meeting, i think 18%. the difference between 200 million dollar contract and 800 million dollar contract - i don't think it is a significant in terms of the local opportunities. you heard from this bidder and perhaps the others that there were opportunities to try to unbundle and break up some electrical work. when i see in a rejection of the bids, would be almost guaranteed cost and scheduling impact without corresponding benefits of increased local participation. i know we all would, and the mayor, the board, everybody would love to see but it is not an outcome that we can guarantee or anticipate yet we would put the project in a customized position.

i am 100 percent sympathetic to those concerns; in terms of the numbers of lbe anticipation and the rest of the agency's capital program. much is federal but we do getting good amount of dbes and lbes the participate in the balance of the agency's programs. we can still achieve the spirit of what the city is trying to do and get san franciscans, and san francisco businesses to benefit. >> follow-up on that. how would you characterize the outreach to the minority and small business communities in san francisco? about the same as always? >> no. we did significantly a higher level of outreach than we do in

a normal construction project. and because of many people in the local community really work hard to get this project to where it is, and advocate for it at the state and federal level. it was important for us to try to maximize the extent that we could given the constraints of the law; as i mentioned, you even heard references, outreach going back five years to the contracting community. we required the bidders for this contract to come to meet and greet sessions with the contractors. we have a number of different forms and try to share all of the perspective bidding information so the program was funding positions in our sbe office and also in the office

of economic and workforce development try to make sure we are maximizing opportunities. it is disappointing that despite what i believe was a legitimate, above and beyond effort in this case with regard to local, small and minority-owned businesses we are not where we would like to be but the contractor has fairly significantly exceeded the sbe goal, which is the requirement that we can enforce and so i guess that is a consolation and it sounds like there are still remaining opportunities that we would be happy to see go to small, local, minority and other firms. >> chair nolan: individuals in san francisco can still be hired but is subcontractors and elsewhere, is that right? it's not good news for the local businesses sincerely but

individual people in san francisco who are painters and -- >> you are correct. is one part of how we are trying to encourage that the funding those apprenticeship slots; we cannot require the those be san francisco residents, we remain optimistic that san franciscans will be put to work, close to 20% of local hire on the current construction projects. the ones where the local hire ordinance technically does not apply because of the same federal laws. even without the force of law we have opportunity to see san franciscans working on this project. >> chair nolan: anybody else on the board? director bridges, i'm sorry. >> director bridges: when doctor director

we really don't have that many options, have zero options because we don't want to see the project delayed for fear of jeopardizing where we are with a federal grant. at the same time it is very disappointing that we cannot force the contractor to comply to our local laws. i would hope that in the spirit of the severn san francisco code, to see if local contractors can be hired for the jobs remaining. >> is that a motion? >> i have a comment and a motion. i'm happy to make a motion; i am not interested in rejecting the bids. i agree that we should encourage the contractor to hire locally if possible.

i think we have to keep in mind that this project is going to create future work all along the corridor. and slowing it down is not going to serve any of our businesses large or small so i really don't want to delay this. we are going to see this project drive the economy along the corridor in the city and it will create business in the city, that is what we want to see all the businesses large and small benefit and moving forward expeditiously will be the best way to see that. >> director ramos. >> director ramos: i do make sure i understand this. the tremendous amount a funny that we are getting from the feds is such that, this is federal funding coming from washington, dc. you said the lion's share the funding, do not fall from the sky or that we paid out of our pockets, is money come from all over the

country. we cannot put limitations on what we expect; theoretically everybody has paid for this project from outside of s san francisco as well. taxation without representation -- is an effort on the part of the federal government to get representation from contractors outside of the region. and because we have to take this funding to be able to complete this project is sort of a necessary compliance that we have to act in accordance with. i want to express my support for this talk in this effort of given all of that, having the lead contractor understand the spirit, and i know from my own experience that this is not unique. this problem twe talkiabout right now is not

unique to this project. it happens with every federally funded project; every time a nickel of federal funding goes into any project like this it automatically opens it up for these kinds of limitations. that being said to support thinking about if we say no to this contract at this time, what happens is a project is delayed for who knows how much time in who knows for what better, if any, we will get. we talk about the economy and how it will turn around the whole corridor and everything; , every time i think about the central subway and i hear about it, i think about those folks who are slaves to the ferry stockton. i would encourage anyone to go ahead and wash dishes in a windowless room for 10 hours, and going and stand in line and wait for crowded bus that will pass you, and have that person,

or have someone tell you that we'll have to wait a few more years before anything changes; this is a transit first city, we have to move this contract forward to improve his vision that is inclusive of those writers and the community in chinatown and i will support this and vote yes in looking forward to moving this along. >> chair nolan: other directors? we have a motion and a second? all those in favor? ayes have it. ms. boomer, next item. >> item 12, to whether to conduct a close session. >> chair nolan: is there a motion? second? all those in favor? we will not go into closed session. thank you. >> secretary boomer: it'll take a moment to put the room into readiness.

(mta board in closed session)