>> all right. done

>> it's not being treated as such. it did pass the assembly and what it does is it /saobgs

to reduce the voter threshold for general local bonds and related taxes so it did pass the assembly, which is remarkable, but it's in the senate and i think the out look in the senate is all such voter threshold related measures will likely be deferred 'til next year so they can sort out the various policy areas that are under consideration ranging from education parcel taxes to general bonds so there'll be a lot of work done and we wanted to put this on the agenda so if we come back year we're already on top of it. couple other key bills i mentioned from time to time -- they're both eye dent cal bills -- they deal with the [inaudible] program. the bills would extend those programs

come /pwhraoet with the fee authority and necessary fees to provide about 2 billion dollars worth of funding over the next decade for alternative fuel in the state and emission criteria reduction programs so those -- the reason i bring that to your attention is the carl moyer program is a funning source for the projects you're interested in here. the one measure, the assembly measure did pass the assembly recently. >> which page. >> ab 8 is on page one. of the matrix. it recently passed the assembly just before the deadline date for measures to pass. the look alike bill s

and we'll see which one gets down to the governor. i have a high degree of faith that unless somebody puts something in either one of the bills that the governor objects to this is something that the administration agrees to. we're halfway into the legislative recess. this is an unusual year. the assembly completed their work and took a recess last week and that extends through august 5 however the senate's recess doesn't start until this friday so there's an odd situation where we will have committee meetings in either house when the other house the out of session, meaning those members have to travel to sacramento to present their bills. it is recklations we're working under

and we're adjusting. one bill of note or issue of note that's re/phrebgted in a measure is seqa modernization and senator [inaudible] is pushing [inaudible]. it modern /tphaoeuzing seqa by moving to more of a threshold based program rather than standards and it's during some support. it recently passed the senate. it has not been set for assembly, although when the assembly returns it will be eligible to return in that point in time. i think early in the budget process this year i mentioned that the governor had called on the secretary of dtnh at that time to convene a working group to look at transportation funding short falls and how to proortize those. they established the [inaudible] and i'm a member of the large /tkpwraoupb and also

on the transit subgroup. they just announced yesterday the conveneing of the next full group meeting in july. they're making some progress. can't wait to see what analysis the administration has put together. as a reminder as of july 1 btnh agency, the cabinet level for transportation no longer exists as such and in this place there is simply cal sta, which we now have brian proven kelly who's in charge of nothing but transportation and the focus is cal transand high speed rail so you have a very experienced secretary with focus on transportation, which is a very good development. i have two more quick things to

brief you on. one is working with staff over the last two-and-a-half weeks an issue has arisen in terms of the -- there's a dispert treatment between your agencies enabling statutes and other statutes that govern local taxes and that is this 1986 enabling statute that you operate under had an overall can only be one percent in 2003 other sections of the revenue and tax code were updated to impose an overall 2 percent cap overall so we're seeking language to be inserted into a bill and mod /tphaoeuz that an bring it up to be consistent /aeu /kwrosz the board. sis >> any opposition to that yet

>> i'll give you an overview of the positions, the current status, the agreements that are the /subts of item four and the consultant contract of subject of item number five and overall schedule of our recommendation. let's talk a little bit about the existing condition first. as you know, as you're traveling westbound into san

francisco from oakland there is an off ramp on the left side that's not standard. typically it's on the right side and also to the westbound onramp is a very short on ramp with very minimal [inaudible] deficiencies. the good news is that we're gonna reconstruct those ramps -- new westbound on and off ram /-pbls. in front of your screen you'll see the blue colored off ramp is the new off ramp on the right side of the bridge, standard in terms of geometry and the new onramp will be in orange, a hook type onramp which will increase the acceleration distance to be able to merge more safely on to the bay bridge. this is separate and independent of the san francisco bay bridge. there's no high strength bolts or

anything in that regard related to this project. this is more stop sign /tkard construction. construction phase is funded with [inaudible] programs to the tune of 77.5 million dollars. project also inchose some improvements on [inaudible] road to make it much better and accommodate bike and pedestrian traffic. current status is i'm happy to report we finished and completed the plans, specks and estimates in march of 2013. i was here in front of this same committee in that same timeframe requesting authorizations to execute right of way certification documents and we have done that. we have submitted all of the appropriate documentation and we are waiting any day now for that funding authorization. it is anticipated we will have it later in july. it is in cal transheadquarters now and will be in front of hwa for /aeu

/pra*ufl. the authority will administer this contract, will add versailles and award the construction contract. they will happen with cal trans, and tita on this contract. we're ready to execute the agreements and construction services contract. i'll get into the details now. lit's talk about the tie agreements first. back in 2008 and 2007 we went ahead and ex/kaoutded agreements with tita in terms of managing this project and to manage the process through the /ka* trans, approval process /abdz in working in partnership with all the main entities on the project. we're at a point where we're ready to finalize all the engineering

documentation, but also for a future projoke, which is the yebi west side bridges so we're requesting an increase to the tita local match and we have worked out all the details with ti /t*rbga city controllers office and the city family and we need to execute moa's for the right away and construction phases. one final note is that tita will reimburse the authority for all costst not covered by federal funds. >> anyone here from tita? >> yes. >> i'll save my questions for you. go ahead and continue. >> sure, i wanna move on to the construction management discussion, which is item number five. it's an important discussion. we... >> let me bring up tita -- i have a couple questions for tiat before we move on to that.

thank you. now on to the

construction management /-pl discussion. the transportation authority went ahead and issued a request for proposals in january of 2013. we received six proposals in february, four firms were short listed and interviews were conducted in march of 2013. unanimous panel selection [inaudible] with the best relevant experience. wanna talk a little bit about the team memberer ship and the make up. we have db participation of 16 percent, made up of firms from

transamerican engineers and garcia associates.

north american engineering is handling the [inaudible] assisting on inspection work as well as some of the environmental permitting. >> okay. mark from db, if you could come up. i have a couple questions. i want to talk about the protege re/shraeugs relationship. can you describe this program. >> bart with parsons, i'm the project manager for pb on this project. the [inaudible] bay area district for cal trance, and they are a program where they want /pwhrarpblg established firms such as ours to help small emerging firms get a head start and be successful so pb's been very involved in this program locally and we actually have

more mou's -- memorandum of understanding with small and emerging firms than any other firm in the program. wanted to underscore what -- we have mou's in place with and so basically what we do is we give them opportunities first of all to be on our teams and then doing this highway work can be pretty complicated if you've never done it, the cost proposals, the audits, how the work is done in accordance with cal transstandards and things like that. some of the firms we've had mou's with in the past have moved on and are doing real well now. >> are they competing against you. >> in some cases. >> i guess that's a determinant that the program's successful. is it very specific that you will take them on projects and...