staff can wait before they respond and not interrupt. >> i'm sorry. >> he just interrupted. >> the estimate was based on us getting three-four bidders or more. if you look at the middle stairs issued it in january we received one bid. we rejected the bid. it came in tripled estimate. rejected the bid. we did additional outreach. we increased the pre-qualified bidders and opened it up and only received two bids so we're not getting the bids that we need to be able to estimate accurately . the elevators, we received one bid each. the board allowed approval to negotiate with each bidder and reduced the price but dealing with one bidder we don't have the luxury of having three-four bids. for us to realize the

competitiveness of the bidding environment we need to get three or four bidders. you get one or two bids there is a margin of 10, 20, 30% above what the package should cost. >>i will note that the biggest contract here is the temporary facilities and there was only one bidder i believe and that recommended award is less than the estimate. >> yeah. this is a timing materials contract. >> director sartipi. >> if the highest risk is the number of bidders what do -- when we interview the contractors that picked up the package what is their responses to why they're not bidding? is it not value? is it difficult? is it complex? or they're busy someplace else? >> they're saying they're busy someplace else but let me bring

in webcore. they directly talk to the contractors. i could use a life line here. >> so mostly it is the fact they have other opportunities in the market place elsewhere that they find more attractive. for example, the metal stairs we had nine pre-qualified bidders and the first time we only had one, and that was significantly above the budget, and we looked at -- we explored options. could we add that scope to the steel package or the below concrete package. that didn't work. we reelected to rebid it and reached out and received two bids. actually the results are in my opinion not entirely unsatisfactory. it is primarily the bidders have other opportunities in the market place. we have done everything we can do to make this project as attractive to bid as

possible. we're doing extensive outreach efforts with the bidders during the prequalification period and the bid period that we have a good list and comfortable working with us if they don't know us and view trans bay as an attractive project. we have been doing other things in conjunction with tjpa. the payment cycle has improved in the last months. we're trying to get that word out to the market place. we want this to be an attractive project for the subcontractors and we're working hard to make that happen but again i think the fact is some other project -- there's a lot of projects in the marketplace that the subcontractors have an opportunity to propose on and many times they find others more attractive. >> director harper. >> yeah, i think what interests me in your evaluation or the team's evaluation is this going

to continue and for how long, this really tough market? i know just within san francisco there's a lot of -- that's me. sorry. i have to kill that. we have mission bay. we have our own things going on. there's a lot happening and i kind of want a feel is this going to end soon or just be throughout the duration of the project? >> i don't think we really know the answer to that question until we receive the bids on bid day. again we're doing everything we can to attract the right bidders and the right number of bidders and we don't know the results until then. >> yeah. but i mean isn't there a way -- we know what is happening in san francisco; right? we should have a good grasp on that and i presume just right here there is our main competition for subcontractors and i am not being -- i'm not that familiar with what's

coming online from hunter's point and everything that is happening in san francisco so i would just like to get a feel from the staff just to looking here is this something that is going to change because we're coming out of the ground now and that's an advantage, so are we lapped ahead of all the other projects so now they're looking for people we're done with dealing, or is it something that all these successes finishing ups we're going to be in the same situation? i have no idea what the answer to that question is. >> the market is very, very busy and there are many competing projects outside of san francisco include silicon valley, some large projects there we're competing for the same subcontractors on. >> we're doing all of our bidding -- the bulk in the next 12 months. i don't think there is any reason to see from what

we're seeing this situation is going to change. >> all right. >> that's true. >> any other questions? >> i have a suggestion, in addition to coming back with possible scope reduction ideas and i think it would be good to have the designer here for that discussion maybe following director sartipi's question it would be good to come back and get a report are on the implementation sailor report recommendations to improve the bidding environment. i think we got a snapshot of that but i recall they had a pretty good list and interest in that to see that report. >> yeah, we can do that and fred is here, the designer, and he can speak to but there is no place to reduce scope to do that and we're a buy america project

and given the heated market so i don't want to provide any fuls expectations here but there anyplace we could reduce that kind of money. we have to get the station built and i think the board can be helpful to me and help identify new funding grants and sources for the project. >> thank you. >> no i'm sorry. are there other directors because i had questions? director nuru. >> i sent questions to staff regarding the bidding and the packages and what type of penalties we might be facing as a result of these bids, so i'm told next week i will get that so start looking into those packages and maybe getting a better sense of what is coming down the line. >> just a couple of things. i was going to touch on what director reiskin said. we have

two board meetings where we talked about the consultant evaluation how to make our bid packages more attractive so i know that is a discussion point. i know the market is incredibly heated. unless the economy drops i know there tons of project in san francisco and this part of san francisco that will continue to bid in this market so i think the question is if our bids are attractive and contractors are saying that there aren't issues with the contracts why are they choosinglet other projects to bid on? you can say there are a lot of projects out in the market but it doesn't explain at the end of the day they are bidding on other projects and not the terminal and i think there has to be a level of honesty in the discussions even amongst ourselves to get additional bidders into the market and again this isn't my

area of expertise construction but i am that community a lot and i hear talk about why our project is a little more difficult to work with, so at this point i feel there has to be a level of honesty among one another and keep this project on budget. i also want to reiterate what director reiskin said we have approved an augmented budget which includes the entire park scope and my -- the direction i would like to move in is stay within the budget and the park as part of the project. we can talk about grants and the mello roos but ultimately we're talking about phase two which is the important aspect of this project, the terminal needs and the [inaudible] to be a transit hub for the region and as much as possible fix the problems today by taking away tomorrow but

that's not exciting to me and going to dc and competing for other projects in the reason and it's a hard pill to swallow and i think we need to reduce the scope and budget so we can complete the project in the budget we approved last year. >> okay. all right. and now i would like to ask our next presenter dennis to briefly present the pla. >> good morning directors. second quarter labor project agreement report. i will go through administration labor updates, progress on the students, veterans and adults and ends with the apprentice reporting trends. administration we had our tenth meeting with the joint administrative committee on may 15. went through construction progress of upcoming trends and the veterans programs. regarding the labor. there was no work stoppage or

labor incidences that affected progress. on june 18 there was impact from the iron workers but no impact to us and we had a strong and decisive response from the iron workers and also michael o tearo and dennis meek an and we are are a pla project not to be touched so it was a good test to show there was complete unity on the project then. skilled labor needs have been met and steve reports from monthlies we had four recordables from the last summer. summer interns are behind us. i am excited to work with them this summer and to show them what we do. regarding progress on veterans. our subs are diving into how they can

recruit out to veterans and anvil builders and others and have been a strong advocate bringing veterans to the project. also each of the labor unions have been trying to strongly recruit as well and of course webcor is outreaching to veterans as they get on base too. anyway possible to get the word out. progress today with the adults. the unions -- basically mike mckenna and peter with the unions and the apprenticeships and they're ramping them up to meet the need and joseph scott with the laborers and we heard the same thing and they're looking for more people and michael o tear i

don't reported they're happy with the core curriculum program is starting this fall at john mcconnell. our apprenticeship craft hours. we're above our goal and at 19% with the majority at 34% coming from san francisco and the rest with the east bay coming following up. we have our trend graph that we show here where laborers we have been down a little bit in the last months and with the sub trade package we have broad it to their attention and getting the numbers up and the operator apprenticeships have been going well and exceeded the goals so with that moots my report. any questions? >> any questions directors? thank you. and we have craig

boyer if you have questions on the quarterly financial report. >> any questions? there are none. thank you. >> great and finally there are just two last items. i am pleased to report that the amendment that you approved in may was approved and that is good news. you know it recognizes the formation of the community facilities district and authorization to sell cfd bonds and funding for the project. you will recall the amendment allows to pursue bridge financing and we're in the organization stages and working with gold man sac i will bring you that information and our community meeting on the 16th on mission and our community meetings are held the third wednesday of every month and that concludes my report. >> thank you and i also just want to thank all of our summer

interns that came to join us today at our board of directors meeting. it's really great to meet you individually and hear about what you're learning in summer internship. it's great to know that we have san francisco natives that are part of building the new skyline and i hope many of you go into the work of continuing to build the city. it's just very exciting to see you all here so welcome again so seeing nothing else for item five we will move on to item six public comment. >> item six is an opportunity to address you on items not on the agenda. [calling speaker names] >> good morning directors and executive director kaplan. i am ht tran and work with anvil builders and a minority owned business in the bay view district i want to thank you for the opportunities you made available to my company and for

me a disabled veteran of the iraqi war. i want to stress how important it is to engage veterans and business owners. we are grateful for the transit center projects. we were awarded a nine proint $2 million contract and hoist for the project and we pursued this project and built with other veterans at the outreach events of the tjpa. as an entrepreneur and veteran i can't tell you how important to get a meaningful opportunity for this project of this caliber. we grew from 10 employees to 50 now and we have other competitive contracts that we experienced here in the city and county of san francisco meeting with other contractors large and small who are becoming our teammates and clients and i

want to mention webcor/obayashi and turner construction have been incredible mentors to our firm. working with this program has help us overcome the challenge of working on large and complex projects and we were able to hire additional veterans to work in office of economic and workforce development and on the trances bay project. >> >> so i want to know the tjpa is making a difference to real people to veterans looking to serve the country in a new and meaningful way. i want to thank director kaplan because without your commitment to this project we wouldn't have grown as much. i hope other agencies in san francisco will follow her lead and support veterans in our community. >> thank you. thank you for attending our meeting.

[inaudible] lawrence. >> ladies and gentlemen of the audience and commissioners, chair kim and maria ayerdi-kaplan good morning. i am mr. lawrence and been in the city and county of san francisco for 45 years. i have been a taxi driver for the last 16 years in the city. i am not here to disrupt the meeting or so-called financial issues but i am here to present facts that in five observations at this commission that i have noticed there isn't one discussion of the taxi issues. number one is this is that over the past four years the sfmta has taken over the taxi commission and we have chaos

today. anybody that wants to get into the car can be a taxi driver and go up to the new terminal and pick up passengers. if you look around the area and the hotels and taxi planning never took place. the only place i see it in the city and county is sfo and partially in the embarcadero but not completely. i consider this trans bay project equivalent to the embarcadero center, one, two, three and basically where you have no taxi plan whatsoever. two, is briefly i make this statement because i have applied for the taxi director position four times in 10 years and -- [inaudible] to this commission but you're talking about kronism is taking over the sfmta. mr. reiskin can ask you about cost over returns

as he triples the prices for taxi drivers in this city and we don't have a level playing field. i come also as a veteran and not hard hat vets or working with the commission or sftta or city and county of san francisco and caltrans and i don't see evidence of that. there are veterans with administrative background, mbas in finance and real estate, et cetera but just to give you a quick bounce off this. i have two things before you. i have a foi to find out all of the businesses related that were handed out the feinstein [inaudible] over the last 10 years and two the sfmta published this four years ago. it's about 400 pages and in the 400 pages they published they

left out 19 pages of documents that i gave them. the power of denial. i thank you for your time. >> thank you. can you clarify whether it's for tjpa? >> i have copies for you as well. >> in the future though i would appreciate public limited to items in this agency which is the transbay joint powers authority. thank you. >> it's ted olson that would like to address you next. >> chairman and directors i am ted olson the newly elected chairman of the community advisory committee and i come before you only if you have any questions you wish to ask of us. bruce ag et, the vice chair and myself have committed to the acc that we will attend all these

meetings and be available to you. >> thank you. director harper. >> yeah. this reminds me of the difference i was going to bring up here which at the alameda transportation commission that i sit on the advisory committee -- we have three our four of them actually, paratransit, all of the different aspects of transportation but the citizens advisory committee have a slotd -- they don't always showum and give a report but they know it's expected of them if there is something they want to say and i think that might be a nice addition here to just know that mr. olson has a spot. >> absolutely. >> and if he's got something to say come in and say it because there is a spot we want to hear from citizens. he's not an ordinary citizen. he's president of the citizens advisory committee.

>> absolutely. we will provide a recurring slot for the chairperson. >> thank you. >> if you wish to note we did create several subcommittees so we could focus as effectively as possible on all of the issues confronting you. we had a success meeting as we did before with many of the questions you're asking, and we did have one instance where the discussion -- public discussion was contentious so consequently i have drafted a statement they will read to the public before each meeting and if becomes contentious the person will lose that turn and we will move on, but other than that i think it was very successful. we will be

meeting with scott -- by the way scott gave an absolutely subbesh discussion of the financing, the history behind it. we will be meeting with scott to see if we can create a prepackage study so that we can focus our questions faster and secondly supervisor kim you would be interested to know that three of your constituents were at the meeting. they had two things in particular that they wanted us to note. number one that they have the fewest number of parks of any place -- of any district in the city and they want us to be cognizant of that, and number two in terms of the rooftop park they were very concerned about the tax burden they might have relative to the 19 buildings tall skyscrapers that would be surrounding it and they wanted

something equitable in financing, particularly for the two that are abutting -- abridging to the rooftop park and therefore likely to have greater use of it. those are the main points. >> thank you mr. olson. i would be happy to add an additional item to our regular board meeting so that the cac has a regular opportunity to report back to the board of directors as they would like to and whether it's you or voice -- vice chair that comes and we also have the smaller parks in san francisco. .6 acres per resident compared to district 2 and has much more per acre and we are working with the director and the mayor's office to make sure it opens with the terminal. >> thank you and i want to congratulate maria and the

staff. we are committed to them and consider it an honor to be on the advisory committee. >> thank you mr. olson. >> and you have [inaudible] >> thank you i don't know if this is going to work. first of all i would like to welcome mr. nuru. welcome to the party. it's great to have you here and i would like to congratulate director reiskin for the delivery of the central subway tunnels on budget and on time and i hope you can learn something there. i hope you can see this. you cannot. what i was hoping to show you is the track layout in the alternate alignment in the trans bay tunnel box which will make it possible for us to basically -- tracks between beale and main street and go across the bay.

the reason i am bringing that up today earlier during the construction update mr. rural showed the construction -- there was fuel, oil tank and a water tank, and if i can -- if this comes up i can -- [inaudible] does this come up any better? no it doesn't, but the blue line that you see over there what we have to do to make it possible to have the tracks we have to push the platforms nearly all the way up to mr. patrick's building and right now the problem is the storage tanks are on top of the other platform and that's an issue. the last point i would like to bring up it's strange to me that we should have -- i mean i understand that you need fuel to power the stand by generators

but it's strange that you would position the fuel tank outside of the entrance of the tunnel and i don't know why that didn't show up when the subject matter experts looked at it and if they had comments about this location. thank you. >> that concludes the members of the public that wanted to address you under that item. >> thank you. let's move on to our regular calendar. i think given our discussion earlier i would like to call item 7 through 11 together. >> we actually have a member that is going to recuse himself from one of the items. >> that was item 11 director reiskin so let's call seven through 10. >> item 7 is contract numbers authorizing webcor/obayashi to a troid a sub contribute to sheedy

drayage company for roof top cranes and not to exceed 11.5 million over four years and the costs and authorizing construction services by $874,000. item 8 is approving amendment for the same contract to anvil builders for the facilities not to exceed amount listed and the costs by the same amount and the construction services as listed. item 9 is approving amendment to that same contract to award a contract to olson and company steel as responsible bidders with the lowest bid in the amount listed for contract number listed metal stair and ladders and authorizing cost by that amount and the construction services fixed fee by amount listed. item 10 is amending the same

contract schindler elevator corporation for the negotiated amount as listed for contract escalators thereby increasing the direct costs by that same amount and the construction fees by amount listed and no members of the public have addressed you on those items. >> that was a lot of word. thank you very much. director harper. >> madam chair i just have a comment on item 7 of a policy that we have. when we do get competitive responses bidding and there is an evaluation on different factors they show the board the score because what the board appreciates is seeing the relative levels of weight because sometimes they will well