on director reiskin was with us earlier we were assured that the work would not be that excessive and there's a small amount of funding to cover that i'm sure the lady from the planning department can correct me but at this point, we're not currently going to be pursuing any additional funding i wanted to note that >> thank you. and thank you also for providing a fairly detailed report on the operating budget for the following fiscal year. are there my questions from board members. all right. thank you very much >> i know members of the public want to address you. >> let's go ahead and take roll call and can we get a motion. >> i'm sorry. >> motion and second. >> thank you. >> i.

>> director reiskin. director harper. supervisor kim it's 4 i's >> item 8 is authorizing the executive director it have the agreement to provide control program management not to exceed 25 million 60 thousands and directors mark i'm able to report and i commend him he started over thirty million down to 25 i 21 million so mark. >> good morning directors. >> our current contract is june 30th this month. so we - we negotiated a new contract that will include the project services management to help phase one as well as phase two and include the management

budget controls and risk management and schedule management. we issued an rfp for the new pmc contract on jill 8, 2013 we had 4 hundred firms a we've contacted and we had a proposal meeting on july 18, 2013, and had over 70 firms that attended 6 were multiple contractors that can do the work. we received one proposal in september of at the 2013 and the proposals was from the hashing mcdonald and the ph c we reached out to other 5 firms that showed interest the response was backlog and unsuccessful team

efforts as well as strong competition we concluded that the contract would not have additional submittals. we vaeltdz the proposal for the experience of the firms and as well as the key staff and we also used an evaluation of the understanding of the project as well as the past performances we based on that information they're able to do the work. it was in the amount of $38 million plus for 5 year term we've negotiated a contract inform for a $25 million plus for the same 4 year term our contract is a reduction in fee

from 9 to 7 percent as well as a reduction in the overall rate in one hundred 16 to one hundred and 4 percent. the terms of the agreement amount is 25 million plus for a 4 year term starting in july 2014 with a fee of 14 percent and the current contract has an r f b - >> it's what. >> thirty percent. >> okay. and based on that that we recommend to the board they approve the agreement to provide the services for the transit >> are there my questions from the board members. >> director reiskin. >> yeah. congratulations an what is an aggressive

negotiation it's great to get the fee and overhead detain about but this contract is how we're managing the entire program the see actual staff is very, very small so i'm just a little bit concerned that we didn't offerly bring the cost down so we don't have the resources to manage a complex program. >> it was lean, however, given most of our work is going to construction in the next 2 years the focus is with the c mo turner and the construction management oversight so this is a lot of construction recommended and this design related work so the project

controls are intact no changes and project activities will be working closely with turner vs. a designer we're not going to have as many design activities but with the construction turner is mental health the construction schedule and the other team the other schedule taxing those into account we're able to negotiate a better account by it's leaner. >> it's good to be lean but also you often tells us it's a big complex project i want to make sure you have the pmc resources to manage it well. >> i continue it's important to hear from kevin would you like to address it they've been with us 9 plus years so i'd like him

to give you the improvement. >> i'll echo that we've worked with staff to make sure we've got a staffing model to work through the duration it's lean but we feel it's important to really be as efficient as possible a it will be tight at the times but at the end of the day that will be a well managed project. >> i have a question once we've realized that essentially you're the sole bidder and i understand why that would be because you've got good experience and it's a good transition why this looks like a completely brand new negotiated from scratch agreement as opposed to the

particular amendment why was this choose and we advertised this we sent it to 4 hundred individuals and got 20 firms in the meeting we only received one proposal. >> you're saying it's a legal requirement that once we got down to one we couldn't amend the amendment by had to create a new one. >> i'll have to defer. >> we advertised the opportunity available to all firms. and if you're asking at the present time, we determined yes. they were qualified and we negotiated could we have amended their existing agreement we explicit take that approach precisely but this agreement conforms with an agreement i mean we negotiated some

different terms like on the fee restriction but if you did a side to side comparison we didn't do this from scratch >> i ask because one of the comparisons that i would want to make in my mind is not this but what's been changed justice to get an idea of the dynamics that's a clue into what, you know, has been the experience and what urs is saying with that experience we need this i can't do it with a new agreement. >> the terms of this agreement the requirements are the same similar to we ask the same things. >> so the percentages you negotiated down how did he

reflect. >> itself overheads on the previous agreement as well as the proposal that was submitted was an average of 14 percent and this is one hundred and 14 percent so that was part of the negotiations. >> right. >> and one of the things that would really help mow me because unlike acting transit i have this great organizational chart of who don't want and what responsibilities i'm sure one exists but i have no idea how everything fits he together and turner and urs and it would greatly help me how the pieces fit together and the usual thing the solidify lines representing direct responsibility or

authority and dash lines representing something else and boxes with names of key people. >> yes. >> so i can is okay. that's kevin okay. >> we'll send you a detailed chart on u.s. turner and how they trace. >> are there any other questions. >> move approval. >> so we have a motion and second any public comment on that item? >> the members of the public indicated they wanted to address you. >> roll call. >> director reiskin. director harper. supervisor kim. that's 4 i's and item 8 is approved >> can we call the next item. 9 is approving the operating proposal it implements the

agency allocation of the recreational nooipd 3 hundred 44908 for the transit program >> and sarah will report. >> this is a standards allocation request to mp c we do the feature for the operating grant it increases every year by 3 and a half percent just in 4.4 million for the upcoming fiscal year if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them. >> move approval. >> all right. no questions from the board so moved and seconded if there's no public comment prior. >> no members wanting to address. director reiskin. director harper. supervisor kim. that's 4 i's and item the is approved >> thank you. can we please

call item 10. >> i'm sorry item 10. >> it's authorizing the executive director to cloout execute an amendment with partners transportation group for the downtown caltrain project to extend the agreement. >> and sarah will present this item it's just a contract item. >> this goes to the urs contract the parsons team has been on board but we're not in a position we don't have the funding for advance design from thirty to 50 co- perp percent staff would have recommended this and done a new contract but we're not in this situation financial so this is just an amendment to the parsons

contract not increasing the amount of the contract. and just allows 80 us to have a team very knowledgeable to remain an call to respond to the work the city is doing our virile work and it extends the term by 3 years >> it is keeping the same dollar amount. >> $4.2 million. >> they've only spent 8.2 so there's a large amount left to spend. >> they didn't want my consideration for exceeding the crack. >> no. >> good for them. >> director reiskin. >> i'm happy to support this and we definitely want to remain the ability to access those services this relates bashgs

back to the budget item you mention those will be the folks should the funding come from planning or the a t c it will be the consultant to do that and it will be important to extend the contracts i want to insure that the transbay participation through the consultant and otherwise that we're as collaborative and coordinate active and open-minded about that process as we possibly can be in keeping with the mayors request that he made when we met the other day and i'm happy to move the item. >> thank you. we have a motion on this item any public comment on that item? seeing none, we do have a motion. >> second. >> and a second roll call.

>> director reiskin. director harper. supervisor kim. it's 4 i's and item 10 is approved >> thank you. next item 11. >> it's authorizing the executive director to expedite a cooperative agreement with caltrain for vicinity oversight assurances for the transit right-of-way not to exceed 4 hundred thousand and directors skyline will report. >> good morning from the project management team i'll only add that this really started in 2009 we entered into on a agreement for the oversight analysis this is the next step the cloth that covers the oversight for constriction for

our work to be done state certified. >> thank you director reiskin. >> at least the monthly reports there were a number of caltrain related challenges associated with the bus ramps project that we had reported it's great this is here are we the weather other issues we had in terms of the caltrain engagement are those being getting resolved. >> they're getting resolved one other item we're working on tintly we're one or two items away from getting that done that is part of what's needed for the encroachment permit. >> thank you. >> any other questions. >> seeing none. is there my public comment on

this item >> no members. >> seeing none, can we take a motions. >> so moved. >> roll call vote. >> director dealing. >> director reiskin. director harper. supervisor kim. that's 4 i's on 11 it's approved >> can we please call the next item. >> 12 to have the executive director to into into negotiations on the trade packet elevators to be determined by a fair and reasonable price for the trade dockets and enter into the elevator code share to be determined if the parties can agree upon a fair and reasonable price. >> and the directors can report on that.

>> this is the elevators and escalators on january 20th of this year we have 12 elevators and 9 escalators this will help maintenance with the elevators and following the industry practice we've included a 5 year maintenance contract after subsequential completion of the escalators and elevators the cost will be from the maintenance budget that will be done after the subsequential completion of the building. we received bids on may 21st of this year, the budget open the escalators and elevator is $11.9 million the estimate that was implemented including the maintenance costs is $13.4 million we had 3 bidders qualified the elevators company

and shining letter elevator copy and the corporation the bidders were invited to bid for the elevators or escalators or both the elevators and escalators were offered to provide a discount for the entire package. the bid amount we received two bids one for the escalators and one for the elevator. the center bid was $10.6 million and the other was 9 million for a total of 19 million plus this excludes the maintenance only for the constellation of the elevators and escalators arrest this is a summary of the breakdown of the bid results starting with the elevators the elevators are for 12 million 25 thousand this contract included

two board approvals as part of the july 2013 bucket and one alternative this was to provide the service elevator 201 one that have the two slates on the loading department of education for $2.5 million and alternated 15 was to have a finish and that alternative was one hundred and 50 thousand we have to increase the glass elevators for security the bid cost came in at no cost so the oldest bid for the elevators by accepting all the saeflts is 25 of million dollars and plus the microscopes period. that includes the maintenance by

otis t is 1440 million. otis bid the navigation of escalators their bid was not in record compliance and it was deemed unresponsive, however, the bid for the escalates was 14 millions plus the maintenance for a total of $13 million by asking the biertsdz to provide a total bid including the savings otis bid $22.5 million as a total bid that bid represents $4.2 million savings. $4.2 million vs. their overview bid their escalator bid is not in compliance. shining letter bid the

escalators and they're by compliance and the escalator bid was 9 million plus million dollars and 2 point plus for the elevator for 2 hundred plus million dollars. since we only received one bid for the escalator and one for the elevator those bids were above the estimates as allowed by the federal transportation regulations they can negotiate for each in order to confirm a price fair and reasonable in this case the sole bidders was otis and the sole bidder is shipping letter. based on we're asking the boarding bystander to enter into negotiation with the tmc with

otis for the elevator and shining letter for the escalators with they're fair and reasonable placing price that concludes my presentation. >> director harper. >> yeah. i'm surprised that the maintenance costs for 5 years isn't there a warrant on those things after they put them in. >> this is above and beyond the warranty period and it's a standard industry practice when you - >> half a million a year just to dwraes the wheels. >> this is their bid and in the negotiations we'll be able to understand better the numbers and how they arrived and did we talk to bart i mean talk about a transit organization that's had it's headaches with escalates and elevators maybe they'll have

something interesting to say about this procedure. >> we're following an industry practices with the maintenance as part of the bid. >> we can contract bart. >> i'm saying everybody understands bart problems with the escalators and the elevators and the announcements that come across i thought they would have some prospective. >> so since steve why don't you address this it's more in line of what you do would you, please address that. >> before we do that i want to make sure that the action item is it to authorize the director to enter into the negotiations and this will come back. >> yes. their bids are above what we think are the market we need to negotiate how he arrived

at the bids and s see if there's any bid and found out what are those numbers and how they came about. >> that's good to provide feedback and other due diligence work we need you to do like communicating with bart so we can learn you know from what they have learned i think we're all familiar with the escalators and elevator issue. >> i mean that would be fine but at some point it would be nice to know we've contacted a sister agency that deals with those things and seniors has for the last hocking years and have perspectives on what we can a lot for in the contract. >> so steve can you address, please the outreach and the due diligence you get, please. >> with all respect the

maintenance portion of the bid was not something we recommended it was recommended by others and so our outreach really didn't include the discussion of the maintenance period we were primarily interested in the impairing the escalators and elevators and the maintenance and the warranty period. >> and then one last question it says that we're authorizing the executive director to enter into negotiations by a joint operation is there any reason we're having to negotiate with web core. >> when we negotiated with the elevator bidders and the escalator bidders that's a team effort. >> but it sounds like the contract is changing and web core has a contract and they'll

enter into a contract we want to be at the table and it's semi narcotics. >> it's web core. >> director reiskin. >> two questions and i'm sorry if i miss this do we know why is other 4 firms tlorment the prequalifying. >> yeah. we contacted them and they were too busy and didn't have the marketplace to bid the project and the other bidder they are in the mix but their elevators were and elevators were not in compliance they diced not to bid them we've informed the bidders if they bid none by inclines within the 25

percent we'll consider approaching the fda asking for a waiver not guaranteed but, you know, we were willing to do that. >> and i think one of the bidders had zero s pe is that something that can be a point of negotiation. >> yes. director reiskin we'll find out the prices how they came about the prices and how they are different in the buildings around us and also how they bid the maintenance and how they bid other components and the f d e will be part of it. >> okay. >> we want to have the opportunity to sit down and talk with them. >> okay. so i i think i'll say it's too

bad or disappointing we didn't get multiple bids on the escalators and elevators but it's at least worthwhile for tangle to continue the negotiations and could be inform the board of directors but it's important to talk to our sister agrees i in my limited knowledge know this is a way to learn. any other discussion items on this >> move approval. >> so we have a motion and second any any public comment on that item? >> noun that i'm aware of. >> director beale. >> director reiskin. director harper. supervisor kim. that's 4 i's and item 12 is approved >> can we move on. >> item 13 is