Page 1

SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITY Rev. Amos Brown, President Mirian Saez, Vice President Micah Allen, Commissioner Dr. Veronica Hunnicutt, Commissioner Ahsha Safai, Commissioner Matthew Schwartz, Commissioner Dorothy Smith, Commissioner

BOARD AGENDA April 12, 2012 4:00 pm Board of Commissioners Room 440 Turk Street San Francisco Ca. 94102 (415) 715-3280 Henry A. Alvarez III Executive Director

.The Mission of the S

“ The Mission of the San Francisco Housing Authority is to deliver safe and decent 1 housing for low income households and integrate economic opportunity for residents.”


Table of Contents MEETING NOTICE .................................................................................................................................. 3 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ....................................................................................................................... 6 ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: LIMITED MINUTES ..................................................................... 6 TENANT REPRESENTATIVE REPORT: ........................................................................................... 19 REGULAR BUSINESS AGENDA: ......................................................................................................... 20 COMMISSIONER’S COMMENT.......................................................................................................... 50 CLOSED SESSION ................................................................................................................................ 100

2


EDW IN M. LEE, MAYOR SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITY

REV. AMOS C BROW N, PRESIDENT

SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITY Mirian Saez, Vice President Micah Allen, Commissioner Dr. Veronica Hunnicutt, Commissioner Ahsha Safai, Commissioner Matthew Schwartz, Commissioner Dorothy Smith, Commissioner Henry A. Alvarez III, Executive Director

440 TURK STREET SAN FRANCISCO, California 94102 www.sfha.org

MEETING NOTICE Thursday, April 12, 2012·4:00 p.m. 1.

The San Francisco Housing Authority holds its meetings at 440 Turk Street, San Francisco, California 94102.

2.

Disability Access: 440 Turk Street is accessible to persons using wheelchairs and others with disabilities. Assistive listening devices are available upon request. Agendas are available in large print. Materials in alternative formats and/or American Sign Language interpreters will be made available upon request. Please make your request for alternative format or other accommodations to the Office of the Ombudsman and Communication (415) 715-3232 (V); (415) 715-3280 (“TTDY”) at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to help ensure availability.

3.

The closest accessible BART station is Civic Center, three blocks from City Hall. Accessible MUNI lines serving this location are: #47 Van Ness, #49 Van Ness, #71 Haight/Noriega, #5 Fulton, #21 Hayes, 36 Parnassus, #7 Haight, the F Line to Market and Van Ness and any line serving the Metro Stations at Van Ness and Market and at Civic Center. For more information about MUNI accessible services, call 415-673-6142. There is accessible parking across the street from City Hall at Civic Center Garage as well as across the street from the Federal Building on Larkin.

4.

Agenda, minutes and attachments are available at www.sfha.org as well as the San Francisco Housing Authority Administrative Office located at 1815 Egbert Avenue, San Francisco, California 94124. If any materials related to an item on this agenda have been distributed to the San Francisco Housing Authority Board of Commission after distribution of the agenda packet, those materials are available for public inspection during normal office hours at the San Francisco Housing Authority at 1815 Egbert Street San Francisco CA 94124

5.

In order to assist the San Francisco Housing Authority’s efforts to accommodate persons with severe allergies, environmental illness, multiple chemical sensitivity or related disabilities, attendees at public meetings are reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various chemical based products. Please help the San Francisco Housing Authority accommodate these individuals.

6.

The use of electronic sound-producing devices at/during public meetings is prohibited. Please be advised that the meeting President may remove any person(s) responsible for the ringing or use of cell phones, pagers and similar sound-producing electronic devices from the meeting room.

7.

Requests for public comment may be heard on items not on the agenda as well as after staff presentation on any Regular Agenda Item. Speakers at Board meetings are requested, but not required, to identify themselves and fill out cards placed on the table at the entrance door. When the Board considers policy, which has not been considered by a committee, testimony is welcome during the Public Comment portion of the meeting. Testimony is not permitted when an opportunity has been given at a committee hearing for testimony on an item. The public may address the Board for up to two minutes or four minutes for speakers who require an interpreter, or unless otherwise approved by the Board of Commissioners. The President, or the Board, may limit the total testimony to 30 minutes. A speaker may not yield his or her time to another speaker. The Board may not take action on a new proposal, which is not on the agenda.

3


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------AGENDA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ORDER OF BUSINESS 1. Call to order and roll call 2. Approval of agenda 3. Public comments on items not on the agenda: limited minutes Note: This portion of the agenda is not intended for debate or discussion with the Commission or staff. Please simply state your business or the matter you wish the Commission or staff to be aware of. It is not appropriate for commissioners to engage in a debate or respond on issues not properly set in a publicly noticed meeting agenda. If you have questions or would like to bring a matter to the Commissions’ attention, please contact the Executive Office of the San Francisco Housing Authority at leey@sfha.org.

4. Secretary’s Report a. b. c. d.

Response to Public Comments Report on Healani Ting (Section 8 Recipient at Park Merced) 2012 Annual Plan Process: Update SFHA Recycling and Energy Sufficient Programs and Capital Improvements: Update

5. Tenant representative report: a. City Wide Council - senior/disabled (“CCSD”) b. Public Housing Tenants Association (“PHTA”) 6.

Regular Business: Public comment will be taken after staff presentation on each agenda item. Speakers are encouraged to complete a comment card. Speakers will be limited to two minutes or four minutes for speakers who require an interpreter.

a. Consent items 1) Approval of Minutes: March 22, 2012 Meeting Public Comment b. Action item 1) [Informational Presentation on CDBG Funding Recommendations and HOPE SF Investments.] Presented by Kyle Pederson, Governmental Affairs Officer, Executive Office Public Comment

4


2) [Informational Presentation by Office of Economic & Workforce Development on Workforce Strategies and Investments Pertaining to SFHA Sites and Residents.] Presented by Kyle Pederson, Governmental Affairs Officer, Executive Office Public Comment 3) [Authorization to create weekend work in partnership with CCSF DPW.] Presented by Kyle Pederson, Governmental Affairs Officer, Executive Office Public Comment 4) [Resolution for two (2) two-year contracts with (1) K2A Architecture + Interiors and (2) Tectonics Architects/Planners/Engineers to provide architectural services for an amount not to exceed $50,000 each in CFP 2011 and $100,000 each for next year CFP 2012.] Presented by James Mark, Senior Project Manager, Housing Development & Modernization Department Public Comment 5) [Pursue and Apply for Funding Opportunities for Sunnydale and Potrero HOPE SF Revitalization Projects with the Development Teams and City Partners.] Presented by Barbara T. Smith, Administrator, Housing Development &Modernization Public Comment 7. Commissioner’s comment 8. Closed session A closed session is scheduled to discuss pending litigation. Public Comment

9. Adjournment

5


PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: LIMITED MINUTES Note: This portion of the agenda is not intended for debate or discussion with the Commission or staff. Please simply state your business or the matter you wish the Commission or staff to be aware of. It is not appropriate for commissioners to engage in a debate or respond on issues not properly set in a publicly noticed meeting agenda. If you have questions or would like to bring a matter to the Commissions’ attention, please contact the Executive Office of the San Francisco Housing Authority at leey@sfha.org.

6


SECRETARY’S REPORT a. b. c. d.

Response to Public Comments Report on Healani Ting (Section 8 Recipient at Park Merced) 2012 Annual Plan Process: Update SFHA Recycling and Energy Sufficient Programs and Capital Improvements

7


EDW IN M. LEE, MAYOR SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITY

REV. AMOS C. BROW N, PRESIDENT

SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITY Date: Friday, March 30, 2012 To:

Board of Commissioners

From: Henry A. Alvarez III, Executive Director Re:

Responses to Public Comment at Commission Meeting on March 22, 2012

Public Comment Regarding Tenants’ Associations: Commenter Carol Flowra, President of the Tenant Association Board at 491 31st Avenue indicated that she would like to see that Ms. Raimey be allowed to continue working with the tenants in the building because Ms. Raimey has forged excellent rapport with them when she was President of CCSD. In addition, Commenter, Paul Currier, also spoke regarding Tenant Elections. He stated that there have been many complaints about the Tenants’ Association (TA), including lack of proper prior notification, lack of communication generally, and speculated that perhaps financing the CCSD endeavor is questionable. Staff Response: On an ongoing basis, the Office of the General Council has overseen the legal requirements and logistics to execute a fair election for the Tenants’ Association. The Housing Authority investigates promptly any allegation of misconduct related to tenant association elections. Tenant associations are also advised to contact Ms. Pamela Palpallatoc as she is responsible for the overall operations of the Tenants’ Associations and liaises on behalf of Mr. Larsen, General Council. Public Comment Regarding Park Merced: Commenter Helani Ting indicated that she is concerned that Park Merced Property Management and Park Merced Owners are targeting low income tenants for eviction due to an upcoming redevelopment of the property. She also stated that she thinks excellent progress has been made by the SFHA management related to these aforementioned issues.

8


Commenter Lynn, resident of Park Merced inquired as to when the public might be able to review information/documents related to Park Merced. How will members of the public be informed and able to review associated documents and information? Staff Response: Management of the Authority met with Park Merced Management on Tuesday, March 6, 2012 and again on Friday, March 16, 2012 to review Ms. Ting’s file. In the meantime, Ms. Ting is in no danger of an eviction and has a rent credit of $7,618. Park Merced denies that their redevelopment will result in the eviction of any Section 8 recipient in good standing. Lynn, however, is in the process of being evicted from Park Merced for failure to pay her utilities. The Housing Authority provides Lynn with a utility allowance, so it does not cost her anything to pay her utilities; she just needs to pass on the allowance to Park Merced, which she has failed to do. Public Comment Regarding Resident Advisory Board (RAB) Meetings: Commenter Uzuri Green, secretary of the Public Housing Tenants Association, (PHTA), indicated that the Resident Advisory Board Meetings (RAB that she has attended are very informative. She inquired as to whether or not various Community Based Organizations, (CBO’s) and other stakeholders are invited to participate in the RAB process. Staff Response: SFHA Management welcomes participation in the RAB process by CBO’s, other relevant stakeholders, and appropriate external audiences that would enhance the RAB meetings. Immediately after the Commission Meeting, SFHA Management contacted Ms. Green and asked her to provide suggestions on potential stakeholders that can participate in upcoming RAB meetings.

9


San Francisco Housing Authority

Memo To:

Henry Alvarez

From: Roger Crawford Date:

4/6/2012

Re:

Report on Healani Ting (Section 8 Recipient at Park Merced)

Issue Ms. Healani Ting, a resident at Park Merced and a Section 8 recipient, has attended recent Housing Authority commission meetings to complain that she was being charged too much in rent by Park Merced. Ms. Ting believes that she is being charged too much in rent because she is part of a group that has been vocal against Park Merced’s redevelopment plans. In particular, Ms. Ting believes that she is being charged too much in rent so that Park Merced can evict her if she does not pay. Ms. Ting further believes that Park Merced would like to remove and replace her with a tenant capable of paying higher rent when the redevelopment is complete. I was assigned to look into this issue. Background On January 26, 2012: Park Merced sent a letter to both the Housing Authority and Ms. Ting regarding Ms. Ting’s rent. According to the letter sent to the Housing Authority, Park Merced was indeed charging Ms. Ting too much rent in error. Ms. Ting was improperly charged this amount for approximately one year. Ms. Ting’s rent was therefore adjusted down from $1,308 per month to $229. $229 is the amount Ms. Ting should pay. On February 3, 2012: I met with management at Park Merced to discuss Ms. Ting. According to management, Ms. Ting’s rent was adjusted retroactively. As Ms. Ting was actually paying the $1308 per month for over twelve months, this left her with a credit in her account of $7,618.

10


I sent a letter to Ms. Ting to inform her that her rent was being adjusted and I invited her to contact me if needed. Recent Developments March 6, 2012: I met with Ms. Ting to discuss her rent credit. Ms. Ting insisted that the amount of the credit in her account was too low and that Park Merced owed her more money. Ms. Ting attempted to produce documentation to support her claims, but was unable to do so during this meeting. March 16, 2012: As a further accommodation to Ms. Ting, I again met with Park Merced management regarding the rent credit in her account. Christina Zsolnay, an accountant for Park Merced, was able to provide me with a detailed accounting that supports Ms. Ting is owed only $7,618. April 4, 2012: I again met with Ms. Ting. I let her know that Park Merced has detailed documents supporting the amount of her rent credit. Ms. Ting believes that her rent credit should be approximately $13,000. I let Ms. Ting know that she must provide documentation to support her claim. We ended the meeting with Ms. Ting once again agreeing to search for any records she has that support that she is owed $13,000, not $7,618. If Ms. Ting is able to produce records that support she is owed $13,000, I will refer her back Park Merced for the issue to be resolved.

11


OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITY

EDW IN M. LEE, MAYOR REV. AMOS C. BROW N, RESIDENT

Memo To:

Henry Alvarez III, Secretary, Board of Commissioners, the San Francisco Housing Authority

From: Linda Martin-Mason, Ombudsman Date:

April 12, 2012

Re:

Annual Plan Process: Update

On March 22, 2012 the Board of Commissioners of the San Francisco Housing Authority (“Board”) was provided with an overview of the 2012 Annual Plan Process. This memo is provided as an update and response as requested by the Board: 1. Who are the various groups involved in the Annual Plan Process? A. Public Housing Resident Advisory Board Armstrong, Joyce Darty,

Reggie

Gans,

Neola

Givant

Tatiana

Givant

Tatiana

Goodall,

Fred

Green,

Uzuri

Johnson,

Annette

Jones,

Elizabeth

Katz,

Peter

Kellom

Frank

Ramey,

Dorothy

Saba,

Beverly 12


Shaw,

Lavelle

Smith,

Deidra

Tam,

Elaine

Watkins,

Solomon

B. Housing Choice Voucher Resident Advisory Board Abramson

Stanley

Ahmed

Sahar

Allen

Marla

Battipaglia

Thomas

Brown

Leroy

Bui

Christine

Cheung

Wai

Cockett

Eric

Demetrius

Socrates

Francis

Gilbert

Hayes

Geraldine

Huang

Bisi

Linares

Gloria

Markham

Brenda

Martinez

Rosa

Mui

Maggie

Nae

Carl

Nguyen

Loc

Nguyen

Nhung 13


Russell

Judy

Schlotterbeck Gary Seneris

Pilar

Si

Alex

Smith

Mary

Taylor

Cheryl

Trikuzova

Lyudmila

Viar

Judith

Warren

Linda

White

Barry

Williams

Kerriann

*This list includes participant(s) of the traditional Tenant Based Voucher Program, Project Based Voucher Program, Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Program (“VASH”), Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS Program (“HOPWA”) and Moderate Rehabilitation Program (“Mod Rehab”). C. Community Partners Bay Area Legal Aid Housing Rights Committee AIDS Legal Referral Panel San Francisco Human Rights Commission AIDS Housing Alliance/ SF Woman Inc. National Housing Law Project City & County of San Francisco Homeless Prenatal Program

14


Episcopal Community Services Independent Living Resource Center City & County of San Francisco City & County of San Francisco La Casa de las Madres Asian Pacific Islander Family Resource Network Bayview Hunters Point Family Resource Center Chicano/Latino Family Resource System Oceanview/Merced/Ingleside Family Resource Center Potrero Hill Family Resource Center Support for Families with Children with Disabilities TalkLine Family Support Center Family Eviction Prevention Eviction Defense Collaborative Season of Sharing The Department of Aging and Adult Services Mercy Housing California AIDS Legal Referral Panel Arab Culture & Community Center Asian Law Caucus Asian Pacific Community Center CARECEN Community Youth Center-San Francisco Dolores Street Community Services

15


Donaldina Cameron House Filipino Community Center Hearing And Speech Center of Nor Cal Instituto Laboral De La Raza La Razo Centro Legal La Raza Community Resource Center API Legal Outreach The Arc Samoan Community Development Center Swords to Plowshares Mission Asset Fund Mission Economic Development Agency Mission SF Community Financial Center Northeast Community Federal Credit Union Asian Neighborhood Design Charity Cultural Services Friends of the Urban Forest In Home Support Service Consortium Mission Language and Vocational School Self Help For The Elderly Booker T. Washington Community Service Center Conscious Youth Media Crew LYRIC Mission Neighborhood Centers Opportunity Impact 16


Together, United, Recommited, Forever United Playaz YMCA Urban Services APA Family Support Services Arriba Juntos Central City Hospitality House Chinese for Affirmative Action LGBT Community Center Goodwill Industries Mission Hiring Hall Mujeres Unidas Y Activas Positive Resource Center Toolworks Upwardly Global Young Community Developers Inc.

2. Preferences The following is a list of preferences that have been suggested to the San Francisco Housing Authority as of April 6, 2012:         

No Preference Persons age 71 and up People with disabilities and children Single parents and children Severe Allergy documented Disabled veterans Anyone with severe health problems at risk of becoming homeless and homeless may cause death Disability Domestic Violence 17


  

Homelessness Senior Homeless Families residing in HSA-funded shelter or on the centralized intake agency waitlist for family shelter

3. Meeting Location The San Francisco Housing Authority will host one meeting in Hunter’s View. As soon as the date, time and specific location is confirmed, the Board will be notified of the updated information.

18


TENANT REPRESENTATIVE REPORT: a. b.

City Wide Council - Senior/Disabled (“CCSD”) Public Housing Tenants Association (“PHTA”)

19


REGULAR BUSINESS AGENDA: Public comment will be taken after staff presentation on each agenda item. Speakers are encouraged to complete a comment card. Speakers will be limited to two minutes or four minutes for speakers who require an interpreter.

a. Consent items 1)

Approval of Minutes: March 22, 2012 Meeting Public Comment

b. Action item 1)

[Informational Presentation on CDBG Funding Recommendations and HOPE SF Investments.] Presented by Kyle Pederson Governmental Affairs Officer Public Comment

2)

[Informational Presentation by Office of Economic & Workforce Development on Workforce Strategies and Investments Pertaining to SFHA Sites and Residents.] Presented by Kyle Pederson Governmental Affairs Officer Public Comment

3)

[Authorization to create weekend work in partnership with CCSF DPW.] Presented by Kyle Pederson Governmental Affairs Officer Public Comment

4)

[Resolution for two (2) two-year contracts with (1) K2A Architecture + Interiors and (2) Tectonics Architects/Planners/Engineers to provide architectural services for an amount not to exceed $50,000 each in CFP 2011 and $100,000 each for next year CFP 2012.] Presented by James Mark, Senior Project Manager, Housing Development & Modernization Department Public Comment

5)

[Pursue and Apply for Funding Opportunities for Sunnydale and Potrero HOPE SF Revitalization Projects with the Development Teams and City Partners.] Presented by Barbara T. Smith, Housing Development & Modernization Administrator Public Comment

20


MINUTES SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING March 22, 2012

SCHEDULED: 4:00 p.m. at 440 Turk Street, San Francisco, CA 94102 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Rev. Amos C. Brown, Chair Mirian Saez, Vice Chair Matthew Schwartz, Commissioner arr: 4:11 Ahsha Safai, Commissioner arr: 4:09 Dorothy Smith, Commissioner Micah Allen, Commissioner Dr. Veronica Hunnicutt, Commissioner Item 1:

COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Rev. Amos C. Brown, Chair

Meeting called to order President Rev. Amos Brown called meeting to order at 4:03pm

Item 2:

Approval of Agenda

Motion:

Commissioner Hunnicut: Commissioner Allen: Vote:

Item 3:

Public Comments on items not on the agenda

Motioned to approve agenda Seconded motion All approved

Commenter, Carol Flowra, President of the Tenant Association board at 491 31st Avenue requested that Dorothy Ramey continue working with their complex because Ms. Raimey established a good relationship with her development while acting as President of CCSD. Commenter, Paul Currier, resident at JFK stated that there have been many complaints made regarding the tenants association including why the tenants are not being noticed for elections, lack of proper communication, and questioned why the tenant association pays anything to CCSD. Commenter, Helani Ting, resident at Park Merced stated that progress is being made with the Park Merced issues.

21


Commenter, Lynn, stated that the Park Merced is in violation of her rights as a disabled person. Further, commenter stated that Park Merced has stopped accepting rent. Commenter mentioned that she needs help getting all of the documentation requested for trial regarding utilities. Commenter, Michael Lyons, member of the San Francisco Grey Panthers stated that his organization is very upset with what is happening to the tenants of Park Merced. Mr. Lyons stated that he submitted a PRA last year that he has not received a response to. Item 4:

Secretary’s Report Henry A. Alvarez III, Secretary, stated that he was in Washington D.C. discussing options for Hope SF and the transformation of the properties involved with Hope SF with the Assistant Secretary Sandra Henriquez. The Secretary added that he will be returning to Washington D.C. for the legislative conference. The Secretary announced that the Authority received a security grant for $250,000 and that there is currently a request for proposal out for security.

Item 5:

Tenant Representative Report 1. Citywide Council Senior Disabled (CCSD) Beverly Saba, President of CCSD commended Tim Larsen, James Ferry and Bill Ford for addressing the security concerns Ms. Saba also thanked Barbara Smith, Anthony Ihejeto and Twima Early for their assistance. Ms. Saba thanked Rufus Davis for assistance with the ROSS grant to attempt to get service coordinators at sites that don’t have one. Ms. Saba also thanked Anthony Ihejeto and Twima Early for attending a tenant meeting at 430 Turk and responding to various concerns. 2. Public Housing Tenants Association (PHTA) Joyce Armstrong, President of PHTA stated that the Annual Plan is being handled differently than in previous years. Ms. Armstrong requested that PHTA and CCSD stay informed with any progress made to the annual plan process. Ms. Armstrong also stated that the PHTA has not received any information regarding the 2012 Summer Lunch Program. PHTA believes that they are being forced into censorship by the SFHA. Ms. Armstrong stated that she believes that the minutes should not be summarized but should report exactly what has been stated verbatim. Ms. Armstrong further reported that the PHTA is working closely with their attorney on bylaws and will begin the election process shortly.

22


Item 6:

Regular Business A. Consent Items  Minutes o Minutes of regular Board meeting held on March 8, 2012

Motion:

Commissioner Schwartz: Commissioner Allen: Vote:

Moved to accept minutes of March 8, 2012 Seconded the motion All approved

B. Action Items 2. [Informational Presentation: Public Housing Annual Plan Process.] Presented by: Linda Martin-Mason, Ombudsman, Office of the Ombudsman and Communication

Linda Martin-Mason presented a Power Point Presentation explaining the annual plan process. Commissioner Saez asked Ms. Martin-Mason to list the stakeholders that would be included under community advocates as well as the City departments and how does that differ from the community based organization. Ms. Martin-Mason provided examples of organizations that have been contacted in addition to the differences between the various partners. Commissioner Safai asked what was done differently with the City-Wide Council for the tenants from previous years. Mrs. Martin-Mason responded that in the past for both the Public Housing and Section 8 whoever wanted to attend RAB meetings were the RAB. However, HUD recommends that if the PHA has a jurisdiction-wide council, the council should be the RAB, which is what was done for the 2012 RAB. Commissioner Safai asked why weren’t any of the RAB locations in the South-East side of San Francisco where the majority of the Housing Authority residents reside. Mrs. Martin-Mason replied that it was not intentional and that will be considered in the future. Commissioner Safai asked if there were any complaints received regarding locations of meetings. Mrs. Martin-Mason responded that they have not received any complaints regarding location. President Rev. Amos Brown asked why the various locations weren’t considered.

23


Mrs. Martin-Mason responded that in considering past complaints and suggestions, the primary complaint was noise, never location. Thus, this year, the meetings were scheduled to be in the same vicinity with different location that may be quieter. Further, Mrs. Martin-Mason offered to update the schedule to include another site. Commissioner Schwartz recommended that potential strategies for Hope SF sites be included in the Annual Plan Process with sufficient time to provide for public comment. Mr. Alvarez explained how everything is accessible through the Housing Authority’s new and improved website @ www.sfha.org. Mr. Alvarez also commended the Ombudsman staff for the improvements made to the website. Commissioner Allen asked if the RAB meetings have been well attended. Mrs. Martin-Mason responded that they have been well attended Commissioner Allen complimented the website and asked if there is heavy traffic. Mrs. Martin-Mason responded that she was only aware of the facebook traffic, which is linked to the website and that the facebook page had 611 hits in the past 7 days. Commissioner Hunnicutt stated that the website looks beautiful and asked about Housing Choice Voucher Program RAB application process in the past versus this year. Mrs. Martin-Mason responded that in previous years, only the RAB from the year prior was invited to attend. In 2012 an invitation to apply for the RAB was sent to all Housing Choice Voucher Participants. The SFHA received 300 responses and randomly selected 30 of the 300. Commissioner Safai requested that the recommendations pertaining to preferences be brought to the board before being finalized. Public comment: Commenter, Uzuri Green secretary of the PHTA, stated that she is learning a lot from the RAB meetings. Ms. Green suggested the following for different locations of the RAB meetings: Bayview: The Opera House, Potreo Hill: Neighborhood House, Sunnydale: Boys & Girls Club. Ms. Green asked if there were any local stakeholders such as the family Resource Center, The Neighborhood House, Salvation Army, and Shiloh involved in the process. Commenter, Lynn, resident at Park Merced asked when will the public be able to review the proposals before they become final and how will that be disseminated in terms to their response. Lynn also invited Mrs. Martin-Mason to visit Park Merced.

24


3. [Resolution Authorizing the Executive Director to enter into a Construction Contract with Nicole’s Work Inc. for Fire Damage Restoration Services Phase II at 350 Ellis Housing Development in an mount not to exceed $408,899 to be reimbursed with property insurance proceeds.] Presented by: James Mark, Senior Project Manager Housing Development & Modernization Department

Commissioner Saez asked who completed the first Phase of this work Mr. Mark responded Ideal Restoration Services Inc. provided $25,000 worth of dehumidifying abatement and cutting out the mold. Commissioner Saez asked what was looked at differently between Transworld and Nicole’s Work Inc. Mr. Mark responded that it isn’t unusual to get scattered bids and construction companies factors this in if the company really needs the work when their bids are lower and want to keep workers busy in this economy. Commissioner Safai asked what controls are in place in the bid to insure that the Board will not be asked to approve a range of change orders to meet the true value of what the project is to this contractor. Mr. Mark responded that the bid amount is the construction amount which is usually enforced and not changed because change orders delay projects. Barbara Smith added that the SFHA conducts an independent cost estimate before the projects are put out to bid and this bid is consistent with the independent cost estimate of $450,000. Commissioner Schwartz asked if this was a Lump Sum contract? Mr. Mark replied that it is a Lump Sum contract. Commissioner Allen asked if this will allow resident hiring. Mr. Mark replied yes. Motion:

Item 7:

Commissioner Schwartz: Commissioner Allen: Vote:

Moved to adopt the resolution Seconded the motion All approved

Commissioners Comments Commissioner Allen suggested the Alex Pitcher room in the South East City College Campus for RAB meetings. Commissioner Saez asked if there would be any time to review the process for summer programs.

25


Mrs. Martin-Mason responded that the SFHA is submitting applications to DCYF for all summer lunch programs allowing DCYF to select which sites will host summer lunch. The Secretary explained that during the budget cuts summer programming was excluded from the budget except for Park and Rec Summer Youth Activities Mrs. Martin-Mason responded that she and Kyle Peterson have been working with Park &Rec to figure out the best outreach to residents and in the next 30 days should have further enrollment information. The Secretary introduced Kyle Peterson as the returning Government liaison. Commissioner Safai asked for report on recycling efforts at all of the developments and whether there are any recycling programs with tenant involvement. Commissioner Safai commented that he attended the Good Jobs Green Jobs Conference in L.A. there were many job opportunities as well as opportunities to build social equity, career path development and energy conservation. Commissioner Safai requested that staff provide him with the number of evictions in Park Merced to date. Commissioner Safai asked the Secretary to invite Olsen lee from the Mayor’s Office of Housing to discuss which nonprofits are proposing CDBG grants that intend to serve directly or indirectly Public Housing residents. Residents want to hear directly from the Mayor’s Office of Housing and the Mayor’s Office of Redevelopment on what nonprofits are being funded to provide employment opportunities to residents. Commissioner Schwartz commended staff for the website and asked if there will be a waitlist shown on the site and will people be able to apply for Housing online. Secretary Alvarez responded that all responses to commissioner Schwartz’ questions will be reported the second week of April Item 8:

Closed Session Present: President Dr. Rev. Amos Brown, Commissioner Micah Allen, Commissioner Veronica Hunnicutt, Commissioner Ahsha Safai, Commissioner Matthew Schwartz, Commissioner Dorothy Smith

Decision was made to give council settlement authority Item 9:

Adjournment by consensus 5:46

26


AGENDA SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Agenda Category:

Informational – Executive Office

Agenda Title:

Informational Presentation on CDBG Including HOPE SF Investments

Presented by:

Kyle Pedersen, Governmental Affairs Officer

Funding Recommendations

SUMMARY: In response to the Commission’s request, the Mayor’s Office of Housing has provided the agency’s 2012-13 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding recommendations (attached). In partnership with the diverse communities of San Francisco, the Mayor’s Office of Housing (MOH) strives to strengthen the social, physical and economic infrastructure for San Francisco’s low-income residents and communities in need. Through CDBG funding, MOH is bringing together priority strategies and initiatives throughout the City that impact communities in need and has a specific focus on HOPE SF, which is a partnership with the S.F. Housing Authority to rebuild select public housing sites, increase affordable housing and ownership opportunities, and improve the quality of life for existing residents and the neighboring communities.

Attachments:

A copy of any attached documents are available at the clerk’s desk. DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION: None. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S RECOMMENDATION: None. Agenda Item No. 1 Date: April 12, 2012 27


Creating opportunity for socially and economically isolated San Franciscans requires a multifaceted and comprehensive approach. San Francisco has determined that the optimum way to address the City’s priority challenges is to work towards a set of five interconnected, multidisciplinary goals that cross program areas and utilize leveraged strategies both internally and across multiple City departments. Funding for these strategies will be coordinated across City departments, so that HUD funds can be maximized in those areas that are both of highest priority to MOH/OEWD and where HUD funds can provide the maximum benefit in terms of unmet needs and scarce resources. These five goals are: Goal 1: Families and individuals are healthy and economically self-sufficient Goal 2: Neighborhoods and communities are strong, vibrant and stable Goal 3: Formerly homeless individuals and families are stable, supported and live in long-term housing Goal 4: Families and individuals have safe, healthy and affordable housing Goal 5: Public housing developments that were severely distressed are thriving mixed-income communities The City has also identified vulnerable populations that are at special risk for being multiply affected by the social and economic problems that are facing San Francisco. These groups include:  Seniors;  Persons with disabilities;  Persons with HIV/AIDS;  Disconnected transitional age youth;  Victims/survivors of violence and family violence;  Re-entry population;  Public housing residents; and  Disconnected LGBT individuals. Services and strategies must accordingly be designed to address the unique needs and concerns of these populations in order to maximize their effectiveness.

28


Attachment I: Preliminary Funding Recommendations for San Francisco’s 2012-2013 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) Programs

29


30


31


32


33


34


35


36


37


38


39


40


41


42


43


44


45


46


47


AGENDA SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Agenda Category:

Informational – Executive Office

Agenda Title:

Informational Presentation on Informational Presentation by Office of Economic & Workforce Development on Workforce Strategies and Investments Pertaining to SFHA Sites and Residents

Presented by:

Kyle Pedersen, Governmental Affairs Officer

SUMMARY: In response to the Commission’s request, the San Francisco Office of Economic & Workforce Development has prepared a presentation to summarize the agency’s workforce investments and strategies (attached). The Workforce Development Division of the Office of Economic & Workforce Development (OEWD) coordinates the San Francisco Workforce Development System, which is a network of public, private, and nonprofit service providers that serve San Francisco jobseekers and employers. OEWD strives to ensure that San Francisco has a qualified workforce that attracts, retains and expands industries, and enhances the quality of life in the City.

Attachments:

OEWD SFHA Commission Presentation

A copy of any attached documents are available at the clerk’s desk. DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION: None. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S RECOMMENDATION: None. Agenda Item No. 2 Date: April 12, 2012

48


ATTACHMENT I OEWD SFHA Commission Presentation

49


50


51


52


53


54


55


56


57


58


59


60


AGENDA SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Agenda Category:

Action – Executive Office

Agenda Title:

Resolution Authorizing the Executive Director to Enter Into A Memorandum Of Understanding (“Agreement) Between the San Francisco Housing Authority (“SFHA”) and the Department Of Public Works (“DPW”) Concerning Trash and General Labor Services at SFHA’s Developments

Presented by:

Kyle Pedersen, Governmental Affairs Officer

SUMMARY The attached resolution authorizes the Executive Director to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the San Francisco Department of Public Works to develop 7501 Apprenticeship Program to provide weekend trash and landscaping services from May 1, 2012 – July 31, 2014 for an amount not to exceed $1,814,190. [Continued on Page 2]

Attachments:

I. SFHA-DPW MOU II. Resolution

A copy of any attached documents are available at the clerk’s desk. DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of this action. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S RECOMMENDATION: I concur with this recommendation.

Agenda Item No. 3 Date: April 12, 2012

61


SFHA-DPW MOU April 12, 2012 Page 2

BACKGROUND Historically, the five largest SFHA family public housing sites (Alice Griffith, Hunters View, Westbrook, Potrero Terrace & Annex, and Sunnydale) have been negatively impacted by elevated trash levels throughout the course of the weekend. The increased levels of trash are due to several impacting factors. First, resident populations are higher during the weekend as residents are not at work, school, and other weekly activities. Second, resident activities and celebrations occur most often during weekends creating an increased influx of trash. Lastly, illegal dumping is most likely to occur at SFHA sites when SFHA staff are not on-site, which would be nights and weekends. While trash rates increase during the weekend, SFHA does not have assigned weekend landscaping and trash staff assigned to respond to and offset high trash rates. By not having a weekend staffing schedule that would be able to respond to the high weekend trash rates, the properties become challenged with overflowing and spilling trash bins, windblown trash throughout the properties, and unsatisfactory landscaping conditions for SFHA properties. To respond to the ongoing concern related to weekend trash levels at SFHA sites, DPW will be expanding the existing 7501 Apprenticeship Program to provide landscaping and trash service Thursday through Monday at five SFHA sites; Alice Griffith, Hunters View, Westbrook, Potrero Terrace & Annex, and Sunnydale. The apprenticeship program will create six full-time benefitted employment positions for SFHA residents that will pay $14.28 per hour. DPW will provide a Packer and a Lumper on weekends (Saturdays and Sundays) to go to the SFHA’s housing developments and pick up trash and other items that are on the streets. DPW will also provide a supervisor to supervise the work of six housing authority residents, to be employed by DPW, to pick up trash from beautification projects and perform general labor work at SFHA’s developments Thursday through Monday (including weekends) on a weekly basis. The employees will begin as Apprentices and end up graduating as Journeymen at the end of the two-year apprenticeship.

62


Attachment I SFHA-DPW MOU

63


DRAFT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (“AGREEMENT) BETWEEN THE SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITIY (“SFHA”) AND THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS (“DPW”) CONCERNING TRASH AND GENERAL LABOR SERVICES AT SFHA’S DEVELOPMENTS THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this ________ day of ______________________, 2012, (“THE EFFECTIVE DATE”) by and between the SFHA and DPW (collectively known as “THE PARTIES”). This AGREEMENT shall be effective from May 1, 2012 and shall continue through July 31, 2014 (the TERM). WHEREAS, THE PARTIES are desirous of entering into this AGREEMENT to pick up trash and perform general labor at the SFHA’s developments, the details of which are hereinafter described. WHEREAS, THE PARTIES are able and agreeable to entering into such an AGREEMENT based on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL PROMISES HEREIN, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: I.

SERVICES. DPW will provide a Packer and a Lumper on weekends (Saturdays and Sundays) to go to the SFHA’s housing developments, including Alice Griffith, Hunters View, Westbrook, Potrero Terrace and Annex, and Sunnydale (the “DEVELOPMENTS”), and pick up trash and other items that are on the streets during the TERM. DPW will also provide a supervisor to supervise the work of six housing authority residents (“CANDIDATES”), to be employed by DPW, to pick up trash from beautification projects and perform general labor work at SFHA’s DEVELOPMENTS Thursday through Monday (including weekends) on a weekly basis during the TERM. These CANDIDATES will begin as Apprentices and end up graduating as Journeymen at the end of the TERM.

II.

PAYMENT FOR SERVICES. SFHA will pay for the services set forth in Paragraph I above in the amounts indicated on the Annual Summary Sheet attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated into this AGREEMENT. DPW will invoice the SFHA monthly. DPW will provide the SFHA with a detailed accounting of hours worked.

III.

INSURANCE. DPW agrees to maintain a policy of public liability insurance with respect to DPW’s services as set forth herein during the TERM. The limits of the public liability insurance shall not be less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence and Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) in the 64


aggregate. The limits of property damage liability shall not be less than the facility’s or property’s replacement value, as determined by the SFHA. Each policy shall name the SFHA as additional insured, and shall contain an endorsement that the insurer will not cancel or terminate the insurance without first giving the SFHA thirty (30) days prior written notice. DPW’s liability insurance and responsibility is limited to and in connection with DPW’s activities. DPW shall be solely responsible for maintaining sufficient funds in its budget to fully pay its employees’ workers compensation claims as required by law. IV.

INDEMNITY. DPW shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the SFHA and its officers, managers, members, employees, contractors and agents from and against any and all liabilities, costs or expenses, including attorney fees, arising from: i.

Any injury or damage occurring during the TERM to persons and/or property resulting wholly or in part by any act or omission of DPW; and

ii.

Any breach by DPW of any provision of this Agreement.

iii.

DPW is not responsible for the sole negligence of the SFHA and its officers, managers, members, employees, contractors and agents.

V.

ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT is the entire agreement between THE PARTIES concerning its subject matter, supersedes all prior agreements and understandings, whether or not written, and is not intended to confer upon any person other than THE PARTIES any rights or remedies hereunder.

VI.

CONFIDENTIALITY. The SFHA and DPW will maintain complete confidentiality of any confidential or privileged information concerning labor negotiations, employment matters, or services provided to, or received by, the SFHA.

VII.

TERMINATION of AGREEMENT. Either PARTY may terminate this AGREEMENT with thirty (30) days notice.

///

///

///

65


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by an authorized representative of each of the parties. SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITY

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

By: _____________________________

By: __________________________

Date: ____________________________

Date: _________________________

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_______________________ Office of the General Counsel

66


Attachment II Resolution

67


RESOLUTION NO. ADOPTED: April 12, 2012

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (“AGREEMENT) BETWEEN THE SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITIY (“SFHA”) AND THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS (“DPW”) CONCERNING TRASH AND GENERAL LABOR SERVICES AT SFHA’S DEVELOPMENTS WHEREAS, the San Francisco Housing Authority is committed to providing clean and sanitary living conditions for all SFHA residents; and WHEREAS, the largest SFHA public housing sites have been challenged with significant increase in trash accumulation over the weekend period; and WHEREAS, SFHA does not currently have staff assigned to weekend landscaping and trash ; and WHEREAS, SFHA is committed to increasing economic and workforce opportunities for SFHA residents; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO THAT:

1. The Executive Director is authorized to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of Public Works to develop and manage a 7501 Apprenticeship Program to provide landscaping and trash services effective from May 1, 2012 and shall continue through July 31,

2014 with the cost of rendered services not to exceed $1,814,190. 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:

REVIEWED BY:

_________________________________ Tim Larsen, Acting General Counsel Date:_____________________________

Rev. Amos Brown, President Date:

68


AGENDA SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Agenda Category:

Action- Housing Development & Modernization Department

Agenda Title:

Resolution for two (2) two-year contracts with: (1) K2A Architecture + Interiors and (2) Tectonics Architects/Planners/Engineers to provide architectural services for an amount not to exceed $50,000 each in CFP 2011 and $100,000 each for next year CFP 2012

Presented By:

James Mark, Senior Project Manager, Housing Development & Modernization Department

SUMMARY: (Supporting Document is attached as Attachment I) Two new architectural contracts are sought to provide a continuation of architectural response to assist the Authority with sanitary, life safety, Code compliance, investigations, public bid specifications and construction supervision. The two highest ranked firms are: K2A Architecture + Interiors and Tectonics Architects/Planners/Engineers. The contract amounts are not to exceed $150,000 each for a total amount of $300,000. The attached resolution authorizes the Executive Director to enter into two contracts with highest ranking architectural consulting firms from 2011 Capital Fund Program for operational fiscal years 2012 and 2013. [Continued on Page 2] Attachments:

I. Resolution II. RFQ Solicitation Process

DEPARTMENT’S REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends adoption of this resolution. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S RECOMMENDATION: I concur with this recommendation.

Agenda Item No. 4 Date: April 12, 2012

69


Architectural Services April 12, 2012 Page 2 OBJECTIVE The objective of these two contracts is to provide the Authority with two competent professional architectural consultants on standby basis to assist with planned renovations, assessing damage and maintaining efficient and safe buildings. The task assignment services may include: 1. Provide field testing and investigations, assessments, analysis, and written reports; 2. Develop recommendations and cost estimates to provide up-grades to any conditions revealed at existing dry-rot and building damage areas, roofing leaks, fire alarm upgrades, bird proofing, accessible elevators and entrances including any new requirements for accessibility under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; 3. Prepare comprehensive construction documents for public bidding within an agreed estimated construction cost for building modernization or up-grades; 4. Assist with clarifications during the public bid phase, contract award phase, and pre-construction phase; 5. Assist Authority’s staff in planning and conducting resident briefings, in notifying residents of architectural problems, modernization or up-grade plans, and relocation or alternative service proposals covering the duration of the construction phase; 6. Assist the Authority's staff during the construction phase by providing construction administration support services such as review of architectural submittals, review of proposed contract changes, performing periodic site inspections, and conducting a final survey to determine if the work performed was in accordance with the project plans and specifications; and 7. Assist the Authority’s staff in the preparation and review of proposals and agreements, classes, operating and maintenance manuals, and general management procedures. EVALUATION PANEL MEMBERS Member: Construction Inspector for HD/MOD Department. Member was selected for their extensive expertise in past construction in the field. Member: Senior Project Manager for HD/MOD Department. Member was selected for their previous architectural consultant management and is a licensed architect. Member: Project Manager for HD/MOD Department. Member was selected for their previous architectural consultant management. PRESENT SITUATION The Authority presently has a list of current projects that require architectural improvements by rehabilitation and modernization activities. Typical architectural consultant projects include construction drawing and specifications for: building upgrades, building alterations, response to Code compliance issues, accessible improvements, dry-rot repairs, liability claims and fire damage investigations.

70


Architectural Services April 12, 2012 Page 2 The current two architectural contracts are exhausted and two new architectural consultants on standby as-needed basis are required to provide continued services and response. ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES If this contract is approved the anticipated outcomes are:     

The Authority will receive two architectural consultants able to investigate and evaluate building issues, provide recommendations, assist in drafting and specifications, provide construction cost estimates and obtain building permits. The Authority will obtain comprehensive construction documents for public bidding within an agreed not-to-exceed estimated fee and timeframe for public bidding. The Authority will receive professional guidance on changes to California Code Title 24, Federal, State and City Codes, and Regulations. The Authority will obtain expertise for prioritizing the modernization, up-grades and maintenance needs to ensure safety, Code and HUD compliance. Residents will have opportunity for training and employment.

WHO BENEFITS Residents benefit from having appropriate immediate professional responses to any building maintenance and repair issues that may arise. The Authority benefits from reduced liability exposure, limited tenant relocation and property loss, and improved ability to respond quickly to emergency situations.

BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS Funding for this planned contract is immediately available from 2011 Capital Fund Program. The Authority and all public agencies in California are required by State and Federal law to select architectural consultants on the basis of qualifications in the form of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ). After the two most-qualified firms were selected, the hourly billing rates were negotiated. For each separate task assignment, hours and reimbursable expenses will be further reviewed and negotiated accordingly to coincide with similar past work. The service term for this two-year contract will be for the Authority’s operational fiscal years 2012 and 2013.

71


Attachment I Resolution

72


RESOLUTION NO. ADOPTED: April 12, 2012 RESOLUTION FOR TWO (2) TWO-YEAR CONTRACTS WITH: (1) K2A ARCHITECTURE + INTERIORS AND (2) TECTONICS ARCHITECTS/PLANNERS/ENGINEERS TO PROVIDE ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $50,000 EACH IN CFP 2011 AND $100,000 EACH FOR NEXT YEAR CFP 2012

WHEREAS, The San Francisco Housing Authority publicly advertised Solicitation No. 11-620-RFQ1153 for the architectural services; and WHEREAS, K2A Architecture + Interiors and Tectonics Architects/Planners/Engineers were evaluated as the two top-rated architectural firms; and WHEREAS, these services are necessary to protect the health and welfare of residents and to preserve the Authority’s real property assets; and WHEREAS, funding is available through the 2011 Capital Fund Program budget; and WHEREAS, the procurement process for those actions covered by this resolution meet the procurement standards of 24 CFR 85.36 “Procurement”, HUD Handbook 7460.8 REV 2, “Procurement Handbook for Public Housing Agencies and Indian Housing Authorities”, the San Francisco Housing Authority Procurement Policy Manual and State of California and local laws; and WHEREAS, all additional relevant documents submitted by the architectural consultants have been reviewed and found to be in order; and WHEREAS, K2A Architecture + Interiors and Tectonics Architects/Planners/Engineers firms will meet the Resident Hiring requirements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO THAT:

3. The Executive Director is authorized to enter into a contract with K2A Architecture + Interiors and Tectonics Architects/Planners/Engineers firms in an amount Not-To-Exceed $150,000 each for a total not to exceed amount of $300,000. 4. This resolution shall take effect immediately.

APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:

REVIEWED BY:

_________________________________ Tim Larsen, Acting General Counsel Date:_____________________________

Rev. Amos Brown, President Date: 73


Attachment II RFQ Solicitation Process

74


RFQ PROCUREMENT The procurement process for the action covered by this Resolution meets the procurement standards of 24 CFR 85.36 “Procurement”, HUD Handbook 7460.8 REV 2, “Procurement Handbook for Public Housing Agencies and Indian Housing Authorities”, the San Francisco Housing Authority Procurement Policy Manual, and the State of California and local laws. The completed procurement process has been reviewed and approved by Procurement. The Authority and all public agencies in California are required by State and Federal law to select architectural consultants on the basis of qualifications in the form of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ).

SOLICITATION PROCESS Pre-approval of the RFQ document and process was obtained from Authority management prior to advertisement. The Housing Development and Modernization Department (HD/MOD) developed this specific RFQ document based on the Authority’s master procurement documents prepared by the Procurement and Contracts Department. The Procurement Department reviewed and approved the documents prior to the start of the RFQ process and bidding. Solicitation 11-620-RFQ-1153 was issued on November 3, 2011. Announcement of the RFQ was made to the City Outreach Services and was put on the web sites for the Authority, the City, and the Small Business Administrations. The notice of the RFQ was published in the Daily Pacific Builder, Bay View, World Journal, Sun Reporter, Small Business Exchange, and posted on NAHRO. Announcements were faxed or emailed directly to five hundred seventy-eight firms from the NAHRO website, and two hundred twenty-four firms from the HD&Mod Department that included at least sixty four firms from San Francisco Human Rights Commission. On the December 1, 2011 due date, twelve Statements of Qualifications were received:           

1. Tectonics Architects/Planners/Engineers 3. K2A Architecture + Interiors 4. Levy Design Partners, Inc. 5. Zachary Nathan Architect 6. Saida & Sullivan Design Partners 7. Pyatoc Architects 8. AE3 Partners 9. Weir/Andrewson Associates, Inc. 10. Lowney Architecture 11. Allana Buick & Bers 12. Merker Architects

75


RFQ Solicitation Process April 12, 2012 Page 2 Responding architectural firm’s summary: 1. TECTONICS ARCHITECTS/PLANNERS/ENGINEERS is a small minority San Francisco firm established in 1984. Tectonics has fifteen architectural professionals, three engineers, one landscape architect and three administrative workers. 2. K2A ARCHITECTURE + INTERIORS is a small minority San Francisco firm established in 1990. K2A Architects has fourteen architectural professionals and two administrative workers. 3. LEVY DESIGN PARTNERS is a small woman owned San Francisco firm and was established in 1979. Levy Design Partners has nine architectural professionals, one intern and two administrative workers. 4. ZACHARY NATHAN ARCHITECT is a small San Francisco firm established in 1984. Zachary Nathan has two architectural professionals. 5. SAIDA & SULLIVAN DESIGN PARTNERS is a small woman owned San Francisco firm established in 1999. Saida & Sullivan has three architectural professionals and two administration professionals. 6. RIM ARCHITECTS is a medium sized San Francisco firm established in 1994. Rim has eighty-one architectural professionals and three administrative professionals. 7. PYATOK ARCHITECTS is a small Oakland firm established in 2001. Pyatok has eighteen architectural professionals and four administrative professionals. 8. AE3 PARTNERS is a small minority owned firm established in 2007. AE3 has (12) architectural professionals. 9. WEIR/ANDREWSON ASSOCIATES, INC. is a small San Rafael firm established in 2005. Weir/Anderson has twenty-two architectural professionals. 10. LOWNEY ARCHITECTURE is a small Oakland firm established in 2004. Lowney has eight architectural professionals and one administrative professional. 11. ALLANA BUICK & BERS is a is a medium Palo Alto firm established in 1987. Allana Buick & Bers has seventy architectural professionals and fourteen administrative professionals. 12. MERKER ARCHITECTS is a small San Francisco firm established in 2009. Merker has six architectural professionals and two administrative professionals.

76


RFQ Solicitation Process April 12, 2012 Page 3 EVALUATION PROCESS In conformance with the Authority’s Procurement Procedures Manual, the evaluation panel individually reviewed the written Statements of Qualifications. At the same time, staff checked the references provided by each firm and provided the results to the evaluation panel members. Then, the evaluation panel invited eight responding firms for oral interviews. After the interviews, the evaluation panel prepared a final evaluation and scoring to select the firm with the highest-ranked qualifications. EVALUATION CRITERIA Listed below are the evaluation criteria and their relative weight. Described in italics are the reasons for the different criteria. The evaluation criteria are based on the Authority’s standards for Request for Qualifications questions and weighing contained in the Authority’s Procurement Procedures Manual. The Contract/Procurement Division approved the criteria and weighting given to each.

77


RFQ Solicitation Process April 12, 2012 Page 4

NO. A

CRITERIA & REASON

WEIGHT

Criterion: Qualifications.

20 points

This allows evaluation of the firm’s technical expertise as measured by the quantity and type of work performed by the firm and its years in business. B

Criterion: Staff Qualifications.

20 points

This provides insight into the quality of the staff as measured by their professional degrees, licenses and experience with the type of work required by this contract. The local staff size and their credentials is a quantitative measure of their knowledge, and are indicative of their ability to respond quickly with qualified staff. C

Criterion: Understanding of the project.

40 points

This demonstrates the firm’s familiarity with building repair issues most frequently encountered with urban public housing in both family housing and mid-rise buildings. A firm with this experience is most capable of providing economical, efficient solutions to by the Housing Authority. D

Criterion: Approach to Project.

15 points

This item allows us to determine that the selected firm not only has office technical skills but also possesses sufficient field experience to effectively deal with field problems and contractor issues. E

Criterion: Affirmative Action.

5 points

This allows evaluation of the firm’s commitment to MBE/WBE and resident hiring participation. Total

100 points

78


RFQ Solicitation Process April 12, 2012 Page 5 The following is the combined scoring results of the written proposals and oral interviews:

FIRM

WRITTEN

INTERVIEW

TOTAL

RANK

K2A Architecture

274

287

561

1

Tectonics

260

289

549

2

Levy Design

275

249

524

3

Rim

260

262

522

4

Zachary Nathan

264

242

506

5

Saida & Sullivan

264

239

503

6

Pyatok

243

247

490

7

AE3

242

212

454

8

Weir/Anderson

257

-

-

-

Lowney

231

-

-

-

Allana Buick & Bers

222

-

-

-

Merker

177

-

-

-

EVALUATION PANEL CONCLUSIONS By review of written qualifications and interviews in scoring and ranking, the Evaluation Panel has determined that K2A Architecture + Interiors and Tectonics Architects/Planners/Engineers are the toprated architectural firms. K2A and Tectonics have prior experience with multi-family building repairs, Housing Developments, public agencies and institutions. The reference checks on these firms for past similar architectural work were excellent.

79


RFQ Solicitation Process April 12, 2012 Page 6

RESIDENT EMPLOYMENT The two highest ranked architectural consultants have agreed to hire public housing residents to meet or exceed the 25% requirement established by Commission Resolution No. 4967 for non-construction contracts exceeding $50,000. These architectural consultants will advertise to seek out and interview qualified Authority residents for job opportunities in their office. It is calculated that about 200 hours of resident employment and training will be provided on each of these two contracts when these contracts are fully expended.

MBE/WBE STATUS Architectural consultants are both small Minority Business Enterprises and have provided an Affirmative Action Acknowledgement form that meets the requirements of Executive Order 11246.

80


RFQ Solicitation Process April 12, 2012 Page 7

Architectural Consultant Services Solicitation No. 11-620-RFQ-1153

ARCHITECTURAL CONSULTANT– CONFIDENTIAL BILLING RATES The Authority’s Housing Development and Modernization Department negotiated the following hourly billing rates. The negotiated rates are about the same level to the rates of past similar professional consulting services. These hourly costs are posted in the contract and are used on all proposals on specific architectural task assignments.

K2A

Tectonics

Hourly Rate

Hourly Rate

Principal

$175

$173

Director of Design

$165

-

Director of Interior Design

$165

-

Project Manager

$140

$138

Job Captain

$120

-

Senior Architect

$120

$120

Architect

$105

$93

Junior Architect

$85

$85

Architectural Designer

$85

$76

Interior Designer

$85

-

CAD Technician

$65

$76

Clerical Staff

$65

$48

Position

81


AGENDA SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

Agenda Category:

Action- Housing Development & Modernization Department_____________

Agenda Title:

Pursue and Apply for Funding Opportunities for Sunnydale and Potrero HOPE SF Revitalization Projects with the Development Teams and City Partners

Presented By:

Barbara T. Smith, Housing Development & Modernization Administrator

SUMMARY: In 2007, the San Francisco Housing Authority (SFHA) selected the Sunnydale Development Co., LLC, (SDC) made up of Mercy Housing California and The Related Companies, to redevelop the Sunnydale and Velasco sites under the HOPE SF program. Sunnydale/Velasco is currently a 785-unit development, and the proposed development plan includes up to 1,700 units of mixed income housing, community facilities and new infrastructure. The SFHA also selected BRIDGE Housing Corporation in 2007 to redevelop the Potrero Terrace and Potrero Annex public housing sites under HOPE SF. These Potrero developments consist of 605 public housing units and the proposed development plan includes up to 1,516 units of mixed income housing, community facilities and new infrastructure. The developers are finalizing predevelopment financing, entitlements, feasibility analysis and detailed Term Sheets for negotiations with SFHA under Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreements (ENRAs), which were renewed in June 2011 with expiration deadlines of December 2012. [Continued on Page 2] Attachments:

Resolution MOUs CNI Planning Grant Certifications

A copy of any attached documents are available at the clerk’s desk. DEPARTMENTS REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends adoption of this Resolution. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S RECOMMENDATION: I concur with this Recommendation. Agenda Item No. 5 Date: _April 12, 2012 82


Potrero and Sunnydale Funding Opportunities April 12, 2012 Page 2

As an activity under each ENRA, the Authority and developers committed to pursuing funding opportunities as they become available in order to finance the project and complete it in a timely fashion. At this time, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has a published Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for Choice Neighborhoods Initiatives (CNI) Planning grants. SDC and BRIDGE plan to submit applications in response to the NOFA, each in partnership with SFHA and the City and County of San Francisco as Co-Applicants. As a requirement under the CNI NOFA, the teams must execute Memoranda of Understanding that establish partnerships and demonstrate the commitment of each team member to work collaboratively throughout the term of the grant. Additional details of the grant are described below: Goals of Choice Neighborhoods Initiatives: Transform housing and neighborhoods into highly functioning communities of choice and to support people and families with a variety of resources that lead to positive outcomes. Purpose of Grant: Fund the development of Transformation Plans, comprehensive neighborhood revitalization plans for the Sunnydale-Velasco community and Potrero Terrace-Annex community. Deadline to submit: May 1, 2012. Maximum Grant Amount and Term: $300,000, 2 year term Lead Applicant: Sunnydale Development Co., LLC, comprised of Mercy Housing California and The Related Companies of California for Sunnydale; and BRIDGE Housing Corporation for Potrero Terrace and Annex. Co-Applicants: San Francisco Housing Authority and the City and County of San Francisco. Scope of the Grant Proposal: The teams propose to develop neighborhood revitalization plans for the public housing sites and surrounding communities. Particular emphasis will be focused on the advancement of human capital development programs and services, as well as programming community facilities. The grant will be used to conduct assessments, further planning and create strategies that: (1) address workforce development and economic mobility; (2) provide quality educational opportunities; (3) promote health and wellness; and (4) reduce crime and increase safety. Overall sustainability of the human capital development will be addressed in the Transformation Planning through community partnerships, program design, capital and operations financing, and the governance and management structure. The teams will also use the funding to engage residents, neighbors, community organizations and the City family in the planning process.

83


Attachment I Resolution

84


RESOLUTION NO. DATE ADOPTED: April 12, 2012 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO PURSUE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES, ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS AND MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING, AND PROVIDE CERTIFICATIONS REQUIRED FOR THE REVITALIZATION OF: (1) SUNNYDALE/VELASCO WITH THE SUNNYDALE DEVELOPMENT CO., LLC AND CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO AND (2) POTRERO TERRACE/ANNEX WITH BRIDGE HOUSING CORPORATION AND THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO WHEREAS, on March 11, 2008, the Authority Commission authorized the Interim Executive Director of the Authority to negotiate Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreements (ENRAs) for revitalization of Sunnydale/Velasco with the Development Team of Mercy Housing California and The Related Companies of California (collectively, the Sunnydale Development Co., LLC) by adopting Resolution No. 5333 and for revitalization of Potrero Terrace/Annex with BRIDGE Housing Corporation by adopting Resolution No. 5335; and WHERAS, on September 11, 2008, the Authority Commission authorized the Executive Director to execute the ENRAs with the Developers, to determine the basis of the material terms and conditions of a Master Development Agreements and Ground Lease Agreements for the revitalization of Sunnydale/Velasco and Potrero Terrace/Annex public housing sites; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the Executive Director extended the Negotiating Period to December 11, 2010 and again to March 11, 2011 to continue certain predevelopment activities; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the ENRAs, the ENRA expiration end dates were extended to continue predevelopment activities, complete the national Environmental Policy Act process, and submit land use approval applications; and WHEREAS, on May 26, 2011 the Commission authorized the Executive Director to renew the ENRAs for an additional 18 months and continue master planning and community building efforts while finalizing the Term Sheets and negotiations for the Master development Agreements; and WHEREAS, the Developers continue to make progress by having: submitted master site plans for land use approvals; submitted initial reports in the environmental review process; met regularly with residents and the broader communities; collaborated with the Mayor’s Office of Housing and City agencies to identify, plan for, and secure funding for social services/community development programs; selected multiple team members including architects, engineers, consultants, and attorneys; worked closely with the Mayor’s Office of Housing to devise feasible financing plans; raised several million dollars from City agencies and philanthropic organizations; developed comprehensive community facilities plans for the new development to include new anchor institutions and community hubs; and developed strategies and feasibility analyses for revitalization of the Sunnydale/Velasco and Potrero Terrace/Annex sites; and

85


WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) published a Notice of Funding Availability (“NOFA”) for the Choice Neighborhoods grant program, which seeks to fund organizations to develop Transformation Plans for the neighborhood of focus; and WHEREAS, the Developers seek to submit responses to the NOFA as Lead Developers for their respective sites in conjunction with the Authority and City and County of San Francisco as CoApplicants; and WHEREAS, the NOFA requires each applicant to execute a Memorandum of Understanding that outlines the partnership and collaboration under the grant; and WHEREAS, the deadline for submission of the grant proposal is May 1, 2012; and WHEREAS, the Developers plan to apply for future funding opportunities as available and the Authority will support, and in some cases submit, these applications in order to secure financing for the revitalization of Sunnydale/Velasco and Potrero Terrace/Annex public housing sites. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, THAT: 1. The Executive Director is authorized to pursue funding opportunities, enter into agreements and memoranda of understanding, and provide certifications required for the revitalization of: Sunnydale/Velasco with the Sunnydale Development Co., LLC and the City and County of San Francisco and (2) Potrero Terrace/Annex with BRIDGE Housing Corporation and the City and County of San Francisco. 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately.

APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:

REVIEWED BY:

_________________________________ Tim Larsen, Acting General Counsel Date:_____________________________

Rev. Amos Brown, President Date:

86


Attachment II Memoranda of Understanding

87


LEAD APPLICANT AND CO-APPLICANTS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR SUNNYDALE/VISITATION VALLEY CHOICE NEIGHBORHOODS INITIATIVE PLANNING GRANT APPLICATION

This Lead Applicant and Co-Applicants Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is entered into this day of April, 2012 between SUNNYDALE DEVELOPMENT CO., LLC (SUNNYDALE LLC), the HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO (SFHA), and the CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO (CITY) in connection with the comprehensive revitalization of the Sunnydale-Velasco public housing development and its surrounding neighborhood, Visitation Valley, in San Francisco, California. RECITALS A. SFHA is the owner of the Sunnydale-Velasco public housing development (Sunnydale; Site) and has entered into an Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreement (ENRA) with SUNNYDALE LLC, whose sole members are Mercy Housing California and The Related Companies of California, following a HUD-approved procurement for development services in accordance with 24 CFR 85.26(d)(4)(1)(A) and (B). B. The CITY seeks to improve the social, economic, and physical conditions at Sunnydale and in Visitation Valley, and has devoted public resources to this end, including funding for SUNNYDALE LLC’s development of a master site plan and revitalization program for the Site, in cooperation with SFHA. C. SUNNYDALE LLC, in collaboration with SFHA, the CITY, and community stakeholders, has commenced upon a comprehensive neighborhood planning process for the transformation of Sunnydale and Visitation Valley into a mixed-income, sustainable, service-enriched, and economically and physically healthy community. D. The parties are submitting an application (Application) to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for a Choice Neighborhoods Initiative Planning Grant (Grant) in accordance with the FY2012 Notice of Funding Availability for HUD’s Choice Neighborhoods Initiative (NOFA). Pursuant to the NOFA, SUNNYDALE LLC, a for-profit entity, will serve as Lead Applicant for the Grant, and SFHA and the CITY, both public entities, will serve as Co-Applicants. Other key partner organizations will be engaged in the planning process, as further described in the Application. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and underlying promises, which the parties agree to be good and valuable consideration, the parties agree as follows:

88


1. Commitment to Work Collaboratively. SUNNYDALE LLC, the CITY and SFHA each commit to work collaboratively throughout the entirety of the Grant. 2. Lead Applicant Designation. SUNNYDALE LLC, the CITY and SFHA agree that SUNNYDALE LLC shall act as Lead Applicant for performance of the Grant. 3. Commitment to Planning Process and Transformation Plan. SUNNYDALE LLC, the CITY and SFHA acknowledge that they each: a. Have reviewed the NOFA and related guidance from HUD; b. Have participate in preparation of the collaborative planning process that will develop a comprehensive Transformation Plan for Sunnydale/Visitation Valley; and c. Are fully committed to the goals and requirements of the NOFA, the planning process, and the Application. 4. Incorporation of Additional Documents. The parties agree that their respective responsibilities and relationships are further detailed in the Application, which is incorporated in this MOU by reference. [Signatures on next page]

89


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Partnership Memorandum of Understanding, which may be executed in multiple counterparts, on or as of the date first written above.

LLC:

MERCY HOUSING CALIFORNIA, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation By: Name: Valerie Agostino Title: Vice President

LLC:

THE RELATED COMPANIES OF CALIFORNIA, LLC, a limited liability company By: Name: William A. Witte Title: President

CITY:

THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO REPRESENTED BY THE MAYOR’S OFFICE OF HOUSING By: Name: Olson Lee Title: Director

90


SFHA:

HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO By: Name: Henry A. Alvarez III Title: Executive Director Authorized by SFHA Resolution No. _________ Adopted April 12, 2012. Approved as to Form and Legality: By: Name: Tim Larsen Title: Assistant General Counsel

91


LEAD APPLICANT AND CO-APPLICANTS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR POTRERO HILLCHOICE NEIGHBORHOODS INITIATIVE PLANNING GRANT APPLICATION

This Lead Applicant and Co-Applicants Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is entered into this day of April, 2012 between BRIDGE HOUSING CORPORATION,, the HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO (SFHA), and the CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO (CITY) in connection with the comprehensive revitalization of the Potrero Terrace and Potrero Annex public housing development and its surrounding neighborhood (Potrero), in San Francisco, California. RECITALS E. SFHA is the owner of the Potrero Terrace and Potrero Annex public housing developments (Potrero; Site) and has entered into an Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreement (ENRA) with BRIDGE Housing Corporation, following a HUD-approved procurement for development services in accordance with 24 CFR 85.26(d)(4)(1)(A) and (B). F. The CITY seeks to improve the social, economic, and physical conditions of Potrero, and has devoted public resources to this end, including funding for BRIDGE’s development of a master site plan and revitalization program for the Site, in cooperation with SFHA. G. BRIDGE,, in collaboration with SFHA, the CITY, and community stakeholders, has commenced upon a comprehensive neighborhood planning process for the transformation of Potrero into a mixed-income, sustainable, service-enriched, and economically and physically healthy community. H. The parties are submitting an application (Application) to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for a Choice Neighborhoods Initiative Planning Grant (Grant) in accordance with the FY2012 Notice of Funding Availability for HUD’s Choice Neighborhoods Initiative (NOFA). Pursuant to the NOFA, BRIDGE Housing Corporation, a not for-profit entity, will serve as Lead Applicant for the Grant, and SFHA and the CITY, both public entities, will serve as CoApplicants. Other key partner organizations will be engaged in the planning process, as further described in the Application. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and underlying promises, which the parties agree to be good and valuable consideration, the parties agree as follows: 5. Commitment to Work Collaboratively. BRIDGE, the CITY and SFHA each commit to work collaboratively throughout the entirety of the Grant. 6. Lead Applicant Designation. BRIDGE, the CITY and SFHA agree that BRIDGE shall act as Lead Applicant for performance of the Grant. 92


7. Commitment to Planning Process and Transformation Plan. BRIDGE, the CITY and SFHA acknowledge that they each: a. Have reviewed the NOFA and related guidance from HUD; b. Have participate in preparation of the collaborative planning process that will develop a comprehensive Transformation Plan for Potrero; and c. Are fully committed to the goals and requirements of the NOFA, the planning process, and the Application. 8. Incorporation of Additional Documents. The parties agree that their respective responsibilities and relationships are further detailed in the Application, which is incorporated in this MOU by reference.

[Signatures on next page]

93


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Partnership Memorandum of Understanding, which may be executed in multiple counterparts, on or as of the date first written above. LLC:

BRIDGE Housing Corporation, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation By: Name: Cynthia Parker Title: President

CITY:

THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO REPRESENTED BY THE MAYOR’S OFFICE OF HOUSING By: Name: Olson Lee Title: Director

SFHA:

HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO By: Name: Henry A. Alvarez III Title: Executive Director Authorized by SFHA Resolution No. ________ Adopted April 12, 2012. Approved as to Form and Legality: By: Name: Tim Larsen Title: Assistant General Counsel

94


Attachment III

Choice Neighborhoods Application Certifications Planning Grants

95


96


97


98


COMMISSIONER’S COMMENT

99


CLOSED SESSION A closed session will be held pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9 to receive advice from legal counsel regarding Pending Litigation

100


ADJOURNMENT

101

SFHA_Commission Book-Final_040612  

Commission Book

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you