on time, the quality of work is poor we don't have to worry about going through a process of not allowing them to bid on our contracts by the nature of only having one active jock and we're not utilizing it and they can't go after another one because they have one currently is in essence -- as they say put them in the penalty box and not allow them to pursue other contracts so i think it's a good thing to have these contractors -- these contractors under the jok. >>i think that's a good point and having the $50,000. we had the safety valve. >> yeah, so the obligation to the contractor is three years of $50,000? >> that's the minimum. the other thing we were trying to

do which the contractors is saying "okay if you use $50,000 but i am concerned about you tying up $3 million or $5 million in my bonding capacity for three years." that's for them is a big thing because they can't pursue anything because we tie that up so we talked about ways of reducing that down so those are the things we have been working on. >> would we get more bidders do you think if the catalog of biddable items was smaller? >> i think in this case the limit tends to be geographical because we use the same catalog for local work in the city and typically get three or four contractors interested in the same line of work. it's just the work -- as the director was saying it's not only it's up in hetch hetchy but if you're a

contractor in that area and the work is at the reservoir it's still an hour drive to the closest town to the reservoir before you're on the job site. >> but that is on their dime; right? >> yes and that's why less are generally interested in the work. we generally see smaller contractors with smaller work and not what we do. the limit on our job programs is up to $400,000 and so that's -- >> per task. >> per task order so that's a pretty big contractor to take that on at one time and the capacity of doing multiple ones and we have different different areas so there doesn't seem to be the pool of that size contractor in that part of the state. >> i would also say in

reaction to this bid we had meetings on planning outreach efforts, and really working within that region to expand our bidders' pool. >> and also perhaps looking at if a three year job requires tie up of capacity of $5 million which is a lot for a small firm maybe that's not the mechanism to produce interested bidders up country. >> let me make it clear that's one of the cash concerns and something we have been addressing. >> >> on the micro set asides we're setting up it's administratively streamlined and so we have the micro joks and it's a $3 million contract. the task orders are $400,000 which are nice sizes but we work with

the city attorney requiring that bond requirement, not 3 million because if you think about it the bonding is for the completion of a project, and jok -- although the contract there is $5 million but each project is $400,000 and so we have been working with the city attorney not to tie up their bonding capacity. >> so we focus on bonding per task order on the micros. >> commissioner moran would you like this continued to the next meeting? >> aside from the fact i won't be at the next meeting. my interest is that -- let me ask one question and sierra mountain where are they located? >> up in hetch hetchy in that area. >> so they're a sonoma firm? >> they're sonoma i don't know their expect address but they're not a san francisco based firm.

they are more regional. >> okay. >> sierra mountains -- >> names are cheap. >> they're in sonora. you said sonoma. >> oh i meant sonora. i really hate one bidder contracts. i mean we don't have many ways of really -- >> [inaudible] >> -- fine tuning and making sure that we get the best bang for the buck. competition is one of the things that we have and when we don't have it it gives me real concern. we could do several things. we could continue it. we could reduce it to a one year contract at a lesser amount. we could have a more general discussion about how we get a more robust

bidding pool for up country work for a variety of things we could do, and i guess i'm not wedded to any one of them. >> what you didn't mention is what was mentioned earlier and there is a separate criteria for these contracts that may be sole source that requires competitive pricing. did i hear you correctly? >> yeah. for example we can maybe -- well, i guess i am trying to think of what the best option would be. the commissioner is correct that we can the minimum we can use is $50,000 and we can use $50,000 in year three as long as it's over three years but i guess given that i don't think there is any work that is needed up country immediately. can we hold this to the next meeting

because i just want to make sure that we come back and with information about why there's one? what efforts we're doing to try to address that? one of the challenges we're are working with the regional -- the regional group -- >> [inaudible] >> yeah, small firm advisory to try to do outreach to get more contractors. we actually pay for hrc to go up there and certify these firms so we're doing a lot of activity trying to get more contractors engaged so maybe if -- since i know you're concerned maybe we can hold it to the next meeting. >> now you're not going to be at the next meeting. >> right. >> so can it be held at the meeting after that? >> i will talk to you before

the next meeting and if you have no objections i can report back. >> yeah, i would like to move this meeting along so i think we shouldn't make the decision now. >> sierra mountain is in tu walme california. >> thank you. >> well, my official last day is september 30 so you may not have a quorum if he's not present. >> oh no. >> sorry. >> my 60 day hold over period on my appointment expires at the end of this month too. i have been renominated but not reconfirmed. >>i would like you to know i spent a whole year once in holding. >> but they changed the rules. >> they changed the law. >> so now i can't serve -- it's not until replaced, confirmed. >> so we a single bidder and a single commissioner.

>> [inaudible] >> we have a quorum. >> yeah. >> okay. >> i made my concerns clear. i think continuing it would be appropriate. and if i am here that's great. if i am not i will trust my fellow commissioners to do the right thing. >> okay. >> approved by the board. >> i'm sorry? >> you're approved by the board. >> we're working on that. [laughter] >> of course you will be. okay. so i need a motion to continue. >> so moved. >> second. >> all those in favor? opposed? the motion carries. so 11c is continued to next meeting. let's now address 11d. >> staff removed that. is that correct? >> correct. >> good afternoon. shelby campbell project manager. my apologies for the typo in the

resolution. it's actually for preconservices so that's the wrong day. >> that was the only issue? >> pardon me? >> that's the only issue? >> yes. >> moved as amended. >> second. >> all in favor? opposed? the motion carries to amend. now i need a motion on the main resolution. >> so moved. >> second. >> public comment. >> public comment on the amendment. >> public comment on the amendment. >> i would like to move the main resolution. >> which is? >> we just moved the amendment and now this is -- got it. moved. >> second. >> do i have public comment? all in favor? opposed? motion carries. okay. item 12. >> item 12 approve the

warnerville substation project and authorize the general manager to release of $3,143,000 in funds on reserve with the board of supervisors. >> any questions on this? >> i thought ritchie had left. move to approve. >> second. >> additional comments? all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. item 13. >> would you like public comment? >> oh public comment. seeing none item 13. >> item 13 authorizelet general manager to review the treasure island development authority and the puc. >> any questions, comments? >> move to approve. >> second. >> is there public comment on had one? all in favor? opposed? the motion carries. i

have a question about treasure island. has that gone through yet? actually there's an economic development memorandum of agreement between the navy and tida to be transferred later this year and bob beck was here and he is not -- he will be back. he could explain that in more detail but basically this year there will be transfer of the property and we're dealing with issues like the drinking water permit for it and the discharge permits and making sure that our house is in order when things start to come to the city. >> thank you. okay. madam secretary before i ask for public comment on closed session. could you read the items. >> yes item 16 litigation between michael walsh and city and county of san francisco.

next is brian hill versus city and county of san francisco. item 18 jean o'connell. item 19 anticipated as litigation against defendant. next is city and county of san francisco versus pacific gas and electric company. 21 city and county of san francisco versus pacific gas and electric company. item 22 pacific gas and electric company versus the city and county of san francisco and item 23 will not be heard today. >> okay. is there any public comment on the items for closed session? seeing none -- >> i move to assert. >> second. >> all those if favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries .

>> the commission is now back from closed session. i would like to read the following from closed session. item 16 settled of the item 17 and 18 settle d. item 19 no action and imrm items 20, 21, 22 and 23 were taken off calendar, so may i have a motion to whether to disclose discussions of closed session? >> move not to disclose. >> second. >> all those in favor? the motion fails. any new business? >> [inaudible] >> thank you. >> and did you have some new business?

>> i did. i had request for two agenda items hopefully the next meeting if possible. the second one we could wait a meeting and the first is the bay side tunnel -- central bay side project and the other is -- i understand there was an interesting report that was ree leased on sea level rise and capital projects so i would like to know what that is about and the implications are. >> okay. >> any new business? hearing none this meeting is adjourned at 4:11 .

>> hello, i'm holly knox with commissioner honda along with the legacy of women voters of san francisco i'm here to talk about measure a on tuesday november 4th pursue measure a is an ordinance that is will allow the city to borrow up to 5 hundred thousand discolors for bonds this decide that use this for the improvements identified by the transportation at the desk the city could use the funds for construct transit only lanes and separated like ways and assessable platforms and

escalators that are and muni and install pedestrian count down signals and audio central nervous system and bulb outs raise crosswalks medium island and bike parking and upgrade muni any proposal will be subject to the review by the mayor and board measure a will allow the property tax to are increases and landowner to pass up to 50 percent to the tenants measure a will will require the citizens advisory committee to review the spending of bond fund tenth of one percent will pay for the oversight functions if you vote yes. i want the city to issue $500 million in general obligation bonds on infrastructure projects designed

to prove metropolitan accessibility and prove the position of streets and make that safer important bicyclists asia pedestrians if you vote no, you don't want the city to order the bonds i'm here with steering wheel and proponent of measure a we're also joined by just quentin the chair of the transportation under 98 to 98 and the member of board of supervisors 80 from 1986 a property thank you he'll start with opening comments ms. brinkman the bond is boo about the sufficiency and efficiency and safety you have our streets if you use the streets in san francisco by private automobile or bus why business bike you care about this bond measure

passing it will help all to move better and get rid of congestion it has not passed a bond measure in over 60 years you you'll of the work done to packing pass the bond measures give us the system people will say night not good in order to continue to improve this system we're going to have the make the investment now and not only for the generations to come. >> thank you just coping our opening remarks measure a is as simple as abc so that at this point the abc a stands 0 for a blank check they don't thrill this is a general obligation bond a boring of

money a half a billion dollars repayable over thirty years at interest which will be over one million dollars one hundred million it contains no denied specific projects it is written in glittering gentle itself and allows spending on anything mentioned or perhaps unmentioned in the measure the it isn't probably going to pass because it takes a 2/3rd's approval and i doubt san franciscans wanted to approve a billion dollars in debt. >> thank you ms. bringing brinkman which changes

one of the changes similar to the project people who ride the six and the 5 l seen changes it will increase sufficiency and we're carrying more people on the bus line little 14 mission bus is something this bond money will be spent on saved accident 14 bus about 4 or 5 minutes so passengers on that ride are having a softer ride we're going to see see severe streets people riding open bikes and walking on foot we're going to see the busses able to move faster to allow to carry more people as if we've added for business they'll be able to pick up more people so we're going to see a lot of

positive changes. >> just cop. >> well, i can't put a finger on any one of those on page 199 of the proposition is states specific that this doesn't note quote involve any contempt implicitly commitment to specific projects to be constructed with bond that precedes and use that to say therefore it didn't need an environmental impact reporter it includes money phenomenon the caltrain system you you know what that is 88 percent of rider are from woodside arthur ton palo alto and potrero hill and san mateo and santa clara valleys not san franciscans they could take this money and spend as much as they want for people

in the suburbia's that are not 2k3w50b8g9d to pay it back it's probably illegal under the called government code and uses the word money maybe spent not shall and didn't define even what the money maybe spent on. >> how will the use of those funds impact levels finds traffic congestion. >> they're to impact them positive less traffic congestion meantime people choose to take a 0 bike instead of a car it is positive in order for people to lease it leave their automobile at home we have to make at that safe and sufficient so some of the projects we've increased the ridership and i on business lines people are switching modes and car driving in san francisco

is a declining mode share meantime we make it easier not to drive again, it is a win for all of us. it helps with air pollution and helps with children's activity levels having the streets safe so kids what walk and bike and parents are comfortable walking their kids to school we're going to see positive results from this as we approve transit only lines on market street the buses move more quickly in the transit again, that's a win for tens of thousand of ryder's. >> just cop. >> again another wish list which nauflz every ballot measure and tells what's in it

any proposed use of the bond bonds it subject to review you can't even building this document because the man in the board of supervisors if it ever passed could change those gentle lettuce every general obligation bond we have voted on in san francisco the earthquake save bond a couple of years ago in 2011, the school bonds defined and identified the schools that the money would be spent on when we established bart in the 62 a seven hundred and 92 general obligation bond for bart when we approved the high speed rail authority ♪

2008 this is a conglomeration of words they're to put money into mta's pocket to spend as we want to spend just like they're doing with the central subway from that an estimate in on a 3 of $6000 million plus to 12 plus >> we'll take final remarks. >> this is boring of a giantic performers which will effect no time property owners in measure a is a specific provision that allows a psycho of our renters to 50 percent of the one billion dollars one million dollars over a cost of thirty years don't let them fool you, you offering we won't sell off a bond is isn't in measure a they'll say well,

it's policy if its policy why did the controller go to all of the specific details to tell voters how much this is going to cost them so if you're a entertainment don't think you're getting a free ride you're not florida passes it should be rejected and no on measure a and get specific projects. >> thank you final remarks and yes. i want to remind everybody this about say future of the san francisco about investing in future transportation for our citizens the bond oversight committee do their why in san francisco it states the prashs are not going to be going up because sf general hospital all of those bonds have the same type of oversight i landmark to the citizens of san francisco

show they have the commitment for the future of the city we need to change our transportation with the city. >> thank you both for your time and comments we hope this discussion has on informative for more information on this, please visit the san francisco website at sf election.org remember earlier voting available ton city hall from 8 to 5 and vote at the city hall two weekend before if not be sure to vote ♪

>> thank you for coming to the talent dance performance and talent show. [ applause ] >> today's performance and talent show. ♪ >> public recreation has every bit of the talent and every bit of the heart and soul of anything that any families are paying ten times for. >> you were awesome.

regular meeting the regular meeting of the board of education of the san francisco unified school district for september 23, 2014, is now called to order roll call please. mr. haney ms. maufas ms. mendoza-mcdonnell dr. murase ms. norton mr. sartipi's president fewer ms. sin at and mr. chin please join me in the allegiance