we will look at the elasticity pricing and a range of other issues. we want to maximize revenues by attracting as many cruise calls as we can, and the parking opportunities that pier 27, and potentially pier 35 my provide for us. the goal of the rfp timing continues to complete negotiations of the management agreement to come back to the port commission for final approval of the deal by fall, 2013. that gives up or just a few months negotiate agreements and get going with phase 2. in the event that metro cannot resolve the prerequisite terms, (indiscernible) --

we have an exciting and daunting task. it is ardently the largest investment import maritime and for structure in the port's 150-year history. we were thinking of what it could've been as monumental as this and we can't. like i said before we have the highest number of cruise passengers ever to transit in the port's history next year. this is a facility that provides great opportunities for special events. went to get a management team in place soon to begin marketing and booking reservations.

we are convinced that this will be a waterfront marquee location for conferences, weddings, corporate parties and the like which would generate new revenue to the port. finally by september, 2014, who want to celebrate the opening of the cruise terminal to the world. to do this we require your request to begin negotiations with metro cruise, as a highest-ranked respondent to the port's rfp. it will come back to the port commission this fall hopefully with the complete a deal for your edification. thank you, and byron and i am numbers of our team are here to answer questions that you might have. >> motion to approve. >> second. >> any public comment? we do. ed ferris. (sounds like) >> good afternoon commissioners.

good afternoon executive director moyer. my name is ed ferris -- local 10 -- is an important decision that will impact the success of the cruise industry here, and will be for many years to come. they should not be made quickly or without careful consideration. whatever terminal operators you choose let's make business decisions that promote labor peace instead of labor unrest. labor unrest can quickly and significantly diminish the quality vacation experience for cruise ship passengers. for some passengers this is their first experience with san

francisco and it needs to be a pleasant and enjoyable one. i'm concerned about labor unrest in the future. we would respectfully request that you hold off on this authorization of the management agreement negotiation to begin for at least a month and allow us to continue to have forthright discussions and try to work out some of the details of our dispute. we certainly would like to be able to make a decision by formally endorsing the terminal operator, it is an important decision we don't want our labor force which is a direct stakeholder in this port do not have our interests met. thank you very much. >> mike ---

>> hello madam chair and commissioners. at the last meeting you heard how we have had labor dispute with metro over the years, especially since 2008. we have sat down with metro recently and try to resolve this year some of those issues. it has to do with our jurisdiction and our jobs, american jobs, and keeping those jobs here for the locals. we are a partner with the port of san francisco and the citizens of the city. i was born and raised in the city. meeting with metro over the last few weeks -- they have assured me that they will continue talks going forward.

some of the things that we have discussed and have agreed upon is getting back on these ships and doing what we do best, load and unload passengers and provisions and cargo. that is our main argument. last year we had a big blowout with metro. it got resolved with them stating that it won't happen again. the issues have to do with jobs. you know the ilw - we are not going to allow anybody to take our jobs on these ships. so moving forward, with the discussion, i think that the teams that picked metro pick the right

stevedor company, they were by far the better choice than mtc or marine terminals. the issues with labor unrest have to be resolved. i was assured that will continue to meet going forward. going forth, being the president of local 10, this commission has to go forward and get business done because we are on a timeline but we will be at the meetings with metro to make sure none of these issues that are taking place that have to do with jobs and our jobs, an american good jobs, and to relate to it with metro -- and we are -- we are communicating quite well on forth. i have to say that metro was the better choice of the two; i was surprised that you only had

two stevedor companies bidding on this because san francisco in our opinion is the best place to come and visit in the country. metro is the best choice going forward but we want to make sure going forward that we don't have any more labor issues with them. thank you very much. >> kathryn hooper (sounds like) >> madam chair, executive director and staff, commissioners. i am a consultant -- i think i can speak on behalf of many of the other cruise companies that have come here. two great choices and i think that clearly the panel that

reviewed the two candidates pick the right person. for me they are local.that means a lot. support agent does a lot of the non-girly stuff, like setting up the -- every port operates in a different way. having local expertise of the country that already has credentials and his work through some of the things that mike and his colleagues have brought up is important. representing the cruise line one of the struggles these days is the cost of everything about bringing a ship to port. i am pleased that metro who has earned their stripes has been awarded the first step in next up is up to the port on the negotiations which you have already passed.

the james herman cruise terminal as kimberly noticed, has been an ongoing wish. phase 2 is important to the port for no other reason, and that is financial. we have to get the facility up and running, out of the time-to-market it to bring in the extra enterprise, and from the selfish part i've been praying for this port. i've been joking that i hope it happens before i end up in a wheelchair. looks like it will happen. to all the stakeholders and the executive director and your staff, kudos on behalf of

everybody in this port and the city. thank you. >> thank you. is there any other public comment? hearing none, commissioners? >> first of all when i came onto this commission about nine months ago, i had a conversation with director moore. she was concerned about the morale at the cruise terminal. we had a conversation. she was saying, what do you think was wrong? i stop to try to find out what the issues were. i myself have been down there twice, went down there is a commissioner and walked around. peter daley took me around. i wanted to see what was going on. and i think what it is is this -- metro, port of san francisco and ilw are all stakeholders.

if there are tensions and problems we have to do it together because we have to grow this business. when i went down, mike -- from local 10 was there, that was the first time ever that the ilw has traveled with the port of san francisco. i went to china with peter daily so that we could show a united front, labor, the port, management so that we could grow. we have an opportunity to do a lot of things. i personally think that i have not been involved in the negotiations, neither will i be because i'm the secretary-treasurer of international. if there is a problem people have to sit down and try to get things resolved because we have work to do. i made a commitment when i got into the commission.

i would travel with metro, the port of san francisco, ilw, whoever to promote the sport and that is what i'm here to do. i saw a youtube video of a gentleman from metro screaming at the top of his lungs. i think there is a protocol by which you have to carry yourself. one of the gentleman from metro made reference to my dead mother. i did not say anything. i encourage stephan and peter daley to resolve these issues. i wanted the whole deal, metro hands down, you were head and

shoulders above ports of america. what is the problem with you and the ilw? what did i say to port of america? i am disturbed by the fact that down in la that you got the bid and metro is doing the stevedoring. if you get the bid and have someone else do the work for you it shows you you don't have a handle on it. i would ask when you come back in september when the three parties come together, when you need to sit down and resolve the issues. negotiation is about give and take.

you never get everything you want. i want to go out with metro and the port of san francisco and double the amount of cruise ships coming in; i want to work with metro and jim peters so that we can buld a state-of-the-art bulk facility. i want china to invest in our port and our city. thank you. >> thank you willie, and i appreciate the comments of the made. i want to add that i think we echo that we want these issues

resolved. we want labor peace. we are here to make a decision on whether metro is a qualified bidder. we heard a lot of similar to say they are the qualified bidder; this is not the final contract. with support that the party should sit down and resolve these issues before any final contract is approved. it is the basis of what we are doing today, whether metro is qualified to commence contract negotiations. i think i'm hearing that there is agreement that they're qualified to enter into contract negotiations, and some of the terms raised by our labor partners that we would continue to ask metro, the port on the unions to sit down and resolve this because it is important to have peace and i agree we don't want passengers to feel tension. based on that, i would like to ask the

commission to vote to accept metro as a qualified bidder. >> i have a question. >> go ahead. >> the name of today has been jobs. it's important that we continue to create opportunities that will continue to bring people to the waterfront with these jobs. i do have a question regarding lbe goals -- if there are any? >> good evening commissioners. port staff. this particular agreement falls outside chapter 21. lbe goals were not set up front; if it had folded inside we would have set lbe goals up front. because it is outside of 21, and the reason it is is

because leases are excluded. also this is a quasi lease management agreement. focuses on payments to the city for this agreement. the operator will hold revenues and pay the port a fee. however knowing the commission's desires, in the request for responses was said that it is our intention that there will be local business component, and local hire as well. the goal will be determined in concert negotiations very much like a development agreement. it will be at their option to agree with an lbe goal and local hire requirement. >> so hopefully when you come back in september since you are the most qualified to do this job that we will have great news regarding lbes and

labor issues. thank you. >> (off mic) >> great, thank you. >> i'm sorry, it's 14b, i don't know why i said 21. >> is in it 12? ( laughter) >> commissioner murphy? >> i would like to say that the numbers speak for themselves as far as mentor is concerned. i would like to see this move forward. i would like to echo commissioner adams about making the peace and working to differences out. i think that's important. >> i want to concur with my colleagues. the message has been sent loud

and clear. working with labor is an important value in san francisco; that is something we prided ourselves on. san francisco is known as the city that supports labor. we are so dependent on our tourism economy but we don't want to show labor strife to visitors when they come here; that is counterproductive to all that we want to accomplish so i hope the message has been sent that we are pleased that metro did well and getting such high marks; we hope that these issues can be worked out and resolve as we go through the negotiations moving forward. >> i think we want to say what commissioner adams already said,

the port commission is not the place to resolve these issues, we are not stakeholders and that. we hope that that will be the case, would not see that -- we are not in a position to judge as to what the term should be but we do expect that you will tell us how you can resolve these issues the two parties going forward. all those in favor? aye. resolution number 1325 has been approved. thank you. >> item 12, new business. >> commissioners i have an item from commissioner brandon on the youth employment coming back from an earlier discussion. any other items a request? >> small one. i want to convey a message from some of the people that travel

to clark, ireland, with monique our director. what a wonderful ambassador she is from the port of san francisco and wanted to give you (off mic) (off mic) ( laughter) thank you. >> thank you very much. appreciate that. >> moved to adjourn. >> second. >> all those in favor? thank you.

[ gavel ] >> the meeting will come to order, call the roll, please. >> president torres? >> here. >> vice president courtney? >> here. >> commissioner moran? >> here. >> commissioners moller caen awn vietor will be arriving a little bit later. >> thank you a. proval of the minutes. can we read them, and are there any public comments before we move to a motion? there being none, is there a motion to approve the minutes. >> moved.

>> moved and seconded. all those in favor, signify by saying aye? >> aye. >> moved, motion carried. public comments? mr. decosta. >> commissioners, you all know this is your city and county of san francisco, and while we know, as the mayor says, that now over 35 cranes hovering over the city, there is a lot happening at the ground level. and one of the thing has there that i want to bring to the attention of the sfpuc, that all over the city, for example,

we have your department of external affairs, that supposedly deals with outreach and has to project and put a nice face to our city, a lot of work has to be done when it comes to the tearing up of our streets, linked with clean water pipes and the sewer pipes. i will give you an example: it's been two months now that the streets of san bruno avenue have been torn up, and people on both sides cannot use the space for parking. san bruno avenue has contributed millions of dollars to the city and while the merchants are quiet, unlike say, geary or the potrero drive

area, the city is taking advantage of it in many ways. our streets are not cleaned, potholes, millions of dollars are taken from our merchants and yet, how does

>> we were wondering with that might be calendared also? i have two more questions and maybe you are aware of this, but the $2 million rec and park department and puc boathouse partnership at lake merced is behind schedule and it's $400,000 overbudget now. area and we're just wondering who is going to be paying for this $400,000 overrun? and finally, under the public utilities commission real estate division and this report was dated february 8th, 2012 and was brought here before the commission several months ago. under section 20 you land use, this caught my attention. it says and this is quoted, "through its watershed

management plan the san francisco puc adopted specific land use policies for watershed lands. certain other lands, such as the lake merced tract, are the subject of specific land use polices." we're wondering what are these specific land use polices? or is till a work in progress? and will the public be involved in this process? thank you, commissioners. that is all i have. >> thank you, and you will be getting notice soon. >> thank you very much. >> all right, that concludes "public comments." any other public comments? >> mr. president, i just have a question for the general manager in response to the san bruno avenue question. >> okay. >> could we get some kind of written response as to how we

try to manage disruption in commercial areas like that and it's not uncommon to limit how many blocks you have open at the same time and what kind of consideration we're giving to that? >> yes. i will follow-up, but typically, there is a process that you go through, through the process where you coordinate with other utility companies. you also work with the merchants to minimize the impact. so i will follow-up and see exactly what has been going on. >> thank you. >> so mr. allen, i am thinking july. >> pardon me? >> i am thinking july for the issues that you raised. >> thank you very much. >> i'm sorry it's taken to long, but things require time. any other public comments? all right, we'll move to "communications." any public comments on "communications?" there being none we'll move on to "other commission business." is there none? we'll move on to re