interviews. >> one question in terms of respondents. it seems two very different roles. one managing cruises and one handling events. admittedly i probably know more about event management. but they are very different roles. are the respondents doing joint venturing with the entities? >> if it would be okay, i would prefer to leave that to the presentation on may 14. because i am not pervy to the panel and i should not respond to that particular question. i did want to comment about what you are saying, president woo ho, regarding port revenues. we set this as an estimate of highs and lows and we will work to maximize our earnings looking

for profitable outcome. and just what peter daly mentioned, the concept of same-day cruise call and event would be a game changer. as you see in the estimates moving from 52 to 65% utilization increasing port revenues about $300,000. between the skcenarioscenarios. so the ability to maximize the facility will change the picture. >> for the record it's important to recognize we not just look at port revenues, with the cruise calls the city benefits in terms of the money spent in hotel, restaurants and retail. and that's the added value we are not recognizing directly, but indirectly. and of course if you have special events people are spending money on catering, etc. so there is money going into the local economy. but on the other hand we do need

to make sure we are looking at it from a standpoint of what the port needs to sustain itself. and recognize that the added benefit of tourism of the city is another benefit that we think is very valuable. and we want to do our part in contributing to that in the city of san francisco. >> and to some tenants along the waterfront. the new restaurants we have. >> thank you very much. thank you. >> item 11, new business. commissioners? >> any new business? any public comment on new business? >> item 12. public comment. >> we do have two speakers who would like to speak in public comment. ed farris. please identify yourself when you come to the podium. >> good afternoon, port

commissioners. i am ed farris and i am secretary/treasurer of iuw local 10. i consider it a privilege to address you all today. i am thrilled to see that the organized labor is being recognized on these wonderful banners and pylons on the 150th anniversary of the port of san francisco. however as a union man i would prefer to this happen on the san francisco water front. the iuw has worked since the 30s. we take pride in the work we perform on those docks. and we do not tolerate infringement of our work lightly. i am concerned about recent violations of the iuw traditional work. these violations occurred in

american cup preparation work where several cargo containers were lifted and moved without i uw professionals. this unacceptable. we have met several time and unable to resolve. it's a same that we resolved with team new zealand in one meeting. my personal patience on this matter is running out. and i am concerned about longshore workers to perform work on cruise operations. this happened several times at pier 35 and needs to stop. the iuw is looking to confirm, what terminal is determined for the new james r. herman terminal must recognize the work to san francisco and allow longshoremen

to work, after 75 years of quality service, it's the least they can do. thank you for your time. >> thank you. david hill. >> good afternoon, madam chair, i am david hill. i am the vice president of iuw local 34. i am speaking here today as a direct representative of the president of local 34, sean farley, who is unable to attend today's meeting. for the last months we have participated in the talks for american cup, for the handling and loading and discharging of the american cup cargo. the net result of those talks

and the c.e.o. of race management for a company of american cup and verbal agreements between iuw and port of san francisco to contract the iuw work at the piers. local 34 is as legally binding as a written contract, and piers 30 and 32, and 37 are still owned and in the port of san francisco, whether leased or not and have an agreement to use iuw labor and we are bound for that agreement. we don't want to have further respect of peter daly to complicate that our use is just an option. we are not just a

iuw local 34 asks to honor the agreement with iuw and hire the contractors that are called for. and we ask you to direct peter daly to prevent anymore damage between the relationship that we have between local 34 and the port of san francisco. thank you. >> thank you. any further public comment? >> i move to reconvene in closed session. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> thank you. >> i move to not disclose anything discussed in closed session. >> second. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> i move to adjourn at 5:15 p.m. >> was there one more comment

you want to make on the public comment agenda? >> yes, executive director moyer, we heard comments during the public comment to me that was very disturbing. and i would like you to look into to find out what are the issues between american cup metro and iuw local 10. we don't need any labor issues and we have had a great relationship. and clearly there are issues there. and we are talking about having a management team to come in to talk about a new cruise terminal. and clearly we don't need any problems. definitely there seems to be problems there, and i would like you to report back to the next commission meeting. and hopefully there is some resolve. >> certainly, we are meeting with them regularly. as you know. but happy to report back. >> but i know, but with a resolve. i would like to know there will be some kind of resolve.

you can't force it, i know that. >> i am not sure what you are asking me to do. i am letting you know that as you know and the way that the issues with team resolved with the port being extremely generous and proactive. and we are doing our best here. >> clearly there are problems. >> i understand commissioner, very much so. i am happy to report back. i am cautious about providing something i can't deliver yet. >> thank you. >> any further discussion? comment? hearing none, motion for adjournment. >> make the motion. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> adjourned.

[ cheers ] >> this park is part of our water front. it is set to make it part of our great city and we are celebrating, the 150th anniversary of our port of san francisco. [ cheers ] so all of you who are here

tonight, those of you who live and work in the city, have a great connection to our port. so it is a wonderful history, and come on down and spend your entire time at the port you will have a lovely time from our exporatorium to the giants, to the park and to go out and celebrate. so thank you, for the port commission, and the wonderful staff and the director. the port of san francisco, congratulations to the city of san francisco. thank you. [ applause ]

>> the city of san francisco sfgtv meeting of the san francisco transportation authority occurring may 6, 2013, will begin shortly. >> good morning, today is monday may 6, 2013, and welcome to the personnel committee of the san francisco transportation authority. my name is avalos, the chair of this committee and the authority. joined to my left by commissioner cohen, and david campos will be joined shortly by weiner and mar. >> and the clerk is cheng and we also broadcast today by sfgtv staff. madam clerk, do you have any announcements? >> there are no announce.s. >> if we could go to the second item. >> approve the minutes of the april 1, 2013, this is an action item. >> colleagues, any comments or

questions on the minutes? >> we can go into public comment on item two on our minutes and seeing no member of the public to come forward we can close public comment. could we have a motion? >> motion, and second. >> item three. >> recommend adoption of the revised salary structure. >> according to authority's personnel manual the review of the structure is performed to compare the salaries against other agencies. the authorities board last had a revision six years ago in may of 2007, the authority, does not follow the step compensation structure, instead we follow on the job performance, structure, and if

there are enough budget, we would pry adstments there. and in 2012, we hired cough and associates in compensation studies. they took a look at 18 of the 19 authority job positions, the one position that was not reviewed is the executive director. it included comprehensive review of the job classifications, description and base compensation and benefits. >> i would like to welcome katie to walk you through the report which starts on page 11 of your packet. >> thank you. >> good morning, to the members of the committee, my name is katie keneco, i am the president of cough and associates and the manager for this study. thank you. that we performed for san francisco county transportation authority. i want to talk to you about the process and the methodology for

this study before we begin, a compensation study we work to determine three variables, one is which agencies we are going to be studying as part of this process. and we chose seven agencies that we felt best represented the labor market for the authority. we were looking at factors that just focus services and population serves and ties to the agency and budget, and geographic proximity is important with the bay area being a fairly distinct market. the seven that we chose are alamena transportation, san francisco municipal agency, conser authority, and lngs tras pourtation, mtc, sanmatao, and the santa clara valley,

transportation authority. we also needed to work with the agency to determine which classifications we would be serving in the market. and because of the variety of classifications and their unique, we usually survey two-thirds, and in this case we did 14 out of the 18. we did not look at the executive director. and we also worked with them to determine what types of benefits we would be surveying. we wanted to look at top monthly salary, of course and we also looked at the cost of benefits in each of these agencies towards retirement, the insurance as sufficient as medical, vision and life and employee assistance plan and any leaves that they offer. so this would be vacation, holiday, and any administrative leave which is sometimes offered to those in select classifications. so, after these variables were determined, we went and

collected the data. we studied the classifications, the current classifications descriptions of the authority and got to know the body of work being performed there and we went and looked specifically not just at titles but at the purpose for the positions, the types of dutis that they are performing, education and experience and any licensing and certifications and with all of that knowing that they are not the same we chose that we felt were 70 percent similar and we collected this data and presented it in three spread sheets, one that summarizes the top monthly salary and one that summarized the information and total compensation. what we found out of the 14 benchmarks is that 13 of the 14 classifications were below the market. there were three of them that were within five percent, we do consider within five percent to be competitive. and then, out of the total

compensation, all 14 of the classifications were below market. we found that in the benefits area there were a few benefits that were more significantly below market that the agency, the contribution to medical insurance, for instance, was significantly lower than the average of the comparative agencies and the contribution towards management leave. it was also lower than the other agencies. but in the end, the authority decided that... >> what we have here in san francisco? the ta is lower than the other agencies? >> correct. but we decided then that we were going to separate out, the benefit and base salary and just make any recommendation to the structure to be based on benefits only. so with that, we went ahead and created a salary structure, ranges that are two and a half percent apart and 35 percent wide and we inserted all of the

classifications system into the system. which is what is being presented to you today. i think that structure is on page 79. in your packet. so, we are showing you here is what the current maximum monthly salary is, what the market placement, and the market median is what we use to make the recommendation and we feel that this best represents the labor market that it is not undually influenced by the very, very high and low salaries like the average would be. so this gives you information for each of the classifications. and there are four benchmarks, or four classifications that were not bench marked. we felt like we had enough market data to internally align them, based on common market differentials that we will see in the class series. for instance, the planners, the rvey but nd the principle

we got the information on the senior planner and we could apply differentials between, the senior planner to make a recommendation for the principal and the planner. any questions on the information or? ... >> any comments or questions? >> so just to go over this chart on page 79, the left side is what is the current maximum monthly salary within the transportation authority for these positions? >> exactly. >> the next column is the median for the market. and all of these agencies that you mentioned which in most cases is higher, except for the first, right? >> right. >> and the proposed minimum salary is actually the minimum so it is lower than what we see with the current maximum. >> yes that is the minimum of the range that we created. >> then for the max um is what is correct and then you have the next column is the difference between the current

maximum and... >> the proposed maximum and the current, yes. >> thank you. >> you're welcome. >> okay. no other questions or comments from the committee, we can continue with mr. kevin torer. >> thank you for your presentation and your work on this. >> in terms of fiscal impact, the revised salary structure does not have an immediate budget impact. because they are granted for performance not for inflation or cost of living adjustments. we are seeking a recommendation to adopt the revised structure on page 79 and we are more than happy to answer any of your questions. >> okay, thank you. let's go into public comment. any member of the public who would like to comment on this item please come forward? >> and seeing none, we will close public comment. >> okay, colleagues this item is lie before us.

i actually appreciate the work of the group that you have provided to us in terms of a new structure and that would be supportive of that in light of that we have had any adjustments since 2007, and it seems that it is time and we are seeing numbers that are well below what other agencies in the surrounding market provide in terms of salaries. so i would be supportive of that. commissioner campos? >> thank you, mr. chairman. just a quick question, and i too support the proposal. what is the over all financial impact on the authority? >> for fiscal year, 13, 14, we have not anticipated any fiscal impact. as i mention it is performance based. we typically don't see any adjustments more than 5 percent. okay >> of the salaries, right now the salaris for 13, 14 budget which the finance committee

will see this month is approximately $5 million and that represents 2.2 percent of our budget. and it is hard to say how much it would actually be right now. and until we have the reviews and evaluations, great. thank you and i appreciate the work. thank you very much. >> thank you. commissioner cohen? >> thank you very much. i think that this is just a clarifying question. you see, you don't have an idea how it will impact the budget for this year and which means that i would assume that you don't know how it will be for the future years to come, correct? and it is performance base? >> yes. >> and am i making an assumption that you have a set of criteria that you used to determine whether an employee is meeting their performance? >> right. there is a system for our evaluations and it is on a scale from one to five, based on how well they do. that is where the assessments for their own job performance salary increases would come

from. >> you said that this is just salary based and it is also does not factor into the health benefits or anything like that? >> no, we are just bringing a recommendation for just increasing the salary range up and instead of adjusting any of the benefits. we are leaving the benefits alone, we feel like that is not just the right climate right now to take a look and ask for and increase of the benefits especially what is going on with the other agencies right now. >> great, that is going to be my next question, if there were any plans to pay or to review benefits in the future? contributions, and employee contributions? >> right now, we are going for a pension reform, and we would like to wait until that is settled down before we take a look at the benefits. health premiums, of course, have been increasing over the past years. and we just like to wait and see what the new rates will become before we bring anything before you. i would rather have more information, that way when i

come back before the board i can really recommend a solid number. you also will see just recommendations to the increase in benefits in our annual budget. right now, for fringe benefits, we are slightly increasing it less than 15 percent, just to accommodate for that range. but, that is not very much compared to our total budgets. again that is just 2.2 percent in totals just no salaries. >> one more final question. do you have an idea of the time line of that of which you will be bringing the benefits? >> if there is, if it increased in that, it narrows us to bring it forward it would not be until later on this calendar, or later on during the year, maybe around september or october. we are on a calendar basis for our medical premiums. and so the new rates would not show up until about september or october and that is when the staff will sign up for the benefit plan that they would

like and that way i can take a look at how much it will cost us from the next calendar year, our budget is on a fiscal year and at mid year we will take a look to see how much difference it is from what we have originally budgeted to what the actual cost s and within the year of budget amendment, i would bring any adjustments to you for your approvele. >> thank you. >> okay. and if no other comments or questions, from the panel? so we have this item before us, could we remain a motion? >> so moved. >> from commissioner campos and seconded by commissioner weiner and we will take that without objection. thank you, colleagues. >> our next item is closed session item, so we will be going into closed session. madam clerk if you could call it and make the adjustments. >> item four, closed session, and update on public employ appointment hiring, executive director this is an information item. >> thank you, i have also

requested that our interim executive director remain with us during this closed session as well and i think that is appropriate. she can provide proper context for happenings within the ta. >> okay, so, we are now going... >> okay. okay. >> i am seeing a black screen.

>> okay, thank you. >> so we are live, now. so we are now back in open session. >> right. >> i will see the live feed. >> i don't see that. >> i do see the live feed. we are back in open session, we are. colleagues could we have a motion not to reveal the contents of our closed session? okay. that is a motion from supervisor weiner and seconded by mar, and we will take that without objection. and then, we can have public comments on the closed session? >> we do. >> we open this item up for public comment. and seeing no member of the public come forward. we will close public comment. and this is an information item. so we can go on to our next item. >> item five, introduction of

new items information item. >> any new item to introduce, any subject matters? >> none? we will go on to public comment. and we will close public comment. >> and our next item it >> item number 6, public comment. >> general public comment and the opportunity for any member of the public who is or is not in this room to come forward and to say or speak their minds. we will close public comment. >> next item? >> 7, adjournment. >> colleagues, we are adjourned. thank you very much. thank you.

>> good evening and welcome to the may 8, 2013 meeting of the san francisco board of appeals. in case anyone needs it, we do have an overflow room set up in room 42 1 on this floor so you can go into that room if you'd like and come back in when your item is called. the presiding officer this evening is board president chris fong and she is joined tonight by our vice president ann lazarus, commissioner frank fong, commissioner darrell honda and commissioner darrell [speaker not understood]. to my left is city attorney robert brian he will provide the board with