[roll call] >> item 2, approval of minutes for the march 10 and march 19, 2020, meeting. >> so moved. >> second. >> second. >> all in favor? >> yea. >> yea. i'm sorry, we need to do a roll call. amy, can you do a roll

call? [roll call] >> chairman: commissioner adams? >> he's on another call. he'll join us later. >> chairman: okay. commissioner gilman? >> yea. >> commissioner macros? >> yea. >> chairman: commissioner wuho? >> yea. >> chairman: the approval of the minutes, march 10 and march 19, 2020, minutes? >> so moved. >> second.

[audio background noise] >> the "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, i indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> okay. the pledge o "pledge of allegiance". >> chairman: item 4. [the ""pledge of allegiance" said again]

[audio breaking up] >> okay. please be advised that a member of the public has up to three minutes to make pertinent comments on each agenda item. please note that during the public comment period, the moderate will instruct dial-in part parents to partici. audio promps will signal to dial in when they are enabled for commenting. item 5, executive director's report. >> good afternoon, commissioners, michael martin. i'll keep my items very brief, and then i'll hand it over (indescernable) for the revenue projection. i just wanted to say thank you. the first thank you is to all of the port staff that

have been serving as service workers, including our executive director elaine forbes. we've had 46 additional staff in addition to executive director forbes, answer the call for the city, and we've been involved in doing whatever we can to help respond to this crisis. it just makes me real proud to be a board employee, and being able to pitch in, as we have. and the second group i want to thank is the rest of port staff, who helped me greatly as i've stepped into this role as acting director. there is a lot going on, and i certainly couldn't do it without their help. i wanted to extend that thanks. with that, i'll hand it over to katie move ahead with the revenue updates. >> good afternoon, everybody! >> good afternoon. can you hear me? >> yes. >> good. i'm so pleased to be with you all this afternoon.

it feels like a little bit of normalcy, which i'm really excited about. i'm katie patrishioni, and i hope that all of you and your families are all safe and healthy as we continue to shelter in place. so in light of the economic disruption that has been caused by covid-19 and the subsequent shelter-in-place order, staff thought that it would be helpful to give the commission just a brief update on revenue projections for the current fiscal year, and to share some of our preliminary thinking on how it will affect revenue for the next two fiscal years. the city is going to

>> the next slide, please? in the current fiscal year, staff is projecting that revenue will fall short of the budget by 17%, which is about $20.8 million. this shortfall is going to come from a combination of loss to maritime revenue, reflecting the fact that there will be no cruise calls through the end of this fiscal year, as well as the fact that tesla has furloughed its factory, limiting auto exports at pier 80. and also from the real estate division, which is seeing losses throughout its portfolio. i do want to note that

covid's impact to our real estate portfolio will be discussed in greater detail in item 16, real worlding renrealregarding rent . the port expects to cover this revenue shortfall through $9.4million in expenditure savings, which includes salary savings from some vacant positions, savings to work orders with other departments, as well as reduction of contractual services to procurement of equipment, and to materials and supplies. we are also projecting that we will defer contributing $11.4 million in net operating income to future capital needs. and so with these changes, staff expects to be able to balance the port's budget for the current fiscal year.

the next line, but, of course, all of these revenue reductions are going to have an impact on the port and on our budget for some time to come. it is still quite early to understand what those impacts will be, but the finance staff has begun to develop revenue projections for the next two fiscal years. we have used an approach outlined by the controller, the mayor's office and the budget and legislative analyst in the city's joint report to model two different economic downturn scenarios. the first scenario is an extended impact scenario, which proposes a six-month recession, followed by a long recovery, through calendar year 2021. this scenario represents the low end of the revenue range that we would

expect. the second scenario is a more limited impact scenario, with a less severe six-month recession, and this scenario represents the higher end of our revenue range. you can see that this table compares projections from fiscal year 2021, and '21/'22, to the budget that this commission approved in february. you will note that the extended impact revenue scenario projects that we will see nearly 50% less in revenue next fiscal year compared tw to what we budgeted. the limited impact scenario projects a 34% reduction to the revenue we have budgeted for, -- in the

budget that we submitted in february. next slide, please. so staff believes that it is prudent to budget to the worst-case revenue scenario. we have three levers at our disposal that will help us address this financial challenge. first, we have approximately $67 million in available fund balance that can help to support the budget in the next two fiscal years. second, we have the ability to constrain operating expenses. and, finally, we can reduce the funding that we were proposing to allocate capital projects next year and the year after. used together, staff believes that these tools will allow the port port. to live within its reduced revenue, it will allow us to protect existing staff from layoff, and it will

support the port's efforts to meet the challenges that will come with recovery from covid-19. next slide, please. so, as i mentioned, the mayor's office has notified departments that the city's budget process is going to be delayed in order to allow us all to revise our revenue and expenditure projections. we still don't have a final schedule from the mayor's office for the budget process. but we expect that they are going to ask us to submit a revised budget in june. some time, my guess would be in the first couple of weeks of june. the mayor's office has also notified departments, including the port, who would normally have what is known as a closed two-year budget, that we are going to be expected to prepare a full budget again this coming winter. this will allow

departments to continue to refine our revenue and expenditure estimates as we get more information about the impact of covid-19 to our revenue. yesterday the finance unit asked each of the port's divisions to start to review their budget and to submit proposed budget reductions, equal to 50% of their discretionary non-salary spending. staff will compile this information into a revised budget proposal, and will bring that revised budget to the port commission for your review either at the end of may or the beginning of june, depending on the schedule that we get from the mayor's office. so that's my quick overview. and now nate cruise and i are happy to answer questions. >> chairman: thank you, katie. >> we really appreciate

those reports. and thank you so much for stepping up and supporting our staff and the port during this time. thank you for the weekly updates, and thank you for the new newsletter that is going out this afternoon (indescernable) that states what is going on. we really appreciate you stepping into this role. with that, i would like to open it up for public comment. we will open the phone lines, and take public comment from members of the public who are joining us on the phone. dennis will be our operator and provide instructions now for anyone on the phone who would like to provide public comments. >> do we have any public comments? is zenika with us?

>> jenika, are you there? >> chairman: her line is muted, so...

can you hear me? >> now i can, thank you. >> chairman: at this time, we will open the cue for anyone on the phone who would like to make public comment? you will be entered into the system in the order you dialed 1-0. others will wait on mute until their line is opened. comments will be limited to three minutes per person. the cue is now open. please dial 1-0 if you wish to make public comment. commissioner brandon, you have one caller on the line. >> thank you. >> chairman: let me activate them now.

commissioner brandon, that caller has left the line. at this time, we have no further callers on the line wishing to make public comment. >> thank you. we will now close public comment. >> chairman: excuse me, we do have a few coming in now. would you like to take the callers? >> yes, please. >> chairman: one moment. the line is now open. >> how many callers do we have on the line? >> chairman: we have four callers on the line. and there is one caller open. can we check if their

phone line is bridged? >> it sounds like the two are not connected. please stand by and i will try to reconnect the public comment line to this meeting. >> sounds like it works. kevin, do you need any further testing on my side? >> no. it sounds like it is bridged over now. >> chairman: okay. there is a number dialed into the cue. last four digits, 1169, is that a test number or not? >> why don't we open up

for public comment, please? >> chairman: okay. i'll do that. i'll take that first question. it looks like there are three callers in the cue at this time. i'll take the first question. >> caller: hi, can you hear me? >> chairman: yes, we can. >> yes, we can. >> i hear nothing. >> can you hear us now? jenika -- >> yes? >> can you unmute the 6558 number. >> i can't hear anything. >> jenika, can you unmute the 6558 number from the participant list? >> i'm looking for that number now. >> thank you. >> kevin, i don't see a 6558 number. >> is there a 5875 number?

>> chairman: yes, there is. i'll unmute that line. >> yes, please. >> your line is now unmuted. >> okay. so now, caller, can you hear us, caller? >> caller: i can hear you. can you hear me? >> yes, thank you. please proceed. >> caller: hello? >> yes. am i the one you're talking to? i'm not sure. >> yes. can you please introduce yourself? >> caller: my name is susan malaney, and i'm calling regarding the lot 344. is that intended to be a permanent -- >> i'm sorry -- >> -- homeless shelter.

>> susan, we do not have that. >> caller: i can't really understand what you're saying. i think you said you're not talking about that? >> no. can you hear me? >> caller: yes. >> okay. we have not gotten to that item yet. we are on the executive director's report. >> caller: oh, i see. >> the item you're to is item 6b. we really appreciate you calling. >> caller: yeah, i just didn't understand the way this was written, i mean, this schedule. so i didn't understand that. but i'll stay on the line for when you get to that. thank you. >> thank you. >> okay. >> claire: w >> chairman: we have two other callers on the line. may i take the next caller?

>> yes, please. >> chairman: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i just wanted to pipe in to say that this is very difficult to follow for the public. and we can't hear clearly what is being said. and everybody has got different items that we are calling about. hopefully this will go smoother, but if the audio continues to be in and out, then i do suggest that you continue it because the public does have a right to public speaking and to understand what is being said. thank you. >> thank you. are there any other callers? >> yes, president brandon, we have one last caller on the line. i will open up that line now. >> good afternoon,

commissioners. this is larry collins. calling from down here at pier 45. i run the san francisco community fishers association, which is the co-op down there. i was present for 35 years, and now i'm letting the next generation take that over. but we're still very, very involved in commercial fishing at the wharf. i've been on here since we started at 3:15. i mean, you guys had six weeks to get it together as far as, you know, not having meetings where

(indescernable). i'm an okie, and, you know, i don't understand this new modern communication. [audio is breaking up] >> i wanted to talk to you about commercial fishing in the future here in san francisco. you guys -- can you guys hear me? >> yes, we can hear you. >> caller: okay. i wanted to talk to you about what is going on with the supply chain and the seasons coming up and everything. and i don't know if this is the right place to talk about that? >> if you have a question or you want to make a comment, please do. >> caller: yeah, i do. i've been fishing 40 years out of wharftown here, and i've never seen times like this. we've got the salmon

season starting may 1st, and we -- i can't find a market that will commit. it's -- hik like i said, i've never seen anything like this. after 9/11, we saw a month and a half of the market difference. but there was a light at the end of that tunnel. but the way this is going now, we -- we're not sure what is going to happen. we cannot -- we unload for the producers co-op out of billingham, and they can pack a lot of fish into the freezer. but without the restaurants -- the restaurants used to by like 60%, 70% of this, the wild salmon. with the restaurants all

closed, we're a wholesale buyer and we sell to distributors and to restaurants and that. that market is gone. [buzzer] >> you're time is up. >> caller: everybody down there -- >> sir, your time is up. thank you for your comments. we will now move on to the next caller. >> caller: oh, wow, okay. >> are you still there? >> caller: i'm still here. >> okay, larry, thank you so much for calling. this is a very difficult time for everyone, and we totally understand. the port is here to work with you. so if you need some type of help, please feel free to contact the port, okay? >> i've been trying to contact the port, and i haven't gotten any calls back from anybody. >> okay. amy, can you make sure that you follow up with

larry? >> yes. will do, commissioner. >> thank you, larry. thank you for your call, and take care. >> caller: okay. thank you very much. i appreciate it. bye-bye. >> bye. jenika, is there anyone else on the line? >> president brandon, there is one more caller on the line. that line should be open now. >> is there a caller on the line? >> yes, the line is open. caller, are you there? i think the call has dropped, and there are no further members of the public wishing to make

public comment. >> thank you, jenika, seeing no more public on the public phone, public comment is closed. thank you. and thank you to everyone for your patience. i'm sorry. we've had three practice sessions, and this never happened. so, of course, they any practice makes perfect, but not in our circumstances. so thank you for bearing with us. i will open it up to the considerations. consideration wuhal? >> angio. all right. alall right.i'm going to try tod through my questions, because we're so far behind as far as time. katie, i do understand what you said as far as this coming year, that you could make it up through your spending the fund balance and cutting operating expenses and cutting capital projects. so that covers us this year. i also want to know what would our cash balance be. on slide three, can you just make sure that i

understand the three columns, the cy, the by, and the b1, what they stand for? yes, i can. so cy is the current first cal year, so fiscal year 1920. , and whaand what that is tellig you is that top line, we believe that -- we started this fiscal year with $67 million in fund balance. and at the conclusion of the year, we will have about $52.7 million in fund balance available, which then can be used to support "by," which is fiscal year 2021, and b1

is fiscal year '21- '22. >> and our fiscal year is through july? >> yes, ma'am. >> what is the cash position you're projecting at the end of this current fiscal year? >> the ending fund balance number, which is the final line on this slide, is that we would have $52.7 million in cash available to spend in the next two fiscal years, if necessary. >> okay. because i always get confused if fund balance is truly all cash -- >> yes, it is. >> it is truly 100% cash? >> yes. yes. >> okay. so you can cover, i guess what our shortage will be as a result of this unfortunate situation that we're in. if you project out, which you have not told us yet, i want to make sure i

understand the presentation, you have not yet told us how we're going to manage through next year's budget and the year after because now the cash position is going to look a lot worse. >> yes. so we -- what we're saying is that we are going to dip into fund balance, or those cash reserves, to help support the next two fiscal years. but that we are also proposing to reduce our operating expenses and that we would propose to significantly reduce the capital budget that we appropriate in the next two fiscal years. so the budget that the commission approved in february assumed that we would a ap appropriate -- it

will help address the shortfall. >> even though you don't have the details in total yet, and you're going to continue to work on the next two years' budget, how will it help to make the bond service? >> we will absolutely continue to make our bond -- debt service payments. we will be out of compliance with the bond covenants for our revenue bonds. we will not be able to meet our coverage ratio, which is something that we, of course, will have to disclose. >> you probably have not yet had conversations regarding that -- i guess at this point -- well, it also affects our rating, too. that eventually will affect our rating. >> yes, it may. we have been communicating

with -- the rating agencies have all reached out to the port for an update, and we've been communicating with them. we have not yet provided disclosure, but we thought that we should get through this meeting with the commission today. and then we actually really do need to put our budget together because it's the ne net operating income that will drive our ratio, and we don't know what that will be until we put together a revised expenditure budget. >> so we when see this again, as you said you'll be revivin revising this, the numbers could change again. this is a preliminary look? >> this is absolutely preliminary. we have six weeks of data, and not really even that, on revenue. so this is really based on some assumptions, but

we're hopeful that as rent comes in and we have a better picture of what revenue we're actually going to be able to collect, that then will help us make a more informed set of choices about what to budget for revenue next year. >> okay. so later, in another presentation, i think mike is going to present to us the rent collection sort of history that we have, which is only for one month, so it is not really a trend yet. are your budget forecasts based on some of those assumptions? or better than? or worse than? so we can correlate with all of the other information that we're getting today. >> yeah, so for the current year, when we first started making -- doing some projection on

revenue, our initial assumption was that we would receive no revenue, basically, for march -- most of march, april, may, or june. that was just our starting assumption, the absolutely worst-case scenario. but then we started getting -- we did receive rent payment for the month of march, so based on that, we have adjusted our revenue projections for the current fiscal year. so it's worst-case scenario, plus we did a little bit better than we were expecting to. and so that's really what 1920 is assuming. >> i'm going to reserve the rest of my comments, because i think it will affect how your revenue forecast on the second

round will look like as well. thank you, katie. i know there has been a lot of hard work to get mere, and i appreciate it. >> thank you. >> thank you. commissioner matthews? commissioner matthews, is he on mute. i'll go with the other commissioner -- >> can you hear me now? >> yes, we can hear you. >> thank you, katie. i have no questions. thank you for the presentation. >> thank you. >> thank you. katie, i have one question that might be for you, or possibly for mike martin. my question was more around what efforts the port has been taking, from a federal perspective, to

lobby and be included in the stimulus funding packages that have flown through congress? it is my understanding that the cruise ship industry is getting billions and billions dollars of support, and the airports will also be receiving large bailouts from the federal government. i would like to know what our lobbying efforts have been to see that some of that money flows to the ports. in the united states, particularly since we're not going to see cruise ships, revenue returns to the port won't be any time soon. >> mike, is that a question you can answer? i don't feel close enough to it to be able to give a good picture of what we're doing. >> i know that we've been working with the city's lobbyists to sort of merge our requests as part of the overall city strategy. we are a hard port port to

target in terms of our operations. we don't have a large container operation, and so it may be hard to define a relief program that goes directly to the port. so we've really been focused on trying to figure out the state and city relief opportunities for our tenants, but then would provide them with rent dollars that would help katie's projection. commissioner, i can get you more specifics. i can work with ben, who has been directing those conversations. >> thank you very much. that concludes my questions. >> thank you. vice president adams? >> gail, i might be able to answer a couple of your questions. first, katie, i appreciate the presentation. and i heard it in mary collins' voice, and i was glad they were directed back to the port.

we need an economic reset, and i don't know when that is going to happen. but that is something i think we're going to need. commissioner gilman, i talk to stefan, who is the vice president. these cruise ships, they're not registered here in the united states. they pay no taxes. and so carnival, which has nine lines under it, they're looking at laying up most of their ships. carnival got a loan for $3 billion, and they're trying to raise another $6 billion, but a lot of people, especially on the federal level, have a problem with carnival, like most of the cruise ships, they pay no taxes in america, and they're asking for the federal government to pay them out. i understand because most of my members, during this time of the year, from march to september, they get all of those hours from alaska to san diego. so it is going to hurt as far as man hours, paying into our health and welfare and our pension.

i hope that helps you. >> thank you. >> thank you, katie, for your report. i really appreciate you taking the time to put all of the numbers together. i know they are ever-changing, and we're not going to know for a few months what it really looks like. but i really appreciate you keeping track of it and making sure that we are able to help our tenants and help ourselves. >> yes. >> thank you. >> thank you, commissioner. it is good to see all of you. >> you, too. >> item 6a, resolution authorizing the executive director for a memorandum of understanding between the port and the department of homelessness, and supportive housing, to extend a term of the central waterfront navigation center for five years.

>> i'm joined today by emily coman, the director of strategy, with the department of homelessness and support of housing, or h.s.h. if i could ask the commission secretary to go to item 6a in the presentation report, and the next slide, please. >> it has been a long meeting, so i'll go quickly. sips thsince the opening, the central navigation center is an exceptional and innovative program for homness. homelessness.

the authorization of use of the navigation center is set to expire in june. the item before you is an action item, to extend our existing m.o. u. between the port, to operate the center for an additional five years. and, two, to uncrease thincreasethe rent to keep it consistent. the project conforms to the number of port and city-wide strategic goals, to extend shelter for homeless residents, and provide a pathway to permanent housing, and the port-wide goal to work with city and community partners to ensure that port improvements result in advances in social equity and san francisco's liveability. i will turn the controls over to emily cohen to

give you some background about the navigation center, the center's operation, and h.s.h.'s outreach. and then i'll return to talk about the proposed m.o.u.. thank you, commissioners, glad to be here with you again. it was the second navigation center we opened and has been a really critical part of our social service infrastructure, especially in our emergency shelter portfolio. as many folks are aware, we are still struggling with the homelessness crisis in our community. and we have over 8,000 people currently experiencing homelessness in san francisco. with 5,000 of those folks living unsheltered in our community. we have opened eight navigation centers since 2015, and currently have six in operation. we launched the central waterfront navigation center in 2017.

we contract with episcopal community services and the providence foundation to operate the program. e.c. s. brings significant shelter operation experience to this program, and providence also has deep roots in district 10, where the nav center is located, so they bring a partnership element to the site. the on-site services include case management, medical care, and housing services and assistance. since opening, the navigation center has served 681 unique individuals, and, you know, we have been able to connect over -- about 20% have left to permanent housing, which is actually quite high for a sheltering program. so we are pleased with the outcomes of the

central waterfront navigation center from a client perspective, and also pleased with the outcomes from a neighborhood perspective. we have been able to reduce encampments in the immediate area, certainly off warm water cove park and the surrounding dog patch area, there was the use of the navigation center. prior to the opening in 2017, h.s.h. and the port had a robust and community engagement process that led to the creation of a community agreement. which is -- especially an m.o.u. between the port -- not m.o.u., but an agreement between the port, h.s.h., s.f.p.d., and public works, in terms of our

responsibility to the neighborhood as this site opened. as we prepared to extend the project and come to you for approval of that, we have renegotiated that inner agency agreement between the four departments and the dog patch neighborhood association. the dog patch neighborhood association has also since issued a letter supporting the five-year extension that is before you today. additionally, we've worked closely with supervisor walton's office to engage the community and have discussions and they are also in support of the project. i'm happy to answer any questions you have about operations or specifics on the site. it is a 64-bed facility, so it is one of our smallest navigation centers. folks have be there, and it is truly beautiful. it is a very relaxing and welcoming environment. and i think it has been overall a tremendous success for us and for the community. so i'm excited to bring this before you today

and happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. >> the term of agreement, 42 months, for $570 a month, was consistent with thepra -- no rent was scheduled for the construction or removal of this site. the original and proposed m.o.u. allows for prompt termination, needed in connection with a port program or project. that is a trust consistent use. the new or proposed m.o.u. for your consideration today extends the terms of the original agreement. the new proposed

affective date is april 15th, 2020. because the original m.o.u. did not charge rent during the demobilization period, that period would be happening right now, between april and june. the new m.o.u. covers that period and has the april 15th start date, affective date. the new rent is 46 cents a square foot, which is consistent with market rate, based on perimeter schedule. no rent will be charged during the two month removal period at the end of this m.o.u. term. mayor breed introduced legislation next week to extend the vacation ordinance, granting access to 25th street for operation of the center. that legislation is tentatively scheduled to go before the land use committee of the board of supervisors on monday, may 4th, with a vote at the full board

of supervisors in mid-may. approval of this vacation extension is required for the m.o.u. to go into affect. that concludes our presentation, we respectfully request that you approve this item before you which extends the m.o.u.between the port and increases the rent to keep it consistent with our parameter rent schedule. i would like to thank the staff, and kimberly beal, from our real estate division, and representatives from the city attorney's office, who have come together weekly during these uncertain times to secure a seamless operation of the navigation center. thank you for your time. emily and i are available to answer your questions. >> thank you. can i have a motion? >> so moved. >> second.

>> i would now like to open it up to public comments. we will open the phone lines to take public comments from members of the public joining us on the phone. >> thank you, president brandon. at this time, we will open the cue for anyone who would like to make public comments. >> to alert the speaker that you have a question, press 1 and then 0. >> you will be entered into the system in the order you dialed 1-0. someone will let you know when your line is open. others will wait on mute until their line is open. comments will be limited to three minutes per person. the cue is now open. please dial 1-0 if you wish to make public comment. >> thank you, jenika.

do we have anyone on the phone? >> president brandon, we have one caller on the phone. >> please open the line to the first caller. >> the line is now open. >> caller: i would like to see a plan on how you will ramp the project up and how you will shut down the project. it will take lots of coordination to do this. i also think there needs to be a time limit on how long the r.b.s will be parked there. with all of the moving parts and partners in concept, who is accountable to complete this i and implement this strategy. i'm speaking to pier 94 and 60. >> i'm sorry, but we're not on that item yet. this is item 6a,

regarding the navigation center. do you have a comment regarding the navigation center? >> no. just a comment on 60. 6b. >> 6b. do you mind calling back? >> caller: i don't mind at all. >> are there any other comments? >> president brandon, there is no other members of the public wishing to make public comment on item 6a. >> so public comment is now closed. commissioner gilman? >> thank you, emily for your presentation. i'm in support of the item and have no questions. >> thank you. commissioner wuhal? >> yes. thank you, boris and

emily for the presentation. i did want to ask a couple of questions, since this is our first navigation center and we have the other one in embarcadero. in terms of some of the specifics you presented on your slide 6, and particularly since the purpose of this was to help people get permanent housing, and emily, you in particular commented that the 20% was a successful standard, two questions. one, what are the other navigation centers, have they been at that level or above or below? and what do we think can be done to improve that ratio over time? >> that's a great question. thank you, commissioner. so 20% is not ideal. we want this to be higher. but it is not -- the navigation center is the place where somebody stays while we work to house them. it is actually our larger housing placement system that is

responsible for achieving that outcome. and so it is a little -- it is a metric that everyone is curious about and wants to know about, and i agree, but it is actually not the responsibility of the navigation center to place people into housing. it is the responsibility of the homelessness response system and our coordinated entry work. so this is fairly consistent with what we see across navigation centers, in terms of the number of folks who we are able to successfully place into permanent housing. it really depends on who we bring in, and if they are among the most vulnerable, and when they are, we have a higher success rate of placing them into housing from navigation centers. so our goal is forever to increase that percentage and to increase our housing placement rate. and the way we do that is by, you know, speeding up our housing placement process, and by expanding our housing exit opportunities. and so we are housing --

our housing placement numbers, unfortunately, are limited by the number of units we're able to place into. as we build more permanent supportive housing and expand the rental sis assistant programs, we're able to speed up our system and have better success rates. so the navigation center is fully doing its part to make sure that every guest is document-ready, has their paperwork in order so they can move into housing. the slowdown is really the housing capacity on the back end. you know, navigation centers are intended to support someone in their journey as they transition to permanent housing, but, again, the success is really dependent on how much of that housing we have available for them to exit into. >> okay. so it is a supply issue, is what you're saying. >> yep. >> if the supply is greater, there would be a higher success rate? >> yes. that's a much more

succinct way of saying that. >> for curiosity now, now that we've gotten into it, and given where we are with covid and everything else, when is that supply going to ease up for the city? >> i think that's a great question. so over the last couple of years, we've expanded our permanent supportive housing capacity, both through the master and new development program. we have hundreds of more units we've opened in the last couple of years. so our housing placements actually have improved. through covid and through the crisis, we've been able to eliminate some of the red tape, so we've actually spead up our showfhousing process, even though we are on emergency response, which is one of the opportunities we've been able to move forward during the crisis. what the post-covid landscape looks like for

affordable housing is challenging to say. permanent supportive housing is certainly a priority for the city, in showing that we have the exits for folks experience homelessness is a top priority, but as the economic situation of the city changes, i think we have to see what we have in the pipeline and how the pipeline is affected by any economic downturn that we'll face. >> thank you. >> thank you. [please stand by]

>> a great asset. we work closely with them to renegotiate this agreement and to move forward with an additional five years because we had initially planned for just three. >> supervisor walton's office has been involved and supports the extension. >> i wanted to be sure because, you know, i would anticipate the embarcadero asking for extended time also. that concludes my questions. i am prepared to vote in favor

of this. >> this is doreen. can i add one more question following that question? i had intended to ask it and i forgot. when we talked about the embarcadero navigation center we were very clear about metrics so the neighbors would feel comfortable we were monitoring and controlling concerns they had. i wonder some of those safety and security metrics. with we using them for the navigation centers and is there regular reporting? >> that is a great question. each community is a little different in terms what they have requested and the data reporting back. the central waterfront dogpatch neighbors have the original metrics they asked us to report on. we renegotiated to be in alignment with what we report at the embarcadero since that is to the heart of what we are tracking on our system.

what we have made available upon request to the dogpatch neighborhood association is very similar to what we report monthly to the embarcadero neighbors. we have additional projects where we committed to similar reporting. >> it sounds like from the neighborhood response they have not had issues of security and safety? >> no, in fact, one of the president of the dogpatch neighborhood association e-mailed me. she had been on the line for the last hour. she had to get off during technical difficulty. the letter supporting the extension she hoped would speak for itself. she planned to be on the line. >> thank you. vice president adams. >> i am very supportive. i also live half a block from the embarcadero navigation center. things seem to be going well.

i live in this community and i voted to support it, and i think things are going a lot better than a lot of the negative people thought it was going to be. thank you both. i support it. >> thank you. thank you for the presentation. i think this navigation center is a huge success. i think that it is going to be successful because of so much community involvement and engagement prior to it happening. we set expectations and it was wonderful last year when they came and asked us to extend it instead of us going to them. i think it is extremely important that we keep the community engaged, keep the outreach going on and working with supervisor walton's office to make sure it continues to be a success. thank you for all of the work you have done to make this such

a success. >> thank you, president brandon. >> amy can we have a roll call vote. [roll call]. >> resolution 2017 passes unanimously. >> thank you. >> item 6:00 p.m. request approval ratifying rent deferral under be the mar27, 2020 staff issued executive directive regarding enforcement of lease obligation during the covid-19 shelter-in-place orders and extending applicability through may 31, 2020. >> good afternoon, commissioners, michael martin.

pleased to be before you to talk a little bit about the existing staff issues, rent deferral policy and resolution to extend it. also to use this time to rough out some additional discussions we are having regarding additional relief beyond limited deferral and forbearance of eviction in the policy. >> next slider, please. as a recap i think we recall the fast moving events of the crisis starting with the emergency declaration in february and the week that began with the bay area shelter-in-place order monday the 16th. the mayor's moratorium on tuesday the 17th. statewide order on thursday, 19th. over the course of that week and the following week, real estate

staff engaged to discuss what is best to do in sort of the crisis mode we were in to address our policy was there because we wanted the same pa platform. we would have different agency considerations for further relief. next slide, please. the key aspects of the port staff issued executive order are listed here. it covers all tenants with a few exceptions m.o.u. with city agencies, agreements for each harbor.

we are not extending relief to master tenants not extending relief to subtenants. the master tenants have been doing so. we will verify that. relief did not modify lease provisions. rent is due. it waives late fees for march and april if those are paid late due to covid-19. we established the forbear residence for eviction for unpaid rent for covid-19. by the terms it said this was a temporary bridge to further relief. we knew there needed to be a follow-up conversation with you, commissioners, because or staff authority only goes so far. this is a part of the strategy to weather this storm to come out on the other side as we touched on during the executive director's report with the financial projections for the port's budget.

next slide. to that point we did a quick review of april rent collections. i want be to thank the real estate and finance division staff who really worked hard to do this sort of on top of the regular duties to keep the ship running. we looked at april rent collections april 15th. weep get around 95% or more of tenanteds paying. this time we had 201 out of 520 paying. significant decrease. categories, we saw a really surprising and positive development where 47% of commercial tenants paid rents in april. these tenants are the fixed rents leases shed-type tenants. the key backbone of the portfolio. that wasn't encouraging they

were able to manage resources and pay rent. on the other end of the spectrum are tenants that pay based on a percentage of revenues. 13% of those paid for reasons understandable in light of the severe restrictions under shelter-in-place order. total payments to the april 2020 rent we received approximately $2.5 million on the $3.8 million not paid. sorry about that. with the total coming to around $6.3 million. next slide, please. this is rent collections by portfolio from left to right fisherman's wharf, waterfront, ferry plaza, southeast portfolio, china basin, central waterfronts and this seems as

though the southern waterfront performed the best in terms of collections or rentses paid. the opposite end fisherman's wharf with those participation rent tenants, those rents were not paid. next slide, please. today's resolution proposes your approval to extend tenant relief structure through may 31st. now expires april 30th. the goal for this extension is to allow further time to observe the impacts of shelter-in-place and when the restrictions will be lifted. this was written yesterday. before yesterday we heard the mayor say the extension of the order will likely run through may. this extension period doesn't allow us to see what happens after shelter-in-place.

i think it allows time to come back at your next meeting and perhaps the may 26th meeting to really flush out the kind of tenant relief proposal you would like to see going forward. today this would incorporate the terms of the march 27th order with the extension and one additional change which is the extended relief does not apply to new tenants signing after april 1st. they are in discussions and are aware of circumstances. to avoid any doubt if they are signing a lease with rent they should sign with expectation to pay under the correct situation. this is new tenants with new leases. it is not intended to capture existing tenants signing lease renewals. because those tenants are there unlike the new tenants they were

there before the specifics of this crisis were evidence. next slide, please. so that is the summary of today's action. this is a bit of hybrid item. i want to outline the thinking we are doing on further relief strategies. the guiding principal is each tenant who can become current on rent by the end 6 by june of 201 is a net financial benefit to the port. the dire projections shown in the executive director's report, but getting that rent in the door as structured under the lease is our primary goal. iit avoids someone not able to survive that long. if they aren't able we have the uncertainty of eviction proceedings and potential of the

real estate market and longer vacancies and requiring lower rental rates. all of that, you know, is a lesser outcome to the one where we can find the right balance and nurse the tenants to the point to operate again and pay rents. the strategy is to strike the te balance to try to get out there to do business which they are incentivized to survive. we think we can find a way to further incentivize that and keep them to be rent paying tenants for the port. this strategy underscores a need to establish conditions further conditions for this additional relief. things like tenant in good standing, the tenant taking action to mitigate damages such as applying for federal and state relief programs. those are what we will outline

further in subsequent meetings so you can understand what we are trying to do and why we are managing the port's limited budget to incentivize the tenants to survive. i think the backbone of the further strategy would be general deferral and repayment. we are in discussions with other agencies as well looking at this potential approach for their tenants. right now the existing march 27th order establishes repayment of june 30th. we retain that for this proposed resolution to keep the limited nature of this initial foray limited, if that makes sense. we realize to have several months of rent piled up payable on a date that near in the future is going to be a burden

for these tenants not able to pay rent in the first place. we recognize they will need additional time to generate revenues to pay those rents. we consider is there a structure in place to have a longer deferral period so there aren't late fees charged would allow for a point in time to incentivize full payment and interest comes in after that. if you weren't able to incentivevise payment after the first date there will be a low interest rate not over burdening the tenants but incentivizes them to pay at the earliest date. one potential structure is to waive late fees andy fault -- ae default interest as long as paid by december 31st. any amounts unpaid that date repayment over the following six months with interest so long as

it is fully paid by june 30, 2021, on the next fiscal year timeline. that is something i think we are working on. we welcome your feedback on those specifics and will come back to you with a more specific proposal. next slide, please. also looking at targeted strategies for specific tenants in particular situations. a couple are here. percentage rent tenants -- our retail operators and maritime excursions not able to operate and generate income. all of these tenants have minimum base rents which are set according to operating and market assumptions when they sign the lease. yeah, we can operate and pay this represent in the down

market. unfortunately, those are challenged. one approach would be to forgive base rents during the public health orders and phase-in over time as we see how the businesses can get back operating. one great example is restaurants. if the shelter-in-place orders evolve where they are allowed to do dine in but limit seating that under cuts ability to generate the incomes before the crisis. this is something to think hard about. those are definitely a set of tenants that we think has to have a separate -- probably would deserve a targeted relief strategy. similarly, we may want a targeted relief for other tenants specifically ones that

advance the port's mission. rent forgiven for certain aspects of the fishing industry in light of challenged seasons. that is something we will consider and bring back subject to direction to share today. lastly, referencing the staff report, the retail leasing policy including direct negotiation exception for extensions. in most situations that is reserved for capital improvements. however, is there is an additional direct negotiation exception for economic downturns. while this is not a traditional recession measured in the same way as prior recessions, we think this is an economic downturn so we may bring back to you some considerations that if retail tenantses are willing to extend leases we may factor that

as part of the workout strategy. to close with our staff recommendations, we would recommend the port commission approves the attached resolution to is this item extending the existing march 27th order through may 31st. any advise you have to us as well going forward would be welcome as we structure the next item to talk about further relief. with that i am happy to answer any questions. >> thank you, mike. may i have a motion? >> so moved. >> second. >> we will open it up for public comment. we will provide instructions for anyone on the phone to provide public comment. we are on item 6b. if you have public comment on

6b, please join us. >> thank you. at this time we will open the queue for anyone on the phone for public comment on item 6b. >> . >> do we have anyone on the phone? >> president brandon, there are no callers on the phone wishing to make public comment on item 6b. >> thank you. >> i am sorry. we have a line in. we have one caller on the line.

>> . >> i want to thank the board for taking care of the commercial fishing industry when we had the crab disaster. this is much worse. if any of us can talk to anybody down there and tell them how it is going, we would be more than welcome to help. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> at this time there are no further members wishing to make public comment. >> thank you. seeing no more public comment on

the phone, public comment is now closed. >> >> i thought the staff presentation is well thought out, and i support the rent deferment with the understanding of a repayment plan later. i am glad to hear that you are pushing out the time for repayment beyond the date in the presentation. i would ask you to think hard of six months after the shutdown is lifted and maybe up to a year of time for repayment. obviously waiving late fees and interest for that whole period of time. if you have a drop dead date one year later whatever is not paid would fall under the normal

terms and conditions of lease for past due represent. i don't necessarily support the idea of excluding people that signed leases recently. i think the raw fact the shutdown is statewide and people can't do any business, we should extend the same relief to that tenant that we are extending to all tenants throughout our portfolio. i think in general if a tenant is asking for relief for three or four months rent and we put them on a payment plan, i am fine with that. if there is a larger concession asked like a waiver of rent i would encourage us to have a policy that they provide us with full financial statements. if it is an llc or company,

financial statements on the principal that is running the company so we can have a sense of their overall financing and then we can negotiate in a better position. i would caution us to balance out loans and grants that tenants can get to run their business like the ppp loan program and if they do, they should be able to pay us their rent. we shouldn't put the port in a double jeopardy position that they get money and they get relief from us so they get two reliefs. if they are getting relief from the federal government through that program, the program allows 25% of their loan to be forgiven if they pay it towards rent. i just feel we should incorporate that so we can best negotiate the deferment and

repayment of rents. those conclude my comments. >> thank you. i would echo that. i think we should, and i don't know if we have. find out if tenants do access ppp and now there is another round that we should make sure that they are not on a full payment and the deferment plan. if it is not able to cover the full rent we should get a share of it. that makes sense. it would be fair not to get anything. we should with whatever is written on the deferment and repayment program that there is

reference that if they are on ppp plan there is some payment of represent. if not 100% proportion at to what would make sense. in addition to if they want to have some other program on an individual customized basis, in addition to financial statements we want to get a sense from that tenant what the business plan is. i think what we want to be careful is we don't want someone on a payment deferment plan we can see the business is not going to survive. we would rather for them and us to be able to make a decision on whether we have to go forward with a different tenant going forward, not just drag it out forever. we don't want them vacant. we want some activity going on, and if they can't make it, then we need to figure out away. i don't know how to incorporate

that. how do they demonstrate there is activity even if it is under certain restrictions in terms of capacity of the restaurant? that they are trying to obviously recover and we just don't have an empty site not operated. i think that is important. i think the third you mentioned some of the special categories that we all know that have been hit the hardest, retail. some of our commercial office tenants and when i think about pier 9 or the other tenants that next to pier 1, that they are working remotely. even under the shelter-in-place it is not like no business activity is occurring. they are just working in a different mode and continuing. it is different than having a direct interface with the public

to succeed in their business model. i think we have to think about those tenants differently if they ask us for deferment afternoon and repayment of relief. obviously they may say we are not able to get our business revenue up and running. it is different from the people that rely upon the restaurants where cash is a daily affair to pay expenses. it is a direct business model where the other companies are able to continue and are able recover quickly. we have to make a distinction. we need to be able to customize and understand. we want to be fair and balanced but we don't want to be taken advantage of. i would offer those as further thoughts as you come back on the next round to have this in your thinking.

>> commissioner gilman. >> thank you, mike, fo for the report. i share in the commentses my fellow commissioners. as part of us expending the item, i am excited to see what you bring back the end of mayor april to keep the viability of the waterfront. some comments or food for thought. i am very interested in seeing the street carve out programs based on business model and type. going back i think our office tenants have a very different situation than our.

>> we need to anticipate the ability to reopen will be later versus office and some curb side retail that his team is working on? i think we need different approaches to different tenants going back to public comment. it is unclear when it will take place. i don't see how you social distance. >> i think the clients working

so io might be back faster. i would like to keep the waterfront viable. i support the item. >> thank you. >> i have a great concern about how many businesses survive this covid-19. i hear 50% may not survive. a lot of restaurants. we don't know. i am in favor of helping as many people. i remember when mayor lee was alive. we helped the crab fishermen. we didn't take rent. that is part of our mission. i am concerned how many businesses will survive. i am sure victor is in real estate. he would know more. i don't have a gauge how many

businesses will survive. i will support the item. >> thank you. >> thank you for the presentation. i know that until we know exactly when this order is lifted and when each of the businesses can get back to work is going to make a difference in what we recommend for our tenants. we are supportive of the extension and look forward to helping our tenants going forward. thank you. >> thank you, commissioners. >> one more comment for direction for staff from my lens of this? >> yes. in the workup that you provided you talked about doing some lease extensions basically in the recession.

if the recession comes to have authority to extend leases from three to five years. i would caution that policy. why on earth would you want to negotiate a lease when the market is at the worst and give more time? we have a strong retention policy on tenants. the tenant is in good standing. they know and we know that they can continue at their site long-term. we cannot have any policy that suggests that we will vacate a place for a tenant so they have a lot of comfort that they can stay long-term. i would encourage us not to negotiate leases when the market is at the bottom. that is the additional component i would like staff to consider. >> thank you, commissioners.

>> thank you. if there is no further discussion. can we have a roll call vote. [roll call]. >> thank you. >> resolution 2018 is approved unanimously. >> item 6:00 p.m. request approval of memorandum of understanding for 3032 as the city test sf covid-19 testing sight and waiving rent and rent waivers for associates llc. 337. for use of a portion of seawall in support of the city public

health response to the covid-19 crisis. next slide please. >> the dialogue with the city emergency managers as this public health response is escalated. a number of things. following the headlines.

those are on the mind of the emergency managers of the city.

>> the parking charges for march totaled $7,603 and the april amount is expected to be similar

and a fairly d low amount. they have all been moved to the backland site and we'll discuss that in the next item. next slide, please. in these discussions with the tenant, we've become aware of other requests for space that they've been involved in and we want a waiver of rent for activities that we think are tightly defined but obviously supports the covid-19 response and the conditions we proposed are that the seawall at 33710 will not collect rent either so that the port would not ignore revenues being generated and the activity would be performed in direct coordination with the city's emergency operation center and so that we're not

doing sort of a wild cat set of services that they're not aware of and don't think are well targeted and number three, and our expectation is no fees and someone may need to collect a small amount of money as part of this but we feel like as long as it's worth it. they would provide these activities so we could keep track of what is happening on our property and a calculation of the rent that would have been paid as they did for the rv parking so that we can track that and hopefully apply for relief funds in the future. next slide, please. so, to close, the staff's recommendation is three different pieces. we've liked to support the commissioner to approve the attached resolution which does three things.

authorize entry no the 3032m.o.u. and approve the waiver of rent for the city test sfu described above. it would approve a retroactive waiver of rent for the rv staging complete seawall lot 337 and a prospective waiver of rent on the conditions i just mentioned for seawall lot 337 in the future. with that, it concludes my presentation. i am here to answer any questions. thank you. >> so moved. >> second. >> thank you. we will now open it up for public comment. we will open the public comment. janice will be operator and provide instructions for anyone that would like to apply public comments. if you have public comment on 6c we would love to hear from you.

>> thank you, president brandon. at this time we will open the cue for anyone on the phone who would like to make public comment on item 6c. >> this conference is in question and answer mode. to alert the speaker you have a question press 1 and then 0. >> you will be entered into the system in the order you dial 1-0. the system will let you know when your line is open. others will wait on you until their line is open. comments will be limited to throw minutes per person, the cue is now open. please dial 1-0 if you wish to make public comment on items 6-c. >> thank you. do we have anyone on the phone? >> at this time, there look to no callers on the line wishing to make public comment on this item. >> seeing no more public comment on the phone, public comment is

closed. commissioner. >> thank you for this presentation. so, i just wanted to confirm that seawall lot 337 is just used for testing. is that the only use being contemplated? >> they had been in conversations with a medical group looking to do a test site but it's fallen on the backburner. they're in discussion besides food distribution and i don't think anything's sort of ready to move tomorrow but it was something that we wanted, if they were going to move quickly we wanted to be ready for it. >> obviously, the giants don't know when they're going to start playing again. so this site is going to be available for at least -- indefinitely for a period of time, right. >> correct. >> ok. and so, it will be tied to, once they know, if they get permission to be able to hold ball games with audience and this site is obviously ideal for

other purposes. >> that's exactly right, commissioner. i think they are very realistic about where the likelihood of having large gatherings and parking at the site so i think they've been trying to do their part and have been looking for opportunities to partner with people so i think they definitely share that assessment of going forward plans for the baseball team. >> and so, they were paying us bait rent for that lot, is that correct. there was a percentage based on the parking? >> that's correct. it's a high-season low-season structure and it's quarterly so they hadn't gotten to the high season. that's where that lot will be challenges but right now they're current on their rent. >> so if we go ahead with this recommendation, i wanted to be clear, then, they're obviously not going to charge and they control the lease there and

they're asking us to wave the rent too so they're zero for both sides? >> there's no rent for this specific set of rvs and the covid-19 responses in the future but any other parking would be subject to percentage rent. >> ok. >> we're just waving one piece of what was payable for the month. >> we don't know even if it's a food distribution, we don't know how long it could last. it could last for several months too. >> correct. we wanted to make sure it did not extend past the emergency declaration. >> they're going to be also trying to judge what you are talking about that they don't want conflicting demands on the site if in the future we're coming out of this situation and so we'll be mindful of that issue but we're thinking they're going to be as able to determine that as anybody.

>> so i guess now it is tied to when shelter in place is lifted for the city? >> i don't know this item was written that way but we can certainly take that up. >> we want to be clear on what we're approving in times of the timeline for this and the covid-19 impact will go beyond the shelter in place being lifted. so at least we know how long the period of time or is there someway to determine that? >> another item that we just -- so the m.o.u. specific calls out the end of the emergency declaration which is different than the shelter in place order and so we're expect particular to last beyond the relaxing of

shelter in place and so that was really to us the outer bounds of when covid-19 responds would be appropriate and also that is probably the bounds of when those activities can get potential reimbursement from relief funds because the emergency declaration is what defines the emergency. so, if the commission wanted to amend the perspective waiver to limit it to the period of the emergency declaration that would be totally appropriate and limiting in that way. at least it's clear. >> at least. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner gilman. >> thank you, mike. i'm supportive of the item and i want to share the thought that the commissioner brought up. we should limit it to the emergency declaration and i also

think that while this leads into the next item, i'm proud of the port that we are stepping up. we have large swaths of land that are surface parking lots, staging areas and back lands. i think right now, with what we're seeing from food bank lines, seniors who cannot leave their homes to get meals that we should do everything that we can to be encouraging any of our lease holder who have land that can be utilized by the city and county of san francisco or by relief efforts to utilize them so i'm really proud actually of the ports that were stepping up on all of these sites to be in conversation about how we can lend a helping hand to our fellow san franciscans in this crisis. >> thank you. >>

>> do you want me to go? >> ok. >> good job and i'm on board and when my fellow commissioner says so i'm good, thank you. >> commissioner. >> thank you so much for the presentation. thank you for all the work that is being done at 3032 to help the city with the testing and for staging. i'm still a little confused about approving it and are we saying if we need more testing

or if we need more space for saving or what exactly where we would wave the rent. >> commissioner, we were realizing these two ideas were out there and test site and the food distribution. we were trying to create a set of conditions that would make sense and would be sufficiently limiting so you would have confidence that things happening on port property may sense in the covid-19 response. that is why we linked it to the emergency operation center. we think people are trying to do things that are helpful but if they're uncoordinated with people at city, at the months coney center that are drive the city's response, it doesn't argue as well for us to provide concession because we're part of the city and we should support the official response. our goal was to link this to

direction from the emergency managers who say we need the food distribution and a site of this size and we verify this and we'll move ahead with the waiver. wore open to coming back to you with each item but in this fast-moving world if these conditions where it could be molded to make sense to you, i think that's why we were proposing this as something that could move forward and potentially capitalized on those opportunities. >> my person is we have certain size available for certain things. not all sites are the same. because the rvs were staged there, i'm not sure why they couldn't stay there and create and in the same effort being done at lot 344 so i'm making sure that we're being open, transparent and fair with our

properties and our waiver. i think personally that, it's hard for me to leave it open-ended when we're not using the site equally. i think i would prefer to know what we're doing if we can. because this situation is arduous i can understand there's a present need but at this point in time, there's just -- there are no recommendations and there are just ideas made. >> there are two ideas that have got more defined than that but your point is well taken and we are move away from the perspective waiver and just come to you with each item as it's refined and as the details are

available. >> now that we're back to meeting regularly, we can decide on each item or each recommendation and like i said, the less it's a real emergency, like if we were going to use part of the back land to set up a testing site for the community that really needs it. there are efforts that our emergencies and efforts that are part of the emergencies. i want to make sure when we are waiting, the that we are do it fairly. so i would appreciate if we can approve the first two items and if possible, bring back any other recommendations to the commission. >> that makes sense to me. you would need a motion of the commission to amend the resolution but that's certainly making sense if that's the approach you prefer to take.

>> ok. >> with seawall 377, raising $7,000 is not a big deal but what is the maximum amount of rent that could be waved at that site? at seawall lot slot a. >> it could be a large amount. if they took up a lot of the space. we're trying tuesday the metrics of the lease and it's not just parking spaces if you are doing it. they also do special events there and there's a square footage rate for those so it could be a significant amount. if that's going to happen i totally understand bringing that back before we wave a large sum like that. >> now between 332 and 344, we're waving $250,000 a month. so he think we should make the

decision case by case. so i ask for an amendment to the motion to approve the use of 332, 3032 and 3374 the rv staging that has happened and any further rent waivers should come before the commission. khyan a second. >> second. is there any conversation regarding the amendment motion? >> can we have a roll call vote. [roll call]

[roll call] >> so item 201 has passed as amended. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> item 6d request approval of a memorandum of understanding with the human services agency for use of approximately 3.4-acre portion of seawall lot 344 located in the back lands of pier 94 in support of the city's public-health response to the covid-19 crisis and waving rent for such use.

>> good afternoon, commissioners, this is randy. communications director for the port. i will be brief as i have been tipped there are several members of the public who are interested in providing public comment on this item. i do want to take the opportunity to walk you through a little bit about the proposed m.o.u. that we are considering with the human services agency. this would be for an agreement to use a portion of seawall lot 344 to provide temporary rv and trailer shelter to unhoused and sheltered people experiencing homelessness within district 10. district 10 is home to our southern waterfront and many communities that are at high-risk of exposure to covid-19. as will be discussed, people experiencing homelessness are at increased risk as well and

providing people coming in off the street and thin out the shelters within district 10 and to provide for greater social distanceing and come out people and protecting the wall of all in district 10. the agreement would be as referenced earlier through the end of the emergency declaration. at this point, it is unclear when that will happen and and the city a proves managing and addressing this disease. that said, it's unclear when it will end. ination d. the request would be to wave rent for this use and the use, the monthly rent would be $52,520.30.

joining me are several members of the human services agency as well as the department of homelessness and supportive housing and public-health said described the operations of the site and everything that will be happening there. trent roar, the executive director of the human services agency had to run. he had another commitment -- >> i'm still here. >> i'm going to tee it off and then go to the mayor's meeting. we have people and stop and hand it over to. >> i have a 6:00 call with the mayor and head of department heads. i can be a little late. i just wanted to tee up this for you all to give you a context, the city context within which we're asking for your approval for this m.o.u.

we have slides, this would be the next slide but as you know, mayor declared the emergency on february 25th -- [please stand by]

>> this provides the hospital not to discharge them to the street. so next slide, with respect to specifically homeless, clearly, are were two main issues that we're struggling with or had to address with respecaddress withh crisis. one is living in the navigation center or homeless on the street and clearly significant risk of acquiring covid if one is

homeless where it's difficult to do handwashing stations and difficult to have the separation that's needed. the other is to get vulnerable individuals off of the street and a safe place to isolate and we call these shelter-in-place housing sites.

we wanted this for people who are under investigation, meaning they were tested and a place to isolate and couldn't because of their homeless status. and sheltering people so they could shelter in place for physical distancing and these are folks on the street and front-line and city workers being hospital clinicians and others. and so far, we have do have dons primarily through hotel rooms and 2700 hotels rooms through the city and i believe that's the title.

learning about the virus from the department of public health, what would be appropriate interventions and, for instance, we thought maybe a congregate shelter would be an ok intervention and turns out it's not an ok intervention and we had to pit it from that in musconey west, for example and we are doing other congregate sites. we have activated two congregate sites for individuals who have run the course of the covid and the guidance from health that the antibodies that they've produced from having covid would allow them to be in a congregate setting. we have that as well as

multiservice center south, which is the largest shelter. in addition, we are activating two other congregate sites looking at as positive medical shelters. one is at a division circle and the other is in negotiations right now on the west side -- or northwest side of san francisco. i bring those to your attention because we had, weeks ago, months ago now, secured 29 recreational vehicles that the city leased for potentially covid-positivetive people or other populations that we weren't yet sure needed an intervention. in addition, the state and my staff will talk more about this has provided 119 trailers through the emergency services for us to use as we deemed yesterday.

thesewould be similar to the hotel rooms in the city and these would be, basically, trailers and rvs that would start as hotel rooms as isolation for d10 and so that gives you a sense, another option for us to try to get to our goal of providing 7,000 isolation and quarantine areas for homeless individuals, as well as those covid positive. so i'll turn it over to, i think, doris barone, who is my lead for the entire activation and then we have on staff, on

this call the representatives from the public health talking about outreach to the community and staffing and department of public health talking about staffing and supports on site. and it's 6:08, if my call ends in time, i'll come back to answer questions but i need to jump on my policy call with the mayor. >> thank you so much and we really appreciate your time. >> thank you, commissioners, and hopefully i'll be back in a little bit. >> great. thank you, trent. and thank you commissioners. my name is doris barone. i'm the human service's agency manager for covid-19 response and i've been working with a really great group of partners, getting this project together and so, i am looking forward to giving you a brief snapshot of our operational picture around this and i'm joined by emily

cohen from shh and dr. bennett that may be able to add some additional contexts that i use through the next few slides and we'll be able to answer questions. so as trent mentioned, we do have currently a group of recreational vehicles that will be -- or we are proposing to have at seawall lot 344 and it's a total of 29 recreational vehicles, as well as 29 residential trailers troye provy the state of office of emergency services and part of their effort is to provide in-door effort to protect them from covid-19. those trailers did arrive in san francisco earlier last week and are now kind of being set up and so we are kind of getting ready to roll this out and push it along and so it's a portal of

120 vehicles that we're proposing at this site. in support of the city's efforts, port staff has worked with city agencies and private parties to make portlands available to us on an urgent basis for safe shelter-in-space. a portion of the backland seawall lot will be proposed or is proposed for the vulnerable homeless population, specifically those living on the streets or shelters or in district 10 and that is our focus area. dph, we anticipate opening the site to mid-may but the date is to be determined.

this is publically-owned land and large enough to provide adequate acreage from fire precession and five plus acres and difficult to find in san francisco and this was an ideal site because of the size and it falls within the jurisdiction of the law enforcement agencies and that is an important piece to note. there's a list of other sites that were previously evaluated and both include pier 30 and 32,

pier 80, the candlestick area and the presidio and none of those panned out and seawall lot 344 remains at the top of the list through the duration. next slide, please. this is an image of the way that the trailers were delivered to san francisco and as you can see, these are trailers provided by the state of california and this image is just a starting point. next slide, please. and so, here we're talking a bit more about operations and then, again, we'll have the dph and

hsh and what they'll be doing in partnership and we will manage and operate the site collectively. together we'll create a service plan for the shelter that will include medical and nonmedical care services and 24/7 on-site monitors with the same model we're using for congregate sheltering, as well as hotel sheltering. and we will also be doing meal delivery, supporting animal care and providing on site, as well. we'll be required to follow the same orders as the general public and only leave for essential trips with essential face coverings. and we want to provide people with everything they need to safely shelter in place or remain on the site. while pier 94 location does not have any residential neighbors, we're approaching this shelter

in a responsible way and addressing the safety and health concerns of the surrounding port tenants and the community. hsa will engage san francisco law enforcement and we'll double up on security efforts here to provide patrols and around-the-clock oversights in the shelter and surrounding community and we're drawing on the expert expertise of healthce professionals, as well, and we'll protect deaths from the spread of the coronavirus. dph will provide clinical support to the site and dr. bennett, i'm not sure if you're on the line and would like to speak a little bit to dph will be providing. >> thank you. as service for all of the sites

for both congregate and non-congregate sites that we've created, together with hsa and hsh and this would be one where we would have some level of nursing care and physician care available to people, the monitor and screenings will be done by both staff at the site, but also as needed by our clinical staff and those screenings would lead to decisions about testing and about placement or treatment for people based on what we came up with. so it would be as needed, regular check-ins and then what happens would be based on what we found. >> great, thank you. emily, do you have anything to add in terms of hsh.

>> hi, everyone, this is emily cohen from the department of homelessness and supportive housing. i think doris covered well the services we plan to provide on site. certainly, you know, meals, care support, health screenings, which have been a big part of our strategy and all of our sites, site monitoring, case management and so similar to what we provide in other homeless service programs and i can move us through the next couple of slides, if you like, doris. so we can go ahead to the next slide. and in terms of our guests at seawall lot 344, our current plan is to use the shelter-in-place opportunity for people experiencing both sheltered and unsheltered homelessness in district 10 and similar to the approach we're using at the hotels. and this site will provide essential temporary housing to 120 of our homeless neighbors in the southeast sector of the city. we will be prioritizing people

who we consider vulnerable to covid, who are people over the age of 60 or have health conditions making them susceptible to covid-19. access to the sites will be referral only and there will be no walk-ins or drop-ins available. really important to note that people will be invited into the site similar to the way they are in the navigation centers by the outreach teams focused on d10 and really ensuring that we are serving people who are hopeless in this community. we want to ensure that this site is an asset to the neighborhood and that it helps to improve safety across the neighborhood for our housed and unhoused neighbors. as we know nationally, people of color in the communities are the hardest hit with the covid-19 and we know these impacts are also here in san francisco. dph has reported that those

communities most affected by health despairties and structural racism are the most affected by the pandemic to date. and the stated trend of positive cases in our community of color demonstrates the importance of thonequity during the coronavirs response. by prioritizing people experiencing homelessness in district 10, this site will reduce the site of coronavirus in the neighboring communities. everyone is healthier and safer when people living unsheltered have safer locations. earlier there were discussions with the port and staff around serving the covid-positive population at this site, and i want to be clear that is not the plan. the current plan is to serve people who are vulnerable, sheltered and unsheltered living in district 10.

exit planning and this is another question and that's trying to understand what happens when the shelter-in-place order is lifted and when people no longer need this service and hsh, our department, will be using our entire response system to acouldn'accommodate that are hon these rvs and trailers and that includes the shelter system or problem solving, homeward bound and permanent supportive housing. there's no one-size-fits all for this and we're working to house a thousand more people than we had previously in these hotels and shelter-in-place accommodation sites, what we'll be able to do for them and with them as the orders wind down.

and so, if people are coming from existing shelter programs, they will have the opportunity to return to shelters for an additional 30-day stay and that is something we've does across our shelter-in-place as well. and then, we canvas canvass cane last slide. additionally, we'll be working with our homeless team to help us to identify the most vulnerable folks on street and and help us identify and pull out people over the age of 60 and those with the specific health conditions that make them susceptible to covid so that we have a really strong understanding of who it is in

the neighborhood, in the community that needs this the most and we'll outreach to them specifically. and that is my final slide that i'm happy -- i'll be on the call and happy to answer any questions. >> as can i. >> thank you, emily, dr. bennett and trent and absentia. we're bringing forward a request for the commission to approve this mou for the port to enter with hsa to operate a temporary shelter site for this district 10 and to waive the rent requirements which would total

$52,520..30 a month. and that concludes our presentation and we're available for questions. noi think i need to read into tt the amendment will be requesting. if you want to look at amendment resolution 2020, to read the changes in our amendment, starting with -- they have determined a need for a site to

provide shelter -- (inaudible). be it further to the last resolve. so can i have a motion to move forward with the amendment in

resolution 10. >> so moved. >> i'll move the item. >> second. >> thank you. >> we will now open the phone lines, open it up for public comment. that completes the instructions for now. >> thank you, president landon. we will open the cue for anyone on the phone who would like to make a public comment on item 60. >> operator: the question is now in question and answer mode.

>> is there anyone on the phone? >> we have one caller so far on the phone. >> i'll open up the line now. >> good evening. commissioners, i've listened to this whole procedure and if you approve using this for homeless rv park for the sake of everyone, i suggest that you make sure that the health department systematically tests the residents and the staff of kilobyte. of covid-19. the health department confirmed district 10 has some of the highest number of covid-19 cases in the city, not implementing this policy is not in the interest of the district 10 residents and essential workers.

thank you very much. >> can you please state your name. >> my name is donald whiteside and i'm a resident of the bayview. in district 10. >> thank you.

>> am i speaking to the commission or to you? >> this is the commission. >> hi, i'm janet carsonelli and i live in the dog patch and then also i work with golden gate autobon. so my concern is that i believe this site is quite close to the

entryway to hansen aggregates and pier 94 where the wetlands is, is that correct? >> yes, it is. >> ok, so my concern is that because the wetlands are a bird refuge and this suspect a public park, per say, we're concerned about having it opened to anybody who might walk in. so what will be the protocol for that sort of thing? will there be any signage put up or what's the story going to be on that? also, my question is, in addition, you've mentioned 120 trailers and rvs that but have not said how many people will be at the site. dogs are a big problem for the

birds at the site, especially now because the birds nest in the grasses. i would like something put in the mou, that states that the housing group from the city. anyway, the city and the port recognised that this is a bird refuge and it's possibly going to be, you know, undersiege, if you will. i would like to know what your understanding is? do you even know there's a bird refuge across the way? and what would be your answer to my concerns? and if we could have that in

writing in the mou so we know everybody is aware of it. >> thank you. thank you very much. so will anyone answer that question. ?is there a wa? is there a way to stop the echoing? (inaudible). >> i don't see that any other callers are there. >> if there's no further public comment, then public comment is closed. president brandon, we have one additional caller just joining. may we take that last call? thank you.

>> this is dan hoke. hello, commissioner. >> hi, dan. >> hello, kimberly, nice to hear you all and thank you for taking the call. my question relates to a comment that was made, priority given to the housing 10. my concern is that there are a number of residents of district 10, people who were born and raised here rendered hopeless over the decades and i'm wondering if there is priority given to those people first rather than having duly arrived homeless given access to the new location. and i bring this up because what was seen over the last few years is that places like mother browns and so on are no longer

available or not being utilized, i should say, by made of homeless, simply because we're pushed out of the way and this is really problematic for people who are from the bayview district, who, unfortunately, are now homeless and could that be addressed, please? >> yes, thank you. are there any other callers? there are no further callers on the line wishing to make public comment. >> public comment is now closed. >> landon, do you want to address the questions corners? r concerns? >> i think my colleagues are best positioned to answer some of the specific questions but regarding populations to be served and operations at the site, but i would like to comment on the proximity to the

westlands. we are, indeed, aware of the location and its proximity to the westlands and the resources that are available there, the natural resources. of course, everyone who will be staying at the site will be subject to the same shelte shelter--in-place guidelines and being encouraged to stay on the site except for essential activities, including walking and the rest of it. we are looking at this site as a place of refuge and safety and i think this is a good thing for shelter-in-place. the fact someone may need to take a walk off the premises for exercise is ok. i would defer that to the expert these that we've all received, that it is ok to get some exercise. the site does provide space for

pets, ample space for exercise but people may need to come and go for various reasons but it is designed to have shelter in place there and they will have ample services and meals delivered to the site and have many of the kinds of things that people would go out to get for essential reasons on the site available. >> thank you. does anyone else want to jump in and answer any of the questions corners? >> hi, this is emily from the department of homelessness and supportive housing. in terms of prioritizing folks in the bayview, i want to remind folks that this is an emergency operation and intended to be stood up quite quickly and we will be using our data systems and outreach to identify known homeless folks in the neighborhood. doing chronological history of

someone's time in a particular neighborhood o and we don't want to delay placement. we'll prioritize folks in the bayview and we understand that there are newcomers and folks in the community for many, many years, we want to focus on people known to our service providers in the neighborhood, known to our outreach teams and known to have been a part of the homeless community in district 10 for more than a couple of weeks and we're not having this be a resource to receive, but this is a resource for the area and we're working for known partners in the community who have a deep understanding of the community that they serve. >> thank you. >> i contribute to the initial question about testing. and if it's the right time.

so this is a very common and really important question for everyone in the public, so it has specific, meaning here, but i understand that it is a question that many people have. and so, there are two things that i always want people to understand in context to the testing questions and that is that we have two limitations and the first is a limitation on our supply interestsupplies and thee supply lines for anything we need for this response, really. and one of those, the very strictest one, really, has been on testing supplies. and staffing to do that. the other limitation is on the usefulness of the test, because it doesn't have very high sensitivity. if it says your positive, you're positive. if it says you're negative, it's less useful and if you're negative in this moment, that says nothing about what happens tomorrow or the next day.

they have to test you every day which is not practically possible. within the two limitations, we are having to do a sense of priority around testing people where the result will be the most impactful. our recommendation for everyone's safety, the thank is most effective more than anyone thing else we can do with no treatment and no vaccine is to keep people away from each other so that the virus doesn't transmit to them. so we ask to shelter in place and this is allowing people to do that isolation and so if you're doing the most recommended response to this emergency already, testerring you to then tell you to isolate is not really very helpful people who are in congregate settings, with other people, who are making contacts, so those are people in long-term care facilities, congregate shelters

and people in a rehab center and all of those people, we absolutely need to know if they're positive because they're in an environment where they're transmitting possibly to other people and, also, those are all populations that are at high risk for having a very severe kind of covid or even dying. so we have limited resource expose we wans andwe want to gin wwe know you are changing what you're doing. something isolating in an rv is not asked to do anything with their test result and that wouldn't be a group we would use our limited resources to test.

>> we'll open this up to discussion. >> i want to support thi say i s item and i want to explain why i feel that way and i then i wanted to invite, if possible, dr. benz to come back or miss cohen because i want to highlight the health despairties in this virus. and i think at this time, we need to, all of us in san francisco, who have been staying at home since march 17th, we need to recognised we've had the privilege to stay at home. there are, besides 5,000 people living on our streets, who are unsheltered, there are thousands living in sros, in the mission in chinatown and living in congregate settings that don't have the luxury that majority of people in san francisco do to shelter in place and to have adequate access to sanitation and handwashing and other

amanty. as amenities. the support has an obligation to assist in this crisis. my understanding is that this would be in place through the emergency order with a breakdown opportunity to move off the site, that i have every confidence in hsh that the supportive housing can do. i'm interested in understanding deeper where this commission supports this item, to really -- dr. bennett, if you could dive into the health despaireries among the latino populations, besides a higher rate of infection, but a higher death rate compared to the angelo and asian populations and i think that would be helpful. >> so my job in this activation is the commander for dph at moment and my regular job is the

director of health equity for public health. all activities fall under me and this is my favourite topic. we have longstanding despairties that are both structural and that impacts what's happening with covid and the ones that are actually individual and physical. and we know we have more hypertension, more heart disease, many, many conditions, particularly on african-american communities by usually the factor of two or three years and sometimes more than we do in other communities. so if you have a disease, that is worse for you than any other conditions, then this will be worse for you if you get it and this is true in the american community and true of the pacific islander community and it's slightly less true of our latin x community and then on down the line. and so we know that if they get it, they'll have a worse outcome

in that order of severity. and beyond that, though, is the risk of getting covid more likely and that is anyone who is unable to stay in their house more or less alone, so if you live with yourself and two or three other people, your risk of getting covid is different than somebody who is living in very compacted housing in one of the neighborhoods where people might have to have 12 or 13 people in a house and we have absolutely clusters that look just like that, where every member in that household will get covid. also, if you have to go out to get food every four days because that's how much you have at a time, you can order from instagram cart, every time you leave to do that, just a risk of getting covid from somebody in the store or on the street. if you also have to leave to work because you get your

employment money a few days at a time, like a day laborer, or some economy job, all of those people, every time they leave have a greater chance. if you're a lawyer and you've been in your house and you've barely seen another human for a month, your chance of getting covid is quite low i. if you are the janitor in that law office, you may have had to leave seven or eight times that month and you have seven or eight times more likely to get covid. we have a higher risk of transmission because people are exposed more and once you have transmission, of having to go to the hospital or passing away from you your coat vid. your coat vid. your covid. we know it's worse for both and that's very clear.

because we've been so aggressive and everyone in the community is doing what we've asked, we are much behind other places but that doesn't mean we won't get closer to where we are and therefore see the despairty at the rates they've been seeing and we have only 23 deaths and that's not enough to really see these great big despairties that they've seen in new york, but we will have more and so now that we haven't seen that yet, doing the aggressive things in those communities to help them get to the level where everybody else is will help us not get this. we don't see them as much as we will in coming weeks and that means that this is the time to act. >> thank you. and i think, again, i know you

went over it, emily, but can you please walk us through again, and i apologize, but can you give us an estimate of what is in district 10 and how you'll do targeted outreach to have the opportunities for this. >> absolutely. so as i pull up the point in time, we have 8,000 people experiencing homelessness in san francisco on any given night and that's from the 2019 point in time count. we estimate that about 5,000 of those folks are living unsheltered, the remainder are in existing shelter programs. district 10 has our second highest rate of homelessness or number of homeless people and in district 10, we have 1800 -- as of last january -- 1820 people experiencing homelessness in the

district and 1500 are unsheltered. so the capacity here is significant. it will make a significant difference in the lives of the people who receive this care and we know it's not commensurate with the need. as we look at 1800 people experience homelessness in district 10 alone, we have more work to do and this is one part of a larger toolbox of responding to the needs. this is not the only thing we're doing. >> thank you, and one final question. can you please -- i'm sorry if i missed it. someone from public comment asked and i don't want to make an assumption. it won't be single-use trailers for one person but can you remind us of what the occupancy will be at the site? >> so this is intended for homeless adults and there will not be families with children on site. however, we will allow couples

to shelter in place together. so we have a family unit on the street and the trailers are large number for two people to comfortably shelter in place together if they are a couple. we'll allow people to bring in their dogs, support animals, et cetera. but generally, this is not a family site. it is for homeless adults. >> thank you. >> commissioner matthews? >> thank you for the presentation, very detailed. i have no questions and i'm supportive of the items. >> thank you. >> hi, yes. thi.thank you. it was a detailed presentation and i don't have any further questions. >> thank you.

>> i think gail did it good enough for me and i'm good. i support it. >> thank you. >> i want to thank everyone, especially commissioner gillman. yoand i want to thank everyone doing this presentation, randy, emily, dr. bennett, trent, everyone came together to do a great presentation. and there are many meetings and conversations, i'll glad we got to a place to put together a resource that will be beneficial to d10 and i do hope that within the good neighbor policy that is created, and the outreach that is done for the community, prior to anyone moving into this, that

we make d10 a priority and the vulnerable population within 10d. i think that there are a lot of shelters who are overloaded and i really appreciate the fact that we have all come together to make this all available. how are we going to keep this site, covid-19, negative? >> so i speak to that somewhat. so our goal is to keep people isolated. if you develop covid-19 and everyone will have -- they'll get as close to zero

interactions as they can. there's always a risk, it's not zero. then our treatment for you, if you are not ill, is to have you isolate continuously, to continued isolation that you don't give it to anyone else and that's our first concern for someone that is not ill and that means you're doing what we would want you to do if you have covid and not go out and stay inside. if you are developing illness because of that and need to go get care, then we would have on-site staff to ee evaluate whether you get minimal care there or be transferred to a higher level of care at a hospital or some other site. if you have people isolated successfully, it's just like all of the houses in any of our neighborhoods. some of our neighbors are going to develop covid and they won't get better and they won't come back out and that is the expectation here, like it is for the rest of the community. the other thing that is a key for all of these sites, for any

place that we have people is that we're trying to create reasonably stable groups. it doesn't mean there will be no movement, but as little movement as possible and for the same people, so that you're interacting with a very small number of people so that if you do have any transmission, it's very limited to a small group and it's not throughout a large group and we have been able to do that in sites like this and we expect to do that to some degree here. >> thank you. >> i'm not saying -- (inaudible). >> is that an option? >> so as i mentioned before, as we move to take down the site, as well as the hotels, to

respond, not everyone will get permanent housing out of this, but we are going to make efforts to assess people while they are in shelter-in-place accommodations to identify the most vulnerable folks in our community, or placement in the supportive housing and we will make the resource available the same way we would make it at any of our shelters, through assessment and prioritization, but i cannot guarantee people would get housing. ( inaudible). >> thank you. i really appreciate everyone and i appreciate all of the hard work that has gone into this and i know this is an emergency situation and i know that things were changing rapidly, but the work that all of you are doing is critical to keeping this at the level we are and now

increasing this as rapidly as other places. so we do know district 10 is ground zero for the virus in san francisco and i think we need to do everything that we can to make sure that this does not continue to spread within the communities and i am happy that we have resources available but i want to make sure our resources keep people healthy. so with that, can we have a role call vote. (role call). >> thank you, for that commission 2020 has passed indianapolisly. unanimously. >> requesting award 2380 and

site preparation to the group in the amount of $11,920,300 and authorization for a contract contingency fund of 10% of the contract amount or $1,192,030 for condition for a total authorization not to exceed $13,112,330. >> good afternoon. i'll be presenting on item 7a and i'll try to keep this -- i'll edit as we go forward to save some time here. it's been a long day.

this is to award the mission bay and site preparation contract to the dutra group and lowest bidder for bids on march 11t 11th of this year and the amount of this contract is $11,920,300 and this authorization includes a 10% contingency request for total authorization of $12,112,330. due to the funding restrictions discussed in more detail and the funding and budget section of this port commission memo, work under the contract must be completed during the 2020 in-water work window, which is june through november and given the funding constraints, the remainder of the mission bay ferry land work be scheduled to

take place in the 2022 in-water work window. can we skip slide three, which just shows the locations? and four, very quickly, the ferry landing would sit within a half mile of approximately 1,000 new housing units, 7 million feet of commercial space, 1 million feet of retail space and 7 70 acres of open spe and it's in a block of the third line and easy walking distance of the ucsf mission bay hospital and campus. the next slide, please. this is preparing the site for ferryland preparation.

this is disposal of 80% of the dredge materials and dredging, rehandling and landfill disposal of 20% of the site dredge materials and import and placement of a sandcap of a portion of the site. and the overall dredge and site preparation in the figure on the left, the figure inset on the right shows an idealized section of the bottom of the sandcap which is shaded blue and that is the part that's included in this work and the orange person which is a the sandcap will be part of the futureland ferry land project. next slide. the important piece of information take away from here is almost all of the permits and authorizations are in place and the last permit is scheduled to be approved by the end of this

month. and next slide, please. port staff published at the advertisement for bids on the port's website on march 11th, project bids solicitations were sent by email distribution to 142 lbe certified contractors, as well as all active chambers of commerce and the san francisco public utility's commission contractor's assistance center and there are 31 plan holders on the website and 10 are lbe firms and based on the registered plan holder list, the project had interest from dredging contractors beyond the limits of the san francisco bay area region. because of the public health order requiring shelter in place was effective march 17th, port staff conducted its first prebid frequent on march 18th. this successful online experience gave us confidence to conduct the bid opening in a

similar online fashion and ensure a public and transparent bid process. the prebid process was attended by 15 contractors, six of which were lbe firms. next slide, please. a highlight of the summary of the bidders requirements on this slide with low-bid contracting, the ordinance requires the departments to award contracts to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder. the responsibility is based on the contractor's prior relevant experience and for the purposes of this solicitation, the bidder's requirements included the requirements on this slide. of note, the requirement for a safety history in the past five years with less than three or six california or federal osha violations and this is implementing the new safety

requirements across city requirements. and next slide please. on april 14th, 2020, the port received two bids for the mission bay ferry landing site preparation contract and both bidders were deemed to be responsive and responsible. on april 22nd, tmd determined the detra group to be lowest bidder. the final bid rankings and prices are shown on this slide. and should note that the engineer's estimate for the project was 11.$8 million and so dutra's bid is within 1% of our engineer's estimate. the contract monitoring division sets lbe subcontracting on the availability of lbe firms and cmd set an 11% lbe goal for this project and the group exceeded

the subcontracting goal by committing to subcontract almost 17% of the overall contract to mikmicrolbe firms. microobe/lbe firm will be performing 16.6% of the contract work and they were the prime contractor for the backlands project in 2019 and there is a typo on the slide here, the subcontractor, the third row, left most column, this is pch survey and they are another microobe/lbe firm providing survey services. next slide, please. this is not only in the san francisco bay area but in southern california, as well as

across the united states and they have significant dredging experience and expertise with over 100 years in business and they listed three drudging projects on their bidder's qualification form, all of which were completed in the last five years. all the projects demonstrate substantial experience in dredging, considerable quantities, as well as the handling and disposable material not for aquatic material encountered in the ferryland project. harry stewart, the chief operating officer of the group is online and prepared to answer questions at the end of the press if desired. next slide, please.

in light of the shock that they're experiencing due to covid-19, port staff believes it is unlikely that mission bay ferry landing will receive project funding from the general fund in fiscal year 2021-'22 budget. the port is pursuing a grant program and if awarded, this grant will replace the general fund as a project source. staff will continue to update the port commission as the project funding plan evolves. and the funding plan for this project includes the following sources, general fund support, office of community investment and infrastructure or ocii funds and port capital funds. these sources fully fund a not-to-ec keyed amount of 13,112,000 and $30.

this is a local entity in the department of finance and has authority over expenditures. they have been managing the process to dissolve the redevelopment agencies since 2012 and pushing oci to extend the funding from the former redevelopment agency in the 2020-'21 fiscal year. if the port cannot fund this by the end of the calendar year, they will go to ocii. we are going to borrow from the port's dredge.

next slide, please. the major scheduled constraint is the regulatory restriction on in-water work for dredging and pipe preparation which is limited to between june 1s june 1st through november 30th in any given year. because of this limitation, a delay in the start of construction beyond june could jeopardize the in-water work during the available time, thus delaying completion by the end of the year. as previously mentioned, due to the economic shock the city is experiencing, due to the

covid-19 pandemic and the shelter-in-place order, port staff believes it is unlikely that mission bay ferry landing will receive funding from the general fund in the fiscal year 2021-'22 budget. they delayed the rest of the project to 2022 to solidify funding for the project. next slide, please. so in conclusion, despite budgetary uncertainty due to covid-19 pandemic, staff recommends moving forward with the contract and utilizing ocii funding before it expires and port staff requests 2830, mission bay ferry landing, dredging and site preparation to the group in the amount of

$11,920,300 and an authorization not to exceeds $12,112,330. port staff recommends that the port commission authorize the executive director to accept the work once it is complete. next slide, please. and that concluding my presentation and thank you for your time and i'm available for questions. >> thank you. >> can i have a motion? >> so moved. >> seconded. >> let's open up this up for public comment. >> thank you, president brandon. at this time, we will open the cue for anyone who would like to make public comment. >> operator: this conference is in question and answer mode. press 1 and then 0 if you have a question. >> you will be entered into the system in the order you dial 1-0

and the system will let you know when your line is open. others will wait on you until their line is open. comments will be limited to three minutes per person and the cue is not open. please dial 1-0 if you wish to make a public comment. >> do we have anyone on the phone? >> president brandon, we do not have any members the public on the phone wishing to make public comment on this item. >> thank you. public comment is closed. >> commissioner? >> i support the item. i have no questions. >> commissioner gillman? >> i support the item. i have no questions. >> commissioner? >> i support the item. i guess i'm just a little bit concerned about now, obviously,

given the current situation that funding to continue this ferry landing is a little bit in peril. so i understand the reason you're asking is because the funds meeting unavailable if we don't proceed but we're not quite sure how we're going to complete the project. so you've pointed that out and i'm not sure what your answer can be, but is there anything else to elaborate on to make this project succeed in the long term. >> well, i think i would like to bring the port cfo in to help talk about this. >> sure. >> good evening, commissioners. this is the port cfo. and you know, i am hopeful that

the grant will be successful and i i think it is very likely that we will put this project in the cue for potential federal stimulus funding. and so, those two potential sources, as well as our expectation that our n3 funding will ultimately be available to the project, as well as potentially some funding from reimbursement from the responsible parties for the contamination adjacent pier 64. i am hopeful that through all of these sources, we will be able to put together the funding that

we need in order to fully -- to go to construction and to complete the project. >> we'll move to vice president adam. >> good presentation, rod. and door reasoi'm supportive of. i'm a little concerned, but it seems like all these projects that we've got going on -- and i think it might wind up down the road a little bit -- but i'm going to support it.

>> this is doreen. i got cut off and didn't hear the rest of katie's answer. could i make one comment? and that is that we are hearing now about an infrastructure bill at the federal level as a part of this covid response and so i suggest, i guess, that we watch all other sources of funding very carefully because this is a setback for our water transportation network plan in this project can't proceed because we don't have enough funds and i'm concerned about that in the long run and i know you can't answer the question and would like to make sure that we continue to keep priority not only in terms of our own local resources but to find out if there's anything to see on a federal level. >> yes, absolutely, commissioner. we are definitely going to pursue federal stimulus funding

for this mission-based ferry landing project. >> ok. thank you. >> president brandon, i have one other thing to say. >> following up, speaker pelosi, this is her district and i think this should be on speaker pelosi's radar because she's the one that will be pushing the stimulus bill and i clearly hope they'll reach out to the speaker and she needs to bring this home. thank you. >> thank you very much for the presentation. and i think given the situation that we're in, i think everyone is a little leery of spending this much money for a project that is not fully funded. but because of the opii fund, it has to be this year, i think we

can move forward with support of this. >> thank you. >> so with that, amy, can we do a role call. (rol pair (role call). >> resolution 2021 has been approved unanimously. thank you. >> authorization 2813, 19t 19th street tension and georgia street to the construction's incorporated in the amount of $2,809,075 and an authorization for a contract contingency fund of 10% of the contract amount or $280,928. or conditions for a total authorization not to exceed

$3,090,203. >> good evening, commissioners. i'm erica peterson.

this will be a historic building 49, a part and a street, which is this contract. contract 1 and 4 are complete and contract 2 is anticipated to be complete this spring, depending when the shelter-in-place is lived. contract 5, building 49, was bid in may of 2019 and the bids were rejected. this has been to value and stay within the current budget.

court staff conducted outreach to companies reffing th represee trades to for this contract. the meeting was attended by 11

contractors, and the bid opening was held on april 6. next supplied, please. you may recall that we had two separate assessments done and had a wide range and this is why there was $4.3 million and that's is what we presented in january. when we went out to advertise, the $3.2 million we received was more realistic to use. and we are pleased there was so much interest in this project and as you can see, six of the bidders were lbe contractors, including the low bidder and low bid came in at 2.8 million. next supplied, please. cozado regardinra construction n bayshore boulevard in san

francisco. they have participated in many work projects including sf public works. the contractor in the bid were on the level, bay area light works and compass engineering contractors. the disadvantaged goal was set by cal-trans of 18% for this contract and they have committed to 19.8%. two dbes are headquarteredded in lbe neighborhood. the contract is at 98%. this is divided into five contracts and the table provides a summary of a status of each and they show the funding sources and as a refreshing, they were adjusted to match the

project's adjustments and not been changed since. this has remained as 36.$6 million. the bottom shows the summary of the budget and colour-coded to match the plan view of the site. this is contract number three and bid packages 1 and 4 are complete and having been delayed due to covid-19. and the only remaining contract is the number 5, building 49, ascension in the january 14th, port commission presentations and the remaining park budget will be for building 49 and the cope will be ajuicescope will b. update to the building 49 status, originally the scope included restrooms, includes the associated hvac and electrical work and a new roof, fire protections for the building and

exterior work to replace siding panel and there was a retrofit of the super structure involved iinstalling new steel framing. at this time, the estimated budget for building 49 is 2.$36 million as shown in the last table expect contingency amount and as of april 2020, we estimate this to be $600,000. we estimate they would be able to fund restroofs and fire protection. they are listed as flexible because they can reduce the scope if necessary. and the billion ha building hast

of the abatement contract and the original exterior panel design was to replace the panels received through fiberglass and we believe the building can still function without these panels being replaced. elements previously included that would not be included were the seismic and retro fit work. fit work. with these improvements, building 49 can be operated for the cafe and support uses but were original programmed on building occupancy. as always, this estimate is preliminary in any contract and scope subject to bids received at the time. next slide, please. so including the 10% contingency, the funding amount is 3,090,000 and one million will be funded through a federal grant received from npc and

administered through cal-trans and through port capital. i would like to note here that we noted a missio mistake in thf report. it says federal grant through cal-transes and we're updating the legislation in the seventh whereas clause to say the total bid price of $2,809,275, plus a 10% contingent contingency and d through cal-tran. if you approve this authorization to advertise today, we anticipate the notice to proceed in july and would be on track to have substantial completion in april of 2021. next slide, please. in conclusion, we respectfully request you authorize the award of this contract to the lowest responsible bidder and we are looking forward to completing this project and opening up access to the pier 70 area and

newly park and lot. myself and other port staff are here to answer questions and i believe cozadora, the contractor is on the line, too, in case you have questions for them. thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> can i have a motion? >> so moved. >> second. >> let's open this up for public comment. >> operator: to alert the speaker you have a question, press 1 and then 0. >> you will be ordered in the system in the order you dialed 1-0. others will wait on mute until

their line is up. three minutes a person and the cue is now open. dial 1-0 if you wish to make public comment. >> looks like there are no callers on the line. >> no callers on the line and public comment is closed. >> thank you very much for the presentation. it was very thorough and i don't have any further questions. >> thank you. commission gillman? >> thank you, i'm excited to see the project move forward and i have no questions. >> commissioner manfor manford? >> no questions.

>> no questions. >> erica, you did such a great job, there's no questions. no questions and no comments. >> thank you. >> thank you so much for the presentation. and i'm so happy to see this is a woman-owned business in construction and the 98% lbe effort and i think that's wonderful. just one question, when will they be able to do the construction? >> that is a great question and i think it's up to whatever the city decides -- we are just trying to plan, assuming everybody resumes at a normal pace and that is why we have assume jim. july. with the infrastructure work, we may get a special waiver, but we're hoping for july. >> thank you. >> can we have a role call vote.

(role call) perfor. >> resolution 2022 has been approved unanimously. >> and item 8, public comments on items not listed on the agenda. >> let's open up the line for public comments. >> at this time, we will open the cue for anyone on the phone who would like to make public comment. >> operator: this conference is now in question and answer mode. to alert the speaker you have a question, press 1-0. >> you will be entered into the system in the order you dial 1-0. the system will let you know when your line is open and others will wait on mute until their line is open.

comments are limited to three minutes a person. please dial 1-0 if you wish to make public comment. >> thank you, jennifer. any one on the phone? >> president brandon, we have no callers on the phone wishing to make public comment. >> thank you. public comment is now closed. >> item 9, new business. >> let's open up the phone to public comment. new business. jennifer, can we open up the phone line for public comment. >> sure. >> operator: this conference is now in question and answer mode. to alert the speaker you have a question, press 1-0.

the system will let you know when your line is open. comments will be limited to three minutes a person and the cue is now open. president brandon, no callers on the line. >> thank you. public comment is now closed. any new business? >> one item. >> commissioner. >> yes, under the circumstances, i would like to explore with the contractor for the jefferson street, if we can fast-track that project now that the street is closed. and business will be slower.

if there's some advantages for the contractor, there's advantages for the city if we could fast-track that job from the schedule that we have. >> this is mike martin. i believe they have accelerated some aspects, but we'll provide a full report. >> thank you. >> this is commissioner gillman. i would hope, possibly, in may, i think it would be helpful to get a breakdown of tenants by type and sort of office, head, , restaurants, bar, because i am very concerned that pier 39 is an example, pier 23 is another example, one of our top grossing restaurants, bodines, will be

coming back much, much slower than other aspects of the port. i would be interested to see a breakdown by business type and based on what we projected as how we budgeted based on the revenue they would be generated, so we could have a clear picture moving forward and i do think it's going to be phased as the governor's famous quote is, it's going to beining to be togglingf and this would be by typing use so that we can understand what our financial risk factors are. >> we'll provide that at the next meeting. >> any other new business? >> i would just like to thank the staff for putting this

together and this is our third big virtual meeting and i know that there was technical difficulties and hopefully, prior to the next meeting, we will be able to work through them all and i think this was an extremely successful meeting and i want to thank the entire port staff for making this happen and thank you for all of the work that you're doing throughout the city during this. >> meeting is adjourned.

>> welcome to the thursday, may 7th, meeting of the government audit and oversight committee. i'm gordon mar, the chair of the committee joined by vice chair aaron peskin and matt hainey. thank you to john carroll and i would like to thank sf gov tv. mr. clerk, do you have any announcements? >> yes, thank you, mr. chair. due to the covid-19 health emergency and