will oversee the perspectiveness and we ask for a site approval plant. we work with them so we're satisfied they're answering all of our questions. based on the results of the site characterization -- how will they handle anything that they bring to the service or bring to the cap that dtsd is requiring of them. they have to submit a third party certification that they have completed the work and it is the consultants belief and they put their license on the line that

meets the requirements. >> thank you. >> does that conclude this item. there was a comment i had, while i'm prepared to move it, there are a lot of issues surrounding the concerns that the community has. there a lot of different communities. the community that i come from is the labor community, so i think it's appropriate to note that i've spoke actually today in fact with some community work force representatives who were not all that thrilled with the relationship that they have with the current developer. i think there could be more outreach there. also,

the san francisco building construction traits council -- i'm a delegate and not thrilled with the dialogue related to the labor agreement that we're hoping would get the work done without any work stoppages. i'd like -- if it's not something we can hear today, i'd like to hear about most recently and most disturbing was the removal of references to stewardship and standard labor community, but of critical importance, border life insulting and the discussions surrounding the application of prevailing wage and i think it's a mistake just to assume the building trade's unions are going to go along because we just go along with everything, so prevailing wage is pretty important. senator

torres, you know what i'm talking about. >> yes. >> there's a lot of things that's going to get this thing through and i think making sure there's labor peace in the southwest would be trade unions and it's important. are there any other comments commissioners. >> how do we make sure that happens? an overview or monitoring? >> i'm confident that supervisor caen about facilitate those conversations. we've begun that dialogue. in this town, it seems odd to me that we would get this far along on something so controversial and we would still be having conversations about the application of prevailing wage, but i'm prepared to move it.

commissioners. commissioner moran. >> a couple of things. our normal role in this sort of thing is figuring out what the utility impacts are and our interest in our employees protection, and we have ended up going farther field of that because of public testimony that raised the protection of public health and i think that's appropriate and i appreciate the time we've had because of the continuance to look at this. in the course of my -- looking over the documentation that has been testified to, this is clearly not a new issue. and this has been around for a long time. the issue, there's no issue that has been mentioned here that is either new or unusual. and

they have -- i think there has been a process that people have gone through to make sure that the development is done in a responsible kind of way. i'm struck by of the nature of the remediation process that you can't make all of our history go away. you have to deal with it in some way and that in many ways, the ongoing public health is dependent upon land use controls. and the materials that i reviewed has land use control and there's seven several things you have to get signed off. what you worry about is somebody is going to stop paying attention over time with land use. i take comfort and one thing is the department

of public health is involved and i'm glad we have local people who care about our community who are involved in this. and the other is that the public areas will be under public jurisdiction. so it's not just a matter of what somebody does with their property, but there's lots of avenues for dealing with issues there. so i think, you know, i think between the mayor's office and the developer and the public health and dpsd, i think the right thing has been done. the thing we're concerned with is disturbances for soil and changes in land use and things that could expose people to some hazard and the first instance of that is our own employees and the people doing the construction work and there was extensive discussion about how those issues will be dealt with, but i think we need to make sure -- just that we have a noticing that says you're not supposed to

grow vegetables here. just like on the pier, you're not supposed to do fishing there. that notice has to be there and there has to be public people from the city that's paying attention there and making sure it's honored over time. i think the review has helped me and i'm ready to support. there's ongoing concerns we need to pay attention to and the protection of our employees including those who work or live there are protected. >> thank you commissioner moran. commissioners? commissioner vietor. >> i concur with most of the statements with moran and i concur can the statements. whatever needs to happen to really do go above

and beyond to protect public health. understanding it not the per view of the puc, but those are raised and they're important for our workers and the people that's going to live there and the children who are going to grow up in those units. i concur with that and request that the developer really do the notification. dts has looked at this and i was hoping that someone from there or our new director who used to chair would be here to confirm dtsd findings, but i too have comfort that the department of public health is watching this and i hope that the city is really going to be vigilant. >> i'm prepared to vote.

>> whose got the motion? >> moved. >> i didn't get a motion. >> i need a motion. >> so moved. >> it has been moved. >> second. and seconded. any other discussion. okay. can i have public comment, please. dr. jackson. >> yes, i would like to say what really bothers me, i know it don't bother you, but when there's development going on in this city especially in bay view hunter's point, it's all super fun sites, they come up with a conceptional plan. do you know what a conceptional plan is? it sound good, don't it. a conceptional plan is a dream. and you know when you have a dream, you might wake up with

the worst nightmare and that's what's happen nothing the southeast sector because i had contacted the park and rec, but i didn't attend the meeting, but the young lady called me this morning to inform me that they did pass on supporting the project, but she said but mrs. jackson after i talked to her, she said you need to make sure that you're at the budget committee meeting on july the 16th at 10:00 a.m. to talk about your concerns because people come up here and do not tell the truth. maybe you all can believe in the health department, but i gave you information about what happened with the health department and the epa, dealing in my community. co-hearsting

with the people and lying. did anybody go to jail? no. there's a lot of people that need to go to jail, about what they are supporting and being a rubber stamp. don't nobody make anything but the developers. they're the ones that's getting the money, and you all are just sitting there. and your workers are going to be dead in ten years, and you're talking about growing vegetables. if you grow vegetables in the southeast sector, all the toxins that goes up and comes down, i wouldn't eat no vegetable grown out there. i'm going to tell you just like it is. but the thing of it is that i'm more concerned about is they're talking about digging feet feet and then go lay something and we have earthquakes in this area and when the cement cracks, all those fumes are going up in the air. you all need to --

i don't know what to say about you all. >> thank you for being here, doctor. >> mr. woods. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is robert wood, and i'm concerned about -- we talk about this magic three foot field that we've put on top of the toxic soil that is already there. that three foot, they're probably going to put a barrier at the testing level where the toxic is and where they're going to put on the bar of soil. everybody knows that when water, when it rains, that some times water penetrates far beyond three feet. and if that water

gets to that barrier, eventually that barrier isn't going to be able to carry that bar of soil and it's going to wash away eventually. it may take eight, nine, ten years, but it will wash away and you will have a disappearing of that three-foot field that you put on top of there, but my other question is when you start putting in your utilities out there, you're talking about digging down inside of that toxic waste to put your utilities in the soil. once you start digging it up and putting that soil to the side and you start trenching and putting in your pipes, that will be --

that will be exposed to whoever is working there or whoever is living in the area. you got to think a little deeper than just the soil -- just putting your footings and other things that you're putting out there in that area. you're going to have to break that three-foot base area if you're going to putting in foundations and things of that nature and that right there will start contaminating that cap that you're talking about that you're putting on top of that if there's water inside of that cap -- inside that cap and it's seeping through, then you're going to have eventually water -- one thing water does is it seeks dry

land. it seems anything that is dry, and eventually whatever it is down there is going to come up through -- where ever you puncture that cap, that water from that toxic area will seep up through that barrier and through that cap area, so i ask you to make sure that the site is clean and that way you won't have to be worrying about these things and worrying about the health department and budget reports and even the developers of the land selling you on something that they could not clean up, so i ask you to be concerned. we are concerned in the neighborhood. thank you.

>> thank you, mr. woods. thanks for being here. >> i have a question. >> vice president caen. >> if this property is not developed, what are your discussions for the property? >> mr. woods. >> i said what would your suggestions be for the property? do you want to still sit there and the old -- >> no. i would say if any property in the city and county of san francisco is too valuable to sit, clean it up. clean it up to a point where it's residential conditions and residential status and where people can live and live safe and if you have to repair

any lines that you bury in a trench to service that area, then i would say then you don't have to worry about the community being exposed to repairs of a line that needs to be repaired because one thing that does happen, we run into repairs on sites whether we like it or not, whether it's new sites or old sites, eventually something will go wrong, so if the whole entire thing is to clean up the residential standard then you won't have to deal with that. can i - >> general manager kelly sglchl as we move forward and we identify the infrastructure that needs to be in place, we mentioned about utility corridors, and so that is the area in which we are going to make sure that is free of

contaminant. so it's not that they're going to bury the pipes in contaminated soil and then put the contaminated soil so that if something happens, our workers goes back out there. i wanted to get some concurrence and articulating that correctly. >> i'm sorry, specifically -- >> what was the question, mr. kelly specifically that you wanted concurrence on? >> one of the things that we talked about is a utility corridor, and the concept is that when we're putting in infrastructure in or as the developer puts infrastructure in, they're putting it in, but they're not putting it in in a way that they're excavating the contaminated soil and putting back the contaminated soil so if something happens,

our workers won't be exposed to the contaminated soil. >> what you're saying is correct. we have most of the clean utility corridors completed, and we have a little bit more to do, but this is the case when we're done speaker: can i have a question as well. 22 years you have been doing this, have you done a lot of ground site redevelopment? >> yes. >> have you seen anything adverse health conditions? is this all part for the choir. >> it is a very typical project. san francisco ball park is a great example of a brown field's project that has been completely, you know, a success and everybody is protected. there's metals in the ground, under the ball park.

>> we just planted a garden. this is very typical of projects that we do. >> is there any other further public comment? i'll have one more after this. >> so one of the commissioners asked and so did some others, what's so unique about this project? on one side, you have a rail, it's about ten feet, 20 feet away. constant traffic of rail traffic. not very far from this project, you have huge tanks containing petroleum and there's certain rules that govern this. on the other side, you have a road that's five feet away, ten feet away to be on

the safe side, many of acres. you need to go over there and check it out. when someone was given the presentation and said he's been involved with this since 1999, once of the commissioners asked a question, why not this big mall -- wanted to built a building there for supplies. and some people do not want that. so what i'm saying is right now the most important thing is this land, if you look at the water shed, that used to be the bay. so we're not talking about a water shed on the left side of san francisco. that used to be the bay. not very far is a garbage site. do you know what garbage is. you put

garbage and you put some little soil. if you look agenda of the public hearing, it gives you a wide area. i don't want to read it. it talks about -- it gives you a wide area. we have midway, not very far- about a mile away and people getting cancer, but i'm here really for the children. the children, we adults to have to defend the children. again and again in the city, adults impact them. what about the principal and what about the mayor act. have you

studied it. why are we putting our children in harm's way, why are we putting our senior's in harm's way. because they don't have a voice. because someone stole $8 million and now is in china and wants to invest in this thing. come on. get real. look at the children. look at the children and say whether you want to rubber stamp this project. i'm sick of this. >> i have -- thank you francisco. i have a card from martin. hi, fran. >> hi. >> well, he already said it. but name is fran martin and i'm with the green way alliance. i'm a member of the dts which looks at site. 15 years ago, they challenged the proposal to big a store at

the toxic slaej lots brown field and we won. our group advocated for that site and it will bring affordable housing and bring jobs and parks for under served community. slaj lock is a gaping wound in the heart of the vegetation valley. we fought to make sure that site is cleaned up and we're in threshold of seeing it cleaned up to unify our community. sleigh lock -- it will be inter goal to the transportation in the south. our neighborhood has supported transportation to help eliminate the greenhouse gases to influence climate change. it brought us all here today. we initiated the redevelopment area and the valley development three. it has been a

forefront for housing in san francisco and most other neighborhood do not want high dense neighborhoods of any sort. 700 housing is to be built. in 2010 the plan alliance received a ward. we have created new paradigm. it is time that our neighborhood after a long process of planning closely and watched mediation based on based scientific practices move forward with the development. after years of intense engagement, we have earned the right of your support. that's what i wrote after hearing what people are saying here. i have to respond. the green way project which is

on puc land, as commissioner caen probably remembers, it's an outdoor classroom. i work with children in vegetation valley. we grow vegetables and there's no way that we're going to allow them to be put in harm's way at sleigh lock. i find that offensive. we have been on top of this process. we led the process. when nobody would help us in the city, we created our own planning department. i want you to know that we're going to continue being vigilant and there's no plan by the way to build community gardens on those two parks that rec and park has okayed already. that's it. >> thank you very much for being here. commissioners, any questions? it has been moved and seconded. there's no further conversation, i'll call for a vote. all those in favor, signify by

saying aye. >> aye. speaker: madam, the next item. city clerk: item 13, the approved -- agreement number cs 392 g not to exceed $400,000 amount in the duration of three years. >> commissioners. >> moved. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is laura page and i direct the education of the sspuc in grades k-12. i was pleased to see the college high school interns here today. i'm here to talk about a grant to help us with environmental stewarts. this is an outdoor education program. we're required by regulators to provide educational lessons through students particularly in the

area of water and pollution. we've had partnerships with other city -- we've lacked a comprehensive strategy to invest in education and elementary level. we have a new opportunity for that program. for the green skill bond unit that was voted on by voters in 2006 and 2011 to allow for the creation of 84 green school yards on sff school yards. it's a perfect opportunity for educator to teach students about the importance of water conservation and things offered. the goal is the program will reach 8,000 students, and it's a one year program with an opportunity to renew for the next three years. >> thank you very much. it has been moved. >> second. >> it has been seconded. any public comment on this item?

dr. jackson. >> here you go again, oh, yes. let me say this to you, that was a report done in 2004 and it was done by the court authority about the so called heritage park. that area was dredge and someone passed about i and said, that looks like a [inaudible]. that's how the park got named, but it is. all you have to do, you yourself, get your staff to find out the results of health risk assessment. it is terrible. i pulled this off this morning and you know when you read

it, it talks about death. the different diseases and things that people get and you die from it. you die from it. people are dying in my community. you have a health department, you have the malls and i said this to you before, my daughter died two years ago and i haven't got a report of what she died from. three weeks ago, 15 seniors died on third street within two months. people are still dying in bay view hunter's point. are you all caring about what's happening, the air? and you think i'm going to trust anything from the health department, epa, because they all do things for development. i can't do it. how can you all sleep at night when the people are dying. it is