because every project will impact all of the communities. and so whether it's pier 70, whether it's mission rock or transportation, waste whatever , everyone needs the same information. thank you, i really appreciate this. all in favour? the resolution 1939 and 1940 has been approved. >> information under the fundraising campaign and partnership of san francisco park's alignment.

>> good afternoon, president and commissioners. i'm the manager on the real estate and development division. this informational item before you is the proposed park fundraising campaign. as you all know, crane cove park has been an active project of the port since 2005 and david bo-prey who lead the planning the park and erica crane are both here to answer historical context questions. drew betchr of the san francisco park's alliance is here today and will be speaking later on in our presentation. just as an overview of what you'll be covering, we will go over the project background and status, the strategic plan alignment, park's aligned history and experience, our next steps.

shoreline ro reconstruction, bot irrigation. and it is anticipated that the 19th street, georgia street and building 49 are delivered by the calendar year 2020. the date has spent 16 millions of the $36 million budget. with that said, there were components of the project of the original scope that were moved due to cost considerations. and moved out to later phases. these included a tot lot and riggers yard. this is a critical investment and important to develop in the plan through the priorities. opening crane cove park by 2020,

raising public funds for the children's playground in 2020 and growing capital funding with external forces. the components were still deemed to be vital components and this is how a partnership could be structured and to fundraise for the park. this dialogue is built upon a long-standing relationship with the park's alliance and highlighted in the coming sites. this raised over $65 million for port's open space. the alliance has been looked to by the city as a fundraising

partner for countless spaces throughout the city. their continuous collaboration for the recreation and park's department is a testament to the success for park and communities p whilwhile they are the most successful in parks, their success is matched to creating vibrant open space for everyone to enjoy and this makes them a natural fit for our partnership and to lead the fundraising campaign. at this time, i would like to invite the ceo of the parks to speak. >> i'm drew betcher and thank you for the opportunity and i want to give a shout-out to my leadership team.

this is important to the citizens and county of san francisco. i just wanted to point out the history and experience of the park's alliance. we have been around since 1971, building and helping to build this city's rec and park department. i would say the rec and park department in san francisco is now one of the top recreation and park's department. it got there with advocacy and partnerships. that's what we are built on with 12 now community leaders that we organize every year and 200 community groups, that we're fiscally sponsored organization and most are in our parks but we're expanding.

we are the first city to reach a ten-minute walk to parks and open space and crane cove will help the dog patch area in the southeast waterfront be more successful. we started off with fundraising in the mid'90s with the conservatory of flowers. mamany of you may remember, it s blown down in a storm and we raised $26 million to reopen that with an endowment and we still operate that if partnership with the rec and park department. we just completed a $30 million campaign to redo the golden gate

park tennis centre, as well, which has a big component for the tennis learning center which is invested in tennis courts, in equity zones around the city and we're nearing the end of our investment, of our initiative, which is 13 playgrounds around the city that are in neighborhoods with the most need and in the middle of raising 1 14.$5 million for that campaign. it's a $36 million programme matched up with bond funds from the bond the city has. we have seven projects under construction and they're due to be opened up in winter, all opened up by 2021. another big investment made by the city and specifically the mayor's office over the past couple of years in the park's alignsalliance.

we had park's groups wanting to be fiscally managed and do fundraising efforts for them and we did not have the capacity. we had 60 to 80 groups waiting and we decided -- we went to the city and they decided to invest in the park's alliance to expand our capacity and we're happy to say we have all new systems. we have new staff and we have a new way of -- almost a trademark system of work an and bringing communities together around projects such as this. an activation is big.

you've heard this from many and this is the old addage, you build it and come, that is something we're work on. i also want to say, we worked with the economic and workforce development, puc, among others and we've worked with the port closely but not this closely over the past couple of years that we've been involved and we're looking forward to this partnership. as you noted in 2004, we started the conversation about the big blue greenway idea and now it's the rubber hits the road. crinco is one of the biggest publically funded pieces of that plan and we want it to be hugely successful for you and we are

really happy to be a part of it and we look forward to work wig you to make it really the shining star in the green necklace that will be southeast waterfront we can be proud of. we're raising money at the same time, which we think is a compliment for india basin and india basin is a pup wit. it's always bad to hav good to s and we have two great options, having both in our portfolio when we shop donors to invest in great neighborhoods. the park's alliance is here and we love working with the port. your staff is absolutely amazing and we look forward to having this become the public private partnership that we can all be

proud of on the southeast waterfront. >> the alliance will aim to raise 6.$3 million for contribution to the park to deliver the yard, the tot lot and two crane tops. and the partnership structure will be similar to what the park alliance does with the recreation and park's department throughout the city, staff envisions executing an mo ultimate tu.there will be commun protocols, port oversight, commission engagement and how it will be accepted by the park. the five-year time line will hit

the target, there will be to allow for any changes that may lengthen or effort. and in conclusion, next steps are as follows in the fall. we will continue at your direction to retype partnership structure. the commission will be presented, a proposed mou to be executed with the park's alliance and winter of 2020, in the new year, the fundraising campaign strategy will be further refined and we will launch a small campaign and in the sprai spring, the park willn with a launch of the campaigning to confetti, lots of kayaking people in the new beach. i'm here to answer any questions and drew betcher and drew and

erica are here as well. >> any public comment? >> director forbes, i'm with pier 70 and we were the first development entity and put a trailer on site and started in the noonan building and moved to our project. the idea is for the park at the time, they were developed, designed and it's really, really exciting to see there's a potential for the port to join a development partner or fundraising partner to raise the money to get the job complete. i know hearing from the committee and from our tenants and everyone else for crane cove park to come online and we want to share that.

>> thank you. any other public comment regarding this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner g gillman. >> thank you for the presentation and i'm familiar with the work and i'm excited we're partnering with them to get the project over the hump and deliver as promised to this neighborhood. so thank you for the presentation. >> commissioner? >> thank you for the presentation, to questions. >> commissioner? >> thank you for the presentation, as well. i was involved with the park ace line'saligns alliance in 201 2012 and so i'my

supportive because i think crane cove park is a long, overdue development and we know that it's been long and coming but we're all excited to see it happen and i think this is an important step going forward. thank you. >> vice president, adam? >> i like the presentation and i would like to say for the park alliance, i appreciated the comments you had to say about the new system and you got it up and running. you got things going, looked at it with the city and stuff and this has been long going. i know david frasier worked on this for years and a lot of people when it first started have passed on. david knows the initial committee, my union that wanted to see this happen and they're all passed on now. this has been going on for years. so i hope i get to see this come to fruition. it would be a tribute to their honor. thank you. >> thank you so much for the

presentation. david, thank you for all of your work, bringing the park to where we are today and you think it's really exciting that the park's alliance is joining us on this fundraising effort and much-needed structures that we need out there. just one question. so you're going to do the finalizing piece and annually, you turn the funds over to the port and the port does the work or how does that work. >> so it can happen in a multiple delivery strategy. the recreation and parks delivered the work and gusted the improvemengiftedthe improve. and then staff delivers through maintenance or through consultants the actual work. so i think that depends how the

contribution is made and each will come to the port as an accept and of cours expend acti. >> so the park's alliance will do the fundraiser and we will do the actual improvements? >> there's an opportunity for multiple paths to be taken. there have been discussions right now with the existing contractor because there might be -- there may be shared expenses that could be more advantageous than using the existing contractor to deliver the work, but that is contingent on us having the fundraising dollars come in and so, i know that the park's alliances having several conversations with donors right now and we anticipate starting donor tours in the near future. so i think that if we were gifted playground equipment, we

could institute a contract for that work, as well. now. >> ok. i'm sure i'll understand it better when you bring the -- [ laughter ] >> -- the mou for approval. thank you very much. this was great and really exciting and we want to thank the park's alliance for partnering on this effort. so thank you. >> thank you. >> could i help to try to provide clarity, maybe? i think what we're asking for is the neglect o flexibility of ths alliance and if it's something our crews could do, we can do that or by us putting it out to bid and take th taking the funde raised. so we'll look to allow any three delivery methods, whatever makes

the most sense from an efficiency standpoint. >> ok, thank you. i appreciate that. >> thank you. >> item 8a, requests for approval to execute an amendment for professional service's contract with ch2m hill, engineers incorporated for planning, engineering and services for the waterfront which includes the army corps of engineering and related activities to increase the contract by $19,000,392,000,000 resulting in a contract. >> i'm brad benson representing the waterfronts of resilience teem to talk about a proposed amendment that we describe to you on an informational basis in

august for a contract with cm2m hill. so i will give a shorter update than we did last time about the waterfront resilience programme, also give a few short updates about the army corps flood resiliency study. i'll go over the major items in the contract scope of work and there's one minor change to the report i would like to flag and we'll end with a funding update with a focus on a planned trip to washington, d.c. with our commissioned officers to advocate for the programme. so as we mentioned last time, we are out in public, in a series of public workshops along the waterfront describing the work going on. we were in the bayview community this last week, had excellent

attendance. the team did a good job of turning folks out. we're trying to understand what people love about the waterfronts, what they think is important to the city, their concerns about flood risk and seismic risk. as part of that outreach effort, we're getting feedback on draft visual ship statement principles, goal and objectives. the draft vision is to create a safe, equitable and sustainable waterfront. the programme involves different activities, some of which are port-wide and po some limited to specific geographies. the flood study covers the entire port jurisdiction. the adapt and envision process where we'll envision a new waterfront to 21 levels is

port-wide. we have efforts like the embarcadaro seawall and rehabilitation programme that are limited to the northern waterfront and in southern waterfront, we're commencing through the front, similar to the northern waterfront kicking off the seawall programme. we are requesting author requesn to amend the contract port-wide and we're trying to integrate efforts like the embarcadaro seawall and army corps wall study. as we're adding resources, we're being mindful and trying to take advantage of the creek study, which is cal-trans finished with the army core work and we're efficient with public money.

we've incorporated your recommendations from prior discussions. the change to the report that i want to flag for you, actually on page 7 of the report, we were projecting a 23.42% spaw spaws e participation and we got approval just yesterday in advance of the commission meeting. the exact mission is 21.9%. we expect that will go back up to the 23.24%. there are some lbes where paperwork is in process and they're being added and that will be before the board of

supervisor's approval. as an overview, we have provided that informational presentation on august 13th. the proposed contract amendment will increase the contract amount by 19.$3 million with that 21.2 lbe participation rate, including contingency and the total amount will be just slightly less than $60 million. as to the army corps flood stow, study, a big part is to support that work. we've been seeking army corps' expertise since 2012. it to the north of the port. if the study recommends a project to congress and congress funds the project, the federal government would pay 65% of the design and construction cost. we have the october throug locad

plan which would be loyal funded. as we spent a lot of time at the last meeting, we think we need a waiver from the army corps of engineers to increase from $23 millio3million dollars$3 mi. it could be a project up to $1 billion. as a measure of that, the seawall is budgeted at $24 million for preliminary engineering and environmental review for three quarters of a mile, so we think we're efficient and we're trying to merge two effort. we expect that the waiver request would happen in spring of 2020 and that we would be talking about that waive i request when we're back in d.c. in october. so these are all of the items in

the proposed contract amendment. i'll touch on the major ones briefly. so we are finishing up the multi-hazard risk assessment right now. the results are expected in spring of next year.

we are trying to ready by building into this contract amendment, a programme to provide lbe support services so that we can, one, understand the tape of work that will be available, advertise that to the appropriate lbes and make sure e they have the capacity and be matched with primes for future work, looking at the bid packages so that they're appropriately sized.

we're excited to start and effort with the explor explorat. , wear skated to be launching an effort to explain this complicated programme to the san francisco public. even as we pursued the bond, the first $500 million strengthened phase of the work willing focusn

life safety. the multi-hazard risk assessment will tell us about the casualties along the waterfront but we need to hear from the city and first responders what we need from the waterfront. so we're amending the contract to provide for two exercises in the spring to call together not only city agencies but weda to understand if you sea this type of damage along the waterfront, how will that include your response and won't yo won't to d existing plans for existing damages through this reduction assessment. so ch2m is committed to the 21 proceeding spa lbe goal.

we think we're close to 29%. and we expect this to be over 23% and we're continuing to work with the contract monitoring division to get those final firms added. we do support a rationale support and we don't think it would be a decision to bid out this work. a new contract award would take

six to nine month and that delay would pose a risk to the flood study and the albei ability to t that. it's difficult to manage a team anand that would be two. we want to get to work on the lbe support services and workforce soo as soon as we can. we think it will carry us through the environmental review and design projects. there some un-foreseen circumstances that would change that. if the flood resiliencecy study found recipiente limited, we wod astrodescope and reduce the task authorizations for that work. similarly, if the army corps is not able to obtain a waiver.

there are circumstances where the flood study could identify a larger project or the damages that we seen in the seawall programme could be so severe that policy makers want a larger project and we might need more resources than we're seeing today. thank you to our officers to supporting us in washington, d.c. we're organizing a trip in the end of october, and plan to meet with the capable del garbages. delegation. we have a proposal to the resource's act that would give the port extra credit for seismic improvements through the flood study. it has to and flood controlled improvement but it would be designed to address seismic risks along the waterfront and this amendment would help with that. we'll be talking about that waiver request that i mensed med

earlier. i will stop there and see if the commission has any questions and to allow for public comments. >> can i have a motion? >> so moved. >> second. >> is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner? >> jajacob is our contractor no. if we to do a new bid, would they qualify for this work under, what is it the 12y ordinance. >> no, because they're headquartered in texas. we could take a waiver that i

think i would be -- i could look at it, but no, they could not bid today for a new contract award because the firm is headquartered in texas and texas is on the list of states that the city and county is not contracting with because they have draconian laws and there are amendments to add to the list states where women cannot get access to abortion. >> has jacobs request add waive. >> no, because the 12 skepticism legislatio12x does notapply. they wanted to make sure not to interfere with big works underway and big engineering work requires to mo modify and

amend. so 12x does not apply to modifications. >> for a noncontract amendment, have they requested a waiver to be able to bid? >> not from me, commissioner. not from the port of san francisco. >> you aware of any waiver that's been granted, jacob and company in san francisco? >> not personally aware. >> colleagues, for me, i think there's a better way to continue this programme. this is a valuable programme and i concur a delay would not be in our best interests. but there's a bay t way to adheo the law of the programmes and go forward without delay. we can go out with a new bid and project eight months from now or

ten months from now and overlap them and have a smooth transition from one contract or another and be in compliance with the ordinance. giving $20 million contracts to someone that can not get the contract on their only if they bid is just a package of circumventing the law. i think we can honor good contracting. i think we can honor no delay and i think we can meet our goals and objectives by pushing it out and bidding it properly. short of that, in a backwards way, we are approving this contractor i and all of the potential ills that our board of supervisors believe that they do. so you will be voting against it and i would prefer to all of you to look for a solution to honor

the ordinance that we have versus taking the easy course out and just sir su sir come cie law on the books. >> thank you. >> well, i had some questions, but just related to what commissioner macra said. we have concerns about this ordinance and companies headquartered in a state we don't agree with in san francisco. but do we have inspection issues with this particular company relating to this law? >> i'll ask brad to get up and talk about it. we did do some outreach to make sure the company itself has good provision and protections for their gay lgbtq staff and did some additional due diligence to make your there's no particular issue with the company in terms of policies. the ordinance doesn't apply. we just wanted to go above and

beyond to make sure there wasn't an issue relative to the company. with that, i'll turn it over to you, brad. >> commissioner, director forbes, do you want me to go over the staff analysis of the apoliticcabilitapplicability. >> so as director forbes mentioned, the board of supervisors in february 11t february 11th of 2017 passed

an administrative code amendment that bans city funded travel and city contracts with firms headquartered in states that had anti-lgbt laws. you think that ordinance has been updated to address states with antiabortion laws. the city administrator added texas to the covered state list for the original ordinance, september 1st, 2017. the port commission authorized the award of the original contract on august 8, 2017 and the board of supervisors approved that contract septembe. you'll see that texas was added to the covered states list. at the time ch2m was in denver, colorado and that state is not on the covered state list.

ch2h stakeholders jacob's engineering on december 13th, 2013 and the state of supervisors approved the contract. pouch2m is still headquartered n denver and as director forbes mentioned earlier and this only applies to contract award and not contract amendments. that's the 12x analysis and now i would like to invite stacie jones up who is the project manager for ch2m, here with laura harnesh. >> thank you, brad. president brandon, commissioners, director forbes and staff. thank you to address this very important topic because it's something near and dear to our company and all of our staff. iin terms of the commitment to

the lgbt. community, when this contract was wa awarded, they went beyond what the ordinance required. we have been very successful in accomplishing that. especially because we work with many states that are not on this list. we have provided that documentation by staff, by state to port staff. like the city and the port, ch2m hill feels very strongly that we embody the spirit and the value of inclusion and diversity, especially as it relates to the lgbtq community. where we strive as an employer, and i welcome you to please visit our website, and our

employees strive to become employer of choice for the lbgtq community and its people. it's really evidenced in our business practises and our employment practises and also recognition by the industry. so i would like to take this opportunity to share with you some of the hu highlights. they have had an employee network especially for the lbgtq community called prisment. pris. it's to create an environment to bring their whole selves to work. when we can't do that in an organization, we can't e excel,

regardless of sex, gender or sexuality. our practises, business practise and our employee benefits are an example of this commitment that wave made and some of those, among other things include same-sex opposite partner benefits, nondiscri nondiscrim n protection. expansion of our prison network, employee network, globally. and this year, we are providing a conscious inclusion training extending to all employees globally and i've taken it and it's extremely important and really provides awareness for our employees.

we support the employee awards in may. the largest state-wide lgbt civil-rights. we supported trans-cal to provide firms as underrepresenting, ne necessitag quality. we are partnering with other organizations that promotes and advocates for lgbtq people and one is build-out. there's an event in november where they'll launch build-out. it is an organization that advocates serving for lgbt people in building, design and construction. so i'm scooted to able to participate.

in january we were awarded a 100% score with an index measuring lgbtq quality in corporate america and their practise. we have been recognised in previous years and our score was 80 two years ago and increased to 9 90 and this year is to 100. this demonstrates or goals as a company to supporting diversity in all areas. i would like to speak for laura and our employees. we personally are tremendously proud of our company's reputation, our diversity and inclusion policies. it makes a stronger company where people of all backgrounds can feel at home and where our widely different perspectives and our talents around the globe

greatly enhance our ain' abilito provide you, our clients with our imaginative an effective solutions. we're admitte committed and we y the spirit of what 12f is trying to english an accomplish and weu could take that under consideration seriously. thank you. >> i think that answers part of my question. thank you very much and i appreciate that. i just came back from a national association of corporate director's national award last night in washington, d.c. for diversity equity inclusion and this is a hot topic. i was representing u.s. bank and we did not win in the category but it was a big topic for the conference. [ laughter ] >> in terms of our board. but i really appreciate that because i think that's a very important category for all of us

and certainly san francisco is even more aware and sensitive to this top understanding, but getting back to the project itself, i guess i had just a couple of kind of more global question, brad. so it looks like we've had a lot of amendments, costs have gone up and scope has gone up. we've been working at this and it seems like we have to sort of test and learn along the way. we've learned things because this is something new we have not done before. i guess the question and concern that i have is that just have we learned enough? do we know enough? are we comfortable? will we keep coming back with more amendments and scope? i know it's a huge topic.

i think this team has been ate for two years and this is the product of more than four months of thinking about this contract amendment. i want to credit all of the members of the team, putting a lot of time into thinking about this additional scope of work, whether i the engagement piece or counting the number of meetings with need over the last two and a half years of all of the different events that will support engagement for folks who don't come to the workshops or steve and matt working with the engineering team on how to develop a seismic solution's kit for the entire three miles of the seawall. there's just been a lot of thought. and not just ourselves but with the army corps of engineers. we're in a project delivery team with the army corps, where the

two staffs come together, meet on a regular basis and the project is owned by the pdt. we spent quite a but bit of tim, really pushing the brow boundarf that and i have a high degree of confidence that we are bringing all of our knowledge gain to date and all of the effort in the last threemans t three montg you the best we can. i can't guarantee things won't change in the future but we have a high degree of confidence this will resource the effort. >> so any lessons everyoned that we can be smarter about this going forward and be faster at it in terms of identifying of something we didn't know that we need to address? >> i think an undertaking like this, it's difficult to having

identify a broader risk to understanding how those risks are affecting assets along the waterfront, including utility infrastructure, hidden infrastructure, to then designing projects. you know, it's unlike what we typically do. we typically start with a pier and saw we want to redevelop a pier or we'll build standard infrastructure in a new neighborhood and the city has design specifications. so we're starting from the hazards to figures out what the projects will be. i think this as been iterative. what about the sound waterfront. we'll try to look for lessons learned. we don't think we have the answers but we're being as smart as we can today. >> thank you.

>> commissioner gillman? >> thank you. >> i'm torn at this moment. there's a lot you want to commend the staff and i want to commend ch2m hill for doing. thank you for the presentation that you as a corporation are trying to do for equity and diversity. the programmes you talked about, they really are impactful for your employees to thank you for that. the lbe representation and the amount of work done today in going forward is impressive. i've learned it's continuing to try to do better every time we contract. but i'm concerned that the board of supervisors passes ordinances. the reason they pass them, stating do not do business under this provision, is to leverage the resources that the city and county of san francisco not do

business with companies that are headquartered in states that don't have their value and i think it's the timeline they put out in the sale because i wasn't here in 2017, and i'm just curious, it seems to me unless i'm missing something, which i could be, that the sale and acquisition conversations were happening white the commission was hearing these contracts. >> everywhere was aware that was occurring. so they were given notice and we made commission aware and the board of supervisors completely aware. this is the situation where we didn't mothe know for certain by had given in the of intent and everyone was aware they would be bought by jacobs and again, it was in this form and with the board of supervisors, everybody was aware of this issue.

>> was there conversation at the commission? i mean, i'm not trying to dredge up and go back on something in 2017, but i need richer context. i didn't find that in the staff report and i actually, on a side note, just think when issues come up to possibly flag them earlier on in the report, also, would be helpful, because i'm concerned that -- my concern is that we are setting a precedent that sends a signal to the companies that if they have subsidiaries in other parts of the country, that we will turn a blind eye to the right essence of why san francisco does this. if we're going to ignore these provisions, whether it's access to rights or issues, louisiana is on that list and i'm concerned that we're set ag precedent with the commission of close not to engine exceed 6o mn

>> the good news is the board of supervisors will have to make a decision when the contract was originally awarded. they were the preferred contractor and the board was aware of what the commission was aware of but there was a potential sale out there and here we're balancing dus differt policy. this signals to states to change behaviour through, basically, a sanction kind of programme, an economic sanction to say we won't do buzz. buzz. business. they weren't purchased at that time and texas wasn't on the list. so there was no lawful reason when we wep went through the bo. texas was on the list so the ordinance didn't apply. here the ordinance doesn't

apply, so we can have legal discuss that and my understanding from listening to the policy makers when they thought of 12x was the balancing of the sanction they're trying to accomplish through a policy and need for city departments to do work and amend big contracts. they wanted hands-off work underway which is why it's about contract award, not amendments to the contract. the board will have another opportunity to look at how the policy is working shoe you shouf prove this. >> i understand it doesn't apply and i'm not saying that it does, i'm just saying that the commissioner, you'll struggling a little bit because this is before under the circumstances, to issue before us. and while a company may have good intentions, that's flocking the whole point in the first place. >> that begs the question, what

is jacob's policies? >> so i'm a lesbian and so this is an issue that is near and dear to my heart. so you looked at their policies and it is jacob's policies, not ch. this is a jacob's firm policy. the benefit and treatment of lesbian and gay policies was good, as well as the network and connections, but that's been the state of affairs for some time. what was especially notable was their policies toward the transgender community, supporting people in transition for gender expression, the health benefits. their transgender pot policies e progressive and this is a group of peach in the lgbt group that still suffers intense employment

discrimination. i was happy with how the lesbi lesbian, gay was treated but i was very impressed with how transgender was treated. >> i'm going back to a question that i would like to direct to jacobs. why would you not asked for an of courshave asked foran exempt. >> so you need so address -- i believe because it's not

required. >> i guess wouldn't it be good housekeeping to act ask for onen these circumstances? >> why doesn't our general counsel take a crack. >> michelle, you ask for an exemption to the extent you have a contract to off apply. you would acts fo ask for a wain amendment. >> because this is a contract amendment -- >> an amendment to an existing contract. >> and because it is not technically apply, we don't need to act ask for that exemption. and they wanted to compete, they could go through a process.

>> i just want to narrow in and there's a big distinction between a company and the law is a state. the board of supervisors could have said we want that by companies and if they don't meet a threshold, we won't do business. that's not the law. the law is a prohibition on companies in texas. they would not qualify today for a $20 million and what's before us today is a $20 million of someone that can't stan up stanp before us. it's not meant to big into the

people in the state. it is the culture of the state that we're dealing with and the economic thrust that they're throwing at them is for companies like jacobs not to move into texas because they pay less tax or whatever their motivation is to go to tax. it's motivating companies like jacobs to move out and be in states that don't have conduct that we believe isinappropriate. it's a state issue, not a compancompany ush. issue. if the they qualify, more powero them and if they don't, we're given a company that doesn't qualify a $20 million contract to date. i'm encouraging our body to not disrupt or