kind of where we are, our choices to award -- your choice -- to authorize a word of the contract and maximizes opportunities or reject all bids and rebid the contract; about score, you heard talk of where are in terms of schedule contingency. given how costs are escalating in the market it would erode our cost contingency and ultimately i don't think we would get a different outcome. there was talk before about the bundling; you directed questions of the contractor. the public comment was directed at us because we had taken four separate contracts and bundled them. want impetus for doing that, we

took into account the potential impact on small business engagement and in the end the gaol that we set for this contract was 20 percent was higher; the low responsible bid we got exceed that goal, up to 25%. initially when we were in the unbundled mode, three different contracts, we bid the first one. the low bid came in not even 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 heinicke's comments, 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 that we are talking about 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. good morning. welcome to

san francisco transportation authority. my name is john avalos. the chair of the committee. the sfgtv staff who are broadcasting today are jessie larson and mark bunch. call the roll please. >> reed present, campos present, cohen present, ferrel present,mar absent, tang present, wiener present, yee, we have a quorum. >> colleagues in route to

mexico yesterday we had a recess today. the recess is to actually all go to oakland to watch mary quan give the -- to steve curry for the championship. we are all going to take a break about 11:20. >> i believe it is mayor lee giving the key to the player of the san francisco city. i think it's the san francisco, not oakland. >> good for san francisco. let's move on with our meeting. okay. next item? the clerk: item 2: approval of minutes of the april 23, 2013 meeting actionsf 2123 >> is there any additional

public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. 1 next item? take the roll call? >> i'm sorry. that's right. let's have a roll call on approving the minutes. the clerk: avalos, breed, campos, chiu, cohen, ferrel absent, commissioner kim? mar absent. tang? wiener, yee, the item passes. >> thanks very much. next item. >> information item. 3. >> thank you. today my chairs remarks will focus on our trip with commissioner wiener and

legislative aids, chiu and cohen took to mexico city. i tdp, a non-profit organization which promotes environmentally transportation to see projects in mechanic -- mexico city that guide the design of rapid transit. i was amazed to see the bus line that moves about ten times the amount of passenger. during rush hour it runs 72 trains an hour. the metro bus has been able to get a number of people out of their cars and onto transit to provide an alternative that moves quickly and reliably.

there was an excitement in pride in mechanic -- mexico city. i think we can see what the solution is when these cost are implemented. i'm glad to see this design in front of us today. we should provide whatever support to implement this in the city. i'm also in couraging the bike lane and bike sharing system has been increased by 60 percent by many people who did not ride bicycles at all in mexico city. it's a way to introduce people to cycling and providing an alternative to transit and helping reduce over crowding in

the downtown areas. my aid, road the transportation system. i was blown away to see many people riding their bikes in the city. once a month it expands to 20 miles of cyclone of bikes. today this committee will prove additional bike sharing pilots that will be taking place in san francisco along the peninsula corridor. i would like to see this expanding so people can take advantage of it's many benefits. i would like to thank itdp and the other delegates

for attending. i want to welcome commissioners wiener to add any observations from the trip if they wish? >> commissioner wiener? >> two things to note. we've learned quite a bit from officials in mexico city about how they move forward with their bike sharing program. even though we are behind them, on the heartening side our general bike structure is ahead for mexico city and i know they are working very hard to advance their bicycle structure and made me feel very good of where we are in terms of bicycle structure and the other is howit reminds me of how in

incredibly slow we are in california in u.s. and actually delivering these products. i object their latest line they have 5 large brt lines. their latest line came within three years. ours, just to get through environmental review is taking forever and will take another 3 or 4 years to get van ness brt built. granted mexico probably doesn't have the same regulatory constraints that we do here in california and ceqa and other facts but it points to the fact that years ago we used to be able to deliver these large important quality of life changing infrastructure projects expeditiously. and

today 1brt line takes many many years long and we have to improve that process. >> thank you, also what was remarkable was the bus system in mexico city previously consisted of a lot of private drivers and now they have joined to one metro bus system and trying to figure out how to break apart these different organizations to one. the congestion and traffic are incredible. the saturation that i have ever seen in my life and it's really hard to get around. 20 million people live in the city and it's very important to be able to move forward and the metro system is always on the table. i will finish my comments. i want to encourage

the commissions to attend the board workshop on the transportation plan which is the longest vision for the dealing with the existing needs, pedestrian safety and transit crowding and how we want to shape our transportation for the future. the workshop is thursday may 30th from 1:30 to 5:30 on market street. that concludes my remarks. if there is no questions from colleagues we can go to public comment. two minutes. >> i took this to mexico. many in san francisco finding out

how our roads are clogged. i think when you go to a place in a city like mexico is an important place to learn a lot of things. we need to try our best to address the traffic flow in san francisco. this has been addressed any main press and i do not see any action happening right here in the chamber. even as i'm speaking there are people having side bars, others busy on their iphones and this is a problem with representation. if the representatives think they know everything and yet they don't want to listen to the constituents because many of advocates are fed up with you so we don't come here. so the

least you can do is do what you are supposed to do. in conclusion let me tell you it's good that we have a process here like ceqa. we need a process. but what we really need in these chambers is sound representation which is lacking. thank you very much. >> thank you. any other public member would like to comment? >> good morning chair avalos. my name is jackie sacs. i'm the member of the advisory committee. when you were in mexico, regarding the bike plan, did it coordinate with

the buses? did they have ada compliant buses with the wheelchair lifts? did you see any conflicts because it's a major issue here in san francisco. that's what i wanted to bring up. >> thank you. we did see on the metro bus system that they had access for wheelchairs and wheelchairs strapped in and they have ramps that you were able to get on the metro bus system. there is a long way to bring harmony on the streets between mexico city and cars and bikes. there is a major route set up for buses and cars in the city. bike are hard pressed to the safe. we were riding a lot and we felt we

were putting our life's in our hands. there is a long way to go. cars and buses have the right away and everyone else has to look out for their lives. >> thank you very much. >> okay. going on to our next item. >> the clerk: item no. 4. directors report. >> i will be very brief. you have the executive director report at your desk. it will also be posted on the website by this afternoon. just a few highlights at the state level. governor brown released his may revision to the budget. not a lot regarding transportation. there is a general budget comment. the government was conservative in relation to budget. there is a $2.8 billion

more in revenue available. they will decide how much they want to use versus set aside for another year. there is no noteworthy change. this is upsetting for a lot of members who wanted to go to cap and trad. there is a significant legislation going on. and some agencies are responsible for dolg out and using the -- it may not be fully prepared to do so. we'll see how it fares. the money will be paid out eventually. third results are due any day now so that will give us how much funds are available. very quickly, the plan bay area, the regional

transportation bay area, the final address in july. we submitted letters of comments to metropolitan transportation agency. they said before san francisco did very well in this plan which is especially trying to coordinate and incentivize better transportation to make the best of our transportation dollars. there is a lot of advocacy and follow up. exciting news on the central subway even to get non-engineers and excited. the tunnel machines that are going to drill the two tunnels are arriving. april 25th the first one arrives and the second one is in early june. the first

driving of the first board, there is going to be some celebration and major event with that construction of that project moving forward and finally on comments. van ness brt reached two amazing milestones. one is before you today, there are two, an -- allocation in getting the caltrans, state department of traption -- transportation to sign off on 104 projects. this is difficult. on a state highway that requires an enormous amount of perseverance. kudos for the

projects team. 19th avenue transit study. this is a study that has a really innovative group of partners working together. authorities, caltrans, san francisco state university and gallery and other state agencies looking at the possibility of relining the motion view for the parks of merced. there is information available on the website and there is an outreach coming this fall. i will close with two more comments with respect to the bike sharing we are allocating funds in the agenda later today. for those interested there is an open session at city hall about the bike share program. this is a regional pilot that will take

from santa clara and san francisco. lastly the chair calls for the controllers office to do a performance audit of the authority and the city has completed the authority of the city and agency stuff and finished their surveys of other similar entities of california and we expect to see the audit available in the next couple of weeks. that concludes my remarks. >> this you for being brief and would like to open for public comment? any member is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> we can take a recess and come back here at 1220. we are >> okay. we are back