the yacht club, i probably would have not heard about this for months. the outreach is a problem. i think one meeting is not going to solve the problem. i think it is going to have to go on for a few more months. you have the commercial tenants. you have the slip holders and you have the yacht club folks. they all have a different take on what you need. if they do not work on the three-legged stool, you are going to have a problem here. because it is going to collapse and it will end up in the board of supervisors's loup -- lap. maybe the port could bring a facilitator into this thing to

help us work better. i do not know. the other thing is the advocate's -- a somewhat i have heard -- i am not a member of the board of the advocates -- mailed a letter to staff. not in the bill. a separate mailing. that has been delayed. so you have to talk to the city attorney, this, that, and the other thing. i really encourage you to encourage the staff to let the advocates send out their own letter. if the board has to control the mailing list, that's great. but figure out a way to do with. the last thing is, there's a lack of specifics and the proposal i have seen so far on the debt. when the debt is paid off, what is going to happen? i don't expect to get a decrease, but i would expect to see some commitments as to what capital improvements we are going to say. i thank you for your time. [applause]

>> barry hanson. >> ok. thank you for your time, commissioners. you have heard a lot of things. i will not bore you by regurgitating and again. first of all, a big thank-you to peter daly and his staff. i am part of the group that was working with them to find common ground here. i think what is obvious here, sitting back there and being part of the advocate group and seeing where it is now, we have a failure to community -- we have a failure to communicate. we have people who come in and have ideas about what is going on. we have not gotten the message out correctly. rather than droning on about this, what i suggest is we work

on extending the time frame so we can have these meetings inclusive of everyone, and also, since john dicastro brought it up, communicate with all the berth holders so we do not have this constant wave of misconceptions. >> after barry, angelo ricardi. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i have some documents. can i pass these to you? thank you. my name is barry hansen. i am our resident of san francisco for 40 years or more. i own a home in the city, have for 39 years. as for the secretary of the advocates for south beach harbor.

i would like to start to echo john masters' comment people -- ,. peter has been a great representative and has worked diligently with the tenants. we don't always agree, but he has been of good man to work with. i want to talk about berthing rates, and it seems to me there two drivers of the berthing rates. one is we have a deficit. i think all the berth holders understand the deficit has to be made up out of revenues. so we are down for that. the other driver is market value. what is the market value of south beach harbor today compared with others in the

area? when we look at the berthing rates, and i have prepared an analysis for south beach harbor. i would be happy to go over this line by line and see what's what. it would take an increase of 17.2% to break even. pay the deficit. eliminate the $810,000 deficit. that does include some additional revenue peter has mentioned, some we list revenue and the charge for the second parking pass. -- wait list revenue. we also have additional revenue we have all talked about any meetings. charter fees for people who are picking up and dropping off

passengers. and electricity revenue, which we have talked about. the port should receive about $500,000 as soon as they raise prices 17%. the other thing is the debt will be paid off in 2017. if we project the 17% increase out to that, there will be a tax flow of $1.9 million per year. so, that is a lot of dough. i am puzzled as to why we have to raise the rates 35% if 17.2% will get us there. the other two documents are current slip rates where south beach stance today, and --

stands today and where it stands with sf marina. thank you. commissioner ho: thank you. [applause] >> after angelo, peter sorenso n. >> good afternoon. i have been a berth holder for just about 35 years. i am trying to work out an economic problem. i have problems with economics, too. sailing had been one of my more economical ways of enjoying time off. i have watched the cargo from open slips to being in demand,

being a wonderful community and robust in areas like that, i think the area should be reviewed in conjunction with the revenues you are seeking, as well as what you are seeking them. -- why you are seeking them. i think the community is not just the slip holders. i know those residents are he people who live in san francisco, but for the people who travel from san jose, i also pay property tax. i would like to know if that makes me a resident or an owner. i am neither owner of the property nor a resident of san francisco. should i be penalized and pay taxes? so, in the community improvements, i think they should consider some of the obligations san francisco goes back to the port authority to support that area for the parks,

for the environment that you can see people enjoying. the other thing is, i think we have not explored all of the avenues necessary to solve the problem. i think you've got revenues that are based upon a need to pay back obligations that maybe should be reviewed. this is not the only place in the world where obligations are reviewed and negotiated. some of constraints that might be better evaluated. my plea is to take a little more time and continue the conversation for all the stakeholders. i think there is a way to work it for everybody's benefit. thank you. [applause] >> after pete sorenson, lev hannessey. >> good afternoon, commissioners. in a recent member of the south

beach address the group. up until tonight, i got all my information about the exchange through the advocacy group. i really appreciate that the port and the group are working really well together. there's not a meeting of the mines at the moment necessarily, but the issues are well understood and there's a very good dialogue going on. there are a couple of issues, three, that have all just been mentioned. i will reiterate them very briefly. one is a large number of slip holders that have no idea about this process. a separate mailing to them would solve the problem. second is the significant profits that will result after a loan is retired, it would

appease a lot of our tenants to see in writing that those profits will stay in the harbor. and last, i am not a member -- excuse me, our resident -- however, i pay property tax by ++ franct

of the alboating -- calboating loan, i believe the harbor is owned by it all of the owners, not just the residents of san francisco. >> hi. i am the president of the advocates for south beach harbor. i am also an owner in the harbor now for seven years. i have a power boat. i would say about 25% of those are powerboaters and the other 75% are still boaters. just by way of information, and i will pass this onto you when i am done, we are at 501c4. i have an e-mail address i will pass on to you. i want to first of all thank for communications peter daily jim walters, forgetting is going. -- for getting us going. elaine is here, too. we have a copy of the $1 million loan. we have learned there is the assumption of a bond that was converted to debts. we learned that. it was good that we knew that. and we now know the operational costs of the harbor.

we see that there are some low hanging fruit, for lack of a better term. they will probably garner $70,000. there are no free rides. there is no longer a free ride. bettis $70,000 a year. landing fees -- there are many non-paying charters the just drop, picked up, do not pay a thing. they have to pay their share. we have to name the harbor something. we do not care. oracle, south beach harbor. we are ok with whatever brings in more money. we what solar energy on the roof. and we appreciate the commuter parker -- commuter parking during the season. there will be a front door

handicap button on the front of the car or house within a month for 138 b, and we have agreed that there should be mandatory operation of your boat once a year. you have got to get in your boat, started up, take it back. is a safety issue. we ended up with questions though. the mud tax. property tax of $59,000 we paid every year seems to be going into the general fund. it slipped through everyone's fingers. it probably should be going back to the port. the parking fees. we still don't have an answer for that. we came up with compromises with peter. berthing rates would probably swallow that. parking pass included -- that would probably swallow that. but the two most important

like you did with 332. we need to be at the bargaining table with you. and we need to contact the other members of the harbor. thank you very much. commissioner ho: ok. >> thank you, commissioners, for listening to us. i would also like to thank peter daly. my name is paul and i am on the board of the advocates for south beach harbor. i will not repeat everything that has been covered here. but i would like to take a look at this. i think barry did a very good analysis. i have been tasked with looking at the calboating documents and

loans. and there are some issues that need to be taken into consideration their. -- there. we are already short on parking. another item is that the part has to be available to all on an equal and reasonable basis. and that means reasonable terms as far as parking, as far as electricity, as far as berth rates themselves. so, the calboating loan is alone from the state and is specifically targeted to recreational boaters of california. again, this goes back to an equal basis. so, everyone has to be treated

equally. , like, said, i won't repeat anything else. i am going through the calboating documents. i am still looking for some. we did a freedom of information request. a bit more time would be helpful. commissioner ho: brian. >> she will be right back. commissioner ho: ok. we will go to joe. >> good afrnoon. thank you for allowing me to speak. this is important for sailors.

operations for our motivations. we have a very good relat ionship with the board, and we appreciate that. we these relationships make our programs.

our main concern is parking. we have people come from all over. we understand parking is very tight. we encourage all of our members and carpool whenever possible.

-- to carpool whenever possible. to take transit. parking in the area -- if you have special needs, it can be very hard if you do not have access. thank you for your support. [applause]

>> are good afternoon, commissioners. i have the votes at south t beach harbor. -- i have a boat and south beach harbor. i do hear there is some concern that this is a harbor in san francisco. it is owned by all the people of california. we should not even considered that as an issue. as far as residency. early on, when it was apparent that the port was going to inherent this, i talk to jim morale is, who was the counsel for the redevelopment agency in an attempt to get the current mailing list so that the tenants

could be notified that things are happening. jim was going to do that and then it became part of the city and therefore have different rules for getting information. made a public records request, tried to talk to jim walter into speaking me a list. that did not work. it is so important that we have come up 500 + tenants. some people have fleets and so forth. the people do not know what is going on. it is going to fall back on the port. it is not going to fall back on any but -- anyone but the port. this does have to go to the board of supervisors eventually.

i really cannot plead with you enough to come up with the way that we can communicate to the entire tennessee. i do not see how you are going to be able to make all the pieces come together between now and september. one of the issues i am pretty familiar with, you currently get your power from puc. and by california puc, at energy commission, you cannot become a utility. if you are putting meters in, they have to be put into the san francisco puc. they have not talked to ports at all. they were unaware of this going on. i am trying to say, there are so many loose ends that you cannot possibly get it by september. if you put that as a deadline,

it will make it difficult for the staff to dig down the enough to come up with the solution. we need to have access, it be able to give you something to send out to each and every -- i never opened my bill. so that we can reach out to those people. we have enough time to do this dance like whether it is parking more power and so forth. -- loose ends like whether it is parking or power and so forth. >> susie smith. >> i am here because we have a family boats at pier 40. i am also here to plead for more time. a lot of people are unaware of what is going on. we have some people who are

residents of the city, some who are not. i know people are up here reaching for solutions and they are saying, we were on the list for 15 years. the thought that suddenly, we're going to hand 100 people -- have people $100 a year, it is like me having to pay an application fee at every school. hopefully, we can be fair about it. hopefully, the pier 40 residents, if we have more time, we will have something we can do collectively as a group. i also want to reiterate that the parking system is not broken. there is some occasional abuses. that has been parked there with yellow tape around that.

that is a space we could use. oat;-if you could give us a lite bit more time beyond september, so we could come up with viable solution for everybody. thank you. >> that is the last of the speaker requests. we are still open for public comment if anyone would like to come up to the podium. >> i am the vice commodore of the bay area association of disabled sailors. ++30 pt

some need accommodation with parking, some have placards, do not. we have volunteers and participants that come from sacramento, stockton. there really needed to drive to get here. we could not run our programs without them. if we have to pony up $600 a year for six or more parking passes to accommodate the folks that need to help us put down our programs for the disabled, that puts a big hole in our budget. when the state passed its budget and dissolved the redevelopment agency, i can guarantee you having been an aide to the board of supervisors, the intent of the state was not to blow a hole in the county's budget. there must be something missing from this equation. that $800,000 either is stuck at the state court is coming to the city or it is coming here and we

are not getting credit for it. that is the second thing. the assessment that was done was faulty and did not take into other south bay marine as. my personal boats is an oyster point. we are very open to solutions. sorry for speaking so fast. three minutes those in a real hurry. for the boats that do not go out, the port is now in the small craft harbors in business, a tremendous revenue generating plant would be to be able to -- the folks that want to be a part of the south beach harbor, make it available, use

some underutilized port facility to pull the boats out. at a western point, there is an additional charge if you want to live aboard your boat. the last thing, a sliding scale. this is a publicly owned facility. a sliding scale would go a long way in addressing -- we have some retired folks. there is a lot more discussion that needs to happen. talk to people who