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, keeping that open a while we are moving them will be another challenge. commissioner fong: ok, just to clarify the sort of when-when using 27 is that we get down the road as far as cruise ship

terminal construction, and when he races are completed, we are at least through stage one of construction? >> yes, i think there are two scenarios we envision. the scenario we are currently advancing and we are currently optimistic will work within the timeframe and provide an amazing grace home, will be to proceed with a new building at 27, demolished the entire 27 non- historic shed, demolished portions of the peer-29 shed that are already degraded when the two were connected many years ago, create a platform. theoretically, you could stop there. it will create places for thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people to view the races. that is one option. another is to continue right along and complete a new building that they can use in its raw form for the america's cup races. essentially, in some ways, you

think about these venues. people create venues like this on a temporary basis even for a month-long event, and the question is how far along we have to get to serve purposes for the race and the authority. that is the question that has to be worked out in detail, but any step we take a long entitling those things, doing the demolition, building the new core shell, all those are major steps in delivering a final pier 27 cruise terminal. >> i'm supportive of approving this agreement today, and like many people in the room, i have been fortunate enough to have been on the san francisco bay. there have been many times where i'm sure it is sunny or maybe the fog is rolling in, where you say to yourself that not that many people are out here and people ought to see this. growing up here on the bay and feeling that it has not been utilized to a full degree, this has been a fantastic

opportunity investment for us to open up the san francisco bay and the waters and the enjoyment and benefits that it brings. so i congratulate all of those who have worked and saved the best part of the heavy lifting still ahead. thank you very much. good work and thus far. so we do have a motion unless there is any other comment or discussion. >> may i? i just want to also be on the record as thanking everyone involved for the efforts that have gotten us here today. a couple of people step up and cautioned us to slow down or try to take a little bit more time, and this is one of those situations where we do not have the luxury of time and you have to seize the moment. i think it has been commendable what has been put together in pretty short order, not the least of which has been the analysis that has been done, and i particularly want to thank port staff for another excellent report that has been mention,

really pointing out the solid numbers and the pros and cons, and as you look at those, you realize that there is never a perfect solution to anything. so you need to weigh those, and i think i would like to weigh in with my fellow commissioners that if i had my choice and if i were voting on one option, it does appear to me that the no. waterfront does in the long run benefit everyone the most. i think we do not want to do any harm, and i tend to see and low potential harm if we end up with more, and i think the no. waterfront has so much longer term potential, and i think also will have that minimal affect on so much of the work that has also been done over the last several years to provide the court with options going forward, and i would hate to see those impacted because we do

have to look out very long-term, and we do still have multi- billion dollar needs at the port, so i think we have some answers that really can address every aspect of it and bring benefits to the city, the port, and the bay area if not beyond, so thank you all very much for getting us here. [applause] >> commissioner, could i review the resolution has proposed to amend -- i just want to say that the resolution authorizes -- essentially urges the executive director to advance the board of supervisors to host city agreements. it should note in the fourth resolve clause, it notes that in both of these in regards to

dredging, there are some calls out that dredging is part of the city's infrastructure projects. it moves it forward, removing dredging as part of our infrastructure works and moving it to the works of the authority, and further, the actual amendment to the resolution authorizing -- adding the language of saying, "do not materially increase the obligations or liability of the city of the port except those offset by a commensurate benefit to the city and the port." i just want to say it was a privilege to represent the myriad of the court and city staff that have been here today. i want to thank everyone that has been working to make this happen. commissioner fong: great. thank you. those in favor of the resolution as read by the court staff