looking at the overview for the r.f.p. on slide eight, just identifies some of the background information. ultimately the minium -- minimum qualifications are out on the far right-hand side, and a couple of the key themes there was we were really looking for a top-tier large provider. at least 40 billion in assets under administration. at least ten years of experience providing this administration. and at least 10 billion under trust and custody. really looking at record keepers that fit the bill of san francisco and city and county. ultimately there were four at record keepers that responded. there were four premier record keepers in the business. these were in power, nationwide, credential, which is the incumbent. we went through a process as shown on the timeline on slide nine and narrowed it down to credential, and empowered to ultimately do on site interviews as well as bring the semi finalist into interview. into the committee. are there any questions about the high overview of process before i turn it over to jana to

the back ourselves. second model is an r.f.p. for the pier but noting the limitation would be targeting to ward the smaller expenditure us that i explained earlier with supervisor gilman. that is the strategies for the piers not on the r.f.p. what are we doing? one option is the intermediate type of leasing. >> does the court have a position for pdr? >> certainly. we have the m-2 zones that doesn't include the pdr. we have tents engaged in that. >> what if they wanted to come up and do a pop-up. walk me through how the court would handle -- the port would handle that. >> you are creating the interest out there. >> creating our own demand. >> good afternoon. mike martin. as we came up two months ago with interim leasing. we talked about pop ups to activate the should is. the bulkheads we look at as a special event. we could have someone come in up to 6 months. you can pop the outreach plan is to get out to the people through the rfi if they want to see those activities it brings them. we think it is a great opportunity as was sugge

finally, we posted the r.f.p. d administration web page and oci web page. we eventually received one r.f.p. from holland consulting inc. it included sub consultants hawk engineering who is the older for the contract and sustainable wattster shed design and sustainable watershed designs are certified lpes. after we received the response, we conteened a review panel for all subject matter experts. we had a member from ocii, public works and two developers. it was selected because they met all of the r.f.p. criteria. the panel received positive reports of previous working relationships. fees were determined to be fair and reasonable. the panel found they were qualified to perform the required services. they have extensive experience with large infrastructure projects including transit center, central subway, extension and other projects. it is a one-year agreement with options for two additional one year expenses with a contracted of $1.7 million. before i conclude or my voice concludes, i would like to introduce memb

the r.f.p. was out on september 4, 2018. e was a web page that included the update and sign in sheets, answers to the r.f.p. answers and submit requirements. on september 13th we hosted a presubmittal conference and to provide networking opportunity. given the specialized nature of the contract services, we were pleased that 16 individuals representing seven prime contractors attended the conference. none were certified l.b.e.s. the certification directory list us 21 firms certified to provide environmental support services. i called a number of the firms. while they provide environmental impact reports they do not provide services compliant with ceqa. we scored the proposals based on the points in the slide. our planner and the former deputy city attorney and the port'port's operating officer b. on october 18th the proposal deadline we received theory responses four the r.f.p. they met the minimum qualifications. the final rankings are on the slide. each panelist scoreid it at each phase. environmental science won with a sco

it may have a different outcome on the r.f.p. process, and we might be looking at something else that makes the whole circle and the best outcomes for our youth today. and so on that note, is dcyf in the room, i'm wondering, maria, because i know maria does have something over the r.f.p. process, that i wanted to ask maria, if you wouldn't mind looking at maybe alternatives to the model that we currently have. that really does incorporate c.b.o.s together. i think what the chief said is we do have a lot to celebrate, but we're at a point now where we have 40 incarcerated and we have all of those c.b.o.s that we have invested years and years and years in, and they have invested years this their staff meeting the needs of youth and the mental health that we mentioned. like, is there a way that we can provide other alternatives or needed services? but again, i'm wondering, we probably have to conduct a study or work in conjunction with someone to conduct a study. i think it's exciting that we have within our power here, supervisor, a

we have reviewed 13 responses to the r.f.p. and after evaluating based on all of the experience of the firm his, and the proposed staffing, and the approach to portfolio monitoring , a committee of three attorneys, including myself decided that the four firms identified in the memo are the strongest with regards to those criteria. and the firm his -- we currently have four that have provided services to us. they are providing services free of charge. these four firms would also be providing the services free of charge to us. i'm very confident that these are quality firms. we had a very robust group of firms to select from, and i do believe that these firms will be able to cassette -- be able to continue to service at the same or bachelor -- better level that we are continually -- currently receiving them. >> any comments? no comments. can i have public comment on this item? >> she is running to the podium. >> excuse me. the question i have is burning tobacco. i am confused by the naming and the fact that they don't do business

june 2017, addendum to the r.f.p. to provide information on scenarios, based on discussions with the mayor's office how city agent kiss can complete housing for homeless persons as efficiently as possible. a team led by bridge housing and community housing partnership or c.h.p. approved by the commission. commission later approved a negotiations agreement and predevelopment loan for the project. a portion of the predevelopment loan set aside to be applied to up front fees and deposits for modular construction. following the selection of a unit manufacturer and the approval of the design. team intends to issue an r.f.p. for the modular scope of work in february. in addition to bridge and c.h.p., the development team includes leddy madeham stacy architects, health right 316, and monica wilson and leblanc and associates as work force consultants. the block 9 project consists of 141 total units. 140 are affordable furnished units when one is a manager's unit. affordable units will serve formerly homeless adults referred to

is finalizing the strategic outreach fund. we will be issuing an r.f.p. for community outreach grants soon. we are ready to get moving, looking forward to working with our city departments, the board to, in the mirror's office, and our community partners. the opt in letter and final board resolution are due to the state of california on february 8th, 2019 in order for san francisco to be eligible for the funds. thank you for your consideration of this resolution and for your continued leadership and advocacy for all of our communities. i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> any questions? supervisor walton while. >> thank you. thank you for the presentation. i guess, just from your explanation, knowing what is going on with the current climate at the federal government, out of curiosity, after we do the account for the hard-to-reach communities, do you think we will get credit for the numbers at this juncture, or what are your thoughts around that clapped. >> it is the u.s. census bureau touch a job to do the enumeration. it is our job as a city to make

the three leases before you today, the score that they received in terms of the r.f.p. process are on page 21 and 22 of the report. page 23 we summarize the term of these leases. each of the lease this is for seven years. they will be phased in because of -- over the first 21 years, terminal one renovations will still be in process, so they don't actually start paying the full minimum guaranteed rent until the second part of the lease. we do summarize that those amounts on page 24 of the report , as stated, will be paying a percentage of rent received, or the minimum annual guarantee. i believe the airport's assumption is they will be paying percentage rent. the rents we estimate will perhaps be higher than what are in the reports, and we do recommends approval. >> thank you very much. any other questions, i have one question for you. where there any local businesses that bid on these retail concession leases? as the office reported, these are three of seven concepts. i can find out for you were each of the three proposed are located. i don't know offhand, but i do know

the r.f.p. was issued on august 17th. we extended the deadline to october 26th.id a considerable amount of outreach and we received four very strong proposals from some of the leading law firms representing lafco's and other public agencies in california. and remy public law group. all four of those firms qualified to proceed to the interview process and then i selected an r.f.p. panel to evaluate the proposals. on the panel were angela calvillo, clerk of the board, beth rubensteen and rachel jones, the executive officer of lafco. the firm that scored the highest was richards, watson and gershan. they left it would be best for lafco. particularly, they have specialized knowledge of some of the issues this lafco is working on. they were instrumental in getting marin clean energy off the ground. they have a lot of experience with c.c.a.s. they have experience and municipal finance, open meeting law, ceqa and land use planning as well. today, i'm asking you to approve a resolution and contract with richards, watson and gershan for a term of four years with general c

we will release the r.f.p. >> other questions? >> on slide 27, long range property management plan referencing -- can you focus us on what are the properties? identified here for western addition. >> i think we have another -- >> she's here, know we are going to ask. >> commissioners, i'm hilde mild. properties in different areas, fillmore heritage center, and we have some other i think only one remnant properties, we have the ellis street driveway, directly adjacent to the fillmore heritage, it's the driveway into that retail shopping center. i believe that is all that we in the course of some of our development projects have remnant parcels in some cases rights-of-way, sidewalks, things like that, so not major, they are not, they don't have development potential, but they are things that we just want to tie up as loose ends and make sure that they are under the correct jurisdiction for governmental purpose or the city, so they are maintained and going forward closed out correctly. does that answer the request he? >> thank you. do

spa brsfo was the highest scorer to an r.f.p. process. we show that on page 12 of our report. the less is for 12 years. the minimum annual guarantee is 250,000 per year or 2.5 million over ten years. the assumption by the airport is that they will be paying the higher percentage rent rather than minimum annual guarantee, and we recommend approval. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. are there any members of the public that would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. colleagues, do we have a motion for this? yes, supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: yes, i'd like to forward this to the if you mean -- full board with a positive recommendation. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. at this time, i'd like to call for a ten-minute recess. we will come back to the board chambers at 10:32. thank you very much. . >> supervisor fewer: we'll combacome back into session. we'll start with our last item on the agenda today, which is item 12. madam clerk, can you call item 12. >> clerk: yes. resolution approving a vertical disposition and development ag

staffing question in terms of when they will make their results public from the r.f.p. but we have been actively involved with them through the process. it is not a staffing question on our side. >> how many people staff this? >> molly is the primary person doing the analytical work. i put in a significant amount of time. >> hold on. she chairs, you probably are filling in and doing a lot of stuff. have they been community meetings around this? >> every one of our meetings is public and open to the public. >> we are not leaving the building, we are not going out into the community? >> yes. >> do you see that happening in the future? >> we are open to that. the expertise is the financial peace of this. how can we put money into what people are saying? if the board board has future direction on which policy direction to provide, and you would like public feedback, we certainly would be open and available to doing that. i don't think we see our role as making the decisions at this point, but rather to provide you with specific so you can make good decisions. >> i want to go

however, the flagship select equity flagship long-only fund was closed at the time of the r.f.p. ey submitted their long-short equity strategy. we thought about it we really liked the firm we with you decided to pass on the strategy for several reasons. fees being one. we felt they are stock pickers not as accomplished on the short side. but we told select equity, if you have capacity, in your long-only strategy, we would have interest. which brings us to our recommendation today. we have an opportunity to take advantage of some capacity that has become available at select equity. before i turn it over talk about select equity, i want to remind the board of a couple of attributes we're seeking when we seek to upgrade the capabilities of the portfolio. one, we look for in owe have a tive differentiated investment processes. we look for strong platforms marked by investor bases with long-term bases and a certain level of alignment, particularly managers having their own net worth that is side by side for us. we look for concentrated portfolio and we look for return or past returns,

the r.f.p. is posted. deadline to submit is marc march 15th. secondly, there is a graduate class at the university of san francisco that was going to be contributing to the study. i am happy to report today i met with the professor and that class commenceses january 21st. there will be three specific study areas, geographic and political economics in the speck tore. special and geographic, politics and lobbying and best practices. the students hope to present findings to lafco in may at our meeting. third i updated the timeline for the study. some aspects of it have taken longer than i anticipated. i included that in the packet. we hope to wrap up by october and by sometime this summer come up with a final report of policy recommendations. throughout this process we are examining best practices of other cities, the graduate class is going to look into that as well. we have preliminary findings our emerging mobility intern is here today to give you a presentation. >> i am officially done with my internship. to put icing on my cake. our emerging m

[inaudible] >> the joint r.f.p. imposed new, stringent requirements for justice providers around the referral process, dictating all referrals must come from a sole probation liaison. we saw earlier the chart that chief nance put up about how many different young people are coming from the different nonprofit organization r associations. among our membership, to date, one, only one referral was made using this new j.p.d.-imposed referral process. restricting referrals prechbss youth from receiving -- -- prevents youth from receiving services in the community by the community. we need unblocked access to our you youth. service needs have changed, and they can best be met by the community. many staff are licensed professionals or have specialized treatments in various treatment modalities. unfortunately, this year, amongst the five agencies that are within that partnership, two of them have been defunded at the end of this year. we have led the way as an association in moving our system to an innovative system, away fr

the airport. preparation of r.f.p. those come to mind immediately. i am happy to get more information on what it would take. >> that would be great to understand that better. is funding for that beginning work including in the sfp budget currently? >> not explicitly. we do have work for planning purposes sort of broadly. the irp. we do have under professional services as needed contracts a number of engineering firms that do this kind of work and we have worked with them in the past on these kinds of projects so it is certainly possible for us to direct some of that capacity towards supporting these efforts. >> thank you. i know that there are for me a lot of questions in terms of distinction between the power enterprise and clean power sf. i know that is sf p.u.c. looks at them very differently. for those in san francisco at least for me it seems power is coming the same thing and i just wanted to ask some questions about the differentiation. as clean power sf gears to start building renewable energy power facilities, can you talk about how the sf p.

it consists of antenna set back on the rooftop and screen behind r.f.p. boxes. this is the original proposal on which planning recommended. it is a preferred design as the visual impact of installation would be minimal from public vistas and streets this. proposal does not exceed the height of perts innocent [inaudible] on the roof >> tom: and compliance site with the guidelines. the first alternative design -- design two consists of six panel antennas mounted to the west-facing building wall. three additional antennas would be located on the rooftop of the building near the northeast corner. and the antennas on the facade would be unscreened and completely viz -- visible from public vistas and streets. community members have expressed support of the facade mounted antenna design alternative. i would like to note that if the facade mounted alternative design were to be approved and built, at&t and other carriers would have the ability to add additional wireless antennas and equipment on the building so loening that the site modification is not a substantial dmain