. >> through the chair, have you selected or rfp and has there been a selection? >> we have no the yet. >> so i guess, maybe this is a question to my colleagues on the panel, and sorry, it has been a few years since i have been here, but why would we disburse the funds before they have done the rfp process and we know has been selected? >> i mean, i would like to throw that question back to the ta and explain, i mean this is a different process than what we have done before. but if you can discuss why. >> okay, if they are going to start? march, which is 60 days from now, and they have not even with the rfp out yet, . >> it is the policy to have funds allocated before a contract is advertised or awarded. and also, the agencies need funds in place in order to procure, the contracts and so, it has been, how we have advanced contracts. there are certainly opportunities for reporting back from the agencies once the contract has been awarded on the scope of work, as awarded, if you wish. i guess the fundamentally questioning that policy. i certainly think that we shoul

, the proposed -- the procurement approach of rfp.the proposed structure of master lease. and have some folks who have that expertise do a peer-review of it between our port and airport and our economic development office, and i don't know if alameda county folks with expertise to validate this approach before we go ahead and issue the rfp. i would make that recommendation that we get that information and make the consultant available to a group of peer-reviewers, so those of us who aren't experts, as well as the staff, can have some validation that this approach, which is really the future of this building, that we have all been working -- that you all have been working to get built is strong and viable as it possibly can be. >> we will certainly do that and i did want to -- i meant to mention that we have been working with counsel, as well and i know joan is here today and has had a lot of experience in this area as well and can certainly speak to her concurrence on this recommendation, but we'll be bringing all of that back to you

. >> through the chair, have you selected or rfp and has there been a selection? >> we have no the yet. >> so i guess, maybe this is a question to my colleagues on the panel, and sorry, it has been a few years since i have been here, but why would we disburse the funds before they have done the rfp process and we know has been selected? >> i mean, i would like to throw that question back to the ta and explain, i mean this is a different process than what we have done before. but if you can discuss why. >> okay, if they are going to start? march, which is 60 days from now, and they have not even with the rfp out yet, . >> it is the policy to have funds allocated before a contract is advertised or awarded. and also, the agencies need funds in place in order to procure, the contracts and so, it has been, how we have advanced contracts. there are certainly opportunities for reporting back from the agencies once the contract has been awarded on the scope of work, as awarded, if you wish. i guess the fundamentally questioning that policy. i certainly think that we shoul

. >> through the chair, have you selected or rfp and has there been a selection? >> we have no the yet. >> so i guess, maybe this is a question to my colleagues on the panel, and sorry, it has been a few years since i have been here, but why would we disburse the funds before they have done the rfp process and we know has been selected? >> i mean, i would like to throw that question back to the ta and explain, i mean this is a different process than what we have done before. but if you can discuss why. >> okay, if they are going to start? march, which is 60 days from now, and they have not even with the rfp out yet, . >> it is the policy to have funds allocated before a contract is advertised or awarded. and also, the agencies need funds in place in order to procure, the contracts and so, it has been, how we have advanced contracts. there are certainly opportunities for reporting back from the agencies once the contract has been awarded on the scope of work, as awarded, if you wish. i guess the fundamentally questioning that policy. i certainly think that we shoul

and the purpose of the rfp. moving forward, should the commission adopt this request for proposals we hope to release it in january. start a pre-bid meetings in february. the proposals are due in may. we hope to bring a selection to you probably in the late summer, early fall and then commence negotiations immediately. ceqa those, of course as normal the trigger that really gives our schedule some variability here because depending on the proposed use it could be six months. it could be two years of review. we would bring a lease recommendation to this commission and potentially to the board of supervisors depending on the term and financial terms in the summer of 2017. that concludes my presentation yet i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you. commissioner low >> i have two questions. what were the reasons for the changes to the rfp? >> we have spoke to members of the public primarily in the boating community who felt that the way it was written was really overwhelming and diffic

. >> through the chair, have you selected or rfp and has there been a selection? >> we have no the yet. >> so i guess, maybe this is a question to my colleagues on the panel, and sorry, it has been a few years since i have been here, but why would we disburse the funds before they have done the rfp process and we know has been selected? >> i mean, i would like to throw that question back to the ta and explain, i mean this is a different process than what we have done before. but if you can discuss why. >> okay, if they are going to start? march, which is 60 days from now, and they have not even with the rfp out yet, . >> it is the policy to have funds allocated before a contract is advertised or awarded. and also, the agencies need funds in place in order to procure, the contracts and so, it has been, how we have advanced contracts. there are certainly opportunities for reporting back from the agencies once the contract has been awarded on the scope of work, as awarded, if you wish. i guess the fundamentally questioning that policy. i certainly think that we shoul

and the purpose of the rfp. moving forward, should the commission adopt this request for proposals we hope to release it in january. start a pre-bid meetings in february. the proposals are due in may. we hope to bring a selection to you probably in the late summer, early fall and then commence negotiations immediately. ceqa those, of course as normal the trigger that really gives our schedule some variability here because depending on the proposed use it could be six months. it could be two years of review. we would bring a lease recommendation to this commission and potentially to the board of supervisors depending on the term and financial terms in the summer of 2017. that concludes my presentation yet i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you. commissioner low >> i have two questions. what were the reasons for the changes to the rfp? >> we have spoke to members of the public primarily in the boating community who felt that the way it was written was really overwhelming and diffic

. >> commissioner dennis zouzounis >> to our existing rfp, we do have existing sp requirements as well. >> okay that's part of that were promised to consult focusing >> there are standards that. >> thank you. >> think of your presentation responding to our questions. if you could just explain to me a little more the major investment analysis by corridor is. what that means >> sure. is there a site you'd like me to reference? >> i'm just looking off the list of elements of the subway master plan and i don't know what that stands for or that means. major investment analysis by corridor. >> what it means is first identifying which corridor are the ones that warrants further investments. meaning, where are the most demand for travel to and from and of those corridor with their identify, what type of investment would we make it amusing the word investment were globally meeting what type of infrastructure we need. we need a bus infrastructure? would we need a rapid rail infrastructure speakers would read accommodation of the two? >> okay. then they also relates back to what makes up that cor

opposing the staff recommendation to issue this rfp now. [inaudible] the securities lending and cash management [inaudible] black swan [inaudible] commissioner meiberger served with me revealed northern trust had frozen our cash account in 2008 and [inaudible] be able to pay pensions. in the process the [inaudible] at least 27 million. october 14 commissioner makras submitted the questions to [inaudible] regarding northern trust. on october 23 mr. coolish responded only to question h. the other 14 questions appeared to have been unanswered to date. commissioner makras most important question, question g, involved actual realized losses and projected unrealized losses, which losses may involve at least 71 million, not 27 million. some observers shared they suspect losses may involve over 150 million. a new black out period may not matter, mr. huish must answer the other 14 questions. until then please vote against issuing this rfp today and return the mat toor the call the chair until and unless mr. huish finishes answering those questions.

. >> through the chair, have you selected or rfp and has there been a selection? >> we have no the yet. >> so i guess, maybe this is a question to my colleagues on the panel, and sorry, it has been a few years since i have been here, but why would we disburse the funds before they have done the rfp process and we know has been selected? >> i mean, i would like to throw that question back to the ta and explain, i mean this is a different process than what we have done before. but if you can discuss why. >> okay, if they are going to start? march, which is 60 days from now, and they have not even with the rfp out yet, . >> it is the policy to have funds allocated before a contract is advertised or awarded. and also, the agencies need funds in place in order to procure, the contracts and so, it has been, how we have advanced contracts. there are certainly opportunities for reporting back from the agencies once the contract has been awarded on the scope of work, as awarded, if you wish. i guess the fundamentally questioning that policy. i certainly think that we shoul

. >> through the chair, have you selected or rfp and has there been a selection? >> we have no the yet. >> so i guess, maybe this is a question to my colleagues on the panel, and sorry, it has been a few years since i have been here, but why would we disburse the funds before they have done the rfp process and we know has been selected? >> i mean, i would like to throw that question back to the ta and explain, i mean this is a different process than what we have done before. but if you can discuss why. >> okay, if they are going to start? march, which is 60 days from now, and they have not even with the rfp out yet, . >> it is the policy to have funds allocated before a contract is advertised or awarded. and also, the agencies need funds in place in order to procure, the contracts and so, it has been, how we have advanced contracts. there are certainly opportunities for reporting back from the agencies once the contract has been awarded on the scope of work, as awarded, if you wish. i guess the fundamentally questioning that policy. i certainly think that we shoul

again, you're not i'm not a part of the rfp process. you're not part of the rfp process but the fact is, there is a x factor that. there is nothing that would preclude any of them to hire you to give counsel? >> i suppose, not. again, i don't know what counsel i will provide in that situation. i think that folks from the mayors office of housing can provide more illumination is to work those into those rfps that i don't think it's the kind of thing where it would matter whether not i was consulting with them, nor again in the 20 years 22 years there is in a single time they consulted with on that kind of process. >> anymore public comment? >> hello. when the stacy capacity on the project manager of mayors office of development but i'm here in support of evan's request. i worked in affordable housing in 10 years. i worked as a developer before i work for one of those tax credit invested. now i work at the city. i just want to echo my all he other colleagues have said but the nature of her industry at its very transparent. in highly regul

excluding including a q and a and a tour of the building the as you may know if you've familiar with the rfp we looking for a lead community partner to identify the mix of uses or single uses within the building to help to support a larger statistic plan to get the building we occupied in the long term so this is really just identifies someone to help to work with the city to facility to realize it is a community amenity the closing of the rfp is the first week 40 in february the committee or the panel four reviewing the bids i'll certainly keep you updated on the updates sorry one last item two requests separate requests by the historic preservation commission to provide regarding rec and park properties from one update on the mothers, as you may know the historic preservation commission committee funded an analysis the new conditions of millions in the mothers building and the windshield condition of the property on the landmark designation i'm working with rec and park to schedule an informational presentation in front of you hope by february to give you an overview of that report and let

excluding including a q and a and a tour of the building the as you may know if you've familiar with the rfp we looking for a lead community partner to identify the mix of uses or single uses within the building to help to support a larger statistic plan to get the building we occupied in the long term so this is really just identifies someone to help to work with the city to facility to realize it is a community amenity the closing of the rfp is the first week 40 in february the committee or the panel four reviewing the bids i'll certainly keep you updated on the updates sorry one last item two requests separate requests by the historic preservation commission to provide regarding rec and park properties from one update on the mothers, as you may know the historic preservation commission committee funded an analysis the new conditions of millions in the mothers building and the windshield condition of the property on the landmark designation i'm working with rec and park to schedule an informational presentation in front of you hope by february to give you an overview of that report and let

the rfp process. july 8, 2015 ocii requested approval for technical support services with a term of 1 year with a option for 2 aadditional 1 year term extensions. the rfp was published in the san francisco chronicle, ethnic newspapers and posted on the city and agency or city and ocii websites. august 10, 2015 ocii received 3 proposals from hsu inc. [inaudible] and hawk engineer inc. a evaluation panel consisting with members of the developer, ocii, ship yard cac, puc and dpw evaluated the 3 proposals. ranked the hawk engineer propoles as the highest among the 3 and further more, recommended negotiateated a new contract with hawk injnch ears for infruc structure technical support. hawk engineer is a small business enterprise locaitded in san francisco, in business for 33 year jz qualified and suited to perform the required services outlined the rfp. they have supplemented task force since [inaudible] working on mission bay project, ship yard and hunters view. according to members the panel, hawk engin

the other area they want to partake in the rfp process.asically reminded them and reiterated the fact that was always port status intend to have a member as a part of the advisory panel that scores and ranks the proposals. so they were happy to hear that. it was actually an idea we told him about quite a while ago, about a year ago. the other part was that, as we give presentations, as we narrow down the proposals to 2-3 of the finals, we were going to let we would have those files give presentations of the port commission and we were going to mimic that and have them see the same presentations so they can get -they conduct they could understand who the participants might be and what kind of uses might be. so, the other area of commissions concern was basically, clarifying some of the use language in the staff reports. and connecting that with how that might be implemented actually on-site within operator and we have done that by adding clarifying language to the staff report, which is underlined to make it easily identifiable for you. i t

the other area they want to partake in the rfp process.asically reminded them and reiterated the fact that was always port status intend to have a member as a part of the advisory panel that scores and ranks the proposals. so they were happy to hear that. it was actually an idea we told him about quite a while ago, about a year ago. the other part was that, as we give presentations, as we narrow down the proposals to 2-3 of the finals, we were going to let we would have those files give presentations of the port commission and we were going to mimic that and have them see the same presentations so they can get -they conduct they could understand who the participants might be and what kind of uses might be. so, the other area of commissions concern was basically, clarifying some of the use language in the staff reports. and connecting that with how that might be implemented actually on-site within operator and we have done that by adding clarifying language to the staff report, which is underlined to make it easily identifiable for you. i t

if you consider macro new changes look to plans that have our full membership and the process has an rfp adding any other planned to the network so one of the things i'm occurs about is if sutter has been deliverability maintaining high costs to other plans like blufld and nickel and dimed health care to low ball the market with their own plan >> thank you for your comment any other comments. >> good afternoon. i'm a representative for i f p local 21 we represent the employees in san francisco and santa clara and, of course, our members who work here in san francisco oftentimes live in you know the bay area county so you know more and more we're seeing our members in the community in potential you know health care plan is very important to us to look at alcohol so as your commissioner vice president moran whether or not to move forward in the health care i on a couple of comments first, i echo the previous commenters you know questions around the current high costs of sutter health care and whether the promises ring try those costs will maechlg drop and mr. staff mentions in a previous c

bringing resources to the board we might looter use and recuse ourselves in the consideration of an rfp; is that correct. >> i don't. >> a vendor for instance, we - if i went out and found vendor and we're getting ready to recommend. >> it would be probable be better if usual gouge to do an rfp that the individual board members do have contracts before the rfp process stats. >> these were actually those are referral from d h.r. companies that i had seen before and i've seen the actual questions so it is not as though i'm including overseeing companies. >> i understand. >> we're not viewing the main thing with the rfp is there is a prospective a level the playing field. >> as i said, i think that the issue at hand would you restate our question executive director dodd. >> my question we add onto the department of h.r. engagement contract they're doing the pilot now and we could do that if we move smifl we have money 90 in the budget and the work order we can use d h.r. there are no went through a process and a i'm hearing an objection with moving. >> we have no idea of the questions. >>

neither rfp or voa could have done this project alone. it takes collaboration. i would urge those interested tape take a look a bill on but your representatives and senators know what you think. i understand there's an argument being made in recent days by some radio free alumni that somehow it might not be acceptable for even legal for federal ceo to oversee the independent grantees. the point of this john lansing is not administration federal appointee. he was chosen by a bipartisan board. he is protected by a political firewall that the bbg represents and i think accountability is a full-time professional with oversight of the whole effort would be good for everybody and good for our country. let me turn for a few minutes to what i think is a key question in our fast-changing media world. what should voa and its sister entities be? in the digital world with a capacity of voices were broadcasters like rg paddle this information is journalism them at the old-fashioned goes up object davidian balance? is a still dancer or is it time to advocate for government po

the rfp process. july 8, 2015 ocii requested approval for technical support services with a term of 1 year with a option for 2 aadditional 1 year term extensions. the rfp was published in the san francisco chronicle, ethnic newspapers and posted on the city and agency or city and ocii websites. august 10, 2015 ocii received 3 proposals from hsu inc. [inaudible] and hawk engineer inc. a evaluation panel consisting with members of the developer, ocii, ship yard cac, puc and dpw evaluated the 3 proposals. ranked the hawk engineer propoles as the highest among the 3 and further more, recommended negotiateated a new contract with hawk injnch ears for infruc structure technical support. hawk engineer is a small business enterprise locaitded in san francisco, in business for 33 year jz qualified and suited to perform the required services outlined the rfp. they have supplemented task force since [inaudible] working on mission bay project, ship yard and hunters view. according to members the panel, hawk engin

the rfp process. july 8, 2015 ocii requested approval for technical support services with a term of 1 year with a option for 2 aadditional 1 year term extensions. the rfp was published in the san francisco chronicle, ethnic newspapers and posted on the city and agency or city and ocii websites. august 10, 2015 ocii received 3 proposals from hsu inc. [inaudible] and hawk engineer inc. a evaluation panel consisting with members of the developer, ocii, ship yard cac, puc and dpw evaluated the 3 proposals. ranked the hawk engineer propoles as the highest among the 3 and further more, recommended negotiateated a new contract with hawk injnch ears for infruc structure technical support. hawk engineer is a small business enterprise locaitded in san francisco, in business for 33 year jz qualified and suited to perform the required services outlined the rfp. they have supplemented task force since [inaudible] working on mission bay project, ship yard and hunters view. according to members the panel, hawk engin

morgan chase not to exceed $40 million and ran a competitive rfp issued one to 12 national banks twoesponses so it shows you what one of the provisions for this letter of credit because we didn't want to impact the power christmas deck capacities on the lowest senior lien the repayment is blow omi and commercial paper and r and r payments and that's why we got very few bids and those were very attractive bids for the looming we've offered for security so the response to our rfp was term for letter of credit between 3 and 5 years the cost for a short time letter of credit is lower than a longer one 1.20 and 1.6 percent for 5 years and modeled 6 hundred 40 thousand in the performa it assumes $40 million at one 60 the cost is or lower this letter of credit for the benefit of our power purchase counter parties and asking for letters of lower credit only drone an termination not for anything else other than termination and we'd be looking to close on execution of the power contract in early january let's see the repayment terms the next slide is while we don't you know expect to have you

this was an rfp issued by the department released on october 22, 2015. we had a pre-proposal conference and was an overwhelming 27 firms ashley to attend for networking event and to sit in for a briefing on the item. our goal is 13%. the firm were awarding this to proposed up with a utilization of 35%. the firm includes women-owned firms and asian subcontinental. this item was advertised with six different newspapers, along with urban planning websites and distributed to all small disadvantage and local businesses that we have identified through the sf database. this item has not gone before the cac because it was no meeting in december but we have a meeting in december 2. in terms of budget, or plan to pay for this project with accommodation of city funds, federal spe funds and proposition k funds. we can answer any questions you get with that were more than happy to answer questions. >> okay. i don't think we have any questions. go to public comments. the comment is now open on this item. we can close public comments. >>[gavel] >> rollcall vote. next i

the continuation is for the same reasons to allow us the time to do a series of rfps. this -- the same service. you have seen it here before so it's continuing the same services. they had a grant increase a peer and mentoring program and it's also the reason there is a decrease in the final year because we're taking that out to make it a standard alone contract just to simplify the tracking and reporting on the grant but otherwise i think it's straightforward but i am happy to answer any questions. >> all right. thank you very much. colleagues any questions? all right. mr. rose can we go to the report on 16. >> yes mr. chairman and members of the committee on page 44 actual and estimated expenditures for the period from july 2010 through december 2015 are $18 million and projected expenditures for the requested two year contract extension are 8.4 million dollars totaling 26.$9 million and in table one shows the actual and projected expenditures and on page 44 of the report. we recommend that you approve this proposed resolution. >> okay. thank you very much mr. rose. c

bringing resources to the board we might looter use and recuse ourselves in the consideration of an rfp; is that correct. >> i don't. >> a vendor for instance, we - if i went out and found vendor and we're getting ready to recommend. >> it would be probable be better if usual gouge to do an rfp that the individual board members do have contracts before the rfp process stats. >> these were actually those are referral from d h.r. companies that i had seen before and i've seen the actual questions so it is not as though i'm including overseeing companies. >> i understand. >> we're not viewing the main thing with the rfp is there is a prospective a level the playing field. >> as i said, i think that the issue at hand would you restate our question executive director dodd. >> my question we add onto the department of h.r. engagement co they're doing the pilot now and we could do that if we move smifl we have money 90 in the budget and the work order we can use d h.r. there are no went through a process and a i'm hearing an objection with moving. >> we have no idea of the questions. >> in ter

this was an rfp issued by the department released on october 22, 2015. we had a pre-proposal conference and was an overwhelming 27 firms ashley to attend for networking event and to sit in for a briefing on the item. our goal is 13%. the firm were awarding this to proposed up with a utilization of 35%. the firm includes women-owned firms and asian subcontinental. this item was advertised with six different newspapers, along with urban planning websites and distributed to all small disadvantage and local businesses that we have identified through the sf database. this item has not gone before the cac because it was no meeting in december but we have a meeting in december 2. in terms of budget, or plan to pay for this project with accommodation of city funds, federal spe funds and proposition k funds. we can answer any questions you get with that were more than happy to answer questions. >> okay. i don't think we have any questions. go to public comments. the comment is now open on this item. we can close public comments. >>[gavel] >> rollcall vote. next i

bringing resources to the board we might looter use and recuse ourselves in the consideration of an rfp; is that correct. >> i don't. >> a vendor for instance, we - if i went out and found vendor and we're getting ready to recommend. >> it would be probable be better if usual gouge to do an rfp that the individual board members do have contracts before the rfp process stats. >> these were actually those are referral from d h.r. companies that i had seen before and i've seen the actual questions so it is not as though i'm including overseeing companies. >> i understand. >> we're not viewing the main thing with the rfp is there is a prospective a level the playing field. >> as i said, i think that the issue at hand would you restate our question executive director dodd. >> my question we add onto the department of h.r. engagement contract they're doing the pilot now and we could do that if we move smifl we have money 90 in the budget and the work order we can use d h.r. there are no went through a process and a i'm hearing an objection with moving. >> we have no idea of the questions. >>

in kind for the childcare on potrero so what happens our money goes directly to hsa and they have a rfp process they like to do it in large chunks they've gone ahead with market octavia and they've issued an rfp or rfq important possible projects they can use those guidelines in insuring that many money goes to creating additional capacity. >> since that's what it is all about in terms of you know, i i think we can work with hsa to see how the funds are spent and what happens on the one side. >> commissioner wu. >> thanks i wanted to follow up on commissioner johnson comments on eastern neighborhoods so there were a number of community members that came last year really feeling last week the public investment was lagging behind officially the housing development so one question first is that group engaged at cac level going there to details. >> so also the eastern neighborhoods we're currently working on the monitoring report we take a comprehensive look at the numbers to see how we're doing in a holistic way we do the cac has appointed a working group to scope out the monitoring report

this was an rfp issued by the department released on october 22, 2015. we had a pre-proposal conference and was an overwhelming 27 firms ashley to attend for networking event and to sit in for a briefing on the item. our goal is 13%. the firm were awarding this to proposed up with a utilization of 35%. the firm includes women-owned firms and asian subcontinental. this item was advertised with six different newspapers, along with urban planning websites and distributed to all small disadvantage and local businesses that we have identified through the sf database. this item has not gone before the cac because it was no meeting in december but we have a meeting in december 2. in terms of budget, or plan to pay for this project with accommodation of city funds, federal spe funds and proposition k funds. we can answer any questions you get with that were more than happy to answer questions. >> okay. i don't think we have any questions. go to public comments. the comment is now open on this item. we can close public comments. >>[gavel] >> rollcall vote. next i

again, you're not i'm not a part of the rfp process. you're not part of the rfp process but the fact is, there is a x factor that. there is nothing that would preclude any of them to hire you to give counsel? >> i suppose, not. again, i don't know what counsel i will provide in that situation. i think that folks from the mayors office of housing can provide more illumination is to work those into those rfps that i don't think it's the kind of thing where it would matter whether not i was consulting with them, nor again in the 20 years 22 years there is in a single time they consulted with on that kind of process. >> anymore public comment? >> hello. when the stacy capacity on the project manager of mayors office of development but i'm here in support of evan's request. i worked in affordable housing in 10 years. i worked as a developer before i work for one of those tax credit invested. now i work at the city. i just want to echo my all he other colleagues have said but the nature of her industry at its very transparent. in highly regul

excluding including a q and a and a tour of the building the as you may know if you've familiar with the rfplead community partner to identify the mix of uses or single uses within the building to help to support a larger statistic plan to get the building we occupied in the long term so this is really just identifies someone to help to work with the city to facility to realize it is a community amenity the closing of the rfp is the first week 40 in february the committee or the panel four reviewing the bids i'll certainly keep you updated on the updates sorry one last item two requests separate requests by the historic preservation commission to provide regarding rec and park properties from one update on the mothers, as you may know the historic preservation commission committee funded an analysis the new conditions of millions in the mothers building and the windshield condition of the property on the landmark designation i'm working with rec and park to schedule an informational presentation in front of you hope by february to give you an overview of that report and let rec and park shar

excluding including a q and a and a tour of the building the as you may know if you've familiar with the rfp we looking for a lead community partner to identify the mix of uses or single uses within the building to help to support a larger statistic plan to get the building we occupied in the long term so this is really just identifies someone to help to work with the city to facility to realize it is a community amenity the closing of the rfp is the first week 40 in february the committee or the panel four reviewing the bids i'll certainly keep you updated on the updates sorry one last item two requests separate requests by the historic preservation commission to provide regarding rec and park properties from one update on the mothers, as you may know the historic preservation commission committee funded an analysis the new conditions of millions in the mothers building and the windshield condition of the property on the landmark designation i'm working with rec and park to schedule an informational presentation in front of you hope by february to give you an overview of that report and let

this was an rfp issued by the department released on october 22, 2015. we had a pre-proposal conference and was an overwhelming 27 firms ashley to attend for networking event and to sit in for a briefing on the item. our goal is 13%. the firm were awarding this to proposed up with a utilization of 35%. the firm includes women-owned firms and asian subcontinental. this item was advertised with six different newspapers, along with urban planning websites and distributed to all small disadvantage and local businesses that we have identified through the sf database. this item has not gone before the cac because it was no meeting in december but we have a meeting in december 2. in terms of budget, or plan to pay for this project with accommodation of city funds, federal spe funds and proposition k funds. we can answer any questions you get with that were more than happy to answer questions. >> okay. i don't think we have any questions. go to public comments. the comment is now open on this item. we can close public comments. >>[gavel] >> rollcall vote. next i

the law more than tripled the time it takes to complete an rfp process, taking the process from two orthree months to nine to 12 months. the solution, the real solution is comprehensive procurement reform both legislative and administrative that maintains ethics and transparency, offers greater flexibility and follows best practices from other states. done properly, we believe this can save illinois taxpayers more than $500 million a year. we look forward to working with this legislature to get that done. [ applause ] now let's talk about one of the most significant transformations under way in our administration. last year we create aid bipartisan commission to propose reforms to our criminal justice system. the commission earlier this month recommended 14 reforms that could help us achieve our goal of safely reducing the state's prison population by 25% by 2025. they recommended we enhars rehabilitation programming in our corrections system. and implement risk needs assessments and evidence based programs that target underlying issues that contribute to criminal behavior. particularl

>> so very specifically he have articulated and documented in the rfp that my expectation is that at the outcome we'll have a proper evaluation in mr. mayor the business requirement and the intended outcome so once in a while, we'll put the goalpost into the ground quite frankly it is in the interest of a sell and 21 tech if they continue to work on and on on this project i was a little bit surprised quite frankly with the qualification if i was them i want this too their participating in this kind of death by. >> though paper cuts i don't know how to say it more bluntly but step number one establishing a goalpost and then an evaluation of what's been done so for and is that pushing us towards that goalpost if so what the delta what exist between where we are and know to be this establishes hopefully, a fairly firmer if not concrete scope of work to kind of cross that and will result in a specific work request or requirement of the vendors very potentially and likely the current vendor it could quite frankly be anybody but the outcome of this phase to firmly establish where we want t

with customers and how we operate customer service so just to give a sense of next steps we issue an rfp and at the end of this month actually, well in advance where we do it because of all the work involved in developing a stormwater run off charge we'll be conducting stakeholder outreach and hope to get the consulate on board in the spring and returning refinery to the commission commissions with further information about charges be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> commissioner vice president moran. >> thank you. >> a couple of questions on the consultants you're bringing in as far as exploring issues before the contract or asking the contractors. >> we're asking the contractors. >> so from the commission collectively or individuals on the commission said to the be part of that discussion when is the appropriate time to do that. >> let me think about exactly how we will structure that from the process. >> okay i think there are some financial policy issues and public policy issues that certainly how you or whether you choose to finance a lifeline; right? for example, is s