being 50 percent through the fiscal year, the spending levels, expenditures and revenues were less than 50%, and i was wondering why that is. project budget was third, and operating budget was like 15 percent, and the fact that it is a problem. wondering what it means. the second question is on the contract report, it looked like there were quite a number of contracts where we were either not meeting the dbe goals or had none. i was wondering what the story was behind those. >> i will have the chief financial officer respond to those questions. i>> on the budget report, we are typically very aggressive when we're putting together the budget. the budgets are on the high end come and that is why typically in each fiscal year you will see us coming in under.

on the operation's budget in particular we have not received a transgendered invoice for operational expenditures through the first two quarters. that is why it looks quite low. we just got your invoice a couple of weeks ago for the first two quarters. you'll notice a difference in the first quarterly report. on the contract status report, if you have questions about particular contracts, -- >> i did not bring it with me. i just noticed there are quite a few where we are under on goals, and quite a few that said na. i was wondering why we would not have goals on some contracts. >> the ones noted as not applicable are the artists, as well as our lease. we would not have a goal on police, and of course all of intergovernment agreement with the city agencies do not have told on them. i>> for the ones that have

goals that are not being met, -- >> the urs has a 30% goal. actuals are 15%. there is a person transportation project. there are some of those numbers that look like utility relocation. six% actual. those are on the d be side. >> those are availability advisory's we put out with the rfp. we cannot have goals on the dbe side. where we are only up 15%, they are at 44% on that side, once you look at folks they are employing from the certifications. parsons is really just on a task quarter basis supporting the designs and the dtx design is on

hold while we pursue funding. they are not subcontracting out any work right now, which is why there was not a cold place on term at 3. the availability on the dbe side is an advisory, and they are much higher on the sbe side. >> if you can refresh my memory, can you explain of what dbe advisory is, and what is the goal. >> because of the western states decision, we raised a completely neutral program, as i believe mta does as well. we cannot place contra rebels on dbe participation. >> why are there zero goals?

>> those were all in place before we implemented the program. we started placing tolls on contracts would be implemented the sbe program in 2009. and all of these contracts are in place before the sbe program was implemented. there was not the way to go back and put vocal on contracts already in place >> why weren't they included in the original contract? take a we did not have a contract when they were originally entered into. we implemented the program in 2009, after we brought the contract to the board. that is when we implemented the program. >> no. i am surprised. >> that is correct. >> i understand, but i am

surprised we did not ask for that in the beginning. >> we did not have a program before 2009. >> the numbers from this project have been really good it throughout the whole thing, but i was surprised there was no program before 2009. >> you are right, our numbers have been really good. when you look at the overall numbers, we're doing tremendously well on the project. even with othe dbe's. >> you will see in the next quarterly report, the percentages awarded will go up, because on the regular calendar you have items for the construction management for best storage, and they will be achieving 74% sbe. any other questions? >> that concludes my report.

supervisor kim: item number six, public comment. >> we have todd williams. >supervisor kim: any other members of the public, please do come up. >> good morning. todd williams, a representative of local 22. i wanted to inform the public of what carpenters are doing with the partnership and john o'connell high school has a carpentry program class, and that we have had contractors and donate materials and machinery to get more exposure to students and use hands-on tools, and we are are reaching to other contractors to get a little bit more. the class is well-grounded. one thing we're very excited about is i have contacted the

manager at the apprenticeships school, and we have been meeting next week with john o'connell to see about getting a direct entry program once they graduate the class to go into carpentry and would have a direct entry into the carpenter ship program. it is something we're starting with this task will come and we want to see if we can start it with others. -- it is something we're starting with at this high school, and we want to see if we can start it with others. speaking with our manager -- we're hoping to get direct management for those interested in the project. in speaking with the manager, the apprenticeships who does the direct entry project, she is working with transportation and just gave me a little bit of information about the grant that

would work very well. and so we can bring more females in and hopefully get them onto the transbay project. a lot of good things we're trying to do with carpenter local 22. the director, which most of you might be familiar with, she is spearheading this with my guidance and the apprenticeship school. hopefully we can come back in the next meeting to see if we can say we have a direct entry program through the high school into the partners apprenticeship program. things we're working on, and hopefully to make this project very successful. supervisor kim: any other public comment? seeing none, public comment is now closed. please move to item no. 7. >> we will move to the consent calendar worked all items will be considered routine and acted upon by a single vote.

there will be no separate discussion of those items and was a member of the board or the public's request. your items are 7.1, proving that minutes of february 9, 2012 meeting. 7.2, approving a resolution stating that the calpers normal member contributions are repaid by the employer shall be reported to the calpers as additional compensation. 7.3, approving the second them into the interim agreement with the san francisco planning department to increase the compensation. supervisor kim: thank you. two board members want to sever any of these items? -- do for members want to sever any of these items? we will take a roll call vote. [calling roll]

>5 ayes. the consent calendar is approved. item #8, authorizing the executive director to execute a professional services agreement with the towns and management to provide construction management services for the bus storage facility for an amount not to exceed 1,250,000 and at three- year term, with the option to extend the term for an additional two years. supervisor kim: we have a representative from towns and management here as well -- townsend management here as well. in >> we have gone through a very lengthy process to get our cm for the bus storage. it is three parts, pre- construction services, the services, and construction management services. we have representatives of

townsend management to help answer any questions. i am available if you have any. we have a 74% sbe goal for this contract that is in the agreement. supervisor kim: any questions on item number eight? director riskein. : the staff report was very clear. can you give us background on what the project itself is, the construction management services will be overseeing. -- director reiskin. >> off the bus storage facility has been part of the phase 1 project location. it is between second and third, stillman and perry street under the west approach upper and lower decks. the purpose of the project is up for best storag for bus storage.

so when they come in in the morning to have a place to reside and do not waste gas or fuel it is more than just excavation. we need the west approached were positioning parking space as a connection to the future bus ramp system, sound walls, and various neighborhood improvement so there is and our mental negotiations so the residents -- the residents and businesses in the area, which may be impacted by the construction of the future bus operations mid-day. any more detailed questions i can answer for the construction portion? >> can you help us understand

the construction costs? >> we have estimated roughly, prior to the 65% cd's, which will be completed by mid-summer will be 100% construction documents by the end of this year. we have a little bit over $20 million estimated right now. it is because we have several retaining wall structures excavation. two-thirds of the site will be excavated. to-5 feet will be heavy pavement for the bus vehicles. -- 2-5 feet will be heavy pavement for the bus vehicles. we have a very large bridge structure over second street, which will carry the buses. the whole site is surrounded by

sound walls. ifurther, we will have some security controls, and minor street improvements and sidewalks. that is the brunt of the scoping. >> the schedule for the work? >> we plan to bid by early 2013. it is a 15-18-month construction schedule. we will work hand in hand with caltrans because it is underneath the western approach, along with other members of the city family. >> you made reference, and the

contractor should know this is an area that had a lot of construction disruption from the bay bridge approach, and caltrans did a lot of our reach in working with the neighbors. and i know they are very eager for this project to get done. we want to make sure we are very sensitive to the continued disruption from -- that this project will bring. i know they have been eager. we will need to be extra careful with out reach and making sure folks know when things are happening. this is something funded an overall phase one of the budget? >> phase one, yes. >> as part of our reach, we have been fortunate to pass the baton in terms of the was the approach project, and have had a

lot of lessons learned for the west approach our reach an for interacting and working with the community. we are taking those lessons learned that to heart, and the design team had a couple of designed tracks in which we have gone the communities in put and to design, and we hope to show them a lot of the mitigation factors, especially the lion -- landscaping and a sound wall features. supervisor kim: any other questions, directors? a motion? >> so moved. >> second. >> no members of the public have indicated they want to address you on this item. with that, we will vote. [calling roll] 5 ayes. item 8 is approved. supervisor kim: any other items?

seeing none, meeting is adjourned.