>> good afternoon. >> my name is morrah bora, president and ceo of security services. i would like to thank the sf mta commission for an allowing us to provide services to this agency on the contract. black beer has been providing this for san francisco for more than 18 years and in good standing with the contract monitoring division and have been on leb last year. we are enthusiastic to partner with andrew international and providing this service. we have worked on this contract from november 2010 to 2012. we are very familiar with the sf mta

requirements and look forward to providing services for sf maet. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. tompolist council for security. i want to say that rumors leading to this contract. we would like to deny these allegations and if the board wishes we would like the opportunity to respond. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> jonas ten rooud. >> mr. nolan, members of the board, i'm the chief operating officer for cypress security. i would like to point out the way this contract was handled. contracts are put out on a

cost and merit bases and not on coast alone. we have transit security in the local region and the west coast. to name a few local recent awarded contracts, ac transit and they are all awarded on a base of merit and cost as well. i believe that this is reflected in the fact that only three companies ended up bidding on this $30 million contract whereas you have 20 companies bidding on other contracts. the sf mta security contract following minimal requirements. thank you. >> next speaker, please. good afternoon, chairman nolan and director. my name is cast nar abused

-- budis, we have been providing services for the last eight 8 years and are familiar with the challenges in doing so. at the last board meeting you heard from both employees and union officials of their concern that their wages might be slashed because the contract was going to a low bidder which at the time was a non-union company. over the last two 2 weeks your staff has worked hard to address those concerns and bringing this contract back to you with andrew commitment now paying those union scale wages. a happy ending it would seem. sf near maet t mta gets services. hardly. when it comes too easy to be

true, it usually is. the red flag is flashing a warning here to take a hard look. the time for due diligence is now and not when the problems begin. only three companies submitted a bid which is the largest contract in the bay area. that should have you call for questions. the two union companies, abc security and cyber security who are aware of the wages both bid i dental cal numbers, 6.4 numbers. andrew 8.9 million. 25 percent less. of course at the time andrew submitted it's bid it was not required to pay union scale. andrew has not promised to do that and it's worth noting that andrew to this day does not know the wages

and benefits to this officer as they didn't know this and potential bidders did. this is voodoo map and it requires andrew to demonstrate how they can perform on this contract with those prices which is primarily wages in this industry. we can demonstrate easily to staff and anyone else that it is not mathematically possible. maybe they are prepared to take a loss on this contract. if that's the case, you should know that. once you know that, it is irresponsible to not require financial guarantees on this contract to protect what is an unviable economical contract. the $800,000 bond is not enough on a $30 million contract. in fact the information they submitted is not theirs alone.

unsecurity needs to provide this. thank you. >> michael molly and he's the last person who turned in a speaker card. good afternoon, my name is michael mali and the security for council vice-president for united service workers west. i would like to thank sf mta for considering secure officers wages, benefits and working conditions and doing all that you could to ensure that we would have a company in there that follows the cba and also that during a contract transition from one security company to another, it is almostways necessary to concern that the wages and benefits are maintained and the union accounts well over 100 security officers. so united service workers west will be

diligent to monitor the services to ensure there are no cuts. we ask the sf mta also be diligent in your oversight of this contract. we hope if there are any issues to come up that you support us in the future. >> thank you. anyone else care to address the board? >> seeing none. the hearing is closed. members of the board, we would like to hear response from staff on this issue? >> i will ask staff to come forward. i will just open by saying that we undertook a fair and open competitive process in accord with the city's administrative code. there are many ways to do procurement process but we chose one that we thought was appropriate for the type of contract and if you look at the submissionses they are actually quite close but the procurement

rules govern what recommendation we bring to you for your approval. the selection of the winning bidder does not all cast any aspersions on any bit biders. it's just the outcome of the process we do our diligence to ensure they are responsible bidders and on that bases are offering the award today. there was an mou assigned between ciu and andrew that encourage the transition that have concerned us and something we'll behind the -- be watching closely. if there is anything you would like to add about the process or substance, i will turn to them. >> good afternoon, chairman nolan, directors. >> my name is pattel, manager

of contracts and procurement at mta. the city has on city contracts done rfp's or ifp. either one is acceptable because it was a faster turn around and we had a time constraint on the contract. knowing that we followed all the loop on the process. it is not exclusively a low bid award. it does have minimum qualification requirements within the document that all bidders must adhere to. it is a qualification base as well as a low price. the city has issued these before of office of contracts and procurement has done so in the past successfully. so other than that, i can answer any questions. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. pattel. i would imagine as you went through

the procurement process there is a supplier validation process that must include financial stability review of the people who are going to be with the company bidding on the contract. so, the idea that because the wages that they are going to be paying are going to be staying the same, the financial stability review would have uncovered whether that was going to be detrimental to the bidding company. >> that's correct. we required 5 years of financial statements with the first three 3 years being the minimum required amount. so $5 million in revenue. we did check their financials, they were in good standing and net minimum requirements. after the bid did come in we did reference checks successfully. we also communicated back with andrew international about the relationship that andrew had with u.s. security, what we were told at that time is that

u.s. security is operated separately as a non-union company and andrew is operated as a union company. both of those companies are essentially owned by goldman sachs, i believe. they are a large corporation and they have done this kind of work before. we also have performance bond requirements as stated earlier. so if there is a failure on performance and paying wages, there is $800,000 for non-performance with the contract and another 800,000 for non-payment for labor and equipment. >> thank you, that was my second question. you beat me to it. thank you. >> other questions? >> director borden? >> you can't really change the orders. there is no more money after the contract to get through. >> for the city to get more on the contract? >> no. the amount we are allocating

for today, if the cost were higher, we wouldn't be on the hook for that, despite >> we would not pay higher than the bid amount. there are always changes and proifgsz provision to the contract but this is the price we would be paying. >> thank you. >> it seems to me that one of the things that cypress has very eloquently raised and thank you for your input is the concern for the workers and that the vug going to be pulled out from under them and they won't be able to live to this agreement. but the director of aciu is here today. does aciu support this contract? >> as director reiskin pointed out that sciu that if they award

to andrew international. they will be transferring all of the existing employees over. >> i understand that, my question goes a little bit deeper of a level. i think the allegations being raised by cypress is andrew, don't take andrew bid at phase value and this may come back. the question isn't whether it's signed up. it's whether aciu has taken a position on this contract? >> i think that would be a question for aciu. >> mr. mali, you need to approach microphone. >> the official opinion would be we are neutral. we don't care who gets the contract as long as they play by the rules of the cba. >> very good, thank you. then my second question is in

direct response to the cypress concerns. do you think andrew can practically and financially meet the terms of this contract without any problem or any sort of reversal on the workers? >> they have met all the requirements that we have worked in the document. we have checked all of their references, we know they are history. yes. we feel that they can perform the work. i would like to have chris address the director of security with his experience with andrew. >> thank you. thanks, my name is chris, the director of security and enforcement. as mentioned in the bidding process we developed a scope of work that had very clearly defined minimum requirements particularly with respect to the experience of the winner of the

contract. and we are satisfied that andrew has signature -- significant enough experience in managing large security operations to effectively manage the business of sf mta. >> okay. i didn't actually hear cypress putting down the other company as unqualified. i think they maybe redding the in fact they didn't get extra credit for service. thank you. but that's the way the bid was structured. one other thing to respond for someone who has been a good vepd -- vendor for years and deserves an answer to questions raise, are you the presenter, maybe it's possible to meet the terms on the contract. when you said the numbers are similar so you are quite comfortable. the president of cypress was here and

said in his opinion he doesn't think andrew can fulfill this contract with the numbers submitted. i'm sure that's a question that you have given some thought to and i want to make sure we have the answers to that question? >> we don't have reason to believe that they will be unable to do so nor would we recommend to the board for approval if we had doubts about their ability to do so. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> what's your pleasure? >> motion to approve. >> second. >> anymore discussion? >> i just want to say one thing. i don't know enough about this situation other than what i have read. i do think that we always talk about local companies and supporting local companies and putting things on ballot with local companies and makes it difficult to compete with outside of san francisco that has lower

chains and lower cost in other areas. thigh -- i think we need to think about if we want to have local businesses and better employee practices to figure out how to put that in the contracting process. >> do we have a motion on this? motion and second. all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> opposed? no. thank you very much. >> motion to conduct a closed session. >> second. all in favor say, all in favor >> we are back from closed section. took no action. it's ais it appropriate to disclose?

>> do not disclose. >> all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> none opposed. we are adjourned. [ meeting is adjourned ] >> >>

test. >> good afternoon. welcome to the san francisco budget & finance sub-committee i'm supervisor wiener to my right is supervisor kim the committee vice chair and supervisor cohen will not be able to join us today, our clerk is awning debris awe bigger and thank you to commissioner honda jennifer lowe and other. madam clerk, any announcements? phones, pagers and similar sound-producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting.

implemented speaker cards should be submitted to the clerk and the. >> can i have a motion to excuse supervisor cohen. >> madam clerk one item. this is for the business sign in the planning code >> thank you. i'm the author of item one my co-sponsor is supervisor chiu. day today those zoning controls amend did business sign intended to identify signage to the business in which it's connected and the products in the business those serve to dish a particular

business between a general sign sloops as a billboard this is hat notice been updated since 1965 since then the practices are challenge we have seen links like loopholes that have been identified businesses turn business signs in effect the billboards that will close the loophole the voters have over and over again voted in large majorities stating they don't want billboards in san francisco this is inconsistent with the preferences dedicated by the voters at the election time. so those controls will close that loophole to make sure the

business sign is connected to the products being sold in the business as opposed to a billboard. so we have dan here from the planning department and mr. cannabis dispensary i want to give you the opportunities to make racks >> he's here to respond to questions. >> supervisor kim has a question. >> thank you, mr. cider good to see you i want to say i'm completely in support of the interim controls before us today and glad we're going to look at cleaning up the lack around business signs it's been over thirty years since. >> 50. >> 50? 62 in his. i had some questions around even

kind of the origin i'm looking at this from a narrow precipitation but in the tenderloin i think one aspect it's a been critically frustrating is the amount of tobacco and liquor advisement on stores that face into the neighborhoods some of out inclines but secondly, it make me think about why do we put this into place why allow the advertising for a loophole >> at least a number of the members of the board we all postdate 1965 when the definition was crafted our working assumes thas has been that everyday when we walk by a

store in the tenderloin and see dan's liquor store and a or whatever and ofrnlts see a somewhat sign for coca-cola our understanding the amenity has been induced and helping the business afford business opportunities and the branding it might not otherwise get supervisor wiener suggested there are shifts but in our estimation we allow a by sign to allow the business to present itself to its business and gain the attraction and support the business. >> in the time that sorry i realize it's confusing us with

the ordinance sign it's much older than that. in the interim period can we talk about the business signage we want to allow if it's true it snbz are getting a benefit you you know, i want to be able to consider the impact it has on the neighborhood and the advertising for tobacco and liquor and things we're trying to curtail i feel like it impacts the health a neighborhood in the tinder tenderloin we have 72 liquor store i ask that not for the interim controls i'm in support of that but insert that >> we'll welcome it

conversation. >> and the second piece this conversation i've not had the planning department we'll have advocates in the tenderloin what is the capacity for enforcement on signage. >> i'll go to scott sanchez he runs the enforcement. >> thank you, mr. considered. >> thank you scott sanchez planning department. so code enforcement has been historically been understaffed it is the lowest staffing one of the staff members is here doing the work in the tenderloins looking the transparency requirement because many of the issues are not the signage issues but what the store front appears can you see inside or boarded you up because of the

machines or registers blocking windows looking more beyond the signage but transparency requirements for the code we've been pro-active in the tenderloin >> i've noticed a difference in the stores walking by they've increased the number of signages on their windows but in terms of you have 7 full time code enforcement officers. >> what's the plan. >> more than 13 hundred codes and packages of regulations from thought clubs and massage enforcement and affordable housing we deal with the general building requirements working with the legal construction activities things that may or may not included like the affordable housing that is just some things. >> i see it's complaint driven.

>> correct we have placement driven enforcement you'll see the work from john and working on the store front efforts he headed up the citywide survey with the removal of signs and we're doing practice enforcement incorporation with supervisor chiu's office so we're trying to do pro-active enforcement with you we get seven hundred plus complaints a year and right now, we're in closing out more seven hundred and making what you think our backlog but try to publicize how to make complaints on our website or, of course, 311 make a complaint we've got to it.

>> you have seven hundred complaints today is that a rough average per year and it's increasing people that have complaints they can direct them and making people aware of the planning code violations it has counted for the amount of complaints. >> on per staff member they manage a hundred complaints over the course of a year. >> yes. and straightforward the step back praying and more complex like affordable housing. some cases a litigation over the years. >> it seems like not have had staffing but thank you for your service in the tenderloin i notice a difference i want to cont t