language. currently, with consent, the port can increase the rent by 50%. without consent, up to 200%. we have agreed that -- to an increase of 25% and 50% upon the natural expiration of the lease, but we always have the option to bring the tenant to the then current market so it is approved by the port commissions. this change does require port commission approval. we agreed to this change for a few reasons. the difficult real-estate market, the new lease represents a 40% increase over the existing leases, and dna stands in the process of submitting a building permit and will make 10 to approve it -- improvements of approximately $10,000 into the property. staff recommends that the commission approved the lease

for premises located at pier 9 for a term of four years. >> public comment on this item? all those in favor? any opposed? the resolution is approved. >> item 12, new business. any new business? >> i would like to delegate peter daily to represent the port at the apa annual conference in september of this year. >> second. >> any discussion? all those in favor?

>> this is not a calendar item, so is it something to be dealt with at the next commission meeting? >> we're just asking peter daly to represent the poor. so it is not a voting item. -- represent the port. >> we are a form in thepa -- we are informing the apa, which requires the governing body to inform who represents us. and that is there any public comment on new business? any other new business? >> item 13, public comment. >> i do have a bunch of speaker cards here. i will call them in the order that we received them. they all seem to be on the same topic, so will go through them.

>> good afternoon. i'm here representing members of the family of a man who was murdered a few weeks ago. by way of introduction, let me say that i was a resident of the city and county of san francisco from mid-1979 through almost the rest of the century. i worked for southern pacific transportation right across the street for 14 years. in fact, i was on the seventh floor of october 17, 1989, when i was hanging on my desk, making sure i would not fall into the bay, when i watched our flag pole on top of this building bend over. i'm not so fond of the president of the board of directors of the calgary united for the directors.

let me say at the outset that i'm not against people having fun. in my 20 years of residence in the city and county of san francisco, i kept more than one liquor emporium from insolvency. i'm also not against the free enterprise system. i believe very strongly in the rights of anyone to the pursuit of happiness, and that often includes the acquisition of lots of money. i support that for all of my adult years, and i think that is probably one of the main stage of the united states system of city government, but with irresponsible profit-taking coming in equal measure of civil and social responsibility, which includes or should providing a safe and peaceful environment, when the public is involved, it is my belief, and this is strongly supported by the facts on the record, that the venue has repeatedly failed to do so.

they have obviously put profits above people, with disastrous and painful consequences. let me try to put a human face on one of those tragedies. i knew him personally for nearly a decade. we had many conversations. he told me on more than one occasion that he appreciated my intelligence. but he may have overestimated. i'm not sure. i know that he was a family man, and very good provider and was dutiful in his duties as a father and did the best that he could, life permitting. he was dedicated and loyal to his children at a time when absentee father hood is seemingly epidemic. he was loved and respected by his wife and brothers and sisters, most of whom reside here in the bay area. his eldest brother and their mother are here with me today. i understand that the owners of the lease and license are

contesting their pending eviction from lease of space owned by the san francisco for the authority, and i personally find that reprehensible and unconscionable. to allow them to continue to do business as usual would be a slap in the face of each and every family member and would reward insensitive and irresponsible business practices. i strongly urge the commission to deny the attempt an edict this public nuisance. thank you. >> i want to start by saying i came here today after reading something on the internet about the fight against eviction. i find it too egregious that

they would, after my brother's death, and the death of another victim, and the four other incidents that i know what involving shootings, that they would fight the eviction under the guise that they are fighting a under. i, too, know that every employer i have ever worked for, safety was always first, and i any business they are in, they have to provide safety to their patients, and they failed -- in the business they are in. they not only failed my brother, they failed multiple other people. four other victims shot and dead. my brother's death is forever. cannot take that back. they have more than ample

opportunity to pull it together, and they failed again. they continue to fail. they continue in this effort to not take on their responsibility. in my opinion, there actions are almost criminal, to have continued to allow what happened -- i mean, they acted in a way that is almost like it is an extension to the o.k. corral. and they did not call the police when the incident initiated, when the police could have come out and done what they are paid to do, and that is break up the

situation. instead, they allow my brothers lifeless body to lie in the street as a result of their negligence and inaction. now, my niece and nephew -- and without my brother -- do not allow them to continue to bring that devastation. they cannot do anything about my brother, but this commission can do something about this. thank you. >> thank you. we're very sorry for your loss

and to the family. next speaker. >> i'm an attorney. with me is one of the owners of the club. we are here today to talk to you about what we think is something that you may not understand what has been happening here, which is, one, we mourn the loss of the victim who was shot outside of the club, and it is a tragedy, but what happened that night is not the owners' fault. then everything asked of them -- they have done everything asked of them since they opened 16 years ago. they installed a security

system. they employed security cards inside. when this incident arose, when it began -- when they became aware of it, they called the police. after the incident occurred, they met with the police. they have done everything in their power to prevent incidents like this from happening. the problem is that incidents do happen outside of business establishments. it is not their fault. the reason that we are here today is because they're being terminated for the least. what you may not know is that a month before the shooting occurred, they were informed that there was raw sewage from the port's sewage pipes leaking into the bay. when they became aware of that, they spent over $20,000 of their own money to replace rusted and corroded pipes of the port's

that were dumping sewage into the bay. in the course of these proceedings, they realized that the ports sewage pipes are broken, that the port's sewage pipes underneath here 50 are right now as we speak leaking sewage into the bay. when they told the court this, the port did not take responsibility, and within two to three weeks, terminated the leases. we believe that this shooting, while tragic, is not the real reason that they are being terminated here. we believe that because there have been other violent incidents in other for establishments. even inside for establishments. those establishments were not shut down.

this occurred outside, not in the club. police confirmed that it did not arrive because of an altercation that occurred inside. the san francisco entertainment commission has agreed this is not the club's fall. this death, while tragic, is not their fault, and we ask you, as commissioners, that this is the time that your role can play a role. you can look at what your staff is saying and say, "is this just? is this the real reason they are being terminated? and look at why they are being retaliated against, singled out, of all the other establishments on the port. why they are being singled out. other establishments have had incidents of violence. they are not being terminated. >> thank you very much. next speaker, stephanie dalton.

>> good afternoon. i write the urban music newsletter, and i manage several working musicians in the city, and many of the musicians that i book and manage perform at jelly's, and i want to talk about the devastating loss of income that will bring to the music community because they regularly higher than and put on some great shows that never in my 16 years of me attending personally, have i ever had a problem or felt concerned. the outgoing commissioner talked about a family, and what you have is a community of people that will be definitely displaced. it will be a tragedy to see

another venue fall. i believe shelley's is the victim of

know they're busting. >> thank you very much. next speaker. jake jacobs. >> hi, my name is jake jacobs. i am a dance instructor. also a musician. i've been doing this for about as long as it's been open, about 16 years. i want to speak to two levels, one an aesthetic level. i want to reinforce what ms. dalton was saying, that there aren't that many venues for latin music and dance. everybody likes latin music and dance. this young lady can attest o'. the crowd that attends, there's very -- rarely any problem i don't think i've ever witnessed a problem either.

basically there to dance and they don't drink that much. it's not a very profitable business in some ways. taking that away will hurt many, someone speak in favor for keeping it in open for that reason. on a practical level, the port has made public statements that this is a public safety issue. i don't think it's the port's responsibility to take vengeance upon this tragic death. joey's in a very expansive area. i would say it provides more security now than anybody else. you know, there's no people

patroling the parking lot. it can't be responsible for every bit of area around it. it is in a fairly separated area. joey's did provide the security and that was validated also by the entertainment commission when they spoke with the bay view police. the entertainment commission removed joey's permits. they have every right to take it away. i think now they have even even have the power to shut down the club. but they went through 17 items with the police department, and joey's, who had a very old permit, was in compliance with 14 of them, even though that joey's original permit only had three stipulations. and the other three joey's was committed to doing. if the police department is satisfied with the public safety efforts made by joey's, then i have to insist that the port should be satisfied as well.

thank you. >> david henderson? >> wow, what a day. congratulations to the commander and all of you for doing a great job. my name is dan henderson. i reviewed the very fers lease here 16 years ago. i've been doing commercial real estate for about 25 years in east bay. also over here out of state. it's horrible when anybody gets shot. there's no doubt about that. but my understanding is i was there the day after, and the place was tagged. it was my understanding, people recognized the symbols that were spread on the trash cans. i'm not here to make any judgments on anybody. any time someone gets hurt, that's something. i haven't gone to joey's. you want to talk about tragedy, she lost her parents when she was 12 years old. she and her three sisters are

lawyers, they're the people that are the fabric of this community for generations. there's probably 20 people that are in her family with all her sisters that work or have worked at joey's. these people are san francisco. just like the giants season ticket holders. these people have been here. she has run clubs. she made all five of bill graham's clubs. hired and fired every waitress. every time i've got to joey's, there's two guys standing outside. she has had a lease one year at a time for 16 years. and yet she spent over a half million dollars on your property. i'm in commercial real estate. we can all do the math. divide it by 12%. that's the money. i don't know about the types.

i'm not aware of all that. but certainly i'll review it. and no doubt, tragedy is tragedy. but that has nothing to do. that's outside. we go and walk over and see giants, whatever venues, whatever is going on with the venue. when you have that big of an expansion, what are you going to shoot? the people are going to come to an open area. they said two guys showed up, a guy was drawn out, so he had nothing to do. they don't recognize -- they didn't recognize who the guy was. it wasn't like he was a regular there. they have nothing to do with joey's. an incident happened in their restaurant bar.

so i know san francisco. they have a place in the mission. they took a shot down there. it provides a good, safe environment. a bad incident happened. >> we're talking about the builder? >> i came from sacramento. actually, part of sacramento. we have a strong and salsa-type music following. so a lot of us came down here in san francisco to joey's specifically on sunday's. so i know as far as all my companions from sacramento that we really enjoy jelly's. and we'll certainly regret it.

all of us have felt safe at joey's, it advocated a clean, healthy, fun environment. i'm not aware of the details. i don't believe this is something that was due to joey's and their way of operation. i'd like to express my support for continuation of joey's. thank you. >> for public comment -- >> good morning. i'd like to speak about the waterfront land use plant study.

>> this is situation is intolerable. to break up a club and put up a tower, which is against the waterfront plan use specifications that they should connect the land to the bay is crazy. they speak out of two sides of their mouth. that's called corruption. this is not about money and greed. hundreds of car garages is wrong. it's an already difficult situation we have now, so how could you approve a plan like this? it's ridiculous. all we can think of is what's behind all this. and so we urge you to retract

that and go back and study this. this is disrupting the whole waterfront. secondly, last night my son called me to say, gone to berlin. go outside and see how it's turning around. this is not right, especially with the historic ferry building. i tell you when you're right most of the times in waterfront. they've done a beautiful job. all these renovations got done. this is so badly flawed.

it's not what the people want. so please go back and review this and see that it's not right. especially with the waterfront plants with the bay. it's not right to block the buildings that we live in. so please, go back and go to the drawing board and see that it's a wrong decision. thank you. >> lee radder in. >> radner. >> good afternoon, commissioners. lee radner from golden gateway, executive director. i have some material i'd like to read. they sent out an alert this morning. we'll try to read it in the three minutes allotted. he has joined our neighborhood

coalition partners and otherings as a party to a lawsuit that has been filled -- filed, excuse me with the san francisco superior court on wednesday, august 18, 2010. the legal action filed against the city was precipitated in our view by the violation of ceqa. our attorney's legal interpretation of the coalition lawsuit is described in the following paragraph, and i quote. ceqa applies to any action that may have a significant environmental impact. it is important that environmental review occur as early as possible. it's not just a prow forma rubber stamp of a project that was already approved. the california supreme court recently ruled that actions short of an official project may be illegal if they move the

project momentum significantly forward. the city of san francisco has, in my view, violated ceqa and allowing the planning commission to adopt a resolution that "recognizes the design principles and recommendations of the northeast embark der row study for new development in this area." without first satisfying an a.i.r., it has guidelines for site design, articulation and quality materials based on the planning commission's "recognition" of the study. the port of san francisco to consider the principles and recommendations in the study as part of its review of proposals and improvements. after that happened, a revised application for the eight washington project incorporated increased heights recommended by the study.