retroactively approve it and to authorize and continue it until september 4 and if there is any questions, i'd be happy to answer them. >> commissioners, any questions? madame secretary, please open it up for public comment. >> members of public who wish to make public comment on item 11,dial 888-273-3658, access code 3107452 and pound followed by pound again. dial 1 and then 0 to be added to the speaker line.

>> mr. moderator, do we have any calls? >> there are no callers in the queue at this time. >> thank you. public comment on item 11 is closed. >> may i have a motion on this item? >> move to approve. >> second. >> madame secretary, please call the role call vote. [roll call] >> thank you. you have five ayes. >> the motion carries. thank you. next item, please. >> item 12 is authorize the

general manager to negotiate and execute a memorandum of understanding with the public works department, municipal transportation agency, fire department and port commission regarding the authority and responsibility for operations and maintenance of public improvements at the mission rock special use district. and approve amendments to the mission rock infrastructure plan. >> and deputy g.m. michael carlin will introduce this item. >> so, the title of the item actually explain what is we're doing here. it is a memorandum of understanding to outline responsibility and authority for each city department as we go into port property in the future. port property, port streets are going to stay under the sdwru, of the port but we'll have infrastructure under those streets and we want to make sure we have the ability to fix those streets going forward. i will naention mission rock is the one doing the black water

system and the micro grid. >> commissioners, any questions? >> yes. i have a question. since part of another reason that it's coming before us is because there's going to be a change, i think because they're going to do something different, which is the light weight cellular concrete and i don't know whether it has been done or not, but they don't know how that's going to affect the streets. and so my question is, since it's unknown, the cost associated with the maintenance of utilities and the light weigh cellular co-concrete will exceed the cost of maintenance, utilities in the street without the light rate cellular concrete. if we find there is a problem, who's going to be responsible for that? will the developer be

responsible for differences from the light weight concrete to the regular? >> yes. so, we're going through the process right now and evaluating light weigh cellular concrete with the port and the public works. it will come under the jurisdiction of the city engineer who will have to make a determination of the use of light weigh cellular concrete. it's also that we have written into the m.o.u. that it's -- there will be acceptance criteria and there will be failure criteria and it will come out of the incremental tax fund for the project as a whole to make up the difference between what we would normally pay for in a street the differences with the light weight cellular concrete. so we're working on that with all the other domestics as well. we haven't landed on that as well. it's not an alternatives and not the final say to say that's what we're going use.

>> if we decide to use that. who is going to be -- >> yeah. if the city engineer makes a determination on the use of it and the responsibility again will come out of the tax benefit for the project to make up the difference at that point in time. we have a responsibility for if it was a normal street, if something broke, we were replacing it but if it is failure of the light weight cellular concrete, that difference between normal fixing it will come outs of the tax increment for that project. >> lit not be the san francisco p.u.c. that will pay for that. >> for the increment. that's correct. >> ok. so, we will not be liable. >> that's correct. >> ok. thank you. >> i just wanted to also let you know that we have, you know, negotiated to put a pilot out there, a real live street section where they actually had

[inaudible]. i think that was the first day i came out of quarantine to go and visit that site. and it is interesting. the basic concept is that normally you have bay mud, you [inaudible] so it will settle over time. again in effect that they didn't have time, they removed a portion of the bay mud and put lightweight concrete that was lighter than what they removed. so, they're releasing -- removing weight from there so that it will settle. so, that is the concept. s the concern we had is that what if our facilities are buried into light weigh concrete. you can't dig it up. so, that was one of exercises they performed in front of me and the city engineers. and you can actually dig it out. it's different than soil. so they -- the developer is

commited to whatever tools or equipment necessary for us to dig it out and they will provide it, and as michael indicated, if there is any differential and cost than we would normally do in the street versus this, they will cover it. and so, yeah. right now it's really up to the city engineer to accept this light weight concrete or not. >> so, what -- so we would have soil and asphalt? normally? >> yeah. so normally, you know, it's layers, right? so we have, you know, soil and in this case it will be bay mud. and then we would have some gravel and then we will have the light weight concrete and then we'll have half the concrete and then we'll have -- i mean thes a fall, asphalt and concrete on top. so you have a wearing surface that looks like every other

street. >> i see. so, we have four steps with the light concrete rather than three. >> yeah. >> basically, yes. >> normally, yeah. normally we have all streets that have concrete. a portion of the street is asphalt, concrete and then you have the soil and stuff. now we just have a lightweight concrete and in the wearing surface, which is asphalt-concrete. >> wow. so it -- so is there a concern that it's less durable or as durable? i mean, our streets are pretty rough right now. you know? they don't seem to last as long as maybe they used to. there are a lot of pits in it. so i'm just wondering. >> well, my take is that, you know, if you have a thicker

concrete section, you won't see a lot of, you know, breakage because what we experienced in especially the bayview is that when you have the settlement, you have a concrete base and after a while when you have a void, you can't really see it and what happens if you have a leak in the pipe, it starts eroding the soil. now it is concrete and you won't get that erosion. so i think it could have [inaudible] better, but my fear is when you go to dig it up, we want to make sure that we can easily access our pipes just in case something happens. >> ok. so you're thinking it might be more durable, but it may be more of a hassle to dig it up. >> yes. >> ok. thank you.

>> this is commission kerr paulson, if i could just say a couple of words in. so many of these projects, especially projects that are, you know, might be adjacent to rising tides and whatever else, this is being, you know, heavily experimented with and commissioner maxwell, your questions are absolutely apropos because anytime different construction technologies come into place, everybody wants to know is this going to work, is that going to work? sort of like when the plasters said well, sheetrock will never replace it. [laughter] and things -- you know, things sort of change and i've heard nothing, you know, as the -- in my day job -- that this is going to be nothing but, you know, not just good for the roads, but good for all accessibility to infrastructure and all the new ways that people are looking at doing the horizontal parts of these development projects.

so, that's just my two seconds. thank you. >> any other comments, questions? madame secretary, could you please open public comment? >> members of public who wish to make comment on item 12, dial 888-273-3658, access code 3107452 and pound followed by pound again. dial 1 and then 0 to be added to the speaker line. >> mr. moderator, do we have any callers?

>> there is one caller in the queue, madame secretary. >> thank you. >> operator: you have one question remaining. >> go ahead. >> caller: i've been hearing some of your statements and y'all can make whatever statement you want to. but how does this project on mission rock, where we environmentalists for the longest time have been working or informing the department about toxic and substances control about real contamination on the site. the other things don't count much. the main thing is, has the site been mitigated? just because there's some land

there, we just cannot use it for whatever. this is what we've done all over candlestick point. we've done it on hunters point. parcel d, c, e, f, it's all contaminated. don't look at it in a superficial way and i've come before you before, when the people make the right type of comments, you don't like it. what is holistic about this project? that is what you should ask yourself. what is holistic about this project? at mission rock. this is a very, very, very contaminated site. >> are you done?

>> ok. thank you. do we have anymore callers mr. moderator? >> the queue is empty at this time. >> thank you. that closes public comment on item number 12. >> commissioners, are there any further discussion on this m.o.u.? seeing none may i have a motion and a second? >> so moved. >> second. >> madame secretary, please take the roll call vote. [roll call]

we have five ayes. >> the motion carries. next item, please. >> next item is item number 13. authorize the general manager to negotiate and eke cute a memorandum of understanding with the port commission, san francisco public works, san francisco municipal transportation agency and the san francisco fire department regarding each drm's operations and maintenance of public improve. s the pier 70 special use district, including improvements located in streets turned por's jurisdiction. and this will be introduced by deputy general manager carlin. >> so it is the same sort of idea. this is another m.o.u. between authority and jurisdiction. the thing here is basically they did surcharge this site with dirt so there is no light weight cellular concrete involved but we need the m.o.u.

to have. the other department outline authority and responsibility moving forward. i'd be glad to answer any questions. >> commissioners. questions. comments. madame secretary, please open public comment. >> members of public who wish to make public comment on item 13, dial 888-273-3658, access code 3107452 and pound followed by pound again. dial 1 and then 0 to be added to the speaker line. [music playing]

mr. moderator, do we have any calls? >> there is one caller in the queue. >> thank you. >> operator: you have one question remaining. >> go ahead, speaker. >> caller: so, pier 70 was used during world war ii to build ships. there's also the stack there which means there was a power plant over there. now i never mentioned this before, but never once do you all know about this and maybe you know about it that you look straight in the eye and lie. and this is what it is. there's one million tonnes -- i repeat one million tonnes of coal tar by the stacks.

it needs to be mitigated. there are two huge ammonia spills which were done by the navy. which needs to be mitigated and abated. now why i was choosing sites that are contaminated, and others have said this, too, others in the know -- why are we choosing sites that are contaminated so that we have some housing? and you know when they do this, the passing of the e.i.r.s and all during christmastime. but they never expected this pandemic to come. now listen, i said this 25 years ago. no good will come at hunter's point and there is one commissioner there that's heard me say that. no good will come at hunter's point and no good will come at

pier 70. now here's another factor that you all never, ever took into account. human remains of the first people were found at the site. why don't we respect the sacred sites and respect the human remains of the first people? because spirit,ly y'all are bankrupt. [bell ringing] and, again, to go forward with this project, you have blood on your hands. >> thank you, mr. decosta. mr. moderator, do we have any other callers? >> there are no more callers in the queue. >> thank you. that closes public comment on item 13. >> commissioners, i would like a motion and a second on this item. >> move to approve. >> second.

>> madame secretary, please take the roll call vote. [roll call] >> you have five ayes. >> the motion carries. madame secretary, could you please read the items that are to be heard in closed session? >> item number 16 is existing mitigation, david alfaro et al. versus city and county of san francisco and item number 17 is existing litigation state water board cases, scament tore superior court jccp number 5013 originally filed on january 10,

2019 in tuoloune superior court as san joaquin tribute tears authority et al. versus california state water resources control board case number cu62094. >> madame secretary, please open the line to public comment for the items on closed session. >> members of public wishing to speak on items 16 and 17, dial 888-273-3658, access code 3107452 and pound followed by pound again. dial 1 and then 0 to be added to the speaker line. [music playing]

>> mr. moderator, do we have any calls? >> madame secretary, there are no callers in the queue at this time. >> thank you. public comment on closed session item 16 and 17 is closed. >> at this time, i would like the request a motion on whether to assert the attorney-client privilege. >> move to assert. >> second. >> madame secretary, please take the roll call vote. [roll call] >> you have five ayes. >> the commission will now be

entering closed session. and we'll be departing from the regular teleconference meeting. members of public may remain on the line until the commission rejoins the regular meeting. >> to approve the settlements. item 17, no action was taken. may i have a motion. >> moved not to disclose. >> second. >> madam secretary. could you call the roll for the vote. [roll call]. >> five ayes.

the motion carries. this meeting is now adjourned at 4:48 p.m. thank you.

(role call). >> item two is pledge of allegiance. >> i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, for liberty and justice for all. >> item 3, a approval of minutes

for the may 12, 2020 meeting. >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> approved. >> role call vote. (role call). >> it passes unanimously. this passes. >> item 4, please be advised a member of the public has up to three minutes to make public comments on each agenda item unless the court commission adopts a shorter period on any item. please note that the public comment period, the moderator will instruct dial-participants to register comment.

audio prompts will signal to dial in. please dial in only when the item you wish to comment on is announced. item 5, public comment on items notlessed on the agenda. >> we will open the phone lines to the public to take public comment on items not listed on the agenda from members of the public who are joining us on the phone. jennifer will be our operator and will be providing instructions for anyone on the phone who would like to provide public comment. >> operator: thank you, president. we will open the cue for anyone. the conference is now is question and answer mode. press 1 and then 0 to summon each question. >> victor makrerish joining the meeting. >> thank you. >> thank you, commissioner.

you'll be entered into the system and others will wait on mute. comments are limited to three minutes per person and the cue is now open. please dial 1-0 if you wish to make public comment. >> thank you. do we have anyone on the phone? >> operator: we have two callers on the line at this time. you have two questions remaining. >> hello?

>> i'm with the building construction trades and i want to say in public comment that i'm in sport o supports of the c mission rock toront and i woulde that you would approve it. thank you. >> thank you. >> next caller, please. >> operator: you have one question remaining. >> question: i'm peter osborne, the owner and operator of the mission rock resort on the south end of the waterfront. i want to thank president brandon and executive director elaine fubbs for the opportunity to speak and i hope you and all of your families are well during this pandemic and certainly our lives have changed dramatically announcemen.i'm hopeful the vics

weekend's fire, like the rest of us who are already living a stressful life are able to find solutions to their new layer and problems and our hearts go out to them. san francisco's crab fishing community is a big part of who we are. as is all of the restaurant and retail stations along the waterfront. needlesstosay, the decision to defer rents has been a welcome relief of short-term stress, not not having to worry about that has been fantastic and i understand you're looking to expand that in the commission hearing and further, while you evaluate what truly is the best path forward for all of us. the slogan going around is that we are all in this together and we are literally all in this together and we need to stick

together. this is unique and diverse and important to the fabric and the community of san francisco as we know it and san francisco has always been a waterfront city town and it's up to the port to maintain that level of excellence and to keep life on the waterfront as we know it regardless of how it's defined and changing on a daily basis in order for operators like myself to survive the pandemic and to survive not only the first wave of the pandemic but the anticipated second wave of the pandemic and the economic recovery associated with both of those, we are going to now more than ever need the partnership of our landlord, the port of san francisco, to help us redefine what those business terms are.

we have submitted -- i have formed a coalition with a number of reputable tenants up and down the waterfront and we have submitted a letter to kimberly beele, who should be circulating that and we hope to get on the agenda in the june meeting. but in essence, the deferral is great, but any type of balloon payment down the road is essentially putting off the inevitable. that is a cyanide tablet that will kill every business on the port to come up with capital that does not exist and we need to talk about new terms for leases. we need to talk about structuring successful financial agreements for all parties concerned so that we can, in fact, live through this together and prosper in the future. i like forwar look forward to te opportunity to speak with the commission again and thank you for this opportunity and again,

i also hope that you all are well as is the case with your families, too. thank you very much. >> thank you so much, mr. osborne. we have received your letter and i'm sure the support staff is working on the restaurant. >> i appreciate this. we are entering this eyes and ears wide open. thank you. >> any other callers? >> operator: at this time, no other members of the public on the phone wishing to make public comment. >> public comment is now closed.

>> item 6, the executive director's report. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am katie patricioni, acting currently as the port's executive director. i have two items for you this afternoon. first, i just wanted to start with an update on the fire this saturday at pier 45. just to give you all an update. long-term impact of the fire is yet to be seen, but we are very concerned about our tenant who were previously grapples with the impact of covid-1 covid-19 d who have lost such a great deal in the fire. we're grateful to the san francisco fire and police department and economic work

development, as well as other city partners who have come together to help us respond to the fire. a four-alarm fire broke out on the morning of may 23rd. it looks like shed c is an absolute total loss. the fire department has remained on site as shed c is an active fire scene. there was a slash yesterday, scott fire continued to smoulder and they continued to pour water on the site. we anticipate the fire wil department will be out at the site for the rest of the week.

the investigation into the cause and origin of the fire will be forthcoming as soon as it's safe for investigators to begin their work. and similarly, structure investigations will begin as soon as it's safe. port staff, red tag and the port engineering division conducted just an initial windshield inspection and made some observations of the perimeter and have not been able to get closer than that. we are hoping tomorrow there will be a perimeter inspection from the water with the third-party engineering firm who will give us a sense of how the substructure fared in the fire.

shed c was used for storage and the red and white fleet had storages in shed c. there were 35 tenants impacted in shed c. the rest of the site, shed a, as know, is home to the new day mecanicue anque and not impacte. there is the commercial industry and where food processers are based was not directly impacted by the fire. there are 65 tenants overall. it did not spread to pier 45, for which we're so grateful to

the quick work of the fire department. port staff heard directly from tenants, to provide updates and provide answers. we have offered assistance to the dislocated tenants and we're working with red an and white to find alternative space for them. we have brought in cleaning contractors to systematically clean all in sheds a, b and d with the priorities on sheds b

and d. there's concern that much of the gear stored in shed c included plastics, among other things, and therefore, the smoke from the fire may have contaminated some of the space in sheds a, b and d which is why we have the cleaning contractors out. we were able to clean three of the unit yesterday and we expect to complete five more by the end of the day today. we've been working to help

impacted tenants, as well as to provide technical assistance for doing things like e like ennatur insurers. we have engaged with the city's risk manager to begin the processinprocessinga claim. we will begin wor working with e insurer to determine what our next steps will be. thanks to the quick work of the san francisco fire department, jeremiah o'brien survived the fire is we will be moving that to pier 35. she was close to visitors because of the health order and will remain closed while at pier 35. and then i just wanted to close

by saying two things. one, our collective heart goes to all who have been affected by the fire, particularly the fishing community who lost equipment in shed c. this is a devastating loss and the port will do everything that we can to support the fishing community through this recovery. and then, finally, i would like to thank all of the port staff who have responded magnificently to yet another disaster. and so, just quickly, that would include tom carter, oscar wallace and tim sulton, as well as the many maintenance staff who responded to pier 45 on saturday morning. i want to thank rod washington for his expertise is guidance, randy kisada who was been

working incredibly hard to keep the information flowing to the public and press, joe riley, the port's emergency manager who got the first call early on saturday morning and who has been on site every single day and then finally, our real estate staff, particularly demetris omyle, who has been patient and compassionate and supporting the pier 45 tenants through this crisis. my next update is slightly happier news. so i want to announce that downtown ferry termal, click completion is imminent and will open in the next couple of

weeks. so, ass know, project completion was somewhat delayed by the onset of covid-19 and, unfortunately, the public health crisis is going to prevent us from a ribbon-cutting ceremony but i wanted to acknowledge the dedication and hard work who brought this project to completion. this was absolutely a collaborative effort not only among port staff but the port and lead-off. this is an example of what happens with collaboration and partnership and i hope we ca thw facility south of ferry building includes six ferry berths including the ferry bay passengers, the current routes including richmond, harbor bay

and arbanita oakland and it will expand service to deep plain lagoon and mission island and includes a new public plaza between the ferry building and ag building. the new gates and amenities will significantly improve waiting and cueing for listing riders and they will expand the space available for stage emergency transit service in the event of a regional transportation disruption or disaster. so i just want to ask everyone to join me in congratulating the completion of this project. this is good news amidst the challenges of the pandemic and we know as the bay area recovery occurs, this will support increased transit across the bay

and that concludes the exclusive director's participan report. >> thank you. now let's e open this up to pubc comment. we will open the phone line. >> operator: you will be entered into the system in the order you dial 1-0 and the system will let you know when the line is open and others will wait on mute until the line is up open and comments are limited to three minutes aperson.

dial 1-0 if you wish to make public comment. >> thank you, jennica. anyone on the phone? >> operator: at this time, no callers are on the line for public comment on this item. >> thank you. no callers on the line and public comment is closed. >> operator: your question is now in question and answer mode. press 1-0. >> president brandon, wish item are you on? >> we're on the executive director's' report. >> you referenced insurance and could you elaborate on whose policy it is and is it the

port's? are we partially self-insured? is it an insurance policy under the leases? do the tenants have an place to obtain their own insurance for their business component of their operations so we can have an understanding of the insurance that will be available for recovery? >> certainly, commissioner. so the port is insured. our property is insured and we have been working with the city's risk manager to begin what will likely be a lengthy claims' process with the goal, ultimately, of rebuilding this facility.

so we're in the process of gathering information. but the port itself is absolutely going to pursue a claim with our insurer for this building. >> would you mind, and maybe this will be helpful for the full commission, if we could identify each tenant that was affected and whether the port has or has not received a certificate of insurance in accordance with that tenant's obligation for insurance coverage? >> yes, we can absolutely do that. >> thank you very much. >> madam president, that concludes my questions. >> thank you, president brandon partnership just wanted to say to katie and the whole port

staff how much i appreciate your quick response to the staff and the fire. i wanted to commend the port staff on incredible work in yet another crisis and also to acknowledge that i'm sure there were challenges in dealing with this crisis in the middle of covid-19 and the pandemic and so i just wanted to give a shout-out to the staff. thank you. >> thank you. >> i'll echo what commissioner gillman said and the tenants and support staff and all of the city agencies that helped to address this issue. i have a couple of questions. i understand there are a lot of things we don't have the answers to as far as how we go from here, but the question would be, and i'm sure, are there any alternatives to help the tenants to resume operations because

rebuilding the shed will take a fair amount of time? and are there any restrictions on rebuilding the shed? and secondly, are there alternatives for some of these tenants to temporarily operate out of other space? because the fishing industry would be a tremendous loss for san francisco not to be able to have the fishing industry and if we waited for the shed t shed te rebuilt, i can't imagine it will be timely. a lot of effort and so what can we do to help the tenants to get through this. i understand the administrative offices have been impacted and willie has been sharing from tom esher, they are determined to resume operations but losing the administrative building has not put them out of business but the fishing industry is what they

are concerned with and what can they do in the interim to help them get through this? obviously, they have a financial loss, but in terms of operationally, how want we help them? >> so, commission b commissiones primary being used as storage space and so, we are -- as well as for red and white, had their offices there and they were helping them find a place to relocate, but by and large, i believe the real losses to the fishing community is the gear that -- all of the gear and equipment that was stored in that shed which is, basically, a total loss. the fish processing really is happening in sheds b and d and everywherother than the fact weo get in and make sure the spaces are cleaned up, i don't think

that community is necessarily going to see a significant impact to its operation. and so, i think, you know, on the one hand, there's a benefit to the fact that we are really using shed c only as warehouse space. and so, i don't know the day-to-day operations, other than red and white will be disrupted. >> thank you, that's very helpful. hopefully they can replace their gear if they get insurance funds to recoupe that and you're saying boats and everything else, they can resume fishing. in terms of just even the pier space or what they need to unload, that's not affected? >> so, it's still an active fire scene and so, there are still fire trucks and hoses out there. and as well as the fact that the valley, the space that runs between the sheds is impacted by

the fact that there are still some walls standing in shed c that are a hazard in terms collapse. so we're definitely limiting access to the southeast portion of pier 45 because of that fact .and i'm not sure exactly what impact that is having on the processers in sheds b and d. but i believe they have other means of accessing their facilities. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> vice president adams. >> katie, i just wanted to thank you and all of the port staff and the heroic action of the firefighters with 125

firefighters that were down there putting their lives on the line. i'm just glad there was no loss of life. and i think commissioner mackerd said something about insurance but it can be built back up. they can continue and you just have to keep them in our thoughts and we will get through this. and going back to what commission wohaul said, i know the guys have been through a lot and we're hoping we can do everything to help them and they were able to salvage the jeremiah o'brien and hats off to everybody. >> thank you. thank you so much for this board and truly want to thank the support staff.

vice president and adam adams ae getting updates and i want to thank everybody and who a huge shoutout to the fire department for their efforts. this could have been much worse than it was. so our hearts and prayers go out to everyone affected, the fishermen, and everyone involved. it could have been much worse and we are so thankful there was no loss of life and everyone can rebuild. and we have our city partners and the economic and workforce development.

next item, please. please. >> item 7a for a sharing agreement for the u.s. army corps of engineers, san francisco district dated september 5, 2018 for the waterfront flood resiliency highwaresiliencyproject and shod by the board of supervisors and secretary of the army for their men, increasing the project budget for 6 million to 20.1 million, extending the schedule from three to five meters and allowing the port to advance cash funds to the project. >> good afternoon, president brandon, vice president adams, commissioners. this is brad benson, the port's waterfront resilience director. i'm here to present again on partnership that we have with

the army corps of engineers along the port's entire jurisdiction. here here today to request an amendment to the agreement between the port and the army corps that governs that study and it's called the feasibility cost-sharing agreement. and this is on may 12th port commission update on the flood resiliency study we're conducting with the army corps of engineers. this is the nation's experts in flood risk management in 2018, we were the fortunate recipient of one of two new starts for coastal flood risk management nationally and highly competitive to get the new

startstarts. under these studies there's a 50/50 study. and as i mentioned, the study looks at the port jurisdiction, also aquatic park. we're looking at five sea-level rise curbs to assess damages and consequences under the different curves and there has been and will continue to be rebust community input. if the army corps finds interest, they would pay two-third of the project costs. in the study we're looking at five major city neighborhoods and we have broken the area down into what we're calling four reaches separated by high ground where there could be independent flood risk management systems

and we're drilling deeper into 15 subareas because we have such a varied shoreline with so many maritime activities and varying from the downtown area where we have a city right up against the shoreline with major infrastructure to the industrial maritimes on the waterfront. next slide, please. and this is a high level timeline for the study and we're at this first phase of over the next several months developing initial alternatives to mitigate the flood risk area and we hope to present to the port commission later on this summer along with the public after pub. after incorporating that feedback, we would have a follow-up by summer of 2021, including a federal plan that is the most efficient means of

addressing flood risk and a local plan will other benefits that would enable full environmental review of those final alternatives and a potential recommendation to congress in 2023. next slide, please. these studies are normally conducted in three years for a total budget of $3 million, 1.5 million from the federal government and 1.5 million from the local federal sponsor. and we executed an agreement in 2018 that assumed that $3 million study cost in three years. we've done a deep analysis of the real efforts that will be required to study flood risk along a dense urban shoreline like san francisco's bay shoreline and believe that it will take five years and more than $20 million to complete.

we already have $3 million in federal appropriations through the army corps work plan and so we're already have more federal dollars than with expected at outset. if there is a waiver approved by the assistance secretary of the army, we would expect $20 million study with a $10 million local, which leads to the staff requests today. we would like to amend this agreement with the commission's approval in two steps. we would like to be able to match the federal spending up to $3 million now using the port commission-approved ch2m contract to provide work-in-kind to support the study and we would like to add a clause that would allow the commission at

its discretion to fund the study if in a given year there is no federal funding, we don't expect that to. , buhappen but it can happenandr the board of supervisors to keep this going. and then, if that waiver is approved, not only by the assistant secretary of the army but by the board of supervisors, authority to spend up to $10 million for federal spending. next slide, please. this gives a sense of the approval steps, so the top row is what happens in 2018 and the federal government approved a new start and the port commission authorized the original fcfa and the ff district engineer and port director signed it, assuming $3 million in three years and the second row shows what we're requesting now and so authority

to fund the port commission, to increase the study to $6 million and then $20 million and this summer, the port director and sf district engineer would sign an amendment reflecting the $6 million study cost and army corps in august is expected to apply for a waiver on standard army corps rules to take to the end of the year to get that waiver. in the fall, we would go to the barred oboard of supervisors toe that cost to $30 million. under the charter, we would expect to spend more than $10 million in city funding. and then, after both of those actions take place, the port director and the district engineer would sign an amended cost-sharing agreement. next slide. so that concludes my presentation and we're available to answer any questions the commission may have.

>> may i have a motion, please. >> so moved. >> seconded. >> now let's open it up to public comment. we will open the phone lines to take public comment on 7a, for members who are joining us on the phone. there will be instructions for anyone on the phone who would like to provide public comment. >> operator: thank you, president brandon. at this time, we will open the cue to for anyone who would liko make public comment on item 7a. your question is now in question and answer mode. to summon each question, press 1-0. you will be entered spot systeme system in the order you dial 1-0. comments are limited to three minutes per person. the cue is now open. please dial 1-0 if you wish to

make public comment. >> thank you, jennica. is there anyone on the phone? >> operator: president brandon, at this time, there are to members of the public on the phone wishing to make public comment on this item. >> thank you. seeing no callers on the phone, public comment is now closed. >> i think we've heard on the information briefing and i have no more questions at this time. thank you very much. >> thank you. commissioner mackerel. >> good report and no questions on my end. >> thank you. commissioner gillman. >> if yothank you for the repor. i support the item with no questions at this time. >> thank you. vice president adams? >> good report and i am fully in support of it and i have no

questions. >> i'm sorry, role call vote. amy, could you do a role call vote. (role call) >> the motion passes unanimously. >> thank you. >> item 8a requests approval of infrastructure plan amendments and memorandum -- i'm sorry. commissioner, do you want to make a statement? >> yes, president brandon and fellow commissioners, i have a fascial interest ifinancial intt

wall 337 and must recuse myself from discussing or acting on this item which is agenda a8. 8a. i will be leaving and returning when this matter is concluded. >> 8a, structure planned amendment and understanding of lot 337 by mission rock street and san francisco bay. >> good afternoon, commissioners, rebecca benesini fro,acting in the real estate dy role, so you will see me a couple of times on this commission meeting and i'm here to present the mission rock mou and infrastructure plan amendments and i'm presenting on

behalf o of these agreements. these are inner-city permitting with primarily the mayor's director of housing delivery, judson true and i want to acknowledge sfpuc general manager kelly and acting public work's director and elaine f forbes who has been quite engaged in helping and patricioni for stepping in as we move to move mission rock to the forefront. a moment of introduction, we want to remind the commission that we have had a couple of items on mission rock and the last item was on the park's design back in january and we looked at street names at that time, focusing on the public

realm of mission rock. there was the phase one budget in september and phase one budget was focused on horizonal cost at mission rock and how much to cost to develop the supporting infrastructure for the first four buildings. and at that time, we touched on a number of things we'll talk about again today. so i'll keep reminding folks to draw the thread forward from where we've been over the last many years to where we are today. next slide, please. the item we're requesting approval are are an amendment to the infrastructure plan, the infrastructure plan originally approved at project approvals in 2018 and it sets for detailed conceptual plans of infrastructure across the whole sites and the amendment is focused on the ground improvement technique which you heard a little bit about back in september call light-weight cellacellular concrete and thisd be added should you all approve

the amendment. i want to note this affects infrastructure that public works, sfpuc will be asked to accept upon completion and public works acted last thursday and the puc acted on the amendment about two hours ago earlier today and so you'll be asked the same question as we move forward in the presentation. the second approval on the memorandum of understanding among the city agencies that will be sort of having responsibilities and actions at the site and that will set forth the rules of the road as we work together, not only in phase one but throughout the four phases of the project. next slide, please. just to provide context of how these items fit in with kind of what we think is the big 2018 project approval, at the top of the screen, this is overarching contracts and transactions and

legal framework that provides the rights and responsibilities to the developer and the ports and one of the sort of what we call shoulder documents or ancillary documents is shown below in the grey box with the inner agency cooperation agreement. that agreement was among the city agencies to set out how to work on new infrastructure. san francisco is big and active as it is, we don't do a lot of new neighborhoods, new streets, new subdivision maps and that was an agreement among city agencies to set out how we'll work together to get these items evaluated, commented upon, permitted and approved. so the ica had an exhibit, the infrastructure plan, which we're asking to be amended at this time and it also set out two processes which we have completed through this sort of centre. one was getting an mou among the city agencies together and so that the ica set out that direction to staff and stating we'll be working together quite

a lot over the phases so please put all of these details into a document that set out the direction to the mou before you. it set out a process in the ica to work on ground improvement at the sites. you all will remember that this is the edge of the bay location as we're adding up to five feet to protect against sea-level rise, ground improvement and how the streets will fit on that infrastructure and as sturdy of a base as we possible can. they acknowledged that and set out a profit to evaluate that ground improvement. the infrastructure plan amendment is the result of that process we went through. and you'll see we've accomplished quite a lot over these past two years or a little bit two years and we formed the cfd and infrastructure design is advanced and the key thing we're trying to get to is this big box at the top right right-hand corf

parcel leases. they have a right to deliver the buildings we're interested in seeing and we want to see those built and that park developed and all of the benefits come to fruifruition. you all know the project very well and 2.7 to 2.8 total growth square feet at build out, 1200 housing units -- 40% of which are affordable and a million, million four office square footage and that pier 48 to be redelayeredeployed into producte years. we're focused on phase one, what is before you, the mou and ip amendment will sort of set the framework for all of the phases by need these documents in place

prior to the phase one final map which is scheduled for the board next tuesday and phase one is the first four buildings shaded in blue, two housing, two office and retail on the ground floor and that 5.5-acre china basin park and infrastructure to go a street from third street to pier 48. if we are able to start this year, we're targeting completion in two years. i want to mention a contracting update will be providing a quarterly ultimat update to the commission. we sent out a memo and contracting updates and the project to date has spent about $65 million and about 12 million or 18% was awarded to lbe's and we're meeting every month with the development team and their gms and various contracting entities to keep an eye on contracting and to make sure they're supporting and affirming all of the goals that were set

forward in the workforce plan. next slide, please. just an overview, the infrastructure plan sets out conceptual designs for a whole slew of all of the infrastructure at the site and this amendment would allow an additional geotechnical improvement. it's the use of stone columns, literally cow columnsch stone co ithimprove the ground. this will be at the site to protect against sea-level rise. we've come to this amendment after about 18 months of analysis and full engagement. i want to acknowledge our engineering team. they have been instrumental in helping with this and the city engineer has been in this evaluation and we are gratified

that public works approved the plan amendment last week and puc approved and we're hopeful we can move forward with one of techniques at the site. this amendment to the plan would be consistent with the costs projected for phase one. you all had a cost in september and phase one is $145 million worth of horizonal costs and lcc is an improvement in terms of -- it's a more cost effective item for the ground improvement as compared with the structure. the amendment would be consistent to the plan. you had a cost in september and phase one is $145 million worth of horizonal and lcc is an improvement in terms of -- it's

a more cost effective item for the ground improvement as compared with the structure street system which was discussed at approvals. this is to ensure that the infrastructure is like the efficient delivery of infrastructure. our goal with the mou is to ensure the infrastructure goes to the appropriate agency with the most expertise and able to absorb, maintain and sort of manage parts of the infrastructure of the city that they have the most expertise in and the ability to really absorb. and so i'll talk more about how the mou does this, but primarily, the idea is that as infrastructure is completed, each agency and the appropriate expertise column, streets, public utilities, parks for the port, each of the agencies are

cued up to receive that infrastructure. next slide, please. this is a five-party agreement and i mentioned all of the parties already, except for fire department. fire department has a key role ensuring that all of the entries, the ingress, egress, there is safe emergency vehicle access and they're on board to provide an ongoing review and concurconcurrence. standard infrastructure components, including light-weight cellular concrete would be accepted by public works and sfpuc but the port would accept the park and this is the key component of our state land's obligation and part of the reason sea lot 337 received the eight to hav abilie legislation is that we were delivering these great access spaces to the water so we want to make sure we're continuing to deliver those by maintaining

control of the park and we'll be accepting the parks, the open space and any unique features. they would be decorative pavers and street furniture and i'll talk about how we're going to maintain those. next slide, please. i mentioned a little bit about the benefits and i think the overall benefit is an efficient delivery of services and we want that in the right boxes. the right division that has that expertise and i want to also mention that when agencies accept infrastructure, they're provided the title to the property and we're unable to give title to our property, to other divisions because of our trust obligations. so this mou is in place of that dedication of land that agencies that accept infrastructure are accustomed to receiving and that's another key item that the mou provides. with regard to port-accepted

items, need will be asked to be accepted by the port commission when they're completed in, say, 18 months, about two years, and we are tracking the maintenance of those items alongside the csc recently completed by the board a week or two ago. we have special taxes that total about 2.8 to $3 million a year at build-out and those are based on the number of square feet developed. that's a bit of a range there. and we are tracking and making sure all of items will be accepted by the port and tracking with how much money we'll have to maintain those. we'll be coming to the port commission as we move on a little bit in terms of the operation of the site to spell that out a little bit more clearly. so you'll see future action items how to operate and maintain these sites. i'll mention one final thing on the public financing protections that the city will receive.

with lcc, a newer type of infrastructure and several protects the city departments ask for and one is a longer-term warrant from thy from the develd project financing. to the extent there are major failures in the infrastructure, the project special tax increment would be drawn upon by the other city developments in weighing the things like requests by the other city departments for this new infrastructure and that upfront port for the street infrastructure which was the alternative earlier in project approvals was being proposed and evaluated by the developer. next slide, please. that concludes the presentation. but i want to give you an idea of what's coming next. if we're able to get approvals today, the final map is cued up for next tuesday, an upon date,

the final map would allow us to sign parcel leases and if we're able to get that june 2nd, we anticipate signing all four leases during the month of june and this facilitates construction. , demo and full-fledged construction needs to wait to be signed among other permitting approvals and we also will be returning to the port commission with cfd bond issuances and we are working hard with the office of public finance to cue up funding for the costs to try to match the lower cost public financing dollars and replace the higher cost dollars and you'll be seeing future items on mission rock relative to cfd bond issuance as we work through this through public finance. i'm happy to pause now and take questions. i want to acknowledge jack bear

on the line. if the commission allows us, they may wish to make a statement. >> thank you. i hope everybody can hear me. thank you for your comprehensive report, becca, and for all of your leadership on this project and thanks to your team of colleagues at the port who made important contributions to the matters before the commission today. and a final thanks to katie at stepping in to such a critical time in the report, the coronavirus' impact and pier 45. president bra brandon, members f the port commission, the items before you today are technical and administrative but important steps forward. as becca discussed, the mou sets fort the various city agencies moving forward and the

infrastructure plan amendment allows us to use the most effective tools to raise the site to project against sea-level rise while preventing settlement. i'm pleased to report the public utility's commission unanimously approved these items today and the public work's director also issued an order approving these items last week. with your support, we will proceed to have the final map approved and with the final map's approval, we can sign parcel leases and we can begin work on constructing the first phase of the project. poini know this is a long time coming and i want to thank president bran ton an brandon if the port commission. president brandon who let's the susubcommission 13 years ago.

we're almost there. we started dep ligs work and we're anxious to get underway. when the different settles and when we emerge from this moment in history, we'll be able to celebrate our achievement together. it has been a collaborative effort with the work of hundreds of people along the way. thank you for your support and i'll stand by for questions if you have any. >> do i have a motion? >> so moved. >> second. >> lelet's open this up for pubc comment on item 8a for members who are joining us on the phone. jeffica will provide struck instructions to provide public comment.

>> thank you, president brandon. at this time, we will open the cue for anyone making public comment on 8a. >> operator: to summon each 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 the line is open and others will wait on mute until the line is open. comments are limited to three minutes a person. please dial 1-0 if you wish to make public comment. >> do we have anyone on the phone? >> yes, we do. >> if you. please open the line for the caller. >> operator: you have one question remaining. >> question: good afternoon president brandon and fellow commissioners.

i'm danny campbell with the sheet metal workers' union. i'm a trustee of the san francisco building construction trade's council, as well. ani'm here today to tell you the building trade's council supports this important historic mission rock project and we urge the commission today to approve item 8a. thank you very much for your time and your service to our city. >> thank you. next caller, please. >> operator: you have one question remaining. hello? is there a caller on the line?

>> the line was opened but the caller looks to have dropped off the call. at this time, there to other callers on the line for public comment. >> thank you. seeing no callers on the tone, , public comment is closed. commissioner gillman? >> thank you, rebecca, for the presentation. it was very thorough and complete and i just want to say how excited i am to see this move forward and i'm excited to see the overall development move forward, but as i have stated before, i've been very impressed they were the first out of the first with the mission rock project to have the affordability requirements across this project at 40% and i really just want to commend them and i want the commission to move the forward forward to get the part up and running and the

first phase and i have no questions. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner wooho. >> thank you for the presentation is thank you, jack, for your comments, as well, to put everything in perspective. evacuewe've worked on this for , long time and great to where we'll execute now and i appreciate the port has worked hard with all of its sister agencies across the city to make this comprehensive mou and, also, to look at the alternatives that we can to make this infrastructure as cost effective as we could. i have been briefed by the staff separately so at this point, i have no further comments or questions and support the item. thank you. >> thank you. vice president adams? >> i just wanted to say to you and the team didn' and jack congratulations, great job and a very good job and very thorough.

and jack, thank you and president brandon, if yo thank r the patience of 13 years from being involved in the beginning and glad it's coming to fruition and you have my support. >> rebecca, thank you for the presentation. and jack, thank you for your commitment to this project and congratulations on the ground-breaks last week. unfortunately, you couldn't do a big hoopla, just knowing this project is under construction and putting people to work during this crisis is a plus. i just have one question. i am so happy they have btw and puc approve this and that gives me a lot of confidence and i

just need clarification on how it will work and what happens if we are cal called in and what or financial obligation is. >> very good to pick up on. you picked up on one of the key components of the mou for sure. so the developer as part of their conditions to getting the map approved has taken on the obligation of up to a five-year warranty after they completed all construction on phase one, a five-year warranty would kick into gear. the tax district, the i fd and csd would start a ten-year warranty at that time. to the extent the infrastructure doesn't meet certain criteria, if it becomes too bouyant and moves up, some number of inches

or portions of an inch, they public works would call upon the project and pay a claim saying we made $200,000 worth of the repair and this is not typical of the city street they call through the mou or tax district to provide that warranty. if the project funds are available at that time and we have the tax district flowing, we would provide that to them and it would go into each subsequent phase final budget that goes to the port commission. and so, if the warranty is called prior to phase 3, it would have clear visibility and it would be integrated into each phase budget. we were clear that those funds are limited to the project's tax increment or special taxes to be clear that the port harbor fund

will not be impacted by this, but it's to the extent we have funds available in those financing districts. does that help? (inaudible). >> was the warranty consideration in the plan when we were discussion how to do the project for the infrastructure? >> so there's a typical warranty that they provide to the infrastructure agency and that was included for sure in the developer contingency for phase one. if there is a major failure that we don't anticipate, but if there were one, then that would have g go into the phase two budget. >> thank you, i appreciate that. >> commissioner gillman, did you have a question? >> no.

>> if there are no more comments, can we please have a role call? (role call). >> motion passes unanimously. >> thank you, commissioners. >> if you. thank you. >> i just texted the commissioner mack and he should be joining shortly.

>> commissioner mack is joining. >> is this the appropriate time? >> yes, thank you. >> i'm 8b, informational presentation and the memorandum of understanding for the pier 70 mixed use district project roughly bounded by the 20th to the north, stance ba san francio the east. >> good afternoon, commissioners. this is your waterfront director and acting deputy of real estate development. for these next couple of weeks. i'm to present on the memorandum of understanding item for pier 70 and i want to quickly acknowledge the same team. we've worked closely with the department. public works, with the mayors, the housing, as well as sfca and i neglected the city attorney calling to help to bring this

document to where it is. i wanted to acknowledge that team and i want to mention that similar to the mission rock item, this mou is a precursor to the final map. the final map for pier 70 is not scheduled and we're hope approximately tful toget it on . we don't have that scheduled yet and we plan to bring it back on the june item. i wanted to mention one other things, you heard pier 70 at the last meeting, the design for development amendment which was an informational item looking to increase the floor area within buildings and we'll be bringing that back next agenda item -- sorry, next commission meeting. we are working to get the square footages the commission asked for just right and that was not time sensitive and we'll bring that back in june and you'll have a pier 70 double header for the next commission meeting. next item, please you have the

overview of the pier 70 special use district, 35 acres and the brookfield waterfront site is 28 of those acres and we're looking at about 3,000 units and 1.75 million square feet of office, nine acres of open space, 500,000 square feet of retail, arts and light industrial space. and if we can go to the next item, i just wanted to provide a similar sort of overview for how the mou, the memorandum of understanding with the other city agencies fits into the overall horizonal development and the upper left-hand corner is a development and dispostion agreement approved in 2017 and it guides and bounds the supports and the developer together and provides all of our rights, responsibilities and obligations to one another.

(audio cutting in and out. >> there's a significant amount of construction that has occurred and we also did a step at mix rock, didn't take, but we did a step at this site which was a transfer map in 2019 and it went through the board of supervisors and delineated

parcels across the whole site and this project had intermediary steps for a good reason to sell that initial condo site to get revenue into the site early on. next slide, please. 20th street has been under construction for quite awhileand this can be instructed because there are fewer employees at the site. for phase one, we're looking at 600 residential units and

overall, 30% of affordable housing delivery at the site and there's 400,000 square feet of office and the retail arts and i'm going to mention similarly, we're submitting these quarterly contracting updates so the latest number we provided for the port noted that the project overall has awarded through the end of 2019, awarded $107 million in contract and 39 millions of those were to sea firms and that totals about 37% of the overall contracting and we'll be happy to continue to keep providing those updates to the commission can stay abreast of all of the contracting at the site. next slide, please. similar to what were talked about earlier, the purpose of this mou is what i think in my mind is an efficient delivery of

infrastructure. as infrastructure is completed, it be accepted by the approach infrastructure agency and it deliverratedelineates infrastrue components and how will it cooperate in undertaking the maintenance. the next slide, please. the structure again is a five-party agreement, supporting pub worpublic works and it willt standards type of infrastructure to the extent that the project has some unique designs and primarily, there are two street segments that don't meet city standards in terms of sizes of the different elements. we have the special building 15 frame, which is sort of a public realm enhancement and there's a port on our side of the ledger

and decorative pavers that we'll keep. next slide, please. i do want to mention one key element of the mou and that it came about similar to the difficulty or the uniqueness of the developing sites on the waterfront and we have these in consideration which means we're raising different parts of the site. pier 70 is unique with its historic score and this creates a bowl in one part of the site. ingoing through the permitting and different codes the project has to meet, in order to meet subdivision code, there must be what is called an overland release path or stormwater. the flow goes across the shipyard, up to the north and occasionally, when the

atmosphere issue river events, you can see the ponding and it has not caused issues to the previous operator and sort of a condition that has been managed in the past and as this project goes through permitting, ar thee is a requirement in the code that this relief pack be memorialized through the mou. next slide. so ultimately, the permitting notes that the key infrastructure agency, they will not accept the sewer system due to their concern about the stormwater unless the port agrees to preserve a path where the water could get out should there be this major storm and the storm drain facilities, perhaps they're clogged up and the storm drain isn't flowing as the designers anticipate the it would flow. there are two solutions. the first is a short-term solution and we worked closely

with andre coleman and jerry warbol. the short-term solution, we will refrain from constructing the new buildings on portions of the shipyard where this overland flow path, the water is anticipated to flow should there be a storm. we look at this carefully, to make sure we weren't impacting the shipyard use and that's a short-them solution. short-term solution. the long-term, we will be working on an improvement to keep the water confined should there be this sort of overtopping or storm type of events. this would need be to constructed in phase three, when the problem is exacerbated within when the site is raised up on the edge of the water or when that area is needed by a

shipyard tenants and they have a need to build a new infrastructure, where this overland release land a located and we would work to more quickly produce this solution. brookfield is anxious to look at various solutions. they as the developer don't like having this improvement that they don't know the confines of, so they're working closely with their engineers to look at the potential col yorvert to confine storm dunkin' donuts watewater. next slide, please. i mentioned what i believe are the benefits of the mou, anu, pg

each in the appropriate bucket, give the utilities to the utility expert and let us environmenhavethe parks to manae waterfront parks. i want to note similar to mission rock, we have the cfd special rocks approv approved be board estimated at 2.$75 million in build-out. before you accept, we'll be talking through operations with you with the acceptance that

will come to you with the completion of the parks and open spaces. next slide, please. so the mou was approved by the sfpuc commission and we want to thank their staff for bringing that forward and we'll be coming back to you on june 9th to seek approval and public works is prepared. they don't need action with their commission and prepared to work with us to get the document into execution form and we'll be seeking a final map at the board in june and we hope that is to be determined on their scheduling considerations, of course. and with that, i want to conclude and note we have various members here to answer questions. i know katherine riley should there be questions for the developer and kevin mas secondsd

others from the portside. >> let's open it up to public comments. anyone on the phone who would like to provide public comment. >> at this time, we will open the cue for anyone on the phone who would like to make public comment on item 8b. the system will let you know when the line is open and others will wait on mute until their line is open. comments are three minutes a person. the cue is now open. dial 1-0 if you wish to make public comment. >> anyone on the phone? >> president brandon, there are to callers on the line. >> thank you.

seeing no callers on the phone, public comment is closed. commissioner? >> thank you for a good report and i have just one recommendation, if it's not already being mentioned. with respect to the overland flow that is planned to be constructed in phase three. if that is to be accelerated because we have identified the tenant as you shared with the commission, i would recommend that you reach out to the project sponsor and start working on a protocol of how you notify each other and how everyone will gear up to bring that construction phase sooner because there's lots of lead time for materials and we would be better suited by having a

protocol for everybody rather than just trying to wing how fast we want to bring it forward and avoiding people saying it's costing more to bring it forward and identifying a protocol up close and everyone agrees. i think we may be helpful putting it online sooner, but it will be in a cooperative manner without interest being competing. >> thank you, commissioner. a good idea. >> madam president, that concludes my comments and questions. >> thank you. >> commissioner gillman. >> thank you, rebecca, for the overview and the report. it was very, very thorough and i have no questions at this time. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> thank you, rebecca. also for the very comprehensive

report and i think you have outlined the protocol given that we are setting up the same collaborative arraignment an ari have to further questions. i think we should move forward. >> vice president adams. >> yes, we rebecca, i have no questions on the presentation and i agree with the commissioner that we move forward. >> if you. thank you. >> rebecca, thank you for the report and i want to thank you for job with the lbe outrcm outh and effort.

rebecca, most of my questions were regarding timelines and you already stated that you will come with us in the future with a plan. but i was wondering, what the timeline for the solution and the implementation? i'm not sure that we want to wait until we get to a certain phase. i think this is something to be work on now and to find a solution and fix it. >> thank you, commissioners. and catherine, please feel from to chime in. >> brookfield is anxious to engage with public works on what would suit their needs in terms of interpreting this code and making sure an improvement would meet their needs in the code, because, ultimately, they'll have to collaborate to dum comeo

an agreeable solution. we were talking with blackfield workinbrook foodfield to work on that this year that they would agree and meet the subdivision code and with the implementation puerto ric pre- d disaster, i think three, or four five years away. i think the date is now unknown, but the earlier date could be accommodated and we are motivated to keep the cost down and not allow inflation to get away from us. and i think that we are just needing to collaborate with the public works. also, our maritime will have to evaluate closely to make sure the infrastructure is placed in the least impactful part of the ship yarshipyard and situationst aren't difficult for a future tenant. i think that is the port

considerations. and catherine, chime in if you have anything from the brookfield sign moving the implementation along, if the commissioners don't mind. >> thanks, rebecca and thank you to all. so i think agreeing with rebecca, jumping straight into problem solving, seeing what the fix is and i think that, then, will let us now know, truthfully, what the dollar amount is and that will drive the timing. it makes sense to get that done and off the books. if it's a more expensive fix, we'll have to give that to impact timing.

>> thank you. >> so rebecca, when you bring us a plan, you can give us an update. >> that sounds great. i think those are aligned in terms of timing and that makes good sense. >> thank you. i appreciate it. >> thank you, commissioners. >> next item, please. 8c, extended port policy regarding enforcement of lease populations during the covid-19 shelter-in-place orders for rent deferral by 2018. >> good afternoon, commissioners. commissioners, president brandon.

thank you for your time this afternoon. i will be presenting the rent deferral and discussion on further tenant relief and i would like to thank our lease administrative team and finance team to craft and prepare data for this presentation. and the presentation will cover the proposed rent deferral on tenant ree relief. next slide, please. the presentation will give an overview on the background of the pandemic, the revenue generated in may and a broad-base extension that is for the action and then the further discussion on the extension of relief measures. the next slide, please.

the commercial eviction moratorium on march 17th and the state-wide shelter-in-place on march 19th and tenant relief policy for general fun departments issued on march 27th and the guidance on phase two reopening released on may 12th and the mayoral directive for curbside pick-up which was issued on may 17th. it should be noted that many of the orders have been extended or modified during shelter-in-place to adapt to the fast-changing conditions of the pandemic. next slide, please. the following slides provide an

overview of may revenue as of may 18th. the next series of slides -- sorry, forgive me. this table, in the stack outlines performance revenue by type. of the 594 invoices, the port received 298 payments representing a 50% payment rate. and revenue is down across all types of businesses. next slide, please. of the approximately 6.5 million that was invoiced, 2.2 million was representing a 33% collection's rate. next slide, please. and in looking across the portfolio geographically, revenue portfolios were spread. amounts of unpaid rent increased in each portfolio.

the fishe fisherman'swork's whae largest. (inaudible). >> in doing a brief comparison in april versus may -- next slide please, sorry. as of may 18th, payments credited to may were at 33% compared to april's 54%. again, may payments continue to be booked and when we return on june 9th, we should see a complete picture of april and may combined as those were the two months of shelter in place. at the last commission meeting, there was a desire for rent participation. it is built at the end of the month and due by the 20th of

that month. we don't have that information but at the june 9th meeting, we should be able to present march and april participation renfor more review.covid-19 impd our support is needed at this time. next slide, please. the extent of the broad-based rent deferral programme. it covers all tenants with a few exceptions. there is interest on rent payments from march 1 to jul july 31st.

(inaudible). >> it is still in place a new tenant's executing leases on our after april 1st are not eligible for in release. this deferral does not apply to mou's for city departments and agreements for small rentals at the south beach harbor. there are master tenants, such relief will available to the port tenant has offered equivalent relief to their subtenant. therefore, it is staff's recommendation to approve the extension of the current broad-based program to july 31st, 20 to allow for shelter-in-place. next slide, please. we are now shifting to the

continued dialogue on further relief measures. as a summary, we will be discussing the opt-in program and opt-out process that will be at commission for approval on june 9th. we would also like to engage in dialogue requiring potential learelief measures, such as participation rent restructuring and lease extension. next supplied slide, please. as shared previously, staff proposals and extended rent deferral program programs to pre relief of the broad-based policy. for your consideration, the proposed extended rent deferral program moves from the broad-based rent deferral program to opt-in program and waives fees and interest on rent payments from march 1s

1st through december 31st if paid by december 31st. it requires the tenants must comply with all lease obligations during the deferral period. i would like to reemphasize that this proposal moves away from the broad-based application of deferral to the opt-in program that is conditioned upon submittal of key documents. next supplied slide, please. as a generate matter, they have been more willing to provide relief for a range of reasons, including public equity concerns and the mission to look at the impact to the leasing portfolio. we recommend that any extended rent program remain available to facttenants and there be dialoge for forgiveness of rent. therefore, we propose the

following submittal requirement. one, a statement from the tenant describing the impact from covid-19 and their need for leaf and back-to-normal operations, providing projects in light of current commission conditions and projecting the ability to resume rent payments on or before december 31st. secondly, approve a submittal to federal, state or local relief programs and a summary of that status and if no applications were filed, the statement explaining why. port staff believe this data can help guide our path in the future's unknown. as shared at the may 12t may 12th meeting, in addition to the opt-in framework, they

have talking abouthisgoes to rer that no longer utilizes port properties. next slide, please. port staff may rely on resolution for those who wish to opt out this is a term of less than five years remaining and a monthly rent of less than $10,000. where staff can negotiate a return on to the premises on terms and conditions that benefit the port. for those tenants that opt out ,

there could be significant benefits in terms of certainty, control and limiting costly legal action later. port staff believes that the proposed extended rent deferral and early termination to be the most advantageous of relief measures to deploy next. it will allow the port commission and staff to develop further release strategies. as you may know, senator scott weiner introduced sb939 to give commercial tenants the right not to pay rent without fear of eviction. it introduces other provisions regarding late fees and negotiations.

this is a requirement on the clause which would make it effective the moment it is signed into law. continuing to monitor sb939 and the port's release effort. next slide, please. in summary, if the fort port commission were to approve the deferral program, the process depictured in this graphic would be put into action and proposing a 30-day period for tenants to answer whether they want to opt-in and if so, submit documents. staff propose a signing, port staff to assistant tenants. additionally, port staff have been evaluating whether to

include an option for tenants to enter into a repayment plan to pay any outstanding balances after january 1st of 2021. port commission feedback on this repayment option and other tenant relief is highly desire. next slide, please. as for further relief, forgiveness, participation rent restructuring and lease extensions have been all presented as possible relief measures to pursue. forgiveness is the most desired relief measure, but it is the most financially impactful to the port's ability to operate. as shared by the finance team at the april 28th meeting, real

estate was estimated to be $98 million and at that time it was projected to develop to just over 75 million. those projections at this time are unknown and are best guesses that impact on our economy and therefore, supporting our tenants would require identifying creative solutions. in addition to what is lifted on this page, other ideas are contemplated, such as providing marketing assistance to tenants, pursuing a permit for outdoor seating to allow for streamlined access and ideas on how to activate social distancing respiratories. respiratorrequirements. in order to allow for our tenants to regain their footing,

we must adapt and your feedback and guidance is very much appreciated. next slide, please. port staff identify ways to facilitate the ability to manage rent forgiveness which requires the lease amendments. as shared on may 12th, charter section stated anticipated revenues of 1 million or more or a term of ten years or more must be approved by the board of supervisors. providing deeper and broader relief such as rent forgive next would trigger amendment under section 9118. it presents a challenge to the implementation of an efficient program and while this does not impact our entire portfolio, it covers many of the port's major