tv Government Access Programming SFGTV August 12, 2019 12:00pm-1:01pm PDT
center station. and i believe over the last year and a half to two years that we've changed the culture at bart. for example, when we hired custodians, who are known as systems service workers, they were not trained. they were simply given the tools of a grabber, gloves, a bucket, and a broom and told to go at it. i have cleaned human waste at 16th and mission station at the platform level and i was deeply concerned that i felt that, first of all, we also had 21 maintenance vacancies in our last fiscal year. so i drove that home, and we do not have vacancies anymore. at the 16th and mission station, the first day that i swept when i was by myself, i had a gentleman who identified himself as being homeless and said that he pretty much lived in the plaza and there hadn't been a full-time custodian daytime for eight months, and i was
absolutely shocked at that. we have had a change in leadership. our former assistant general manager for operations retired, and tamar allan who is an engineer and she's been with bart for over 30 years has come into this role as being our assistant general manager for operations and engineering. we now participate with the international systems supply association, issa, which is an international maintenance and cleaning association that i'm sure city hall belongs to, the empire state belongs to. so now we have two certification programs that we have for our custodians and they love it. our new employees, our continuing employees, love the fact that we have he will -- elevated the art of cleaning and maintenance and how important it is because it does set the tone for our riders.
i think we are remiss in that it would have been good for our assistant general manager tamara allan to come and latifa simon and janet lee, we work closely with her. i think in the additional years maintenance should be minimal. we have not seen major problems at the two canopies that we have. we have a public safety problem with a lot of narcotics dealing around the 7th and market. i was connecting carl fabry with our police chief. and i think the issues around employment have been communicated. so chief scott has been asked to engage our department to engage employment. while i'm at it let me say we have hired 33 additional police officers just this year and we really are working hard to fill our vacancies. so i want you to know that i
think that there is true religion at bart about the importance of cleanliness. we're working through a lot of modifications on our fare gates to create a system that has more integrity to it. i can tell you in the time latifa and i have been there, the youth fare had been from ages 6 to 12. it made no sense to come in there when 18-year-olds are the most likely to ride the system and go to middle school or high school or camp or wherever they are going to. i think there is very much a changing culture as we grapple with the societal issues that have really affected us. now, to be candid, loss of ridership in transit is something that the mta is facing. it's a huge issue in los angeles. we have not lost our ridership on weekdays, but on evenings and weekends we are losing ridership
with uber and lyft and unless you see an active safety presence, there are people less comfortable when the system is not crowded. i know we haven't given you specific numbers, but we will work with the staff that is here and operations and give you the numbers that will be funded by muni and supporting and maintaining these stations. >> chair fewer: i think what we're concerned about is joint relationship, that we're making sure that these structures will be maintained, but i think it's good to hear that you had a change in leadership perhaps. that might be a little bit more diligent about this. this is just such a huge investment, and we want to make sure that our investment holds up well in the conditions in san francisco. >> yeah. and as you know, we are hopefully completing a search for our new general manager. we have a closed session tomorrow at our board meeting and we may hopefully have an
announcement. that's important. i think it's really the reason i ran for the bart board is because i do know the city so well from running the complaint department of neighborhood services, to being a supervisor. so i really do endeavor to have partnerships and i think you see what we're doing working with urban alchemy, a admonish-profit organization that has a lot of credibility in their work with the city and we've embraced with them and working with the hot team here. we've extended through supervisor ronen's leadership, the initial work at pal and civic and we've added 16th and 24th street because we have to rely on the city and county of san francisco partnering with us to help people enter treatment, housing, shelter, all of those things. so that really is -- that's my mission as a bart director is to bring us closer. and i think that both latifa simon and janet lee bring their
enormous experience and toolbox to make sure we are connecting and cooperating and maintaining our programs and doing a good job with the facilities that you help us fund >> chair fewer: thank you. >> thank you so much. >> chair fewer: and then one last question. we have -- so currently if people would like to see what this structure would look like, they can go to the pal street station and that will be replicated similarly as other stations. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> chair fewer: that is the design that mta and bart has chosen? >> well, it's mta, the mayor's office -- yes, and planning. >> chair fewer: okay. got it. >> yeah. >> chair fewer: okay. colleagues, any other questions? comments? seeing none, let's open this up to public comment. any members of the public like to speak on item number 1?
>> while admittedly this is a waste of saliva i'm sure, but i believe you have a definite problem with calls which very likely relates to bureaucratic redundancy and too many middle men. what are the estimated material costs per square foot? who is the manufacturer? who is the fabricator? this project sounds like something that will be custom manufactured offsite and installed as a kit. so how is it that a simple canopy is supposed to cost as much as a custom, luxury, three-level home? it doesn't make any sense? >> chair fewer: thank you very much. any other public speakers? seeing none, public comment is now closed. so we heard from the bla.
they actually approve of this item. so let's move this to the board with a positive recommendation, and i can take that without objection. thank you very much. madam clerk, can you please call item number 2. >> clerk: resolution authorizing the san francisco public utilities commission to accept and expend a grant in an amount not to exceed $3,759,822 from the california state water resources control board for planning, design, and construction of the sewer system improvement program baker beach green street early implementation project for the period of november 4, 2017, through march 21, 2022. resolution authorizing the >> chair fewer: thank you very much. so i believe we have sarah bloom here. >> hello, supervisors.
thank you for the opportunity to present today. i work in the wastewater enterprise of the san francisco public utilities commission, and here today i am here to speak to you about the baker beach green street projects and the grant we received from the control board. so the baker beach green street is one of our eight early implementation projects that we are delivering as part of phase one of our sewer system improvement program. we selected one project in each of our eight urban watersheds, and the baker beach green street project was selected for our richmond watershed. the project has two major project locations, one is from alcameno del mar and the second location is in the seacliff neighborhood along seacliff avenue and 25th avenue north. in the baker beach terrace area we will have rain garden at the corners of 25th and 26th
avenues, along with merm i can't believe paving strip. and then at the 25th avenue north in the cul-de-sac at the entrance to baker beach we will have a rain garden on the property that helps to improve the entrance at baker beach. along el camino dell mar we have four nodes of green infrastructure and those are located at existing pedestrian crossing. they are going to include rain garden belts and provide traffic calming benefits and pedestrian safety. the overall performance of the project, it's going to manage 17 acres of area within the richmond watershed and it's going to remove over 3 million gallons of stormwater. and in addition to the removal of stormwater it's going to remove activations of rainfalls on baker beach and china beach.
the total project budget is just over $12 million and we've been awarded 3.8 by the state water control board. we're going to spend that on bid and award and direct construction costs. and the remaining funding will be through our sewer system improvement program. the stormwater grant program is administered by our state water resources control board. it's funded by a combination of proposition 1 and proposition funding and some of the major grant requirements are that the program requires a minimum 50% match, quarterly reports and reimbursement invoicing and records of retention for 36 years after the project. we were awarded the grant back in december of 2016 and our commission approved it in march of 2019 and if the board of supervisors approves our request to accept and spend, we anticipate we'll be executing the agreement in august of 2019.
that is it. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. let's hear from the bla, please. >> good morning, chair fewer, supervisor stefani, supervisor mar. the board is being asked to approve acceptance of a grant from the water resources board for $3.8 million. this is for the project being described, the baker beach green street project. this is part of the city sewer improvement program. the grant of $3.8 million, the city's matching funds are $8.3 million for a total project cost of $12 million. you will see the project budget on page 7 of our report. the city's matching fund is from the wastewater enterprise and we recommend approval >> chair fewer: thank you very much. seeing no questions or comments from my colleagues, let's open this up for public comment. any members of the public like to comment on item number 2?
seeing none, item number 2 is closed. i will recommend to move this to the board without objection. madam clerk, can you call item number 3. >> clerk: item number 3, resolution authorizing acceptance and expenditure of california state senate bill 1 local partnership program formulaic funding in the amount of $2,340,000 for san francisco public works' sunset and parkside streets pavement renovation project. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. and i believe today we have oscar -- oh, no, hi. who do we have here? >> elizabeth ramos with san francisco public works. >> chair fewer: please start. >> good morning. the resolution before you will authorize san francisco public works to spend the partnership funds in the amount of $2.3 million. these state transportation funds are part of the local partnership formulaic funding
otherwise thon as sb-1 and this is the third project to receive these funds. on october 17 of 2018, the california transportation commission programmed $2.3 million in these funds to our project and the project will actually repay $2.5 million in residential streets -- 2.5 miles in residential streets in the sunside and parkside neighborhoods. this construction work in conjunction with our asset management strategy decrease the lifetime maintenance and repair costs, while also providing safer and reliable roadways for multi-modal transportation. i'm joined today by our project manager and we'd be happy to answer any questions >> chair fewer: thank you very much. any questions from my colleagues? seeing none, let's open this up for public comment. any members of the public like to comment on this item? i didn't call on the bla.
let's have the bla report first. i'm so sorry. >> this accepts the senate bill 1 grant for the sunniside and parkside streets. these are street pavement programs. the grant amount is for $2.3 million. the city is matching $2.6 million. the total project cost is $5 million. we show it on page 10 of our report and we recommend approval >> chair fewer: thank you very much. let's open this up for public comment now. any members of the public like to comment on item number 3. seeing none, public comment is now closed. supervisor mar, would you -- >> supervisor mar: actually, i had a few questions. >> chair fewer: sorry. >> supervisor mar: i had a few questions, more a background question. how much does the city receive in the lppformulaic funds for
these types of projects? >> we've applied three times for formulaic funds. >> supervisor mar: so we don't receive a regular funding amount? >> we don't. we apply in joint partnership with the transportation authority. they're eligible to receive these funds since bayes do collect a tax here in san francisco. so we've overall have received -- let's see here -- i'm going to ask my colleague to help out. >> supervisor mar: so the formulaic funds are received by the transportation authority, it's about $2 million per year. the first three years were programmed for san francisco public works resurfacing projects. we haven't decided or the transportation authority hasn't decided how they're going to spend future years of formulaic
funds. thank you. i did have a question about the sunset parkside pavement renovation program. i'm really happy to see this being the priority for the funds this year. it looks like the bla report says that -- this was chosen because of the poor state of the streets in the sunset and parkside generally. there's a pci score of -- in the mid-40s. but then it says: upon completion of the project, public works expects the pci score to rise to 100, which sounds great, but is that real -- what does 100 mean and is that realistic? does that mean that we're going to have perfect streets in the sunset and parkside with no pot-holes? >> is it moratorium grade also? >> yes, good morning,
supervisor. paul ratis, public works project manager for this project. there's about 30 blocks in the project. we score streets between 0 and 100, 100 being the best and 0 being fully pot-holed and a really bad street. once you pave the streets, the street goes up to 100. those streets will go up to 100 and then every year slowly scale back down. >> supervisor mar: one final question -- i would be interested or my office would be interested in seeing the more detailed streets and blocks that would be repaved through this and i guess maybe just a comment. it seems like it would be good to sort of get input, at least from the district supervisor's office, about priority streets and blocks. so i don't know if there's still an opportunity for us to still have some dialog about that. >> this project is nearing the
100% design, but we do have our information about our program on our website and we can also provide you the information about the project directly to your office too. >> supervisor mar: that sounds great. thank you. >> chair fewer: i think actually you bring up a good question. what are the streets that are going to be resurfaced? >> sure. we have two streets on 16th avenue, two blocks on 18th avenue, a stretch of blocks on ortega, about ten, about six blocks on pocheko and another ten blocks on uloa. >> chair fewer: okay. wow, lucky you. so i understand that these moneys were actually -- we applied specifically for the sunset and parkside streets paving. so it's not like we have these moneys and we put it in district 4. i think we applied for these moneys specifically for this
project; is that correct? >> that's correct. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. so we've had public comments. would you like to make a motion, supervisor mar? >> supervisor mar: i'd like to move that we recommend this -- move this forward to the full board with a prorecommendation. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. i think we can take that without objection. madam clerk, can you call item number 4. >> clerk: item number 4: resolution declaring the intent of the city and county of san francisco ("city") to reimburse certain expenditures from proceeds of future bonded indebtedness; authorizing the director of the mayor's office of housing and community development ("director") to submit an application and related documents to the california debt limit allocation committee ("cdlac") to permit the issuance of residential mortgage revenue bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $50,000,000 for 401 avenue of the palms (parcel c3.2 >> chair fewer: okay. thank you very much. i believe we have amy chan. >> good morning, chair and supervisors. item number 4 before you is a
resolution related to the tax-exempt bond financing for the maceo may apartments. this resolution would require the city to conduct a bond financing application which is not to exceed $50 million. the proposed bond issuing will be conduit financing and not require the city to prejudice any of its funds for repayment of the bonds. about the project, it will be a 105-new unit supportive construction to be located at 401 avenue of palms and treasure island. it's being developed by china town development corporation. 42 apartments in the building will serve as replacement housing for formerly homeless veterans. the remainder will house formerly homeless or low-income veterans. all units will serve extremely low and low income households.
we intend to return later to the board for the bond issuance approval and we anticipate it will close next here. here i have my colleagues with me if you have any further questions about the project and we ask that the committee send out the resolution to the full board with positive recommendations. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. let's open this up to public comment. any members of the comment like to speak on item number 4. seeing no comments or questions from my colleagues, i would like to move this to the board with a positive recommendation. we can take that without recommendation. >> clerk: item number 5, resolution -- >> chair fewer: 5 and 6 together. >> clerk: resolution authorizing the mayor's office of housing and community development, ton behalf of the city and county of san francisco, to accept and expend
the county competitive allocation award in the amount of $18 million under the california department of housing and community development program and number 6 resolution authorizing and delegating the mayor's office of housing and community development, on behalf of the city and county of frisk, to accept and expend the inconsequential non-competitive allocation award. >> items 5 and 6 authorize us on behalf of the city to accept and expend no place like home project designation for competitive funds which is item number 5 and non-competitive funds which is item number 6. the state of california created this program to develop multi-unit housing for people with mental illness, homeless or at risk of chronic homelessness. the no place like home funds was made available to each county's most current sheltered and
unsheltered count. we have awarded the city funds based on approval of documents that we have submitted with the county's documentation back earlier in the year. that was with this body back in february to make this application. so we're here to seek your approval to accept and expand the funds. as next steps to receiving the funds, we require that an application is made to the body. the resolution before you designates us to accept and designate the funds. we will enter into a standard agreement with the state of california, that's our contract, and we will loan funds to a qualified housing project. the project will be selected to receive these funds that's located at 1064 to 68 mission street and we will return to the board for approval of our anticipated loan to that project in the fall. we anticipate receiving further
non-competitive funds and will be funding other permanent supportive sites where referrals meet the program criteria in the coming years in the same no place like home program. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. there is no bla report on this. any members of the public like to comment on items 5 and 6? seeing none, it is closed. seeing no comments, i would like to move these items 5 and 6 to the board with a positive recommendation. thank you very much.
>> it would pay for the operations expenses and furnishings for a district headquarters office and a cultural community center at 229 ellis street. it would pay for the district public awareness place making campaign that the district is beginning to undertake, which includes banners, murals, and branding in the district. it would also pay for a district launch party on august 31st of this year commemorating the 53 rd anniversary of the compton's cafeteria rights. it would pay for a transgender tenderloin oral and visual storytelling project to raise awareness for the rich transgender history of the tenderloin neighborhood and it would also pay for aspects of district strategic planning and for the development of the report that is required for all cultural districts. that is my report. >> thank you very much. >> i will submit those expenditures for your approval. >> there is no file report for this.
-- there is no b.l.a. report for this. his or any public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. i would like to move this to the board with a positive recommendation and we can take this without objection. please call item eight. >> resolution approving and authorizing the director of the mayor's office of housing and community development to execute documents relating to loans for the acquisition, rehabilitation or permanent financing for four projects pursuant to the small site program, preservation and seismic safety program and downtown neighborhood preservation fund for a total loan amount not to exceed $87.5 million. >> thank you very much. i think today we have liliana lopez. >> hello. good morning, chair and supervisors. i am one of two project managers for the small sights program at the mayor's office of housing and community development. today the action i am requesting you to approve his first a resolution authorizing the
director of mohcd to execute on loans providing permanent financing for four projects and one requesting when requesting downtown neighborhood preservation fund. and requesting preservation and seismic safety programs for past mortgage loan financing. the second request is confirmation of planning sequel determination and findings with respect to the projects regarding the general plan and planning code section 101.1. these loans are brought before you today because the loan terms are 40 years and thus require your approval. one thing i do want to point out is all the projects requesting funds today fall within programmatic and funding guidelines of the ssp program, with a total not to exceed the amount of $37 million, which is actually $51,000 less than what is written in the resolution you received.
i am going to gloss over these because my colleague talked about these last month when we were here. i will focus on the projects. if you have questions, we can answer them at the end. so the four projects before you today, three of them are located in district nine and one is located in district three. among the four projects, the units total 100 residential and four commercial units. projects are in various stages of development from preconstruction, to post rehab and are expected to close between august and november of this year. the first one is 305 send carlos which is sponsored by mission economic development agency in district nine. it includes ten units plus two former garage spaces that have been converted into two a.d.u. units. two retail spaces were rehabbed and are now being released to
community serving tenants, which include a music teacher and an artist or jewellery maker. the building is curtly occupied by households ranging from 11% and my two 71% a.m.i. the things are occupied by latino households, half being elderly and other half our family. 937 clay is sponsored by chinatown community development center and is in district three. this project will rehab and preserve 71 s.r.o. units while adding two new larger units and preserving one ground-floor retail space. prior to acquisition, the tenants were facing evictions and harassment threats. the crew -- the tenants are chinese-american individuals, families and seniors with incomes averaging 30% a.m.i. the next project is 3198 24th street on the corner of south van ness and 24th. it is sponsored by mission economic development agency, also in district nine.
the project is fully occupied with eight residential units and incomes ranging between 13% a.m.i. and 100 and 5% a.m.i., with the overall average being 52%. the funding will preserve -- provide seismic and life safety upgrades and will enable five long-standing community businesses to be preserved. finally, we have 654, street, which upon completion will include seven residential units including five one-bedroom, one studio, and a three-bedroom unit the construction work remaining includes the conversion of a carriage house into a one-bedroom accessory dwelling unit. finally, i recommend your approval of the resolution so mohcd can provide the permanent financing to preserve these buildings as affordable for low to moderate income families for the generations to come.
i'm happy to answer any questions and my colleague, caroline mccormick is here, as well as a representative. thank you so much. >> thank you. let's hear from the b.l.a., please. >> the board is being asked to approve loans totaling $37.5 million for the four small sights projects. there are three different types of amounts that are being requested in this legislation. we summarized them on page 15 of our report. 937 clay would receive funding from the downtown neighborhood preservation fund as well as the preservation seismic safety program. san carlos, on the 24th street project will receive funding from a small sights program as well as the preservation program in terms of the loan amount and
the loan terms, they are all summarized in that table. the loan amount are for $33.6 million. this is less than $37.5 million as specified in the legislation. the difference has to do with a contingency encase project costs are higher than anticipated to allow them to go up to each loan program. we would you have a technical amendment to have the correct amount placed in the legislation we recommend approval as amended >> let's open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public that would like to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. i understand that the b.l.a. gives as a recommendation to approve as amended, so can we
take that amendment, please? i make a motion to approve that amendment. we can take that without objection, and then i would like to make a motion to move this to the board with a positive recommendation as amended. thank you very much. madame clerk, please call item number 9. >> nine is a resolution authorizing the sheriff's department to enter into a third amendment to the existing contract between the commissary commissary network and the city for a jail commissary services to extend the term contract by six months beginning september 1 st for a total term of such ever first, 2014 through for butte 28th, 2020 with no change to the guaranteed annual minimum income of $590,000. >> thank you very much. i think we have kristin here from the sheriff's department. >> yes.
>> i'm here today to request approval. the term extension of the current inmate commissary by six months from september 21st 2019 to ferrier 28th 2020. some program history. this is a revenue contract currently with keith commissary network. we have had it since september 2014. it and prides -- provides inmates the opportunity to purchase food, personal care items, stationary, on accounts that are funded by friends and family. currently the financial terms of this contract have keith pay 40 3% of net sales to the inmate welfare fund. the r.f.p. -- we do have an r.f.p. out now for a new contract that was initially posted in january of this year. it has similar financial terms, however, working with the treasurer's financial justice
project as well as the mayor mayor's budget office, we were able to council that r.f.p. with those financial terms. we have introduced a new r.f.p. for which we actually already have bids, it eliminates payments to the inmate welfare fund. it reduces commissary accounts deposit fees and this ultimately reduces inmate cost for commissary. while we are here asking for a six-month extension, it is my hope that we will be implementing the new contract well prior to the line that is in the legislature. so the inmate welfare fund is established by the california penal code, which allows the sheriff to establish a fund for the county to be used for the benefit of education and welfare of inmates confined within jail. sources currently come from commissary commissions and inmate phone calls primarily. we are moving away from that.
as you know on the inmate phone calls, we are reducing the cost of inmate phone calls now by 50% from the end of last fiscal year to the beginning of this fiscal year, and it is our intention to reduce that down to zero before this fiscal year is out. when we go into the new commissary contract, it will also take away the funding for this. then program -- the program and supplies are around violence prevention, sobriety, family connections, and let's see, one last slide. the minute -- the benefits of the new contract ends the commissary commissions. this will in turn result in savings for inmates. and then also there is a reduced cost of adding funds to inmate accounts.
currently, if someone wants to put $20 on an inmate's account on the web, it is a 5-dollar cost that will come down to a dollar. although, primarily these days, during the sheriff's term, she was able to reduce the deposit at -- that cash deposit at the kiosk at the jail his 20, and that is really where primarily people make their deposits now. >> that is great. it looks as though we are moving in a positive direction to give some relief to the inmates or people who are incarcerated when they are using these services. is that correct? >> yes, ma'am. >> this is the bridge of money to finish off the rest of this contract. >> this is really -- because we issue the r.f.p. under similar financial terms, but then turned around, we understood through the budget will be able to fund this to the general fund. we pulled that r.f.p., and so we
have -- so we have a new r.f.p. out there and we are just needing some more time to finish that process. there's a good chance that we could be done within three months to have the new contract. >> okay. that is great. there is no b.l.a. report on this. let's open this up for public comment. would any members of the public wish to comment on item number 9 seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, i would like to make a recommendation to move this to the board with a positive recommendation. and we take that without objection? thank you very much. >> thank you. >> madame clerk, please call item number 10. >> item ten is resolution approving and authorizing the real estate division two and acquire real property located at 1828 edward avenue for a purchase price of $67.3 million subject to future authorization of certificates of participation and placed with the real property under the jurisdiction of the real estate division for use of storing evidence and moving property from other
positive recommendation for a resolution authorizing the acquisition of real property at 1828 egbert avenue. i will briefly go through the project description, dual points , timeline, cost. we also have a few minor changes to the resolution which i will walk through and then next steps the property to be acquired is located at 1828 egbert avenue. it is a four-story building with a reinforced concrete frame. it is approximately 127,000 square feet in total. each floor has a floor plate of approximately 31,700 square feet there is also a 63,000 square foot parking lot adjacent to the end part of the sign. the building meets the highest seismic standards. it has a seismic importance rating of 1.5, and occupancy category rating of four. it is currently being used for self storage for approximately
900 customers. looking at the pictures that are on the screen before you, the first picture in the upper left, it is a little dark, but you can see the building which is on the left-hand side. it is an l-shaped building. the property to be acquired is in yellow hash marks. the parking lot area is in the upper portion of that picture, and also extends to the right. the property that is in the lower right-hand corner is an adjacent parcel and not part of this acquisition. the second picture on your right shows the front of the property to be acquired. as you will see, it is a very robust structure and has no windows. the lower left-hand picture shows the rear of the property. you can see the rear of the building and a portion of the parking lot, and the lower right-hand side, you can see the interior of the property and its
vacant condition. you will note that the concrete columns are widely spaced and uniform, which allows for a very efficient use of the space. the deal terms, the purchase price is $67.3 million. this was subject to an appraisal under review appraisal. the negotiated price is consistent with the market value as part of the deal term, the seller has requested a leaseback the purpose of the leaseback is to allow the seller time to vacate the current self storage tenant. at this point, i wanted to make clear that the site is being used exclusively for storage of goods and self storage. there are no residents, there are no businesses that would be displaced by this acquisition.
the initial leaseback term would be for six months, however, recently the seller requested an option for three additional months should that prove necessary to vacate all of the tenants. this recent request by the seller is agreed upon by real estate and we are asking that this be included as part of the amendment this morning. the rent for the lease will be $1,000 per month. i believe that this is an approximation of the fair market value of this lease in that the only purpose under the lease is to vacate existing tenant. the thousand dollars per month will be taken out of a holdback amount. the holdback amount is $5 million, which will be held in escrow. this will serve as liquidated damages should the seller fail to remove all of the self-serve tenants in the timeframe within
either the six-month or nine-month, should an option be exercised. speaking briefly to the uses, this building will be used as city secure storage. the primary tenant will be the police department. the police department must vacate their storage facility at the hall of justice where evidence is currently located, as well as building 606 at the shipyard, which is where police property is currently located. the purchase of egbert provides the city a long-term assurance that evidence is orderly and well maintained and well documented. the egbert site meets the police 's needs in terms of space , infrastructure, security, and seismic strength. it also would decrease the loss or misplacement of items and ensures the integrity for trial. it also allows for retesting for
those wrongly convicted on appeal. a timeline of relevant date, if approved by this committee today , we will be going before the board of supervisors on july 30th for their approval of the purchase and sale agreement. the purchase and sale agreement is contingent upon the issuance of c.o.p., certificates of participation, which will finance the acquisition. we anticipate september 2019 the introduction of c.o.p. in october 2019 and issuance of the approval of c.o.p. you can see here in the timeline , the issuance of december or january. we'll start the leaseback process upon vacancy of the tendencies. we would take occupancy, and this timeline, which would conclude in either july through
october of 2020, would still allow us to meet our target dates for an ho jay exit. i did speak to a revision of the resolution. the resolution, direct -- i'm recommending the resolution be revised in three locations to do two things. one, to add a three month option to the lease term, and second, to incorporate the b.l.a.'s recommended amendment. those changes would occur on page 1212, line 22, page 3, line six, at page 4, lines nine and ten. i do have proposed language for the clerk if you are interested. that concludes my presentation. commander commander sullivan of the police department has a greed with capital planning.
jamie from public finance and i are available to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you very much. let's hear from the b.l.a., please. >> the board of supervisors is being asked to approve the purchase of 1828 egbert street for a price of $67.3 million. this purchase price was confirmed by an appraisal and an appraisal review. the purchase -- this is for the police evidence and property unit. he described the property itself the purchase would be funded by certificates of participation. the board board would have to approve those. our understanding is that there would be legislation introduced for approval in september. table one on page 22 of the report summarizes the acquisition cost and the financing costs for their
certificates of participation. the existing leases previously approved by the board of supervisors with the very same use for the police evidence unit the real estate department and public works made a determination that this was not actually appropriate at this time for use by the police evidence. it is a vacant site. the city is paying rent on it. and another use of the property has not yet been determined. the city is committed to a ten year lease so they can't exit the lease. we recommended that the resolution be amended for a report back from the director of real estate on the status of this property. my understanding is that amendment has been introduced and we recommend approval as amended. >> thank you very much. we say, so this is because a 77 brannan street, 777 brandon street that we have a ten year lease on still, and that we thought originally we would have to use this facility to store
for this purpose, but these are being paid through the funding through all of this that is through certificates of participation. is that correct? , as stated in your report. >> the funding for 1828 egbert is. >> not for 777 brannan. so the project is being funded through cops. >> correct. >> thank you for that clarification. i see that you have an amendment there for us, for the director of real estate to report back in january of 2020 about the use of 777 brannan since we have a ten year lease on that. got it. are there any members of the public that they to comment on this item? i see one public speaker. >> i was just curious, it seems like this will be occurring rent during the six to nine month
lease period. is there an estimate on the amount of money that they will be receiving over the six to nine months, and are you factoring that in the sales price at all? >> thank you very much. public comment is now closed. actually, i think the public speaker brings up a really good question. so if you wouldn't mind? >> chair fewer, real estate division. actually, they will not be getting revenue during that period in here is why. the seller has $5 million in holdback that is dependent upon them timely vacating the tendency. as soon as we close escrow, the seller will be giving notice to all other tenants to vacate. under the contract terms, the tenants have seven days to vacate, however, the seller will be giving them 30 days.
once a notice of termination is given, no tenant will be paying any additional rent, however, the carrying cost for the property will continue, so the seller will be losing money until such time as they can fully vacate the property and get their 5 million-dollar holdback out of escrow. >> got it. also, this structure is so unusual looking, and quite frankly. >> if i may speak to that, you are absolutely right. i came into this structure with some reluctance, it was the only way to do the deal. the property is currently mortgaged. it has a 12 million-dollar mortgage on the property. the terms of that mortgage require a certain level of tenancy in order to maintain debt service. so the only way that the seller could structure this deal was to be able to close on escrow, payoff pay off the loan, and then be able to vacate the
tenancy over the six month timeframe. in exchange for agreeing to this very unusual arrangement, we ask for a very high hope back amount that is $5 million. so even if just one tenants left is left at the end of that term, that $5 million belongs to the city. >> so this building was formerly used as a storage facility. is that correct? so the tenants aren't -- i mean they just have -- it is not businesses that are being operated, because it looks like they have no windows. >> that is correct. there are no businesses, there are no residents. the building was originally constructed as a data center, a server farm, if you will. that is why it has such a robust seismic structure and it has very robust switchgear inside. it was converted to self storage
after the.com bust. >> okay. got it. that actually explains that there was an unusual design of the station. >> right. >> very odd. okay. we have heard from the b.l.a., we had public comment, the b.l.a. has recommendations, so let's approve the recommendation of the b.l.a. that the director of real estate returned to us in january of 2020 with a plan to use 777 brannan which is still a ten year lease. we can take that without objection. thank you very much. i would like to make a motion to move this to the board with a positive recommendation as amended. >> chair fewer, one clarification, are there any additional amendments? >> i believe he had some additional changes, but i think they are nonsubstantive. is that correct, city attorney? thank you very much. we can accept the amendment and make a motion to accept the abundant -- amendment as amended by the director of real estate.
we can take that without objection. thank you very much. we will move this to the full board as amended. thank you very much. madame clerk, to be have any other business before us today? >> no further business. >> thank you very much. the meeting is adjourned. - working for the city and county of san francisco will immerse you in a vibrant and dynamic city that's on the forefront of economic growth, the arts, and social change. our city has always been on the edge of progress and innovation. after all, we're at the meeting of land and sea.
- our city is famous for its iconic scenery, historic designs, and world- class style. it's the birthplace of blue jeans, and where "the rock" holds court over the largest natural harbor on the west coast. - the city's information technology professionals work on revolutionary projects, like providing free wifi to residents and visitors, developing new programs to keep sfo humming, and ensuring patient safety at san francisco general. our it professionals make government accessible through award-winning mobile apps, and support vital infrastructure projects like the hetch hetchy regional water system. - our employees enjoy competitive salaries, as well as generous benefits programs. but most importantly, working for the city and county of san francisco gives employees an opportunity to contribute their ideas, energy, and commitment to shape the city's future. - thank you for considering a career with the city and county of san francisco.
shop and dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do their shopping and dining within the 49 square miles of san francisco. by supporting local services within our neighborhoods, we help san francisco remain unique, successful, and vibrant. so where will you shop and dine in the 49? >> my name is ray behr. i am the owner of chief plus. it's a destination specialty foods store, and it's also a corner grocery store, as well. we call it cheese plus because there's a lot of additions in addition to cheese here. from fresh flowers, to wine, past a, chocolate, our dining
area and espresso bar. you can have a casual meeting if you want to. it's a real community gathering place. what makes little polk unique, i think, first of all, it's a great pedestrian street. there's people out and about all day, meeting this neighbor and coming out and supporting the businesses. the businesses here are almost all exclusively independent owned small businesses. it harkens back to supporting local. polk street doesn't look like anywhere u.s.a. it has its own businesses and personality. we have clothing stores to gallerys, to personal service stores, where you can get your hsus repaired, luggage repaired. there's a music studio across the street. it's raily a diverse and unique offering on this really great
street. i think san franciscans should shop local as much as they can because they can discover things that they may not be familiar with. again, the marketplace is changing, and, you know, you look at a screen, and you click a mouse, and you order something, and it shows up, but to have a tangible experience, to be able to come in to taste things, to see things, to smell things, all those things, it's very important that you do so.