get out? i'm trying to imagine. [laughter] maybe this is a too-early question. how do you get out? >> there is one dedicated empty space. you drive in and you go around and around and then when you are ready to have your car to pick up, you press a button where you parked. so there is always one empty space. you drive into the empty space and you get out in the empty space. >> chair mondejar: and then you press it and it goes around. >> it goes to an empty spot to park. >> chair mondejar: my experience is the car lifts in new york, where you don't know where to go or how to get out. >> this is a simpler system. it's a german system. >> chair mondejar: okay. thank you. just wanted more education on how the car lifts work in this

building and i don't think i know of any building in san francisco who has a car lift, at least from my knowledge. thank you very much for your presentation. and if there are no further questions and comments, i need a motion to approve this. >> i move. >> chair mondejar: moved by commissioner rosales. >> second. >> chair mondejar: seconded by commissioners scott and singh. madam secretary, can you please call a vote? >> clerk: please announce your vote when i call your name. [roll call] madam chair, the vote is five ayes. >> chair mondejar: thank you. motion carries. madam secretary -- thank you very much, everyone. looks very exciting. madam secretary, can you please call the next item? >> clerk: the next order of

business is agenda item 5e, workshop on the january-june, 2018 report on ocii small business enterprise and local hiring goals practices, discussion. madam director? >> director sesay: thank you. this is a periodic update on the monitoring of small business enterprise and local hiring. it's that time of the year. six months already. this is january-june. and now i will leave it to you to discuss. >> thank you. good afternoon, chair, vice chair, commissioners, director. very much looking forward to presenting the last six months of small business and work force programs. before getting into facts, figures and resulting analysis, i would like to provide a brief

overview of the policies that make up the core of our small business and work force programs. the office of community investment infrastructure to the redevelopment agency in city and county of san francisco provides contracts for professional service designs as well as in the work force of contractors providing work. as an independent organization, ocii adopted and continues to actively implement the equal opportunity programs. as you can see, the policies are comprehensive and mirror city ordinances. adopted in november, 2004, the objective of the small business enterprise is to level the playing field for small businesses, particularly san francisco-based small businesses in their efforts to compete on

the projects. in keeping with the overall objective, unique to the agency's policy is the first consideration. businesses will be given contracts in the following order. to project area, second, to sves in san francisco, third to all other sves outside the borders of san francisco. the principal of first consideration is consistent with the state's overall objective with redevelopment. our sve policy establishes an ambitiously high 50% goal for proactive measures to engage small businesses. it's designed to encourage participation by requiring developers and contractors for good faith efforts to include sves in contract agreements and

entered into by contractors and consultants. this includes incentive for s.b.e.s in small areas of work that can be participated. outreaching to small businesses in a proactive manner, regarding prebid and allowing small businesses to respond to solicitation, which is 30 days. and working with o.c.i. staff throughout the process. more specifically, staff is involved and we participate in interviews and similarly for construction contracts, we review contractor selections and

are involved in tabulations all before contract are awarded. these activities are done with the purpose to ensure that contractors are performing due diligence and good faith and ensuring san francisco businesses first. ocii identifies a small business as ownership and control by individuals and not associated to a larger company. licensing requirements are in an effort to mitigate confusion and program administration, standards were adopted to the city and county's local business enterprise or l.b.e. program with regard to their micro and small l.b.e.s. to qualify, a firm's gross receipts averaged over three years must not exceed the following thresholds -- $20 million a year for general, $14

million for specialty, $10 million a your for suppliers, $3.5 million for trucking, $2.5 million for professional services. the focus of the s.b.e. summary is projects and contracts reviewed and approved by the commission or awarded by developers and contractors between january 1, 2018, through june 30, 2018. data was synthesized from the web-based reporting tools. during this reporting period, six contracts valued at slightly more than $44 million was awarded for design construction services. this included awards for the point blocks 2a and 11a. mission bay south block six west. blocks 29 to 32 and 33 and 34, public improvements, scope four and five.

and transbay streetscape improvements. it supports a variety of projects ranging from public infrastructure, market rate, inclusionary, and stand-alone, affordable housing. overall, projects reported good s.b.e. participation. it was well over ocii's goal of 50%, achieving 56%. for professional services, s.b.e. reached near 90%, exceeding the prior period of 82% in december, 2017. on an accumulated basis, the overall s.b.e. credit is 30.2%, increase of .4% from the prior

period. notably it's well above the goal of 50%, reaching nearly 61.1%. participation figures showed a favorable improvement over the prior six months, achieving 28.2%. when assessing the past three years of activity an an aggregated basis, professional service has increased. 1.2% for professional services and .2 for construction. please note that the construction trend lines dropped in 2016 and 2017 because s.b.e. participation was challenged when $1 billion in contracts were committed during the two periods for four significant tower-structures and two high-rise market rates inclusionary towers, transbay

block 8. we see a recovery of .5% and .2% respecti respectively. removing the construction analysis and looking at ocii projects, shows a stable rate of participation and construction in the band of 40% to 45% as represented by plots along the pink line on the grass. while not a disparity study, we've captured a snapshot of the firms working on ocii projects. the availability figures were derived from the database for suppliers, firms, and construction contractors. as the commission previously expressed an interest of contracts by zip code, i would

like to quickly draw your attention to a map of san francisco with attention to ocii's main project area, transbay, mission bay and hunters point shipyard-candlestick point project areas. of all active construction and professional service contracts awarded to san francisco firms, 61% awarded to district 10, made up of 94124, 134 and 107. to further the aims of the s.b.e. programs, staff continues to conduct outreach to the small business community three various publications and media outlets. staff has participated in 18 prebid meetings and continues dialogue with owners of small businesses and the associations

such as the african-american chamber of commerce, national association of minority contractors, women in construction, clark construction strategic management and bayview business advisory committee. moving on to work force. prior to the city's adoption of the work force hiring policy, ocii had implemented on a contract-by-contract basis a work force construction project. the policy is aggressive and university ebbing -- unique, in which is first consideration for area residents and requires contractors to adhere to state wages. monitor work force compliance through the monitoring and reporting system contractors and subcontractors

are required to submit payroll reports that attracts by trade and project, each hour worked. the system tracks employee information such as residents and ethnic and gender data as supplied by the employer. in addition, ocii has an agreement with office of work force development, oewd, to provide day-to-day work force services. it works with contractors and subcontractors on working referrals. we meet monthly with city build to discuss the program and monthly with city build and general contractors in hunters point to discuss the hiring of the local residents. for this report, ocii staff extracted data and reported the

hours worked by san francisco residents and those in the zip codes. contractors logged 2.32 million work hours. it reflects the ongoing challenges of a constrained labor market within a booming sector. 7.02 million work hours have been logged on an accumulated basis as of june 30, 2018. san francisco residents performed 1.46 million hours or 20.8%. on an aggregate basis for each project area, bayview shows work force engagement of 19.8%, shipyard 32.9%, mission pay,

17%, transbay. in short, it's a challenge because of the pickup in the economy and all of the construction activity. while the percentages seem low, it's important to note that over 16,200 workers have had a hand in the projects. 2,330 are san francisco residents. on average, san francisco workers performed 20% more hours on ocii-assisted projects than nons non-san francisco workers. meeting work force demands remains challenging. the strong economy provides

options. we see this trend nationally, region alally and locally. demands on construction and labor reflect the abilities to attempt to meet the goals. construction labor demand is high and significantly higher than the previous year. to further show this spike in the demand for work force, when compared to the previous fiscal year, we see a 75% increase in the number of total construction hours performed on ocii projects. 1.8 million additional hours were performed on ocii projects in the last year. and while local work force did not increase at a proportion at rate, it did increase by 44% translating to 233,238 hours performed bill san francisco residents. this translates into 140 full

time-equivalent positions as defined by metrics established by the office of economic and work force development. to address the previously referenced challenges, ocii and city build staff work closely to assess each project and each developer and each contractor's activities, including ongoing good faith efforts on their part, which include employers sponsorships of apprenticeships and trade unions. 16 employ years on the golden state warriors-chase center have sponsored 50 san francisco residents. the significance of the sponsorships is the employer hires and trains an individual for a set number of hours and helps them to join a trade union and develop their own career. to address the overwhelming demand and pipeline of san francisco workers, city build

continues to expand their sector academy programs. they're operating cycle 29 of construction academy and anticipates 41 participants to graduate this year. in addition, the third cycle of is chase center academy is under way, offering trade-specific trainings in steelwork and concrete. this is a five-week, 200-hour curriculum, a cohort of 35 participants in mid-august. furthermore, to engage the hardest-to-serve populations, those folks with the most significant barriers to employment, they've been engaoiengag engaging with the i.p.o., interrupt, and work with the transition allaying youth prop

populations for case management, conveyance of applications and placement in jobs in follow-up with support via critical retention services. while analysis of the last six months of s.b.e. activity has provided us with note worthing milestones and positive trends, what i hope is taken away from the summary is while s.b.e. participation will fluctuate, we'll continue to increase participation in construction, by supporting advocacy and technical assistance, and encouraging supplier participation. participation in s.b.e. networking and certification to small businesses. as related to work force, along with the assistance of city build, we'll continue to attempt to build a pipeline of workers,

to increase participation. also to contractors and unions and every opportunity to provide work for san francisco residents. this concludes the presentation of the january 1-june 30, 2018, s.b.e. and work force practices. after public comment, raymond lee and joshua arse and i will be here to address any questions that you may have. thank you. >> chair mondejar: thank you. do we have any speaker cards? >> clerk: yes, madam chair, oscar james. >> oscar james again. first, i want to commend that report. they did a marvelous job. i do have some problems.

when we first came up with the community or the work force project, it was 50% community and 100% citywide. i don't know if they tapered off from there, but i heard 50%. it's 50% a grandfathered clause from 70, or is it citywide. after that, you go to whoever after that. san francisco community residents and san francisco as a whole have first priority on all of these jobs. i like what city build is doing in training the people in our communities and getting jobs and what have you. it's a lot of late overtime for a lot of the construction. i have a grandson, for example, who worked for 1 1/2 years and has been out of work the last six months.

he's a drywaller. it's a lot of other people in our community who has been dealt with that problem and these are good -- some good workers. you do have some that want to hold up a shovel or what have you, but the majority of the people really want to work. the other problem that i have is the capacity. helping them with their payroll that a subcontractor should be able to pay his own payroll in a decent amount of time and not be staggered. and when i say make his own payroll, when you make your own payroll, you build up a track record where you can eventually get on your own and get your own capacity. if a general contractor is paying your payroll, the

subcontractor does not get that leverage of building up paying his payroll. in other words, he will always be dependent on a general contractor and not building up his credibility on becoming a person that pays their own payroll and i know that from experience the other thing -- i will talk about the other thing later on. i don't want to go past that 3 minutes. thank you very much. >> chair mondejar: thank you. >> clerk: pete farmer. >> good afternoon. pete varmer, national association contractors. i want to thank you. for the last few years, i've been addressing the participation of small business contractors of the ocii projects. i see a lot of improvements. i see a lot of our members working and they have contracts. we're making a tribe and

improving. there is still room for improvement on some of the projects. some of the projects that i want to echo is the model at the chase arena, the warriors and the contractor, clark construction. it represents that it gives our members an opportunity to participate on the very tough type of project in san francisco. many of our members are working at the site. they're going to gain quite a bit of experience and it will give them the suppliers and information on the project. so it has been a great model that warriors have brought to san francisco. if we can mimic that model, we

will exceed our goal very quickly. 5 wanted to first thank the leadership. when i first met with them, they were receptive and followed through for what we have asked to have the participation of the small business, especially the minority contractors. and that came through. and because of that, our association has grown and we want to provide and grow the capacity for suppliers. we are also going to launch a new program for our members and future members. it will be a program that will help to join the union that will provide with a lot more opportunity and sense of training on specific trades.

it will help the subcontracting requirements and a lot of the communities that they will have to work on the construction project. thank you. one more thing. i wanted to thank the staff. it's great work they've been doing. >> clerk: no more speaker cards. >> chair mondejar: since there are no more requests to speak. i will defer to my fellow commissioners. commissioner rosales, your favorite thing. >> commissioner rosales: my favorite topic. i have at least five of them. thank you for the report. it's very full. it has a lot of information. i'm trying to digest all of it. i have some general questions on slide 6 and i know it's in our memo.

i thought it was a typo and then i went to construction and it's construction, this is overall, 56%. that's actually very -- it's more than very good. >> it's really the type of project. for professional services, certainly we've been consistently above that 50%. and what was striking in the past six months are the projects in the bayview-hunters point area. so there was a strong commitment in terms of bringing on local folks and particularly in joint ventures as well.

i attribute that really to the city of san francisco. with the city of san francisco, l.b.e. program, much of what has taken place in infrastructure-related. so it's ingrained within the community strong participation of local businesses. certainly when we do our infrastructure projects, such as the mission bay street improvements or the streetscape improvement, our participation increases in that respect. >> commissioner rosales: so it's built into the d.n.a. of the general contractor community? >> i truly believe it's built into the d.n.a. with respect to infrastructure and public works. >> commissioner rosales: i'm showing my age, but that's 30 years in the making. that's amazing. that's great. i didn't see here a comparative

chart as we had in the past. i know there are narratives, but correct me if i'm wrong, my impression is that transbay and mission bay were also strong in terms of participation, stronger, i should say, than what we've seen in the past. >> certainly for professional services. construction is a challenge with respect to the large complexes, tower projects. in transbay, there's a lot of construction taken place with the towers and so construction in those respects are averaging at about 20 plus percent or thereabouts. but professional service, we really haven't had much of an

issue because it's very low with that respect. it's the expertise of the individual. for construction, it's a different matter. >> commissioner rosales: one more question on the s.b.e. side and i will defer to my fellow commissioners, what -- we know about the local san francisco picture. where are the contractors coming from that are outside of san francisco. do you know? >> not off the top. we do have figures of that. i didn't delve into those particular metrics. i do know a fair amount comes from the east bay, certainly in alameda county. and in contra costa county. there's a fair amount from the south as well, as far down as san jose. but i don't have any particular figures i can give you at the moment. >> commissioner rosales: i would be interested. my sense is that we're drawing

diverse contractors from the east bay in particular, alameda county. >> chair mondejar: thank you, commissioner rosales. >> commissioner singh: do we have a list of the contractors that you have? and with small business. >> do we have a list of the firms? >> commissioner singh: yeah. >> we certainly do have a list that have participated and the l.b.e.s as well through the monitoring here in san francisco. and we draw on the list from the s.b.e. from the department of general services from the state of california. so we maintain the database of firms that participate on our contracts or have bid on the contracts that we know of. >> commissioner singh: what are the requirements are there to

become a member of the s.b.e. for us? >> for certification, we accept firms certified through governmental entity. there's a certification process that takes place through the state. the caveat is that the firm that is it must meet a certain threshold. what we do in that instance is scrutinize the firm a further step. for san francisco as another example, we accept due policy amendment. we do have -- we have conformed or program to the micro l.b.e.

and the small l.b.e. program administered by the city. those revenue thresholds conformed with ours so we accept those. the other is the federal government under the d.b.e. program. it's certified through a governmental entity. we rely on the aspect of certification by another entity to determine ownership and contract. with the d.b.e. program, we take it one step level further and ensure that the firm meets the size standards met by the commission. >> commissioner singh: we used to have a working group that met every quarter. and commissioners used to sit and -- do we have that yet? >> no. we don't have a current working

group. we've looked at that. we'll continue to look at it to see if there's interest within the community. >> commissioner singh: it's a good idea if we start that again. >> if there is one thing i can say, we had some discussion with the contract monitoring division here with the city and certainly partnering in terms of -- because we share common goals partnering with the -- and drawing from their experience with the small business -- let me take that back, the l.b.e. advisory committee would be helpful. the one reservation is the resources needed to hold the monthly meetings and so forth. but if we can partner with another agency and share the resources, it is something that i think would work with ocii.

>> commissioner singh: okay. thank you so much. >> chair mondejar: thank you, commissioner singh. commissioner bustos. >> vice chair bustos: so i -- i was getting excited about the numbers. and then when we got to page -- got to page 14, 20%, that made me nervous. we don't know how long this boom of construction will last.

sometimes this stuff goes through ebb and flows. and being able to get our folks opportunities to work while the situation is good because there's a lot of work happening, 20% is not a lot. can we talk about that a little bit? >> we've looked at that in terms of how to draw or increase that. i think josh arse is here in the audience and maybe he can add some additional color. i think the difficulty is that times of too good at this particular moment with construction. i feel as though there's a plateauing of the utilization of san francisco workers and, again, i would like to bring up josh and maybe he can add some

additional color to that. >> vice chair bustos: this is san francisco land. in order for these projects to be built, they have to get san francisco approval, whether it's through our body or through planning. nothing can move without san francisco. is this good faith or are we mandatory in our asking them? >> thank you. josh arse, compliance department. to your question, this is a good faith efforts policy. it's by raymond lee, brooks solomon, all working together to turn it into something meaningful. we work to achieve the goals that mr. oscar james had spoken

about of 50%. if you look at other specific projects and not having the slides in front of me, we do see other sites, high-profile areas that people are paying attention to, projects like the shipyard or transbay, where you see the numbers are higher. i'm looking at it now. hunters point shipyard, 32.9, nearly 33%. to not go too far away, it's a good faith efforts policy. across the 7 million hours, it's 21% local. >> vice chair bustos: maybe this is a question to the director. isn't there a way we're able to at least have this body go on

record to ask for mandatory 50% rather than good faith? because sometimes, i mean, good faith works to a certain amount, but if there's a plateau that's happening about san francisco workers, you know, we still want our people working, especially with the cost of housing. it would be a shame to have san franciscans build housing they can't afford. how can we work on this? >> director sesay: i would like to have staff come back with a pros and cons. i think we haven't talked fully in this body what the mandatory does and how they're performing and what it means. i would like to entertain the idea of coming, having an agenda item in the future to talk about the pros and cons of the two rather than to take action on changing to a mandatory program.

>> vice chair bustos: it would be great to at least have the discussion sooner rather than later because time is moving and work is being -- >> director sesay: i do want to underscore that in terms of the work the agency does and all the outreach with our partnership with city build, that would in no way change the outcome. so what you are proposing here is good faith versus mandatory. i think the same level of input, same level of aggressive collaboration, policy, it doesn't diminish that. it would change the metering and maybe not the outcome. we're doing everything we can in our power to increase the work force or the contracting piece. go

>> vice chair bustos: or maybe we need to look at how we think outside the box. for example, there was a trade school that my brothers went through and a lot of great workers came out of that school. maybe we can look to some of our schools that are focused on the trades or look at apprenticeships or other things that we may want to look outside the box. >> director sesay: i know we've had the same conversation and we're exploring the capacity. my sense is some work force space, we don't have the capacity in the city. so we want to have all of the areas not just holistic because we're monitoring and reporting on a period. we probably just want it have a discussion on what the barriers

are, period, so it can be more robust and come back with more details in terms of -- because it's also capacity. it's not just whether policy is mandatory versus good faith. i think it's what the resources are out there. >> if i might offer a thought, and this is something that you catt catalyzed at the last meeting, director sesay should be aware that we heard the call loud and clear. it was the big realization for us at city build and the city that this number of hours of increase is massive. you saw 72% year on year increase on the ocii projects in terms of construction hours. we ran the numbers for city-covered public works that has the mandatory policy. it, too, was 43% single-year

increase. we ran that in preparation for our annual report after the inquiry last time. what is good for colleagues to know is that commissioner bustos followed down a path of being very conscientious in reminding us the importance of local hire. commissioner bustos came out to speak to the contractors and parties working together on work force development outcomes at the chase center. got together when we had a conversation about bringing more sponsorships and placements. don't forget, when you look at the sponsorships and placements, it's something separate and apart from the percentage that is a success story in the impacted communities. when commissioner bustos talked about what it meant for him to grow up and be raised in the mission district and what it meant to give park, along with

warriors, city build, you saw the contractors step up their game immediately. it's a much more rapid pace than today and it led to more creativity. it was a new pilot, pilot specifically focused on the need for cement masons at the arena. out of 10 recruits, learning very specific industry needs, not just generally speaking in the city and region, but specific to that arena, 10 out of 10 students graduated, 8 out of 10 went to work on the arena. the other two, we have plans to help move them, too. 80% of everybody that started in that targeted sense in response to commissioner bustos's call and the discussion we had and creative juices flowing to figure out who is left behind? who is in the 2.1% unemployment.

it's only about 11,000, 12,000 san franciscans looking for work that don't have it, but it doesn't count the people not looking for work. or the 80,000 san franciscans that are barely making ends meet. when the time is right, we'll be happy to come back and share with you the proposal that flowed from that. as a few hours ago, we were with a class that are in their seventh week learning the specific trades that will be needed and industry-wide. there are 35 disadvantaged job-seekers that are finishing second day of the second week. we'll have more workers to come out by the end of the 5 weeks. so if it's the direction of our partners here, commission and staff at ocii, we'll present the case for the different policies, because there is a degree of

competition among project sponsors, city agencies, and community expectations on the mandatory stuff. there's a financial penalty if they don't hit their number. on the flip side, you have no shortage of creativity of the sponsorships and placements that we can do more of to grow the public, make sure no one is left behind and keep moving forward. >> vice chair bustos: absolutely right. thank you. >> chair mondejar: before you go, can you reintroduce yourself? do you work for ocii? >> we're a team. we all work together anyway. that's what it's about. mr. james, for thoekz that don't know, apart from being such an

outstanding, vocal, passionate community advocate, goes back to the beginning with the hunters point and san francisco building trades council, where the 50% objective. and i think a lot of us that came out of -- into this work mentored by mr. james, and mr. jackson and others, there is always work to be done. whether it's 10% unemployment, or 2.1%, there are still people that we can bring in. if you look at the graph -- i don't know the slide number, but if you look at the work we're doing bringing 45 students into the industry and another 45 in the fall. we're hopeful that as many of those 35 students as possible, working with ocii and partners

were to trade twice as many as long year. i don't know math, but if you look at that demand, if we're constant growth but demand is like that, it will result in a lower percentage. >> chair mondejar: we still don't know your title. >> joshua arse, director of city build in the office of economic and work force development. working closely with ocii on a number of projects. >> chair mondejar: so he's not with ocii. >> we're on the same floor and see each other every day and you fund our work, so we're grateful for that. >> chair mondejar: thank you. i do have a follow-up question. >> commissioner ransom-scott: you're answering part of the question that i had. do you see that there is

continuing capacity to build this pipeline in san francisco? it's not -- we're not just talking about ocii projects. we're talking about city wide projects. have we gone to the well too often is what i'm asking. >> never too often. there will always be people left behind. if you look at with the mayor london breed is bringing to the conversation, she's going into the neighborhoods and asking people if they're working, if they're housed. if they're not, i know we'll get an inquiry to contact someone and bring them construction opportunities and that is something that's happening and it's really special to look forward to sharing more about with respect to the chase center advanced training. >> commissioner rosales: and i'm focusing on construction. >> oh, yes. it's interesting, construction is a great pipeline.

we have local hire ordinance that really in construction stand for the proposition that if you are looking for work, a disadvantaged job-seeker who has barriers to employment, experience with the flawed justice system, english, or anyone at risk of being left behind, you can train with us and we can provide a pathway that gives you high assurances and near guarantee of employment and construction. we think about how to move this concept. over the next five years when the state looks at 6% job growth in the city and county of san francisco, half of that is from professional services. our men and women, disadvantaged job-seekers, former incarcerated workers, those at work of being left behind, don't have to go to work with their tools. they can go with a briefcase,

computer, drafting instruments. we're involved very extensively with regard to the cannabis industry and how to leverage that construction contracting apart from the work on the ground. everything that flows indirectly and directly, how we have assurances in the pipeline and the community from there as well. >> i want to add to what josh is saying. we say we want 50%, which means the other 50% comes from out of town. once people are trained here in san francisco, what makes us think they work here and then go other parts of the bay area to work. so people have been trained here to work in other cities because

they're hardworking people and they take great pride in the work they do. we're setting up people for success. so that's exciting. >> commissioner rosales: and stay and work in san francisco. >> absolutely. 50% will push us. we see a report like this, and we'll go back and think about how to keep pushing. that's the flip side. you don't want to set a floor that's too low because then you achieved it and may lose a creative spark. the balance of everything is somethinger we're considering. >> chair mondejar: i have a couple of questions. finally, i get to ask my questions. sorry, too many active commissioners here. [laughter] i was looking at page 7, slide 7, professional services.

and -- i asked your question, mr. singh. >> commissioner singh: thank you. >> chair mondejar: it would be wonderful -- maybe it's here, but i couldn't find it. the list of professional services and who are the firms? i'm looking at the charts and i have in parentheses, professional consulting. for example, cahill contractors. they're a professional consulting firm? and i'm looking at the list that you gave us and it has like, the project, mission bay south. i forgot what this is. attachment a, block 1. mission bay, west. professional consulting. and the contractor is cahill contractors. are they considered professional

servic services? >> no. it's the general for the project. excuse the reference in that respect. the summary sheets provided to you when it lists the contractor, it's building the site. >> chair mondejar: who is the professional services, for example, in this line? it doesn't say. >> it doesn't give you that specific detail. every six months we've gone before the commission, we've provided the details. i believe there's a separate attachment that you have that lists the firms. >> chair mondejar: it would be interesting to find out who are the professional services organization that are meeting, basically, this high total of 61.1%. i was looking for that. >> sure. it's a lot of firms. a lot of different firms. the architects, structural engineers. and that's approximately how

many firms? >> chair mondejar: is it over 100? >> 2,400 firms in the database that's done work for ocii. >> chair mondejar: for these numbers for -- from january to june 30 that brought up this total to 61%, i want to get a number and get a sense of how many professional service firms are we actually giving business to, which is about $252 million. >> for the past six months, there's a commission attachment. eyeballing it, i would say there's a least 30 firms. >> what is the attachment? the file? >> there should be a separate attachment provided called "commission attachment."

and the title of the report is "semiannual ocii-s.b.e. dollars by project detail." it's commission attachment. >> oh. >> chair mondejar: oh, that one. okay. thank you for pointing that out. i was looking for it. so it's about 30 firms that receive this -- much was the number, $256 million, in the last six months. is that correct? >> yes. correct. estimating. >> chair mondejar: that's good to know. and then i go to slide 9, where you have a breakdown offa ethnicity. these are men and women and

latino and -- >> correct. >> chair mondejar: at the bottom, you have non-minority female and non-minority male. is there minority female and minority male? or is it because they're into the -- broken down according to ethnicity? >> they're embedded in the ethnicity category. when we say asian-american, that's both male and female. >> chair mondejar: can we break that down to nonminority female and male, in the next round? >> yes, sure. >> chair mondejar: so we can look at gender equality here and both on minority and nonminority groups. that would be helpful to learn so we're spreading the business,

the wealth, among constituents in san francisco. so would you say a lot of the firms are san francisco-based, especially the professional services? the average is 22.5 million. >> correct. for professional services, we average 70 plus percent of san francisco-based firms. that's a different story with construction, of course. construction, i think we average about 40%, plus or minus. >> chair mondejar: thank you. this is very good. thank you for the presentation. it gets richer every time we receive your report and thank you for listening to us and giving us more data, because it helps us when we do our own outreach and we're out there to be able to see that we are supporting san francisco residents, san francisco firms. and our local hires hopefully

will increase soon. thank you. any other comments or questions? this is for discussion. it's not for a vote, right? so thank you, again, to your team for putting these numbers -- okay. let's go to, madam secretary. call the next item. >> clerk: the next order of business is item 6, public comment on nonagenda items. madam chair, we have one speaker. oscar james. >> chair mondejar: is he still here? oh, there he is. >> oscar james again. i'm tickled pink, pickled tink.

i've been dealing with redevelopment agencies since 1967. when we first started coming to the commissioners, trying to fight and do things for the community. at that time, the commission didn't look nothing like you guys. so to me, it's a blessing to have each and every one of you here serving, okay? go back to when mayor shelley was mayor. that's how long i've been dealing with the redevelopment agency. i got a job with the redevelopment agency, where i could be a real inside watchdog, watching the agencies to make sure that they did what they were supposed to have done. the senior on this commission is commissioner singh. i saw him when he first came here. but with so many commissioners who have came of different