there you go. he's a business leader. advocate. all that. paul, thank you so much for delivering a tremendous event we also have beautiful food from cater jr dean who provided the morning refreshments as well as our lunchtime food as well. may i also please enjoy the food and have shuttles to take you all up to see the project and enjoy the view up there and just see the tremendous results of everybody's hard work. for now, if i could invite those speakers and the folks in the front to join the underside we will head up there quickly to do a quick within cutting. thank you. thank you, everyone. >>[applause] >> >> >> >>[gavel] >> good morning. welcome to the

aging and adult services commission. can we have roll call >> james, present. dodd highly is excused loo is excused powell, present. roy, here. sims speaker please note executive director mcspadden is present >> because we have a very long agenda before we approve the agenda we are going to table a lot of the reports because a lot of these items require action and i know you want to see you are contracts approved. so we are going to table all of the reports until next month unless there's something urgent. with that will also

table under new business item 7 cla six month report. we will table back also and i think that was about it that what we were tabling today. with that, i would like to have a motion to approve the agenda with those amendment. >> moved and seconded. >> it's been moved and seconded we approve the agenda with the following corrections. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the aye habit and the motion is carried >>[gavel] >> at this time could we have some general public comment. any public comment at this time? i am sorry. approval-before i

go there let me go back to item 3. can i have a motion to approve the october fifth commission meeting minutes? >> moved and seconded. >> it's been moved and second we approve the october 5 commission meeting minutes. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? thank you. so the motion is carried. now item 5, we are tabling the reports and we are moving down to general public comment. are there any general public comment? >> good morning. thank you for having me get my name is barbara rose brooker and i'm here to present my age march. age march i'm the founder of the first age march in history in san francisco. age march is

to celebrate age of pride for all ages, gender, race, sexuality and two and age discrimination and age seegation where we are often identified by our age and our number and age racism where we are often discriminated i losing our work, our housing and many other things. martin luther king had a dream to judge that people would be judged not by their color but by their character and i have a dream that some day age, all of us, will not be judged by our numbers were our age but by our experience and what we can do. the age march is going to be december 4 in san francisco on union street. a short walk, a

big dream and people of all ages will be there. also the press is very interested in it and i'm excited as a native san franciscans that age march will eventually be global and yearly just like gay pride is and thank you for hearing my age march. flyers are on the table of this march and where it is going to be good thank you very much >> thank you. any other public comment? hearing none, we will close. now any old business? hearing none, we are under new business. this is information only. dept. of aging and services budget fiscal year 16-17 and 17-agent dan kaplan presented. >> good morning. glad to be here. i had wanted to do a

quick update on the budget for the current year. we bring you a budget as we are working on it typically in late january or early february and then in the past we have not generally come back and reported where we have gotten from what i would like to do is do a quick report on where we've gotten to. they make some preliminary comments about he 17-18 budget process which we have started already. certainly what we've done so far is not ready to bring to the commission but we have started the process. so if we take a look at the first slide which is a comparison of the 15-16 original budget to the

16-17 original budget what you see is that the budget has increased about 8% overall. the percentages if you look at the various slices in the pipe, are similar in size from year-to-year. so in general, we've grown on a proportionate level way. we get a little bit more into the slices the office of aging budget has grown by about $6 million. this is a number of new initiatives to the biggest of which are additions to the new [inaudible] program and the introduction of a new program for support of home and home care pilot program which is in development but it's funded for this year and funded for next year and then we will go from there. in addition, you can take a look at the slide labels

independent provider wages which is really what we call the ihss is i'm only remain [inaudible] effort payment if you remember back in 2012 the legislature approved a bill to recast the way the ihss program is funded. from that point on it worked until 13 on it works good counties had a maintenance of effort payment that they made. in lieu of paying for a particular percentage of wages and benefits for ihss. so the main maintenance of effort payment amount was set a store on 11-12 actual expenditures on the county by county basis and it grows at 3.5% a year and if you compare the numbers and 15-16 216-something you'll see

they're all most 3.5% different from each other could then it is adjusted by changes in collective-bargaining agreements at the account. the county makes up collective-bargaining agreement that increases the low cost of wages for benefits that will increase the amount of the moe. now in san francisco we have not done that in the past year. what has happened instead is that the minimum wage ordinance has kicked in. before the minimum wage ordinance kicked in the ihss wage was a little bit about the minimum wage. as it kicked in and remember we are moving towards $15 an hour over several years the minimum wage caught up to the ihss wage and has started pushing it up. so i hss workers are now making $13

an hour, which is the minimum for the minimum-wage ordinance went into effect they were getting paid $12 an hour. next fiscal year their wage will go up to $14 an hour. but what we've had extensive discussions with the state about the impact of local ordinances local minimum-wage ordinances on me and will we and we have an agreement that at this point that we are minimum-wage does not trigger a change in the ml we. because is not the result of the collective bargaining process. it is something that applies to all workers in nature restriction. which is good news from a budgetary point of view because the ihss workers get a higher wage but the city does not come up with a higher general fund share to fund its. it's a good situation. we also have growth in the ihss public authority health and dental payments. another big category of the budget. there is medical

inflation. certainly in the ihss how the workers program there is throughout the world of medical coverage and we are feeling that here.. that is being reflected in our budget that also doesn't trigger a change in the moe. and we are expecting that there will be some fairly significant additional inflation into the next fiscal year in this category. costs are in fact going up in the healthcare arena. so is there anything also want to call your attention to? the last is around ihss is service and county staff as you will note our costs went down there. that is actually an artifact of

shifts of staffing within the budget. it is not a lower commitment in terms of staffing to the administration of the ihss program. in fact, we've added a significant number of positions on the social work and support staff side of the ihss program. what we have done in the budget is we've taken the eligibility workers were part of the ihss program on a budgetary level we combined them with our san francisco benefits net group which is the group that has medi-cal and cal fresh eligibility work. so the cost of those eligibility workers have slid off of the das budget into the dhs budget. if you are looking to the actual staffing was doing eligibility work for seniors and persons with disabilities you would see the numbers actually gone up. we have added

sf benefits net eligibility workers systemwide and a larger share of those workers are in fact working on the aging and disability side of the program. so it's a budgetary move that reduces cost but if you look at where the actual staff are working there are more of them. just to add confusion. okay. if we look at staffing what you will see is that there are small additions to the number of staff in a number of programs. the largest addition to the to take account of his in the eps program where we added next team of social workers and as i said before if you look at the ihss group you can see the numbers go down but what this is is a number of new social work and support staff

offset by a reduction of eligibility staff which is just a gadget budgetary change.then if you look at our funding mix from year-to-year what you'll see a percentage basis it's very similar. so the federal revenue represented, 30% in one year and represents 30% in the next year and so on throughout the other [inaudible]. so overall, it sort of interesting to look at the two bases of the budget process that are probably most important for us here. the first phase is the agency proposed budget and that is what we bring to you when we come to you in february. so this represents charlene's

proposal supported by the hsa executive director. it comes out out of our agency budget process. in that part of the process we have tended to focus most on the departmental infrastructure. by that i mean, the people and systems that provide services within the das part of the program. the dos agency part of the program. when we get to the ad backs phase the mayoral ad back phase and the board at that faces, then a lot of money comes in typically for direct client service. that's where additional nutrition money would come in. that's where money for things like the home support program would come in. so when we brought to you our proposed budget it was not

exclusively staffing and systems. but that was where the large body of the dollars went. most of that has made it into the final budget. there were some reductions along the way and typically what happens is we make a proposal. we will go to the mayor's office. the mayor's office will except a large portion of the proposal. not necessarily all of it and ate at in some other things. then when we get to the board phase of the process we work with the budget and legislative analyst who recommends trends to the mayor's proposal. and some of those actually get implemented and some of them don't and then additional money comes in but normally as i said before, it is for things like increased money in the nutrition program, increased money in the new initiatives.

this year for example as we were developing the budget does a great deal of interest in having a new center at reiman street in the valley this a little bit of money second year of the budget for that. so that's the sort of thing that comes in in the second days of the process.if we look at this last five dos enhancements added since february, this is where those items came in. so you can see there its nutrition program money. there's housing subsidy money. this is where money on the dignity fund, which doesn't take into current this so your butt hits in the next fiscal year assuming passage comes in and then if the

that proposition is passed next week opposition i then also be a little bit of staffing money for the dignity fund to do work, preparing and doing studies and setting up the analysis and the decision-making process. but that is a small piece of the whole. the big pieces the service these enough $6 million and it comes in the second year of the biennial budget. so that is just the kind of quick high-level records in the process and where we ended up. i want to talk a little bit about next year. the dynamics are going to be i think a little bit different next year from last year. so where we have had room to grow on the staffing side of the dos budget has really been around the ihss program. it really is an artifact of the i-h ss mo we

which has basically hold the city harmless from general fund growth in that program. that will still be there but we have grown the program a great deal in the last several years. we have also grown the aps program and the aps program is funded largely with federal money and with 2011 realignment money. in 2011 we up realignment money, which is funded by state sales taxes and state vehicle license fees it has been growing relatively rapidly of we've come out of the recession and growth in that pot of money had actually slowed a good bit over the past year in sales tax revenues are coming in a little more slowly than they anticipated at the state level.

so that is a source of revenue growth that will not be as robust in the future were not expecting it's going to drop but it's growth won't be as robust in the future. then on the dhs side and dos and dhs are sort of linked by their general fund, we had a lot of growth in the medi-cal program and cal works program and cal fresh program over the last several years which is allowed us to sort of free up and we leverage general fund money. the growth in those programs has basically stopped on the medicaid-on the medi-cal side. it slowed dramatically on the cal fresh side. actually reversed on the cal works cited cow works is very dependent on caseload and caseloads have come down as we got further and further away from the

recessionary period. there's more employment and more people are able to get jobs. these are all a good thing. but it does reduce money in the cow works program. so that tends to tighten up our budget all around. so we will feel a tighter situation going forward into the next fiscal year then and the past. i don't think it's a situation where were going to be doing anything like dramatic cutting but on the other hand growth won't be as easy as it has been in recent years. >> thank you. any questions from commissioners? >> the only question might be the timing of dignity fund revenues into that budget. are you saying that the diminished revenues streams you are highlighting are not offset by dignity fund dollars in the next fiscal year? it will only

be the year following? >> no. in the next fiscal year , 17-18 assuming passage next week will have an additional $6 million of service related money. which can be used to pay for nonnatural services. that is, that can be used to cover 100% of the cost of a new service or they could potentially be leveraged if we have a good way to leverage them. with some other federal stream. in which case the total amount would generate would be more than $6 million but $6 million of money that can be used as if it were general funds. okay? thanks. >> any other questions? thank you. next item, all these items below are action items and require a vote by the commission. the first item a

the dept. requests authorize asian to modify dos grant agreement with nonprofit service providers the cost of doing business. funding during the period of july 1, 2016 through june 30 2017. in the aggregate amount not to exceed $90,809 could deny the motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> good morning commissioner john john-director of contacts for hsi. the common request authorizations to modify the dos contracts for cost of doing business adjustment as you know these are funds the city provides to assist nonprofits in meeting the cost of doing business in the bay area. last year the dos commission approved the cost of doing business for both fiscal year 15-16 as well as the zero

fiscal year 16-17. so this request is an adjustment of the 16-17 copy in its round total of $90,000. by comparison the total copy added to the last two years by last year's approval was $2.4 million. this is just kind of a change in methodology as well as applying it to funds that were not covered in last years motion. to describe the first part of the copy for this year there's a change in methodology about a calculated the cost of doing business. last year they took 2.5% of all eligible base cost and added to 15-16 and then added an identical amount to 60-17. what they did not do is not applied the 2.5% to 15-16 god b. they did the base amount. so this is a compounding thing where the change they are doing is they are adding the 2.5% from last

year. it's kind of that actually less than a 10th of a percent increase. agencies will get some funding but it won't be a significant amount. the larger part of this $98,000 is funds that were not covered by last year's motion is a that is new contracts that came in the year 15-16 as well as add backs that got baselined were not included so they did not get a 16-17 increase. we are applying that now. i'm available to answer any questions you have regarding this year's cotton b. >> any questions? it was his addition they did on a pro rata basis human of context by agency? >> what we do is look at the calculations from last year and see what the eligible base cost is over the 2.5% we would figure out what base and multiply the 2.5% to that 2.5%. some of these increases are

like less than $10 for a contract because it's a small amount. for the cotton b for new funding it be a whole 2.5%. added as a card b for this fiscal year could >> agencies don't have to apply for these funds. you just distribute it as i can >> right it will contact each agency and let them know and allow them for the budget adjustments. >> okay. any questions??is there public comment at this time? any public comment on this item? i will call for the vote all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> the next item, b the department request authorization to modify the grant agreement with next ability san francisco for

provision of the village model program during the period of july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 in the amount of $50,000 plus a 10% contingency for a revised total amount not to exceed $283,250. >> denied a motion to discuss? b was moved and seconded. >> good morning. executive director of [inaudible] this item for you today is board of supervisors one-time only at back funding to support village model services in district 3. the contractor next village is a -provides a village service in district 3. they have been around since about 2010. we've seen significant growth from them over their short existence. they are now approaching 300 members total in their bills. this funding today will be used towards going towards increasing the program capacity to meet the

increased service demands of high membership. largest chunk is going to be going towards an increase in staff time. we will see about an equivalent of .5 fte increased. as well as an increase in hours for to have a contractor who's providing chinese language translation services. we will see more of her time helping with the program as well's expanding role just beyond translation we also will see some funding towards operating expenses such as production of their monthly newsletter database costs and other program expenses such as space rental for e vents. with the increasing were also busy in the scope of service increased course funding increases in service units including client serves new memberships and volunteers. with that happy to answer any questions the commission might have on this item. >> any questions? is there

any public comment at this time? please. >> good morning madam or madam chairman emeritus of the committee. i'm the executive director of next village san francisco. michael did the highlights present i'm here to answer the questions you might have. did you mention we were part of the most diverse village in the [inaudible] >> i don't think i did >> we are somewhat proud of. we just attended the national village to village conference in columbus alive. we are one of the bigger villages in the country but we also discovered we are the most diverse. we have the highest concentration of ethnic diversity, income diverse city, and by the way the highest concentration of seniors in the city are in our district. so we work very hard to make sure that our membership reflects our neighborhood and that we don't

turn anyone away because of income. so we are pretty proud of that. thank you. >> thank you. any other public comment? hearing none, i will call for the vote. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the ayes have it. the motion is carried. >>[gavel] >> item c request authorize asian to enter into new grant agreement with south stone sound family ymca writer many services programs to seniors and adults with disabilities in the neighborhood of san francisco the time. beginning november 1, 2016 and ending june 30 27 and in the amount of $75,000 plus a 10% contingency of 75,000 7500 per total not to exceed an amount of $82,500.

can either motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> you are on. >> thank you president james. i'm linda-office on aging. commissioners, i seek your approval for the grant award to [inaudible] to facilitate committee services in the park merced area of district 7. park merced housing is on 19th ave. near where 19th and [inaudible] cross. there are it's about 115 acres and there are 3000 units of housing there. the department park merced management estimates in those 3000 units of housing about 2500 older adults who live there. this is a great location to start some community services in district 7. the grant will fund a 30 hour a week on site activity coordinator at park merced will correlate services to a minimum of 110 new consumers. 375 hours

of activity and 100 hours of social services. park merced management plans to have a shuttle service driving around the property. this is going to happen within the next few months. the ymca is also going to buy something in service to its stone town facility to take individuals from park merced to activities that stones down. the lunch program there for example. as a great drumming class. there's also sf connected computer lab. the director of the family and senior programming at the y has been doing her job at the y for about 14 years. she has been overseeing senior programs for about eight years. she's going to oversee ultimately this program. in partnership with park merced. can i answer any questions? >> since i know that area, it's in my area i was just wondering, are there where they'll be a site within park

merced. are you transferring-it's a small center over there at stones down. are they going to use both to establish one? >> the goal is to have actual services at park merced. there are i believe 11 towers of their in the community meeting rooms in each of the tower areas. so there is space. we also want some services are there. we don't want to transport everybody down the street to the why. we want something happening at park merced. >> okay. commissioners? >> i know there's some budget for the driver. i don't see any cost for the vehicle. is there an existing vehicle of their extending service? is an handicapped enables? yes. i would expect it is, yes, circuit i don't know that for sure but to be compliant it would have to be. >> any other comments? we can

always look at muni for the transportation, right? we do have a transportation to take them shopping. we hope that- >>[inaudible] [off mic] thank you. public comment at this time? any public comment? hearing none, i call for the vote. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the ayes have it. the motion is carried. >>[gavel] >> next item requested d requesting authorization to enter it into a new grant agreement with san francisco in-home supportive services public authority for independent provider mode in-home support services during the period of july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2020. for years, okay. in the amount of winner and $50,000 plus an

annual 5% contingency for a total of amount not to exceed two winner and $63,220. could either motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> okay. megan? >> good morning commissioners. megan cannot here be today so i'll be presented. my name is [inaudible] i'm a manager in the home support service services program. so i'm here to ask your approval for the public authority administrative budget. which runs from july 1, 2016 through june 30 2020. it's a four-year budget. public authority performs a wide range

of services. among them they maintain a registry. when clients are not able to find someone to hire the registry dispatches a list of potential providers from which our recipients interview and select and then they notify the county. so that is one key service that the ihss public authority provides. in 2009 the state of california required all providers to go through the enrollment process which includes fingerprinting. this is a criminal background check. so the public authority receives the results of the fingerprinting and when people are cleared they share that with the county. so then the provider become eligible for employment. also the public

authority maintains the health benefits of all providers and any provider who works 25 hours in two successive months of which in one month if they were 25 hours, they qualify for health coverage and that is provided through san francisco healthy workers. so that is maintained by the public authority as well. one of the key services that the public authority provides is the mentorship program. this is when clients returned from long-term settings such as laguna honda. they assist them in successfully transitioning into the community. so that is all i have. if you have any questions i will be happy to answer.

>> commissioners? >> my only question is i don't see a lot of capital costs. most of this is salary. so do we have another way of equipping these people with computers and various costs but it appreciated somehow? >> i would have to the assistance of the budget people. >> commissioners, there are not very many capital cost. this all passed through funding from the state. it was chartered by the state that we have this program and there are few items. possessing three computers, a couple of laptops, minor things. they don't really require that. >> great. thank you. >> i had one regarding

training because for these in-home support services workers. what kind of training do you have for them in case there is abuse or something like that? is there training program for them around that? >> basically the public authority coordinates with home bridge. are other contractor. they provide basic personal care service training which includes cpr and it's around 40 hours of training. >> okay. what happens if there's abuse with the provider? because i am hearing that in the community. what kind of training do you have in

case there is a case of abuse? do you dismiss them or how is that happen? do they go to train because i asked about that before. one of the items >> one of the items the enrollment [inaudible] talks about his abuse of clients or clients with disabilities. basically we come to know about this through aps reports. when that happens it's investigated and then as you know, i hss the employer is the clients. if the client doesn't agree with us to terminate the provider because of these allegations we are really-we are not empowered to just tell them we can terminate this provider because usually they have the right to go to a hearing and the administrative judges sometimes amuck most times, agree with them.

basically. >> okay. well we will talk about that. sometimes they feel dependent on that person and so you need to really look at that and see what happens because as a dependency there. right but that is my concern regarding that. >> president james? president james i was can add to what he

said good basically say the adult protective services workers are really knowledgeable about that very issue. i think there is some pros and cons to the way that in-home supportive services is set up and i think most people feel it's really a pro that people can choose their own worker and manage that worker. when we run into situations like you are talking about with the person is dependent upon the other person and at the same time abused at the hands of that person then aps is really trained on working with a person to try to working with a person in potentially working with a family member to change the situation. but as he mentioned, we don't-in ultimate because were working with adults would have the ability to make their own decisions, it's very tough. you know we are doing with essentially state laws and peoples rights to make their own decisions. so what we do, though then his

work with them and continually try to support them as much as we can. >> okay. there's a little thing called dementia and their >> there is and there is also and with that comes in that creates a different scenario. >> it does. it does did i just want to make sure this training regarding that. any other questions? public comment at this time? any public comment? if not all called for the question. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the ayes have it. the motion is carried >>[gavel] >> next item, e requesting authorize agent to enter a new grant agreement with san francisco in-home support services public authority for on-call in-home support service during the period july 1, 2016 through june 30 2020 in the amount of $1.1 million plus an

annual 10% contingency for a total grant amount not to exceed $1.2 million. could i have a motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> okay. >> i will be presenting this one as. when of the key services that public authority provides is the emergency on-call program. the emergency on-call program assists clients who providers are not able to be in the home to continue providing services due to illness or family problems. in those cases, we make referrals to the public authority and they dispatch an emergency on-call person. it's not unusual for hospitals to discharge people on fridays and we get calls to send someone

and this is when we use the emergency on-call program as well. >> any questions from commissioners? public comment. any public comment? hearing none, i will call for the question. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? so the motion is carried. hearing the motion is carried. >>[gavel] >> with item f i'm going to turn it over to my vice president seriiñà >> they can. item f requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with bayview hunters point of the purpose center senior services for the provision of elderly nutrition program congregate meals during the period of july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of ticket 1007 or $76 plus a 10% contingency

for a revised total grant amount not to exceed $503,638. >> good morning president james commissioners and executive director mcspadden. before sarah actually prevents present bayview, we wanted to give very quick and brief overview of the nutrition presentation. this morning. so again my name is tiffany kearney and i am one of the nutritionist at the office on aging. today my colleagues sarah chan and i will be requesting authorization to modify 29 nutrition grant agreements with multiple community and nonprofit providers. for the provision of nutrition services. the modification total over $3 million and these funds will be allocated among several types

of nutrition service programs both for seniors and adults with disabilities. all of these original nutrition grant agreements were presented and approved for this fiscal year by the commission, most in june of 2016. all but one requested modification is for july 1 2016 through june 30 these contract modifications will have positive and by enabling nutrition contractorsmeaningful impactsof 201to collectively provideclose to 400,000 more needed meals for seniors and adults with disabilities get the contract modifications whilst on hands food pantry home delivered groceries and food outreach programs. thank you. >> sarah chan, thank you. >> good morning commissioners.

executive director mcspadden should my name is sarah chan nutritionist from dos. today a man up present the bayview hunters point elderly nutrition grant modification. bayview-hunters point as you know in june this year actually opened a new facility and for their senior ctr., doctor george davis senior center which has three times the bigand a lot of new seniors an adult with disabilities. so with the continuous [inaudible] in district 5 which western addition senior center is, we are recommending ad back sums to additional amount,, to additionally proximally 9000 meals to this site. so we ask pending your questions we ask

for your approval of this grant modification. >> thank you. any questions from the commission? any public comment? hearing none, i will call the question. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries >>[gavel] >> item g requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with centro latino san francisco for the provision of elderly nutrition program congregate meals for the period july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 in addition amount of $46,100 plus a 10% contingency for revised total grant amount not to exceed $383,000. thank you, sarah. to have a motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> sarah >> centro latino provides

american with keynote food cuisine for seniors. we see a very strong demand continuous in district 5 and district 9 and the recommended ad back sums were adding additional 7000 meals to help the agency do continue to meet the needs and to also help to start a saturday meal program starting in spring 2017. at veterans common and centro latino [inaudible]. site. still pending your questions, i will ask seeking your approval for modifying this grant >> thank you. any comment or questions from commissioners? any comments or questions from the public? thank you. >> good morning commission. correa-executive director of center centro letting good i just want to express my appreciation to staff for doing

such a great job in supporting me centro latino in doing the-doing are in preparing our requests. to you and i want to express my recognition for the -the recognition that the staff , for the status recognition that centro latino program are growing by leaps and bounds and that the caliber of services that we are providing our exceptional and just would like to ask for your support. thank you. >> thank you. any other public comment? hearing none, i will call the question. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? thank you. the motion carries. item h.

requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with-for the provision of elderly nutrition program congregate meals during the period july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of $64,561 plus a 10% contingency for revised total grant amount not to exceed 547 $589,000. sarah? motion to discuss >> moved and seconded. >> the elderly nutrition congregate meal grant.. part of this ad back money is one time only and basically it is district supervisor allocated for district 5 nutrition program. as we know-is facing a rent increase crisis for their

senior center sites. so part of the one time only money the-choose to use to help with the relief. another part of this ad back is he will be able to add additional 6000 meals to the site. as we know the site is a very popular site for district 5 and so we pending for your questions, we will seek your approval. >> thank you. any, sore questions of commissioners? >> staff question may be good i'm surprised there's rent world into a nutrition program. is that a common thing for us to do? >> normally the event is been calculated into the meal rate and both for this is the case the-their rent lease actually expired and that during the negotiation with our landlord and on a month-to-month and

basically every month they pay an additional $6300 approximately in their rent to compensate that gap. so it's additional. we hope the lease agreement will be negotiated successfully and if that is the case-they will use these funds to build out their capacity or other infrastructure. >> okay. >> any other, sore questions? any, sore questions from the public? >> one question. otherwise it would interrupted the program very much >> correct. because it's very significant increase. the staff is working really hard trying to negotiate a better rate with the lease. >> any other comments or questions commissioners? any comets or questions of the public? hearing none, all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item i requesting authorization to modify the

grant agreement with the episcopal community services of san francisco for the provision of elderly nutrition program congregate meals during the period july 1, 2016 to june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of 56,004 $96 plus a 10% contingency for a revised total grant amount not to exceed two and her $55,220. leave a motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. spews just note on the record i living episcopal services community property not affected by this and so i will recuse myself if there's any need to both. thank you, tiffany >> hello again. this call community services first-quarter the old numbers indicate there continues to be a high demand for senior meals at senior center located south of market district 6. the additional requested funding to provide 8400 more meals will

result in episcopal community services being able to meet this high demand noted. pending any questions i seek your approval for approving this agenda item. >> think. any comets or questions from the commission? any comments or questions of the public? hearing none, i call the question. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? >>[gavel] >> the motion carries. j requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with glide foundation for the provision of elderly nutrition program congregate meals during the period of july 1, 2016 to june 30, 2017 in addition amount of 39,006 seven $31 plus a 10% contingency for revised total grant amount not to exceed 206,006 and $74. once again, tiffany. whether motion to discuss >> moved and seconded.

>> thank you. tiffany. he was glide is one of the nutrition contractors that provides a congregate wreck test meal program. like most of our other providers, their first-quarter meal numbers confirmed the need and seniors desire for a practice meal. adding funding for nearly 12,000 more meals will allow glide to serve at the same capacity as last year and provide more meals to meet the consistent and you are outgrown the need for seniors in the tenderloin neighborhood district 6. pending any questions come i seek your approval. for this agenda item. >> thank you. any comets or questions from the commission? any comets or questions for the public? hearing none, i call the question. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item k. requesting authorization to modify the

grant agreement with jewish community center of san francisco for the provision of the elderly nutrition program congregate meals during the period july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 in the amount in the addition amount of $14,562 plus a 10% contingency for revised total grant amount not to exceed $145,590. tiffany kearney will present a motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. tiffany? the jewish community center of san francisco is the only kosher nutrition meal site in san francisco. jewish community centers first-quarter meal lovers demonstrate an ongoing demand for kosher senior meals. the additional funding for over 2100 meals will allow jcc to not only meet the demand but also provide the meals that are michael and concert of the cultural preferences of those seniors served by jcc senior meal program. pending any

questions, i seek your approval for this agenda item. >> any comets or questions from the commission? any comets or questions of the public? hearing none, i call the questions it all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? thank you. the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item l requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with gay services for the provision elderly nutrition program congregate meals during the period of july 1, 2016 to june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of $21,938 plus a 10% contingency for revised total grant not to exceed $615,187. july the motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. tiffany >> they've 600 meal sites in several neighborhoods across multiple district. their

first-quarter meal numbers revealed an increase in demand for senior meals the additional funding for a little over 3300 meals will enable-to continue to serve at the same capacity as last year and will allow them to meet the increased demand. pending any questions, i seek your approval for this agenda item. spews thank you. any comments or questions from the commission? any comets or questions from the public? hearing none, call the question. all those in favor say, aye the course opposed? thank you. the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item or mike requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with project open hand for the provision of elderly nutrition program congregate meals during the period of july 1, 2016 to june 30 wendy 17 in the addition amount of 197,008 at eight and $65 plus a 10% contingency for revised total grant amount not to exceed 1,000,007 or $48,000.

whether motion to discuss >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. tiffany. >> project open hand is another one of our meal providers that serves a practice meals as well as traditional senior lunches. their first-quarter numbers for this fiscal year demonstrated an ongoing demand for their senior meal programs. trading well above their current monthly allocation. among other programs could the funding for 38,000 more meals will enable project open hand to serve at the same capacity as last year and further assist project open hand to meet the high demand in many of your mill sites that are located in multiple districts throughout the city. the contract modification also provides for additional $19,390 to cover additional costs that

they will encourage this year at the john king senior center. pending any questions, i seek your approval for this agenda item. >> thank you. any comets or questions from the commission? any comets of questions from the public? hearing none, call the question. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? thank you. the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item n? reservation to modify the grant agreement for the russian american committee service for the provision of elderly nutrition program congregate meals during the period july 1 20 16th of june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of 2007 at $20 +10% contingency for revised total grant amount not to exceed two and 55 two and $59.832. motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. tiffany. >> russian-american community

services provides authentic russian meals at its meal sites located in the richmond neighborhood district 1. russian-american communities first-quarter numbers indicate they will meet their current contract and likely can serve more meals to meet consistent demand if funding were available. the additional funding for 1000 more meals will allow russian-american to meet the ongoing demand for congregate meals and also allow them to modestly expand mail service at their meal site now. pending any questions i seek your approval for this agenda item. >> thank you. any comments or questions of of the commission?, for questions from the public? hearing none, i will call the question. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? thank you. the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item o requesting authorization to modify the grand agreement for the self

help for the elderly for the provision of elderly nutrition program congregate meals during that period of july 1 22nd to june 30, 2079 $593,000 plus a 10% contingency for rise total grant amount not to exceed $2.1 million to have a motion to discuss >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. tiffany. >> the additional funding for nearly 75,000 moore's will enable self-help for the elderly to me in these demand especially for chinese style food that is served at many meal sites located in multiple districts throughout the city. including to camp meal sites. the sites will have be allocated over 40,000 additional meals with the additional funding in the grant modification and also with the intended goal of opening one more meal site. the additional

funding also enables self-help to continue to serve at the same capacity as last year and further assist self-help to meet the high demand of their observed at many of the meal sites while accommodating the cultural preferences of those they serve. the contract modification provides for an additional $20,000 to cover the startup costs that were involved in opening a new meal site in visitation valley. so pending any questions, i seek your approval >> thank you. any comments or questions from the commissioners? >> only this looks to be the most significant increase by percentage of the budgets proposed it is that largely because of the additional site? >> no. i think it has to do more a lot of the meals are going towards champs meal program. about 65% did so out of the six ashley six percent

of the funding is for the champs meal site. >> any other comments or questions bequest, took questions from the public? i will call the question. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item p requesting authorization to modify grant agreement for the jewish family and children's services for the provision of elderly nutrition program in the addition amount of one point 714+ a 10% contingency for revised total grant not to exceed $89,652. motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> tiffany. >> jewish family and children's services provides home delivered meals to seniors who have a preference for

kosher style food. jewish family community services first quarter meal numbers not only confirmed the need for home delivered kosher style meals for real higher demand, a higher demand than anticipated. the additional funding for 200 meals will allow jewish family children services to meet demand for kosher meals kosher style meals. pending any questions, i seek your approval. >> thank you. any, so questions from the commission?, for questions from the public? hearing none, out call the question. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? thank you. the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item q. requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with russian-american community

services for the provision of elderly nutrition program home delivered meals during the period of july 1, 2016 to june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of $1041 plus a 10% contingency for revised total grant not to exceed two and a 66,000 interval $51. by the motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> tiffany. >> there continues to be a strong demand for russian style home delivered meals and russian-american community services first quarter meal numbers confirm that. the addition of nearly 200 more meals will ensure russian-american ability to meet that demand. pending any questions i seek your approval for this agenda item. >> thank you. any, took questions from the commission? >> i just have one. because the african-american partnership meets at one of the centers and they have a large russian population. i am just

wondering, to look into that for connecting. they don't have meals served there so that may be a site. i'm just asking you. the was i will pass that information. that is in bayview? >> no. western addition >> okay. >> they had requested some of the clients while we were meeting their were requesting. >> i will pass that along to neck. >> right would you? >> yes. thank you. >> any other, so questions from the commission?, took questions from the public? hearing none i will call the question all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries >>[gavel] >> item r requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with central latino san francisco for the

provision of elderly nutrition programs during the period of july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of $85,000 plus a 10% contingency provides total grant amount not to exceed two and $81,000. motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> sarah >> for central latino we see a very strong demand in the district 6, nine, and 10 and 11 for the home delivered meals. almost 40% of the waiting list is in this district and last year central latino serves up over 24,000 home delivered american-style latino meals to clients. with-but they are actually at their capacity. so with this recommended a back fund we are recommending 30,000

one-time only funds to help the agency to build up capacity. they'll be able to build up one additional route to inner and outer mission single residence occupancy locations. and to provide additional about seven 800 mealsseven 800 meals to clients. so pending any questions i seek your approval. >> thank you. any, so questions of the commission? any, so questions of the public? hearing none, i will call the question. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries >>[gavel] >> it seems we have a duplicate of the letters for the next items while referred to the necks one as q-one request authorization to modify the grant agreement with-for

the provision of elderly nutrition program home delivered meals during the period of july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 in the additional amount of $37,000 plus a 10% contingency for revised total grant amount not to exceed two and at $77,000. motion to discuss bequest >> moved and seconded. width thank you. sarah. >> again this is a one-time only add back and to help to relieve the rent increase prices for the agency. with the successful pending successful lease negotiation they will be able to use this one-time only fund to building their capacity. as we know last year they served over 31,000 meals and also they are so high demand for the cuisine on the waiting list. so pending your questions, we will seek your approval. >> thank you. any, so questions from the commissioners bequest >> i am confused but we divided this one-time increase

>> one of the reasons we do this is to maintain the flexibility that the-building up their capacity for their congregating meal sites and also building up capacity for the home delivered meals. they are looking for funding to building up a additional route for their home delivered meals. so we think this is will be the best way to divide the funds and if they need to use it unfortunately, if that is the case, but if they would be able to negotiate a successful lease and those funds will be released to building up capacity for both programs. >> thank you. any other, so questions? any, so questions for the public? hearing none, call the question all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item for the purpose of

discussion will be r-one requests and authorizes you to modify the grant agreement with meals on wheels for the provision of elderly nutrition program home delivered meals during the period of july 1, 2016 to june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of excedrin $2000 plus a 10% contingency for a revised total grant amount not to exceed $6 million . motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. sarah. >> meals on wheels home delivered meals provides two meals a day with various diet and low-salt diets. sold last year they actually served 1 million, over 1 million meals. that is over served their contract by 10%. so with the recommended at that funds we will be able to add additional --about 147,000 meals to this

program to serve additional clients and also provide additional units and pending your questions, we seek your approval to modify this grant. >> thank you. i have one question. you said over served. how do they fund those over served meals. was it private donations? >> yes. meals on wheels every year they have a grant fund raising event and is successfully fundraising for a lot of the meals funds. >> meals on wheels for steve and thanks for asking the question i was cannot remind us that we match every government dollar practically. so last year but 46% of private dollars went to conflict this program

in order to do the two meals a day in the commentary volunteer services that we add on to the program. >> thank you. and it of, took questions commissioners the quest when he comes of questions of the public? hearing none, i will call the question. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item s, requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with bayview hunters point multipurpose senior services for the provision of adults with disabilities congregate meals during the period of july 1 2016 through june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of $7308 plus a 10% contingency per a revised total grant of not to exceed 101 eight of $85,000. sarah chan. motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> thank you, sarah. >> bayview hunters point with a new center opened in june and attracted a lot more people and adults with disabilities as

well. so with this recommended at back fund we are adding additional 1100 meals and to meet the service demands and the needs. last year they served about 12,000 meals for adults with disabilities pending your questions, all seek your approval to modify this grant >> thank you. any comments or questions bequest mission or james >> they operated two centers out there, they viewed the george david and still operating about multipurpose center? >> note. they basically relocated to the new site. that's doctor george see this site is at the new location at the new complex. there is a rosa park and there is some other site. western addition. >> president james we switch from senior meals two meals for adults with disabilities could maybe you're wondering why we've seen bayview again but that is why.

>> okay. thank you. >> thank you. any other comments or questions for the commissioners bequest comments or questions from the public speakers hearing none, all call the question. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? thank you. the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item t requesting authorization to modify the grant percent of latino san francisco for provisions with adults with disabilities cognitive meals of july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of 6003 at $85 plus a 10% contingency for a revised total grant amount not to exceed $40,540. motion to discuss bequest >> moved and seconded. >> thank you, sergeant >> again this is adult with disabilities congregate meal site in central latino. we recommended the at that funds to add additional about 1000

meals to this site and pending your questions all seek your approval to modify this grant could >> thank you. any, took questions from the commissioners bequest >> yet. your population, is it younger more younger or older adults were combinations bequest do you know? >> it's a combination but it depends on the site central latino because they do have a veterans, and site and that attracts additional adults with disabilities who are not living in that contract. i would say maybe younger there but i can definitely if you need to see the demographic profile. >> because i am wondering with the type of meals maybe with older people it may be more softer,, different kind.. is it more [inaudible] something like

that where the younger adults with disabilities may not need that or no problems with that combination? >> central latino serves latin american style food and regular food. not substituting because [inaudible] so it's a regular cuisine. >> okay. he was to add to that what we see in the congregate meals sites where traditionally they've served over older adults they tend to serve younger adults who are getting close to the quote seniors. they tend to be an older population of younger adults with disabilities. i think one of the things we are looking at that we might serve a much younger population but right now that's what we see in the sites we currently have. >> so it's not younger late 20s

>> right. generally seen that's what we are seeing. >> okay. okay. >> thank you. any other, took questions from the commission?, so questions from the public? hearing none, >>[chorus all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? thank you get the motion carries >> >>[gavel] >> item u requesting the authorization to modify the grant agreement for project open hand for provision of adults and disabilities congregate meals during the period july 1, 2016 through june 30 27 in the addition amount of 41,000+ a 10% contingency for eyes total grant amount not to exceed $176,000. motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. tiffany. >> there is a great demand for adults with disability meals in the various districts where project open hand provides meals and their first-quarter

numbers this this courier confirmed that. each month of the first quarter project opening exceeded the target number of meals. the addition of over 6500 meals in naples project open hand to meet the demonstrated demand and serve the adults with disability population. pending any questions i seek your approval for this agenda item. >> thank you. same question i had with meals on wheels. is this excess from the contract being funded through private donations to project (? >> yes. at this point in time i mean they still there funding per month is not blocked off. so they will get all the money in their contract until it is gone. >> i see. think of and intercoms of questions bequest hearing none, and he comes of questions from the public? hearing none, all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? thank you. the motion carries >>[gavel] >> item v requesting

authorization to modify the grant agreement with russian-american community services for the provision of adults with disabilities congregate meals during the period of july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of work thousand $674 plus a 10% contingency for revised total grant amount not to exceed 10,000 hundred $68. motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. tiffany >> russian-american community services also serves the adult with disability population at their congregate meals site get the additional funding for 750 meals will aid russian-american community services in meeting the est. demand for adult with disability congregate meals. their first-quarter numbers are consistent with this request. pending any questions, i seek your approval for this agenda item. >> think. any comments or questions from the commission?,

took questions from the public? hearing none, all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? thank you. the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item w question the authorization to modify the grant agreement with self-help for the elderly for the provision of a adult with disabilities congregate meals during the period of july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 name out of $17,509 plus a 10% contingency for a revised total grant amount not to exceed 37,503 and $55. motion to discuss >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. tiffany. >> self help for the elderly reported first-quarter adult disability numbers also confirmed the ongoing demand and need to provide meals to the adult with disability population. that may also have a preference for chinese style meal. over half of self help for the elderly scholar. neil

site serves this population adding additional funding and meals to this contract will allow self-help for the elderly to continue to serve and meet the increased neil needs for this population. and expand its service to include a new meal site recently opened in visitation valley. pending any questions, i seek your approval for this agenda item. disputes thank you. any, took questions from the commissioners bequest and he comes of questions from the public? seeing none, all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? thank you. the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item x requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with russian-american community services for the provision of adults with disabilities home delivered meals during the period of july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of 20,000 hundred $81

plus a 10% contingency for a revised total grant amount not to exceed two and $28,000. motion to discuss >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. tiffany. >> russian-american community services first-quarter meal numbers for home delivered meals to the adult with disability population confirms the need to provide meals in the service area covered by russian-american community services. the addition of a little over 3400 meals will enable russian-american community services to meet the known demand for meals in the district they serve which includes one, four, five, and seven. pending any questions, i seek your approval for this agenda item. >> thank you. any comments or questions from the commissioners bequest hearing

none, any, took questions from the public? again seeing none, all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries >>[gavel] >> item y requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with inst. on aging for the provision of adults with disabilities home delivered meals assessment services during the period july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of 118,001 at $13 plus a kid 10% contingency for revised total grant amount not to exceed three and $22,000. motion to discuss >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. sarah >> inst. on aging a disability assessment. this piece basically they provide citywide adult with disabilities outreach to the citywide adult with disabilities waiting list for the home delivered meal monitoring to manager the waitlist and they also do intake the assessment and coordination with the home

delivered meals with adults with disability clients and providers. so with the recommended ad back funds we actually will be able to add additional 313 additional units to allow to address the strong increase and the demands for this program. pending any questions, i will seek your approval to modify this grant >> thank you. and he comes of questions of the commission? commissioner sims >> only an observation this is a sizable increase to the original budget >> correct. what we experience with the past three months there is a very significant increase for referrals. so the agency not only needs to do referrals. they do annual reassessment for clients. that's why we see the need to increase the units. >> thank you. any other, took questions from the commission?, took questions of the from the public? seeing none, all those

in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item z, requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with meals on wheels for the provision of adults with disabilities on delivered meals during the period of july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 in the additional amount of two under $69,209 plus a 10% contingency provides total grant amount not to exceed $888,000. motion to discuss >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. sarah chan >> again this is meals on wheels adult with disabilities on delivered meals and witty increase for the referrals and we see an increase for enrollment for the meals on wheels adult with disability meals they serve citywide and with this fund we will be able to add additional 62,000 meals

and to this program. so pending any questions i seek your approval to modify this grant >> thank you. any comfortable questions from the commission? and he comes of questions from the public? hearing none, all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries >>[gavel] >> item aa requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with meals on wheels for the provision of emergency home delivered meal services delivered meals during the period of july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of 31,006 and earned $85 plus a 10% contingency fee for revised total grant amount not to exceed $153,000. motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> sarah >> meals on wheels emergency meal services service citywide

and provides consumers with within 2-5 days after the home emergency delivered meal eligibility been approved by dos intake. with this recommended ad that will be able to add additional 8000 proximally 8000 meals to this program to meet the increasing demand. pending your questions about seek your approval. >> thank you commissioner james >> this emergency, how many approximately how many meals are for people with disabilities and how many how can you separate that from senior? and for how many days? what are we talking about? >> for the emergency meals in general it's up to 60 days and in dos we actually have the transitional care program which allows 14 days. so normally if clients are admitted into the

hospital or a facility in being discharged and there is a transitional care program with ihss working together to provide 14 days meals. for the clients in the emergency meal we see both adults with disabilities, younger ones, under 60. we also see over 60. so it is a compounded for both. after the emergency meal, if there's a continued need and there will be enrolled into separate programs. >> thank you. mister james >> further, what is the emergency? i mean they get admitted to the hospital and they have to have a discharge plan? >> the transitional care program is specific 14 days after discharge but in general the emergency meal home to home

delivered meal can be referred by aps. could be referred by other resources that the client acting identified as an urgent need for that meal. though the service is well connected quickly within 2-5 days. that's how it goes. >> okay. >> thank you. any other comets or questions? and eight, sore questions from the public? hearing none, all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries >>[gavel] >> item bb requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with chinatown community development center for the provision of chinatown single room occupancy sro food outreach program during the period of july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2020 in the addition amount of $21,600 plus a 10% contingency for a revised total grant amount not to exceed one or 26,000 seven or $64. motion

to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. sarah. >> chinatown community development center food outreach program actually is a four-year contract starting this fiscal year just presented a few months ago. original contract was approved in august commission meeting and since the original budget if they pass through super subcontractor presbyterian church. so with this ad back funds we recommend about 5400 annually to the contractor to do important administrative work including client intakes moment and data entry. so this is for years contract. pending any questions

from icq or approval to modify this grant. >> thank you. any consequences from the commission? >> to be clear this is for administrators were not for meals? >> this is actually a home delivered grocery program and food outreach. so it's food bank dropping off the food bags at the site. the provider of this grant actually distributes the bags to eligible clients. so the modification of this grant will be able to capture the client information to have the staff being able to do the assessment and enrollment and put data in our system. >> so it's an administrative >> administrator. >> thank you. any other comets or questions? any comets or questions for the public? earwig all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item cc requesting

opposition to modify the grant with community living campaign for provision of food pantry and home delivered grocery for the period july 1, 2014 through june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of $66,039 less than 10% contingency revised total grant amount not to exceed four and 22,006 or $50. is that correct is a july 1, 2014? >> correct. >> it is, okay. motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> 80. sarah >> community living campaign food pantry on delivered grocery program actually is a three-year contract starting 2014 and this is the last fiscal year for this contract. so we be at that fund it will enable dos to add additional 2000 at fax into her store the service level. also be able to expand the program to a weekly

on delivered grocery delivery. right now there are deliver biweekly. so the back funds also help the agency to fill a shortfall in the budget amount existing for their existing services. pending four questions i will seek your approval to modify this grant. >> thank you. any, so questions of the commission? any comments or questions- >> yes. because that program is in my community. seniors do appreciate the home delivered meals. they put them in the basket and their volunteers to put them together. then they deliver them to the homes good so it's really very much needed and they are very vocal when the quality is not good. so i approve. >>[laughing] >> thank you. again, i will

call the question is did i ask for public comment? is there any? hearing none, all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion passes >>[gavel] >> item dd requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement golden gate senior services or the provision of food pantry and home delivered grocery during the period of july 1, 2016 through june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of 153,003 and $60 plus a 10% contingency revised total grant amount not to exceed 237,009 or $66. motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. sarah >>: gate senior services home delivered grocery and food pantry program actually one year expansion. we have 416-17 in having resented and proved

in this commission meeting and the ad back recommendation is to supported by the district supervisor specifically for district 1 for security to improve and to outreach the needs. the food pantry-fiscally in this monthly grant this to peace. there's a food pantry piece and there's a home delivered grocery. the food pantry program is a target eligible ambulatory seniors and adults with disabilities who can pick up weekly supplemental foods. the home delivered grocery program serves low income and frail in unable to access healthy food choices and unable to come to the pantry site. so for this ad back funds we are allowing golden gate senior services to expand their program and to serve additional

seniors and adults with disabilities. be able to add additional service scope for volunteers and recruitment and development. as we know volunteers have been a critical important piece in this program. for the in the presented budget you can also see that there is a 138,000 actually goes to the subcontractor,, richmond district neighborhood center who actually operated a home delivered grocery program and food pantry program. so with this additional ad back actually for the home delivered grocery we will be able to increase from 3500 250 5200 bags. for the new pantry bags we will be able to add in around 17,000 bags distribution to the eligible target

populations. so pending your questions i seek your approval to modify this grant. >> thank you good any comets or questions from the commission? and he comes of questions from the public? hearing none, all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item ee. requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with san francisco marin the food bank for the provision of food pantry program are in the period of july 1, 2012 through june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of 589,007 or two dollars for revised total grant of $1.2 million less a trend 10% contingency for revised total grant amount not to exceed $1.3 million. what a motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> thank you. sarah

>> san francisco marin food bank pantry program as it provides food bags to the above mentioned home delivery rose 3 programs. and other partners. also, with this ad back expansion we will be will to serve additional clients. you can see the program actually increased a lot increased a lot increased a lotabout roadcrew a lot. so the program actually was calledbrownback program but it was a five-year contract and this year is actually the last year. so we only ask to modify this year. the ad back funds will enable us to add additional 82,000 food bags to restore the service level 215-16 and also significantly expand our services to meet the growing needs to the target population which are seniors and adults with disabilities. the contractor is able to

expand the participating pantry sites to up to 21 sites and we were able to see that across the town and basically every district will at least have one pantry site that we can reach our target population and will be easier accessible to our target population. so the revised above budget in front of you will include both pantry food bags and home delivered grocery food bags. pending your questions, i will seek your approval to modify this grant. >> thank you. any come to questions of the commission? comments or questions of the public? hearing none, all those in favor say, aye

>>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> item ff requesting authorization to modify the grant agreement with the san francisco marine food bank for the provision of home delivered groceries during the period of july 1, 2012 through june 30, 2017 in the addition amount of one or $43,000 to revised total of $612,000 plus a 10% contingency for revised total grant amount not to exceed $673,000. motion to discuss? >> moved and seconded. >> san francisco marine food bank partnership with home delivered meals providers to deliver those bags this grant is actually five years of agreement and until the end of this fiscal year again this is the last piece and the ad that will enable dos to add an additional 11,000 bags to restore the services up to the 15-16 service level and enabled to expand the services to include one additional

undeliverable deal partner and to meet the growing needs in our community. the budget presented in front of you actually shows there is around 120,000 it is a pass through to the home delivered meal providers who deliver those bags. you see it is both the food cost, the food bag cost and the past through with the partners. so pending any questions my secure approval to modify this grant. >> thank you. and he comes of questions? >> on this last food preparation. i just have a comment because i been attending meetings regarding emergency preparedness, earthquake and what have you. i just want to the nutrition people to think about that because they expect that san

francisco a lot of elderly will be affected. so not only the people who are not getting deals here but we may have an additional people who have their own separation of doing their own meal. so we might want to think of that. the library is on board with looking at earthquake and recreation and parks. i think what they are saying is that the population of the elderly and the handicapped particularly, the elderly will be affected in san francisco. so i just want you to think about that >> thank you. that's a very good point >> for looking up preparation what were doing about that. >> right. that's a good point. the cities already in conversations with home delivered meal providers and congregate meal providers around emergency preparedness and has been for actually many years.

so we have been talking and thinking about that and planning for that. >> okay. >> okay, thank you >> any other comments or questions commissioners? any, so questions of the public? hearing none, all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries. >>[gavel] >> just an observation a suggestion i don't know if it's possible but at least 10 of these contact one of occasions for less than $25,000. couldn't put on a consent agenda? >> again this is john-ages 800 this answer a lot of debate between program and contacts whether we put on the consent agenda where we show it individual. this represents a whole set of ad backs and where distributing the funds that were we sought needs trying to meet the needs of the population in terms of delivered foods and congregate meals. though the question really was, in terms of

transparency and showing the public as was the commission we are we are distributing the funds and how much, to put it all on the agenda were to section off a part the 10 items into do it as consent, depending on the preference of this commission we can do it either way. in the future good enough to be good for us to know how you want to proceed with that. >> thank you. it's up to the chairman but my suggestion would we have this many contracts as many as we can put on the consent agenda is transparent and of any commissioners have questions they can raise and it would expedite the process. just a suggestion >> yes. the only thing all of the reports,, i know we just was just so much. so we don't want to do this too often to our advisory council and all the other committees that want to report. so i think it would be a wise to put this >> i would say myself on a

contract that was kind of pushing to have the information more out there. what program adjusted was to actually identify the items in the general memo that you received so you know these are items included but not to have them as separate agenda items that we can do that in the future. >> i would say that i am fine with that for most noncontroversial or very standard low-budget increase. the place where i would call exception of things like this to mosey centerlines negotiation where i think it's important for us to expose those fax in the public forum just because there's a contract for at least that's under negotiation apparently is unsettled. we are awarding money in at this patient will be. it's a little bit important for that to be publicly exposed. >> okay. >> thank you. >> final item, gg review and approval of revision 1 to the

2016-17 dda area plan budget. martha peterson present in. >> good morning executive director mcspadden president james and commission. my name is martha peterson i work with the human services agency budget unit them here before you this moment last for your review and approval for vision number one to the fiscal year 16-17 area plan budget. the net effect of these changes from the base plan budget this year six and-17 is an increase of 238,000 in the area plan budget for new total of $5,000,506,000 . i will of this total 150,000 or six and 46 is from reallocated or increase allocation from the federal government. additional one-time state funding of $66,593

specifically for the home delivered meals program and $21,309 from additional state funds for the state health facilities penalties account. attached to the commission memo details the area plan fluctuations in federal and state funding by title and dos program staff recommended actions. the program defendant include support services congregate a home delivered nutrition disease prevention family caregiver ombudsman and elder abuse prevention as well as administration funding for these programs. the local support is not included. an earlier version of this commission memo included an incorrect total for the ombudsman program. provides annual contract total is four and $76,000 when it $36. 621% of this increase in the area plan funding is a spike in the nutrition program with a total of 46,300 in the congregate meals program and $99,000 for the home delivered meals program. these one-time funds

were included with the app back dollars overallocated earlier today. which with approval of this item staff will make the appropriate contract modifications please, let me know if you have questions. >> thank you. any constant questions from the commission? >> yes. on the combustion state health citation account. what is that about? >> those funds are actually, they are collected as a result of state and federal civil penalties imposed against health facilities for noncompliance with state and federal laws and those funds are broken out into a federal account and a state account. so when the state funds-when the state receives those funds they allocate those according to the

and allocation limits abided by all of the counties within the states. so that we allocation of those funds back to the county. >> okay. >> thank you. any other comments or questions from the commission?, took questions from the public? hearing none, all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] opposed? the motion carries >>[gavel] >> we are at the end of the agenda. >> any general public comment. >> we tabled everything did not push anything to the end. >> do we want to continue? the things we tabled you want to do them now would you want to - >>[inaudible] [off mic] we will table them thank you everyone. >> we have an announcement? >> any announcements? >> any announcements? i apologize to the people i have asked to table your viewport

but we were afraid that we might not be held over and we want to make sure all these contracts get her good so i apologize. i have to buy some ice cream but anyway, thank you very much for your time. any public comment? no announcements can deny the motion to adjourn >> moved and seconded. >> it's been moved and second. we are to adjourn the meeting. all those in favor say, aye >>[chorus of ayes] the ayes have it. the motion carries. >>[gavel] >>[adjournment] >> >> >> light for our city and our

streets illuminating our ideas and values starting in 2016 the san francisco public utilities commission is xhoefl that light with new led with the did i audits for better light for streets and pedestrian and they're even better for this vitally lasting longer and consuming up to 50 percent less energy upgrading takes thirty minutes remove the old street light and repeat 18 thousand 5 hundred times while our street lights

will be improving the clean energy will remain the same every san francisco street light is powder by 100 percent godfathers hetch hetchy power in one simple word serious as day turnspresent. kim, here. reiskin, here. nuru, present. dr. sartipi is expected to be here. >> next item >> communication and not aware of any. >> okay. i don't think we have any from the board. >> item 4 is board of directs new and old business. >> okay-we have a new president elect, we know that. >> i would like to not know.

>> just in case nobody knew. next item >> item 5, executive director report. >> october 20 meeting approved reduction in lease rates under interstate 80 for the bus service facility . this will benefit golden gate transit which has similar storage lot under i 80 with lease rates set to exspire nucs month. the current lease is approximately $560 thousand per euros year. [inaudible] caltrans informed on the current fair

market value the cost of the lease will increase to $1.4 million per year after twnt percent discount. through the collaborative effort of golden gate district and ac translt and help with caltrans approved a lease term with 85 percent discount of fair market value reducing the lease to more than $85 percent discount of fair market value reducing the lease to more than a million to $25 thousand a year which is half of what golden gate is paying now. like to thank director harper who was at the meeting and thank director sartipi caltrans staff for helping come to this. that was a great result for us. our next steps would be enter into agreement with caltrans and ac transit and take back to ctc and bring back to board for approval. [inaudible] been a strong supporter of veterans

throughout the history the project. tomorrows is veterans day and felt it was important to honor the veterans working hard to development the translt center. from the trades in the field to professional staff 30 veterans are invited to sit torenl for exclusive lunch to thank them. like to thank [inaudible] for the construction erflt. we are looking forward to. last month we hoped to receive first dispersement of [inaudible] in late october. we have not been able to come to agreement on the loan amendment per taining to city financing. we are still hoping to receive dispersement later this munthd and talked to leadership in washington and agreed to give dispersement later this month without the amendment officially executed and city financing

closed, however, this provided we are able to come to terms with the agreement on the tournament. we have a call later this afternoon to finalize that so the hope is we receive dispersement later this month. i have sarah here and can answer any question regarding this and this concludes my report. >> on the ctc meeting, we can particularly thank chairman alvarado. he was absolutely masterful. he has a big-like 14 or 16 people and they are just-he just focused and focused and focused and focused and focused and he want going to let anyone continue the item for any reason, we will figure it out now. it was masterful. if any board member wants to see how you chair a meeting or at least that item, it was really good. everybody helped, but he did it and

directed it and where he wanted to go and it was unanimous after he finished. really good to watch. okay. next item. >> construction update. >> good morning, directors. for this months update we are back at full staff so ron and i will split duty and go 33 the usual items we hit on. so, regarding roont activity, this graph shows a lot of green, green means good. a lot of progress. pink is all activity in progress at this point. we have about 700 workers on site today, so we continue to bump up and continue to add as we get throughsoever the next quarter or two working day, swing, night shift saturday and occasion alsundays. this shows the rooftop restaurant starting down to the ground level. beale

street, the last train block con crete pour was done the past week so sthra lot of activity throughout the entire above grade portion and below grade there is tru-minds progress on the lower concourse and train block. the lower con course is heart and lungs. in the graphic a lot are going 3 d which mean thaiz are active or completed so very good progress going on on these sites. when you jump >> to the had bus ramp the graphic shows activity to the cable stay to climen teen through harrison. the graphics are continuing to change and update and lot of progress made. you can see in the picture in the western zone that shows that there is a lut of work on the bus deck. the water proofing and concrete makes to

either end chbt we started in the middle and worked out so now it is making to the far west end. the bottom left it shows where all the conduit, there is a amazing amount of conduit. if you have been out you know how much. on top the switch gear transformers continue to be installed. there are a lot of those out there as we get towards permanent power. the central focus is rooftop and water proofing happening up there. also the glass canopies over escalators are taking shape. one the skylights has a grade placed on it, a big milestone. a large oval has the framing on top in preparation for the glass that will go there. also the glass foor has a lot of panels in it. in the eastern

zone the light column is taking shape with the skylight. about to have its framing go over it as well too. the awning is making progress in the western and eastern zones as we proguess. in the grand hall the glass ceiling which is our critical path so a lot of emphasis on that area mptd on the bus ramp, our cable stay, the cables have been stressed, all 7 of them. it has been lifted up and a lot of the false work is gone already. it looks beautiful as you drive down howard street but have miscellaneous pieces to come into place to make it permanent soon. items on the bus ramp are progressing like the retaining wall squz deck work is happening as well. now, there is a lot of-we are in transition on the presentation and put all

the words up and won't reference them. they are later reading but the main focus is there is a lot of items that will be completed in the next period. completed, completed shows up through this especially in the central zone. we are in a transition period where we talk more about bus operations, getting that on board. the getting the building up and running. the commissioning of it and the retail cl element ron will talk more in on his operational readiness slide. this is a slide that is focusing on a lot of things that complete in the field as we move into 2017 getting ready fl day one. unfortunately had one lost time accident, it happened a month ago. a employee as he was-tripped on a tray underneath a porta john and

ripped thetenedens in both quadricepts so it wasn't technically a work related incident but on the job site so one lost time this year. we wish him well. he is a having surgery and hopefully see back on site shortly. the craft hours sur passed 2.7 million hours to date on the project so we continue to get very very large numbers with the crafts. >> while we are on that slide, i always thought that every lost time incident is recordable incident? >> we put it under the category so don't lose track of a lost time. it is sort of a fundamental-just the way we report it at this point. >> you had zero in lost time. >> we keep them separate. >> okay. >> with that i'll turn it over to ron for the rest the presentation. >> thanks dennis. always

appreciate the level of detail you share with us in the activity in the field and your correct, we are coming to the end of the big heavy construction and moving more into the grandural activity of mep and commissioning and all that. exciting place to be. with respect to budget, no real big surprises. it is kind of trending as expected. we spent expenditures went up about just under $28 million over the last month. pretty much expected in terms of finishic ing up in the next 14 months as expected. commitment wnt up about $28.4 million and in terms of forecast estimate of completion we went down $1.3 million reflective of the favorable bid we received on the network so going in a good direction

there. in terms of percent complete in terms of budget and contract time both tipped up about 1 percent, so no real surprises there. um, with respect to contingency cost, it was a light month predominantly on electrical i think about $100 thousand of contingency draw around electrical and this is where we reflect the plowing back into the program reserve, the 1.5 cost avoidance by having a favorable bid. there ask a number of things in the hopper as you see with the forecast continge aenss use. just under $3 million in discussion in terms of things and potential

contingency draws. not all of them will become real but gives a idea of magnitude of discussion going on. mubing mubing moving on to schedule, as dennis reported, last month we received a recovery schedule, so we are really seeing a stabilization of the schedule. if you recall over the months the previous months and current month report we bobbed around because of the issues we rp wrestling with. not a lot to say here. we stabilized reflective of the recovery schedule and no big changes over the last month. it is up to us to monitor and maintain the current recovery schedule to achieve the objective of being substantially complete by

12-22-17. even looking that grandural streams of activity they are all well stabilized. we have a bit more work on the roof park as i think dennis relaid in terms of recovery but all in all, ready for its inteneded use is on track for december of-december 22, twnt 2017. as -going back for a second i want to highlight the bus storage again reflects the normal slippage with ability to settle on the lease and mark mentioned, lease terms have been determined with the bus storage facilities, so we are looking towards focusing on that and getting that back on track. this slide here outlines we are dialing in

milestones to initiate to get correct with the bus storage facility in terms of getting the bid out to bid, getting ready. there is residual ark logical field work that needs to be done. we are looking at 14 to 18 month duration with a trajectory towards fall of twnt 2018 to have the bus storage facility in place and obviously that is post operations of the transit center, so there will be a interim period we deadhead or accommodations need to be done. >> quick question. is there a reason why we are waiting another three months to start the field work? >> i think we still need the bid. the drawings are done, i think it- >> it looks like the work is starting observe the contract

award. is this happening outside the contract? >> ark logical work? >> right. >> we already [inaudible] our initant is start in january. there is the areas used for parking lot now so need to work with caltrans on entering the area and need to terminate the lease or figure whether we can do some of that work and remain as a parking lot use. >> okay. anything we can do to- >> absolutely. >> the time from the transit scepter opens and bus facility. >> that is intent. >> why didn't dee the bidding period earlier? we didn't need the lease agreed before the bids go ow so could have done that earlier, right sph >> yeah, receiving bids there is a timeframe that they hold

true. there was a risk there. >> we didn't have to advertise until there was a commitment from ac transit to fund the lease and ac trandst wouldn't fund the lease without the lease terms. ac transit indicated they will not be able to fund the lease based on the initial copative agreement- >> the 85 percent is totally unaffordable. >> yes. we have to wait for that, so now that we have that resolved-- >> still would have been--you can go out. not all ac transit's fault. that's my job. [laughter] >> we try to be strategic and preload what we could. that is how it played out but now that the lease is just about in place in

terms of being official, we need to pick up the pace and put focus on that stream of activity as well. >> i like to ask a question. i was going wait but since we are on the slide, ron you and your team have done a great job on budget and schedule. if i understand i think probably the biggest risk from a financial standpoint is bus storage facilities since we haven't bid it yet? there is potential for bid bust. is that my seeing this correctly from a numbers standpoint because this piece the project hasn't been bid yes, there is potential for the numbers not to hit what we are estimating? >> yeah, as i say we can get hit by any number of comments out there. we just need to manage to where we are going and- >> this is the largest item missing out there to make sure

you hit your forecast. >> yeah >> appreciate that. >> good point. lost site for a while focused on the transitsenter but there is a big chink in there. >> to manage the risk there will be a major outreach because we can manage the risk. >> until you go the number you dont know the number. >> moving forward with challenges and we have normalized thinks out there so the challenges are the big threat challenges are quite deminshed from previous months. again, we always have to wrestle with the schedule and as i mentioned recovery schedule in place. we continue a strategic overtime

-elements in the floor. the trazal floor has a lot of medal dividers that are design jz laid out in the field. devised a manner in which to law them out in a modular fashion and get a running start on that and that is just one element in our strategy that decompressed the concentration of activity out in the grand hall, which was for a long time the critical path that we have been focused on. so, a lot of thinking along those lines.

training. we started biweekly meetings with ac transit and other transit providers. i think we are starting

to get dialogue and traction along looking at what their expectations are when they are arrive in terms of training, it provisions, layout of what minor tenant improvement that may happen along those lines. so, as dennis mentioned, i think this presentation will demensh on the heavy construction piece and expand a bit on monitoring or informing on what our thoughts and strategies are insureing operational readiness. i developed about 4 our 5 slides for next months to kind of demonstrate our line of thinking and some of the things we initiated with the transit operators how to tackle thal that challenge. >> on that issue, i r you working closely with ac tenant

impruchb provement? i understand equipment and furniture, yeah but in terms of the wiring and all the stuff-that will be all be done? >> exactly. they may populate it racks with their equipment so need to tease that out. relating to ac transit there isn't tenant improvement there is a prefabicated supervisors office to generate drawings. the ti work is related to golden gate transit and one other gray hound. it is fairly minor. i think the most of it is gray hound and golden gate in terms of the second floor build' out for their space. it is

relatively minor but needs to be teased out and advanced and ready to get a running start with the master lease when they come on board. trying to get them as soon as possible, looks like early next year, there is not to get too far ahead in terms of the slides i'm developing, but there are three streams of activity on operational readiness. getting the transit agencies prepared, working with the master lease and others how to operate the building, stationary engineer and housekeeping and security and third stream is focused on retail, leasing, on-boarding and ti work associated with that. those are the streams of thoughts and trajectories we are developing to advance through the next year on being operationally ready. >> i know that there is a lot

of phase two impact on what i think was high-speed rail announcement a couple weeks ago they will put in 800 foot train instead of 1400 feet or 1200 feet? we were built out for a much longer train. >> 600 or 400 meters right? >> at the moment they operate 400 meeting long trains. >> 400 meters? >> nilthsly initially they start with 200, half a train. 200 meters long and can fit them in easily. they have not given up on the idea of the longer trains, it is only the initial start up. >> the announcement was every other station, not ours.

>> what was the length, 200 meters? >> yeah. >> it was 400 and now 200 meters? >> i don't know how it is supposed to work, it every other station can only support a 800 foot train, what is the likelihood they will run 1200 foot trains or whatever it is in san francisco? >> i think you are right, but they won't admit to if at this point. >> [laughter] >> they are negotiating in los angeles. >> >> i they look at the transit center and seeing capacity whether they can store trains there or not. we need to have more discussions with them before we- >> that's why we pay him the big bucks >> it will be a long day. >> i just bring it up now. we look at mitigation strategies and i

don't know that there might be something even at this stage in terms of what we are building or finishing we can say my gosh if we 800 foot trains lets not get carried away at the end. >> we haven't. we haven't built a extension. the end is beale street, not main. that is the next stage. it in the environmental agreement. >> even within the building we have much more than we need on a 800 train. >> we have a little more. cal train committed to 8 car trains. they are going to 6 right now and it wont be long before they get to 8. >> cal trains, how long is a 8 car cal train? >> i dont remember the exact number. it is a lot-[inaudible]

theprint stations. >> i see >> they already-it is- >> it will be a while- >> it will take 10 years or so, unless-if there is a big push on ridership, you can always put trains in, you just use different parts of the train with the stations. >> yeah. >> it is done all over. >> okay, just wondered how we were thinking about that and glad to hear we are. >> we are not building anything at this point beyond what we originally designed. >> the big empty box downstairs is defined >> that is how you get a impression of how big that building is because nothing in the way. stand there while the train platform would be and looks like the curvature of the earth. you have can hear the trains coming. >> [laughter] >> that concludes my part. thank you all. >> ready for next item?

>> yes, police. >> #50i89m item 7 is citizen advisory update but understand [inaudible] there is nothing to report. with that we can move to item 8. public comment, opportunity for members to address on matters notd on todays calendar and have jim patrick here with us. >> morning directors. jim patrick, patrick and company in san francisco. i'm concern about the politics the opening of the transbay terminal when the buses complete and operational and may want to think about those magic dates. are the same date or different? you are going to have a closed meeting with three potential bidders for the master lease. i suggest several things need to be considered. number 1, the master lee will have to

make maybe 20 or 25 leases as he does his job. can we package those leases toort together such that we have a streamlined building permit process in the city? they are a sister agency after all i make that work faster. can we provide financial incentives? we ask the plumber to work over time or hvac, can we provide financial incentives to the lease ee to be done and operational as specific date we think is right? not sure we are thinking about those things. notion is we pay over time for this, maybe we can take some of that money and get those guys fully operational. also, i think the goal should be up and operating and fully staffed in terminal on such and such date. maybe it isn't the same as a bus operational date, in which case we need to publicly

say this is what the strategy is because now if the bus runs, everything runs. i think that is am mental place where people are. is that correct? as i look at this play out, i don't think it is correct. thank you. >> that concludes members of the public that wanted to kraesds and can move into consent calendar. >> yes, please. >> all matters are considered to be routine acted on by a single vote, no separate discussion unless member of board or public request and not received indication a member of the board or public have items severed. call your item. >> motion for approval consent calendar? >> so moved. >> seconded by the supervisors. any objections? seeing none- >> calendar is approved. thank you. >> item 10, authorizing the

executive drether to execute agreement for state advocacy service for 2 years for $216 thousand with an option to extend the agreement for up to 4 one year terms nchlt . >> we have two items related to advocacy services in dx dc and sacramento. the existing state contracts expired july 31 so engaged in a rfp process and the process is described in the staff and results are what we recommend today. for this item for state services and also for the federal item, we saw a opportunity for some significant cost savings because prior to this going back to 2010, we always had two contracts, two contracts in dc and two

contracts in sack sacramento and as we go from phase 1 to phase 2 we believe we can have the representation that we need on the ground while continuing with one contract in sacramento and for the next item just one contract in dc. there are a number of major funding streams in the phase two funding plan that will require both state and federal approvals in the coming years, but in terms of the state contract, we believe the firm we are recommending townsend public affairs has the appropriate experience to provide the representation we need. they have extensive experience with the funding streams we will be pursuing and the agencies that will be implementing those funding streams. um, we did following the presentation in june where

we walked through our phase two funding plan with the board, engage in a peer review process. we had gotten our initial revenue projections that were used to inform our phase two funding plan from sperry capital which is a financial firm we worked with a number of years. we engaged a ferment called ross financial to engage in a peer review of the assumption and methodology that is used putting the reb new projections together. we just completed the review and the results were quite positive and afirmed the reasonableness and validity of assumptions and methodology sperry used to put those projections together so from our perspective the task at hand shifts to implementing all of those funding streams. in addition we want to make sure we are prepared for new opportunities that appear to be on

the horizon and believe that is potentially true in both sacramento and dc in termoffs sacramento, there are ongoing discussions about a new transportation funding pack age and this could potentially be one time funding like things that we have seen in the past, prop 1 b and so forth so want to be prepared to take advantage of the opportunities if they arise to augment what we already have in our current phase two funding plan. but again, there are elements of the existing plan that will require state and federal approvals going forward. commitments made in planning bay area related to things like future bridge tolls and high-speed rail funding and passenger charges we will look at. the other thing i wanted to mention, when we had our first meeting of the

new cost review committee in august, there was questions that came up about the nature of the interaction between our lobbyist and city's lob i byist. i reached out the the mayor's office and walked through how we approach the service squz walking through in the staff reports you see today and how we intened to move forward. got good feedback, concurrence with the approach we are repding recommending and had a good conversation looking for more opportunities in the fuch frr collaboration and coordination on areas of mutual interest, shared priorities. i know that in terms of the state services, the firm we are recommending townsend public affairs have a good and longstanding relationship with [inaudible] which is the city works with. a similar situation for the dc contract. they welcome the opportunity to have the

increased collaboration and that can be as formal or informal as the city would like. we could do more regularly scheduled meetings or a as needed basis. i do have with us christopher townsend and nick low dulukea and alex gibs from townsend public affair squz happy >> student answer any questions you have as would i. thank you. >> questions? i sort of have- my problem with this and i don't know if-didn't know the mayor 's office want in full agreement and this is something they wanted but always had the issue that really the city of san francisco should have a lot to say about the transportation projects and what is pushed and when and that include us but that is just my feeling. i did want to

start crossing swords with the satey because the city has a lot of transportation infrastructure it is trying to do and on this one if we are going on the basis of the alignment they haven't figured out yet or not, i just wanted to make sure that that's not happening. if you say that is fine, that's a little bit of relief in that respect- >> we reached out to them specifically in response to that question coming up at the cost review committee in august. the other thing i would say about the rab is regardless of the outcome of the study we need to put the elements of the funding plan in place to move forward with which ever alignment goes forward. >> i'm still not sure-my preference and expressed a number of times is take whatever money we have and giveren supervisor peskin and ctc, san francisco ctc's

reluctance at least to give the $6 million, i want to be sure we are husbanding the money in the right way and we are not stretching out. to me lobbyist are something you hire once you know exactly where you are going and doing and i'm not that comfortable that we do at this opponent. point. i dont know what to tell them? keep a eye out for the generalties coming out of sth state? >> our apreach is see a stimulus or funding package in sacramento come up and washington dc. through the contracts we are able to capture $400 million that wnt to phase 1. >> how do you capture them now? what do you use to capture the money?

>> we have approved environmental document and funding plan that we could use in order to secure funding. if the alignment happens to change later the money stays with the project. the money doesn't disappear. so, why not- >> so we use an environmental document approved to get money if the alignment were changed and it is amended we keep the money? >> it comes with the project. >> vice chair. >> my question, is this something that can wait a little so that we can really iron out things we are trying to figure relating to dtx and funding opportunity we need? >> well, the reason i see urgency at the federal level is that we are poised to enter the new starts pipeline and continue to be identified as a regional priority. we

have funding identified for the preliminary engineering and design work happening in the first phase of the new starts process which is process justification. we are anxious to begin the process and also looking at federal loan programs that will help us take fund that flow in the out years beyond construction of phase 2, particularly things like the redevelopment area tax increment that need to be captured and brought forward to years of construction. going through a process like the riff program, which is one of the key loan programs we are looking at for phase 2, it is multiyear process to get through the riff application process. so, there is some urgency related to continuing to move forward with locking in those funding streams. and, it is i think a unknown if a transportation spending package is approved in sacramento when those deadlines would occur and how quickly we

would need to move. >> my recommendation would be to delay this for a little bit. >> my position is little different in the sense that we are just one agency of money many across the country in the federal level and state trying to compete for funding. as we all know there isn't enough to go around and as you alluded there is a changing administration coming that we need to keep a eye on whether they make a commitment to invest in infrastructure or change the rule jz suspect there will be changes in rules at the very least. unless we are willing to be in sacramento and washington dc and have our hands on the pulse of what is changing, we better have resources to help us to at least stay in line at the

very minimum and hopefully get ahead of the game and be ready for when those rules change andfunding becomes available because this takes a long time. we have seen sacramento what two years of extraordinary sessions on infor structure investment and haven't come up with anything yet and hopefully in the next year because it won't get any better by maintaining the status quo. i look upon of giving the magnitude what we need and what we need to stay in line and keep the hands on the pulse of what is coming, this is a wise investment. otherwise we have the potential of losing our place in time and trying to play catch up which is never a good place to be when you seek federal or state funds for transportation and infrastructure. >> there is a lot of work lobbyist do relating to new

funding streams that we are seeking. there were changes that needed to be made to tiffia loan and approval in sacramento needed by state department of finance to move forward with bridge loan. it afs lot of work and meeting with legislative and agency staff and keeping them informed. as everyone knows we had cost increase with phase 1 and had to keep our delegations in dc and sacramento updated and i don't think any of you heard concerns about that because we did a lot of work to make sure they understood what was happening and why it was happening and how to address it and how to proceed with city, mtc and other financing. >> i guess that's why we have a $9 thousand month cost on this thing. we are doing more than just standing in line i presume. okay, sorry.

>> i guess i would largely concur with director gee. i think if you look at the history of other projects in the region, i'm sure it was the case with the central subway, but pre-dates me before the final alignment was chosen the city's lobbyist were at work getting the central subway in line and keeping them there. orignomy there was talk coming up third and kearny and on fourth and stockton not sure i concur we need the scope drilled down before state and federal funding and policy. cal train i know had their federal lobbyist engaged in working before the core capacity grant program existed and because they had some presence in dc as soon as the federal government created that core capacity program they were able

to be one of the first in line and that will probably bring a couple hundred million dollars of federal funds to the region. not sure waiting is helpful to our project. there are some things that are maybe imminently upcoming in the extraordinary session that they are potentially will be some proposed legislation brought forward by the chairs of the senate and assembly transportation committees within the next month and while the prospects for passage may not be grite, we want to make sure our voice from our agencies and this agency are at the table for that discussion. likewise, that transition is underway at the federal level and as i understand the person they brought in to lead the transition with regards to transportation is-seems that would lean towards support for programs like the riff

that are within the new i think the build america transportation-- >> build america bureau. >> build america burey. bureau. i can see a lot of shift moving towards those programs and will be redefined and want to make sure we have a voice so we don't get redefined out of eligibility for them. i think continued voice for this billion dollar program at the state and federal level is pretty important both for funding and for policy reasons. >> supervisors? >> this is not the item that i had concernwise. i have certains with the next item. >> looks like we are out voted. [laughter] >> i move to approval. >> alright. >> is there a second? approval and second. any discussion?

>> no members of public wanting to address you on the item. >> okay. take the roll. >> director gee, aye. kim, aye. reiskin, aye. nuru, aye. harper, aye. 5 aye, item 10 is approved. >> just on the side and this i like our attorney to look at. this contract is embarrassing to me. i mean our poor folks out in sacramento have to promise the preservation treated containing arsenic not used mpt i like to find out if we can talk to had city and find out we can have something that is a little-food services waste requirements. it is nice to have something that has less than 62 sections in it for getting some lobbying service squz

other things. i know the city's got its things but if you are not building a staircase, preservation wood requirements have nothing to do with the requirement. as does i say about 15 other things like that and maybe we should look at it and make sure that we are not handing out contracts that are silly in their scope. it is just for me a matter of pride, just i draft contracts sus sinktly and if we do that and still get city's yes, fine, it would be nice. okay. next item, please. >> item 11, authorizing the executive director to execute amendment to extend agreement for federal advocacy service for carpy and clay for 1 year additional compensation for $155, 500. >> this is federal extension of federal contract for one year

and [inaudible] >> the federal contact we have one more one year option to extend and what we are recommending moving forward with carpy and clay which is a existing firm. >> supervisor you want to start out here? >> i think we worked something out that i think that there is a lot of uncertainty about the future of federal funding and like more time to think about what our role in washington dc is. i do feel comfortable with three month extension but at this time wouldn't feel comfortable with a full year. in lieu of my original proposal which is continue the item for a month i feel comfortable move frgward with three month extension. >> three months. comments on that? >> i'll second it. >> motion and a second. director gree. >> director kim, i understand. at the end othf three months what we

would look to either do something different or extend for another three month just for a clarity standpoint? >> i wanted to continue for a month to discuss what our goals are and get a better landscape of what federal funding will look like particularly to city's like san francisco that are sanctuary cities given the president comments about the first 100 day goals so want to make sure we are wisely investing our resources. this is a unfortunate statement not a hopeful statement but i think this deserves further discussion about what we plan on accomplishing in washington dc. that being said, my understanding is we need to do work on existing funding as mr. bulay mentioned with our tiffia loan so understand those currents needs existing funding so supportive of three months. i think we deserve discussion perhaps next

board meeting about what we think what the landscape will look like. >> thank you for that clarification. >> very up in the air. okay, would you call the roll >> no members wanting >> student address on the e item. taking roll to approve the item for three months. director gee, >> we need to vote on the motion first? >> i was going combine it. we have a first and a second to take the amendment three months amendment. all in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? no members opposed wanting to address you on the amended amendment. is there a motion to approve? >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> roll call. >> all in favor aye. opposed?

item 11 is approved as extension of three months. item 12. approving of resolution of appreciation for principle engineer brian dykes. >> directors this is mixed emotion i report that brian decided to retire this year. he- >> as soon as we really needed him. say what brian contributes to us over the years. >> brian has been with the tpa since november twnt 07 and 52 years of experience as a licensed engineer and worked globalally and nationally. he works in south africa and europe and worked in the united states on projects in california and southern california and seismic reto fit caltrans after the loma pree eta earthquake.

i worked with brian with caltrans on the replacement for the sipress structure and met 10 years later, 15 years later. he also managed to [inaudible] sicily and milan italy by building the [inaudible] suspension bridge. a lot of experience and lot of help. brian graduated from empyreal college in london, 1964 and he is great knowledge base and advice and guidance so want to thank him for a life of services to the the world and us as well. thank you brian and if you have anyone--[applause] >> thank you. actually, my wish didn't come true from that point of view. we never built [inaudible] bridge. [inaudible] got in the way

and stopped. that's why i am here. my last 10 years would have been doing the seena bridge. now the last 9 years is there biggest project i worked on and been a real fun ride and thank everybody, the directors and also the staff , small staff and worked together well and made life great so 65 long and all most 75, it is time to quite down a little. i will be avaible if you need knowledge in the future but it is time to enjoy my time with my wife and do traveling. >> is that a promise? >> it is a promise. >> we can draft up a consulting agreement you will be on hand. >> that is understandable. i can make that type of a promise. i already discussed it with my wife. two partnerships. thank you very much. >> thank you, brian.

>> thank you, brian. >> thank you. >> no members wanting to address you but sure we have a motion. >> move for approval. >> second. >> gee, aye. kim, aye. reiskin,i rir . nuru, aye. harper, aye. itedm 12 is approved. at this time you are scheduled to go into closed session. not received a indication the member of the public want to address on the items listed but have a opportunity to do so now or can clear the room. >> okay. go into closed session.

>> good evening, and welcome to the san francisco board of appeals. the presiding officer is commissioner honda and we are joined by our vice president commissioner fung and commissioner lazarus and commissioner swig we do expect commissioner bobby wilson to be here to my left is thomas owen and gary the local assistant executive director. we're joined by representatives from the city departments that have cases before this board. sitting at the table in the