who helped support the goals -- as identify liaisonned from the committee. and my goals on behalf of the maritime tenant were to assure that the public has -- continued to pay great attention to the value of the industry. and its need to survive on the water front. we were very pleased. the sting longer term leases very important. the -- up to 49-year leases we think that will be very helpful to the industry. the recognition that the need of the industry can't always have the public walking around in the back end of the operations. so we were pleased that -- and i

think this will carry forward with bcdc. we want to share with the public support but that need to be protected. i think overall what was most impressive to me about the plans is seeing the culmination of the process since 1997, when the city barely recognized its connection. but beginning its connection to the port. and over this period of time, 20 years, we now have full -- with the city and the port with the recognition on the bond issue and as a ballot. and we hope this continues as my colleague erin said, the big vision is we need more dollars to support the ports and its implementation for maritime historic preservation and the environment. so it's honored to serve on the committee on part of of the

industry, and we will continue the good work. thank you. >> thank you. is there any other public comment on this item? commissioner katz? >> commissioner katz: thank you. first, if i could just take a moment to have rudy, pia, linda and alice, please just stand up so we can thank all of you. [ applause ] and the other committee members could you all please stand up and join them. [ applause ] really just an extraordinary commitment to the city from the committee members. so i really just want to thank all of you. i certainly feel like it's

already exceeding our expectations for the work product coming from these (e)s and it really was a very dynamic group. i attended some of the meetings and watched many of them online and i'm just -- frankly in awe of the dedication all of you put in and i think just one of the groups -- in what was it, 7 months, met 14 times. that's an amazing commitment to public service. so thank you. and dianne, thank you for your stewardship. i think you have all recognized what an extraordinary team member and leader we have in dianne here. i want to thank you and your staff for -- it really -- it was an extraordinary -- i keep using that word. i can't think of another one at the moment put it really does say it all. effort from so many people..

and i think we all recognize the water front update will have a long-term impact on the future of the city and the waterfront as the initial waterfront plan did in its day. this update will have an impact for decade to come. we really are at an in an inn inflexion point and i recognize the importance of thinking big and dreaming. and yet i recognize constraints. not letting it get so far out there that we couldn't implement it. that's the beauty of that balance, beam people are still encouraged to think big. we still want that. but within some of the twines. i know there are things you would like to do if you had a larger budget. so if you have any of those we

would like to welcome those as well. i know there's a lot that's been said and it's very dense and i'm excited about how this things gets pulled together too. and one of the thing one of the committee members commented on, being a little bit ciloed. this is one of the thing that the efforts of the resiliency group do overlap with everything. it's not resiliency separate from the rest. but resiliency -- in some respects almost a foundation for everything as we move forward. that's been -- i think the hallmark of the city. we have been resilient. we've been through a lot. and that's another example of how we all have to rest on the resiliency efforts. we are facing some new challenges with climate change and sea level rise as well as potential other natural disasters. some man made disasters in

washington. but here we are facing a lot of challenges. and i think resiliency will have to run through all of that. so i think that's something to keep in mind and see how the interplay occurs here. along that front, just specifically -- i don't want to get too much into the weed, and i'm hoping actually that in the future we will be able to have each of the groups as they come and present to us in a bit more details. the recommendations and where they are, and each step. but instead of a large presentation. if we could have an umbrella from the co-chair bus from the resiliency. i think what would be helpful too is guidelines for tenant. it's something that keeps me -- and what i'm concerned about. we think about this for the port

and our efforts but even in our leases we have thought about what do we put in our leases going forward? what do we need from our tenants? i think that may be something to look at, how this can be a useful tool as well for our tenant, for them to consider. one of the other things too, going back again to resiliency and transportation, if we think about what happened in the 1906 earthquake it was the water transit that was there for everyone. so the transportation and resiliency and emergency preparedness. and even land use making sure that we have the resources available. it's all interconnected so i think that's something i do want to bear in mind. i know we've got -- you know for those that don't have a copy of all of it, it's an extensive report. almost slightly over 50 pages

and i would urge everyone to actually read it. so those of you that are watching us, it will be found online. at the sf port.com waterfront/plan/update. but it really is useful reading. so i don't want to go into all the details there but i think it's worth looking at the recommendations. and thinking about where we want to go. going back to the big vision. and this was a group of dedicated san francisco citizens that we all recognize were looking at the future and for those of us up here am i guess what i want to hear from all of you, what were the surprises? good and bad. what keeps you up at night. what are the thing you would want us to most take away from the work that you performed in this process? what we should look at as the next phases come in, what would be most useful.

and i know some -- it was mentioned enforcing it, some of it becomes codified, potentially and others are recommendations to us. so how would you best recommend that this be useful for us so that -- as was pointed out, it's a process -- sort of a living, breathing document that we can continue to use. and it can inform our actions, both as it gets codified but also some of the other comments or represent days agos tha days recommendations that may not be something that would inform us but our decision making process for us to think about. again too, i think as we look at the land use process, i know we've been at the forefront in sustainability, and it was

mentioned. but i think there is -- you know a need to take a look at the interplay and the overlay of sustainability. and again, with the transportation, which it's certainly a part. but also for land use. how that sustainabilities a if he can is going to be playing forward. cruiseship terminal was an example of what can be done. with it being the most sustainable cruiseship terminal -- not hopefully, that it's not the only one like that in the world, that others have followed that example but it really was designed to be one of the greenest, most sustainable facilities. and i know for those of us who have gone to conferences with other points around the world it's a big thing we learned from that project.

and that's something going forward some i think we should accept the recommendations and the recommendations from all the committee members. but most of all -- i will spend a lot of time going back over and over again on these recommendations as we move forward and i guess i would call on the committee members to reach out to you will all of us on the commission if there are thing you think are important to highlight, thing that you want us to be aware of. i would appreciate calls and can't. it would be helpful for things to note. especially as we wait for final product. there are thing that come along and it would be helpful if there are take aways that would come from the committee members but most of all i want to thank the committee members and some committee chairs and the committee chairs and our port staff for moving this project

along. this is really something that will have such a big impact for generations to come. so thank you. commissio commission er woo ho. >> commissioner woo ho: well, that's a tremendous job. you guys have taken a lot of time. and when we first started this i had a lot of trepidation with so many people in the community which we knew had different point of view and to hear what rudy said about the process and in terms of the values that the group was able to maintain in this whole period. we are not short of being vocal in san francisco, as we know. we are very diverse. and everybody has their own voint of view. the amazing dedication and values you main taped, i just want to say i really respect that you all maintain those

values and that process is my first comment. second would be, it is about a vision. and what the nice part about all of this -- we will be working on the strategic plan. some of you were here earlier. we had an update on that from the executive director. and to assure you, rudy. all of the pieces were coming together. this is another piece that help us with the road map that we need in the port and we have a strategic plan which touches upon some of the thing that you have already talked about and this whole waterfront land use plan was to make sure we were engaged with the rest of the city, with the various communities to give us a blueprint and while you may think we are headed towards a final product. as far as i'm concern -- and i know i'm just speaking about that. you know about the plan and the pipeline things just to maintain the port is already a huge, daunting task

but it's very instance ragal f inspirational for us to hear all that you have done. and would say on a high level from all the recommendations we heard today. there's not something there that i've said, wow, that is something the commission would not be in agreement with. it's no question of priority. i didn't see anything i did i agree with. it's all good recommendations i don't know that one that you didn't agree upon. you may want to comment on that later. 160 but one was not put forward. i think also the integrated approach and the fact that you got the state lands commission involved, that is tremendous because they are a tremendous stakeholder for us because they decide on what we do in terms of consist sieve trust and they have to agree and approve certain thing and you will go to bcdc. i think the piece on resilience which is very much a part of our

strategic plan but that is brilliant to have it inn corps rated as part of another additional part of this whole effort. i think there are obviously going to be tactics that we willer hear about as we go forward and i would agree with admissioner in katz that we need updates, for instance on the open space. even though we just had a big discussion on how we are. spending our dollar today. the question is do we have enough open space? i wasn't sure. so with the recreation, what can we actually do in i think these are thing we would all love to hear more about. what are the specifics? we did do an rfi that talked about the peers that we don't use today. we scratched our head and came up with piers 32 and pier 38. we didn't quite get what to do. we need information from the public in terms what have is viable. so i think that's it. i think the idea of a having a

big competition. i think that ties in, in a little formal way, come he will us what you could use the big piers for. about but the competition is a good idea. i think we have to be constantly challenged. we have a process and a capital plan. we go through all of these things we have aagain da items that we approve projects but we do need to get us in the framework and i definition of what we are doing on the strategic plan and the water front land use plan gives us a bigger framework to be bold. i think our own said earlier. i remember when first came on as a commission, trying to connection on the waterfront. and i think it's important that we are not just trying to connect on the waterfront. but we really want to be for the whole city. and this plan i think now does speak to that and as well as what we are trying to do in the strategic plan.

we are an asset for the whole city. for the west coast and are not country and for the world and we need to shine. so i think this is -- it is ambitious and now our problem is how are we going to figure out how to get there. but that's a good problem to have. so i commend all of you for giving us and passing that challenge on to us and to the staff of how to figure that out. but we will continue to work on it. but i'm very inspired and excited to see this work today. thank you. >> president brandon: thank you. commissioner adams. commissioner you have a long time. commissioner adams please. >> commissioner adam: i'm not going to beat a dead horse. we could talk under water and i'm not going to do that. i just want to say thank you. i know we have other items. and i want to thank the community and the staff and other things. we have other things to do. rudy i hear what you are saying about taking things under consideration. >> president brandon: thank you,

commissioner. >> that was more mundane. i didn't want to interrupt. when you mentioned some of the next steps and the walking tours, if it would be at all possible to get some sort of video recording and posting it on to youtube and get bloggers and others on the opportunity. but i think if we will have committee members on this tour speaking i think that would be a great opportunity to share this information even more broadly and that would be a great opportunity. commissio commission ers any other comments? i truly would like to thank all of the committee members, rudy and janice, for leading this wonderful, wonderful effort. because it sound like everybody just got along. it sounds like -- the ideas just

kept flowing and the committee just really got along really well. i want to thank linda and pia and alice for cheering the committees. i want to thank everybody for their recommendations. thank you for coming one the great recommendations. i've read through them. they are great recommendations but i also think that commissioner katz's idea about the committee's coming and talking about each of their recommendations in a little more detail so we really get a feel and understanding of where any are going with that, would b would be great and i really love the idea of a big contest. it might be the same as our rfi that is going out and big ideas to come from what we can do with our various spaces but i just -- i want to thank dianne. dianne was here through the

first water front land use plan which was a huge effort. and she is still here. [ laughter ] [ applause ] i want to thank carol and david and brad and especially thank carey and anne for coming back. you guys are a great team and thank you so much for working account community and i am just so impressed with everything that has happened with this. so i'm really looked forward to the next steps and what we see next. thank you dianne. >> thank you. >> president brandon: next item. >> item 13a of the neck declaration and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the ferry project located at

piers 31 and 33 and embarkaddarra base 3. >> request approval to three documents one a general agreement between the port and the national park service. >> president brandon: let's take a quick break. and then we can clear the room. >> commissioner adam: 5 minutes? >> president brandon: almost. 5 minutes, we will be right back. 5 minutes. >> clerk: we are going to take a 5-minute break. everyone >> the national park service for the term for use of the site primarily for alwha alcatraz island to be used for improvement for ferry services including the site for alcatraz island and with the golden gate

national parks for site improvements and to operate visitor amenities including a visitor contact station and cafe for a 30-year term with two, 10-year options for the general agreement. >> good evening, commissioners, rebecca with the waterfront development. i'm pleased to be here with you for the second time. we were with you on january 9th for the informational. today i'm supported by our every present senior michael martin. j edward and hurley. and we really pleased to have a big contingent from the park service here to answer questions that specifically superintendent will join the podium for part of the presentation. jessica carter and altman are also here along with other staff members to make sure we get all of the questions answered. the outline includes a little review from the january

9th item. items 1, 2 and 3 all go through relatively quickly because you all remember it so well not because we are all missed dinner. and we will be focusing on new information. we want to get back to you on the questions that were raised tejan 9th meeting and the questions we've been getting, parks service has been getting and i know others have been getting with respect to the perspectives that were issued in the interim since we saw you last. quick orientation. the alcatraz project is located in the alcatraz location site between piers 31 and 13 near bay street and intersection. the current site is envisioned to be approved. as i was listening to diana i was thinking this has a lot of elements that the land use subcommittee can come up. with we are improving the site under the project to include more pedestrian access or removing some parking on the site and moving it into the shed so it's all pedestrian access site and getting more access to

the water for public and consolidating and rationizing the embarkation site where passengers get on to the ferry to access alcatraz and also we are facilitating through the project site improvements through that pier 31 bulk head where a new cafe will be activated and also in pier 33 bulk head, also one of our historic facilities and also adding new waterfront capacity to the ferry-side of the site. a little bit of background on where we started. we started with environmental review -- actually initiated by national park service. the national park service sawing an opportunity to get a long-term site for the embarkation site to alcatraz. it was vying heavily. park service did their due dill against and evenly settled on the site where we currently have

the embarkation. the requirements was issued in 2015. the port term sheet was endorsed by the commission as well as the board of supervisors in 2016 and specifically with the term sheet which is why i'm going go through them a little bit quickly. the project that was stated was endorsed under the term sheet. between the term sheet enforcement through 2017 we have been negotiating the agreements with national park service and continuing and completing the environmental review of the quest. a quick overview of the roles and relationships. there are four entities that have to, would together to make this site operate even better going into the future for 30, 40, 50 years. the ports role graphically. either the port role is to oversee the leases with a concessioner that will be

selected by national park service of over time there will be more than one commissioner. and we also will sign the agreement once approved as national park service. we call that our general agreement and that is our operational agreement where we both work together to facilitate and fulfill the goals of the site operately revenue generated public access, enter pressing. all of the goals embodied in the leadership. and park services role is to bourque on the interpretation with the parks conserveck conservancy through their agreement and every 10 to 15 years under current practices and current regulations. the transaction duty of thes that are before you for the approval are the general

agreement. like i mentioned it's a 30-year agreement between the port and the parks service. the other key document is the lease. we call it a form lease. it's a form lease because we don't know who the concessioner will be but it would be a form lease that the ferry would be required to sign and the term of the release would be with the park services would know be 33 years and the park conservanycrby and they're role is to provide visitor contact services as well as operate the cafe. we've canucke conducted all the environmental review necessary. the eia was completed in 2017. the banks declaration which is what was determined to be required under seaquest has been

completed and an appeal was filed and heard last week and the planning commission upheld the mmd that we have a time mmd which was signed last week as well. going forward we will require permits from all of the regulars that have jurisdiction to oversee the sight. the engineers and the regional quality control board and asiring which role the party has with look at which they have and limit the port and ferry, which will be working under the permit and then would work together to complete the permitting processes. this is a bit of new information i wanted to put in front of you to provide more information on perspectives but has been issued sip we first started it provides

some of the key metrics of the ferry operators and that's, what is the scale of the service. the scale of the service as estimated in the projections by park service is anticipated to be about 1.7 to 1.8 million passengers to and from alcanad alcatraz. 30 or 40,000 passengers through that service and also a new service described in the perspective and analyzed through the environmental review process. that is called a park crew. it's anticipated to serve about 80,000 and up to 90,000 per year. so that's good. the park service, being an interpretive cruise where the attendees could go on to a boat which touches national park service waters and they would receive cultural and historical

information about park service sites such as fort baker and fort mason. headlands and other areas. and for a context -- on the side of this cruise we looked back at a couple of staff report. one of the current tenant at the port has 190,000 pages that they served in 2015 and that's one of our operators we have other data and other operators to give us a context of how large the 80,000 park crews and services are appealed to be. i also wanted to note the annual projected gross revenue from in contract is between 44 and 52 million per year and the crac contract is for 15 years. >> this is the port metrics and what was projected at the term sheet level. it provides the rent through the

services and also notes -- you can see the total from the whole side appealed and billed out around 2020 to be $3.3 million. this is slightly above what we currently receive from the site and also we would be provided rent credit totaling 3 million-dollar for the investment in the site that we view as big building i will provements. speaking of investment in the site, how much revenue will be directed to port facilities through this contract and project. the ferry commission is expected to spend about $30 million. we will spend up to 5 million. and the conservancy will spend a 5 million credit for a total of $32.3 million invested in the site. i would like to invite

superintendent josh to respond to some of the questions we heard in january and to remain with me for other questiongle until the presentation is complete. superintendent. thank you. >> thank you, rebecca and thank you commissioners for your patience. i know it's been a long evening. i appreciate your interest in this project and allowing doubts speak and i also want to thank the staff who have worked on this project for many years along with our partners and port staff. i've been general superintendent at golden gate for exactly three month today. i came from the regional office. ways regional direction for a -- i was regional direction for a number of years. the park service has been collaborating to identify the location and develop the vision and solidify the business terms that would enable a long-term

alcatraz state with benefits for stakeholders and i'm happy to be here today with the final business agreements for you. the nature and structure of our partnership was unprecedented in many ways and park services are genuinely excited about what the future hold which is a new high quality welcoming gateway to alcatraz island centered on piers 31 and 33 on the national historic district. the site will provide a seamless experience for visitors and create a plaza for millions of visitors each year. so an update on some perspectives. we have been busy since the session at the port commission on january 9th. as you heard last thursday the planning commission approved the document for the project. their action upheld two very

thorough independent analysis from both the national parks service. we completed an environmental impact statement and san francisco planning staff litigated neglect declaration. editionly the ferry contract also known as the prospectus was released on january 31st we have a site visit and the slicetration is due to close on may 31st with the goal of selection by fall. the concession contract requires the future concessioner to provide a number of services consistent with those envisioned in the general agreement and that's between the port and national park service as well as being detailed in the ferry concessioner lease, including alcatraz passengers ferry service. that's the heart of the business opportunity, serving over 1.6 billion visitors each year and passenger ferry charter transportation to and from

alcatraz for permitted special events and the new park crews. the park crews will provide a unique chan for visitors to learn about the park services natural and cultural resources around the bay area and include a minimum 45-minute on-board narrative program in multiple languages as described for the draft concession crack. the service will be educational and highly interpretive for visitors who are focused on the national park service experience. as you heard, it will serve a maximum of 90,000 visitors per year consistent with the litigated negative declaration and we see it as an opportunity for people who maybe can't get out to alcatraz directly but want to learn about the bay area's national park sites.

so food and beverage on-board vessels is a requirement. they will be authorized to certain visitor services subject to national park service oversight should they elect to do so. that includes photography, charter transportation to other locations subject to and pass appropriate infrastructure at charter destinations. future passenger ferry service to port baker are contemplated and those those services would be provided in accordance with the final environmental impact statement as well as the document and they cannot commence until parks service works through details regarding the connection points in the baker and richmond. we would first need to make a significant development in the port baker pier infrastructure as well as better understand the

infrastructure and partnership opportunities in richmond. we are committed to working with perspective state stakeholders prior to moving ahead to enabled success. so the next federal contract -- do i have the clicker? sorry. thank you. >> i'm going to talk a little about the national park commitment we know about the minimum wages applicable to the ferry service concession contract and i want to assure the community that the national park service is committed to a fair and legal competitive process and commission contract which includes fulfilling our obligations with respect to the service contract act, the sca and appropriate measures for concession employers who provide these important services.

so i would like to go into a bit of detail about the roles and processes by which minimum wages are established. under the sca, only the department, dol has the requirement for determinations. the national park service does not have such authority but rather realized on aol to rates. and for the 2016 alcatraz ferry contract reached a determination using dol to establish the procedure. and the mps has a site for both the 2018 wage determinations for the current crac current contract and the dol. we want to acknowledge this has been a learning curve for the park service because we have a very limited number of

concession contracts around the country. one such learning opportunity was with respect to the wage determination for the non--- oh, gosh. for the non-stand positions, particularly maritimes. so related to the draft conception contract in the perspective. we misunderstood our new crac contract but parks looked at the dol. it was submitted last tuesday by the 98 process and we just received the results back, and the results do appear to be higher. we will release the pe per specprospectus.

we will push it back. and with that 3-month period we believe we will have sufficient time for all interested party to prepai prepair a proposal. >> the parks service has provided contract location about the location and nature about the services. namely that it is a passenger ferry operation in san francisco. as well as the list of applicable occupations. in 2016, dol provided a wage determination to mps for the local san francisco region for a standard occupations. it also provided a supplemental wage determination for foreign nonstandard occupations of captain, engineer and general

vessel assistance. that references the harbour operations and nation-wide applicable on the east, gulf, west coast and hawaii. park service as the contracting agency did not have the authority or expertise to evaluate the speck wage rates. however interesting parties by the age including representatives of employees may request that dol wage determination if they have evidence to support such a request. we understand this is something that the stakeholders may be interested in undertakintake ultimately we understand that the services start with compensations and safe and happy concession employees. that is our shared goal. so the next slide...

thank you. so for the project schedule, may 8th is the deadline for the new concession contract to become effective. a delay in the port commission approval of the general agreement and leases will trigger delays in consequent required approvals and could possibly result in the need for national park service to pursue a temporary contract. by law they can extend contracts for a maximum of three years. the current alcatraz contract expired on may 9th, 2016. parks services have extended to 2019 in order to accommodate the completion of embarkation site planning. the approval of associated business agreements and the solicitation and selection process for the next concession

contract. the concession contract process is compressed due to the planning development phases for this important crack and we also are providing 30 days between the mayor's approval and the close of our slittatio period for the deadline for the new contract. if that were to happen the national parks service would enter into a temporary contract to avoid a gap of service to alcatraz. likely by avoiding operations to continue to provide services under the temporary contract. that's what we have seen occur in other locations. specific terms and conditions would need to be negotiated. we tend to have embarkations for

services and improvements as we have presented them to you. we met the key regulatory construction window in the fall of 2019 for watersite infrastructure to support new services and lend greater flexibility in terms of laydown space for construction. there would be delays to be made under the next concession contract. the services and associated revenue streams to the port would not be introduced until the new concession contract is effective. all of this results in lost opportunities for participates. and more importantly for the visitors alcatraz and the embarkation site. the next slide discusses the specific schedule milestones in greater detail and i look forward toy a chiefing theming to as we begin to implement this exciting project in the year ahead.

>> president brandon: thank you. ahead. >> thank you, superintendent josh. we will be seeking approval through the board of supervisors. if we can get the other approvals then nts can put into perspective we have final approvals so the prospectus can be assured that's the final thing we are working under and what superintendent josh mentioned we will go into next year. construction would then be phased in over the various window with the first window coming up later this year they would be able to take possess of the now vacant bulk head and begins construct there. the next in-water construction window would occur in fall

2019. that would be for the next phase of construction with the concessioner phasing in the phases of work over a 3.5 or 4-year period. the second part of their work in the bulk head is anticipated to occur in 2020 with full site improvements need to be complete by 2024. >> you did a wonderful job of reading the rest solution but i want to say thank you for allowing us to come back and answer some of the questions and thank you to everyone in the audience for staying this late. we look forward to your questions and comments as well. >> president brandon: thank you. may i have a motion to approve this item. i need to recuse myself. is there a motion?

>> commissioner adam: i do. >> president brandon: i'm going to put this for discussion purposes and we have public comments. daniel. and then harvey stratford. and then john pattaro. >> hello. thanks for opportunity to speak. my name is daniel. i'm -- from this area and i've been involved in the union. and i just want to speak to concerns about maintaining a certain standard of compensation for deck hand that worhands that work on the bay. and i've been very fortunate to work as a deckhand since about april of last year.

and it's been a huge thing for me to have a sense of dignity and to be compensated pretty fairly after -- you know most of my life not really being able to save any money, have -- you know plan for retirement. and i think that -- you know, that is very, very important. and i think -- for ten years i was -- i went to a lot of city council meetings. people talking about building -- you know nice plans and physical spaces and talking about success in a certain way. and sitting through the meeting i was thinking about what does success mean? what does resilience mean? and i hope it means more than

just the facilities. i think that also it's about the people that work here on the bay. and i think you have a lot of power here working on this crack to maintain a good standard for deck hand. i work on the bay with deckhands that will be around when there's an earthquake. and they will be responding to that emergency. [ please stand by ]

. lease stand by ] >> -- and it seems to be an attempt to skim or the business of the existing port tenants and long time maritime employers on the waterfront. also, i think we'd like to see

that the the decision or going forward with the contract, awarding the contract be tabled until we have in our hands and can see the actual numbers of the wage determination -- local wage determination, 'cause i think -- i don't think anybody wants to go through what happened last time where we had to sue to get the current contractor to pay the fair minimum of the prevailing wage. thank you. >> thank you. brian helman. [ inaudible ] >> he had to leave? robe robert estrada. >> good evening. i've been a deckhand for 30-plus years. i started in march of 1985. i've recently become the regional director of the inland boat man's union, which is the

maritime division of the isle epu. we represent upwards of 300 members in this region, mariners, and we have great concerns on two fronts, as you know. our first concern centers around the idea that this late in the process, this late in the game, we still don't have an accessible department of labor wage discrimination that passes the sniff test. why not 2006 be the learning experience, when our two unions had to spend half a million dollars fighting this experience issue. we would hope that would have been a learning experience for the national parks. that was a long, drawn-out process, and ultimately, what it did, it cemented a contract

with concession here based on two big lies. the promise of a big, fran see, interpretive museum, never materialized. a station looking boat salor that everybody said wasn't going to happen, and it never did. now, once we fought that and we won it, nominally, what was the remedy? well, we're going to get to keep the contract, bump the wages up at the back end, and then they were given nearly the doubling of the ticket price to help pad that. what i don't want to see again, because it was a learning experience for us, what i really don't want to see is a contract handed on a wink and a nod, a promise that we'll get to it and then have to deal with it at the back end. here's the opportunity to have it done right, since 2006 when this contract was given.

they were required by that same service contract act to revisit the prevailing wage every two years, and as we understand it, that didn't happen until two years ago. and you would expect that when it was finally revisited after all those years, that it would be a little bit of a bump up from what the wages is. the wages went down to $12 an hour for a deck hand, $19 an hour for a captain. i've got it teto tell you that less than half of the reality. so i would also like to talk and say thank you, commissioners, for helping to at least get the park service to say that they will submit this department of labor wage determination. we very much appreciate that. thank you for those efforts. that, and the idea the bay cruise is sucking off the work of our very good employers, our legacy employers, to help pay for this $30 million

infrastructure, that museum, that visitor's center should have already been built. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> captain ezra l. hill hunt, jr. >> good evening, president brandon, vice president adams. commissioners, executive staff, and brothers and sisters from both the mmp and the ibu, i'm a 30-year-old retired captain from the blue and gold fleet. i'm a san francisco native, born and raised. hunters point, bayview, st. marry's college. what i've heard today about not understanding things, not knowing what i'm doing. i'm sorry, i'm not a college

graduate, but you can understand, i don't care what kind of way you cut a dog, it's not going to be anything depending on what you breed it with. i also want to say i'm worried when we see paragraphs in some of these what looks to be innocuous statements inside of a federal document. i represent 251 members alone right up the street where i worked for 30 years at blue and gold fleet. on average, and these are rough numbers. don't hold me to it. let's say we do 2,000 bay cruises, if you're going to do 450 bay cruises where we employ 250 members, it looks to me like a 20 or higher, 20% reduction in my workforce and my labor group, so this at's

offensive to me. i don't want how else you say it to me, other than the jobs that are being done are in jeopardy. when i first started working, i was a college student. i made a conscious choice to stay in san francisco. when i graduate in high school, i was just going on a basketball scholarship. i had a bunch of big schools that i could have left the state to go play. one of the reasons i chose st. marry's was its proximity to san francisco. the 30 years i spent at blue and gold, and the additional years i spent with other companies, to me, seems worthless in this new market. what do i tell my kids who are graduating from college? can you spend 30 years in a career in the maritime industry in san francisco? what do i tell my son who's about to graduate from high school and attend college? can you spend 30 years in a maritime institute in san

francisco in wh francisco? what did you guys think, is my question, when you read some of this stuff. the bay cruises, what it's doing, supports families. men, women, children, grandchildren. to lose those jobs, i'm telling 20% of my workforce, you have to find another job. it's unacceptable. thank you. >> thank you. keith manning. >> good evening. my name's keith manning. i'm a resident of san francisco, professional mariner. i've been a mariner for 40 years. cal maritime grad, 1976, and i worked on the waterfront here

out of san francisco for 30 years. to see substandard concessionaires come into the neighborhood and pay their employees a substandard wage is unconscionable on a national maritime -- i'm sorry, the park service contract. the union members earn a wage that can send a kid to college. commissioner adams mentioned earlier the problem with even in the -- in the park -- i mean, in the port -- in the ports for kids having a -- a college degree to get promoted.

so thoese wages are really important to the community. i couldn't afford to live in this town even at the wages i make now if i didn't have rent controlled apartment. so i don't know how these people at this concessionaire can even live in town, in the neighborhood. they're super commuters now, so they're driving from fairfield and sacramento just to go to work here in town. and so thank you for letting me speak, and i hope you listen to our pleas. thank you. >> thank you. >> the next card, i cannot read. it starts with a k, and other than that, i have