>> i'm going to take the consideration of affordable housing out of the mayor's office of affordable housing's hands. it needs to be in the hands of a federal judge. you violate the law, due prosper taining to equal application of the law pertaining to the homeless people out on the -- due process, pertaining to equal application of the law pertaining to homeless people out on the street. you can price gouge and price fix and let that 30% of affordable let it be for people in high income brackets.

40% at 45 to 50% of a.m.i. you do not use the [s thbrackets on the a.m.i. back on me, camera man. jane kim price fixed and price gouged. 40% of that apartment complex is supposed to be affordable housing, and only 2% is accepted to apply at an income of about 45,0$45,000 to $50,00. you've got inclusionary law where people in the low-income is supposed to be drunkinclude the housing opportunity, but yet, when you do the documentation, you do not include them.

>> supervisor walton: thank you, mr. wright. is there any other public comment on item number seven? seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor mar, did you have any questions or statements? thank you. with that said, i will make a motion to refer to the board of supervisors with positive recommendation. we'll take that without objection. at this time, we would like to -- i'd like to make a motion to recess until 11:15. going to give our nominee for item number four an opportunity to get here by 11:15. . >> supervisor walton: back in session. thank you so much. mr. clerk, would you please call item number four. >> clerk: item number four is the motion approving-rejecting the mayor's nomination for ruby

bolaria-shifrin for a term ending february 26, 2022. >> supervisor walton: thank you so much. miss bolaria-shifrin, you have the floor. >> you know, when you can't get rid of your maiden name. so my name is ruby bolaria-shifrin. i'm honored and humbled that the mayor has nominated me to be on the board. san francisco has been my home for most of my adult life. i started my career in the environmental movement in earth justice and after working with the obama campaign in '08 i bam

an event organizer working with water and food rights. i wanted to learn more and went to ucla to earn my master's in urban and regional planning. after graduating, i worked in real estate development in san francisco both in the office market and as a regional manager for fi5-point. my current role allows me to blend my mission driven roots and experience with my more technical housing knowledge. besides visiting island for my birthday, i went to treasure island to learn about its rich history including the emergence of san francisco as a force,

including the navy was fascinating. i learned about the climate impaction plan. i am familiar with the island, its conditions, and history. should i be appointed, my goals would include helping ensure treasure island development delivers on its promises so both current and future residents can enjoy the community. i'm committed to learning the desires of the current residents and make sure they're heard. we must think about the communities impacted with the development. it is my goal to promote transparency so that the outcomes are well understood. throughout my career, i have sought to promote equity and believe the built environment, housing in particular, are key to building thriving communities where everyone has access to opportunity. i believe my experience working with impacted communities,

development, and supporting policy change would be put to good use to supporting the public in this role. treasure island will become a destination for bay-area residents and tourists around the world. i would work with the board to building treasure island into a better place for our city. i thank you for your support. i also have some letters inform are your support -- letters for your support. >> supervisor walton: do you have any questions, supervisor mar? >> ye >> supervisor mar: i did have some questions -- well, just to say you're -- you're -- you're a really impressive candidate, and you bring a lot of -- of

great per spspectives and to t great work happening around the development. i was just wondering if you could elaborate a little bit more maybe on how you would approach working with the current residents to ensure their concerns and their voices are included, you know, as this important work moves forward. >> yeah, absolutely. one of the things i've been able to do is work with supervisor haney's office to identify some of the community leaders and activists on the island, so i've setup meetings with them to meet with them and hear more of what their concerns are, not only with the island "bohemian rhapsody" their engagement in the gorchsance and process? so one, just listening, they're the experts, they're the impacted community. they're the ones that should be proposing both the concerns and

their solutions. and i think that what i would like to do, some of the concerns that i have heard about are the residents post d.d.a. and what happens with them? the toll and congestion pricing, and the desperate impact it has on low-income folks. so i think both of those issues are solvable? but making sure that the current residents are -- have a seat at the table in coming up with those policy decisions i think will be critical, so that's something that i hope to bring. >> supervisor mar: thank you. and i think for this project and others that -- that are potentially contentious, and there's different interests, sometimes competing interests, i think building trust among the different stakeholders is really key, do you have any thoughts about how we can continue to foster and built more trustine tida and the

residents and the businesses? >> yeah, in my current job, i would say that 90% of my job is building trust, so i think that this would be a very similar situation and a similar use of my skills in that way in engaging with folks especially one-on-one and on us the realm of -- and outside the realm of a courtroom, having more of informal conversations. and proof is in the pudding, right? so i think step one, listening, talking, engaging, bringing those concerns up within the tida board but also acting on that, right? talk is cheap, and so it'll be really important that the board is able to take action that

reflects the concerns of the community. >> supervisor mar: great. thank you, and just maybe one more specific question as an example. what are your thoughts on the proposed tolls. >> so congestion pricing is not new. it exists in london, singapore. so i think there is a model -- and by the way, there are exemptions for low-income folks. so there are model that we can look to to try to find the most equitiable solutions here? so i think there needs to be some carve outs, but what that looks like -- the devil is in the details? but i think that is a conversation that needs to be on the table. >> supervisor walton: so you mentioned a little bit on -- talking about what concerns residents have for their rights

post-d.d.a. what kinds of ideas are you thinking about working with the residents on so that they can keep their rights? >> yeah, absolutely. so the d.d.a. was signed almost ten years ago, right? so, like, this is not something where you sign the d.d.a. and then, a year later, right? this is now something where you've had folks living in the community for a while, so we need to be looking at something that include them in an equitiable way but don't threaten their housing. in another job, we had folks eligible for considerable upgrades, and folks were moving in not considered under that same agreement.

so we had to work -- there was the government side, and an n.g.o. that we were working it, so we worked together to find a solution to incorporate these residents and what that would look like. and what that was based on was community participation and engagement. so i think one thing to figure out is what that looks like for folks in the community and then figure out what's possible. >> supervisor walton: how would you work with the residents to make sure that the site is clean, there aren't any radiological hazards, health issues. how would you make sure we do the right thing in that area? >> absolutely. so one of the main things -- and this is where i think communication and transparency is key. a lot of times, folks say trust me or do it in a way that

doesn't resonate. step one is understanding and then tida could be involved in the communitien gamgment process to get community results and get community buy-in. so -- gaugement process to get community results and get community buy-in. this goes back to what supervisor mar was saying about building trust and building trust in the community. >> supervisor walton: there's always communication concerns particularly when we're talking

about development, and we know that there are populations of folks that english is not their first language. how are you going to ensure that information gets out to residents where english is not their first language? >> absolutely. i think we need to have demographics around the community and stuff so we know what we're dealing with in terms of how to communicate? because there's other things to deal with. and then, the second step is to work with -- i mean, i would probably hire a consulting firm, also, that can put together either consulting -- probably more appropriate would be, too, community groups that exist in the city? i think treasure island sometimes feels isolated, and there's a lot of amazing community groups that exist in san francisco that if given a

little community support would be happy to lend their services to treasure island, and so thinking about how we can share our resources in san francisco. >> supervisor walton: thank you. any other questions, supervisor mar? with that said, we will open this item up to public comment. if anyone would like to speak, you can lineup to my left, your right, and you have two minutes. >> i want you to pay real close attention. first of all, there's no concrete test results on that r radio active material at treasure island. i recommend you getting hired, but there's a recommendation to getting those samples tested. there's an example of a black man coming to the offices of jane kim to talk about the cancer that he was diagnosed

with, and jane kim slammed the door in his face. this complex on my right is a three-story apartment building apartment of 144 units, and the price is $56 million per 144 units. it's the best bargain in construction of apartment complex in the whole god damn city and county of san francisco. i'm upset that you're not taking advantage of my information. there's another apartment complex, as well. it's an 87-unit apartment complex. it's being built and sold for $57 million complex. three times nine is 29. th -- 27. that means you could build three complexes and use the same technique as this 87-unit

apartment complex and take chunks out of the homeless. we've got a rule that says 15% of all apartment building complexes are supposed to be for low-income and very low-income and you're not using it. that's why you've got -- >> supervisor walton: thank you, mr. wright. any other public comment? and please feel free to lineup over there if you plan to speak. >> hi. i'm katelyn fox. i'm a resident of san francisco's district ten? and i work with ruby, and she managed our housing portfolio which is within the justice and opportunity initiative. i believe ruby would be an excellent member of the treasure island development authority for three reasons.

first her passion for housing is undeniable. her career speaks to this issue, and seeing it from multiple points. she has helped craft a comprehensive nuanced strategy to develop housing in our region and in our state. she is able to push for very bold solutions for our housing. i've seen firsthand that ruby does this beautifully. third, she is committed to ensuring equity and addressing the consequences that may impact the most vulnerable residences. she makes sure that no one is left out of living in the city and benefiting from our region's growth. so i think that ruby would be an excellent addition to the committee and i fully support her recommendation to the

committee. thank you. >> supervisor walton: next speaker. >> hi. i'm anna lee gould. i've known ruby over a decade as well and her commitment not only to the members of san francisco but to the members of this most vulnerable community is something that's truly drawn me and others to her. i started working with her back in 2009, i believe, as a domestic violence crisis counselor for women's inc? she has continued to show her dedication to the women's rights issues. global fund for women is another project that she dedicates her time to that i've seen firsthand how effective she can be. she's clearly empathetic and

passional but above all, pragmatic which will serve her and the other community members well. so i strongly support the nomination, and i appreciate the time. >> my name isally jones. i'm a ten-year resident of san francisco. i'm here today to offer my personal recommendation for ruby bolaria-shifrin to the treasure island development authority. i've been lucky to know ruby over 20 years. we grew up in sacramento. ruby takes it upon herself to right the wrongs in the world and inspires those lucky enough to be around her to do the same. i know she would excel as a

board member because she represents everyone in treasure island. her determination and passion to make a difference, and her commitment to use housing as a tool to create opportunities in san francisco, across california, and as you heard internationally where she worked to approve housing settlements in johennesburg, south africa. i know she will take this position seriously and create a treasure island that is equitiable and offer opportunities to those who face the greatest barriers. i ask that you support mayor breed aways recommendation and appoint ruby to the treasure island development authority. thank you. >> supervisor walton: thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is j.d.baselco. ruby and i met seven years ago

at ucla. we took many of the same classes, including those focused on affordable housing development and planning. she was always speaking out for those who don't have a joyce. this stems from her own personal experiences and experience in personal justice. ruby is unwaivering in this, regardless of the situation she finds herself in both personally and professionally. she's not afraid to speak up and asks the hard questions when evaluating a situation which i think will make her especially value for this commission. lastly, ruby is an active member of all of her various communities that she finds herself in. for example, she initiated ucla

alumni association in the area. i have no doubt that ruby will bring a community oriented and technically sound perspective to this board, and i urge you to support her nomination. thank you. >> supervisor walton: thank you. do we have any other speakers on this item? >> hello. my name is lala hume, and i am here to support the nomination of ruby bolaria-shifrin to the treasure island development authority. i practice land use law, and clerked for federal judges including here and the northern district of california. i'm a graduate of u.c. berkeley

school of law. i'm a proud resident of the mission district in san francisco. i've known ruby almost two years in personal engagement as well as professional capacities. given my past experience and the contacts and interests i maintain in these areas, i've had the opportunity to learn about ruby's work in a professional context. she has a thoughtful approach to solving problems to ensure all voices with heard. in many situations she has proven herself to be the most engaged and impactful when she's helping others.

i support ruby's nomination to the treasure island development authority and i urge you to do the same. >> supervisor walton: thank you. is there any other public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you so much for coming in and step forward to want to serve in this role. the work on treasure island is really important. we have a lot of work to do to make sure that we do the right thing. i am working very hard to do some of the same things on the shipyard, so this role is not to be taken lightly. supervisor mar, do you have any comments? >> supervisor mar: yeah, would just echo your thanks, you know, to miss bolaria-shifrin's

willingness to step up to one of the most important roles in the city, and i thank you for the willingness that you expressed in working with the community to make sure that their voices are heard and their interests are considered in the work that's going to be moving forward on treasure island and also your commitment to ensuring equity, you know, in the new development. so i would like to make a motion to approve the mayor's nomination of ruby bolaria-shifrin to the full board of supervisors as a committee report. >> supervisor walton: i second that motion, and we will take that without objection. >> clerk: that matter will be

recommended as amended to the board meeting scheduled for tomorrow. >> supervisor walton: and mr. clerk, do we have anymore items? >> clerk: that completes the agenda for today. >> supervisor walton: thank you. seeing no more business, this meeting is adjourned. >> shop and dine in the 49 promotes local businesses, and challenges residents to do their

shopping within the 49 square miles of san francisco. by supporting local services in our neighborhood, we help san francisco remain unique, successful, and vibrant. so where will you shop and dine in the 49? >> i am the owner of this restaurant. we have been here in north beach over 100 years. [speaking foreign language] [♪] [speaking foreign language] [♪]

[speaking foreign language] [speaking foreign language] [♪]

[♪] [ gavel ]. >> good morning, everyone. the meeting will come to order. this is the july 24, 2019, regular meeting of the budget and finance committee. i am sandra lee fewer, i am joined by supervisor catherine stefani and supervisor mar who is sitting in today. our clerk is ms. linda wong. colleagues may i have a motion to excuse supervisor rafael mandelman. madam clerk, do you have any

announcements? >> clerk: yes, please silence all cellphones and electronic devices. anything to be included as part of the file should be submitted to the clerk. the items today will appear on the next agenda. >> commissioner fewer: thank you very much. can you please call item new brunswick 1. >> clerk: item no. 1 is the resolution retroactively approving an agreement between the city and county of san francisco and the san francisco bay area rapid transit district (bart) regarding administration of capital funding to fund half of the cost of the bart/muni market street entrance modernization project with proceeds from the sale of general obligation bonds, in an amount not to exceed $45,000,000 for an agreement term from february 1, 2018, through december 31, 2025. >> commissioner fewer: thank you very much. colleagues, last week we heard this item and continued it for more information. we heard from the bla last week. we may not need to hear the report again, but we are joined today by supervisor mar who was not here last week. supervisor mar, would you like

to hear from the bla? >> supervisor mar: i don't think that's necessary. i had a briefing from them already. >> commissioner fewer: thank you very much, supervisor mar. let's bring up leo levinson from the toa and of course our elected bart representative bevin dusty. >> thank you, chair fewer and committee members. i am the cfo for the san francisco mta and happy to be coming back here to supply more information on this item. just briefly, this is an item for the mta to share with bart the cost of installing 21 can y canopies over the shared bart and mta stations along market street. this is up to a $90 million project of which the mta would be agreeing to fund up to $45

million from general obligation bond funds. i'm very happy to have here carl holmes is the assistant general manager for bart and he's going to supply more details about this project. >> commissioner fewer: mr. levinson, you mentioned 21 canopies, but in your powerpoint it mentions 22. >> there are two installed as pilots that helped with the costing of the remainder. there is 19 further that would be in the base contract that would be approved here within the $90. then there are three others that could be an option under this. so the 22 would represent one more optional canopy, but this funding of $90 million would be for 21 canopies. >> commissioner fewer: for 21. >> as in the bla report. >> commissioner fewer: thank you very much. >> so carl. >> thank you, leo. thank you, supervisors, and

thank you for acknowledging our board president. my name is carl holmes, assistant general manager. i lead the design and construction for most of the capital projects for bart. first, i want to thank you for the partnership that we have with you and with sfnta. i also want to apologize for not having the right info last week. i believe there was a miscommunication, but we hope that we're bringing the right data today. we normally do present to our own boards when we ask for approval of funds, so we understand the questions. first off, before i introduce tim chan who is our group manager for stations planning, i will say that the main point of this i believe is the questions came with the questions of the cost. so i'll just start by saying -- and tim will get into it as well -- we believe, i believe,

it was the responsible thing to do with -- by having our engineer's estimate be modified based on the lessons that we learned in our pilot program that we have in san francisco at pal street station as well as the civic center station. this is our second pilot. so we had another pilot that we installed several years ago in 19th street in oakland. san francisco wanted a different design. so that's why we have this template that we're proposing. it is more costly than what we had in oakland, however, we think that even with 2019 dollars the cost for our 19th street canopy, it was around $2.3 million could be as high as $3 million. we have another canopy in downtown berkley using that same template. so we believe that was going to be the model.

however, we're willing to work with san francisco with public works, sfmta, and that's why we're moving forward with this canopy design. there has been a history of engagement and tim will speak to the details of that. we have a lot of information that's in these slides. there's six slides, including the cover, but i asked tim to just highlight some of the points and that way it allows for if there's questions, we would be happy to answer. i know supervisor fewer, you had a question about the quantities. so the $90 million is for 21 canopies. we've got 19 that are in the base contract, two -- that includes the two pilots. so that 19 plus the two gets us to 21. we have options for three canopies, and that could allow for us to go to 24. this agreement that we're asking for approval, the $90 million is

requesting $45 million to be paid by city and county san francisco. this is an estimate. we're wanting to advertise this project and we want to have estimates better in line with the market conditions and better in line with the lessons we learned on the pilot program. we think that's the responsible thing to do and once we get the business that will verify that we're closer aligned to the market. >> commissioner fewer: mr. holmes, apologies for interrupting you. just to clarify, the $90 million that we are talking about and discussing today will cover 21 canopies, as 19 base in the contract plus the two pilots? >> that's correct. >> commissioner fewer: this does not include the option for three additional canopies that we have the option of adding on later on; is that correct? >> that's correct. >> commissioner fewer: and the cost of the additional three

canopies, do you have an estimate cost if we wanted to extend for three other stations how much that would be? >> i believe we do. i can make sure we have that if tim doesn't have it with my colleague sits behind me. >> commissioner fewer: thank you. you're telling us you also installed these structures over the 19th street station in oakland; correct? at the 19th street bart station in oakland, you had constructed one of these canopies over there? >> yes, that's correct. >> commissioner fewer: and that was at a cost of $2.3 million? >> yes, that's correct. >> commissioner fewer: and the one in berkley cost how much? >> that was around i believe it was $3 million. >> commissioner fewer: so from your pilot of the two, and i believe you mentioned civic center -- >> actually, i think it was the closer to $2.5 million. it was a bigger canopy. we tried to isolate the cost because there's a number of station entrances so we tried to

isolate the cost for that particular canopy. >> commissioner fewer: so we've had this pilot and there's been two pilots. i think what you mentioned briefly is that after doing the two pilots and the one was at civic center and the other one is at pal street, that your cost estimate that you're giving to us today incorporates what you've learned around the cost analysis or what might be needed during the construction of these 19 canopies; is that correct? >> that's correct. >> commissioner fewer: okay. so -- and then you have here today with you someone that can respond. so actually i think what supervisor mandelman asked last week was about a cost analysis. so if we build these canopies over the escalators i think and i think during our meetings we have heard that the purpose of these canopies, one, is that it

is required by state ordinance -- >> state code. >> commissioner fewer: state code. so we must have the canopies in accordance with state code, so they're required. we -- the reason we're doing this is because also wear and tear on the escalators, also to prohibit feces from getting stuck in the escalators and whether -- all that kind of stuff; is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> commissioner fewer: so we know what we're getting. and i think what you may not have mentioned which i got during your briefing and i wanted to share with my colleagues is that the 19th street bart station design over in oakland is a different design than what the city and county requested because of better market street. so because of better market street they wanted a design

element that was different than the 19th street bart one that added also additional costs because of the redesign of them. and then also each entrance canopy must be custom designed because of the site environment. now, am i capturing that correctly? >> absolutely correctly. >> commissioner fewer: okay. great. sorry to interrupt. i just wanted to clarify because it is confusing and i think it is a little complicated and it is a hell of a lot of money. so your next speaker, please. >> thank you. >> commissioner fewer: thank you, mr. holmes. >> tim chan, group manager, stations planning. >> good morning, supervisors. you did a great job. i feel like i don't have to say a lot, but i will add more information. so i'm not going to go through a lot of information that was provided at the briefing on monday. so what i can do is i can take questions towards the end.

this is really just a list of the process that we went through. the information has not changed, so i'm going to move to the next slide. we did add this slide in providing an overview of the market street canopy project. so i have 22, but it is 21 plus two options. it is anticipated for that construction program to be completed over the next seven years. now, the benefits of the canopy program is to provide safety for bart and muni patrons as well as employees who have to close early in the morning and late at night. when we took a look at the performances of the entrances at the 19th street station with and without the canopy, we saw, in fact, an 80% improvement on the operational reliability. so that is significant. of course, you know, by closing the gate at the top, we are significantly improving and will

improve the entrances at the four downtown stations. we are of course expecting to have the canopies last for decades to come, as long as the maintenance is consistent, and this maintenance includes cleaning, it includes glass replacement, stainless steel, grille gates, maintenance, and then lighting. so we included a lot of this information, but it just quickly bears mentioning that we did significant outreach to bart and and muni customers when we started the process to get input. we've reached out to a lot of supervisors and other elected officials, but over the last two days of course we briefed supervisor fewer, supervisor mandelman, and then we also had an opportunity to brief the staff of supervisor stefani and supervisor mar. we've engaged a lot of the stakeholders on market street, and the one information i would like to highlight is that staff went to the sfmta board on june

18 of this year and received approval from that board. so we -- there was a lot of lessons learned from the pilot, and this is a list of that. i think you saw that on monday. so we took all of those lessons learned and then incorporated that into the next phase of design and cost estimates. and then at the same time, as you are well aware, the construction climate, the market conditions for all major public works construction projects are astronomical. we're dealing with a lot of factors that are driving up costs annually, and these are what we're dealing with, these factors. i'd also like to mention any delays to the canopy project is going to significantly impact the overall project costs, not just for the canopy project, but also for the escalator project because they have to be constructed in tandem. now, i know there was requests for information about how we do our cost evaluation.

we bring on a professional estimator, and that professional estimator is very fully aware of all of the market conditions, all of the site conditions, everything that we do in the state and in the region, and brings that knowledge to our projects. so when we have the estimator both help us in developing the engineer's estimate, the engineer is also there when after we advertise and we receive the business, the estimator is also there to review that information, the bid information, to determine for accuracy and reasonableness. so the cost information, this is the last slide, so it's the unit cost for this next phase of design is approximately $4.5 million, but that does include the 10% contingency. so the construction costs, if we break it down, it's approximately $3.3 million. the soft costs that include

design, construction project, project management, it's approximately 1.2 million. as carl mentioned as we go out to advertise we'll have a better sense of what the bid will be and what that price will be. as we compare that with the 19th street pilot, that project was completed in 2015 and it was 2.3 million and the market street pilot that was just completed last fall is $3.5 million. if we were to take the 19th street pilot, again complete in 2015, and we escalate that over the five-year period to 2019, it would cost $3 million to implement that project now. so again, it's giving you a sense of that cost escalation that we're dealing with. so there was also some information requests around the allocation, the funding allocation. so here's a table that shows you over the next seven years of the construction phase where the money is going, all the

different pots of money that we've identified. so the column right after the phase is the san francisco prop a bond. so you can see how much is allocated for each of those fiscal years. then we layer on the state prop 1 b money and how that's going to be spread out over time. we are going to frontload i think the prop a bond and the state prop 1 b bond towards the front. and as we move forward and towards the middle to the tail end of construction, we're going to bring on the bart measure rr. then finally, in partnership with san francisco, we applied for a state and cap grant fund and we received $1 million from the state to help contribute to one of the canopies on market street. i believe it's in conjunction with an affordable housing project that's coming in in that location. so finally, i also want to highlight that sfmta, we're

commiserating and sharing the pain. just a simple project, although nothing is simple, if i use a muni shelter, that is a consistent design across the board. even the sfmta saw a cost escalation of 40%. so this concludes my presentation, and i'm here to answer questions. >> commissioner fewer: thank you. so, mr. chan, i think what supervisor mandelman asked was sort of a cost analysis about the current situation of our escalators. so we spend money to repair them. do escalators need to be replaced because of weather or feces? how much do you think this will -- putting a canopy will offset the overall cost of the maintenance, also the inconvenience that happens when our escalators are not functioning? >> we were trying to get that cost from our maintenance and engineering group. i'm going to turn to carl and

mark to see if they know. i had not heard back from me. >> so we don't have a cost yet. we got numbers from them, but we're trying to make sure that they're accurate. what we also were looking at were the number of maintenance calls and also the days out of service. i can say that looking at other escalators, for example, at 19th street station, there was a number of days out of service i want to say over 100 without the canopy and then you were looking at maybe 50 with the canopy. so the cost may not translate linearly, however, that's just an order of magnitude. we've seen significant improvements with the operability of our escalators.

>> commissioner fewer: you've mentioned these canopies will last for decades -- should? >> yes. >> commissioner fewer: we've had problems with structures here, cracks in beams and things like that, so does bart have a maintenance fund that actually is -- so these canopies will be on a regular schedule of maintenance? >> so we have an operating budget and that includes the maintenance for all of our assets. so -- >> commissioner fewer: is this a shared asset with the city and county of san francisco? >> yes, it is. >> commissioner fewer: so would we be responsible for the maintenance of these canopies? >> yes, for half of -- >> commissioner fewer: for half of them? >> yes. >> commissioner fewer: how are we coordinatoring this effort together? because as we're seeing this is going to be a $90 million investment, so we want to make sure our investment is well-tended and maintenance does not slack off so that we maintain these and they're in good condition, they should last

us for a long time. how is that coordination going to be happening on the maintenance of these canopies together? >> so i'll make sure at staff level that it's happening with bart staff as well as sfmta staff. i know that has been occurring in the past in regards to providing a five-year look-ahead for projects, as well as making sure that both maintenance departments are on the same passage with regards projects that sfmta may be performing and making sure they're in line with our projects. there is that synergy there and i'll make sure it happens with these new canopies. >> commissioner fewer: yes, because it has been a concern about our bart stations and we co-share them with bart, and the maintenance and the cleanliness, the elevators, everything, i actually feel there has been an issue with the maintenance and this is why i bring it up.

maybe mr. levinson can shed some light on this. >> i can just say that we meet regularly with bart staff over the maintenance needs and we have an annual maintenance agreement or maintenance funding that we supply with bart and a discussion over priorities and roles and responsibilities. that includes not just physical maintenance, but also issues around security in the bart stations and other items such as staffing of elevators in order to have better security and cleanliness in the elevators. so we are reviewing all of those maintenance items, and we have a substantial commitment and contribution each year. it is something that comes out of our operating budget. so when we have operating budget pressures, this is one of those things that is also under pressure, just like everything else in the operating budget. but i know i have a very strong

commitment to the concept of maintenance, that we don't underinvest in our existing assets and then have greater costs later. so it's very much on our radar screen that we maintain the assets that we have as we get all of these requests to expand our services and assets, we don't want it to be forgotten that we have to maintain what we currently have and that includes a close relationship with bart on our current assets. >> commissioner fewer: supervisor stefani. >> supervisor stefani: thank you, chair fewer. i'm glad you are asking those questions because those were mine. but i'm wondering what is the annual cost of maintenance for these structures? do we have an annual cost of maintenance? >> we do not, at least at this meeting, but i can see between now and the last question if i can get something for you. >> supervisor stefani: do we have a ballpark figure? do we have any idea? >> supervisor stefani: i can get that for you, any minutes.

>> supervisor stefani: and any foreseeable events that could increase the cost of maintenance. >> i think the intention of this project is that there is a net reduction in maintenance costs associated with the station because the reduction in maintenance costs around the escalators, should bart heed the extra cost of a physical canopy. i'm not speaking from any cost analysis, but that is one of the general purposes of this project is that it's reducing escalators maintenance costs. >> supervisor stefani: okay. >> commissioner fewer: but we have not seen a cost analysis of that. so i think that is fairly vague, quite frankly. supervisor mar. >> supervisor mar: thank you. thanks for the presentation and for all your work on this important project. i just had a question around cost information that was presented and just wanted to see if you could provide a little

more explanation about the difference in the estimated costs per unit is $4.5 million for the new canopies and in the pilot -- for the market street pilot, it was $3.5 million. can you just explain that, the cost difference, is that just due to the cost escalation or is there going to be any -- some changes made to the new canopies from the pilot? >> sure. so there are a number of lessons learned from the pilot. for example, we needed to provide additional security. as we were doing the construction of the pilot. so we incorporated that cost of providing officers into the next phase of design. we also had some unanticipated things that came up around the permitting, requiring that we do monthly permits. so we're going to reach out to some of the supervisors to see if we can help expand the permit time so that our contractors don't have to keep going back to public works to get that permit.

and then also i would say that if you look at the second half around the labor shortage, the fact that wages are going up in order to meet really the cost of living in the bay area, we're dealing with that. we're dealing with a lot of construction. workers leaving the bay area because they can't afford to live here. we're dealing with significant steel tariffs, up to 25% that we're incorporating into the engineer's estimate. we are working very proactively, including with our board president, devin dufty, but also with staff. we're reaching out to all of the construction companies that are in the bay area in order to generate interest, because as you know, the more competition that we have, the more we're able to drive down the overall bid price. i mentioned the cost of doing business for agencies, we incorporate a lot of different programs around sbde and around

our pla programs. i also want to mention this is going to be an approximately seven-year project to construct, but we're also dealing with city issues and policies around moratoriums. so during the period between thanksgiving and new years, we have to shut down. we're not going to be able to do a lot of construction work at pal area. so all of those different factors, including an annual cost escalation of 5% is what's elevated that price from 3.5 to an engineer's estimate of approximately 4.5. but again, we're really working diligently to get all of the different construction companies to be interested, and from there we hope we will see some benefits as a result of that. >> thank you. >> commissioner fewer: i'd like to call up actually board president devin dufdevin dufty.

good morning. devin, i know you've been doing a lot of work about cleaning up our bart stations yourself -- i mean yourself actually. so we've had this question, i think supervisor stefani and i were just discussing, about the maintenance of these -- i mean, of bart stations in general, but also about the maintenance of these canopies because it's such a huge dollar investment, we want to make sure that they're maintained on a regular basis. since you've been working so diligently on cleanliness and maintenance of the bart stations, i thought you would have some insight to this relationship that bart has with mta around shared maintenance. because what we've seen so far isn't that reassuring.

>> thank you so much and it's an honor to be here with my friends at the budget committee and, madam chair, as you know i swept at the 16th station for four months with your colleague supervisor ronen. i spent a lot of time in civic center station. and i believe over the last year and a half to two years that we've changed the culture at bart. for example, when we hired custodians, who are known as systems service workers, they were not trained. they were simply given the tools of a grabber, gloves, a bucket, and a broom and told to go at it. i have cleaned human waste at 16th and mission station at the platform level and i was deeply concerned that i felt that, first of all, we also had 21 maintenance vacancies in our last fiscal year. so i drove that home, and we do not have vacancies anymore. at the 16th and mission station,

the first day that i swept when i was by myself, i had a gentleman who identified himself as being homeless and said that he pretty much lived in the plaza and there hadn't been a full-time custodian daytime for eight months, and i was absolutely shocked at that. we have had a change in leadership. our former assistant general manager for operations retired, and tamar allan who is an engineer and she's been with bart for over 30 years has come into this role as being our assistant general manager for operations and engineering. we now participate with the international systems supply association, issa, which is an international maintenance and cleaning association that i'm sure city hall belongs to, the empire state belongs to. so now we have two certification programs that we have for our custodians and they