of that, i don't feel that it is appropriate to change the rules when this one is before us. i would like the hear if any other board member has anything to add on that idea. >> yeah, i mean, i guess i feel like i'd like to hear more or get a report on the safe parking areas concept. i think that that is a really important thing. i think obviously we -- it sounds like the major reason we have this policy is related to parking but we also have other priority principles in the city around housing and i just feel like we have to figure out how we deal with that. i mean, there's some cases where people are parking their oversized vehicle on the street when they are housed and taking up space and is there are instances where people are living in their spaces and i feel like we have to have a way to deal with that, we have to figure out the safe parking areas, we are in a position where we can't allow -- people

who are homeless, we don't have a place to put them, we don't have enough shelter beds, i would also like to understand better where the concentration of oversized vehicles tends to be i know like maybe along golden gate park and ocean beach and there are more wooden areas where they tend to be i would like to understand more about where we find these vehicles and then the other thing i think of is that i know when people get towed if that's their home, like, how can we make sure they don't have to pay thousands of dollars, i mean, that they don't have, we don't want someone to lose their home, how do we deal with that differently, have a process for people to petition so they can get their homes back if indeed that's where they're living. it's hard to say on this block yes or no that's -- in terms

of the bigger picture policy, like, making people homeless or displacing people is not what this body wants to be doing, so how can we get there, and right now, we're in a crisis around the housing situation more generally, so if we could expedite the efforts in this area and have some recommendations brought back to us so we can consider maybe based upon like where the concentration is and whatever else we know about who are parking in those vehicle, then i feel like i could make a decision about where these prohibitions should and shouldn't be, i would also be interested in knowing if there's a concern about crime whether there are any correlations with police reports and these vehicles because again that would also kind of help us figure out location issues, so i think we need to figure out a policy around locating these vehicles

if we're not -- assuming we're not banning them out right. >> thank you, director borden, i remember the first time this came to us, we did have a very detailed staff report that mr. thornily put together, we did meet with bevin duffy, there was a lot of discussion around it perhaps it bears having a discussion like that again or maybe a one on one with staff again, it is challenging because what we have control over and what our purview is in this case, there is so much overlap with other city agencies that we don't have control and you're right, as a city, we do have a lot of challenges, the ones we have control over in this situation and what we have control over is in the scheme of things quite small. board member, do i have a motion to approve? 10.2e and 10.2i? can i have a follow-up -- >> if we could get, i would like the get more information as follow-up on this, i know

last time this came up i know director reiskin, you know there was training of pco's and people who were enforcing these rules, and st vice chair mentioned, there's been work done on this difficult is issue, so i respect the process, i would like to hear an update especially on training, especially in mainbacker maiming sure the folks that this adversely affects, i mean, i do want to make sure our folks are trained as best as possible on this specific issue and i know that was an area we didn't have clarity on last time, so i would love to get more information in addition to the issues, any updates on the issues director borden raised. >> thank you. >> if i may, madam chair i do feel that this is one of the more difficult decisions that we ever make is implementing these -- or following up on these requests when they're made to us. there is -- it does feel like obviously decisions that we're

making have a much broader impact than just parking enforcement, and i think that it would be really helpful for not just us but for the community as well to hear about what systems are in place to help soften the impact of these enforcement or the enforcement of restricting commercial vehicles overnight. every time this comes before us, we find ourselves in this awkward position and i think it would be great if we could have some kind of preparation from someone to be able to respond to this so that we can feel assured that the attention that this merits is actually being followed through, so that we're not just, you know, enforcing these things and realizing the repercussions and not feel that there's anything happening as a result of it, so if it's not

just for us, it's also for the public, people who might not really understand what programs are out there a lot of people don't know what bevin duffy is and what the programs may be so it would be great in the future when these things come to us, that we would be prepared to have someone speak to that as well, what's happening. >> perhaps we can request a presentation from the appropriate office and agency. >> i wouldn't want to say a presentation, just because i don't know that it merits every time, but -- >> no, i aoep not saying every time, i'm saying as a follow-up, when we initially had this conversation, when we had the oversized vehicle ban, we could ask them for an update on how it's going and the housing crisis ma not gotten better. >> the only thing i want to add, i think we need a strategy. the truth is that you ban oversized vehicles on the street and then they move to another street in which then those people come to us for a ban, so i do think we need to

figure out a bigger strategy because otherwise what you keep doing is pushing people around and every new neighborhood who now is that location wants a ban, so i do feel like if we can -- if there is a ban, if there are plans to come up with a strategy around this or have safe areas, then i don't know where that is, but if that could come to us sooner and we could have some data about where concentrations are so we can figure it out. i feel that that's what we really need. i'm not saying it's not helpful to know the outreach. in general when people build -- whether it's a homeless encampment or oversized vehicles, the minute you move people out of a location you don't change their circumstance, they just change locations. ing >> thank you, thank you, directors, again, do i have a motion to approve these items e and i, do i have a second. thank you, all in favor aye.

thank you, that pass, melody, thank you again for coming. now we're dwoing to move on to -- >> item 10 .3 approvers commuter pilot program. >> and i believe director rubke will ask to accuse on this. >> i'm requesting to be recused from 10.3. >> all in favor of recusing director rubke? >> aye. >> and all in favor of -- approving item 10.3p. >> do we need to take public comment on this? >> there is no public comment on this. >> do i have a motion to approve? >> yes. >> do i have a second? >> all in favor aye. >> and then the last item that has been severbacker severed is aaoem 10.7 requested by a member of the public, barry toronto. >>

environmental review, and i'm very much harmed that this does not occur that you worried about the environment with helping cab drivers stop smoking but you're not willing to help drivers serve passengers. thank you. >> thank you, mr. toronto. directors, does anybody require more information on this or do i have a motion to approve? >> motion to approve. >> do i have a second? >> second. >> all in favor aye. >> aye. >> thank you, madam chair, that concludes your consent cal abasing moving on to your

regular calendar, item 11, approving contract number sfmta 2015-31, armed and unarmed security services with cypress security to provide security services in the amount of 38 million 314 thousand 2008 dollars and 17 cents for an initial term of the three years with an opinion to extend the term for up to three additional years. >> chris carpet, security of investigation and is enforcement, we're before you today to request your approval of an armed and unarmed security service with cypress security for an option to extend for an in addition three, the contract being approximately 38.8 million, it includes a comprehensive package which i will briefly highlight, 30 thousand 832 hours of armed services annually for the protection of

revenue sales, collection operation and is special event 159 thousand 497 hours of unarmed security services annually for the protection of 11 bus and lrb divisions with the significant imbacker increase in deployment at muni metro east in anticipation of the increased workload at that division. staffing the 24/7 security operations center at the transportation management sent e maintaining the video surveillance program, patrolling the subway system for 16 hours daily for the safety of our patrons and saf, supporting board president reid's antigraffiti initiative that documents graffiti and uploads it to the police department, six persons deployed throughout the transit system to check there ada compliance and of course 24/7 security, with that, i'm happy to take your questions. >> thank you for the detail

behind that because this is -- it is a large dollar amount that we're approving so it's always good to hear the background on it. the fleet protection, that's at the bus yards and the bus barns patrolling them after hours when they're closed which i understand in the past had been an area with we were getting buses broken into, graffiti, vandalism happening. >> has th*'s right, madam chair, prior to 2008 when cypress took over, security services for the mta, the previous vendor was suffering graffiti and other incidents while the vehicles were on the yards, an average of once per week, we're pleased to be able to say with the current vend do we've only had two major dinsbacker incidents on the yards for six years. >> that's good to hear, any questions before we go to public comment? >> we can do public comment first, that's fine. >> thank you, madam chair. >> public comment?

>> (calling speaker names). >> good afternoon, my name is peter evans, a district manager with [inaudible] international, i appeared before this commission board before in term of a contract that was approved for andrews international, later on as we look through the pay registers that we receive from cypress security, we withdraw from that actual bid and that was the last time. and the city actually requested pay rej sters the attorneys office that we turned over our reasoning for backing out of the first bid, we rebid it again and we worked hard and we won the actual contract again and then when we went into negotiations with the actual contracts department, we were faced with an issue that was not put in an rfp, if you put in your rfp and you say that two positions are to be

unbilled for the operations position and the account manager, it should be spelled out correctly. what the rfp had said in your mark-up, you're only to focus on the guards and then all of the other additional employees, other positions are to be included in the actual mark-up, so the issues that we have at andrews international is when i look at as i receive the letter from mr. patel he states those two positions should not have been billed, then why sit on cypress', as i look at their contract, the two of the positions are listed. the badging clerk and then also the ada, so i ask this board to consider the facts that are rfp was not written correctly and that we studied it, we put our information together. if you say to us that 6 positions that they have here are not supposed to be billed,

this is on their rfp and then you turn around and let cypress security do this, it's a big problem. i ask the board to really consider this and i ask the board to call for a special investigation. >> thank you, thank you. >> brad lower. >> good afternoon, my name's brad lower as peter stated, when we bid on the security program, we were selected as the top bidder and entered in negotiations in good faith. however, we have some concerns with how the negotiations were handled as well as the response we received dated march 16th in response to our letter of protest about the award of security services, i want to focus on the inconsistencies as peter brought up, one in the rfp, it was clearly stated on

page [inaudible] services that these two positions, account manager and operations manager were considered part of the rfp process. these positions directly followed all of the listed security officer positions and there was nothing that stated either of these positions were not billed until we entered into negotiations and were basically told that we needed to remove the cost of these two positions which would have impacted our bid by about 150 thousand plus on an annual basis. in the response to our letter of protest, mr. patel referenced a short sentence in section 3 which says not to include security officer pay rate ins overhead and markup, mr. patel claims from that sentence we should have known that all other positions should have been an overhead and not billed

directly. my question is why would the burden be on the vendor to figure out from a sentence that says whatnot to do to understand what to do when it could have been very clearly stated in the rfp where to bill, what to bill and whatnot to bill to include an overhead so as we respect our competitor, we respect cypress as a strong competitor in the field, we respect the folks -- >> thank you, mr. lower. >> kessler buti is the last speaker. >> kefner, i'm here to thank the staff for all their hard work in these extensive deliberation, it's been a long process for them and we also thank the sfmta for the opportunity to provide service again and we ao*f been honored

to do that for the last six years, i want to give recognition to the three local business enterprises that will be working with us, this contract requires 20% of the services to be provided by lbe's because they are only doing the unarmed component of it it probably represents almost 35% of the actual labor hours to be provided here and we've made a decision that the community and the sfmta would best be served by dividing that very extensive amount of work amongst three highly qualified lbe's and we were pleased we were selected for that process, with that, i'm here to answer any questions you may have and other than that, we thank you for the opportunity. >> could you come back up, i

believe mr. heinicke had a question. >> my understanding is and klek me if i'm wrong i aoep not trying to be flippant about this, the first time this contract went out, andrews bid won the bid, and then our friends from cypress and others said there's no way they can complete this contract on the bid they've committed, it doesn't make sense economically, i asked my friends from andrews who represented themselves very well here today is that the case and we were told, no we can make this contract work, we asked our friends from the union, do you have a position on this, they said, we respect both cypress and andrews, we'll work with whichever one, whoever has the contract they didn't take a position. we asked staff maybe you directly, i won't put you on the hot seat, i think it was, is this contract going to work, all the assurances were given and then it turned out they

couldn't make the contract work on the numbers and they withdraw it. now, our friend from cypress refrain framed the phrase i told you so today, so i wanted to make sure he was in a position to say i told you so is that the history that led -- and then cypress who was the incumbent bid on this and our feeling is that they have -- they've provided good service, so i hear from the crowd that may not be true and i think it's important we set the record straight. i did mean that as a question because i think we all want to understand the history that led us here between the two companies. >> i think that's accurate after the ifb was issued last summer, we -- andrews had been identified as you noted accurately as the winner of the ifb, we came before this boater, sought and obtained your approval to go forward with with the full board four minutes before we were schedule

today go before the finance committee, andrews withdraw their bid and we extend ted cypress contract for this rfp. >> regardless of that situation, an crews is a respected companies in the dountbacker country, it's our responsibility to get the best tax dollar for our best folks and while they presented eloquently and politely, i do get the sense that there's an undercurrent that they're saying they weren't treated fairly and that cypress knew that these positions could be billed and they didn't know it. i assume it's safe to say there was no -- how will you say -- sort of discomfort or displeasure with andrews and that from your view, they were treated fairly is this

a material difference? >> no, i don't think that that's accurate either. i think that -- and one of the things if i may, it was a little puzzling to us when we initially received the rfp, cypress compiled with our instructions with a bid struck khu, andrews did not, we gave them an opportunity to make a correction, then when we entered into negotiations, we encountered this communication, we vacated our -- with andrews because we could not arrive at a deal that was consistent with what our available funding is. when we started negotiations with cypress, cypress seemed to

understand the terms that were put into the rfp, so their proposals to us were consistent with what we were looking for specifically, that the two positions in question were not include as line items but were built into the overhead of the actual cost structure. >> okay. i think i understand that. >> director, do you have a question? >> no. >> director, any other questions? do i have a motion to approve? >> yes. >> do i have a second? >> second. >> all in favor aye. >> aye. >> motion passes, thank you. >> director item 12 discussion and vote pursuant to administrative code section 67 .10 as to whether to conduct a closed session. >> a motion to move into closed section. >> directors, they're coming back into open session, we'll

wait a moment for sfgtv. alright. item 13 announcement of closed session, mta bedaubed of direct toser went and discussed the harrington case, the board settled the matter, directors, it would be appropriate to disclose or not disclose the information discussed. >> do i have a motion? >> all in favor to not disclosed. >> that concludes the information before you today. >> meeting adjourned. (meeting is adjourned).

thanks. >> i example the first thing to

point out is the first word is camp tlargz to be bugs and dirt and so long as you can get past that part in place is pretty awesome. you're going to get to our cabin and why is it so small well most of your time is spent outside. programming was our first step we wanted to offer a program that is, you know makes people happy and leaves them with memories. >> here and there. >> so more points. >> ready 1, 2, 3. i think a big part is it's coming from san francisco it is real estate a kind of vibe people relate to each other and everyone's living in the city

and you can feel the breath of fetish air and the experience you get out here. i think it give us an opportunity to get away from technology you come out here and look at it here and not look at our iphones and you kind of lose users in the city and have a cup of coffee >> i'm corey a typical day increase no typical day. and just the first time being on the talent show and getting a huge applause and i never expected it is is r is a great experience i'm an executive

chief here at kathy serve over one hundred meals a day for the camp mather folks. people love our meals and the idea they can pick up a meal and don't worry about shopping or doing dishes and enjoy and have a great time at camp mather >> grasping grab on. >> i like camp mather it is a lot of freedom and kids run around it's great. >> they have all the things i don't have to do the kids get to do what they want to do and we basically focus on them that's our only job. >> i like camp mather because i can ride my bike. >> i love camp mather. the children are up here playing

around and riding their booiths bicycles that's a great place to see what the word is like outside of the city. can you please rise for the pledge of allegiance? >> pledge of allegiance. >> president, i'd like to call roll. >> president loftus. >> here. >> vice president turman. >> here. >> commissioner marshall enroute. >>