too. we have not got a newsletter from a director in three years. we were just kept in the dark about everything. it is refreshing. these commissioners can confirm what is actually going on. so thank you for that. >> thank you. >> ok, is there any public comment on item 5a through 5g? >> good morning. this is nancy again. i have a comment on the issue of the tracking system. i certainly appreciate the need that this needs to be expedited, but i want to give you some insight into what is before you. i have to support debra walker's comment by virtue of

the fact that my personal experience at san francisco general hospital, when we had to convert from a very archaic manual system to a vanilla system that needed to be testified -- customized for the university's needs and we had to a degree of medical records, assignments, and billing. may i repeat, billing, money. this is extremely important to have online services that were generated on the floor with patients to be able to be tracked immediately and captured for billing purposes. complex is beyond -- i cannot even describe it. so i appreciate what is happening here. i am simply saying that two years, as long as it is, is going to be going very fast. the biggest problem, i would advise you, is the training staff. it is always orders of magnitude is difficult to go from what you know to an automated system. i do not know anything about this company.

i do not know about the system. but i do know people. i will tell you that if you can get the system honed very carefully, it will grow much faster and will be more successful. and you need a backup system for the horrible thing day when something goes down. you need a backup system. all of these things are what what i would -- or what i was involved with with the san francisco general system. i want to tell you, have some patience and keep their feet to the fire, absolutely. but do not compromise on the fact that this is going to be an enormous responsibility for all people. also, i wanted to ask point blank, when is this training system? i got a notice that it was going to be on the 26 that to 30 p.m., and i heard today that it would be at 3:30 p.m. and it indicated that it was going to be an hour and a half, not just happen hour. can that be clarified right now?

the pac meeting on the 26? >> the pac meeting is from 2:00 to 3:30 p.m., always an hour- and-a-half. we're going to start the demo at 3:00, a time certain. >> why was the date change on the pack -- on the pac meeting? >> the date was changed in order for the meeting to be available to the planning commissioners and the planning department. they cannot do it on a thursday. that is the planning commission day. so we wanted all of you to come, and we wanted the planning commission to come, and we have also invited people from the mayor's office and all the other departments that use our system. dpw, puc, mta.

>> ok, i get that. >> good morning, commissioners. luke o'brien. one quick comment is for the directors' report. i would suggest that when you have that many items, they should have public comment in their own right. it is not easy to make public comment on so many items that are bunched in it together. just a suggestion for future structured meetings. interesting that the previous speaker before pamela made the comment, but did agree with commissioner walker on the the 18 months. she kind of said what i was actually going to say, especially when she said keep their feet to the fire. sure.

i guess we're all in agreement that we want to monitor it. your tasked with getting the best value and return for your dollar investment from the public coffers, if you will. so every company is made up of human beings, and human beings and are -- are creatures that will take the path of least resistance when it they can. so that is just something that we are all subject to as human beings. so they need to know that people are watching. they need to wake up and feel that heat and say, gosh, i have got that report coming, so i'd better give some priority to this. i have done nothing of this scale, but i have implemented systems. i run the system for my own small company. i managed an engineering system for an internet company prior to that. you know, it is nice seeing you have 20 subject experts from

planning and 20 subject experts from dbi. i am not going to use the full expression, because it is blogger. but the first word is cluster. i will leave you to imagine what the second word is. do not fall into the trap of having all these chefs in the kinship and stomping all over each other. what you need is a nimble, smart, dedicated, flexible, a small group of people. that is all you need. you do not have to have 20,000 people from all over the world. you just need a team of about 10 people that are representative, and they will get the job done. secondly, i had suggested before that you do not try to bite off too much too quickly. [bell rings] i suggested that this be a local project within the dbi first with a condition on the vendors

that this will be open compatible, using the appropriator protocol and standards for ethernet and networks, the protocol machines can talk to each other and keep it simple. my time is up. i will finish the comment later. thank you. [bell rings] >> is there any additional public comment? seeing nine, item number six, commissioner's questions and matters. 6a, inquiries to staff. at this time, commissioners may make inquiries to staff regarding various documents, policies, practices, and procedures which are of interest to the commission. commissioner walker: as a result of public comment today, there are a couple of issues that i think it would be good for us to sort of discuss the issue of special inspections.

and what the criteria is and what the requirements are, so that the public understands what is public record and what is actually not. some of the reports that special inspections submit are not public documents. that would be a good thing, just an international bank. it is also a good idea to have sort of a presentation to us about what it is we have jurisdiction over and what we do not have jurisdiction over it with all the different -- the golden gate park, a port, redevelopment, all of this different entities. i think that would be a good and from a snow day for us to get from staff. also, -- i think that would be a good thing for us to get from step. also, an update on the gliding building program. it is clear it is working on some levels, but on other levels it may not be. i think if we get presentations

from the staff about that to be able to discuss and sort of know what those issues are, i would love to see those on some future agenda. >> ok. commissioners. one more item. this is where i recently heard and was informed that somehow in the early morning in the push for the customer looking for parking, some house staff at times monopolize the parking garage. even after the need to be out in the field. the only request that i have here is that somehow if and when they get their clearance and/or orders and/or essentially coordination of how they are

going to facilitate their day, that they could be mindful of making those parking spaces available to our paying customers. >> are you referring to the parking lot or the parking meter? >> probably, nation. but as much as any parking around the building, it really gets to be problematic when it is the first push, at the end of the day, or especially at the beginning of the day. >> as far as the garage, i believe i just moved out nine cars. we do not use the garage at all. as far as parking, i will definitely speak to staff about trying to be mindful of that. generally what we do is most of our staff drive to work, and they switch out their cars from

the parking lot, and they tend to bring their cars around the building. i will definitely talk to them about may be keeping them a block away. we will see what we can do. >> i think this stakeholders would appreciate that. they run around in front trying to find a parking spot. >> ok. is there any commissioner or public comment on item 6a? ok, item 6b, future meetings and agendas. the commission may discuss and take action to set the date of a special lady -- meeting and/or determine those items that could be placed on the agenda of the next meeting and other future meetings of the building inspection commission. the next meeting is scheduled for november 16 right now. commissioner walker: and the litigation committee? rights litigation on november 15. >> we're going to get a report

of the tracking system. we get that every month anyway. >> is there any public comment on item 6b? >> i do like the comment made by the public speaker on public comments on each of these items, rather than waiting until the end. i like that idea. >> ok, we can do that at the next meeting. i think it is up to the chair. >> we will put it on the agenda of the next meeting. >> ok. item seven, review and approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of april 20, 2011. >> move to approve. >> second. >> ok. is there any public comment on item 7? ok, the minutes are approved. i'm sorry. is there a vote? all in favor?

ok, thank you. item number 8, adjournment. >> motion. >> i second that. >> ok, is everyone in agreement? ok, we're now adjourned. >> meeting adjourned.

captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- >> good morning. welcome to the regular meeting of the budget and finance committee. mr. young, are there any announcements? >> please turn off all cell phones. if you wish to speak during public comment, please fill out the speaker card and return it to myself. any document should be submitted to the clerk for the file. anything discussed today should be brought up for the full board on october 25. >supervisor chu: thank you very much. please call item no. 1. >> item #one. resolution authorizing the

director of public works to execute an amendment to the emergency public work contract to install a new, permanent emergency electrical generation system at san francisco general hospital to increase the not to exceed amount from $18,000,000 to $20,500,000. >> good morning. my name is ron alimeda. i am the program manager for the general rebuild. i am here with the project manager. i appreciate mr. rose and his report, and the level of history and detail in the report and his recommendation. i have a brief power point to facilitate giving background to the project. the first slide it is just a quick overview of the generator

replacement project that is occurring in the building that serves as the central plan. it provides the essential utilities to keep campus software. we are introduced to the new generator system in that building, while maintaining all of the central abilities that remain active. this resolution is seeking to increase the current $18 million capped to $20.5 million. i want to underscore that funding is coming from the rebuild. additional capacity is trying to mitigate issues that we would encounter, two of sort some of the rebuilds go. -- to absorb some of the rebuild

scope. in terms of where we are in terms of progress, the design is complete. the office is stabilized. state level agencies have permitted the project. the basement demolition is complete. general repairs and associated equipment have been manufactured and put in place. exterior equipment is nearly completed. utility connections are under way. i have included a few photographs. there is the overall plan. a shot of demolition occurring in the basement and a couple of photos of the basement filled with a generator equipment, actively being connected in the

project. impacts to date -- the problem -- project thus far has encountered a number of occupational problems, all of which were resolved within our $18 million capped so far. issues included the state delays in the terms of the office of statewide development planning being under furlough, as well as experiencing a number of other issues so that the regulatory approvals delayed the advancement of the project. inside the building, given that it is 40 years old, with active

system issues and hazardous materials, including legacy issues, we found ourselves having to put the entire basement under hazmat control and containment, working through that and updating the area. leslie, another pressure point on the budget has been the addition of the three generators in the rebuilding project. originally the project was planned to proceed to rebuild, making the building ready to receive the generators for the rebuild. however, with that the protracted time that it took to secure financing for this project, as well as the aforementioned statement, i found both projects overlapping

into each other. in order to mitigate a potentially large rebuild, we have absorbent some of the scope of work that was originally in the rebuild, absorbed into the generator project, ink -- impacting the generator project. we are up against the $18 million limit. forecasts are requesting a limit of 25 million to replenish some of what was eroded by the additional scope of work. also, in anticipation of encountering other issues on the first floor. right now, the project is wrapping up. when the generators go live, we

go to the first floor with turbines, reconfiguring the boilers. we expect to encounter similar issues. so, leslie and in conclusion, support of this resolution will allow us to meet the original objective of restoring reliable emergency power while also maintaining the original schedule with the added benefit of shifting a good benefit of work from the contracts on the rebuild to smaller, local contractors that are advancing the generator project. with a quick overview, i can address any questions. supervisor chu: thank you. let's go to the budget analysts

report. >> madam chair, members of the committee, on the bottom of the page, towards the end of page 4 of the report, at the p.w. -- dpw points out that by combining them, we were able to save $2 million in general contract and to install all five generators. given the recommendation on the following, page 5, dpw did not require a competitive bidding process for the work and is, instead, seeking an amendment -- as you know. the reason is, rubicon has begun

cancellation of the five generators and has undertaken a new competitive prophecy at this time, which will cost more than what is needed to complete the work. we find that explanation to be reasonable. supervisor chu: let's open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public that wish to speak on item number one? >> good morning. my name is douglas. i want to make it for the record that i worked at general hospital for 20 years, which prepared me for my current activities. i am opposed to this. usually i support items like this. the reason that i oppose it is that it seems, to a common sense

person like myself, if you have an emergency situation, why would you be asking for $18 million? in my opinion, repairs to the generators should have been done a long time ago. it probably would have saved money in long run. it seems to me that they waited so that they could ask for even more money. this approval of $2.5 million is interesting, since on item number to it lists the dollar amount as $1 million, but on item number one it does not mention the increase of $2.5 million. i will mention it to obama, the next time that i see him. i have a feeling that repairs at general hospitals have not been done efficiently in the past.

i have a feeling that this is going to go on. i suggest that it will cost little more than $20.5 million. there is no sponsor for this item, which i thought was interesting. does that mean that no one wants to put on the record that they are trying to sponsor improvements at san francisco general hospital? or is that somehow tied in directly to the upcoming audit? thank you. supervisor chu: thank you. >> good morning, budget and finance. ♪ black is black general hospital wants its money back credit went away for what can they do because they are feeling

blue they have got so much to lose i want to read a in the news that they have got money from you it is yellow i want to yellow yellow lots of money i need from you, what more can they do, they are feeling blue? ♪ supervisor chu: thank you. are there any other members of a public that wish to comment? seeing no one, public comment is closed. colleagues, this item is before us. we have a motion to move it forward, and seconded. we will do this without objection. item #two -- number two, please. >> item number two.

ordinance appropriating $1,000,000 of mirant potrero, llc, settlement funds to the department of public health for neighborhood improvement and mitigation in the neighborhoods most impacted by the potrero power plant in fy2011-2012. supervisor chu: i would like to ask if supervisor cohen would like to say a few words. supervisor cohen: thank you. the settlement funds that the city received from the merit our plan, after decades of community advocacy, the city was successful in closing that power plant at the end of last year. the terms of this agreement, approved by the board of supervisors, provided for containment to be used by the city, including the measure's most impacted by the power plant. the organizations designated to developing plans for the funds, after months of public meetings,

have put forth these recommendations. the programs that the task force have recommended at the center ground, they have produced -- one, a tangible change in the community. two, have the potential for sustaining change. 3, the quality of life for people that have as much, or reducing the burden of chronic disease. this supplemental appropriation allocates funding to four programs that meet these criteria. including funding air quality improvements for existing homes , partnerships with the mayor's office and department of public health, promoting physical activity with sf live, promoting community gardens with partnerships in the park trust community gardens with partnerships in the park trust