There please be advised the ringing and utilization of cell phone, pagers are prohibited. The chair may order the removal from the meeting room of any person responsible for the ringing of or use of a cell phone, pager or other electronic device. Please be advised a member has up to three minutes to make Public Comments on each agenda item unless the Commission Adopts a shorter time. Is there any Public Comment on items not listed on the agenda seeing none, Public Comment is close. Item 6a, directors report. Good afternoon, president brandon, Vice President adams, members of the commission and members of the staff. Im the ports executive director. I have a happy report today because i get to talk about two awards gim given to port staff. To first, the california preservation foundation, the cpf, has selected the pier 70 design award in Cultural Resources studies. The design for Development Agreement was created through a Long Partnership with the port, San Francisco Planning Department, Mayors Office. Economic workforce and Brookfield Properties and project team, including but not limited to site lab, urban studios, david baker architects, Architectural Resources group. It was designed in the planning and history, as well as renowned architecture critics selected to look at various submissions to make their selection and i want to read to you from what they said about our design for Development Agreement. The report tackles a lot of issues. Its ambitious, groundbreaking. This work at addressing the issues what to do with places that have Historic Structures and need infill. Its less about the preservation of the history resources and more about the infill and creating vibrant public spaces. Its a very ambitious tool to try to encourage the right type of compatible infill, and it will be fascinating to see the next ten years as the project emerge. Were so excited to see the project emerge. This award will be presented to the project team friday, octobes ceremony at the 36 proceeding annual gala at the mac Hopkins Hotel in San Francisco. I would like to congratulate the pier 70 team. This saturday, september 28th, is National Public lands day to be celebrated on the 4t 4th saturday of december. Well be participating to provide a day of service connecting nature through service at herrins head ecos centre. There will be wall climbing, introduction to fishing, planting in the park and beekeeping demonstration. It should be a fun day. I would like to announce another award that port staff and our consultant partners earned and this is from 3cma, city and county association, the 29 savvy awardees competition to agencies committed to Public Service engaging residents in finding creative, inspiring and outcomebased strategies. Specifically this association was very excited about our makers partnership. Our port staff worked with local makers in San Francisco who were willing to put their own energy in our seawall programme, specifically coffee and brewery and they made seawall theme drinks and coffees to get the word out about the programme. Black hammer hosted a meettheengineer happy hour to promote their beer, seawall puppy and get the public engaged connected to our Engineering Team working on the programme. The blend was available anywhere coffee was sold in august of september of 2018 and included five locations in Popular Grocery stores through San Francisco but importantly, the label told the story about our seawall and introduced the public to the seawall programme in touching audiences that we wouldnt traditionally touch. So im proud of k irster salvy as our lead. Youre always pushing the envelope and getting the word out. That concludes my report. Thank you. Is there any Public Comment . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. I would request item 9a be moved to the end of the agenda after item 10a. Good afternoon, commissioners. I am presenting item 6b, the informational item and possible action regarding the proposed vision to the rules of order. The item before you is an informational presentation and possible action on updates and changes to the rules of order. The San Francisco charter session 4. 014 set forth the general hours and commission. The powers and duties enumerated relate to the General Organization and operation of each commission and a holding of regular and special meetings. B3. 581 enumerates specific powers and duties of the Port Commission. The charter empowers and requires the Port Commission to use, conduct, operate, maintain, manage, regulate and control the port of San Francisco. The port director has the duty to implement the commissions policies to execute priorities and programs and to manage staff. Every governmental body has an inherent right to regulate its own procedure subject to the provisions of the constitution, statutes, charter or other control be authority. The Port Commission has adopted rules of order, but has not been updated for some time. The last time it was updated was in 2006. So specifically, we are recommends an amendment to article 1, item 2 of the rules of order which states among the commissioners a president and Vice President was elected and will serve a oneyear term. Elections will be held every year at the physical da first cr meeting. We propose alternative one, delete the reference of alternative limits, so no officer may serve for more than two years executiv consecutive d increase term of commission officers. So no officer may serve for more than four years consecutively in the same office. The policy rational is to require upfront rotations to provide opportunity for other members to serve in the officer commission. While the Port Commission votes on the officers and has free latitude to rotate opportunities, the upfront term limit serving in officer roles every two years. The policy rationale is that the Port Commission has freedom to choose officers every year and the upfront term limit requirement to supPort Commissioners from exercising authority to choose among all of the Port Commissioners. There are specific circumstances and goals that continue wit abilitwith theeight acability to compete. They continue with the executive director in terms of approach and time and limitation. We propose in article 5 of the rules order which requires the Port Commission secretary attend all regular and special meetings of the Port Commission. The proposal would be on occasion, the Commission Secretary may miss a meeting at which time the Commission Secretary with the concurrents of the port director will attend the meeting in his or her place. We will delegate to another staffer if necessary. We request approval of the resolution attached to your staff report and director forbes Legal Counsel are available to answer questions. Thank you. Is there any Public Comment on in item . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Commissioner . Yes, thank you for the proposal and i think its probably time for tos us to revt the rule. I think limiting alternates is not a Good Governance procedure but it gives us all continuity that you have mentioned in your report and thats my position. Thank you. Thank you gillman . Thank you. Amy, can you just enlighten me, i know in the staff report you talked that most commissions dont have term limits. Most commissioners, thats correct. The only ones that do have them because i called around and found out, so at the moment, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency and the Planning Department have no term limit restrictions and the rest do. Are they typically two or four years. I think one year. Some are one year and some are two areas. So it varies. Im actually just for fellow commissioners, im in favour of loeliminating the term rule. We have ample opportunity to switch leadership or make different decisions. You dont want to see us get boxed into a position on a fouryear cycle or if that fouryear cycle didnt mesh up or moved to another commission. So i will give you my personal opinion. I work a lot of governance in the private sector and i do think that it helps to set expectations for both the staff, as well as for the commissioners involved and there should be, i think, rotational opportunities throughout time. And i think because of our oneyear election cycle change, it becomes more awkward. But if theres a limit, its national to rotate leadership in that role. And i think its good to have fresh perspectives periodically. I think currently have been president of the commission myself, you dont get accomplished everything through a cycle and four years is a much better cycle. Ok. Commissioner gillman, do you want to finish . I would like to finish my comments. I jaws saying that alternative one spoke a little more to me because there could be a situation where we feel the leadership is strong and we want to have a president or Vice President serve for five years or for six years and since many commissions dont have term limits and we still have keeping the reelection every cycle, every area, that just resonates more with me. Thank you. Commissioner . I support alternative one, no term limits. Vice president. I support the youve been on the commissioner for seven years and mark has been president for ten, 12 years on the parks board as the president and he seems like he has a lot of leadership. I think mark buehl is his name. So im fine with alternative, too. Once again, at the end of the year, the commissioners get to vote, so im good. So youre with for years or no term limits . Im good with four years. Amy, thank you, we appreciate it. We neeas far as the president ae president , i think that we should try the fouryear terms. If we think thats not enough, we can come back and change it, but maybe we should start out with four years and see how it goes and if theres recommendation for change, later on, we can always revisit it. Not so would someone like to make a motion . Can i ask a question in. Sure. As our most tenured commissioner, have you seen a scenario, where you felt leadership would have had more continuity if that person had served for more than four years. I think its hard to say since we have had term limits and we havent had that opportunity. Weve always had to change. I think it would be great to have leeway because our projects dont take so long to come to fruition. Ii think theres needs to be se continuity and some transition. So i think im comfortable with the focuser years. Thank you. Four years. Thank you. Is there a motion . Ill move alternative number one, noterm limits. Ill second that. I think we have should have public give discussion on that. I thought this was an informational item. With powerful action, so we can act today or we can continue to discuss. So there is a motion on the floor and there is a second. And so we will vote on that. All in favour . Aye. Any opposed . Is there another motion in. I move for alternative two, fouryear term live and i agree with president brandon, we should try it and we feel it needs to be revisited, then we can revisit it just as were revisiting the twoyear limit today. Second. All in favour . Any opposed . Four in favour, one opposed. And resolution 1938 has been approved. Thank you, commissioner. Thank you, amy. Item 7 a requests approval of Affordable Housing subsidy plan for special tax rates for the project at 337 by chinabasin channel, third street and San Francisco bay, to adoption of the parks plan in and request resolution for a nonprofit utilities entity to operate a District Energy system and a nonPotable Water plant providing recycled water to the residents and commercial tenants. Good afternoon, rebecca benisin, honored to represent the rock team behind me today. Were here with an action item for you, a significant milestone for the mission rock project. I want to go over some pledges youve seen before but i think many bear repeating. The first one is with the project area. We know it took us more than a decade to get here but we have an entitled project that consists of a 28acre site, located at lot a near oracle park. It will include 2. 7 to 2. 8 million growth square feet of residential, 1200 of those will be housing units, 40 below market rate. We have a little bit more than a million square feet of office and 20,000 square feet of rehabilitation at pier 48. You all know documents were executed in 2017. Since that time, document has been working on sitewide issues. Earlier in the year, they received a portal submittal. Phase one on the left consisted of the parcels that lined china basin park. The phase one before you today has been reconfigured to focus on that corner between the intersection of parcels a, b, g and f. New phase one provides infrastructure and a more Cohesive Strategy from the developers standpoint and we like it because it delivers more housing units. The proposed phase one includes at buildout 560 rental units, 202 of which will be Affordable Housing below market rates, a little bit more than 550,000 square feet of office, retail. It requires all of the commitments made in the dda and da related to local hire and lbe enterprises, as well as 5. 5acre park. Really the linchpin that the community made sure we would hold our feet to the fire was that 5. 5 6 5. 58 park. Parcel k was a smaller residential parcel. Well talk more about the infrastructure in subsequent slides. Before i get into the meat of things, i want to repeat what amy said, maybe more in laymans terms. Im not sure if i can do it but ill try. Whats before you are two resolutions, resolution 1939 is approval of the phase one budget and approval of the parks plan. Those are required to be done together under our transaction documents. All of our smart City Partners new that we who put our Vision Forward for the parks before we started spending some amount of money on those parks. Very smart thinking on our attorneys and our City Partners on that one. So when we approve the phase one budget, well be approving the horizonal expenditure of 145 million and that is the amount the developer can receive their full reimbursement return on. If they go over, theyre subject to a lower return rate, tied to the treasury note which we all know is low, so theyre heavily incentivized to keep that to 145 million. Welwell establish it will tako years and theyll have up to five years to complete it or phase a dda default. You will direct staff to put in place all of the implementing documents. The key is the facilitys district which we need in place to issue bond. Were increasing the jobs housing equivalency fee to subsidized residential and executing the housing plan which is the structural document that tells the Office Developer they need to pay us, the residential developer can get the subsidy. The parks plan establishes goal for the sitewide parks and open space and ill talk about subsequent documents. Three resolution 1939. Resolution 1 1940 is resolutionf support for nonprofit status for an entity to be formed by the master developer and a utility partner, private utility partner in order to operate these unique district serving systems, the District Energy system and blackWater Treatment plant. Just an overview of the fist o e budget, the entitlement sum must be repaid as part of phase one. The total costs are shown with the anticipated developer return. The sources of payments are four prepaid ground leases for phase one parcels at 41. 2 million and all of the bonding that we anticipate. First bonding on the entire 28acre site and after each building comes on to the tax role and we have assessed value doing bonding over the first several years of the project. I want to mention one item which is in the staff report we note that 1. 7 million of the entitlement sum will be deferred at a 0 return to a subsequent phase because we couldnt fit it into budget. It felt comfortable that the entitlement sum at 0 Interest Rate was in the interest of all parties. What are we getting for the 145 million . I think i made that joke two weeks ago and its not that funny the second time. Were getting eight city blocks of very interesting and unique infrastructure. I wrote unique because we have shared public ways. These are streets designed to encourage slowvehicle traffic and encourage more pedestrian bicycle connection. We have deadends into the park that will be the same, very much more focused on pedestrianed and bicycle unfortunatesists. District a, recycled water which reduces Potable Water in our parks than nonPotable Water needs. The lightwet sel cellular conc. The documents understood what we thought we should do but it recognised that had not been completed in terms of Due Diligence and directed the city and director to form a geotechnical working group and that occurred in 2018 through 2019. The group considered a number of geotechnical solution for this difficult fill site in order to mitigate the street settlement that weve seen in mission bay. Theyve considered a number of approach. Light weight Cellular Concrete was the mixer. In light thimission. This has ber applications in San Francisco but this would be the largest application in the city and the city negotiated a much higher level of protect. Public work, puc, the port as well, including port review of the drawing, the outside, a Technical Advisory Panel to oversee the design of the streets, as well as the pilot project. So the developer will be required prior to getting its final street permit to demonstrate and to allow the city to do inplace testing at the site it will be used. The city negotiated a longer Warranty Period for the infrastructure. And so thats an overview of the phase one. Note the cost since phase approvals in 2018, we thought phase one would be 96 million and theyre at 145 million. Want to note that the key increases are around china basin park and streets and utilities and the primary reason is cost escalation but more design work, understanding what you have going in that park acreage has increased the cost in creating noosely designecreatingnice lied nicely designed future. The primary reason is that the soft cost at approvals were sort of a formula and now we have the real contracted soft cost and primary reason theyre so much business, theres a lot of site work. Were doing the bases of design for all of the purchase a infra. They have to take place at phase one to get the lay the groundwork for the subsequent phases. The parks plan, the parks plan, as i mentioned is a subset of documents that govern the parks. The dda requires they deliver the parks. The agreement with the city requires that they limit Public Events in the park to mak make e they have a public park. We have a permit that similarly requires quite a lot of Public Access and maintains access during private events. For the port side, well have two documents. The first is this parks plan and we will subsequently bring to you a Management Agreement this will be a contract to manage the parks. So the one before you is a planning level document. We want amend it as we go forward if we find the vision or goals need to be tweaked. The two goals here the vision here is one as developer and port staff. Talking to the public, they feel its an accurate representation of what the public wanted. They wanted robust public activation. The parks and open space requires goals and objectionives. I listed the four key ones on this slide. Im not a planner so when i talk about planning documents, i cannot get the language right, so i wont read those to you, but it will be great. [ laughter ] we were looking for special parks. Than where thwe want a structure can give a feedback of how the park is functioning. So we have a way to hear that and be responsive to concerns that are coming to us about these parks. And the parks will be a great asset in terms of just maintaining the Real Estate Asset over time for the port. This will be the first, like, impression that people have and having this park in place and being run very well. So in terms of next steps, we will continue Public Outreach on the phase budget and parks plan discussed today, as well as all of the other mission rock items before you in the coming four to six months. So we want to note weve gone to swack to provide this. We want to put a plug in for the open house that mission rock will be hosting at oracle park to get input on park programming and park design. Ive listed the other dates to consider subsequents approval documents that are needed. I know thats a ton of information and i look forward to your comments. Thank you very much. Are you going to give us any information on the utilitys entity . Thank you so much. I should have done that. They have not formed an entity. Theres nonstatus for the entity. The reason this is beneficial for the port is that the infrastructure that needs to be delivered, the black Water Treatment plan and Energy Treatment system have to be delivered whether its forprofit or nonprofit. If they achieve status, they can receive a lower cost of financing and if they receive a lower cost, then the rate payers will not have to pay as much for water. That will show up in building expenses sitewide. If they can charge lower rates, our future buildings gain a benefit because there will be lower operating costs. So were supportive of them being a nonprofit. We did include the communications we had with sf fuc on whether or not threat would be interested. For a variety of reasons in terms of how large the system is and how sort of unique it is, that they were supportive of the port Going Forward with what we needed for out project. So that letter we included provided their kind of handsoff that the port should go ahead and do what they would like to do in the ability goals. So the resolution before you only says that we are supportive of this entity when its formed, achieving a nonprofit status. For the benefit of the public, can you explain what a black water system is . I can. [ laughter ] im trying not to think of what my children would say. Its a plan to provide recycled water, drawing water from every parcel in site and filter that water and auto o out of the oth, it will provide irrigation uses. The items not on site will be put back into the sa sanitary sr system and sent back into the plant. Double pipe . The infrastructure is the double piping, so it saves Construction Costs for all of the parcels in terms of them having to provide the inside of the building. Thank you very much. Can i have a motion . So moved. Second. Is there any Public Comment on this item . There is one person and i cannot read this card. If you filled out a speaker card on this item, please feel free to come up. My name is bruce gerard. Thats my handwriting. This does not say bruce. [ laughter ] i happen to have the pleasure of leading a small lbe located at the third street area of hunters point. Were a small lbe, enfutured ina number of areas, the puc, the airport. What am i missing . We have not had a chance go to the port yet and were very interested in this project. In all of the projects, the one im most proud of is pedestrian. But the ones with rec and parks is the ones im most proud of because when you drive around and see it and share it with family, friends and acquain acquaintances, it leaves a project with you. Theres a lot of cache for that project and on my team, were very, very eager to be engaged or work on that project and were looking forward to it. The other piece, we have been very, very flavourbly pressed by the level of outreach you all have put your effort into. We feel that each one of the departments, there were always challenges in learning how they do business and learning how to work in their ecosystem. So the port has been one of those that we wanted to engage with, an and anxiety with starg with a new department but we see that the level of effort that you all are going through to make sure that you include a lot of Small Businesses that this is probably the best time and worthy of our getting involved with this particular project. Thank you. Can i just ask, what type of business do you have . I have a construction company. Im an alicense, b license in concrete. We have done a lot of parks here and weve been in problem a lot of iconic locations here. Are you working with the giants or you want to work with the giants . I want to work as a prime contractor. So you havent had a conversation or been approached by them or gone to any of their open houses or anything. Anything . I have, indeed. Whats the name of your company. It is gecms, doing business as gerard construction. Thank you. I appreciate that. Does anybody else want to speak . Im a Small Business in San Francisco and were speaking to actually have the opportunity to be able to be a part of this project. Thank you very much. Im have harris wasting and were one year old and also lbe. We do crane and elevators and we would love to be a part of this project, as well. Ive attended several of your outreach and we would like to see more. Ok, thank you very much. Jacob wallace. Growing up in district 10, were familiar with the port. Outside of professional athletes, and other elected officials, people like themselves are our hero. And so for them to get an opportunity to be able to work as representation of district 10 and people in district 10 and to be a reflection of district 10, it makes me proud to know that the giants granted have gone beyond the call of duty to try to put them at the forefront so they can be competitiv com compy bidding. Any a Public Comment . Im with the economic development. Im come here for three main purpose. To give you a quick update. Cycle 31 is graduating october 17th and we started with 15 men and women from San Francisco, from the impacted communities and were graduating and ready. Theres 12 more left and we placed more than 30 folks and they have three more weeks left of class and were excited. I brought in a special improv sl invitation and im here to answer any questions about our partnership with giants, and the mission rock development. Weve been meeting with them to impact them more and get them ready when its about to start and we want to make sure when the shovel hits the ground that we have residents working on the project. Thank you so much. Any other Public Comment . I do have to stay Public Comment is closed but i have to say that i was extremely surprised to see 145 million phase project and no mention of lbe contracting or Workforce Development. I was really surprised not to see that included in this report. So im happy that people came out to say that they really want to work with the giants and looking forward to working with the giants. I have been asking for a report and i got a report. I couldnt understand the report and i still dont understand what type of contracting weve been doing on this contract. So hopefully someone can speak to the lbe numbers, the lbe goals, Workforce Development, how were getting people ready for this 145 million phase one project. You am going to need help. So im sorry that wasnt in the staff report. Right now, they have not signed a contract with granite, so thats, perhaps, part of the problem. We should have put in what the requirements are in the goals they have to meet. Im very aware of the cmd goals and what they have to meet. Ive been asking each time that you have come up regarding this project how were attaining that and what are we doing to make sure those goals are met and what has been done today. Somebody is coming behind me to help me think. I may be able to help. On the reconstruction work, there was reimbursement for 10 and we achieved 20 in the preconstruction work. Were entering the phase where construction will start and the first phase is horizonal construction. Weve taken a hard look on how to have the work scopes developed to maximize the participation. We have had openhouse, training, reached out to district 10 and mate people aware of the opportunities and over the next couple of months, there will be opportunities that are put on the street for lbes and contractors to work in the horizonal project where we have an obligation to have 20 lbes. Weve done outreach, hired consultants to help us so that we can get the word out wide and far and do training so that people are not familiar with the process for the city and it can work and submit bids. So we can give you reports as we go forward and if you have moredayold questions, we can follow up with them or i can have my colleagues answer them but were committed to hiring lbes and throughout the city and were committed to create work scopes that are designed for lbes to participate that might not have as much resources as larger contractor. We have submitted or horizonal grgranite and well continue to work with all of the entities to make sure we deliver on all promise. I appreciate that. I did receive the report and i did have questions because i did not see the firms associated with the lbe numbers in the report. Soy still dont know what lbes are work on this project. From what i saw, the outrag outo women and minorities is not good at all. Im hoping we can do better and when you come back, you have something in this report that tells us what were doing with local hiring, with Workforce Development and how were engaging the surrounding communities in this effort. I know youll do a great job because you always have. I just want to make sure that Going Forward, we can see what youre doing. You have our commitment and were starting the construction phase now so we dont have any companies on board because we havent let any of those contracts yet. Well keep you posted. Commissioner gillman. As i said in the informational, im supportive of this project, excited to see it work. I like the Affordable Housing component and those are two parts of the project i was particularly proud of. Im going to supPort Commissioner brandon and hope on the lb lbe and his participatio, with the ongoing recruitment and pipeline, that their gc e. U. S gs and we can be proud with our participation. I want to say im happy Going Forward but i want to call out the road issue as something of concern to me and something that is at the end of the day has risk associated with it. So i do not want us Going Forward and being blind to the risk associated with it. Simply said, i reached out to staff, i reached out to the project sponsor and industry and sadly said theres none in the United States for a project of this size. So this is something new. Its something innovative and i like this, but you want to emphasize that it has risk associated with it. I am disappointed when you read in the report on page 10, that they talk about more due dull diligence in i this area. We have not hammered down the road issue yet to what we can all put our arms around and feel comfortable with. I am comforted that they are doing a pilot project. I would like for them to report back to us so they would understand that were all behind a new product and hope for its success. I have just a couple of questions. I am not going to monday morning quarterback the four points this entire deal, but i would like some answer so answers so i und. On page 10, they talk about the return of funds by equity. Could someone explain why theretheport receives 10 retu. I would say we each return the same amount of money. Could you share the rationalization that the developer will deal with an 18 return and the city and county of San Francisco will receive a 10 return for their contribution . I can start. We have fought hard to get a return on port capital and we have that in this agreement. The reason were not earning the same return is because theres more risk to the developer than port because were the landlord, ultimately. So if the project were to fail, we hold the lease and we would hold whatever improvements made on that lease. So recognising that we have less risk because we hold the land and are the landowner, we didnt ask for 18 and we were proud to get ten. The only second reason that i recall from that negotiation time period was that the developers required to fund all of the costs for phase one. Whereas we can elect to put in money and if there are cost overruns, its on them to fund to complete their obligations under the dda. We have an opportunity to submit cash and if we do, are we subject to the return . Thats right. We can earn 6 and get 130 bigger bang for our buck. I can answer that, too, because its a Capital Planning question. So we just dont have enough cash on hand and profit to get through our capital list. So when we looked at our capital proposal, were trying to deal with regulatory issues, avoid red tag facilities and make other investments that return revenue to the port and we simply have not had enough capital dollars to get down the resislist and that is why at ths point were not asking for an allocation of dollars to invest in this project. Would the agreement allow us to bring in an investor and we put it in this transaction and we share with the investor the 10 . And if they were happy with 6 , we would make 4 and if they were happy with 8 , we would make 2 . Are we allowed to do that within the boundaries of contract . Within the boundaries of contract, we can put in money the Port Commission off crews and puts into its budget. As long the Port Commission approves it, we can put money into the deal. I will note that we talked about this very thing because the timing was such that we werent at this point able to put in money. The developer anticipates starting construction in ernest early next year. To the extent theres money, they are open to putting that into the deal. I think all of us on the models, see how close phase one is and we can replace the 8 money with 10 money and that would help phase one achieve feasibility. That includes my question, thank you. Weve been over this phase pe onphaseone many times so im comfortable with the project and supportive. I think one other aspect and i wasnt going to make comment here because i didnt have further questions, but one of the things in the past and the reason for the 10 , when we compare it to the investment yield that we have on our cash securities investments, that the treasure of San Francisco we have surplus cash the 10 is an attractive yield relative to 1 or 2 yield we get. Thats a factor of why when this return is discussed in the past, that we compare what are other alternatives are for not just our Capital Planning but for actual return on investments. Obviously they take safe investment guidelines. The 10 is a very good yield relative to their yield. No further comment. Thank you. Vice president adam. Im in favour but i agree with president brandon. Shes been asking about this for month and sometimes i think when the commissioners talk, it falls on deaf ears. The staff may think they know more than the commissioners. Thats fine, but i think when asking is asked, you know, shes been asking for this for months, and no excuse not to be in the report and you cant duck it. If theres an issue, it needs to be dealt it and thats how i feel. Jack came up, but it should be in the report and should be talked about. So i think when we say something, it should be heeded and as president brandon said, people from the community hadnt come out today, a lot of this stuff we wouldnt have known and we have to talk about these things. I think to me, transparency is important and when we say something, it should be there. Im not blaming you, but somebody should have had that in the report and you should have been able to call that immediately to give those anticipation. Answers. This is too big, something take 12, 13 years, we need have it right. So ill sport. Support it. We need facts to make the right decisions. Thank you. Rebecca, thank you for this report and jack and team, thank you so much for all of the work that you have put into this project because this will be an amazing project. I think our concern is to make sure there are opportunities for everywhere to be involved in this project. Anything that happens along that waterfront will affect that community. It will affect everybody. So ive been asking over and over, can you please include the southern Waterfront Advisory Committee on everything going on on that corridor. So hopefully they get the same opportunities that everybody else is getting and know of opportunities coming up, that they may be interested in. So hopefully, Going Forward, we will talk to all of our advisory groups prior to anything coming to the commission. And i can explain what our thinking was. It wail not satisfy you at all. Foul. [ laughter ] we come to the Port Commission first and we came to you on september 10th and i put them on every single calendar and their meeting is tomorrow and they didnt have enough meeting before today so we could delayed the Port Commission. Everyone has the same opportunity. I agree. We didnt have a meeting, a swack meeting since the last meet. But what we are instituting is Community Reports on the mission rock project to the swack and the seawag. So well institute that starting now. It will allow the swack to get caught up on the projects because theyre not well informed and moving forward, well do quarterly updates on them. I dont think it should take me to say that all of these advisory groups should get a briefing. I think theyve had a meeting and there was arriv ample oppor. Again, i shouldnt have to ask where we are with the workforce and who are we giving this information to. Thats not my job. There is so much happening along the third street corridor which is why i thought the Mayors Office put together an effort to make this all work together. Because every project will impact all of the communities. And so whether its pier 70, whether its mission rock or transportation, waste whatever , Everyone Needs the same information. Thank you, i really appreciate this. All in favour . The resolution 1939 and 1940 has been approved. Information under the Fundraising Campaign and partnership of San Francisco parks alignment
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.