Policy that was designed to triage the complaints and sort them out into low, medium, or high risk complaints. For example, the medium risk cases involved potential losses of 10,000 to 50,000 or they implicate a mid level manager. The medium and high risk cases are not represented in the whistleblower reports. Instead, we get a preponder remembers of cases of low level employees who use Work Computers for personal business, who leave work early, or show up late, who gamble or sleep on the job, or who smoke in city cars and park them inappropriately. Preventing these abuses is worthwhile, but wheres the beef . We dont hear about the big money violations or mid to high level official misconduct. Why not . If the Whistleblower Program does not receive such complaints, they should know why. If the Whistleblower Program refers such complaints elsewhere, they should know how many involve violations of criminal or ethics law. Since the Whistleblower Program already categorizes complaints according to their low, medium, or high risk, they should ask why they are not reported as such. Thank you. Thank you dr. Kerr. Any other Public Comment . Good. Can you call the next item. Item number 6, opportunity for Committee Members to comment or take action on any matters within the committees jurisdiction. 20192020cgoboc work initiates. Good morning, just to remind everybody the format of this agenda item is to have a list of administrative and Committee Functions that you are working on during the year and we can report progress on any of them as need be. I will just run down the list and stop me at any point with your questions or comments. Standardized template. This was a desire of the committee during last fiscal year to look at the variations that you get from different programs and try to move towards a format you find most useful in terms of having them be common, use the same terminology, standard views for schedules and expense reporting, and so we didnt do work on that last year just given your capacity and ours. We are prepared to do work on it during the current fiscal year. I think that chair chu has designated herself, volunteered to be the liaison on this subject, and i think probably what will happen between now and your january meeting is ill have some of my staff refresh and build on a matrix that we worked on before that shows the bond programs, the type of schedule theyre providing, what their reporting period is, so we can see the variability that exists and we can explore how useful the committee has found the reports and where we may look for improvements. So you have a period now, november and december where you dont have an inperson meeting, so i think we should be able to find time to have a liaison meeting on that subject if that sounds appropriate. One other thing. Can you ask them to go back and look at our previous meetings to you know, understand how we use it. Brian was referring back to some specific information in some of the reports, so i think we can use that as facts on how were using them, how that information is actively being used in a meeting. I know brenda also had interacted with the reports in an indepth way. Okay. The expenditure audit, this is where we have reviews of expenditures and bond programs. You will see issuances. Mark, will you update us on your schedule, any changes that may have happened . Sure. Just a quick update. So we completed expenditure audits of eight various projects. We have one ongoing, the 2016 Public Health and safety program. We will be issuing that in either december or early january, right in time for your next cgobos meeting in january. Then we have plans to touch the programs we havent touched before, including the Affordable Housing program and the sea wall safety. Those will be deferred to next fiscal year. We want to make sure theres enough expenditures to audit and that will be the case for the 2018 sea wall safety, so well put that on our work plan for next fiscal year, and definitely the 2016 Affordable Housing, we should have enough transactions to audit by the beginning of next fiscal year or end of this fiscal year. Were also planning on touchi touching or doing reaudits of the bonds we audited before. Looking at those projects within those bond programs that we did not audit in the past, just to make sure we have a full extent in coverage of the various projects within each bond program and we can attest to the fact that we audited all of the various projects within all of the bond programs. Do you have any concerns about the timing of the projects for the 2016 Affordable Housing . It sounds like i mean they dont start until next summer, a year from now or so. I have some, but i mean there werent a lot of expenditures in that one the last time i looked. I understand that theres not much to look at. I believe it only gotten started on 3 of the 30 items that are in there when i was looking at it in our report. So obviously, i love to see them as soon as possibility, but we cant audit what hasnt been spent. I understand that we have to keep an eye on that. Okay. So the port for me, its very much about black box over there, and we probably would have learned more if they come today with some information. So, it feels to me that, thats one that may creep up on us, maybe not the whole thing. Its not the whole parks bond. Right. Those have not been issued. Im talking about the 2012 parks bond. Its that. Right. A more detailed report would be key. Got it. And with the content they get from here, ill reach out and meet up and see if we can get to the bottom of it and get a report. And well talk about it in our next meeting. That will end up having some concerns, particularly as we go into the sea wall where we will have a lot more money. We certainly can do as part of our work planning for next fiscal year is to revisit the bonds we have audited and figure out which portions or projects are attributed to the port and we can use that as our way to narrow down the scope of our o g. O. Bond projects. Okay. Great, thank you. Okay, next item 1c is the schedule of upcoming bond issuances. You have a memo in your packet and our director of public fitness finance is here to answer any questions or comment. The sea wall, will that go to the board in april . It went to the board last april. It has been healthed held up a little bit, but we should have an update at the next meeting or the meeting after. Great. And im sorry if i asked this last time, but the transportation and road improvement, 258, that seems like a large number for issuance. I looked at the encumbered and unencumbered. We have 50 million thats unencumbered. Prior to determining the final bond amount, we will make sure there are projects they have planned for expenditure within the next 3 years per i. R. S. Guidelines. One note that was mentioned earlier, we are pleased to report that we did sell the last series bond for Affordable Housing last week, about 93 million and then we also sold the final series for the parks bond, which will be a port project, so thats in the amount of 3. 1 million for that final port project. Right now, were just starting to do our work on vetting projects for both the Public Health and transportation bond to determine what size we will be bringing forward for issuance in the spring and were evaluating some refinancing opportunities, given the low Interest Rate environments for our g. O. Bonds. Is the market looking favorably op our bonds . Most definitely. We still have 2 of our 3 Credit Ratings are aaa and the next is aaplus. Thats a good thing. Congratulations. Thank you. Can i ask something. Sure, please. On the 22b road improvement bond, do we have a scope for that yet, a description . I know rochelle is here in the audience. Hes shaking his head. Its something that were just now selling the bonds last week for the Affordable Housing and parks. This is our next area of focus and well be determining that soon. Yeah. Were just getting started. We havent put a Financing Team together yet. Ive been in contact with project managers for both of those bond programs and theyre confident that there is a need for another to be issued. Theyre still in the process of scoping out and putting together an expenditure schedule. Once theyre ready, hopefully in the next few weeks, the plan is to meet with them and get their plans and the projects, and matrix make sure their expectations are reasonable before we move forward with any bond sales. The last conversation i had, they were hoping to have an issuance for the full balance of the program bond. I put that in there as a headsup to you that it could potentially be as large as that but well validate what theyre asking for when we go over the projects. Our next meeting is january. Yeah, by then we should have that. All right, moving on to 1d. Were going to spend a couple minut minutes on this. Again as a reminder, last year on your behalf, we had a Public Perception survey that was conducted by one of the providers in our prequalified pool, where we have a pool of providers that do Public Opinion testing, focus groups, and work of that type. We use them for a lot of different purposes in the city. They did intercept surveys and tested two sites in the bond program that you oversee. We were testing Public Knowledge about the site before and after visitor use, their perception of the use of bond funds, some of the demographics of the people using those sites and we got some interesting findings and feedback on how people perceive the bonds and the kind of improvements that rise up highest in public favor. I think you were strongly interested in that type of content, wanted to do another bond. Were interested in focusing on Affordable Housing. So, i did a little bit of work reaching out to the Affordable HousingProgram Managers and staff in the Mayors Office of housing and Community Development in the Mayors Office to discuss it and had talked about bringing back to you a lets of potential sites that we could make the subject of a Public Perception survey. So, i have those sites, but let me add a couple of qualifiers before we look at the list. You know, as you observed in the discussion with member natoli and the expenditures audit, there isnt a lot of money out the door yet in the Affordable Housing bond. There arent any completed projects yet that were completed with these bond. Thats something to keemenp in mind. You can do a Perception Survey focused on this bond. You can wait 18 to 24 months and choose another bond program to work on and by which time there would be more expenditures and hopefully completed projects in the Affordable Housing bond. Those are two options. At the same time, part of my discussion with bond Program Managers here is the public isnt all that cognisant of the difference in Funding Sources. So what youre interested in is getting more public understanding of the feeling around Affordable Housing, how the city funds those things, how the building processes goes, and the number of subjects we talked about that you can test here, you can go ahead and test some of those Public Opinion things, whether or not the Funding Source was g. O. Bonds. Thats an option. Just to again remind everybody, we talked about there are a lot of things you may want to test in Affordable Housing. Its not the same as streetscapes where youre testing users and whether there are g. O. Bonds or not and if they remember voting for it. These things are different. Do you want to test the perception of understanding of stakeholders communities, the residents of the projects, the neighbors, the businesses in the neighborhood, the housing providers, the housing managers, builders, or are you trying to actually test citizen voter understanding of how the city funds Affordable Housing and how it manages its work in that area. Any one of those things is project interesting in legitimate possibilities. Im putting those out there. Lastly, the projects themselves, there are five projects they gave me, which is a mix of funding by the city zone Housing Trust fund, federal home funds, Development Impact fees, theres a good range of geographic spread, and different target populations, which were funded with these projects. I can detail any of them if youre interested in taking that approach. Thats where i gotten to so far. Id appreciate your thoughts and feedback on how you would like to proceed. Yeah. I still think there is a lot to be learned, even if were not talking about completed projects. I think its still interesting, especially because as we look at another Affordable Housing bond going on the ballot, a lot of things i hear from people when they ask me is, i dont see anything happening with this. I dont know about it. Especially given the kind of oversight were doing, i care a lot about providers, i care about construction, all these things matter. I think from our viewpoint, what were really interested in is we require twothirds of the voters to approve this, so i think their perception is an important component in this. Their understanding of who is being served and what exactly we are accomplishing with that money because a lot of people say nothing. They dont feel like anything is happening. So, i guess to that one part of timing, i think there is still some valuable things to be gained from this. As to some of the other points, happy to follow up more. I definitely have some thoughts, but i want to think on it a little bit more about some of the other aspects you brought up, for sure. I have a different point of view. I think we should stay within our jurisdiction, which is to ensure bond funded projects are carried out to the expectations as much as possible by the voters who approve them. It is not our job to start digging into what people think of Affordable Housing in the city. I would rather postpone pegs suggestion when there are projects to pull on and look at Something Else the next couple of years. Really, im interested in everything that you listed of course, and that peg listed, but thats not our job. Our job is to evaluate bond funded projects and while it is important of course to make sure theyre bond funded projects that the city needs, its again, we are reactive. That is this committees role, to look at projects after the bonds have been approved by voters, not to start getting into issues of parks or Affordable Housing or transit. Its not our jobs. I would actually prefer to wait on a perception study for Affordable Housing and perhaps look at one of our jurisdictional areas. I think lauren makes a valid point. There is a lot of Affordable Housing going on and i dont know where the funding is. Its so complex and meshed in a lot of different things. For example, one of the ones off the top of my head was ping young, one of the things funned by a bond. Clementine towers, there is a lot of confusion there. I think thats a valid point. Its after the fact for us. If we were to poll or to get a perspective, you know, accommodation of the residents in the project, the surrounding area, and yeah, the shops and owners in the area, does it bring business . Does it bring economics and keep it here . The and gave me some edits and the clean copy with all those edits that was included in your packet today. If you have further comments or edits or suggestions, we can make them now and then you can approve it on that basis. The only thing i left blank on purpose was the date on the front, which we usually put the publication date when we push things out on the Controllers Office website. Just to remind you, an attachment to this report is my offices g. O. Bond report. So you dont need to worry that your report needs to include detailed content on scope, schedule, and budget because all of that is here in that format. So just to remind you, that is how it will look. It will get posted. Great. I think were going to have to vote on this one. Does anyone have any addition changes you like to see in the document . I had a question. There were edits that you made to my report and i read this. I dont see that there were any changes. It was just small things like tense or punctuation. Oh, i probably needed that. [laughter] nothing material. We tried to preserve the original voice of each speaker. Great to know. Is there a proposal to vote on this . Move. Second. I guess i move to approve this. Just for the record, there is no member of the public present. Great. Great, thank you for your work on this. We will get it posted on the website and congratulations. Thank you. Item 2b, your work plan. The only change that i am noting is that you ask the port park Program Manager to be present at your january meeting. The slides they provided in the current packet didnt have details that you want to see, so you would like a bond Program Style report from them. Am i understanding that correctly . I believe so. Part is bart will meet with them so he can give direct feedback on what were looking for. A bond style report would be great. They werent here. Were they here the last time . I dont remem