The second issuance, 3. 9 million for 19th avenue, so we are just finalizing and getting our final approvals from caltrans, and i believe they will advertise as early as this spring. That will be in construction this year and will bring significant Pedestrian Safety improvements. In terms of ocean avenue, i know that we have some spot issues that we are aware of in our working on solutions for. Im not sure offhand if its in the high injury quarter, but the overall bringing to the committee in the next few months will lay out essentially how we are going to, how we are planning through, particularly our fiveyear c. I. P. , takes us to almost 2024, our vision 0 goal, well be able to show how that Capital Budget on the street side addresses the balance of High Injury Network which is still yet to be addressed. If ocean is on the network, i imagine there will be improvements that you will see in the upcoming five year, relative to ocean avenue. Upgrades over the last 15, 20 years, but the extent there are remaining intersections or stretches of ocean that should be reflected in our fiveyear Capital Improvement program. Supervisor yee the intersections and also a few of the muni stops, where it seems to need improvement almost immediately. Right. I know the one at aptos is one we have discussed, may or may in the be a design issue, but on the radar to address now. Probably not a Large Capital fund need we would necessarily need the bond for but something we can do with the engineering and field resources. Supervisor yee thank you. Why dont we move to rec and park for now. And present. I believe miss campbell, you want all four of these. Madam clerk. Chair yee, supervisor tang, good morning. My name is antonio guerra, finance manager for recreational and park department, and 2012 clean and safe parks bond. In total, the rec park portion of the 2012 geo bond, 160. 5 million. In order to fund Capital Projects for the renewal and repair of our parks, recreation and open space assets. First two allocated 83. 8 million and today what we are seeking approval of is additional 76. 7 million. This program is split into three main categories. On the left of the slide you can see that there are 15 voter approved Neighborhood Parks projects, totaling 97 million. There is 40. 2 million in programmatic funding, park, playground, forestry, trails, water improvements throughout the city, and 21 million dedicated to citywide park projects at golden gate park, lake, and john mclaren. Overall, the 2012 geo bond, 195 million. And it was split between ourselves at rec park and our friends at the port of San Francisco. This is our third and final issuance. However, the port still has a subsequent sale of 3. 1 million that will take place in the future. And this is our issuance summary, broken out by appropriated projects. Proposing to allocate 35 million to complete the Neighborhood Parks projects in the third issuance, and remaining allocation, toward the citywide parks and programs. I believe the previous presentation mentioned leverage funding. We do the same thing with our bond program. We have been able to leverage at this date, 30. 8 million. These Revenue Sources include Development Impact fee revenue, philanthropic gifts, state grants and other city funding like the Department Capital baseline and other allocations. So, this is a status update of our Neighborhood Park program. We currently have six sites open to the public, two are in construction, and seven are in either planning or design. For citywide parks and programs, we currently have Community Outreach for projects in mclaren park and lake merced underway. We just went through the mclaren park visioning process, approved by the Rec Park Commission in november of last year. And at golden gate park, the stanyan street entrance Improvement Project is now in planning. For lets play sf, we just had a presentation earlier in this meeting. 13 parks, Concept Design has been approved for five parks. Two parks are in planning. And this third Issuance Fund design for all tier one parks. Trails program, last november, approved 2 million for trails in mclaren park. 1. 9 million for golden gate park, woodland trails. Improvement project, bid package is being finalizeed and advertised in early 2018. Forestry program, rec park is working on a master plan with the planning department. Water conservation, alamo is in construction, and others will be completed this fall. A chart of the Neighborhood Park spending, 90 expended of our Neighborhood Parks funds. So, i can tell you, we are very eager to receive the cash from this bond sale. Overall throughout the entire bond program and the two issuances, 78 of the funding we have spent. And in citywide parks and programs, we have spend 50 , a much smaller percentage. However, its a much smaller portion of the first and second issuances, and we are focussing on that in the third issuance. This is a line graph of our spending over time projection. As you can see, once we have cash in hand, by the end of the summer, we are projecting a large increase in spending due to the construction of our final Neighborhood Parks projects. We plan to spend all bond funds by the end of 2020. Say Program Schedule overview of the Neighborhood Parks program. The green bars on this schedule are when construction is going to commence. And we have quite a few projects ready to break ground this year, like rossi, garfield, george christopher, margaret hayward, and willie woo woo wong. Complete by 2019 and all the citywide programs los angeles completed by the end of 2020. With the passage of proposition b in 2016, city charter was revised. Annual capital plan, and bond funding is a critical component to the successful completion of our goals. So, what these bond funds will do is make progress on a few of our deferred maintenance goals. We have a plan to complete the renovation of all our rec park swimming pools. We will complete renovation of all but five rec centers. And with the funding from the lets play sf initiative, make significant progress renovating and it is an unfavorable bidding environment. Bids coming back 20 to 40 above engineers estimate, we are looking at a bid reserve to ensure we can deliver the scope as promised in the bond. Thats it, i want to thank you, also thank michelle traviti, who may have some comments and i am available for questions as well as our acting capital manager and program manager. Thanks. Supervisor yee thank you, any questions. No questions. Could i have the b. L. A. Are you presenting thanks for hearing these items, im from the Controllers Office of public finance. Briefly summarize and detail some of the financial impacts of the resolutions. Again, for item number 7 and november 2014 voters approved proposition a, 500 million for infrastructure, repairs and other transportation Improvement Projects. This resolution authorizes the sale and issuance of the second of the bonds authorized, not to exceed 177 million. Item 8, ordinance appropriating the proceeds from the bond sale and 9, november 2012, proposition b approved by the citys voters authorizing 195 million in general Obligation Bonds to finance park and recreation facility improvements, and third issuance of bonds in the program, not to exceed 76,710,000. And 10 appropriating the proceeds from the bond sale just described. Based on the total amount for both of these programs of 251. 3 million, using a conservative 3. 99 estimated interest rate, we anticipate the annual debt service on these bonds that we will sell to be approximately 18. 7 million. Over the 20year life of the bonds, result in a total of 361 million in debt service of which 110,690,000 110 million towards interest on the bonds. Annual impact, 7. 97 per 100,000 of assessed property value. So for typical, well, maybe not typical, properties assessed at 600,000, that would be about 47. 29 impact on property taxes. The city charter imposed debt limit on general Obligation Bonds is 3 of the total assessed value of the property in the city. The citys outstanding general Obligation Bonds equal approximately. 88 , if the board of supervisors were to approve the issuance, and the debt ratio increased by. 1 , in the limit. Additional, the tenyear capital plan, places a policy constraint to ensure property tax rates which fund the citys bond program would not be increased above 2006 levels of 12. 01 cents, and proposed sale of these bonds is still consistent with the policy, and we are expecting to price and close the sale of these bonds in february. We have also submitted forms of the financing documents, including the notice of sale, notice of intention to sell, preliminary official statement for the boards approval and review, any questions regarding financing, i can respond to those. No questions. Thank you very much for the presentation, and miss campbell, presentation . In terms of the use of the appropriations of the transportation bonds, we do have a summary on page 16 of our report and details by project in the attachment beginning on page 19, in terms of the use of the park bonds, and how they would be allocated to projects. We have a summary of that on page 27 in the report. And sort of reiterating what mr. Traveti said about the impact to the city, for the issuance of 175 million in transportation bonds, total debt service, 251 million. For issuance of 76 in parks bonds, over 20 years, 110 million. Annual debt service, 18 million increased annual debt service to the city per year, and then the impact on a Property Owner with assessed value, 600,000, would be 47 per year. And this would still be within the citys debt limit of 3 of assessed value. We recommend approval of all the legislation. Supervisor yee Public Comment . Seeing none, closed. Supervisor tang motion for items 710, positive recommendation for the full board. Supervisor yee passes. Item 11. Clerk 11, resolution approving and authorizing, located property seven hewn to 730 stanyan street, Mcdonalds Corporation, for 15. 5 million. Office of president london breed. We have the Real Estate Department and staff here to present on the Technical Details of this particular purchase and sale agreement, but i wanted to take this opportunity to express president breeds perspective on how incredibly excited we are to be at the point we are with mcdonalds and the city to acquire this particular property for 100 Affordable Housing. This particular property has been a challenge in the community. And the ability for the city to step in and acquire it to build 100 Affordable Housing represents a significant opportunity for the city and the upper haight community in particular. This relates to the purchase and accusation and under what terms the city is acquiring it for, we intend to work very collaboratively with the community and the city to, after this acquisition, hopefully through the board of supervisors, to do the design work and designing the Affordable Program for this particular site. So, im here to answer any questions you may have, but turn it over to john to talk about the individual Technical Details of this purchase and sale agreement. On behalf of president breed, we are very happy to be at this point and the ability to purchase this site and 100 Affordable Housing and ask the Committee Support this item today. Supervisor yee thank you, john updike from real estate. Thank you, chair yee. Supervisor tang, john updike, director of real estate. We share president breeds, mayor breeds excitement about this site. And frankly, most acquisitions are not a partnership, but i have to say this was a collaborative effort with the seller of the Mcdonalds Corporation of this property. So, before you today is the purchase of 700 to 730, a couple different addresses, stanyan street, from Mcdonalds Corporation as the underlying owner of the property. The Purchase Price is 15. 5 million. That is significantly less than the approved appraised value, which ranged between 18. 5 and 19. 7 million. We have been doing a lot of Due Diligence on this property since summer, collaboration with consultant team, so understand all of the remediation risks on the site, to complete the evaluation analysis which is done, to have the general plan referral and conformity issued in the board file. A note it was not yet ready while the budget of legislative analyst has been doing their report. But it was received and placed into the file. And working through the relocation of the existing operator who is a franchisee on the site. And so the budget legislative Analyst Report details the costs. They are estimates. But they are very conservative, high end estimates, being as transparent as possible of all the possible implications downstream, post purchase. So, we do have some modest remediation, but we do not see any show stoppers in the initial Geo Technical report that came back. So, that was very encouraging. The property does have a use of both in history, a dry cleaning operation and a gas station. So, we are very thorough in our investigation. Secondly, we have had our consultants work on the relocation benefit package, and a sense of that total scope and that is also included in the report here. Even with those costs, added on to the Purchase Price, we are still significantly under the appraised value total cost to acquire this, just a fantastic agreement for the city. This is a, about a three quarter of an acre site of land bounded by three streets, creating lots of excitement, because that gives us lots of design alternatives Going Forward and the restaurant itself is a little under 3500 square feet. Should this be approved by the board, our next step is to complete our escrow instructions, complete a notice that has to go out to the existing occupant, 90day notice for them to wind down their operations. So that we can close on the property and take possession to the property after the relocation, so we will not be in the business of being the landlord of the mcdonalds, the operations will cease and then we will take title. That will happen likely in the spring of this year and then by summer of this year we will accomplish the demolition of the improvement, a condition of the contract, not unusual when its a Corporate Identity issue on a purchase, its pretty typical removal of that identity is a condition of a sale. I believe that addresses most of the issues from our perspective. Joined by colleagues at mayors office, housing, Community Development who may have further info and happy to answer your questions. Supervisor yee just curious, mr. Updike. In regards to the relocation piece, who is what are we relocating . Relocating the business or so, yes. Because chair yee, because the property is being acquired with federal funds, the uniform relocation act, federal law, that provides how one provides relocation benefit payments to displaced occupants, business operators takes hold here. So, we dont normally have these conversations, its really either in the use of eminent domain, or the use of federal or certain state funds. Certain funds trigger that requirement. Otherwise we do not have it as a local policy. What that means is someone who is displaced and has to move to a new location is afforded certain benefits to cover those costs of relocation. Those are capped under certain regulations in certain categories. In this case, the current operator has a number ever other franchises. And so they will most likely take their fixtures, furnishings and equipment and relocate them into potentially multiple locations, existing locations, so its not like this will be a current restaurant that will open up at location b. Its more a case of the operations get wound down at the Current Location and those items that are personal to the business operator will move to existing franchises throughout the bay area. That is at the discretion of the person who is displaced. So, we just simply have a financial obligation to cover some of those costs because of the acquisition. I hope that helps. Supervisor yee basically automatic benefit. Yes. Supervisor yee and we have no say so in this. Even though that is correct. Yes. Federal law is very clear about that. Supervisor yee ok. It is a little odd. Hes closing down business and not opening up a new business, but hes getting a benefit. Also curious about, its a good deal as you mentioned, and sometimes i wonder why are we getting such a good deal. Is there are there other agreements with this particular entity thats not thats outside of this sale . The question is . Im always skeptical, and here is a good deal, on paper, and sales, what we are seeing. Any side deals where maybe hes getting Something Else thats outside of the sale . Thats benefitting the entity . No, not to our knowledge. No. This is, i think, really a question of a corporate entity who was prepared to dispose of the asset. Public entity c