>> 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.

>> we did not deliberately bury it. >> i will put aside who they are. it is triggered by some regulatory agency saying you have to act. >> it is not triggered by anyone other than the city itself. if the local community does not find it acceptable, they would build along the perimeter. it is purely a decision of the local community.

>> if sea level rise increases by 16 inches, there is a method and an obligation to fix that. >> [inaudible] apologies. i am not intimately familiar with the language he just read. i think it certainly makes it clear what the priority is, but keep in mind, there will be discretionary decisions made by

the city in issuing debt as required, so if what you are looking for is a completed obligation to fund at this point that some third party could pint to, i don't know that's legally possible. the city is going to have to exercise that right. when i say the city, it could be a governmental entity that will have to exercise that. if that is what you are trying to identify, so feel free to clarify. i am not your attorney, so i do

not know the details. >> we are willing to make it stronger. we should work on that language with you. >> part of it is to make sure we don't take actions to make that money go away. they also have to control themselves so there is money left when that date comes. th clerk'sis lin -- >> this is exactly what my concerns were, an i would feel much more

comfortable if there was something clearer. i have to go, and i am going to hand over the chair. we are suggesting we continue to the next meeting or the following month. it would be up to him to see if they are ready to come to vote. >> was it your intent to have the vote? >> it was on the agenda, but i think there are a lot of outstanding questions, so i did not necessarily think we should call a vote until the questions can be answered.

it is very specific, and i know the hour is getting late, and it gets harder to make good decisions. >> is there an issue if we carry this over? burke'swe -- >> we are ready to address any issues. we have >> we have the technical questions. >> yes, but i think that the issue is that it's getting late and that we have a lot more questions as it relates to utilities and that perhaps it would make more sense if there's no reason not to carry the item over.

>> the next meeting, it can be a month from now. obviously, to continue, that's your right to do that. i think that there is an issue. one assumes this might be appealed, and if it appealed, it will restrict your ability to make decisions for a period of time. it will depend on what that period of time is in terms of the appeal and what happens with that. >> what would the timing be? >> i would go on to say this is one of the mayor's priority projects. we've been working at the staff level to resolve all of these issues over the past five years. we feel that we have done so. we feel that delaying an action tonight creates entitlement uncertainty both for tita as well as the developer and our ability to move forward pursuing the project. again, if there is an appeal, you would not be able to act until the board of supervisors heard that appeal, which would be in the middle of june.

this has been on the calendar before. it has already been delayed. we're into the trying too accelerate the schedule. we think the information that's been provided to the commission is sufficient for you all to take action tonight. >> and just to be clear, i totally understand that reasoning. i don't believe that it's a legal requirement as such for you to take action. it certainly is a strong preference. >> i do have additional questions. they go to basically my role as due diligence to make sure our interests are protected. i'm prepared and have the time to go through this. >> proceed. >> tonight, on the other hand, if we'd like to -- if people would rather not do that, i'm fine withholding it over and we could meet and talk about what my issues are and have better

answers to that when we come back. so -- >> i agree. i'm uncomfortable moving this item to the next meeting. if we have to stay till midnight, let's stay till midnight. because the problem is, a lot of people have questions and we'll never build it. so let's do our due diligence and make that happen, and it's my hope that we'll vote. >> so as i started, i'm happy to hand over the chair and, you know, my main concern is really this issue about the financing mechanism to the adaptive management strategies and to make sure that those are clearly defined and in place and that there's very clear language around that, because that's been my real concern. and i just want to go on record saying that. and then i will leave it to the chair to then figure out if his answers and the rest of the commission's questions can be answered in order for there to be a vote. >> is there a provision on this

commission for a call to be placed and a vote? in other words, if i have to leave by 6:30, which i have to, will there be a quorum left? and if not, is there a way -- because i'm prepared to vote tonight. i'm prepared to vote right now. but i don't want to preshrewd any discussion or questions that are sincere dnd preclude any discussion or questions that are sincere. but members may have to leave and a motion is made and a call is put on the vote until people are prepared to vote and i don't know whether that applies here tonight procedurally. >> programs the city attorney can help us. >> nor arena ambrose, city attorney's office. you have to be present in the room to vote. it requires an affirmative vote of a majority of the commission. so -- >> i'm not talking about not being present. i'm talking about i move this action for approval. you take the roll. i vote aye then i have to leave, but there still remains a quorum.

that's being here present and voting. >> i think, as i understand it, we have a quorum. >> i have to leave. >> you have to leave as well. >> you have to leave, so -- >> ok. so that was the question. i didn't hear about your time limit. >> i have to leave at 6:00, but i could make it till 6:15, but, you know -- >> ok. >> i just feel that we have not even touched on the role of p.u.c. and this project on treasure island. we haven't even talked about it yet. so i have questions in that regard. >> how many other items do we still have to consider besides this? >> several. well, you know, my suggestion would be that we continue the other agenda items as it gets later and later. >> this doesn't preclude us from holding a special meeting next week, if we have to. >> right, a special meeting. >> correct. >> you can have a special meeting on this particular item. i believe the deadline for an appeal to be filed