Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Employees Retirement System Lease topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Budget panel pauses decision on proposed 10-year lease for retirement system offices at 1145 Market St.

San Francisco Board of Supervisors Budget and Finance Committee ยท January 29, 2014
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The committee continued consideration of a proposed 10-year lease for the Employees' Retirement System at 1145 Market Street, citing ongoing negotiations to reduce cost and footprint; staff said a renegotiated lease and amended resolution will return to committee Feb. 26, 2014.

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors Budget and Finance Committee on Jan. 29 paused action on a proposed 10-year lease at 1145 Market Street that would house the Employees' Retirement System.

John Updike, director of real estate, told the committee staff were "continuing discussions with ownership" and working with the retirement system and the budget analyst to "repackage a slimmed down lease with lower fiscal impact and hopefully also a reduced footprint." He said staff expected to return with a renegotiated lease and an amended resolution on Feb. 26, 2014.

The clerk had introduced the item as a resolution to authorize a 10-year lease for office space "for the Employees' Retirement System for approximately $119,000 monthly." Committee members asked no substantive questions on the record, and public comment on the item was closed after no speakers came forward.

Chair Supervisor Mark Farrell asked for a motion to continue the item to the committee's Feb. 26 meeting; the motion was made and taken without recorded opposition. The continuance means the committee will review the amended lease terms and the revised resolution at the Feb. 26 meeting before forwarding any recommendation to the full Board of Supervisors.

No formal vote on the lease was recorded at the Jan. 29 meeting, and no further fiscal details beyond the monthly figure in the clerk's reading were provided to the committee that day.