Appear on the january 28 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. Thank you very much. Madam clergyman, can you call item 1 and 2. Clerk resolution approving the issuance of up to an additional 3,000,000,000 aggregate Principal Amount of San Francisco International Airport second series Revenue Bonds to finance and refinance airport capital plan projects; and item 2 ordinance appropriating 3,888,069,311 of proceeds from the sale of Revenue Bonds or commercial paper for Capital Improvement projects to the Airport Commission for fy20192020; and placing 3,888,069,311 on controllers reserve. Thank you, madam clerk. I think we have Cathy Widener from the airport joining us today. There has been a request to continue this item for one week, but i think well have the presentation for today. So if you wouldnt mind, ms. Widener, and we will hear from the b. L. A. Good morning. Cathy widener with the San Francisco International Airport. The two bond items for consideration before you
Good morning, everyone. The meeting will come to order. This is the january 15, 2020, regular meeting of the budget and finance committee. I am sandra fewer. I am joined by supervisors walton and mandelman. Our clerk is ms. Wong. Clerk please make sure to silence all cellphones and electronic devices. Completed copies of any documents to be included as part of the file should be submitted to the clerk. Items acted upon today will appear on the january 28 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. Thank you very much. Madam clergyman, can you call item 1 and 2. Clerk resolution approving the issuance of up to an additional 3,000,000,000 aggregate Principal Amount of San Francisco International Airport second series Revenue Bonds to finance and refinance airport capital plan projects; and item 2 ordinance appropriating 3,888,069,311 of proceeds from the sale of Revenue Bonds or commercial paper for Capital Improvement projects to the Airport Commission for fy20192020; and placi
Otherwise stated. Thank you very much. Madam clergyman, can you call item 1 and 2. Clerk resolution approving the issuance of up to an additional 3,000,000,000 aggregate Principal Amount of San Francisco International Airport second series Revenue Bonds to finance and refinance airport capital plan projects; and item 2 ordinance appropriating 3,888,069,311 of proceeds from the sale of Revenue Bonds or commercial paper for Capital Improvement projects to the Airport Commission for fy20192020; and placing 3,888,069,311 on controllers reserve. Thank you, madam clerk. I think we have Cathy Widener from the airport joining us today. There has been a request to continue this item for one week, but i think well have the presentation for today. So if you wouldnt mind, ms. Widener, and we will hear from the b. L. A. Good morning. Cathy widener with the San Francisco International Airport. The two bond items for consideration before you are two bonds up to 3 million and to appropriate 3 million
Secondly the letter of approval is usually included by, excuse me by the permit holder. I didnt see that either. Lastly in the last page of their submission they show various sites that they attempted to look out, i presume, but they provide very Little Information there. The code says something about good faith efforts. When so many puts on the table that there was no interest. I have no idea whether that is a good faith effort, or not. I need to see these things before i make a final decision. I would be happy to respond. My understanding, the first item you brought up was our compliance with the Design Guidelines and preservation review. Did i understand that correctly . Historical review. I can respond to that. This is not within the webster street historic district. It is immediately adjacent to the district which was established in 1981. This property was not included. It is a category d building for our preservation standards. Included in the report is a ceqa exemption which is
Is usually included by, excuse me by the permit holder. I didnt see that either. Lastly in the last page of their submission they show various sites that they attempted to look out, i presume, but they provide very Little Information there. The code says something about good faith efforts. When so many puts on the table that there was no interest. I have no idea whether that is a good faith effort, or not. I need to see these things before i make a final decision. I would be happy to respond. My understanding, the first item you brought up was our compliance with the Design Guidelines and preservation review. Did i understand that correctly . Historical review. I can respond to that. This is not within the webster street historic district. It is immediately adjacent to the district which was established in 1981. This property was not included. It is a category d building for our preservation standards. Included in the report is a ceqa exemption which is signed by our Historic Preservat