Everything is done inhouse. I think it is done. I have always been passionate about gelato. Every single slaver has its own recipe. We have our own we move on from there. So you have every time a unique experience because that slaver is the flavored we want to make. Union street is unique because of the neighbors and the location itself. The people that live around here i love to see when the street is full of people. It is a little bit of italy that is happening around you can walk around and enjoy shopping with gelato in your hand. This is the move we are happy to provide to the people. I always love union street because its not like another commercial street where you have big chains. Here you have the neighbors. There is a lot of stories and the neighborhoods are essential. People have they enjoy having their daily or weekly gelato. I love this street itself. We created a move of an area where we will be visiting. We want to make sure that the area has the gelato that you like. What we give back as a shop owner is creating an ambient lifestyle. If you do it in your area and if you like it, then you can do it on the streets you like. Chair fewer good morning, ur everyone. The meeting will come to order. This is the february 26 meeting of the budget and finance committee. I would like to thank corwin and colina. Madam clerk, do we have any announcements . Clerk yes. [agenda item read]. Chair fewer thank you very much. Madam clerk, can you please call item 5. Clerk yes. Item 5 is a resolution authorizing the Mayors Office of housing and Community Development to accept and expend a gift of 100,000 from San Francisco 722 montgomery. Chair fewer supervisor peskin, do you have anything you would like to add . Supervisor peskin i would like to thank steven sang for accommodating my request for this additional 100,000 on top of the inclusionary fees and interest and the Mayors Office of housing for preparing for the accept and expend and recommend it to you for full recommendation to the board of supervisors. Chair fewer thank you. Is amy chan here from mohcd . Okay. Supervisor peskin, is this something that you want to present on since emmy chan is not in the audience today . Supervisor peskin so yeah, sure, im happy to present. This is a gift to the Affordable Housing fund of the city and county of San Francisco in the amount of 100,000 from the developer of 722 montgomery street. Chair fewer okay. No b. L. A. Report on this. Any questions or comments from my colleagues . Seeing none, lets make a motion to move this to the full board with a positive recommendation. [gave [gavel]. Chair fewer madam clerk, please call item 1. [agenda item read] [agenda item read] [agenda item read]. Chair fewer thank you very much. We have michelle and luke from the Controllers Office presenting today. Yes. Good morning, members of the committee. Thank you for hearing this item. Just to introduce it briefly, this is a resolution authorizing issuance of general obligation refunding bonds. It was to be heard at the february 12 meeting of this committee, and we asked for it to be continued until today because we had some technical amendments that needed to be made upon the advice of our bond counsel and the City Attorneys Office which weve distributed to you in a red line for your review. Upon review by the City Attorneys Office, theyve deemed them nonsubstantive technical amendments, so were hoping, supervisor, that you off one of your colleagues could approve the resolution that weve given to you and recommended the amended version out of committee today. Chair fewer excuse me. Are these amendments substantive . The City Attorney has determined theyre not. Chair fewer thank you very much. Additionally, upon coordination with the budget and legislative analysts office, we understand that theyre going to be recommending some additional minor technical changes to the language in this resolution. Theyre not incorporated in the red line that we gave to you, but we when they make the recommendation, we are aware of what the recommendations will be, and we have no concerns, so theyre acceptable to us, as well. Chair fewer thank you. So if there are any questions specifically about the amendments that were proposing, i or mark lake, the City Attorney on the transaction, is here to speak to those. If there are not, my colleague, luke, is going to present the proposal that were submitting today. Good morning. Im going to be presenting on items number 1 and 3, which is the funding resolution, and my colleague will be presenting on item 2. This presentation has both of them, so so the item before you is authorizing the refunding bonds from time to time. General Obligation Bonds, the city has numerous bonds outstanding, and they have provisions in them that allow us to refinance them. General them every eight to ten years that theyre outstanding. So currently in the next five years, there are the opportunity to refund 1 appointnottoexceed resolutio. Theres also of the 1. 48 billion which can be refunded, were also looking to approve the first sale with a nottoexceed amount of 255 million. The resolution authorizes and directs o. P. F. To determine which bonds should be determined to be refunded bonds. The refunding bonds must not have a final Maturity Date later than the Maturity Date of the bonds to be refunded, and the cost must not exceed 2 , and underage cost must not exceed 3 . The office of Public Finance must return to the board with each supplemental appropriation with the request to issue funding bonds. This authority to issue refunding bonds under the refundi refunding resolution expires june 30, 2025. So heres a summary of the bonds that we are proposing to refund this coming spring. Theres two series of eser, two from parks 2008, and safety from 2011. Were currently estimating based on markets back in late january that the gross savings to taxpayers would be approximately 31. 64 million based on an estimated Interest Rate of 2. 19 on a net present value based of the case flow save cash flow savings, were looking at about 11 of the funded bonds, which is well above the 3 threshold that this funding resolution requires. We are seeking the approval of the sale of the initial series in addition to the full authorization over the five years not to exceed 255 million. Final maturity is the final maturity of the bonds, which is june 30, 2025. The source and uses here are estimated sources and uses provided to us by our municipal advisor and do not associate directly with the appropriation ordinance which was prepared earlier in january in order to get everything on the same timeline, that is a nottoexceed amount, which we do not anticipate issuing all of. So as far as timeline, weve introduced, back in january, our were expecting the board to hear the approval for the resolution next week and the First Reading of the ordinance next week followed by the final appropriation the next the follow along with the final closing of the refunding bonds in march and april, which allows us to refund the bonds on their very first call date of june 15, 2020. Any questions . Chair fewer any questions or comments from my colleagues . Seeing none, could we have the b. L. A. Report, please. Good morning, chair fewer and members of the committee. Severin campbell from the budget and legislative analysts office. These changes are largely due to changes in securities and Exchange Commissions requirements, so the language in the debt policy conforms with those requirements. But i do we do actually recommend a change to the resolution itself. This resolution as written would allow changes to the debt policy, not only for minor changes, but for more resolution changes without coming back to the board of supervisors. That would continue to allow the department to make amendments or changes to the debt policy if they are specific to regulatory changes or legal changes, but more discretionary changes just as best practices would need to come back to the board for approval. And then, on the other two items, item 1 and 3, item 1 is a resolution authorizing funding bonds through 2025, and issuing 255 million through those bonding funds. The total amount to be refunded are shown on page 8 of our report. The actual bonds that would be refunded or proposed to be refunded by the 255 million to be sold this spring are shown in exhibit 1 on page 5 of our report. And then, the appropriation of those bonds is shown on page 6, and we can answer any questions you have about that. Again, we do have a couple of recommendations to the resolution approving the issuance of 1. 5 billion in funding bonds. Both of these are more for clarification, and we recommend approval as amended. Chair fewer so the amendment that you are proposing is for item number 1, that is correct, miss severin . We have a proposal for item number 1, the refunding bonds, and for item number 2, the debt policy. Chair fewer so madam clerk, we didnt call item number 2, would you please call item number 2 right now. Clerk yes. [agenda item read]. Chair fewer so colleagues, we are now listening we are now hearing items 1, 2, and 3 together, and is there a separate presentation for item number 2 . There is. There is. Chair fewer okay. So lets hear that all together since we have recommendations from the b. L. A. For items 1 and 2. Okay. Just in brief, this is also continued from item number 2 is continued from the february 12 budget and finance hearing. From time to time, the office of Public Finance needs to update its the citys debt policy due to changes in regulatory or industry policies. So when they update that policy, we bring it back to the board for approval. That was what we were intending to do. We brought this back on january 28, and just before the last hearing, the s. E. C. Issued a new legal guidance which required us to review what we had submitted for introduction, and working with our City Attorneys Office, the changes to the guidance recommended a change to index i which concerns municipal finance disclosure policies and practices, and so ive submitted a copy of the changes as introduction to appendix i. You can see the red line of the changes that were submitting since introduction. The amendment is only to this appendix i, theres no requested change to the legislation itself. However, as ms. Campbell noted, the b. L. A. Has recommendations to the resolution, and we find those recommendations acceptable. More specifically, to speak to the updates since the last board approved version of the board policy, my colleague, ana, is here to speak to what has changed since the last time the board approved the debt. Chair fewer thank you. Thank you. Im director of the Controllers Office of Public Finance. Weve long maintained a formal written debt policy. It establishes our formal objectives such as maintaining moderate debt Service Levels while maintaining our highest practical credit rating. It further requires us to establish internal controls and procedures and demonstrate a commitment to best practices in municipal debt planning issuance and management. So got a few a couple powerpoint slides. As a reminder, we were also here last january for updates to the use of proceeds designation as well as extending the term for general Obligation Bonds for Affordable Housing loans. And the next slide, we go through the updates some of the key updates that were presenting here today that were asking for your approval. Specifically, those are as noted. Were finding the citys disclosure practices, which are detailed in appendix i. Additionally, wanted to note that a board of supervisors disclosure training has been scheduled for april 7, and during that, the City Attorneys Office will review our practices. Another change in the policy would allow for the use of negotiated sales for complex refinancings. Just terminations to sale bonds requires consultation with the controller and the citys municipal advisor or advisors as well as a competitive process for underwriter selection. And with that, i am happy to answer any questions on the citys debt policy. Chair fewer okay. So colleagues, any comments or questions . Seeing none, lets open this up for Public Comment. Are there any members of the public that would like to comment on items 1, 2, or 3 . Seeing none, Public Comment is now closed. [gavel]. Chair fewer i first would like to make a motion to approve the amendments to items number 1 and 2, is that correct . Yes, and we can take that without objection. Thank you very much. [gavel]. Chair fewer and then id like to approve the amendments presented by the b. L. A. And items 1 and 2, if we can take that without objection . Thank you very much. [gavel]. Chair fewer and no comments on this complex item . Yes, sir. Were also asking for approval of item number 3. Chair fewer yes, but item number 3 has no amendments, correct . We just approved the amendments. Id like to make a motion to approval items 1, 2, and 3 to the full board with a positive recommendation. If we can do that without objection, colleagues. [gavel]. Chair fewer madam clerk, if you can call item 4. Item 4, resolution approving San Francisco municipal transportation agent contract for armed and unarmed Security Guard services with universal Protection Service l. P. , in an amount not to exceed 59,028,401 for a threeyear term to commence on the Effective Date following board are professional with three oneyear options to extend at the discretion of the director of transportation. Chair fewer and i believe we have glen mar for a presentation. Thank you, mr. Mar. I believe your request for armed and unArmed Services are for your locations only, is that correct . Yes. Chair fewer okay. Go ahead with your intention. Good morning, supervisors. I am glen mar, chief security officer. So im here to talk about the carr. Our agency approaches security for our employees and for our customers in a multitiered fashion. Ultimately, the Contract Security is the main one were talking about today, but we also approach it through capital improvements, muni transits. We also address it through p. O. P. , training for staff members, and also a partnership with sfpd. So today, were going to talk just about the security contract which deals primarily with the safety and security of our members. I conducted an assessment of 12 facilities, and out of them, nine of those were severely lacking in security. What i mean by severely lacking, there were Security Guards, but only for certain hours of the day. So during the times that Security GuardSecurity Guards werent there, employees had to deal with other issues, homeless getting into the facility, using rest rooms, stealing items from the lockers, feces and urine issues they had to deal with. Some of our facilities had no Security Officers, so thats why we wanted to up the manpower and hours for most of these facilities. So the next page is a contractual review of what this contract will be. The vendor is allied universal Security Services. It was formerly cypress, but it was taken over in june 2018 by allied. Chair fewer excuse me, mr. Mar. Would you like to put this up on sfgovtv . Im sorry. Chair fewer thank you. So heres the overview of the contract that were proposing to you today. Its not to exceed 28 milli million 59 million for a three year contract. Here, we have the overview i think theres a lot of numbers up there, but i think the one we should concentrate on is the service hours. Based on my assessment and what we talked about earlier about the need for all of these facilities, the nine facilities we did the assessment on, we want to increase it to approximately 233,000 per year, which is roughly a 25 increase. Here we have another chart, and theres a lot of numbers, but please concentrate on the number in the lower right hand corner. Our current cost is 6. 7 million for Security Services from allied. And because of our security concerns, and the employees that we want to increase that, 233,000 would increase it to 8. 5 million, up to 10. 2 million due to the increase in wages and also the increase in manpower. So why do we want this contract approved . As ive talked about earlier, its so, so important that we show to our employees that we actually care about their safety first. So for the last eight to nine months that i was with the agency, i received numerous phone calls and numerous emails where they were concerned about their employees safety. I think with this contract, it would be a big step forwardtor tforwardtor forward for the city and for the agency that we show our employees that we care about them, so i ask that you approve this contract. That concludes my presentation, and im happy to answer any questions that you may have. Chair fewer thank you very much. So lets hear from the b. L. A. , please. Yes. The board of supervisors is being asked to approve the resolution to approve this new contract for Security Services at m. T. A. As mr. Mar pointed out, the provider would be allied universal, but if you see on table one, page ten of our report, the existing provider, cypress provide security had the highest private security had the highest score, but offer the conclusion before but after the conclusion before you, they were purchased by allied universal. Mr. Mar reported on the increase in hours in this contract compared to the existing contract. We show the total number of hours on page 11 of our report. But also in our footnote, we note where there would be an increase in hours at existin