in a period of time. so the big picture answer to your question, supervisor is i do want to applaud the port, the city and the p.u.c. staff to figure out a way in this particular instance of keeping it neutral to the port. if that answers your question. >> thank you. i think i have about a minute and a half more. i pronal won't finish my slides but hopefully i will have some follow-up. i just want to return to the presentation and note this slide shows some of the operational air quality impacts of the america es cups in the number of tons that would be admitted in each category. the short powered project has such air quality benefits that it will resolve in actually

reducing air quality impacts in three of four criteria pollutant areas. and this is just applying the first two years of the short power project as mitigation. the project will have a useful life of up to 30 years. so it's an ongoing air quality benefit to the district 10 neighborhood. the port is going to be considering on february 14th zero waste policy sociated with large events. i really want to call the department of the environment staff who helped staff develop this proposed policy. and in sense for large events the ports would be banning the use of plastic bottles for water, plastic bags requiring compostable food service and prohibiting the release of balloons on port property. mike martin mentioned the notice to boaters which is going to have boaters understand the importance of

cleaning the hulls of their boats to avoid species spread throughout the bed. we have major access and removal associated with this project. and i might want to return to this because i think it underscores the fact that this event is going to improve environmental conditions on the waterfront and it's going to leave legacy benefits in the form of public access that the public will enjoy for many years to come. with that, i'll conclude. and i also want to call out diane oshima which is the lead port staff person on the sequa document and did an amazing job. thank you. >> thank you. before i continue i want to just note that we have a stenographer who is transcribing. she needs a five-minute break to change out a break. i want to take a five-minute recess and this come back. i understand there been some

questions an proceed to public comment in support of the project. if we could take a 10-minute, five-minute recess, thank you.

[gavel] >> in good evening. welcome back to the board of supervisors meeting. we are continuing with the appeal of the america's cup document. we just heard a presentation of

city staff who is one of the partners of this. let me ask if there are any questions with the presentation. if not, i would like to ask the project sponsor if you could step up. we have a number of questions of you. if you could identify yourself. >> mary murphy, counsel to one of the parties and co-sponsors. >> ipad two questions through the course of this proceeding. the first is the issue of a project level review. the department had stated it is their understanding that long- term development plans would be required to go a review to comply with ceqa. is that the understanding you have? >> yes, mr. president.

it is our understanding. as has been explained on the record when a further development proposals are presented, further environmental review will be required. president chiu: i have a question around the turn cernan's concerning bed j -- concerns concerning the jumbo tron. i suspect that a number of our colleagues have similar concerns. based on that testimony and the issues, i was wondering if you or the authority would consider not pursuing the jumbotron on the water. if, instead, it he would consider looking at land-based

alternatives. >> thank you for that question. we have listened to the testimony today. i would agree with the planning staff that the p i r -- eir is complete on this issue. the authority is prepared to commit to amend all of its plants and applications with all regulatory authorities to eliminate the jumbo tron in the water. instead we will explore, as suggested by some of the speakers, a land-based jumbo strong -- tron. we will review any of the agencies that currently have it in there. >> i appreciate that. >> it is our pleasure. [applause]

i rarely get a pause when i appear. -- applause when i appear. [applause] [laughter] i do want to commend the the city and the staff for the tremendous job they have done on the eir. i would urge the board to a pot -- aldus cert. i am here you have any questions during >s. supervisor campos: i appreciate the change with the jumbotron. going back to the question president chiu asked about what would happen as you make decisions about some of the a

specific projects, there may be a need for additional eirs. i was wondering if you could provide clarity on that. will the -- will there be a position that would, because of what this contained, no further environmental review will be provided. >> we agree with what has been said that the law provides that when we come forward with a proposal and a development plan that the city charged with doing the analysis will look at that and subjected to review. that is our understanding. that is reflected in the materials before you today. that is our anticipation. we understand that review could

include supplemental eirs. we expect that further review will be required. supervisor campos: that is important because there is a difference between a supplemental eir as opposed to what you just said, further review will be required. that is an important clarification. the second point, going back to the issue of the extent to which some of the financial constraints that are being faced by some of these agencies may impact to their ability to mitigate some of the environmental impacts, one of the things that needs to happen, is that to address that

tension, the additional responsibilities that these agencies will face, there may be a need and modifications to the underlying agreement. i noted that is not the subject of this discussion, but is that something that the event authority is open to? >> i am not quite clear, i think you have something in mind. i would say for the purposes of this hearing which is about the adequacy of the eir, there has been a slight conflating about the issues of business transaction that will be before the board in subsequent hearings. this eir is a thorough and complete.

he accurately described how these things work under the law. i am not clear if you have something particular in mind. supervisor campos: will there be any changes to the agreement went the environmental issues are resolved? >> the dda does, there had been some changes over the course of the transaction, the negotiations as was alluded to earlier. there had been concerns about the issues you're asking about earlier which i believe that negotiations between the city, the event authority, and the courts have adequately addressed. i think it is one that has comprehensively dealt with some of the concerns.

supervisor campos: i appreciate that prospective but i think that raises some concerns that i do think that we have identified how the financial responsibility that city agencies are taking on is relevant to what we're talking about today. to the extent we're saying that the dda is sufficient, that is a problem. >> i would submit to you and urge you to separate out in your own mind at the adequacy of the e i are -- eir.

this is adequate and deserves your support. i think if you have specific concerns to the business transaction, this is not the evening to address that. as i said, i think you are conflating the two things. i think we should unwind those. if you have specific concerns, the moment will be when the business transaction is before this board. i don't know if the mayor's office or the port would like to speak to that issue? >> good afternoon. i want to underscore three some tense negotiations we have worked hard to address the concerns about what the effects

of the agreement. there was an agreement to forward that you will see that addresses a number of those potential liabilities. we think that, combined with our implementation plan, could give you an idea of how we're going to address these. we look forward to that discussion. supervisor campos: why not wait until we have additional analysis from the analysts to the extent it implicates the ability of these agencies to handle some of these responsibilities? >> i would underscore what was already said. this is about the adequacy of the eir in terms of implementing these mitigation measures. you are assigning

responsibility for those measures and whether that goes to the city, that starts to delineate where they're going to be paid for. in reality, we would like to bring that forward to you. the port has moved ahead on approving one piece of this project. i think we are interested in moving that board as quickly as we can. we ask this hearing of ahead with upholding the decision. we will be with you to talk about the approval. supervisor campos: one of the concerns i have was that there is a sense, the way it was articulated, that the dda is sufficient. i do not know that is the case. to the extent there is an implication of those terms, i think that is relevant. supervisor farrell: i want to

say thank you to the event authority for your willingness regarding the jumbotron. for a lot of the neighbors and president chiu and i, it is a big deal for the neighbors and the clubs. to me, it is a testament to the spirit of cooperation i have seen in my neighborhood. we have a lot of the waterfront. a lot of the spirit of cooperation we have witnessed. thanks for doing that. it is a step forward in the right direction. president chiu: any other questions to the project sponsor? why don't i ask members of the public if you could please line up on the far right side of this chamber. why don'