City and County of San Francisco Thursday, September 11, 2014

>> I'm the chair of the

committee to my right is

supervisor tang and the clerk is

lisa miller I'd like to thank sfgovtv Mr. Jim smith we're

going to get started we have a

legislated I didn't meeting today Madam Clerk, any announcements? >> please silence all electronic devices. Completed speaker cards and

copies of the documents to be completed as part of the file

should be submitted to the

clerk.

Okay. Today, we're here to hear

3 items from the can I feel

grand jury report we want to

call the first and second items today, we'll hold the hearing

and have a presentation first on the port

>> Madam Clerk call items 15e.

>> is a hearing and resolution responding to the proceeding

just of the superior court on

the published civil grand jury

report entitled the 76 caught been dollars.

>> before we get to the specification I'll give el lane

smith a couple of minutes to

speak to the committee thank you

for your work on this I know you've spent a lot of hours putting those reports together

so, please provide us with an overview. >> thank you very much Madam

Chair supervisor tang and supervisor chiu thank you for

your time to the a year worth of work for the 2013-2014 civil

grand jury I want to give a

quick context how we operate and

what the reports is trying to do

the civil grand jury is made up

of 9 citizens we volunteered to

be the citizens watchful dog as

spelled out many the california

decision we began the years as

individual and during the year

meshed as a jury our commitment

to look at the aspects of local

government to see as citizens

representatives thought greater

fetishness was possible we didn't point fingers or investigate individual we saw

our johns as looking at the processes at programs and seeing

what might work better for the

citizens you'll hear 3 reports

and 3 later there is on

underlined theme we are for

greater transparency and greater

opportunity for citizens vochld

from the flow of information to

the citizens transparent is one

of the best tools for participation in government we invested that theme again and again.

We ask for more involvement from

the public as the potential

projects developing for the

ports the rising sea levels the san franciscan need to hear about this planning mitigation

for the intrusion of rising sea

level waters we asked for

increasing transparency for the

money our portfolio was

underlined by confidentiality we

take a note we've not identify

who talked to us we met every

monday night and held numerous

committee meeting we asked about

the items of interest we scoured

and into the archives of the

city and put hundreds of hours into each report.

I want to note we approached our

trappings with open minds and

didn't have preconceived ideas

of the outcomes and broadened on the other hand, our

investigations and started with

a grand scheme and end up with a focused report.

The other thing we've realized

we put out the report July 1st

and realized the local

government is not state inning

so some of the issues woirp

dealing with were in fluctuates

and continued to evolve new

information is coming in new numbers for the rising sea

levels has come from the national research council and

the united nations I pcc.

In terms of the draft city has

draft guidelines for incorporating sea levels into

the capital guidelines and a

series of hearings the e that

was chaired that I the assembly

person if san mateo county we have information from President

Chiu and the state but today we've presenting a picture of

what we saw and leernld during our time we trust yourself

you'll hear our concerns in the healthy spirit in which they were intended thank you for your

time and I'm going to turn it over to the lead writers you'll

hear from today david will present public utilities the

port report and retro at that on

rising sea levels and robin on

the ethnics report >> thank you.

>> I'll now ask for david

homage to present object the san francisco port. >> and great. Thank you very much thank you for your time to

review and respond to the

reports Madam Chair and President Chiu and supervisor tang. I'll speak briefly on the

misdemeanor doing we used was to interview and review of

documents we reviewed about one

hundred and 75 documents

websites, reports, agenda etc.

Meeting minutes and 24 different individuals.

We came to the conclusion that

the port it challenged with

sometimes contrary damaged caught business owner between

the public trust and public dollars the preliminary goal to

serve the public trust a seven hundred-year-old discipline but

in order do that the port is

phasing limited resources so

they have to report to

soliciting private capital to

provide better access to the

port that this is what the port designates the members of the

grand jury in addition to being part of the public are

representatives of the public so

we're charged with promoting the public interests.

The port decisions made by the port h have far-reaching consequences for the city and

region this was a report we

started broad because the port

is 7 and a half miles long

encompass a great deal of aspects many aspects.

So its difficult to narrow it

down to the issues we really wanted to is first of all, the

port does many things well, it's

not meant to be a slam other

than the activities of the port

the open space, the

exploratorium is a great

transmission the at&t park the

saufl proceeding cargo many, many other projects. The purpose of the report to

look at areas we feel the port

is a could improve if process

and public input so first off finding a recommendation one

we're not going to separate the finding of the recommendation at this point do you which the me

to read 0 those or not

>> if you can summarize please.

Finding one we determined that

the activities of the port a strongly influenced by the

mayor's office like the 8 street

project pier thirty, 32 the

cruise ship terminal, america's

cup we felt that the decisions

were made with oftentimes you

without sufficient public input.

And the port commission is

appointed by the mayor statutely

from the burton act 5 commissioners appointed by

approved by the board the recommendation is that the port commission should be restructured to have two representatives appointed by itself board of supervisors and

3 by the mayor.

Our belief that a great deal of influence from the mayor's office is often political.

And the public outreach is limited for example, the jury

report this report has not been presented to the port commission for their review E.R. Public

review and hope to have it September 23rd meeting this

month long after a report was

issued often August 13th although the board of

supervisors must approve the appointees there is no selection

the selections is made solely by the mayor's office with the board of supervisors making that

up and down vote on those selections.

We asked the board to place a

policy assessment statement own

the 2017 ballot and florida passes to lobby stated representatives to amend the burton act to allow the board of supervisors to select and

appointed their own representatives to the port commission.

This was our finding and

recommend e recommendations one.

Finding in recommendation four

we feel the port is really

focused on developing an income

stream which the the capital

improvements needed to preserve

the infrastructure and but they're required to maintain

height he limits, etc.

But in the search for private

dollars they're often looking

for a variance to the waterfront

land use plan the recent

projects involve some kind of

variance plan so we're

requesting the port or

recommendation is that the port

review and rise the land use

plan, which was created 17 years ago.

And include a maritime aspect because it focuses on

preliminary land and development and the maritime aspect of the

court is very, very important.

We feel there should be a lot of

pun input on the revision there

was a revision announced

August 11th we received a copy

today between August 11th and December 30th too the time

period closes is 7 weeks we feel

that's an example how it's not

city to public entity on this

and finalized on October 13th it should include maritime aspects

of how to develop the maritime

activities of the port which is

examples are great cargo and

fishing and x urgsz a a great

deal of of other things private

birthing and reject finding six

the 2007 it is estimated that

that will be b at thirty percent capacity and one of the

preliminary reasons is fell

statute dating back to the 18

hundreds where the passenger

vessel prohibits passenger

vessels to stop and two enter

eloquently ports this is limited

the cruise port brings in seven hundred and 50 thoughts if not

one million dollars to the city

this is tourist dollars ekg.

There are recommendations that

the city should begin lobbying

for moefkdz to the passenger

vessel services act of 1886. Understand this is a federal

statute and the city would have

very this if any input to the

federal statutes, however, the

last attempt to rise the

passenger service act was in

1858 for sea bearing workers and

merchant marine industries would

be harmed, however, they no

longer exist so the change

chance of harm is neglectable

the port states they're working

with the american association of

puerto modify the service vessel

act we're hoping this it board of supervisors can request

updates as at port works in

conjunction with other ports

throughout the united states to

allow increased traffic and

finding 11 referred to the I f d bonds infrastructure district

bonds which can be issued by

statute without voter approval. In some aspects those are

similar to revenue bond and many

aspects they're not the recommendation is that the port commission work with the board of supervisors and put a

referendum before the voters to

request approval of issuance of

you f d bonds should the

approval process should state

the amount of bond independentness and the length

of time to repay.

the jury believes that the

citizens would be better

informed regarding financial structuring of capital improvements to the port

infrastructure if I f d bond

were placed before the voters

they do not increase taxed but defer taxed for the period of

time until the bond is repaid

with the eliminations of the

district it is an increasing

importance to capital although

in the interest of the

transparency the jury redirect requested that board of

supervisors work with the port

to place the information as

stated in recommendation 11 before the voters before ownerships of bonds that

conclude any questions.

>> all right. Thank you Mr.

Holmes a monique the port

director will present on behalf

of the port.

>> good morning, chair breeding

and President Chiu's and members

of the public and members of the

jury and staff thank you for

being here today can I have the

power point if you can put that

up for me? All right. Let's see thank you very much tonsillitis it's my

pleasure to be here I thought I'd define the boundaries the

port of san francisco we have the extreme privilege of not

having our port behind that

fences it's a unique privilege

unknown to the 85 other ports in

the country and unphone neon to

port around the world it's hard to understand the boundary of

the port but essentially from

the he northeast side awe

consecutive park to the boundaries of hundred hunters

point in the basin it's 7 and a

half miles and all on either

filled or structured structures

on the east side of the bay

they're in numerous business

lines 14 separate maritime lines

a lot of are commercial

enterprises and a are tremendous

amount of sole proprietors as

well as big names we all know

and love we've been around since

1950 most of our infrastructure

was built around the turn of the

century and most following the 1906 san francisco earthquake by

it's simply been repaired or neglected. One of the things I think it is important to understand about

the land use of the port how it

is laid out geographically.

Maritime accounts for 39 percent

of the land portfolio of our 7

and a half miles we have

underdevelopment some we're

pursuing opportunities that will

there our maritime land use

almost half of portfolio that

didn't include the water to birth our ships real estate real

estate is a quarter of the portfolio and the different projects underway bring that's

to a third in the coming years

but more importantly we have 85

acres of park 657 acres

developed when the land use plan

took effect 46 acres of parks

planned to a total to more than

a quarter of our portfolio I want to highlight this is a in this case thing we do in san

francisco and we've been able to

do it with the support of public

funding from a variety of sources.

The civil grand jury highlighted

hair transparency and whether there's opportunity for citizen engagement we looked at what

we've been doing since the land

use plan was adapted we've held

over 4 hundred public meetings either at the board of

supervisors or the port

commission or as driven

communities meetings in addition the get into the weeds

neighborhoods held he meetings

we do quite a bit of outreach we

have a 3 hundred person mailing

list that gets agenda and our

postings are on the website as

well as covered through sfgovtv

we publish a forward collapsed

to make sure our citizens can time their appearances at the public works their level of

engagement on the item they're

interested in the grand jury

said we do do a lot of despite things we understand from talking with the grand jury and others there's a sense that

information is not getting out

as wildly as we'll like we

didn't understand on our 15

hundred mailing listed so with

the land use plan to reach out

further than we do island I'll

note that some of the projects

that were highlighted by the

grand jury and some highlighted

as not beneficial to the city

had the same amount of public hearings. As was mentioned we've been if

the process of doing is review

of our water land use plan we

had that if mind when the jury

investigated the port with the warriors project off the

property we were able to free up

staff time to put this report

together and as was mentioned in on that ground it was released

publicly I don't know Mr. Him

you were there we're going to

move our comment time to

November with our intensifies to

do the outreach this is a land

use review it goes bag to

inacceptance the waterfront land

use was adapted in 1997 looking at what was accomplished and not

accomplished and why within the

water land use review the port

staff has indicated areas we

are, improve we've had good

responsiveness for people

looking at the water land use

review and we're excited to go further with that

>> in terms of what the port

staff thinks about updating the

water land use plan a lot of

areas the plan has moved forward in the ferry building sub area

we note there's a couple of area

we need better planning with the

neighborhood but also our

colleagues at the bay conservation and you land use commission and the planning

department so we're proposing

that we had a revised planning

in the south beach near telegraph hill we'll be talking

about that in the coming months.

So that's the highlights I

wanted to make we didn't respond

to items 1 and 5 not directed to

the port and provided answers to

6 through 11 but there's a

number of port staff and city

staff available for questions >> thank you thank you.

>> is there a response to Ms.

Miaiers report any feedback ongoing thank you. We're going to we'll open this

up for public comment public testimony will be taxing

specifically to the report for

the civil grand jury on the

ports specifically so any

members of the public who wish

to testify at this time, please come down

>> it May not be simply because it's to the professional progression their in charge of

the literature the literature

that covers every single area of

government and all state and cities.

How much you need see it's funny

to say oh, I'm the ceo the

company leader and a business

the whollyness how much do you

so much are for you how

high-level 10 thousand volume of

such from chinatown I have

everybody for you a 5 hundred

fragile of team for this work

for figured society for tokyo

>> thank you. >> thank you. Next speaker, please.

>> chairperson breed thank you.

I'm a thomas a resident of the

richmond district and a member

of civil grand jury throughout

the process of serving on the

grand jury it's as that r an

incredible experience to be a

average person of the jury to meet with government officials

and look at things from a

citizens prospective it's at&t's

an amazing opportunity I encourage anyone regardless of

age or experience you know, I

guess general level of availability to certainly apply it's at&t's an opportunity if

they want to be part of.

Finding 11 is one of particular

interest to me because of how

important I guess that you type

of debt instrument is in terms

of public finance general

although infrastructure finance

district their pondered been the

idea they'll be funded on future

development in to the for the

creation of the bonds I think

there are fiscal combats how an

example ii f d to include the

warriors arena fits not included within the boundary to the best

of my knowledge of court I f d

ultimately I want to know where

our elected officials stand on

the debt without voter approval >> thank you >> thank you. Next speaker, please.

>> morning supervisor breed

and members of the committee I'm

john I'm here with the

waterfront I've been involved

with the waterfront for more

than a decade I want to make a

general comment and speak to two

recommendations angular to vote

on where you adapt them

recommendations one and 4 d I'm

going to speak broadly everyone listening you know the we can't

a has been on the mind of people

who monitor the port but every

voter in san francisco in a last

year we have evidence this grand

jury found the port and

commission is deeply distung I

fundamental we have a wide

disconnect between the six political appointees have been

managing the projects and people

that own and run actually own

and should be involved in

running the port we have two

votes rejected the washington

project ems more than 50 percent

of the voters voted to have the heights on the waterfront those are facts the grand jury report

I'm hoping you and the port and others take the recommendations

very seriously outside item one that's the fundamental recommendations there's no one

here from the mayor's office but the mayor's office submitted a

letter to have the port be a mix

of the appointees and not a

choice by the mayor's office the

letter should all is fine I want

to know how you agree and if the port commission has moved forward in a different direction

than the voters and I also- >> thank you yes.

>> are there other members of

the public who wish to testify.

>> thank you chair breed and

I'm larry bush a member of the grand jury I've soefrd on the

committee I want to undermine a

few points when we talk about a

waterfront and maritime use it

takes in so many departments for

example, the issue of traps convenient along the waterfront

if you see the comments from the transportation department they

don't have a master plan for the

waterfront so when we did our

interviews we learned that the

department heads don't get

together to look at the

waterfront whether planning, dbi

or environment or health, or

transportation all sitting

around a table together to talk

about the combats the result is

sometimes the right hand didn't

know what the alone is doing so you build on this.

>> the other point is the whole

thrust off our report to

increase the public assess and

when monique mirror who has done

an excellent job of the report

who showed the number one issue

was public comment on washington

with 80 meetings it if succeed

at creating a consensus because

the voters overturned what the

port was doing so the number of

meetings held and who attends is

eir relevant it took 5 years

with at&t a series of hearing

before the board voted on it.

>> thank you any other members of the public come forward please.

It appears to me from observing

this mayor brown promoted did

miles corporation they went

bankrupt and the project was not

billed mayor newsom sporltd is

it didn't happen and mayor ed

lee supported the warriors and

that didn't happen everyone is

doing a joe going good job

something's wrong and needs to be fixed it's something about

good afternoon the fight between

capital and public trust goes

back to 1869 french capital

lifts set up a deal to take over the port for one hundred years

or something like that it was in

the fix until governor downey

vetoed it the whole city of san francisco went nuts there's something that protects the port

from the private money because many of the things have failed

maybe the trick to rebalance the commission and put more people

on the commission that

understand the public trust and

direct all our attention to

getting projects that are not

rejected by the public.

>> thank you, sir any other

members of the public who want

to make pickup seeing none,

public testimony is closed.

Colleagues, we have been asked

to respond to several finding specifically to the port and at

this time I think it's important

that we go through each finding.

I won't read out each specific

finding by focus on whether or

not the six to be to agree or

partially agree or disagree and

there's also specific text we

want to be entered read into the record important each finding

the goal to summit those with

the current resolution we have amend the current resolution and

submit it to the full board for consideration.

So that's the process here today

and I'm going to start with you

think this was a very good

report I really presenter a lot of the feedback from members of the civil that grand jury as

well as the hatred work.

I vshthd one specifically high suggestion we partially disagree

with the finding and I want to

specify my thoughts on why we believe or I believe that to be

the case so the board can't

speak to the level or and a half of the influence at any time to

the privy to all the interactions mar the mayor's office influence many activities

at the port and throughout the

city authenticity difficult to

look at the minimum bureaucrat

but the board buildings the port

commission has followed the

practices of every agency with

regard to public hearing there

are several commissions that are

appointed by the mayor public works rec and park commission

fire commission and mta commission.

On the recommendation

specifically from the civil

grand jury the this will not be

implemented and the resident to

as to why is because such an

effort is well beyond the board's jurisdiction requiring

the stated protective changes as well san francisco voter approval san francisco state representatives are the appropriate officials to undertake an effort and

colleagues that's the first

findings I was wondering any

other suggestions to be is supervisor tang

>> sure thank you chair breed I agree with our suggestions for

finding do number one I think

that the statement the port commission readilyly gave

permission it's a statement that

I had an issue I believe the

port like any other commission

did it due diligence in

obtaining public comment as to the terms of the port commission

should be restructured to rehabilitate public interest

when the mayor did come up with

some of the nominees they

actually are suggesting to the

rules approval so I sit down on

that so the public can speak for

or against it so their mayoral

appointees they go through a

process for prrld. >> President Chiu. >> thank you, Chairman Breed

and colleagues on this issue

we're and I'll mention to the public we're required for

various finding to agree or

disagree it wholly or

partiallyly I suggest that we

patricia disagree in my mind I partially agtitates semi

narcotics I agree with our suggestion we parkinson's

disagree let me say a couple of

thing I absolutely appreciate

the frustration Mr. Taylor because of the decisions made by

the port let me use the most

significant example in recent

years business owner around the washington eight project they know my prospective on the project the hope and desire when we were going through the

process when we were going to be

able to figure out how that

project could meet the community

needs as ended up obeying being proposed as the lead champion on

the board of supervisors I had a

significant disagreement with

the port that being said there's a process for how port commissioners are selected it

goes through the board I am the

one person here at least on this

committee for example, choose to vote against a port commissioner

property by itself mayor that's the process we have right now

and that's the progress that

process was envisioned in the

burton act there's a way for us to at the board of supervisors to significantly weigh our

objections to port commissioners

and because of that process you

know, I think we had a process

that allows the prospective on

this issue through, you know,

we'll be monitoring this and in

the future how diversity

nominees into glow it's

important to have nominees that reflect experiences and

community voices I'll continue

to ask the administration and

port staff to think about what

those nominations look like I

want to lay out the prospective

and why I said the partial agree

and partially disagree remark.

>> I'll move on to item 4 my

suggestion to parking lot

disagree again specifically help

to fund capital improvements and

enhance the quality of life is

not exclusive the local business

opportunity mixed housing are

good aspects of the development

and the board encourages the

port to look at those they should be looking at case by case with the public involvement

as it relates to the recommendation it's been

implemented as noted in the

reports respond the all port

projects undergo a vesting process.

So those are my comments and are

there any other comments or questions, concerns? >> President Chiu.

>> I'll have a partial disagree

and agree the disagree response

is one I appreciate there are folks that are frustrated

because of the port we have several billions of of capital

infrastructure needs we need to

deal with we are looking at

making sure our piers don't fail

into the sea in some instances we've gotten the right result

whether the work there are many members of the public who preserved the piers at the

exploratorium to make sure the

cruise ship terminal were good

examples of how we worked on

this that piers thirty and 32 I

believe 6 attempts over the last

decades to develop that spot

with the controversy we May

never find the money and that is

a pier that could fail into the

sea I agree with the citizen

minded with the members of the

public how the port and

properties are really utilizing

those spaces in ways it maximum

the public trust that allow us

to engage as many members of the public with the beautiful of the

waterfront I want to agree with

the sentiment of the finding

that being said that sort the be

mixed respond is the appropriate

response for that. >> thank you President Chiu.

>> is there any suggested

amendments to what I read?

For the appropriate response

>> do you have a copy of what

you read.

>> yes. Not here I'm sorry can

you give us a minute please.

>> I can agree with that.

>> thank you.

Okay moving right along.

A lot of paper here.

Finding number 6.

I agree.

The board can't confirm those

figures but agree eir respective

of the degree such an act would

benefit the port and city so for

finding number 6 as it relates to the recommendation it will

not be implemented the board is

no the appropriate city body

spearhead an effort, however, it

encourages the port to advocate

or exemptions from the passing

that could benefit the board and

city the board will support the port in its effort, however, it know

>> I think that's good.

>> thank you, thank you President Chiu.

Okay moving right along finding

8 parking lot san diego the city

and port lost the city

government lost money open the 31st america's cup but san

francisco experienced a net

benefit the board will defer to the civil grand jury the cities

model for the event was

speculative and don't even

fundraising there was known risk

that the fundraising fell

horticulture of the goal the

cities tax basis would have

netted reviewing revenue so the

objective was to make a profit

by the objective was not

realized so for the specific recommendation jimbo bob major

is a substantive term but similar to the thoukt america's

cup as the ports response note the america's cup was extensively vested and approved

by the port commission and the board of supervisors our respond

to the recommendation is that it

has been implemented supervisor tang >> thank you I would agree with our or concur with our recommendation to say we disagree with the finding recommendation I'm sorry finding

number 8 I'd like add I want to point out what the port respond

almost 90 percent of the money

thatnto the america's cup went into infrastructure improvements that

would help the port

infrastructure last for 3 decades that's something we

should point out 2 wasn't a loss

because of the event but a huge investment to ourlz infrastructure. >> President Chiu and I will add one of the things that

finding a lacking is the fact

america's cup brought in one half a billion dollars and

thousands of jobs while I think

all of us would have appreciated

not spending any money the fact

we're talking about a few million dollars that

recommending resulted in half a a billion dollars I don't think

that many city leaders would

have turned down that interest do you understand the citizens

frustration but not as part of the organ next year's to fund-raise and met that for

better or worse that was our experience with the america's

cup it's not come back to san

francisco but we see an awesome

love activity I'm happy to

concur in what our Chairwoman Has proposed.

>> thank you. Do we need to clarify we're going to be

amending or you'll be able to

take the language that I

proposed and insert the recommendations of both

President Chiu and supervisor

tang? >> supervisor breed that would

be helpful to clarify with the resolution of the board repeat specifically the amendment.

>> if I could repeat amendment.

>> that you made as I can

repeat amendment about that I

made by not incorporating the

comments of my colleagues and

our goal to basically write a

resolution that will be heard before the full board on tuesday

we need to make sure the wording is exact.

>> I'm happy to provide you

with my list as well.

>> that might they let settle

the problem.

So partially disagree voter

approval with yield greater

awareness not necessary to

assure the taxpayer interests

are take place care of they're

paid for by college tax they

issue other bonds like mta

revenue bonds they encounter

taxpayers bond like the general

obligation bonds are rightfully

to come before the voter for

approval that's the response to

the recommendation will not be

implemented did I skip something

here 11 okay there you go.

The boarding board has placed restrictions on how they

exercise I f d bonds a process

that involves extensive public

review voter approval is not

required by law or necessary

that make sure that the public

interests is protected and this

is generated by port property

and don't increase the taxes

other cities have the mta

revenue bonds bond that emancipation proclamation can

you remember general obligation bonds require approval for the

reason it will not be

implemented implemented.

Okay any comments?

And supervisor could you go over

recommendation 8 b?

>> 8 b the response to the recommendation?

Has been implemented the departments response indicates

it has and will continue

implementing this recommendation

which the board fully supports

thank you.

Okay. Those are my comments and

suggestions for the board

response are there any other

comments? Okay. At this time,

we'll close the hearing on this

matter.

Or I need okay. So is there

a motion to take these

recommendations as an amendment to the resolution? >> so moved. >> u.

>> okay moved any objections no objections this passes as amended and is there a

recommendation to send this to the full board for approval. >> so moved.

>> without objection yes.

>> excuse me.

>> as the committee report.

>> as a committee report thank

you without objection.

Okay. I think I did everything

appropriately so we can move

forward and actually, I think

we're going to take ethnics out

of order call item number 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6

>> item six is the preceding

just report other than the 2013-2014 civil grand jury

report dierltd civil grand jury pretense.

>> Mr. Ron will be presenting on ethnics.

>> thank you, Chairman Breed

and vice chair tilly chang and President Chiu.

This report deals with the topic

that many people have strong opinions about.

You know, whether people in city

government are acting properly

and how their conduct is regulated. There's an anecdotal evidence of

good conduct and bad conduct

there's a structure in place

there's a lot of beliefs about

the utility of the structure as

we looked at it we could see

there's tangled lace behind that

it include both state and local

laws, there's a federal

constitutional overlay that

comes into play in the financial area, there's common lay

background when it comes to conflict of interest so a lot of

the report goes through the laws

and kind of looks at at how they

operate we got into basically 3

areas where we made finding and recommendations.

One has to do with enforcement

of the laws as it now stands

while people look at the ethnics

commission it enforced the law

the reality is the state

enforces the last in many

instances because the state

political practices act really

controls a lot of what the local lay says.

We see more enforcement by the f

p pc than the ethnics commission.

So we recommended that we

contract with the f bbc at the time there was a state law being

considered that allowed the f

bbc allowing them to correct

with municipalities it fell

apart and will be reintroduced

next year.

We also looked at transparency

the ethnics commission is the

filing for the city and county

for campaign finance and other

reports they put those reports

open the web some are in pretty

good shape and some more complicated we made certain recommendations how the data

gets posted most of those were

commented on by the ethnics

commission I city staff and

really not up for your review there are certain changes in the

lazy we know think May makes sense going forward particularly on reporting on traveling

expenses and things of that nature.

Those will come to you in the

future we also called for an

anti whether funds had been

properly forfeited to the city

when taken in by campaigns

properly and we've called for

sort of revisiting the public

records status of e-mail and

text messages used in public

policy whether the public

calendar requirements of the

sunshine ordinance we called for

the annual report that is specified in the city chart

about the ethniccy of those laws

to be prepared in writing and submitted inform the board of

supervisors and the mayor and

hope you'll port that concept

the ethnics commission tips to

previously prepare this report

once again we called for

revisiting some of the concepts

that were in proposal j that

were feuded in part of the rewrite of the ethnics laws.

Those dealt with the concept of

people seeking public benefits

from the city and regulating how

members that vote on the benefits then get employed are

work for the people that sought the benefits.

The third area we loopthd was restructuring some of the activities of the ethnics commission itself.

We called for a reaffirmation

that that the ethnics commission

is the policy body and the

ethnics commission agreed to

call them to get an executive

secretary for the meetings and

hope you'll support that concept.

Once again I know this is an area that people have opinions

by the made a number of other recommendations and finding I

look forward to your discussion

of them thank you >> thank you.

>> on behalf of the city we

have Mr. John synsoy that's

going to present the executive

of the depth ethnics commission okay. Thank you and chairperson

and supervisors I don't have a

presentation but here to answer

any questions you might have.

>> okay. Thank you.

Okay. At this time we're going

to open this up to public testimony.

Are there any members of the public that want to testify

>> can I make a couple of

public comments I want to thank

the members of the grand jury

for your work the civil grand

jury knows our office has

offered 4 pieces of ethnics

legislation of ethnics reforms I want to thank our colleagues who

supported it which helped to

tight rules around biologists

and other clarifications there

was a number of topics address

raised under the civil grand jury report I believe that san

francisco needs to be a leader

on transparency and neglected

for the public to trust in what

we do we need to have even

though highest ethnical standards around transparency

we've made a lot of progress in

the recent years there are more

things we can have more room to

moderate we ought to consider whether or not the ethnics

commission has the resources to

tobacco pro-active and this

report was very wide-ranging and we have a lot of responses what

I tried to do as I was reviewing

this and would like to suggest I

have a number of possible recommendations how to move

forward and thoughts around this

I'm happy to go through I want

to thank you who worked hard on

this as well as ethnics for good government and for ethnics in

our city for the work working

with my office and working today and working in the future with that, again, thank you and let's go to public comment.

>> thank you President Chiu.

>> are there any members of the

public who wish to make comments.

>> us s I s the problem in the

middle east the only solution

and the 10 thousand professionals together for the

good conscious of the conclusion

from the introduction to turning point all decisions is to. >> thank you.

>> make a friendship because

only making through friendship

is the U.S. And obama and to the mideast.

>> sir, I'm sorry we have to

stick to the subject matter. >> thank you. Next speaker, please.

>> chair breed and vice chair

tilly chang I'm larry bush a member of the grand jury has

been noted this is a moving

target as we started our

investigation in September it

changed after we issued our

report xhoups legislation the

state legislator there were

court decisions and so you'll

see where we have headed t is lateral towards transparency

because the more people have

information the more they can

participate in what is going on whether we're talking about who

is funding travel and how much

they're spending on that whether

there's dark money 20b disclosed

those all I have those are in

the report when we talk to

provide a written report open

was efficiency of our laws we

hope it will look at how other

jirgsz in california are responding to the issues harvey

rose did is a good job of

comparison us to los angeles a couple of years ago that's at

yardstick to use I'm glad you'll talk about this in the budget process one of the things that's

hard to do it nail down in

advance what something May cost

and sometimes, the projections

are outside reality so such.

>> thank you, Mr. Bush any

other members of the public that

wish to provided public comment

testimony seeing none, public

comment testimony is closed. >> all right. Colleagues President Chiu.

>> thank you, Madam Chair and

because the civil grand jury did

thorough work I have literally

11 packages of notes I'm going

to go through to agree or partially agree so I'm going to

try to peed this up I'm going to

speak quickly and colleagues if

you disagree please stop me but I'll start. >> ready.

>> let's go and many of those I

do agree with so finding one a

around the ethnics commission

lacking resources to handle law

enforcement agree 1-b the fact

the I agree finding one c the

confidentiality runs contrary

around public trust I disagree

the board of supervisors extorts supports the greatest

transparent thank you empathy go

commission including its

investigation but recognized the

charter site by this city

attorney finding one d around

the investigative staff around investigation agree.

One e the fact the f b example c

is successful agree finding one

f the investigation is better outside of the perseverance absolutely agree.

Going to recommendation number

one the jury reminds a contract

for a 2 year pilot I'll suggest this is not going to be implemented the board of supervisors doesn't have the authority to implement this recommendation the board agrees

that this is a suggestion that

ought to be considered and encourages the ethnics

commission to look at it and

finding one-on-one two the

improper campaign funds were returned to the folks rather

than the city I suggest we disagree the board of

supervisors we've not received information about specific

examples but the ethnics

commission should follow-up on

specific allocation I think my

staff has provided the summary

I'm on page 2 for recommendation

number 2 around whether we need

an anti audit we support this

but implementing it will require

the supervisors to propose an

audit by the assistance from the

city attorney the board should

report within 6 months.

on finding number 3 that a

broader citizens right of the

aforementioned will support the

action I disagree partially I

want to say I find the nuance

between arresting partially or discharging partially so my comment the board of supervisors

understands how the right of

action to the greater

enforcement but buildings the

private action would be employed

more frequently and the action

on is next finding what we

suggest is it is not implemented any member of the board of

supervisors could propose it but at this time the board of

supervisors we are not convinced

the right of action needs to be broadened.

On ifrnthd number 8 around the definition was lobbyists and contacts disagree partially because the ordinance was all

the time in the ordinance that I

had lfkd and partnered with

dennis herrera this should had

should paragraph we're not

disagreeing we've down done it

with regards to recommendation

number 8 around the lobbyists

ordinance for the city officials

this has been implemented again

in our orientals 9814 strengthens the lobbyists requirements and finding 9 the

influence is not limited within

the city officials but outreach to the community and nonprofit

organizations through tv ads and

polling and other strategies agree.

Recommendations number 9 that

the retirement for the

disclosure of money should be

reestate with full public

disclosure what I say not be implemented it was strengthened

again with what we did by the board of supervisors and the

expenditure lobbyists was not

reinstated I'll state that as

fact and any future member of the board of supervisors could

suggest this if it's something

that is of interest >> I'm reilly I'm making some

changes to what is in the

document but you can see I've met with members of the civil

grand jury this is work in

process finding 11 the text medicare's has not been implored

again if so one I think I agree partially and disagree paternal

the board of supervisors agrees

that the emerging technologies

create new difficulties and the

city attorney has provided a significant amateur of advise

including an interrupted sects

in the newly revised good

government on recommendation 11

I suggest it requires further analysis the board of supervisors looked at this by

the sunshine task force ethnics commission and city attorney

will report back to the grand

jury after this work he the

conclusion of supreme court case

finding 16 around the traveling

and gifts I suggest we agree

with what is suggested by the grand jury with regards to

recommendation 16 in this area he say it requires further analysis the board of supervisors is open to making

changes and looks forward to the

additional analysis and the recommendation of the ethnic commission finding 18 around the fact that the board of

supervisors is not subject to

the requirement and many

provided their counters and will

be helpful to someone that provide my calendar frequently

and I'll say the following the

department did not I'm going to

amend this as far as we know all

supervisors respond to public requests for calendars

recommendation 18 I would say it requires a further stipulate analysis the board of supervisors will ask the clerk

to have this in the board rules.

Finding number 20 with regards

to the fact that the ethnics dimension and the sunshine

ordinance task force are similar ends but difference between them

and sometimes the work is not in

harmony I agree what

recommendation 13 a with the

blue ribbon panel this is not directed to the board of

supervisors and many any member

of the board could r request a

task force recommendation 20 b

also it will not be implemented

it represents to the sunshine

task force and not directed and a at the board of supervisors.

On finding 21 a that the

policymaking powers invested in

the commission itself I agree

finding 21 b the staff provides

the commission meetings contents create the impression 9

commission is not a policymaking

body I disagree most members

receive a ethnicable

contemplation rely on staff work.

Recommendation 21 is the board of supervisors should provide the commissioners with an

executive secretary separate from the commission staff requires further analysis I

think this is something we ought

to consider as part of the

ethnics commission budget I agreeing suggest an additional

staff member could have a better

improvement finding 21 a that

the jury was able to locate and

the ethnics commission was unable to provide notes or presentations to the board of supervisors regarding the annual

reporting open the focusness of

our san francisco ethnics laws I

parkinson's disagree it's

unfortunate that the civil grand

jury was enable to find those

but obviously communications can

be improved finding b the

transparency induct, etc. I will

suggest we agree finding 24 c the proper suicide is considered

their ability to achieve the

purposes set forth when combngd

I agree recommendation 24 that

the mayor and the board should

request on annual written report

on the review of effectiveness

this will be implemented the board of supervisors wants to

receive the report from the

commission go, of course, we should talk about funding

finding 25 a the fact that a

periodic review of information

is to share itself validity.

Finding 25 b that the ethnic

commission has undertaken no auditing of the conflict of

interest and the going finding

for late finding statement partially disagree there's more

work to be done but the board of

supervisors look at those area

recommendation 25 they should monitor other items again, this

recommendation is within the jurisdiction of the ethnics

commission and I'll suggest this is not something we'll implement

but the board of supervisors will consider providing

additional resources in the next

budget process I'll say offhand I've voted for the jurisdiction

around the budget but and budget

is challenged we're really to trying to decide whether more

money for for public health

england this is of importance to

the community that is a body

that ought to lobby I don't get

requests for more funding for ethnics I'll make that

suggestion it has nothing to do

with the recommendations.

I'm sorry was that finding 27

and President Chiu what was our

answer for 25 I it will not be implemented because it's within

the jurisdiction of the ethnics commission the board of supervisors should consider

providing more information in the next process

>> finding 27 requiring the

proposals to amend the campaign

lazy explains how for the

purpose of the law I partially disagree the technical finding

is here and the board understand

such venltd are not required

although advisable

recommendation 27 for the

campaign ethnics laws should be

specified how it explained the

cheaper will be implemented individual supervisors should

ask the city attorney to include

those we're almost done.

Finding 19 the finding of the prop j articulate many publicly

concerns and should be adapted

and again, this is one where I

partially agree slash disagree

the board of supervisors saids

the proposition j should be

revisited but by the ethnics

commission to the finding and

finally the last represents the ethnic commission augment to

hold a hearing this is not a recommendation to the board of supervisors although the board of supervisors can hold the

hearing on the matter and the board recollections it is

outlined by the ethnics commission. So colleagues thank you for your

patience if there are any questions or suggested changes

I'm happy to take the suggestion

I want to thank my staff to and

hopefully, we got most of the

answers I hope our colleagues

can agree with . Thank you President Chiu >> thank you President Chiu I

don't have my disagreements I

was happy to support the legislation basically to strengthen our regulations

around transparency I will say I

want to stop the flow in particular with recommendation or finding number 2 and

recommendation number 2 I wanted

to point out that, you know, as

a campaign we're subject to regular auditing so I felt

strongly about that there are

existing procures in place that

subject candidates that take a

look at some of the instances talking about u talked about but I look forward to working with

the board if we should come up with future legislation or

further resources or sunshine

task force to be able to

properly sure we do everything with transparent. >> thank you commissioner chan.

>> President Chiu.

>> I think the final comment I know with the civil grand jury

thought about the suction that in some salesman's we May partially agree or disagreeable

or not implement them in many

instances it's a function of the fact either something was

directed to a body outside the

board or I don't think this is necessarily the forum with this

particular resolution for us to

decide the specification an

issue buses any members of the board of supervisors can propose

changes to our ethnics rules we

can consider in the future and in some instances? What the

board is going to do pits

meaningless nmgs unless some

members of the board highlights

those for our side to move forward. >> thank you President Chiu

there will be further analysis

required based on your cigarette

butts suggestion so I'd like to

taken a motion to continue this meeting to the call of the chair. >> so moved. >> without objection the

meeting is continued to the call of the chair was there.

>> I think we need to adapt any reopens.

>> okay.

Okay. So at this time are we

would you like are we going to

be able to adapt the responses

that don't require further

analysis within the current resolution or should we bring this back

>> actually, I was going to suggest. >> chair breed all the

responses and further analysis

will be in the meeting on tuesday.

>> I have classification on the specific recommendation. >> please identify user.

>> I'm the protective a native recommendation 16 that requires.

>> could I say what page.

>> recommendations 16 on page 6 okay.

>> oh, on page 6 I'm sorry

recommendation 16 on page 6 of the response we want to clarify

in here there will be a report back to the civil grand jury

within 6 months when it says 6 months from the date of the issuance of the report.

>> that's fine with me.

>> recommendation 18 says report by the way, back within

the date of the report with the recommendation.

>> recommendation 21 on page 8

again, we will want to specify this request for further analysis and a report back to the grand jury on the date of

the issuance of the report.

Recommendation 24 on page 9 will not be implemented

>> will be and oh, will be

we'll need a timeframe for the implementation.

>> I'll suggest 6 months. >> if that makes sense.

>> all right. And to the under

staff commission.

>> number 27.

>> no, no 25.

Inaudible:  .

>> oh, yes recommendation 27 on page 10 again we'll need a

timeframe for the implementation of that recommendation. >> john gibner, deputy city

attorney on 27 it mike May not be the answer will be

implemented and my office will

include those finding with the

campaign governmental code and

that's fine we'll implement it immediately.

>> it's good to have immediate implementation.

And ma'am, chair we don't need

to keep this hearing open we're

making this as part of our

proposed response we should

counter a calendaring laundering

calendar a hearing but specific

not this hearing

>> so at that time, you can

specific submit a hearing request for the matter and in

this case we can resend the vote

for continuing the hearing to the call of the chair do we have a motion.

>> motion and without objection

the item to continue the hearing

is rescinded and is there a

motion to table the hearing?

I think we first need to adapt the recommendation

>> item 5 you can table the

hearing and item 6 amend the resolution.

>> so a motion to table it. >> so moved. >> it is tabled.

>> would you like to accept the amendment.

>> we're going to do that next thank you

is there a motion to accept the

amendment to the resolution as property by President Chiu so

moved without objection.

The item passes is there a

motion to move the resolution as amended to the full board

>> I want to thank the advocates and the civil grand

jury for your incredible work on

this we have going on work to

you do but we'll continue to set

an example to other cities and

jurisdictions what we ought to be doing.

>> so we'll be moving this item

forward as a committee report

without objection the item

carries thank you.

Madam Clerk call items number 34r5e

>> items three and four is

rovpd to the preceding just to

the 13rushg9 on the civil grand

jury report entitleed rising sea level.

>> can you introduce yourself.

Chair for the rising sea level for the committee

>> thank you for being here.

>> it's a pleasure. During our interviews search

warrant staff we've learned speaking that surprised us every

member of our staff is well aware of the reich's sea level

situation and their posed to do

something about it I want to

tell you I'm not following the

recommendations prepared he will

I'm going I'm going to give you

highlights I want you to hear

those and please oh, your support

>> first of all, I said upper

submitted a draft guidance for incorporating the sea levels into capital planning that

document was received by me

after a report was published it

is a step forward I want to

remind the board that draft guidance refers to city assets

only not to private investment and hopefully it will be extend

to that in the future.

I want to talk about mainly

planning and building codes.

Ones this assessment is complete

I imagine everyone is working on

this this is 2, 2 year studies

serious consideration go begin

to include mitigation for rising sea level.

Sequa has been mentioned in the

painstaking sequa gives the city

authority to mitigate that

doesn't maple it happens this

will give us a solid future with resiliency.

In the city's responses a mention of quote consequence of failure of a project.

We read that to maple that under

pressure a permit could be

issued in a known flood zone but

which developer moves on who is

left with the consequences the

business owner and homeowners

I'd like to talk about ocean

beach to develop a master plan

and involves the city spur the

army core of engineers the ocean

will have its way and sand it is

getting in the way the sand that

was pit on the beach was washed

away from 3 months perhaps better options would be

configurations if in that area

and natural tied lands and other

things to be considered.

Wastewater treatment plants the

southeast water treatment plant

this involves everybody in the

city southeast treatment plant

dates to 1952 settings

techniques date to 1938 the

plans are at sea level there are

20 outlets where wastewater

flows into the bay and saltwater

cleans the watermelon and

deteriorates equipment days

should be instead of to stop

this intrusion the oceanside

plant hastening countered

intrusion the 89 equate cause

one of the roofs on the

southeast plant to fail there

was an out flow of untreated

water into the bay considering

those things I think puc did

have a 20-year plan they work in

my neighborhood thais they're

well organized and doing a good

job but this new plant is

expensive and it's a serious

situation I recommend to puc please increase pulling put that

up adhere higher on the priority

list mission bay.

Mission bay is considered a

flood plane yet new development

is mush roaming the pirates s

are issued without accomodation

for sea level unfortunately this

is a good idea they've hired a

consulting engineer from holland

that's helpful we ask the jury

asks for your support permits

not be given out going to until

the things are in place.

The vulnerability of sro they

are also in a two year study

trying to determine what to do

to keep our airplanes with us.

Regional considerations we must

be careful our mitigations don't

put our neighbors at great risk

putting up a saufl to force

water into other counties bcdc

are worried about this they have

41 cities that surround the bay

and san francisco is a major

factor we sit as a gateway to

the bay the jury asks one or

more staff be representing us, please.

Also is a matter of policy on

any new development within the

purview we ask that bcdc be

involved at the onset their wise

and watchdogs for our precious bay.

Early concentration please.

Money. Once this assessment is granted

we'll be in a better position to

receive federal grants but what is grand jury said time is

running out for money they're

looking for creative shorelines

that will be considered the credential pay as you go will

not work it is suggested in the

draft guides rising fees are

targets if we don't stay ahead

of the tied we'll end up

spending more money in the long

return recur dpw had a

consultant rectify the juries

report and were kind enough to

send me a copy he brings up a

good example with pay as you go

funding talk about the exploratorium they're in

approximately 17 year lease it

doesn't retrofit beyond the

needs and the expensive to

retrofit at that time, May cause

abandonment of the investment if

money had obey spent to elevate

the sidewalks they'd be enjoying

a longer period no one cares

about money and stokes than the

insurance industry their geneva

industry has done a done a

report and concluded credential

fixes will not work in closing

this is a huge issue and you

have so many other things it

look at we have to look ahead to

the future we urge the city to stay ahead the curve and plan

aggressively for the future of

our city thank you very much.

>> thank you.

We also have a presentation from

roger kim the environmental director.

Oh, environmental advisor to the mayor

>> good afternoon board members

human resources roger kim I'm

senior verse to the mayor first I want to thank the members of

the federal generalizing for

their attention to this issue

and highlighter a few efforts

underway inform prepare the city

for sea level rise I have

departmental folks here today to skewer questions and a few

departments that be o will be making brief pregnancy of the work underway.

Let me begin by saying the mayor

and the city and county are taking the risks of sea level

rise seriously in our

departments are involved in

cutting-edge work to prepare the city and the mayor buildings the city needs to lead with

adversities own assets to

prepare for the sea level rise

in front he directed a comprehensive plan.

We have a guidance for incorporating sea level rise in capital planning going to the

capital planning committee for

action on is 22nd of September

this guidance incorporated the

most up to date science owe about enable the capital

planning committee to better understand and prioritize to

prepare for a sea level rise

it's also going to deepen the

coordination on this issue

daifrd b heart from the sf puc was the co-chair of the

committee that drafted and will

spend a few minutes to update

why you, we have chris to talk about how we evaluate sea level

rise in our thoughts about planning and building code

changes in accident future and

finally we have representatives from major infrastructure departments highlighted in the

report to you to give you, in

fact, highlighting highlights to

prepare the city for sea level

rise including the sf puc and

the airport and the port with that, let me I'm going to turn it over to Mr. B heart to talk

about our guidance

>> thank you. >> thank you roger and good afternoon program director at

the puc as roger said we've been meeting about a year and

appraise the capital planning in

san francisco spub sub title to

support adaptation we're pleased

to have 7 members on the department including the puc the

airport and puc and planning and

public works and the planning program additional two consultants that are doing a lot

of work for a number of clients along the shoreline including

the city democrats.

The guidance draft form will be

credit card by the capital

committee open September 22nd I'll outline it's feature it

gives a consensus on the science

we believe that climate change

should at least start what science and figure out which is

confusing and the wide array of

report on a particular variable are understood they're not

written for us it will take an

effort we're learning the state

of the art mapping product by itself public speaker at the

same time our work was going on with the sewer program this

should highlighter our data to understand our shoreline and

offer lazy the sea level rise

and storm surge to look at

understanding our assets might

be xoesz k30e9d it provides 4

steps one starting with the

conceives looking at the life

cycle of the assets that is the

level of protection and step two vulnerability assessment are you

imposed to this endorse and

what's the adoptive capacity of

the foot of your asset for

future it it is right way and

step 3 risk assessment we think

this will help the departments

to prioritize and the adoption

what are we going to do to make

our assets good we enlighten the

prelims as a interactive process t we're going to be learning

over time this is the first time

we're doing this and the first

that anyone is doing this we

think that organic

implementation of how this thing

works in david is important it

will continue to be driven and departmental level the

departments know their resources

best as roger mentioned at the

cpc level accommodating the uncertainty is important we've come up with a balance between

the need to act today to create

resiliency and the longer than

outweigh, we'll tliptly manage

the public infrastructures

>> thank you.

>> thank you. >> thank you. Next speaker, please.

>> good afternoon chris from

the environmental city planning

I want to talk about a little

bit about the planning and building code.

>> excuse me. We haven't

opened up public just yet. >> part of the staff presentation I wanted to make sure no one was standing in line for the public comment.

>> I was going to cover the

responses from the planning and

building code and the planning

department addresses the review

under sequa and attach on what the planning department is doing

to fellow through on the master plan.

So starting with the code

amendments we're still at and

early day in considering option

for amendments to our existing

codes and our responses that this requires further analysis

and preempted to report back to

the grand jury when I say early

days we've had numerous discussions with many

departments and are moving in

the direction of developing

language and to amend

appropriate codes really to

approach sea level rise in the

same fashion as development is dealt with in regulate flood

plans today, the best fshgsz of

where the sea has taken the

approach in the sequa analysis

for our large plan areas in

areas under prishthd to be

effected by the sea level specific the treasure island and the shipyard development.

In both of those projects

through the sequa analysis we

really treated areas you know

those development areas both as areas their subject to flooding

in the present-day but we added

on top of that unprotected sea

level rise and plan those

developments as you would

developments in a flood hazard

area with multiple areas of

protection instruments for future adaptation as we learn

more in the future as the plans

of the sea level rise progresses

this is not a new approach for the planning department we've been addressing the impacts of

sea level rise on plans and

development since 1998 I did not

do an careful search for sequa go documents but based on

institutional knowledge and

going back to the supplemental

eir in the 1998 we addressed sea

level rise in that document and

just a few examples of more

recent project with the irs all

addressing sea level rise the

moratorium project and the

candle stick, the recent cruise

terminal and the couple of projects we're currently working

on that will have a detailed

analysis the warriors and the mission bay and the planning eir.

I just wanted to note that sequa ultimate perspire is disclosure

for the public what the

environmental plans or proposed

project to be and affords ample

opportunity for public participation and the planning department encourages members of

the public and the grand jury

who would like to contributed to

how the city is addressing this issue sea level rise to

participate in the sequa process and take advantage of the opportunity it provide and

briefly with respect to the

ocean beach master plan there

numerous departments the puc,

the dpw, mta, and others along

with planning which are following up on many of the

recommendations contained in the plan from the planning

department prospective in

particular we have proposed to

amend our local coast program

itself first time in 20 years to

address the sea level rise as well as the recommendations in

the ocean beach master plan

addressing coastal hazards we have a couple of applications in

the state and hopefully those

will be approved later this thank you.

Thank you >> thank you. Next speaker, please.

>> good afternoon chair breed and good afternoon distinguished

committee members I'm joe bear

the manager at the san francisco international airport.

Being on the bay sfo is aware of

our vulnerabilities from the

flooding from the bay today is

where he in place sea level that

protects the bay front perimeter

and a drainage and pumping

system to remove water from our

terminal revise the airport is

protected we have no known

vulnerabilities there's near gap

areas that is unprotected as identified in the grand juries

report in order to understand

this we've hired a consultant to

performance a study

study their performed bay water

moldings in the vicinity of the

airplane an assessment of the

sea levels from height in turn

of height and structural quality

and depend strategies and

remedies for the airport in ways

to protect us from both extreme

storm events and sea level rise.

Out of the study we know we're most vulnerable to excuse me.

To extreme storm events that's

where we're concentrating our new term efforts.

That will be includes clogging

up the known gaps and constructing new sea levels in the north field area.

But during the time to implement

that process we'll focus on sea

level rise this has a loerj term

rising it is going to be much

larger and will effect our

entire bay front and north and south boundary.

The protects we put in place

will have to protect us under

sea level rise and storm events as I recall the board authorized

the airport to accept a grant we

applied with the county of san

mateo from the california coast

to study two creeks that empty

into the bay north of the airport understanding the

interaction with the bay b will be important to determine the

protections both for the airport and our neighboring south san francisco in this case and san mateo county.

And finally, I'd like to assure

you have two things first

there's a statement about water

on our runways in the grand juries report the airport

doesn't have a problem with

running water on our runways that's important to the airport

and second you should know that

airport management and staff is

taking this issue seriously

trying to evaluate our risk and plan appropriately to protect

the airport into the future. Thank you

>> thank you. >> thank you. Next speaker, please.

>> good afternoon, supervisors. Lauren senior planner with the

port of san francisco I'm here

to share you and the public the

port is well managing the waterfront in san francisco

we're taking this very, very seriously and doing he

everything we can to plan and

insure we address our vulnerabilities, in fact, we've

been considering this item for

quite a few since 2009 we've

been including sea level rise within our jurisdiction, in fact, one of our engineers

submitted a proposals to bcdc

for the sea level rise

in 2009 as well between 2011 and

2012 we solicited a consultant

to do a comprehensive evaluation

of the impacts along our shoreline and using this

information to help to look at the design going forward in conjunction with the guidelines

we've been involved with with the sea level committee in

developing for the city.

And in addition, weer actively

involved with a project a pilot

project assessing the vulnerabilities and looking at the adaptation strategy store mission creek and the surrounding mission bay area

that project we're working with

super and other agencies as well

bcdc, in fact, we've been

working with bcdc and

incorporating and advising with them about our waterfront use plan and in addition working

that them on their bay policy

relating to sea level rise.

We also are flaking right now a

comprehensive study related to

the seismic vulnerability with

our seawall and that study

should be available in 2015.

In addition we've been active in

the participation of looking at

solutions for sea level rise and adapting the rising tides

project and working with the bay

area doing council and working with fema on a coastal hazard

study and we've been working

with the san francisco bay

adaptation resiliency group as

well as sf lifeline council and

in addition helping the

department of water helping to identify the priority projects

within the state to help protect

us from sea level rise including the seawall.

We've been talking with the

federal agency like the U.S.

Core of engineers and looking at

structural engineering solutions

to addressing the vulnerabilities in downtown san

francisco that being said one of

the other things we're actively

collaboratively with our fellow departments in understanding

this important issue and as such

the more we understand together about what are the common vulnerabilities and the

priorities for the city the

better off we'll be to position

ourselves to act as a citywide group to look at potential

funding mechanisms to address

some of the adaptation strategies

>> thank you very much.

>> will I david him lessor

again, I'm going to focus on the

sewer program it's on a upgrade

it gives us an tremendous

opportunity as we're

rehabilitating our older system

to be incentive to the system we

can make margin investments the

s I b is 4 levels of targets

empathize with our

infrastructure structure and

most jermaine to today's hearing adaptation to climate changed

part of the assessment we're

involved in a climate adaptation

system is completing an asset inventory underway now with the

critical tool I've mentioned

that is the mapping of various

shoreline activities when we have that asset inventory

coupled with a layer of

indication we can look at the

assets most at reflex and

develop an adaptation plan after

the owl lazy comes the documents

of the measures to puc protect

our wastewater projects we're

looking back flow to prevent

saltwater and we know it's going to happen protecting our pump

stations and a loss of

functionality.

Preserving capacity for

stormwater and finally

identifying the sewage on

oceanside and north point. Thank you.

>> thank you that concludes our

prediction we're happy to answer questions.

>> thank you okay. Is there a

response to the city's presentation for the members of

the civil grand jury no, not at

this time that we'll open this up for public comment.

>> thank you supervisors and

chairperson I'm Dr. Max leno at

the scene a recent retired

scientists located in the south

bay in her mountain view I was

ahead of the adaptation study

for my center much of that lies

between 10 feet of high water.

I wish to remind the committee

of the 2012 innovating national council report entitled sea

level rise for the coasts of oregon and washington past perpetrate and future.

The numbers posted in the report

is 11 inches of sea level rise

by 2050 and 36 by 20 one hundred

it has large upsides that would

be adjusted this can add several

feet to our tides due to king

tides as well as el nino's the

tide gage records show clearly

the effect of el nino and in

18982 and 1998 thank you your time

>> thank you. >> thank you. Next speaker, please. >> good morning. I'm laura

I'm with super thanks for

holdings this hearing thanks to

the civil grand jury for adding

the enforcement support for the

sea level I'm here to support

the project we've no evidence of

moved from 5 to 10 years from

the sequa documents to a public conversation to prepare our shorelines I know that san

francisco is enclosed on many

sides so today, you've heard many departments talk about not only the vulnerability assessments they're doing alone

in their areas of interests but working collaboratively together

on a number of projects that are

considered leadership models for

the region to highlight two

super is working or working with

the agencies here today as well

as federal and state agencies in

the ocean beach master plan on

the open space and public access

we're working with bcdc the

dutch government and private

partners including the san

francisco bay area e bay giants

to adapt the strategies in the

mission creek and the waterfront we have the capital guidelines

we're starting to work on the

seawall we're part of the resilient collaborative on the rockefeller foundation that's

funding to grow the conversation

subtitling around recipients and

climate change in conclusion I think the grand jury

recommendation really get at an issue that's he getting

attention in our city some of

the ideas are more readilyly implemented by regardless we

look forward to the progress and

continuing the conversation.

>> thank you are there any members of the public that wish

to make P.M. Public testimony

seeing none, it's closed.

Okay. So colleagues, can we go

through each item and make recommendations for response supervisor tang

>> thank you. I want to thank all the different city agrees that have

come together to address the be

issue and as supervisor representing a district that's borden by ocean beach we're

concerned about the issue and have been working closely with

all the agencies not only from

our city level but state and

federal as well as spur to address the sea level rise with

that, I concur with the comments

made by several members from the

adverse and

a half so it is documents and

sometimes, we really need to

even engage in trial and error

with that, said I want to go

through this or some of the

findings finding one that the

city didn't have a citywide

comprehensive plan to sea level

rise I partially disagree the city and counties city was

formed in 2013 a sea level

committee that has a draft for

the sea level access the draft

plan was be presented to the

city administrator in May of

2014 and is currently undergoing

review by city agency the draft

plan includes information on the

effected and possible sea level

rise through 200 one hundred and

the storm surge effecting water

levels for the comprehensive

plan to follow to be sure the

resiliency and the draft plan

will be acted open been the

capital plan in 2014.

So as with recommendation one a this is regarding whether the

city should prepare and adapt a

risk assessment for the comprehensive plan regarding sea

level rise the answer is similar

to in finding one but this recommendation has not been

implemented but will be

implemented in September 2014 so

as mentioned the city has a

draft comprehensive plan adapted by the capital planning

committee in September 2014 and

the plan provides a fraction

that can be used in southeast

the development along the shoreline in addressing that

reflex for recommendation 1-b

this talks about adapting a

citywide comprehensive plan for

adaptation to rising sea level

and the flood plans and should

include a lifespan of each

project outlined in the plan.

My suggestion is that we say the

recommendation has not been

pledged bye bye September 2014

currently sequa provides that the planning department's with

authority to require the

promotions be designed zoo to

mitigate sea level rise. For recommendation one c this

has to do with the resiliencycy if the reich's sea levels and through our planning and

building department require that

the construction project

vulnerable to future floodplain

flooding be with the 2015 project. I will say that the

recommendation will not be impeding the reason being well,

I'll say that the board of

supervisors agree with the

statement the city should build

implement this it is adapt

terrify but resilient to the 2050 projection doesn't influence the project including

explore inform storm surge or

wave action or lifespan and

location or failure of a project. Additionally the draft guidance prepared by itself sea level

rise committee will address this issue.

And colleagues if you have comments

recommendation one d this has to

do with the city departments

that are involved in the dames

such dpw mta poster and

coordinate the efforts to

minimize any inconvenience to

the public and address the certify few minutes this

recommendation has been implemented while this requirement didn't officially

apply to the board of

supervisors currently, the city

departments cooperate with

various utility companies stafshd years ago.

Finding number 2 the city

planning code has no provisions addressing the impacts associated with rising sea levels without the appropriate

provisions there's no means to

insure a sustainable on land rising sea levels we partially disagree with the finding the

planning and the reason being that planning department

evaluates whether the proeptd

projects exposes people to

injure or dedicate as a result

of the sea level rise.

For recommendation 2a it should

be and it should be again

amended I'm saying currently this requirement didn't

officially pertain to the board

of supervisors the puc has maps

along the shorlz that are potentially vulnerable for

protected sea level rise and the

planning department additionally

considers those maps in

evaluating the flood zones under

serial killer recommendation two

b the planning code should be

amended for public safety where

it can't be protected while this

didn't specifically pretender to the board of supervisors our

response should be this will not be implemented sequa provides

the planning department with sufficient authority to require

the mitigation of potential

hazards from sea level rise.

Vblths number 3 this states our

city's building code with no

impacts associated with sea

level rise I disagree partially again, while the board of supervisors doesn't have the jurisdiction over this the city agrees with the statement that

the building code and the ports

building code dpoo didn't

include the impacts of sea level

rise how have they evaluate the

impacts required under sequa. recommendation 3 also talking

about the building code and the

ports building code this had

address the impacts with sea

level rise especially with strm

rise and will insure the protection from sea level rise

and also amendments to protect

the most vulnerable system and

be reviewed and reassessed every

5 years will require further analysis.

The statement and the rational

being any further implementation

of the building codes will

require prirmgs changes and

further analysis between of the scientific community must be

performed to perform effectively

policies and to address our sea level rise.

Finding 5 just states we engaged

in a process to conduct the

ocean beach master plan we agree

number 5 we look at the master plan this is recommendation has

been implement I'll note it is

ongoing.

The city is currently working

with all agencies and finding 11

states the city has not set

aside funds we agree with that statement I suggest we agree

with that statement but also

note open the side while we've

not set aside funds this is through the draft comprehensive

plan the city will be taking up

as we engage on future budget allocations.

Recommendation 11 a the city

should start a reserve fund that

will not be implemented the

reason it is unnecessary since the mayor and the board of

supervisors set aside funds on an unanimous basis in the

something as a whole the

planning committee can take up

yearly recommendation b the cost and implementation of the

adaptation strategies and the

loss of the families to do so I

you go the implementation ass recommendation has been

implemented as part of the harassed implementation plan the

city identified the man made

hazards and future versions of

the hazy mitigation plan will

incorporate the more recent work

by updating the vulnerability

analysis for the sea level rise.

Recommendation 11 c our city

should explore more positions

the various departments have

received federal funding and in

certain cases while the request

is to find a success certain

departments continue to look at

the funding options.

Recommendation 11 d our city

should request a insurance

recommendation from fema for mitigations and adaptation

against future funding this

requires further analysis the staff is pursuing all available

opportunities they have and

continue to do so.

Finding 11 states that reich's

sea levels is a regional problem

finding 12 I'm sorry it is a

regional problem we agree with that statement.

All right. Last two

recommendation 12 a the city through the board of supervisors

we should cooperate our agencies

we will say this has been implemented the yours respectfully, yours respectfully, from stakeholders

from san francisco and san mateo

and bcdc and california coastal

and south san francisco and

others met in August 2014 to

address the impacts open peninsula.

Recommendation 12b create a local combrup of stakeholders

and citizens to feed into the regional group further analysis

and we again, this is not in the directors board of supervisors

we agree that the community and

stakeholders involvements t is

essential and the various city

departments will fourth the best

the exact nature of the outreach

for that.

That concludes the sea level recommendation

>> okay. Thank you supervisor tang.

Colleagues is that there a

motion to table the hearing on this item

>> I'll make the motion and

again, thank you to the civil

grand jury and take a moment to thank the budget analyst and as

well as this has

been an enormous concern for all commissioners on bcdc it's

gifted e gifrl to get a progress

report but obviously we've got

more work to do thank you for

putting this open the forefront

I'm happy to table this hearing

and move into onto the recommendations. >> there's been a motion we'll take that without objection. The

hearing is now tabled.

And also is there a motion to

accept the recommendations

proposed by supervisor tang to

amend the current resolution >> so moved. >> okay.

>> I want to make a

classification to forward the recommendation responses

recommendation 2a where it was

recommended that required

further analysis we want to

clarify a report back in front

of the grand jury in six months the same american people recommendations 3 again, the response request further

analysis we want to clarify the

report back within 6 months and

11 d where the response requires

further analysis and recommendation leveling d. >> okay. Thank you. And just for clarity at that

time, we will call for hearing

before the geocommittee that's

why we're tangling the current hearing.

With that, it has been properly

move forward that we accept the

recommendations from supervisor

tang without objection we'll

accept the recommendations to

accept the resolution and then

lastly we would I'd like to entertain a monoxide to move

forward the resolution as

amended to the full board of the committee report >> so moved. >> thank you we'll take that without objection. The item is

is moved and finally any other

comments or motorcycle from any

of the other members. I'd like to thank the civil grand jury for their hard work

and thank everyone for their

patience as we went through this process.

I'm to thank my aid johnson for

working on this and assisting me

in reading through the reports a

lot of great information in the

report a lot of hard work clearly making this a reality

and thank you to all the

departments for B.C. Being

responsive as it relates to the

report and thanks to everyone a

lot of hard work a lot of great

things have happened in the city

so with that, any more items

before you will say Madam Clerk. >> there's no further business.

>> all right. Seeing none, this