people wanted. >> [inaudible] >> the earliest that they could issue them in his 21 days. and we will monitor closely the next three weeks to see how things work. >> the proponents could petition and ask the ninth circuit to extend the stay. i would not be surprised if they did. they will have to do that before the mandate issues. >> [inaudible]

>> i think you are correct, it is very unlikely that it will be denied. right now we have to see if they will petition for review in the next 14 days. the earliest that if there was not a petition for review, the very earliest something could happen would be going before the supreme court if they were to accept its in the late fall or early winter of this year, but that is a very aggressive timeline. >> [inaudible] >> i did. >> [inaudible] >> that's correct. that's correct.

that's correct. >> [inaudible] >> yeah. i mean, this is -- if you go back and look at a briefing in this case, that is the exact argument that the city made and terry argued in the ninth circuit. in the chronicle this morning, there could of been a variety of ways that this case went. the ninth circuit chose a narrow approach that applies only to california. and based upon the panoply of rights that are already given to lgbt people in califormiania, there was no rational basis to have prop 8

be declared constitutional. they said it was so focused on taking the dignity away from same-sex couples that there was no rational basis whatsoever. it could not be reconciled with the panoply of rice that are already provided to lgbt people in california. they aplpiplied it only to california. we are very gratified by how thoughtful and well-reasoned to the ninth circuit's opinion was , and we continue to a look forward to making the arguments. >> [inaudible] >> i can say we are disappointed of zero.

the most important thing is to make sure that we have the ability to marriage same-sex couples in california. that is what san francisco has been focused on from when we started this fire eight years ago. it is another brick in the wall, another step in the process. if you look at how far we have come in eight years, six states, the district of columbia issuing marriage licenses, i am not disappointed with the ruling at all. in fact, i am very gratified with where we are at today and we continue to make progress and move forward. >> [inaudible] >> i don't pretend to be in the minds of justices, but as we know, and the high court

oftentimes like to take cases when they are ready for them and take an incremental approach. as we see things develop, we have seen progress, and i have no doubt that the tide of history is that our side. i am sure that whether it is a narrow or brought decision, it will inform how the justices look at the case and how they decide whether to take it or not. i am sure it plays a little better. >> [inaudible] >> you know, i have never gotten cynical on this. we have always had hope that the right thing would be done in this is another verification of it. it is a brick, but it is a huge brick.

we needed that confirmation from these ports. is it legal? is it not legal? we have quite a few hundred challenges. it was very frustrating. the only for the city but for the state of california. it saves us in terms of our understanding and how equal we all are under the law. that, to me, is a really positive message. we will keep that hope alive and we will keep the foundation strong. i think and i feel that this is a time that these appeals will be exhausted.

>> [inaudible] >> hate crimes is obviously something that we always want to be vigilant about. they're very strong responses to that predictability. we do think that this is the right direction, they applied to themselves and all of the reverse families of his bay area region. we are not afraid of that risk, if you will.

i think this is been in front of everybody for a long time and the degree of acceptability and understanding has foundational lay there. -- foundationally there. >> [inaudible] >> you recall that we tried the case on the very broad theory to try to show because no matter where you are in the country, it doesn't make any sense and it is not irrational thing and to deprive the people the right to marry. on appeal, we felt that it would be important to add a separate voice to say that in addition to those arguments the plaintiffs continue to the advance, there

is a particular reason -- it did not change any of the family laws. it is not discouraging people from having children or -- it enables the court to decide the issue. without necessarily reaching what happened in the rest of the states. the supreme court like to often act incrementally. the ninth circuit to of the alternative.

>> [inaudible] >> unfortunately, i have not have the opportunity to review the entirety of the opinion, but i think it was a fairly strong ruling that with respect to what it was that we alluded to. there is no rational basis to put it forward but for wanting to single out one group for discriminatory treatment. when you are just focused on the title without going after any of the panoply of rights that lgbt people have in california. i think that really struck them in terms of the motivation.

i think that it was getting to that motivation. >> [inaudible] >> i have to tell you that to me, it was a lot of argument that i found particularly offensive. it was all the way through, if you follow that line of reasoning, as ridiculous as it is, it means a woman couldn't sit on a gender discoloration case or an african american judge could not sit on race discrimination case. i think that was particularly offensive and i am glad that they rejected that out of hand. >> [unintelligible]

>> [inaudible] >> there is the chance that the supreme court could and by taking this case up. and that case, the ninth circuit ruling is final and it would apply here in the state of california, and we can move forward. >> [inaudible] >> i think that the city's position has always been clear, that we are dealing with civil marriage. we are not dealing with the religious traditions of the faith with respect to marriage. we have been consistent with that for the last 80 years -- 8

years. that is always been the city's position that each faith leves iaves it up to them to exercise their decisions. any other questions? >> any frustration on the fact you have a winning opinion, but there won't be any marriages in the foreseeable future? >> we have been dealing with this for eight years, and there have been ups and downs. we have to wait the years, but progress has been made in that time frame. i choose to be an optimist and

focus on the progress that we have made, understanding that history is on the side of marriage and quality. certainly, i wish that when we dealt with this years ago, that was the end of it. it is hard to fight, but you have to. i want to focus on the progress we have made. >> [inaudible] >> if the case goes -- i imagine what will happen is that probably both sides will encourage the ninth circuit to proceed on an expedited schedule. that is about as much as you can do, and they can do that either

because of hearty petitions. i think the latter is very unlikely. >> thank you for being here, we appreciate it. [applause] >> roll-call. [roll-call] item number two, approved the

meeting minutes for the january 2012 meeting. >> so moved. >> second. >> any public comment? any public comment on the executive session -- on the minutes. >> item #4, executive ses >> i move that we reconvene an open session. >> second. >> all in favor? i move that we not disclose anything discussed in executive session. >> second. >> all in favor? >> item 6a, b advise the use of self phones, pagers, and electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting.

be advised the chair may you remove anyone in the room responsible for the ringing of a cell phone, pager, or other electronic device. be advised to member of the public has up to three minutes to make pertinent public comments on each agenda item unless the commission adopts a shorter time on any item. the executive director's report. >> good afternoon, and happy valentine's day, commissioners. thank you for sharing your love with us and thank you to the public as joined us today and the plethora of ports staff here as well. we have a very robust agenda today and just have a few items to talk about in my executive directors report. the first one is to tell you about this great new book called "a negotiated landscape." i am about half way through it and it is quite interesting.

to tell you a little bit about the book, it really picks up on the port as we came out of world war two, the global logistics supply chain changed mots to containerization from bulk cargo which the port of san francisco was built for. the army and navy which occupied most of the ports properties left and the rebirth of the waterfront was upon us and it brings us all the way through until my tenure with the port, so it is a look at the factors that have driven development along the waterfront and the creation and import of the waterfront land use plan as a discussion point, but not necessarily a recipe for success or failure.

some of the chapters are very well named, but it goes into what is called the absence of plans, the 1950's and 1960's. the pressures of the 1970's, which would be when fishermans wharf came into being the way we know it today, and questionable results, the 1970's and 1980's and then the waterfront plan of the 1990's and the new millennium. a lot of the names that you will know as leadership in the city or of the port are featured in the book. the book itself is written by a man named jasper written who is a assistant professor at san francisco state university and is in the department of urban studies he was formally an employee of the san francisco planning department where he served as a lead it planner in the central waterfront plan, and his knowledge of the waterfront

which was adopted in 2007. he is a current member of the central waterfront advisory committee. what ended up happening is he prepared his dissertation on the development of the port of san francisco from the 1950's to the present that worked at that time and subsequently with a bunch of different parts staff to look at numerous proposals. prior attempts to build cruise ship terminals are in the book as an example. the world trade center was opposed the 30 story tower is featured in the book. this is a book that we hope to be able to help distribute on his behalf and the stores will be carrying it sent including the bookstores here in at the ferry billion building.

-- here in the ferry building. very happy to be part of that, if we can. next on my report is a really interesting to evening of entertainment at the aquarium in the northern waterfront. they are preventing the next friday night, friday, february 24th. they will be showing a variety of different shots, animations, and full-length feature films by both foreign and domestic film makers. there will be breathtaking footage of cruising journeys across the seven c's by adventure seekers and explorers of all ages. it sounds like a very fun event.

i wish them great success and we're really happy to see something that is so focused on a sporting in the day. another thing to report on is the pier 45 improvement project, we are calling it a resounding success and we are quite happy about this. this is the clean beaches and initiative which we have called the drainage improvement project which was grant funded with money from the american recovery and reinvestment act also known as the stimulus bill. we have recalled $1.5 million and we have used these to construct processed water and storm management improvement. this is to capture and treat the

washed down water from the areas at the fish processing center. the project was completed, the construction projects were completed a short time ago but then we monitored what equality for one year in the vicinity of pier 45. they are very healthy levels of oxygen and the decline in concentration of bacterial contaminants. we are pleased with the results of this project and our ability to have secure stimulus funding to do it. this is a big win for everyone. i will add one item to the report their parents had part project will begin construction as early as next week. you might recall that this is part of the greenway and received some funding from the 2008 general-obligation fund measure and those new park

improvements will include contained dog run and a sensitive lighting, picnic and seating areas, as well as other amenities. construction will start next week and cause a little bit of inconvenience for park users but the result will be worth it. that concludes my report. thank you. >> is there any public comment on the executive director's report? hearing none, we will move on. >> we are on item 8f, with your permission, will be taken off of the calendar. this is to provide the sub they construction project and authorization for the contract contingency fund of 10% to the

contract amount for a total opposition not to exceed $1,467,000. authorization to advertise for competitive bids for a much as the power and modifications project. and request authorization to award construction contracts, brannon street construction project. authorization for the contingency fund, 10% of the contract amount for an anticipated contingencies for a total authorization of up to $14,891,000. authorization to award the urban economics inc. to the economic and planning systems at, a

contract as needed for economics related consulting services each an amount not to exceed $500,000. approval of a resolution supporting the high-speed rail project and pledging to work with the california high speed rail authority and other regional governing entities to promptly implement this project. this will make it compatible with high-speed rail well- designed it to be compatible. request approval of the amended at least number, with intelligent transportation inc. for a 10-year lease and the process space in. in the horsemen of the executive

director to the intelligent transportation inc. dated january 30th, 2012, which commits not to facilitate the exercise of its rights under section 4.2a before july 30th, 2015. >> so moved. >> second. >> any public comment? >> madame president, members of the board. speaking on behalf of the pilots. i just want to congratulate the staff and for lending the wharf and to this wonderful point of construction and we have been waiting for a long time for this. special kudos to dan who made

this his passion. we have had a very successful history of working with construction on another project and other projects and we would hope that they would contract with a good union employers. you have a tenant here at the port of san francisco. although that decision on which it tugboat company to use has yet to be made, we are looking for captain's that have an

aptitude to operate the tugboat's on this job. we congratulate the port for bringing this project to this point. >> any questions or comments? all in favor. >> resolutions 1206, 1207, 1208, 1209, 1210 have been approved. >> restricting the sale, use, and distribution of certain plastic bags, plastic water bottles, plastic food where. >> good afternoon, commissioners.