maps. each household will be required to buy a pass. we're not trying to prevent some from buying cars. all of the congestion pricing revenues, commercial parking fees will go back to that agency to be disbursed to trump the providers -- to transit providers, so we are trying to encourage people to get out of their cars. >> i have a question, and why don't we start with a disclaimer hamas -- a disclaimer herrmann -- a disclaimer?

let's go back to the prices of three in the sea walls to various levels. -- bring in the sea walls to various levels. 29 to take it from 16 tase 36o . 8 to bring it to 65. at some point don't they become jurisdiction will to somebody? our guess i believe that is when they could answer this. -- >> i believe that is when

they could enter this. >> that would be the 36 inch level. >> i believe that is correct. >> maciel levels are higher than today's levels. -- the sea levels are higher than today's levels. >> who has jurisdiction over those levees? >> those are certified by fema. the city would certify the levees but will be dealt -- built. >> they would be fema-designated sections for developmened areas? >> that is correct they would have maps showing treasure

island as a lovey-protected community. -- levee-protected community. >> those levees are going to be different structures then what you have now, and it is surprising that the estimate is only $35.8 million. >> we have a few sections here and it showed the levels are not what you typically see in the delta of. there will be an additional structure in iraq of the existing perimeter -- in back of

the existing perimeter. >> has that design and cost estimate been reviewed? i know of the soil stabilization work was reviewed, but as far as estimating the cost, is about third-party reviewed? >> they have concurred that based on the level of design and engineering we know today, these are reasonable estimates. >> that included costs? >> correct. you>> it is really hard to believe, and i am not saying anything that is not in your

record, but it is hard to believe that. you said the total would be $38.2 million. the numbers do not add up. >> the sum total to get us from what is existing -- the initial up to 16 inches is what is provided as part of the infrastructure development, also 29.4 million to get us to 36 and 8.8 to get us up to 55. the grand total would be 45, and that does not take into account geotechnical stabilization. >> if you do it now, why is it so much more expensive? >> the strategy is different.

the number i gave you would be into elevates it to 55 inches. and there are challenges in terms of technical feasibility. you would not be protecting the existing school facility, so the perimeter is are actually more complete. >> sadat was to build had higher and not the wall higher? >> as far as financing, the mechanism is the facilities district, and there is a cap of

2 percent cited, -- 2%, and how much those that generate beaumont regenerate? >> that is the correct tax rate that would go to a number of things. the other one would be for property taxes. >> the first one and a half is for the general tax rate. the other is used to bond against it. the assessed value is

approximately $4.2 billion. you would generate in one year $37 million. you would have retired some of the bonds, so if you only have 50%, you could collect $17.8 million per year. >> forgive me if i am slow, but it is the problem of dealing with this of the late state. -- at this late date. 9.85 is the tax rates? >> that is correct. >> it translates to how many dollars? >> the average value is $750,000

for a total of $4.2 billion. but now it's you 35 ports $7 billion on an annual -- $354 7 million on an annual basis. >> is there a budget for how that 20 allocated -- how that would be allocated? >> it would be allocated to pay the initial improvement for all of the infrastructure. . there would be of process that

would include a cost estimate of peace improvements in -- of these improvements. after that they would make decisions about ongoing and parks and open space. we have not estimated that, but the first call is sea level improvement. >> who is making the decision on that? today exist in perpetuity -- do they exist in perpetuity? >> they are a city agency. they could at some point now designates to another authority.

>> what i am concerned about is i think adaptive management is appropriate as long as financing is behind its. i am concerned that it becomes a shift in obligation at some point. we are saying the obligation would go to them. they would have the community improvement fund, and that would be generating $35.7 million a year. you're saying the first priority is sea level rising improvement. is that mandated at some plays,

-- at some place bowman -- place? is there some way to deal with these improvements? >> in the financing plan, which is transactional agreement as well as this monitoring program, which is a mitigation program. >> i did read that, and i saw the mechanism exists corrigan which i did not see is some obligation to use that mechanism -- i saw the mechanism exists. what i did not see is an obligation to use the mechanism.

>> the sea level rise improvements have the first call on those dollars. goothe financing plan is an attachment. >> that is what i could not find. if it is in there, i would like a citation. it looks as though if there is enough money there, you can probably afford the increases, although i am highly skeptical of what that would cost. >> i have one follow-up.

what is the bill the projected? you said that would be assessed at 35.7. what is the projected to be? >> 20 years. i would also point to the financing plan that gives the city the authority to issue bonds at any time. what we have done is cap them at 1.85 common -- 1.85, so we can make this improvement faster than anticipated a. we do not expect 16 inches to be reached until 2015, which is approximately 40 years from now. >> 20 years would start when? >> we believe if the project is approved, development could

start as early as winter of 2012. >> see if you can get me that citation. i did see the city could issue bonds. what i am very concerned about is we are capable of postponing the inconvenient and seeing sea level rise increasing and not taking action until it is overwhelming, and we have many examples, is where i will be looking for a an obligation we do so that is where i would be looking for an odd but it -- so that is where i would be looking for an obligation. >> who will look into that. shel and move on to the technical pieces?

-- shall i move on to the technical pieces? the next set of slides are pretty technical. would you like us to walk through them? >> briefly. there are other questions. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am an engineer for the project. >> if you can make a point of using the microphone, i would appreciate that. >> is that better? >> thanks. >> there are 10 or 12 slides i have four c level, and they are fairly technical. if you would like to elaborate on any side, please let me know. the first slide shows the

existing agreed on treasure island -- existing gravedes on treasure island. this is a preliminary map, and it shows the northwest corner of treasure island within the flood plain mapped as his own a -- as zone a. this premature knows where the flood plain ends. -- pretty much shows where the flood plain ends. most of is 11 feet and above. geour sketch, coming back with e waves do and the tides do, the sketch shows the perimeter is

approximately 12 feet around treasurer arlin. -- treasure island. as it exists at about 17 or 18 feet. at a 100-year tied of about 9 feet, the allowance is needed for waves, answed when the waves exceed a certain-answered, that is not as coastal flooding common -- mapped as coastal flooding, which is periodic flooding that occurs. there is a procedure specified

by fema itself during good -- in the of. -- itself. it happens to be approximately 1 foot below the existing and who elevation. it has succeeded. what is assessed, and fema would not not set as a flood plain. -- map that as a flood plain. one of the first thing we have to do it is look at existing

agencies, and none of those had any sort of guidance. they have elected to local agencies to assess the risk. the independent science panel recognized it. given the inability to meet future sea level rise, they suggest local agencies use between twenty and fifty feet increase, and in the plan

itself, though a strategy that would address higher sea levels. they took it a step further unspecified -- m specified projects should be built by the year 2015 so there would be no work and needed region by the year 2015 so there would be work needed until the year 2015 -- who should be built by the year 2050, so there would be no work needed until the year 2050. >> i want to see if there is a way -- if there are specific questions, maybe we can address

the pieces that were not in the binder, and so if there are pieces in here that are not in here, you could present the spirit of that would be great. -- you could present that. that would be great. >> [unintelligible] >> they are all in the report we received? >> they are all in the report. >> maybe if we have questions, because i do, but i would like to turn it to other commissioners first. i will start with a couple things. one has to do with this is what led to peace, and i did not see much -- what lent peace -- wetlands piece, and i did not

see much. i think something has been missing in this project. >> i could point to these slides, to spirit -- too. along the west edge, is the urban open space and the park, so the opportunities that existed for bringing in wetlands are a long scenarios shown -- along areas shown. thank you. those areas have the potential for laying back the perimeter of

the beginning of the project, and those areas could be temporarily inundated, which is what what lent function at -- puebloans -- wetlands function as, and how it would function is on this particular side, this is the northern shore line. this is us constructed along the edge, which is 3 feet or so, of to the year -- so of to the year -- so up to the year 2050, this would not need changes.

a more simple approach would be to raise the perimeter. it includes grain down to the perimeter, removing hamas -- the rock and building of speech or a wetland. the northwest corner is most exposed to waves, is about would work as. -- so that would work best. those areas can be converted into a wetland. the final extreme is to go back even further.

i will end with one slide here. this is from travis. he was there at almost every meeting.

there are a number of supplies on tsunamis -- slides on tsunamis. >> back to the requirements to fund these improvements, the plan is on page 24, third brought a -- sub paragraph a.

it is subparagraph e. it is the last paragraph on page 24, and that is the sentence immediately after the bold words, "future sea level improvements." >> right. >> is required to be installed by the pursuant authorities, the city agrees to finance future improvements through the bonds and those becoming available to

the city. we then go on to say, the notwithstanding the discretion , for each cfd, if prior to the conversion date, sea levels rise by 15 inches, the future sea level improvements will be authorized to be financed. >> no wonder i didn't find it. no wonder i did not recognize it to be that.