15 black soldiers who lost a limb for this country and cannot get a job in construction, not one of them, because there are no blacks in it. these people are going crazy as far as black people are concerned. san francisco has become the mecca of the ku klux klan attitude because we cannot get work. 42% of black people in san francisco are unemployed. that is unheard of. something needs to be done, and someone needs to sit down and either stop this project or just come out and tell us, "we are not going to hire blacks in san francisco." is down to that. it is down to there are no african-american contractors under contract doing work in san francisco for any agency. san francisco's spent about $40 billion. black people pay taxes here just like white people do. i am asking you to -- i would

like to first note -- can this agency get the number from webcor and all the rest of them on how many african-american contractors they've got. when you talk to them, they say they have minority contractors, but that always hides itself that they did not have to hire black contractors. it is right down to all of that. it is back to the stone age in so far as black people are concerned, and sentences could should not be like that, and i am asking for assistance from this board to launch an investigation particularly into turner. director harper: thank you, mr. walker. >> you are welcome. >> that concludes public comment on that item. that, we can move into the consent calendar. item 7.2 has been removed from the consent calendar and will be [inaudible]

will actually have one item to consider, and that is the minutes of the may 12 meeting. director harper: i believe i am recused from that. does it require a quorum? can we pass it? >> majority. director harper: majority is fine? i was not here. any objection to those minutes? any comments, correction? seeing none. >> all right, minutes are approved. director harper: regular calendar item 8, the money. capital budget operating budget. sarah is here. >> this is the final presentation of the fiscal year budget for next year. it is a $220.3 million capital budget and a $4.3 million operating budget. it has not changed at all since it was presented in some detail

last month, and we have not received any public comment. director harbor, i know you were not here, but i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> the only thing i was going to contribute to this organization had i stayed on totally as a board member, which -- back in 1972, i moved in sanford's is good to take a job as a planning engineer with beckel. did that for a few years and have since become a contract attorney in construction and so forth, but what i wanted to make sure was that this organization had a smooth line in contract initiation that they were developing at this stage because i am involved in so many cases in which i tell my clients, "had i only know six months ago that you were beginning to have contract problems, things would not have gotten this far, and

things like that. my only hope is that we understand that that is millions of dollars at stake, and it is so important to be able to go from the field to the consulting attorney very smoothly, very quickly, and as soon as the supervisor, someone in the field see is that something is not going right, picks up that change in a hurry. and i think that is happening. >> yes, absolutely. director harper: great. ok, thank you. do we have a motion for approval? >> so moved. >> motion. director harper: i will second. >> no members of the public indicated they wish to speak on that item. director harper: so i have a motion and a second. is there any objection? need we have a roll call, or can

it passed unanimously? >> all those in favor? >> aye. director harper: item 9. >> authorizing the executive director to execute a renewed agreement for engineering design professional services for the caltrain downtown extension project with parsons for a third three-year term, 2011-2014, and a maximum compensation of $4.2 million. >> good morning, directors. principal engineer. i am here to give you an update on the work being done by parsons corp. on the downtown extension. the agenda is in three parts. first, what was achieved in the first part of the contract to define what we're building, conception engineering, and the second is what we have achieved in the last three years, where

we have got to, and what we plan to do for the next three years to keep this contract, no pun intended. part one defines a revised improved local preferred alternative. this was confirmed in april 2007. it consists very simply of a two-track lead from seventh street in 2000 st., the underground station, 83-track tunnel, turning into second street. three platforms and 6 tracks fanned out into the station, and it allows for modifications to the yard to continue storage of trains and chains that do not go all the way to things like the ball park. this is the general layout. this is the agreed alignment. it has not changed.

we are in the same footprint as we always were. we then went into two, which to take that design, which was roughly at the 15% level, and parsons completed by july 2010 all the project deliverable reports, all the investigations , a geotechnical work, and design calculations were done, and that was performed within the contract budget. in fact, we save money by making certain we did not go too far, and that has produced a 30% design level with drawings that could be used at any time for a design build contract if we went that way in a fast-track process, or could be used to develop final 100% drawings for a conventional design bit build. we then did between july of last

year and january of this year, some updating, and this is basically to deal with some alternatives and requirements required by high-speed rail, since they started to do their environmental process, and make certain that we could meet whatever comes in from high- speed rail as a future connection. we have therefore designed for them using their so far preferred of a deep tunnel approach, which they would be putting under pennsylvania avenue and coming in to join ours. we have increased the curve links approaching the station out of second street. original concept was 550, and we have agreed on a 650 radius, and we have increased the length of the tension platform so they can have ee trains, not 200 meters but 400 meters long.

and we successfully have in fact worked with both high-speed rail and caltrain. parsons was very helpful in getting all this work done. we have submitted formal magic 7 formal design variance is. we have that approved, so we know we're building the station in the right place. we have agreed on the layout spirit we have agreed on the link with rail concourse layouts, and we are now in a state where we can bid out the below ground work with confidence that we will meet the requirements of both operators. we then start a strategy of what we should do over the next three years. that strategy, which was really important that we continue the interface with and -- caltrain

and high-speed rail, that we provide all the information needed to put it to the train box being built at the early stage now where we go in to bid next year so that we do not ever have what happens on some projects where the systems and the work comes in to late and you have already put the concrete in, and you are looking for places to finalize work. we will go through with parson'' contract in practices, whether we actually do design build, or whether we do some early practices to move utilities out of the way, which is always important when you are doing a big toddling project. we will continue to provide -- ask them to provide cost updates. with that strategy in mind, and negotiated with parses a third term, which keeps all the information they have gone all the design capacity, and provide

as needed engineering services, as directed by the tjpa, and it would be for a 36-month duration. it is a flexible enough contract to have smaller starts at the beginning. once we make our mind up, we could actually produce bigger task. the initial time for the next coming year, the most important tasks will be to keep on working and revising and responding to high-speed rail and caltrain. we need our input. we need to make certain everything works. provide engineering support to the design team for the terminal, and continue whatever is needed in the way of cost estimating, risk-management, help with property acquisition to get the engineering solutions and the cost of these solutions. we also need to work with muni

because we will have a crossing of the new central subway, and we need to come up with a decent engineering solutions so both projects work smoothly. we also will be completing a dual mode alternative solution just in case we need to operate without full electrification on the peninsula. i hope this does not happen, but we need to have all contingencies available. that is the good thing about having a big corporation like prices. they have divisions that understand how to work with the fra and with the railroad systems. if there are any questions, i would be happy to take them. >> on the response to the california rail high-speed eir document, we are doing that because we were noticed, and it is sort of a formality, or do we have substantive issues that we want to bring forward? >> yes, over the years, there

have been a lot of substantive issues. when they come up with alternatives -- like one station that was not in the same location at all, the beale street alignment. obviously, we did a lot of engineering to show that that was not a practical solution, and high-speed rail accepted that. we are in a good position now where the engineers all know what we're doing, and the confidence level -- they are totally different companies. progress has been very good in the last year. >> that is good to hear. years ago, they were -- they made specifications that everybody would scratch their heads at an ask what a country that high-speed rail runs in.

>> that is why we have been doing that. some of the specifications were unnecessary, and we have been reaching agreements. sometimes, they are only arguing over 20 seconds difference in travel time, depending on the link of your buffer at the end of the platform for the radius you approach on, and i think common sense is now coming to the forefront. >> i also sit on the alameda county transportation commission, and every once in awhile, over my objections, up comes the ultimate pass variation and things like that. kind of tried to play that down and say that it really is not productive and we really should not be getting involved, but it is alameda county, so i do not prevail in that. but there are issues that come up here where the alternative really needs to be addressed in some sort of -- i am just

thinking that it just needs to die, but at some point, it looks like that is getting threatening, i would like to know. i know that it does not work in alameda county. it just seems to have a life of its own, i'm afraid. >> we will keep you posted. the tjpa has not taken a position. director harper: and i do not know what if it needs to. >> our main discussion has been what happens at the county line. i attend all the meetings. parsons assist me in writing background information, cost estimates, and layouts.

motion? -- all in favor? >> item 12 is approved. we move to item 13, approving the recommend applicants to the transbay joint powers authority citizens' advisory committee. >> i just wanted to say that at the last board meeting, ortiz vice, and director -- vice chair ortiz and director kim asked that we do a little more outreach, and we did. with the further out -- it, we have some new members to recommend to the board, and bob will give more information on that -- with the further out reach we did. >> we do have eight positions on our cac up for appointment or reappointment. we have 15 total members of our citizens advisory committee.

as maria mentioned, after bringing an initial slate for recommendation to the board, we did go back and do additional outreach , including advertising to a number of different publications, and re- circulation to our partners. the solicitation resulted in an additional six applications. after reviewing all of the applications, the various constituencies that they represented, we have incorporated three of those additional applications in the group that is being brought forward for recommendation, so with the current recommendations, we have five new members coming to the cac and three members of for reappointment. i can answer any questions you have on applications for the process. director harper: thank you.

director kim: could you go over the increased diversity of these applicants? >> yes, the three additional applicants being brought forward for recommendation -- one of them is african-american. one is korean-american, and one is biracial african-american and caucasian. director harper: members of the public wish to speak on this item? >> [inaudible] director harper: ok, is there a motion for approval of the appointments as submitted? second? any objection? all in favor? >> aye. >> item 13 is approved. director harper: that is the meeting. all right, thank you all. >> thank you very much.