. >> the public works contracts to replace the unstabilize roof at the southeast, west not to which we had $10 million. >> okay colleagues this was heard last week and we have the public works staff back and we amend it to open increase. colleagues any questions at this time? >> okay. mr. rose. >> mr. chairman and members of the committee as you know you continued to item and amended the medication e legislation we recommend you approve it. >> any yes, sir. for mr. rose. we'll open this open for public comment seeing none, public comment is closed. we can move this forward >> item number 2 resolution approving the declaration for the policy for the north shore main not to exceed 75.3 million. >> colleagues any questions on number 2. mr. rose >> mr. chairman and members of the committee we recommend you approve this legislation as amended. >> colleagues any questions. at this time we'll open this up to public comment seeing none, public comment is closed. can we move this marred. so move forward >> item number 3 resolution approving an amendment between the contract of the public works

just to recap the goals of this charter amendment it would put our city open unstabilize grounds in the future. we're going to switch to a fully funded model and we're going to cap our cities contributions. as well, a solve the governor in advance issues. we'll make sure our children are not paying for and benefits down the road. i've been working closely with a number of retiree groups as well as the city staff that have work on this ballot measure together. i want to thank the group protect our benefits that represents 4 thousand employees from the community colleges and our court system. our shared system is the protection to provide predict for the city budget and insure that the benefits remain from take. i looked to working with the controller and city controller to add the city staff which allows the disbursements. i appreciate all the group that will continue to work closely with the common goal is honored by sound practices. ultimately this will have plenty of chapter benefits. through the measure we'll eliminate the liability in four years. it provided for balanced entity. the

for those of you who know about flying and aviation, you know unstabilized approaches are very risky.of accidents, approach and landing. we want to make sure the pilots are monitoring, they don't get behind the aircraft, and we're going to be taking a look at all of those factors in this investigation. >> don't the initial stages, though, of this investigation show that what steve had asked you seems to be the case, from eyewitness accounts they did come in hot? >> well, we've got to take a look at all of those speeds, but what we do know is when they were configured for landing, they were at -- they had the engines at idol and had the flaps down and they were very slow in this critical phase of flight and we're going to walk all of this back to look at all of the approach. we have 24 hours of flight recorder information and we're going to put all of that together. we will release more factual information in the coming days. >> all right. ntsb chairman deborah hersman, thank you very much for joining us this morning. we want to bring in retired american airlines captain jay rollins. h

it was too high, it was too low, it was simply unstabilized. and a go-around should have been, in fact is mandated to be required in order to avoid an accident. >> put me in that cockpit and in lay terms, tell me on what equipment am i relying if i'm the captain that tells me where to land the aircraft? >> all right. the pilot's looking outside, because this is a visual approach. he's looking at the runway, and he can see the touchdown zone of the runway. that's the part that we've all seen as passengers or pilots. that's the part where all the skid marks are, about 1,100 feet down the runway. now, that's the aiming point. that's where he wants to touch down. and he's got to adjust the air speed of the aircraft to be at what's called v-ref. so he's looking at the air speed indicator, he's set in the speed he's supposed to be flying, 137 knots, for that weight. and what he's doing is looking at his vertical speed and his glide path, so that the sight picture that he sees is going to put him down in the touchdown zone. >> so what's -- i'm sorry,

this airplane made an unstabilized approach to the airport under beautiful weather conditions.o reason for it not to have been stabilized. and what stabilized means is being at the proper speed, the proper dissent rate. the airplane configured for plann landing. and this airplane, for most of that, wasn't any of those things. it was at the improper speed, slow at points, right before the crash, it was too high, too slow, it was simply unstabilized, and a go-around should have been, in fact, as mandated to be required to avoid an accident. >> put me in that cockpit and in lay terms, tell me on what equipment if i'm relaying, if i'm the captain, that tells me where to land the aircraft? >> all right. the pilot's looking outside, because this is a visual approach. he's looking at the runway, and he can see the touchdown zone of the runway. that's the part that we've all seen as passengers or pilots. that's the part where all the skid marks are, about 1,100 feet down the runway. now, that's the aiming point. that's where he wants to touch down. and he's got to adjust the air speed

. >> would that be an unstabilized approach because of the execution of that landing or might it be anyilure of that plane short of that runway? is there a way to know? >> it's hard to see a any -- without getting the information from the cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder, it's hard to know what because given that the weather was relatively clear and that in fact they were flying under visual flight rules, it should have been a relatively straightforward approach for an airline pilot to make unless there's something else going on with the aircraft or indications in the cockpit to mislead the pilot to fly the way they did. >> for a flight like this, 10 hours from seoul to san francisco, it's not unusual that the plane would be on auto pilot. upon approach, a landing like this at san francisco, might the pilots be in total control? it would no longer be on au autopilot, correct? >> that's correct. during the beginning and takeoff and end of the flight during landing, pilots have a lot more input what's going on than during the cruise portion. because this was a relative ly g