why was there no effort to encourage local business enterprises in that top tier? because that our goals for the city are not just for the smaller contracts, for a fair chance for women, and people of color, and local business enterprises, but for all category? s so i am just wondering why there is no effort in the tier one to insure that there is that level of diversety of the vendors. >> we do encourage lbes, to apply and in the top tier and in fact, probably the last time around, xtattoo is maybe one of the biggest success stories that we have had in terms of joint venture and it was two, former bles that now have graduated from the program. and certainly, from a dollar standpoint, where one of the most successful vendors the

last time around they are participating this time around. >> so it sounds like there is some effort with the recruitment and out reach to lbes, but why is not there some other efforts like there are for the bottom tier and the second tier to encourage that level of diversity at that top level? >> we do encourage it. and we do hold prebid conferences so that the different vendors could basically meet and determine whether they would like to partner or not. >> so it sounds like it is, you encourage and you do different or other efforts but i see for the bottom tier, there is a specific set aside, it looks like, and for the middle tier there is a bid preference, and why isn't there more done at that top level like there is for those two tiers? >> because, these are in accordance with 14 b, rules.

and so, we apply the preferences as prescribed in the admin code. and we set up a set aside program as prescribed presently in the admin code. and we actually go above and beyond that in terms of trying to at least provide opportunities for lbes to partner. >> supervisor avalos? >> just a follow up question on that. when you say that we comply with 14 b rules, it is kind of like just saying just because, but what is the rationale on 14 b, that says that we will not have an lbe component at way. it does not make a lot of sense? >>ctred that >> i will because i was not in the present position when that

was determined, and the dollar amounts and i understand that the board will be looking at that again. shortly, that the dollar thresholds will change. and i will decline to answer and i would defer really to the contract monitoring division, who has worked more closely in terms of the legislation itself. >> it seems like a real flaw, especially if we are looking at local business enterprises, you know, when we and they have a contract with the city. and that is fun, and that is money that gets recycled back into the local economy. and you know, we are missing out on big opportunities like that, and i am wondering if anyone in the mayor's office or the controller could explain anything about the policy rationale and to me it does not make a lot of sense.

>> you know, the things that we have in this contract that are not reflected here, is that we do require that all of the vendors have a local presence, so in that way, funds are also funneled back into the community, >> it >> no it is not exactly the same absolutely not. okay. next slide please? >> okay. and so before you today, are contracts that do estimate to exceed the 10 million dollar threshold and we are proposing $12 million dollar contracts for central computer, and

computer land, en point, tig, worldwide technology, and xtech, intervision,... let me see. and robert half and stellar services. the estimated lbe subcontracting opportunities under this is $3.7 million. and again, that is because there are product and service components to this tier. and the $3.7 million, is based on subcontracting opportunities for services. and even though these contracts do not require board approval we would like to familiarize

you with the second tier. and this tier again was 2.5 million dollar contracts, and the contracts are being awarded to ameritech which is an lbe bridge micro, and another lbe dynamic systems, sns, sf jv which is a joint venture with an lbe, there are tier, 2 b specialists and academy x, cmpros, and soft net solutions and two of the three are lbes. and the total lbe contract amount awarded in this tier was $12.5 million. and finally in tier three, there are again, multiple... >> i am sorry to stop you for a

second. >> you said 12.5? >> yes. >> that is aggregate. >> aggregate. >> thank you. >> and then in tier three, there is microlbes, there is 14 contracts total, and the amount where the microlbes will be prime is 4.3 million dollars

participate, as primes. also, there were no dollar limits for large projects within the store before and we have placed the dollar almost of 2.5 million dollars through the technology market place. so, larger projects will go out for bid and in that way, the market place will have the ability basically to bid on all of those larger projects.

that concludes... and i am sorry, i would like to address one more thing, also i did receive a protest in may, in response to our notice of intent to award. we have given careful consideration to the concerns raised. and we reviewed the process, and however, we are still recommending that the committee and the full board affirm the selection of the panel's review and approve the contracts that are before you today. we are available if there are any questions. >> okay, supervisor avalos in >> just a follow up question, does the 14 b, program, does it require that they are not b and lbe bonus for proposals over 10 million dollars. >> yes that is correct. >> it is a requirement. it is not an option. >> i believe that it is a

requirement. >> okay. >> thank you. >> >> okay. colleagues, any other questions? at this time, why don't we move to our budget analyst report, mr. rose if you would not mind? >> yes, mr. chairman and, members of the committee on page 4 of our report, it is shown in table two, it actually that so page 3. and each of the nine contracts will be for a not-to-exceed amount of 12 million or 108,690 for the contracts for a term of approximately three years. and as you know, all moneys to purchase the technology products and services are subject to the appropriation approval to the board of supervisor and we recommend that you approve this legislation. >> okay, thank you, mr. rose. >> just to be clear, mr. rose, did you dig into the selection

process, within there, or was this just, or was your scope of your work outside of the process. >> we did not look at this protest issue whatsoever. and we were not there and we are assuming that it was a fair and proper solicitation, process, and we do know, that it was a competitive process. and we rely on the department to report back to us that it was a fair competitive process >> okay, thank you mr. rose, any other questions? >> at this time we will open it up to public comment, if anybody wish to comment on item three, step forward. good morning, chair and supervisors my name is chester young and i represent central computers and we are one of the intended awardees of the contract and i want to make a specific point and a general point, and one was in a

response concerned raised by supervisors mar and avalos, regarding lbe and encouraging lbe participation in the tier one contracts and there is a specific goal that all tier goal one contractors commit to in terms of percentage of service work that must be fulfilled in partnership or through the lbe subcontractors and in that sense, it is very much parallel to the goals that were set aside in the previous contracts. and over all, my experience before and hopefully in the future is that it really does create a sort of community between the larger firms within the city as well as the smaller ones because there is also regular meetings and is there a lot of partnership in terms of trying to mentor smaller firms and to open up the opportunities that we are able to access for their benefit. and it is not easy. but that is certainly there. and so there is a hard

numerical goal to which we need to adhere and i think that it is for the base requirement is around 20 percent and i think that my firm, we pledged 25 percent of the service work and that is the most lucrative and the type of business that most lbes are to perform and compete against the larger firms 6789 do i want to voice my support to the contract in the sense that my company is a family owned and operated store, and we have been in san francisco on howard between 4th and 5th for 20 years now, back when that section and that block was more like 6th street and this is a tremendous opportunity for our firm to be able to okay ses the type of sales that really large multinational corporations are usually going to dominate. and so i would like to voice my

support for approval of this contract. >> thank you, very much. >> supervisor mar? >> mr. young, and so that is where the academy of sciences you are like next to where the academy of sciences. >> we were just down the block and well before they moved in. >> so you mentioned that you are a family-run, i have been in there before on howard but you are not an lbe. >> we are too big to be an lbe, fortunately we are too successful to be an lbe, we are actually otherwise certificated women-owned minority owned but in terms of our gross sales we are too big to qualify for lbe status. >> and miss fong mentioned of the non-lbes you have contacts in san francisco and could you explain what those kinds of contacts are, like a presence in san francisco? >> the contract requires that

all bidders have an actual physical presence in the city in terms of an office as well as show room capability and assembly and etc.. and so, the natural consequence of that is that it benefits employment. for the city in terms of the actual staff for those offices is generally going to be living in staoet and in our store, every single one of our 20-plus employees is a resident of the city and the sales tax implications. >> thank you. >> okay, thanks very much. >> anybody else from the public wish to comment on item three? >> please come on up and if there are any other folks, line up against the far wall and we can take you in order. >> good morning, supervisors my name is sandesh and i am a principal at sfp data and we are part of the joint venture with corner store and we teamed

with them and a handful of lbe contractors, for the larger tier one a and level work because we want our business to grow and oca, had deemed us qualified to handle this work. and there is a few things that i want to make sure that i touch over with you guys. through this process, that this is, there is a pool of firms that are being selected to be allowed to compete in the technology market place. and via the open purpose orders and this is a contact for award for the specific jobs that you guys are that you have in front of you today. a couple of things that you guys have brought up previously is that i want to make sure to address, is the very structure of this procurement in the 18-year-old lbe ordinance, placed our team at a

significant competitive disadvantage in three respects, the contract over $10 million, the process does not award lbe firms like us bonus points. we received no bonus points and as a result, we were not an attractive partner to two of the larger firms that issued contracts. and we approached them, and because we are not large enough to because we are large enough to compete as a prime contractor, we are not attractive to them as a partner, that we may pose a threat to them. so, it is hard to see how we can get a fair shake as an lbe. and there is one more thing that i would really like to make sure that i point out, but did not make sense to me is part and parcel of the over all rfp and appendix g, in the technology market place, it allowed for a special class of lbe to earn, two percent bonus

points, while we were allowed zero. and i don't understand, why the process would include a preference bonus for larger lbes and when smaller lbes like corner stone don't get a preference, and so, just in conclusion, what we would like to ask for is just to be allowed to compete for jobs in san francisco. and without procurement rules and thresholds that hurt us rather than help us, thank you for your consideration. >> thank you, next speaker please? >> good morning, supervisors my name is wane perry and i formed corner store in san francisco and all of the employees are here and so i am happy to be here as the only lbe prime cap able of going after tier one contract although it was not intent the process is a little

unfair and it does not make any sense for larger sba, lbe firms to receive preference points when assembling their teams but as a smaller lbe within the lbe ordinance, 14 b, we don't get any preference points. so, the result is that when as i, or as the managing partner of our joint venture, when i go out to put together a competitive team with some of these larger firms, and some of them outside of the city, they come to us and they say, well we go to them and they say to us, well, you don't bring anything to us and we say that we have eleven years with this experience with this contract. but you don't bring me points, no we don't bring points, do you fall in the category of a larger firm, no we are too small for that, well we can't use you, we have contracts like the city of san francisco, all over the world and we will wow them with what they are able to do and we don't need your local experience. that effectively is the impact to us and i know that there are

changes under way, for 14 b that will help this, but it does not help us right now. i am not here to bash oca or the process, i think that the process is not perfect, but it is what it is and so i am not here to address that issue, i am also not here to ask that you, you know, don't award the contracts to some of the other firms. and i am also asking that you don't reject the whole process, i am just asking that you consider allowing us to participate in the contracts process. and all lbes in this room, all that we want to do is to be able to compete at level one and we don't want to relegate it to tier two and three, and the reality is that without those bonus points, we don't have the capability of being attractive to those other firms as the partner said, the two solutions are that we recommend that since there are 14 b, ordinance changes under way, we recommend that we either wait

until all of those changes are made in 14 b and then consider the process, or two, that the city, consider using the language that was in the rfp that allows them at that discretion to add firms like ours and finally we would just like to request that we be able to this direct oca or the staff are the supervisors would do this to immediately use that language to go out to create another tier one a category so that we can have a chance to compete. we can't go back in the past to fix a program and that we were not able to get the points in the beginning and we would like to treat it and disadvantaged i would like to say. >> thank you very much. >> any other member of the public wish to comment? >> working with corner store, and i think that there is a point that is getting muddled

and i would like to highlight it, we are hearing from the city staff, that there is no 14 b does not allow any preference points whatsoever for tier one folks and in the ifp there is a two percent reverence and in that 4 tier and the preference given to a different category and you can't say that it is possible that we didn't give it to you and you are treating them differently in the exact same category and i think that that is adds insult to injury for my guy. and i want to make it clear that is actually in the rfp. and for an lbe, thank you. >> and what are the members of the public that wish to comment on this item? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. >> a few questions, i just the city attorney, mr. gibner to be

clear there is an lbe reverence for the 10 million plus contracts but it is bifercated, could you articulate what that is? >> i am not get thating off of the top of my head, but if you have questions, i could just check in and report back specific number of thresholds. >> okay. >> thanks. okay. i guess without the history here and the revisions being contemplated right now, and maybe for those who been around the block more than in city hall when this was enacted do you recall the dialogue around the bifercation here? >> monique from the controller office, it is a long standing

practice, and $10 million back then was a lot more money than it may be worth now. that threshold was developed and approved by the board of supervisors in the code and has been in practice for a long time. and there has been testimony today about some of the impacts of that, that may be less than what had been originally intended they are required to adhere to the existing laws and requirements and i could review the history of that, with the contract management division, and the purchasing office and report back, but at this point, the department has been adhering to our laws, and requirements of the city. >> got it, and yeah, and no fault on that, and i am just curious about some of the legislative history if you will, and i obviously fault and did not dig into that before this meeting today. and supervisor mar? >> yeah i don't know if she

could answer this or someone from the office of the city administrator, but in public comment, it was mentioned that an amendment to the lbe ordinance, is currently on the table, and it would increase the threshold from ten million to 20 million, could you give us background on that? >> and when, like what the time lines are for that amendment change? >> again, supervisor, mar, that has been in the process and in the discussion for a very long time, and it starts over the years, and there is another effort anew, to try to clarify some of that. and update the language, and again, the ten million dollars threshold was considered a lot of business from the city that would allow, those bidders, to compete. and with other large companies, that is not so much the case any more, with inflation, and the changes of the commodities

and so forth. but, i think that the contract management division and the purchaser's office can work together with the controller and provide you with a little bit more information. >> i understand that you are abiding by what is in our laws, it is something that i would like to support and it strikes me as the options and i would like your opinion on them in terms of implementation and one, i pds that there is amendments drafted right now for 14 b and that will be considered by this body and the full board, and so with could either, i guess, the question becomes if we wait and maybe

that is too long, for that law to pass, then you could potentially include, corner stone is the one that is speaking today and understand, that though, however from the corner stone perspective, partnering from the larger firms it has impacted them for leading up to this process and i don't think that this is something that we can fix here, we are talking about the years in the making at this point. or, there is, and maybe this is a city, and the question, the ability to do just proactively put the corner stone as the one kind of complainant into this process as a board ourselves and i am a little bit less hesitant and less political and policy based but if that is the easier solution, to get to the policy any way to this body, and it is something that i will be open to. mr. city attorney. >> that is not an option before you. the board has three options, one is continue the item, one

is approve the contracts that have been proposed by the department and the other is to vote down this resolution. >> okay. >> i would add supervisors, that there are opportunities mr. perry mentioned to vendor and we could add through additional processes and be added into the store. >> okay, supervisor mar? >> i think that sounds like a reasonable approach. like supervisor farrell and avalos, i have questions about the process and i don't want to second guess the process, and i feel like for the top level,

ten million and above teams that some kind of preference to lbe, should have been included but i am not going to second guess, again your process. but i would like for consideration for adding later additional teams like corner stone, and so i would support that motion of approving the contracts, but, for your office to work with the corner stone's team to try to see if they could be included at some time in the future, and if we have a process like this, moving forward in the future, that lbe preferences should be considereded or bid prernses should be considered in all of the tiers but that is just my opinion. >> maybe, colleagues, i will suggest this is what we can do, and a motion for approve this item and also, as this next item comes forward, this legislation and amendment comes forward, if it is a threshold of $20 million, that is

something that is considered we can implement that and also, discuss and you can have the clear direction from us or whether it be in the ordinance or not, that to any, firms or recently award a contract that were excluded because of the delta there between the ten and 20 million that you seek to work with them to participate in the additional rfp and the intent of this body and the full board and all other contracts that we want this to go forward and the current folks that are awarded in the process you ran and also you give this opportunity and suppose that i would suggest that, and have that motion to go forward and we can work together with the purchaser office. >> so moved. >> we have a motion by supervisor avalos and we can take that without objection. >> we are going to take one item out of order.