i am more than happy to answer any questions. >> any questions or comments from commissioners? seeing none. public comment is closed. is there a motion to award this contract? >> same house, same call. the item is adopted on first reading. his are in the introduction new items? is there any general public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed and to the t.a. is adjourned.

[ roll call ] >> president brandon: item two, approve meetings from october 23, 2018. >> approve. >> second. >> president brandon: all in favor? thank you. 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.

>> president brandon: please be advised the use of cell phones, pagers, and similar electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. please be advised the chamber ordered the removal from any person responsible for using a cell phone, pager, or other similar sound-producing electronic devices. please know the public has up to three minutes to make public comment on each agenda item unless the commission adopts a shorter period on any item. item five, public comments not listed on the agenda. >> clerk: is there any public comment on items not listed on the agenda? come on up. >> president brandon: yeah, come on up. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is mark dwight. i'm a home owner and

manufacturing business owner in the historic dogpatch neighborhood and a founding board member of the dogpatch business association, a small business commissioner, and founder of s.f. made, which supports local manufacturing. i was also a member of the back street business advisory board formed by gavin newsom to consider land use, including distribution and repair businesses, commonly referred to as p.d.r. i'm here to concern jewel is hoarding space, i'm told jewel has made offers to buy longstanding businesses in the american industrial center, one of our most precious enclaves of businesses. i'm also concerned jewel was permitted to sublease the entire pier 70 spees known as tea collection, a san francisco-born infant clothing company. i question the developer's motives in subleasing the space rather than writing a new lease for jewel. in my experience, most

commercial property owners forbid subleasing and i view this as an attempt to lease the space under the radar of local community groups that worked tirelessly over the years to ensure pier 70 remain accessible l with the public and populated with some businesses with benefit to the community. jewel, clearly, does not meet those criteria. finally, i believe it's imperative jewel be prevented from leasing additional space at pier 70 and their current leases be evaluated for their compliance to rules and regulations governing the leasing of public lands of pier 70 and p.d.r.-zoned properties in the city's purview. thank you for your conversation. >> president brandon: thank you. >> hi, my name is becky barton, and i'm a mother and long-term portero hill resident, and both of my children are either attending or on track to attend our local elementary school,

daniel webster. i'm also a residence of the education fund, which main mission is to keep families in san francisco. and i am also here today to voice my displeasure with the current path to give public land space to juul as a corporation. i believe pier 70 has been responsible in meeting the public's need and addressing the needs of the public. a very concrete example of that is pier 70 has been near and dear to my heart in hosting some of the largest fundraisers for daniel webster, which fund $550 per student in terms of additional resources we need, and i think that if we can keep the public land focused on those that align with the public interests and can support our community, i think we'll all end up in a better place. thank you. >> president brandon: thank you. is there any other public

comment? >> hi, i'm here today to discuss my strong opposition and discuss the leasings of 102 and 104 to juul labs. as a long-time resident, a parent of a 14 year old, i'm appalled that the many years of planning with and for the community on the new iteration of historic pier 70 has resulted in the de facto privatization of public land and utterly fails the community. at expansion of private use on public land is for juul labs, a tobacco company that's come under fire by the cdc, usf, and stanford, and whose core mission is addiction is unconscionable. this company has given us a new verb, juuling, because of their

slick, high-tech cigarettes. up more than 77% in high schools and 55% in middle schools in one year. in fact, they are so addictive and attractive to youth that the city of san francisco has outlawed them, but somehow the city has allowed these leases and subleases for juul to occupy building 104 and now 102 in pier 70's historic core. you may have heard today that juul announced it will stop selling most e-cigarette flavors in stores and halt all social media promotions, but don't let that news fool you. juul is as addictive to its profits as kids are to their nicotine vape. read the fine print in the announcement, buried in the back of the announcement the company said it would renew sales at retail outlets that invested in age-verification technology, because even with juul's capitulation to not sell

flavored pods for now, the jeangenie is already way out of the bottle. anyone can get the pods online. there's a huge secondary market of manufacturers, distributors, and e-sellers. i ask to get back to rejuvenating the waterfront in a way that brings us all together and look back on a project that serves community with a true sense of dignity and pride. juul has and will continue to use kids it's addicted to do its marketing for it. there's no place for juul in our beautiful historic pier 70. privatizing public space with a company that addicts youth illegal in the city and county of san francisco will not be the way to do it. we insist that you remove juul labs from the public port land and buildings of historic pier 70. thank you. >> president brandon: thank you.

is there any other public comment? >> hi, my name is christine, i'm a long-time resident, 20-year resident of san francisco. i have three teenagers born and raised in san francisco. after i found juul products in my teenaged son's backpack twice this summer, something no parent wants to do is go through their kids' stuff, but unfortunately juul products are so difficult to detect, we're left with no other choice. i asked my son and his friends why they do it, and these were there responses. you get a short head rush and then it's over and you go to class and there are no side effects. people do it in the bathroom. last year half my friend group got suspended across all grades for one to two grades. a decent portion of my friends are addicted, they have withdrawal symptoms when they try to stop. lots of athletes use it, even nondrinkers do it. as s.i., you will now get expelled for juuling, but that hasn't stopped anyone yet.

there's nothing that says it's not safe. if you do too much, you can throw up. it's called nic-sick. we'll just have to wait until the next big things comes along for us to stop this. you can buy it at good fellas and most gas stations if you have a fake i.d. or are a regular. i see it every day in class at lowell, probably about 50% use it regularly and more have at least tried it. this is a tobacco company, and the city of san francisco masquerading as a tech company, and they fully embrace the tech company mantra of "move fast and break things." unfortunately, what they are breaking is our children and our teenagers in san francisco, which is also a stress on the parents and the families. i urge the commission to reconsider the expansion of juul in our great city of san francisco. thank you. >> president brandon: thank you. is there any other public comment?

>> hi, i'm allison thompson, and i'm a long-time resident of san francisco, as well. i have a 14 and a 16-year-old daughter. you know, we were at a place not long ago where the majority of teenagers would not even think about smoking. they understood the health risks, and it wasn't cool. but thanks to juul, it is cool and a majority of my kids' friends vape. i think it's unconscionable to reward a company like juul, who's reintroduced the inhaling of nicotine to our children, with grounds to occupy public land, and i really hope you will reconsider and, you know, renegotiate this lease. i would love to see them leave san francisco completely, but certainly not have them occupying public land. thank you.

>> president brandon: thank you. is there any other public comment? on items not listed on the agenda. seeing none. i'd just like to say that we've also received a stack of letters regarding this issue, and director ford, would you like to comment at all about this? >> sure. thank you. yes, we received many letters over the weekend addressed to the port commission, that also came to me, and my staff has been aware of this issue and attended several community meetings, where the community has expressed quite a bit of concern about this tenant in terms of their businesses practices, specifically as you've heard relating to encouraging young people to vape. this is a sublease and a lease of o.d.i. as we do our master development projects, we do not have authority over those subleases. o.d.i. is our tenant, and they lease within the parameters of the building types that are in

the master lease, and they also need to conform with all city policies. there's nothing in city code or city policy that would exclude juul from being a subtenant, so there's nothing before the port commission to approve or disapprove the lease, because they have proved the master lease with o.d.i. some time ago, and it's their subleasing abilities to bring in a tenant of their choice, as long as they meet the requirements of the building. there are other bells and whistles, of course, related to historic preservation and public access, and we're trying to attract p.d.r., so we have context in the lease to improve the public experience of these important historic resources, but we do not have approval authority over the subtenants. and i've written a letter to the commission that really lays that out. thank you. >> president brandon: thank you. amy? >> clerk: item 6-a, executive

director's report. >> good afternoon, members of the commission, my name is elaine forbes and i'm the port's executive director. the first item today, i have very big news to report about our very own vice president, willie adams. the first contested election in 18 years for the i.w.u. resulted in a new leader for the organization in willie adams, who is the first african-american person elected to this position. vice president adams became the union's seventh international president. the i.l.w.u. represents 50,000 members in oregon, california, washington, hawaii, alaska, canada, and the panama. we're so proud of you, vice president adams. congratulations to you. [ applause ] in keeping up the very good

news, last tuesday we received results from proposition "a," which was a measure on the ballot to repair san francisco's seawall. a down payment of $425 million, and i'm very happy to report that we received an overwhelming yes vote of 82.48% of ballots cast. and that means 251,983 people voted to improve our seawall. and the port could not be more encouraged by this overwhelming support for the infrastructure, and the port staff also feels we had a great opportunity before the measure was sent to the ballot to tell the story of the seawall, to explain to the residents of san francisco what the port does, not only what you see on top, but what it protects underneath and behind, and we made clear our need and the voters responded so overwhelmingly.

and i'd like to thank our mayor, mayor breed, who got 100% behind the measure. she said she was convinced and convinced everyone else, and i'd like to thank the whole commission, but most specifically our president, kimberly brandon, who's been there 100% for the seawall. it was a huge victory for the port, and the first of its kind in a port-only measure. so congratulations to everyone. now we have lots and lots of work to do to get our seawall safe for the public. my next item i would like to report the results, the initial results, of the historic pier's r.f.i. response, and i would like rebecca to do the honors. thank you, rebecca. >> thank you so much, director forbes. assistant deputy director of real estate and development at the port. very excited to present some of

the results we have, or some of the initial results we have, from the request for interest. you'll recall the request for interest was issued earlier this summer. it's been open for about three months. what we were seeking in the request for interests are concepts that were public-oriented in nation within facilities of the embarcadero historic district. this included 13 piers and an agricultural building. we spent quite a lot of time over the summer promoting the r.f.i. and going directly to associations that represented industry types that we thought might be public oriented according to our definition, which means invites the public in. this included associations related to arts and cultural uses, recreational uses, entertainment, education. we received 52 responses when the r.f.i. closed on october 31st. just to give you a brief flavor of what types of uses -- what types of respondents we received, respondents were able to self identify as tenant type, master tenants meant that the

entity thought that they could take on a full pier redevelopment. a lot of space, a lot of cost. they could also respond as a smaller tenant, meaning they were capable of leasing a smaller part of the facility, but had a concept that would really benefit from being on the embarcadero and could benefit the embarcadero. they could also self identify as either, meaning they thought they could take on the whole pier redevelopment, or be part of another program. we're potentially looking for partners. and finally, several respondents have expertise in designing, planning these types of piers and wanted to provide some of their concepts, as well. when we received the 52 responses, we laid them out on a table and then we started gat -- categorizing them. we rated from largest category with the largest number of respondents and the smallest category. just to give you a flavor, education, training, incubator,

and innovation. included programs that were educational in nature, different types of specialty schools, training, professional types of training, incubator space that focused on one public interest type of use or another, and innovation space. we also had a number of response that had live performance associated with their use. attractions like gondola rides, entertainment uses that are unique for the waterfront, and i'll get to how you can review these in just a moment. food and beverage uses, small proprietors of food and beverage locations, up to larger food hauls and beverage hauls, using a cultural space. waterfront-wide concepts that were primarily partner organizations that had a vision for the waterfront and were looking for tenants to take up their ideas. active recreation, including tennis, basketball, future sports, which is gaming and robotics, swimming, as well as running were the types of active recreation uses we received.

artist space, maker space, and associated retail, where they would sell pieces or sell their wares. mariti maritime excursion, as well as mixed use in nature, but which focused on hotel as a potential use, understanding that proposition "h" prohibits hotels in piers. in terms of next steps, today we'll be posting all the responses we received. we provided print-out copies for your review, as well. we're anticipating quite a bit of public input. on the website you can now respond with the types of categories that you're excited about, the locations you think would benefit from these types of uses being incorporated into the piers. we'll be holding a public open house, as well, where you can comment in person on tuesday, november 27th. we'll come back to you in december and give you a full informational that delves into the types of uses and the locations that were noted in the responses. and we'll be scheduling other input opportunities for early

next year, with the goal towards having an initial staff analysis of the r.f.i. and potential concepts that may be brought forward through an r.f.p. process in february of next year. and that concludes my overview of the r.f.i. responses. thank you. >> thank you, rebecca. my next item is related to the pier 70 shipyard request for proposals. as the commission and the public knows, we've endeavored hard to have a new ship repair operator at pier 70. we've put out two r.f.p.s to that end, one in 2017, which we cancelled because we only had one respondent, and the second again in 2018. and, unfortunately, we do not have a submission, which we can bring to you. we did receive two submissions, one from bigger marina portland and the other from an l.l.c., but we've determined they are infeasible in terms of having a sustainable ship repair

enterprise and do not match the scope and terms of the r.f.p., so we'll bring neither forward to the commission. instead, we are looking to see what sustainable options we have for maritime industrial activities at the site, and we'll be looking closely at what options we can bring to the commission and to the public. we plan to be back in march of 2019 to discuss what is possible. we do believe there are market opportunities for maritime industrial work at the yard. we think that it is its purpose, and we are going to do our very best to bring options to the commission. my next item is related to a conference that is coming up, the national trust for historic preservation is having its annual conference here in san francisco november 13th through 16th at the hyatt regency. it's expected to draw over 1,500 attendees across the country and internationally. the theme of the conference is pass forward and will showcase

san francisco as a city maintaining cultural landscape and intangible heritage. it should be very interesting, and i encourage people to look on the website if they would like to participate. next item, you have your schedule for meetings in 2019. it's included in your packet and it's also available to the public. and finally, i have -- >> president brandon: this is a long executive director's report and great information. can we just have public comment on the first half before we get to this one, because i think this is so important by itself. >> absolutely. >> president brandon: so is there any public comment on the executive director's report, any of the items? no? >> i think it's great we had such a terrific response to the r.f.i., but i think it's what we sort of expected, 1,000 flowers flowered, and so i understand that we're going to continue to get input and have the community

engaged, which is very importanimportan important. i just wonder, if we could, have more discussion on guidelines of how we are going to approach this, given that there's such a variety and also since there are so many piers involved. it's not like, you know, one size fits all. it could be we have to separate, but i know that staff is going to work very hard on trying to give us some ideas, but i think we need to see an opportunity to figure out how to simplify the complexity of so many response and what guidelines or criteria that we would set to take this forward, and so i think otherwise we're just going to be -- it's going to be difficult, and we don't want to waste the opportunity. on the other hand, some of these opportunities probably may or may not be, as we know, may be great ideas, but we may not find them operational, executionable,

or financially feasible, so we need to figure out how to put some gates on this and how we are going to whittle it down. otherwise it's going to take a long, long time, and we've been waiting on some of these piers for a long, long time already and don't want to wait another five years. >> thank you so much for the question and the guidance. this process, which was a request for information, an r.f.i., is really to seek maximum feasibility in public serving uses, or uses that serve the public, bring the public in, because we heard loud and clear from the waterfront plan update, that is really the goal. in addition to historic preservation that the public seeks, so the thousand flowers are different ideas of how to bring the public in, and staff will be listening to the community groups, listening to what happens online, but importantly doing analysis to bring to the commission to say this is what we think we should do in terms of an r.f.p. for x and y pier.

some piers may be less well positioned for investment, and we'll be bringing our results of our own internal analysis and understanding of the facilities combined with the public and coming to the commission to work through the details of next step so we have every intention to gauge the commission heavily on the next steps following this r.f.i., and rebecca has a schedule how that will occur, should you have more questions, but we'll be sure -- >> president brandon: calendar of the schedule, and i'm talking about understanding the landscape and fitting in the forests before we start looking at the trees. so it's a little bit of, you know, how do you approach this strategically. >> i see. we will look at the calendar and should you have additional feedback, we can modify as is appropriate. we think this is an exciting start, but there's much analysis to come. >> president brandon: thank you. any other questions or comments?

commissioner gilman? >> commissioner gilman: on the same topic, it's slightly off, but we have been having conversations looking at when we do our leasing, what our leasing strategy is, what our lease structures are. i think we heard from the community some are disappointed, so before we enter into a full r.f.p., we should take time to look at this strategy. i don't want to see us maybe repeat missed opportunities or mistakes that we've done in other places with this new set of piers. i would hope that could be part of the conversation. >> certainly. >> president brandon: anybody else? i would just like to congratulate commissioner adams on his presidency with the i.l.w. that is just huge, and we are just very fortunate to have him here on the commission with us, because he brings such great insight, and i have had the pleasure of serving with three of the seven presidents of ilwu,

so the san francisco port commission is extremely lucky to have local representation. i also want to congratulate and thank everyone on the yes on "a" campaign. i think everyone went out of their way to get this measure passed. all the commissioners were involved, the staff volunteered their own time. director forbes was everywhere. she was the cheerleader for yes on "a" and ran a great campaign. outside of being the executive director, of course. so i just want to thank everybody for their time and thank you for your commitment, because that is extremely -- the funds are extremely important and a great start for what is to come. i think it's absolutely phenomenal that we got so many responses to the r.f.i., and i look forward to going through this binder and getting the calendar of what's going to

happen next and seeing what actually comes out of it. i think those are my comments. so now -- >> thank you so much. okay, this brings me to the really exciting part of my director's report. i have the pleasure to introduce harlon kelly jr., who is the general manager of the p.u.c. general manager kelly is an incredible public servant and offers guidance to many of us directors, especially when we're new on the job, and is really -- has taken his organization into a whole new arena of triple bottom line, quadruple bottom line, understanding the public benefit's framework, and he and his staff have been a huge resource to the port as we've looked to enhance equity in contracting. so he agreed to come and talk about some of the work he's been doing at the p.u.c., and with that, mr. kelly.

>> thank you, commissioners. i want to thank you for inviting me today, especially because it is a commission day for the p.u.c., and given that we had a heated exchange about the bay delta, where the p.u.c. has a position of protecting our water supply and the environmental has a position where they want to release more water for the fish, we're talking about trying to come to some negotiation, and it got heated. and then all of a sudden they pulled me out and said i needed to be here, so i said great. sorry, and so -- but it's actually with great pleasure to be here. first, i just wanted to just say that the port has been an organizati organization, as the director has mentioned, i look at the port as a sister or brother to the p.u.c., because we, of

course, provide water service to you guys, wastewater, and also the power, as well. so you definitely have been a great partner of ours. and then also i just wanted to congratulate you on prop "a" on the seawall. you may remember clean power, we got 78%, and you keep raising it up to almost 83%, so that's great on that. and then just wanted to congratulate adams on your appointment. it's well deserved. so with that, i wanted to talk about what the p.u.c. is working on as it relates to our community benefits policy, and i have staff, yolanda menzoni, who

will help in the presentation. but i think the first thing we wanted to point out is, we had to really work on what our mission statement is, and we wanted to make sure our mission statement reflects who we are as an agency. so i put up here on slides -- there you go. our mission statement. and basically it just is to provide customers with high-quality, efficient, and reliable power, water, and sewer services in a matter that is inclusive of the environmental and community interests. and that's sustaining the resources entrusted in our care. and basically what the last part talks about is that we just want to make sure that we'd be a good neighbor in how we deliver our services and how we do business, and that's really part of our dna.

so in coming up with our mission statement, there are some policies that our commission passed, and these policies, i'm just proud to state that these are policies that are of first public utility in the country that have passed these policies, and the first policy is our environmental justice policy, and then our second one is our community benefit policy, and yolanda will go in more detail about how we're implementing these policies. but really these policies really kind of guide the way that the organization actually implements our work, and it's really been very helpful to the staff to look at that. and so i just wanted to just say

that we have been doing a lot of work and not only trying to make sure that staff understand the policy, but it's really embraced by staff of how we can make it even more better. so with that i will turn it over to yolanda to give you some examples of how we're actually implementing the program. >> thank you, general manager kelly, and good afternoon, commissioners. my name is yolanda menzoni, i'm the director of community management and social responsibility at the public utilities commission, and i'm delighted to be here to explain how we at the p.u.c. operationalize these concepts around being good neighbors and environmental justice. so as general manager kelly mentioned, we have two landmark policies, our environmental justice policy, and our community benefits policy, and those two policies together enabled us to create what we call our "community benefits

program," and that is a program that's agencywide that's across water, power, sewer, and it is organized into six discreet program areas. i'm going to go speak specifically to a deeper dive on our social impact partnerships, or how we embed community benefits into our contracts, because i understand that to be of most interest for the commission today, but before i get to that, i'll give you a quick overview of the various program areas for a little bit of context. so our first program area is education, and it's quite simple. we're growing the next generation of environmental stewards, who are going to care for our water, power, and sewer systems. our second category is around art. so we manage all of the public art enrichment dollars for the agency, working in close partnership with the s.f. arts commission. we also have a program area which is a big one, important for us and i'm sure for the port, as well, around workforce and economic development, and that's where we're really investing in programs to develop our own talent pipeline, but

also doing that in a way where we're seeking out opportunities for local workers and small businesses. additionally, we have our environmental justice and land use program area, and this is where we're really looking to make sure that we're doing our part as a utility provider to help support healthy communities, where our residents can live, work, learn, and play. and finally we have neighborhood revitalization, and that is to recognize that certain communities within our service area have more impacts than others, and so in those more impacted communities, we go above and beyond to make sure that we're trying to do our best to create that healthy environment for people to live, work, and play. so as a quick example, the community bay view hunters point is home to our largest sewage treatment plant, which processes 80% of the city's rain and wastewater, so that represents a disproportionate area of the community, so that's an area we really focus on. and last but not least what we're here to talk about today is our program around impact

partnerships, or you may have heard this referred to "community benefits in contracts." and this really represents the most progressive, most unique process that we have undertaken here at the s.f. p.u.c., and that is to say that for any contract we estimate is going to be valued over $5 million, we utilize that solicitation process through the r.f.p. to embed community benefit criteria to say to our private partners, come join us and give back to the communities that you're going to be doing work in. and this really is an important note that i'd like to emphasize, which is this process is completely voluntary for our contractors in the r.f.p. process. they are eligible to receive up to 5% of the overall r.f.p. points. typically, that's five out of 100, sometimes not quite out of 100, but it's 5%. and it's a voluntary commitment. that is, they can leave that part of the r.f.p. blank, and,

in fact, some firms have and they've still been a successful proposer, but practically speaking, most people like to get a little extra credit where they can, and so that is the point where firms will tell us what they are willing to give back to the community in the form of in-kind contributions, volunteer hours, and financial contributions. and those community benefit commitments go directly to the community. they don't come to the p.u.c., there's no role for us to have, directly into the community, and i'll explain a little more how that works in the next slide. and then these voluntary commitments, if the proposal is successful, they become part of that final agreement, and, therefore, are enforceable alongside all the other terms of the contract with these providers. this is just a snapshot of some of the firms participating in our community benefit in contracts or social impact partnership program. you may recognize some of these firms, they do work across the city, indeed, some of them are international, some of them are local. we have a nice mix of firms.

and diving in a little bit deeper into the program parameters, where the rubber really meets the road, again, these commitments that are voluntarily made by the private sector are meant to go directly into the communities impacted by whatever contract, service, or program we're operating in. and those go to 501(c)3 nonprofits or local schools, so that's how we verify it's, indeed, going directly to the community, there needs to be a 501(c)3, nonprofit, or school that receives those. goes hand-in-hand with that, but the benefits must not go directly to a city department or any particular employee, and they have to be delivered as zero cost to the s.f.p.u.c., and that's an important one, because for our rate payers, what we're really doing here is leveraging the existing corporate/social responsibility, or corporate philanthropy that these firms

already have and tapping into that and saying, you can create a better value for the community if you align it with local needs. so again, these are firms that have existing typically social corporate stability platforms or philanthropy and we're inviting them to localize that to the communities and that's at a zero cost to the agency. another important point is to mention that these community benefit commitments are separate and apart from any legal requirement. so, for example, we have a great local hire rule here in san francisco. a firm could not say, i'm going to use my community benefit dollars to comply with local hire. no, you already have to do that. that's why it's the law. here what they could do is say i'm going to use my community benefit dollars to put in place an internship program as a pipeline for local hire, for example. that's above and beyond those local rules. and lastly, those community benefits are really delivered throughout the life of the contract. as soon as we have our technical

term, a notice to proceed, where everything is all checked and ready to go, those commitments can start flowing to the community, but they are really meant to be delivered over the life of the contract. say, if it's a ten-year contract, that's how long they have to perform on those community benefits. and then lastly, because the s.f.p.u.c., water, power, sewer, we have a regional authority, we have projects and contracts across seven different counties in the bay area, and this graphic shows our system and how we work to align geographically where the scope of work is happening or the services with the local communities for the community benefits to make sure that, again, we're maximizing impact where we can. and i'm going to end with just a couple of examples of how these commitments have taken shape once they've been implemented, and that is specific, again, to our commitments in contracts. so the first is our s.f.i.p.,

our sewer system improvement program, and we have our city works internship program. and this is an internship program for youth from the southeast neighborhood, mainly district ten, 15 to 19 years old, where students, again, are partnering with our private firms to get inside their offices and really explore careers around engineering, architecture, urban planning, operations, finance, and even communications. those are all jobs at the p.u.c., and those are all things we're excited to have these youth exposed to through paid summer internship programs. to date we've had 147 interns participate in this program that, again, is funded through our social impact partnerships with our private firms. a next example that aligns a little bit more with our education strategy, as i said, we're grooming the next generation of environmental stewards at the p.u.c., for us, s.t.e.m. education, science,

technology, education, and math, is really important. and a few years ago the first new school in bay view hunter's point is decades was built, and it has a focus on s.t.e.m. education. and so our partners, our firm partners, have invested in spark, which is a national nonprofit that runs mentorship programs, and they partnered with spark to bring those mentorship programs to willie brown middle school, and as of this year we've had partners engage directly with the youth from willie brown for eight consecutive semesters. and lastly as an example just to show how this plays out outside of san francisco, one of our projects down on the peninsula, a firm, brown & caldwell, sponsored an organization called youth united for community action, which is an environmental justice nonprofit, and they funded the nonprofit to do research to educate the community about the history of water access in east palo alto,

so sort of that intersection of environmental justice and water in a community on the peninsula east of palo alto. so, again, all examples of how these commitments take shape once those contracts are signed and they become part of the agreement. and with that, i'll turn it back over to general manager kelly. >> so in closing, i just wanted to also say that we've been working on a national level, and there are other water agencies that are using the community benefit, because they see the benefit that it will have on areas that they impact. we have hampton roads, camden, seattle, atlanta, and louisville are agencies that are taking our community benefits and starting to apply them. and also new orleans. and so we are very proud of our community benefits, and so

currently we're working with the city attorney to actually write some legislation so that we can help legislate it, so we know that we've talked to the port, d.p.w., the airport, are all interested in having the flexibility of doing something like this. so we just want to make sure that, you know, we said it such that it won't be taken advantage of, you know, because there are certain things that you should not do, and we want to make sure those are known. and so with that, we're here to answer any questions. thank you very much. >> president brandon: thank you. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, commissioners, any questions or comments? commissioner gilman? >> commissioner gilman: i just wanted to thank the p.u.c. for the presentation and congratulate you on having a vision that is so inclusive of the community. i think sometimes the public struggles in seeing that

connectedness between government or government entities and the community, so i just wanted to really commend general manager kelly and your staff for doing this. i think there's a lot of great ideas that we can learn from here at the port, so thank you, it was very interesting. >> president brandon: commissioner makras? >> commissioner makras: i think we should just copy it. thanks for sharing. >> president brandon: commissioner woo ho? >> commissioner woo ho: i'd like to echo the comments of commissioner gilman and makras and say, as listening to it, it's a great program. and i certainly think we do want to implement something similar. i think many times we've talked about what we're doing, and we've been encouraging l.b.r. contracts, et cetera, and i think this is a missing link for us, because we do find many times we do not have l.b.e.s that have the skills and the background to be able to be part of contract, and it's that missing link to figure out how can they get over that hump,

they need the training and development, and a program like this would help to train them and give them that opportunity to be part of it. and so i think that's very important, because we can just keep reaching out and saying, put your proposal forward, but if you're not qualified, we're also very sensitive, because we do have a fiduciary responsibility to be sure that the people we award the work to are qualified to be able to do the work, and so we need them to help some leg up in terms of being able to get qualified and able to do the work. and i think this is the link that we've been missing, so i think that's important, and i think the fact to have a funding source, which is a great idea, and because we are, as i guess you probably don't do as many capital projects, but we do enough capital projects here that we could also have this be something as part of our regular program, so i think this is a regular idea, and i hope since we're going to be talking about contracts later today, i don't know what we can do to sort of even introduce it as we go forward. thank you.

>> president brandon: commissioner adams? >> vice president adams: general manager kelly, excellent job with you and your team. i really appreciate the due diligence. it was well thought out, your diversity, inclusion, stakeholder engagement, and i think it would be good if you could come once a year to remind us. i would like for you to come back, and i think this is a good education not only for the commissioners, but for the community. a lot of times the community doesn't know what you're doing, and a lot of times people just complain and stuff, and this lays it out. a lot of good things are happening, so i would ask director forbes we invite general manager kelly back next year, him and his team. thank you again for so much. please, let's continue to get this out, and i think this could help us what we're trying to do at the port. >> president brandon: thank you. general manager kelly and yolanda, you guys did a great presentation. thank you so much. i know that we have been talking about sharing all the incredible

work that your agency has been doing for a while now, so i'm happy that you are here. this is great, and at this point, the port is in the process of developing a community benefits program for the overall port, so this is right on time, and we can adopt this, and i've told you over and over we'll be your guinea pig in any way you want to share resources, and, you know, valuable information. so thank you so much. we really appreciate you taking the time and hopefully you can get back to your commission meeting. but thank you. we really do appreciate this. this is invaluable to us, and as we have our contracts getting bigger and we really need to have something in place to make sure that we are reaching the community, and that we are reaching our l.b.e.s and our workforce, our local workforce. so thank you very much. >> thank you, and i'll give a

final thank you to general manager kelly and yolanda. these are terrific ideas, and port staff is really diligently writing them down and looking forward to copying most of them, because you have done extraordinary work. and as the commission said, as we move into projects like the seawall, which is such a bigger scale for us, it's very important that we think of the framework in advance. so thank you so much for your time today, and that concludes my report. >> president brandon: thank you. thank you. i just wanted to say on the schedule of port commission meetings, there's one error. october 8th should be october 9th. october 8th is a monday. and then we have public comment. is this regarding the director's report? >> how are you doing? >> president brandon: good.

>> good. demetrius williams, bay view resident for 45 -- 47 years. i'm a union plumber contractor, small business, local business, minority business. my concern about bay view charlie walker brought up in the last meeting, he wanted to know from the sfpuc, the smell, we had a bad odor over in bay view that just lingered over bay view with the old sewer treatment plant, and we wanted to know how would the sfpuc control that, or do they know the smell, how the smell is going to be? and, how are you going to involve the bay view residents in on some of this, all this work that's going on in the bay

view? >> president brandon: is that it? >> yeah. >> president brandon: thank you, thank you very much. unfortunately, that's not on our agenda, but you might want to go to the sfpuc meeting and get answers to those questions. thank you. >> thank you. >> clerk: item 6b, commissioners report. >> i want to add my congratulations to vice president willie adams on his election, we're proud of you, and you've been a tremendous contributor, so that's very exciting for us and i'm sure we'll benefit, as well, so thank you. >> vice president adams: i would just like to say it's an honor to be elected as president of the most powerful union on the planet, the i.l.w., and it's an honor to follow in the foot steps of bridges, herman, and also a pleasure to be on the

commission, the san francisco port commission, and to serve with the best five commissioners, pound for pound, of any commission in this city. and the next thing i would like to say, i would like to give a shoutout to our former commissioner, who was just elected lieutenant governor, the first woman lieutenant governor in the state of california, and a woman who had a grasp of real estate second to none. and having her there has lieutenant governor of state lands, she was on the port commission, she understands unions, she understood working people. i think that will be an asset, her working with gavin newsom, our new governor, to help the port as we continue to move forward. thank you. >> president brandon: thank you. >> clerk: item 6c, the results of the 2018 federal and state legislative program and, two, the port's proposed 2019 federal and state legislative program.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. president brandon, newly minted president adams, congratulations, executive director forbes. daly dunham, special projects manager for the port, joined by brad benson, director of special projects. here to give an update and get your feedback on our 2018 legislative program and 2019 priorities. so a quick overview and significant happenings in the last six months. on december 13th, we are, after we take your feedback here, we'll go to city hall and present for the city, state, and legislative committee our priorities for the coming year, at that time the mayor's office will integrate with other city departments to come up with the city's priorities. so over the last six months,

r.m.-3, the transportation measure designed to -- bridge tolls, essentially, to relieve congestion on the bridges, pressure on the bridges. that went to the voters and was approved in june. we also had our new start award from the united states army corps of engineers and the administration, which was a very big event for us, the gold standard for partnering with the corps on the seawall. our infrastructure financing legislation, which i'll talk more about in a moment, did not make it out of the california senate, unfortunately, but we will try again. executive director forbes reported out and everyone heard our g.o. bond, we were successful there with over 80% of the vote. and we had also crafted some language in hope to benefit from the statewide water bond sb5, but that failed at the statewide ballot on the 6th.

so our priorities going forward, at the state level we do want to pursue infrastructure financing district legislation again. rm3 passed, and we're eyeing the china-based freight lining for that, and upcoming regulations to the california resources board could potentially have a big impact on our cruise business, so that's something we very much need to stay engaged. on the federal level, what we're proposing is the army corps' work plan, where they fund their various projects to -- because of the time we've already requested, year-two funding, pretty standard stuff. we also have another larger ask for a pier 70 project. and i'll get to all these in a moment. the cost-benefit analysis the way the court determines how they are going to fund big federal projects like the seawall are up for review, and

we'd like to weigh in on that as best we can. and then the central basin, given the developments at pier 70 and the shipyard, to hold that over for the future to see if it can work for whatever comes next. our i.f.d. legislation, we were really looking to the state to help us out and invest. we were fortunate enough to have assembly member chu as author and senator weiner as a strong advocate. if that didn't get out of the senate, there were a few other similar bills that died on suspense that also had a larger-than-average impact on the state's general fund. so we think that's why, but we're going to have a new budget, a new governor, and we'll take another crack at it next year.

starting soon in, you know, january and february, we'll begin our outreach for the next round of our work. part of that will involve refining some of our financial analyses to be more flexible, give a few different looks at what's going on. really, we want to emphasize more also that the state built the seawall, it's all on state lands, the state audit, you know, be involved somehow in this giant project. so far there's no real strong nexus. we feel strongly that there needs to be. and then there's talk about redevelopment 2.0. we're definitely going to be keeping an eye on that. cap and trade is something that is -- would be a bit novel for this use, but we do want to take a look at if there's any way that it could work for the seawall. there's a fair amount of money in that project, but it's -- it

would be a bit of a marginal application, so we are doing more strategizing on that. the seawall has our consultants and advocates, and we're working with them to make sure we get it right the first time. it's an idea, if not done correctly out of the gate, could have not the outcomes that we're looking for. and rm3 funding, fortunately, that passed in the ballot. we've been looking for $25 million. out of that we've been working, having an ongoing conversation, there are a lot of other priorities, so we're going to continue to be at the table for that to try to make sure that project is fully funded through this, which is the perfect funding source for it. ferries relieve congestion from the bridges, so we like where that money's going. and then lastly at the california air resources board,

has been really ratcheting down on the kinds of emissions that are allowable at ports, requiring plug-in, all kinds of e l things that are not particularly practical for us. there are a lot of other ports that share our concerns, so we've been working to make sure as those regulations come out in the next few years, that they are taking everything into account and are inherently economical and any other manner of hazard to our operations. on the federal side of things, the army corps' work plan is due out in about two weeks, so we'll know if we're going to get funded or not on these two big projects. the second is