>> the meeting began at 936 a.m. secretary fuller, please call the roll. >> good morning. please respond with, here, or present. lynne newhouse siegel is on her way but running late. [roll call] >> with 3 members present, we do have quorum for the public works commission. due to the ongoing covid-19 health emergency and given the public health recommendations issued by the san francisco department of public health, and the emergency orders of

the governor and mayor concerning social distance and lifting restrictions on teleconference this meeting is held via teleconference and being streamed by sfgovtv. for those watching live stream, please be aware there is a brief time lag between the live meeting and what is shown on sfgovtv. i like to extend thankz to staff of sfgovtv media service and building management for assistance putting on the meeting. for members of the public who wish to comment, dial 415-655-0001 and using today's meeting id number, which is 24876431685, and then pound and pound again and to raise your hand to be recognized press

star 3 on your touch pad. please note to public commenters that you must limit your comment to the topic on the agenda item discussed currently, and unless you are speaking under the general public comment item. to remind you as you do not stay on the topic the chair may interrupt and ask you limit your comment to that agenda item. we ask public comment be made in a civil respectful manner and you refrain from the use of profanity. please address your remarks to the commission as a whole, not to individual commissioners or staff. chair post. >> thank you. before calling the nextetum any request from the commission to amend the order of this agenda? >> (inaudible) >> yes, commissioner newhouse siegel is present cht >> commissioner

newhouse siegel is present and have 4 members present. >> hearing no request we'll move to the next item announcement by the chair. i have two announcements this morning. one is that earlier this week i met with board of supervisors aaron peskin to update him on the actiskties of the commission and seek his assistance helping us fill our 5th vacancy. that is a board of supervisors appointment and asked for his help and he said he would give us a hand there. my second announcement, you may have seen a artical earlier in the press this week about a former dbi commissioner pleegd guilty to a number of crimes. coincidently i met with representatives from the city attorney and controller's offices for status update on the city historic public integrity investigations. details were not shared of course, i was pleased to hear a number of major problems have been addressed and the

investigation is winding down. for example, one major fix is san francisco voters approved moving waste hauling setting to dpw to the controller. my understanding is that dpw does not expect any further criminal probes coming out of the charges against former director nuru. i like it note last month the controller published a public integrity report summarizing progress made city wide to address transparency and operations and internal control weaknesses and risks. the december 22 report could be found on the controller website so a quick google of sf controller you get to there home page and scroll to news and you see the december 2022 report. pursuant to this report, the city attorney and the

controller representatives i met with made several suggestions on how our commission can work with dpw to carry out the controller's reports recommendations and i'll note some of that in the new business portion of today's agenda. that concludes my comments. we will move to item 1, secretary fuller, please call that item. >> good morning. item 1 is commission secretary report and my report is relatively brief. earlier in january the city attorney's office issued a memo regarding remote participation for both commissioners and as well as members of the public, and that is on the city attorney's website. it has been distributed to the commission as well as posted along with this agenda on the commission's website so that-there will be

some changes that will be necessary ahead of the march 1 implementation of that. now i want to let the commission know i have a number open questions out to city departments as far as what implementation will look like, and so we'll have more information at our february meetings about what that will look like. then, the other two items i have is later in the meeting on the agenda is a update on the director hiring and wanted to just let commissioners know that part of the director hiring process will be this commission sitting and interviewing candidates in closed session and i'll be distributing the department of human resources fairness in hiring training that will need to be

completed before those interviews begin so i'll send those out this upcoming week, and then the one other item that was requested of me-the january 6 meeting was a updated organizational chart of the department of public works and the department has implementation of prop b, 2022 on january 1, posted a new organizational chart and that is available on their website under about and then organization and i'll send that out to all commission members as they have that live link as well. but that concludes my report and i'm happy to take any questions. >> thank you secretary fuller. i have no questions. are there questions or comments from the commission for secretary fuller on his report? hearing none, we'll

open public comment on this item. >> members of the public who wish to make three minutes of comment on item 1, secretary's report may line up against the wall furthest from the door if you are present in the hearing room. if you are calling, 415-655-0001 and use the meeting access code 24876431685 fallowed by pound and pound again and to be recognized please press star 3. looking--in the hearing room it does not appear we have any members of the public wishing to speak on the secretary's report. sfgovtv, do we have any callers in the queue wishing to speak on this secretary report?

they are-we do not have any members or--let me check this. sfgovtv, do we have any members of the public wishing to speak on this item? >> there are no callers. >> thank you. okay. so, we do not have public comment on this item. >> thank you. we will move on to item number 2, secretary fuller, please call that item. >> item 2 is general public comment and members of the public may address the commission on topics that are within the subject matter of the commission, but not part of any item on this agenda. comments specific to a agenda item may be heard when that item is

considered. members of the public may address the commission for up to three minutes and general public comment may be continued to the end of the agenda if speakers exceed the 15 minutes of general public comment limit. members of the public who wish to make three minutes of comment, may line up against the wall furthest from the door here in the commission room. if you are calling in, again dial 415-655-0001 and use the meeting access code, 24876431685 and then press pound and pound again and then press star 3 on your touch pad to be recognized. it appears we do not have any members of the public wishing to speak on this item in

person. sfgovtv, it appears indicating we have two members of the public wishing to speak. please unmute the first caller, and caller, you will have three minutes to speak and i'll provide you with a 30 second warning. >> excellent. good morning. david pillpel, can you hear me okay? >> we can hear you. >> couple brief comments. first, on the chair's report from earlier, i didn't have any specific comments right now, but there was interesting highlights there, i appreciate that. in the future i suggest making that a numbered agenda item so you can take public comment in the event that there are chair announcements that warrant public comment. that is relatively standard elsewhere and probably not a huge change. next, my experience this week at a dpw director's hearing was

very positive. i wanted to call that to your attention and specifically name susan (inaudible) chris buck, (inaudible) and david steinburg for their help and professionalism. no final order has been issued yet, but i'm hopeful and there may be some administrative things that can be changed to further improve the hearing process and i have been in contact with staff about that overall very impressed of the efficiency and openness of a director hearing, which i have not had the opportunity to participate in in a long time. next item, i note on the website there's reference to a special meeting of this commission a week from today on the 27th. i understand that no agenda has been posted yet, but

wondering if you can tell me what time so i can block that off on my calendar and finally, i hope to prepare and have some comments later on on the budget and thank you very much for listening. >> thank you caller. sfgovtv, please unmute the second caller and caller, you have three minutes to speak and i'll provide you with a 30 second warning when your time is about to expire. >> commissioners, my name is francisco decosta and i strongly feel that after the storms or the pineapple express that was (inaudible) that we experience that you commissioners should do a needs assessment link to the emergency

services that were lacking during this storm. granted, this is a storm one of a kind, but it gives us a opportunity and you commissioners to see how best we can address a storm like this, because we will have them in the future. so, we do not have a director who is well versed with infrastructure, we have somebody pretty well versed with trees acting as a director of the department of public works. i think you commissioners should spend more time doing a needs assessment on every level of operations and maintenance when the department of public works. as to the

criminal investigation, let's leave it to the federal bureau of investigation, and i say that because the controller was sitting on this issue for a long time. ben rosenfield. the feds can follow the money and let the feds do what they have to do. don't be concerned with it too much. we need you the commissioners to work very hard to address quality of life issues and my final remark and i am not here to insult you or anything, dont run this commission like a kabal. keep in touch with the people. the people do not like to see raw sewage running down our streets. they do not like to see secondary affluents

going into our bay. >> 30 second s. >> sure we can address the trees and so i know you have your work cut out, i know it is too much for you all, because you are a new commission, but just focus on operations and maintenance, not on the crimes. let the fbi take care of that. thank you very much. >> thank you caller. okay. and that is our last caller for public comment on general public comment. >> thank you. we will move to the next item the director report. please call that item. >> item 3 is director report. interim director short is here to present the report and this is a informational item. >> good morning commissioners. carla short, interim direct

san francisco public works. thank you again for the opportunity to update on a few noteworthy events. as i reported out at the last meeting, public works team has been at the for front of the city storm response efforts. while we had heavy showers wednesday night, we have been getting a nice break from these distrucktive down pour. since new year eve san francisco reported 17 inches of rain . as you know with the series of storms came a lot of damage keeping our staff extremely busy, so i have some numbers dramatic i think. we distributed 31.397 sand bags to san francisco residents and businesses during a daily operation at our operation yard often amid pounding rain and high winds. working hard to replenish the staut and have more then 15 thousand sand bags on

hand. our street repair crews patched 828 pot holes. consider we average just over 600 pot holes repair a month. today we are already above 800 and the month is only half way over. i don't know if you are aware of why pot holes emerge in the rain. it is interesting science, but it is fairly straight forward. when water seeps under the pavement through a crack the subsurface can start to erode and then it gets worse when vehicles like heavy trucks or buses pass over that compromised area and the roadway can break down more, which creates the pot hole. our crews can repair small pot holes fairly quickly using hot or cold path to smooth the divots and remove the hazard. the goal is patch 90 percent of pot holes reported through 311 within 72 hours and i'm proud to

say during the lastest paiching spree we can close to 95 percent completion rate. next up, flooding and catch basins. as you i think know public works partners with the san francisco public utility commission to help keep catch basins clear of leaves and debris so the rain can run to the storm water system and to help minimize localized flooding. when the rains come fast and heavy like new year's eve the system maxes on capacity and when we see flooding occurs. there is no urban system in the united states that is built to capture that amount of storm water that quickly as we had on that day. since new year's eve we had 942 service orders related to flooding and blocked catch basin. public works clears the catch basin at the surphasis and cleared 852 of those. the san francisco public utility commission which runs our sewer system is

responsible for clearing the drains below ground and they use specialized equipment such as vacuum trucks, 90 of those were transferred to them so if our crews can't get the drain to drain by clearing the surface we refer it over to them. in addition, our trades workers including roofer, plumbers glazier, electricians carpenter and sheet metal workers and painters had a lot of work fixing city buildings effected by the storms. we had 61 service orders for everything from leaking roofs to overflowing drains inside city facilities. we also dealt with 28 rock slides and mud slides. when we get notified of these conditions our engineering team assess the damage, they will recommend the short term safety measures, such as potentially shutting down a street or

placing k-rails at the site to catch falling rocks and then we start looking towards long-term fixes if they are warranted. our street repair and cleaning crews are then also brought in to clear the walks place sands bags and put up barricades. once again it demonstrates how we work together and it pulls from all different sides of the department. the biggest slides in the sit a eare located on it great highway between slote and sky line. next to corona heights playground add twin peaks and 200 block of bookdale and also had a sink hole on 2900 block of buchanan. as i highlighted last meeting, the tree crews have also been front and center. we had 1665 storm related service orders put into our queue. of those, 848 related to fallen trees, tree

branches or limbs threatening property blocking roads or falling on overhead power lines. rounding out the service request were request to trin and prune trees to hopefully prevent falling. thankfully none of the street tree insdants resulted in injury or death. sadly a tree limb fell in golden gate park and killed 73 year old san francisco resident beth aberams. a heartbreaking result. i will try to transition from tragedy to joy. the lunar new year starts on sunday and end february 9. this is the year of the water rabbit. a symbol that embodies diligence patience and cleverness. the operation crews have been working hard getting china town in good shape for the festivities. we have done steam cleaning of the dragon gate at bush and grant and we

have been repainting the colorful dragon light poles that adorn grant avenue. also provide extra deep cleaning in the alleys and busy commercial corridors packed with shoppers during this important holiday season. this year parade will be held february 4, which usually draws hundreds of thousands of onlookers. one of the bigest events in san francisco and the tradition the public work directors is invited to serve as a judge in the best float competition. staff does a lot of work before and after the parade. the street inspector travel to route to make sure construction work is buttoned up or remove hazard, pot hole crews smooth out the parade route and street cleaners come throughout afterwards to clean up the mess left behind. like lots of folks we love a good parade, evefen if there a lot of work so wish everyone a very happy new year. also excited to let you know that love our

city neighborhood beautification day our community based volunteer clean up and beautification program is back for the second year on saturday january 28. the focus will be the outer mission excelsior crocker amazon and district 11 neighborhood. these event bring together community members students neighborhood organizations and city staff. a lot of our public works employees actually come out and volunteer on their day off to work alongside the gardening tree and street cleaning crews to plant trees weed medians paint street furniture, remove graffiti and pick up litter and pitch in on any other projects to make our neighborhoods shine. we work with community groups on their scope they identified. we are frequently joined by district supervisors and other elected officials at these events. so we hope you can join us and i want to give a shout

out to commissioner siegel who already attended before she was seated on the commission. the day gets started at 9 a.m. we will kick off at balboa high school and we do a kick off rally to get everybody fired up and give the volunteers a safety talk and work on the project sites. we'll make sure the commission secretary gets you the schedule for the whole season. next i wanted toologist let you know about our black history month activities organized by staff, for staff and take place throughout february. this year's theme is black resistance. we have three panel discussions on tap which staff is in discussion with outside guest including san francisco state professor suretea (inaudible) arnold touns end and john (inaudible) there will be a series of did you know e-mails that go out to all staff throughout february and the month will cap

with employee pot luck. the department black history month organizing team does an amazing job educating celebrating and inspiring and as always i'm looking forward to what is on the roster and we really learn so much during that month. it is a really great celebration. told rachel not to include this because i wouldn't be able to keep it together. unfortunately i have bad news to share. one of our employees died unexpectedly on the 12. kevin bird was the (inaudible) building and street repair. kevin was a lovely person. positive, kind, hard-working. i literally saw him before our very first commission meeting because they just replaced the carpeting in city hall. he was active in (inaudible) bikejug jogging around

the alameda shoreline and we are comforted to know kevin was at his dojoenjoying what he loved during the final moments. he will be missed and i apologize for my emotion. thank you for taking the time to listen. that concludes my report. >> thank you very much director short. i have couple of follow-ups. the commissioners will certainly strive to immolate the characteristics of the water rabbit. quick question, on the annual lunar new year celebration and parade, do we put out extra trash cans along the parade route since it is a much larger trash load? do the sit a put out extra? >> we don't. we don't put out extra trash cans along the parade

route. that's a- >> should we? >> we do have temporary trash cans that are made from cardboard and so we could look at potentially including those. we do of course have a team ready to come through and clean up after the parade route. >> it is just nice to encourage the parade attendees to put their trash in trash cans but i know in the excitement if there isn't one close by they might not but the more trash cans the merrier if it doesn't interfere with people looking at the parade. it just makes the job easier for staff. i have seen pictures what looks like after the war, victory parade and pride and cut on the garbage in the streets going to the storm drains would be a great thing. perhaps you can consider that. >> i'll investigate the option. >> thank you very much. my ort comment is to the storm response and you mentioned that the trades professionals had assisted a number

facilities with leaks and damage and things like that, when that happens, it is probably a good opportunity to identify weaknesses in the structure, and how does each building and its facility staff then coordinate with dpw going forward on how to freshen up that building, repair it, try to anticipate future failures, things like that? >> great question. the city administrator's office oversees the real estate division, and the city administrator actually asked for department heads to notify-make sure they notify real estate if they are experiencing any issues with their facilities and the real estate department is looking at sort of comphensively identifying the root causes that may need to be addressed and we already been working-i think we briefed you

on looking at facility maintenance on a city wide basis rather then on a department by department basis like roof repairs elevator upgrades and trying to make city dollars go further by working across the city to make those repairs. it sounds to me like they are taking a similar approach with the-a lot of the identifies challenge said that came from this storm and so they'll be the lead on that, the real estate department, and then they will-we work routinely with them, in fact they enter requests directly into our service request system for repairs, so we'll work with them on that. >> okay, thank you. it just seems that if our team sees this roof may not have a lot of life left instead of take thg knowledge and drifting away that gets on the list for a new roof so next storm it is worse. i'm glad

somehow there a coordination and long-term plan once our team goes in and sees problems that occur. thank you mpt commissioner zoubi. >> thank you commissioner post. i want to start by offering our condolences to the family and his colleagues. dpw. we have been seeing all the impacts of the harm of water in san francisco and i saw dpw vehicles and employees working around the clock. my question is, and sure you can guess, it is about the urban forestry part and the trees. i have 311 app on my phone and i use it religiously. it is a great tool. i see a lot of good impact out of it and the only

part of the 311 app that just gives you a message saying, leave it alone, we are doing it is trees. just to get a better picture of what's happening with those trees because they do cause damage and they did end with a life of a person. what can be done-? can we maybe get a presentation of urban forestry with the report of all these and what can we do to give the residents of san francisco access and at least authority or power to get their trees inspected immediately through 311? >> thank you

commissioner zoubi. so, we do have a online map that shows people can go to to look at-first of all, let me start by saying, we can give you a presentation and in fact, we chair post asked we give overviews of the operations divisions as well, so we'll be scheduling those and sure to give you the overview of the urban forestry program. we do inspect when we get request for tree inspection we do send a inspector to look at that tree. the pop up is designed to manage expectations for how quickly we'll be able to do pruning because we are trying to as much as possible stay on a systematic approach which is obviously the most efficient way to do tree pruning where we go block by block rather then one tree here and there. inspections and safety concerns, inspector do

go out and look at the trees and then if they determine a tree may need to be pruned before it's scheduled they will put in the request for the tree crew. so, we also have a public facing map for people who can look at-you can plug in your address and you can see when was the tree last pruned by us and when is it tentatively scheduled to be pruned next, so by that we hope people can get a little bit-feel reassured it is planned and working our way through the city. in terms of immediate inspections, we do have some limitations based on staffing but the inspectors respond to 311 request and look at trees. i think if it is entered as a tree pruning request rather then tree inspection request that may be where you get the pop up message saying we are working through the city on a routine basis. we did work actually as a

result of the recent storm worked with the 311 team to make a new category that relates to tree hazards, because they were entered as tree pruning or damaged tree and so this will help us all i think identify that category more quickly, so if you go in today it is slightly different then what you would have seen a week or two ago in terms of dp you go to damage tree or tree maintenance you get a fallen tree or-i don't have the exact language off the top of my head, but that way we can be sure if somebody is reporting a real tree down in the road or broken tree that we can see that very quickly and respond to that quickly. >> is there any way to-inspections-getting a message back on the 311 app saying it was

inspected? >> yeah, they should get that. when we close the request as the tree was inspected, any notes the inspector put will appear in the 311 app. >> thank you. >> thank you. commissioner newhouse siegel. >> thank you for all the work that this department has done over this emergency. incredible. so, i like-i know about the 311 information on trees and i damaged trees and pruning them, and i actually attended a hearing about people who were not tending to their trees several months ago, and i'm wondering if there could be some kind of outreach or announcement or something letting people know not just

people looking into what to do with their trees-they might not know their tree is danger or people trimming their trees improperly without our knowledge, those trees can be in danger now of falling and hurting someone, so could we possibly do some well publicized announcement saying this information is available on whatever media on the website so they know this is available because it does not appear that people, especially in the older neighborhoods where people are used to trimming their trees themselves and where they have professional gardeners that think they are doing the right thing, but it might end up endanger the public so outreach what you answered to

commissioner zoubi so that something proactive would be great. the other thing is, how do people know-i also noticed people in my neighborhood are complaining about rec park trees that are blocking the sidewalk, so i know the sidewalks, the right of way are our responsibility, but they were concerned about i tried to tell them that, that we are not responsible for trim thg rec park trees, but maybe in that announcement that you are making that education that could let people know, because it is not clear to people that trees-they often overlap to different jurisdictions and just what this all is. there is a lot of changes recently. thank you. >> thank you commissioner siegel. we did do a pretty

robust outreach campaign when we launched street tree sf and had a lot of fliers translated in many languages that said leave the pruning to us and explained we will be embarking on this new maintenance program. we can definitely look at starting that up again because i think we need to do that every few years sowe have a lot of great materials developed for that and we can look at relaunching that campaign. in terms of part of the design of 311 is you don't need to know whether it is public works or rec park responsibility. it is city responsibility. if you call 311 they will let the appropriate party know. the sidewalk inspectors if it comes as inspection they take a look and notify rec park and say we got complaint about your vegetation encroaching on the sidewalk, so hopefully the public can have

good success by relying on 311 and if they identify it is coming from the park, they can send to the park. a sidewalk inspection we would do that and we have a way to send directly to rec park as request for them. >> it would be great-san francisco has so much turnover, especially with the pandemic with renters and air bnb and dog walkers and people are in different neighborhoods, they are not up to speed on what the conditions are. thank you. >> thank you very much. if no further comments or questions from the commission, we'll open the item to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make 3 minutes of comment on item 3, the director's report, may line up against the wall furthest from the door in the chamber. if you are calling in from outside, please

dial 415-655-0001. use the meeting access code, 24876431685 fallowed by pound and pound again and press star 3 to raise your hand to be recognized. does not appear there are members of the public in the chamber looking to speak on this item. sf govern, do we have callers wishing to speak on the director's report? we are seeing one member of the public who raised their hand. please unmute that caller and caller, you have three minutes to speak and i'll provide you with a 30 second warning when your time is about to expire. >> commissioners again, my name is

francisco decosta and i would like you commissioners to look at the situation with the recent infrastructure bill. how you can incorporate needs assessment, logistics when it comes to sand bags. if you watch the tv, again and again we run out of sand bags. why? are we going to fix this problem? number two, talking about combined system. you all have any idea how a combined system works? are you all watching the tv when at 17th and folsom immense damaged was caused? are you fully aware this storm has caused millions and millions

of dollars of damage? we have infrastructure coming in. are y'all prepare today do a needs assessment so we have generators, heavy equipment? address the hot spots. check on the hot spots. you commissioners. we need the workers, the superintendents, your input. that somebody well versed with (inaudible) and stuff like that, landscaping, that's fine, but i'm talking about operations. maintenance. logistics. emergency services. emergency services training. do we have a commander-qualified commander, (inaudible) as we have with the federal emergency management agency? we cannot rely on a

(inaudible) but a commander who really understands how to provide the services. how to build in a plan so that the safety of the people is first. there were many many places where we had- >> 30 seconds. >> thank you very much. >> thank you caller. that is our final commenter on the director's report. >> thank you very much. we will move to item 4, secretary fuller, please call that item. >> item 4 is consent calendar of routine matters. includes the minutes from january 6, 2023 meeting of this commission, a resolution to approve

the findings under the state urgency legislation allowing for hybrid meetings, and the construction contract award for the master as needed agreement m14 curb ramp construction. the minutes include corrections of typos and changes for clarity in the chair's announcements as well as items 3 and 4, and for the contracts award, item 4c, the contract value is above the $1 million threshold for consideration by the commission and below the $5 million threshold to be heard individually in accordance with there contract delegation policy adopted by this commission. as reminder all consent items can be heard individually upon request and adoption of the consent calendar and all resolutions contained in it is an action item. >> thank you secretary fuller. deputy city

attorney taylor is with us today pitch hitting for chris tom. thank you for attending. i have a quick question. can you please remind me, prior taking a motion and second on the consent calendar, may the commissioners ask questions and discuss any item on the calendar? >> deputy city attorney taylor, if you ask questions i would take it off. are you asking questions to city staff? >> yes. too specific, i don't mean to be coy i posed questions to city staff earlier in the week which they responded to in writing but thought their answers would might be of interest to the public and commission so was go toog ask that staff person if he were here to come up and answer my questions again but verbally rather then just leaving it in the written record. >> given that i might

suggest you pull it off consent calendar. >> alright. thank you for the guidance. alrighty. will that be a motion and second to pull it from consent? >> so moved. >> second. >> i don't believe-i think it doesn't require a motion. >> maybe we just request. thank you very much. this pertains to item 4c and so we will entertain that as the first item of business after we discuss consent calendar. alrighty. thank you very much deputy city attorney taylor. we are pulling 4c to regular calendar, thus this leaves 4a, the minutes and 4b, adopting findings and state urgency legislation. is there a motion and second to approve the revised consent calendar?

>> moved, woolford. >> second. >> thank you. we will turn to public comment. >> given the motion we will now hear members of the public who wish to make three minutes of comment on item 4 the adoption of the consent calendar may line up against the wall furthest from the door if in the chamber. calling in dial 415-655-0001. the meeting access code is 24876431685 fallowed by pound and pound again and then press star to raise your hand to speak. looking in the chamber it does not appear any members of the public want to speak on this item in person. sfgovtv, do we have any callers wishing to speak on this motion to adopt the consent

calendar? it appears we have one caller. sfgovtv please ahead and unmute the caller and caller you have three minutes to speak and i'll provide you with a 30 second warning. caller, you have been unmuted, please begin your comments. okay. i think it is a unattended line. please go ahead and mute them again and that is our only public comment on this motion to adopt the

consent calendar. >> thank you. is there any debate on the motion? hearing no debate, all in favor of adopting the consent agenda with the change that we discussed earlier, please say yes. >> yes. >> i believe it issue nanimous and motion passes. secretary fuller will publish the adopted minutes to the commission website. we will move to item number 4c, on the regular calendar. secretary fuller, please call that item. >> item 4c is the master as needed agreement for m14 curb ramp construction contract award and i believe paul is here, the project manager for this and will be able to speak on it and this is a action item. >> good morning commissioners. thank you very much. project manager with

the street resurfacing program at public works. thank you very much for the 3 questions. i can see where they can come from and how this is a little confusing. our typical-i'll go in a little of background. our typical projects are design, bid, build. design them, bid out to contractors and they build them. this is a master as needed with ongoing solicitation for contractors so sort of like a pool of contractors we can get on-board. currently we have three contractors that have this agreement. this specific agreement is for curb ramp construction so when you enter or exit a cross walk is what we are buildings under the contract. the three contractors we have, each have a as needed basis, so on-call if we need to provide curb ramp work to the city. for example-sometimes we need to provide curb ramp work when we pave a intersection and

need the curb ramps biment for compliance, we can use this mechanism to build the curb ramps before the paving comes and paves the intersection. the way it is working, we design a package a contract service order and announce it to the contractors awarded in this pool, they will each provide us a proposal and lowest proposal cost wise will get the work. each contractor now i believe has not to exceed of million dollars so this is the fourth contractor going into this master m14 curb ramp construction agraument. to date we issued to contract service orders. it is good we have more contractors in the pool so when work comes along we have more bids, hopefully more competitive bidding to get a lower price on building the curb ramps we need. with that, i can go into the questions if

you like or-i know the first question is, why did it take 4 years between the request for qual fiications and award of it contract? this is ongoing solicitation. we first solicited this agreement january 2019 so we have a few more months before we close the solicitation and that will be the pool of contractors we can use in the pool. again, it is if, and as needed basis so we may issue work, we may issue no work, it is only when we have work. anything else on the first question there? >> no, i thank you for clarifying and clearing up my confusion. just to recap, many contracts we see the bid goes out a month later, the bid period opened early 2019 but you didn't need a response to this until late 2022? >> right. >> thank you. that is where i was confused

and appreciate you clarifying that. >> sure, thank you. number two, did the excessive delay negatively effect the delivery of public benefits and no, as we get work this is when contracting mechanism we can do to build the work. and the third question was, did the (inaudible) renew their license? yes, we checked the license website and they are good to october 31, 2024. >> thank you very much for attending today and answering my questions. please chalk up to another teaching moment by dpw to the commission. i appreciate you coming by. do any other commissioners have comments or questions? >> i do. >> commissioner zoubi. >> thank you for coming. question, how long is this contract for? >> five years. >> five years and the license expires next year? >> 2024, so we would ask them to renew it

again if they want to get work under this contract. >> and we have three as needed contractors will sign a contract for five years from now? >> right. this is the fourth one going into this as needed. we have 3 currently on-board under this as needed. >> got it. and the contract starts now? 2023. >> that's right. >> thank you. >> hearing no further questions we open the item to public comment. >> madam chair, we need a motion before we go to public comment. >> thank you very much. do i have a motion and second to approve the master as needed agreement for the m14 curb ramp construction? >> so moved. >> i'll second. thank you. now we'll turn to public comment. >> members of the

public who wish to make three minutes of comment on this item 4c, which is the master as needed curb ramp construction contract award, if you are with us in the hearing room please line up against the wall and if you are calling in, please dial 415-655-0001. use the meeting access code 24876431685 fallowed by pound and pound again and press star 3 to raise your hoond hand to be recognized. it appears we do not have any members of the public in person wishing to speak on this item in person. sfgovtv , do we have callers who raised

their hand to be recognized on this item as well? okay, there are no raised hands, so that concludes public comment on this item. >> thank you. is there any debate on this motion? hearing no further debate, all in favor of adopting this motion please say yes. >> yes. >> yes. >> i believe it is unanimous and motion passes. secretary fuller will publish the adopted resolution to our commission website. we will move to item number 5. mr. fuller, please call that item. >> okay. the regular calendar of items to be considered individually, the first is--the next is item 5, the proposed operating budget and

priorities for fiscal year 2023-24 and 24-25 for the department of public works. this presentation is presented by budget manager devon mccally and this is informational item today. it is scheduled as a action item for approval at this commission's meeting on february 3. >> i can not see the presentation on this. i don't have a password. the whole

thing will be on here? okay. don't worry about it. okay. >> thank you. please proceed. >> good morning commissioners and welcome to the members of the public who are in attendance today and watching on sfgovtv. devon mccally the budget manager of san francisco public works. joining me today are three members of the public works finance and budget team, capital budget manager victoria chan, jennifer mar quez and finance administration bruce robertson. we'll give a overview of it public works fiscal 24 -25 budget. the organization and range of services public works provides, the fiscal 23 adopted budget amount and fiscal 24 proposed budget and 25 proposed

budget. commissionerss as you may be aware when the fiscal 23 budget was adopted last july and signed by mayor breed in august we had two department budgets. one for public works, and one for sanitation and streets. with the voteder decision in nrfb to eliminate department of sanitation and streets the fiscal 23 budget value of $450.95 million is consolidated amount of then two department budgets into the rejoined public works fiscal 23 budget. because of the initial split and subsequent rejoining of public works the total value of the knujt is expected to be smaller, similar to values before proposition b processes. we'll go into more detail on those numbers in a moment. first, i like to take a moment to reintroduce the divisions and bureaus of public works. building design and construction provides

the planning architectural building management project management and other related services for new modernization of buildings facilities and landscapeism infrastructure design and construction provides engineering and construction management service through planning, design and project management to produce new infrastructure that is sustainable and highly functional. street use and mapping insure a safe accessible esthetically pleasing public right of way. maintain official city maps, issue public right of way permits and inspect city streets. building and street repair, public works has merged two bureaus. formally the bureau of building repair and bureau of street and sewer repair were separate. building and street repair provide much of the same service as before-(inaudible) management service for city owned facilities and provides emergency repair subs to insure

public safety operations are always functional. in addition to overseeic paving and street prepare, patch paving and pot hole fixes. they also repair sidewalks and are build and maintain curb ramps. urban forestry is responsible for the landscaping and maintenance of medians tree planting and establishment and maintenance of city owned trees. but also operate the city (inaudible) keep the city streets and sidewalks and public spaces clean with mechanical and manual sweeping graffiti abatement power washes and encampment cleanup. general administration provides human resource finance accounting budget preparation capital planning contract administration performance management public affairs emergency management and information technology services. here is a graphic of the public works organizational structure. public

works consist of 4 divisions. infrastructure, buildings, operations, and financial management and administration. each division is lead by a deputy director who reports to director of public works. through the director, the department reports to two commissions, thesonitation and streets commission focused on guidance and oversight of operation division while public works focus on guidance and over site of public works department. the public works performance team compile and monitor data on service delivery metric while those results will be presented at another hearing i want to take a moment and highlight a few metric for the things public works has done in fiscal year 22. public works constructed over 1 thousand curb ramps which meets the city obligation to provide accessible sidewalk

and crosswalks. responding to 150 thousand street cleaning request. 140 thousand graffitee request. paved over 500 blocks. filled over 9 thousand pot holes. planted over 1300 trees with our community partners. maintained over 10 thousand trees. responded to over 2600 building service requests, and swept over 163 thousand miles of streets with our mechanical street sweepers. to all that great work we highlighted public works relies on multiple funding sources in the annual budget. on the slide is two pie charts. the left side represent fiscal 24 sources and the right fiscal 25 sources. i do want to quickly bring to your attention the fact that the fiscal 25 pie chart on the right has a total value

considerably less and absent significant piece then the fiscal 24 chart. this missing piece is the capital project funds where the funding allocation decisions have not yet occurred. public works anticipates receiving a significant allocation of capital funds in fiscal 24 and fiscal 25 after the mayor and are capital planning committee finalize their decisions in may. on the left hand side fiscal 24 department sources currently total $391.6 million. largest piece is interdepartmental funds and account for $159 million. this represents about 5 percent year over year increase. these are funds coming from other city departments. payment for service that public works provides. while this is a significant budget source this is only the funds that exist within the public works annual budget and not include the

funds often multiple larger then this budgeted in other city departments that come to public works during the year. the next source is the general fund continuing. that is light shaded gray. that is 9.1 percent or $35.6 million. this represents a year over year increase of about 17 percent, largely due to increase in cost of issuance and debt service and capital allocations for discreet particular projects. this is continuing allocation of funding from city general fund. the general fund is primarily supported by property tax, business tax, sales tax, hotel tax and transfer taxes. general fund continuing is capital projects and discreet projects such as add back appropriations from the board of supervisors. in the darker gray pie piece, this is general fund operating and this is

about 24 percent or $94 million. this represents a year over year increase of about 1 percent. this again is funding from the city general fund and supported by the same tax i just mentioned. general fund operating is annual allocation to support annual operations. we'll review more in detail later in the presentation. as a summary level if you think general fund operating this funds street cleaning. next is solid waste funds. this is 2.4 percent or $9.5 million. this is funding from the refuge rates and delivered to public works through impound account by department of environment. the process is administered by the controller office. next is the tree maintenance fund. this is about 5.83 percent or $22.9 million. this represents a year over year increase of about

2.4 percent. this funding source is from the tree maintenance fund which is annual baseline amount calculated by the controller from adjusted discretionary general fund revenue. this baseline approved by voters as the proposition e in 2016. next is special revenue funds. this is .614 percent or $2 million represent year over year increase of 4 percent. the funds relate to the pit stop program and comprise of 2.2 million for agreement with jc (inaudible) and $200 thousand from bart. these help offset the scost and staffing of the pit stop program. next is general fund annual. about 2.1 percent and $8.3 million. this represents a year over year increase of about 11 percent. decrease use of the fund balance. this is gas

tax public works receives from the state. san francisco as a city and county receives the county appropriation and road fund and city appropriation in the gas tax fund. these funds support maintenance and repair of medians streets and roadways. next is the gas tax annual. about 4.5 percent or $17.9 million. this is increase of 2.1 and this is funding we receive through gas tax from the state. next is capital funds. about 10.84 percent or $42.5 million. this represents year over year decrease of 56 percent and emphasize here much of the budget process is still to come and we anticipate the capital funding to be increased not only for fiscal 24, but of course 25. that will follow discussion with the capital planning committee and mayor in the months ahead. the funding we currently have the 42.5 is capital gas tax

appropriations from the state, specifically the road maintenance and rehab account dedicated to the public works paving program. now that we discussed where the funds come from and major programs where they are used, this slide represents the uses categories. on the left is fiscal year 24 uses which again total $391.6 million. as you see the dark blue pie piece is the largest and that is labor. that is $211.9 million. year over year increase of about 2.6 percent. this includes salaries, benefits and overhead charges. next in the dark gray is interdepartmental service 53.4 million and decrease of 17 percent. this is work orders for services provided by other city departments that

public works pay for. this includes rent worker compensation, technology infrastructure, central shops for fuel and vehicle maintenance and repair. the year over year decrease is due to removal of the prop b mandated shared administration cost. under prop b the general administration team was shared between public works and san station sanitation and streets. that mechanism was through a work order so with the removal of prop b, that work order goes away. that is responsible for the 17 percent decrease. next in the dark green pie piece is capital and equipment and projects account for approximately 16 percent of the budget for fiscal 24 and currently represent year over year decrease of 40 percent. capital improvement project typically include street resurfacing and pot hole repair, curb ramps sidewalk repair and accelerated

sidewalk abatement, street structure and plaza inspections street scape and bicycle safety improvements. capital equipment includes vehicles such as sweeper trucks aerial lifts lands and chippers to support the department daily operations. next in the orange is the city grant programs. this is funding for non profit services performing street cleaning and landscape maintenance through programs such as the pit stop program, sweepjug watering. this budget is flat year over year. non personnel includes as needed contracts and erl tos and supplies includes cleaning supplies personal protective equipment, safety supplies and items reasonably expected to be consumed in 12 months or less. the increase is due to increasing system consulting services and software licensing

fees. next is facility maintenance funds. these funds are reinvestments for to maintain the public works owned facility. year over year increase of 5 percent. this is part of the capital budget request from last year and will be revisited in the months ahead. funds are used for operating projects such as maintenance of city refuge receptacles dist rth projects including $6.4 million for the pit stop program received in fiscal 22 to board add back and represent 3 percent year over year decrease due to one time adbacks awarded in fiscal 23 which is now expired. this slide looked exclusely at the general fund operating by divisions. in fiscal 24 general fund operating bureaus will

receive $93.9 million and as you can see the largest section is for street is environmental service, that is 85 percent of the funding or about $80.1 million and represents a year over year increase of about 1 percent. this is street cleaning. the next in the green shaded piece is building and street repair which account for 5 percent of the general fund operating, $4.6 million represent year over year increase of 19 percent and due to the equipment appropriations budgeted in fiscal 24. street use and mapping about 9 percent or $8.8 million. represents year over year increase of about 15 percent and again due to equipment appropriations in fiscal 24. and of course we have the commission. 1 percent or about $500 thousand and that represents a year over year decrease of 39 percent due to the deletion of the commission support staff. we had two

commissions previously and still have two commissions but in terms of staff we have just one commission manager and one commission management assistant. this slide is budget snapshot by divisions and this represents the divisions all the funds in the division. the public works budget is reported to manage 7 bureaus. the budge td for the general administration bureau is largely allocates today the other 6 bureaus through the departments and direct cost plan. at the very top building design and construction, the year over year increase of about $2.7 million is comprised mainly from increased labor cost as well as software licensing cost for the capital project management system. next is infrastructure design construction.

year over year decrease reflected is due to the cacapital programs and not reflected in the fiscal 24-25 budget. this amount to $30 million for the street resurfacing and $11.7 million for the critical repair projects. those are not included in the fiscal 24 budget at this time. next is street use and mapping. year over year decrease of about $.6 million a result of the special funds transferred to the general fund. next is the urban forestry. decrease of 4.4 percent or $2.2 million is primarily result of the capital budget for street establishment not yet included in the budget. next is building and street repair. the year over year increase of 3 percent or $1.6

million is primarily result of the equipment purchase request for the street repair program. next is street environmental services, the year over year decrease of.1 percent or about $600 thousand is result of one time add back appropriation in fiscal 23 that are not continuing. next the commission, mentioned the year over year decrease of 39 percent or $300 thousand is it the result of the prop b position deletions. next is general administration. the year over year decrease of 86 percent is a result of several factors and includes impact of prop b in fiscal 23 which makes the year over year comparison dynamic. i like to focus first on fiscal 24 value which is $3.59 million and explain more about the method how general

administration is budgeted. the expense is spread to other divisions and bureaus through indirect cost recovery plan. the cost includes in the general administration budget as a negative expenditure. in a perfect recovery environment the general administration expenditure budget would be perfectly offset and budget show zero. again, the cost is spread to and recovered from the other divisions in bureaus. the actual fiscal year occurs and both expenditures and recovery may differ from the original plan. there is always either under or over recovery at the year end. this over or under recovery is carried forward to future years as means to true-up. the $3.59 million in fiscal 24 is the amount of general fund expenditures public works is intending to under recover. the reason for this is

because public works over-recovered in the past. this amount has already been received and because it is already in a fund balance we don't need to recover in fiscal 24. this existed in fiscal 23 as well. however fiscal 23 had another element to the general administration budget. the fiscal 23 budget again was built under the original prop b plan requiring public works department and sanitation and streets department the general administration team home department is public works but to be largely shared between the two departments. while the general administration expense still needs to be recovered we need to recovery from the separate department the recovery is treated as revenue. this is different accounting treatment thenwritten the department. that is treated as a expenditure. this may

sound complex and from a budgeting perspect ive this is one of the most challenging aspect of the original implementation and reverseal of prop b. now i like to provide you with a summary of the budget value. when we control for prop b and revenue recovery factors, the general administration budget in fiscal 23 was $74.8 million. the general administration budget in fiscal 24 is $70.2 million which reflect decrease of 6.1 percent or $4.6 million. the decrease is primarily result of prop b and two main areas. there was a fiscal 23 appropriation for facility up grades at the operation yard which is one time appropriation and that amounted to $2.6 million. there second is the deletion of 9 full time equivalent

fte positions. for aadditional $2 million in savings. this included the sas director, director management assistant and 7fte for accounting budget administration it support and the department is no longer the positions are no longer applicable. on to fte, full time equivalent positions. the slide before you does not include temporary positions and i do want to call out there is two different types of positions and ft erfx. operating positions on budget positions and those positions are where fte where salary benefit amounts are included in the budget. project positions or off budget positions are those where the salary benefits are not included in the annual budget and these arefunded by ort

funding sources including those of other city departments, bond funds or capital projects. the top of the list, building design and construction, the overall change of 1.05fte represents the annualization of 5 new positions that were approved in last year's budget process. when new positions are approved the fte value in the first year is not a full 1.0ft serks. the city standard is budget the new positions to start after the first quarter, 3 monthinize to the year. this creates a fte value of.79. which of course annualizes to 1.0fte in the following fiscal year. this is watt you see here and what we refer to as position annualization. next is infrastructure design and construction. the change of.21 represents the annualization of one

new position that approved in last year's budget. street use and mapping, the overall change of 1.68fte represent the annualization of 8 new positions from last year. building and street repair, reduction of 1 position is due to merger of the bureau and removing one superintendent position (inaudible) lead the new central operations. urban forestry, the overall change of 2.5 represents annualiation of 10 new positions approved in last year's budget. street environmental service, the change of 2.25 represents annualization of 9 new positions from last year's budget. the commission the overall decrease of 1.7 represents the deletion of the sas commission manager and management assistant

position. general administration, this represents the annualization of 49 new positions approved last year's budget and annualization of 10 additional positions reassigned from the city administrator office at different points during the year for hr as well as the deletion of 9 positions given the voter approval of prop b last november. next like to talk about indirect cost plan components and there is 3 main cost components of the indirect cost plan. the first three components are paid time off, overhead and administration costs. the paid time off is for all holidays vacation sick leave that all employees of public works will receive and take. bureau overhead is the cost that are associated with the

administration of that specific bureau. and the department overhead of course cost is for the cost that is applied to the full department, this is director office, all deputy directors, contract administration, human resources, rent for the 49 south van ness office. and one more component is direct labor. direct labor is project and/or operation service work. it is all the labor other then administrative over head and paid time off. relative to the total of paid time off over head administration cost, the more direct labor public works is able to achieve, the lower the overhead rate required to recover on per hour basis. next is the proposed major

capital programs. those mentioned previously, these discussions will be occurring in the months ahead and this is high level summary what we will be asking for to be funded by the general fund. currently our general fund request is about $135 million which will be going in front of the capital planning committee and mayor office and hope many of those are funded. those of course improve street resurfacing and paving program which is on track to resurface and meet the goal of 500 blocks. the current city wide pavement condition index or pci score is 74 the highest amonth large bay area cities. of course the fiscal 24 goal is resurface 500 blocks with proposed funding support of 33 and $33 and a half million from the general fund. also have the curb ramp program, $4.2 million is request of the general fund for over

hundred curb ramp repair expansion projects. proposed funding $2.5 million for fiscal 24 for curb ramps with subsidewalk basements which is ongoing and continuing program. right of way renewal projectss general fund allocation of $3 million for pot hole repair, $5 million for sidewalk repair and 3.3 million for street structure and half million for plaza inspection and repair. other projects include $2.4 million for sunset boulevard recycled water program. $2 million for street tree planting and establishment and equity priority neighborhoods. $700 thousand for ennesarve new capment and 600 thousand for guardrail repair. next i like

to talk about our cut targets. the mayor office has asked city departments to reduce general fund support 5 percent in the first year growing to 8 percent in the second year and this is a summary how public works will meet its budget instruction target. doing that through revenue decreases and expenditure decreases. the decrease in revenue is collected by the bureau of street use and mapping primarily street space of $1.5 million. street space is the revenue that is collected when a large building project say downtown a contractor wants to close off a street to facilitate their equipment, if they close off the street they have to have a permit to do so. that's what street space is. with the-we have seen the trend of revenue declining over the last 2 years and with the projection of the slow down in the economy we thought it is responsible to

reflect that reduce said revenue in the budget. that did make meet thg target a little more challenging but one we thought was the responsible course to take. that decrease in street space revenue was offset with slight increase from our street cleaning work for the puc and catch basins. they increased about $200 thousand support for street cleaning. the net expenditure decrease or reduction in general administration of $4.2 million. the second year we also are planning to make reduction in non profit grant programs of about $700 thousand. no plan layoffs and expediting hiring for critical positions proposed and no anticipated service reductions from the targets. we will also

be proposing initiatives thin budget. these amounts are not already included in our budget but propose to the mayor for inclusion in the consideration. the first one is mechanical cleaning expansion of about $10.2 million in fiscal 24. this expand street cleaning, allow public works to return to weekly street sweeping in neighborhoods throughout the city. next is private graffiti expansion. we did receive last year budget $2 million allocation for a pilot. this is to expand to ask $3.3 million to provide the staff or enhancement and are enforcement removal of graffiti in high impact parts of city such as mission tenderloin bayview and (inaudible) next is green waste composting site. the procurement of tub grinder, tenant

improvement and lease cost for space to no longer have recology provide the services. that is $1.3 million in fiscal 24. next is maus coney center cleaning expansion to build upon a enhancement we received last year, adds dedicated crew for cleaning amount the moscone center and neighborhoodss. next is funding for expedite mapping review and approval. this is for staff for review of maps to expedite the housing developments. next bsm front counter staff to add two staff dedicated to improving customer service experience at the bsm permit center counter. and lastly construction performance database staff adding one staff member to monitor and manage the construction contract performance data base

recommended by the san francisco civil grand jury. next i like to highlight the ongoing efforts of the racial equity initiative. we really have done a good job with existing staff resources to lay the foundation for our racial equity initiative and going forward, going to have dedicated staff members and consultants that are going to push this initiative forward. currently we are building on the staff survey that the department is implemented as well as there has been racial equity priorities put in every employee performance plan so the major priorities we have is career pathways, rethink the disciplinary processes, empower front line workers, broaden diversity of staff and support and

train the managers. commissioners, thank you for your oversight and guidance and helping us create a even better budget for there coming fiscal year and thank the public works budget team, christopher tang, phillip (inaudible) and victoria chan. not unlike much of the department these members are working harder and smarter given the high vacancy rate and want to highlight their hard work and dedication. that concludes our presentation and happy to answer any questions. >> thank you very much budget manager mccall y and thank you for the briefing you gave to the commissioners in smaller meetings so we could get up to speet more quickly and not just have to rely on getting this all today. i also appreciate you considering comments i sent ahead of time. i

did have one question on slide 13 or page 13 if you don't mind pulling that back up. thismectomy -might be a correction for interim director short. so many of these initiatives it seems to me are one of my pet peeves is dpw cleans up the messes left by other departments that may fall short of their job. do we get enough funding to cleanup those messes, director short? in other words, do you anticipate that we will get all this funding in the mayor's budget as mr. mccally said dpw would like, because dpw carries a big burden in the city of helping other departments look good. it doesn't seem quite

fair we have to go to the trough and ask for more money because other departments perhaps are not carrying their end but that is something we will hear from you about in the months ahead. >> thank you. i can take a crack and also see if mr. mccally has anything to add. this is a going to be a difficult budget year for the city. we do have a significant deficit and all departments have been asked to make cuts. having said that, i think we have had pretty good success with getting many of our particularly cleaning initiatives funded in the past. i think there-i know there is a big focus on economic recovery and obviously clean streets are a big part of that, so i think we will maybe be better placed then some other departments because that is such a

critical component of the economic recovery and been the direction we have gotten from the mayor office for this year's budget. having said that, it is going to be a tough year and they are going to have to make difficult choices about who gets what funded, so i wouldn't speculate whether or not we will be suck fesal. i don't know if the budget manager wants to speculate. >> i'll decline. [laughter] >> thank you very much and thank deputy director robertson sharing prior to the meeting the mayor december budget outlook and department instructions. that was very helpful to give us perspective on what you just said. i guess my only other comment is, how we capture deputy director ko and alameda capital project in the budget preezentation and i appreciate your detailed budget presentation and

understand dpw budget and where it comes from, but their projects even if heavily supported by bond funds for example, bond funds are paid for by taxpayers and so it is all taxpayer money, it is just a question where the taxpayer money comes from and goes into, and so maybe in the future going forward we can think of a way even if not technically part of the official budget prezen taishz or what you are requiring to show to us and required to review, i think it helpful to the public to be reminded of a large portion of dpw work not reflect ed in this budget. a ginormous portion that reflected. i think to the tune of $4 billion, so again just a way maybe going forward we can highlight those departments capital projects, even though it has nothing to do with strictly approving the budget, it feeds into what the department does and

the department of course works together and relies on each other and all sort of part of the same picture so hope you consider that for future years. >> absolutely. i think that's a great recommendation and certainly in term-this is just the annual budget and there will be further conversations to discuss capital within the annual budget. if you look retrospectively in past years you see the impact of the public works work and that could vary from a billion dollars of work up to $4 billion of work and that is predominantly the capital project team, so both from infrastructure design and construction and building design and construction and that is the piece not necessarily reflected thin annual budget but part of the work that the public works staff is doing every year. >> great. thank you very much. commissioner zoubi. >> good to see you again. thank you for the great presentation

and thank frz the warmup in the smaller meeting. i did keep-i was looking at the old presentation of-before that. what determines the amount of funds or sources dpw gets from road funds and gas funds? >> thank you for the question. it is from the state and that is really by the gas tax paid at the pump. that is coming for both city and county appropriations so san francisco as a city and county receives the city share from the state and county. with the fluctuation in gas taxes received that could impact the revenues coming to public works as well as where we might not spend everything in that particular year we have a fund balance and when those

variations do occur in the revenues coming from the state, we are able to use the fund balance in the funds to help maintain the operations that are ongoing for those services. >> so, the state gives counties and cities per square mileage of the city, the amount of vehicles, the amount of streets? how is that determined? >> it is a tax paid by- >> san franciscans? >> at the pump- >> so, my question would be compared to san mateo and san francisco, does san mateo get more because it is a larger county or how is the amounts determined by the state? >> i like to see if deputy director robertson-- >> good morning, bruce

robertson. it is allocation from the state so about this time we are work wg the partners at the state and they provide us a number that they think is going to be reasonable based on the tax on per gallon will be for the city and county. we get the county projection and we get a city projection and what devon and his team does, they take the estimated number and determine whether we agree with it, whether we think it is conservative or maybe too aggressive and budget against that and like any budget number what we do is we get monthly (inaudible) from the state and that basically is just a monthly revenue that we get from the state. it is a state driven allocation that we get from the state. for this fiscal year for the budget process we have the county estimates, but we don't center have the city estimates yet so really it is a allocation that comes from the state and we go with their numbers. they have been doing forever but it is based on sales within

that jurisdiction on per gallon bases and as mentioned it is a unusual because we get both the county and the city portion so get the road fund and gas tax and also get senate bill 1 a couple years ago created the road maintenance rehab account which was additional 12 cent tax per gallon we get that directly funds some of the paving and curb ramp work. you heard earlier talking about the curb ramp contract. part of the money comes from the city general fund or the gas tax we receive. >> got it. so, the state decides what they want? >> we generally go with the state projections. they are more in tune how the money is distributed throughout the state. to their state credit they are fairly accurate what they think we will get. during the covid-19 pandemic things were

askew with people driving less. aside from that they are fairly accurate in terms of forecast and what we actually receive. >> thank you. next question is, the comparison between the sources and the uses, and we are all most hundred billion dollars more then what we projected it to be last year. is that correct? >> are you speaking of just road fund and gas tax? >> no, entire sources. fiscal year 23 and 24, those projections were already on the last year's preezentation and jumped by all most a hundred million. what happened there?

>> bruce is going to come up and comment. >> the last presentation was $299 million and now it is 391. >> thank you. just as this presentation at this point in the fiscal year the capital allocations are not fully included. that was the same situation last year or last presentation. the capital allocations are really budgeted on a annual basis so every year we show this, that second year of the budget last year was fiscal 24 and this fiscal 25 is sus pressed because the capital allocations are not yet included so looking at this point fiscal 24 we already have that capital allocation because the budget process has been completed, but at this point thin year it is more like a timing issue. there is a part of the budget process that hasn't

yet occurred, so that is going to result in that change in the total value of the budget. >> thank you. >> any other question or comments from the commission? we'll turn to public comment please. >> members of the public who wish to make three minutes of comment on item fiver the presentation of the proposed departmental budget for fiscal years 23-24 and 24-25, may line up against the wall in the chamber. if you are calling in please dial 415-655-0001. use the meeting number access code, 24876431685 fallowed by pound and then

pound again and then press star 3 to raise your hand to speak. we have a member of the public wishing to speak on the budget. if you want to approach the micro and you have 3 minutes to speak and will be provided with a 30 second notice when your time is about to expire. >> good morning. brian weeden myer the executive director of friends of urban forest. i acknowledge any budget considered means weighing difficult choices how the government agency like public works spend money and address priorities that are may seem equally important to san franciscans. i want to advocate this morning that you all look at this budget through the lens of our climate emergency and the ongoing climate crisis and

impact of climate change san francisco faces and will continue to face in the years ahead. as you saw from the presentation san francisco voters did a wonderful thing in 2016 by voting for proposition e and establishing the street tree maintenance funds. no similar dedicated source of revenue or general fund set aside exist currently for street tree planting. friends of urban forest is proud to be a partner in the work with department of pub lrk works and city and just to acknowledge heard we heard director short report we lost hundreds of trees during the recent storm events. the trees we will be planting in the years to come, this year and following two years we will not see the benefit of the tree for upward of 20 years. future extreme heat events and drought conditions mean that street trees and urban forest is a essential piece of green infrastructure just like our sea wall, just like the work that the department is doing to make sure we are

resilient to changing climate, street trees protect our most vulnerable residents from heat and drought conditions and we need to invest so here to strongly urge you to continue to invest and uas commissioners to send a strong message to the mayor's office and board of supervisors by approving a budget that has a strong investment continued investment in street tree planting and establishment. we really need to get beyond just maintaining the level of canopy coverage san francisco currently has, which by the way is among the lowest of major cities in the united states and we need to continue to invest and that take investing public resources that are vulnerable to being cut in a deficit budget environment. please consider that. please consider broadly our climate priorities but in particular street tree planting and establishment funding in this budget. thank you. >> thank you. okay.

it appears to be our own in-person commenter. it looks like we have two members of the public who called into speak on this proposed budget. please go ahead and unmute the first caller. caller, you have three minutes to speak and i'll provide you the 30 second notice when your time is about to expire. >> commissioners, again, y'all need to form a small committee to understand this rather large budget. we see missing from the budget communications. a digital platform. when there is a emergency, we need the

right information to go to the right place so the right things happen. we cannot rely on 311 and 911. of course we can't rely on 911 because that isn't the place to go. 311f you do a needs assessment, it is a mickey mouse type of operation. somebody needs a emergency, depending on the call, code 12345, they need to have a (inaudible) now, it is budget and many things are said in a budget. do you know that we do not have a helicopter? san francisco, we used to. do you know we don't have the real heavy machinery equipment in all the

quadrants? what are the quadrants? you have to divide the city into quadraunts and each has to have a captain or whatever designation. having all the equipment. can you imagine if we didn't have sand bags? the sand bag people. there would be large warehouses where we show the sand and so on and so forth. so, we have a large budget. it is very convoluted because a lot interact with agencies like san francisco public utility commission. at one time dpw and water department were one. it was better, now it is convoluted and i can say more but i'll leave at that. you commissioners are very new to this type of operation and the best way for you

commissioners to learn- >> 30 seconds, >> what is happening is to talk to the superintendents as one or two stated to take the time to write to them and get feedback, that's the way to do it. that's the way to do it. my name is francisco decosta and been monitoring all thederment departments for the last 40 years. i get all my (inaudible) from the presidio, having run the presidio and understanding how to- >> thank you, your time expired. thank you for calling. sfgovtv, please unmute the second caller and you have three minutes to speak and i'll provide a 30 second warning. >> great. david pillbell again. i assume you can hear me. i did not stee the mayor's budget instructions in the presentation but it was covered in the oral discussion. i

are appreciate that. the issue today really is the budget priorities under administrative code section 3.3b. i believe we are doing that hearing today. it is unclear to me which units roll up into the 7 or 8 (inaudible) slide 2 shows 7 bureaus. slide 8 and 9 break it into 8 different bureaus and not sure how things will look. for example, central operations and the various general administration functions including some of the bureau management positions. it is also difficult to assess the budget without having position vacancy information or at least summary vacancy information, and some of the performance metric. it seems to

me odd if dpw could meet say 95 percent of its performance metrics within 72 hours or whatever the appropriate metric is, and yet the health department or rec park could only meet 70 percent of their performance goals with the staffing proposed. maybe that's something that the city level mayor office can attempt to reconcile, but having the performance data to go along with the position and vac ancy information allows you to correlate so in some cases adding to the staff in a particular unit allows you to better meet performance goals, whereas, eliminating or keeping vacant one or two positions would not hurt performance. it is all very detailed. i'm also thinking about various ways to consolidate

and streamline functions throughout the department where possible. i'm wondering on slide 13 which of the new budget proposals can be covered by increased fees or recovery through the indirect cost. >> 30 seconds. >> such as increase bsm staffing and-one moment. and the contractor performance database. and just finally, i don't think weekly street cleaning is (inaudible) reduce and target to where it is needed- >> thank you, your time expired. okay. that is our final caller for public comment on this item.

>> thank you. is there further discussion or questions from the commission? budget manager mccally if you could-thank you. we are scheduled to have a special budget hearing if needed a week from today. if we have the meeting do you plan to give us any additional information from what we had today? >> the presentation is largely the same but can expand on a few elements, for instance can talk invect verse direct cost but largely the numbers will be as they are currently. >> thank you. i would like to propose we do not have a special meeting a week from today but that we then in two weeks at the regular meeting hold the vote on the budget and during that regular calendar item mr. mccally can

present any additional information or revisions at that time. would anyone like a special meeting a week from today or are you alright waiting two weeks on the day we vote? >> i will be traveling to take care of my father next week so i won't be here so wouldn't be able to attend so perfectly comfortable with the recommendation holding at it regular hearing in two weeks. >> thank you. alrighty, i think we will not have a special meeting next friday on the budget. you get a break but we'll see you in two weeks for that when we actually vote and certainly feel free to present anything further or change anything. whatever would be most helpful for informing us before we vote. >> thank you. >> thank you very much for today's presentation. >> thank you. >> alrighty. it is 1134. i would like to call a short break until 1145. we'll reconvene at 1145.

>> item 6, secretary fuller, please call that item. >> item 6 is the contract award for the castro station elevator construction. this contract value is above the $5 million threshold for construction contracts to be heard individually on the regular calendar. this is a action item and project manager jane chan will present it. >> hello everyone. sorry, there we go. commissioners, director short and the general public, my name is jane chan, an architect with bureau of architecture at building design and construction.

building design and construction and bureau architecture are the projbect lead for the castro station elevator project, and here i am to present it. so, the recommendation is for this project to be awarded to clw builders inc. for the amount of 11 million 540 thousand. the duration of the project is estimated at 600 days, roughly 20month jz the goal of the project is improve accessible at castro station and to be able to connect castro station better with the bus line nearby. going to talk about the overview of the project. the client agency is sfmta. the

project lead as i mentioned earlier is bureau architecture within building design and construction. we also have other public works colleagues working on this project from infrastructure design and construction. the engineers from that department and we also have as needed consultants providing services that we don't have capacity for this project. so, the scope of the work is this project is fairly straight forward in terms of design services. we provided an initial site analysis to figure out where best to place this new elevator. one thing i do want to say currently at castro station there is a existing street elevator and it only goes two stops from

street to the concourse level so this new elevator would be a 4 stop elevator that would connect the two levels of the streets so we have market street and castro street roughly about 8 feet in elevation change, and then we also have the concourse level and the platform level, so this elevator would be to access all the different levels at the station. the design team have prepared the construction documents. we also obtained the necessary approvals from the san francisco arts commission where mr. commissioner woolford you are a part of that and we also presented the project to the general project. the project was also reviewed by the planning department and we are under review right now at bart, which is the

owner of the station, so the station was built as part of barts construction along market street. bart had built 4 market street station that surface both muni and bart and there are two other market street stations, the castro station as well as church street station so those two stations are muni only. muni in this case lease those station from bart. at the end of the day, bart is the owner of the station. our department will also be providing construction administration services on this project. so, this is a project overview. i just want to talk about the existing

conditions and why we propose. as i mentioned before rfx there is only one elevator currently at the station, which is on the north side of market street. folks who are on the south side of market street will have to cross market street, which is quite wide at that point and if in a wheelchair difficult to navigate the slopes so the elevator had always been a little difficult to access. our proposal of additional elevator on the south side is to provide better access for the folks who are on that side of the street. and also on south side of the street, there are two bus stations right adjacent to the castro station. one along market street, and one along castro street, so the 35, 37, the 24

and i believe the 6 are all stopping around that area. all of those buses with people getting dropped off and getting on, most of them would connect directly or access castro station, so in this case, the elevator is also to provide additional surfaces so people getting off it bus would be able to get to the elevator and get down to the station easily. also, on site there are several physical challenges. the station and also the plaza, that was built back in the 1980's, so the finishes and lots of infrastructure are quite old. the street lights along the stretch of the sidewalk are very dim, some are broken, so part of our improvements is to replace not only just

adding a elevator, but also improving the conditions of the sidewalk and also adding additional streetlights and we are also proposing to continue the accessibility path of travel all the way from castro and market to another block over, which is (inaudible) and market and from that point also proposing two new curb ramps and then also a new crosswalk. so, this is a overview of the scope of work. you can see that the blue is the newly proposed elevator. the red is the accessible path of travel improvements and then the curb ramp is on the far left corner where there's going to be one on the

castro side and then one on the receiving end across the street. so, this is the image of the project overview. the proposed elevator is a tower. a good portion of the tower roughly about 39 feet of will be exposed and then another 14 feet is buried below ground, so the total tower is roughly about 55 feet. the visible portion is only about 39. the design and also the construction of the new elevator tower would be integrated with the existing architecture and also the structural system of the station. the

station itself is constructed-type 1 construction, which means non combustible so the elevator tower we are proposing is also of that same type of construction of glass and steel and concrete. and as i mentioned earlier, this is the 4 stop elevator, so the elevator would stop at market street level, with a very short bridge to connect market street to the elevator to the tower and also stop at the upper plaza level and this is the level that is accessible directly from castro street, so this is the upper side of harvey milk plaza. it also stops at the concourse level where passengers will be able to on-board or go directly to the-go into the station or

come out of the station and if they need to take a elvart they are able to get on the elevator at that opponent point and down to the platform level and this is on the in-bound platform side. some additional street level site improvements including replacing the break sidewalk on the corner of the castro and market side. we are replacing it with a sparkled grained colored concrete that iscurrently installed along castro street on both side of castro street so this would be a continuation of the colored concrete all the way around into our sifement we are also replacing the existing light with new street lights and replanting the area where the construction site is going to be.

we are also widening a portion of the sidewalk along market street that is currently very narrow. we are widening it to align with the rest of the portion of the sidewalk that is little wider. (inaudible) about 5 feet but wide enough somebody in a wheelchair might be able to navigate. and then we are doing additional improvements at it concourse level. there will be replanting and also new paving at the concourse level. the existing paving at the concourse could get very slippery when it rains so we are proposing to replace with a material that has more traction. we are also replacing a portion of the fencing around the concourse to provide-to be more

integrateed with the existing concourse and providing a new gate so when the elevator is-when the station is shut down, the new gate would be able to provide continuous barrier from the outside. and in addition to that, we are going to be replacing some of the interpretative signage of harvey milk down there in the plaza, and a new bench commemorative bench. and then down at the platform level, we are proposing a roughly 17 foot long tunnel connecting from where the elevator is to where the proposed elevator is to the platform. as you can see there on the left image. and then the

right image there shows a cross section of the elevator that you can see that is a tall skinny tower as you called it roughly about 13 by 14 feet. so, we received three bids on this for this project. they were all timely bids. after tabulation of the bids, clw builder inc. was the apparent low bidder. the funding the construction funding hawse already been partially funded by mta. they consist of prop a, mta operating budget funding, and also the transportation sustainability fee funding. so, the

contract amount is for 11 million, 540 thousand. duration is 600 calendar days. we for this project we have met the 20 percent local business enterprise lbe requirements and the project was also categorically exempt by the planning department because the main portion of the project is accessory building, the elevator tower is accessory building to the station. so, i have -these are the key milestone dates for the project. it was advertised back in april of last year. bid open in august. i know it seems like quite a long duration for bid. this project

had a couple challenges when it comes to bidding. one of the most challenging part i think some of the bidders were a bit concerned at the beginning is a portion of the bid document is considered sensitive security information because the construction document, the drawings shows a good portion of the station. it shows where the electrical rooms are, where the mechanical spaces are, so that was considered sensitive, and so the bidders were asked to actually they have to sign a non discloser agreement first and then they have to make their way to sfmta to physically pick up paper copy of the drawings and then share that with their bidders. so, it had greatly slowed down

the way people can review the drawings and the documents and so forth. there were two separate requests from the bidder for a total duration of 10 weeks, so the bid was delayed by 10 weeks based on the challenging circumstance of the material. and then we hope to issue note to proceed after this is awarded in march, and start construction in march, and roughly a 20 month construction duration we should be reaching substantial completion by november, 2024. i

think from this point on, i am just showing some renderings that we are projecting to eventually replace with photograph. this is a view, looking at twin peaks behind of the proposed elevator. you can see that the elevator at this point at the castro street level has two connections. one is a connection from the castro level,er and then 8 feet above is the connection from the market street level. then some additional images of market street level entry point and also the castro street level entry point. the idea of the design had always been that we wanted this to not

just be a elevator. it serves the functions as a elevator, but we also want this to be a destination. we want it to be a landmark at this corner of castro street. the intent of the design had been that we are envisioning a lanten, as you will at that corner, which is the darker corner of the hustle and bustle of castro street, so this is is a image that is something that we've always envisioned from day one of the project. i would like to address a couple questions that chair post you had commented and asked. secretary fuller shared those comments with me. so,

i think one of the first questions or comment is that, since this project had not been awarded and we dont really have a schedule, we have a tentative schedule, but don't have a full construction schedule so, when we get clw on-board and we come up with a full construction schedule i'll be happy to come back and share that with you. and then there are two questions about the bid. one question that you had asked was why there are two bids, that are much higher then clw's bid and it just happens that those two other bids are at $19 million. one is 19 and one is 19.6 and clw bid is 11.5. i think the two bids happen to be at 19, i

think that is a pure coincident. looking at the tabulation and also looking at the itemized bid numbers for both of those companies, they are very very different. one thing that i could say that is-their numbers are really different from clw number, the low bidder's number is that, two of the higher bids definitely have much higher numbers for the point supported gloss system so the gloss box that encloses the elevator tower. one of them is about twice i think all most three times the amount as clw number and the other was about $200 thousand more. there is also a very large

discrepancy between steel and concrete. clw's bid of steel and concrete are pretty much in line with the cost estimate that we did for the project, and i reviewed all of their numbers very closely with our cost estimator and we agreed most of the itemized numbers if you look closely, they are very in line with our cost estimate. versus the two higher bidder numbers are some are way off and some of them are much lower. i guess i'm not really having a really good answer for you chair post. i can only say that i believe the reason for the higher numbers is that, we are in the bidding climate that i think a lot of numbers are all over the

place. we have seen other projects, which we have some very low bids and some very high bids and something between, so in this case it happens we have one low bid, which is really close to our cost estimate of $12 million, and then we have two much higher bids. so, and then you have another question about why was there a correction of bid prices after contract admin reviewed the tabulation? that is because for one, there was a calculation error on the contractor's-the bidders side. trico submitted one number that was multiplied incorrectly. and then another is because there was a typo, i think the 4 looked like a 9, and it should be a 9 but calculated as a 4, so

we had corrected that when we did the review of the bids and hence the corrections. i think that's about it with my presentation. i would just recommend that the commission will be able to review this and award the project to clw. thank you. >> thank you very much project manager chan and thank you for answering my questions. i have a couple follow-up though. you did a very nice job answering my question to the bid discrepancy, but i guess should we be nervous the point supportive glass system was similar in the two high bids? and understand your explanation about steel and concrete. i'm confident about that, but should be nervous perhaps winning bidder underestimated the

glass system? >> actually, i had to do due diligence after all the bids came in. we have been working with (inaudible) structures the vendor for the point supported glass system, and i reviewed the numbers with them after the three numbers came in for specifically for this particular item, and he agreed with clw number. they have given us a preliminary cost when we are doing the design,b and that's very similar to clw number which is in the $400 thousand range. >> okay, thank you very much. you said you were hopeful about the notice to proceed in march. why are you not more confident that it is likely there will be a notice to proceed in march? >> i was just telling ron about some of the

other challenges we have. this project being-bart being the owner of this project, they would have to grant us the building permit for this project, so that is still in negotiation at this point. our city attorney's office have been working with bart's attorney. at this point we don't have a finalized permit yet, and know we can't ntp until we have that, so we are waiting eagerly for that to happen. >> thank you. i must say, i did not know bart owned the church and castro street stations. that was very informative. thank you. perhaps interim director short will look forward to good news if you could let us know when that permit from bart comes through. >> i would be happy to let you know. >> thank you. i must say, i feeling so youthful until you mentioned when the castro street station open because i was here when it opened. i lived nearby. it

was a big deal and exciting and took it all the time and still occasionally use that station, and it was of course new and exciting and great shape so it is nice we are giving it a refresh because it needs one. a couple questions, is the neighborhood the business owners in the neighborhood and residents in the neighborhood you said there was public input, did you is a hearing or two in the community to show them the renderings and discuss with them? >> yeah. we have done several public outreach. this is all mta lead outreach efforts, so we as the design team participated in this outreach. we presented to the-i believe called a castro merchant group and also another presentation to the friends of the harvey milk plaza. i'm not sure if the commissioners know that there is a

concurrent project going on right now that is in design phase to redesign harvey milk plaza. so, we worked really closely with them to merge our design with their design. however their design is still-i believe they finished design development and they have gotten ceqa exemption just recently, but they are still quite a bit behind, but they are designing around the proposed elevator that we are going to be building. >> great. thank you. about that elevator, i want to clarify, is this going in the footprint of the existing elevator or new? >> this is new elevator structure. the existing elevator on the north side of market street and we are on the south side. harvey milk plaza. (inaudible) >> the existing elevator is kept? >> the elevator as

mentioned is challenging to get to in a wheelchair because it- >> i congratulate on the design. it is very difficult site with all the elevation changes. very tricky. were you design this elevator? were you a part of the team that did? congratulate on a lovely design. >> thank you. >> it really looks first rate in the renderings. >> i hope we can replace those renderings photographs in a few years. >> look forward. it looks like a terrific addition to the naerbd and the city. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners zoubi. >> thank you for the presentation. i was assuming that community outreach comes way before we get to the point where we actually start the bids, right? >> uh-huh. >> my question is, first question is, i notice that it says

600 days, 20 months. does that include all the moratoriums since it is a commercial area over there? how are the moratoriums? (inaudible) >> yeah. that is all counted into construction schedule. that's why it is 20 months. it is a pretty small project, but the site as you know is quite challenging. there's market street on one side, businesses and condominiums and residential on the other side, so the construction will only take place during the day. we have not planned out any night work unless it is absolutely necessary. that's why we are studying the overall schedule for the contract. we realized we will need all the time, the entire 20 months to go from mtp to substantial

completion. >> you are the project manager that will be watching? >> i'm the project architect. we dont have a project manager on this project, on the public works end. this is what i would call a legacy project that we started back in 2017, so at that point it was just going to be the elevator and the project expanded to a much larger scope of work. >> no one is watching the winning bidder from dpw? for example, let's say the construction company decides to buy that glass from texas, which is a state that prohibited to do business with. >> that was the substitution material substitution that has to be reviewed by us the design team. >> got it. >> we are manage-we are part of the

construction administration process, so we are doing ca work in this case on this project. following through-we will be around for the next 20 months at least. if not longer. >> there was a protest on this bid? >> yes. >> can you tell me more about that? >> we had three bids. the protest came from the two higher bidders. one was specific to-one was about clw steel subcontractor not having aisc certification, american institute of steel construction certification. after checking with clw and clw confirmed that

their subcontractor, ibs, usa is in the process of getting that certification and we have gotten documentation proving that they are in the process of getting certified, so the final determination is that the bid protest is null, because they are in the certification process. that was bid protest number 1 and that came from trico construction. bid protest number 2 came from the other bidder, rubicon and that was regarding clw had not listed all their subcontractors that will be performing half of 1 percent of the work and we had asked-for that we asked clw to submit supplementary bid forms, which had more

detailed listing of who their subs are. in this case, we have a good understanding that they have enough subs that will perform the 1 half of 1 percent that would meet the goal and then we also understood that for whatever they are not listing clw themselves will be doing the work. those are the two criterias of meeting the goal set forth by contract monitoring. >> at what point do other bidders have access to their colleagues or other construction companies that submitted a bid? >> all of that information-in order for us to respond to these bid protests we have to share all the information. once we review the bid protests, the process is that we reached out to clw in this case

and for them to respond to the protest. and all that information that we have gotten from clw was shared with the other bidders. >> thank you. >> last question i promise. in the contract itself, is there a clause that addresses late surrender or completion of the project to the construction company? the winning bidder? >> perhaps i can answer that question. our construction contracts have language regarding delay. we have liquidated damagesism we have specific number of days that contracts have to be completed and we have various provisions that deal with contractors who do not perform in the time specified. >> thank you. >> thank you.

>> thank you. commissioner woolford. >> thank you. jane, good to see you again. >> good to see you. >> i have seen the project under various iterations overthe last 6 years so you answered the questions about coordinated with the friends so elevation points are aligned. that is privately sponsored project to coordinate with the city. having seen all the presentations and review of the various design iterations i can share it is a incredibly important and missing public point of access. this is one of the most highly used stations, the north elevator is not appropriate and sufficient for demands today. the neighborhood has many people with different ambulatory needs whether it might be a parent a child or someone older in a wheelchair or crutches or walker and it is really a challenge for everyone to get-the new elvariety and multiple points of

access will address all of those concerns, so i endorse this. all the points that jane was sharing about contract disputes, about timelines are all normal and part of the process in a typical city project in which there is this much attention and frankly this much concern from a variety of sources and neighbors that the city very carefully worked throw so thank you for everything and i'll support it. >> thank you. >> thank you commissioner woolford. very helpful. commissioner newhouse siegel. >> throughout the process but also during the period of bidding and after the bid protest and choice of the lowest bidder, what other departments were consulted about this through the change of the project?

was sfpd consulted about security that would be involved in this? were maintenance, are we responsible pr maintenance or mta responsible for maintenance? has bart been consulted because they will be involved? there are so many-i think it is beautiful and hope to use it, but all the different stages, i like to know how it interacts and security is so important now and always and i appreciate that they didn't publicize all the details and had non disclosure agreement about that, but did we go to all the security agencies that are required in this? >> the project was reviewed with bart so still working out a permit approval from bart, so bart is most

definitely aware of the project. and then with regards to our clients agency in this case sfmta, they are instrumental in getting this project through the review process and also just being the champion for the project. we had multiple meetings with various folks at mta to figure how this building being glass and all will be eventually maintained, so the direction is that mta would spearhead the maintenance process.

and then we had also talked about the castro cbd, that has been maintaining the planting area around the proposed elevator, so they will continue that and maintaining the landscape area and then also this is also in the public right of way, so i'm sure public works would have a role in that too in terms of overall maintenance. in terms of the question about sfpd, we have not reached out directly to sfpd with this project. this is something that i need to discuss with my mta counterpart to see if how we could go about addressing this. the station itself in

term s of security and safety, that's mainly maintained by mta. bart has no role in it because they don't really-even though they own the station but they don't have presence at the station. so, the station in terms of the maintenance of the gate and how the station is shut off after it closes, that's all on mta at this point, so i would like to have a discussion with mta security and see how we can further understand the overall security aspect at the station. but that is a really good question. >> i would be concerned sfpd and all the other security organizations are so challenged in terms of staffing, and budget, but even with higher budgets staffing is

still a problem, so- >> yeah. >> remote location and it is hard to keep it safe and monitored. >> i understand your concerns. >> thank you. >> i hope to have a answer for you shortly. >> thank you. commissioner woolford. >> yfs go toog share having seen the project go through multiple years of revision and design all the issues you talked about commissioner newhouse siegel were addressed, there was much vetting on it and the central reason for the elevator is for both access and also security. the other elevator is not in the spot that is-it is across from the gas station so not eyes on the street. this is the vertical point of circulation entering and exiting the

station and the design of it is also intended to be a beacon of light so everything jane was sharing about all the lighting improvement and increased lighting we worked through every issue so there is a lot of diligence on that, so just from my perspective having seen from another commission i think it will be enhancement and improvement and will be more light in the area. >> i want to add to that, thank you commissioner woolford. the elevator being a glass elevator it is not only glass on exterior but the elevator cap is mainly glass on at least three sides, so in which case people who are coming in and out of the elevator will be seen and that's part of providing additional security is that you will feel safe if you are visible by people around you, so that was a specific request at the beginning of

this design by sfmta is make it as transparent as possible. >> thank you. commissioner zoubi. commissioner newhouse siegel. >> thank you. i appreciate this. it is gorgeous and i can see many sets of movies at this spot. it is definitely a destination. >> thank you. >> i'm still concerned about security and one final question. after the lower bid was chosen during this period, the construction of the steel and the glass that were part of the questions of the protest, are they as secure and have they been reevaluated by the security

organizations? >> i'm sorry-- >> by mta, by-i dont know, it might be home land security as well. are these as strong for security purposes, the glass and the steel that are less expensive. >> you mean the construction of the glass and the steel? >> not just the construction, but the composition of them. >> the project have been reviewed by sfmta security. off the top of my head i can't recall the name of that department, but it have been reviewed by them and not sure if answer your question, but ultimately they are the ones that determine that we

cannot share the station information with the public, so that's why it was a-the bidding process was elongigated because of the information. i'm not sure if i answered your question correctly. >> you can't guarantee anything, but- >> yeah. >> we are creating something that is beautiful and high visibility and we want to make sure that it is secure. >> we are hoping that the eyes on the street will be part of the security system. it is a busy corner, however it does get pretty quite at night, so by having more light at that corner and just having more activity of people coming in and out of the elevator and going up and down would be able to activate the area and hopefully creating a safer environment for people

passing through at night. >> thank you. good luck with this. i will support it and i plan to use it and-- >> thank you. >> thank you commissioner. commissioner zoubi. >> this is a general question. who is in charge of the environmental testing of the-we were just-(inaudible) there is a gas station right there. does the construction company, are they responsible to go do a phase 1, phase 2 and make sure the store looks good or us? >> well, we are actually not on the gas station side, we are on the opside side. >> across the street. >> right, across the street. so, our (inaudible) department had contracted as needed consultant to do a work plan of all

the remediation work that we might need to do that we will need to do when construction starts. we actually done-we have done surveys and we done sampling of the areas that will be part of the construction scope, and surprisingly there is not a lot of really very contaminated materials that we have to deal with. there is some paint material that we need to address down in the platform level. in general the soils are pretty clean, so there is not a lot of work that we have to do to clean up the soils in the immediate area where we are going to be digging down and creating the foundation for the elevator. so, there is definitely miner remediation that needs to be done and that will be done by the general contractor so there is a allowance

that is part of the overall contract. >> so, the environmental review phase 1 phase 2 are done by us? >> by us. >> (inaudible) mta and the project budget-we just pass it on to who ever wins the bid, ready to go? >> yeah. >> thank you. >> commissioner woolford. >> i thought maybe it is helpful to put clarification around the process that the department goes through. civil geotechnical work are done on projects like this with structural conditions so there is analysis about appropriateness before design begins. through the process does the bid effect the integrity if you will of the construction materials and the answer to that is no. specifications are written that are extremely specific, written by the bureau, written by the architect , those specifications guide

no matter who bids so if you bid a dollar or hundred dollars you have to meet expectations of the very specific specifications. so there should be no concern about a bid being of one amount or another amount. that is what the bureau does, they review these bids to make sure that the bid and in fact there was a couple disputes and it went back and you clearly explained why and how they were resolved, but in every case based on the process that the department has to go through each step of the way and the specifications that are written there should be no concern from the commission or public side that the integrity of anything built is more or less because of the award amount. >> thank you. >> thank you commissioner woolford. i have one more question and this is something we brought up around other projects. you mentioned sfmta will be maintaining the work once it is done and so what happens

when mrs. chan the ribbon is cut and moves on to the next project? this is a continuing conversation director short on maintenance of dpw projects after dpw hands them off. i realize it is sfmta but if we can keep thinking how to have more a stake in the maintenance of the project or invest clients with more a stake, coordinate with them so that if there are maintenance issues that arise on this in months and years to come, that would be a waste of taxpayer money and dpw time putting their hort and soul in their project. not suggesting that mrs. chan drop by the station every--something to think about on how can we make sure these facilities that dpw builds are maintained by the client organization if we are

not maintaining it. thank you. >> thank you. >> any other discussion or comments before we go to public comment on this item? is there a motion and second to approve the contract award? >> moved, woolford. >> second. >> thank you. we will go to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make three minutes of comment on this item 6, the construction contract award for the castro station elevator, may line up against the wall furthest from the door in the chamber. if calling in, please dial 415-655-0001. use the meeting number access code, 24876431685 fallowed by pound and pound again and then to rise

your hand please press star 3 on your touch pad. it does not appear we have any members of the public in-person wanting to comment on this item. sfgovtv, do we have any members of the public in the queue looking to speak on this? they are indicating there is one caller on this item. please unmute the caller and caller you have three minutes to speak and i'll provide you with a 30 second warning. >> david pillpel, i assume you can hear me. on the last item on the budget i was cut off and wanted to say i may follow up with staff and or written comments to address more specifics on that so devon with expect a call later. i believe bart owns as well the van ness and west portal stations but not forest hill station. that was an original muni station from back in 1918. i have mixed feelings about the new elevator

and harvey milk plaza changes but is what it is as they say. i do have concerns about muni operations and passenger access during construction. if there are exposed metal eltments including the bench replacement, particularly as relates to rust whether rain or fog at that location and signage, the plaza the redesign bridge plaza portion but also the elevator itself with the various entrances indicate when the station is close that (inaudible) i'm also just wondering what would happen to the two existing station elevators, particularly the existing platform to concourse elevator on

the inbound side. i suspect we end up with two elevators on the south side. one that goes to the top and one that only goes goes to the concourse level but if the existing elvariety is being taken out of-just trying to understand what happens to the existing south side elevator. i assume there is electrical conduit in the station that will be relocated both exposed in front of the brick wall and behind the brick wall and that will be (inaudible) it is nice if dpw and mta staff can also review the north side for lighting concerns and perhaps also exercise the emergency exit on the north and south sides of the street east of castro that rarely get opened just to be sure they still work. i don't know if that happened

recently. there may be issues of graffiti maintenance of the elevators you just spoke about and unfortunately urine in the elevator and elevator shaft is a huge problem for bart and hope bart is addressing those issues. that is all i have. thank you. >> thank you caller. that is our final public commenter on this item. >> thank you. is there debate on the motion? hearing no debate, all in favor of awarding this contract please say yes. >> yes. >> yes. >> i believe unanimous. the motion passes. secretary fuller will publish the adopted resolution for the item to the commission website. thank you mrs. chan and we'll move on to item number 7. >> thank you very much. >> please call that item. >> item 7 is public

works department infrastructure design and construction and building design and construction performance measures report. bureau of engineering manager (inaudible) and bureau architecture manager julia (inaudible) will present this item and this is an informational item. >> good afternoon commissioners. good to see you again. i'm (inaudible) acting manager for bureau engineering, and today

i'll be presenting the (inaudible) pertaining to capital projects. all bureaus of infrastructure and building division deliver these capital projects on behalf of the city. i would also take this opportunity to acknowledge the support received from our finance division staff and operation division staff. finance division staff are taking care of the financial matters for the capital projects and opposition decision staff because (inaudible) and also the performance management team that helps manage the data. this slide shows the projects by phase.

public works is involved on large portfolio of 423 active projects totaling $4.4 billion. this includes 136 projects that are in planning design phase and 142 projects in construction phase. this is just a snapshot of data as of two weeks ago. it can also be noticed from the slide that public works provides services on pretty much all the phases of the projects. chair post you had asked me to include or briefly explain the different terminology used on few slides as well as site example project. i'll try to do that on this slide as well as the couple other slides. planning phase. some of the projects have planning phase to (inaudible)

studies and analysis is performed, potential alternatives identified, (inaudible) to study the alternatives and then select a different alternative and conceptual design prepared. a example, planning phase work is performed for a $88 million project. that is currently under planning phase. design phase, during design phase concept design is developed and detail design and documents prepared used for soliciting bids from the contractor. folsom (inaudible) valued at $10 mix million des currently under design phase and this is one where the caller mentioned pertaining the flooding in the 17th and folsom area neighborhood so this will help flooding in the neighborhood of 17th and folsom. bid

award phase. during the bid award phase the contractor advertise the bids to select the contractor and award the contract for construction work. we received bids for location payment invasion 59 recently and it will be presented to you i believe on march 3 to obtain your approval for award to a contractor for approximate value of $7.6 million. construction phase, yackter procures approved materials mobility to the site and performs construction work during the construction phase of the project in accordance with the contract documents which is plans (inaudible) codes regulations and standards. construction work is ongoing on one of the projects, (inaudible) total project cost of $49 million and includes sewer water as well as auxiliary

water system (inaudible) as well as (inaudible) maintenance phase. some of the projects such as street scape and (inaudible) have a specific maintenance period after construction is completed during which the contractor is responsible to maintain the site with establishments of plans. folsom street scape project is currently under the maintenance phase. close-out phase. this phase includes review and approval of full construction submittal from the contractor, acceptance of contractor work, making final payment to the contractor as well as financial close out. lumbard street (inaudible) completed and has a project value of $36 million is currently under the close-out phase. a slide will be included in future presentation including comparison (inaudible) understanding the data is just a snapshot in

time. this slide shows projects by client. as shown in addition to the projects internal public works program, we provide professional service to the host of clients for construction replacement and improvements of wide range of interest to project of (inaudible) public buildings and facilities and open space projects. breakdown of active projects by client are shown on the slide and you can see sfmta and sfpuc are two of the largest clients. again, for your request chair, i'll provide example of a project for each of the client. puc. sfpuc has a facility in (inaudible) for water enterprise. we are working on the $237 million project

that will include construction of new buildings at this facility that include administration building maintenance shops and (inaudible) we also prepared design and planning for another project which is $55 million north shore facility implement project. this facility is located across pier 39 and currently this project is under construction. public works. i think i have given you a example but besides that i can site another example. (inaudible) mta. 56 million $56 million parking enforcement and 7 $7 million project you approved a couple months ago (inaudible) in western addition are two examples of the projects for mta. department of public

health. $64 million china town public health center which is currently under design. that project will be doing (inaudible) as well architectural mechanical electrical upgrades that is from department of public health. recreation and park department, i cited an example earlier, (inaudible) that project includes (inaudible) existing historic structure and replacement of existing annex. (inaudible) building function as multi-use recreation center as well as emergency operation center when required. san francisco public library. $25 million mission branch library project is a example of a project from this client and it is under bid and award phase currently. san francisco fire department. in addition to various fire stations that we

have worked on and improved in the recent past, currently we are working on $250 million fire training facility under planning phase. san francisco police department. (inaudible) please station renovation project is a example of a police department project and which is under design. san francisco real estate. south van ness (inaudible) is a example of a project from department of real estate. ocii, transbay block 3 has park and street scape improvement work under design phase and has a project (inaudible) $7.6 million. mayor's office. hunter view phase 1 and phase 2 projects, development projects are the examples from the (inaudible) housing

oversight. gsa. our new office building at 49 south van ness is a example of gsa managed project. department of elections. (inaudible) phase 2 is a example of a project that we have done for our client department of election. this- >> just want to say thank you for that. i find that very interesting. it demonstrates the departments work. we will not be asking for that in the future, but i appreciate this first time around very very interesting diversity of projects the department is leader on. thank you. >> sure. similar to the (inaudible) we are also present a bigger slide in the future presentations with the

comparison of (inaudible) previous year. next slide is active projects by scope. full service scope. close to 90 percent of projects are full service scoop so we are involved on all most all phases of the project from beginning to close-out. examples are typical paving and streetscape improvement and projects from some of the clients, for example sewer system improvement, traffic sigical projects from mta or building facility projects we take from the beginning all the way to the close-out. planning and design service only. on the approximately 8 percent of the project we provide planning and design services and design support during construction phase, however, construction management is done by client agencies. for example, some of the sfpuc sewer system improvement project lead to planning and design but the construction

management is done by puc using their own internal staff. some of the projects of which the construction phase may not yet be planned or funded, those projects (inaudible) as responsibility of the construction phase center not yet been determined. construction management only. these are the projects where we provide construction management only, meaning planning and design have done by others. for example consultants and then we are being asked to manage the project during construction phase only. (inaudible) is a example of that. studies investigations and review. some projecktds or assignments are listed. examples are preparing studies for project development or scoping validation for the client, seismic studies, submittal for small development

projects, investigations, et cetera. 11 and (inaudible) is a example, study for that project will be created to create a new half acre park in the soma district. this site currently is occupied by industrial buildings. project management only. project management includes (inaudible) that is managing project scope schedule and budget. pm services can be provided at the program level such as branch library improvement. (inaudible) headquarter at 525 golden gate or 49 south van ness we managed the project management level and design and construction was done by others, for these projects (inaudible) provide pd by others as i said. oversight. there are projects that dpw provides

oversight. large scale housing development projects. other fujzs include reviewing submittal to insure compliance permitting quality assurance and acceptance. public works is not responsible for all project delivery. including the schedule and scope of the project. (inaudible) as well as hire design as well construction management staff and secure the (inaudible) other. projects that do not (inaudible) are listed under other category. examples include (inaudible) construction contract or consulting contract meaning we have goc as well as as needed consultants in place. sometimes the sister city departments have a need to get the work done, they approach us and using our contracts that are in place we issue the work to either

consultant or the goc contractor so we receive the funds and issue the cso. that is in this category and peer review work we do sometimes. (inaudible) updating gis or sewer system on behalf of puc or the client is not related to any of the other categories we discussed. >> i just thought perhaps you are all familiar with the terms, but referring to joc, a job order contract so we talked about this when we got the contracts overview. these are contracts that get established for a wide range of scopes and basically available as needed when something comes up. so public works has quite a few of the job order contracts available and if another department has a urgent need for something then they can basically tap into our contracting pool

we established and then we will help manage the cso which is the contract service order. essentially, when there is a work scope developed you issue the contract service order, the job order contractor then provides a cost for it and if the client is happy with that, then we would proceed and issue under our contract, rather then they have to go out and procure a contract . one other comment, ocii is the successor agency to the redevelopment agency. the office of community infrastructure and investment. >> thank you very much director short. >> i guess we can create a glossary and provide for a lot of terms we use because we will be coming to present this particular item periodically so we don't have to explain every time. this slide shows the design projects completed by

fiscal year. for example, in the fiscal year 22, design for 55 infrastructure projects and 20 building projects were completed. on this slide you had asked for a explanation for the reduction in design completed in fiscal year 20 and 21. so, the designs reduction of paving and (inaudible) and as well as the sewer project funds from our client puc. for example, in the fiscal year 13 to fiscal year 17, we had a much higher level of funding compared to 18-22. that is our in the design project. also, there were few projects we had brought to the detail design level. some

projects we completed 65 and 95 percent design and close to finishing design but the client had a need to reprioritize the project and these projects were placed on hold, so we couldn't take the (inaudible) because we didn't take it to hundred percent. additionally, one thing i would say that (inaudible) could vary on the size complexity and (inaudible) dollar values smims we have joint venture project and type of project and funding also may effect how many projectss we design and construct in a particular given year. sometimes client have project schedule and sometimes (inaudible) also comes into the picture. projects substantially completed by fiscal year. this shows a number of projects which construction is completed in fiscal

year for the last 5 fiscal year. 22 was completed on 43 infrastructure projects. >> we need a slide for this. there we go. thank you. >> (inaudible) 24 building projects. answer a similar question on this slide, requesting explanation for a drop in project completion from fiscal year 20 and 22. as mentioned earlier, project size and complexity is construction duration could effect the completion of a particular project in which particular fiscal year. sometimes this slides into the next fiscal year depending on the construction duration. (inaudible) effect the count for project in a given fiscal year. then we know that the projects we design in this fiscal year are going to get constructed or completion or

construction occurs 2 or 3 years down the road, so if we compare the count of the first three bars on design side and then look at it total count of projects for those three fiscal years and compare with the recent 3 bars on the construction slide, the count is close. (inaudible) so, it is close and projects moget might have a different design schedule (inaudible) besides that, construction work was also impacted because of covid-19. because doing the early period of covide 19 pandemic period, we had to implement new cal osha guidelines and ppe

requirements so that effected completion of the effected projects. this slide shows design section participation. it shows that what is participation rate for a specific design discipline on department acting project portfolio? for example, we are providing structural engineering service on 115 of the 423 total projects resulting in 27 percent participation rate for the structural section based on the count. many of our projects involve multiple disciplines, and some of the complex projects involved participation and collaboration of all the design disciplines from the department. contract awarded by fiscal year. number

of construction contracts and professional consulting service contract awarded over there last 3 fiscal years are shown on the slide. construction on the left and professional service contract on the right sidef the slide. during last fiscal year public works did award phase for 31 constructs totaling $166 million. that included 25 infrastructure totaling $153 million and 6 building projects totaling $13 million in the contract value. which included two recreation and park department projects. please note that some of the projects at design are advertised bid and awarded by other chapter 6 departments (inaudible) because we don't manage the bid award phase. also the data on this slide is also for design bid

contract. the work awarded to goc contracts or work performed by operation staff is not included or represented on this slide. you also had asked questions, the rec and park department is actually our client and besides preparing design and performing the construction management work for their projects, we advertise and bid their contracts because of our expertise and the capacity that we have in our department. but besides advertising and bidding, we also provide other administrative support to the recreation and park project managers during this phase. bid award phase dur ation by fiscal year.

average duration from advertise to (inaudible) for last 3 fiscal years of construction contract shown on the left hand side. likewise professional service on the right side. i will also briefly explain what entails in the different subphases. advertisement to bid. dpurg this phase we advertise the contract for (inaudible) have sufficient time to understand the scope and requirements and put together a bid proposal. responding to questions on the scope and procurement documents and issuing (inaudible) any changes to the scope and procurement documents as well as conducting (inaudible) receiving bids is part of this phase. bid to award of phase. during this phase we receive bids proposal

for professional service contract, and insure that vendor is responsive and responsible, resolve bid protest, negotiate contract if necessary and professional service contract, review is done by the panel and often requires 2 to 3 panel members to review the proposals received, (inaudible) digest information from the submittal and procurement document, so that is part of this phase and commission approval also falls under this phase. one thing i like to point out, as we go forward, the count of days for this particular (inaudible) increase because we have this extra staff for the bid and award phase. as well as insurance to

compliance with the state federal and code such as prevailing wages and 12x, 12b, 14b also needs b to checked, and review contractor safety performance is also checked during this phase. award to certification phase. during this phase, obtain performance and payment bonds. we also have to insure the contract compliant insurance. execute the agreement. obtain outside agency approvals (inaudible) local hiring firms that need to be submitted by the contractor to meet the requirement for the local hire percentage requirement for the workforce. certification to mtp subphase. project-during this phase project and

construction manager insure the project site is (inaudible) for the contractor to mobilize and begin construction work as well as construction management and am inspection staff is available to provide oversight of the project. at times also the preconstruction meeting is held during this phase. you had a question chair post on this particular slide and you want ed to know why the professional service contract take longer to award then the construction contracts. so, the main reason is the difference in industry for procuring professional service contract versus contraction. for the construction contract lowest responsible responsive bidder gets awarded. for professional service contract, we are required to review the proposals and award based on

qualifications. at times, depending how many proposals we receive for a particular advertised professional service consulting contract, we had to identify the panel member to review these proposals and provide the scoring and if necessary also conduct the interviews of these proposers where they present specific questions and present their proposal and then (inaudible) interview and then total scores (inaudible) and then contract is awarded to the best performing highest-the highest score gets awarded. because of this additional staff, which requires the identification of the

panel which is from different agencies and they have to spend time and reviewing (inaudible) and final scores and subsequentially if needed the follow-up presentation will be -oral presentation and interview session. that takes additional time to award the contract for professional service so that is the main reason for longer duration for the award of professional service contract. and then you also mentioned that you would like to see a similar slide for the construction phase that will span from mta to close-out so i'll work with the managers from both construction management bureaus and we'll brainstorm and decide what data needs to be included in those future presentations. >> thank you.

>> (inaudible) pci score. san francisco maintains more then 900 miles of streets comprising all most 13 thousand blocks. (inaudible) make sure streets are safe for people to walk drive bike and take transit and accessible. transportation commission requires cities and county to have the program to be eligible to receive the regional discretionary fundings. pci score is a standardized scoring system (inaudible) and rates the condition of the scores from 0-100. (inaudible) zero for the worst condition street. we use contractor as well as public works operation staff to perform the

work. on this slide, we are showing the pci score distribution across the city and the steady investment san francisco has made tremendous progress over the past decade improving our roads. streets with good and excellent scores and poor scores are shown in green yellow and red colors on the map in the upper left corner. in the bar chart in the upper right corner. and you can see from the bar chart all the last 8 years or so, schedule increased in the number of blocks that is a rating of good or excellent condition, and decrease in the count of the at risk or poor

numbers of blocks in the city. (inaudible) pci score for san francisco streets increased to 74 because of this investment and the work we have done over the last several years, and it is better the bay area of 67, which is considered fair. the map on the left side shows the condition of the streets city wide. the challenge has been to sustain the funding. the height before the bond fund was depleted we were able to (inaudible) 900 blocks a year and last year only 500. this is still a good number and allow to maintain the pavement condition store, however it isn't enough to (inaudible) and the graph in the lower right corner er explains it. the gray line shows the trnd in pci scores over the

last 13 years. 13 years. the other three lines show projected trnd in pci in the next 10 years depending how much-funding is available to do the work. dark green line shows that if you were to $10 years depending how much-funding is available to do the work. dark green line shows that if you were to receive approximately 120million annual funding over the next 10 years adjusted for inflation, then it will allow us to good state of repair and increase the pci score approaching 82 in 10 year period. green line shows if you receive approximately $75 million funding over the next 10 years, then we are able to maintain the current pci score of 74, 75. red line, if you were to receive the minimal funding, in the range of $30 plus million over the next 10 years it will result in a downward trend in the pci score

and wiped out the gains achieved since 2009. this slide shows goals and number of blocks that were paved annually over the last several years. chair post you had a few questions on this slide. first question that you had was, how do you decide what will be the goal for a particular fiscal year? goal for annual blocks is set based on the number of projects that received notice to proceed for construction phase, and as a result, number of blocks for those projectss and these are projects that are anticipated to complete the substantial completion in the fiscal year. based on that we can come up with the count

off the number of blocks that are going to be paved in a particular fiscal year. the next question was, why-again, i think i tried to answer it. why the number of blocks are lower for the recent three fiscal years. the number of blocks (inaudible) and i mention that the 5 year average annual budget for the fiscal year 17-18 through 21-22 was lower then the 5 year average budget for the period between fiscal year 13 and 17. hence the number of-reduction in number of blocks. you also asked why the fiscal year 21 goal was not met. the fiscal year 2021 goal was not met mainly due

to covid-19, which also impacted the funding approximately $11 million funding direction was there for the paving program fund, and also resources were shifted to assist with the pandemic. some of the paving work we anticipated having the operation crew to do it, they were not able to do as much because those staff members were helping out with the pandemic. curb program, commission score trends. we tried to provide accessibility (inaudible) pie chart on the left side shows the breakdown of approximately 41 thousand curb ramps we have throughout the city. 74 percent of these curb ramps are in good condition and 17 percent ramp locations have no ramps. our internal program projects as well as the other

right of way infrastructure projects initiated by other sister city departments as well as private utility agencies that do the excavation in therectomy of way are required to evaluate curb ramp locations and include necessary curb ramp improvalment work as part oof the project scopes. as a result the curb ramps get constructed in addition to our small funding that we receive for our curb ramp implement program. resurfacing program crebt the most because we touch on larger number of blocks in a given year. with the steady investment and increased paving and capital project resulted in the significant construction of a curb ramp and as a result increasing the good ramps from 53 percent in 2014 to 74 percent

in 2022. (inaudible) annual projection and are constructed by year. this slide as it explains shows how many curb ramps we anticipate to be constructed in a given year and what were the actual count of construction. you can see it projection and not the goal because it depend on many other projects and also i answered your question because you also asked why the curb ramp construction has been steadily decreasing. particularly in the last 3 years. so, one reason is pandemic related funding effected it. (inaudible) and sewer program projects. but additionally, from the pie chart we saw in the previous slide, (inaudible) are in good condition.

having constructed. so, as we do future projects, we have less percentage of curb ramp location that needs to be addressed and hence the reduction in the count of the curb ramps we will be constructing in future periods. street structure programs. (inaudible) public works manages over 275 accepting street structures for the city. a structure is inspected every 4 years. however, only 3 years as shown here for better clarity. structural geotechnical code conformance and ada conformance are criteria used determining the total score of a particular asset. and then it shows the comparison of the average scores by type for last 3 years. one thing i

would say here is that we receive very minimal funding for our street structure implement program and it has gradually decreased over the recent past. i remember from the slide i looked at previously that over the last 5 years it has gone from 8 million to 4 million to 1 million to 850 thousand for $350 thousand this fiscal year so i need to do a better job toask for more money to get increase in the funding approval. and with that, i conclude my presentation and thank you very much for your time and i'll try to answer any questions that you may have. >> thank you very much for answering my

questions in your report. i think this is a good first cut at annual performance metrics and so now we have a baseline and can update the slides over time as we go. my only other comment was, i did note that in the controller's annual performance results, the report the controller does on every department which was very interesting, and of the most recent one on page 69 with public works and there were a few metrics there that is nice to include in our-your proposal going forward. something like petage och construction contract advertises in the lowest bid received is range of 80 percent of hundred percent of the cost estimate. percentage of projects contracts are awarded on first bid solicitation. that was interesting data and nice to pull

that from the controller to our department report as well. >> that is a plan to include that information in future presentation slides. >> perfect. thank you very much. again, good first cut and this is i think a work in progress and we'll all look forward to moving through it every year and i thank you for all the detail. i don't anticipate asking all these questions every year but i just think sometimes the slides especially if there is what looks like a negative trend shown thin slide i think it is important for the record to have a verbal explanation so the public sees that they don't ask what i was asking, why are we not doing as much as we used to or going down and often there is a logical explanation so thank you for attending to that. >> understood. >> any questions or comments for mr. dapa before we have public comment? okay. i guess we will open public comment. thank you. >> thank you.

>> members of the public who wish to comment on item 7 performance measure report for infrastructure design and construction and building design and construction division may line up against the wall if joining here in the hearing room. if you are calling in dial 1-415-655-0001. use the meeting access code, 24876431685 pound and pound again. and then to be recognized please press star 3 to raise your hand. looking in the hearing chamber, it appears we do not have members of the public wishing to speak on this item in person. sfgovtv, do we have any members of the public in the queue? they are indicating there is

one caller. please unmute that caller and caller you will have three minutes to speak i'll provide with a 30 second warning. >> great. david pillpel. probably my last time today because i have another meeting at 1:30. appreciate the presentation. it was hard to find a goal of say 90 percent of construction contract awarded within 60 days of bid receipt. maybe is a goal and maybe not. that was the kind of thing i was looking for. slide 9 suggest various points here lend well to metrics like from one item to the next or bid to award et cetera. also, the percent of project awards within some percentage of the project engineer or project architect

estimate would seem like a good metric. i would even consider a percent of projects with unanticipated project scope changes or schedule delays. that would suggest number of good (inaudible) slide 11 i would break down the pci scores by supervisor district to highlight disparities and (inaudible) across the city. slide 15, that suggested to me that more effort is needed on guardrails and perhaps less on retaining walls within existing resources. i only saw the power point presentation (inaudible) in attachment 2 with performance report but did not see it on the website if it is exists and if not posted if can could be. finally for today, i did a quick search, i didn't realize and now i see

chair post is raland post's daughter. he was a great man and didn't know that and now i do and really appreciated him and appreciate you even more. thanks very much. >> thank you caller. and that is our final caller on this item. >> thank you very much. any further questions or comments from the commission? if not, we will move on to item number 8. secretary fuller, please call that item. >> item 8 is the public works director hiring update and chair post will provide the update and this is a informational item. >> thank you. i know it is a long meeting. i will try to be brief. in the past couple weeks since we last met, i had a number very helpful meetings with

regarding the effort to hire a permanent director for dpw. i spoke with the mayor chief of staff, the city administrative officer, the controller and the president of board of supervisors and sought counsel from depy city attorney tom and from those meetings i learned a lot and we have then refined the process for how the new department director will be hired and i will outline that now. i will meet regularly with berkeley search that the city retained along with the city hr rep shawn sureburn and this will be a effort to prepare recruitment material and use for search and kept apprised of search progress. i asked interim director short and deputy city administrator and former dpw employee douglas leg to assist in the effort given their department expertise and they graciously agreed to attend these regular

meetings and insure we are putting our best foot forward. the specific process will be berkeley search preparing the ideal job profile and gaining good understanding of what the city requires for the position and to help them do this they will conduct a number of stakeholder interdues both individual and group. this may include conversations with community groups and labor representatives city government officials dpw client organizations real estate developers and small business associations and other key constituency who work with dpw and can provide helpful information to the recruit ers on what they see the ideal candidate looking like. while the interviews are conducted by the search firm the search firm will be doing its job of identifying and recruiting candidates through a national search. once the candidates are

identified, our full commission will interview the candidates that berkeley search presents to us and then of course we will recommend any finalists to the mayor for her appointment. again, i'll invite deputy city administrator leg to participate in our interviews along with san station streets commission chair mario (inaudible) to both participate in our interviews with the candidates as non voting members. concurrently with our commission interviews of the finalists, the mayor will be convening a special panel to interview the candidates at the same time and offer feedback to our commission. that is a summary of the process for hiring the next department director. do any of you have comments or questions about that? commissioner newhouse siegel. >> this is a huge amount of work and

really appreciate it. you may have mentioned it and maybe i missed it, what is the your goal in terms of timeframe? >> the goal in terms of timeframe and perhaps director short can help, we did discuss it and that is oversight. i believe my march so about 6 weeks, 6 to 8 weeks to have the search process underway and nationally advertised and search firm to start talking to candidates. do i have that right? >> yeah, i-thank you. i think the search firm indicated that the original intent was to have candidates identified by the end of march, but with some of the additional interviews that would probably be pushed out so they have it advertised and then he said after-he didn't give a firm date for

completing their recommended candidates, but he said it would be 30 days typically for someone to give notice to their current job at this level and another 45 days for on-boarding. after they have-after you have selected a candidate it is still two months, 2 and a half months to on-boarding. >> i will in future reports be sure to include milestone timeline. commissioner zoubi. >> are the interview sessions and the mayor will have a panel or are we going to finish ours because my understanding is we finish our interviews, we make a recommendation to the mayor and the mayor takes (inaudible) >> no, her panel will be interviewing

candidates concurrently. it sounds confusing. we can keep if people are flying from different parts of the country so they don't have to come out more then once, the mayor requested that her special panel which consist of high level city officials as well as interim director short that they interview the candidates at the same time as we are. and then-let's say the words, it is to help prevent the mayor not liking any of our recommendations if her panel is already given us thoughts we can ignore those thoughts but my guess is we will listen and appreciate having more city feedback. the more input the better. any other questions or comments? alrighty. i believe we turn to public comment. thank you.

[providing instructions for public comment] looking in the hearing room. it doesn't appear we have members of the public looking to speak on the director hiring update. sfgovtv, do we have any callers? and they have indicated that there are no callers wishing to speak on thisitesm. >> thank you. if no further comments or questions from the commission we'll move to the next item. item 9. please call

that item mr. fuller. >> item 9 is new business initiated by commissioners. this is a informational item. >> thank you. i have several new business initiatives to introduce and request please. the first i mentioned in reference earlier when i was talking about the controller public integrity report and are what i like to request director short is if this commission annually have a update on the department's ethic training for both staff and commissioners, updates on it contractor policy and how the city whistle blower program is encouraged by the department and use said by department staff. a annual update ethic update will be very helpful to us. second, as the months go by, i like to request presentation by the department new hr director mrs. hill on

how her progress is coming building her new department and the goals for it and introducing her self and senior staff to the commission since we haven't had a chance to say hello yet. third, i think it would be helpful if we have a presentation on the san francisco department of the environment. what it is, how the work intersects with dpw and perhaps this can be a joint presentation, i will leave it up to your discretion but perhaps a tag-team presentation between the department of environment and dpw on how they work together on behalf of taxpayers. last, and you mentioned this directser short earlier in your remarks now prop b passed and department isn't split in two, we even though sanitation and streets will still be advising on contracts and policies regarding their sector

and operations, none the less i like to request please 5 presentations, similar to the presentations we already had and hope can be just use the same used the sas commission had on overall presentation on the department operations and then preezentation on the 4 divisions just the way we have been having a presentation on the infrastructure instruction divisions and again, i hope this isn't inventing the wheel but the same presentation you used for the sas commission, perhaps need to be updated and leave it up to you. all these requests are for the months ahead. i think prioritizing those i would like to hear from director hill at some point but the other three certainly and operations those i think are important. we need to get up to speed on operations. thank you very much

director short. commissioner zoubi. >> thank you commissioner post. so, in addition i know i requested the list of all as needed contracts with their expiration and-i wanted to add if we can get monthly report of hr update on new hires versus retirements and how vacancies are going? i spoke to a couple of supervisors and the first thing they were asking was, how soon can we hire? so, if we can request a report once a month, doesn't have to be every week, just on how many vacancies we have, how many applicants, how many hires we achieved and

what is the-i don't want to call (inaudible) retirements and so forth. how fast are we catch ing up to closing those vacancies. >> commissioner, may i request that be a quarterly update rather then monthly? would you be comfortable with quartery update rather then monthly? >> i'm fine with quarterly, yes. >> okay, thank you. any other request for new information and new business? i don't hear so open to public comment. thank you. >> [providing instructions for public comment]

looking in the chamber, does not appear we have any members of the public wanting to speak on the item in person. sfgovtv do pwe have callers who have raised their hand on this item? it appears we do not have any callers who raise their hand to speak on this either. >> thank you secretary fuller. will you please call the next item, iletm 10? >> item 10 is general public comment and this item is not necessary since we did not exceed the 15 minute maximum for earlier in the agenda on item 2. >> thank you very much. mr. fuller do

we have remaining business today? >> there is no further business on this agenda. >> hearing no objection adjourn the meeting and meet friday february 3, 2023. thank you all. [meeting adjourned]

welcome to the upon puc meeting. i'm sophie maxwell. madam secretary call the roll. why president agramy is excused. vice president maxwell. >> here wrochl commissioner paulson. >> here. >> rivera. >> here >> stacy >> here you have a