we also expect to have energy efficiency as part of the program launched they'll be matured as the program engross initially focusing on the energy watch and bay run programs that are offered here in san francisco by the vice president of investment and the other existing repair funded programs programs pg&e is offering to the pg&e customers meanwhile we're developing programs with the department of environment targeted towards the customers that sign up for our program we saw in sonoma they marketed in the early part of their program an energy program the amount of dollars you seek from the california puc can supportive of those pilot that's an attractive approach for us. >> again, our housing trust fund that was pass by the voter in 2012 has a section of that where funds can be allocated up to $15 million

yf, our website, we did an extensive amount of outreach on the rfp, we had a bitters conference we know as a government entity it's public money, it can seem overwhelming if you are a young community based portion organization to put this together we have a bitter conference to walk them through the rfp, we post the questions on the website, then we also have you know, people can e-mail alexa with additional questions, which are also posted on the website. so a we as debbie said got 16 proposals in we have panels that consisted of alexa and myself, and a 0 waste expert, a long time residence and possibly one of the first consultants in the u.s. so very knowledgeable so we scored proposals, anybody who got over 70 got to the nekdz round, and anybody over a 90, we thought, yes, we will fund them, the ones between 70 and 90, we interviewed those people, that was a different committee of alexa, me, and the executive director of the clean city tell us if you don't know work force development organization that serves people with barriers to employment and formulae incourse rated, so they do a

i guess my question is why can't we rfp out this proposal? a proposal that includes the rebuilding of teatro's theater, with hotel and these ten rooms? i can only imagine when it comes back to the budge committee, harvey rose's report saying that we don't know if it's the best deal for the city because it wasn't publicly rfp'd out? >> good afternoon, brad benson, director of special projects with the port and here with ricky in support of the project. this question about competitive bids is something that we grappled with as well at the staff-level. you know, throughout the process we have been focused on relocating teatro on port property. we have the experience with the america's cup of dislocationing a lot of very good port tenants. we are able to relocate the large majority of those to other areas of the port property at the time. but with teatro, they really needed to be in the northern waterfront. they needed a longer-term lease at a new location that can't be entered at 27 because the new terminal construction. so that has been our goa

to make the city's incredible need for affordable housing our budget assumes we'll be issue 6 new rfps with you have a full plate you've seen before you that we continue to work and on will be funding $20 million for asset management including assets such yerba buena and other western edition and other related matters we have 12 for million dollars for staffing and other consultants and legal services, etc. and $11 million for specific infrastructure reimbursement and expenditures in our budget we have that visibly so again if so e this is the program and project portion of the hundred and $41 million as you can see the blue portion make ups 70 percent of the budget followed by asset management and the project management and infrastructure expenditures on the sources side also added up to 4 heed and $42 million those are the developer one hundred million dollars plus the affordable housing and debt service and some infrastructure so the sources cross different uses and we've been talking about as part of the acceleration for the housing is the potential should we have the ability to bo

go over this number at this point we includes to keep it at the same number because it is still in rfp not completed negotiations no one is doing it july 1st, we'll have someone in place the program is subject to kind of budgets swings so it is hard to judge how much money and how much services they'll be able to provide we're going to use that as a base to build from and hopefully increase that actual performance. >> thank you. any questions or comments any comments or questions from the public hearing none. > all in favor, say i. > >> any opposed thank you the motion carries thank you, rose and cherlyn. >> the next item on the agenda g request authorization to enter into a new contract with national council on crime and diligence so provide the structured decision making for the adult protective services during in a 2015 in the maturely of $124,000 plus plus a 10 percent contingency not to exceed hundred and $36,000 plus and it looks like sherry reign will be doing this presentation yes, i'm giving jason is a break i want to thank kim and jason for getting this contract through our c

proposal before us with the benefit and any consequences i certainly understand when you put out on rfp one the strongest you know thump up or down whether or not you're going to be considered if you get yours in on time and, yes an appeal process along the way i suspect we can create an appeals process to meet that deadline we want to address this particular one because this is where we are in the process. >> we're viewing a first round of an rfp or an r f q. >> did they say the second search firm say they'll submit in given the chance. >> definitely. >> i like commissioner vice president andrewss idea if we can provide an explanations and the two proposals is better than one. >> one of the things that work we could do is to tell h.r. that we view the - he want to set a different cut off date in terms of to stand the date to june or whatever and also instruct them along the lines for them to contact the various ethics commissions in the state of california and ask them what search firms if any they've used in they're hiring of on executive director and we know the f p pc has a trusted

will be drafted and out the door the schedule i put together at the end end of may or june for the rfp o and hopefully, we'll moderating and get this section done that much quickly. >> thank you >> next speaker. >> eric brooks. >> commissioners, if you'll indulge me i have a colleague it needs to leave around 2 o'clock so take her in my place. >> i'll be quick you don't know i don't need to tell you that kriengs is a big thing i want to encourage you when things get tough to remember this is san francisco's opportunity to lead the nation in this crucial activity and show we're the city that knows how thank you. >> good below brooks. >> either brooks san francisco green party and grassroots organization in our city and an organizer for san francisco clean energy advocates we have so many things i can't remember the names i want to talk about one first on the drought actually i'll involved in the state effort to ban finally clear-cut logging and the culture vacation of open cultivation of rejectingly - and berkley is picking up the resolution recycle in san francisco last september berkl

it smokeless because of the great work that m y m company does that this year we didn't put out an rfp i mean there was one in not and this year seems like only one submitted out of the outreach you've done and obviously has done great work i just want to know we didn't put out an rfp because this is an extension? >> yes. so we you know we were waiting to transfer the property to the city and we really soaps we hear our property has been approved week to week we'll implement that transfer so you you know we find a time to keep things going the continuity going and smooth run an r f q pros progress takes 6 months and go through the whole process we don't know when we're going to transfer the proposed ware trying to buy some time and allow for transition the time city and look like an r f q process again. >> just wanted to get on record she'll be the only one to respond and we'll get approved we don't need to say more the garden a beautiful and appreciative of the comments you take it for grand and don't think about what impotence behind the scenes i was there back in 1993 for the ribbon

that went out i imagine the rfp we referenced the prop b language that was something we're asking the private developers i imagine and included that if the sale of our proposed i imagine that's included in the rfp. >> it was included as a clear statement of the expectation of the community the existing code is a place to start but not a place to finish we've made it clear that any developer should expect we is a have a high priority set. >> let me ask we've referenced prop k. >> we didn't make a specific request to that proposition i'll be disappeared any major developer who is capable of tackling the complexity of that development is totally aware of the issue. >> my suggestion for any city agency that is interested in sort of what happens here that that to the extent this is policy that was sported by the board of supervisors, by the mayor that we should as a matter of policy walk the talk and if we're asking private developers to follow the intent in the spirit of prop k that we should do the same when it comes to property we are trying to sell i'm surprised i'll leave it at that s

if we continue the delay the rfp for the electric vehicle it could jeopardize right now now it's being driven by the construction efforts it could be driven by the decision to what is procured. so the next couple of monthses we're talking to policy makers there are many different parts of this as i said in the beginning this is a crucial one do we design the cars to not procollude the high speed rails and we will go to stakeholders and encourage people to go to our board as well to get to the issue with you need to wrap this up and make a decision in order to meet those milestones. >> we talked to car builders yes it's possible. we have solutions that would not procollude you using higher platforms they came up with two options one adding more doors onto the train we have pictures so you can visualize what that is that meanses you have doors at the low level which is what we show is the original thinking then doors at the higher level which is where you can board high speed rail they did tell us there is a capacity loss on the seat side of that if you have a door there you can't put se

changed to a fixed price of $71 million to help you understand that i can give you quick history an rfp is land escrow date ass was 2016 the tjpa requested is escrow close in 2015 to get the funding sooner for the construction of the transit center moving up is closing date required is developer to incur additional financial costs those were deemed the exceptional costs is purchase price up to $2 million was negotiated on and on for is financial costs between 2015 and march of 2016 during the recent d da deductions a fixed price of $71 million was negotiated and fixed price it relieved is parties of is process to prove on the one hand u occult the financial costs and for is tjpa additional project changes since is e n a of the schedule has been revised for is commencement is outside date was april 2016 and now it has been moved to september of 2016 the developer still plans on beginning the project of 2016 but wanted more time because of delays in financing and lastly a reduction in the sisters of the grocery stores if 22 thousand square feet to 12 thousand 5 hundred square feet regardi

. >> we have no more more formal comments you've put out an rfp we didn't chose to pressure it but one we have known of bills activities and respect for your staff current and form and had the right resources on the team to support you and so we choose you to be our client and we think we've organized the right set of resources and the right people i go to beach blanket babylon i get teary eyed when they play i left my heart in san francisco. >> bill anything more communication. >> thank you, bill take advantage one thing that allen mentioned there's real quick i believe in the past year that mp c passed on doesn't participate in more than hundred and 50 rfps they've ripped replied to few allen indicated the he's inspired by the possibility of working for us and the city obviously is near and dear to my heart he's supported by an organization that has both great breath and deep depth of research and prudent their initiative and creativity we thought that was the right consultant for this board we believe this board is willing to be innovative and creativity and pioneers you know willin

good question the reason it is going to expand for one year the following year we'll try to get a new rfp so i'm trying to extend everything from the federal grant and we'll be three to four 0 diagonal and looking at people bring in their own devicess what exactly do we want to do to put it in place as any other questions or comments from the public hearing none call the question. >> > all in favor, say i. > opposed thank you the motion carries item j requesting authorization to renew the grant with the reliable technician with the provision of the sf connected program from july 1st, 2015, to june 30th, 2016, in the amount of $51,000 plus plus a 10 percent contingency not to exceed 463 heed and $13 thank you aaron. >> thank you reliable tech has been providing the tech support and provide the support for the 200 and 50 computers in the locations across the city and satisfactory completed services requests in addition reimaged the system is we actually do both pro-active or preventive maintenance and reactive it has for scheduled unserviced calls in addition to provide for service the tech