first of all, we all know that the port has critical, long-term financial needs. to me this is an opportunity to address those needs. with that the leverage that we have, and i do not believe that there is actually competition to the bay. by think that mr. ellison wants to very badly have the racier and i think it is a good choice as well, the leverage that we have, it would seem we have an ability to strike an agreement that minimizes or mitigate risk to the port in the city, financial risk. so, i would like us to think about that kind of stuff, the port making money to address its financial needs and not losing sleep over potentially losing money. we all know the things that have an estimated cost seem to always

go up. i think that towards that end, the no. waterfront option is a much better option than giving away a tear 50, which has a ripple affect down the southern waterfront. displacing those people will impact the ability for the court to earn revenue. i know that the mayor was to get this done before he moves on to sacramento, but i would like support staff and the mayor's staff to actually know that the people of sanford cisco are behind them in striking the best possible deal with the least possible risk. >> paul, and, please. >> good morning. my name is paul dimes and i have

been working on the san francisco bay waterfront for almost 20 years, putting myself through college working in marine trades as well. i am currently a tenant in the hyde street municipal pier. as a small charter business we are grateful not to have to compete with luxury yacht on the waterfront. as you consider this proposal there are long-term tenants whose livelihoods depend a great number of jobs depend on access to the piers and water. while we unequivocally support your acceptance of the protocol, we would also just ask if there is some way if the long-term tenants and tenants such as us, on a year-to-year basis least, in the position of competing for the large yachts, but might at some point come before the

commission that there would be a question as to whether smaller charter boats and working boats would be allowed to remain when there is so much more revenue from spectating fleets. we would ask that your existing tenants like ours be offered long-term leases with other service businesses that are in place to provide those important structural benefits that are part of the offer being afforded some opportunity for a longer lease so that we can invest in our infrastructure of staff, training, and resources, providing the resources that will be required in the manner that would represent our city as a professional and worthwhile place. thank you for your time, in encourage support for this proposal. >> thank you. >> hello.

my name is dan ross. skycam -- i am long time involved in land use activities, putting together the waterfront plan for the advisory committee. by come to you today more familiar with most people about -- more familiar than most people with what goes on in the port. the e-mail that i got yesterday, we were notified several weeks ago about this, although it was only really 12 days ago. frankly, the attachment report did not come out until 2:00 yesterday afternoon and i did not get around to my e-mail last night. needless to say i have not had time to go through this 50 page document very carefully. these keep that in mind as i make my comments. my initial response is that i am

concerned for the future of the port based on these leases, many of which are still unclear. i was trying to articulate that in my notes and have had trouble doing so. the balance of leverage in throwing this thing together over a short period of time, i am not clear at this point what the waterfront options are in trade-offs. what kinds of 66 year leases are negotiated on waterfront property? i am concerned about the balance in terms of what we have known over the years, putting these proposals together is a complicated process.

leverage is an oddball park to get a deal. does that mean that my time is up? i did not hear that there was a time limit. >> thank you very much. [reads names] >> good morning, everyone. i am here to voice support for the america's cup. i am proud of the giants for winning the world series, but i was out sailing when the games were going on and i was not alone. i think that the perception that we are giving away the waterfront needs to be at rest or interpreted correctly. these concessions will be in the turn for benefits that will be long term with a great effect on the infrastructure of the port.

i am sure that the topic of the investment is one that we are familiar with. this is one opportunity where the revenue that comes from the event itself will make many opportunities commercially viable, something that is very tough based on the investment required. again, i urge you to bring the world cup to san francisco, it is a great venue. it would be like any city in brazil passing up the soccer world cup. if that does not do it for you, it would also be equivalent to the vatican passing up the opportunity to host the second coming. [applause] >> and the cats. keith [unintelligible] >> it is hard to follow the

comments about the second coming, but anyways. my name is andrew cats. phd strongly supports bringing the america's cup to the northern waterfront so that our historic peers can be used by the public to view the event free of charge. it is important that these potential plans take into account the historic nature of the peers. the america's cup is a classic example of a spectacular event that draws people to the waterfront for maritime oriented use that could not happen anywhere else in the city. but the devil is in the details and you want to be sure that in addition to structures and developments, that this only happens with strong community and put with long-term ramifications on the board of revenue. we only received the documents host city revenue agreement

yesterday. so, we are hoping that there will be ample opportunity to review commands for public input along the way. we are not sure why this has to be rushed through so quickly. it will be a great opportunity. thank you. >> patrick [unintelligible] , >> thank you, commissioners. i am the general manager of the got connection international. we have been providing affordable yachts to the general public since 1979. remember, some of our boards are a long pier 39. frankly, this is san francisco's to lose. it would help to define san francisco and the sailing community. the sailing community with its maritime background goes back years.

to talk about economic development, i would like to put more of a face on it. many of our businesses are suffering from year to year. this is a significant moment in time and this could be something that we could repeat over and over again. looking back in history, this could be the opportunity where we go around the corner and pull out of a financial downturn. thank you. [applause] >> good morning. my name is patrick markell on pier 29. maybe you are not aware of our not-for-profit arts organization with a strong educational component in its 11th year. we employ over 50 full-time

employees each year. a significant portion of the revenue goes to the port. for a lease. we entertain and to bring joy to people from around the world and the bay area. we consider ourselves a cultural institution. we support the bid to win the america's cup and we look forward to being part of any plan to move forward. thank you. [applause] >> [reads names] >> hello. my name is jim pettigrew, i am a scientist that studies the surface currents of the san francisco ballet and the california coast. we work under a bond funded measure, thank you very much. our data is provided for free to

the public, in the past it has been used to monitor the flow in the sound. our measurements were key in the trajectory maps. technology was developed and currently manufactured in the bay area. the america cup knowledge of the currents in the bay area will be crucial for all competitors, producing a map every half of an hour. very high resolution yield. obviously, we are in support of the america's cup being held here. i think that a likely outcome of using our data for planning the race will be products that will make sailing a basic for everyone. thank you for your time. [applause]

>> good morning, commissioners. my name is michael hammond. i am a member of the southern waterfront advisory committee and a resident of the basin, active in other bayview organizations. including the host point project area. our community, along with staff members, have worked for many years to ensure and expand the maritime industrial activities of the southern waterfront that have met with some steady and the growing success over the years. we have a number of enterprises that provide much needed jobs to our community and city. we look with great trepidation and alarmed at the proposals for the long-term transformation of the southern waterfront,

turning it into commercial, retail, and perhaps even residential activity. this would completely obliterate the opportunities for blue collar, maritime jobs in san francisco. in fact it would ruin the san francisco heritage as a maritime power house on the west coast and would have a great long-term harm for the overall city. we think that there is a way to do this that will be successful and will not have these deleterious effects. we hope that you will consider strongly other venues other than the southern waterfront for this. let me suggest to you one that no one has mentioned that is an obvious choice to me, the hunters point shipyard. there are huge peers out there and a lot of space. i am sure they would be thrilled

to discuss the opportunities with these people to provide everything that you have on pier 50 and elsewhere. thank you very much. >> [reads names] >> thank you. i am a historian with the california heritage council. we endorse bringing the america cup to san francisco. we have a couple of proposals in that regard for historical context exhibits. one would be to exhibit the history of yachting in san francisco and california generally. and a history of the america's cup going battue the original days in england and the the east coast. i think that this would be done with support and in conjunction with the maritime museum and it would be most appropriate to contribute to the display.

we have a couple of other proposals for historical oriented type exhibits. i think that it is premature to bring them up right now. altering the possibility at the appropriate time. thank you very much. >> is there any other public comment at this time, on this item appeare? >> yes, i am fred sherman, president of marine highways llc and the marine commercial advisory committee. i am here to publicly asked the leaders behind the america's cup event to lose it -- use their influence to select san francisco for this event. likewise, bmw, on larry oracle,

they are premier players. the benefits to the city and the port will be great by having the america's cup here. therefore i would hope that mr. ellison, oracle's, and bmw would bring this event to the bay area with such significance in their business. thank you. [applause] >> any additional public comment? ok. recapping to get the next steps? >> thank you, commissioner. the next steps with public comment first, after this hearing and your consideration of this action, the host city

agreement is next going to be considered on december 8 at the finance committee before the board of supervisors. it will be the next opportunity for public comments as well, to be considered by the full board on december 14. so, with your permission, commissioners, there are a few items that i realized came up as a part of public comment that i neglected to mention that i would like to address them. the first has to do with the no. waterfront obligation in terms of longer-term leases being portrayed for structural improvements. on the northern water from alternative they are expecting $55 million worth of structural improvements made by the team, the bulk of that would be structural repair. some of it would be essentially

a gap for building a 4 inch shell for a new cruise terminal building. $55 million, what we are proposing as long term leases at 3032, different from the host city agreement. the first of those is that the first host city agreement obligates the city to sell the lot. we have softened that language, saying that we will explore the sale for 70 five-year leasing. -- 75 year leasing. with bank credits for the $55 million or whatever the infrastructure ends up being. that is an important distinction. similar to the way the moratorium deal that was just signed the day of the parade --

we did that under those exact terms. there receive credit to mint -- commensurate to what was below the debt. i also wanted to address the timing issues that people raise. in terms of the holiday and the actual agenda when the materials went out on tuesday before the thanksgiving holiday, two of the advisory groups could not make it out until after the holidays. everything was properly posted when the meeting was announced. i also heard some questions about the issues regarding what was brought by the maritime union in terms of foreign flag vessels. those issues can be addressed by

the city perspective and it would be appreciated. >> thank you. cherry cullen. as i said, we are strongly committed to working with maritime unions to address this issue. seeking legislative and regulatory authority to make sure that we can have these racing yacht with foreign flags out of the race course. as well as the super yachts that will be coming. the folks down the boats, those spectators could be on the water. we will work with the unions that were here today and those that were not, we will work with the city attorney to make sure the language accurately reflects our intention. we will resolve this prior to it getting to the budget committee next week. >> thank you. >> i am here to enter any

further questions. >> questions, comments? >> we will start with questions and go back to comments. would you equate what we are voting on today to the dna that we debate -- that we typically do what they development? there is some lack of complete understanding to what we are accomplishing today. >> informally i would equate this to someone e betweenna -- a between ena and a development agreement. this commits us to -- you shall lea -- usually ena has a term sheet, so this as an expanded term sheet. perhaps these are not the exact numbers are details, but the core principle of the transaction outlined here,

subject to review in mitigation or other changes through the process, you have outlined at the core benefits to the city and obligations of the city to the port and the acoc. >> any other questions? comments? >> i would like to start off by thanking the mayor and his staff and the organizing committee for bringing this extraordinary opportunity to stand and cisco. as far as public comments today, everyone wants it here and it is a great opportunity. there are a few concerns and i would like to caution you to study the need for peer 50. it will displace one of our largest maritime tenants.

if we can find the best space somewhere else on the waterfront, it would be better if we could use that option. i am also concerned about the loss of revenue to the port. this is a great opportunity for the city overall, creating one of the best economic stimulus package is hopefully within the next one or two revisions, we will find a way to ensure that the port is made whole or close to call in order to bring this extraordinary opportunity to san francisco. i also know that for the city, it is a great thing, but i did

not see any community benefits for the communities that will be impacted by this coming, and there were some great suggestions of maybe finding portions of the blue-green way, or maybe even working with some of these nonprofits working with disadvantaged kids to fund some of the activities or have some type of special thing for these kids during the cup, so i would also like to hopefully see some kind of community benefit, but other than that, i think it is a wonderful community opportunity, and it would be great for the city. [applause] commissioner fong: a couple of questions and some general comments, regarding the waterfront alternative, how do we treat cruise ships when we have a double header day? and we are far out enough to maybe try to schedule around that, but at least for the first 24 months, how do we treat that?

>> that is an excellent question. honestly, we are trying to go the other way. we are hoping to attract cruise ships. it does put us in a position where there will be challenges to that, and we acknowledge that. i would say that. when we had a triple and quadruple headers now, there is often two ships, so there are some opportunities in the ultimate design -- it is not clear whether an east-facing earth is something that could be incorporated into the designs for even at the briefing opportunities while the use them as the industrial bases, and i just want to point out pier 50 has hosted cruise ships in the

past, so there are other opportunities on the port. we acknowledge these are challenges. we have set internally that having the challenges of having to accommodate so many maritime uses that want to come to the port is a challenge we are up for. >> thank you, and i just want to, for my own clarification and the public's, when i look at the tables, the central waterfront option compared to the northern waterfront option, from a dollar perspective, they are not quite side-by-side, but when you look at them side by side, they are huge in terms of cost. the central waterfront option -- by my rough calculation, i should be careful because we are talking about millions of dollars -- a $39 million difference. obviously, the difficulty of moving tenants. but i'm curious, aside from the dollar, because that is obvious to me, time-wise, using pier 50

compared to 27, are we able to turn over a prepared site to the america's cup group sooner at 27 or 50? >> i think those are also excellent questions. in delivering any site where major changes are going to happen is a major challenge to hit eight open for business in 2013 schedule. we need to all of knowledge that this is going to take a lot of effort from all of us to deliver this. we believe we can do it, but it is going to be a challenge. two, pier 27 is further along in that process. we have schematic design keyed up for improvements, talk about having done a lot of the community outreach and some of the work that has to happen to move a project forward. i think that is definitely an

advantage. overall, the concept of using on the northern waterfront more likely to target six months of use arawn the event is inherently helpful in meeting those timelines. pier 50 adds additional steps of preparing the site as significantly more complicated. there might be some removal at pier 27. first of all, we have studied it more already. not only is there should removal, but there is significantly more removal. there is a for your sheds to remove. any number of tenants that need to be relocated, and moving the port maintenance facility while keeping it functioning, which i'm sure will be integral to these actual plans and moving forward in infrastructure, forward in infrastructure, keeping that open a while we are