and i think that ultimately based on my understanding of the legislation that it will positively impact a number of nonconforming units that tend to have significant problems with the planning department and permitting and codes and violations in my district. many of those situations that i have to personally deal with as supervisor. i also hope this is a disincentive to those who continue to move folks out of these units and the desire to renovate and make them what they want them to be. i understand it's their property, but this also sadly takes much needed rental housing units off the market which are just a very low supply of our units that are rent controlled units. and i just also lastly want to say, because i think people get

sometimes confused with rent control. rent control is not necessarily meaning the units are affordable. rent control means that you don't get the significant increase in your rent. your landlord is only able to raise your rent by a small percentage compared to those that don't have rent controlled units. but sadly it is a problem in our city, and why these rent control units are so incredibly valuable. so, i agree with supervisor cohen's comments earlier that, yes, this is something great that we're doing, but we have to look at the larger picture here as well and how we try and deal with rentals and what this means in terms of affordable housing in the city in order to not be forced into a situation where we have to continuously

push emergency legislation that is a gray if i can, a temporary fix, but there's a larger problem here. we have some great minds in this chamber. i know if we continue to work together and put our heads together, we can come up with something even better that is more of a long-term solution for folks. so, i will be supporting the legislation today. look forward to hearing or seeing the revised language and thank you. >> okay. unless there are any further comments, madam clerk, why don't we take a roll call vote on items 34 and 35. >> supervisor campos? campos aye. supervisor chiu? chiu aye. supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor tang? tang aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye. supervisor breed? breed aye. there are 11 ayes.

>> the ordinance passed on the first reading with the various amendments. [gavel] >> madam clerk, can you go to our adoption calendar? >> items 32 through 47 are being considered for immediate adoption without committee reference. a matter can be removed and considered separately [speaker not understood]. >> colleagues, would anyone like to sever any of these items? roll call vote on items 42 through 47. >> supervisor campos? campos aye. supervisor chiu? chiu aye. supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor tang? tang aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye. supervisor breed? breed aye. there are 11 ayes. >> the resolution are adopted and motions approved. [gavel] >> madam clerk, can you read the in memoriams? >> mr. president, before i read the in memoriams, supervisor cohen would like to be

re-referred. >> supervisor cohen. >> we lost sergeant nevil gittens from the police department last week. i have so much to say it's hard for me to organize my thoughts. what i want to say is there is a me norial planned thursday, december 12, 11:00 a.m. at joins me norial united methodist church. the address is 1975 post street in fillmore. sergeant gittens was an asset to the community and a true gentleman and true professional. he worked very hard particularly with the domestic violence community. thank you. i'd like to make a motion that we close out the board meeting in honor of sergeant nevil gittens. >> can we do that without objection with the full board? [gavel] >> that shall be the case. >> today's meeting will be

adjourned on behalf of the following beloved individuals. on behalf of president chiu for rhonda [speaker not understood]. on behalf of supervisor breed for the late melvyn holmes. and mr. ikenna waka. and on behalf of the full board of supervisors fully, sergeant nevil gittens and nelson mandela. >> colleagues, i want to take a moment to thank sfgovtv, charles kremenak and manny very last uke. i want to swish supervisor tang a happy birthday. with that madam clerk is there any more business in front of the body? >> that concludes our business today, mr. president. >> with that, ladies and gentlemen, we are adjourned. [gavel]

>> the city of san francisco sfgtv meeting of the san francisco transportation authority occurring december 10, 2013, will begin shortly. >> good morning and welcome to the san francisco county transportation authority, finance committee, i'm scott weiner the vice chair of the committee and i will be chairing today's meeting to my left is commissioner david chiu and to my right is commissioner mark farrell.

our clerk today is erika cheng and i want to thank sfgtv for broadcasting today's hearing. >> are there any announcements? >> no announcements would you read, or call item two. >> item two, approve the minutes of the november 19, 2013 meeting, this is an action item. >> any changes or comments regarding the minutes? >> okay, is there any public comment on item two? seeing none, public comment is closed. could we have a motion to approve the minutes? >> motion. >> okay could we take that without objection? >> that will be the order. >> please call item three. >>recommend award of construction contract no. 04-3a6404 to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder, golden state bridge, inc., in an amount not to exceed $49,305,345.50, authorize the executive director to negotiate contract payment terms and non-material contract terms and conditions for the construction contract, authorize the executive director to execute all other supporting agreements, and authorize an additional construction allotment of $14,569,340.50 for the i-80/yerba buena island ramps improvement project.

>> this is an action item. >> good morning, commissioners my name is eric and i am with cordoba and i am the ranch project manager and i am happy to present item three starting on page nine, i do have a short powerpoint presentation that i wanted to go through. just to give you a brief overview of the project, this project will reconstruct the westbound on and off-ramps pictures in the diagram there, the off-ramp in blue and the on-ramp in orange and as well as other improvements on the road associated with the tie-in to the new san francisco oakland bay bridge, separate and apart but independent with separate funding construction phase is funded with federal highway bridge program and

proposition state one the seismic retrofit program to the tune of 77.5 million dollars. we have completed the plan specifications and estimates and certified the right-of-way for construction. we also received approval to construction funds in july of 2013, for 77.5 million. we have been working in partnership with tata for six years in developing this project and have executed all of the agreements that we need, and we have hired and retained a construction management firm back in july of 2013 to go ahead and be a representative in the field. and the to over see the activity and we are ready to administer the contract with the oversight with cal transand let's talk about the advertisement process. this is our item here today. you know, we issued an invitation for bids in

september third of 2013, we blanketed and we felt the construction community as much as we could, 14 builder exchanges and legal ads in the chronicle for eight days consecutively and ads in multiple minority and industry publications. and held our mandatory prebid meeting on december 17, 2013, and had almost 100 people there in attendance and so we got the good coverage in terms of out reach to the construction community. it is important to know that since this is a federly funded project, we established that goal at 12.5 percent. we had a bid opening on november 2013, at the transportation offices and we received one from welsh construction company and another from golden state bridge and a third from mcm construction, as you can see on the screen, all three of the bids came in under the

engineer's estimate and that is good news. the first walls construction came in at $46 million, 183,331 dollars but they did not meet the dbe commitment they only came in at 4.5 percent. golden state bridge, bid was $49 million,305,345. and they exceeded the goal and committed to 13.83 percent commitment and dg the bid was 53 mill object and their db commitment was 3.93 percent. federal regulations require that either the dbe goal be met, or good faith effort documentation be provided that indicates that they in essence tried but could not make it for the specific reasons.

we went ahead and reviewed all of the dbe goal information, and good faith effort documentation submitted by all of the three bidders. in our analysis welsh construction company failed to meet the dbe goal or demonstrate the adequate good faith effort. they were advised of that ruling and we had a good faith effort reconsideration meeting on november 27, 2013, they did not provide any additional information in writing at the meeting or anything that in essence made us change our decision. so in that regard, welsh construction company was a non-responsive bid and in researching the work with the legal staff, the california public code requires that we award the contract to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder and in this case, golden state bridge is that lowest responsible and

responsive bidder at 49.305,345. >> is that common that two of the three bidders would come in so dramatically below that threshold required by the rfp. >> we have seen it in the past. and in the hiring projects in that regard, >> just blowing it off. >> it seems like sort of an odd thing. >> i would say that, in our analysis, they did not meet a good faith effort to meet it. and we were surprised frankly, because we were very clear in our analysis and we felt that the 12.5 percent goal should have been met by all three bidders. >> it is unfortunate. >> this is all federally funded and state funded and the 49 million is all within the budget that we have established. >> thank you. >> i want to highlight the

disadvantage business enterprise participation, there are three total, six women owned and three asian owned and three african american and three spanish own, they did the job in meeting the goal and out reaching and making the commitment. i do have a list here of all of the subcontractors that are part of the team and a rather long list like we indicated they are going to provide concrete and steel, and concrete placement and steel fencing, trucking, and traffic control and other support to the golden state bridge team and we do have representatives from the golden state bridge and the construction team here behind me. they are awaiting with baited breath. i want to go through the

construction contract allotment so that you understand the numbers here clearly and what we are seeking in terms of our approval. as i indicate the bid itself, the lowest responsive bid is 49 million,305,345. and we have established a supplemental work budget of 1 million, 571,360. for any work that is typical on these types of highway projects. there is materials that we are purchasing from the state of california, from the bay area toll authority given that we are tying into the new bay bridge and that is allocated budget is 2,172,200. when you add it up you come up with $53,228,905.50. and we have been able to get an approval for a very healthy

which is good news because you want to have the unforeseen things that arise in the field. so, that the total construction contract allotment will be 63 million,. our recommendation is to award it to golden state bridge incorporated and to also authorize the additional construction allotment for any unforeseen, state furnished materials and supplemental work items and any other potential contract change orders for $14,569,340.50 and also to allow for the authorization of the executive director to negotiate the contract payment and non-material terms and to

execute the supporting agreements that are required through construction, for example with chp we need to execute an agreement any time we are out there at night with the highway patrol and they have to be out there to make sure that everything is done safely tha. concludes my presentation i am open to any questions >> that is helpful. >> one question about dbs and i know that this is something that we start here in the conversation about in terms of lgbtowned firms, i know that they held a pretty i don't know if it is first of its kind, if not pretty close. very significant out reach meeting to lgbt, owned firms to encourage them to bit on transbay projects, and so, i am wondering if does the ta do encourage that kind of out reach to lgbt owned firms?

>> yes, we do, the federal requirements do not classify them as business enterprises at this time. >> the federal government is about 30 years behind the rest of the country. >> yeah. >> but we can go above and beyond. and we do? >> yes. >> yes, vice chair we know that we got to look into that and follow that direction, thank you. >> thank you. >> great. thank you for the presentation. >> colleagues, are there any questions or comments? >> okay, in that case, we will open up item number three to public comment, is there any public comment on item three, if so, please come forward. hi. >> public comment will be two minutes. >> good morning, my name is gwen and i am a business owner ace mailing in the north east mission business area. and here in san francisco, on 16th street, i serve on the board of san francisco small

business network. and the board of the san francisco chamber of commerce. and i want to personally thank the sfcta and its staff for taking a bold stand in regard to setting a solid dbe goal. for this contract, and more importantly for sort of sticking to their principles and in their review of the good faith effort, put forth by the apparent initial low bidder on this important project. thank you to golden state bridge for understanding that there was more than enough dbe talent within san francisco and the bay area to exceed the goal. my hope is that cal transis watching and my belief is that they are watching the leadership of the sfcta on this project and let's get these dbe businesses to work on this

project providing jobs. so, thank you again. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker? >> good morning, chair. president, and commissioner. my name is durk butler and i am the chair of the executive committee of the san francisco african american construction committee and i would like to say that we are excited to be here to support this project and the direction of the agency. we are tirelessly fighting the issue of low bidding, and at low bidding against, dbe participation. and so, often organizations agencies and departments, go low bid at the expense of dbes suffering and not participating on the projects. if you just look at the numbers that were presented earlier, by the staff we are asking for a 5 million dollar difference that will ultimately go if this body, directs the staff to move forward, about 5 million

dollars worth of contract opportunities and job opportunities to local dbe firms that impact all of our communities. and it is an important that a statement is made from this body, because it has already been made from the cta. and they have tirelessly taken a stand on behalf of dbe or the dbe community and we are proud to be able to come up and speak on behalf of them and we would love to see all of the city departments take the same stance because the same dbe businesses that are getting businesses they normally have their offices located here and buy their goods and services here and they hire from the city of san francisco and the people of the city which is very important, and so that five million is multiplied i am sure threefold and so we are here to argue and to support the project and hope that you move forward in a positive recommendation. thank you very much. >> next speaker? >> good morning, supervisors my name is kiransen and i am the

owner of the prolocal and i represent a number of organizations and i am also a member of the... i am sorry. i am also a member of the golden gate business association, and i wanted to personally thank the sfcta for taking a bold stuff in supporting the goal on the project. my work that i have been doing for the past year i see a need for more like this, thank you very much. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> hello, my name is julie berry and i am the owner of cal tonight pumping which is located here on treasure island where the project is actually taking place. i want to congratulate the sfcta and the new executive director, chang for the leadership on the dbe participation, pumping got one of the first major breaks on

the project and because of that we have been working on major public projects throughout california. the sfcta must not under estimate the impact on the community when it comes to the dbe participation, its leadership is critically important to small business. and we are honored to a part of the golden state bridge and we have the privilege of working with one of golden state bridge's senior executives and it is because of the performance and relationships build on that project that golden state bridge asked for a competitive quote for their bid. without a doubt, golden state bridge was communityive with us even before the conference they were open to answering our bid related questions prior to the bid submission date and understood that because our business was located on treasure island that we are perfect fit for this project. they are serious about small business and continue to support the small business community. and thank you commissioners for understanding the opportunity

this project has for my dbe firm, thank you. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker? >> good morning commissioners my name is clifton birch and president of construction and on behalf of the golden state bridge, we are listed as a subcontractor for the ybi ramps. we are a certified dbe firm as well as an lbe of san francisco and district ten. this will be an injustice to my firm if we cannot be allowed to perform on this project. i believe that the goal of the sfcta is to impact dbes as well as lbes of san francisco, and other small businesses. and in closing i believe that it is in the best interest of sfcta to award the contract to state bridge contractors for this particular project.

as the lowest responsible bidder for this project as it was stated before me. thank you very much for your time. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker. >> good morning. my name is louis and i am the president of municon consultants and this is a homecoming for me and we have been in business for 23 years and one of the notable projects is 850 rolls of film photographing the san francisco city hall retrofit. we have had a long and favorable relationship with many of the contractors in san francisco and in the bay area. we have over 20 years of association with our friends brian, and dave, at golden state. these are people who have taken the time to make relationships which is probably a real factor in why they were able to meet the goal of 13 percent. they believe in the system and they believe in the programs. you mentioned why were there

only three bidders, there is a lot of work out there, people are busy. it really at this point in time takes somebody to work with you, to try to reach out to you. and i noticed that you had over 2,000 letters went out to different dbe firms and we received those. this is the kind of working relationship that i'm sure as this is the first project with the cta this is the kind of situation we want to nurture and i totally support and urge you to recommend the acceptance of the bid with golden state. thank you. >> thank you very much. is there any additional public comment on item three? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, are there any comments relating to item three? >> seeing none, could i have a motion to forward item three to the full authority with recommendation? >> so moved. >> okay. >> could we take that without objection?

>> that will be the order. >> item number four, please? >>recommend acceptance of the audit report for the fiscal year ended june 30, 2013. this is an action item. >> deputy director for finance and administration, this starts on page 21 of the packet and this is the presentation of the annual audit for 2013, 13 fiscal year and as you are well aware that the transportation authority is required to undergo an audit each fiscal year and we have hired oconell as the external audit ors and also for the city and county of san francisco. today we have eugene, and to walk you through the results from the audit. >> thank you, apparently the results is a room clearing

event in any case, as she pointed out we are proud to be in the account ans and i must apologize for my partner who could not be here and she is actually the engagement partner and so i am just a fill in and so please be nice to me on the comments in question. >> as cythia mentioned we were to conduct an audit in the generally accepting standards in the united states as well as government auditing standards just to highlight, an audit is to attain reasonable assurance that the financial statements are fairly stated with that in mind, i am proud to, you know, conclude that the audits that we conducted for the basic financial statements as well, were we issued unmodified opinions and unmodified is a new term of this year, and in

previous audyed reports is called an unqualified opinion. but, due to changes in the au iting standards we decided to add more terminology into our world and called it unmodified, now in addition to the unmodified opinion, we also issue a report called the report to the finance committee and i believe that starts on page. and the report is basically a summary of the required communications that we are supposed to make. and to those charge in governor ans, and it will come to the significant items and with regard to the qualitative aspects of the accounting aspects and practices, we did note that the authority did implement two new that are required to be implemented and no significant impacts are the result of implementation of the statements and just kind of

changed certain terms of ours and beginning to get a little theme here to account and auditers just to get to more fees, i guess, in addition, to that, we noted no transactions that were entered into the authority that lacked the authority, guidance as well as all significant transactions have been properly reflected in these financial statements. accounting estimates are critical in the financial reporting and the few, major accounting estimates that we entered in or that we reviewed for the reasonableness were to accommodate the absence liability and the posing contributions as well as funding project. and proud to say that there were no difficulties encountered during the audit and any corrected adjustments that we identified as a result of the audit pro-secretary were corrected by the management and were not material in of itself or in the aggregate. proud to s