>> commissioner willie adams, here. commissioner kimberley brandon, here. commissioner lesley katz, absent. commissioner aleenan kounalakis, here. commissioner woo ho, here:

approval of minutes for february 23, 2016 meeting. >> all in favor say aye. >> aye. >> pub lecomment >> any public comment on executive session? public comment is closed. >> executive session. >> so moved. >> all in favor say aye. >> aye >> o >> move to reconvene in open session. >> so moouved, and second. >> all favor aye. opposed? okay. >> move to--we recess closed session and william -will reconvene. >> item 6.

>> pledge of allegiance. >> i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic, for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> item 7 rfx the ringing and use of cell phones pages and similar sound producing devices are prohibited. the chair may order removal from the meeting of any person responsible for ringing or use of cell phone pager or similar sound producing electronic device. a member of the public has up to 3 minutes to make a pertinent public comment. public comments on items not

listed on the ajnda >> i have one card, david santose. >> good floon, thank you for the time. i am here in regards to a previous meeting regarding landing right agreement between city and count aef san francisco port commission and south beach harbor [inaudible] it specifically is for increased insurance requirements and i believe there wasn't input through the public sector and would like to have information to who to speak with at the city and county level risk management office. i contacted different port e-mails and haven't received a appropriate response to who to contact. thank you for your time and you have my name and

phone number as a port [inaudible] for the last 22 years >> you may want to talk to [inaudible] is our director. she can refer you in the right direction. anymore public comment? if not, public comment is closed. next item >> item 9, executive director report >> good afternoon, elaine fords interim port director. we are welcoming our 5th port commissioner on the commission, ambassador kounalakis is a business woman with experience as aland developer in sacramento and diplomate. she served as the ambassador to hungry and received two awards of honor. she

wrote a terrific book called madam ambassador [inaudible] this wonderful story includes a wild bore hunt, dairy hel copter rides and explains how diplomacy provided guidance with hunggarian nationalism and antisimptism. ambassador kounalakis holds a fellowship at [inaudible] a senior advisor at stone bridge group and serves as a chair thof cam advisory council for international trade and investments. she serves as a [inaudible] where she received mba in 1992. kounalakis and hoar family live insuch and luchbs her city. she isn't new to local service. she served as a trusty at [inaudible] and

member of california state world trade commission and the first 5 california commission. the ambassador is a proud first generation greek american. her father immigrated here and started work as agriculture day labor. she was a advocate for interfaith cooperation and served for religion of peace and in recognition was awarded the metal of st. paul which is the highest honor the greekoth dox church in american. committed to the advancement and understanding of democratic ideas she servess a a advisor to the new york times and [inaudible] it is international womens day today and befitting to welcome our 4th leder to the commission. congratulations commissioner kounalakis, we are

so proud to welcome you. [applause] >> thank you very very much for that gracious introduction. i think the only thing that you didn't mention because i am sure you didn't know is 16 years ago all most exactly my husband and i were maried and had our reception in i think this exact space because it was the former world trade commission and you may have heard about big fat greek wedding, we had about 800 people crammed into the world trade center so this building is special it me but i love my city, i love san francisco and anyone who loves san francisco has to be passionate about the water front because there is so much that goes on in the 7 and a half mile stretch plus other parts of the water front but there are so many activities

and so many things to do with your family and so many reasons to come down and enjoy it. what i already? yoied is having the opportunity to peal back the ungen and earn and understand more not just about the history of the water front but all the contemporary issues that the port commission deals with so it is a true privilege and honor and something that is very exciting to be part of this. i also want to thank my new fellow commissioners for their support during my #2345u78ination and confirmation process and reaching out with history and context and friendship and collaboration and everything that i know is so important to have a healthy and well functioning board and you have my commitment to put in many hours and as much energy as necessary to

live up to your standards of being a engaged and committed commissioner. i any all of you. thank you so much ghen, it -again, it is a honor and privilege to be here. [applause] >> okay, i would like to give a update on the water front land use process. if working group will meet march 9 add pier 1 from 6 to 8 and entopic is port finance. megan wallace and i willprint the port budget and financial process. i would like to thank the port commissioners for all the attendance you served in coming to the working group meetings to date. we heard feedback and sharing your insights is helpful. -broader city regional

water front planning efforts particularly as it relates to making the water reziltiant. the working grouperize well ateneding. today port staff briefed the working group on the goal andpologists of the water front plan, two port guv nrns by state and local law jz regulation and 3, maritime industry and water dependent use that plan their home at the port. wednesday we'll do the port finance training and the next two working sessions in parallel with the port commissions review of sea level rise, the port commission march 22 and working group march 23 and then on the port sea wall structural study results and that for the port commission is the 13th. in the spring the working group will focus on the historic pier district,

open design and open space and this will provide the framework to get started in part 2 that happens summer and early fall and the working group will tackle the trade off, priorities and make internal policy recommendation. they hit parlt 3 of the process to address south beach and northest water front side and the working group will come to the final meetjug come with recommendations how the water front plan should be updated. we are excited about the process and the level of commitment from the working group and the partners. we want to let the public know that all the reports, powerpoints presentations vid yetapes are whether available on the port

website, sf port.com. on the final piece that march 1 the boardf supervisors voted unanimously to approve the ports first infrastructure financing district and financing plan and that is around the development area. the city and state will contribute future property tax dollar for 45 years in this area. this contribution equals about $49,000,000 nomally over the term which equates to 18.3 million in project sources. the ifd plan includes repay the port and developer for public infrastructure and small bond issuance of [inaudible] park. this secures 18 million dollars signals the cities willingness to allow

us to use the powerful financing tool and addressing the back log and livering critical infrastructure. this is a work in progress for 10 wreericize i proud to announce we have our first infrastructure. >> any comments? >> 9 b port commissioners report. >> commissioner [inaudible] >> nothing to report. >> mr. katz >> want to well sxh our new commissioner. delighted to have you join us. known you for many years. i know for your cunl passion and public service so think you will be a valuable new addition so welcome aboard. >> vice president brandon

>> yesterday i had the opportunity to attend the swearing in ceremony for kounalakis and it was a wonderful sair mony, the mayor swore in 18 people and the commissioner had her own dedicated cheering section. she has a lot of sport and it will be wonderful working with her. we had a great contijant here from the port so welcome and look forward work wg you. >> when i first heard ambassador kounalakis name and was scared to say the name. i got to speak and feel very honored at the rules committee and she had a great turn out and the respect she had from nancy pelosi,

[inaudible] ambassador kounalakis, art agonis and iow and came down and commissioner katz was there with me and her skills are impeccable but she is a true humanitarian. it was 16 years to the day she got mar raed at city hall. i'm happy. we are 5 now and i guess you can see the gender balance up here. i want you to see that. brad looked at me so you can see i'm out numbered. welcome commissioner kounalakis and glad to work with you in your new expertise. thank you. next item. >> item 9 c, informational overview presentation by to the executive directorf sosan francisco

ethics commission regarding the department education and enforcement role in city and county government. >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is leon pelm and i am in my 9th week as the executive dretherf osan francisco ethics commission. i appreciate the opportunity oo be here today to introduce myself very briefly and tool perhaps reinduce theectics commission. you may know my predsering was in the possession for 10 years so any organization that made a transition i think you also are familiar with. this is a great opportunity to be able to get out and introduce ourselves. i'll let you know about the priorities and support we hope to provide and solicit your feedback and continuing interest and let us know how we can support the work you are doing

on behalf of san franciscan's. i have a very brief powerpoint presentation. there were copies on the counter outside. we don't have a audioo visual but have copies in hard form. i want to introduce pat peter son. pat is in the blue jacket and is our outreach and education officer so she is busy ramping up the efforts to provide information in the most timely and effective way for those covered by our regulations. first of all i want to recap that the ethics commission as you may remember was created by san francisco voters in 1993 and as with many ethics commissions around the country, the commission was established by a vote of the citizens in the city county and established to do a broad range of responsibilities. we

have a broad raisk of problematic responsibility within the area of government reform and public disclosure including campaign finances, conflict of interest, lobby disclosure and registration, registration ofcome pain consultant and a variety of roles in the governmental ethics area. we work closely with office of city attorney and providing guidance and advice but our funchgzal duties are housed in the commission are [inaudible] we provide public diz closure for these areas. we provide education and partner with the city attorneys office. our job is also look at policy to make sure it is actually strong and workable and enforceable in practice and that is area we are trying to increase our effectivalness in. we also provide assistance to agency to help employees and public officer tooz understand the rule jz help provide the tools you are

subject to. when we find people have over stepped the laws that ally to us we have a investigative function. one question we get is where on r the standards we all have to live under, where are they expressed. as you know the state in 1974 passed a political reformant act and that set standard for government officials up and down the state from large to small cities so it is the foundation for our work. that is built upon by city law. the voters in san francisco are active and supportive having strong and extensiveictics laws so we have a campaign and governmental conduct code which has a lot of provisions we help folks understand and comply with. we [inaudible] sunshine ordinance

and departments in the city have statements of incompatible activities sethese are laws public servants have subject to. the port has its own statement of incompatible activities. in termoffs the information and education role that we play recollect, there are a number of disclosure rirenlts that applyment we have forms and disclosure information we try to provide people so everybody and understand the rule thofz road and understand how to comply with them and our job is really to provide the resources to help understand the rule jz tools to comply with the rule jz also providing nrfckz that equipts the public to hold us all accountable. one thing pat will tell me if i dont find out today is come april 1

public services have a financial disclosure requirement. commissioners department heads and other employees who participate in government decisions so that is something our office workwise your staff to accomplish. we want to get as close to 100 percent full accurate compliance. we have a online filing system that enables department heads and commissioners and elected officials to file the statements on line and hope that is a wie to do it simply and effectively we are working to bring unthe other filers that are about 3 thousand employees into the same system over time to make it easier for them as well. that is also one of the educational tools that with the information the state provides and the information we can provide to staff and you to help with compliance we also have information the public is able tolook at to insure decisions are made fairly and objectively in the

city so it is a tool to avoid conflicts and tool for the public to hold us accountable. i want toologist draw your attention to one thing we are trying to do more of in the coming year and months, the ethics commissionworks with the city attorneys office. the city attorneys office as done a slnt job putting together a government guide that is a strong resource for everybody about the laws that govern our activities. from this we also work to develop smaller shorter timely and practical sheets information that we can send out when it may be most useful. for example, this is the first of the inaugeral fyi from theectics commission. we try to make sure folks are aware of the rules at a time when it most relevant so we issued one of these at the end of january to

remind of the city and state rules. we hope to do more of that and welcome your ideas but what may be topics that are useful to you and your employees in the department. in terms of enforcement, statements of incompatible activities each department has in edition to the standards we are held to engaging in activities are empermissible can subject city employees to sanctions. it is a very strong statement in the city and if t is something our office takes very seriously. we have a charter mandate by the voter tooz investigate issues brought to our attention and initiate investigation when the fact and law indicate

something needs to be looked at and also require today treat these conconfident. we don't want concerns raised in our office or issues investigated to turn into political footballs. people have reputations to be protective of and until there is a reason to determine someone violated a law. the saczs that aplay under the law can be crim nm or civil sanction squz the commission has the ability to levy fines up to $5,000 for ethics laws or 3 times the money improperly reported or taken. there was a charter requirement we work with the city attorney and district attorney so complaints are required to be referred to them, but it is most important i think that you, your employee squz public knows there is a place to levy and raise concerns and it is part of our job to make sure we treat

those fairly, seriously and resauvlt cases objectively and thuryly and timely as we can. where the law and facts take us is the gome to make sure we resolve them in the most effective way. lastly i would say that we have a broad mandate at the outset with a variety of problematic areas and function and the blue print for our organization is something we are working to strengthen and build on in the coming year. we are being aggressive as our commission starts the new charter we want to look at operations and be responsive to questions we can provide advice and strengthen a look alt the law tooz make sure they are workable in practice and enforceable and insure our enforcement is fair, proactive, thorough and consistent. we'll do a lot of work in

our own house to up our graim and strengthen the role in supporting your job which is critical and challenging one. in a time we are asked to do more with less it is critical creteivity be alouded to happen and the extent we can be a thought partner or support to make sure the issueerize tackleed in the most ethical way we are happy to play that role in support of your work. if there are questions i'm happy to take them and provide information that may be of use to you but appreciate the chance to say hello this afternoon and just say on behalf of all of us at the ethics commission we look forward working with you and supporting you in the work. >> thank you. any public comment on 9 c? director pelm. seeing there is no public comment, public comment is closed. commissioners, mrs.

kounalakis. >> no comments. >> thank you for the wonderful report, it is great to get a refresher and congratulations on your new role. >> i want to thank you for coming and speaking to us. i appreciate the refresher and it is nice toknow the city is doing it right so thank you for being here and welcome to the city. >> commissioner woo ho >> thank you for the are minder and good to know we have to file form 700 and appreciate we continue to express our core values throughout the city with various commissions and think that is important as something that represented san francisco at its best. >> thank you so much for coming today. i was the one that requested it. your ethic is important. the public

is always watching and there has to be high level of transparence and say this without apology, this is the best commission in the city, the port commission and we have to have high standard and one must be aware of conflict of interest. you can't be up [inaudible] people are watching and there has to be transspairns dw need to be reminded ask you have to do the right thing, so we as commissioners, this is the best commission and have to carry our suchbls that way and make sure the transs paerns is there, the public is always watching and there r people are look frg something and want this always to be a commission the public and everyone can have faith and interest. once again, thank you for coming. with that being said, you want to call the next item >> item 10 a, informational presentation on national flood insurance program and draft san francisco flood insurance rate

maps. >> good afternoon president aedms and commissioners. brad [inaudible] director of project here to present on the national flood insurance program. like to kick off the presentation welcoming director of risk management as the city administrator matt hansen and we will describe the role >> we as the city administrate strairt aifs collect chbly and individually for naomi kelly is the flood plain manager for the city and support all departments and enterprises and working through us with fema in your individual concerns are issues that you have with the program or may have and comments and appeals. the comment period, the

maps were actually started in 2007? yeah. before my time, but it started in 2007 and not until this past november do we have draft maps and they are put out by fema and we have a chance to comment and appeal those decisions they made on engineering basis. the staff here at the port will give a deeper presentation on the effects it will have on developmented and what they are attempting it do to work with us through fema to make sure it is a transparent process and that we have the opportunity to comment on these findings. second thing, we are coordinating outreach and sure there will be more information from brad but with each of our effected departments and enterprises there are

specific stakeholders communities that may or can be effected by these mapping tools and what happens then is that we worked with or work wg all the public information officers to make sure we have a coordinateed rft city wide, we speck with one voice to fema in that each area of concern has a opportunity to address their concerns. that is our role, we are coordinator facilitator and [inaudible] staff at the port have been very engaged and it has been a pleasure to work with them. >> thank you so much, matt. i will make this presentation with [inaudible] from the engineering division and let me start up the powerpoint presentation. okay. this is

our first opportunity to brief this commission about the national flood insurance program. as matt eluded to, the process started in 2007 where fema published draft flood insurance rate map frz the san francisco area for the first time. san francisco never has been mapped by fema for flood hazards, coastal flood hazard in particular so there were many presentations to the port commission in 2007 and some to the board of supervises and we are at a point in the process now where

we are beginning those efforts again to make sure that the commission tenants and other effected state holders understand the meaning of the map jz the rules that we'll have to follow going forward. so, what is the national flood insurance program? it really consists of 3 parts. building standards that fema requires for construction activities in flood hazard areas, flood information, sharing with the public analysis that fema has done that predicts where flooding will occur and those are on the maps that they publish. and then insurance requirements and the federal government offers a federally backed flood insurance program that is available to participating communities so that really adds up to the flood

risk management strategy that congress envisions with the national flood insurance program. congress acted first in 1968 delegating the lead agency responsibility to fema. when fema goes out and maps flood risk in the local community it sets the clock in motion for a decision as to whether or not to join the national flood insurance program. and to join local community has to adopt a flood plain management ordinance with building standard acceptable to fema and attach to that ordinance on the maps that show the flood hazard-air yuz. san francisco because of the prior mapping erfts made a decision to join the flood insurance program in 2008. the -it was adopted at the time was amended in 2010. we haven't had a lot of flooding in san francisco and haven't

experienced a lot of flood damage along the port and coastal areas, but there are areas inpland where the combined sewer system backed up and residents now can tap into the federal program to purchase flood insurance which is a great benefit to those residents. >> the flood plain management ordinance the port had a lot of participation in the drafting of the ordinance because the concerns they will describe more about. it establishes standard for building and flood plain jz those requirements are reflected in theport building code. they were reexisting of the building code. generally the rule is build above the elevation of base flood elevation so that is the total water level in a hundred year

storm. the city admin strairtd administers the ordinance and [inaudible] recognized in overseeing the port building code. there in that ordinance important variances for historic structures, important to the port because of the historic piers and for functionly dependent use for maritime use the rules are strictest in those zones and a zones which are high hazards. the maps that i mentioned earlier map the location of the flood hazard as they are really a look at current flood risk, it isn't looking forward to sea level rise, the information that we are learning in this will help us understand sea level rise better. they are looking at hundred year storm which is 1 percent chance of happening in any given year. they are also looking at the 500 year storm, which has

a.2 percent chance of happening in any gichben year and much stronger storm. the uses of the maps are to set insurance premeiers, higher has rbd areas, generate higher premiums and also to attach to the flood plain management ordinance. matt mentioned also the schedule. fema issued the pleliminary flood insurance map sfr san francisco in november. we are in a protest period right now . they are getting ready to publish the existence of the map in federal register and that along with the local newspaper notice will trig ar90 day formal appeal period. we will talk about issues we may want to engage in that period and flood insurance rate maps will be effective in mid-2017. i'll

turn it over to [inaudible] now. >> president adams and commissioners. my name is [inaudible] assistant [inaudible] principle of the port. thank you brad, for explaining a lot of terms so that makes my presentation easier. as brad pointed out, in 2007 for the first time in ports history, fema came up with a draft flood state map. [inaudible] which didn't consider [inaudible] flood protection, structures such as [inaudible] also the ports historic sea wall and a

wharf structure. [inaudible] also known as the fema [inaudible] based on comments submitted by the port and the city. latest draft maps which were issued by the fema in november last year now recognizes the [inaudible] provided by the break water structures. a number of areas, for example [inaudible] finishermans wharf and south beach harbor are less [inaudible] fema has also indicated they are willing to consider the raise of flood protection [inaudible] sea wall if we can get the sea wall section certified by submitting the calculation and

analysis that supports sea wall can withstand the wave and [inaudible] louds. also, it is high enough-[inaudible] for a majority of the sea wall section the top of the sea wall is higher than the base accept for some exceptions . one exception is along the sea wall section at pier 14 where you get annual flooding. the water tops over, so the port is working with a consultant to prepare a package which includes the coastal analysis and alsoa analysis that shows sea wall and the wharf are strong enough to withstand. [inaudible] we are working with matt hen sons office to get fema's

feedback about our approach whether they would like something else. based on their feedback we will update our packets and once we find something which is acceptable to fema we'll try to submit it before the end of the appeal period. so, all the structures in the flood plain are subject to the fema regulations. these reguless are also part the [inaudible] building code. this slide which applies to new construction fema [inaudible] they do not allow any new construction on the [inaudible] high tide. if it is a [inaudible] and also coastal

[inaudible] if you are in a mapped [inaudible] zone which is high flood area you cannot have new construction unless it supports maritime function or water dependent use. this slide applies to the existing piers. most of the existing piers we are allowed to do improvements and repairs and the repairs and improvements which exceeds 50 percent of the market value of thstructure, we are required to xum ply with the elevation requirements for fema regulations and for the building code and also the flood proofing requirements. there are certain structures which brad pointed

out, historic structure jz structures supporting the maritime and water dependent use, they are not required to comply with the requirements. also, the structure has to have 4 recalls walls and roof on the top. i would like to opponent out one structure at pier [inaudible] doesn't have structure on the top so it isn't insureable structure but if we try to build something on the top it may consider a new structure and then we believe at this time we will be allowed to do a new [inaudible] supports anything other than maritime use or water dependent use. so, we are exploring these issues and also seeking the fema feedback to see how we can -if in the future you

want to do anything on the top of pier 32 how we can accomplish that. another example is [inaudible] i think it could be considered existing use and any improvement all you need to do is elevate the structure or do flood proofing and i dont see problems in pursuing those projects. so, next i will try to explain some the features in the fema flood maps. fema mapping for based on the flood hazard which delineates extent of flooding

in a hundred year flood. it is a flood with 1 percent inward chance. i would also delineatearea subject to 500 flood. [inaudible] during 100 year flood event are called a [inaudible] as explained in the slide. subject to high velocity wave action and storm wave heights greater than 3 feet are mapped at a v zone. [inaudible] subject to 1 percent flooding with waves less than 3 feet are designated a zone. flood rate maps also show the base flood elevation, that is the elevation of the

water expected during a hundred year flood event. the total [inaudible] includes not only the storm surge but also the height of the wind driven waves, which mostly comes from the southeast directions. this slide summarizes the entire-we have like several panels for the fema map. this slide tries to capture the entire set of maps in one slide. one thing i would like to point out, as you can see, the dark blue is a v zone and the light blue is a zone. there is a brown colored area is 500

area subject to flooding with 500 year flood event. in 2007 when they came up with the flood maps tide waterfront was dark blue. since then based on our appeals and comments they listeninged to us and they updated their analysis and it is much better than what we had in 2007, so it is a good progress. [inaudible] work with fema to kind of see if we can certify other structures like sea wall and the wharf structure that ties to the sea wall. this slide is another interesting slide which compares the pier deck elevations with the base flood elevation. as you can see, the most of the piers at

this moment are out of the base flood elevations. and we have about 12 to 18 inches of the [inaudible] is the difference between the top deck and base flood elevation. under climate adaptation perspectives most of the piers have 12 to 18 inches of the sea board left. it looks like the water will be over the deck. when we talk about the climate [inaudible] these maps and graphs are helpful to understand how much time we have left. also like to point out the stretch of the waterfront from pier 26 up to pier

28. as for fema, the pier deck elevation is below the base flood elevations. they [inaudible] under water. any type of project we propose to do we have to elevate the deck. that is the only way to make it work, otherwise the most of the projects in that section of the waterfront-elevating the deck i dont know , it may cost tons of money and the money will be feasible or not thats not something i'm sure of at this moment. here is a interesting slide, this shows the low lying areas along the waterfront. once again, when we talk about the climate adap

tation strategies the strategies should attack these areas first which will buy us time. these areas include areas along mission creek [inaudible] and also one stop near pier 14 and i believe the one area near pier 15 also. next i will go through some slides which gives you some idea of the amount of [inaudible] we have for some key piers. what did i do? --the first one, pier 1, this is mapped at a a zone in fema

flood maps and the dark blue color shows the high water which is about 6.2 feet, the tide level that you see on a day to day basis, that's the deep blue and the light blue shows the fema based flood elevation. you can see the deck elevation is about 1.7 feet above the base flood elevation so we have quite some time before it will be subject to flooding during the hundred year event due to sea level rise. >> king tides, right? >> king tide, want to make sure the king tide is below the base flood elevations. usually when you

talk about king tide we are talking about the flood elevation this could be something of 7 and a half feet, but base flood elevation is 10 to 12 feet. usually we don'tee the hundred year flood. it is like a earthquake, we never see the earthquake which i think some people say 1906 [inaudible] we never see the [inaudible] but it could happen. especially with global warming and climate change it could become more frequent. with pier 29 we also have 1.6 [inaudible] and the next two slides, this is the area which one the low lying areas in mission creak ek. pier 27 is a map in a v zone

which is high hazard coastal zone and we have a lot of [inaudible] base flood elevation, so it looks like [inaudible] by 2050, this could be subject to the [inaudible]00 year flood event. pier [inaudible] is already under water. so, just to summarize my presentation, new constructions are not allowed on the sea water in high tide in a v zone and coastal a zone. i hand this over to brad which will go over a few remaining slides and then at the end of the presentation i'll be

available along with brad to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you so much. just as reminder we have there variance procedures for our historic piers and maritime uses that we can rely on and all of the issues we talked about we are now in a place where fema is publishing the maps and have a lot of specialist available to communities to help navigate the implementation #3r5uss process so we'll engage with fema ovthe coming weeks and months. just insurance, this is another component of the program. flood insurance becomes mandatory under certain circumstances which fema maps special flood hazard areas whether or not local communities join the national flood insurance program, so

there is the federally backed insurance. it generally subsidized product but congress is trying to move away from the subsatize and encourage more private and self insurance. there is a published flood insurance manual that shows premiums higher in high hazard areas, but there may be some breaks for structures built not substantially improved before 1982 and a lot of our piers are a lot older than 1982, so-an important issue for us is that the law requires federally backed and regulated lendsers to require flood insurance when they make loans so that may have implication for lending in the development project context and

that is something we'll get a lot about and report back to you on. matt is a insurance expert and wim help with that research. so, just in closesing next steps we feel a obligation to reach out as quickly as possible to port tenants in the special flood hazard areas particular those on long term ground leases so we can explain the public process and how fooengage and what we are doing about it. as [inaudible] mentioned we are doing analysis about piers. we think many piers are above the base flood elevation. could they be remapped on the map so they are not shown in flood hazard areas? it is something that boston pursued and we hope we can copy. we are going to meet with fema regularly to discuss the appeal with matt's help. we

will research those insurance option squz come back to you before the appeal period is closed to report back on all of our learnings and i do want to say the city administrator office has a ton of information on the website about the flood insurance program. the link is here at the bottom of the slide if you want to find ought out here and we are here to answer questions you may have. >> any public comment? seeing none public comment is closed. commissioners. >> i learned more than i think i will ever hear about flood insurance. i will say i got a little lost in the weeds there. what i would like to know and know you are not asking for approval from us is what do we think the outcome the study will be and whether it will change. whether we are-i guess there was mention towards the ends about the impact of

sea level rise which i think is more realistic to us that we need to figure out and may not have been taken into consideration in previous reports. i hope we can get back-i'm not sure i understand we are doing this like ground zero studying everything, what change we expect out of this and you say there is a appeal process so i want to know what the key take away after hearing all this really are. >> key take aways are fema is publishing the maps whether the city likeatize or not and those maps will get attach today the cities flood plain management ordinance and a hazard area shown on the maps are going to impose new regulations on new construction or repairs to existing facilities that are at least half the cost of the value of

those facilities. generally you have to build above the base flood elevation. two, people need to by insurance in certain circumstances where there is a family backed loan there is a requirement to get flood insurance and we need to work with people to make sure we understand all the options available in the market for that. and three, we communicate important flood risk to the general public. there are low liar areas thatd could be subject to flooding in a very severe storm and it is important duty to let people know about that hazard. >> so, you mentioned and showed maps of where we think there are existing flood risk that is already in the existing flood plain that is already there that fema already recognizes. [inaudible] do we automatically tie this

because i'm sure commissioner kounalakis will mention something but this is standard if you are on a flood plain you must have insurance and that is a standard real estate term. [inaudible] when we do our outreach there won't be a surprise, it just says we may have added a few more into that because most of it is already mapped hopefully. >> so, the city flood risk map attached to the ordinance don't show most of the piers in a flood area largely because we know the decks are higher than the base flood elevation. there are a few shore line areas that are mapped as flood hazard areas, so what would be considered a hazardous area is expanding under the fema maps. we do have lease insurance requirements and also have the ability with the risk manager to wave those insurance requirements where there is no commercially reasonable

insurance product available. i didn't get into it because we are learning more about the insurance market but the national flood insurance program typically doesn't provide insurance product for structures in high hazard areas. so the federally backed insurance is accept for the pre-1982 structures, not a option for many people so that is why we have to do more research with matt, but we have disclosure language and are addressing this in the leases today and revising. >> i speak from a residence standpoint because [inaudible] all over bank physical you don'ts have flood insurance on lending into homes in flood plains so it is very straight forward and mandatory. i dont think that is news. the question is whether we expect a lot more and guess what you are telling me is a certain percentage to be more mapped into had

flood plain that before and secondly, more importantly we have to figure out sea level rise figures in this. >> yes, we do. >> would that be a good take away >> that would be a good take away. the final take away is we have a disagreement whether many piers buv the base line elevation should be mapped as a flood hazard area. that is a important issue we need to resolve. >> thank you for the presentation. i too learned more than i ever knew about flood insurance. in terms of and i know we are still looking at options and analyzing it, is there increase what the impact would be in some the changes and zones in terms of our cost if any for insurance or are we already carrying insurance that would have covered this and likewise impact on any tenants or perspective tenants

and impact on persective products. >> i may not remember all of those and may need help but in termsf of our own insurance we carry property insurance under the cities [inaudible] but believe insurance has a exclusion for flood damage. what's that? okay. >> can you repeat that? >> in the [inaudible] program there is a supplement that covers some amount of flood damage but not a lot. so, we don't have comprehensive flood insurance program today for the facilities that are in port ownership oppose d to long term ground lease. your next- >> next is just any added impact on our tenants? >> we think there will be a added impact in terms of cost of insurance because these are now high hazard areas

so premiums are higher for tenant who choose to buy flood insurance or required to because they are seeking a loan from the bank. that will be a important part of our outreach to tenants is explaining the options available in the market place. >> and then any projects that would have already been cont plating this added insurance coverage that are proposed, ie, pier 70, mission rock, any of the other development sites or would those have all cont plated? >> i think it will be new for any pier project, i think it is where we will see the impact of this. [inaudible] sit down with the development partners and started some of the outreach to select development partner to help work with their brokers to understand what is available. as to the land side, we don't see as many impacts.

there will be one or two locations that will be impacted by there rules but pier 70 and 337 we are talking about raising the sites so way can remap the sites out of a flood hazard area as they address sea level rise. >> lastly just in terms of timing on determining whether we do any kind of potential appeal, what is the timing on that sph ? >> let me pull that slide back up. so, we think that fema will put a notice in the federal register in march publish in local paper beginning of april that will start a 90 day appeal period. we'll work with sthem well

before those dates come to pass, consulting with them about the studies underway and somef oour preliminary findings about the height of piers. >> but you will bring it back to us when we determine [inaudible] which someone shows up first thing in the morning can it be out of energy? in other words, what is that proportion to how sunny does it have to be in a 24 hour period in order for cars to charge over time? >> i don't know the exact answer. they say you can charge up to 100 electric miles a day. over cast days will reduce that some. there is no indication that usage at night will fully deplete the charger for the

people who arrive in the morning. we can look into that, but it raising another question which is where we deploy these and the initial instinct is it we get one deploy at pier 3. port has 2 electric vehicles un one is nissan lease and use it at pier 50 as proof of concept for electric vehicle on the waterfront but cant use it at pier 3 because we don't have the infrastructure. this is tech nology that doesn't require hooking up to the grid so our instinct if we get 1 we put it at pier 3 and a second we may put in a more public area and may use [inaudible] we would decide as a team. >> thank you, that is a wonderful report and we [inaudible] this is absolutely wonderful. just wondering are there cost associated with

receiving this gift? >> there are. they are not mandatory. the manufacturer requested that we purchase their maintenance contract which is together with a remote monitoring program about 950 dollar per year and talkedwit the director of maintenance taking over the maintenance fee and the manufacturer prefers we continue to use their services and the reason is it is a special technology. we have a pretty amazing crew of maintenance folks so we'll look into that. minimum we would use the remote monitoring management system which is about 360 dollars a year and possibly use the maintenance contract itself. >> how long does it last? what is the

life expectancy? >> typically solar panels have a life span of 20 plus years. the other ones did and new ones as well as long givety. i guess the long jev teis 20 plus years but it is a new technology and don't exactly know. >> thank you. >> commissioner woo ho. >> i think questions have been asked but to follow up on what would the rules be? is it you can only be in the spot for so many hours so someone else can come in? >> on the port it may be one thing but a public parking lot how will the

public know-is it who is there first and there for had whole day? how do we develop rules? >> there were rules during the driving sunshine program and the parking operators were helpful and the rule is 2 hour maximum charging and their were helpful insureing everybody abided by that. this may help expand our electric fleet so we'll look into that as well. electric vehicles are a ideal technology that the port staff do. you don't have to go so many miles you exhaust the range of the vehicle so it may be something we'll do in the future. if we put it in a public place we have a model we can look to. >> when you mention it romote monitoring and maintenance cost is that per vehicle or total for two? >> the charger. >> it st. per vehicle?

per station. >> that is correct. per station. >> that would inkmental if we added more. kwrrks that is correct >> what is the understanding if we are interested in more not just a donation is there discussion how that would work? >> i have been initial contact with the sales manager for envision but haven't discussed that. purchasing others. >> maybe we should have a understanding at least in terms of do they expect there is something following that they wont be happy with 3 things sitting in san francisco. >> i don't know. they were very happy to have them on display and whether they will expect we will purchase one- >> there is no strings attached which i understand which is fine, but

their are a business so they won't saying 3 for the city is their goal ult mltly so we should also say just to for ourselves understand if we did want to add under what terms? >> okay. >> commissioner katz. >> thank you. most of my questions were answered. in terms of just generation so you said it provides for 100 electric miles, so much with each car taking the charge it seems that would drain it pretty significantly if they did a full charge? and then will we have any come up with some kind of restrictions or determination which cars with use the charger and how what type of priority? >> we should ask all those

questions. if we work with the pier 3 model where we know that the parking operator there also has several electric vehicles not relate today the port and may want to share that with port vehicles and want to establish rules for that. there seem to be mow problems with the model from driving on sunshine so imagine we start with the 2 hour limit but if we want to adjust that we could. >> is there any backup exclusively relying on solar generation? >> there is no backup. >> if i may, one of the initiatives of the mayors office is build capacity for electric charging vehicles which is quhie we participated on sunshine. is a excellent technology to get

to zero emissions but the infrastructure isn't there to build [inaudible] the price point is still very high so as we dwem infrastructure and are part of that initiative in putting charging stations and purchasing our electric vehicles we hope to participate in the effort to build market share for this very clean technology and that is mayors office initiative he rolled out to the department. >> [inaudible] this is a area i work in so quite familiar with it and try to expand efforts to put in more charging stations up and down the state with longer and faster charges. that is another question, the speed in which the charges-so they can plug in for 2 hours is there a effort to put in the faster charging stations so the next step, do we know that? >> you mean the later models?

i dont know i can look into that. i read it is building more advertising capacity so you get more revenue on your investment. >> do we know who else provides this technology? >> they claim they are unique. >> that is exciting and glad we are participating so thank you. >> [inaudible] i remember the song walk in the sunshine and we talk about driving in sunshine and like all the partners involved. [inaudible] this is getting out front and totally in sport support of that and think i heard from all the commissioners this is something that [inaudible] it is good to see how it works out and think starting at pier 3 is a good example and you can always come back if they don't think

it is working and we can look at it but think we should give it a try so you have my support. that being said, resolution number 1610 all in favor say aye. >> aye. >> opposed? >> resolution passes >> can we get a report how it is going? >> absolutely. >> maybe 6 months or 9 months. >> of course. thank you. >> item 11 a, informationalpriseentation on contracting activity for first and second quarters of fy 2015/16 july 1, 2015 through december 31, 2015. >> good afternoon commissioners. boris [inaudible]er ports contract administration with finance and

administration division. the matter before you is informational overview of the ports contract activity report for 2015/16 and covers july 1 to december 31, 2015. during the presentation i will review the number of local business enterprise firms that are certified and go over new contracts awarded during the reporting period and discuss payments made on open and active contracts. i'll also talk about the local hire program and upcoming contract opportunities. the local business enterprise or lbe program is designed to level the playing field for small local businesses bidding on city

contracts. gain advantages such as bid discount and subcontracting goals when bidding on city contracts. the contract monitoring division certifies firms as small local business and classify as minority business enterprises, women business enterprises, other business enterprises and non profit business enterprises. there are 1273 local business firms in the sitee. minority are further classified by ethnicity. the [inaudible] in october. about 45 percent asian maench, 25 percent african american, 23 latino [inaudible] during this reporting period we had a decrease in new crarkt awards.

wegenyerally award between 5 and 6 million dollars worth of contracts in a 2 quarter period. this period we had 6 contracts tote aelg half a million dollars, of those 5 were new professional service contracts, one was a new construction contract, all were awarded under the directors delegated authority so none are subcontracting goals. we did successfully award 3 of the 6 contracts as micro lbe set asides. these are small informal contracts set aside for competition only among the smallest lbe firms mpt during the reporting period 76 percent of dollars awarded went to lbe firms. details about individual contracts and awards can be found in attachment one of the report. this is a look at awarded contract. they are broken iby lbe type. the quarter of the awards

went to non lbe firms. women [inaudible] the minority business enterprise is represented by one award to a subcontractor on our construction contract. constitute 32 percent of the awards. obe firms received 14 percent new contract awards. it was a small dollar amount, but we did succeed awarding 76 percent to local firms. looking at the payments we had over 4 million dollars paid on open and active contracts during the reporting period. construction and as needed contracts exceeded average lbe subcontracting goals, professional service contracts fell below the mark. the scope of sources on the financially advisory contract didn't have lbe work during the first half 06 the year but anticipate that will increase

in the second half of the year and contracts will fall in line in terms of the lbe subcontracting amount. overall the average subcontracting goal is 14 percent and we are at 18 percent in payments. it is important to note that each of the contract categories identified in the table are made up of many individual contracts with their own individual subcontracting goals. there are a few exceptioness thrks dredging contract, the financial advasery contract are not meeting the lbe goal but mest of the other contracts are exceeding or meeting their contract monitoring division goals. details on all current contracts in the lbe performance are also included in your report attachment. this is another view of the breakdown by lbe type for payments. the bulk went to non lbe firms. we had a small amount of payments compared to other years or other

reporting periods. 800,000 or 40 percent of the non lbe payment went out on the dredging contract. lbe received 51 percent of payment. awards and payments made in the first half of the fy-year compare today the previous 2 fy years. yoi can see there is two awards and fewer payments, however the lbe percentage did increase. switching to the local hire ordinance, construction projects over a million dollars are subject to the cities local hire ordinance. since the inception of the ordinance there ar14 port projects subject to the program. all 14 met the cities local hire mandates. there were fourp open projects subject to

the ordinance during this reporting period, all 4 have sense closed and each met their local hire requirement. in the case of the blue [inaudible] contract, [inaudible] granted a conditional waver for providing offsite hiring credits on oorkt city project. we didn't have a lot of new contract activity and will be busy in the coming months. the as needed engineering rfq was issued last friday, 6 million dollar contract 20 percent lbe goal due mid-april. rfq is coming in the next two weeks, that is a 3 million dollar contract also with a 20 percent lbe goal on the construction side we have a microlbe set asideoon the street now valued around

$250,000. in the spring we have a report modular rest room contracts and that is a million dollar contract. the lbe goal isn't set yet and that is a example of few contracts and there will be many more coming and all the contracts are rfp's and rfq are advertised on the ports web seat on the bhz tab. in conclusion, during the recording period we had a smaller volume of contract but 76 dollars went to lbe, [inaudible] stayed with local business, all the projects meet the local hire requirements. we have a number of upcoming lbe opportunities that concludes my presentation and available to answer any questions you have. >> is there public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> thank you very much for this report, it is very clear and appreciate

it. i want to understand, is women business owners a subcategory within lbe? >> [inaudible] >> i'm glad to see in terms of 29 percent and last quarter but [inaudible] when we look at the historical amount of payment said it looks like it is a tiny segment, only 2 percent so is there anything we do to sort of try to reach out more to women owned business enterprises to in the future perhaps make this more of a goal for us to aimprove upon? >> the programs are race and gender neutral however when there are opportunities we e-mail, call and notify all lbe certified >> that is why i asked whether women owned business enterprises were a conscious subsegment but you say we cannot list it

>> or give preference. but we can report out. >> okay. i understand that. i appreciate we exceeded the 20 percent goal we set and know commissioner brandon will be happy to talk about this since this is more of her passion for the commission. i just hope we can see more diversification going forward. whatever we can do unconsciously to diversify would be good. >> commissioner katz >> thank you for the report also. there is always see some improvement-significant improvement or should say my understanding is we are doing better than most other city departments and we set higher goals for ourselves than mandated but do

you see areas we can improand thoughts and suggestions how we can improve some the numbers? >> i think that is a great question. a lot is dependent on who is certified and increasing the number of certified firms increases lbe participation and subcontracting goals set on specific contracts. for our parking rfp that will come before you next month, we went out and did canvased and [inaudible] encouraged firms to become certified. we had 4 new firms certified and increased the pool by 40 percent. i think those are areas where we have time to look at a specific scope and encourage local firms to beam certified. it increases the overall subcontracting amount and participation

so think that is a primary focus. >> i was following up on that and following up on a successful-we had a couple years back to meet with representatives from the various different groups representing different communities, prams it may be time to do something along those lines gaen following up on take agplay from the success we had on the parking contract and see if we can do more outreach but perhaps set something up to make it easier to sign up. i know that is a barrier, often it is not a horrible process but it is not easy as well and it may be helpful if we can figure out a way bringing other folks in from the city and perhaps setting up something here at the port where we bring in the firms and encourage them to sign up and get certified and go through the process and have staff on hand

to help facilitate so beyond doing the outreach and urging the businesses become certified but if there is something we can do to provide affirmative support on that front so a combination of outreach and support services. >> one of the professional service contracts we did award in this period went to a lbe for that specific purpsh on a construction contract. we awarded to the [inaudible] group to do education and outreach related to construction contracts over the next 2 years so they will go out and encouraging firms to become certified, meetings and helping us outreach weilated to construction opportunities. >> i think that the outreach efforts you bring up commissioner katz were very successful for us. not only did we let the chambers and local business know of our interest, we heard

about their problems with the process. they try today bid one time before and gave up. we got good feedback how important it is to sit down and tell them how their application faired in the review so they don't lose interest and continue to bid on projects. we have done more partners work. the contract monitoring division launched a partnering program so small businesses can team up with larger firms and the most important think that i think you are hearing from borisis when we know a opportunity is coming up we take advance time to do outreach and remind firms not now registered to get registered and compete for the work and that is where we will see a difference in the numbers if we have advance time to do that work. >> kudos to those efforts and

if there is anything we can do to further advance-[inaudible] >> i have no questions, just neuro presentation. thank you. >> commissioner brandon. >> i'm very happy with this. [inaudible] following commissioner woo hoand katz comment. i'm happy we are doing more outreach to wem squn minorities and hopefully that will attract more firms to participate in the contracting and pure curement but i think it is absolutely wonderful so we are exceeding all our goal squz doing so well so congratulations and thank you very much. >> i have to say thank you too and appreciate the presentation and i know from the time i have been on the commission how near and dear

this has been to commissioner brandon being on the commission for 18 years and i think that the port is really tried to reach out more to the community and have more diversity and have to keep pushing. i sauls say sometimes some the smaller firms have got to team up with the bigger firms and learn how the process happens and sometimes you don't get it the first time but got to keep trying and need to understand how the game works and keep coming and to me i believe that comp tense is above all. you have to be competent and do the thing and turn it in on time and have to know what you are doing. like i say, a lot the bigger firms have been doing it for years and years and maybe a minority firm you are just learning so i think the programs that we have i enjoyed when the chamber of commerce got together and they were informed. i think you did outreach in the community so appreciate the effort. we have come along way and will continue so

want to absolute you and say thank you. >> thank you very much. >> [inaudible] come back in 6 month tooz report on the evars charging stations and success. [inaudible] >> just looking at the calendar and dont remember when this topic was brought up before how we lelft it for the future but wonder at some point not to calendar it, but pier 32 at some point we would like to know where staff stands with what to do with those piers. >> anything we like on the calendar? >> commissioner [inaudible]

>> i have question you can tell me and maybe the other commissioners may know more than me, but i remember when this [inaudible] going down [inaudible] looking at going to pier 32 and it was like no opposition. it was like it was something that could have happened and didn't happen. i understand he was going to chicago and the voters [inaudible] i heard they may be goeing to oakland. i live in the neighborhood, not being partial or nothing but it is just sitting there all most 100 million dollars that is a lot of money, but i mean would george, would they still be [inaudible] i think she reached out. is it still up for [inaudible] maybe i should ask my

fellow commissioners, is this something that wouldn't work. commissioner woo ho said something, maybe reach out to them. that is my thoughts, that's all. >> i think that is something that probably needs to be coordinateed with the mayors office. i'm sure the mayors office is happy to answer if they thought there was any [inaudible] >> just going to mention because it isn't on the agenda it isn't appropriate to have a discussion today but if you like to have a discussion you should [inaudible] >> [inaudible] put the pier on the agenda and will do so. i think the pier-we'll put it on the agenda and talk about it and go from there. >> thank you. >> move to reconvene in closed session. >> so moved. >> all in favor say aye.

>> aye >> opposed? >> back in closed se move to reconvene in open session. >> so moved. >> all in favor say aye. >> opposed? >> move to not disclosez anything discussed in closed session >> second. >> all in favor say aye. >> president adams i have one item under new business and that is pier 80. remember we had a presentation in december regarding pier 80 and pier 29 to use as temporary facilities for homeless and that was only in the case of all other beds in the city being used and i keep reading these newspaper articles about trying to make pier 80 a permanent shelt frr the homeless so if

we can get a update on that that would be wonderful >> anymore? with that i entertain a motion to adjourn. >> so movaled. >> all in faiv say aye. >> aye >> opposed? >> adjourned, 5: 58. [ meeting adjourned] >> i would like to call to order, the finance committee to

order. our chair, spurp mar will be here shortly, and i'm lon down breed and we are going to get this started. to my left supervisor norman yee and jane, kim and we should call the record. >> commissioner breed? snechlt here. >> compos? >> absent. >> kim >> present. >> mar? snechlt absent. >> yee. >> here. >> could we approve the minutes, without objection, those are approved. >> we will take the public comment. when public comment has been completed. >> all right. let's get to item number, 3.

and we are now joined by commissioner mar. who is the chair of the committee. >> item three. state and federal leg sislativep date, this is an action item. >> welcome. >> happy to be here today. i thought that i would give this a brief, overview of where we are at the capitol and where we are. >> could you identify yourself? >> i am sorry, yes. >> mark watts, advocate for the transportation, authority in sacramento. the legislature welcomed the new assembly speaker yesterday, when he was sworn in and he was elected in january and so he is now, fully in charge of the transition has been completed. and it was a very, very, happy ceremony. and i think that he has filled out priorities for his term. and i think that they will suit

the state very well. beyond that, where we are in the legislative process for the capitol, is on a sheet of paper here that i can't seem to find. >> darn it. i apologize, here we go. the end of february was the last day to introduce measures and you will see that reflected in the matrix today, where we have gotten about 40 bills, that we reviewed and made recommendations on. and i will come back to that in a moment. but next major deadline for legislation would be april, 22nd. for the bills that were introduced in late february. and they have to clear the first committ committee or they are dead or they are dead for the remainder of this session. there is a spring recess in the midst of this process, on march 17th, and march 28, they will be

in recess, so the hearing for these measures will be very, very, heavily attended. and very, heavy agenda. s and as they try to get through all of these by the end of april. in terms of note, on transportation, funding, which is a strong interest around the state right now, senator bell, has a measure in the special session and he intends to amend and we had hoped to see that on monday or tuesday at this point in time, his office says that he is refining some of the amendments, his amendments will add significant amounts of funding and finance for transit projects. even though the main balance of the bill will be focusing on the state and local, road repairs. there is an indication that the administration may elect to move on with a more stream lined

proposal in about $2 billion range, that would not require a super majority vote in the legislature, we are trying to understand if that is something that they are working on. but there are indications that there are, or there is a preference to try to get a small amount of funding for state and local road repairs, rather than make the push for the larger amount, that is represented in senator bell's bill and the assembly member's frasier's bill. and i will be keeping you abreast of the developments as we go through the next couple of weeks. in terms of the matrix of the legislation, there are 13 specific recommendations that we are making to you. one is a changed position, and then the other 12 are new bills for your consideration. and in addition, there is like 32, or 33 other measures that we have recommended watch for one reason or another, and they have may have applied to a policy

area, where there is not much flesh on the bill at this point in time and many cases there are spot bills on topics that may become of interest. and so rather than trying to find them again, when they get amended and we put them on the watch and that allows us to monitor that flux more evenly. and so if you would like, i can cover the 13 measures, starting with the first one, which is ab 1550 on page six. this is a position we had recommend that opposed in the past. and we are recommending watch. and it deals with disadvantaged communities in the cap and trade area. it did not change for the proportions of the projects or the funding that is required to be spent in the disadvantaged communities and as you may realize, or you may recall from the first go around of the money and the disadvantaged communities in the region did

not fare well because of the way that is designed, and this bill, takes another step and leads the current, 25 percent requirement in place, but as the requirement and 25 percent of the funding must be for projects that benefit, low income households. and so, what we have or why we are recommending moving to a wasatch front rather than oppose. we would like to continue working on the definition of disadvantaged community more in the background and working with there is a green gas reduction, and working to see if we can improve the disadvantaged definition. and we are asking for your changed to a watch position. >> i just wanted to thank you so much for being sensitive to the low income communities. and in some ways whether they are in the san francisco bay region or east la, so that we are taking in some ways a regional and even a state wide approach to equity but policies,

but thank you. >> and we have seen a number of these types of measures over the last couple of years, and we are recommending oppose on ab 1768, and on page 10 of the matrix, and essentially, it directs, the, remainder of the high speed, rail bonds to be used to pay off the, outstanding high speed, rail bonds, effectively, turn nighting the stream for the project and so as a consequence, we are recommending oppose. and in the several more and i will cover them briefly, because i don't think that there is going to be concern about the recommendation and we are recommending oppose on 1866 on page, 12. and this would redirect, the remainder of the high speed, rail bonds to the state water project funding and again, that is a major change in the high speed rail.

and we think that the policy of this before you is for the high speed rail program. and the next measure, ab1886, we are recommending a support and i have to tell you that i have to draw a diagram, three or four times before i fully understood this one. and essentially, there is an exemption provided within the e seqa, where 25 percent of the projects are no further than a half mile. this takes it to 50 percent, so no more than 50 percent of the land mass, is an expansion of the sequa expansion for these types of project and we are recommending a support position. ab 1964, on page, 14 is another, and a long series of bills, over the last couple of years, this one is little bit different than the ones that we have seen

before. this simply extends the white sticker, authorization, to access hov lanes, and the white stickers are pure, battery and electrics and the natural gas vehicles as distinguished from the greenstickers, when are the hybrids. and so this, applies only to the white sticker vehicles, but they are growing in sales, and the population throughout the state, is growing. and the concern is, that allowing, the continued and expanding access of the hov lane and so we recommend an opposed position. >> ab2034, on page 15, recommending the support position to you. and more than a decade ago, the federal government, authorized the delegation, to state transportation departments. to over see nefa, of the reviews, within their state. and that was enacted and it has

been continued once and this simply continueses that authorization at the state level to allow cal transin circumstances to administer and over see both nepa and sequa documents but i will not comment on the effectiveness, but it is a continuation of an existing policy. and what will bring the high speed rail program to an end. it says that no more bonds could be sold. >> and it will have to go back to the voters and so there is a double layer of protection against this becoming effective. because i don't see this measure moving forward but that one is found on page 15, if you would like more details or more information. we are also recommending support on ab, 2126, on page, 16. of the matrix. and this applies, to the state's current authority to utilize construction manager, and general contractor and

authority, for administering projects, large scale, complex, projects and it will be coming to another bill, similar to this in a moment that applies to you, about you this applies, only to the state. the state has the authority to do six and they have occupied the six slots in statute, and this will extend it to 12 for cal trans, to administer. >> mr. prazir is the author. and the state, highway and protection program is the main program or the main, financing source at the state level for the projects that are approved or we construct that provide, major maintenance and reconstruction, as well as the operational funding to operate the state highway system. and the funding is generally, only available to the cal trans. and the ctc and the annual report, recommended the expanding a one small provision

within this program to allow the operations, to also have capitol improvements. so previously, up to now, the operations will be you know, widening the guard rail, and you know, expanding tauxiliary lane, and this allows for the capitol projects to qualify for the same projects. this bill, ab2374, was introduced by mr. chui. and we are recommending that the transportation authority not only support but register as sponsors of this measure, because it came from staff conversations with the author's office. and it would uniquely expand, or authorize, some what uniquely authorize, that the ramps, for the -- island, program and the ramps that connect to the bridge system, would be eligible

utilize the cmgc authority just like we, or just like cal transhas now for a certain number of projects. and i would specifically be targeted towards some of the complex engineering and construction that is anticipated for phase two of the ramp project. and i have been doing a lot of due diligence with state engineers and other folks who have had concerns in the passed about the similar authority. senator bell, has introduced sb 1066 which is on page, 35, and we are recommending a support for this measure, it does not appear to do much on the surface. and it is more of a place holder sponsored by the -- and what it does is it provides in the state law, the authorization for the new fast act revenues approved by the federal government and by congress to flow to the regular programs at the state level that

we anticipate them to. and in essence, it does not really change the law, but it is, and it, it would, actually be operative, if it were to pass. the game plan, however, is for the self-help counties to have, a joint, jointly, jointly managed bill that they can work on in case there are wrinkles in the fast act that the people have not anticipated and some of the funding formulas. so this is to preserve their option is to move the legislation. and senator glazier from the east bay has introduced us, and we are recommending the support position and it is on page, 35. the mtc, has commute benefits ordinance, and they have the authority to adopt a commute, benefits ordinance, and that is soon to expire. and this was, simply, extend that authorization,

indefinitely, and consequently we are recommending support. and the final measure for your consideration, is sb, 1259, by senator runner, and on it is page, 36 of the matrix and we are recommending oppose. this picks up the idea that have been attempted several decade or more to allow veterans with special, decals and the ability to access toll facilities and there has been similar, authorizations in other states, where we have, and the reports are that, it can result in fraud. and associated decreases in the toll revenue. so, it is, mainly an issue of equity. with that i bring my oral part of the presentation open for questions if you have. and i will try to answer them. i am still trying to digest all of the bills.

there is more than 1,000 in each house. >> so questions colleagues? >> i wanted to say on the sb1128, by glazer that the bay air quality district, and the community benefits policies and give many options or a couple of options to employers, and i think that is a really important one in insuring that we are reducing greenhouse gas and trips as possible. and the coalition that are really trying hard on automatic speed enforcement. and the speeding cameras. but i know that some communications with some of chui's office were fruitful up until the last minute but we are hopeful that there is legislation that comes forward, but it is a little disappointing but i want to give a shout out for the work behind the teams on those efforts but thank you so much, mr. watts for the great presentation. and commissioner yee? >> thank you, for your

presentation, and i know that you mentioned some bills may not have all of the details, necessary, or whatever, and so you are watching it. and one of them may be, under or possibly may be ab 1677. >> on page, 9. or 17? >> i guess that what i would like to do is to move that to suggest that we urge you to move it from watch to support. and the reason for this, is because this is a bill that, so that the board of supervisors have already passed a resolution to support. and we want to keep it consistent and we want to keep the heat on. and we are actually, my office is working with the senator on this particular bill and we are trying to give them as much information in terms or

suggestions about the bill, as possible. hopefully, we will have some meat on it. >> so, commissioner yee has made a motion to add, ab 1677 from the move from watch to support. is that your motion? >> yeah, this is in regards to the tour buses. in terms of making it possible for local jurisdiction or the local government to have the additional inspectionses as sort of the general idea. >> is there a second on the motion. >> so it is seconded by commissioner, breed. so we are adding 1677, to the action list, presented by mr. watts. any other comments, colleagues? >> let's open this up for public comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to speak? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. and so on the motion to add ab1677, from a watch to a

support, position, could we do that without objection? >> the house has changed. >> so the house has changed. roll call on the motion. >> breed? >> aye. >> campos? >> absent. >> kim. >> aye. >> mar. >> aye. >> yee? >> aye. >> the motion passes. >> and then now on the recommendations on the new bills and the recommended positions can we do that same house, same call? >> yes. >> thank you. >> thank you, so much mr. watts. >> next item? >> item 4, introduction of new items. this is an information item. >> so let's open up this for public comment, anyone from the public that would like to speak? public comment is closed. next item. item 5. ? >> general public comment. >> good morning, commissioners.

(inaudible) trueself or well-being. (inaudible) money, (inaudible) making oneself a well-being. (inaudible)

>> thank you. >> next speaker, anyone else? >> i would like to speak about number, 18, please? if you could go to 18. so i think that we have already handled. >> you might be in the wrong meeting. >> i apologize. >> or actually i am sorry. i apologize. >> i think that the proper time would have been when we were dealing with the legislation. but you could speak on general matters. >> that is fine. >> okay. so seeing no other public comment, we will close public

comment. and mr. stamos next item >> item 6, adjournment. >> thank you for coming today. meeting adjourned. 2, 3, 4. >> good afternoon. welcome to the san francisco planning commission regular hearing for thursday, february 4, 2016,