item. >> second. >> further discussion? all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. >> thank you. >> item 10 -- -- approve the consent agreement for switching contract no. cs-169 approve modification no. 1 and authorize the general manager to negotiate and executive a consent to assignment to the existing agreement from mwh/urs joint venture to mwh americas, et cetera. >> through the chair, i'm going to have a number of questions and my primary concern is that my questions are going to lead to other questions. it's more procedural than anything. i'm not comfortable moving forward today. i'm also not comfortable with the situation that may end up

being practically a hearing. if i was able to get an opportunity to discuss in more detail some of my concerns about just the process here, and i would ask that we remove the item and place it on the next agenda, if there were no objections. >> i would have to inquire with legal counsel about this. it's on the agenda. can that be done? >> maureen ambrose city attorney's office. yes, you could remove an item from the calendar and re-calendar it to the next meeting. i think the question to staff is whether or not it would have implications from that point of view -- >> we have put everything on hold for this particular project, waiting for this amendment. it was on calendar last time and we pulled it and we thought we had addressed all of the questions. if we haven't, we can put it to the next calendar. >> the matter is subject to

the board of supervisors' approval and can't be approved by the board until the beginning of september. so as along as you hear it by the -- well, you will lose two weeks in september if you don't do it today. that is right. >> cathy, does it have any effect on the schedule or anything else? >> at this point, it doesn't hugely impact our schedule. >> okay. >> at the pleasure of the commission. >> commission is that quite all right with you all or not? or do you want to start to hear it, and if it looks like we're at an impasse to continue it? >> my concern is just being respectful of everybody's time. like i said, my honest opinion is that one question is going to lead to another, and then i'm still going to be short the information that i need to be able to vote on it today. so i

am asking that i have an opportunity to meet with you, cathy, just to flush this out in the interest of just moving it forward. >> okay. >> i would be supportive as along as we are assured that there isn't a scheduling delay, and that hopefully, the information can be provided. >> i would like it to move forward, but i'm willing to meet with commissioner courtney, because i want him to be comfortable with this. we did spend a lot of time with mwh and go through their whole process and how they selected to add a major subconsultant. we looked at the lbes and what was on the current contract and we considered whether we should rebid it or put out another rfp? or whether we should do this amendment? so we do spend a lot of time on it. so i am happy to meet with commissioner courtney on this. >> okay. >> should we continue to the

next meeting? i want to point out though that we only have three commissioners at the next meeting. >> i do really need that motion the next time. >> wasn't that item already -- ? >> yes it was on the calendar two weeks ago and we moved it to this time because we still had some follow-up questions with our consultant, mwh. >> noreen ambrose, city attorney, if it's heard today you could get it introduced by the board at at the end of the month and hear it the first week of september. if it's heard at the next meeting or the one after that in august, it's irrelevant. you won't be able to get it introduced until the first meeting in september to the

board. so you will necessarily -- if you don't do it today, whether you do it on july 28th or august 11th, it won't make any difference. >> okay. i just want to make sure that we have a quorum for the next meeting. it's very important. all right. thank you. >> i promise i will be here. [laughter ] >> you better be. >> do we have to make a motion to continue? >> so moved. >> you can do it by motion or the president can do it. >> okay. president just did it. >> okay. >> thank you. >> next item, please. >> item 11 authorize request for qualifications and subsequent requests for proposal for agreement no. ww-628 for an amount estimated to be $225 million. >> good afternoon, commissioners. president caen, this item is for our sewer system

improvement program project and this goes right back to the memo regarding cm/gc and we're asking to put out a request for qualifications and to put out a request for proposals to have contractors apply for this contract. because we would like to bring a contractor on-board early on to work with our designers. and so in answer to commissioner moran's question earlier, it really does remove the conflict of being able to work with the same contractor that then does the construction the with the traditional low bid, we cannot talk to one contractor versus another and it's a conflict for us to talk to the various contractors on means and methods. and so going the cm/gc route would allow us to work with a

contractor in constructability. >> mr. moran, i think you had an amendment to the resolution. >> well, we had talked to staff, and as i indicated before as ongoing discussion of administrative procedures we should put in place around the new ordinance. i had proposed a "further resolve," that basically says this contract would be subject to whatever administrative provisions this commission adopts at a later time. >> that is correct. we talked earlier today. we came up with some language in antpation of this question coming up. if i could read into the record, the language, further resolved that the award and administration of any agreement entered into pursuant to this authorization will be subject to any administrative provisions subsequently approved by the commission's applicable to cm/gc contracts.

>> and i'm not sure what the appropriate process is. i can move that amendment. that might be the best thing to do, and i will do that. >> okay. >> i will second that. >> discussion? any public comment on the amendment? i will call for the question. all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. >> excuse me, may i ask for clarification, is that the last further resolved? >> yes. >> okay. >> thank you. >> now we have to vote on the motion itself. i have a motion >> so moved. >> second. >> further discussion? public comment? all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion

carries. next item. >> item 12 approve proposed modifications to the floodwater management grant program. the sfpuc will seek appropriations to increase its allocation to $2 million. >> i would like to move this item. >> second. >> i have a question on this. does this remove any further legal action against these properties, or from these properties? >> brian henderson, wastewater enterprise, filling in for agm walla. the simple answer is no. i do have -- if you would like, i do have a summary of the changes. we have a very

detailed description of the modifications in your packet, or i can go through a quick summary, if you would like. >> a quick summary would be good. >> okay. about two years ago, this commission approved a grant assistance for floodwater management system to encourage san francisco property owners to make improvements on their properties that will lower their risk of damage due to flooding. the current program reimbursed property owners for removalable flood barriers and sewer back flow preventers. we kicked off this program to the public at a workshop, where supervisor campos, sfpuc management, and the appropriate vendors. outreach since then has included presentations to community groups door-to-door outreach and drop-in session where we helped the applicants with their paperwork. our grant administrator and staff have personally communicated with over 35

individuals about the program. flood barriers and back-flow preventers have been installed by some property owners as a result of the grant program, but many face more site-specific challenges and have not been able to take advantage of the program. today we're asking the commission to approve a set of modifications that would expand the program in several ways. based on a feedback that we have received from one-on-one meetings with residents, small business owners, and property owners. the modified program would additionally reimburse concrete flood wall and special projects such as ceiling of garage -- sealing of garage doors, modifications to plumbing and increase to $2 million. coincidentally today, supervisor campos is also introducing an ordinances to the board of supervisors that would exemption these

grant-funded projects to help further incentivize the program and one of which is this grant program modification. as with the current grant program, the modified grant program would be administered by the sfpuc and applicants would be -- applications would be reviewed in coordinate workers' compensation dpw and dbi. we believe these modifications reflect the needs of the affected communities and hope you will consider approving this important resolution to help property owners lower their risk of damage due to flooding. >> we have a lot of public speakers, but commissioners,

any comments? >> yes, i have a question and comment. so the uptake from the first program two years ago -- because i remember we spent some time reviewing -- >> right, right. >> has it been pretty successful? it sounds like you have done a bunch of outreach and have people really been applying for the grants? >> yes. we have had several people actually going through the grant process right now. but we have run into challenges, because the flood barriers and the back-flow preventers didn't necessarily meet everybody's needs. hence, flood walls, in further meetings we decided that we can meet an awful lot more of these needs with flood walls and grade changes, perhaps plumbing changes. different plumbing changes than the back-flow preventers. >> if people are still applying have they been in the areas most prone to flooding? >> yes. >> they have. so that part it

sounds like has been successful at least from the outreach perspective. and i do hear that there are projects for el ninos coming potentially this winter. so i think that probably would include some pretty heavy rainstorms. >> every rainstorm spawns a whole new initiative to get this going. >> yes. i'm just wondering a little bit about the timing, and with the hope that if indeed the forecasts come true, that they bob able -- would be able to have the barriers in place by the next time the rains hit? >> it's an individual base. property owners actually responsible for all the construction work. they don't go through a standard process through approvals and what not. they go through what any private construction, if you are modifying your house, you go through the exact same dbi and dpw approvals. absolutely. some of these can be done very quickly. >> great. i would just ask if we approve

this today, that you really get out there and do the outreach. because we're in july, and if people want to get prepared for what could potentially be a heavy rainstorm winter, it would be great to make them aware of this program. >> we will definitely continue an aggressive outreach program. >> thank you. >> good. any other comments from the commissioners? okay. to the general public, because there are so many speakers, i would like to limit it to two minutes, if you don't mind. i'm going to call three people at a time. robert hanson. dennis casey. and chris hinkley. come forward, please. [ inaudible ] >> all right. >> just real quickly, i'm dennis casey, five-time president of the san francisco motorcycle club. we're 111 years old and we had

mayors of the city of san francisco as members of our club. we're about 100 members strong now. we're the largest motorcycle club in the world at one time and we're first to allow women members. we have been in the building at 2194 folsom for many years. we are not an outlaw club, just a regular motorcycle club. we are not the sons of anarchy, but the sons of san francisco and particular folsom street. our clubhouse is a -- our club is non-profit, we use our clubhouse for weddings, birthdays, christmas parties special events. it's just a clubhouse. it's open to the public. and we have always been very generous to our neighbors and never had the police there except one time 30 years ago for a noise compliant. if we are in the clubhouse right now, and the last flood, you would be the only people on dry ground. so the other thing we have done, we spent almost

all of our own savings -- i can't mention specific numbers. it's way in excess of $50,000 to support our own foundation on our own dime. we can really use some help with waterproofing the front door and with the plumbing back-flow items that we would get funding for if this were approved. thank you very much. >> thank you. our next speaker dennis casey. >> i was dennis casey. >> oh, sorry. too many pieces of paper here. >> go ahead. >> my name is chris hinkey and i have had my building three years. there has been three floods there. after the first flood, i realized it's going to be a lot of work to get this fixed. i spent almost $ million on the building to prevent water getting in with doors and

flood-prevention systems and pumps and everything. i urge you to get this motion passed so all the other residents can do the same things to protect their buildings. it would really be helpful, particularly before el ninos come in and global warming and so on. the bigger picture, we would like to get this fixed permanently to prevent the surge waters getting into our builds. there are proposesals and one is to put a proposed park on 17th and folsom street. but if we can put that in, it could actually prevent the water getting into our buildings anyway. so i really hope we could look at this further and meanwhile today, let's get this first stage passed. it could really help a lot of people. thank you. >> thank you. now do we have mark jordan? okay. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is mark jordan. i am a 13-year member of san francisco motorcycle club, the same club that dennis casey just addressed you about. dennis has told you about our

history in san francisco. we are really an institution here and i believe a true asset to the city. in addition, to the things that dennis mentioned that our clubhouse does, one thing that i would add, we do a lot to support not only the motorcycling community, but all of the folks in our peripheral communities when they need help. we do a lot of fundraising and so forth and now it's us to do fundraising efforts to waterproof our building. we're having to rebuild our foundation because of hydrocompaction that happened over the 100 years or so that the building has been there. this is one of the lowest-laying areas of the city. on march 19th, i attended the public seven-day forecast safety and neighborhood services commit, where they discussed improvements on folsom street. i'm not hydrologist or engineer, but the takeaway i got effectively there is no easy solution to fix the flooding problem that we have

in that area. what was discussed was large numbers and large reservoirs to be constructed. so i urge this body to approve the motion before you today, the modifications. and i also have an estimate actually from a company called flood -- i will submit that to you to give you an idea of the numbers and amount of money. it's about $20,000 to flood-proof the top two feet of our wall and add a floodproof door. thank you for your consideration. >> thank you for your time. the ne three speakers: hans arts. angela sinocropi and francisco garcia. >> hi.

my name is hans art. i'm an auto mechanic and i have been running my shop for 45 years in the mission district at 17th and folsom. we had to mop out our shops more times than i can remember because of overflow of the sewer system. i want to support this program, because we will -- i tell you, we will very effectively use the dollars available to help keep the waters out of our properties. one of the difficulties that i have is that i have a parking lot that acts as a conduit that floods the restaurant next door. so that is the sort of specific solution to a problem that the earlier program didn't have the money to support. so we'll save you a lot of money. >> good. thank you. >> hi my name is angela and i

own a building that is both my business and residence on 16th street. we got flooded off and even more in 2004 and got flooded against -- this last year and to thank the puc and meeting with hans and others and discussing in depth the changes to the grant for our buildings. because the dam was just not the right solution for the majority of the buildings. i think very, very few people actually went through that, because it won't work. you know, it would prevent you from entering your building. you would have to be there to install it and know ahead of time. things like that. so the changes would be so each of us could individually do something that would specifically prevent our buildings from flooding. and we really, really need it. you know, i mean it's really stressful.

it's really expensive. it's an ongoing problem. so we need this, so we personally can hopefully immediately act on it to prevent damages, rather than repair thing after they have already been damaged. so i think it's a really good solution to at least get things started and that is about it. thank you. >> thank you for coming. our next speaker. mr. garcia. >> hello commissioners. i ran a restaurant in the mission, cafe and we have been flooded five times in seven years. so we support 12 families, all mission residents. it's a little hard to keep going with a business, you know? when we have every winter is a headache.

we can barely sleep and we appreciate that the city helps us cleaning and opening again. this time, we were closed four months from december to april. so really actually were doing our best. we already installed the barriers, but we get 70% of the water -- so we really need the help. and we really want the issue to be solved on the ground, and not just cleaning every year. so we really need to be able to grow. so we really appreciate that you help us in this matter. >> what was the name of the restaurant [speaker not understood] . >> thank you. >> it's on the property of malcolm davis. we opened seven years ago and we flooded five times. every year, every winter, especially now with el nino coming it's very scary.

it's hard to run a business, when you know that you close and you have to re-open again or have the funds to start again from zero. this is all mission san francisco residents that we support, low-income people. thank you very much. >> thank you for coming. next speakers, malcolm davis. and mr. picasso, is that pronounced correctly? and are there any other speakers that want to speak to this item? >> i'm malcolm davis. >> i'm sorry, some of you have already spoken. [ inaudible ] >> fine. fill out a form. okay. mr. davis.

i think you called sam picasso and malcolm davis. >> that is me. who is on first? [laughter ] malcolm davis, could you please speak? >> yes, i just wanted to show something on the overhead. >> may we have the overhead, please sfgovtv? >> there is actually a possible solution for our problem at 17th and folsom. there is an existing parking lot there. there is an existing parking lot that is currently sladed to be a park and affordable housing. and if that area was lowered by 4', it would hold 1.5 million gallons of water and be a straightforward and simple way of doing a temporary fix, that would keep all of these buildings in the area from flooding. right now it's currently planned that they are going to start the park construction. it's imminent. i haven't been able to get a

straight answer from anybody about the park. i have talked to supervisor wiener and representative from david campos' office and i can't get a straight answer when the park is really supposed to start? i think it's really foolish to take the park out of conversation about the solution to the problem. because it's half the site. and once we were talking about three-levels of problem solution. we were talking about immediate, sort of short-range solutions, mid-range solutions and long-range solutions and working through the grant program, which i'm very much in favor of. we have gotten down to the grant program being the mid--level solution as opposed to ground storage as the solution what i am talking about here is this is from december 12th, when midterm solution was subsurface storage underneath the park. i think a lot of people think

there is going to be storage underneath, but it has no storage. so i think it's a silly long-term plan for the city to be spending money on a park that is either going to make the problem worse. because if the park is higher than the flood-level, it will go first evangelical lutheran church and if it's lower than the flood-levels, it's going to flood and it has a play yard and vegetable gardens. so neither one of those is a good solution. like really this piece of land needs to be part of the solution. so that is what i wanted to say. >> so mr. carlin, can you put somebody in touch with mr. davis? >> we certainly will. >> i can leave this with you, if you would like. >> our next speaker.

>> buenos tardes. >> translator: my name is samuel picasso. i live in folsom and 17th. for 44 years. in these 44 years living in this area it has been flooded 37 times. okay he is saying a lot and he doesn't see a solution, unless something big, like a big step is made, like changing the

pipes or maybe making what malcolm said. he says -- never fixed -- never. >> never. >> never, >> translator: he said his child saw him 20 years ago, there is a big canal under folsom could be the solution -- that is all. >> that is it. >> thank you. >> thank you for coming. the last speaker is mary anne robertson. >> hi, my name is mary anne robertson and i have a business at folsom and 17th, and own the business at the -- or own the building that the business resides in. it floods every time it rains, even though we are in a drought year, last year it flooded