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. could you call item 13?

>>ordinance modifying the requirements of administrative code, section 6.68(h), to authorize the director of public works to issue requests for proposals to pre-qualified construction managers/general contractors (cm/gc) and their teams of pre-qualified core trade subcontractors to design-build the mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and exterior building envelope scopes of work for the traffic company and forensic services division proje >> good morning, i am representing the department of public works and we are joined by the department and lieutenant walsh along with the colleagues, garis and wire and in case that you have the specific questions, and the item before you, is an ordinance that is project specifickive that will allow us to hire a general contractor and a construction manager along with the team of prequalified trade contractors to build a new, forensic lab.

and remodeling in the way that they are done throughout the bay area and you hire the contractor with the specialized subs and the specific group of them so that they can work with the design team, to develop the project in a way that will meet future accreditation standards in a nutshell that is what we are asking, is project specific and if you have any questions we are here to answer them. >> okay. >> colleagues, any question at this time? we will move on to this budget analyst report. >> on page 22 of our report, we report that under the current city policy, qualified subcontractors are awarded the contracts as submitting the proposal at the most responsible bidder and by using the design of the model, nine cost factors are considereded for up to 35 percent of the

total score. on the other hand, using the design and construction and design, the contractors may be on the project and potentially resulting in receiving more bids and lower than (inaudible) and according to dbw, potential lawsuits, which over all might recall in reduced cost to the state and so our conclusion on page 22 is our recommendation is that we consider this matter to be a policy, decision, and the board of supervisors given that the proposed use of the design and construction procurement model would apply as the department to this one project and the police department and traffic control and the division project and could be increased or decreased to the state and qualify that we are not negative on this legislation, and the dpw is the

expert, in this area. there are as you know, two other models and they feel for this project that the model is the best that we could not put a number or a fiscal analysis on what might happen. and we defer to the board and say that it is a policy matter for the board. >> supervisor avalos? >> take the question for mr. lopez? >> and i am just wondering, we spoke on sunday, and you mentioned how this model could actually serve as a framework for the future projects and just how real is that? and if that is the case, it will be, and i think that it will be important to be able to hear back about how this is actually kind of tossing the dice, but i just want to hear. >> yes. >> and it is to talk about what the history has been, and anything similar to this, and that has already occurred in san francisco. >> okay. >> thank you, supervisor, and yes, we are currently working with the controller's office to

evaluate chapter six of the admin code to see if we can recommend a set of changes to that chapter six, including this particular project, delivery for the future projects. the industry is shifting in construction and specialized subcontractors are wanting to operate in a design built basis, and in this ordinance will allow to us do that. and in the hospital and the project that you are familiar with, we have a similar model that was also approved by an ordinance that some 7 or 8 years ago, that has been extremely successful for us, the project and on time and on budget, performance, and so, you have in the past taken similar actions and not the way that this one is drafted and approving on what is learned and we do expect a copy for you, and in the near future, with the recommendation that this will be an option for all

future projects, that meet the criteria of complexity. >> with the general fund dollars, the year before, the design build, you know, process. >> the board, did approve the bond. correct. and so you did fund, $25 million for the project development which was very strategic and allowed us to do the preplanning phase of the work and scoping the project and that has obviously had a huge impact and allows us to see the unforeseen conditions up front and did not run with property ject. >> and what do you see is the main difference between that, and it seems like we are using and we improved upon the building and so it is actually paying for the work and... for the general hospital. >> correct. >> and this is just a question for the controller, because, it sounds like you have been

helping with the dpw on this, and just your and any response to mr. rose's, you know, what says that they are going to be an increase or a decrease, and we are not clear, and clearly you see a value in this type of model going forward. >> mr. chairman, and supervisor, avalos, from the controller's office and we are working with all of the departments that do construction on the chapter six provisions for construction contracting, and looking at ways to enhance the process, and make the process more efficient, as well as flexible for the departments. and the design build concept is one that has been used for a number of the latest, geo bond, construction projects and again, it is approved by the resolution, by the board of supervisors on a case by case basis, and we are going to be

looking at a number of areas for reform or changes, or enhancements. and we are currently working very closely with the public works department, and as well as the airport and the puc port, and the recreation park and others, that actually administer the construction contracts, and working obviously with the purchasing department, and the office of the city administrator to put the recommendations forward in legislation. >> you see the real value in the cost effectiveness for this approach. >> absolutely, in terms of accountability, in terms of time, and certainly, we have seen, the advantages in terms of cost. >> okay. >> thank you. >> okay. thanks very much. and so no other questions, we will open it up for public comment, anyone wish for item 13? >> item number 1 3? .

(inaudible) standard guidelines, and (inaudible) law imposed upon us, and (inaudible) >> okay, thank you very much. >> anyone else wish to comment on this item? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. >> motion to move this item forward. >> i motion to approve and move forward with the recommendation. >> we can take that without

objection. >> could we go back to item four? >> item four,resolution approving and authorizing the execution of modification no. 1 to the lease and use agreement l10-0097 with united airlines, inc., at the san francisco international airport to increase the premises by approximately 92,331 square feet of exclusive use space and with a minimum rent amount of $10,745,068 per year and a total amount of $75,215,476 over the remaining seven years of the term, expiring on june 30, 2021. >> okay, thank you. miss widner? welcome back. >> thank you. good morning, chair farrell and members of the committee, with the san francisco international airport, we are seeking approval to modification one to the existing lease with united airlines in order to increase the amount of exclusive use space by approximately 92,000 square feet. and this modification will come with an annual rent increase of $10 million, and as you know the airport has recently undertaken a series of capitol projects including the renovation of boarding area e,

in the terminal three at the airport with the completing of the portions of these terminal projects and the opening of area, e, in january of 2014, united would like to now increase its exclusive use space within the terminal, and in order to accommodate additional terminal space as well as a new airline club and the addition of some baggage carosels. >> originally in the airport commission, approved the increase in annual rent over the term of the lease, and we were using rates based in our fiscal year, 13, 1 4, rates and charges, we now have the fiscal year of 13, 14, rate of charges and it is appropriate as recommended in the budget analyst report to increase the projected rent over the next 7 years of the term of the lease. to reflect the updated amount

of 93 million 694,849 dollars, that is again, over the remaining seven years of this lease. and if approved i will submit an amended version of the resolution, to reflect that higher number this afternoon. >> okay. i can answer any questions that you might have. >> thanks. >> colleagues if no questions, we will turn it over, to your report? >> yes, mr. chairman and members of the committee, on page seven of our report, we know that in fiscal year, 14, 15, united will pay the airport, 11.3 million for the use of the additional square feet of exclusive use space that is from july first, 2014, to june, 30th, and that is shown on table three on page eight of the report and then on page eight, we also report that over the remaining seven years of the existing lease which expires on june 30th, 2021, the

airport estimates that united will pay, 9.7 million, for the use of the additional square feet of exclusive use space, for july, 2014, to june, 2021 and that is shown in table eight in page 4 and, supervisors for your information, we have revised the numbers in our report, based on the latest information from the airport. and so when you look on page 10 of our report. the number of which we did have, of 92.6 million, should now be 93.7 million. and the 10.2 million which is in the original report has been revised to 11.3 million and so the recommendations on page 10 are as follows. and we recommend that you amend the proposed resolution, on page one, 1, and 6 line, to be changed by the rent to be paid for the use of the additional

92,331 quair feet from $75 million, to 93, 6849, over the remaining years of the lease, and on page 2, change the minimum rent of 10 million per year, or 75 million, 25476 for the remaining seven years of the lease, to that is to, 11 million, 33912 per year, and that 93 million, and 694 of the remaining years of the lease and recommend that you approve the proposed resolution as recommended >> thank you. >> are you in agreement with those amendments? >> absolutely, and i will submit the amended resolution this afternoon. >> you know the drill. and you no other questions we will open it up to public comment. >> anyone wish to comment on item four? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. >> we will have a motion to

approve these. >> move the amendments. >> and amendment. >> without objection as well. >> madam clerk, could you call number five? >> item five,resolution approving amendment no. 1 to the cellular service equipment sites lease no. 09-0051c between t-mobile west, llc, and the city and county of san francisco, acting by and through its airport commission, extending the term for five years through june 30, 2019. >> okay, thank you. welcome back, miss wiyner. >> thank you, chair, with the san francisco international airport, we are seeking your approval to our existing lease with t-mobile in order to extend the term of the lease for an additional five years, and to increase the annual rent paid by t-mobile by 25,000 for a rent of 475,000, and t-mobile, and in addition to three other wireless companies, leased space at the airport in order to provide cellular and data services to our passenger and their customers. and these, leases were all

approved in 2009. by the board, and since that time, the companies have all substantially increased and upgraded their infrastructure at the airport, and this five-year extension to this lease will help t-mobile ammortize some of those costs and the board also approved identical extensions for the other three wireless companies in april of 2012, and t-mobile had not requested to be part of this extension, until march of this year and so the resolution would require retroto july of 2014. >> any questions? >> seeing, none, mr. rose could we go to your report? >> yes, on page 13 of our report, we report that the t-mobile will pay the airport, 475,000, for the leased pay, from july 1, 2014, to june, 30, 2015 and then in the subsequent four years, the rent will increase by 25,000 per year,

and total amount paid to the airport of $2,625,000 for the period of july first, to june 30, 2019 is shown in the table two on page 13 of our report. and we recommend that you amend the proposed resolution, authorizing the subject lease with t-mobile to be retroactive to july first of 2014 and proposed resolution to be approved ads amended. >> we will open it up to public comment. >> anyone wish to comment on item five? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. a motion? >> a motion to accept the recommendation and move forward the recommendation. >> okay, and we can take it as well. >> madam clerk, could you call item six. >> resolution to approve the

modification, number one,resolution approving modification no. 1 to the 2011 lease and use agreement no. l11-0011 between hawain airlines, inc., and the city and county of san francisco, acting by and through its airport commission, to add the administrative office (538 square feet) to the lease, for a minimum guarantee of $698,480 over the remainder of the lease expiring on june 30, 2021. >> welcome back. >> cathy widner with the san francisco airport, and seeks for modification for hawaiian airline to add, 538 quair feet, for the office and comes with a rent payment to the airport in the amount of $698,480. over the remaining term of the lease. through june 2021. hawaiian airlines was the significant tour airline to the use agreement which was approved by the board in 2011, but initially the lease only included terminal space and not administrative office space. since october, 2014, hawaiian airlines has been using and paying rent on this 538 square

feet in the international terminal, under an airport permit. this modification will incorporate the additional space into their existing lease with us. and the initial projected rent, over the remaining term of the lease was contemplated only to five years, which was incorrect, and it is 2021, 7 years, and as the budget analyst report, correctly points out, we need to use the 7 year formula and so the rent payable to the airport associated with this modification should be $870,000, excuse me, $870,000, not the $698,000 that is currently in the resolution. and so, one more amended resolution to get to this afternoon, should you approve the modification. >> thank you. >> colleagues, if no questions, mr. rose, could we go to your report. >> yes, mr. chairman and members of the committee on page 60 of our report, as she has indicated as shown in table three, which is on page 17 of

our report, hawaiian airlines is projected to pay the airport a total of $870,250 for the 538 square feet of exclusive use space from july to 2014 through june, 30, 2021. and so, a recommendations on the bottom of page, 17 are two-fold and we recommend that you amend to state that the existing lease expires on june 30, 2012, and not june, 30, 2014, and amend the proposed resolution to require a minimum guarantee over the seven year term of the lease of $870,350 instead of the $698,000. and approve as amended. >> anybody wish to present on this item. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. >> so i move the budget analyst amendments and the resolution as amended. >> we can take that without

objection. >> okay. madam clerk could you call item 7 to 12 together? >> item 7,resolution approving amendment no. 10 to the treasure island childcare master lease between the treasure island development authority and the united states navy to extend the term for one year for the period of december 1, 2014, through november 30, 2015. >> item 8,resolution approving amendment no. 26 to the treasure island event venues master lease between the treasure island development authority and the united states navy to extend the term for one year for the period of december 1, 2014, through november 30, 2015. >> item 9.resolution approving the sixth amendment to the treasure island fire fighting training center master lease between the treasure island development authority and the united states navy to extend the term for one year for the period of december 1, 2014, through november 30, 2015 >> item ten,resolution approving

amendment no. 39 to the treasure island land and structures master lease between the treasure island development authority and the united states navy to extend the term for one year for the period of december 1, 2014, through november 30, 2015. >> item 11,resolution approving amendment no. 18 to the treasure island marina master lease between the treasure island development authority and the united states navy to extend the term for one year for the period of december 1, 2014, through november 30, 2015. and item number 12,resolution approving amendment no. 30 to the treasure island south waterfront master lease between the treasure island development authority and the united states navy to extend the term for one year for the period of december 1, 2014, through november 30, 2015. >> thanks very much. thanks for being here. >> thank you. chair farrell and members of the committee, with the treasure island department authority and as was just read before you, the six items looking to extend the leases for one year and, all other terms and conditions remain unchanged. >> and i am happy to take

anything from the committee? >> thank you. i see no questions, and we don't have a budget analyst report for this item, so let's open this up, for public xhept. >> is there anyone from the public that would like to speak? >> seeing none, the public comment is closed. >> so, colleagues, could we have a motion on this item? >> motion to move forward. >> and seconded. could we do that without objection? >> thank you. >> next item? >> number 14,ordinance retroactively appropriating $12,292 to overtime and de-appropriating $12,292 in fringe benefits in the public utilities commission bureau operating budget to support the department's projected increases in overtime as required per ordinance no. 194-11 in fy2013-2014. >> and we have mr. restrum. >> general manager and cfo and if i may through the chair request that the next two items also be called, because they

all relate to the technical budget adjustments. >> thank you. >> item 15,ordinance retroactively appropriating $79,437 to overtime and de-appropriating $79,437 in salaries in the public utilities commission water enterprise department operating budget to support the department's projected increases in overtime as required per ordinance no. 194-11 in fy2013-2014. >> item 16,ordinance retroactively appropriating $193,935 to overtime and de-appropriating $193,935 in salaries in the public utilities commission wastewater enterprise department operating budget to support the department's projected increases in overtime as required per ordinance no. 194-11 in fy2013-2014. >> thank you, please continue. >> all three of these items are covered through the salary, savings and other personnel costs safe ands they are technical matters to adjust the budget to bring them up to all of the over time costs which were slightly higher than budgeted and that is mainly because of the hiring that we are doing, as well as the very large growth and development and in the amount of permits that we are seeing in the activity, and in the capacity charge assessments.

and so i am happy to contract that there is no backlog, in the assessments and so things are moving along nicely, but it required a little bit of over time at the end of last fiscal year. >> we approve everything. >> mr. chairman and members of the committee, table one on page 26 of our report, shows that the source and uses in the funds, 285,664 that is for the proposed over time for the fiscal year, 13, 14, and so this is strikely clean up resolution and on page 26, we recommend that you amend it in the retroactive to june 30, 2014, and you approve the proposed ordinances as amended. >> thank you very much. >> colleagues any question? >> we will open it up to public comment. seeing no public comment, public comment is closed. colleagues, could we have a

motion to approve these for the budget analyst, and the line items as amended. >> so moved. >> motion by supervisor mar and we will take it without objection. >> could you read item 17? >> 17,ordinance approving the remarketing of the city and county of san francisco finance corporation lease revenue refunding bonds, series 2008-1 (moscone center expansion project) and city and county of san francisco finance corporation lease revenue refunding bonds, series 2008-2 (moscone center expansion project); >> okay, thank you very much. >> good morning, members of the budget and finance committee, my name is anthony, and i am with the controller's office of public finance, the item before you approves the remarketing of the city and county of san francisco finance corporation, lease for the funding bonds for 2008, 1 and 2 and also approved the related agreements in connection with the remarket and this city, initially issued in 2000, lease revenue bonds for west which was called the ex-expansion project, and in

2008 those were refunded and in connection with that refunding, and in keeping with the same structure, from 2000, the city entered into reimbursement agreements, and supporting the marketing of that debt. and in october, of 2014, those reimbursement agreements expire. and following a competitive solicitation we are selecting state street to provide the letters of credit, just before the marketing of those bonds. and the prior, agreements had 0.70 percent on the series one, and with the bank of america, and the 0.72 percent with state street, and pending approval by the budget and finance committee and the board, the new agreements will have a 0.35 fee, and expire in october of 2019. and happy to answer any questions should you have them. >> thank you very much. >> colleagues any questions? >> mr. rose, could we go to your report, please?

>> yes, mr. chairman on page 3 of the report referring to the table, as shown in the table, the total annual cost to a city of approximately 406,070, would result in an annual savings of $417,672 and that is as compared to the existing agreement. we report on the bottom of page 30, that for purposes over the 5-year term of the proposed agreement, an estimated $2 million, 88,360. and that assumes, that $160 million in bonds remains outstanding for the term of the agreement and however, as the outstanding principal is reduced over time and since the fees are on a percentage basis, and and as he just indicated the actual fees take to state street will decrease and we recommend that you do approve

this ordinance. >> thank you very much. >> colleagues, any questions? >> okay, we will open this up to public comment and, seeing none, public comment is closed. i have a motion to move this forward. >> so moved. >> and we can take that without objection. >> madam clerk, before we adjourn, i would like to rekind the vote on item 7 through 12. >> so moved. >> take that 7 through 12, once again and could we have a motion to send that item forward and we can take that without objection. thank you. >> okayed madam clerk, do we have any more business? snre. no, mr. chair. >> thank you everybody, we are adjourned.

>> a lot a ton with the community and we say to ourselves, there is this one and this one. we all compartmentalize them, we