Celebrated the 100th anniversary of the opening of San Francisco City Hall in the summer of 2015 and completed a number of capital improvements in the centennial year.
Completed Phase 2 Structural Steel for the Moscone Convention Center Expansion Project with the final beam set on the east half of the building, and started the Howard Street plug to reconfigure the street and ensure traffic flow.
Celebrated the 15th anniversary of the Community Clean Team in 2015, which has logged more than 148,000 volunteer hours, added more than 30,000 plants to public landscaped areas, and painted over approximately 3 million square feet of graffiti.
Launched the Pit Stop Program, which provides 15 locations with clean and safe public toilets, sinks, used needle receptacles, and dog waste stations in the City's most impacted neighborhoods. The Pit Stop Program provides a place for people to take care of their bathroom needs with dignity, improving neighborhood livability and reducing demands on department staff to clean up human waste from the City’s sidewalks, doorways, and streets. The Pit Stop program has been successful because all facilities are staffed by paid attendants who help ensure that the toilets are well maintained and used for their intended purpose, and because Public Works has collaborated with a community non-profit to help rehabilitate and train Pit Stop workers.
Created 14 murals through the StreetSmARTS program in collaboration with the Arts Commission in the most graffiti-tagged parts of the City to engage both artists and private property owners in the effort of deterring tagging.
Launched the City’s free municipal wireless internet access in parks project at 32 parks, plazas, and open spaces across San Francisco. The project is another step toward a larger vision of connectivity for the City as a whole to bridge the digital divide.
Secured funding and advanced planning for a seismically resilient Animal Care and Control Shelter that will reduce overcrowding, provide modern, safer standards of care, and enhance the health of animals in the City's care to help prevent the spread of disease.
Community Clean Team
Other General Accomplishments
Completed construction on the Critical Construction Project for the City’s 9-1-1 Center and Emergency Operations Center, which aimed to address the vulnerability of critical infrastructure while ensuring the operational readiness of the center; as part of this project, all critical telephone circuits have been rerouted through new vaults for maximum security and to establish operational redundancy. Additionally, the cable work completed allows the Department of Technology to install new redundant fiber infrastructure to serve multiple City Departments and the Recreation and Parks Department to proceed with the planned renovations of the Margaret Hayward Playground.
Advanced the Citywide 800MHz Radio System Replacement Project by completing design for the Twin Peaks Tower replacement, which includes generator, electrical, HVAC, and controls improvements for nine radio sites; the Clay Jones generator replacement; and the VA Hospital Site move.
Completed 90% of the ADA Transition Plan projects, with the other 10% in design or construction phases, to provide uniform physical access for the public and employment opportunities for persons with disabilities.
Designed, constructed, or upgraded 1,563 curb ramps to comply with ADA standards.
Economic + Neighborhood Development Accomplishments
Port of San Francisco
Celebrated completion of Crane Cove Park, a major transformation of previously inaccessible industrial shoreline in the Pier 70 neighborhood into a 7-acre public open space.
Completed substructure repairs to Alcatraz Ferry Embarkation at Pier 31 1/2 to prepare the site for future activation by tenants.
Completed 23 acres of improvements to Pier 94 Backlands including creating 16 acres of leasable land.
Completed installation of a 2,600 square foot ground transportation shelter at the Pier 27 Cruise Terminal. This provides a weather-protected space for passengers connecting to public transit.
Completed the first round of Facility Inspection Repair Program Assessments which provided Port staff with accurate data and assessments of costs to bring 10 Port facilities up to a state of good repair.
RFP completed for the redevelopment of Historic Piers 30-32, Piers 38 and 40.
Improved lighting, water, and sewer systems at Pier 23, including new backflow preventer, energy efficient LED light fixtures, and sanitary sewer riser allowing for future above deck sewer connections.
Planning Department
Adopted and certified the Market and Octavia Area Plan Amendment (Hub), which will provide space for up to 8,500 housing units, as well as $832M in public benefits over the life of the plan.
Completed ConnectSF which developed a fifty-year vision for San Francisco and its transportation system. In 2021 the City will adopt new transit and streets plans to be followed by a new Transportation Element of the General Plan in 2022.
Adopted the Balboa Reservoir Site Development Agreement which will include 1,100 housing units, 4 acres of open space, 100 seat childcare facility, a community room, other infrastructure, streetscape, and bike improvements.
Adopted the Potrero Power Station Mixed-Use Project which will include 2,600 housing units, 6.9 acres of new open space, 1.8 million square feet of commercial space, 50,000 square feet of community facility space, and a new childcare facility.
Adopted the India Basin Mixed-Use Project which will include 1,250 housing units, 5.6 acres of open space and 270,000 square feet of retail space.
Adoption of the Phase I Racial & Social Equity Action Plan by the Planning Commission in November of 2019.
Neighborhood Development
Mission Bay: Over 4.48 million square feet of commercial, office, clinical, and lab space have been completed, along with the Chase Center; in addition, 68% of the UCSF campus and more than 22 acres of parks.
Transbay: 2.2 million square feet of commercial space has also been completed. The Folsom Street Improvement Project completes construction in FY20-21.
Hunters Point Shipyard/Candlestick Point: Approximately 35% of the housing units in Hunters Point Shipyard Phase 1 have been completed, with over 500 total units constructed. Nearly all the horizontal infrastructure at the Hilltop area of Shipyard, Phase 1 project is also completed.
Completed all three of OCII’s Planned Enhancement Projectsover the past two fiscal years including completion of 1,823 housing units. At the end of FY2020, 468 units were under construction in Mission Bay South and Transbay.
Treasure Island Development Authority
Construction of new roadway and utility infrastructure has commenced on Yerba Buena Island including access improvements to and from the I-80 Bay Bridge. The first residential development on Yerba Buena Island broke ground in Q2 2019 and should be occupied in early 2022. New water storage reservoirs are under construction and will be commissioned before the end of 2021.
The Yerba Buena Island to Treasure Island causeway has been reconstructed and reconstruction of the eastern half
is underway.
Geotechnical improvement of the first subphase area of Treasure Island is substantially complete as is the improvement of the site of the new wastewater treatment plant and electrical switchyard. New utility infrastructure is underway on the island as well.
Secured grants of $30 million for roadway improvements on Yerba Buena Island in the past two years.
Received five land transfers from the Navy, comprising 336 of the 463 acres to be transferred on Yerba Buena Island and Treasure Island.
Economic + Neighborhood Development Accomplishments
Port of San Francisco
Revitalized the eight 20th Street Historic Buildings at Pier 70, returning them to active use for office workers, retailers, artists, and manufacturing companies.
Celebrated the groundbreaking at Pier 70 Historic Shipyard, where the neighborhood will feature new parks, rehabilitated historic buildings, and space for artists, local manufacturing, and commercial uses.
Completed ADA improvements at Pier 31 and 29½, buildings that contribute to the Embarcadero Historic District.
Improved life-safety conditions with the installation of fire standpipes at Piers 33 and 28, creating easy access points for the Fire Department to connect hoses along the pier.
Completed $1.6 million in routine maintenance on a float at China Basin, increasing the float’s longevity.
Continued successful state of good repair efforts from Port crews, including the removal of dilapidated piles along Islais Creek and repair of pier substructures.
Won 82% voter approval on the $425 million Seawall General Obligation Bond. Other sources include $5 Million of state grant funding and $1.5 Million for a Federal New Start Study to fund the Seawall program.
Plan for Crane Cove Park
Opening of the Bayview Gateway
Planning Department
Adopted Central SoMa Plan, which will provide space for 32,000 new jobs and 8,800 new units of housing, as well as $2 billion in public benefits over the life of the Plan.
Convened ConnectSF to develop a fifty-year vision for San Francisco and its transportation system, to be codified in a new Transportation Element within the City’s General Plan.
Adopted the Central Waterfront/Dogpatch Public Realm Plan for inclusion in the San Francisco General Plan.
Began environmental review of the Market Street Hub Plan, expected to add space for an additional 12,000 housing units and 7,000 new jobs to the area.
Completed the Rail Alignments Benefits Study, which recommended a rail alignment into the Salesforce Transit Center and associated transportation and land use opportunities.
Completed public space and street design concept development for Civic Center Public Realm Plan.
Rendering of the Transbay Transit Center
Neighborhood Development and Affordable Housing
Mission Bay: Constructed 5,789 housing units, including 1,191 affordable units, and 3.8 million square feet of commercial, office, clinical, and lab space; in addition, developed 66% of the UCSF campus, including the first phase of the UCSF medical center and more than 18 acres of new non-UCSF parks.
Transbay: In Zone 1 of the Project Area, completed construction of 719 residential units, including 310 affordable units, and 2.2 million square feet of commercial space. An additional 1,485 residential units, 416 of them affordable, as well as Folsom Street improvements are under construction.
Hunters Point Shipyard/Candlestick Point: Completed nearly all of the horizontal infrastructure at the Hilltop area of Hunters Point Shipyard, and 439 of the 898 housing units are complete.
HOPE SF: At Hunters View, construction is complete on Block 7, Block 10, and Block 11, and all residents choosing to reoccupy have returned. Completed the final phase of Alice Griffith with all public housing residents expected to have exercised their right to return by early 2019. At Potrero, advanced vertical construction for Phase 1. At Sunnydale, began construction on Parcel Q, the first vertical phase.
Yerba Buena Gardens: Transferred the intact portfolio of financially self-sustaining Yerba Buena Gardens properties, along with a dedicated source of funding, to the City and County of San Francisco, through its Real Estate Division.
Treasure Island Development Authority
Recorded final subdivision maps for the first subphases on Yerba Buena and Treasure Islands and commenced development in
both areas.
Geotechnical soil improvements on Treasure Island and mass grading for new water storage reservoirs, utilities, and roadways at Yerba Buena Island both underway.
Received 315 of the 463 acres on Yerba Buena Island and Treasure Island from the US Navy, with the full transfer expected in 2022.
The booming Bay Area economy of the recent past and the support of the Mayor, Board of Supervisors, and citizens of San Francisco gave rise to historic levels of capital investment in the years leading up to 2020. As a result, even in the face of the current economic crisis, San Francisco is well positioned to build a healthy and well-balanced infrastructure program for future generations.
As the City responds to COVID-19 and moves towards recovery, there are new challenges ahead. Funds that might have been directed to one-time investments may be needed to shore up ongoing programs to avoid reductions in social services and employment. At the same time, the age of the City’s infrastructure and projected population growth in formerly industrial areas represent ongoing demands that will become more pressing the longer they go unaddressed.
The Plan recommends a level of funding of over $38 billion over 10 years. Despite this, the Plan defers nearly $7 billion in identified needs for General Fund departments, assuming recommended Pay-As-You-Go program funding levels as shown in Chart 2.1.
Chart 2.1
Years of historic underinvestment in the City’s capital program has resulted in a current facilities backlog of $621 million for General Fund facilities. The backlog is defined as the difference between the total current renewal need and the portion of this need that is funded in the first year of the Plan. The total current renewal need includes both items identified by departments as deferred maintenance, as well as first-year renewal needs. This backlog does not include buildings and sites for Recreation and Parks. While the department has identified a 10-year renewal need of $1.2 billion, funding towards those needs will come from the Recreation and Parks set-aside within the Pay-Go program, as well as the planned 2028 Neighborhood Parks and Open Space G.O. Bond, pending voter approval.
Under this Plan, if the City meets the Plan’s funding recommendations, the existing facilities backlog is projected to start trending downward by FY2031. As compared to the current level, the backlog is still projected to increase 20% to over $750 million, as shown in Chart 2.2. This expected increase is the result of needs accumulated during low spending periods and projected cost escalation of today’s backlog. To address the gap, the City continues to investigate various approaches, including revising funding benchmarks, leveraging the value of City-owned assets for debt financing, preparing projects for voter consideration at the ballot, forming public-private partnerships, and exploring new revenue sources.
Chart 2.2
While the City has made significant progress in improving the quality of its streets in recent years, having already attained a “good” Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of 75, a streets backlog of $280 million remains if the City is to reach a PCI of 83, at which point the year-on-year cost of maintaining the streets declines significantly. Under this Plan, given the funding challenges to the Pay-Go Program due to COVID-19, the streets program has been supplemented with additional funding from the recently-approved Health and Recovery G.O. Bond and FY2023 and FY2024 Certificates of Participation. Despite these efforts in the short-term, the PCI is projected to decline to 74 and the existing backlog is projected to increase to over $688 million by FY2031, as shown in Chart 2.3.
Chart 2.3
In addition to the formidable backlog, there are a number of other issues that the City will face with regard to our capital program, and the associated risks will have to be managed.
Though the pandemic certainly slowed construction activity in the short term, there is still strong local demand for construction services, keeping overall construction costs in San Francisco high. While this activity buoys the local economy, the cost of construction strains available resources. Displacement and recovery efforts from natural disasters across northern California continue to exacerbate the already tight construction labor market. COVID-19 safety precautions bring with them extra costs and in some cases slower delivery schedules. The City is well-positioned to be a counter-cyclical investor, but with persistently high local costs, there are still limits to what those investments can be expected to deliver.
Finally, striving to achieve resilience in San Francisco presents its own challenges. As a densely populated, aging city situated between two fault lines and surrounded by water on three sides, the threats of disaster and climate change raise serious safety concerns. At the same time, racial inequality and economic hardship threaten the fabric of San Francisco’s communities, and housing affordability remains out of reach for many. The City must balance our efforts on these fronts and keep them all moving forward.
However difficult, crisis brings opportunity. Through the Economic Recovery Task Force, the Climate Action Plan, ConnectSF, and many other recent and citywide planning efforts, San Francisco has laid out intentions to build a strong, equitable, and resilient future. In particular, San Francisco’s commitment to climate resilience and the need to respond to current hazards like heat, air quality events, and sea level rise will drive the exploration of new strategies to deliver improvements. Likewise, the pandemic will push the City to seek out options for partnership and to prioritize stimulus projects that can bolster the local economy. As part of that recovery, the City will be able to make investments to improve public health, safety, and quality of life.
This Plan puts forth a robust plan that balances maintaining current assets in a state of good repair with investments in major projects to build out of the current crisis. Though there are risks associated with the pandemic, construction costs, a substantial capital backlog, and the scale of need, the City’s capital program is well positioned to respond and deliver a strong program of investment for San Francisco’s recovery.
The booming Bay Area economy and the support of the Mayor, Board of Supervisors, and citizens of San Francisco have given rise to historic levels of capital investment in recent years. As a result, San Francisco is better positioned to build a healthy and well-balanced infrastructure program for future generations. However, there are challenges ahead. A potential economic slowdown or downturn looms. The age of the City’s infrastructure, combined with the large population growth in formerly industrial areas, some large replacement projects, persistent construction cost escalation, and rising sea levels all translate into substantial demands on the City’s limited resources.
The Plan recommends a record level of funding at $39 billion over 10 years. Despite this, the Plan defers $5 billion in identified needs for General Fund departments and does not fully fund annual state of good repair needs until FY2027, assuming recommended Pay- As-You-Go program funding levels as shown in Chart 2.1. With this in mind, it is important that the City strive to take advantage of current economic conditions and one-time revenues to achieve or exceed the recommendations of this Plan.
Years of historic underinvestment in the City’s capital program has resulted in a current backlog of $799 million for streets and General Fund facilities. The backlog is defined as the difference between the total current renewal need and the portion of this need that is funded in the first year of the Plan. The total current renewal need includes both items identified by departments as deferred maintenance, as well as first-year renewal needs.
Chart 2.1
Under this Plan, if the City meets the Plan’s funding recommendations, the existing backlog is projected to start trending downward after FY2027. As compared to the current level, the backlog is still projected to increase 106% to approximately $1.1 billion by FY2029, as shown in Chart 2.2. This expected increase is the result of needs accumulated during low spending periods and projected cost escalation of today’s backlog. To address the gap, the City continues to investigate various approaches, including revising funding benchmarks, leveraging the value of City-owned assets for debt financing, preparing projects for voter consideration at the ballot, forming public-private partnerships, and exploring new revenue sources.
In addition to the formidable backlog, there are a number of other issues that the City will face with regard to our capital program, and the associated risks will have to be managed.
The regional boom in private sector construction continues to drive up demand for construction services, and with it, overall construction costs. While this activity buoys the local economy, the rising cost of construction strains available resources. Recovery efforts from natural disasters across northern California are further exacerbating the already tight labor market. Meanwhile, the prospect of a downturn continues to linger on the horizon.
New construction in the formerly industrial eastern reaches of the city continues to accelerate demand for and usage of transit, streets and other right-of-way infrastructure, and open spaces. San Francisco must accommodate that growth while balancing state-of-good-repair needs and absorbing greater operating and renewal costs.
Finally, San Francisco’s resilience mindset presents its own challenges. As a densely populated, aging city situated between two fault lines and surrounded by water on three sides, the threats of disaster and climate change raise serious safety concerns. At the same time, obstacles both physical and financial threaten the fabric of San Francisco’s communities. Without letting anyone fade, the City must balance our efforts on these fronts to keep all of them moving forward.
Chart 2.2
Aligning the capital budget with the Plan’s recommendations in the years to come will be challenging as competing needs persist and arise. However, San Francisco has taken many steps that demonstrate our commitment to carrying out the Capital Plan’s recommendations, including but not limited to: increasing the General Fund contribution to the capital budget, continuing “smart” General Obligation and General Fund Debt Programs that tackle critical needs, and developing strategies for addressing infrastructure demands associated with projected growth.
This Capital Plan puts forth a robust plan that balances maintaining current assets in a state of good repair with meeting San Francisco’s growing service and population needs. Though there are risks associated with rising construction costs, a substantial capital backlog, the scale of our resilience goals, and a potential economic slowdown or downturn, the City’s capital program is undoubtedly much better positioned than it was at the time of the first Capital Plan in 2006.
The booming Bay Area economy and the support of the Mayor, Board of Supervisors, and citizens of San Francisco have given rise to historic levels of capital investment in recent years. As a result, San Francisco is better positioned to build a health and well-balanced infrastructure program for future generations. However, there are challenges ahead. A potential economic slowdown or downturn looms. The age of the City’s infrastructure, combined with the large population growth in formerly industrial areas, some large replacement projects, persistent construction cost escalation, and rising sea levels all translate into substantial demands on the City’s limited resources.
The Plan recommends a record level of funding at $35 billion over 10 years. Despite this, the Plan defers $4.6 billion in identified needs for General Fund departments and does not fully fund annual state of good repair needs until FY2032, assuming recommended Pay- As-You-Go program funding levels, as shown in Chart 2.1. With this in mind, it is important that the City strive to take advantage of current economic conditions to achieve or exceed the recommendations of this Plan.
Years of historic underinvestment in the City’s capital program has resulted in a current backlog of $472 million for streets and General Fund facilities. In prior versions of the Capital Plan, the definition of current backlog was limited to deferred maintenance and did not include immediate renewal needs that could not be funded in the first year of the Plan. In the current Plan, the backlog is defined as the difference between the total current renewal need and the portion of this need that is funded in the first year of the Plan. The total current renewal need includes both items identified by departments as deferred maintenance, as well as first-year renewal needs. The new definition of backlog used in the current Plan more accurately captures the full picture of immediate renewal needs.
Chart 2.1
Under this Plan, even if the City meets the Plan’s funding recommendations, the existing backlog is still projected to increase 191% to approximately $1.4 billion by FY2027, as shown in Chart 2.2. This expected increase is the result of needs accumulated during low spending periods and projected cost escalation of today’s backlog. To address the gap, the City continues to investigate different approaches, including revising funding benchmarks, leveraging the value of City-owned assets for debt financing, preparing projects for voter consideration at the ballot, forming public-private partnerships, and exploring new revenue sources.
In addition to the formidable backlog, there are a number of other issues that the City will face with regard to our capital program, and the associated risks will have to be managed.
The local boom in private sector construction continues to drive up demand for construction services, and with it, overall construction costs. While this activity buoys the local economy, the rising cost of construction strains available resources.
New construction in the formerly industrial eastern reaches of the city continues to accelerate demand for and usage of transit, streets and other right-of-way infrastructure, and open spaces. San Francisco must accommodate that growth while balancing state-of-good-repair needs and absorbing greater operating and renewal costs.
Finally, San Francisco’s resilience mindset presents its own challenges. As a densely populated, aging city situated between two fault lines and surrounded by water on three sides, the threats of disaster and climate change raise serious safety concerns. At the same time, obstacles both physical and financial threaten the fabric of San Francisco’s communities. Without letting any one obstacle fade from focus, the City must balance our efforts on these fronts to keep all of them moving forward.
Chart 2.2
Aligning the capital budget with the Plan’s recommendations in the years to come will be challenging as competing needs persist and arise. However, San Francisco has taken many steps that demonstrate our commitment to carrying out the Capital Plan’s recommendations, including but not limited to: increasing the General Fund contribution within the capital budget, continuing “smart” General Obligation and General Fund Debt Programs that tackle critical needs, and developing strategies for addressing infrastructure demands associated with projected growth.
This Capital Plan puts forth a robust plan that balances maintaining current assets in a state of good repair with meeting San Francisco’s growing service and population needs. Though there are risks associated with rising construction costs, a substantial capital backlog, the scale of our resilience goals, and a potential economic slowdown or downturn, the City’s capital program is undoubtedly much better positioned than it was at the time of the first Capital Plan in 2006.
The FY2022-31 Capital Plan responds to the sudden and dramatic economic shifts that have arisen from the COVID-19 pandemic and the resultant economic crisis. Retaining a focus to be good stewards of public funds and assets, the Plan preserves San Francisco’s longstanding funding principles for capital, with a renewed emphasis on using investments as stimulus for an equitable and strong economic recovery. In addition to the Plan’s funding principles, restrictions around issuing debt and setting funding targets for priority programs help San Francisco to demonstrate its intention to invest responsibly and in the areas of greatest need. The Plan’s policies govern the level and distribution of funds that feed into the Plan while the funding principles show how the funds will be prioritized.
Policies
Pay-Go Program Policies
The Plan recommends a Pay-Go Program funding level based on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the short-term, with an anticipated economic recovery in the longer term: $46.3 million in FY2022, growing at 10% until FY2024, increasing to $110 million in FY2025, and growing by 10% thereafter. This level of investment is significantly lower than pre-pandemic funding levels, and the Plan recommends supporting the Pay-Go program with the issuance of Certificates of Participation in the short-term. This program is the City’s primary source for basic public facilities and right-of-way repairs, an essential function of government that the City is required to deliver.
From FY2015 to FY2020, San Francisco met or exceeded the Capital Plan-recommended funding level for the Pay-Go Program. However, the Program suffered significant cuts as part of the FY2020 rebalancing required to absorb unexpected costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Those cuts were followed with reductions in the Pay-Go budget. The General Fund component of the Pay-Go budget was $47 million for FY2021 and $46.3 million for FY2022, about $100 million less than the previous budget cycle and recommended levels. As capital appropriations represent one-time uses, it is understandable that the City would pull on that source to deliver essential and time-sensitive services. Looking forward, San Francisco will need to again build back up to healthy levels of capital Pay-Go spending to ensure a basic state of good repair for public assets.
Table 2.2
Pay-Go Program Funding
FY22-26
FY27-31
Plan Total
(Dollars in Millions)
Routine Maintenance
82
104
186
ADA: Facilities
8
8
16
ADA: Public Right-of-Way
23
33
56
Street Resurfacing
65
192
256
Recreation and Parks Base Commitment
72
72
144
Capital Contribution to Street Tree Set-aside
31
39
70
ROW Infrastructure Renewal
10
40
50
Facility Renewal
94
324
418
Total Projected Funding
384
813
1,197
A direct result of these short-term fiscal constraints is that funding will not be available to meet the annual needs of San Francisco’s aging infrastructure and the renewal backlog will grow. If the City’s economy rebounds at a faster pace than the annual growth envisioned in the City’s Five-Year Financial Plan, the Capital Plan recommends the City reassess the Pay-Go Program growth targets and consider closing the gap to previous funding levels more quickly.
Acknowledging that fiscal constraints in the short term may make these targets difficult to reach in the early years of the Plan, the Pay-Go Program policies recommended by the Plan are:
The Pay-Go funding level will be $46.3 million in FY2022, growing at 10% until FY2024, increasing to $110 million in FY2025, and growing by 10% thereafter.
The Street Resurfacing Program will be funded at the level needed to maintain a “Good” Pavement Condition Index (PCI) score of 75. At currently recommended funding levels the PCI is projected to drop to 74 during this 10-year cycle.
ADA barrier access removal projects and the ongoing curb ramps right-of-way program will continue to be a program priority.
Several voter-determined outcomes over the past two years have affected the Pay-Go Program. Recently approved set-asides for the Recreation and Parks Department and street trees maintenance without associated revenue sources have resulted in restrictions on General Fund spending. These measures have reduced the flexibility of the
Pay-Go Program.
The policy constraint for the General Obligation (G.O.) Bond Program is:
G.O. Bonds under the control of the City will not increase long-term property tax rates above FY2006 levels. In other words, G.O. Bonds under control of the City and County of San Francisco will only be used as existing bonds are retired and/or the city's assessed property value grows.
Consistent with the 2020 update of the Five-Year Financial Plan, the G.O. Bond Program assumes a reduction in Net Assessed Value of 4.83% in FY2022, and growth of 5.89% in FY2023, 5.92% in FY2024, 4.64% in FY2025, 3.99% in FY2026, 3.37% in FY2027 and FY2028, and 3.38% annually thereafter.
The policy constraint for the Certificates of Participation (General Fund Debt) Program is:
The amount spent on debt service in the General Fund Debt Program will not exceed 3.25% of General Fund discretionary revenues.
Consistent with the Five-Year Financial Plan, the Plan assumes that General Fund discretionary revenues grow 16.75% in FY2022, 8.39% in FY2023, 5.48% in FY2024, 3.99% in FY2025, 3.94% in FY2026, and 2.7% annually thereafter.
General Policies
The Capital Plan uses the Annual Infrastructure Construction Cost Inflation Estimate (AICCIE) approved by the Capital Planning Committee for the first two years of the Capital Plan. For this Plan, that figure is 3.50%. Thereafter, the Plan assumes an annual escalation rate of 5.0% unless otherwise noted. The City uses a revolving Capital Planning Fund primarily to support pre-development of projects for inclusion in bonds with the expectation that these funds will be reimbursed at bond issuance.
Departments with major building projects within the Plan's time horizon are expected to develop estimates of the impact on the City’s operating budget. Those impacts appear in the Plan to the extent they are known at publication and are discussed as a standard component of requests made to the Capital Planning Committee. Operating impacts are also considered during the City’s annual budget development process. The financial impact of operations is not recorded in the Plan, but is addressed for major projects in the City’s Five-Year Financial Plan.
The FY2020-29 Capital Plan retains many of the policies set in prior years to ensure good stewardship of public funds and assets. These include the application of funding principles, restrictions around issuing debt, and setting funding targets for priority programs. The Plan’s policies govern the level and distribution of funds that feed into the Plan while the funding principles show how the funds will be prioritized.
Policies
Pay-Go Program Policies
The Capital Plan recommends a funding level in line with the previous Plan: $157.2 million in Pay-As-You-Go (Pay-Go) in FY2020, escalated by 7% annually thereafter.
Table 2.2
General Fund Pay-Go Funding
(Dollars in Millions)
FY20-24
FY25-29
Plan Total
Routine Maintenance
74
95
169
ADA: Facilities
5
5
10
ADA: Public Right-of-Way
44
56
99
Street Resurfacing
351
450
801
Enhancements
50
50
100
Recreation and Parks Base Commitment
75
75
150
Capital Contribution to Street Tree Set-aside
28
36
64
ROW Infrastructure Renewal
45
81
126
Facility Renewal
232
421
653
Total Projected Funding
904
1,268
2,172
The Pay-Go Program policies associated with that funding level are:
The Pay-Go funding level will grow at an annual rate of 7%. This enables the program to grow at a higher rate than inflation so that the existing backlog and ongoing needs can be addressed.
The Street Resurfacing Program will be funded at the level needed to achieve a “Good” Pavement Condition Index (PCI) score of 75 by FY2025.
ADA barrier access removal projects will continue to be prioritized, with the ongoing Curb Ramps right-of-way program fully funded.
Ten million dollars of Pay-Go funds each year are expected to fund critical emergencies and enhancement projects not covered through debt programs.
Several voter-determined outcomes over the past two years have affected the Pay-Go Program. Recently approved set-asides for the Recreation and Parks Department and street trees maintenance without associated revenue sources have resulted in restrictions on General Fund spending. These measures have reduced the flexibility of the Pay-Go Program.
The policy constraint for the G.O. Bond Program is:
G.O. Bonds under the control of the City will not increase long-term property tax rates above FY2006 levels. In other words, G.O. Bonds under control of the City and County of San Francisco will only be used as existing bonds are retired and/or the city's assessed value grows.
Consistent with the March 2019 update of the Five-Year Financial Plan, the G.O. Bond Program assumes growth in Net Assessed Value of 6.49% in FY2020, 4.51% in FY2021, 4.31% in FY2022, 4.03% in FY2023, 4.03% in FY2024, and 3.50% annually thereafter.
The policy constraint for the Certificates of Participation (General Fund Debt) Program is:
The amount spent on debt service in the General Fund Debt Program will not exceed 3.25% of General Fund discretionary revenues.
Consistent with the Five-Year Financial Plan, the Plan assumes that General Fund discretionary revenues grow 4.50% in FY2020, 3.79% in FY2021, and 3.15% in FY2022, 2.97% in FY2023, 3.19% in FY2024, and 3.50% annually thereafter.
General Policies
The Capital Plan uses the Annual Infrastructure Construction Cost Inflation Estimate (AICCIE) developed by the Office of Resilience and Capital Planning and approved by the Capital Planning Committee for the first two years of the Capital Plan. For this Plan, that figure is 6.0%. Thereafter, the Plan assumes an annual escalation rate of 5.0% unless otherwise noted.
The City uses a revolving Capital Planning Fund primarily to support pre-development of projects for inclusion in bonds with the expectation that these funds will be reimbursed at bond issuance.
Departments with major building projects within the Plan's time horizon are expected to develop estimates for the impact on the City’s operating budget as part of project development. Those impacts appear in the Plan to the extent they are known at publication and are further discussed as a standard component of requests made to the Capital Planning Committee. Operating impacts are also considered during the City’s annual budget development process. The financial impact of operations is not recorded in the Plan but is addressed for major projects in the City’s Five-Year Financial Plan.
The funding principles for the Capital Plan are the categories used to make trade-offs between competing needs. They help San Francisco to keep our long-term perspective when it comes time to make choices about major projects and offer a consistent and logical framework for some of the City’s most difficult conversations.
San Francisco strives for equity across our programs and investments. For capital, this means enabling access and supporting departments in their respective equity plans, which include considerations of race, age, income, geography, ability, and more.
FUNDING PRINCIPLE 1: Addresses Legal or Regulatory Mandate
Improvement is necessary to comply with a federal, state, or local legal or regulatory mandate.
The City faces a wide range of directives and requirements for our facilities, some with significant consequences for failure to perform. Action in these cases is required by law, legal judgment, or court order, or it can proactively reduce the City’s exposure to legal liability. The legal, financial, operating, and accreditation consequences for failure to perform are all weighed when considering these types of projects.
FUNDING PRINCIPLE 2: Protects Life Safety and Enhances Resilience
Improvement provides for the imminent life, health, safety, and/or security of occupants and/or the public or prevents the loss of use of an asset.
Life safety projects minimize physical danger to those who use and work in City facilities, including protection during seismic events and from hazardous materials. Considerations for these projects include the seismic rating of a facility, the potential for increased resilience in the face of disaster, and the mitigation of material and environmental hazards for those who visit, use, and work in City facilities.
FUNDING PRINCIPLE 3: Ensures Asset Preservation and Sustainability
Asset preservation projects ensure timely maintenance and renewal of existing infrastructure.
It is imperative to maintain the City’s infrastructure in a state of good repair so that the City’s operations are not compromised and resources are not squandered by failing to care for what we own. It is also important to support projects that lessen the City’s impact on the environment. Some assets are more critical than others; for example, some facilities provide services that cannot be easily reproduced at another location or serve as emergency operations centers. Considerations for these projects include the effect on the asset’s long-term life, importance for government operations, and environmental impact.
FUNDING PRINCIPLE 4: Serves Programmatic or Planned Needs
This set of projects supports formal programs or objectives of an adopted plan or action by the City’s elected officials.
Integrated with departmental and Citywide goals and objectives, this funding principle aims to align capital projects with operational priorities. Considerations for this type of project include confirmation that they will contribute to a formally adopted plan or action from the Board of Supervisors or the Mayor.
FUNDING PRINCIPLE 5: Promotes Economic Development
Economic development projects enhance the City’s economic vitality by stimulating the local economy, increasing revenue, improving government effectiveness, or reducing operating costs.
These projects may have a direct or indirect effect on the City’s revenues or may help to realize cost savings. Considerations for this type of project include the potential for savings, the level of revenue generation (either direct through leases, fees, service charges, or other sources; or indirect, such as increased tax base, business attraction or retention, etc.), and any improvements to government service delivery, such as faster response times, improved customer service, or increased departmental coordination.
Resilience and Sustainability
As the stewards of San Francisco’s public infrastructure, capital planning stakeholders in San Francisco look for ways to increase the City’s resilience and sustainability via our capital program. Resilience describes the capacity of San Francisco's individuals, communities, institutions, businesses, and systems to survive, adapt, and grow, no matter what kind of chronic stresses and acute shocks they may experience. For San Francisco this means (1) the ability to quickly respond to a disaster or large shock; (2) the ability to recover from systemic crises such as economic downturns, poverty, and housing shortages; and (3) the ability to prepare for and address slow-moving disasters like climate change and sea level rise.
As a coastal city in a dense metropolitan region, San Francisco faces a wide range of challenges when it comes to promoting sustainability in our infrastructural programs and projects. Sustainability in San Francisco means promoting green building, clean energy, mass transit, urban forestry, and careful planning, as well as preserving our existing assets to reduce the need for additional building.
The FY2018-2027 Capital Plan retains the policies set in prior years to ensure good stewardship of public funds and assets. These include the application of funding principles, restrictions around issuing debt, and setting funding targets for priority programs. The Plan’s policies govern the level and distribution of funds that feed into the Plan, while the funding principles show how the funds will be prioritized.
Policies
Pay-Go Program Policies
The Capital Plan recommends a funding level in line with the previous Plan: $137.3 million in Pay-As-You-Go (Pay-Go, or General Fund) in FY2018, escalated by seven percent annually thereafter.
Table 2.2
General Fund Pay-Go Program Funding
(Dollars in Millions)
FY18-22
FY23-27
Plan Total
Routine Maintenance
67
86
153
ADA: Facilities
7
6
12
ADA: Public Right-of-Way
38
49
87
Street Resurfacing
278
416
693
Enhancements
50
50
100
Recreation and Parks Base Commitment
75
75
150
Capital Contribution to Street Tree Set-aside
25
32
58
ROW Infrastructure Renewal
47
74
121
Facility Renewal
202
320
522
Total Recommended Funding
789
1,107
1,897
The Pay-Go Program policies associated with that funding level are:
General Fund revenue will grow at an annual rate of seven percent. This enables the program to grow at a higher rate than inflation so that the existing backlog and on-going needs can be addressed.
The Street Resurfacing Program will be funded at the level needed to achieve a “Good” Pavement Condition Index (PCI) score of 70 by FY2025.
Projects under the City’s ADA Transition Plans for facilities and the public right-of-way will be fully funded.
Ten million dollars of General Fund each year will fund critical emergencies and enhancement projects not covered through debt programs.
Several voter-determined outcomes over the past two years have affected the availability of funds in the Pay-Go Program. Newly approved set-asides for the Recreation and Parks Department and street trees maintenance without associated revenue sources have resulted in restrictions on General Fund spending. In addition, the failure of the $150 million sales tax revenue measure at the ballot box in 2016 caused the City to rebalance the budget and five-year financial projections.
The impact of these measures and other pressures on the General Fund could have resulted in a significant hit to the Pay-Go Program. According to estimates developed during the budget rebalancing process, a net loss of $33 million was anticipated. If that loss had been carried unescalated through the entire Plan, it would have meant a $330 million loss to the Pay-Go Program, a 17.4% drop from the recommended level.
In April 2017, however, Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 1 to provide $5.2 billion annually for California’s roads, bridges, and transit systems. The legislation, which includes a gas tax increase and a vehicle registration fee, is expected to provide sufficient revenue to enable the City to recover from the anticipated challenges resulting from the local sales tax measure’s failure.
Though another source emerged in this instance, it is worth noting that a reduction of $330 million in General Fund capacity would have had serious consequences for the City’s capital assets and program. In FY2018 alone, the City would have spent less than 20% of the recommended $38.6 million on Facilities Renewals and Right-of-Way Infrastructure. The results would have greatly increased the renewal program backlog. It is important that San Francisco prioritize its critical Pay-Go Program needs now and in the future.
Debt Program Policies
The policy constraint for the G.O. Bond Program is:
G.O. Bonds under the control of the city will not increase long-term property tax rates above FY2006 levels. In other words, G.O. Bonds under control of the City and County of San Francisco will only be used as existing bonds are retired.
Consistent with the Five-Year Financial Plan, the G.O. Bond Program assumes growth in Net Assessed Value of 4.19% in FY2018, 5.90% in FY2019, 4.49% in FY2020, and 3.50% annually thereafter.
The policy constraint for the Certificates of Participation (General Fund Debt) Program is:
The amount spent on debt service in the General Fund Debt Program will not exceed 3.25% of General Fund discretionary revenues.
Consistent with the Five-Year Financial Plan, the Plan assumes that General Fund discretionary revenues grow 4.8% in FY2019, 3.2% in FY2020, and 2.8% in FY2021, and 2.7% annually thereafter.
General Policies
The Capital Plan uses the Annual Infrastructure Construction Cost Inflation Estimate (AICCIE) developed by the Office of Resilience and Capital Planning and approved by the Capital Planning Committee for the first two years of the Capital Plan. For this Plan, that figure is five percent. Thereafter, the Plan assumes an annual escalation rate of five percent unless otherwise noted.
The City uses a revolving Capital Planning Fund to support pre-development of projects for inclusion in bonds with the expectation that these funds will be reimbursed at bond issuance.
Departments with major building projects within the Plan's time horizon are expected to develop estimates for the impact on the City’s operating budget as part of project development. Those impacts appear in the Plan to the extent they are known at publication and are further discussed as a standard component of requests made to the Capital Planning Committee. Operating impacts are also considered during the City’s annual budget development process. The financial impact of operations is not recorded in the Plan but is addressed for major projects in the City’s Five-Year Financial Plan.
Portola Branch Library
Funding Principles
The funding principles for the Capital Plan are the categories used to make trade-offs between competing needs. They help San Francisco to keep our long-term perspective when it comes time to make choices about major projects and offer a consistent and logical framework for some of the City’s most difficult conversations.
FUNDING PRINCIPLE 1: Addresses Legal or Regulatory Mandate
Improvement is necessary to comply with a federal, state, or local legal or regulatory mandate.
The City faces a wide range of directives and requirements for our facilities, some with significant consequences for failure to perform. Action in these cases is required by law, legal judgment, or court order, or it can proactively reduce the City’s exposure to legal liability. The legal, financial, operating, and accreditation consequences for failure to perform are all weighed when considering these types of projects.
FUNDING PRINCIPLE 2: Protects Life Safety and Enhances Resilience
Improvement provides for the imminent life, health, safety, and/or security of occupants and/or the public or prevents the loss of use of an asset.
Life safety projects minimize physical danger to those who use and work in City facilities, including protection during seismic events and from hazardous materials. Considerations for these projects include the seismic rating of a facility, the potential for increased resilience in the face of disaster, and the mitigation of material and environmental hazards for those who visit, use, and work in City facilities.
FUNDING PRINCIPLE 3: Ensures Asset Preservation and Sustainability
Asset preservation projects ensure timely maintenance and renewal of existing infrastructure.
It is imperative to maintain the City’s infrastructure in a state of good repair so that the City’s operations are not compromised and resources are not squandered by failing to care for what we own. It is also important to support projects that lessen the City’s impact on the environment. Some assets are more critical than others; for example, some facilities provide services that cannot be easily reproduced at another location or serve as emergency operations centers. Considerations for these projects include the effect on the asset’s long-term life, importance for government operations, and environmental impact.
FUNDING PRINCIPLE 4: Serves Programmatic or Planned Needs
This set of projects supports formal programs or objectives of an adopted plan or action by the City’s elected officials.
Integrated with departmental and Citywide goals and objectives, this funding principle aims to align capital projects with operational priorities. Considerations for this type of project include confirmation that they will contribute to a formally adopted plan or action from the Board of Supervisors or the Mayor.
FUNDING PRINCIPLE 5: Promotes Economic Development
Economic development projects enhance the City’s economic vitality by stimulating the local economy, increasing revenue, improving government effectiveness, or reducing operating costs.
These projects may have a direct or indirect effect on the City’s revenues or may help to realize cost savings. Considerations for this type of project include the potential for savings, the level of revenue generation (either direct through leases, fees, service charges, or other sources; or indirect, such as increased tax base, business attraction or retention, etc.), and any improvements to government service delivery, such as faster response times, improved customer service, or increased departmental coordination.
King Tides on the Embarcadero
Equity in San Francisco is one of the many ways that the City thinks about resilience—making sure that the programs, services, and features of the city are available to all. From a capital perspective, this means enabling access for persons with disabilities through ADA improvements to public facilities and rights-of-way and also seeing that the distribution of resources like parks and transit options is equitable. Affordability is a related concern as San Francisco strives to enable new residents to make the city their own while preserving space for those already here.
Resilience and Sustainability
A fundamental concern of the City and the Capital Planning Committee is to develop and implement infrastructure policies and programs to provide a safe, livable, and equitable environment for local residents, workers, and visitors for current and future generations. As the stewards of San Francisco’s public infrastructure, capital planning stakeholders in San Francisco look for ways to increase the City’s resilience and sustainability via our capital program.
Resilience describes the capacity of San Francisco's individuals, communities, institutions, businesses, and systems to survive, adapt, and grow, no matter what kind of chronic stresses and acute shocks they may experience. For San Francisco this means (1) the ability to quickly respond to a disaster or large shock; (2) the ability to recover from systemic crises such as economic downturns, poverty, and housing shortages; and (3) the ability to prepare for and address slow-moving disasters like climate change and sea level rise.
As a coastal city in a dense metropolitan region, San Francisco faces a wide range of challenges when it comes to promoting sustainability in our infrastructural programs and projects. Sustainability in San Francisco means promoting green building, clean energy, mass transit, urban forestry, and careful planning, as well as preserving our existing assets to reduce the need for additional building.
For more information about capital-related efforts supporting each of these high-level goals, please see Chapter Four: Building Our Future.
The Capital Plan is one of the cornerstones of San Francisco’s commitment to long-term planning and responsible stewardship of public dollars.
The Plan connects directly with the City’s overarching strategic aims. In 2016 as part of the City’s Five-Year Financial Plan, the Mayor’s Office published the Citywide Strategic Initiatives Framework, which presents a set of shared values and vision built upon the Departmental Strategic Plans from across the City administration.
Our Values
The Citywide Strategic Initiatives Framework defines our City values—what we stand for. These values guide how we operate and conduct our service to the public.
Equity. Our services reflect the value that each person deserves an opportunity to thrive in a diverse and inclusive city.
Collaboration. We are stronger when we work together. We serve through consensus building and cooperation across all sectors.
Community. The needs of an engaged and empowered community drive our service and we support participation and democracy for all.
Compassion. Our service is grounded in respect, dignity, embracing diversity, care, empathy and inclusion.
Service Excellence. We work to continuously improve services that are high quality, innovative and informed by what works.
Responsibility & Integrity. We are stewards of the public’s dollars. We make responsible decisions to ensure the long-term success for our City and residents.
Accountability and Transparency. We hold ourselves accountable based on outcomes and believe that transparency fosters public trust.
The vision from the Citywide Strategic Initiatives Framework articulates a five-part call to action to unify the diverse work of City departments towards a common direction for the City. (1) Residents and families who thrive. (2) Clean, safe, and livable communities. (3) A diverse, equitable, and inclusive City. (4) Excellent City services. (5) A City and region prepared for the future. This is the City San Francisco wants to be. The City’s facilities and infrastructure are essential components of this vision, and the Capital Plan helps lay the financial groundwork so that our plans can be realized.
