[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:03] Good morning, all, and welcome to the Los Angeles Board of Harbor Commissioners, regular and special meeting today Thursday, August 11th, 2022. The Board is now in session for both meetings. Our first item for is item a roll call, President Lee. Vice President Renwick. Commissioner Middleton. Here. Commissioner Maruano-Linarez. Here. Commissioner Prozi. Here. Thank you. Our quorum is
[0:33] confirmed. Moving on to our next item B, Executive Director Marks, Wajeez Rocajee.
[0:40] Thank you Amber and good morning Madam President, Commissioners, Harbor Department staff
[0:45] distinguished guests and members of the public. I'll begin this morning's remarks with a short
[0:50] video concerning the Port of Los Angeles sponsored community boat tours that took place on Saturday, July 30th.
[0:58] Dustin, please play the video.
[1:12] We're celebrating World Trade Week in July.
[1:14] Traditionally, we host our boat tours in May in honor of World Trade Month, and we kind
[1:20] of share with the public and our families and friends the importance of international
[1:24] trade, all the goods and services that come through the ports.
[1:28] Today, we have about, I want to say, nearly 3,000 folks joining us, so it's very exciting.
[1:36] We haven't done this in three years, so it's great to have this great turnout.
[1:40] every bud's been so positive, everyone is excited and we're excited to have
[1:45] everyone back. On the boat tour they're good to see gantry cranes, they'll get to
[1:49] see cargo ships up close. Even maybe a sea liner too, a sun baby. It's very nice
[1:55] about to appear for a hundred. They come back around the bridge. How many
[1:58] opportunities do you get to see the Vincent Thomas bridge from beneath the bridge?
[2:03] And you'll get to see the battleship Iowa, SS Lane Victory as well as the
[2:07] XC and Irving Johnson tall ships.
[2:10] It's a lot to see they're beautiful
[2:11] and you don't get to do that every day.
[2:13] We really appreciate everyone who came out today
[2:15] to celebrate this with us, families, friends.
[2:18] They brought their dogs, they brought their pets.
[2:20] It was an amazing turnout
[2:22] and we're just so honored and grateful
[2:24] that our community loves us
[2:25] and we love them and we've got to spend the day together
[2:28] and we'll see you next year.
[2:37] Many thanks for our own Sheila Gonzalez
[2:40] of Community Relations for coordinating
[2:42] this successful event.
[2:45] Now, for the latest on the import container 12E, directed at ocean carriers. Initially expected to take effect back on November 15th, the fee will remain on hold until at least Friday, August 26th.
[3:00] It's important to note that since the fee was announced nearly 10 months ago, no monies have been collected.
[3:07] We'll continue to monitor this data and reassess the fee implementation accordingly in the days and weeks ahead.
[3:15] As an update, the San Pedro Bay Ports had a peak decline of 71 percent combined in that
[3:22] aging cargo on the docs since the fee announcement in late October of last year.
[3:27] As of this past Friday, August 5th, the combined percentage reductions due to 26.
[3:36] Data from the LA Port Optimizer today indicates that Los Angeles specifically, as import containers
[3:42] Enter sitting on the docks have dropped by 36% since October 24th.
[3:47] That's down from nearly 95,000 container units to 60,500.
[3:53] Cargo sitting nine days or longer has dropped by 39%,
[3:58] from 37,400 to just shy of 23,000 units.
[4:03] All this since October as well,
[4:05] and it's now climbing primarily because of rail.
[4:08] As has been shared in this setting for a number of meetings now, rail volume has increased
[4:13] sixfold in the past several months and is just not able to move off the docs fast enough.
[4:20] Railboxes are currently waiting 8.2 days to get on a train here in Los Angeles.
[4:26] That's nearly four times the dwell period compared to pre-pandemic days.
[4:31] More on this in a few moments, but as I state every board meeting, this issue continues to be a focal
[4:37] point of the Biden-Harris administration and the port and supply chain envoy retired
[4:42] four-star general Stephen R. Lions.
[4:46] Now for the latest on our port operations.
[4:49] On Monday of this week our port police led by Chief Tom Gasey captured drone footage
[4:54] of the vessels at anchor as well as our marine terminals.
[4:58] As you can see on the screen, the number of container ships at anchor within the 40 nautical
[5:03] mile radius of the port complex remains extremely low. In fact, per yesterday's report there were no
[5:10] container vessels headed to the San Pedro Bay within that 40 nautical mile mark and it must be said
[5:16] we answered the call of the community who saw it at time when vessels were anchored close to our
[5:23] neighborhoods the pollution was increasing. The industry rallied to answer those concerns.
[5:30] There were, however, nine container vessels awaiting birth assignments, six destined for
[5:35] Los Angeles and three for Long Beach.
[5:39] As a baseline comparison, there were 89 vessels under these parameters back on November
[5:44] 16, which is when the new queueing system went into place designed by the private sector.
[5:50] We saw a peak of 109 vessels at anchor back on January 9th of this year.
[5:57] Concerning our marine terminals, you can see from the drone footage that they look about
[6:01] the same as they did at this point last year.
[6:04] Truck cargo is moving smoother, however the issue with on-dock rail remains, as already
[6:09] noted.
[6:10] Yesterday, there were 14 container vessels at birth and working here at the Port of Los Angeles,
[6:15] so 40% more than our average prior to when the surge began.
[6:20] The dwell time of containers here at the Port of Los Angeles on terminal over the last
[6:25] month is standing at 4.4 days well off its peak of 11 days dwell time. And the
[6:32] on-dock rail dwell time over this past month stands at 8.2 days while off the
[6:37] peak of 13.4 in more normal times you'd see on-dock rail cargo waiting
[6:43] about two days. Containers and chassis dwelling off terminals as of the last
[6:50] 30 days stands at 9.7 days, inching towards that peak of 11 days, and back when things were a
[6:56] little more normalized, we would see the dwell time on the street at about three and a half days.
[7:03] The number of containers waiting to be loaded to OnDoc Reel here in Los Angeles stands at just a bit
[7:09] more than 33,000 units, 20,000 of which are nine days or older, and concerning our empty containers
[7:17] at Port of Los Angeles Marine Terminals and near dock facilities. We stand at 53,600 units
[7:25] and that's a pretty good sweet spot for us to load those back against the vessels.
[7:31] Before moving to the recap of my business meetings, just a few comments about the vessels
[7:35] in route to the San Pedro Bay from Asia and on dock rail imports waiting to be loaded.
[7:41] First, let's take a look at the vessels in route. We have 46 container ships that have departed
[7:47] toward Asia, traversing the Pacific. That's a very solid number showing continued strong
[7:53] import volume as we go through our traditional peak season. And there are only nine container
[8:01] ships waiting to enter the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach at anchor between the 40 and
[8:08] 150 nautical mile range. Down from 109 in January, we've been steady state now in single digits
[8:18] for the past week and continue to work through this backlog of cargo. Great credit to the International
[8:24] Longshore Warehouse Union, the Marine Clerics Forum and all others involved as well as our marine
[8:30] terminals, trucking groups and liners shipping companies. Concerning the on-dock rail imports
[8:36] that await loading, busy slide, but in the green block middle.
[8:41] You see the 33,000 container units there on the ground, and more than 20,000 that have
[8:47] been sitting nine days or longer.
[8:49] Bottom line here is that the inland rail terminals in locations like Chicago, Memphis, Dallas,
[8:56] look like the ports did last year.
[8:59] They're simply overloaded with cargo, and the importers here in the United States need
[9:04] to pick up their containers much quicker so we can load up the next crane and get them out
[9:09] of the Los Angeles area.
[9:13] This graph shows the breakdown of the aging containers between
[9:17] both the Union Pacific Railroad and the BNSF. The numbers continue to climb and we're working
[9:22] around the clock with both companies as well as the administration and other private sector parties.
[9:29] And now for my meeting recap over the last two weeks. Since we last met on July 28th,
[9:34] I've had eight media interactions, including birch tool and telephone interviews, as well
[9:38] as taped and live segments for CBS, City News, the Journal of Commerce, CNN, News Nation,
[9:46] Yahoo Finance, Transport Topics, and Local News Radio Station, KNX 97.1 FM.
[9:53] Topics discussed were all about the supply chain, organized labor, inflation, China-Taiwan
[10:00] on issues 2022 outlook cybersecurity and our nation's leading
[10:05] port optimizer. Also occurring this reporting period where the
[10:09] standing weekly supply chain disruption task force meetings led
[10:13] by general lions, usdot and key stakeholders. We've had check in
[10:18] calls with the White House on the free logistics optimization
[10:21] works and our biweekly supply chain optimization and resilience
[10:25] steering committee meetings also known as score. Other
[10:29] After important meetings or as follows, beginning Friday, July 29th of the morning, we'd
[10:35] a Zoom call with Martin Overman, the surface transportation board chair and his team.
[10:40] I was joined by David Libetique and Avine Sharma.
[10:44] Later that afternoon, we had a coordination meeting with active via Zoom.
[10:49] I was joined with Marla, Mike D, David Libetique, Tony Juello, and Mike Luay, the managing director
[10:55] of active.
[10:57] In the evening, I attended and provided remarks at the first annual ILWU Women of the Waterfront
[11:04] event in Long Beach.
[11:05] Many thanks to our friend Fran Grove of ILW Local 94, one of our walking bosses for
[11:12] the invitation to participate in this inaugural event.
[11:19] On Monday morning, August 1st, I joined the CAPA Zoom meeting where retired Army 4 star
[11:25] General Stephen R. Lyons was the keynote and shared his updates on the current port
[11:30] and supply chain issues facing him as our new envoy.
[11:35] In the afternoon, I had a meeting with former Secretary of Commerce and U.S. Trade Representative
[11:41] Mickey Cantor in Santa Monica.
[11:44] That afternoon by a Microsoft Teams, I had a meeting with Scott Dickerson of CMACGM shipping
[11:49] line to discuss the port's cyber-resilience center.
[11:53] The meeting was led by our Port Police Chief Tom Gazing.
[11:57] In the afternoon, we had a meeting with Councilman for the 15th District Joe Buscaino in his
[12:01] San Pedro office.
[12:04] Tuesday afternoon, the 2nd of August joined the Northern California on ramp stakeholders
[12:09] meeting by a Zoom, organized by Don Barton of Gold River Orchards.
[12:14] Reps were present from the BNSF as well as CMACGM.
[12:18] I was joined by Mike D and our marketing team led by Eric Harris.
[12:23] This is all an effort to work with various sectors of California's agriculture community
[12:29] and get their cargo moving.
[12:31] As a side note, it reported recently in the media, here in the state of California, we are
[12:35] storing 2 billion pounds of almonds, 2 billion with a B, because they can't find transport
[12:42] space.
[12:43] And our job is to bring those parties together to get those goods to their overseas markets.
[12:48] In the afternoon of August 2nd, we had another Zoom meeting with Martin Oberman, the Surface Transportation Board Chair,
[12:54] and Joe Gregorio Senior of Pacific Crane and Maintenance Company to talk about land use opportunities
[13:00] and how best we can start pushing out more of our designated rail cargo.
[13:05] David Libetique and Avine Sharma joined me for that meeting.
[13:08] In the evening with Mike DiBernardo and Eric Carris, we had a business dinner with Paul Navarro of Costco.
[13:15] And on the 3rd of August in the afternoon, I had a business lunch with Joe Gatlin here in San Pedro at Raffiella.
[13:22] Thursday morning, the 4th of August, we had a meeting at HAB with Mariam Brown, President and Neil Naven, the Vice President for Clean Energy Innovations of SoCal Gas,
[13:33] talking about the hydrogen hub concept and better ways to navigate our future
[13:38] towards zero emission capabilities here at the port and with on-road trucks.
[13:43] Monday evening on the 8th of August, I attended an event at Ambassador Jane
[13:48] Duke's home, the Australian Consul General. The featured speaker was Senator, the
[13:53] honorable Don Ferrell, who was a spray-as-appointed minister for trade and
[13:58] tourism. The afternoon of Tuesday August 9th, I had a meeting with
[14:03] with Nilsa Serrano, working on our project at AB 59
[14:06] under the guidance of our State Secretary of Labor
[14:09] and with the team from Guggenheim Investments
[14:11] in Santa Monica.
[14:13] The ideas here are to create these inland ports
[14:16] and other opportunities to bring folks
[14:19] that are our customers closer to the port.
[14:22] Yesterday morning, August 10th,
[14:24] I joined the California inland port system project
[14:27] meeting by Zoom, led by Tony Boren
[14:29] of the Fresno Council of Governments.
[14:31] And yesterday evening, I joined the USC Kendrick Global Supply Chain Institute Executive Board
[14:37] meeting, followed by a reception aboard the Harbor Breeze Vessel Triumph in Long Beach.
[14:46] And a bit of outstanding news before I conclude my remarks this morning.
[14:51] Yesterday, California's Senators, Diane Feinstein, and Alex Padilla announced the eight local
[14:59] government's
[15:00] It's transit agencies and tribes in California that will receive more than $119 million in grants
[15:08] from the U.S. Department of Transportation. This funding comes from the rebuilding American
[15:14] infrastructure with sustainability and equity. Discretionary grant program also known
[15:20] as raise. The bipartisan infrastructure law that senators voted to pass last year increased
[15:28] the funding available for the RAIS program, which will help communities modernize transportation
[15:33] infrastructure. Specifically, the Port of Los Angeles will receive $20 million for our
[15:39] Maritime Support Access Terminal Island Rail System Project. This project will construct a
[15:46] four-lane rail roadway grade separation that will eliminate a significant impediment to truck
[15:53] access to an important container terminal support facility located on Terminal Island
[15:58] at the center of the San Pedro Bay Port's complex.
[16:03] Additionally, yesterday, the U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration
[16:09] awarded a $3 million advance transportation and congestion management technology's deployment
[16:16] grant to our Gateway Project.
[16:19] The grant will help us here at the Port of Los Angeles deploy advanced technologies to improve
[16:25] trucking, grayage, and terminal operator activities. This grant will accelerate our digitized data systems
[16:34] to further improve fluidity at the nation's busiest container port. With our port optimizer,
[16:41] the first of its kind information portal, we've proven that we can streamline maritime shipping data
[16:46] for cargo owners and supply chain stakeholders through secure channeled access.
[16:52] Many thanks to the federal government and so many agencies that helped us
[16:55] participate in these grant awards by selecting the Port of Los Angeles to be
[17:00] recipient of these grant funds and to the staff here at the Harvard Department for
[17:05] working so diligently on applying for the grant funding for our critical port
[17:09] projects. And what these grants do are accelerate our ability to deliver projects
[17:15] in the bricks and mortar infrastructure space as well as our industry leading digital
[17:21] infrastructure platform, the Port Optimizer.
[17:25] Madam President, that concludes my remarks for this morning and wraps up yet another
[17:29] busy two weeks here at America's Port.
[17:33] Thank you so much, Shane.
[17:34] Congratulations also.
[17:36] So exciting about all of the grant funding coming through the race programs.
[17:39] So congratulations on that at this point.
[17:41] I'd like to open it up to any commissioners who have questions for the executive director.
[17:50] Thank you for that report, Jean.
[17:53] Just two comments. One, thank you for acknowledging Sheila Gonzalez and the staff that put together the boat tours.
[18:00] The boat tours were very exciting, but I was also thrilled to see people crowding the docks along the new promenade.
[18:10] And I think it's a harbinger of things to come and how wonderful it will be when West Harbor is officially open
[18:16] and there can be more access to the community.
[18:19] Great videos.
[18:20] Also, I mean, it really has to be noted,
[18:23] when you go from 109 vessels waiting
[18:28] to none within the 40 miles,
[18:32] and only nine, half the 40 miles,
[18:36] and only six destined for LA, tremendous progress.
[18:40] Congratulations.
[18:41] I hope the community can join with us
[18:43] and acknowledge the wonderful work that was done, particularly around this issue of pollution
[18:51] and how it will help to have those vessels off. Nothing more. Thank you.
[18:56] In Commission Middleton on that note, we've worked that backlog down to the nine container ships,
[19:02] as you've mentioned, all while continuing box-for-box on the record setting pace that we set just last year.
[19:10] So the work of our longshore and all the other members of our supply chain that I mentioned have been at the highest levels
[19:17] while going even further to work down that backlog. Appreciate your recognition.
[19:27] I was going to say a couple things presently. Gene, thanks for that clarification and thank you, Commissioner Middleton.
[19:33] I was thinking the same thing as you were talking. We're still hitting records and we burned down the backlog and the
[19:38] the ILW team and industry and everybody working to resolve this all the way up to the administration has been just amazing.
[19:46] So thank you for your leadership, thank you for the leadership of ILW and everybody involved to make that happen.
[19:52] I wanted to also thank the recognition of Sheila Gonzalez for the attended public tours.
[19:59] Wow, I didn't realize there was going to be 3,000 people there. I thought that was fantastic to note that and show that.
[20:05] and people are excited to get out.
[20:07] I'm sure there was a lot of employees there.
[20:09] Folks at work on the docs have brought their families
[20:11] as probably like a family date,
[20:14] like bring your family to work day or something.
[20:17] So that's fantastic.
[20:18] And then I was gonna ask you regarding the grant funding.
[20:20] What's the timeframe of receiving that you may have said?
[20:24] I may have missed it, but what was the timing of that?
[20:26] I read that, I thought was great.
[20:28] And I was just wondering what the timeframe of that was
[20:31] to receive those grants.
[20:32] Yeah, we want the grant funding to come on yesterday, Commissioner, but in the days and weeks ahead we'll learn more from the USDOT and the Federal Highway Administrator on exact timelines and the progress that they'll be making to push the money out the door and the responsibilities we have on our project timelines.
[20:48] All right, great. Thank you. Congrats, all.
[20:50] Thank you so much, Jane.
[20:56] I appreciate it. Amber, back to you.
[20:59] Thank you.
[21:01] Just a note for the record.
[21:02] I understand there are people calling in who are trying to view our board,
[21:06] meaning which at the time we do have technical difficulties,
[21:09] we do understand it's audio only.
[21:12] So thank you all for your patience while we've worked through that technical difficulty.
[21:15] Moving on to item C, comments from the public on non-agenda items.
[21:21] Call Center, I do believe we have one caller, Kathleen Woodfield.
[21:24] whatever Kathleen is available, bring her on in.
[21:29] Kathleen's been admitted.
[21:31] So I'm here.
[21:33] Hi there. Welcome.
[21:34] Your time will begin.
[21:36] Kathleen, your time will begin when you begin speaking. Welcome.
[21:40] Okay, this is Kathleen Woodfield from Stampede Joke and
[21:43] IntelliHomeowners Coalition.
[21:45] My public comment is actually about your public comment process.
[21:50] Your process for public comment is so cumbersome.
[21:53] that it discourages public comment, other public agencies such as ACUMD have set up procedures
[22:05] that make public participation and comment a simple user-friendly process.
[22:11] I assume your goal is not to discourage public comment, but that is the outcome.
[22:16] Many of my colleagues opt out of giving their input to you because of this.
[22:23] Please investigate alternatives that can be implemented to make public comment
[22:29] more accessible to the public.
[22:33] I know today you're having even more technical problems.
[22:39] For instance, right now I don't think anyone is able to see the board meeting.
[22:44] at least when I called Joey back that's what he said and I've been looking all over Channel 35
[22:50] and the internet to find you. So you're down may have been solved by now. But my experience
[22:59] today is no different than on other days which is I put into a dark waiting room and I'm listening
[23:05] to this music going over and over and over again on my phone and then I hear you. And that's all I get.
[23:13] I have no idea of anything else so please reconsider how you're conducting these meetings for the public because it really shuts us out. Thank you very much.
[23:45] You're on your day.
[23:50] Thank you.
[23:50] Presently, would it be possible in a future meeting to have some kind of report back on this.
[23:56] This comment that public comment has burdened some.
[23:59] What are other agencies doing that makes it easier than what we do?
[24:04] Because I know we have a great IT staff.
[24:06] So if there's a way to improve it, I know we'd all be in favor of that.
[24:09] The last thing we want to do is shut out public comment.
[24:12] So if there are specific recommendations, you know, within the parameters of what it's possible to do, it'd be great to hear them and hopefully implement them. Thank you.
[24:23] Yes, I agree. Thank you for that comment and if it's possible to admit that Amber.
[24:29] And also, I just spoke with Chris came in here to speak with me and just a reminder that the city
[24:35] phone, city council phone rather is a resource for a lot of people if they need to see that.
[24:40] Again, we apologize, but the stream is down. Moving on with the meeting, that concludes item C
[24:46] for the regular agenda. Moving on with the meeting reports from the neighborhood council representatives,
[24:50] there are none to report today. Item E, report to the commissioners.
[24:54] I
[24:59] should meditate.
[25:01] Nothing to report.
[25:02] I was going to note this during Jean's comments, but let me add it now.
[25:07] I live right above birth 46, and I am delighted to report that there was an event last Saturday
[25:13] that apparently went from 9 in the morning till 9 at night, didn't hear a thing.
[25:19] So whatever is being done around noise, we should acknowledge whenever it's really good.
[25:24] But I personally am in favor of our waterfront getting the greatest use possible without disturbing the neighbors. I'm willing to put up with a little disturbance because I believe in public participation.
[25:35] There wasn't a thing to be heard. Good news. Thanks to staff for coordinating that. Thank you. Nothing more.
[25:53] Thank you.
[25:54] from where you're at, our sound monitor, I think, I think what, you know, making light of it,
[26:00] but in seriousness, that's why we have three commissioners on this,
[26:04] local commissioners on this commission because we're all kind of in locations that we can monitor
[26:08] certain things in our spare time, so thank you commissioner and for stating that. I did want to say
[26:15] that, let's see, my report out is I participated in the Harvard Department's softball double
[26:20] elimination tournament. As you could see, the trophy is right here on my desk. The team wanted
[26:26] me to at least say that the honey badgers won it for the second time last time was in 2019 and we've
[26:34] been this is the poor police team by the way. We've been down now since COVID for a couple of years
[26:40] obviously and I've been teasing people that we've actually held the trophy for four years but
[26:45] then I get some banter from the other teams that have won it actually for four years or five so
[26:50] But anyways, in all seriousness, it was fun.
[26:53] I wanted to thank everybody who participated,
[26:57] who organized it, and it was just nice to get out
[27:01] and be with the Harvard Department
[27:02] folks playing softball once again.
[27:05] I did want to mention, though, we did have before the game,
[27:10] we had a moment of silence for an employee
[27:13] who suddenly passed away named Tom Crenshaw,
[27:16] played on the green machine.
[27:17] I mean, I know we will do what we normally do when one of our family passes at one of these meetings that I thought it was fitting to at least.
[27:27] I mentioned Tom and his passing and he was an LA city employee for over 21 years, Harvard department employee for over six played on the green machine and was part of the CNM division family.
[27:41] So I just wanted to send our thoughts and prayers out to his family, his friends,
[27:47] the team, everybody who has known him and worked with him.
[27:50] And I just wanted to offer a moment of silence here for him.
[27:55] And then I know, presently, we'll do something that probably the follow-up meeting
[27:59] and more detail in recognition of Abtong and his contributions.
[28:05] So if we can do that, I'd like to take a quick moment of silence.
[28:17] Thank you.
[28:20] Thank you so much for that commissioner. I look forward to honoring Tom's memory and recognizing his family had a future meeting as well.
[28:28] For my work for I do not have anything to report this meeting. Thank you board secretary back to you.
[28:33] Thank you.
[28:35] Moving on to item at for board committee reports would be for the audit committee meeting of July 28, 2022 commissioner prosy.
[28:43] Yeah, so we went over a portion of the agenda we had some time constraints. So there's a few
[28:52] items on here. We will continue on to the next meeting, but we discussed grants and updates on
[28:58] grants and then the remaining nine items we will discuss at the follow-up meeting at the next
[29:04] meeting out of committee meeting. That's all I have. The next item approval of the minutes for the
[29:15] I would like to make a motion to approve both sets of minutes.
[29:20] So moved.
[29:21] Second.
[29:23] Thank you roll call vote commissioner Prozi.
[29:25] Yes.
[29:26] Commissioner Marino Linaris.
[29:28] Yes.
[29:29] Commissioner Middleton.
[29:30] Yeah.
[29:30] President Lee.
[29:33] Thank you.
[29:34] The minutes are approved.
[29:36] There are no presentations on a category age or level one closer to
[29:40] developments permits for item I. Next, J, board report to the executive director. Consent
[29:46] items number one through two. There are no comments on either of these items. Item one is a resolution
[29:52] to approve a local permit number 228 with so-called ship services, a California corporation,
[29:58] and item 2 was
[30:00] The resolution for the approval of dedication of our boulevard as a public street. Motion to approve items one and two. Second, roll call, please. Thank you, roll call, vote, Commissioner prosie. Yes, Commissioner marine on the rise. Yes, Commissioner Middleton. Yes, President Lee. Thank you. Item one and two are approved. Moving on to our next item item number three before we get into the record. There are three commenters.
[30:29] for this item. Item three is a resolution for the approval of U.S. Department of Transportation,
[30:36] fiscal year 19, court infrastructure development, program funding agreement for the Phoenix
[30:40] Container Terminal Intermodal Railyard between the City of Los Angeles, Harvard Department,
[30:45] L.H.G. and the U.S. Department of Transportation. And here to discuss today is Sue. Welcome, Sue.
[30:55] Good morning, commissioners. I'm Sue Lye,
[30:57] Harbor Engineer with the Engineering Division, and I'm here to present item number three for
[31:03] your consideration. This is a grant funding agreement with the U.S. Department of Transportation,
[31:10] Maritime Administration for the U.S. Department of Transportation, fiscal year 19,
[31:17] Port Infrastructure Development Program funding for the Phoenix Terminal Intermodal Railyard.
[31:24] Next slide please.
[31:29] The project location is highlighted in yellow on the diagram and it's located
[31:36] on Terminal Island within Pier 300 Terminal. The project scope consists of expansion of the
[31:45] existing rail yard. We can't see any slides. Did you think you put them up? Oh, I apologize for that.
[31:56] I don't know if you meant to, I don't want to interrupt.
[31:58] Yeah, I did, I did mean to.
[32:01] I'm sorry we are having an issue with the slides.
[32:04] We're trying to get them up as quickly as possible.
[32:07] Okay, thank you. I just have one slide to share.
[32:10] And I can, I can speak to it, describe it.
[32:15] So it was just a diagram and aerial views showing the project location.
[32:22] and this project is going to be expanding the existing rail yard.
[32:29] Yes, thank you Commissioner for showing you have a printout of the presentation
[32:34] and you'll see on that printout there's a yellow highlighted area
[32:39] and that's the project location, right adjacent to the existing rail yard.
[32:45] So the project's scope includes expansion of the rail yard and it includes new loading
[32:54] tracks, rail signal improvements and civil infrastructure and electrical improvements.
[33:03] The total cost of the project is $55.2 million and the project is currently in design.
[33:12] Thank you, Andrew.
[33:13] So
[33:16] the project is currently under design with construction schedule to begin in July of 2023,
[33:25] where at that time, the construction division will bring a construction contract for the
[33:32] board's consideration. And then completion is scheduled to be done by June of 2025.
[33:40] Now, the project has three sources of grant funding.
[33:47] The first one pertains to the Funding Agreement under your consideration today,
[33:52] which is the US DOT, Port Infrastructure Development Program Funds,
[33:59] in the amount of $18.2 million.
[34:02] So both Merad and Port Staff have been working closely together
[34:07] to meet a deadline of September 30th, 2022,
[34:12] to have this funding agreement in place.
[34:15] The other two grants for this project
[34:18] consists of 8.9 million of US DOT national highway,
[34:24] freight program, and state corridor enhancement funds.
[34:29] And 10.3 million of state trade corridors improvement funds.
[34:35] A funding agreement for both of these grants were approved by the board in August of 2021.
[34:44] The project is also funded by our report capital improvement funds in the amount of 17.8
[34:53] million.
[34:54] This concludes my presentation and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.
[35:10] I guess I have a quick question.
[35:11] Thank you for this.
[35:12] I think it's great.
[35:13] This is what we need to be doing.
[35:15] do we know just offhand how many rail lines for this will be there? I can see adjacent to that
[35:23] looks like there's three but it's such a high view. I'm not sure three or four but you know what
[35:29] that's going to add to some. Yeah. Yes good question commissioner. We're adding five tracks to the
[35:35] 187. That's fantastic. Okay that's great. So what I wanted to hear thank you if any other questions
[35:42] if they don't I'll make a motion to prove. We do have comments. Okay.
[35:47] Mr. Middleton. Um, were there any collars on this side of
[35:51] member? We have three. Because we're going to take the collars
[35:57] before. Are we going to take those? Yeah.
[36:00] Before we're trying to do right now. Okay. Well, what would you like to do
[36:04] then? Because I want to hear the collars. And you did send us one
[36:08] letter from Jasmine Egaladus. And I have questions about her letter. But if there were other comments,
[36:16] I just assume listen to everything. Okay. Thank you. We do have three. Okay. Our three callers are
[36:23] Kathleen Woodfield, Jan, Jan Victor Addison, and Yasmeen who did write the letter from
[36:34] or justice. First caller is Kathleen Woodfield. Call center if you would let Kathleen in.
[36:43] All three callers have been admitted. Okay great. Kathleen, you'll be our first speaker. Your time
[36:48] will begin when you begin speaking. Okay, can you hear me? Yes, thank you. Hi, I'm Kathleen Woodfield
[36:57] with San Pedro Peninsula Home Owners Coalition.
[37:00] We oppose this project because for the environmental review,
[37:10] for this expansion project is deficient,
[37:13] as it relied on behind-the-scenes approval
[37:17] and wrongfully used and addenda process on an existing FEIR.
[37:23] Environmental reviews need to be thorough and transparent and allow for public input.
[37:30] A proper SQL review should not be circumvented in this manner.
[37:35] The commission should delay this item until, after a proper sequel, a NEPA review has been
[37:42] completed.
[37:43] This expansion project will have significant emissions and health impacts for and on the
[37:50] community, and it needs to be properly studied.
[37:54] Dicbala is very important and should be followed, not circumvented.
[38:00] This project should be zero emissions as the technology is currently available.
[38:08] I'm really surprised that a $55.2 million project would be addressed in this
[38:15] manner and circumvent sequence through a dendiprocess. Thank you.
[38:22] Thank you for your time. Next caller, Jam. Jam your time will begin when you begin speaking.
[38:31] Hello, can you join me? Yes, thank you.
[38:35] Thank you, thank you. Hi, my name is Jam Victor Anderson. I am a resident of the city of Carson and
[38:42] a number, a senior organizer with GPRD in the age of 25 years
[38:54] since I've been in the U.S.
[38:58] and I'm meeting today because I found out about this rail yard expansion, I think, just
[39:06] a few days ago.
[39:08] And as a resident, it not only has lived in the region, right, I feel, but compact, but also
[39:13] was very invested in environmental issues
[39:15] and various pointing facilities that affect my neighborhood.
[39:20] I urge the board to lay the board on this process
[39:24] by which this project is moving forward.
[39:27] Under mines, many of the laws that
[39:29] are meant to protect frontline communities,
[39:32] living next to places that my hub environment will impact.
[39:37] I'm really disappointed that it's already here
[39:41] and this place where y'all are discussing about funds versus how have you engaged community
[39:47] when in my city, in person, there's 100, you know, there's hundreds of thousands of
[39:53] people and along each, there's half a million people in Romance and in San Piro, you know,
[39:58] there's so many residents and how are they engaged?
[40:00] How are they able to voice the potential impacts, but there are, that they're going to be dealing
[40:05] with as a result of this facility expanding.
[40:08] Any type of extension that's going to increase emissions, especially after what we've learned
[40:13] in this pandemic, where my community, as a person who will maintain West Long Beach,
[40:19] are immunocompromised until additional pollution adds additional burden to us when we see
[40:25] global pandemics like this.
[40:27] The poor really needs to delay this process.
[40:30] They need to engage residents and community groups, and that is the letter that I think one
[40:35] the board members was referring to since my organization signed on, along with their
[40:39] justice.
[40:40] It needs to be a stop to these backdoor behind-the-scenes review process because it undermines
[40:47] the fact that this board is actually supposed to represent and protect the communities and
[40:52] really think about how projects, yes, well, benefits are economics, but also protect residents
[40:58] who make sure that our health isn't compromised.
[41:00] And finally, if there are any conversations about rail reports that the poor of Harvard
[41:07] commissioners really invest in zero emissions, but we can't move forward with that until
[41:11] you go through a true transparent and robust process of engaging residents to eat part of this
[41:18] process so that we can voice a concern.
[41:20] Thank you so much for your time and I really hope that there is a delay to this conversation.
[41:26] Thank you.
[41:26] for your time. Our next caller is Yamine. Is it Ag-E-Lidus?
[41:38] And for the weather. Yes,
[41:41] Meane did provide a letter which has been provided to you. Welcome. Your time will begin.
[41:48] Hi, this is. Okay, wonderful. Can you hear me? Yes, thank you. Okay, perfect. Thank you so much.
[41:56] Hi, my name is Yasmin Agiletus, I'm an attorney with Earth Justice and I want to start by saying
[42:03] I really appreciate the opportunity to make Paul the comment today and that I fully support
[42:09] the testimony that my two colleagues just gave. Yes, I submitted a comment letter along with
[42:16] Health, Environment Suggestions and Environmental Groups yesterday afternoon asking the commission
[42:21] to delay voting on approving the $18 million in federal funding for the Phoenix Railway Project.
[42:30] We're asking the board to delay this vote until after it's able to perform a new proper
[42:36] environmental review for the project under both Sequa and NEPA. In fact, we think that it's
[42:42] actually unlawful for the commission to move forward with the funding vote today until it fixes
[42:46] those environments review documents. So the review documents for this project were completed
[42:52] in 2012 and the project was then significantly expanded in 2016 and again in 2021
[42:58] and the expansion proposed last year and approved by the board in the second addendum
[43:04] was very significant to add at least five tracks and to increase throughput by an additional
[43:09] 520,000 TEUs annually, this is a big, you know, these are big changes and we think that
[43:16] just doing a, you know, cursory, non-public addenda to approve that is just not right.
[43:22] And then under federal law, a project is not able to receive federal funding until a proper
[43:28] need to review is complete.
[43:29] So that's why we're raising these comments today.
[43:31] And there's really two reasons why we think the need to review and secure reviews should
[43:35] be redone.
[43:36] First, is that the COVID-19 pandemic
[43:38] had brought on significant increases in freight pollution,
[43:42] which were all very aware of from the shipping locomotive
[43:44] and trucks, and that was not accounted
[43:47] for any of the environmental reviews for the project.
[43:50] So we think that new SQL and NEPA reviews need to be done
[43:53] in order to address this increase in pollution.
[43:57] Just as, you know, and as part of that,
[43:59] these increased circumstances, there's also cumulative impacts
[44:03] from the rail yard and other surrounding projects including the increase in shipping
[44:09] that couldn't have been addressed under the current condition. So we think that the reviews
[44:14] need to properly show that and evaluate that. And then second, as my colleagues mentioned
[44:20] as well, the environmental reviews for the project relied on two, you know, behind-the-scenes,
[44:25] backdoor approvals. This just isn't acceptable, especially for significant changes to the projects,
[44:31] like we've seen here. So we really need that all environmental views are going to be transparent
[44:36] and public in order to comply with CEQA and MEPA. And then finally, you know, if the port of
[44:41] L.A. is going to, you know, if this project does move forward, it should use your mission locomotives,
[44:46] trucks, and railroad equipment. You know, this technology is currently available. We've been
[44:51] advocating for it heavily because we know that it is a way for industry to be able to meet its needs,
[44:56] but also not for single communities.
[45:00] Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner, is that does conclude the commenters for item number three at this time?
[45:11] Sounds like we need report back from council and Commissioner Melton has a question.
[45:20] May I speak now? Yes. Okay. I'd like to thank the three callers, particularly Ms. Aginitas for the specificity that she provided.
[45:32] I thought this was a pretty routine resolution, but I think there have been some very serious
[45:40] questions raised, and I'm happy to see, as always, representation from the city attorney,
[45:47] and I think I don't know if Chris Cannon or someone from that department's around.
[45:52] But here's what troubles me, and what I find very problematic, and I'd like some answers
[45:58] on the record.
[45:58] First of all, it appears that there is a deadline to apply for this funding and that staff
[46:06] has been working very diligently to meet that deadline.
[46:10] And when I'm done, Ms. Ly, perhaps you could address that because we certainly don't want
[46:14] to lose the funding because we haven't complied.
[46:20] Secondly, my understanding is that rail is considerably better than trucks in terms of
[46:28] pollution and that we want to put as much cargo as we can on rail because it reduces pollution.
[46:36] So it would appear that anything we could do to further the efficiency of rail transport
[46:42] is a good thing for the port, for our clients, and for the community. Next, we heard in Mr.
[46:51] Siroka's reports, we're having problems with rail now. We don't want to do anything to delay rail.
[46:57] We want to do something to improve it.
[47:01] Now, I know the collars, I'm hoping the collars are responsible and would not make allegations
[47:07] likely when I hear that there wasn't a proper sequel and there are things like circumventing
[47:16] the process behind the scenes, dealings, backdoor approvals, those all sound pretty horrific.
[47:23] But as a commissioner, I don't want to rubber stand something if that's happening.
[47:28] So I'm going to ask whoever, Chris, or Sue, to address those because I don't take those
[47:36] allegations lightly, and I don't think we should be accused of those sorts of things
[47:42] that there's no factual basis.
[47:45] Ms. Agilita's in her presentation mentioned 2012.
[47:50] Well, there's obviously this enormous time lag between a project being proposed,
[47:58] SQL and EIR process, everything being put in place, funding being approved, and it coming
[48:04] to the board, to say that we need a more current SQL, it's only going to delay the process
[48:11] another couple of years, and that will then lead to the allegations of conditions of change.
[48:17] Conditions have always been changing.
[48:19] I mean, that's the nature of a dynamic port.
[48:23] So those are some of the concerns I have.
[48:26] I mean, my original intent was that we need to move forward.
[48:30] We need more on doc rail.
[48:32] And if this is gonna facilitate it,
[48:34] we don't wanna hold it up,
[48:36] but I'd appreciate it if someone could address
[48:39] those concerns because I certainly don't wanna ignore them.
[48:42] Thank you.
[48:44] Thank you.
[48:45] Well said, who would like to jump in first?
[48:48] I can start. Go ahead. Why don't you start? Maybe you can talk about the deadline. I think
[48:52] that's probably the big thing here. Thank you, Chris. In regards to the deadline we're
[48:58] facing for this funding agreement, both Merad and the Port are meeting a, are working towards
[49:05] a September 30, 2022 deadline to have a fully executed funding agreement. So the process
[49:13] will be that the port goes through its approval process, and then the document will be sent to
[49:23] Maraad for their final approval. So we're getting close to that September 30 deadline.
[49:35] As far as the the SQL issues are concerned, first of all we are always appreciating from
[49:41] the community, especially Earth Justice,
[49:44] they're a good commenter, and they participate
[49:48] in a lot of the discussions that we have.
[49:51] That being said, I think, maybe I can clear
[49:53] by a couple of things.
[49:56] First of all, this project wouldn't increase
[50:00] the terminal's capacity by 520,000 cubic rupees to use.
[50:05] It just increases the rail yards capacity.
[50:08] But the overall terminal capacity stays the same and that's actually described in the document and our addendum that's described there.
[50:19] So the terminal is birth limited.
[50:23] I can try to explain that to the engineers and carry it out. There's probably get into the details, but essentially the limitations on throughput have to do with the amount of cargo that can be moved across the birth.
[50:33] And so increasing the capacity of the rail yard doesn't change the limitation of what can and cannot come across the birds. There's limitations on just what is humanly possible to be unloaded.
[50:45] That's my sort of easy explanation. I'm sure that the engineers could describe it in a much more precise manner, but that's essentially it.
[50:53] So changing the capacity of the rail yard simply allows for a mode switch into your point commissioner militant. That's good if you can take trucks off the road and instead put cargo on to trains.
[51:07] We like that it has an overall benefit for greenhouse gas and for the environment so so that's a I think that was a.
[51:16] clarification that is needed. The second clarification is NEPA. NEPA was done for this project by Merad.
[51:23] We have the NEPA document and it can be circulated. I don't know where it is right now, but Merad completed the SQL for this project last September.
[51:35] and it, sorry, I said NEPA for this project in last September and so that part
[51:44] has been taking care of us before. Our, the adendum was brought to the board. You
[51:50] considered it also want to say last September and I can confirm the date but it was
[51:57] not done behind the scenes or anything. It was brought to the board. So I think
[52:02] those are the main points. The last one is as far as zero emissions is concerned. We can't
[52:07] speak to the specifics of this project because the nature of the way the grant process works and so
[52:14] forth. But the Phoenix terminal has been very active, communicating with us and it's a desire to
[52:24] meet our 2030 cap goal of being zero mission cargo handling
[52:30] equipment. We are going to continue to work with them in that, you
[52:34] know, will certainly include activities in the rail yards. So we'll
[52:38] need to continue to work closely with them on their activities as
[52:42] they lead up to 2030. But we have no reason to think that they are
[52:45] not serious about that commitment because they've made that
[52:48] Publicly. Thank you very much. I could just add Commissioner that I did look at the May
[52:58] 20-21 agenda and and and a denim number two was item 11 on that agenda not on the consent
[53:08] agenda and and the denim was considered and accepted by the board. Thank you Ken. I couldn't
[53:14] remember if it was September. Thank you. It's made last year.
[53:22] I hope those clarifications sufficiently satisfy the commissioners that this has been a
[53:28] transparent process has been completed with full participation and support
[53:35] amera and that all of the environmental was taken care of as well as the process by which
[53:42] it comes to the public through this board and these stages in order to accept this
[53:48] grant funding, which I'm posing.
[53:51] Yeah, I was going to say, I remember when our late colleague Dave Arian was on this commission.
[53:56] I learned a lot from him on one of the things he talked about was expanding rail, the importance
[54:01] of it.
[54:02] So, I reflected back up now when I saw this and I can't help but think of the positive impact
[54:09] of this by taking trucks off the road.
[54:14] would be able to offload, especially now when we think about how impacted our docs are
[54:20] because of the what's going on in different parts of the country.
[54:24] This provides us an opportunity to not only load up more cargo on trains, but it also provides
[54:30] us to get the ships in and out of here quicker and then not sitting off the coast here polluting.
[54:36] So I think about all of those elements and I hear the callers I appreciate when they call in I've heard the you know we have to make it green we have to use green locomotives and I'm sure we will go down that path because we are heading down that path to get the zero emissions here within the next decade or so.
[54:57] so I still would like to move forward the motion and get this project designed and I think the
[55:05] opportunity to get even more input on not just the what but the how in this this opportunity for
[55:13] us and the community so I'd like to put that motion forward.
[55:20] Thank you motion for commission
[55:31] Thank you.
[55:33] Item three of today's agenda is approved.
[55:40] Moving on to item number four of today's regular agenda.
[55:44] We do have one commenter for the record.
[55:47] Item four is a resolution for the award of contract number 39981.
[55:52] To thermal environmental instruments LLC for the purchase of air monitoring.
[55:56] screen instrumentation. And here to discuss is Christine. Welcome Christine.
[56:01] It's actually going to be me this time. Sorry. We. Oh, it's me.
[56:07] So I'm going to cover Christine. So let me share my screen.
[56:20] Can everyone see it?
[56:22] Yes. Okay. So today we bring before you an item for purchase of certain monitoring equipment instrumentation.
[56:33] About a year ago we received instruction from management to replace all of the monitoring equipment for the four monitoring stations that exist at the port.
[56:47] There's the, as you can see in the Wellington Community Station, the St. Peter Community Station, the source dominated station on terminal island and coastal boundary station.
[56:56] and we received instructions to do that.
[56:59] The equipment, some of it is getting a lot,
[57:03] most of it is getting very old
[57:05] and so it needs to be replaced
[57:07] and so we were given that instruction.
[57:10] This is what's happening at the stations now.
[57:13] These are the four stations.
[57:14] As you can see, the source down there
[57:16] and the coastal boundary stations
[57:18] don't have as much operating of the coastal boundary station
[57:22] was shut down in anticipation of construction.
[57:24] that was going to go there. And then that's been delayed. But because of all the old equipment,
[57:30] we need to replace it. And then the source-domain station also is getting old. And so the community
[57:35] stations are largely still operating or there's some maintenance activity that's needed at those,
[57:40] but they're largely still operating. So once we began, once we received instruction about a year ago,
[57:48] to upgrade all of the equipment we had to go through a process. We first had to identify
[57:56] a list of all the equipment, figure out how much it cost, get internal approval to move forward,
[58:01] and then we entered the city's procurement process. That process is lengthy and it's designed
[58:08] to make sure that others get a chance to offer proposals or equipment. That is what has happened.
[58:18] Um, the, our, our staff, uh, Christine, who you, whose name we mentioned, and we also have, uh,
[58:25] technical advisors for this station, the two of them, uh, undertook this process. They've been
[58:31] working very, very hard and, uh, we're going through this process, including, uh, coming up,
[58:37] coming up with a good idea, they were able to piggyback on a solicitation for some of the equipment
[58:42] that was done by the, by the state of New Jersey. And so that actually speds things up. If it weren't for
[58:48] that we would have to go through an additional step.
[58:53] So the equipment is evaluated and reviewed and it's awarded.
[58:57] Some of the, depending upon the cost, if there is a,
[58:59] we reach a certain level of cost, I think it's over $150,000,
[59:03] we have to come to the board.
[59:05] So we're going through that process.
[59:08] We've ordered all of the equipment
[59:10] that can be ordered without going to the board due to the cost.
[59:14] And then now we have to come to the board and ask you
[59:17] for approval for ordering some of the other equipment.
[59:22] So this is what we're going to ask you to do.
[59:25] It is a recommendation for certain, it's SO2 carbon monoxide and multi-gas as you can
[59:33] see all, and there's four of each, so they all will be installed at each of the stations.
[59:40] When this is the timeline and this is something that was being asked for, this is how long
[59:46] it's going to take to install all of the equipment as you can see some of the equipment is already installed
[59:53] where you see there where it says PM 2.5 continuous monitor and PM 10 continuous monitor. We back
[1:00:00] We actually already received that equipment. It just came in last week. So we will begin installation of that by the end, hopefully the end of this week. It's going to begin. We say by the end of September for completion, to give ourselves a little buffer in case we have any issues that come up during installation. The ultra fine particles counters. One of them will be installed by the end of this month, another one by the end of October. There's a delay in one of the pieces of equipment that's being shipped in.
[1:00:29] And then the green items are the ones that you are going to be approving or considering,
[1:00:36] I should say today, the NO2 analyzer we actually ordered last Friday and the meteorological
[1:00:44] instruments are actually already being installed.
[1:00:47] They will be installed as part of the work with the continuous PM 2.5 and PM 10 monitors.
[1:00:54] And then of course the data log in the communication system is all going to be automated now.
[1:00:58] So all of that is most installed. There's one station where we're still finalizing that when it's all done. This is what each station will have was just all of this equipment will have four of them.
[1:01:11] And they'll all have this these full systems and so we're pretty happy a lot of that equipment is brand new and it will be newer and perform better than the existing equipment.
[1:01:28] We had a meeting there were concerns raised by Andrew Rico who was with USC and so we actually had a meeting on Tuesday with Andrea and two of her professor colleagues from USC as well as certain members of the community.
[1:01:46] they were concerned about the length of time that it takes or it has taken, I should say, for this to occur.
[1:01:55] They were also concerned about data gaps for information that they were looking on the website and they saw certain information that would be.
[1:02:03] Here's the time where data were shut down.
[1:02:06] They wanted to make sure that the overall maintenance was maintained on the site.
[1:02:11] they were worried that that was not happening, and then who all was, you know, making sure that
[1:02:18] the data quality is good. We explained to them the city's procurement process, but we agreed
[1:02:23] that we would see if there are ways to expedite this kind of thing in the future. For certain things,
[1:02:29] there ought to be a way to do it. They said, you know, if you hadn't or had to order all the equipment
[1:02:33] at once, maybe you wouldn't go over the threshold to have to go to the board, and that's true.
[1:02:37] So going forward, we need to obviously pay attention to that.
[1:02:42] The data gaps that were identified have to do with replacement of existing equipment that is breaking down.
[1:02:49] And so we explain that, but we also have since that meeting talked about a system where when we take some equipment down for replacement in the monitoring stations,
[1:03:01] They immediately pops up a notice online or on the station, excuse me, the website which says equipment down for maintenance.
[1:03:12] And so it would pop up immediately. It doesn't say that now. It just goes down and then you can't see.
[1:03:17] So we're actually trying to build in a system so that the moment we pull it down for maintenance or replacement or whatever, something pops up so people know what's going on. So that's something we're working on.
[1:03:27] We also agreed to have quarterly meetings with Andrea and her USC colleagues as well as members of the community.
[1:03:35] The first one would be in three months, which would be right around the time that those near term items that you saw here are going to be completed should be there around October.
[1:03:46] And so we at that time we can explain in more detail our ongoing maintenance activities that are planned.
[1:03:54] We'll talk about our quality control that is going to be occurring and is already occurring
[1:04:00] and it was occurring.
[1:04:02] And then we can answer any questions.
[1:04:05] And then the last thing is we want to invite once this is completed, I think, as early
[1:04:10] as January, we will have at least one of the stations done.
[1:04:17] We would like to invite new members of the board as well as Andrea and others for a tour.
[1:04:23] We'll take and show you all of one of the stations and show you exactly what's there.
[1:04:30] We'll show you how the equipment works and how it's downloaded and monitored on the site on our website.
[1:04:35] And so that way everybody can see.
[1:04:36] And at that time, we can talk further about, you know, data collection, data quality, and other issues.
[1:04:42] So the last thing I want to say, I just want you to want you to know that our staff and particular Christine Batikian who is in charge of this program for us has done a fantastic job.
[1:04:54] She's working very hard and she's very concerned about the issues that have been raised and wants wants to address them as best she can.
[1:05:05] And so she's done an excellent job.
[1:05:07] I really want to give her a lot of credit
[1:05:09] for the works that she's done
[1:05:11] and let you know that she's been doing her good job.
[1:05:14] So I'll stop there.
[1:05:15] I know that there is a caller.
[1:05:20] And then I'll be happy to answer questions.
[1:05:22] Yes, let's go ahead and hear from the caller.
[1:05:34] Thank you.
[1:05:35] I'm having difficulty getting my camera available,
[1:05:38] but let's just go with audio for now.
[1:05:41] So we do have one caller,
[1:05:43] Kathleen Woodfield who was on hold and we did receive one letter that was
[1:05:47] provided to the board from Pacific Environment that was provided upon
[1:05:51] receipt. A call center of Kathleen is on. You may begin speaking when your your
[1:05:58] time will begin when you've been speaking. Thank you.
[1:06:14] Hi. Hi. Your time will begin
[1:06:16] speaking. Hi. Thank you. I was trying to unmute. This is Kathleen with
[1:06:25] I thought Chris Cannon's presentation was very comprehensive and candid, and he kind of covered everything I was going to say.
[1:06:37] I just want to say that we, of course, approve of this purchase.
[1:06:44] and we are encouraged by that in the future things will work better. There have been data
[1:06:55] gaps and also breakdowns and some monitors shut down as long as some three years I think
[1:07:01] at this point. So you can imagine that this was very alarming to the community that feels
[1:07:07] this is a very important asset to both support and to us to know what's going on, but I do want
[1:07:16] to say I appreciate everything that Chris said and I was on the phone call and I do plan to
[1:07:23] be involved and I greatly appreciate Andrea Rico for bringing this to our attention.
[1:07:36] I'm a
[1:07:36] more time than should have been allowed for certain things to go on without being addressed
[1:07:43] and I hope that the communication between the consultant and the support improves.
[1:07:50] And I'm hoping that someone at Onport staff will actually be assigned to keeping an eye on
[1:07:58] the monitor data as well and make sure that everything is working properly.
[1:08:02] So thank you very much. We look forward to these systems being new and being functioning properly.
[1:08:14] Thank you.
[1:08:19] I take the clock down. I think it's interfering with the camera.
[1:08:24] Okay, there we go. That does conclude our comments for this item number four.
[1:08:30] Thank you.
[1:08:31] First,
[1:08:36] I'd like to thank staff for a really comprehensive presentation, everyone who worked on it, and I particularly like to thank the person who submitted the written comments and also Ms. Woodfield.
[1:08:50] I mean, I believe that there's no ill intent on anyone, from anyone on the staff, and I had a lot of comments and a lot of questions.
[1:09:00] but once I heard Ms. Woodfield say, I really want to thank staff for bringing us into the process.
[1:09:06] I'm glad Ms. Woodfield was able to participate in the call with Dr. Rico. I think it's a great
[1:09:13] example of cooperative work. I'm obviously in favor of this, but because this topic has been
[1:09:20] the subject of quite a bit of letter writing and comments and public comments and so on,
[1:09:26] I want to ask you a couple direct questions, Chris.
[1:09:29] So there's no doubt on the record of what's happening here.
[1:09:32] I particularly appreciated the PowerPoint presentation.
[1:09:36] Could you turn to page three?
[1:09:38] Current monitoring station operating status.
[1:09:45] Do I correctly understand that within the port of LA,
[1:09:49] there are a total of four monitoring stations?
[1:09:54] Yes, that's right.
[1:09:56] And do I further correctly understand that there was a problem with one of them,
[1:10:00] whether we want to call it being shut down, turned off, malfunctioning,
[1:10:06] and that was the coastal boundary station.
[1:10:09] That's right, it was shut down.
[1:10:10] We anticipated that there was going to be construction for the outer harbor.
[1:10:17] The ports policy for construction is that you can't have somebody
[1:10:22] somebody on an operating actively on a construction site who's not part of the construction team, so we have we have a technician who goes to each of the monitoring stations probably about once a week.
[1:10:37] Sometimes more if there's maintenance and other things that need to occur and so we can't we couldn't have somebody go to that station when it's in the middle of a construction zone.
[1:10:48] So we shut it down. Now that being said, we're about to put it up with new equipment and there will be construction in the future.
[1:10:56] And so we're actually going to work with our construction team and with the port to find a way to get access to that station even during construction for our technicians so that we can make sure we keep that operating that we don't have to shut it down.
[1:11:11] Perfect. That was a longer answer than I anticipated. So let me go back and break it down a little.
[1:11:18] The bottom line is, of the four stations in the past recent history, let's say the last two
[1:11:25] three years, the three stations were functioning. The only one that had a problem was coastal, correct?
[1:11:31] No. There were two stations that were functioning, the two community stations, the Wilmington and
[1:11:35] San Pedro stations were functioning. The coastal station has been shut down for I think two or three
[1:11:41] years, the, the, the, uh, uh,
[1:11:44] terminal island station has been shut down for a little over a year.
[1:11:47] Okay.
[1:11:47] About a year and a half.
[1:11:48] Your comments with references to the technicians.
[1:11:52] Again, I appreciate Ms. Woodfield's concern.
[1:11:55] And the fact that she said,
[1:11:58] could staff have somebody looking into this and monitoring it?
[1:12:03] I think your answer made clear that it's not like you set up these stations and forget them.
[1:12:08] There's a technician there every week and you indicated in the answer you just gave that not only is there technician there every week, but you are trying to figure out a way to keep that technician checking up on the systems, even if there's ongoing construction, which here to four has meant technician couldn't be present.
[1:12:29] You're trying to work around that correct.
[1:12:32] That's correct.
[1:12:33] And may I correct something that I said a moment ago as well?
[1:12:36] Sure.
[1:12:36] Sure.
[1:12:37] The source dominated station, which is the terminal island station, was shut down for about
[1:12:41] a year.
[1:12:42] It's back up.
[1:12:43] As you can see, it's not fully, but it's got PM 2.5 and black carbon monitoring occurring
[1:12:50] there now.
[1:12:51] And so I just wanted to be clear that it is limited things, but it is functioning now and
[1:12:59] And obviously we'll be completely functional when we finish all of this installation.
[1:13:03] But yes, the other question was somebody looks at the data.
[1:13:07] We have a technician that goes out and checks the sites, each of the sites about once
[1:13:11] a week.
[1:13:12] And there are people that look at the data including Christine, there is a person who is assigned
[1:13:16] to it.
[1:13:18] She sees the data as well as our technician.
[1:13:20] So we're going to describe all of those QA procedures kind of in a kind of a slow to call.
[1:13:31] And that's one of the things that we'll go over with the people in our first quarterly meeting in two months.
[1:13:37] Okay, next slide.
[1:13:39] When you've had the monitoring network upgrade process, I understand that this is taking longer than any of us would have liked.
[1:13:48] But as I look at this slide, when I look at the four steps in procurement, I mean number
[1:13:57] one, you have to figure out what you needed, which is specifications, and you have to submit
[1:14:03] it to the board.
[1:14:05] Solicitation, I mean, we certainly don't want to just pick either the old provider or the
[1:14:12] first one that comes to mind, so you have to go through a transparent solicitation process
[1:14:18] which would be two and three, and then four is what we're doing right now, correct?
[1:14:25] That's right. It's frustrating, but it is important. You need to give people access to the
[1:14:30] you know, potential bidders access to a process to allow them to be able to
[1:14:37] participate and submit their quotes and potentially provide a service. It takes time, but it's
[1:14:43] necessary in order to, you know, provide full access. So yes, that's right. So it's
[1:14:48] completions expected by September 31st and we're going to vote on this today. Hopefully we'll be
[1:14:56] six weeks ahead of time. A little bit less
[1:15:00] And that, but yes, it has to go through the city council, you know, acceptance period, and that takes two or three weeks, but, but we say completion expected by September 31st, just to give ourselves a little cushion in case there is a delay. Okay. And then the final question I have is installation timeline. You say on this slide, completions expected by March, 2023. But when we look at the installation timeline, you've actually
[1:15:29] installed some of these items already. And it looks like many of them may be in by the end
[1:15:37] of January. And I trust that if it's available in the equipment here earlier, you're certainly
[1:15:42] going to comply and it'll be installed earlier. So the installation timeline is dependent on when
[1:15:48] the equipment arrives, correct? That's right. We again tried to be conservative. We didn't want to
[1:15:55] predict and then have a date arrive and people say hey wait a minute you said you know it's going
[1:15:59] to be done and it's not so just to give you an example the the the NO2 analyzer has a four to
[1:16:09] six month timeline that it takes to to have it delivered we ordered it about I think a week ago
[1:16:16] so four months puts us at the end of the this year so it's possible that we could receive it by the
[1:16:22] end of this year and then it takes a little time to install. So that might put us into January.
[1:16:28] We said March because we went with the six months because it's four to six months and so if it
[1:16:33] takes that long then it'll go into March. So same as true with the carbon monoxide and the ozone
[1:16:40] and the SO2 analyzers, all of those and the calibration system. Those are things that we will be ordering
[1:16:46] today if you approve this, we'll order it right away as soon as we're finished with our process, and then we hope it comes faster, but we are comfortable with saying it'll be installed by January.
[1:17:02] Okay, and again, without putting words in your mouth, but as Mr. Matthew will say, we're not in the court of law.
[1:17:16] and you're ready to put it in when it arrives.
[1:17:19] We sure are, it is correct.
[1:17:20] And again, I want to emphasize that our staff, Christine,
[1:17:24] and others are very, very concerned about this
[1:17:29] and even a little frustrated that things just take
[1:17:32] the time that they take.
[1:17:34] And so we're going as fast as we can.
[1:17:36] And everybody is trying to do their job.
[1:17:39] Theresa Pasano is the director of the manager of that team.
[1:17:43] and she's been very, very hands on along with Christine to try and make sure this is getting
[1:17:48] in. So they're going as fast as they can. They really are.
[1:17:52] Okay. No other questions. Thank you. Very comprehensive answers.
[1:17:57] Thank you, Commissioner. Are there any other questions from the other commissioners?
[1:18:03] Seeing none, would something like to put forth a motion?
[1:18:07] So moved. Second.
[1:18:09] What was the rain of the next a year?
[1:18:16] Yes there was a rain of the next year?
[1:18:18] Yes, there was a rain of the next year.
[1:18:19] As you can.
[1:18:19] Thank you.
[1:18:22] All right.
[1:18:22] I see.
[1:18:23] It is a rain of the next year.
[1:18:24] Thank you.
[1:18:24] Thank you.
[1:18:25] I'll move it.
[1:18:30] That does include open session items on the regular agenda.
[1:18:35] Moving on to our special agenda.
[1:18:38] There are no comment cards under C how do we do have a
[1:18:41] a few speakers that are waiting to speak.
[1:18:45] So for item number one is a resolution
[1:18:47] to approve the fifth amendment to lease number 915,
[1:18:51] the San Pedro Public Market LLC,
[1:18:53] and here to discuss this mic, Alvin.
[1:18:54] Welcome, Mike.
[1:18:55] Thank you, Amber.
[1:18:56] Thank you, Amber.
[1:18:57] Any commissioners?
[1:18:58] Any commissioners?
[1:19:04] You have the second device.
[1:19:07] Why is it doing that?
[1:19:14] I don't have two devices open.
[1:19:16] All right.
[1:19:16] Hey, that's better though.
[1:19:18] I'm whispering, that's why I think.
[1:19:20] It
[1:19:29] sounds like you have a device.
[1:19:32] You know, it does.
[1:19:56] Okay.
[1:19:57] Morning, everybody.
[1:19:58] Sorry about that technical glitch there.
[1:20:00] I think we're good with audio now.
[1:20:02] So my galvan director,
[1:20:03] Washington commercial will stay here to present on the fifth amendment to
[1:20:08] least number 915 with the centimeter public market just as a little bit of context on May 16, 2016.
[1:20:15] 2016, the board approved the initial lease with the developers and
[1:20:23] Peter Public Market for redevelopment of the site,
[1:20:26] firmly known as what's a call on St. Pedro.
[1:20:29] The last amendment was the fourth amendment,
[1:20:31] which was on May 20, in May of 2022, and that extended the current
[1:20:36] option period, the September 17, 2022, to allow for the completion of five
[1:20:43] milestones, which were included in a previous amendment, and those milestones include the
[1:20:48] requirements.
[1:20:49] She released that marketing package, which was done, received first bona fide term sheet
[1:20:54] for project construction debt, which was completed, execute term sheets with the selected
[1:20:59] lenders, which was completed in required internal finance staff in May of 2022.
[1:21:04] And then the last two steps still exist, which is keeping credit for the approval from the
[1:21:08] selected lenders and closing the loans.
[1:21:09] So what we're here for today is to provide enough time for that to happen.
[1:21:13] It's been out another 60 days, the option period to November 16th, 2022, and approve various documents,
[1:21:22] including consent with the do the lenders, as well as an established certificate and a memorandum of
[1:21:29] police. So, General, we understand what the site is, 48-year site, which is the main commercial
[1:21:37] development site here in San Pedro. We're asking the board today to do various things that
[1:21:43] that are required really to take the loan into the last these loans into the last process of
[1:21:49] escrow and allow them to be closed by the lenders and the developer. So going through item by item
[1:21:56] the option that's encouraging which I mentioned just for 60 days. November 16th 2022 will be the new
[1:22:02] option extension period deadline. We had to change the definition of lease hold mortgage,
[1:22:07] and that goes to what we have as the two lenders here. So let me give a little detail on that.
[1:22:13] We have Part View Financial, R-E-P-I-T-L-P, which is a conventional lender that is securing
[1:22:20] their rights to the money that they are lending through a deed of trust. And then we have Petra's
[1:22:26] Pace Finance LLC, which is not conventional, but they issue bonds and secure their rights on the
[1:22:31] property be assessment. And so we had to change various issues with the lease to allow for that
[1:22:38] assessment to be used on leasehold interest to collateralize the leasehold interest through
[1:22:44] the assessment process, which wasn't perceived to be an issue earlier, but had to be changed as
[1:22:50] a developer went out looking for lending opportunities in the marketplace. The Petros Pace piece,
[1:22:56] which is a senior piece is approximately $55 million and Petra's piece is a lending vehicle
[1:23:04] that allows for lower rates, longer term loan, which can be used only for green type improvements
[1:23:13] on the facility.
[1:23:14] So it can't be used for all components of facility improvements, but can be used for specific
[1:23:19] improvements, which relates to the dollar amount that they have there.
[1:23:21] The junior loan here with CARPU financial is $44.5 million, and that can be used for
[1:23:28] any purposes on the site.
[1:23:30] The developer has the remainder of the equity through their own monies and sponsors
[1:23:37] through Oscar E financial that amount to a total cost estimate of about $155 million for
[1:23:43] the first two phases.
[1:23:44] So other issues that need to be addressed based on the lending vehicles that are being used
[1:23:49] are allowing the police hold to be used as collateral for the assessment, modifications
[1:23:54] to exhibit end to allow for or to require the port to provide the forms that have been
[1:24:00] received and are attached to amendment 5 as new consenting documents to future lenders
[1:24:09] that would come into the transaction in the future whether that be a lender that was approved
[1:24:14] by the board or a lender that was affiliated with these existing lenders and therefore did
[1:24:18] need to be approved by the board. Approval of the form of a stopping certificate, which will be
[1:24:23] required once escrow opens, will be deposited into escrow, to basically state that the tenant
[1:24:30] in our case SBPM has about a tenancy here is not in any issue, does not have any default issues
[1:24:37] with a tenancy that the police is valid to go for, and also to disclose whatever existing leases are
[1:24:42] on the property at the same time. Memorandum of lease will be used to record against the property
[1:24:47] at the close of escrow, and then the consenting documents which are in favor of the lenders
[1:24:54] and SPPM that relate to various obligations between the port and the lenders to allow for
[1:24:59] notice to be given in case there are issues of default with the existing loans.
[1:25:05] So recommendation is to request to approve the proposed Fifth Amendment to be seminar 9-1-5
[1:25:10] with San Pedro Public Market just to give a little bit of context of where we are in
[1:25:14] the process.
[1:25:14] So once this approval goes through and then goes through city council and everything gets approved there, our expectation is is that that will allow escrow to open quickly thereafter.
[1:25:25] We expect once escrow opens that it's going to be 30 to 45 days to close.
[1:25:30] There are several conditions that still need to be met as far as the least being triggered, which is important to understand after escrow opens and after all conditions are met.
[1:25:39] the rest row title insurance appraisal environmental report system sent to documents being approved.
[1:25:46] In addition to that, a financing condition, which is a final financing condition,
[1:25:49] meaning that the loan must close for the developer to actually take the option on the lease.
[1:25:55] They also need California State Lands to provide a documentation of the termination of consistency
[1:26:02] under the State Lands Act. We have to have received that and they needed to enter into a project
[1:26:06] labor agreement, which they have already done. So this is the loan closing, which I said would occur,
[1:26:12] sometime likely in the next 60 to 75 days, based on when this approval gets received from City Council,
[1:26:19] will then create the condition for the last approval there, and we should be ready for them to
[1:26:24] trigger the option and begin the lease and then construction will start soon thereafter.
[1:26:31] So that is the end of the presentation. I'm hoping up to any questions. I believe there
[1:26:36] or maybe are some commenters involved?
[1:26:39] Yes, let's see the colors first, please.
[1:26:52] Can you hear me?
[1:26:53] Yes, there you go.
[1:26:54] Okay, thank you.
[1:26:55] We do have three speakers,
[1:26:58] or excuse me, there are four commenters for this item.
[1:27:01] First commenter is Rock Ashfield.
[1:27:03] Your time will begin when you begin speaking.
[1:27:05] Thank you.
[1:27:07] Hi, thank you.
[1:27:08] This is Rock Ashfield on the local wheelchair here in San Pedro.
[1:27:11] In fact, we just opened the office on the 200 block of 6th Street, which is blocks from the West Harbor development.
[1:27:18] And I'm here to support the West Harbor development and this amendment.
[1:27:22] When I moved to L.A. 24 years ago, I worked for a local consulting company that actually did the initial analysis on the pike, which was then known as the Queensway Bay project.
[1:27:33] So yes, development projects can change your name big way.
[1:27:36] I remember at the time people were saying,
[1:27:37] well, people really come to downtown Long Beach.
[1:27:40] Well, we know they did.
[1:27:41] So I've lived in San Peter 921 years waiting for the opportunity
[1:27:45] that we're seeing now with the developments
[1:27:47] in downtown San Pedro and the West Harbor development.
[1:27:50] I know people who are enjoying the prom night already
[1:27:53] who take walks there.
[1:27:54] You know, we've had two events down there.
[1:27:56] The Urban Land Institute had something.
[1:27:58] Joe Pescano had something with a tent where the prom night
[1:28:01] I go there so we can already see the feel for it.
[1:28:04] So I want to compliment the porch and the development team
[1:28:07] for the work they've done and the progress they made.
[1:28:10] Development is not easy.
[1:28:11] So the fact that we're here in the precipice
[1:28:13] of this financing is frankly fantastic
[1:28:16] and I appear to support their project.
[1:28:19] Thank you.
[1:28:22] Thank you.
[1:28:24] Our next caller is Elise Swanson.
[1:28:28] Elise, welcome.
[1:28:29] Your time will begin when you begin speaking.
[1:28:41] Please start you with us.
[1:28:44] You may need to hit star six to unmute.
[1:28:48] Okay, thank you.
[1:28:50] I did hit star six.
[1:28:51] Thank you so much.
[1:28:52] Good morning.
[1:28:54] Elise Wanson, president of the San
[1:28:57] Pedro Chamber of Commerce and a resident of San
[1:29:00] Pedro.
[1:29:01] The San Pedro Chamber is in strong support of the
[1:29:04] West Harbor development, and we support the staff
[1:29:07] recommendation for item one on the special meeting agenda.
[1:29:10] We know that the West Harbor development will revitalize and reimagine our
[1:29:15] LA waterfront, provide new jobs and investment in our community. Also, it is
[1:29:21] such an important project for the revitalization of downtown San Pedro and
[1:29:26] our entire business community. We are so close to realizing the new
[1:29:31] development. COVID-19 presented many in the business community with economic
[1:29:36] challenges. So I feel the least extension is warranted through mid-November to allow the
[1:29:41] West Harbor team to complete their financing and move forward with the development. We're so
[1:29:47] excited. We truly appreciate the work of the real estate staff at the port and commissioners all
[1:29:53] of your time and energy on this project. Thank you so much. We look forward to joining
[1:30:00] With all of you, once the development opened, thank you.
[1:30:06] Thank you, our next caller, Xavier
[1:30:09] Hummer-Cirlo. Hi there. I have a number of questions.
[1:30:19] And can I share with this motion
[1:30:21] that you had before you for funding? Which I have a little over $100 million. What happened
[1:30:29] to the two tranches that came from Osprey,
[1:30:33] whatever that money, because I haven't seen anything that suggests
[1:30:37] that the debate for the work that the port has done is,
[1:30:41] you know, spursing up the old land.
[1:30:46] I'd like to give an answer on that, if that's possible.
[1:30:50] I'm also in looking at the issue
[1:30:55] of the the the project itself okay you know I there are I'm not sure who it is
[1:31:09] it's probably you know the the developer they're talking about bringing in a
[1:31:15] different crowd okay and and and you know they want to upgrade the facility to
[1:31:23] bring in other customers. And, you know, we've heard comments, I have it to be of Mexican descent,
[1:31:30] but, you know, we've heard comments made about, you know, dirty Mexican, this and that,
[1:31:34] and, you know, employees, and we're people from the hill, et cetera. And, you know, it concerns
[1:31:42] me because, you know, people kind of, for example, we can contrast that against the fact that you've
[1:31:49] the mouse that you're going to have a babysitting thing for dogs or whatever it is. And so, you know,
[1:31:58] bringing dogs, you know, keep out mechsons because they're not the economic target that you
[1:32:06] want to reach. And so, I hear a lot of talk and it's kind of hushed because they don't want to get
[1:32:27] It appears Mr. Hermesio you did himself, I believe.
[1:32:32] Mr. Hermesio, if you can hear us, can you please unmute and we'll start the time again.
[1:32:37] Okay, I'm not sure what happened.
[1:32:39] Let me move the needle away from there.
[1:32:41] Okay.
[1:32:42] I was saying that this proposed constant haul, 6200 seats.
[1:32:48] If people come through to a car, that's 2100 cars.
[1:32:52] and I haven't heard or seen anything to suggest how that's going to be addressed
[1:32:57] from an environmental perspective and all these things you want to put there
[1:33:02] then it lines just doesn't look you know big enough for that. The noise, you know
[1:33:07] when they had the last professor you could hear all the airport these bands and stuff
[1:33:11] and then those restaurants and tables that are in the channel, is that gonna require
[1:33:26] I'm going to send to the commission a link of a fellow for Mexico, a drug lord who says he is a partner with one of your partners here in this project. That's a great concern.
[1:33:39] I know my time's run out, but you need to address that.
[1:33:46] Thank you. Our next caller is Bruce Hainan. Welcome, Bruce. Your time will begin when you begin speaking.
[1:33:53] Good morning, everybody. President Lee, commissioners, Jean and staff. Thank you for the opportunity to come before you today. My name is Bruce Hainan. And I'm the executive director for Los Angeles Maritime Institute and also a proud San Pedro Chamber board member. I'm here on behalf of a lot of people in the community to speak.
[1:34:16] in encouragement of adopting this measure,
[1:34:20] hopefully unanimously.
[1:34:22] You know, I think this has been a really tough job
[1:34:25] and I really want to thank, you know,
[1:34:26] the port, the developer and a lot of people in the community
[1:34:29] for really working hard putting their shoulder
[1:34:32] into this very heavy and very consequential boulder
[1:34:35] to push it uphill.
[1:34:36] So thank you very much.
[1:34:38] I'm encouraging full adoption and thank you.
[1:34:47] Thank you.
[1:34:49] That does conclude the commentaries for today's item.
[1:34:51] and we did receive one letter as well
[1:34:53] that was provided to the board upon receipt.
[1:34:57] I can just respond to some of the comments.
[1:35:01] In regards to the question about Osprey,
[1:35:03] so that dollar amount is included in the $155 million.
[1:35:08] As I mentioned, there's more or less $100 million
[1:35:11] as that is being funded through both Petrus and Parkview
[1:35:15] and Osprey and the developers' portion of equity
[1:35:18] makes up the remainder more or less $55 million.
[1:35:22] So that's where that is related
[1:35:23] to the proposed concert hall that's not at issue here
[1:35:27] because that is going through a sequel process
[1:35:29] that's separate from this at this time
[1:35:31] and that's not what they are moving forward
[1:35:34] with development of nor is this funding related
[1:35:36] to that at this moment.
[1:35:38] And in regards to overwater seating,
[1:35:40] everything that is being developed
[1:35:41] has already gone through the sequel process.
[1:35:44] And everything has been approved
[1:35:46] through various sequa actions over the course of the last 12 or 13 years since 2009.
[1:35:54] So, just want to address those issues that were brought up.
[1:36:05] Any other questions?
[1:36:06] I wish you're welcome.
[1:36:07] Um, some of this question you've had all day, Mr. Gallon.
[1:36:11] Gallon, um, this is denominated.
[1:36:15] Send people a public market.
[1:36:18] We know that's now being called West Harbor.
[1:36:22] Do the documents need to be changed? Are we going to have to do all this again?
[1:36:28] No. We brought a previous board action that allowed them to use the name West Harbor as the
[1:36:33] development name, but the entity, the legal entity that we're under contract with,
[1:36:37] the lease is still synced with the public market LLC.
[1:36:40] Got it. So it will be marketed. I assume it's the developer's choice, but at this point,
[1:36:45] it looks like they're going with West Harbor, but legally, we're good because legally the documents
[1:36:52] are in the name of San Pedro Public Market. And they have the allowance for the lease because
[1:36:57] of previous action that we took to use the name West Harbor for the development.
[1:37:03] And I'd really like to thank Elise Swanson for the support of the chamber and Bruce Haman,
[1:37:11] who spent a great partner can't wait to get going on this and fully in support of this resolution.
[1:37:17] Thank you no question. Thank you. Is that a motion, Commissioner?
[1:37:23] Motion to approve. Thank you. Second.
[1:37:27] Wait a moment, RS.
[1:37:28] You will call vote, Commissioner Prozi. Yes.
[1:37:31] Commissioner Ruin Alonaris. Yes.
[1:37:34] Commissioner Middleton. Yes, President Lee.
[1:37:39] President, if I could just thank some people that were really instrumental in helping us get to this place, the city attorney did a lot of work in the last several months and getting these documents into place, this isn't something the port goes through.
[1:37:54] Transaction of this complexity very often with private money coming in and being used for properties, so I really want to thank Helen Sock and Carl McQuerry for their work on this to work with Lenders Council to get us to this point.
[1:38:08] point and make it the potential that it can be going forward and getting us to a place
[1:38:14] where we can close us grow in the very near future.
[1:38:16] I also want to thank Gene, Marla, and Tony for all the leadership they provided as well.
[1:38:21] And getting us to this point, it's been a long haul.
[1:38:24] We've been working on this and I'm hoping this has elapsed the amendment for construction
[1:38:28] starts for sure.
[1:38:30] So I just want to thank the board for all the support and the community for supporting
[1:38:35] our efforts here.
[1:38:36] Thank you very much, Mike.
[1:38:38] It is to you as well on all of your work on this transaction.
[1:38:42] And for any years already, it will be a few more years still before we see a completed project,
[1:38:47] but we're looking forward to it.
[1:38:48] Anything could be great addition to the water time, which is why this board has been supported.
[1:38:54] The actions to drive this development forward.
[1:38:57] Thank you.
[1:39:00] Thank you.
[1:39:01] That does conclude all open-session items for both the regular and special meeting for today.
[1:39:06] Moving on to closed session, item K, Ken.
[1:39:10] Thank you.
[1:39:11] Amber, at this time the board will recess in the closed session to consider that 12 items
[1:39:16] on the published agenda.
[1:39:19] Mr. Dibernator will be recused on item 10 and 11 and will not participate in the discussion.
[1:39:27] Any reportable actions taken will be announced at the conclusion of the closed session.
[1:39:34] Thank you.
[1:39:35] Okay.
[1:39:41] In the closed session, the board considered the 12 items on the published agenda and took no reportable action.
[1:39:52] You want to mention my fee. My fee was did not participate in items 10 or 11. He was recruased. Thank you.
[1:40:02] Thank you. And please search during this meeting at 12.48 pm. Thank you everyone. See you next time.