SFGov

2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004

MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY AND

COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, HELD ON THE

6^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2007

The Commissioners of the Redevelopment Agency of the City and County of San Francisco met in a regular meeting at City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 416, in the City of San Francisco, California, at 4:00 p.m. on the 6^th day of February 2007, at the place and date duly established for holding of such a meeting.

President Richard H. Peterson Jr. called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Mr. Peterson welcomed members of the public and radio listening audience, and asked that all electronic devices including pagers and cellular telephones be turned off during the meeting. Mr. Peterson asked members of the public who wish to address the Commission to fill out speaker cards, and to state their names for the record, and to limit their remarks to three minutes. Mr. Peterson stated that the appropriate time for members of the public to address the Commission on matters not on the current Agenda, but related to general Agency business, would be Item 6 on the agenda. This portion of the Agenda is not intended for debate or discussion with the Commission or staff, and members of the public should simply state their business or matter they wish the Commission or staff to be aware of, and if they had questions, to follow-up with staff or Commissioners during a break or after adjournment. It is not appropriate for Commissioners to engage in a debate or respond on issues not properly set in a publicly-noticed meeting agenda.

1. RECOGNITION OF A QUORUM

The Commission Secretary announced the presence of a quorum with the following Commissioners present:

Richard H. Peterson Jr., President

Francee Covington, Vice-President

London Breed

Leroy King

Ramon E. Romero

Darshan Singh

Benny Y. Yee

Marcia Rosen, Executive Director and staff members were also present.

2. REPORT ON ACTIONS TAKEN AT PREVIOUS CLOSED SESSION MEETING, IF ANY. None.

3. MATTERS OF UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None.

4. MATTERS OF NEW BUSINESS:

CONSENT AGENDA

4 (a) Approval of Minutes: Meeting of January 16, 2007

4 (b) Resolution No. 7-2007, Authorizing an Amended and Restated Tax Increment Loan Agreement, an Amended and Restated Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS Loan Agreement and a First Amendment to the Hazardous Materials Loan Promissory Note with Mercy Housing XX, L.P., a California limited partnership, to allow for permanent funding from the State Housing and Community Development Department Multifamily Housing Program, all in conjunction with the development of 139 units of very low income senior rental housing at the Mission Creek Senior Community, 201 Berry Street; Mission Bay North Redevelopment Project Area

4 (c) Resolution No. 8-2007, Authorizing an Amended and Restated Ground Lease; an Amended and Restated Memorandum of Ground Lease and a lease rider with Mercy Housing XX, L.P., a California limited partnership, to allow for permanent funding from the State Housing and Community Development Department Multifamily Housing Program, all in conjunction with the development of 139 units of very low income senior rental housing at the Mission Creek Senior Community, 201 Berry Street; Mission Bay North Redevelopment Project Area

Commissioner Singh requested that items 4 (b) and (c) be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda.

President Peterson stated that the Commission would vote on Consent Agenda item 4 (a) and entertained a motion for adoption.

Commissioner Breed put forth a motion to adopt Consent Agenda item 4 (a). Commissioner Covington seconded the motion.

ADOPTION: IT WAS MOVED BY MS. BREED, SECONDED BY MS. COVINGTON, AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED THAT CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 4 (a) APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MEETING OF JANUARY 16, 2007, BE ADOPTED.

The Commission considered approval of items 4 (b) and (c).

Items 4 (b) and (c) were presented together and acted upon separately.

Presenters: Pam Sims (Agency staff)

Commissioner Singh asked how much financing had been provided to Mercy Housing and if it was a loan or a grant.

Ms. Pam Sims, Development Specialist, stated that the permanent financing for Mercy Housing was $7.5 million. Ms. Sims stated that the permanent financing for the project was a loan.

Commissioner Singh asked what the interest rate was on the loan.

Ms. Sims stated that the loan was a forgivable loan with a 3.5% interest rate.

Commissioner Singh stated that if the loan was a forgivable loan, then the financing was not a loan because if it was a loan, then it had to be paid back.

Ms. Sims stated that technically, it was a loan, which was a forgivable loan, and as long as they continued to serve low- and moderate-income seniors, the loan was forgivable.

Commissioner Romero put forth motions to adopt items 4 (b) and (c). Commissioner Breed seconded the motions.

ADOPTION: IT WAS MOVED BY MR. ROMERO, SECONDED BY MS. BREED, AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED THAT ITEM 4 (b) RESOLUTION NO. 7-2007, AUTHORIZING AN AMENDED AND RESTATED TAX INCREMENT LOAN AGREEMENT, AN AMENDED AND RESTATED HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS LOAN AGREEMENT AND A FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS LOAN PROMISSORY NOTE WITH MERCY HOUSING XX, L.P., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, TO ALLOW FOR PERMANENT FUNDING FROM THE STATE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MULTIFAMILY HOUSING PROGRAM, ALL IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF 139 UNITS OF VERY LOW INCOME SENIOR RENTAL HOUSING AT THE MISSION CREEK SENIOR COMMUNITY, 201 BERRY STREET; MISSION BAY NORTH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, BE ADOPTED.

ADOPTION: IT WAS MOVED BY MR. ROMERO, SECONDED BY MS. BREED, AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED THAT ITEM 4 (c) RESOLUTION NO. 8-2007, AUTHORIZING AN AMENDED AND RESTATED GROUND LEASE; AN AMENDED AND RESTATED MEMORANDUM OF GROUND LEASE AND A LEASE RIDER WITH MERCY HOUSING XX, L.P., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, TO ALLOW FOR PERMANENT FUNDING FROM THE STATE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MULTIFAMILY HOUSING PROGRAM, ALL IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF 139 UNITS OF VERY LOW INCOME SENIOR RENTAL HOUSING AT THE MISSION CREEK SENIOR COMMUNITY, 201 BERRY STREET; MISSION BAY NORTH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, BE ADOPTED.

REGULAR AGENDA

4 (d) Work plan to implement dust control measures on Parcel A to mitigate dust and naturally-occurring asbestos emissions generated from the Phase 1 development; Hunters Point Shipyard Redevelopment Project Area

Presenters: Nicole Franklin (Agency staff), Paul Menaker (Lennar), Amy

Brownell (DPH)

Commissioner Covington stated she was much encouraged by the update as she was very concerned about the pace of improvement in the monitoring and dust mitigation, but it sounded like finally, the process was moving in the right direction. Ms. Covington asked how many monitors were installed originally and how many more were installed.

Mr. Paul Menaker of Lennar, stated that there were five original monitors and four additional monitors had been installed for asbestos. In terms of dust, Lennar installed one additional dust monitor outside the site adjacent to the school and two additional dust monitors on the site.

Commissioner Covington requested verification that the data from the monitors was collected in the evenings.

Mr. Menaker stated that the data from the monitors was collected at the end of the work day, which were analyzed the next day and Lennar received the analysis the following day, so there was a 24-hour delay before they saw the results.

Mr. Jeff Austin of Lennar, stated that the monitoring period for asbestos and dust was 24 hours, and typically, the monitors were started at about 7:00 or 7:30 in the morning. The monitors under the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) program were run and operated by Lennar’s consultant, Mac Tech, and the community monitors were run and operated by Treadwell and Rollo and Acumen, under guidance from the City. They both showed up at the site around 6:30 or 7:00 in the morning, collect the filters, and submit them to the laboratory, and the results would be available at about 3:30 to 4:30 in the afternoon of the same day. For example, on Monday at 7:00 a.m. they would start monitoring and at 7:00 a.m. the following day on Tuesday, the filters would be collected, and later that Tuesday, they would have the results for Monday’s monitoring period.

Commissioner Covington requested verification that there was at least a 24-hour lag between the time Lennar received the results of the monitoring period that the construction work at site should cease, and the ability to actually order cessation of the work.

Commissioner Covington inquired about the people that the Young Community Developers (YCD) hired and asked how many additional people Lennar hired.

Mr. Menaker stated that about a month ago, Lennar hired two YCD employees to monitor the dust control, and since that time, they had hired an additional person to relieve people during lunch time in order to have full coverage. Mr. Menaker stated that the people they hired would be available on site during the weekend, and there would be one person working on the weekends to monitor any dust situation from wind currents or anything else and they would report it to Lennar, so that water trucks could be dispatched to the site.

Commissioner Covington stated she previously expressed concern about the misting systems and asked if they were operational during the weekends.

Mr. Austin stated that the misting systems were operational on Saturdays when there was work during Saturdays, but would not be operating if there were no work activities. Mr. Austin stated that Ms. Amy Brownell from the DPH mentioned that they were updating the dust control plan where a new section had been added, which was a response time required on days when no work was occurring such as on Sundays or holidays. Lennar had an obligation to respond within a particular timeframe, and that response included mobilizing a water truck to the site to water the site to keep the dust down. As Mr. Menaker mentioned, there would be one YCD employee at the site regardless of work status checking for any wind-generated dust on the site and immediate vicinity. Mr. Austin stated they had not yet reach agreement on the response time, but that their goal was to have a response time of around an hour and a half to two hours.

Mr. Menaker added that as they were finishing the grading work, much of the site was covered with a foot of suitable, non-serpentinite fill material on top of the graded areas, so that even after the grading work was completed, any dust generated would not be from serpentinite material, but from suitable fill material that had been used to cover the graded areas.

Commissioner Covington stated that the field inspection team and control measures described by Mr. Menaker sounded good and that she was happy to hear that, but that she wanted to know if Lennar anticipated any problems with the next phase of the installation of infrastructure.

Mr. Menaker stated that Lennar would maintain the same level of diligence that they had instituted during the first phase. Mr. Menaker stated there would be short-term trenching activities in order to install pipes and that as part of their grading contract was to do the over-excavation of the trenches ahead of time, so that they would not need to be on the site with major excavators to excavate the trenches.

Commissioner Covington stated that as much as possible, if Lennar could anticipate any future problems and address them immediately, she would greatly appreciate that.

Mr. Menaker stated they would continue their diligence and would do everything they could to address any future problems. Mr. Menaker stated that Ms. Nicole Franklin reminded him that the Article 31 controls in addition to the BAAQMD standards placed upon Lennar would continue on to the next phase of development with the same standards.

Commissioner Covington stated that her understanding was that the letter of the Article 31 statutes was being met, but that there were still problems.

Mr. Menaker stated that Lennar was in negotiations at the present time for a modification of Article 31 with drafts going back and forth, and that there would be a better defined Article 31 as the development moved forward.

Commissioner Covington asked if they had a timeframe upon which the negotiations to modify Article 31 would be completed.

Ms. Amy Brownell from the DPH, stated that they expected to complete all of the revisions at the end of next week.

Commissioner Covington stated that Ms. Brownell mentioned earlier that the DPH had added random inspections twice a day at the site and asked if the inspections would be at random times. Ms. Covington inquired about the health assessment protocol and requested verification that the State Health Department had opined that the biological, laboratory and environmental testing would not be suitable at this time.

Ms. Brownell stated that the random inspections would be at random times. Ms. Brownell stated that the State Department of Health’s opinion was that there were no biological, laboratory and radiological testing that would be suitable, and the draft protocol included interviewing parents, discussing the health symptoms, which was not a specific biological or radiological test. Ms. Brownell stated that an assessment could be done, but not an actual sampling of tissue.

Commissioner Covington asked when the assessments would be done.

Ms. Brownell stated they had sent the draft protocol to Dr. Muhammad and the agreement was that the doctors would work on the draft protocol and once everyone agreed, they would implement it, but Dr. Muhammad had only responded that he had received the DPH draft protocol, and he had not yet responded with anything specific whether they agreed with it or not.

Commissioner Covington stated that she knew that people were thinking that the Commission was going into a lot of detail about the issue, but that the Commission had spent a lot of time on these matters, both at the Commission and at ad hoc community meetings. Ms. Covington stated that she hoped the process would move forward without any more missteps.

Commissioner Romero thanked Commissioner Covington for her questions and stated that he appreciated the detail of her specific questions and concerns and how closely Commissioner Covington had monitored the situation from the Commission’s standpoint. Mr. Romero stated he wanted to thank everyone who had acted on the Commission’s concerns since the last Commission meeting, and that it was obvious that they had taken the Commission’s concerns seriously. Mr. Romero stated he listened very carefully to the presentation and the responses to Commissioner Covington’s questions and that he appreciated the level of intensity in addressing the community’s concerns. Mr. Romero stated this was exactly the kind of responsiveness that the Commission was looking for to address community relations in the area and hoped that would be maintained.

Commissioner Breed asked if Minister Muhammad was informed of the Commission meeting and if he was provided information about the work plan.

Ms. Rosen stated that Minister Muhammad was provided a copy of the memorandum for the work plan and was informed at the last meeting that the item would be heard early on the agenda.

Commissioner Breed stated that she was happy to hear that there were no additional problems since the last Commission meeting and that she was hoping things would continue in the same manner. Ms. Breed stated that she was looking forward to hearing from Minister Muhammad about whether or not he was completely satisfied with the dust control and other measures that were being implemented. Ms. Breed stated she wanted to thank the DPH for the work they had done and for being assertive in resolving the issues. Ms. Breed stated that the other matter that would continue to be of concern was the parents’ concerns around the health of their children from possible exposure. Ms. Breed stated that the informational memorandum did not provide details as to what type of testing or if there could be testing done for any health hazards. Ms. Breed stated that previous attempts to meet with the school and parents had not been successful, and although she appreciated the progress made to date, she was certain that the health issues would resurface, and that she was hoping that everyone would continue to be proactive, and that Ms. Brownell would continue to work with the school to try and schedule a meeting with the parents in order to ease their concerns.

Commissioner Yee stated that he also was glad to see the progress and responsiveness from Lennar and the DPH and that he appreciated their efforts. Mr. Yee inquired about the collection of the dust samples from the filters and asked if the dust material was toxic.

Ms. Brownell stated that there were two different types of monitoring, one was the dust particulate monitoring, which examined the air for dust, without analyzing chemical content, and then the asbestos air samples, which pumped the air through a filter and sent to the laboratory to identify asbestos fibers. Ms. Brownell stated that the only chemical substance that was being tested for was asbestos, and the dust was just to verify if it was there and exceeded certain thresholds.

Commissioner Yee stated that he noticed there were no school children, parents or Minister Muhammad at the Commission meeting and requested verification that they were made aware of the work plan that was being implemented to address the issue.

Ms. Rosen stated that the school and Minister Muhammad had been informed that the work plan was on the Commission’s agenda and were provided with all of the information. Ms. Rosen stated that the school’s doctor, Dr. Alim Muhammad, had also been contacted by Dr. Rajiv Bhatia of the DPH and there had been communications between the doctors. Ms. Rosen stated that the Commission was also provided an informational memorandum regarding a letter from a lawyer retained by the school about whether or not additional environmental review was necessary. Ms. Rosen stated she wanted to thank Dr. Katz, Dr. Bhatia and Ms. Brownell because the DPH had been very diligent in trying to stay in touch with the school not only pursuing their regulatory function, but also looking out for the health of the families at the school and trying to make their services available.

Commissioner Yee thanked Ms. Rosen and commended staff and the DPH for a job well done and to keep up the good work.

Commissioner Singh stated he did not see Minister Muhammad, his associates and the school children at the Commission meeting and asked if they were informed of the Commission meeting.

Ms. Rosen stated as she just responded, the school and Minister Muhammad were informed about the Commission meeting and they had contact with the DPH, and their lawyer had been in contact with her by correspondence and had received her response. Ms. Rosen stated that she believed they did have the opportunity to attend the Commission meeting, and staff was awaiting a response from the school as well as their doctor on the proposed health assessment protocol sent by the DPH.

Items 4 (e) and (f) were presented together and acted upon separately.

4 (e) Resolution No. 9-2007, Authorizing an Amended and Restated Tax Increment Loan Agreement with BRIDGE Tower, LLC, a California limited liability corporation, in an amount not to exceed $20,543,329, for a total aggregate amount not to exceed $29,508,183, for the development of 124 units of low- and moderate-income ownership units at 5600 Third Street; Bayview Hunters Point Redevelopment Project Area; Citywide Tax Increment Housing Program

4 (f) Resolution No. 10-2007, Public hearing authorizing a Disposition and Development Agreement with BRIDGE Tower, LLC, a California limited liability corporation, for the development of 124 units of low-income and moderate-income ownership units at 5600 Third Street; Bayview Hunters Point Redevelopment Project Area; Citywide Tax Increment Housing Program

Executive Director Rosen stated that there was an unavoidable delay on these matters and because this was a noticed public hearing, she would recommend calling for any public comment, and then a motion to continue the items to the next Commission meeting. Ms. Rosen stated that this was a project that the Agency was very much looking forward to and the Agency’s risk manager and BRIDGE were trying to resolve a technical matter regarding insurance.

Commissioner Singh put forth a motion to continue items 4 (e) and (f) to the Commission meeting of February 20, 2007. Commissioner Romero seconded the motion.

ADOPTION: IT WAS MOVED BY MR. SINGH, SECONDED BY MR. ROMERO, AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED THAT ITEMS 4 (e) RESOLUTION NO. 9-2007, AUTHORIZING AN AMENDED AND RESTATED TAX INCREMENT LOAN AGREEMENT WITH BRIDGE TOWER, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY CORPORATION, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $20,543,329, FOR A TOTAL AGGREGATE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $29,508,183, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 124 UNITS OF LOW- AND MODERATE-INCOME OWNERSHIP UNITS AT 5600 THIRD STREET; BAYVIEW HUNTERS POINT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA; CITYWIDE TAX INCREMENT HOUSING PROGRAM, AND 4 (f) RESOLUTION NO. 10-2007, AUTHORIZING A DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH BRIDGE TOWER, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY CORPORATION, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 124 UNITS OF LOW-INCOME AND MODERATE-INCOME OWNERSHIP UNITS AT 5600 THIRD STREET; BAYVIEW HUNTERS POINT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA; CITYWIDE TAX INCREMENT HOUSING PROGRAM, BE CONTINUED TO THE COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 20, 2007.

4 (g) Resolution No. 11-2007, Public hearing Authorizing a ground lease with 650 Eddy, L.P., a California limited partnership, for the property at 650 Eddy Street, Block 0740, Lot 45 (formerly Lots 11 and 12), in conjunction with the construction of 83 units of very low income rental housing; Citywide Tax Increment Housing Program

Presenters: Ann Romero (MOH staff)

Commissioner Breed put forth a motion to adopt item 4 (g). Commissioner Covington seconded the motion.

ADOPTION: IT WAS MOVED BY MS. BREED, SECONDED BY MS. COVINGTON, AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED THAT ITEM 4 (g) RESOLUTION NO. 11-2007, AUTHORIZING A GROUND LEASE WITH 650 EDDY, L.P., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, FOR THE PROPERTY AT 650 EDDY STREET, BLOCK 0740, LOT 45 (FORMERLY LOTS 11 AND 12), IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF 83 UNITS OF VERY LOW INCOME RENTAL HOUSING; CITYWIDE TAX INCREMENT HOUSING PROGRAM, BE ADOPTED.

4 (h) Resolution No. 12-2007, Approving a personal services contract with Robin Chiang & Company, a California corporation, in an amount not to exceed $72,000 to prepare a conceptual streetscape plan for a portion of the Bay Trail along Cargo Way; India Basin Industrial Park Redevelopment Project Area

Presenters: Lisa Zayas-Chien (Agency staff)

Commissioner Yee asked that the consultant team be introduced to the Commission.

Ms. Lisa Zayas-Chien of the Agency’s Planning Division, introduced the members of the Robin Chiang and Company consultant team: Robin Chiang and Huzefa Irfani from Robin Chiang and Company, Architects and Planners; Chi-Hsin Shao from CHS Traffic Engineering Consulting Group; and Cathy Merrill (who had not made it yet to the Commission meeting) from Merrill Morris Partners, Landscape Architects.

Commissioner Yee stated that he thought it was a good consultant team and put forth a motion to adopt item 4 (h). Commissioner Singh seconded the motion.

Commissioner Breed stated that she could not move forward with the item without expressing her concerns about the area even though the proposed contract was a small amount, because the area was a neglected area that was primarily used for industrial uses. Ms. Breed asked if people were being encouraged to ride their bicycles to work, how they would get off Cesar Chavez Boulevard onto Cargo Way and traverse the industrial areas from other parts of the City when all that was being proposed was the improvement of just a portion of the Cargo Way artery.

Ms. Zayas-Chien stated that one of the reasons for selecting the particular consultant team was its familiarity with recent work in the area, which would strengthen and speak to Commissioner Breed’s concerns. Ms. Zayas-Chien stated that KCA Engineers had been working with the Port of San Francisco and the City Attorney’s Office on different issues with Port property just north of the Cargo Way area and that she believed that Mr. Chi Hsin-Shao had worked on the Illinois Street Bridge adjacent to Third Street and Illinois Street (which had bicycle lanes on it), as well as Mr. Robin Chiang had worked on a project with the new bus facility and at the Islais Creek project. Ms. Zayas-Chien stated that the consultant team was selected so that they could immediately address the issues that Commissioner Breed had brought up to create the linkages to provide both pedestrian and bicycle access through the area.

Executive Director Rosen stated that Commissioner Breed’s questions also related to the broader issues of the area and staff saw the proposed contract to prepare a conceptual streetscape plan as a small piece in a much larger geography. Ms. Rosen stated that as the Commission knew, the Bayview Hunters Point Redevelopment Plan had community enhancements as one of its main goals, which included streetscape and traffic calming, pedestrian access and the Blue-Greenway Trail. Ms. Rosen stated that Mr. Tom Evans, the lead planner for the Agency, was also working on the larger planning issues for what was known as Area C of Bayview Hunters Point adjacent to the Cargo Way area, and may have additional remarks on similar planning efforts that were underway.

Mr. Tom Evans, Lead Planner for the Agency, stated that there were active planning efforts to enhance both the Bay Trail pedestrian access and bicycle access north on Illinois Street, which would be designated as a bicycle route all the way to Mission Bay, and there was actually a proposal for bicycle lanes to be striped to go all the way through the Central Waterfront area to Mission Bay where there was an extensive bicycle route already underway. Mr. Evans stated that the City’s Department of Public Works had planned to stripe the bicycle lanes, but that had been held up due to litigation on the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance. Mr. Evans stated that staff had done extensive planning for Area C around the Hunters Point Shipyard for multiple both recreational and commuter bicycle travel ways to wrap around all the way to Candlestick Point, and the proposed contract for a portion of the Bay Trail along Cargo Way was just a small link in a large plan to actually have a trail go all around the bay, and that the Association of Bay Area Government (ABAG) specifically came to the Agency for assistance in addressing one of the gaps in the Bay Trail system.

Commissioner Breed thanked Mr. Evans for the information and stated that she went to school at the University of California Davis and it was all about the bicycle lanes, and in San Francisco, especially in an industrial area such as the Cargo Way area, she was uncertain how this specific area would connect to the rest of the City. Ms. Breed stated that she was very familiar with the area, which had plenty of parking and there was now Muni light rail serving the area, so there were other transportation options and with the cold weather in San Francisco and the lack of significant jobs in the area other than the U.S. Post Office, she was a little uncertain about the future of the area.

Executive Director Rosen stated that two of the members of the consultant team had arrived at the meeting.

Ms. Zayas-Chien introduced Mr. Tom Radulovich from Livable City Planners as well as Mr. David Beaupre of the Port of San Francisco.

ADOPTION: IT WAS MOVED BY MR. YEE, SECONDED BY MR. SINGH, AND UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED THAT ITEM 4 (h) RESOLUTION NO. 12-2007, APPROVING A PERSONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH ROBIN CHIANG & COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $72,000 TO PREPARE A CONCEPTUAL STREETSCAPE PLAN FOR A PORTION OF THE BAY TRAIL ALONG CARGO WAY; INDIA BASIN INDUSTRIAL PARK REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, BE ADOPTED.

4 (i) Transition Planning for the Western Addition Project Area A-2

Presenters: Gaynell McCurn (Agency staff)

Speakers: Rev. Arnold Townsend, Ace Washington

Commissioner Breed stated she was happy to have the opportunity to discuss the Western Addition as it was becoming increasingly important, because of the upcoming redevelopment plan termination in January 2009. Ms. Breed stated she would like the reference on page 6 of the Western Addition A-2 Implementation Plan corrected, because it stated a ten-year period from 2000 to 2009, and that was obviously not a ten-year period. Ms. Breed also requested staff to keep the “Project & survey Areas Community Meetings” calendar up to date with the Western Addition Citizens’ Advisory Committee (CAC) meetings, particularly for March and April 2007, which were not included in the copies provided to the Commission.

Commissioner Breed stated that as far as she was concerned, the Agency was not doing a favor for the Western Addition area, and regardless of how much work and effort was done by the Agency, it would not change what had happened in the past and it would not make things better, because as far as she was concerned, the Japanese American and African American communities had been completely destroyed. Ms. Breed stated that as an Agency Commissioner, she felt obligated to do everything she could to provide the support for the community moving forward in order to hopefully, provide benefits to the particular communities. Ms. Breed stated she would like to see what the racial make-up was of the housing tenants in the Western Addition before the Agency began redevelopment and after, based upon the number of affordable and market-rate housing built. Ms. Breed stated that although staff reported that the Agency built more housing units than it tore down in Western Addition, it was important to note that housing could be replaced, but not people, and that she wanted to know what type of households lived in the housing units, including their racial make-up and income levels. Ms. Breed stated that Supervisor Mirkarimi had scheduled a hearing at the Board of Supervisors Land Use and Economic Development Committee on Monday February 12^th on the Agency’s Certificate of Preference Program, and that she agreed with Rev. Arnold Townsend’s comments that the Agency’s Certificate of Preference Program was a joke, because the program had been around for so long and that she did not think there had been significant outreach efforts to certificate holders, most of which were her grandmother’s age and were not fully aware of the program. Ms. Breed stated she would like to see information about how many certificate holders had participated in the Agency’s affordable housing program and how many were still holding certificates of preference.

Commissioner Breed stated she knew there were efforts to repair the damaged artwork on the Fillmore Bridge and to possibly relocate the artwork, but that she wanted to explore other options that could include potentially, another art component, including a mosaic component or some other appropriate artwork that was not easily vandalized, unlike the Mildred Howard artwork that had been installed. Ms. Breed stated she thought the artwork should be repaired and relocated to either the Muni substation parcel or within the Fillmore Heritage project and for the Agency to maintain it, but to also look into other public art options for the Fillmore Bridge like mosaic tiles, which would be easily cleaned and less likely to be vandalized, because they would provide such an abstract look of an artistic expression.

Commissioner Breed stated she knew that funds had been allocated in the current fiscal year budget for sidewalk repairs along Fillmore Street, because some sidewalks were lopsided and in disrepair. Ms. Breed stated that the maintenance of the parking area around Safeway and the property owned by Mr. Richard Zeto was really disgusting, and that it was disappointing that the Agency would make claims of great work and award contracts, but that the Agency would allow such a disgraceful situation to continue to happen. Ms. Breed stated that she frequented the area and recalled that when she complained previously about the upkeep of the area, she did notice that the area was being power-washed in the evenings, but that recently, she had not seen anyone cleaning the area. Ms. Breed stated she hoped that the Community Benefit District that had been established would continue to maintain and improve the maintenance of the area, because she patronized the businesses in the area and enjoyed the area, but that she was disgusted every time she saw the dirty sidewalks, and that the Agency should not allow the situation to continue.

Commissioner Breed stated she would like information in writing provided to her about the $1 million that was claimed to had been issued to the African American Art and Culture Complex formerly known as the Center for African and African American Arts and Culture.

Commissioner Breed stated that with all of the development projects that the Agency had done in the area, the Agency should think about the public housing developments right across the street from multi-million dollar, beautiful and well-done developments, because as a poor person living in the community, it was difficult to see these high-priced developments around you and not be able to avail of them. Ms. Breed stated that she brought up the issue because she wanted to let her fellow Commissioners know that as a person who was born and raised in the Western Addition, she wanted to purchase property at the Fillmore Heritage project and found out that she could not as an Agency Commissioner, and that this made her reevaluate whether or not it was more important to serve on the Agency Commission or to try and establish herself and to live the life she felt she deserved, like anyone who lived in the Western Addition. Ms. Breed stated she thought that the Agency should really think about how it developed its rules and regulations on the Commission, because she understood that Commissioners did not deserve to be treated any differently than the general public, and that Commissioners should of course recuse themselves from matters where they would have financial interest, but that she did not think it was right that Commissioners could be precluded from purchasing property like everyone else, whether the Agency was funding the development or not, and as long as Commissioners qualified and followed the rules, they should be able to.

Commissioner Breed requested a comprehensive report that provided an inventory of the housing and economic development, to be created by a dedicated staff person or consultant, and not an intern. Ms. Breed stated she was informed by members of the Western Addition CAC that an intern was working to compile information on the transition planning for the Western Addition in preparation for the expiration of the redevelopment plan. Ms. Breed stated that she planned, for the next budget cycle and staff should already be working on this, to make sure that there would be more time and effort as well as a designated staff person or consultant who would have the sole responsibility to inventory what had occurred in the Western Addition, to compile and prepare a very comprehensive report about the Agency’s activities and effects on the entire Western Addition area. Ms. Breed stated she wanted the report to be well done and not treated as a side project.

Commissioner Breed stated she knew that the Agency would be developing the Central Freeway parcel at Fulton and Gough Streets, adjacent to the Performing Arts parking garage where murals had been installed, and that she wanted to know if the Agency gave its approval for the installation of the murals, because they would be obscured by the development on the adjacent site.

Ms. Gaynell McCurn, Project Manager, stated that the murals would not be completely obscured, but that she did not know if the Agency gave its approval for the installation of the murals.

Commissioner Breed stated she wanted to make sure that people who were doing public art projects be notified in writing, of potential Agency development plans that may cause problems with the arts community, artists and the fine arts folks, because as both an Agency Commissioner and a supporter of the arts, she did not want to be involved in a controversy about obscuring public art displays with Agency development projects.

Executive Director Rosen stated that staff would find out about the history of the site, but that the Agency only recently owned the property, which was a part of the former Central Freeway, which was owned by the State and recently conveyed to the City, and the Agency would not have known of any development plans adjacent to the parking garage.

Commissioner Breed stated that an item regarding the development of the 1345 Turk Street project was listed on the Agency’s forward calendar for the February 20^th Commission meeting, but it did not identify who the developer was, and asked if staff would be making a recommendation to the Commission, because she knew that the CAC recommended a different developer than did the evaluation panel.

Ms. Rosen stated as the Commission knew, there was a competitive developer solicitation and the CAC also heard the matter at its last meeting, and the matter would be before the Commission to select a developer. Ms. Rosen stated that staff would not be making a recommendation to the Commission and would put all of the facts before the Commission for its consideration.

Commissioner Breed stated that the other matter she wanted to inquire about was the mini-park adjacent to the Muni substation parcel owned by the San Francisco Recreation and Parks Department, but that they did not do a very good job of taking care of the mini-park, and asked if there was any way for the Agency to acquire the mini-park property and to include it in the development opportunity for the Muni substation parcel, or perhaps look into options of developing the mini-park parcel.

Ms. Rosen stated that she would look into the matter, but that she understood that the mini-park was formerly Agency property that was deeded to the City’s Recreation and Parks Department, long before the Agency took ownership of the adjacent Muni substation property.

Commissioner Breed stated she believed that it would be a good idea to aggregate the adjoining parcels to have a major cultural use surrounded by the existing housing developments that may be of great benefit to the community, because the mini-park was clearly underutilized and not well taken care of.

Commissioner Breed stated that her final request was for the Commission to consider passing a resolution urging the Mayor to form a task force that would explore to take into consideration the African American population in San Francisco as an endangered species, and would also look into opportunities to develop and attract middle-class African Americans back to San Francisco, primarily based upon a lot of the damage that had been done in the past, specifically as a result of redevelopment activities. Ms. Breed stated she thought that the Commission should pass such a resolution and maybe have a workshop to discuss the matter. Ms. Breed stated that every time she attended public events and heard speeches by mayors and elected officials who always talked about San Francisco’s diversity and touted San Francisco as an inclusive city, she felt disturbed that what people did not know was that San Francisco’s makeup was changing considerably, and that she was really disappointed that a lot of middle class African Americans chose to live in the East Bay over living in San Francisco. Ms. Breed stated she thought that San Francisco was not only starting to lose middle class African Americans to other Bay Area cities, but with all of the problems that seem to plague some of the poor areas in San Francisco with a large population of African Americans, the City was losing people in so many other ways. Ms. Breed stated she thought this was a matter that the Agency should look into seriously, because of the ills of the Agency and the negative stigma upon the Agency, and that she believed this was the Commission that could change all that, just by looking into the facts and to determine if the suggested resolution was an appropriate step to take.

Commissioner Covington stated that the Western Addition was near and dear to her heart and that she wanted the Agency to do the most it could and the best it could by January 1, 2009. Ms. Covington stated that although some people may get tired of hearing about the history of the Western Addition and how the community was harmed and may suggest getting over that, the community would never get over and forget what had happened, and it may take 10 to 12 generations even before the community would stop talking, but that the community would never get over the destruction of the community. Ms. Covington stated the loss was not limited to the Western Addition, and the African American community, but also a loss to the City, State and the nation. Ms. Covington stated that as an Agency, she would like to see the Agency do as much as it could before January 1, 2009. Ms. Covington asked how many undeveloped parcels remained in the Western Addition Project Area.

Ms. McCurn stated that the following parcels remained undeveloped: Central Freeway Parcel C because staff was still negotiating with the developer, 1210 Scott Street, which was the property next to the Jewish Community High School of the Bay, 1345 Turk Street, and the Muni substation parcel.

Commissioner Covington stated she went on an extensive tour of the Western Addition Project Area a couple of weeks ago with Ms. McCurn, Executive Director Rosen and Commission Secretary Erwin Tanjuaquio, and that she was heartened by what she saw and that she wished there was a lot more of it. Ms. Covington stated they had a hard-hat tour of the Fillmore Heritage project and the views from the upper floors were spectacular, the units were large and the space for Yoshi’s looked as if it was going to be fabulous, and that she was happy that the Agency had the jazz center parking garage. Ms. Covington stated that for more than eight years, she served on the Japantown parking garage board of directors and she knew that a lot of revenue could be generated by parking garages, and asked how many parking stalls would be in the Fillmore Heritage parking garage and what the projected revenue was for the garage. Ms. Covington asked what would happen to the money generated from the garage.

Ms. McCurn stated there would be 111 parking stalls and she would have to get the information about the projected revenue from the garage.

Ms. Rosen stated staff would provide the projected revenue information to the Commission. Ms. Rosen stated that the CAC had taken a strong interest in the parking revenue issue and was discussing various proposals, and they had started to discuss a proposal whereby a percentage of the revenue would go, in perpetuity, to dedicated economic development and cultural enrichment of the lower Fillmore district, which would be administered in a public fashion, either by the Mayor’s Office of Community Development or potentially by the Community Benefits District and that had not yet been refined, but that there would be a dedicated revenue stream available to fund economic development and enhance the cultural district. Ms. Rosen stated she believed that the CAC would discuss the idea further and that it had discussed coordinating the idea with the Japantown garage, which had many more parking stalls, about 900 spaces, to be available to have shared valet parking and access to large events. Ms. Rosen stated she hoped to have more information for the Commission in about a month following the Cad’s deliberations.

Commissioner Covington asked if a board of directors would be formed for the Fillmore Heritage parking garage, and if so, when.

Ms. Rosen stated that what was under discussion at the present time was to expand the existing Japantown garage board of directors that would include Fillmore Jazz District representation and would be under a single management for the operations of both garages. Ms. Rosen stated she believed that the CAC wanted to discuss the proposal again in March, which would be brought back to the Commission thereafter.

Commissioner Covington stated that again, the Agency had to expedite some things because a lot of decisions had to be made, some entities had to be developed and established and if the jazz center was scheduled to open in eight months, the Agency needed to get moving with whatever the plans would be for the revenue stream that would go back to the community.

Ms. Rosen stated that staff was aware of the timelines, and that she thought the CAC had a proposal that addressed the public policy concerns that Commissioner Covington had raised, and staff was hopeful of getting to closure on the matter quickly.

Commissioner Covington stated that in visiting the Muni substation, she thought that was a tremendous development opportunity and that she would like the Agency to do its best thinking about what could happen so that it could happen under the aegis of the Agency before the Mayor’s Office of Community Development stepped in. Ms. Covington stated the Muni substation was a gorgeous building and that there were so many opportunities that could come to fruition and that she agreed with Commissioner Breed that if the adjacent mini-park could be deeded back to the Agency and incorporated in the Muni substation plans, and become a very valuable entity for the community.

Commissioner Covington referred to Rev. Arnold Townsend’s testimony about the certificate holders, and that she thought the certificates of preferences could be inherited and were being inherited.

Ms. Rosen stated that the certificates themselves were not a property interest that could be inherited, but what the Commission did in 1999 was to expand the certificate of preference program so that all members of the household that were displaced could get separate certificates, and the Agency did in fact have a number of adult children of households that were displaced who had been given their own certificates. Ms. Rosen stated that had been the process for expanding the program and that the Agency had also required from the time of the establishment of the program to the present, that the Agency had mailed to all of the certificate holders addresses that it had, every time there was housing development either funded by the Agency or approved by the Agency on a disposition of land that the Agency had or within the Western Addition or the Bayview Hunters Point Project Areas. Ms. Rosen stated the Agency had done mailings to certificate holders to inform them of those housing opportunities and that she believed that over 1,500 certificate holders had taken advantage of the program over the years. Ms. Rosen stated that while it was disappointing that the Agency had not been able to serve everybody that was displaced, which was certain a harm that was done in the past, the Agency continued to keep updating the list and identify certificate holders and keeping everyone informed.

Commissioner Covington asked if the Agency had done advertising.

Ms. Rosen stated that the Agency had done advertising in the past and that she was working with staff on a proposal for an additional outreach campaign to find people whose mail was returned with no forwarding addresses. Ms. Rosen stated that in 1999 when the program was expanded, there was an outreach effort with leaflets, advertisements and presentations at some of the community churches in the Bayview and the Western Addition, and the expanded outreach campaign that she had asked staff to work on would help the Agency get the list as complete as it could and make the housing opportunities known and available.

Commissioner Covington stated she thought that was very necessary because this was the Agency’s last chance to include people who were most directly harmed by the policies of the Agency in the past, so it was imperative that the Agency do all it could to get in touch with those certificate holders. Ms. Covington stated she would like the outreach plan to be as detailed as possible and that she would like to see the plan in the next three weeks.

Commissioner King stated that it was disappointing that there were no community members at the meeting other than Rev. Townsend and Mr. Ace Washington. Mr. King stated that Commissioners Breed and Covington had a lot to say, but without community involvement, the Commissioners could debate all night long and it would not do any good. Mr. King stated he was glad that Supervisor Mirkarimi had scheduled a hearing on the Agency’s Certificate of Preference Program and that he agreed that the program was a joke. Mr. King stated that it was the late Mary Rogers who made the Agency stick to the program, but that there were not a lot of certificate holders left and even though the Executive Director stated that the program was expanded to other members of displaced households, they could not afford to live in the newly developed housing units. Mr. King stated he did not know who could afford to live at the Fillmore Heritage project much less certificate holders would not be able to afford even the affordable units. Mr. King stated that everyone in the meeting room was from the agency staff and no community members, and the Commission meeting was more like an Agency staff meeting and not a community meeting. Mr. King asked if staff made any efforts to notify the community of the Commission meeting.

Ms. Rosen stated she understood Commissioner King’s frustration, but that she thought one of things that had changed since had been at the Agency was that the CAC was taking a role of having community meetings and convening their own discussions and they were attracting more members of the public to their meetings. Ms. Rosen stated that in the past, before there was a CAC, the Agency may have seen more community attendance, but that now, she thought that the public was participating in more the open-ended discussions that took place at the subcommittee and full CAC meetings. Ms. Rosen stated that Ms. Gaynell McCurn informed her that there were more than 40 people in attendance at the CAC meeting when the transition plan for the Western Addition was discussed and that there was a lot of interaction with members of the CAC and the community. Ms. Rosen stated that staff would redouble its efforts on community outreach and that she thought there was a lot of participation at the community level through the CAC meetings. Ms. Rosen stated that as a partial response to a point that Commissioner Covington raised, staff was working very hard to try to address two of the directives from the Commission: one, to get as much done as expeditiously as possible, and two, to have as much community consensus and discussion at the community level before items were brought to the Commission. Staff was trying to balance those things, and many items were under discussion for a long period of time at the CAC.

Commissioner King stated he disagreed because even with all of the Project Area Committees (PAC) and CACs, there were still a lot people who attended the Commission meetings and the various community organizations used to bring people out to the meetings. Mr. King stated that the Agency paid these various community groups to bring people out to the Commission meetings and there was something wrong when people no longer came to the Commission meetings. Mr. King stated he was planning to attend the Board of Supervisors Land Use Committee hearing on the Agency’s Certificate of Preference Program and that he agreed with what Commissioners Breed and Covington were saying that there were not enough people involved in the process. Mr. King asked who many people were notified of the Western Addition transition planning workshop.

Ms. McCurn stated she did not do a separate noticing of the Commission workshop because on the previous Thursday, the matter was on the CAC agenda and it was also on the CAC’s January agenda.

Commissioner King stated he did not know why Agency staff could not get people to come to the Commission meetings because there used to be hundreds of people attending the Commission meetings years ago. Mr. King stated he noticed there was no one from the Bayview and that Commissioners had said that this was not just a Western Addition issue, but a citywide issue and there should be more members of the public in attendance. Mr. King stated that was why he wanted to attend Supervisor Mirkarimi hearing because the Board of Supervisors was the governing body of the Redevelopment Agency and it could eliminate the Commission if the Agency was not doing its responsibility to get people involved. Mr. King stated he was glad that Commissioner Covington went on a tour of the Western Addition and asked the Executive Director if she had offered to tour other Commissioners and if the Commission President had gone on a tour.

Ms. Rosen stated that staff would always be available at a Commissioner’s request to tour any project area.

President Peterson stated he had gone on other tours previously, but not on the recent tour of the Western Addition.

Commissioner Covington stated she had visited every project area that the Agency had, which was her goal when she was first appointed to the Commission, and the Western Addition was the last tour she had gone to, and that she requested the tours and had informed the Executive Director and staff that she would be visiting project areas at least once every quarter. Ms. Covington stated that was just her way of being informed of the progress that the Agency was making in the project areas.

Commissioner King stated that he disagreed because Commissioners used to get on a bus and tour the project areas as a Commission and receive the same information without each Commissioner going in different directions.

Commissioner Covington stated there was nothing that precluded Commissioners from getting on a bus and touring the project areas.

Commissioner King reiterated that he was very disturbed that there were no community members in attendance and that he blamed staff for not getting the community more involved on a very important matter such as the transition planning for the Western Addition, which was the first community that was destroyed by redevelopment activities.

Commissioner Romero thanked Ms. McCurn for an excellent and informative presentation. Mr. Romero stated that Commissioners had different perspectives depending on their tenure on the Commission, and that he did not know why people were not in attendance and would not speculate as to why, but that this was a very important workshop on the transition plan to wind down the Western Addition project, and that his perception during the last nine years on the Commission was that the Western Addition community had been the most involved in the Commission’s business and had the most presence at Commission meetings and was not at all bashful about sharing its views. Mr. Romero stated the lack of attendance at the Commission meeting was a little surprising, but because the CAC was very active, he was certain that a lot of people had been diverted, and as the transition plan was further developed, he was sure that there would be more participation from the community. Mr. Romero stated he knew that the staff was always responsive to the community’s concerns and believed that there would be more involvement as the specific details of the transition plan was developed. Mr. Romero stated he heard a lot of good ideas and hoped they would be refined and focused so that things would be done positively. Mr. Romero stated that in defense of Commissioners that had come and gone, he thought that the Commission had been very supportive of the Western Addition’s projects and getting them done, and the Fillmore Heritage project was an excellent example, because the land sat empty with a previous developer for 11 years until the Commission selected the present developer to develop the parcel. Mr. Romero stated there were other examples and that the Agency had positive successes in recent years, which he hoped that staff and prior Commissioners including present Commissioners would get the credit someday, and that the transition plan should focus on a realistic plan with the resources available on important community matters. Mr. Romero stated he was glad to hear Rev. Townsend clarify his earlier remarks because he knew that Rev. Townsend did not intend that any of the present Commissioners or even some of the recent ones as people who destroyed a way of life in the Western Addition, because from his point of view, the Commission he had been a part of for the past nine years, had actually attempted to do the reparations that had been suggested and if one looked at the matters that the Commission had voted on for the Western Addition, one would see very positive things with virtually unanimous support even with some hard debate and supported by the community. Mr. Romero stated he wanted to give credit to staff because it had been a difficult job of meeting the community’s needs and staff had done a lot of good work and not always received the credit it deserved. Mr. Romero stated that there was a lot more work to do and hoped that everyone could unite and work toward accomplishing what needed to be done and not dwell on what happened 25 years ago and not because people were tired of hearing about it, but that it was important to put emphasis on what the current reality was and to focus on the positive things and to try and do as much good as the Agency could for the community with the remaining time and available resources. Mr. Romero stated he looked forward to seeing more details about the transition plan and hoped for more community involvement.

Commissioner Breed stated she wanted to make a correction to her earlier suggestion to pass a resolution to create a task force to investigate the loss of African Americans in San Francisco, to include Japanese Americans because they were also displaced as a result of redevelopment activities. Ms. Breed stated that since the CAC meetings were held at her office, she could attest to the fact that the meetings were well attended with large crowds and intense discussions, and that she was honestly happy that the CAC was there because it provided a forum to fully vet community issues and assisted in providing so much information, which spared the Commission from being deluged with many requests, but that she thought that the Commission workshop should have been communicated to the CAC and the community that this was an agenda item. Ms. Breed stated that it was important for the CAC to have the transition plan calendared as a regular item at every meeting, because the whole point of establishing the CAC was to provide the Agency with support and advice on Western Addition activities, but also to provide community feedback as to what they wanted to see in the transition plan. Ms. Breed stated that this was very important to her because she took the CAC’s advice very seriously and that she appreciated their hard work because they spend a tremendous amount of time attending meetings and dealing with so many different issues and continued to be very committed. Ms. Breed stated she had received a lot of feedback about the Agency’s Affordable Housing Program and how complicated and unrealistic it was, but that she had also received a lot of great feedback about the program and how people had availed of housing opportunities. Ms. Breed stated she would like to have workshop on the Agency’s Affordable Housing Program and how it worked and that she would like background information on the program to review because based upon the verbal explanations she had heard, she thought there could be ways to possibly amend some of the program language and elements to make it easier to attract a broader range of people to participate in the program, and that she would like the workshop scheduled sooner rather than later.

Executive Rosen stated that for clarification, the CAC was informed of the Commission workshop at the CAC meeting when they discussed the matter and that the item was calendared for their next meeting and that they were seriously taking Commissioner Breed’s advice to continue discussion on the transition plan on an ongoing basis.

4 (j) Review of 2006 significant projects

Presenters: Benjamin Ibarra (Agency staff)

President Peterson commended Agency staff for taking criticism well and stated that it must be very nice when staff considered all of the accomplishments during the course of the last year and staff must feel good about that. Mr. Peterson stated that as the staff and Commission went through the arduous and sometimes acrimonious process of redevelopment, it was good to reflect upon last year’s accomplishments and be reminded of the achievements.

Commissioner Romero thanked Mr. Benjamin Ibarra for a good presentation and welcomed him to the Agency and stated that it was good to have a staff person who grew up in a project area that brought a unique perspective. Mr. Romero stated that he would keep the slide presentation materials on the Agency’s accomplishments as part of his Agency Commission memoirs, because it was good to hear about the very positive achievements the Agency had made as it continually heard complaints. Mr. Romero stated that the presentation was very informative and it was too bad that there were no members of the public to see it, but that he hoped the presentation would become an annual event to update the public and the Commission.

Commissioner Singh thanked Mr. Ibarra for an excellent presentation and welcomed him to the Agency. Mr. Singh stated that he was also concerned with the community participation because there was no one from the community attending the Commission meeting.

Commissioner Breed stated that at the previous Commission meeting, she requested a performance review of the Executive Director, which was not based on what people might think, but more so based on the presentation of significant accomplishments and that the Executive Director and staff was acknowledged and appreciated for the hard work that they did. Ms. Breed stated that the staff was to be commended for maintaining a good attitude with all of the Commission’s requests and that it was obvious that staff enjoyed their jobs as well as the Executive Director who continued to be diligent and responsive to Commissioners’ concerns. Ms. Breed stated that she thought it was important to share the information about the Agency’s accomplishments with the public and that it was important to talk about the Agency’s achievements. Ms. Breed thanked staff for the excellent presentation and stated that she like the way it was presented and enjoyed the beautiful photographs of Agency projects. Ms. Breed stated that she was looking at a broader perspective with a large constituent that she had to answer to and that she knew that staff brought a lot of heart and soul in doing their jobs and that she really appreciated all of the hard work that staff did. Ms. Breed encouraged staff to keep up the good work, but to also keep in mind that the Agency was dealing with people’s lives and that the Agency’s work affected the lives of many people. Ms. Breed stated that as she looked at photographs of the Museum of the African Diaspora and the model of the Contemporary Jewish Museum, she could see the possibilities and the excitement around it, as well as the Plaza Apartments, which she drove by regularly to enjoy the beautifully designed building and the happy people who are living in it, and remarked to staff, “job well done.”

5. MATTERS NOT APPEARING ON THE AGENDA None.

6. PERSONS WISHING TO ADDRESS THE MEMBERS ON NON-AGENDA, BUT AGENCY RELATED MATTERS

Ace Washington

7. REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT None.

8. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Mayor Newsom’s town hall meeting in District 10, Saturday February 10^th at 10:00 a.m., Whitney Young Child Development Center, 100 Whitney Young Circle. The focus of the town hall meeting would be the Mayor’s Communities of Opportunities program. Ms. Rosen stated she would be attending with Agency staff as well as other City department heads.

Board of Supervisors’ Land Use and Economic Development Committee meeting on Monday February 12^th at 3:30 p.m. for a hearing on the Western Addition and the Agency’s Certificate of Preference Program.

Ms. Rosen reported that at the February 5^th Board of Supervisors’ Land Use and Economic Development Committee, it heard a resolution authored by Board President Aaron Peskin and Supervisors Bevan Dufty and Sophie Maxwell, urging the Agency, Lennar and the Mayor’s Office to work toward an integrated development of the Shipyard and Candlestick, including a proposal for a 49er stadium at the Shipyard. That resolution was passed by the committee and was scheduled to be heard at the full Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday, February 13^th.

The Bayview integrated development topic was also scheduled to be discussed at a joint meeting of the Shipyard CAC Executive Committee and a committee of the Bayview PAC on Thursday February 8^th at 6:00 p.m. at the trailer inside the Shipyard. The matter would be discussed and considered by the full Shipyard CAC at a future meeting.

Agency Commission workshop at its February 20^th meeting to discuss the Bayview integrated development concept, which would be presented by Mr. Michael Cohen, Director of the Mayor’s Office of Base Reuse and Development.

Informational memorandum re: 1210 Scott Street – At the Commission’s direction, the Western Addition CAC had been considering the recommended use for 1210 Scott Street, and decided at their last meeting to support a proposal by the Jewish Community High School of the Bay to propose a land exchange. Ms. Rosen stated that if the Commission wanted to discuss the matter, she would suggest that the Commission calendar a closed session item to instruct the Agency’s property negotiators.

Informational memorandum re: Litigation between Gateway Construction and Sheba Lounge, which was proposed for settlement. Ms. Rosen stated that staff believed this was a good settlement and unless the Commission directed otherwise, she would execute the settlement on the terms set forth in the memorandum, which was essentially a settlement of agreed upon amount of prevailing wages due, for which the Agency had previously agreed to fund a loan. The claim would be dismissed, and each party would bear its own attorney’s fees and costs. Ms. Rosen stated that she had informed Sheba Lounge through the General Counsel that the Agency would consider any potential adjustment in their loan terms after the settlement was concluded, and that she believed there would likely be such a proposal from Sheba Lounge.

Commissioner Singh asked how much money was involved in the proposed settlement.

Ms. Rosen stated that the dispute was between the construction company, Gateway Construction and Sheba Lounge as to the amount of prevailing wages and the amount that they had settled on was $95,000, which would be paid to the workers who worked on the project.

At this time, approximately 7:15 p.m., President Peterson departed the meeting. Vice-President Covington presided over the remainder of the meeting.

9. COMMISSIONERS’ QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

Commissioner Covington stated she wanted to publicly congratulate Commissioner Breed who, a couple of weeks ago, was elected as a delegate for the State of California Democratic Central Committee.

Commissioner Breed stated she would support putting the 1210 Scott Street matter for closed session at the February 20^th Commission meeting. Ms. Breed stated that with regard to the Sheba Lounge matter, she would recommend the Executive Director to execute the proposed settlement agreement.

Commissioner Romero stated that he agreed with both of Commissioner Breed’s suggestions, but that he wanted clarification on the Sheba Lounge matter, and asked if the Agency was a party to the litigation, because he did not recall prior discussion on the proposed settlement.

Executive Director Rosen stated that there was a closed session meeting, but that Commissioner Romero may not have been in attendance when the Commission discussed the pending litigation in the Sheba Lounge matter.

Commissioner Romero requested verification that the possible loan term adjustment for Sheba Lounge mentioned by the Executive Director, was a completely separate matter and not a part of the settlement agreement and would not commit the Agency to anything, and that he hoped that there had been no oral commitment to that effect.

Executive Director Rosen stated that the only thing communicated to Sheba Lounge regarding any loan term adjustment would come to the Commission for its consideration.

Commissioner King referred to a letter from a member of the community alleging that Commissioner Covington recommended against contracting with Radio Station KPOO, and asked what that was all about.

Commissioner Covington stated she had asked the Commission Secretary who was negotiating the contract with KPOO to include other opportunities for the Agency to get its information out, because the Agency was KPOO’s primary source of revenue and the Agency paid to be on KPOO’s radio broadcast, and that she wanted to make sure that the Agency got more bang for its buck because the rates were going up. Ms. Covington stated that she never suggested that another radio station be used other than KPOO, because there was no other radio station that did what KPOO did, and that she had always supported KPOO. Ms. Covington stated that she was amazed the way rumors began totally without substance and totally without merit, and that she had the point of view that people just created things in their minds. Ms. Covington stated that as far as she was aware, the Commission Secretary was the only one negotiating the contract and that she was never involved with the negotiations. Ms. Covington asked the Commission Secretary if he had ever heard Ms. Covington say anything untoward about KPOO.

Commission Secretary Erwin Tanjuaquio stated that to his recollection, he had not heard Commissioner Covington say anything untoward about KPOO.

Commissioner Covington stated that there was another rumor alluded to in the letter that she stormed out of the meeting and did not vote on an item because it was not going her way. Ms. Covington stated that she thought she was one of the most even tempered Commissioners on the Commission.

Commissioner Singh stated that he wanted everyone to know that he strongly supported KPOO. Mr. Singh requested verification that the Commission Secretary negotiated the KPOO contract because he thought Agency staff negotiated contracts.

Commissioner Covington stated that the Commission Secretary negotiated the KPOO contract at the direction of the Executive Director.

10. CLOSED SESSION None.

11. ADJOURNMENT

It was moved by Ms. Breed, seconded by Mr. Romero, and unanimously carried that the meeting be adjourned. The meeting adjourned at 7:29 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Erwin R. Tanjuaquio

Agency Secretary

APPROVED:

San Francisco Redevelopment Agency