we have a tenants' group that can do that now. we have a great opportunity in pure 40 -- pier 40. there is a beautiful sight there that only needs a few million dollars to fix it. i know, i have worked in the industry and looked at places to be. they are willing to pay. i think that if you would open your eyes to that aspect, you would not have to raise one penny of rent to any of our tenants. thank you. >> thank you. is there any other public comment on this item? commissioner? >> [inaudible] >> that is ok. come on up. >> my name is martin.

like many of us, i am a member of the south beach yacht club. i have been a member for about 20 years and am blessed to have a boat there since 1988. i do not live in the harbor, but i lived in south beach. much of my life everyday is in that harbour. much of my own recreation and my forward looking life plans with my new son being a sailor in the future is also there. i worked at south beach apartment, where i am one of the property managers. for 10 years i sat, as mr. pierce did for a long time, on the citizens advisory committee. during those years, we all delivered on a lot of neighborhood issues. i think that i am privy to know that the harbor was, in fact, a

development point for the rest of the neighborhood that was intended to bring the persons of the immediate area to the waterfront. i concur with mr. pierce. if these rents are raised to the extent that myself and other persons who might be able to just nominally afford this wonderful recreational opportunity, we have to move and other people come in to pay these much higher prices, there will be a much different social circumstance in that harbour. the yacht club has worked for years to develop a social atmosphere that serves the neighborhood. i have not sat on any committee since 1999. and then i was given a very nice platform services. i am sorry to say that i do not know as many of the issues we are currently involved in.

i feel very strongly about my neighborhood in our privileges in the harbor. certainly, we all agree, as far as i know, that things need to change. i hope that they can change reasonably to serve the interests and citizens of san francisco. and that we will not be left out of the deal. thanks for letting me make a comment. i apologize for not getting in there earlier. >> no problem. any other public comment? seeing no one -- >> you have alluded to this, earlier today, talking about the productive meetings, as i looked through the material, a few things jumped out at me. i went sailing not long ago. i loved it. i did note that my friend had a

guest pass and as i was leaving and looking at the giants' game i was looking at, i did not want to give up my parking space. others may not have, so there may be some opportunities to look at the parking, perhaps even on a fluctuating basis, working with the birth holders -- berth holders. i imagine that that is some of what was discussed. in terms of increased rates, could be looked at it for different rates and new boats coming in? taking a look at the adjusted for current birth holders modest basis? lastly, and i do not know how many short-term visitors there are from other clubs, but i

would anticipate that those would be very popular when the america's cup comes. perhaps that is something that we could look into, whether we could generate more revenue. obviously, not enough, but more by increasing the visiting rights as well. i think that the other points given today were well taken. i am very excited for the comments, that we have the south beach harbor back. i look forward to trying to come up with solutions that will work for everyone. >> when was the last time that rates were raised? >> there has been cpi for every second year. i understand that there has not been a market analysis since the inception of the harbor. but that could be wrong.

>> that is correct. it is raised every year. as far as i can research, some of these voters have been here longer than meat, but i could not find anywhere -- longer than me -- some of these boaters have been here longer than me, but i could not find anything to contradict that. >> can you tell me about the selection process? >> you mean how they get on the list? they fill out an application. there is no restriction or requirement except for the onetime $80 fee, which when they get a slip, that is part of their first month's rent. if they choose to drop off the list, they forfeit the $80. >> there is no income requirement? >> no. >> no location requirements?

>> no. >> you do not have to live in the city or the bay area? >> no. we do try to push and require that they have emergency contacts if they do not live in the city. >> just by looking at the addresses that we send the bills to, approximately 65% or 75% do not live in the city or county. most of them are off by 49 miles. >> that might raise another interesting option, which begs the question -- do we know what the turnover rate is? do any of them become abandoned due to failure to pay it? anything like that? >> there is a slight turnover

rate. it is about seven or 10 each month. the harbor i was at before is more like 40. even now. it did increase when the economy took a dive. we do have reflection problems and we have had very few just walk away. >> having sailed out of there, it was fantastic. it beats the ones that i sailed out of a in sausalito. >> peter, i guess you have your hands -- your work cut out for you. i am glad you did hold a meeting with the tenants of south beach harbor. i hope that hopefully we can all work together to find a solution. we do not have the funding, so

some way we will have to work this out. we will all have to come together and come up with constructive ways to do that. thank you. >> one comment for the audience. once public comment is closed, we cannot have people speak, but if you have comments for individuals, we have staff that will be happy to talk to you afterwards. >> thank you. >> item number 11, new business. >> any public comment on a new business? >> item number 12, public comment? >> any more public comment? >> is there a motion to adjourn? let's second. >> all in favor? >> the meeting is adjourned at 5:25 p.m.. >> mr. brandon, thank you for chairing the meeting on short notice. i hope that you enjoy the

rewards this weekend. know that we are applauding you from here. what thank you. -- >> thank you. supervisor mar: good morning

everyone. the meeting will come to order. this is friday, june 15, meeting of the land use and economic development in a meeting. i am. eric mar. miss miller, please give us the announcement. >> please silence all electronic devices. items today will be on the january -- june 26 agenda unless otherwise stated. supervisor mar: thank you. we have 13 items on the agenda. please call all 13 items together. >> the legislation package related to the medical center, cathedral hill, and st. luke's campus including the general plan change in the official sidewalk list and approving the

street encroachment and development agreement. supervisor mar: colleagues, we are expected to be joined by several of our colleagues on the board of supervisors. they should be coming in during the hearing. i also wanted to say i really appreciate the packed room of passionate community health care and labor members in the audience today. we will do our best to be as respectful as possible to comments from the public and get as much maximum public input as possible. today is the first of courtroom hearings on this -- first of four hearings on this project which includes the development agreement as well as the final environmental impact report. this is a huge project that will have an impact on the city for decades, maybe generations. the importance of breaking this hearing up into four issue areas

is important for us to give full consideration of all of the increases sees -- intricacies and impact on the city. today's focus is on jobs. that is what we will do our best to focus on. i will ask the people testifying from the public and the presenters to do that. we will be giving an overview of the project. that is where the presentations will come in in a moment. very important is jobs. second of all is health care that we will be focusing on in the next hearing next week. the third will be transit and they permit issues. finally, closing it up with housing. i wanted to thank supervisors cohen and wiener for hearing the issues and recognizing how important this project is and the detailed consideration it

deserves. i want to thank them for accommodating this committee with their busy schedules. i know they're both on the budget committee as well. thank you to the mayor's office for their work in helping us scheduled a different hearings rescheduling the different hearings. as supervisors, it is our awesome responsibility to ensure the city's interests and the interests of our residents are protected in these agreements. is the second-largest employer in the city now. is the second-largest employer. it is projected they will become the largest private employer after the project is completed. this will have a profound impact on our city and residents for decades to come, especially in the context of job opportunities. after reviewing the jobs portions of the eir and proposed development agreement, a number of concerns have been raised. i have some of the same concerns about the number of jobs with

the project over the years. i will not die than to those issues now. i wanted to say that we will do our best to look at those issues today -- i will not dive into those issues today. because this is the first hearing at the board level, we will hear a brief overview by department staff and cpmc and their architects to give us the overview of the existing project. the office of workforce development is a key department in the city that has been working with the developer and our office to schedule these hearings. since there are four hearings, we will give a brief overview now to give the context for jobs. cpmc will do their presentation before hearing public comments. after the city presentation, we will have time for the supervisors to ask questions of relevance city staff.

in maximum time for public comment. this is an important issue to those in our city. before we move to the city presentation, i see our planning director ready to go. i know that supervisor john annapolis -- avalos is here. also supervisor ava-- i also wanted to give the other supervisors time to comment. supervisor avalos? actually, supervisor cohen was first. supervisor cohen: did morning, everyone. we're going to have a spirited conversation to work together to get the most robust plan for san francisco. thank you for allowing me a moment to speak. i am excited to begin the process. i see a lot of our partners.

the fun part is going to begin. i wanted to open up with a couple of housekeeping rules. you heard the rules from the chair. i want to reiterate that you will have public comment. when you are a soft bell, that will indicate you have 30 seconds to complete your statement. i want to encourage everyone to be respectful and courteous to the next person that wants to speak so we can continue to move this process along. the seismic safety a city hospitals is essential in ensuring the network is robust and intact. the need for rebuilding cpmc is clear. the city and in particular our southeastern neighborhoods have a significant health care need and challenges. because of the scope and sale reduced scale of the project, we

have a duty to ensure the project is being done the right way. that includes insuring st. luke's is robust enough to meet the health care needs of our southeastern new roots, that local residents can benefit from construction and permanent jobs associated with the product. that we are investing in programs that will ensure we have a pipeline of residents qualify for these jobs and that the project provides a reasonable amount of charity care for our most vulnerable residents. i look forward to hearing from members of the public today and continuing our conversations about the project in our committee hearing. let's get ready to rumble. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you. supervisor avalos? supervisor avalos: i appreciate you giving me a moment to share my thoughts as we begin hearings on the cpmc development.

i cannot stay long. i wanted to insert some of my thoughts as we begin the process. i will be reviewing the presentation from the department later on. i will be meeting with constituents who have many concerns and review part of the testimony today. to be honest, i do not know if i can see all of it. it looks like it will be going on for hours with people in this room and those who will come later today. my biggest concern, i have lots of concerns. today i will talk about jobs and how i think this development is vital to the future of san francisco. i realize we need to do it the right way. i am concerned about some of the impacts that will happen. i will speak specifically about jobs. supervisor mar said this project -- cpmc is one of the largest

private employers in san francisco. as this project moves forward and it becomes a network, it will be the biggest employer in the city. it is important to recognize how we build a hospital network that is going to provide stable employment for san franciscans moving forward. on the construction side, i understand how important this is to the building trades. there are an estimate of 7000 construction jobs that will be made while development is occurring. 1750 jobs will last about four years. for a household struggling with unemployment or to have stable employment, for years can mean a lot to help a household become economically stable and

sufficient and lead to greater instability in years to come afterwards. i understand how important it is or brothers and sisters in the building trades to make sure this project goes through. i also live in the part of san francisco that has some of the highest unemployment in the city. we have seen some success incrementally so far in our local tire ordinance. many have been benefiting from a local hire work. i see this as having a huge benefit for local residents. i want to make sure we're capitalizing on that as well. i believe it is great to see there have been discussions and labor agreements at how to maximize local resident involvement in the pipeline of the work force for this project. i am happy to see that.

i am also concerned about the permanent jobs. i am hopeful there can be a way to insure the people currently employed at cpmc are able to know they have jobs in the new hospital that will be built. the standards that are being created with the largest employer in sentence of can be the highest they can be for the rest of san francisco. what happens with this development and the work the hospital goes over the years will have a major and balance -- influence on how other hospitals and employers in san francisco treat their workers. i want to make sure we have stability long term for families in san francisco as well. i wanted to make sure my thoughts were shared. i believe we have something, a

project before us that still needs a lot of improvement for me to want to feel comfortable with supporting it. i feel this public process we have started a month before -- we will be working on is making important changes. i think it is an important way to make sure we have changes to make it a better project and what we have today. supervisor mar: thank you. president chu would like to make some remarks. president chiu? >> we have a microphone issues. i want to thank all of you for coming out and taking part in

this very important conversation about the future of health care of our city. i want to thank the committee members. i know everyone desires to set up a legislative process where we have a full feting of all the issues. i hope in the coming weeks we will be able to do that. one thing that has been very important for me as i have been conducting meetings with various parties on the issue is to remind folks i think everyone in this room, regardless of what you think about the project as it currently stands, i think we share the same goals. i think everyone wants to make sure we have seismically safe hospitals in san francisco. everyone wants to make sure we are developing the best health care and hospital system weekend in our city. we all want to take care of the health care needs of all of our cities. as we go through the process, what i hope to here are answers

-- hear are answers to a lot of the factual questions about what level of charity care we need moving forward for our city, exactly how we make sure escalating health care costs are taken care of, planning issues we will talk about. how do we make sure the hospitals we are talking about will fit within the neighborhoods being discussed? how do we make sure transit and transportation issues will be concerned? today's conversation will be about jobs. i do not think it is any surprise that issues raised are ones that i share as well. i have wanted to know and i know we will have a conversation about why there seemed to be a low level of commitment when it comes to permanent jobs. how do we make sure our city commitment to local hiring and making sure we are insuring san

francisco residents are put to work, how does this fit into the bigger picture? i wanted to say this is the first hearing of a number that we will have. i would ask all sides to be respectful and understand we're all trying to get to the same place. hopefully, in the coming weeks we will be able to resolve a number of the issues and get answers to others to move this to a good place for the city. supervisor mar: 80, president -- thank you, president chiu. supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: 80. welcome to everyone. i know there are a lot of specific issues to discuss and come to resolution and consensus on around transportation, health care delivery, charity care, etc.

i think it is incredibly important as we work through the process to keep our eye on the big picture, which is the future of health care in san francisco, the seismic needs of our hospitals, and the possibility of making our world-class health care system even more world- class. in recent years, we have gone through a number of very large and sometimes contentious projects. it may be treasure island or mission point. then there is the america's cup, the warriors, cpmc, we have all of these projects. they can become divisive in the community and emotional. we get caught up in a lot of issues, some of which are very important. it is important to focus on the

big picture of the future of the city. someone made a comment to meet a week ago, someone who's not really involved in politics or land-use. they said to me that some of the projects --wow, san francisco actually has a future. i think we need to focus on that. there are issues we will discuss and work through. we need to work hard on that. we have to keep our eye also on the big picture of the future of this city. i just wanted to note that. supervisor mar: -- -- thank you, supervisor. the 13 items on the agenda today, we will be having three more hearings. there is an appeal filed. we are planning to not take action on them that this committee but they will have

full and thorough analysis in a hearing. at the board level, that is where action will be taken in the middle of july. i would like to call up the planning director. there are a number of speakers. we have the planning department, cpmc, andy smith group architects followed by our department public health officials. then too rapid up -- wrap it up, rhonda. >> i am with the planning department. we're pleased to be aired today. i will make opening comments and turn it over to my colleagues. what is before you is that we will be discussing the development agreement and a general overview of the project. i want to emphasize this project,