February 15, 2024 Commission Meeting

1. 1. Call to Order
   2. Roll Call
   3. Public Comment Period (Each speaker is limited to three minutes) A maximum of 15 minutes is available for the public to address the Commission on any matter on which the Commission either has not held a public hearing or is not scheduled for a public hearing later in the meeting. Speakers will be heard in the order of sign-up, and each speaker is generally limited to a maximum of three minutes. It is strongly recommended that public comments be submitted in writing so they can be distributed to all Commission members for review. The Commission may provide more time to each speaker and can extend the public comment period beyond the normal 15-minute maximum if the Commission believes that it is necessary to allow a reasonable opportunity to hear from all members of the public who want to testify. No Commission action can be taken on any matter raised during the public comment period other than to schedule the matter for a future agenda or refer the matter to the staff for investigation, unless the matter is scheduled for action by the Commission later in the meeting. (Steve Goldbeck) [415/352-3611; steve.goldbeck@bcdc.ca.gov]
   4. Approval of Minutes for February 1, 2024 Meeting
      (Reylina Ruiz) [415/352-3638; reylina.ruiz@bcdc.ca.gov]
   5. Report of the Chair
   6. Report of the Executive Director
   7. Commission Consideration of Administrative Matters
      There is no administrative listing (Harriet Ross) [415/352-3615; harriet.ross@bcdc.ca.gov]
   8. Commission Strategic Plan Progress Report
      Senior staff will present an update on the progress associated with the Commission’s 2023-2025 Strategic Plan. (Larry Goldzband) [415/352-3653; larry.goldzband@bcdc.ca.gov
   9. 2023 Enforcement Program Annual Progress Report
      The Commission will receive a progress report on the program improvements and developments in 2023. (Matthew Trujillo) [415/352-3633; matthew.trujillo@bcdc.ca.gov] Presentation
   10. Briefing on the San Francisco Waterfront Coastal Flood Study Draft Plan
       The Commission will receive a briefing from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Port of San Francisco on the Draft Integrated Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the San Francisco Waterfront Flood Study, which was recently released for public comment. The draft plan addresses coastal flood risk and effects of sea level rise for the 7.5 miles of waterfront within the Port of San Francisco’s jurisdiction from Aquatic Park to Heron’s Head Park. (Jessica Fain) [415/352-3652; jessica.fain@bcdc.ca.gov]Draft Plan: https://www.swt.usace.army.mil/Portals/41/SFWCFS_DIFR_EIS_Main%20Report_1.pdf Presentation
   11. Adjournment

This report lists the administrative permit applications that have been filed and are pending with the Commission. The Executive Director will take the action indicated on the matters unless the Commission determines that it is necessary to hold a public hearing. The staff members to whom the matters have been assigned are indicated at the end of the project descriptions. Inquiries should be directed to the assigned staff member prior to the Commission meeting.

Articles about the Bay and BCDC

S.F. boat harbor relocation scrapped after opponents fight Marina project

Audio Recording

Audio Transcrispt

OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: GOOD AFTERNOON AND WELCOME. I’M GOING TO START AGAIN. GOOD AFTERNOON, ALL. AND WELCOME TO OUR ONCE AGAIN HYBRID BCDC COMMISSION MEETING.

I AM ZACH WASSERMAN AND I AM THE CHAIR OF BCDC. OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS AS ALWAYS IS TO CALL THE ROLL. COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU ARE PARTICIPATING REMOTELY, PLEASE TURN YOUR MICROPHONE ON TO ANSWER AND THEN TURN IT OFF.

REYLINA, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

>>CLERK, REYLINA RUIZ: CHAIR WASSERMAN.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

HERE. OOIGS EAST —

IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS

ENFORCEMENT H

>>REBECCA EISEN: HERE.

>>EDDIE AHN: HERE.

>>JOHN GIOIA: HERE.

>>SUSAN GORIN: HERE.

>>ANDREW GUNTHER: HERE.

>>YORIKO KISHIMOTO: HERE.

>>BARRY NELSON: HERE

>>AARON PESKIN: HERE.

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: HERE.

>>SHERI PEMBERTON: COMMISSIONER PEMBERTON.

>>CLERK, REYLINA RUIZ:

COMMISSIONER PEMBERTON. AND COMMISSIONER JOHN-BAPTISTE.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: WE HAVE A QUORUM SO WE CAN DULY CONDUCT OUR BUSINESS. THE NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS PUBLIC

COMMENT. IF ANYONE WISHES TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON ANY MATTER THAT IS NOT ON OUR AGENDA TODAY OR ON WHICH WE HAVE NOT HELD A PUBLIC HEARING, NOW IS THE TIME TO DO SO AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO DO SO. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS?

>>CLERK, REYLINA RUIZ: NO PUBLIC

COMMENT.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: NO

PUBLIC COMMENT EITHER IN THE

ROOM OR REMOTE.

THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM 4, WHICH

IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF

OUR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 1. WE

HAVE BEEN FURNISHED DRAFT

MINUTES OF THAT MEETING. AND I

WOULD APPRECIATE A MOTION AND

SECOND TO APPROVE THE

MINUTES.

>>MARIE GILMORE: MOVE.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

COMMISSIONER GILMORE MOVES.

COMMISSIONER RAN — RANDOLPH

SECONDS. IS THERE ANY

CONNECTIONS? SEEING NONE, THE

MINUTES ARE APPROVED. THAT

BRINGS US TO MY REPORT.

BEFORE OUR EXECUTIVE

DIRECTOR BEGINS HIS ANNUAL

CAMPAIGN OF BADGERING US —

THOSE ARE HIS WORDS, NOT MINE

— I WANT TO REMIND ALL

ALTERNATES THAT THE FINANCIAL

DISCLOSURE FORM, FORM 700, IS

DUE APRIL 2. PLEASE LET REGGIE

KNOW IF YOU HAVE NOT RECEIVED

THE FORM OR NEED OTHER FORM OF

ASSISTANCE IN ORDER TO COMPLETE

THE REQUIREMENTS. I’D LIKE TO

RECOGNIZE PAT SHOWALTER TO GIVE

US THE BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE

SEDIMENT BENEFICIAL REUSE

COMMITTEE DISCUSSION.

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: HELLO,

EVERYBODY, CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

YES.

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: GREAT. ON

TUESDAY WE HAD A SEDIMENT

STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOP. IT WAS

ACTUALLY DAY TWO. WE HAD THE

FIRST ONE ON JANUARY 13, AND I

PERSONALLY WAS ASTOUNDED AT THE

TURNOUT. WE HAD, I THINK, 35 OR

SO PEOPLE THE FIRST TIME, AND WE

HAD 50 THIS TIME WHICH TELLS YOU

THAT THIS IS A SUBJECT THAT GETS

PEOPLE INTERESTED. SO THIS IS

PART OF BCDC’S WETLAND

ADAPTATION PROGRAM, WHICH IS A

JOINT REGULATORY PLANNING AND

STAFF EFFORT WITH BCDC AND ITS

PARTNERS. U.S. E.P.A., THE

COASTAL CONSERVANCY, THE

REGIONAL BOARD, SFEI AND SAN

FRANCISCO JOINT BAY VENTURE. IT

WAS TO DEVELOP AN

IMPLEMENTATION ROAD MAP OF

ACTIONS TO INCREASE BENEFICIAL

REUSE OF SOIL AND SEDIMENT IN

THE BAY AREA. ON THE FIRST

WORKSHOP, WE DID A LOT OF

BRAINSTORMING ABOUT WHAT WERE

THE POLICY ISSUES AND OUR STAFF

AND THE FACILITATORS HAD DONE AN

AMAZING EFFORT OF SIFTING

THROUGH OVER 17 PAGES OF, YOU

KNOW, SINGLE-LINED COMMENTS TO

PUT IT TOGETHER INTO A — I

THINK IT WAS EIGHT INTEREST

AREAS. AT THE EVENT, THERE WERE

50 ATTENDEES FROM A VARIETY OF

STAKEHOLDER GROUPS THAT ARE

ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN AND

IMPACTED BY SEDIMENT

MANAGEMENT.

THIS WORKSHOP FOCUSED ON SETTING

THE PRIORITIES FOR ACTIONS AND

FOR DEVELOPING A GOVERNANCE

MODEL TO IMPLEMENT THE ROAD

MAP.

WE ALSO HAD A PANEL DISCUSSION

OF FUNDING CHALLENGES AND

RESOURCES WITH OUR PARTNERS AT

THE ARMY CORPS, THE CONSERVANCY,

SAN FRANCISCO BAY JOINT VENTURE

AND E.P.A. WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR

THE PARTICIPANTS FOR THEIR

INVALUABLE INPUT THROUGHOUT BOTH

DAYS OF THE WORKSHOP. AND I

WANTED TO ALSO ADD TO OUR

CURRENT WORK PLAN, WHICH MAY GET

REVISED, IS TO INITIATE THE BAY

PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS SOMETIME

THIS SUMMER. AND TO DO THE

PRELIMINARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION

AND PUBLIC HEARING IN THE SPRING

OF 2025, WHICH IS WHEN THE DRAFT

POLICIES WILL BE READY FOR

COMMISSIONERS TO REVIEW. AS A

HEADS UP, WE PLAN TO DO A

BRIEFING FOR THE COMMISSION

ABOUT THE WORKSHOP AND FINDINGS

AT THE COMMISSION MEETING ON

MARCH 21. I’D BE DELIGHTED TO

TAKE ANY QUESTIONS AND ALSO, I

JUST WANT TO THANK, AGAIN, THE

STAFF, BRENDA AND MAYA AND ERIC,

FOR THE EXCELLENT JOB THAT THEY

DID.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

THANK YOU, PAT. ANY QUESTIONS

FROM COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER

EKLUND.

>>PAT EKLUND: THANK YOU. IN THE

FUTURE, CAN THE NOTICES OF THE

MEETING OR THE INFORMATION BE

POSTED UP ON THE BCDC WEBSITE?

>>SPEAKER: WE’LL MAKE SURE.

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: OKAY,

YEAH.

>>PAT EKLUND: WHEN IS THE NEXT

MEETING, IT’S MARCH, WHAT?

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: MARCH 21,

WE’RE GOING TO HAVE A BRIEFING

AT THE COMMISSION MEETING ABOUT

IT.

>>PAT EKLUND: WHEN IS THE NEXT

MEETING OF THE SEDIMENT

COMMITTEE?

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: MAYA, DO

YOU KNOW THAT? I DON’T KNOW IT

OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD?

>>SPEAKER: I DON’T KNOW BUT

WE’LL FIND IT OUT AND GET IT TO

EVERYBODY.

>>PAT EKLUND: AND ARE YOU GOING

TO BE PRODUCING MINUTES OR

SUMMARY?

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER:

ABSOLUTELY. AND IF YOU LOOK ON

THE WEBSITE UNDER MEETINGS UNDER

SEDIMENT — UNDER MEETINGS,

UNDER SEDIMENT, YOU WILL SEE,

YOU KNOW, THE AGENDA AND

INFORMATION FROM THESE

MEETINGS.

>>PAT EKLUND: WHAT ABOUT A

SUMMARY OF THE MEETINGS, WILL

THEY BE POSTED AS WELL?

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: THAT’S MY

UNDERSTANDING, THERE ARE

SUMMARIES. ONE THING THAT’S

INTERESTED ON BEING ON THIS

WORKING GROUP, THE FIRST YEAR

WAS DEVOTED TO A SEDIMENT 101.

SO WE HAD A SERIOUS OF PROGRAMS

THAT TAUGHT US ABOUT DIFFERENCE

SEDIMENT ISSUES AROUND THE BAY

AND NOW WE’RE WORKING ON

WORKSHOPS TO TACKLE THE POLICY

CHANGES. SO THERE REALLY IS A

PLETHORA OF INFORMATION UNDER

THAT SEDIMENT HEADING. UNDER

MEETINGS, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO

LOOK AT IT, ABOUT, YOU KNOW,

THESE ISSUES.

>>PAT EKLUND: I AM VERY FAMILIAR

WITH IT BECAUSE OF MY WORK WITH

THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY. SO I LOOK FORWARD TO

ATTENDING THE NEXT MEETING.

THANK YOU.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

BEFORE I RECOGNIZE COMMISSIONER

GUNTHER, JESSICA, DO YOU HAVE A

COMMENT?

>>JESSICA FAIN: I WANT TO

RESPOND TO COMMISSIONER EKLUND’S

QUESTION ON WHEN THE NEXT

WORKING GROUP WILL BE. WE’LL BE

MEETING ON MARCH 15. ALL OF

THOSE ARE PUBLICLY NOTICED

MEETINGS. EVERYONE IS WELCOMED

TO ATTEND. WE WILL WILL BE

DEBRIEFING FROM THE TWO

WORKSHOPS WITH THE

COMMISSIONERS, REALLY KIND OF

REPORTING ON WHAT WE HEARD, SOME

OF THE THEMES, AND THEN THE TEAM

IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPING A ROAD

MAP FOR THE REGION FOR SEDIMENT

AND BENEFICIAL REUSE. THAT’S

REALLY THE OUTCOME OF THIS

PHASE, AND THAT’S SOMETHING WE

WILL BE DISCUSSING BEFORE THE

FULL COMMISSION AS WELL.

>>PAT EKLUND: I APPRECIATE

THAT.

I THINK ALSO IN THE FUTURE WE

SHOULD IN THE, PUT UP ON THE

WEBSITE WHERE THE WORKSHOPS ARE

OR HOW PEOPLE CAN PARTICIPATE.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: I

BELIEVE THEY ARE ALWAYS POSTED,

PAT, BUT WE’LL DOUBLE CHECK.

THANK YOU.

>>PAT EKLUND: IT WAS NOT

POSTED.

ANYWAY, THANK YOU.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

COMMISSIONER GUNTHER.

NO, COMMISSIONER PASS — I

DON’T HAVE MANY REMARKS THIS

AFTERNOON. WE CONTINUE TO

PARTICIPATE IN THE EFFORT TO

DEVELOP A REGIONAL M.O.U. ON

COOPERATION, BOTH OF FUNDING AND

IMPLEMENTATION OF MEASURES TO

ADAPT TO SEA LEVEL RISE, THE

FUNDING PIECE IS PARTICULARLY

IMPORTANT AS WE TRY TO

RATIONALIZE THAT PROCESS AND

MAKE IT MORE EFFICIENT AND EVEN

MORE IMPORTANTLY, MORE

EFFECTIVE. THERE WILL BE A

MEETING IN MARCH OF THE

AGENCIES AND HOPEFULLY BY LATE

SPRING WE CAN HAVE AN M.O.U. TO

PRESENT TO THE VARIOUS AGENCIES.

WE WILL NOT HOLD A MEETING ON

MARCH 7.

OUR NEXT MEETING WILL BE ON

MARCH 21 UNDER THE BAGLEY-KEENE

ATTENDANCE RULES. AT THAT

MEETING WE EXPECT WE WILL TAKE

UP THE FOLLOWING MATTERS — A

PERMIT APPLICATION FOR PG&E’S

APPLICATION BAY AREAWIDE — FOR

THE BAY, NOT THE ENTIRE BAY. I

SHOULD BE CLEAR. WE ARE NOT

TRYING TO EXPAND OUR

JURISDICTION IN THAT MATTER AT

ALL. A PERMIT APPLICATION FOR

THE MARCH RESTORATION IN SAN

RAFAEL, AND A BRIEFING FROM NASA

ON THE CLIMATE CHANGE SCIENCE

THAT UNDERPINS THE DRAFT, STATE

OF CALIFORNIA RISING SEA LEVEL

GUIDANCE THAT WE HEARD ABOUT AT

OUR LAST MEETING. THAT BRINGS US

TO EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS. IF

ANY COMMISSIONER HAS HAD A

COMMUNICATION, WHICH HAS NOT

BEEN PREVIOUSLY REPORTED IN

WRITING CONCERNING A MATTER OF

AN ADJUDICATORY NATURE THAT

WILL COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION,

NOW IS THE TIME TO DO THAT. YOU

NEED TO MAKE IT IN WRITING UNDER

ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. I SEE NONE.

THAT BRINGS US TO THE REPORT OF

THE EXECUTIVE

DIRECTOR.

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: I KNOW YOU

MAY BE TIRED OF HEARING ABOUT

TAYLOR SWIFT. HER UPCOMING

ALBUM WILL BE TITLED “CLARA

BO.”

SHE TRANSITIONED SUCCESSFULLY

INTO TALKIES. HER SUCCESS HELPED

DEFINE THAT DECADE AS THE RURG

20’S. SHE WAS A PRETTY PARTY

GIRL. LIKE TAYLOR SWIFT, THERE

WAS MORE TO CLARA THAN GOOD

LOOKS AND TALENT. SHE UNDERSTOOD

HERSELF BETTER THAN ANYBODY ELSE

AND SHE RECOGNIZED WHAT MADE HER

SO APPEALING AS AN ARTIST. AND

ON THIS DAY IN 1927, FEBRUARY

15, CLARA BEAU

BECAME THE IT GIRL, THE SEXY,

VIVACIOUS, TALENTED STAR THAT

DOMINATED THE MOVIE SIMPLY MADE

“IT” WHICH TOLD OF A CINDERELLA

STORY OF A POOR SHOP GIRL THAT

MADE IT BIG.

AS THE IT GIRL SAID OF HER

SUCCESS, I’M A CURIOSITY IN

HOLLYWOOD. I AM A FREAK BECAUSE

I AM MYSELF. WE CAN ALL AGREE

THAT TAYLOR SWIFT CONTINUES TO

DEFINE HERSELF. SHE’S NOT

LETTING ANYBODY ELSE DO THAT

JUST LIKE CLARA DID. IT’S JUST

TOO BAD THAT SHE ROOTS FOR THE

WRONG TEAM.

[LAUGHTER]

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: I WANT YOU TO

MEET SIERRA PETERSON WHO STARTED

OUT AS THE BCDC EXECUTIVE

LIAISON. EVERYBODY SEE SIERRA.

OKAY. STARTING AT INSURE NEXT

MEETING, SHE WILL SIT WHERE

REYLINA IS SITTING. GO AHEAD AND

SAY GOODBYE. YOU ALREADY

RECEIVED ONE EMAIL FROM SIERRA

INTRODUCING HERSELF. PLEASE FEEL

FREE TO COMMUNICATE ABOUT ANY

COMMISSION LODGE CYCLE OR

PROCEDURES ISSUE WITH HER OR ME

AND WE WILL BE SURE THEY WILL

GET IT REQUESTED. THE SMALL

PERMITTING STAFF HAS BECOME EVEN

SMALLER. ONE HAS LOST FOR

WASHINGTON, D.C. AND WE LOST

DOMINIC TO THE FEDERAL

GOVERNMENT. OUR SHORELINE TEAM

LED BY

CATHERINE

A.T.M. LINA TAM. AND WE NEED TO

REPLACE DOMINIC SO WE DON’T NEED

TO NOT — WHILE WE HAVE POSTED

OUR VACANT POSITIONS AS I TOLD

YOU TWO WEEKS AGO, THE

COMBINATION OF RELATIVELY LOW

STATE SALARIES DO NOT ATTRACT

MANY QUALIFIED CANDIDATES WHO

FITS BCDC’S NEEDS. I’LL KEEP YOU

POSTED REGARDING HOW WE WILL

MAKE OURSELVES WHOLE AGAIN.

MEANWHILE, PLEASE LET ME KNOW IF

YOU NEED ANOTHER COPY OF OUR

VACANT POSITIONS LIST TO

DISTRIBUTE TO YOUR NETWORKS. AS

COMMISSIONER SHOWALTER WAS KIND

ENOUGH TO NOTE, BCDC’S SECOND

ACT OF OUR TWO-PART BENEFICIAL

REUSE OF SEDIMENT PUBLIC

WORKSHOP APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN A

SUCCESS. OUR STAFF WILL GIVE YOU

A FULL WRAP-UP DURING THE NEXT

MEETING AND I KNOW THAT JESSICA

FAIN WILL TALK TO SOME EXTENT

ABOUT IT. I DO WANT TO SAY

BEFORE JESSICA DOES THAT

DEVELOPING AND HOLDING THE

WORKSHOP WAS A TRUE TEAM EFFORT

BY OUR REGULATORY, PLANNING, AND

ADMIN TEAMS AND IT WAS GREAT TO

SEE AND WE CAN’T SAY THAT

ENOUGH. I ALSO WANT TO THANK OUR

COMMISSIONERS AND ALTERNATES ON

THE ONE BAY VISION COMMISSION

THAT JACKIE PRESENTENT WERED TWO

WEEKS AGO. STAFF ARE FINISHING

WHAT WE SHALL CALL OUR WORKING

VISION WHICH INCLUDES MANY OF

YOUR SUGGESTIONS. WE’LL SEND A

CLEAN COPY FOR YOU TO READ AND

WE’LL POST IT THROUGH OUR

REGULAR BAY ADAPT AND REGIONAL

SHORELINE ADAPTATION PLAN

PROCESS. I’M ALSO PLEASED TO LET

YOU KNOW AS PART OF THE NATURAL

RESOURCE AGENCY’S BLACK HISTORY

MONTH OBSERVATION, OUR

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE PROGRAM

MANAGER, PHOENIX, WILL BE

SPEAKING NEXT WEEK ON A

STATEWIDE PANEL ON CAREER

PATHWAYS FOR AFRICAN-AMERICANS

IN STATE SERVICE. THE SECRETARY

HAS MADE WORKING WITH CAL H.R.

AND OTHER STATE ORGANIZATIONS TO

ATTRACT A MORE DIVERSE AND

PROFESSIONALLY DIVERSE WORK

FORTS, A — WORKFORCE, A MAJOR

GOAL. AND WE ARE HONORED THAT

PHOENIX HAS BEEN ASKED TO BE

PART OF THE WORKSHOP. I SHOULD

ALSO REMIND YOU THAT ONE OF

BCDC’S NEWEST STAFF MEMBERS,

ROSIE VELASQUEZ, HAS COME TO US

FROM THE CALIFORNIA CONSERVATION

CORPS TO BOLSTER OUR PROGRAM AND

THAT REFLECTS THE SECRETARY’S

ADVOCACY. FINALLY, I WANT TO

THANK SUPERVISORS VAZQUEZ, PINE,

GORIN, GIOIA,

MOULTON-PETERS AND PAM. I WILL

SAY IT AGAIN. THEY RESPONDED SO

QUICKLY TO OUR REQUEST FOR EACH

OF OUR COUNTY SUPERVISOR

COMMISSIONERS TO ARRANGE FOR A

SHORT BRIEFING ON THE

DEVELOPMENT OF THE REGIONAL

SHORELINE ADAPTATION PLAN AND

THE GUIDELINES TO BE PROMULGATED

THIS YEAR WITH THE MAYORS IN

EACH OF THE COUNTIES IN BCDC’S

JURISDICTION. I’M HOPING I SHALL

HEAR FROM THE REMAINDER OF THE

COUNTY SUPERVISORS WITHIN A WEEK

OR SO BEFORE I AGAIN TO QUOTE

CHAIR WASSERMAN, TO HECKLE,

BADGER THOSE WHO HAVE NOT

RESPONDED. SO ALL THIS LEADS ME

TO SAY CHAIR WASSERMAN, I’M GLAD

THE UNIVERSE IS BACK IN ORDER

BECAUSE PITCHERS AND CATCHERS

ARE REPORTING TO SPRING TRAINING

CAMPS THROUGHOUT ARIZONA AND

FLORIDA THIS WEEK AND I AM HAPPY

TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: ARE

THERE QUESTIONS FOR THE

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR? SEEING NONE,

THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM 7,

CONSIDERATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE

MATTERS. WE HAVE BEEN —

PROVIDED A LIST OF THOSE. DOES

ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT

THEM? HARRIET ROSS IS HERE TO

ANSWER THAT. AND IT APPEARS SHE

GETS OFF THE HOOK. THAT BRINGS

US TO ITEM 8, WHICH IS A

BRIEFING ON THE PROGRESS

ASSOCIATED WITH THE COMMISSION’S

2023 TO 2025 STRATEGIC PLAN.

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GOLDZBAND

WILL INTRODUCE THE BRIEFING.

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: THANK YOU,

CHAIR WASSERMAN. AS WE PROMISED,

WE ARE TRYING TO BRING YOU THREE

TIMES EACH YEAR A PROGRESS

REPORT ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN. WE

COULD NOT DO IT IN DECEMBER AS

WE HAD PLANNED BECAUSE OF THE

PRESS OF BUSINESS ON THE

COMMISSION’S AGENDA, AND THEN WE

DIDN’T HAVE A MEETING IN

JANUARY. AND SO AS A RESULT,

WE’RE DOING IT IN FEBRUARY. AND

SO WE’LL ASK, I BELIEVE ANGELA,

TO START THE PROGRAM AND HERE IT

COMES. AND SO YOU’VE SEEN THIS

BEFORE. THIS IS OUR SEPTEMBER,

2023, THROUGH JANUARY, 2024

UPDATE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

YOU’LL RECOGNIZE OUR VISION AND

OUR GOALS AND OUR ANTICIPATED

OUTCOMES. THOSE HAVE NOT

CHANGED. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. I

DO WANT TO REMIND YOU OF THE

CORE VALUES THAT YOU ALL HAVE

PUT INTO THE STRATEGIC PLAN.

THAT IS THAT BCDC IS EQUITABLE

AND INCLUSIVE. THAT WE ARE

SCIENCE-BASED AND DATA-DRIVEN.

THAT WE CERTAIN ATTEMPT TO BE

AGILE AND PROACTIVE. WE TRY TO

BE COLLABORATIVE AND

SERVICE-ORIENTED, AND WE

CERTAINLY HOPE TO BE TRUSTED AND

ACCOUNTABLE. NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE.

WE HAVE HAD SOME GOOD

STRATEGIC PLAN PROGRESS, AS YOU

CAN SEE.

WE HAVE DIVIDED THE ACTIONS THAT

YOU ALL HAVE TAKEN A LOOK AT

INTO FOUR DIFFERENT CATEGORIES.

THOSE THAT ARE ON TRACK, THOSE

THAT WE HAVE HAD DELAYS OR THAT

— THAT ARE SUBJECT TO VARIOUS

ISSUES. SOME THAT WE’VE ACTUALLY

COMPLETED. AND SOME THAT WE HAVE

NOT STARTED. BUT WHAT I WANT TO

DO NOW IS GET INTO EACH OF THE

GOALS. SO NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE. YAY, GOOD, WE’RE SET.

WE’LL START WITH JESSICA ON THE

PLANNING SIDE.

>>JESSICA FAIN: THANKS, LARRY.

GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.

JESSICA FAIN, PLANNING

DIRECTOR.

I WILL GO OVER A FEW UPDATES

THAT ARE ON SEVERAL DIFFERENT

GOALS AND WE SHARED WITH YOU

BEFORE RELATED TO OUR REGIONAL

PLANNING WORK. SO ONE OF OUR

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES IS ABOUT

IMPROVING OUR REGIONAL SEDIMENT

MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. AND WE’RE

REALLY EXCITED, AS COMMISSIONER

SHOWALTER DESCRIBED EARLIER, TO

HAVE REALLY TAKEN SOME MAJOR

STEPS TO ADVANCE THIS WORK. WE

CALL IT THE SWAP PROJECT, THE

SEDIMENT FOR WETLAND ADAPTATION

PROJECT, WHICH WAS FUNDED AND

LAUNCHED THIS YEAR. SO FAR WE’VE

HOSTED SIX SEDIMENT AND

BENEFICIAL REUSE COMMISSIONER

WORKING GROUP MEETINGS. AS PART

OF THIS EFFORT, REALLY BRINGING

ALONG THE COMMISSION AS WE START

TO EXPLORE THE CHALLENGES AROUND

BENEFICIAL REUSE. WE’VE

CONDUCTED STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS

AND BRIEFINGS. COLLABORATED WITH

MANY PARTNER AGENCIES. AND AS

WAS DESCRIBED EARLIER, JUST

COMPLETED HOSTING TWO

STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOPS ON JANUARY

23 AND FEBRUARY 13. AND SO UP

NEXT IS TO FINALIZE WHAT WE’RE

CALLING THE ROAD MAP FOR

BENEFICIAL REUSE IN THE REGION.

REALLY, THIS MULTI-PURPOSE,

MULTI-AGENCY MAP OF THE THINGS

WE NEED TO DO REGIONALLY TO

ADDRESS IMPROVING OUR SEDIMENT

AND BENEFICIAL REUSE SYSTEM. AND

THEN AFTER THAT, WE’LL BE

STARTING A POLICY PROCESS,

BRINGING TO YOU IDEAS FOR HOW WE

CAN UPDATE OUR BAY PLAN TO

ADDRESS THESE ISSUES AS WELL AS

DEVELOPING A FUNDING STRATEGY.

AND AS LARRY MENTIONED, JUST

REALLY WANT TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT

TO THE COLLABORATIVE EFFORT OF

THIS. THIS IS BOTH A PLANNING

EFFORT BUT REALLY INTO THE DEEP

EXPERTISE AND LEADERSHIP OF OUR

SEDIMENT TEAM WHO IS REALLY

CO-LEADING THIS PROJECT WITH

US.

NEXT SLIDE. OUR NEXT GOAL THAT

I’LL — OUR STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

I’LL UPDATE YOU ON IS REGULARLY

UPDATING THE BAY PLAN. AS YOU

ALL KNOW, IN NOVEMBER, YOU

ADOPTED A NEW SEAPORT PLAN. FOR

THE FIRST TIME IN OVER 20

YEARS.

SO ONE OF THOSE CHANGES THAT YOU

SAW IN LARRY’S PROGRESS SLIDE

THAT WENT FROM IN PROGRESS TO

COMPLETED WAS THIS ONE. THIS IS

NOW FINISHED WHICH IS A VERY

EXCITING MILESTONE FOR US TO

REACH. WE’VE ALSO BEEN MAKING

PROGRESS ON AMENDING OUR — THE

SAN FRANCISCO WATERFRONT SPECIAL

AREA PLAN. WE’VE BEEN WORKING

CLOSELY WITH THE PORT OF SAN

FRANCISCO TO REALLY REBOOT THIS

EFFORT AND REFOCUS IT, INCLUDING

BRINGING TO YOU A MEMORANDUM OF

UNDERSTANDING AND A SLIGHTLY

REVISED SCOPE FOR THIS YEAR. WE

PROVIDED RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE

FALL FOR — ON THE SUIS UNMARSH

PROTECTION PLAN AND HOW THAT

PLAN CAN START TO ADDRESS THE

CHALLENGES FACING THE SUISUN

MARSH TODAY. AND WE’VE ALSO

BEGUN SOME EARLY RESEARCH ON OUR

PUBLIC ACCESS POLICIES AND HOW

THEY RELATE TO ISSUES RELATED TO

WILDLIFE AND SEA LEVEL RISE,

INTERVIEWING STAKEHOLDERS ACROSS

THE REGION AS WELL AS OUR OWN

STAFF. COMING UP NEXT, WE WILL

BE BRINGING TO YOU A MODIFIED

VERSION OF A SPECIAL — SAN

FRANCISCO WATERFRONT SPECIAL

AREA PLAN. YOU’LL BE HEARING

TODAY FROM THE PORT OF SAN

FRANCISCO WITH BIG PLANS ON THE

WATERFRONT. WE’RE TAKING A MORE

TARGETED APPROACH RIGHT NOW ON A

SPECIAL AREA PLAN UPDATE TO

ALLOW FOR SOME OF THOSE BIGGER

RESILIENCY PLANS TO BE

DEVELOPED. AS WELL AS THINKING

ABOUT AS WE DEVELOP OUR REGIONAL

SHORELINE ADAPTATION PLAN, HOW

WE’RE REALLY GOING TO CODIFY

THAT AND BRING THAT INTO OUR

FORMAL POLICIES WITHIN THE BAY

PLAN, SO THOSE ARE THINGS ON THE

LIST OF TO-DOS. I WANT TO GIVE A

SHOUT OUT TO OUR LONG RANGE

PLANNING TEAM LED BY ERIC, WHO

ARE LEADING THE CHARGE ON ALL OF

THESE EFFORTS AND I THINK I’LL

PASS IT TO HARRIET.

>>HARRIET ROSS: GOOD AFTERNOON,

COMMISSIONERS. I’M HARRIET ROSS,

THE REGULATORY DIRECTOR. I WILL

BE REPORTING ON — OH, NEXT

SLIDE, PLEASE. I’LL BE REPORTING

ON STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES 2.2 AND

2.3 WHICH REALLY AIM TO UPDATE

OUR OPERATIONS, IMPLEMENT OUR

LAWS AND POLICIES MORE

CONSISTENTLY, TRANSPARENTLY, AND

EFFICIENTLY AS WELL AS INCREASE

THE CAPACITY OF THE REGULATORY

DIVISION TO OPERATE MORE

EFFICIENTLY. SO WE’VE BEEN

PRETTY BUSY SINCE WE LAST

PRESENTED TO YOU ALL. WE HAVE

DRAFTED WHAT WE ARE CALLING A

REGULATORY ROAD MAP, AND THAT

ROAD MAP IDENTIFIES IMPROVEMENTS

TO OUR CURRENT PROCESSES,

REGULATIONS AND POLICIES. THE

EXISTS REGULATIONS AND

PROCESSES, AS YOU ALL KNOW, WERE

FOR THE MOST PART ESTABLISHED

MANY YEARS AGO AND THEY REALLY

NEED TO BE UPDATED TO REFLECT

THE WORK WE’VE BEEN DOING

ESPECIALLY IN THE RESILIENCY AND

EQUITY SPACE. THE ROAD MAP

INCLUDES UPDATING OUR

REGULATIONS AND PLANS, INCREASE

CLARITY AND EFFICIENCY. WE ALSO

WANT TO UPDATE OUR PUBLIC ACCESS

DESIGN GUIDELINES. AND SOME OF

THE WORK HAS ALREADY BEGUN, AS

JESSICA MENTIONED, AND THAT

DOCUMENT WAS CREATED BACK IN

2005 AND 2007, SO SOME UPDATE IS

DEFINITELY NEEDED. AND WE’RE

LOOKING TO ISSUE MORE PERMITS

MORE QUICKLY FOR CERTAIN TYPES

OF PROJECTS THAT REALLY

PRESENT — WE ARE LOOKING TO

IMPROVE SMALLER RESTORATION

PROJECTS. WE HEARD A LOT FROM

OUR STAKEHOLDERS ON THAT AND

PROJECTS THAT REALLY INVOLVE

NATURE-BASED ADAPTATION

TECHNIQUES. THE ROAD MAP ALSO

INCLUDES MORE UPFRONT

DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATION WITH,

YOU KNOW, TALKING APPLICANTS

EARLY, ESTABLISHING A MORE

FORMAL PREAPPLICATION PROCESS SO

WE CAN GET THE BIG ISSUES ON THE

TABLE AND PERHAPS — PERHAPS

COME TO A GOOD SOLUTION PRIOR TO

THE BEGINNING OF THE REGULATORY

SCHEDULE AND MANDATES FOR IRAQ A

PERMIT — FOR ISSUING A PERMIT.

OUR REGULATORY ROAD MAP INCLUDES

THOSE INITIAL RECOMMENDATIONS

DETERMINED AND DEVELOPED BY THE

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE’S

MISSION-BASED REVIEW. REALLY

THAT DOCUMENT LOOKS AT FINDING

PERMIT EFFICIENCIES. AND SO

WE’RE WORKING WITH THE

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE STAFF

RIGHT NOW TO TIMIZE THAT — TO

FINALIZE THAT. THE NEXT

CHALLENGE WE HAVE, WE’VE

IDENTIFIED A BIG LIST OF

REGULATORY IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE

REALLY LIKE TO MAKE. AND WE

REALLY NEED TO PRIORITIZE WHAT

WE’LL BE DOING FIRST AND NEXT

AFTER THAT POINT AND WE’LL NEED

TO CREATE A TIMELINE AND HOLD

OURSELVES ACCOUNTABLE TO KEEPING

TRACK ON THESE TASKS. AND I ALSO

WANTED TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO

ETHAN, HE’S VACATIONING NOW IN

SOUTH AMERICA, I BELIEVE, BUT

HE’S REALLY LEADING THE

REGULATORY IMPROVEMENTS UNIT AND

RESPONSIBLE FOR MUCH OF THE WORK

THAT’S BEEN DONE. AND I THINK

THAT’S IT FOR ME.

>>SPEAKER: MR. CHAIR.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

YES.

>>SPEAKER: I KNOW WE HAD LOTS OF

DISCUSSION ON EQUITY — ON — IN

OUR — IN THIS PLAN. I JUST

THINK — AND I FAILED TO MENTION

I THINK WHEN THIS CAME UP IN OUR

— WHAT WAS THE MEETING WE HAD,

THE WORKSHOP ON THIS? THE

WORKSHOP, SOMETHING LIKE THAT,

I THINK WE NEED TO INCORPORATE

THAT LANGUAGE THROUGHOUT. AND

WHERE IT SAYS UPDATE EXISTING

REGULATORY LAWS AND POLICIES

MORE CONSISTENTLY, TRANSPARENTLY

AND EFFICIENTLY, I THINK IT

WOULD BE GOOD TO SAY

CONSISTENTLY, TRANSPARENTLY,

EQUITABLY AND EFFICIENTLY. I

KNOW WE HAVE THE EQUITY POLICIES

THROUGHOUT BUT IT WOULD — I

THINK IT’S WELL PLACED HERE.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

SECOND THAT NONMOTION. ANY OTHER

COMMENTS? BACK TO

YOU.

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: IF THAT’S

ALREADY, CHAIR WASSERMAN. I WANT

TO BRING ONE THING INTO FOCUS. I

WANT TO SORT OF STEP BACK FROM

WHAT HARRIET SAID. IN 2011, THIS

COMMISSION APPROVED THE

GROUNDBREAKING CLIMATE CHANGE

AMENDMENTS, WHICH ESSENTIALLY

CHANGED IN MANY RESPECTS HOW WE

DO PERMITTING IN TERMS OF

SCIENCE-BASED, VULNERABILITY

STUDIES. I MEAN, YOU NAME IT.

AND BCDC WAS REALLY THE FIRST

REGULATORY AGENCY IN THE UNITED

STATES TO DO THAT. SINCE THEN,

WE HAVE LEARNED A LOT ABOUT HOW

TO DO THAT AND HOW TO DO THAT

WELL. AND THE REGULATORY TEAM

HAS TAKEN, YOU KNOW, GREAT PAINS

TO TAKE GREAT STRIDES TO DO SO

AND THEY’VE BEEN VERY

SUCCESSFUL. HOWEVER, WE HAVE

NOT CHANGED, REALLY, SINCE THEN

THE WAY WE

ACTUALLY PROCESS PERMITS OR HOW

WE DO REGULATORY ACTIONS.

SO THE ANALOGY I USE, ADOPTING

THE CLIMATE CHANGE AMENDMENTS IS

SORT OF LIKE BUYING A TESLA

ENGINE FOR A CAR. SOMETHING VERY

NEW. SOMETHING MARVELOUS.

SOMETHING THAT WILL BE HELPFUL.

SOMETHING WE ALL WANT TO DO IN

SOME WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM. BUT

UNFORTUNATELY, WE PUT THAT TESLA

ENGINE INTO A 1997 ACCORD. AND

WE HAVEN’T BEEN ABLE TO REALLY

MAKE THE CAR MOVE AS WELL AS IT

SHOULD AND BE AS EFFECTIVE AS IT

SHOULD BECAUSE THE TIRES DON’T

WORK WITH THE ENGINE. THE

TRANSMISSION IS STILL THERE.

THE — YOU KNOW, AND THE BODY

SIMPLY DOESN’T CONFORM TO WHAT

THE ENGINE NEEDS, ETC. SO THE

REGULATORY ROAD MAP THAT ETHAN

HAS STARTED AND DOMINIC REALLY

HAS STARTED WORKING ON WILL, IF

WE CAN GET IT DONE WELL, BE ABLE

TO TRANSFORM THAT 1997 ACCORD

INTO SOMETHING WE CAN REALLY BE

PROUD OF DRIVING. AND THAT WILL

REALLY, I THINK, WORK WELL WITH

THE WAY WE DO OUR VULNERABILITY

ANALYSES AND EVERYTHING ELSE

RELATED TO PERMITS THAT WE NEED

TO DO. SO I WANTED TO STEP BACK

AND GIVE YOU THAT ANALOGY AND

HELPS YOU UNDERSTAND WHY AND

WHERE WE’RE

GOING.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: AND

LET’S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

>>SPEAKER: THANK YOU. I’M

PHOENIX. I’M STARTING OUT

TALKING ABOUT STRATEGIC

OBJECTIVE 3.1 WHICH FOCUSES ON

PRIORITIZING THE PROGRAM BY

ADENTFYING BCDC’S SPECIFIC

POLICIES, PROGRAMS, AND

PRACTICES THAT HAVE LED OR

CURRENTLY LEAD TO INEQUITABLE

OUTCOMES AND WORK TO RESOLVE

THEM. SO SINCE WE LAST TALK, WE

CONTRACTED WITH M.I.G. AND

BENCHMARK CONSULTING FOR — TO

WORK WITH THE E.J. ADVISORS ON

THE ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

ASSESSMENT OF THEIR PROGRAM WITH

THE GOAL OF STRENGTHENING THAT

PROGRAM. WE ALSO APPLIED AND

HAVE BEEN SELECTED FOR A NOAA

COASTAL FELLOW TO ANALYZE OUR

PERMITTING PRACTICES WITH AN

EQUITY LENS. OUR NEXT CHALLENGES

ARE TO COMPLETE THE

ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

ASSESSMENT. AS OF RIGHT NOW,

THEY’VE DONE SOME FOCUS GROUPS

WITH STAFF AND COMPLETED ONE

WORKSHOP WITH THE E.J. ADVISORS

AND THEY’RE PLANNING TWO MORE

WORKSHOPS WITH THE E.J. ADVISORS

AND ALSO GOING TO BE COMING TO

THE NEXT E.J. — ENVIRONMENTAL

JUSTICE WORKING GROUP ON MARCH

21. AND WITH THE NOAA COASTAL

FELLOW, OUR NEXT STEPS ARE

DEVELOPING A METHODOLOGY TO

EVALUATE EQUITY IN THE

PERMITTING PROCESS. NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE. SO FOR STRATEGIC

OBJECTIVE 3.5, WE ARE LOOKING TO

DEVELOP A LONG-TERM

RELATIONSHIPS AND PARTNERSHIPS

BETWEEN AND AMONG BCDC AND THE

BAY AREA’S TRIBAL COMMUNITIES TO

INCREASE AUTHENTIC AND LASTING

ENGAGEMENT. TO THAT END, OUR

SENIOR STAFF ENGAGED WITH THE

TRAINING CALLED “BEYOND LAND

ACKNOWLEDGMENT, WHICH WAS HOSTED

FROM THE REDBUD RESOURCE GROUP.

THEY WERE TESTING OUT THAT

TRAINING TO SEE IF WE COULD

BRING THAT TO ALL STAFF. AND OUR

E.J. MANAGER HAS BEEN INVOLVED

IN ASSEMBLING A TEAM TO WORK ON

DEVELOPING OUR TRIBAL ENGAGEMENT

POLICY. AND LAST MONTH I MET

WITH THE CONFEDERATED VILLAGES

OF LISJAN TO DISCUSS PARTNERSHIP

ON SHORELINE LEADERSHIP

ACADEMY.

OUR NEXT CHALLENGES IS TO DRAFT

A TRIBAL ENGAGEMENT POLICY AND

SCHEDULE A TRIBAL ENGAGEMENT

TRAINING FOR ALL STAFF. THANK

YOU.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: I

HAVE A QUESTION AND I DON’T KNOW

WHETHER THIS IS FOR YOU,

PHOENIX, OR FOR YOU,

PERMITTING.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID IN

ADOPTING THE AMENDMENT, THE BAY

PLAN, TO ADDRESS EQUITY ISSUES,

WAS TO REQUIRE OUTREACH TO

IMPACTED COMMUNITIES IN A WAY

THAT IS DIFFERENT

THAN THE

CEQA OUTREACH. AND I WONDER IF

THAT IS HAVING ANY IMPACT,

BLOWBACK, OR HE THIS JUST

HAVEN’T WOKEN UP YET?

>>PHOENIX: WE’VE BEEN WORKING TO

TRY TO UNDERSTAND ON OUR

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. SO I’VE

ACTUALLY WORKED WITH A COUPLE OF

PERMITS, ALONG THE LINE, MOST

RECENT THE OAKLAND HARBOR BASIN

TO GET OUTREACH FROM THE

COMMUNITY. WE DID GET FEEDBACK

FROM THAT. THE COMMUNITY —

DIDN’T THINK IT WAS SUFFICIENT

BUT I THINK WE DID A LOT MORE

THAN WAS NORMALLY DONE. PART OF

THIS NOAA FELLOW, THEY WILL BE

WORKING WITH EACH PERMIT AND

WORKING WITH C.B.O.’S SO WE CAN

HAVE A MORE ROBUST COMMUNITY

ENGAGEMENT PROCESS.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR

MENTIONING THE TURNING CIRCLE

AND I THINK THAT’S A GOOD

ILLUSTRATION WHERE WE HAVE

ACHIEVED SUCCESS. THE MEASURE OF

SUCCESS IS, UNFORTUNATELY, NOT

THAT THE IMPACTED COMMUNITIES

ARE THRILLED WITH WHAT’S BEING

DONE. WE DON’T DO VERY MUCH

THAT THRILLS A LOT OF PEOPLE.

[LAUGHTER]

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

BUT — BUT I DO THINK THE FACT

THAT WE GOT THAT HIGHER LEVEL OF

INTEREST AND INPUT IS A MEASURE

OF SUCCESS. COMMISSIONER

NELSON.

>>BARRY NELSON: JUST TO COMMENT

ABOUT TRIBAL ENGAGEMENT. IN THE

LAST COUPLE OF YEARS HAS BEEN A

REAL EXPLOSION OF INTEREST IN

ISSUES — WATER ISSUES UPSTREAM

FROM THE BAY, THE DELTA, AND ALL

THE RIVERS UPSTREAM FROM THAT. I

AM HOPEFUL WE CAN GET THE SAME

ENGAGEMENT ON TRIBAL AND BAY

ADAPTATION ISSUES. THAT WILL BE

GREAT.

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: I HAVE GOAL

FOUR. STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 4.1 IS

TO LISTEN TO, COMMUNICATE WITH,

AND ENGAGE STAKEHOLDERS IN WAYS

THAT ARE MORE ACCESSIBLE TO ALL,

INCREASE AWARENESS OF BCDC AND

ITS ROLES AND PROCESSES, AND

FOSTER SUCCESSFUL COMMUNITY DIE

LOGS. I THINK WE HAD SUCCESS

DURING THE PAST FEW MONTHS.

FIRST OF ALL, OUR NEW WEBSITE IS

NOT ONLY BEING CONSTRUCTED. IT’S

BEING CONTEXTUALIZED, IF YOU

DON’T MIND THE TERM. THE

INFRASTRUCTURE IS PRETTY MUCH

DONE, AND THE CONTENT IS BEING

WORKED ON. I WANT TO THANK ETHAN

AND COREY. COREY MANN, FOR

REALLY TAKING THE LEAD ON

CONTENT. AND WE HAD A REALLY

GOOD TEAM THAT DEALT WITH THE

CONSTRUCTION. AND REYLINA HAS

BEEN PUSHING US ALL TO MAKE SURE

IT GETS DONE. WE ARE HOPEFUL WE

WILL BE ABLE TO RELEASE IT AND

PUT IT ONLINE LATER — I SHOULD

SAY EARLY THIS SPRING. WE WERE

ABLE TO HIRE, AS I MENTIONED

EARLIER, ROSIE VELASQUEZ, WHO IS

A CONSERVATION CORPS INTERN. AND

WE DID SO NOT ONLY COULD ROSIE

HELP THE E.J. — OUR E.J.

PRACTICES, BUT ALSO TO HELP GET

US A LITTLE BIT MORE UP TO DATE

ON SOCIAL MEDIA. BCDC IS NOW ON

INSTAGRAM. AND I CAN TELL YOU

THAT I KNOW WE’RE ON INSTAGRAM

BECAUSE OUR SON, WHO IS AN

INSTAGRAM FOLLOWER, KEEPS

SENDING ME THINGS ABOUT HOW GOOD

OUR REELS ARE. WHATEVER THE HECK

THAT MEANS. AND SO WE HAVE

DEFINITELY INCREASED OUR USE OF

SOCIAL MEDIA AND WE HAVE

INITIATED — ANNIE HAS DONE A

TREMENDOUS JOB ON THIS — BCDC’S

FIRST-EVER MEDIA PLAN. IT

HASN’T BEEN CERTAINLY PUT INTO

PRACTICE YET BUT WE ARE WORKING

ON IT AND I THINK IT WILL END UP

BEING VERY, VERY SUCCESSFUL. OUR

NEXT CHALLENGES IS TO FINISH UP

THE WEBSITE AND PUT IT UP. AND

AS I SAID IN MY REPORT, USE ALL

OF OUR COMMISSIONERS WHO ARE

COUNTY SUPERVISORS TO ENABLE

RSAP GUIDELINES BRIEFINGS, THE

REGIONAL SHORELINE ADAPTATION

PROGRAM GUIDELINES FOR THEIR

MAYORS AND KEY STAFF THROUGHOUT

THEIR JURISDICTIONS IN ORDER TO

MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE MORE

AWARE OF WHAT BCDC IS DOING. THE

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. YOU

CAN’T —

YOU CAN’T WALK THROUGH BCDC

THESE DAYS WITHOUT SOMEBODY

ASKING, WHEN ARE WE GETTING A

P.I.O.? WELL, WE’RE GETTING

THERE. WE HAVE ACTUALLY — WE’RE

IN THE MIDST OF REQUESTING, I

SHOULD SAY, CAL HR TO APPROVE A

SENIOR LEVEL POSITION CALLED THE

DIRECTOR OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS.

THAT INCLUDES A PART-TIME

P.I.O., A PART-TIME LEGISLATIVE

LIAISON, A LOCAL GOVERNMENTALLY

ASSON, AND A PERSON WHO HAS SOME

EXPERIENCE, KNOCK ON WOOD, WITH

CZMA. AND SO THE NEXT CHALLENGE,

OF COURSE, WILL BE GETTING IT

APPROVED BY CALHR, WHICH I THINK

THEY WILL DO, BUT THEN, OF

COURSE, GETTING IT FUNDED DURING

THIS TIME OF STATE FISCAL

DISREPAIR. EVEN WITH THAT, I

HAVE SOME HOPE. IF THERE ARE NO

QUESTIONS ON THAT, WE’LL GO TO

GOAL FIVE.

>>SPEAKER: GOOD AFTERNOON,

COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS

REYLINA RUIZ AND DIRECTOR OF

ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNOLOGY

SERVICES. I’LL BE TALKING TO YOU

TODAY ABOUT GOAL FIVE WHICH IS

TO ADEQUATELY MEET THE GROWING

NEEDS MORE EFFECTIVELY AND

SUSTAINABLY. ONE OF THE

OBJECTIVES FOR GOAL FIVE IS TO

HAVE STAFF REFLECT THE BAY

AREA.

WE REGRUTED GREAT TALENTED FIELD

POSITIONS. IT’S BEEN DIFFICULT

BUT WITH THE PERSEVERANCE OF OUR

HIRING MANAGERS, WE’VE BEEN ABLE

TO FILL SOME VACANCIES IN THIS

LAST QUARTER. WE EXPANDED OUR

OUTREACH LIST TO NOTIFY CONTACTS

OF JOB OPPORTUNITIES AND WE’VE

ENHANCED THE JOB POSTING PROCESS

TO INCLUDE SENDING ANNOUNCEMENT

LINKS TO ALL STAFF SO THEY CAN

DISTRIBUTE TO THEIR NETWORKS,

POSTING EVERY VACANCY ON

LINKEDIN AND ALSO PUBLICIZING

THE OPPORTUNITIES IN BCDC ON THE

INSTAGRAM AND X, FORMERLY KNOWN

AS TWITTER, ACCOUNTS. IN THIS

NEXT QUARTER, WE’RE WORKING ON

CONDUCTING AN ORGANIZATIONAL

HELP SURVEY, INCLUDING A

SEPARATE SURVEY ON RACIAL EQUITY

AND WE’LL ALSO BE COMPLETING A

WORKFORCE ANALYSIS AND

SUCCESSION PLANNING TO BETTER

INFORM OUR STAFFING STRATEGIES

MOVING FORWARD. NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE. SO ANOTHER OF OUR

OBJECTIVES FOR GOAL 5 IS TO

IMPLEMENT TECHNOLOGICAL UPGRADES

TO IMPROVE OUR PROCESSES. AND

NOW WE’RE ONBOARDED TO THE

NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY

SECURITY OPERATION SERVICE, OUR

C.I.O. HAS IMPLEMENTED SYSTEMS

TO MONITOR SECURITY, ENCRYPT OUR

DEVICES AND COLLECT SECURITY

COMPLIANCE AND VULNERABILITY

DATA ON ALL OF OUR DEVICES. AND

IN ADDITION TO IDENTIFYING THE

ISSUES, WE HAVE END-POINT

SOFTWARE BEING IMPLEMENTED TO

ALLOW ANDREW TO IDENTIFY THOSE

IMMEDIATE THREATS AND MANAGE OUR

SOFTWARE DEPLOYMENTS AND TRACK

COMPLIANCE ACROSS OUR ENTIRE

NETWORK. THAT’S A BIG

ACCOMPLISHMENT THERE.

ADDITIONALLY, WE RECEIVED THE

FINDINGS FROM THE I.T.

ASSESSMENT I SPOKE TO YOU ABOUT

LAST TIME. WE RECEIVED A PASSING

SCORE, BUT THERE ARE

OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT.

SO WE’LL BE WORKING ON THOSE. WE

COMPLETED THE MIGRATION, AS

LARRY SAID, OF THE EXISTING

CONTENT ON THE WEBSITE INTO THE

HOSTING SERVICE. AND WE DID

CONTRACT WITH AN EDITOR TO

ENSURE OUR WEBSITE CONTENT IS

USER-FRIENDLY ON THE NEW WEBSITE

WHEN THAT GOES UP. SO NOW THAT

WE’VE IMPLEMENTED THESE SYSTEMS

TO IDENTIFY THE SECURITY ISSUES,

THIS NEXT QUARTER, WE’LL BE

WORKING ON IMPLEMENTING A

SOLUTION FOR ATTACK

DETECTION, THREAT VISIBILITY,

AND THREAT RESPONSE — THREAT

RESPONSE. SO WE’LL ALSO

PRIORITIZE THE FINDINGS FROM THE

I.T.

ASSESSMENT, BECAUSE WE DO WANT

TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS, AND

WE’LL FINALIZE THE CONTENT WITH

THE EDITOR FOR THE WEBSITE.

THANK YOU.

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: WITH THAT,

CHAIR WASSERMAN, I THINK YOU CAN

SEE WE’VE BEEN PRETTY BUSY.

THERE’S A LONG WAY TO GO. I

THINK THAT IT IS FAIR TO SAY

THAT STAFF WHO HAVE DAY JOBS TO

GET THE PERMITS OUT OR TO DO

WHATEVER THEY’RE DOING ARE ALSO,

YOU KNOW, PART OF THIS WHOLE

PROCESS TO GET THE STRATEGIC

PLAN DONE. SO IT IS TO EXTENT

FITS IN STARTS, BUT THERE’S

DEFINITE PROGRESS, AND WE LOOK

FORWARD TO HAVING A HIGHER

HISTOGRAM BARF COMPLETION BY THE

END OF THE YEAR.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: ANY

QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM

COMMISSIONERS?

>>YORIKO KISHIMOTO: YES.

ALTERNATE COMMISSIONER. I JUST

HAVE A THOUGHT TALKING ABOUT

THIS — THE PUBLIC OUTREACH AND

THE P.I.O., WHICH IS BADLY

NEEDED, I AGREE. AND I’M JUST

REFLECTING, ONE OF THE PROBLEMS

IS, OF COURSE, THERE’S SO FEW

JOURNALISTS AROUND IN THE BAY

AREA THESE DAYS. SO THEY ARE

BADLY MISSED. BUT WHEN I THINK

BACK ON ARTICLES THAT I USED TO

— PLACES I USED TO GO TO TO

KIND OF UNDERSTAND TRENDS AND

SOME ANALYSIS, BAY NATURE IS

ACTUALLY A GREAT MAGAZINE WHICH

KIND OF TALKS ABOUT THE

SCIENCE.

THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF

THE BAY AREA USED TO PUT OUT A

REGULAR NEWSLETTER THAT TALKED

ABOUT —

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: MONITOR.

>>YORIKO KISHIMOTO: DO THEY

STILL DO THAT? YEAH, THERE’S A

FEW SOURCES. THERE’S SO FEW OF

THEM. THE OTHER ONE IS THE

COMMITTEE TO COMPLETE THE

REFUGE. THEY ACTUALLY HAVE AN

EXCELLENT NEWSLETTER THAT COMES

OUT QUARTERLY THAT I READ

RELIGIOUSLY. SO I — I DON’T

KNOW WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT

EXCEPT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE GET SOME

MORE ARTICLES OUT IN THE BAY

NATURE WOULD BE GREAT OR I DON’T

KNOW WHAT — YOU KNOW, IT’S —

EXCEPT TO LAMENT THE — YOU

KNOW, I WISH THERE WERE MORE

SCIENCE AND REGULATORY

JOURNALISTS IN THE BAY AREA.

JUST WANTED TO SHARE THAT. THANK

YOU.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

OKAY. VICE CHAIR EISEN.

>>V. CHAIR, REBECCA EISEN: THANK

YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR THE

STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE. MY

EXPERIENCE WITH STRATEGIC PLANS

IS THEY SOMETIMES COLLECT A LOT

OF DUST ON SHELVES AND I’M

TUFLLY GLAD TO SEE THAT’S

NOT —

AND I’M GLAD TO SEE THAT’S NOT

OURS. AS FAR AS THE INSTAGRAM

ACCOUNT IS, I KNOW WHAT A REEL

IS. IT REALLY IS A FANTASTIC

INSTAGRAM ACCOUNT THAT’S BEEN

SET UP FOR THE BCDC. FOR ANYBODY

THAT’S NOT YET GOTTEN ON

INSTAGRAM, MY NAME IS CALLED ONE

STONE TWO BIRDS IF YOU’RE

LOOKING FOR ME. THAT IS REALLY

FANTASTIC, FANTASTIC STUFF ON

THERE, AND THE BCDC’S ACCOUNT IS

EXCELLENT. I WANTED TO — LARRY

STARTED OFF BY SAYING WE HAVE

ACCOMPLISHED SOME OF OUR

STRATEGIC GOALS. AND IT OCCURRED

TO ME THAT SOME OF THEM ARE HARD

TO KNOW WHETHER WE HAVE IN FACT

ACCOMPLISHED THEM. AND THE FIRST

ONE WE TALKED ABOUT, 1.4, THE

SWAP BENEFICIAL REUSE PROGRAM.

I’M WONDERING IF WE HAVE IN MIND

WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE WHEN WE

HAVE ACCOMPLISHED THAT

PARTICULAR GOAL, WHICH IS TO

INCREASE THE BENEFICIAL REUSE OF

SEDIMENT. HOW ARE WE GOING TO

KNOW WHEN WE’VE ACCOMPLISHED

THAT ONE?

>>JESSICA FAIN: I THINK THERE IS

A MORE PHILOSOPHICAL ANSWER.

I WOULD DEFER TO THE

PHILOSOPHICAL ANSWER WHICH IS

HOW MUCH SEDIMENT IS GETTING PUT

INTO WETLAND AND BENEFICIAL

REUSE PURPOSES RATHER THAN BEING

DUMPED OFF INTO THE OCEAN. BUT

WE DO ALSO ACCOMPANYING OUR

STRATEGIC PLAN HAVE SPECIFIC

STRATEGIES THAT ACCOMPANY EACH

OF THE OBJECTIVES AND SO THE

PRACTICAL ANSWER WOULD BE, YOU

KNOW, WE HAVE A GRANT THAT IS

HELPING US IMPLEMENT THIS AND

THERE’S TASKS ASSOCIATED WITH

IT. THE FIRST THING IS TO

DEVELOP THIS ROAD MAP WHICH IS

SORT OF THIS REGIONAL ACTION

PLAN AROUND SEDIMENT AND

BENEFICIAL REUSE WHICH I THINK

WILL REALLY LAY OUT A LOT OF

THOSE METRICS WE WANT TO GET TO

AS A REGION. AND WE HOPE TO

AMEND THE BAY PLAN WITH YOUR

APPROVAL TO HELP AMEND OUR

POLICIES TO GET THERE AS WELL AS

DEVELOP A FUNDING STRATEGY THAT

WILL ACCOMPANY THIS THAT IS A

SORELY NECESSARY PIECE TO

ACTUALLY GET THE WORK DONE.

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: IF I CAN

FOLLOW UP ON THAT. ONE OF THE

REALLY GREAT PIECES OF NEWS THAT

WE RECEIVED IN THE PAST MONTH OR

TWO IS THAT DUE TO THE INCREASE

IN FUNDING ON THE FEDERAL SIDE

THROUGH THE WATER RESOURCES

DEVELOPMENT ACT WORK WE’VE DONE

ON, MORE THIS YEAR OF THE

SEDIMENT HAS ACTUALLY GONE TO

BENEFICIAL REUSE THAN EVER

BEFORE. AND SO, AGAIN, SO MUCH

OF IT DEPENDS UPON FUNDING. BUT

WE WILL CONTINUE TO MAKE — WE

CONTINUE TO MAKE PROGRESS ON

THAT SO LONG AS THE STARS

ALIGN.

AND FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THE

REALLY INTERESTING BIT, AS

JESSICA SAID, IS THE

COMMISSION’S ROLE IN HELPING US

FIGURE OUT HOW BEST TO AMEND THE

BAY PLAN TO ENSURE THAT

BENEFICIAL REUSE ACTUALLY

HAPPENS.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: AND

I WOULD NOTE THAT IN THIS AREA,

AS IN MANY AREAS, WE DON’T ACT

ALONE. WE ACT IN CONJUNCTION

WITH OTHER PARTNERS. AND ONE OF

THE STRONGEST PIECES OF NEWS WE

HEARD ON THIS WAS WHEN WE GOT

THE REPORT TWO MEETINGS AGO THAT

THE ARMY CORPS WAS INCLUDING,

REALLY ON THEIR INITIATIVE,

BENEFICIAL REUSE AS PART OF THE

PROJECT. THAT’S A HUGE —

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: HUGE.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: HUGE

APPROACH. ARE THERE OTHER

QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? SEEING

NONE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR

THE EFFORT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH

FOR THE CONTINUED EFFORT ON

PROGRESS ON THIS. AND THAT WILL

BRING US TO ITEM 9, A BRIEFING

ON THE 2023 PROGRESS THE

COMMISSION’S ENFORCEMENT

PROGRAM. OUR ENFORCEMENT POLICY

MANAGER, MATTHEW TRUJILLO, WILL

PROVIDE THE BRIEFING.

>>MATTHEW TRUJILLO: GOOD

AFTERNOON. I’M GOING TO GET SET

UP HERE. I AM GOING TO SHARE MY

POWERPOINT.

SORRY.

OKAY. I CAN’T SEE MY NOTES AND

SHARE THIS AT THE SAME TIME SO I

AM GOING TO DO MY BEST HERE. MY

NAME IS MATTHEW TRUJILLO,

ENFORCEMENT POLICY MANAGER. AND

TODAY I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT

BASICALLY OUR 2023

ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN THE

ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM. I AM GOING

TO START BY A REVIEW OF OUR

ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM THAT’S BEEN

PUT IN PLACE AROUND 2019/2020. I

WILL TALK ABOUT SOME CASE

MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENTS WE’VE

DONE IN THE YEAR. GO OVER SOME

CASE MANAGEMENT DATA. GIVE US

PROGRESS ON THE OLD AND OLDEST

CASES IN THE QUEUE. REVIEW SOME

OF OUR AVAILABLE RESOURCES. AND

THEN FINISH ON A HIGH NOTE WITH

PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS AND KIND OF

GO OVER SOME OF MY IDEAS AND

DESIRES OR GOALS FOR THIS

UPCOMING 2024. AND ONCE AGAIN,

SO OUR PROGRAM GOALS ARE TO THE

DEFENDANT, DETERRENCE,

TRANSPARENCY, CONSISTENCY, AND

FAIRNESS. DETERRENCE, WE WANT TO

REMOVE THE INCENTIVE TO VIOLATE

THE LAW. WE WANT TO CLEAR THE

EXPECTATIONS AND ENSURE THE

PROCESSES ARE UNDERSTOOD BY THE

REGULATED COMMUNITY. THAT’S

TRANSPARENCY. CONSISTENCY IS WE

MAINTAIN A CLEAR, DOCUMENTED

ENFORCEMENT PROCESS. AND THEN

FAIRNESS, WE TREAT ALL

VIOLATIONS SIMILAR IN NATURE AND

IMPACT TO THE BAY AND PUBLIC

ACCESS SIMILARLY. DURING 2023,

WE — THIS WAS THE FIRST FULL

YEAR WE HAD A COMPLIANCE

PROGRAM, AND WE’VE WORKED ON

COORDINATING CLOSELY WITH THEM.

KIND OF SETTING UP DEFINING

ROLES AND EXPECTATIONS BETWEEN

THE COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT

STAFFS AND WHAT I CAN REPORT

OUT, HAVING WORKED WITH THEM

OVER THIS PAST YEAR, IS THAT

THEY’VE BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN

ASSUMING COMPLIANCE MONITORING

OF ANY ORDERS WE ISSUED AND

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS WE

ISSUED.

HOW IT WORKS, WHEN THE

COMMISSION ISSUES AN ORDER OR A

SETTLEMENT, THAT ESSENTIALLY

CLOSES THE ENFORCEMENT CASE. IT

GOES TO COMPLIANCE TO MAKE SURE

THEY RESPONDED TO THAT ORDER OR

SETTLEMENT FOLLOWS THROUGH, PAYS

THEIR FINES, MEETS THEIR

DEADLINES, DOES WHAT THEY’RE

ORDERED TO DO. THEY’VE ALSO BEEN

INSTRUMENTAL IN MANAGING REPORTS

OF IMPENDING AND POSSIBLE

VIOLATIONS. AND THEY’VE BEEN

ABLE TO RESOLVE ANY ISSUES

WITHOUT INFORMAL ENFORCEMENT

ACTION. FOR EXAMPLE, THERE IS A

KIND OF BOILER PLATE CLAUSE IN

OUR PERMITS IN THE MANT TANS

PROVISION THAT — MAINTENANCE

PROVISION THAT SAYS, IF WE FIND

THERE IS A PUBLIC ACCESS ISSUE

WITH REGARD TO MAYBE A PIECE OF

A TRAIL THAT’S IN DISREPAIR OR

HAS BEEN SHUT DOWN FOR WHATEVER

REASON, OFTENTIMES WE WILL REFER

THAT TO COMPLIANCE RATHER THAN

OPENING A CASE BECAUSE THE

BOILER PLATE LANGUAGE GIVES THAT

RESPONDENT OR THAT PERMITTEE,

RATHER, 30 DAYS AFTER BEING OFF

STANDARD, 30 DAYS AFTER BEING

NOTIFIED TO FIX THAT PROBLEM

BEFORE IT BECOMES AN ACTUAL

ISSUE, AN ACTUAL PERMIT

VIOLATION. SINCE THAT’S A COMMON

ISSUE WE RUN UP, COMPLIANCE HAS

BEEN REALLY GREAT IN BEING ABLE

TO WORK WITH THE PERMITTEES TO

GET THEM ON THE RIGHT TRACK

BEFORE WE HAVE TO OPEN AN

ENFORCEMENT CASE. THAT’S BEEN

VERY HELPFUL. MILESTONE

TRACKING. WE USE OUR TECHNOLOGY

— TECHNOLOGY I MEAN EXCEL FOR

THE FIRST PART TO ORGANIZE DATA

AND TRACK DEADLINES.

APPROXIMATELY 34 OF THE 71 TOTAL

CASES IN THE QUEUE AS OF THE END

OF LAST YEAR ARE SUBJECT TO

MILESTONE TRACKING.

THE REMAINDER OF THOSE ARE

PRE-2020 WHEN WE DIDN’T HAVE THE

SYSTEM IN PLACE AND THEY ARE

TREATED A LITTLE SEPARATELY, A

LITTLE DIFFERENTLY. WE’RE

WORKING ON THAT. I’LL GET TO

THAT LATER. THEN, 2023 IS ALSO

THE FIRST FULL YEAR WE’VE HAD

THE NEW ENFORCEMENT REGULATIONS

PUT IN PLACE THAT TOOK PLACE AT

THE END OF LAST YEAR. THESE HAVE

BEEN INSTRUMENTAL IN

FACILITATING MORE EFFICIENT

COMMUNICATION. WE’RE NOW ABLE TO

COMMUNICATE EXCLUSIVELY

ELECTRONICALLY, GRANTED WE’VE

GOT WRITTEN PERMISSION. THAT’S

BEEN HELPFUL IN TERMS OF GETTING

THINGS OUT OF THE DOOR QUICKLY

AND FACILITATING FAST RESPONSE

AND EFFICIENT CONVERSATIONS.

IT’S ALSO PROVIDED, I

THINK CIVIL PENALTY CALCULATION

POLICY. THAT’S APPENDIX H OF THE

REGULATIONS. THAT’S HELPED TO

STANDARDIZE HOW WE CALCULATE

CIVIL PENALTIES TO DO IT MORE

TRANSPARENTLY, TO DO IT

SYSTEM@ICILY — SYSTEMATICALLY.

AND IT’S BEEN GREAT. IT’S BEEN A

LEARNING PROCESS, THOUGH. NEW

AND IMPROVED TOOLS. FORMAL

ENFORCEMENT DOCKET. THIS WAS

STARTED UNDER OUR EX-ENFORCEMENT

ATTORNEY, BRENT. HE TOOK,

CREATED A SPREADSHEET AND

PROJECTED OUT FOR — I BELIEVE

IT WAS 2023 — 2022, MAYBE, THAT

WE WANTED TO BRING FORMAL

ENFORCEMENT THAT WAS IN THE

QUEUE. HAVING COME ON IN MARCH

OF 2022, I’VE TAKEN THAT ON AND

DONE SOME REVISION. I’VE

IMPROVED THE FORMULA. IT’S MADE

IT A BIT MORE USER-FRIENDLY, A

BIT MORE AUTOMATED AND I DID

THAT BASED ON LESSONS LEARNED,

STAFF FEEDBACK AND

COLLABORATION. AND ALSO DRAFTED

AN ADMINISTRATIVE CIVIL PENALTY

CALCULATOR TO MAKE EFFICIENT USE

OF ALL THE REGULATIONS OR THE

NEW PROCEDURES AND POLICIES THAT

ARE IN APPENDIX H SO NOW IT’S A

MATTER OF DATA ENTRY AND THE

SPREADSHEET WILL CALCULATE CIVIL

PENALTIES BASED ON THE INPUTS

AND SPIT OUT A GOOD NUMBER.

THAT’S STILL TESTING. THERE’S A

LOT OF BUGS IN THAT. I’M HOPING

TO GET THAT PERFECTED THIS

YEAR.

WE’LL SEE. IN 2023, BCDC

ENFORCEMENT OPENED 70 NEW CASES

TOTAL AND RESOLVED 50 OF THOSE

70 NEW CASES. OVERALL, WE’VE

CLOSED 88 CASES IN 2023. AND THE

VAST MAJORITY, AS YOU CAN SEE

FROM THIS TABLE TO THE RIGHT,

WERE OPENED IN THE LAST TWO

YEARS, 2023 AND 2022. AND

IT INCLUDES THE — OH, WE HAD

AN OLDEST CASE IN THE QUEUE FROM

1990. WE WERE ABLE TO RESOLVE

THAT IN 2023. WANTED TO CALL

THAT OUT. THEN, PROGRESS ON OLD

AND OLDEST CASES. SO OUR

MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES DEFINES

THOSE OPENED IN 2016 AND BEFORE

AND DEFINES OLDEST CASES AS

THOSE OPENED IN 2000 AND PRIOR.

CURRENTLY WE’RE DOWN TO ONE OF

OUR OLDEST CASES. AND THE NUMBER

OF OLD CASES IS NOW 19. WE

REDUCED THE NUMBER OF OLDEST

CASES BY TWO AND REDUCED THE

NUMBER OF OLD CASES BY ABOUT 14

IN 2023, WHICH IS A PRETTY GOOD

ACCOMPLISHMENT. OLD AND OLDEST

CASES COMPROMISE APPROXIMATELY

52% OF THE TOTAL YEAR-END

CASELOAD OF 71. IN 2024 WHAT I’M

DOING IS PRIORITIZING THE OLDEST

AND OLD CASES FOR RESOLUTION. WE

USE THESE RESOURCES TO DO OUR

WORK. PRIMARILY ARCGIS SYSTEM,

WE CALL IT THE DATABASE, WHERE

WE’RE ABLE TO PUT PIN DROPS AT

DIFFERENT PROPERTIES THROUGHOUT

THE BAY AREA AND KEEP NOTES.

THAT’S KIND OF OUR CASE TRACKING

METHOD. WE ALSO HAVE MANY OF OUR

PERMIT FILES AND OTHER FILES ON

1DOCSTOP WHICH IS A DATABASE

THAT HOLDS P.D.F.’S OF PAPER

SCANS THROUGHOUT OUR AGENCY.

IT’S BEEN PRETTY HELPFUL. WE

WENT TO FULLY ELECTRONIC

ENFORCEMENT RECORDKEEPING. WE

USED TO HAVE PAPER FILES. AND WE

MOVED AROUND 2020, ESPECIALLY,

WE MOVED INTO REALLY TRYING TO

BRING EVERYTHING ONLINE. WE WERE

MAINTAINING BOTH OF THOSE FOR A

WHILE. NOW WE ARE FULLY

ELECTRONIC. WHICH HAS MADE

THINGS MUCH MORE EFFICIENT. WE

HAVE TEMPLATE LETTERS AND FORMS

WE DEVELOPED TO SUPPORT THESE

—

OUR PROGRAM. WE RELY HEAVILY ON

OUR BAY DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN

ANALYSTS AND OUR ENGINEER TO

CONSUBJECT ON THINGS — MATTERS

OF PUBLIC ACCESS, DESIGN, AND

ENGINEERING QUESTIONS. AND WE

HAVE, OF COURSE, OUR STAND-BY

COMMUNICATION TOOLS. PHONES,

EMAILS, TEAMS, AND ZOOM. PROGRAM

HIGHLIGHTS. SO WE ENDED 2023

WITH THE LOWEST CASE COUNT IN

THE QUEUE BEGINNING SINCE THE

PROGRAM’S REINVIGORATION EFFORT

IN 2019. YOU MAY RECALL IT USED

TO NUMBER IN THE HUNDREDS. NOW

IT’S DOWN TO ABOUT 71. NOW IT’S

AROUND 74 BECAUSE WE GOT A FEW

NEW ONES. WE’RE WORKING THROUGH

THAT. BUT PRETTY GOOD. SO I

WANTED TO MAKE SURE I RECOGNIZED

THE COMPLIANCE STAFF FOR

STEPPING UP AND HELPING TO SHARE

THAT BURDEN. CERTAINLY, THE

ENFORCEMENT COMMITTEE HAS

PROVIDED A LOT OF SUPPORT AND

GUIDANCE OVER THE YEAR. AND OUR

INDIVIDUAL ANALYSTS, ADRIAN

KLEIN AND RACHEL COHEN, HAVE

BEEN DEDICATED AND HARD

WORKING.

RACHEL COHEN IS OUR NEW

ANALYST.

SHE’S COME ALONG VERY WELL. OF

COURSE, GREG AND LARRY, OUR

SENIOR STAFF, HAVE PROVIDED

GREAT SUPPORT AND GUIDANCE. AND

I CANNOT — WE COULDN’T DO THAT

WITHOUT MARGIE, OUR

ADMINISTRATIVE STAFFER. KEEPING

US ON TRACK. SHE’S REALLY TAKEN

OWNERSHIP ON THE TEAM IN TERMS

OF TRYING TO COORDINATE

MAILINGS, COORDINATE OUR

MEETINGS. REALLY VERY

IMPORTANT.

OH, YEAH. SO WE COLLECTED ABOUT

— EXCUSE ME. WE COLLECTED

$425,000 IN PENALTIES IN 2023,

DEPOSITED INTO THE BAY CLEANUP

AND ABATEMENT FUND. AND JUST

RECENTLY WE WERE SELECTED FOR

—

HONOREE FOR A 2023 GEO FOR GOOD

AWARD THAT’S AWARDED BY GOOGLE

EVERY YEAR FOR OUR USE OF OUR

GOOGLE MAPPING TOOLS,

PARTICULARLY GOOGLE EARTH,

GOOGLE MAP, TO ASSIST IN OUR

INVESTIGATIONS, RESEARCH, AND

MONITORING OF SITES AROUND THE

BAY. AND IT’S PARTICULARLY

HELPFUL IN THE MOST REMOTE

LOCATIONS LIKE UP IN THE MARSH

WHERE WE CAN’T ACCESS THROUGH

ANY ROAD. WE DON’T HAVE ACCESS

THROUGH BOATS OR WATER. WE’RE

ABLE TO, FOR EXAMPLE, VIEW

HISTORIC IMAGERY. WHEN WE GET

NAVIGATION, DEPENDING HOW

UPDATED THEIR DATABASE IS, WE

CAN ACTUALLY SEE ACTUAL

CONDITIONS ARE, CURRENT

CONDITIONS ARE, WITHOUT HAVING

TO GO OUT THERE OURSELVES. AND

BEING A SMALL STAFF, WE REALLY

RELY ON THESE TECHNOLOGY TOOLS

TO HELP DO OUR JOB. SO IN

2024, I AIM TO PUT MUCH MORE

HEARINGS BEFORE THE ENFORCEMENT

COMMITTEE AND THE COMMISSION

THAN WE DID LAST YEAR. ALREADY,

OUR DOCKET HAS ABOUT SIX

CASES. WE’VE STRETCHED OUT TO

ABOUT MAY RIGHT NOW. AND MORE

WILL BE COMING ON TOP OF THAT,

HOPEFULLY. THE WORK CONTINUES TO

COORDINATE ENFORCEMENT. OUR

PROCESSES WITH PERMITS AND

COMPLIANCE. MORE COLLABORATION

THERE. MORE KIND OF PROCESS

IMPROVEMENT WOULD BE IDEA. AND

THEN WE ARE ALSO REFINING

EXISTING AND DEVELOPING NEW

PROCEDURES AND BEST PRACTICES

BASED ON LESSONS LEARNED IN

2023. I MENTIONED A COUPLE OF

THEM SUCH AS OUR ENFORCEMENT

DOCKET AND ONE THING I’M ALSO

DEVELOPING RIGHT NOW IS A —

BASICALLY A WORKBOOK TO MANAGE A

CASE WHERE IT SHOULD MAKE IT

MUCH MORE EFFICIENT TO BE ABLE

TO ENTER THE INFORMATION OF A

GIVEN CASE OR A GIVEN RESPONDENT

AND THEIR ISSUES INTO THE

WORKBOOK AND THEN HAVE IT

POPULATE OTHER TABS THAT WILL

HELP US TO GENERATE LETTERS AND

SO FORTH. AND HAVING GOTTEN IT

WORKING YET BUT I’M WORKING ON

IT, I’M CLOSE. SO I’LL BE HAPPY

TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS

TIME.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: ANY

QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER

GILMORE.

>>MARIE GILMORE: IT’S NOT A

QUESTION BUT A COMMENT. I REALLY

WANTED TO THANK MATTHEW AND THE

ENFORCEMENT TEAM FOR THE

DEDICATION AND THE HARD WORK

THAT THEY ALWAYS PUT IN. BUT IN

PARTICULAR, THE LAST YEAR, THEY

KEPT A STEADY STREAM OF

ENFORCEMENT CASES COMING TO US.

AND WE’VE HAD SOME REALLY

PRODUCTIVE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT

JUST HOW THE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM

HAS DONE AND IMPROVEMENTS THAT

COULD BE MADE. SO IT’S REALLY

GREAT. THE ONE THING I WANTED TO

ADD WAS ABOUT OLD AND OLDEST

CASES. I’M NOT SURE HOW MUCH

THE COMMISSION REALIZES THAT

THOSE CASES ARE REALLY TIME AND

RESOURCE-INTENSIVE. ONE,

BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF TIME

THAT HAS ELAPSED. AND SOMETIMES

BECAUSE THE PROPERTY HAS CHANGED

HANDS NOT ONCE BUT MULTIPLE

TIMES. SO IT DOES TAKE A LOT OF

TIME, A LOT OF DETECTIVE WORK,

AND THIS IS ON TOP OF OR IN

ADDITION TO THE NEW CASES THAT

ARE COMING IN. SO IT’S — THE

ABILITY TO WORK BOTH ENDS OF THE

SPECTRUM TOWARDS THE MIDDLE,

WORKING THE OLDEST AND OLD CASES

VERSUS THE NEW CASES THAT ARE

COMING IN ON ESSENTIALLY A DAILY

BASIS AND TRYING TO BALANCE THE

RESOURCES NEEDED FOR BOTH TO

KEEP THE PROCESS FLOWING ALONG

IN A REASONABLE MANNER. AND THAT

BALANCE IS NOT ALWAYS EASY TO

STRIKE, BUT I THINK THE TEAM

DOES A REALLY GOOD JOB. AND I

LOOK FORWARD TO — AND THE REST

OF THE COMMITTEE LOOKS FORWARD

TO WORKING WITH YOU AND THE TEAM

AS WE MAKE EVEN MORE PROGRESS

OVER THIS YEAR. SO THANK YOU.

>>MATTHEW TRUJILLO: THANK YOU.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM

COMMISSIONERS? AND I ASSUME WE

HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENT.

>>CLERK, REYLINA RUIZ: NO PUBLIC

COMMENT.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER NELSON.

>>BARRY NELSON: JUST AN

ENCOURAGING COMMENT THAT THIS IS

REALLY IMPRESSIVE AND

ENCOURAGING THAT — IF WE STEP

BACK AND LOOK BACK FIVE YEARS TO

WHERE — HOW OUR ENFORCEMENT

PROGRAM LOOKED, WE MADE ENORMOUS

STRIDES.

WE’RE MAKING PROGRESS BOTH IN

TERMS OF PROTECTING PUBLIC

RESOURCES AND IN TERMS OF

PRESENTING COHERENT COMPLIANCE

AND ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM TO THE

PUBLIC. OVER TIME I’M CONFIDENT

THAT’S GOING TO MEAN WE HAVE

LESS ENFORCEMENT PROBLEMS IN THE

FUTURE. THAT’S REALLY

ENCOURAGING, ESPECIALLY THE

DISCUSSION OF COMPLIANCE. THANK

YOU.

>>MATTHEW TRUJILLO: THANK YOU.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: YES,

SIR.

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: THANK YOU,

CHAIR GILMORE, FOR THOSE

REMARKS. I KNOW THE ENFORCEMENT

TEAM TAKES HEART IN THAT BECAUSE

THEY HAVE A JOB THAT IS REALLY

DIFFERENT CANDIDLY THAN ANYBODY

ELSE AT BCDC. THEY HAVE TO BE

THE BAD GUYS. AND IT’S NOT EASY

TO DO THAT WITH A SMILE ON YOUR

FACE THROUGH THE DAY. BUT THEY

SOMEHOW DO. AND I WILL SAY THAT

THINKING OF STRATEGIC PLANS AND

THE LIKE, THERE WAS NO

CONSIDERATION, REALLY, OF

PUTTING ENFORCEMENT IN REALLY A

STRATEGIC PLAN WHEN WE STARTED

BECAUSE THERE REALLY WASN’T

ANYTHING TO TALK ABOUT EXCEPT WE

NEED TO DO IT BETTER. AND NOW I

THINK WE’RE DEMONSTRATING TO THE

PUBLIC, I KNOW WE’RE

DEMONSTRATING TO THE RESOURCES

AGENCY THAT WE’RE DOING IT

WELL.

AND I THINK IT’S REALLY, REALLY

IMPORTANT TO KEEP ON HEARING

FROM MATTHEW THROUGH THE YEAR TO

GIVE UPDATES BECAUSE I WANT — I

WANT US TO SEE THAT 71 NUMBER

GETTING DOWN TO 50. I MEAN,

YOU’RE NEVER PROBABLY GOING TO

GET BELOW 50, BUT IF YOU CAN GET

IT DOWN TO 50, THAT IS — THAT

WOULD JUST BE REMARKABLE. AND

THE PROBLEM WITH THAT OR THE

DIFFICULTY WITH THAT — AND IME

LOOKING — AND I’M LOOKING AT

MATTHEW AND I THINK I AGREES —

THE OLDER CASES AND THE OLDEST

CASES TAKES SO LONG TO DO, YOU

HAVE TO HAVE A PORTFOLIO OF

DOING THOSE WITH OTHER THINGS AT

THE SAME TIME. SO I DON’T KNOW

WHEN WE’RE GOING TO GET DOWN TO

50, BUT I THINK IT’S A GREAT

GOAL TO DO, ESPECIALLY

CONSIDERING, MATTHEW, THAT WE

WERE AT 230-SOMETHING WHEN WE

STARTED THIS, IS THAT RIGHT?

>>MATTHEW TRUJILLO: YEAH, JUST

ABOUT.

>>LARRY GOLDZBAND: SO I THINK

THAT SAYS A LOT ABOUT STAFF AND

STAFF’S WORK SO THANK YOU VERY

MUCH FOR ALL YOUR SUPPORT.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: AND

I CERTAINLY WANT TO ECHO THANKS

TO THE STAFF FOR ALL THAT WORK

AND THIS FAVORABLE REPORT AND

THANK COMMISSIONER GILMORE AND

OTHER MEMBERS OF THE ENFORCEMENT

COMMITTEE FOR THEIR EFFORTS IN

THIS AS WELL. ALL RIGHT. THAT

BRINGS US TO ITEM 10, BRIEFING

ON THE SAN FRANCISCO WATERFRONT

COASTAL FLOOD STUDY DRAFT

PLAN.

BCDC’S PLANNING DIRECTOR JESSICA

FAIN WILL INTRODUCE THE MATTER.

>>JESSICA FAIN: THANK YOU AND

GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.

I’LL KEEP THIS BRIEF AND LET THE

PORT AND ARMY CORPS DO MOST OF

THE TALKING BUT OUR NEXT ITEM IS

ON THIS DRAFT, SAN FRANCISCO

WATERFRONT COASTAL FLOOD STUDY

PLAN, A COLLABORATION BETWEEN

THE PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO AND

THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

TO ADDRESS COASTAL FLOOD RISK

AND THE AFFECTED SEA LEVEL RISE

ACROSS 7 1/2 MILES OF THE SAN

FRANCISCO WATERFRONT FROM

AQUATIC PARK TO HERRON’S HEAD

PARK. AND WE’LL START BY TURNING

IT OVER TO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

LANE FORBES FROM THE SPORT OF

SAN FRANCISCO.

>>LANE FORBES: GOOD AFTERNOON,

COMMISSIONERS.

>>ELAINE FORBES: I’M REALLY

PROUD OF THIS MOMENT BECAUSE IT

REFLECTS MANY, MANY YEARS OF

ANALYSIS AND WORK TO BE AT THIS

POINT AND SO WE’RE HAPPY TO BE

AT THIS POINT AND TALK TO YOU

ABOUT THE DRAFT PLAN. YOU

KNOW, PROTECTING THE SAN

FRANCISCO WATERFRONT FROM SEA

LEVEL RISE AND THE IMMINENT

THREAT OF EARTHQUAKE HAS BEEN A

SERIOUS MATTER AND SOMETHING WE

MUST ADDRESS BUT SOMETHING

THAT’S ALSO REALLY, REALLY

CHALLENGING TO FIGURE OUT

EXACTLY HOW

TO ADDRESS SO I WANT TO SAY WE

APPRECIATE THE GUIDANCE AND NEED

THE GUIDANCE OF BCDC IN THIS

MISSION AS WE ENDEAVOR FOR A

SAFE AND FLOOD-RESILIENT SAN

FRANCISCO WATERFRONT. WE’VE HIT

THIS MILESTONE AND WE STARTED IN

2018 ASKING THE SAN FRANCISCO

VOTERS TO HELP US FIGURE OUT

THIS BIG PROBLEM WITH A

$425 MILLION BOND AND WE’VE

WORKED VERY CAREFULLY WITH THE

ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS WHO HAVE

GUIDED US IN HAVING A PLAN OF

SOLUTION. WE STARTED WITH A LOT

OF PROBLEMS AND NOW WE HAVE A

DRAFT PLAN OF SOLUTIONS.

WHAT DOES THIS PLAN DO? YOU’LL

SEE FROM OUR TEAM THAT IT WILL

HAVE THE FLOOD RISK AND THE SEA

LEVEL RISE ON THE WATERFRONT AND

THE CITY AND THE SAN FRANCISCO

THAT THE SEA WALL AND OTHER

PARTS OF OUR WATERFRONT

PROTECT. THE PLAN IS SHOWING

HOW THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND

THE POTENTIAL FEDERAL INTEREST

WOULD RESPOND TO THIS PROBLEM

AND HOW THEY WOULD BUILD FLOOD

DEFENSES THAT REALLY TALK ABOUT

HOW HIGH WE NEED TO GO, HOW

WIDE WE NEED TO MAKE THAT

ADAPTATION AND WHERE WE SHOULD

BUILD THE LINE OF DEFENSE.

YOU’LL SEE TODAY DOING SO IS AN

EXPENSIVE ENDEAVOR.

MULTI-BILLION DOLLARS AT THIS

POINT ESTIMATED AT $13 BILLION.

BUT THAT IS A VERY, VERY NOT

DEFINED ESTIMATE WITH THAT

DESIGN, ETC., BUT IT IS GOING TO

BE AN EXPENSIVE ENDEAVOR. THE

ONE AMAZING THING IS AS WE MOVE

FORWARD, WE WILL HAVE THE ARMY

CORPS POTENTIALLY INVESTING 65

CENTS TO EVERY DOLLAR OF THE

PLAN — OF THIS PROJECT. AND SO

THAT WOULD REPRESENT FOR SAN

FRANCISCO ONE OF OUR BIGGEST

FEDERAL INVESTMENTS IN

INFRASTRUCTURE. SO IT’S A

TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITY FOR

PARTNERSHIP. I WANT TO SAY THAT

THE ARMY CORPS HAS BEEN TERRIFIC

IN FIGURING OUT HOW TO DEVELOP A

PLAN THAT IS RESPONDING TO

UNKNOWN CONDITIONS OR FUTURE

CONDITIONS THAT WILL BE

CHANGING. AND THIS IS THE FIRST

MAJOR PLAN WHERE THEY HAVE

DESIGNED TO UNKNOWN CONDITIONS.

SO YOU’LL SEE MONITORING AND

PHASED ACTIONS, ETC. THE ARMY

CORPS HAS ALSO CONSIDERED THINGS

JUST BEYOND COST BENEFITS AND

YOU’LL SEE OUR VALUES RELATED TO

EQUITY, RELATED TO ECOLOGY,

RELATED TO A NUMBER OF THINGS

THAT MATTER FOR US IN TERMS OF

HOW WE WOULD PREPARED FOR AND

DELIVER THE WATERFRONT OF THE

FUTURE. WE DO HAVE A MILESTONE

HERE BUT WE HAVE A LOT OF WORK

AHEAD. WE’RE GOING TO THE PUBLIC

WITH THIS PLAN AND, OF COURSE,

WE WILL BE WORKING VERY

CAREFULLY WITH YOUR STAFF AND

WITH YOU, COMMISSIONERS, ON HOW

THIS PLAN EVOLVES. WE — WHILE

WE HAVE A SENSE OF THE

FOUNDATION AND THE WORK WE NEED

TO DO TO PREPARE FOR THE SEA

LEVEL RISE, WE DON’T HAVE

DESIGNS FOR WHAT IS ON TOP YET.

SO WE WANT OUR FUTURE WATERFRONT

TO BE AT LEAST AS WONDERFUL AND

PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE AS WE HAVE

TODAY SO WE WANT TO LEVERAGE

OTHER PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE

INVESTMENTS, OUR UPGRADES, OTHER

PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS AND

UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE CITY AND

STATE WANT TO ACCOMPLISH FOR

THIS WATERFRONT. I ALSO WANT TO

LET YOU KNOW CONSTRUCTION WILL

INEVITABLY HAPPEN OVER DECADES.

THERE WILL BE SEQUENCES AND WE

WILL BE LEVERAGING OPPORTUNITIES

TO DO THIS SO THE PUBLIC

MAINTAINS MAXIMUM EXPERIENCE OF

THE SAN FRANCISCO WATERFRONT AS

WE FIGURE OUT HOW TO

ADAPT. OF COURSE, THE

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN WILL, OF

COURSE, TAKE DECADES —

THE IMPLEMENTATION IS CRITICAL

AND WILL TAKE DECADES TO

IMPLEMENT. SO WE HAVE AMPLE TIME

TO LOOK AT THE REGULATORY AND

POLICY CHANGES THAT INEVITABLY

WILL NEED TO HAPPEN IN ORDER TO

BUILD A RESILIENT WATERFRONT,

AND WE’RE LOOKING FORWARD TO

DOING THAT WORK. SO I THINK I

WILL END WITH AND TURN IT OVER

TO MY STAFF TO SAY THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP TO

DATE. THANK YOU FOR THE WORK

THAT IS TO COME. AS WE MARCH

FORWARD AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO

VERY — HOW TO TACKLE A VERY BIG

CHALLENGE ON AN OLD CITY’S HARD

URBAN EDGE AND SOUTHERN

WATERFRONT WITH INDUSTRIAL USES

BUT ALSO MAJOR OPPORTUNITIES FOR

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT. SO WE

APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT AND WE

APPRECIATE YOUR GUIDANCE AS WE

MOVE THROUGH THIS PROJECT. SO

WITH THAT I’LL TURN IT OVER TO

MY TEAM.

>>BRAD BENSON: THANK YOU,

ELAINE. I AM THE WATERFRONT

DIRECTOR. WE WANT TO THANK YOU

FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT

AND ENGAGE WITH STAFF. I

AM ONLINE IS MELINDA FISHER WHO

IS THE ENVIRONMENTAL LEAD FOR

THE ARMY CORPS TEAM. MELINDA IS

AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ON

THE PRESENTATION, AND WE JUST

REALLY WANT TO EMPHASIZE THE

PARTNERSHIP ELEMENT OF THIS

WORK. THIS REALLY IS

COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE PORT

AND THE ARMY CORPS TO PRODUCE

BOTH THE REPORT AND THE DRAFT

PLAN THAT I’M GOING TO GO

THROUGH. AND I’LL TRY AND MOVE

THROUGH QUICKLY SO WE CAN GET TO

POLICY DISCUSSION WITH THE

COMMISSION. NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE.

SO AS I THINK MANY OF YOU KNOW,

THE WAY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

DECIDES TO INVEST IN WATER

RESOURCES PROJECTS IS THROUGH

THE ARMY CORPS, THROUGH A

VARIETY OF GENERAL

INVESTIGATIONS. WE WERE LUCKY TO

GET THIS GENERAL INVESTIGATION

OF COASTAL FLOOD RISK IN 2018. A

LOT OF HELP FROM OUR

CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION IN

THAT. THE STUDY IS LOOKING AT AN

UNUSUALLY LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

INSTEAD OF 50 YEARS, 100 YEARS

FROM 2040 TO 2140. IT’S REALLY

AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS TO GUIDE

THE RECOMMENDATION TO CONGRESS

ABOUT WHETHER TO INVEST FEDERAL

FUNDING. AS ELAINE MENTIONED,

IT’S A VERY HIGH LEVEL DRAFT

PLAN AT THIS STAGE. VERY LITTLE

ENGINEERING. JUST ENOUGH TO GET

TO THIS HIGH LEVEL COST ESTIMATE

OF $13.5 BILLION. WE EXPECT THAT

NUMBER TO CHANGE, AND WE WILL

KEEP ON SAYING THAT BECAUSE WE

DON’T WANT FOLKS TO BE SURPRISED

BY CHANGES IN THE NUMBERS OVER

TIME. EXCITED THAT THERE IS SUCH

A POTENTIALLY LARGE FEDERAL, YOU

KNOW, COST SHARE OF 65%. EVEN

THE 35% THAT WE’RE TALKING ABOUT

HERE IS A HUGE AMOUNT OF FUNDING

FOR THE CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO TO

COME UP IN THE CONTEXT OF THE

CITY’S 10-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN.

WE’LL NEED OTHER SOURCES,

INCLUDING STATE SOURCES, TO

ACCOMPLISH A MATCH ON THIS

SCALE. I MENTIONED THE

COLLABORATION. THE PORT IS THE

CITY’S LEAD AGENCY, BUT WE’RE

VERY KEEN TO INVOLVE OTHER CITY

AGENCIES. THE WAY SAN FRANCISCO

IS BUILT OUT, WE HAVE MAJOR

INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS RIGHT UP

AT THE SHORELINE SO WE NEED

SFPUC, PUBLIC WORKS AT THE

TABLE HELPING US THINK ABOUT

THIS PLAN, HOW TO REFINE IT

GOING FORWARD. NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE.

WE’D LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE

ARE ON UNCREDITED ANCESTRAL

HOMELAND OF THE RAMAYTUSH

OHLONE WHO ARE THE ORIGINAL

INHABITANTS OF THE SAN

FRANCISCO PENINSULA.

IN ACCORDANCE TO THEIR

TRADITIONS, THE RAMAYTUSH

OHLONE HAVE NEVER CREDITED —

CEDED, LOST NOR FORGOTTEN THEIR

RESPONSIBILITIES AS THE

CARETAKERS OF THIS PLACE, AS

WELL AS FOR ALL PEOPLES WHO

RESIDE IN THEIR TRADITIONAL

TERRITORY. AS GUESTS, WE

RECOGNIZE THAT WE BENEFIT FROM

LIVING AND WORKING ON THEIR

TRADITIONAL HOMELAND. WE WISH TO

PAY OUR RESPECTS BY

ACKNOWLEDGING THE ANCESTORS,

ELDERS, AND RELATIVES OF THE

COMMUNITY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SO WE HAVE JUST PUBLISHED A LOT

OF INFORMATION ABOUT THIS STUDY

AND THE DRAFT PLAN. WE’VE TRIED

TO MAKE IT ACCESSIBLE ON THE

PORT’S WEBSITE. FOLKS CAN SEE A

STORY MAP THAT WALKS THROUGH THE

PLAN AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL. WE’VE

ALSO GOT THE FULL REPORT

AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD,

INCLUDING ALL OF THE TECHNICAL,

ENG ENGINEERING — ENGINEERING,

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS,

INCLUDING THE IMPACT ANALYSIS.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. WE’RE IN

THIS VERY CRITICAL PUBLIC

COMMENT PERIOD. WE’VE GOT A

DRAFT PLAN. THE WAY TO THINK

ABOUT THIS PLAN, IT’S THE WORK

OF THE DELIVERY TEAM, THE ARMY

STAFF AND PORT STAFF AND

CONSULTANT TEAM AND IT’S A

DRAFT. SO WE NEED PUBLIC

ENGAGEMENT AND PUBLIC COMMENT

DURING THIS PERIOD AND GOING

FORWARD TO MAKE THIS A BETTER

PLAN. WE’VE GOT FOUR ARMY

CORPS-HOSTED NEPA WORKSHOPS

COMING UP IN THE LATTER PART OF

THE MONTH. AND WE’VE GOT

MULTIPLE OTHER WAYS FOR MEMBERS

OF THE PUBLIC TO ENGAGE. NEXT

SLIDE, PLEASE. SO I’M GOING TO

GO OVER BRIEFLY WATERFRONT RISKS

AND HAZARDS, WHICH I THINK

YOU’RE VERY FAMILIAR WITH. I’LL

TALK ABOUT WHERE WE ARE IN THIS

STUDY AND NEXT STEPS. GO OVER

THE DRAFT PLAN AT THE HIGHEST

LEVEL AND THEN, YOU KNOW, TALK A

LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW WE’RE GOING

TO BE FURTHER ENGAGING WITH THE

PUBLIC. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO

AS WE’RE THINKING ABOUT

WATERFRONT RISKS AND HAZARDS,

WE’RE THINKING ABOUT IT THROUGH

THE LENS OF HOW PEOPLE USE THE

WATERFRONT TODAY. NEXT

SLIDE. AS DIRECTOR FORBES

MENTIONED, WE HAVE AN AMAZING

WATERFRONT THAT IS HOST TO A LOT

OF VISITORS SERVING USING,

MARITIME FUNCTIONS, INDUSTRIAL

USES ACROSS THE WATERFRONT,

NATURAL AREAS LIKE THE HERON’S

HEAD PARK AREA AND WETLANDS. SO

WHEN WE’RE TALKING ABOUT RISKS,

WE’RE LOOKING AT IT THROUGH THIS

LENS AND WE’RE ALSO LOOKING AT

THE INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY THAT

WE’RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY AS AN

OPPORTUNITY TO LEAVE THE PLACE

EVEN BETTER THAN IT IS TODAY.

NEXT SLIDE. SO WE KNOW THAT WE

HAVE CURRENT FLOOD RISKS IN THE

CREEKS, BOTH MISSION CREEK AND

ISLAIS CREEK. THE

CITY’S RECYCLING FACILITY IS

LOCATED.

THEY GET REGULARLY FLOODED

DURING KING TIDE EVENTS. ON THE

LEFT-HAND SIDE OF THIS SLIDE IS

THE BOMB CYCLONE THAT OCCURRED

IN MARCH, 2023. HAD THIS

OCCURRED AT AN EXTREME TIDE

ELEVATION, WE WOULD HAVE

EXPERIENCED MUCH MORE IN THE WAY

OF FLOOD DAMAGES. AND WE’RE

MOSTLY CONCERNED IN THIS AREA

RIGHT NOW WITH THE EMBARK DARROW

— EMBARCADERO PORTAL AND THAT

CONNECTS DOWN TO THE SUBWAY AND

BART. WE’RE BEING REMINDED OF

POTENTIAL FIRST ACTIONS THAT

COULD DEAL WITH THE CURRENT

FLOOD RISK SO WE DON’T HAVE A

SANDY TYPE OF EXPERIENCE WITH

OUR SUBWAY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

WE’VE LEARNED THROUGH THE STUDY

THAT SAN FRANCISCO IS VERY

VULNERABLE TO SEA LEVEL RISE.

ESSENTIALLY WITHOUT ACTION,

FEDERAL ACTION, MUCH OF THE AREA

THAT WAS FILLED OVER THE LAST

CENTURY AND MORE FROM MARITIME

AND RELATED PURPOSES WOULD BE

RECLAIMED BY THE BAY ON THE HIGH

SEA LEVEL RISE PROJECTIONS.

WITHOUT A FEDERAL PROJECT, THE

MODELING IN THE STUDY SHOWS BY

2050 WHEN WE EXPECT UP TO A FOOT

OF SEA LEVEL RISE UP TO 500

STRUCTURES AND ASSETS WOULD BE

VUL VERBAL NO — VULNERABLE TO

FLOODING. AND BY 2140, DAMAGES

COULD AMOUNT UP TO $23 BILLION.

AND THAT’S ONE OF THE FACTORS,

NOT THE ONLY FACTOR, THAT WILL

LEAD THE ARMY CORPS TO A

POTENTIAL FEDERAL INTEREST

FINDING EFFORT. NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE.

>>SPEAKER: CAN I MAKE ONE POINT

ON THE SLIDE AND APPRECIATE

THIS? ONE OF THE THINGS WE’VE

DONE IN PRESENTATIONS ABOUT SEA

LEVEL RISE, THE BAY AREA

GENERALLY, IS COMPARE THE COST

OF DOING NOTHING TO THE COST OF

ATTEMPTING TO MITIGATE OR FIX

IT. AND THIS WOULD BE A GOOD

SLIDE FOR YOU TO MAYBE PUT DOWN

THE NUMBERS OF WHAT THE

ESTIMATED COST WOULD BE TO THE

INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE CITY IF

NOTHING IS DONE. I KNOW YOU

PROBABLY TALK ABOUT THAT,

GENERALLY. I KNOW YOU HAVE. IT

JUST SEEMS TO ME — IT’S ALWAYS

STARK WHENEVER WE SAY HOW MUCH,

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THIS, WE

ALWAYS SORT OF REPEAT THIS IF

WE’RE GOING TO TRY TO GET

SUPPORT IN THE BAY AREA NOR ANY

FUNDING — FOR ANY

FUNDING.

>>BRAD BENSON: AND WE HAD

SEISMIC HAZARD ON THE

EMBARCADERO WATERFRONT. WE KNOW

THE FILL AREAS BEHIND THE SEA

WALL AND UNDER THE SEA WALL ARE

WEAK AREAS THAT WILL NOT PERFORM

WELL IN AN EARTHQUAKE AND YOU

SEE THE POTENTIAL DAMAGE THE

BOTTOM RIGHT PHOTO HERE IS

LATERAL SPREADING ALONG THE

EMBARCADERO POST-1909 RIGHT NEAR

THE PIER 26 CRUISE TERMINAL

TODAY AND THOSE SOIL CONDITIONS

CONTINUE TO EXIST. THE ARMY

CORPS STUDY QUOTES THE PORT’S

MULTI-HAZARD RISK ASSESSMENT AND

THE REASON I’M SHARING IT TODAY

IS THE ARMY CORPS DRAFT PLAN

DOESN’T DEAL WITH ALL OF THE

EARTHQUAKE RISK ALONG THE

WATERFRONT. BUT THIS INFORMATION

IS HELPING US THINK ABOUT HOW TO

DESIGN COASTAL FLOOD DEFENSES SO

THAT THEY WON’T FAIL IN A MAJOR

EARTHQUAKE. AND THAT’S A BIG

IMPROVEMENT TO THE WATERFRONT

THAT WE HAVE TODAY. NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE. SO THIS STUDY IS REALLY

LOOKING AT THE 7 1/2 MILES OF

THE PORT INJURIES DICTION FROM

HERON’S HEAD PARK UP TO AQUATIC

PARK. THERE ARE OTHER EFFORTS

ONGOING IN THE CITY LED BY OTHER

CITY DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE

LOOKING AT THE OTHER AREAS OF

THE CITY’S PENINSULA. AND THE

CITY’S SEA LEVEL RISE ACTION

PLAN POINTS TO A UNIFIED PLAN

FOR COASTAL FLOOD DEFENSE ON

BOTH BAY AND OCEAN SIDE. THIS IS

A BIG STEPPED TOWARD — BIG STEP

TOWARDS THAT BUT IT’S GOT THE

WHOLE EFFORT. NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE. SO GETTING INTO THE

FLOOD STUDY — NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE. WE’VE BEEN AT IT SINCE

2018. WE’RE AT THIS GREAT

MILESTONE WHERE WE HAVE A DRAFT

PLAN. WE ACTUALLY HAVE SOMETHING

TO SHOW TO THE PUBLIC TO GET

FEEDBACK ON. WE’RE GOING TO BE

GETTING TECHNICAL FEEDBACK

THROUGH AGENCIES, INCLUDING

TECHNICAL FEEDBACK FROM OTHER

ELEMENTS OF THE ARMY CORPS. AND

THAT WILL HELP US BUILD A BETTER

PLAN THAT CAN BE A RECOMMENDED

PLAN THAT THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS

WOULD RECOMMEND TO CONGRESS IN

2026. IT’S ONLY IF CONGRESS

AUTHORIZES THE PROJECT THAT THAT

WOULD OPEN THE DOOR TO FUNDING

FOR DESIGN AND LATER

CONSTRUCTION. AND WE DON’T

EXPECT CONSTRUCTION TO START

UNTIL AFTER 2030. AND, AGAIN,

LIKELY IT WOULD OCCUR OVER

DECADES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO

WE HAVE ASSESSED MULTIPLE

SCENARIOS FOR SEA LEVEL RISE.

THE ARMY CORPS HAS ONE SET OF

PROJECTIONS THAT THEY TYPICALLY

USE IN THEIR PLANNING. WE’VE

ALSO USED THE O.P.C. PROJECTIONS

TO LOOK AT DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.

AND ESSENTIALLY, THE WAY TO

THINK ABOUT THE PLAN IS WE’RE

NOT PICKING ONE SCENARIO TO

INFORM THE PLANNING PROCESS.

WE’RE LOOKING AT HOW PLANS

RESPOND TO A RANGE OF SEA LEVEL

RISE SCENARIOS AND COMING UP

WITH AN ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT

STRATEGY THAT CAN RESPOND TO ALL

OF THOSE SCENARIOS. NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE. SO ESSENTIALLY, THE PATH

TO THE DRAFT PLAN HAS BEEN THAT

RISK ANALYSIS, LOOKING AT THE

FLOOD RISK AND IMPACTS TO

COMMUNITIES. WE’VE BEEN OUT

PUBLICLY TRYING TO ENGAGE AND

UNDERSTAND PUBLIC VALUES FOR THE

WATERFRONT OVER THE LAST SIX

YEARS. IN LATE 2023, WE ISSUED

SEVEN DRAFT STRATEGIES THAT

LOOKED AT THINGS FROM RETREATING

TO DEFENDING AT THE CURRENT

SHORELINE TO LIVING WITH WATER

IN SOME LOCATIONS. WE GOT

FEEDBACK ON THOSE DIFFERENT

STRATEGIES. AND THEN WENT INTO

SORT OF A PROCESS WITH CITY

AGENCIES AND THE ARMY CORPS’S

COST AND BENEFIT ANALYSIS

PROCESS TO SELECT THE BEST

ELEMENTS OF THOSE STRATEGIES TO

COME UP WITH THE DRAFT PLAN.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO THESE ARE

THE PUBLIC VALUES THAT WE’VE

HEARD MOST REPEATED IN THE

PUBLIC PROCESS. I WON’T GO

THROUGH EACH OF THESE, BUT IT’S

BEEN THE JOB OF THE PORT’S

PLANNING TEAM TO BRING THESE

VALUES FORWARD IN THE PLANNING

PROCESS, AND NOW WE’RE GOING TO

GO THROUGH A PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

PROCESS TO SEE HOW THE PUBLIC

THINKS ABOUT HOW WE’VE

INCORPORATED THOSE IN THE PLAN.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THE ARMY

CORPS, HISTORICALLY, HAS LOOKED

AT THE MOST ECONOMICALLY

EFFICIENT PROJECT TO ADDRESS THE

FLOOD PROBLEM. IT’S SOMETHING

CALLED THE NATIONAL ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT PLAN. AND THAT HAS

GOVERNED CORPS PLANNING FOR MUCH

OF THE PAST 30 YEARS. THEY’RE AN

ORGANIZATION IN CHANGE. THEY

HAVE NEW GUIDANCE FROM THE

A.S.A., ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF

THE ARMY, TO LOOK AT

COMPREHENSIVE BENEFITS. THIS IS

WHAT DIRECTOR FORBES WAS TALKING

ABOUT EARLIER. SO WE’RE LOOKING

AT REGIONAL EFFECTS OF THE PLAN,

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES, LIKE

HABITAT AND ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACTS, AND THEN OTHER SOCIAL

EFFECTS THAT PARTICULARLY

IMPACTS VULNERABLE POPULATIONS.

SO THE STUDY HAS METRICS IN EACH

OF THESE CATEGORIES THAT HELPED

INFORM PLAN SELECTION AND WE

THINK THIS IS A BETTER WAY TO

GET TO A MULTI-BENEFIT PLAN.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS —

THIS IS A FIRST, A BIT OF A

FIRST FOR THE ARMY CORPS.

TYPICALLY WHEN THEY COME INTO A

LOCAL JURISDICTION, THEY’RE

IDENTIFYING A FLOODING PROBLEM.

THEY COME UP WITH A PLAN,

IMPLEMENT IT, AND HAND IT OFF

FOR LOCAL MAINTENANCE. SO

KIND OF A ONE AND DONE

SCENARIO. HERE WE’RE LOOKING AT

MANAGING RISK OVER TIME. SO THE

PLAN INCLUDES FIRST ACTIONS THAT

REPRESENT THAT $13.5 BILLION

THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER.

AND THEN, MONITORING, LOOKING AT

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, RATES

OF ICE SHEET MELT, OTHER FACTORS

INFLUENCING SEA LEVEL RISE TO

DETERMINE THE TIMING OF

SUBSEQUENT ADAPTATIONS TO

ADDRESS HIGHER RATES OF SEA

LEVEL RISE. AND THEN THE EARLY

PROJECTS THAT YOU SEE HERE ARE

RELATED TO THE PROP AND FUNDING

WE — PROP A THAT WE GOT FROM

SAN FRANCISCO VOTERS. NEXT

SLIDE, PLEASE. DIRECTOR FORBES

REALLY WENT OVER THIS. THE PLAN

IS TRYING TO ANSWER THESE VERY

HIGH-LEVEL QUESTIONS ABOUT WHERE

TO BUILD FLOOD DEFENSES, HOW

HIGH. AND YOU’LL SEE THAT VARIES

IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE

WATERFRONT. HOW MUCH SPACE TO

USE. WE’RE TRYING TO GAIN

ELEVATION OVER SPACE TO MAINTAIN

THE CONNECTION WITH THE BAY.

THAT ALSO HELPS US ADDRESS THOSE

WEAK SOIL CONDITIONS THAT I

SHOWED YOU EARLIER. AND THEN HOW

FLOOD DEFENSES CAN BE ADAPTED

THROUGH SUBSEQUENT ACTION. NEXT

SLIDE, PLEASE. WE’RE VERY EARLY

IN THE PROCESS SO WE DON’T HAVE

ANY DETAILED DESIGN OF THESE

FLOOD DEFENSES. WE HAVEN’T

DESIGNED THE PUBLIC REALM YET.

WE DON’T HAVE THAT CONSTRUCTION

SEQUENCES OR PLAN FOR THE LOCAL

MATCH. WE TEND TO DEVELOP THAT

IN LATER STAGES OF WORK WITH

ROBUST PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT. AND WE

NEED TO THINK ABOUT — OTHER

INVESTMENTS THAT ARE HAPPENING

ALONG THE WATERFRONT, WHETHER

IT’S IN PIERS ALONG THE PORT,

WHETHER IT’S OTHER

INFRASTRUCTURE. AND THEN HOW DO

WE KNIT THIS ARMY CORPS

INVESTMENTS WITH OTHER

INVESTMENTS THAT ARE HAPPENING

AROUND THE WATERFRONT IN A

RATIONAL WAY? NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE. SO THE DRAFT REPORT THAT

IS OUT ON THE STREET RIGHT NOW

INCLUDES AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

STATEMENT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY

ACT. AND THERE’S OTHER FEDERAL

LAWS THAT THE ARMY CORPS WILL

HAVE TO COMPLY WITH IN ORDER TO

GET THIS PROJECT AND STUDY OFF

THE GROUND INCLUDING COMPLIANCE

UNDER THE CLEAN WATER ACT, THE

NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION

ACT AND THE ENDANGERED SPECIES

ACT. AND BCDC IS WORKING WITH

OUR WORKING GROUP. AND WE

APPRECIATE THE STAFF AND OTHER

AGENCIES WHO ARE PROVIDING

FEEDBACK ON THE PLAN. NEXT

SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS A LOT OF

INFORMATION ON THIS SLIDE, BUT

WE WANTED TO SUMMARIZE JUST THE

VERY HIGH LEVEL ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT ANALYSIS. IT’S INFORMED

BY THE LEVEL OF DESIGN THAT WE

HAVE RIGHT NOW. SO WE HAVE A

LOW-LEVEL OF DESIGN. THE IMPACT

ANALYSIS FOLLOWS WHAT WE KNOW

TODAY. YOU KNOW, IT HAS LOOKED

AT APPROXIMATELY 50 RESOURCES

LOOKING AT BAY FILL, YOU KNOW,

ETC., ACROSS THE TOP. WE ARE

SEEING IN THE PLAN VERY LIMITED

BAY FILL. ACTUALLY, THE EIGHT

ACRES YOU’RE SEEING HERE RELATES

TO SOME POTENTIAL ADDITIONS TO

THE PLAN THAT ARE OPTIONS FOR

THE FERRY BUILDING. AN AREA JUST

SOUTH OF THE FERRY BUILDING THAT

IS VERY CONSTRAINED. YOU HAVE

THE TUNNEL RIGHT NEAR THE

SHORELINE. SO WE’RE TRYING TO

PROVIDE SOME FLEXIBILITY IN THE

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FOR

FUTURE DESIGN. NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE. SO JUST GOING THROUGH

THE DRAFT PLAN, NEXT

SLIDE. THIS PRESENTS THE DRAFT

PLAN AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL. WHAT

YOU’RE SEEING HERE IN YELLOW IS

THE GENERAL AREA ALONG THE

EXISTING SHORELINE THAT WOULD BE

ELEVATED TO DEAL WITH EITHER A

FOOT AND A HALF OF SEA LEVEL

RISE OR 3 1/2 FEET OF SEA LEVEL

RISE. THAT 3 1/2 FEET IS REALLY

BETWEEN THE BAY BRIDGE AND

TELEGRAPH HILL AND I’LL GET INTO

WHY. THE SHORELINE WOULD BE

STABILIZED IN THAT AREA. WE’RE

LOOKING TO ADD NATURE-BASED

FEATURES WHEREVER WE CAN.

ADOPTING THE HISTORIC RESOURCES

THAT STRADDLE THE SHORELINE.

THEN, AS WE RAISE THE SHORELINE

— AND I THINK YOU’RE AWARE OF

THIS — WE HAVE A STORMWATER

ISSUE. THE CITY OPERATES NOW

RELYING ON THE COMBINED SEWER

SYSTEM BUT EXTREME RAIN EVENTS

TRAVEL ALONG THE STREETS AND

FIND LOW POINTS IN THE

SHORELINE, WE’RE GOING TO HAVE

TO COME UP WITH A NEW SYSTEM FOR

MANAGING THAT STORMWATER THROUGH

STORAGE AND PUMPING, GREEN

INFRASTRUCTURE, AND OTHER

STRATEGIES. AND THE PLAN

INCLUDES FUNDING FOR THAT.

AND THEN I’LL POINT OUT IN THE

FISHERMAN’S WHARF AREA, IT’S A

BIT HIGHER THERE. WE’RE SEEING

LESS FLOOD DAMAGES IN THE NEAR

TERM. SO THE INITIAL STRATEGY IN

THE WHARF AREA IS FLOOD-PROOFING

OF INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS AND

PIERS. LET ME GO INTO SOME OF

THOSE DETAILS AND THEN I’LL WRAP

UP. NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE.

SO THE WHARF AREA IS A FOOT OR

MORE THAN OTHER AREAS OF THE

SHORELINE. YOU SEE ON THIS

SLIDE, IT’S ALSO PROTECTED IN

SOME AREAS BY BREAKWATERS WHICH

KNOCK DOWN WAVE ACTION. AND SO

THE PROPOSAL IS FOR A SMALLER

INITIAL INVESTMENT IN THE WHARF

THAT WOULD FLOOD-PROOF

INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS AND PUT

SHORT FLOOD WALLS AROUND PIERS.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AS A

RESULT, WE’RE REALLY NOT SEEING

A BIG SORT OF INVESTMENT IN THE

SHORELINE THAT WOULD DEAL WITH

THAT SHORELINE STABILITY

PROBLEM. AND WE’RE REALLY GOING

TO HAVE TO RELY ON CITY

INVESTMENT LIKE OUR PROP A

PROJECTS TO IMPROVE THE

SHORELINE. WE HAVE ONE GOING NOW

THAT WILL STABILIZE PART OF THAT

SHORELINE. THROUGH MONITORING,

THE ARMY CORPS PLAN INCLUDES

MORE LATER, ROBUST ACTIONS FOR

THE WHARF THAT WOULD ELEVATE THE

SHORELINE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

IN THIS EMBARCADERO AREA OF THE

WATERFRONT, WE’RE SEEING A VERY

ROBUST FIRST MOVE THAT WOULD

ELEVATE THE SHORELINE TO DEAL

WITH 3 1/2 FEET OF SEA LEVEL

RISE, STABILIZE THE SOILS, RAISE

THE FERRY BUILDING, BUILD NEW

WHARFS AND PUT BULKHEAD

BUILDINGS AT HIGHER ELEVATION

WITH A TRANSITION DOWN TO

EXISTING PIERS. SO THE PLAN

DOESN’T ELEVATE THE PIERS, BUT

IT PROPOSES TO PUT SHORT FLOOD

WALLS AROUND THE PIERS.

THIS IS PARTLY BECAUSE IT’S

SUCH A HIGHLY DEVELOPED AREA OF

THE WATERFRONT. THE THINK WAS

GOING ONCE, DO MAJOR DISRUPTION,

AND HAVE IT LAST FOR A MUCH

LARGER PERIOD OF TIME AND GET

INTO THIS AREA RATHER THAN

DISRUPT MULTIPLE TIMES. NEXT

SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS SHOWS YOU A

BIT HOW WE WOULD IMPROVE, YOU

KNOW, THE SOILS UNDER THE

EMBARCADERO.

GAIN ELEVATIONS TOWARDS A HIGHER

SHORELINE TO NEW HIGHER WHARVES

WITH THE BULKHEAD BUILDINGS

NEAR THE TOP AND HELP WITH THE

PIERS.

NEXT SLIDE. AS A RESULT OF THIS

ROBUST INVESTMENT, THE PLAN

DOESN’T INCLUDE A PROPOSED

SECOND ACTION IN THIS AREA BUT

WE’RE LOOKING AT SPENDING

PROPOSITION A FUNDING FOR THINGS

LIKE DOWNTOWN COASTAL RESILIENCE

PROJECTS THAT WOULD PROTECT THE

PORTAL. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

MISSION BAY IS VERY VULNERABLE

TO FLOODING. THE PLAN HERE WOULD

RAISE THE SHORELINE TO ADDRESS A

FOOT AND A HALF OF SEA LEVEL

RISE WITH GROUND IMPROVEMENTS

AND STABILIZING THE SHORELINE.

THERE’S A LOT MORE OPPORTUNITIES

FOR NATURE-BASED ADAPTATION.

THERE WOULD BE SHORT FLOOD WALLS

AROUND THE PIERS IN THIS AREA.

AND THEN NEXT SLIDE. WE HAVE THE

UNIQUE FEATURE OF THE BRIDGES

ACROSS THE CREEKS, WHICH ARE A

POTENTIAL ENTRY POINT FOR WATER

DURING EXTREME EVENTS TO GET

INTO SURROUNDED NEIGHBORHOODS.

SO AS WE RAISE THE BANKS OF THE

CREEKS, WE HAVE TO HAVE

DEEMPLOYABLES FOR THE BRIDGES

TO, YOU KNOW, THAT CAN BE

TEMPORARILY DEPLOYED DURING

EXTREME EVENTS. NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE. SO THAT THE ACTIONS HERE

GET UP TO A FOOT AND A HALF OF

SEA LEVEL RISE WITH LATER

ACTIONS TO RAISE THE SHORELINE

TO ADDRESS 3 1/2 FEET OF SEA

LEVEL RISE BASED ON THAT

MONITORING EFFORT. I’LL GO TO

THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND

FINISH UP WITH THE PORT’S

SOUTHERN WATERFRONT WHICH IS

WHERE OUR MARITIME INDUSTRIAL

FACILITIES ARE. WE GOT LIGHT

INDUSTRY AND BUS FACILITIES

AROUND THE CREEK IN THIS AREA.

HERE WE WOULD BE RAISING THE

SHORELINE TO DEAL WITH A FOOT

AND A HALF OF SEA LEVEL RISE

WITH GROUND IMPROVEMENTS,

NATURE-BASED FEATURES IN THE

CREEKS. THE GATE CLOSURE

STRUCTURES ONLY ON THE ILLINOIS

STREET BRIDGE BECAUSE THE CITY’S

IN THE PROCESS OF REPLACING THE

THIRD STREETLIGHT RAIL BRIDGE AT

A HIGHER ELEVATION. SO THAT’S A

SEPARATE ADAPTATION OUTSIDE OF

THE PROJECT. I THINK I’M GOING

TO TRY AND WRAP UP NOW AND GET

TO BACK AND FORTH WITH THE

COMMISSION. CAN WE GO TO THE

NEXT SLIDE AND LET’S SKIP OVER

THIS? AND SO THE SUBSEQUENT

ACTIONS GO TO A FOOT AND A HALF

OF SEA LEVEL RISE WITH

ADAPTATION SUBJECT TO MONITORING

WITH A LATER MOVE AT 3 1/2 FEET

OF SEA LEVEL RISE. NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE. NEXT

SLIDE. SO WE’RE REALLY THINKING

ABOUT NEXT STEPS HERE WITH YOU

AND YOUR STAFF.

WE’VE GOT THE RESOURCE AGENCY

WORKING GROUP. WE’RE GOING TO BE

GOING BACK TO THE WORKING GROUP

IN THIS PERIOD OF TIME TO MAKE

SURE THAT WE GET TECHNICAL

COMMENT FROM EACH AGENCY. SO

THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE REGIONAL

WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, ALL

THE NATURAL RESOURCE AGENCIES AT

THE FEDERAL AND STATE LEVEL TO

INFORM BOTH THE IMPACT ANALYSIS

AND MITIGATION AS WELL AS

POTENTIAL CHANGES TO THE PLAN.

WE’RE GOING TO BE GOING UP TO

THE CALIFORNIA STATE LANDS

COMMISSION AND PRESENTING TO

THEM ON MONDAY. WE’RE

PARTICIPATING IN YOUR REGIONAL

SHORELINE ADAPTATION EFFORT.

ADAM AND LUIS ARE BOTH MEMBERS

OF THE WORKING GROUP. AND SO

WE’RE REALLY EAGER TO LEARN HOW

THE REGIONAL EFFORT CAN INFORM

WHAT WE’RE DOING AND HOW WE CAN

ALSO EDUCATE PEOPLE ABOUT THE

ARMY CORPS PROCESS. NEXT SLIDE,

PLEASE. WE’RE SUPER EXCITED

ABOUT THIS. EVEN THOUGH IT’S

GOING TO UNFOLD OVER A LONG

PERIOD OF TIME, IT’S A LEVEL OF

INVESTMENT IN THIS WATERFRONT

THAT CANNOT ONLY DEAL WITH THE

RESILIENCE ISSUES THAT WE’RE

TALKING ABOUT TODAY, BUT IT

COULD LEAD TO EXCITING

INVESTMENTS IN NEW RAIL

IMPROVEMENTS, ADAPTATION OF

RESOURCES, IMPROVE

TRANSPORTATION ALONG THE

WATERFRONT. SO IT REALLY IS A

GENERATIONAL OPPORTUNITY. IT’S A

BIG CHALLENGE IN TERMS OF THE

FUNDING, BUT ALSO A GREAT

OPPORTUNITY FOR THE CITY. SO I

THINK I’LL CLOSE THERE AND

WELCOME QUESTIONS FROM THE

COMMISSION.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC

COMMENT?

>>CLERK, REYLINA RUIZ: NO PUBLIC

COMMENT.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS.

COMMISSIONER PESKIN.

>>AARON PESKIN: THE MAGNITUDE IS

HARD TO GET YOUR HEAD AROUND. AS

MR. BENSON SAID, SUBJECT TO

PLENTY OF CHANGE. THIS IS A VERY

PRELIMINARY PLAN. MAYBE 20

30 FEDERAL FUN. I GUESS MY

QUESTION IS, MR. BENSON, HOW DO

YOU ENVISION THE PUBLIC

ENGAGEMENT AND PUBLIC COMMENT IN

THE 60 DAYS? LIKE, WHAT IN THE

HECK —

EVEN AN ORGANIZATION LIKE BCDC

— LIKE, HOW DO YOU EVEN MAKE

COMMENT ON THIS? YOU CAN SAY,

YES, I THINK THIS IS GREAT THAT

YOU’RE FLOOD-PROOFING IN THE

FISHERMAN WHARF’S AREA AND DOING

ADAPTATION IN THE CREEK AREA. I

MEAN, HOW DO YOU EVEN COMMENT ON

THIS? AND ARE THERE

OPPORTUNITIES FOR MORE COMMENT

AS THINGS BECOME MORE REFINED

AND BECOME FINE GRAINED?

>>BRAD BENSON: THAT’S ACTUALLY

AN ISSUE WE’VE BEEN REALLY

WORRIED ABOUT. IT IS SUCH AN

OVERWHELMING SET OF ISSUES AND

THE PLAN, IT EFFECTS SUCH A

LARGE PART OF THE WATERFRONT.

IT’S HARD FOR THE PUBLIC TO HEAR

THE INFORMATION AND THEN HAVE AN

IMMEDIATE REACTION TO

IT. IT’S A BIT MORE CHALLENGING

GIVEN THE PLAN. WE’RE OFFERING

WHEN WE ARE REPORTING WITH PORT

TENANTS OR NEIGHBORHOOD-BASED

ORGANIZATIONS TO BRAINSTORM WITH

FOLKS ABOUT THE PLAN. IF THEY

DON’T REALLY KNOW HOW TO RESPOND

TO THE PLAN BUT, LET’S SAY AS AN

EXAMPLE, THEIR INTEREST MIGHT BE

HISTORIC PRESERVATION, WE’RE

OFFERING TO MEET WITH FOLKS,

TALK IN A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL

ABOUT HOW THE PLAN AFFECTS

HISTORIC RESOURCES, WHAT THE

IMPACTS ARE WE’RE SEEING, HOW

IT’S INVESTIGATING IN THOSE

HISTORIC RESOURCES AND THEN JUST

BEING AVAILABLE FOR A

BRAINSTORMING ABOUT HOW THEY

MIGHT COMMENT HOW THE PLAN IN A

WAY THAT MIGHT ACTUALLY AFFECT

THE PLAN. SO THAT’S ONE STRATEGY

THAT WE’RE

USING. I THINK GOING TO MAYBE

THE OTHER POINT EMBEDDED IN YOUR

QUESTION, THIS IS NOT THE ONLY

OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

THIS IS THE NEPA PUBLIC COMMENT

PERIOD. AND WE REALLY SEE A

PROCESS WHERE WE GET INTO THE

DESIGN PHASE OF THE WORK.

DIRECTOR FORBES TALKED ABOUT,

LIKE, WE HAVEN’T DESIGNED WHAT

GOES BACK ON TOP YET, THE PUBLIC

REALM. I THINK IN TERMS OF OUR

SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING EFFORTS,

WHEN WE CAN GET INTO A SPECIFIC

DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT’S

HAPPENING IN A SPECIFIC LOCATION

ALONG THE WATERFRONT, HOW IT’S

GOING TO AFFECT HOW PEOPLE USE

THAT AREA OF THE WATERFRONT, I

THINK WE’LL GET MUCH MORE

ENGAGEMENT AND SORT OF FEEDBACK

AS TO HOW TO FURTHER SHAPE THE

PLAN. SO WE’RE NOT LOOKING AT

THIS AS THE ONLY PUBLIC COMMENT

PERIOD. WE’RE LOOKING AS THE

FIRST OF MANY.

>>AARON PESKIN: AND THEN MAYBE

THIS IS A QUESTION TO

OURSELVES.

WHAT IS THE ROLE IN BCDC? ARE WE

GOING TO SPECIAL AREA PLAN, BAY

FILL QUESTIONS, 50% RULES? I

MEAN, WHERE — THIS — I MEAN,

ARE WE GOING TO TOTALLY — 2030

IS ACTUALLY NOT VERY FAR AWAY.

AND THIS IS UNDERGOING FEDERAL

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. WHAT’S THE

ROLE OF BCDC — I UNDERSTAND

WE’RE INVOLVED. BUT WHAT’S OUR

ROLE?

>>ELAINE FORBES: I’D LIKE TO

MAKE SOME COMMENTS AND ALSO GO

BACK TO YOUR PRIOR QUESTION,

COMMISSIONER PESKIN. THE ROLE OF

BCDC IS ENORMOUS HERE BECAUSE WE

HAVE TO MAKE THESE IMPROVEMENTS

CONSISTENT WITH THE VISION OF

BCDC AND THE PUBLIC WATERFRONT

WE’RE SEEKING TO RETAIN. AND

THERE’S CERTAINLY LEGISLATIVE

AND POLICY CHANGES THAT NEED TO

BE MADE TO DELIVER A

COST-EFFECTIVE PROJECT HERE AND

TO MAXIMIZE PUBLIC BENEFITS.

WE’LL NEED THIS COMMISSION AND

STAFF WILL NEED TO RETHINK

THINGS LIKE THE FILL REMOVAL

REQUIREMENTS AND WHAT PUBLIC

ACCESS LOOKS LIKE IN A

WATERFRONT THAT REQUIRES A

HIGHER — A HIGHER AND BROKEN

FABRIC FROM THE HISTORIC

SHORELINE HEIGHTS. AND SO THERE

IS JUST MANY, MANY

CONSIDERATIONS HERE. AND I THINK

THAT IS THE DIALOGUE THAT WILL

— WE WILL NEED TO HAVE THE

COLLABORATION AND DIRECTION WE

WILL NEED TO HAVE ALONG WITH THE

STATE LANDS COMMISSION TO GET

THIS RIGHT. SO IT IS AN ENORMOUS

CHALLENGE MOVING FORWARD. AND

ONE OF THE KEY CHALLENGES,

ACTUALLY I THINK, TO HAVE A

SUCCESSFUL PROJECT COMPLETED.

AND BACK TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT,

I THINK MR. BENSON SAID IT

RIGHT. IT IS A CONCERN WE’RE

HAVING. I DO WANT TO RECOGNIZE

THAT PRIOR PUBLIC COMMENT WE

HEARD VERY, VERY STRONGLY THE

CONNECTION AND ATTACHMENT TO THE

FERRY BUILDING AND THE ARMY

CORPS OF ENGINEERS FOUND

PRELIMINARY FEDERAL INTEREST IN

THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS HISTORIC

RESOURCE NATIONALLY TO

CONTRIBUTE TO RAISING THAT

BUILDING. SO THAT IS AN EXAMPLE

OF —

>>AARON PESKIN: THAT’S RAISING

WITH AN S AND NOT A Z?

>>ELAINE FORBES: YES. I WANT TO

TELL YOU HOW PUBLIC COMMENT

WHILE WE’RE IN THE CONCEPTUAL

PHASES HAS AN IMPACT.

>>AARON PESKIN: I CAN SEE FOR

BCDC AND FOR THE PORT A LOT OF

INHERENT CONFLICTS IN BOTH OF

OUR ARGUABLY SHARED MISSIONS. I

MEAN, ON THE ONE HAND, WHEN YOU

TALK ABOUT CONNECTION TO THE

WATERFRONT AND ON THE OTHER HAND

YOU TALK ABOUT HISTORIC

PRESERVATION WHICH AT LEAST IN

THE CASE OF THE ICONIC FERRY

BUILDING MEANS RAISING IT UP

SEVERAL FEET, YOU’RE ALSO

CUTTING OFF CONNECTION TO THE

WATERFRONT. THERE’S A LOT OF

COMPLEX STUFF HERE. HOW HIGH ARE

YOU TALKING ABOUT? SIX FEET?

>>BRAD BENSON: I DON’T WANT TO

GET INTO EXACT NUMBERS BECAUSE

IT VARIES DEPENDING ON THE AREA

YOU’RE AT. THERE IS A LOW POINT

JUST SOUTH OF THE FERRY BUILDING

THAT’S ABOUT EIGHT OR NINE

FEET.

OUR CURRENT DESIGN ELEVATION

THAT WE’RE LOOKING AT FOR THAT

AREA IS TO GET UP TO ABOUT 15

1/2 FEET. FROM URBAN DESIGN PER

EXPECT, YOU CAN IMAGINE HOW

DIFFICULT IT IS TO GET UP TO

THAT HIGHER LEVEL. WHICH IS PART

OF WHY WE’RE LOOKING AT HOW MUCH

SPACE THAT WE’RE TALKING ABOUT,

GAINING ELEVATION OVER SPACE

HELPS WITH THAT. SO THAT’S AN

EXAMPLE OF ONE LOCATION.

>>AARON PESKIN: YEAH, THAT’S

TOUGH. BEFORE I RELINQUISH THE

MICROPHONE, HOW MUCH OF THIS IS

BEING DRIVEN BY THE PORT AND HOW

MUCH IS THIS BEING DRIVEN BY THE

CORPS AND HOW DOES THAT DYNAMIC

WORK GIVEN 65 CENTS OF THEIR

PENNIES TO THE DOLLAR?

>>ELAINE FORBES: I CAN ATTEMPT

TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. MUCH IS

DRIVEN BY THE CITY AND THE

PORT.

SO THE INITIATIVE REALLY STARTED

AS A CITY INITIATIVE. YOU’LL

REMEMBER THIS VERY WELL FROM THE

PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD CHAIR

THAT WE WANTED TO INITIATE THIS

PROCESS TO FIGURE OUT A PLAN. SO

IT IS THE CITY AND THE PORT

DRIVING THE PROCESS. THE ARMY

CORPS OF ENGINEERS, THROUGH THE

NEW START, IS OUR PARTNER. AND

IT IS NOW THEIR INTEREST TO

FIGURE OUT HOW TO SOLVE THIS

PROBLEM AND REDUCE THE COST OF

NO ACTION AND SO THEY ARE OUR

PARTNER IN THIS. IT WILL BECOME

THEIR PLAN WITH US. THEY MADE

CLEAR WHEN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH

THE FEDERAL APPROPRIATION, WE

WORK HAND IN HAND TOGETHER IN

TERMS OF IMPLEMENTATION. SO I

HOPE THAT DESCRIBES WELL THE

RELATIONSHIP AND WHO’S BEHIND IT

AND HOW THE PARTNERSHIP WORKS.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: SO

MELINDA, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU

—

>>BRAD BENSON: AND SO, MELINDA,

IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD

LIKE TO ADD TO THAT ANSWER?

>>MELINDA FISHER: NO. I THINK

THE ARMY CORPS POLICIES AND THE

VARIOUS LAWS THE FEDERAL

GOVERNMENT MUST FOLLOW ARE IN

PLAY HERE SO AT TIMES THERE’S

—

THERE’S FEDERAL POLICY AND STATE

POLICY THAT MOST — BOTH MUST BE

FOLLOWED. SEA LEVEL IS GOING TO

BE A CHALLENGE BETWEEN THE TWO.

ULTIMATELY, IT WILL BE UP TO

CONGRESS TO DECIDE. SO THIS GOES

REALLY HIGH. MUCH, MUCH HIGHER

THAN ALL OF US HERE. AND SO IT

IS, AS DIRECTOR FORBES SAID,

IT’S BEEN A GREAT PARTNERSHIP SO

FAR. AND THERE’S A LOT OF

DIFFERENT PLAYERS GOING ON AND

DECISIONMAKERS INVOLVED.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

THANK YOU,

MELINDA. —

>>BRAD BENSON: THANK YOU,

MELINDA. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT

BCDC PLANS AND POLICIES BECAUSE

I DON’T KNOW IF WE ANSWERED THAT

AT ALL. JESSICA, DO YOU WANT TO

TALK ABOUT SPECIAL AREA PLAN,

ETC.?

>>JESSICA FAIN: AS YOU RECALL,

IN THE STRATEGIC

PLAN, WE TALKED ABOUT THE

EFFORT OF THE PORT AND BCDC TO

UPDATE THE SAN FRANCISCO SPECIAL

AREA PLAN AND WE DID THAT WITH

THIS IN MIND. WE DECIDED FOR NOW

TO TRY TO TAKE A MORE NUANCED

AND TARGETED APPROACH TO SOME

NEAR-TERM ACTIONS THAT WE CAN DO

TOGETHER.

BUT TO PAUSE A LITTLE BIT

BECAUSE WE KNOW THERE ARE SOME

POLICY — LARGER, AS YOU POINTED

OUT, LARGER POLICY ISSUES THAT

WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK

THROUGH. AND RIGHT NOW WE — WE

HAVE A STAFF TEAM THAT IS

PUTTING TOGETHER COMMENTS. SO

WE’LL BE REALLY DIGGING INTO OUR

LAWS AND POLICIES SO THAT WE’RE

PROVIDING THOSE TO THE PORT AND

CORPS DURING THIS COMMENT

PERIOD. AND WE HAVE, AS

MENTIONED, HAD A CHANCE TO SHARE

WITH A LOT OF THOSE ALREADY AS

WE’VE BEEN ALREADY GOING THROUGH

THIS PROCESS AND

PARTICIPATING.

>>MELINDA FISHER: IF YOU DON’T

MIND, I WANTED TO ADD THAT THIS

IS AN ONGOING PROCESS. WE’LL

CONTINUE WORKING WITH BCDC AND

ALL OF THE AGENCIES IN THE BAY

AREA INCLUDING U.S. FISH AND

WILDLIFE, THE WATER BOARD, OTHER

AGENCIES THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE

PROCESS AND THEN WHEN WE GET

INTO OUR PRECONSTRUCTION,

ENGINEERING, DESIGN PHASE, WHERE

WE WILL HAVE MORE THAT DETAILED

LEVEL DESIGN AVAILABLE, THAT’S

WHEN WE’RE REALLY GOING TO BE

COMING TO BCDC AND REQUESTING

THE CONSISTENCY, DETERMINATIONS

WE’RE NEEDING TO UPDATE THE

SPECIAL PLANS AND DIFFERENT

THINGS LIKE THAT AND

SO AT THIS PHASE IN THE STUDY

OR THE STUDY PHASE, EVERYTHING

IS BEING TAKEN INTO

CONSIDERATION. WE’RE TRYING TO

MODIFY OUR PLAN AS MUCH AS WE

CAN TO BE COMPLETELY COMPLIANT

NOW. HOWEVER, WE DO NOT EXPECT

TO ACHIEVE FULL COMPLIANCE PRIOR

TO THE CHIEF’S SIGNING OR PRIOR

TO CONGRESS AUTHORIZING THE

PROJECT BECAUSE WE JUST DON’T

HAVE THE DETAIL AND WE WON’T AT

THIS PHASE. SO WE’LL CONTINUE

THAT IN THE FUTURE. AND AS

EVERYONE HAS SAID, THIS IS A

LONG PROCESS. IT’S NOT DONE. BUT

WE HAVE BEEN WORKING CLOSELY

TOGETHER AND WE’LL GET THERE,

FOR SURE, PRIOR TO

CONSTRUCTION.

I MEAN, WE CAN’T PROCEED

BEFORE.

SO WE HAVE TO HAVE COMPLIANCE

WITH EVERYTHING.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: I’M

GOING TO RECOGNIZE COMMISSIONER

PESKIN — SORRY — COMMISSIONER

GIOIA.

>>JOHN GIOIA: I HAVE TO LEAVE SO

NO DISRESPECT FOR THE PORT BUT

THANKS FOR THE PRESENTATION. SO

I MEAN, I KNOW FINANCING IS

REALLY THE SUBJECT OF OTHER

DISCUSSIONS, BUT THE PORT IS THE

LARGEST REAL ESTATE ALONG THE

WATERFRONT. ARE YOU ALREADY

ANTICIPATING FINANCING —

FINANCING PLANS AS PART OF

DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE APPROVED

ALONG THE WATERFRONT TO PAY ANY

LOCAL SHARE FOR THIS?

>>ELAINE FORBES: WE DO SOME

PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS AND

WE ALSO HAVE A LOT OF FACILITIES

DIRECTLY MANAGED THAT DON’T HAVE

PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS

DEVELOPED. WE ARE THINKING OF

OUR DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS THAT

HAVE COME THROUGH. MOST

RECENTLY, WE HAD A LOT OF

DISCUSSIONS AROUND PIERS 30-32.

THAT’S WHERE THE PROJECT WILL

LIFT AND PREPARE FOR SEA LEVEL

RISE AND PROVIDE SEISMIC

IMPROVEMENTS AND WE’RE LOOKING

INTO WHETHER THAT CONTRIBUTION,

THAT INVESTMENT CAN COUNT FOR

OUR 35 CENTS AS A WAY TO MAKE

OUR MATCH SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD

WITH OTHER PROJECTS. WE TRY TO

LEVEL PUBLIC-PRIVATE

PARTNERSHIPS WHEREVER WE CAN TO

PAY FOR SEA LEVEL RISE TAX

WHENEVER WE PAID FOR THE

INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDED SO WE HAVE

ANOTHER SOURCE FOR OTHER

IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AREAS. WE’RE

VERY MUCH UNDERFUNDED, VERY,

VERY UNDERFUNDED. SO WE ARE

GOING TO LOOK FOR PUBLIC-PRIVATE

PARTNERSHIPS SO WE CAN LEVERAGE

THAT PRIVATE INVESTMENT AND —

TO ENABLE US TO PAY FOR MORE

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. BUT THERE

ARE MANY, MANY AREAS WHERE WE’RE

GOING TO RELY ON STATE GRANTS,

CITY GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS,

AND OTHER WAYS TO FIND FUNDING

BECOMES THIS IS OVERWHELMINGLY A

PUBLIC COST AS WE SEE

IT.

>>JOHN GIOIA: THANKS.

>>SPEAKER: I THINK MY FIRST

RESPONSE IS HOLY COW. THERE’S A

LOT IN HERE FOR US TO CHEW ON SO

THANK YOU FOR THE BRIEFING. A

COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AND A COUPLE

OF COMMENTS.

>>BARRY NELSON: DETAILED

QUESTION AND THEN A BROADER

ONE.

WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE

PIERS, YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT

BUILDING FLOOD WALLS AROUND THE

PIERS SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE I

UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS. THAT

MEANS NOT RAISING THE DECK OF

THE PIERS UP. THAT MEANS

BUILDING FLOOD WALLS SO THAT WE

WOULD HAVE PIERS THAT WOULD BE

BELOW WATER LEVEL WHICH I HAVE A

HARD TIME WRAPPING MY BRAIN

AROUND. DO I HAVE THAT RIGHT?

>>BRAD BENSON: LARGELY RIGHT,

YES. THINK OF IT AS ASSET LEVEL

PROTECTION. SO THE FLOOD WALLS

AROUND THE PIERS ARE PROTECT —

AREN’T PROTECTING THE CITY.

THEY’RE PROTECTING THE PIERS.

THE REASON THAT THEY’RE SHORT

FLOOD WALLS IS BECAUSE WE, LIKE

YOU, ONLY SEE THAT WORKING TO

KNOCK DOWN SORT OF EXTREME

EVENTS AND WAVES THAT CAN’T

MANAGE WATER THAT IS LIKE

ROUTINELY HIGHER THAN THE PIER

DECK. WE GOT ANOTHER ISSUE WITH

MAINTENANCE OF THE PIER

UNDERNEATH THAT BECOMES

PROBLEMATIC.

>>BARRY NELSON: THAT WAS MY NEXT

QUESTION. WILL THE PIERS TAKE

THAT?

>>BRAD BENSON: SO WE’RE LOOKING

AT ALL OF THESE ISSUES. IT’S A

FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED DISTRICT.

WE HAVE CONSTITUENTS THAT HELPED

US REGION STRAIGHT IT IN THE

NATIONAL REGISTER. THERE’S SOME

REAL CHALLENGES WE’RE LOOKING AT

HERE IN TERMS OF HOW SEA LEVEL

RISE CAN AFFECT THE PIERS.

>>BARRY NELSON: NEXT QUESTION IS

— IT’S ABOUT COST. THE $13

BILLION PRICE TAG BOTH IS AN

ENORMOUS PRICE TAG AND IT’S NOT

A SURPRISING PRICE TAG. AND WHEN

YOU PRESENTED ONE OF THE MAPS

THAT SHOWED THE SAN FRANCISCO

WATERFRONT, THIS IS ONE OF FOUR

REACHES AROUND THE WATERFRONT

THAT WOULD HAVE A COMPLETE PLAN

FOR THE CITY SHORELINE SO THAT’S

IMPORTANT CONTEXT. CAN YOU HELP

US AT ALL UNDERSTAND WHAT THE

BIG COST DRIVERS ARE OF THAT $13

BILLION PRICE TAG? IS IT MOST OF

IT ONE THING? IS IT SPREAD OUT

OVER TWO DOZEN CATEGORIES? JUST

SO WE HAVE A SENSE OF WHAT’S

DRIVING THE COST OF PLANS LIKE

THIS.

>>BRAD BENSON: THE WEAK SOIL

CONDITIONS ALONG THE SHORELINE

ARE A BIG DRIVER OF THOSE

COSTS.

YOU KNOW, DEALING WITH, YOU

KNOW, CITY INFRASTRUCTURE AND

TRYING TO NAVIGATE AROUND CITY

INFRASTRUCTURE. THINKING ABOUT

THE ACTIONS THAT ARE BEING TAKEN

RELATED TO THE FERRY BUILDING

AND THE SORT OF HISTORIC PIER

CONNECTION TO THE SHORELINE

AREA. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE

THINGS THAT ARE DRIVING COSTS IN

THE PLAN.

>>BARRY NELSON: OKAY. AND JUST A

COUPLE COMMENTS. WE’VE SPENT A

LOT OF TIME, ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF

TIME OVER THE LAST SEVEN YEARS

IN — SEVERAL YEARS IN

DISCUSSION ABOUT SEA LEVEL

RISE.

A LOT OF WHAT WE’VE DONE IS

PLANNING TO PLAN. THIS IS ACTUAL

PLANNING FOR OUR A VERY COMPLEX

URBAN WATERFRONT AND IT’S

SOBERING. AND THIS IS JUST A

FRACTION OF SAN FRANCISCO WHICH

IS A FRACTION OF THE BAY

SHOWLINE WHICH IS A FRACTION OF

WHAT CALIFORNIA WILL HAVE TO DO

AS JUST ONE STATE. IT JUST GIVES

A REALLY IMPORTANT SENSE OF THE

COLLECTIVE CHALLENGE WE FACE IF

WE DON’T GET CLIMATE CHANGE

UNDER CONTROL. AND IF WE DO

INDEED FACE A WORST-CASE

SCENARIO. THIS IS THE — SAN

FRANCISCO IS A WEALTHY CITY IN

AN AREA THAT’S WEALTHY IN A

STATE THAT’S WEALTHY COMPARED TO

THE REST OF THE COUNTRY AND,

YET, LOOKING AT THOSE COSTS IS

SOBERING WITHOUT WRESTLING WITH

HOW AS A GOVERNMENT WE DEAL WITH

ENORMOUS COSTS ON THE SOUTHERN

ATLANTIC COAST, ON THE GULF

COAST. SO IT’S JUST A REALLY

IMPORTANT CONTEXT WHEN WE

REALIZE AS BIG AS THIS PLAN

LOOKS, IT’S TINY, IT’S TINY

COMPARED TO CALIFORNIA AND THE

NATIONAL CHALLENGE WE’RE

FACING.

THANK YOU.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

COMMISSIONER RANDOLPH.

>>SEAN RANDOLPH: THANKS VERY

MUCH, BRAD. AND THANKS, ELAINE.

MY QUESTION HAS BEEN PARTIALLY

ANSWERED. I WANT TO GO FURTHER

ON A COUPLE OF THEM. ONE IS ON

THE PIER. IT SOUNDS LIKE THE

PLAN IS NOT JUST ABOUT THE SEA

WALL BUT IT INCLUDES THE

STRUCTURES AND THE PIERS. CAN

YOU SAY A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT

THE WALLS AROUND THE PIERS,

BECAUSE I WORK ON THE WATERFRONT

EVERY DAY. IN THE LAST MONTH I

SAW THE WATER LAPPING RIGHT AT

THE BOTTOM OF THE PIER. EVEN

WITH THE WALL, HOW DO YOU DEAL

WITH THE CHALLENGE OF WATER

COMING UP DIRECTLY UNDERNEATH

THE BASE OF THE PIER OVER TIME?

AND THE OTHER QUESTION RELATED

TO THE PIERS IS — I THOUGHT I

HEARD YOU SAY THAT YOU WOULD

MOVE THE BULKHEAD STRUCTURES

HIGHER BUT HOW DO YOU MOVE A

BULKHEAD STRUCTURE HIGHER THAT’S

CONNECTED TO A PIER?

>>BRAD BENSON: THAT’S A GOOD

QUESTION. I’LL TACKLE THE LAST

ONE FIRST. WE HAVEN’T DONE ALL

OF THE ENGINEERING WORK THAT WE

WOULD DO TO REALLY ANSWER THIS

QUESTION. BUT ESSENTIALLY WHAT

YOU WOULD DO IS LIKELY PICK, YOU

KNOW, DISCONNECT THE BULKHEAD

BUILDING FROM THE PIER SHED.

THAT’S SOMETHING YOU DO ANYWAY

TO INSTALL A SEISMIC JOINT FOR

THESE PIERS. THEN, YOU WOULD

BRACE THE BULKHEAD, MOVE IT

OFFSITE, REBUILD THE WHARF AT A

HIGHER ELEVATION AND PUT THE

BULKHEAD BACK WITH TRANSITIONS

DOWN TO THE EXISTING PIER

LEVEL.

AND WE’VE DONE SOME CONCEPTUAL

STUDIES LOOKING AT THAT. AS

DIRECTOR FORBES MENTIONED, THAT

CREATES AN IMPACT IN THE

DISTRICT BECAUSE YOU’RE CHANGING

ELEVATIONS IN THE DISTRICT BUT

IT ALSO REPLACES A VERY

VULNERABLE PART OF THE

DISTRICT.

THE WHARVES ARE THE OLDEST PART

AND AGING FAST.

>>SEAN RANDOLPH: THE OTHER

QUESTION IS RELATING TO WHAT

DIRECTOR PESKIN HAD, OUR

JURISDICTION AS BCDC. SO WE’RE

GOING TO BE PERMITTING PROJECTS

THAT WILL HAVE A LIFE SPAN THAT

WILL GO BEYOND 2030. IT’S NOT

JUST PIER 30, 32, BUT THINKING

OF THAT SPECIFICALLY, HAVE YOU

THOUGHT IN DETAIL YET HOW YOU

WOULD FACTOR IN THE KIND OF

INVESTMENT THAT MIGHT BE MADE BY

PRIVATE SECTOR PARTNERS TO

REINFORCE THE WATER — RATHER

—

REINFORCE THE SEA WALL, SEGMENTS

OF THE WATERFRONT, OF COURSE,

INTEGRATED INTO THE ENTIRE PLAN

BUT WHERE THERE IS AN

OPPORTUNITY TO BRING PRIVATE

FINANCE IN TO CONTRIBUTE TO PART

OF THE CHALLENGE? HOW ARE YOU

—

HOW ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT THAT,

BECAUSE I THINK IT WILL COME UP

AS WE GO THROUGH VARIOUS

PROJECTS. AND I THINK IT MAY

TAKE A FAIR AMOUNT OF

RETHINKING, JUST THE STRATEGY OF

THE WATERFRONT AND STATE LANDS

AND HOW DO WE ADAPT OUR POLICIES

AND OTHER POLICIES TO MEET THIS

NEW SET OF ISSUES?

>>BRAD BENSON: WELL —

>>ELAINE FORBES: SORRY, BRAD. I

WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE FINGER

PIERS AND THEN TRY TO ANSWER

YOUR VERY GOOD QUESTION. THE

FINGER APPROXIMATE PIERS, WHILE

THE PLAN IS RECOMMENDING MOVING,

YOU KNOW, ESTABLISHING THAT LINE

OF DEFENSE AT THAT WHARF AREA,

AT THAT BULKHEAD AREA, RETURNING

THOSE HISTORIC BULKHEADS AND

SIMPLY LEVELING DOWN TO THE

PIERS AT THEIR HISTORIC LEVELS,

THAT’S VERY UNLIKELY TO BE WHAT

THE CITY AND THE PORT WILL

PROPOSE ULTIMATELY ABOUT WHAT

GOES ON TOP WHEN THE PROJECT

GETS IMPLEMENTED. WE WILL BE

EXPLORING WHICH HISTORIC PIERS

HAVE CAPABILITY AND WE WOULD

WANT AS A CITY TO SEE HE WILL

BRIGHTED AND WHICH — TO SEE

ELEVATED AND WHICH WILL BE

DEMOLISHED, ESSENTIALLY, OR NOT

MOVE BEYOND A CERTAIN POINT. AND

THE CHALLENGE OF HOW TO DO

INVESTMENTS OVER TIME. SO WE

WILL WANT OUR PUBLIC-PRIVATE

PARTNERSHIPS TO COME AND MAKE

INVESTMENTS IN THESE HISTORIC

PIERS DURING THIS LONG TAIL OF

TIME WE HAVE LEFT WITH THE

DISTRICT. AND WE DID A STUDY,

HOW DO WE MOVE THE HISTORIC

PIERS OUT FURTHER AND HELP THESE

FLOOD WALLS SUBSTANTIALLY? THERE

IS EPISODIC CHALLENGES. THIS

COULD SAVE THE PIERS FOR 30

YEARS FOR PUBLIC ENJOYMENT.

THERE IS OPTIONALITY IN WHICH WE

HAVE TO ADVANCE AND ANALYZE. SO

WE KEEP THE PIERS AS LONG AS WE

CAN FOR THE PUBLIC’S ENJOYMENT

AND LOOK AT WHAT OTHER HISTORIC

DISTRICT WE SAVE AND WHICH ONES

WE LET FALL TO SEA LEVEL RISE? I

WANT TO MAKE SURE THE COMMISSION

UNDERSTOOD THAT. AS TO THE

QUESTION — AND BRAD WILL HELP

MORE — AS TO THE QUESTION OF

THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS,

ONE OF THE BIGGEST CHALLENGES IS

HOW DO WE PHASE THE PROJECT’S

IMPLEMENTATION? SO IF WE HAVE A

PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP THAT

CAN ADVANCE, SAY, A PIER 70

PROJECT, RAISE THE LEVEL OF THE

SHORELINE, PREPARE FOR SEA LEVEL

RISE, HOW DO WE — HOW DO WE

MAKE THAT PROJECT WORK WITH THE

FUTURE LINE OF DEFENSE THAT THE

ARMY CORPS PLANS TO IMPLEMENT

WITH THE CITY? SO THAT IS A

COMPLEX SET OF QUESTIONS. WE’LL

NEED TO RESOLVE THAT IN PIERS

30, 32, SO ESSENTIALLY OUR

INVESTMENTS FIT TOGETHER BUT IN

DIFFERENT SEQUENCES OVER TIME.

SO THAT’S ONE OF THE CHALLENGES

WE’RE FACING AND WE’LL HAVE TO

SOLVE.

>>BRAD BENSON: COULD I ADD ONE

— DOFL

>>SEAN RANDOLPH: COULD I ADD ONE

THING TO THAT? AND NOW THE COST

IS JUST — HAS JUST GONE WAY,

WAY UP. SO IT DOES SEEM THERE IS

HISTORICAL DEBATE, COULD YOU

PUT HOUSING OR OTHER FACILITIES

ON THE PIERS? AND THERE DOES

APPEAR TO BE A BIG CHALLENGE OF

ADEQUACY OF CAPITAL AND

FUNDING.

SO EVEN WITH THE PRIVATE

DEVELOPER COMING IN ON A

PROPERTY, IT LOOKS LIKE IT’S

GOING TO BE MORE EXPENSIVE OVER

TIME. BUT IT IS A SOURCE OF

FINANCE. AND TO IT TRIKES ME

THAT’S ONE OF THOSE ISSUES —

STRIKES ME THAT’S ONE OF THOSE

ISSUES, COMPLEX ISSUES THAT HAS

TO BE FIGURED OUT. DOES OUR

FRAMEWORK FOR NOT HAVING HOUSING

OR OTHER OFFICE SPACE ON PIERS

ACTUALLY FIT WITH THE CAPITAL

REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS SET OF

CHALLENGES IF WE HAVE THE

ABILITY TO ADDRESS IT WITH THE

PRIVATE PARTNERS?

>>BRAD BENSON: I THINK I WANTED

TO ADD ONE THOUGHT. THINKING

ABOUT PIERS 30, 32, OBVIOUSLY, A

LOT OF EFFORT HAS GONE INTO THAT

WITH STATE LEGISLATION IN

COLLABORATION WITH YOU AND YOUR

STAFF. WE ARE LUCKY TO HAVE A

COASTAL CONSERVANCY GRANT TO

LOOK THAT SORT OF LARGER SEGMENT

OF THE SOUTHERN EMBARCADERO SO

WE CAN DO MORE REFINED PLANNING

TO THINK ABOUT HOW THIS PLAN

FITS WITH THAT INVESTMENT

KNOWING THERE THE 3032

INVESTMENT COULD PROCEED THE

ARMY INVESTMENT FOR QUITE A

WHILE. WE’VE

GOT SOME TIME TO DOING THAT

PLANNING EFFORT.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

COMMISSIONER GUNTHER.

>>ANDREW GUNTHER: THANK YOU. I

REALLY APPRECIATE THIS

PRESENTATION.

[INDISCERNIBLE]

WHAT’S GOING TO BE A VERY, VERY

LONG PATH THAT WE CAN’T EVEN

UNDERSTAND YET. SO I REALLY

APPRECIATE YOUR [INDISCERNIBLE]

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

ANDY, WE LOST YOUR VOLUME.

EITHER YOU MUTED — WE CANNOT

HEAR YOU.

>>ANDREW GUNTHER: I AM IN A

DIFFERENT ROOM. CAN YOU HEAR ME

NOW?

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

YES.

>>ANDREW GUNTHER: I AM TRYING TO

UNDERSTAND THE PRESENTATION

ABOUT [INDISCERNIBLE]

ANALYSIS THAT WILL BE UNDERLYING

THE CORPS’ PARTICIPATION AND I

BELIEVE — I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU

SAY THERE IS NEW GUIDANCE WITH

THE CORPS THAT IS GOING TO ALLOW

FOR THE INCORPORATION OF

NONMONETARY OR DIFFICULT TO

MONETIZE BENEFITS AND COSTS. DID

I UNDERSTAND THAT

CORRECTLY? OUT OF THE FRAME OF

OVER THE YEARS WITH

UNDERSTANDING COST AND BENEFITS,

THERE IS A VERY, VERY PARTICULAR

STRUCTURE THAT THE CORPS USES

AND IT SEEMS TO BE A LITTLE MORE

AFFECTED WHEN BOTH STRUCTURES

THAT YOU ARE DESCRIBING AND THAT

WILL ALLOW US TO REALLY GET OUR

ARMS AROUND ALL OF THE

ECONOMIC IMPACTS —

THE PROJECT OR THE

[INDISCERNIBLE]

WILL INCLUDE?

>>BRAD BENSON: MELINDA, WOULD

YOU LIKE ME TO ANSWER OR YOU?

>>MELINDA FISHER: YOU HEARD

RIGHT, THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY

OF THE ARMY HAD ISSUE GUIDANCE

THAT PROVIDES A COMPREHENSIVE

LOOK AT OUR FOUR ACCOUNTS. TWO

OF THEM ARE MONETARY. SO THE

NATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT,

WHICH IS WHAT YOU’RE MORE

TYPICALLY USED TO SEEING, FOR

EXAMPLE, WITH THE DREDGING, A

COST BENEFIT RATIO, SOMETHING

VERY DEFINED. BUT THEN WE GET

INTO THESE SOCIAL EFFECT

CATEGORIES AND ENVIRONMENTAL

QUALITY. SO WE’LL LOOK AT THINGS

LIKE LIFE SAFETY OR BENEFITS TO

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

COMMUNITIES, TRANSPORTATION

BENEFITS THAT AREN’T RELATED TO

COSTS OF THE TRANSPORTATION

BEING DOWN OR SOMETHING. IT’S,

CAN PEOPLE GET TO WORK? CAN THEY

NOT — HOUSING. LOTS AND LOTS OF

FEATURES. THE ENGINEERING WITH

NATURE FEATURES THAT ARE

INCORPORATED THROUGH SOME OF

THIS. WE CAN BENEFIT FROM THE

VALUE OF THAT OR THE POTENTIAL

FOR REDUCING STORMWATER

OVERFLOWS FROM THE COMBINED

SEWER SYSTEM, THINGS LIKE THAT

CAN NOW BE INCORPORATED AND

LOOKED AT AND ACCUMULATE

TIFFLY — CUMULATIVELY USED TO

JUSTIFY BEYOND A COST-BENEFIT

RATIO.

>>ANDREW GUNTHER: AND SO WE CAN

ALWAYS USE THE LOSS OF — IF WE

DON’T DO SOMETHING, THE LOSS OF

[INDISCERNIBLE]

THE COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS, THE

IMPACT OF THE — AND ONE OF THE

LARGEST COST WAS THE LOSS OF

PEOPLE WHO GO TO THE BEACH, YOU

COME UP WITH SOME VALUE IF YOU

ADD UP — [INDISCERNIBLE]

I’M EXCITED TO HEAR HOW THE

CORPS — I KNOW IT’S GOING TO BE

— IT’S A STRUGGLE FOR YOU GUYS

TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO IT BUT I

THINK IT’S A MUCH MORE REALISTIC

BASIS FOR WHICH WE CAN THINK

ABOUT THE COST-BENEFIT FOR

IMPLEMENTING THE PROJECT OVER

THE COMING DECADE. THANK YOU.

>>MELINDA FISHER: DEFINITELY.

THE MAIN REPORT AND ECONOMIC

APPENDIX, ENGINEERING APPENDIX

HAVE DETAILS HOW WE IDENTIFIED

THE COST-BENEFITS AND TRADEOFFS

OF THE SOCIAL EFFECTS, VIERMAL

QUALITY, THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT

TO YOUR POINT, SPECIFICALLY,

ABOUT LOOKING AT WHAT WOULD HAVE

HAPPENED, ABSOLUTELY. WE COMPARE

ALL OF OUR COSTS WHAT WE CALL

THE FUTURE WITHOUT PROJECT

CONDITIONS. THAT WOULD BE, IF WE

DID NOTHING. AND THAT’S OUR

BASELINE. AND SO EVERYTHING

ABOVE THAT IS WHAT WE CONSIDER A

BENEFIT OR A POSITIVE IMPACT AND

FOR MONETARY STAFF, THAT’S WHAT

CONTRIBUTES TO THE BENEFIT COST

RATIO. FOR THINGS THAT ARE

NONMONETIZED, THAT’S HOW WE CAN

DEMONSTRATE, LOOK, THIS IS A

REALLY POSITIVE THING. IF WE

WERE ABLE TO SAVE 20,000 JOBS

—

I AM MAKING UP NUMBERS. I DON’T

KNOW WHAT IT WAS IN THE REPORT.

IF YOU’RE ABLE TO SAVE THAT

BECAUSE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN

LOST, WE WOULD SAY, THIS IS

REALLY VALUABLE TO GET TO THE

NEXT PLAN WHICH HAS ALL THESE

OTHER BENEFITS TO IT.

>>ANDREW GUNTHER: THANK YOU.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

COMMISSIONER EKLUND.

>>PAT EKLUND: THANK YOU VERY

MUCH, CHAIR. I THINK

COMMISSIONER PESKIN HIT IT RIGHT

ON THE NOSE. THIS PROJECT IS

HUGE. AND THE COMPLEXITY OF THE

PROJECT IN AND OF ITSELF LET

ALONE LOOKING AT THE REGULATORY

AND ALL THE COMPETING INTERESTS

IS JUST OVERWHELMING. HAVING

WORKED FOR THE ARMY CORPS OF

ENGINEERS FOR EIGHT YEARS AND

THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY FOR 35, I CAN

REALLY UNDERSTAND AND I CAN SEE

BCDC HAVING TO — AND OTHER

REGULATORY AGENCIES TO REALLY

RETHINK SOME OF OUR

REQUIREMENTS. AND I, MISS

FORBES, I AGREE THAT ALL OF US

WILL HAVE TO SIT DOWN AND FIGURE

OUT HOW WE CAN, YOU KNOW,

IMPLEMENT AS MANY NONSTRUCTURAL

IMPROVEMENTS AND MAINTAIN THE

HISTORICAL STRUCTURE AND STILL

MAINTAIN THE JOBS AND THE

QUALITY OF LIFE AND EVERYTHING

FOR SAN FRANCISCO. BECAUSE IT’S

WHAT DRAWS PEOPLE. WHAT YOU ARE

DOING IN SAN FRANCISCO, IT’S

DRAWING MORE PEOPLE TO SAN

FRANCISCO. BUT THE QUESTION I

HAVE, MISS FORBES, OR YOUR

COLLEAGUE THERE, IS THAT SAN

FRANCISCO CAN’T BE THE ONLY PORT

OR THE ONLY CITY THAT’S DEALING

WITH THIS. SEA LEVEL RISE. AND

HAVE YOU REACHED OUT TO OTHER

SMALL AND LARGE CITIES

THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA OR EVEN

THE UNITED STATES ON WHAT

THEY’RE DOING IN ORDER TO TRY TO

BALANCE ALL THE COMPETING

INTERESTS WHILE MAINTAINING

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS AND

ALL THE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS

THAT YOU CAN

MEET?

>>ELAINE FORBES: WE HAVE REACHED

OUT. THERE ARE LESSONS LEARNED

ALL OVER NATIONALLY, AND THE

ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS,

MELINDA, HAS BEEN ESPECIALLY

ATTUNED TO HELPING US UNDERSTAND

THE WAY OTHER JURISDICTIONS HAVE

RESPONDED. AND BRAD BENSON WILL

HELP ME WITH THIS, BUT WE DO

HAVE SOME VERY KEY EXAMPLES THAT

ARE HELPING US FIGURE OUT THE

PATH. THIS IS A HARD-EDGE

HISTORIC OLD WATERFRONT. HAS ALL

THE UTILITIES COMING TO ITS EDGE

SO ECOLOGY GETS HARDER. RETREAT

IS HARDER BECAUSE OF THE

INFRASTRUCTURE. AND THESE ARE

THINGS THAT WE ARE LEARNING AND

WE’LL SHARE WITH OTHER

JURISDICTIONS, ACTUALLY, OLD

CITIES ON WATER’S EDGE. SO WE’RE

AHEAD, BUT WE ALSO HAVE

EXAMPLES, SPECIFIC PROJECTS,

ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO HAVE

RESPONDED TO DISASTERS, KATRINA,

SANDY, LESSONS LEARNED,

NORFOLK, GREAT COLLABORATION.

AND THE CORPS HAS GIVEN US THESE

TOOLS TO LEARN FROM OTHER

EXPERIENCES.

>>PAT EKLUND: THAT’S GREAT.

MELINDA, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR

TAKING THAT ONE. I WORKED FOR

THE CORPS. IT WAS A DIFFERENT

ORGANIZATION. BUT I HAVE A TON

OF OTHER QUESTIONS, BUT THESE

QUESTIONS ARE MORE DETAIL

ORIENTED AND IT’S NOT

APPROPRIATE FOR THIS BUT I

REALLY LOOK FORWARD TO

CONTINUING TO BE ENGAGED IN

THIS. AND TRYING TO THINK

OUTSIDE THE BOX ON HOW WE CAN DO

A WIN-WIN FOR NOT ONLY THE

ENVIRONMENT BUT ALSO FOR THE

FUTURE OF THE CITY AND THE

COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO AND THE

PORT AS WELL.

>>MELINDA FISHER: THIS IS

MELINDA. SORRY. I WANTED TO ADD

TO WHAT DIRECTOR FORBES SAID, WE

HAVE REACHED OUT TO A NUMBER OF

GROUPS. AS MR. BENSON ALSO

MENTIONED, WE ARE LEADING THE

PACK AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL WITH

THIS PROJECT. A LOT OF OTHER

PROJECTS, THERE WERE A FEW

PROJECTS SLIGHTLY AHEAD OF US

BUT THEY DIDN’T INCLUDE THE

ADAPTATION OVER TIME, THE

MONETARY PROTOCOLS SO WE ARE

PAVING THE WAY AT THIS SCALE,

BUT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF

PROJECTS ON OUR HEELS. WE’RE ALL

WORKING VERY, VERY CLOSELY. FOR

EXAMPLE, BOSTON, CHARLESTON,

MIAMI, ALL OF US HAVE BEEN

COLLABORATING AT THE CORPS

LEVEL, THE FEDERAL LEVEL TRYING

TO FIGURE OUT HOW DO WE EVEN

DEAL WITH SUCH A SITUATION AND

AS YOU KNOW, ALL OF THOSE

DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES ARE —

HAVE DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT

ECOLOGIES, HISTORIC VALUE,

FLOODPLAINS, EVERYTHING ABOUT

IT. SO IT’S BEEN A LEARNING

CURVE, BUT I KNOW OUR LEADERSHIP

AND EVERYONE NOW SEEMS TO BE

VERY PLEASED SO FAR. SO SAN

FRANCISCO DEFINITELY WILL

PROBABLY BE ON THE MAP IF THIS

THING FULLY GOES THROUGH.

>>PAT EKLUND: MELINDA, THANK YOU

SO MUCH FOR ADVOCATING FOR

THAT.

I KNOW IT’S DIFFICULT SOMETIMES

IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BUT

REALLY APPRECIATE IT. THANK

YOU.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: I

CAN’T QUITE TELL WHETHER

COMMISSIONER AMBUEHL HAS HIS

HAND UP OR IF THIS IS

COMMISSIONER GUNTHER’S HAND —

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: I

APOLOGIZE, WHEN YOU’RE IN THESE

ROOMS IT’S A LITTLE HARD. GO

AHEAD.

>>SPEAKER: THANK YOU. FIRST OF

ALL, WE WANT TO

[INDISCERNIBLE]

I THINK I GOT A LITTLE BIT LOST

IN SOME OF THE

COMPLEXITY.

>>SPEAKER: ALICIA, CAN YOU SPEAK

TO WHEREVER DAVID HAS HIS

COMPUTER OR WHEREVER ANDY HAS

HIS COMMUTER?

>>ALICIA JOHN-BAPTISTE: IS THAT

BETTER? I WAS SAYING THAT I

THINK I GOT A LITTLE BIT LOST IN

SOME OF THE COMPLEXITY OF THIS.

SO THERE’S SOMETHING TO ASK,

JUST A COUPLE OF — SOME

QUESTIONS. MY FIRST QUESTION IS,

WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE

ENGAGEMENT BETWEEN THE PORT AND

THE CORPS AND THE PROJECT, ARE

YOU — IS THE PROJECT

ESSENTIALLY THE UBER-PROJECT OF

RESPONDING TO SEA LEVEL RISE? SO

LET’S CALL THAT THE CAPITAL P

PROJECT. UNDERNEATH THAT THERE

ARE A SERIES OF SMALLER PROJECTS

WHICH COULD INCLUDE THINGS LIKE

LIFTING THE FERRY BUILDING UP TO

ADAPT? OR IS THERE A DEFINED

KIND OF SET OF INTERVENTIONS

THAT THE PARTNERSHIP PERTAINS

TO? AND IS THERE A TIMELINE ON

THIS BODY OF WORK, EITHER BY

WHEN IT NEEDS TO BE COMPLETED OR

SOME OTHER MILESTONE OR

DEADLINE? SO THAT’S SORT OF ONE

QUESTION. JUST THE NATURE OF THE

PARTNERSHIP AND HOW IT APPLIES

TO THE — YOU KNOW, THE REALLY

COMPLEX SET OF INTERVENTIONS

THAT WILL BE REQUIRED. AND THEN

ANOTHER QUESTION RELATES TO

FUNDING. I BELIEVE THAT THERE

WAS A PERIOD OF TIME WHERE

YOU’RE LOOKING TO SECURE

COMMITMENT — FEDERAL COMMITMENT

TO SUPPORT THIS WORK. IS THAT A

ONE-TIME ASK THAT ESSENTIALLY

GETS BANKED FOR THE LIFE OF

IMPLEMENTATION? OR IS IT

INTENDED TO BE MORE OF A KIND OF

A ROLLING BASIS OF THERE WILL BE

PROJECTS COMING THROUGH OVER THE

COURSE OF DECADES THAT WILL NEED

TO SEEK FUNDING AUTHORITY AT THE

TIME OF WHICH MATCHES, ETC.?

>>ELAINE FORBES: I’LL START THAT

ONE. I THINK THE FUNDAMENTAL

ANSWER IS, WE DON’T KNOW ANSWERS

TO YOUR QUESTIONS YET. BECAUSE

WE’RE AT THE PHASE WHERE WE NEED

TO DEFINE WHAT THE ACTIONS ARE

IN THIS OVERALL PROJECT. SO I

WOULD DESCRIBE IT AS AN OVERALL

BIG-SCALE PROJECT TO PROVIDE

FLOOD PROTECTION TO SAN

FRANCISCO BASED ON THE SEA LEVEL

RISE CURB. THAT’S THE PROJECT.

HOW WE IMPLEMENT THE PROJECT IS

THE NEXT BIG PIECE OF

WORK FOR THE CITY AND THE ARMY

CORPS TO UNCOVER. WE WILL NOT DO

— IT’S VERY UNLIKELY WE’LL DO

THE WHOLE 7 1/2 MILES OF

WATERFRONT AT ONE TIME. WE’LL

LOOK AT FIRST ACTIONS WE CAN

TAKE THAT WILL FIT INTO THE

CITY’S INTERESTS WHERE WE

UNDERSTAND HOW THE UTILITY

SITUATION WILL WORK, WHERE WE

HAVE A GOOD PLAN OF

IMPLEMENTATION, AND I BELIEVE WE

WILL HAVE SEQUENTIAL

APPROPRIATIONS, I BELIEVE, FOR

STAGES OF THE PROJECT.

MELINDA WILL HELP HERE. IN TERMS

OF HOW TO PHASE FOR THE ARMY

CORPS, IT’S GOING TO BE WHERE

THERE IS THE MOST FLOOD RISK AND

WHERE WE NEED TO TAKE ACTIONS

EARLY. SO IT WILL BE ANALYSIS OF

DEALING WITH RISK EARLIEST IN

THE AREAS THAT NEEDS MORE URGENT

ACTION. WE’LL ALSO BE LOOKING

FOR PHASING IN IMPLEMENTATION

THAT ALLOWS US ENOUGH SPACE AND

ROOM TO TAKE BIG ACTIONS TO COME

DOWN THE ROAD. LIKE YOU’LL SEE

IN THE HISTORIC EMBARCADERO, THE

ACTIONS PROPOSED IN THE PLAN ARE

TO HIGH LEVELS — TO 3 1/2 FEET

INSTEAD OF A LOWER LEVEL. THE

ANALYSIS SAYS, YOU DO THAT ONE

TIME. YOU DON’T TAKE

SUBSEQUENTIAL PHASES TO ADAPT

BECAUSE IT’S TOO MUCH. WE LOOK

AT PHASING, I ALMOST CALL IT A

PROGRAM, PHASING THE PROGRAM SO

WE DO ENOUGH DESIGN TO PROJECTS

ARE READY TO IMPLEMENT. BUT

THESE ARE ALL THE BIG WORK OF

MOVING FROM THIS CONCEPTUAL

CONCEPT OF HOW TO PROVIDE FLOOD

PROTECTION INTO SPECIFIC

DISCREET PROJECTS WHERE WE KNOW

WHAT’S ON TOP AND HOW TO

COORDINATE THE INFRASTRUCTURE

MOVES THAT HAVE TO OCCUR AND

THAT COULD INCLUDE FLOODING

CONCERNS FROM THE P.U.C. THAT’S

ONE EXAMPLE. THESE ARE THE

PIECES TO WORK THROUGH AND THE

ARMY CORPS HAS SHARED WITH US

IMPLEMENTATION AND THE STRATEGY

AROUND IMPLEMENTATION IS ONE OF

THE — IS REALLY KEY, KEY WORK

TO GET RIGHT IN SOMETHING OF

THIS SCALE.

>>ALICIA JOHN-BAPTISTE: THANK

YOU.

>>MELINDA FISHER: WHATEVER’S

RECOMMENDED TO CONGRESS, THAT

FIRST ACTION, IF IF IS

AUTHORIZED BY CONGRESS, IT

IS APPROVED, I GUESS YOU COULD

SAY.

WE ALL KNOW CONGRESS. WE ARE

DEPENDENT ON THE FUNDING

STREAM.

IF WE GET A HUGE SPLEL BILL —

SUPPLEMENTAL BILL, THE 35% COST

SHARE IS WHEN IT BECOMES FEDERAL

AND — AVAILABLE AND THE FEDERAL

WOULD BE PUT IN A BANK. IF NOT

IT WILL COME IN WORK PLANS AND

SO WE HAVE TO REQUEST THE

MONEY.

AS TIME COMES ON — HOPEFULLY

—

IDEALLY THAT WILL MATCH WHAT THE

COST SHARE AVAILABILITY IS AT

THE TIME. AND WHATNOT.

THAT FIRST ACTION IS

GUARANTEED, DEPENDENT ON FEDERAL

FUNDING, OF COURSE, IN CONGRESS

APPROPRIATIONS. THE SECOND

ACTION, WE’VE BEEN ADVOCATING

FOR TRYING TO MAKE IT MORE

STREAMLINED SO THE SECOND WOULD

BE THE ADAPTATION FEATURES OR

THE ACTIONS. WE’VE BEEN ROUGHLY

ASSUMING TO HAPPEN IN THE

2090’S. IT COULD BE SOONER OR

LATER. DEPENDING ON THE

RESULTS.

WE’RE TRYING TO ADVOCATE THAT

THE AUTHORIZATION OF CONGRESS

WOULD STREAMLINE IT SO WE DON’T

HAVE TO WAIT AS LONG, SO WE’RE

KIND OF SET UP IN THE QUEUE. BUT

BECAUSE THIS IS THE FIRST OF THE

NATION, FIRST OF THE CORPS, OF

COURSE, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE,

THERE’S CHALLENGES TO THAT SO

WE’RE GOING TO KEEP FIGHTING FOR

THAT. BUT WE DON’T KNOW WHAT

WILL HAPPEN 100% WITH THAT —

THAT SECOND ACTION. THE FIRST

ACTION, IF CONGRESS APPROVES IT,

AND IS SUBJECT TO FUNDING STREAM

WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR FUNDING

— FROM FEDERAL

FUNDING.

>>ALICIA JOHN-BAPTISTE: THANK

YOU.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

COMMISSIONER KISHIMOTO. IT’S

HARD TO TELL.

>>PATRICIA SHOWALTER: I WAS

GOING TO ASK THE QUESTION THAT

ALICIA JUST ASKED SO THANK YOU

VERY MUCH. I’D LIKE TO OFFER MY

COMPLIMENTS TO THE CORPS FOR

TAKING SUCH A COMPREHENSIVE

VIEW. I THINK THAT’S VERY

VALUABLE BECAUSE IF THESE

PROJECTS DO NOT FIT TOGETHER ON

A HYDROLOGIC — A HYDRAULIC

BASIS, THEY WILL FAIL. WE DON’T

WANT THAT TO HAPPEN. LOOKING AT

THEM TOGETHER IS EXTREMELY

VALUABLE SO THANKS FOR DOING

THAT.

>>YORIKO KISHIMOTO: WELL, I’LL

JUST ADD MY ONE QUICK COMMENT

WHICH WE — I ALSO AGREE, IT’S

VERY, VERY IMPRESSIVE TO SEE

THIS VERY THOUGHTFUL,

COMPREHENSIVE, MULTI-BENEFITED

APPROACH. SO REALLY HATS OFF TO

ALL OF YOU. ONE QUESTION I’LL

ASK IS — HAS TO DO WITH —

THERE WAS A COMMENT THAT THEY

THOUGHT THE BENEFIT WAS GOING TO

BE ALL PUBLIC BENEFIT AND I

GUESS MY QUESTION IS, WHO OWNS

THE WATERFRONT? IS IT ACTUALLY

THE PORT THAT ACTUALLY HAS

OWNERSHIP OF THE WHARVES AND

PORTS OR ARE WE LOOKING AT 1,000

OWNERS?

>>ELAINE FORBES: IT’S THE CITY

THAT OWNS THE PORT OF SAN

FRANCISCO, BUT UNDER TRUST TO

THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. SO WE

ARE STATUTORILY A TRUSTEE OF THE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA. BUT WE ARE

AN ENTERPRISE DEPARTMENT OF THE

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN

FRANCISCO, BUT THE PORT

COMMISSION AND THE PORT

ORGANIZATION IS CHARGED WITH THE

MAINTENANCE AND DEVELOPMENT AND

REPAIR AND OPERATIONS OF THE

HARBOR.

>>YORIKO KISHIMOTO: THE WHARVES

CAN BE OBVIOUSLY INDIVIDUALLY

OWNED?

>>ELAINE FORBES: IT’S ALL PUBLIC

OWNERSHIP. IT’S LONG-TERM

LEASES. IF THERE IS NOT A TRUST

BENEFIT FOR SOME SEA WALL LOTS

OR SOME OTHER PURPOSE, WE

SOMETIMES HAVE A PROPERTY SALE

BUT IT’S VERY, VERY RARE. IT IS

ALL UNDER PUBLIC TRUST, PUBLIC OWNERSHIP.

>>YORIKO KISHIMOTO: I SEE. OKAY.

GREAT. THAT’S ONE THING I DIDN’T SEE IN YOUR REPORT. YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER ADDING THAT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: COMMISSIONER ECKERLE.

>>JENN ECKERLE: THANK YOU. I WANT TO THANK THE PORT AND THE CORPS FOR THE FANTASTIC PRESENTATION AND OUR RESPONSES TO ALL OF OUR QUESTIONS. IT’S REALLY ENCOURAGING TO SEE THIS PLAN THAT HAS — IT’S INNOVATIVE, IT’S SCIENCE-BASED. IT HAS THAT PHASED RESILIENCE PLANNING COMPONENT AND EMBEDDED MONITORING SO WE CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT’S HAPPENING AND ADAPT OVER TIME. I JUST WANTED TO BETTER UNDERSTAND — THIS MIGHT BE GETTING WEEDY. ARMY CORPS PROJECTIONS IN THAT ONE SLIDE THAT COMPARED IT WITH THE OTHER PROJECTIONS, THEY LOOK LIKE THEY

WERE LOWER THAN THE NATIONAL REPORT SCENARIOS. AND MAYBE WE DON’T NEED TO GET INTO THAT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THE PLAN COME TEMPLATES RESILIENCE UP TO SEVEN FEET. MY MAIN QUESTION IS, IS IT POSSIBLE THAT IF THOSE PROJECTIONS ARE SHOWN LOWER THAT THERE WOULD BE — THAT FUNDING FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WOULD NOT SUPPORT PLANNING UP TO THAT SEVEN-FOOT LEVEL?

>>BRAD BENSON: MELINDA, WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO STAKE A FIRST STAB AT THAT?

>>MELINDA FISHER: SURE.

>>BRAD BENSON: AND THEY CAN YOU CAN ADD. SO WE LOOKED AT BOTH THE ARMY CORPS’ PROJECTIONS AND THE O.P.C. PROJECTIONS,

COMMISSIONER ECKERLE. AND THE ARMY CORPS HIGH CURVE IS BOUNDED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA MOST LIKELY CURVE ON THE LOW END AND THE 100 AND 200 CURVE FROM THE PRIOR GUIDANCE. AGAIN, WE’RE NOT CHOOSING A SPECIFIC CURVE. IT LOOK US A LONG TIME TO GET TO THIS. AS PLANNERS WE WANTED TO

KNOW WHAT WE’RE PLANNING FOR AND IT IS AN UNCERTAIN FUTURE. AND SO WE’RE LOOKING AT ADAPTIVE

MANAGEMENT TO MANAGE RISK OVER

TIME. I THINK THE ARMY CORPS’

REGULATIONS REQUIRE US TO LOOK

AT THE THREE ARMY CORPS CURVES

AND ALSO DO NOT ALLOW CHOOSING A

SPECIFIC CURVE OR AT LEAST OUR

STUDY GUIDANCE DID NOT ALLOW

THAT. AND I HAVEN’T HEARD

NOTHING ABOUT SORT OF A CONSTRAINT ON FEDERAL FUNDING, YOU KNOW, RELATED TO SPECIFIC

SEA LEVEL RISE CURVES. BUT MELINDA, MAYBE YOU CAN HANDLE THAT PART OF THE QUESTION.

>>MELINDA FISHER: YEAH. SO, AGAIN, THE FIRST OPTION,

DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU’RE AT

ALONG THE WATERFRONT, IS TIED TO

AN ELEVATION. SO THAT MIGHT BE 1

1/2 OR 3 1/2, WHICH THEN

CORRELATES TO VARIOUS CURVES. AS

YOU SAW THOSE CURVES IN THERE

AND THERE WAS A GRAY LINE ACROSS

THAT HAD 1 1/2 AND KIND OF SHOWED YOU WHERE YOU’RE AT IN

THOSE. THOSE WOULD BE COMMITTED TO IF CONGRESS DID — COMMITTED,

TOO, IF CONGRESS DID APPROVE THE PROJECT. SO EVEN IF THE CURVE

WAS LOWER OR WHAT ARE ACTUAL

EXISTING CONDITION WERE SOMEHOW

LOWER, WE WOULDN’T TAKE THAT

BACK OR TAKE THE STRUCTURE OFF

THE LAND. WHERE THE FUNDING

MIGHT BE TIED TO MAYBE THE

MONITORING AND IF THE

MONITORING IS MAYBE INDICATING

THAT SEA LEVEL RISE IS MORE

AGGRESSIVE, MAYBE IT’S ON A

HIGHER CURVE SOONER THAN WE

THOUGHT IT WOULD BE, THAT’S

WHERE FEDERAL FUNDING, WE’D NEED

TO GO BACK TO CONGRESS, ASK THEM

FOR MORE AND THEN WE WOULD DO

THE ADAPTATION.

THE ADAPTATIONS FOR THE DRAFT

PLAN DO — DOES INCLUDE UP

TO THAT SAFE HIGH CURVE AND AS

BRAD SAID IT’S BETWEEN THE TWO

CALIFORNIA CURVES. SO THAT’S

KIND OF HOW THE FUNDING IS TIED

TO CURVES. AND I WOULD BE

GETTING WAY OUTSIDE MY LANE IF I

EVEN TRIED TO EXPLAIN HOW

THE USACOE’S. IT’S TIED LOCALLY ON

WHAT IS TIED TO SOME TIDE GAUGE

SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE NATION OR

ALONG THAT PARTICULAR COASTLINE

OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND THEN

THE OTHER PIECE I WANTED TO

MENTION, OUR ELEVATIONS WE HAVE

COME UP WITH ARE ACTUALLY BASED

ON WHAT I LIKE TO CALL A PERFECT

STORM, WHERE WE HAVE HIGH TIDE,

1% STORM, PLUS SEA LEVEL RISE.

SO THE LIKELIHOOD OF EVERY

SINGLE ONE OF THOSE HAPPENING,

IT COULD HAPPEN. BUT IT IS LOWER

PROBABILITY. IN A SENSE, WE

COULD BE OVER — WE ARE

OVERESTIMATING IF ONLY ONE OF

THOSE HAPPENS SO THERE’S A

LITTLE BIT OF A WIGGLE ROOM

THERE IF THAT CURVES ARE OFF OR

SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

>>BRAD BENSON: I WANT TO OFFER

ONE QUICK CORRECTION. WE ARE NOT

RAISING THE SHORELINE 1 1/2 OR

THREE FEET. WE ARE COMING UP

WITH AN ELEVATION THAT WILL DEAL

WITH SEA LEVEL RISE AND THAT

TRANSLATES TO ON OUR — LIKE 13

1/2 FEET NAVD-80. FOR FEET AND A

HALF. AND 15 1/2 FEET. NORTH

AMERICAN VERTICAL DATA. SO JUST

WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.

>>JENN ECKERLE: THANK YOU BOTH

SO MUCH. I WAS CLEAR ON THAT

SECOND PIECE AND REALLY

APPRECIATE YOUR ANSWERS TO MY

QUESTIONS.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: I DO

NOT SEE ANYTHING OTHER HANDS,

COMMISSIONERS. SO WITH THAT I

JOIN IN THANKING YOU FOR THE

WORK AND THE REPORT. YES, VERY

COMPREHENSIVE. BUT IT NEEDED TO

BE. SO THANK YOU. SORRY. I THINK

I ASKED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AT

THE BEGINNING.

>>CLERK, REYLINA RUIZ: NO PUBLIC

COMMENT.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN:

ALWAYS BETTER TO BE SURE. THANK

YOU VERY MUCH. THAT CONCLUDES

OUR BUSINESS ITEMS AND BRINGS US

TO ADJOURNMENT.

>>SPEAKER: I OBJECT.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: YOU

REALLY WANT ME TO SAY THAT?

>>SPEAKER: NO.

>>CHAIR, ZACHARY WASSERMAN: I

WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO

ADJOURN. COMMISSIONER GILMORE

MOVES. COMMISSIONER NELSON

SECONDS. COMMISSIONER PESKIN

Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act

As a state agency, the Commission is governed by the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act which requires the Commission to: (1) publish an agenda at least ten days in advance of any meeting; and (2) describe specifically in that agenda the items to be transacted or discussed. Public notices of Commission meetings and staff reports (as applicable) dealing with matters on the meeting agendas can be found on BCDC’s website. Simply access Commission Meetings under the “Public Meetings” tab on the website and select the date of the meeting.

How to Provide Comments and Comment Time Limits

Pursuant to state law, the Commission is currently conducting its public meetings in a “hybrid” fashion. Each meeting notice will specify (1) where the meeting is being primarily held physically, (2) all teleconference locations, which will be publicly-accessible, and (3) the ZOOM virtual meeting link. If you would like to comment at the beginning of the meeting or on an item scheduled for public discussion, you may do so in one of three ways: (1) being present at the primary physical or a teleconference meeting location; (2) emailing comments in advance to public comment until 10 a.m. on the day of the meeting; and (3) participating via ZOOM during the meeting.

If you plan to participate through ZOOM, please use your ZOOM-enabled device and click on the “raise your hand” button, and then wait to speak until called upon. If you are using a telephone to call into the meeting, select *6 to unmute your phone and you will then be able to speak. We ask that everyone use the mute button when not speaking. It is also important that you not put your phone on hold. Each speaker may be limited to a maximum of three minutes or less at the discretion of the Chair during the public comment period depending on the volume of persons intending to provide public comment. Any speakers who exceed the time limits or interfere with the meeting may be muted by the Chair. It is strongly recommended that public comments be submitted in writing so they can be distributed to all Commission members in advance of the meeting for review. You are encouraged to submit written comments of any length and detailed information to the staff prior to the meeting at the email address above, which will be distributed to the Commission members.

Questions and Staff Reports

If you have any questions concerning an item on the agenda, would like to receive notice of future hearings, or access staff reports related to the item, please contact the staff member whose name, email address and direct phone number are indicated in parenthesis at the end of the agenda item.

Campaign Contributions

State law requires Commissioners to disqualify themselves from voting on any matter if they have received a campaign contribution from an interested party within the past 12 months. If you intend to speak on any hearing item, please indicate in your testimony if you have made campaign contributions in excess of $250 to any Commissioner within the last year, and if so, to which Commissioner(s) you have contributed. Other legal requirements govern contributions by applicants and other interested parties and establish criteria for Commissioner conflicts of interest. Please consult with the staff counsel if you have any questions about the rules that pertain to campaign contributions or conflicts of interest.

Access to Meetings

Meetings are physically held in venues that are accessible to persons with disabilities. If you require special assistance or have technical questions, please contact staff at least three days prior to the meeting via email. We will attempt to make the virtual meeting accessible via ZOOM accessibility capabilities, as well.