for more than 30 seconds, which is the low end of what it takes to board. so captures the big incidents, but it also captures the day-to-day congestion. for example, customers that are stuck between forest hill and west portal, trying to exit the subway. we set a goal here to reduce delay by 10%. we did meet that goal. we met it primarily by focusing on our transition points. for example, by putting parking control officers at west portal and being more proactive about how we are prioritizing trains getting out of the subway. we saw an immediate reduction in the amount of time people were spending between -- stuck between stations. embarcadero is another place

where we the faster we can turn trains around and get operators in this seat, the less time people are going to spend stuck between montgomery and embarcadero. there's a lot of very small things that work together to create excellent service, and that's what we are focused on. we also, on the breda, we focused on the couplers because we are experiencing too many breda breakdowns in the subway and on the rail system, were generally, while if you look at it discreetly, it looked like a door issue or compulsion -ish -- propulsion issue, when we dug deeper is we are finding that we had to do with a train line issue. how the two trains were connecting up electronically, so we went through a series of inspections and enhancements to our coupler adjustments as part of the 90 day initiative.

and then the last place that we focused on was preventing collisions. here we worked across the agency , in particular with our partners and the safety division to look at several areas. the first thing we looked at was sideswipe his, sideswipe so one of our largest causes of collisions. we are a congested city, these are big vehicles, and we implemented a host of improvements, including making the back of the bus is more visible to drivers, working with operators so that they were less inclined to have their tail end sticking out into the lane, as well as working on some overall education on pieces. the second area of safety that we worked on related to our operators safety.

prior to this 90 day plan, we had protected shields on our buses, which is a plexiglass door that our operators have available to them to prevent things like spinning. so there were other horrible things that our operators face on a daily basis. we had about 85 vehicles he didn't have a backdoor. that particular design did not include it. we retrofitted those vehicles so we now have 100% of those shields available for operators wish to have that protection. >> i just had a few questions about the preventable provisions it looks like we have been consistently below the goal of 68 preventable collisions, so that is good news. i was just wondering if there was thought about setting a more aggressive goal or a lower goal.

>> i think that is absolutely the right direction that we want to go. all of these are intended to be incremental towards an ultimate goal, so we are in the process right now, internally, of looking at this last 90 day plan , what worked, what didn't, a lot of things got completed, not everything got completed. in addition to looking at what that is, we also want to look at the metrics themselves. >> thank you. as a city we said vision zero was a policy framework because we determined that no net -- no number of preventable casualties was acceptable or should be considered part of a goal. i was just wondering how with 68 preventable collisions set as a goal, and if these collisions are preventable, shouldn't the goal be zero?

>> i am very proud of the fact that over the last year, we did have zero fatalities on our light rail system, certainly our goal in looking at any of these metrics is for fatalities and major collisions to drive as close to zero as we can get them getting to an overall zero four things like sideswipe his and rear ends and some of those other issues, i think is a big challenge and something that we just have to start chipping away with those bite-size pieces. we do know that where we make investments in transit priority that our safety record also improves.

on mission street, for example, we went from having two and four collisions oh, week -- collisions a week, now less than five month. until we can really address the environment and the narrow lanes of the challenges we will face in the system, i think it is more prudent to take an incremental approach, but always driving the major collisions and fatalities 20. >> thank you. >> before i wrap up, i also wanted to talk about some work that we did at the tail end of this 90 day plan, but i think it speaks to the overall need for improved performance, which is

related to switchbacks. we do switchbacks whenever we have an incident where we have several trains, all bunched together, and then no trains in another part of the system. as you can see in this graphic, it is a very simple graphic here , and we have all three trains on the bottom portion of the track, and by switching back the train in the middle, we are able to get much more even and optimal spacing. when we do switchbacks, we do do them to minimize wait times and gaps that we have and in other parts of the systems. we also do them, in some instances, because a portion of the track is blocked. that is something that we are not going to be able to avoid. if there is a breakdown or a non

meaning collision, or a passenger incident that is somehow got a train stopped on a track, we have to turn the trains back, and then we cover that remaining piece of the line with buses. we do have control over whether or not we use switchbacks as a tool to reduce wait times. i do believe that if done correctly with a train close behind and good customer information, they can be a valuable tool. we intend to use them particularly in the middle of the day so that any kind of service disruptions or gaps that came up during the morning don't become worse and worse as the day goes on. we pick the middle of the day for his -- as an opportunity to reset. that being said, we do know that for folks who are on the end of our lines, we feel these switchbacks the most acutely,

which is why we are experimenting with as many tools as possible to reduce them. most boldly, we started an initiative on april 6th, which builds on our main equity strategy and concerns we are hearing out of the bayview that essentially stops switchbacks on third street. we are using other techniques like having a gap train that can be slotted in to fill in some of these gaps as tools, and we are watching closely to make sure that while we do this, the rest of the system benefits and we are not just sending all of our problems to another part of the system. we have been tracking this very closely. we have successfully ended switchbacks. i think we had one nonmechanical switchback which was related to an operator hitting their

maximum 12 hour shift, but for the most part, we have been able to achieve this. we have also seen gaps in other lines remained relatively flat, and we haven't seen an increase in overall switchbacks. i think that is, in part because we are watching this issue more broadly, but also because we implemented new schedules at the beginning of april that recognize that our overall service has slowed down because of congestion and other factors. so having a more realistic schedule to start the day with also can minimize the need for switchbacks. this graph here shows our recent switchback history. the katie that is shown in april is essentially just a k. line. it is this line at embarcadero. there is actually nine points

along the k. line that can switchback, but we are making, in some cases, a decision that there is a big gap on ocean avenue. it is a train that is supposed to go all the way to the tee line that comes through, then we will switch it back at embarcadero, but we are head signing it as a k. rather then as 18, so customers don't have the expectation that it is the k. line. the february and march switchbacks are lower just because we had less service overall, we had no tee line service during those months, and a more typical month would be if you look at the fall versus what we are achieving today. >> i ask a few questions? >> it looks like, just looking at the line, there was quite a variation in the number of switchbacks, pretty high in

december and january, actually, prior to february, but then it went down significantly and then it went back up in april. what was the reason for that again? >> there was no tee line service at all in march and april because of the platform construction, sorry, in february and march. >> and then for -- first of all, i want to commend your commitment to ending switchbacks on the tee line, and i also support the munimobile equity strategy. i understand why the tee line should be prioritized as a historically underserved line, and i also think we should have a conversation about a munimobile efficacy strategy about prioritizing changes that will have the most impact for the most writers. it is my understanding that the

judo line has the highest ridership in the system. >> yes. >> in february and march, it also experienced the most switchbacks, and absent of the tee line, it looks like the end line also experienced the most switchbacks of any line in october and november and december, so are you able to commit to any switchbacks on the line considering, yes, it is the most heavily leaked used line? >> i think i am we are going to learn a lot about the tee line. i would like to understand that before i enter into that type of commitment. because the and judah has the double challenge of being our heaviest ridership line, but also has an incredible amount of it that is mixed traffic, i think that the customer impacts

of ending switchbacks is not managed -- if not managed very closely, could be acute. >> can we set a goal for switchback reduction to include in the next 90 day action plan connected to include both a reduction in the number of switchbacks per line and also looking at setting a goal for the next train arrival time when switchbacks are ordered? >> we would be happy to look at both of those. >> before you keep going, just to reemphasize that point, thank you, that is a line that impacts our district -- district considerably. i know you have given us a lot of information today, but it sounds like to me, correct me if i am wrong, one of the biggest problems with the switchback is

that you are adjusting for shortcomings in other parts of the system, so you have to adjust those cars and send them over to areas where there are other shortfalls. it's not just a matter of cars stacking up. >> for example, it is very easy once the trains start to get bunched for them to get very bunch because the front train is picking up a lot more customers than it was supposed to because it is covering a 15 minute gap in services instead of a ten minute gap in service, and the train behind it actually become much more quicker because they are not picking up very many people because the front train is doing all the work. you could have a situation on the judah where travelling towards the beach, you have two, three, at the very worst case scenario, four trains that are always in a short period of each other. and you have customers waiting to go inbound heading towards downtown that are experiencing

extremely long gaps in service because there is no training available, so that is what i'm trying to describe, is not that there are switchbacks on the judah and we are sending the train to the l line, it is really typically contained within a single route. >> i guess what i'm trying to say is if you had enough operation, you had enough cars, would you be doing switchbacks? >> on the real system, we are delivering almost all of the schedule every day. we are still experiencing these issues because of other factors, delays, congestion, a passenger incident, anything that creates a momentary delay or even a five to ten minute delay can create the situations. for example, this morning, we had an intruder in the subway. once we have an intruder in the

subway, we immediately take the train out of automatic and we drive very slowly until we find who is in the subway to bring them up safely but that creates a bunch -- >> i understand, that sounds like more of an emergency. i guess what i'm trying to say is is this a practice that is used in other major hands has rotation systems? >> it is. >> and on the level that we use it? it seems like we abuse it. i have to say, of travel to new york, boston, other places, i never remember ever experiencing the level of switchbacks that happen here in our system. so i think something else is going on. that is what i'm trying to get to the bottom of. that is why i ask you this specific question that if you had enough car trains and you had enough operators, it sounds like you would probably still do this in limited situations, but

it seems like we abuse it in our system here. so the riser -- the writers are the ones left holding back because they can't get to go where they are going. why are the operators then -- if the example that you gave other than emergency was that some of the cars get too full, why aren't they limiting and moving it on in the system quicker to allow for the cars behind -- it seems like it is not as much of a coordinated system as it should be. that is what i think the frustration it is. you letting people on, and a few stops later, you have to get off and there's no information of when the next car his coming. i understand having to adjust gaps in the system, but it seems like we are overusing this process and then i hear an announcement two weeks ago that you are stopping it on one of

the rail lines altogether. how is it that you are able to stop one rail line altogether, what you are not able to do it in another case? that doesn't make sense for the average person because the headline is -- which is great for the bayview hunter's point, but everything you just said does not make sense if you say we can stop it in one area of the system, unless that is not coordinated in to the entire overall system. how are you able to do that? >> what we have been -- just to answer the first part of your question, well i don't know how often other places are using it, i do know that our real system is unique in that it has a small subway section with a lot of trains, and a surface system that is in traffic and in all the delays. >> a minimized i minimized amount -- >> system maybe new york or

boston where everything is in a protective right away, and even our own bart system where things are not competing with pedestrians, bikes, the day-to-day traffic. i think maybe it is not prone to the bunching. that is not to make an excuse because we do want to be using this tool less. switchbacks are a symptom, they are a symptom that the service is not as predictable and reliable as it needs to be, so part of how we are addressing it on third street as we are really trying to fix problems before they happen, tried to have a gap train which we can use and if we see a big gap forming, it has a slot in a train. we are unique -- learning things on the experience that will apply to other systems, other routes. it is extremely labour-intensive , it is not something that has been easy to even just tread water in terms of how we manage gaps on third

street. we are, we are tracking it very closely and we are seeing fluctuations. for example, we are seeing gaps on baseball days, we are reshaping how we deliver the baseball service and sending more of our baseball shuttles to do runs all the way down to the bayview, to acknowledge that congestion and related delays that are impacting the whole line. >> do you have statistical models that look at where your trains are, where the volume of traffic is, what you just described, are you using statistical modelling, or is it just human observation? >> we have a little bit of both, to answer your question, but we don't have simulation models of the surface routes. >> isn't it a completely computerized system. >> no, it is only under automatic control of the subway,

and that is only when -- >> i don't mean computer operation, i mean, is in the entire system monitored with technology to understand where the cars are, how frequently they are getting there, when they arrive, when they depart. >> yes. >> that's what i mean. if you have all of that, you should be able to use statistical modelling to look at the numbers. it looks like what you just described as we are looking at game day. are you using statistics to do that? i guess i am trying to understand. >> we are. in fact, our most schedule recent enhancements were based on the data you are describing. >> okay. >> i just had a few more questions about the switchbacks, and maybe connecting it to the service goal and interaction, the 90 day action plan. do you feel like -- what is it,

1,0001800 switchbacks per month is an acceptable number from the perspective of switchbacks as a service management tool? specially given you have set a say goal for the line to be enclosure with in closure with zero, and then, also, obviously from a writer perspective, that is an acceptable number. i was just curious whether you feel like the 1,000 to 1800 number of switchbacks per month is just something that is acceptable from a management perspective. >> what i am focused on is the trajectory. while i would like to see us get lower than 1200, i am also pleased that it is a significant improvement over the 16 talk to 1800 that we were seeing this fall.

>> and what about the different metric around switchbacks on which the writer has to wait, after just getting off the train , until the next train comes. do we have any data on that? like for the existing switchback , what the transit has been around that, and do you think it will be good to consider a goal to reduce the wait time for the next train? >> i think it is an interesting goal. i would want to go back and get with our data folks to make sure it is something that we can easily extract from the data. we do have a policy that we are not going to switchback a train unless there is another training within five minutes, -- unless there is another train in five minutes, and i would like to watch as closely to ensure we are tracking. i have one more slide. do you want me to wrap it up?

so we do have this competing need within the transit division and at sfmta. first and foremost, we need to get the service out every day. and we are only as good as our community. we have to keep the lights on. we also need to make sure that we are working on big, visionary things. we are looking at things like moving forward projects, light -- like light real we forward projects, and we have a three talked of five, and even a 20 year plan. but kind of in between those two day-to-day service and these bigger visionary initiatives, we also need the folks that are managing the transit service to

be able to get their arms around these big problems and start to chip away and make incremental progress. we're going to continue to use this plan framework. i anticipate we will probably about three a year. we want to make sure that we have time in between to digest, to really look at the metric and talk to folks like yourself and our board to make sure that we are tracking the right direction our preliminary actions that we have been brainstorming are to continue and maybe elevate the safety element to look at service reliability more holistically, and i think some of our discussions on switchbacks is into that category. to maintain the pressure of public performance, as well as to call out specifically the need to tackle the issues in front of us, and nearly get to a

point where everyone can stand up here and say this is going to be a great train for san francisco because while i truly believe that, i still think we have some homework to do their. so, you know, in conclusion, while no system is perfect, and i don't think that is a reasonable goal, we do want to do better, and we do want to provide great service, we do want to internally, and externally provide an atmosphere where people are comfortable asking questions, doing problem-solving, there's really great ideas that can come from a lot of different places, and we are very -- i'm very open to that approach. this is the approach that i am sharing more broadly. i appreciate this conversation

today. i am open to any other questions or comments you have. >> thank you so much. i do have one other question in the different metrics that you presented for the 90 day goals and action plan. i think there is one that i feel is very much missing, and it connects to the writer experience, and trying to think about our goals and/or metrics and our perspectives from the writer, and one of the most serial experiences for any passengers is the travel time and how long it takes them to get where they need to go, and i know this is reported on for the subway only, but is it something we can track outside of the subway as well? for instance, the coverage and two and travel time for a particular line?

>> it absolutely is. it is something we track internally, but definitely according to the plan. we also -- it is a little harder to communicate to a layperson, but we also look at the travel time variability as the same metric of, well, good, but on an average day it may take me ten minutes, but on the fifth day it takes me 20. but maybe it takes me 20 every day because that is how i am planning this trip. we can definitely look at both of those. >> that is great. just to bring it back to my constituents and my district, if the trains are evenly spaced and there is a preventable collision but it still takes a passenger over one hour to get from the outer sunset to their job downtown, which, by the way, is

very common from my experience as a commuter, and also i hear it constantly from constituents, you know, this is a very important service. i feel like there's a metric and setting our goals and improving our service with reducing travel time. it is my question would be that can we track this in the next 90 days period with a goal set for reduction and travel time and drink peak commute hours? >> let me take it back and look at it. i think what gives me pause on the goalsetting as some of the things that really have the biggest impact on travel time or not. for example, we are going to see significant improvement in travel time with with the taradale project.

we have already seen incremental improvements from some of the quick fixes. i think i will have to digest that a little bit to see what we can hope to move the needle on in terms of the next 90 days versus maybe a year-over-year. >> thank you. thank you. i think there's been some folks here from the community waiting patiently to speak. i think they are switching just to apologize for the folks who have been waiting. we have been switching off because he had to run out. i would have called you up earlier, so i apologize you waiting for this long. if there are any members of the public would wish to comment on this item, please come forward. each speaker will have two minutes. you can just slide up and begin speaking one at a time. >> hi, my name is christopher

peterson. i live in district seven, i believe. two points, firstly, i am a little bit surprised by the focus on switchbacks. i definitely have experienced them. when i experience them, they can be frustrating. but it is a much more common experience for me and that is long service gaps. it is common to have 30, 40, 50 minute service gaps, and if a switchback that is going to get off the train -- if there is actually one coming along in a few minutes, i would rather have that then a 45 minute wait for a train. i hope too much of an emphasis isn't put on switchbacks. it is simply a system of other larger problems. the other comment is more of a big picture comment.

the city under the charter, under the general plan, the transit first city, recently the board of supervisors adopted an emergency declaration regarding the kind of -- this kind of crisis, that i do not get the sense that city agencies as a whole view transportation issues through that prism. many, many projects also involve interaction, cooperation with other city agencies. i encourage all of you to consider what can we do to get other agencies to work more efficiently in the community to improve munimobile service. and also, does politics are huge issue. very often projects can improve munimobile and they are controversial. they get watered down. it seems like -- there was a pilot project in west portal portal to reduce waste. yes, we have to look at the problems within m.t.a. as an agency, but we also have to look at it the other way.

>> thank you. speaker. >> eileen, here on my own behalf although one quarter of the m.p. operating budget is general fund set aside money, taxpayer money, our money, the policies and practices do not appear to reflect this. residents and neighborhoods serving businesses do not see a meaningful return on their investment. in a recent article, it was written that munimobile's problems are real and persistent it needs massive funding, and it needs workable administrative structure, which puts it at the center of the department. we should look at a series of revenue measures such as congestion pricing charging, tee and c., and a special fee for entering the transit business district. we need to dramatically increase

transit fees on our new market rate housing, and commercial to this study levels. we need to create a new gross receipts tax on transit dependent existing businesses downtown, and in the south of market. and then we need to appeal the 1999 property and replace it with a munimobile department that puts transit operators at the very center of the activity that increases driver pay and training, recruiting in san francisco high schools, transport workers union his proposed in 2018, and building a workforce that lives here and cares about the city. thank you. >> my name is john and resident of the forgotten some, known as the outer sunset. in 1965, we published a shocking -- a public -- a shocking book was published. an investigation into the safety of the american auto industry.

it was called unsafe at any speed. it was groundbreaking resources, noting that the american automobile industry has systematically failed to recognize the need for a safety and environmental improvements in their cars. similarly, if ralph nader were to analyse the safety of the design situation, specifically through the light rail line, they would also publish a book telling 109 year of failure to recognize a fundamental area, which is a disgrace to this city the actual stations themselves are a danger to all of the public in my area. i cannot be more emphatic getting on and off the light rail system on 31st and judah is a micro- example, my young c.f.o. wife was nearly killed twice getting off the train

because there is no station. the stops are not equal to each other. look at soma. let just look at the new chinatown. look at this recently rang new -- >> do not direct to the audience >> those stations are elevated, well lit, they have transit ramps on both sides, on brandon and embarcadero, there is actual poetry to leave read. there is places to sit south of market. why is there an issue of station and equality on my street corner -- on my street corner, you can park a donkey -- >> please wrap up your comments.

thank you. any other members of the public wish to comment on this item, please come forward. >> my name is willard duffy, i am a longtime resident of the outer zone, the forgotten zone. hundred years ago, a century ago , the outer sunset was -- i currently live in the tenderloin area. we do have a much higher incident of pedestrian fatalities, and i believe there was three this time last year. it is an artifact of the fact of the population is much greater. if you equalize for population, you have is equal of a chance to have a pedestrian accident anywhere in the city, including the sunset.

some years ago, there was an uncontrolled intersection behind where i live, and bill hickey, a famous surfer got hit by a car, but you don't know if -- the city came at three weeks later and put out a stop sign. it is a work in progress. >> thank you. any other members of the public wish to comment on this item? public comment is closed. supervisor mark we. >> thank you. first i want to acknowledge the progress that has been made in reaching a point where we could hold this meeting today. sfmta his holding a 90 day action plan, and it is a big step forward. for this to be meaningful, the goals we set and how we measure them must always be grounded in the experience of passengers. sometimes it requires setting new goals, rethinking the ones you have and having

uncomfortable but necessary conversations. i called for this hearing because of my deep belief in oversight and holding public services accountable to the public. too many things that have happened under sfmta's jurisdiction, on at issues with the l.r.p., to the subway shut down, to chronic operator shortage, are absolutely unacceptable. we are all aware of these problems. our focus must be on solutions. as legislators, our tools are impacting transit operations are limited to, but i will continue to push munimobile forward whenever i can. director kirschbaum, thank you for your time and your insight, and thank you to my colleagues on the committee, thank you for the members of the public who share your really good perspectives on these important issues as well, and chair, i wanted to make a couple motions to close the hearing. with the expectation that

switchbacks may be included in future munimobile service and performance reports, i would like to request a motion to file number 3, the hearing on switchbacks. secondly, i would like to request a motion to continue item four to the call of the chair so we can report back again on the results after the next 90 day period has ended. >> i think that is within order. we can work with your office along with mda to determine the appropriate time and have a follow-up meeting, and it would be on the same topic that has already been filed. i'm happy to support that. i think we can do that without objection. without objection, this passes. madame clerk, that brings us to the end of the meeting. motion to adjourn. >> yes. >> yes, thank you.

>> i went through a lot of struggles in my life, and i am blessed to be part of this. i am familiar with what people are going through to relate and empathy and compassion to their struggle so they can see i came out of the struggle, it gives them hope to come up and do something positive. ♪ ♪ i am a community ambassador.

we work a lot with homeless, visitors, a lot of people in the area. >> what i like doing is posting up at hotspots to let people see visibility. they ask you questions, ask you directions, they might have a question about what services are available. checking in, you guys. >> wellness check. we walk by to see any individual, you know may be sitting on the sidewalk, we make sure they are okay, alive. you never know. somebody might walk by and they are laying there for hours. you never know if they are

alive. we let them know we are in the area and we are here to promote safety, and if they have somebody that is, you know, hanging around that they don't want to call the police on, they don't have to call the police. they can call us. we can direct them to the services they might need. >> we do the three one one to keep the city neighborhoods clean. there are people dumping, waste on the ground and needles on the ground. it is unsafe for children and adults to commute through the streets. when we see them we take a picture dispatch to 311. they give us a tracking number and they come later on to pick it up. we take pride. when we come back later in the day and we see the loose trash or debris is picked up it makes you feel good about what you are doing.

>> it makes you feel did about escorting kids and having them feel safe walking to the play area and back. the stuff we do as ambassadors makes us feel proud to help keep the city clean, helping the residents. >> you can see the community ambassadors. i used to be on the streets. i didn't think i could become a community ambassador. it was too far out there for me to grab, you know. doing this job makes me feel good. because i came from where a lot of them are, homeless and on the street, i feel like i can give them hope because i was once there. i am not afraid to tell them i used to be here. i used to be like this, you know. i have compassion for people

that are on the streets like the homeless and people that are caught up with their addiction because now, i feel like i can give them hope. it reminds you every day of where i used to be and where i where i used to be and where i [gavel] >> chair fewer: good morning everyone. the meet willing come to order. this is may 1, 2019 regular meeting of the budget and finance committee. i'm sandra lee fewer. i'm joined by supervisor walton and raphael mandelman.

clerk, do you have any announcements. [announcements] >> chair fewer: thank you very much. colleagues may i have a motion to excuse supervisor stefani from this meeting? without objection, thank you very much. please call item number one. [agenda item read] >> chair fewer: thank you very much. we have the director of d.p.h.

business office. >> we're here for this contract. this is a check-writing contract for the purpose of purchasing items that fall into categories which aren't feasible. set up contracts or issue timely reimbursements for items that are client need. approximately around 12 to 15 million payments annualing and over the past five years about 50,000 of that total is for the cost of the check fees. hr360 vendor received $22 per check. it's quite a small portion of the amount we're paying for. of the funding category bucket, the main bucket is for residential care facilities it's about $11 million annually. what that pays for is a patch woman who live in the

residential board and care hom homes. we pay about 500 patches per month to about 58 separate operators. that average patch or the base patch we thought specialty is $22 per day. i like to come in main type -- it wouldn't work for licensed operators to enter intoth contract. the monitoring for this contract is of the vendor. what we monitor annually have vendor do with timely payment, correct reporting, charges the correct accounts. the items that are in here aren't programmed. they are not monitored separately. they are part of wherever they fall. like the residential care facilities is part of our unit,

which is called transitions which goes out and checks on the well being of the clients that are living there. that's how that's monitored. then those are licensed facilities. we're getting ready to start the solicitation for this. we finished all our other behavioral health solicitation. we hope to get it in place no later than next july. we have 18-month extension request just in case. just in case hr360 isn't the selected vendor. it's very insurance if there's no gap. otherwise, we're in agreement with the budget legislative analyst report. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. colleagues any questions or

comments? seeing none. could we please have report from the b.l.a.? >> good morning. yes, the board asked to approve the fourth amendment for check writing services by health right 360s. original contract was entered in 2009 with asian-american recovery services which merged into health right 360. this could extend the contract 18 months. the board did approved it through june 2019. our understanding is to allow for solicitation of a new vendor for the services. the contract amount over the 18-month extension period including a contingency is approximately $27 million. we consider that to be reasonable. there was just a difference

between what the legislation says in terms of the contract increase and the actual increase that's needed under this legislation. >> chair fewer: are there any members of the public that like to comment. seeing none, public comment is closed. i like to make a motion to accept the amendment from the b.l.a. and if we can take that without objection. thank you. i move this with a positive recommendation amended to the full board. thank you very much. please call item 2. [agenda item read]

>> chair fewer: thank you very much. >> good morning. i'm with the san francisco international airport. the item before you seeks your approval to award a new contract to bombardier transportation for the operation and maintenance of the airtrain system. the contract has original term of 10 years beginning july 1, 2019. the airport agrees with the budget analyst recommendation before you to amend the legislation to return to the board of supervisors if the airport exercises the option to extend the contract term for an additional five years. the contract has not exceed amount $219,541,698. the contract includes several capital asset replacement program tasks but will include customer satisfaction and airtrain reliability. it will replace vital components

on each airtrain vehicle which will extend the operating life of the system. bombardier installed the current airtrain system and has provided the services to operate and maintain the airtrain since its opening in march of 2003. bombardier has met all obligations and maintained system availability rating above 99.6%. airtrain is a proprietary system operated by bombardier equipment. the office of contract administration waived the solicitation requirement for this contract under the administrative code. the original contract was the result of a competitive request for proposal process. in order to ensure that the airport was negotiated competitive and fair price for this new contract, a staff engaged a third party to review comparative costs for the annual operation of similar systems throughout the united states including systems operating at

atlanta airport as well as denver and dallas fort worth. the review indicated that compared to these other contracts at similar airports, the current contract will have an annual saving of around $1.2 million. the pricing for this contract has been negotiated through the original 10-year term as well as the 5-year extension if that is exercised. the budget analyst has reviewed and approved made the recommendation that we return to you if we exercised the additional 5-year option which we agree to. i would be happen to answer questions. >> chair fewer: any questions. let's hear from the budget analyst please. >> the board of supervisors ask to approve new contract with bombardier for airtrain operation and maintenance. this is a soul source contract because of the proprietary

nature of the airtrain. there was a third party assessment by the engineering reasonableness of the cost of the contract. we showed the contract budget for the first 10 years on page 9 fable 1 of our report. it's $200 million for the base contract. there are annual increases in each year of about 3%. there's also a capital project component on page 10, table 2 which is about $18 million in capital improvements to the contract. we recommend an amend to clarify that the 5-year extension will be subject to board of supervisors approval. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. are there members of the public it like to comment on item number 2? seeing none, public comment is closed. i like to approve the amendment from the b.l.a. if we can take that without objection. move to full board as amended.

thank you very much. item 3 please. [agenda item read] >> chair fewer: thank you very much. >> thank you chair and. i'm with the airport. the item before you seeks your approval for an amendment to an existing special city store lease with air sun joint venture in terminal three. the proposed amendment will extend the term approximately one year and eight months through december of 2020 to accommodate construction projects. the airport can terminate the lease early with the 6-months notice if in is necessary.

the original lease was result of a 2009 competitive request for proposal process and was approved by the board of supervisors. the current rent associated with the lease is either the greater of a current $194,000 minimum annual guarantee or percentage rent formula with the mag adjusted annually based on the c.p.i. the tent nantes is paying on the mag rent. the b.l.a. recommended approval of the modification. >> chair fewer: any comments or questions? seeing none. let's hear from the b.l.a. >> this is a concession lease in terminal three at the airport. board is asked to approve for extend it for 18 months which would put it beyond the 10 years

of the original agreement in the r.f.p. understanding is the extension is because of construction in the terminal. there will be new solicitation process prior to the terminate nation of the lease. -- termination of the lease. we showed the minimum guaranteed rent to be paid under this lease in table 1 of the report and we recommend approval. >> supervisor safai: any members of the public like to comment on item number three? public comment is closed. you like to make a motion to move to the full board with positive recommendation. thank you very much. please call item 4 and 5 together. [agenda item read]