City and County of San Francisco Thursday, November 02, 2017
>> good morning. Is good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I want to welcome you to the budget and finance committee. This meeting will come to order this. Is the regular meeting.
I'm supervisor malia cohen, Chairwoman Of this committee.
To my left is supervisor tang.
To my right is hillary ronen.
She's joining us in -- in stepping in because supervisor yee is excused from today's
meeting. Our clerk of the board is Miss Linda wong.
I'd like to thank our friends at sfgov-tv jess for assisting us with today's broadcast. Madam Clerk, do you have any
announcements today?
>> clerk: yes.
Complete speaker cards as part of the items to be submitted to the clerk. Items will appear on the
November 14th supervisors' agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you very much. I'd like to entertain a motion to excuse supervisor yee from today's meeting. >> so moved. >> thank you very much. We'll take that without objection. [Gavel] Thank you.
Madam Clerk, please call item one.
>> clerk: item number one,
resolution to retroactively
allow the arts commission for a
value of $398,000 and accept a
donation from the justice women
coalition for $208,000 with the
title comfort women's column of strength for a period of not less than 20 years. >> okay. Thank you very much.
So just as a matter of fact,
just want to call into into the record that we have supervisors
kim, fewer and peskin are the sponsors. Colleagues, you May remember
that this item had to sit a week due to the substantive amendment changes regarding the gift value
of the art work. Unless there is any further discussion, I'll make a motion
to send to the full board.
Seeing there are no colleagues' names on the roster, I've got a list of cards here.
We'll start with judge lillian singh. Okay. >> good morning. I'm very delighted to be here. I just want to thank you all for
going through this very important proceeding. I'm happy to answer any questions that you have.
>> thank you very much, judge singh. I'll call names. You'll have an opportunity to speak in two-minute intervals.
Judith merkinson.
I have a bunch of cards with no names on it. That's weird.
Who did that? Who tried to stack the deck, so to speak.
If you'd like to come up, please speak.
Any microphone will work. Michael wong as well.
I see your name in there.
>> that's okay. Any microphone will work. >> I am so short.
I am speaking because you all
labeled my father as a lobbyist.
My father went to war to for for our country.
How do you feel when your father
fought? They said japan has not apologized. That is a lie.
In 1993, the prime minister apologized.
In 1994, P.M. Apologized.
And he provided an apology to
each survivor and then another apology. How much money was
given to a Councilwoman? In
1965, japan paid to south korea.
In those days, many japanese
families themselves were so poor
just to buy milk and eggs, my
mother went to work when I was
only 6 coming home from school I
found myself alone. [Bell] I cry.
Yet the japanese government gave
money to south korea by collecting the tax even from the poorest of the poor in japan.
In 1994, again, japan paid the Councilwoman.
In 2016, again, japan paid another $8 million to south
korea. This was supposed to be the final agreement between japan and -- [Bell] >> thank you.
Thank you. Excuse me. Excuse me. Cut her mic off. Excuse me. Your time is up, ma'am. Thank you. >> okay. >> yes. That's okay. For the other members of the public that are here for the
first time, you will hear a soft chime indicating that you have
30 seconds remaining and you'll have two minutes to speak. and also as a reminder this, is
an item that is agendized to either accept and expend a gift
in the amount of $393,000.
So we are not taking public comment on whether japan apologized or not. That has already -- we've already taken comment on that.
We are here to talk about a gift amount and your time is up. Thank you.
Next speaker, please.
>> good morning. I strongly
protest against this resolution
number 171070 to accept the gift.
The inscription had many errors.
The city of san francisco must
not make a judgment without verification.
The city should spend money for
the current victim but not the controversial monument. I don't
believe that this comfort --
this comfort of the statue is a piece of art.
I don't believe so.
That is merely a form of propaganda advocated by china
and north korea.
>> supervisor cohen: thank you. Next speaker, please. >> good morning.
I strongly oppose resolution
171070 to accept the gift.
There are many errors in the
inscription on the memorial.
It is not simply a woman's issue.
The comfort women is not simply
a woman's issue. This is being used as a political tool of
human rights by china and korea.
Many facts have been sorted and some were sold by their family
for the same reasons. They were paid.
Some woman purchased a house. If anybody doesn't believe this
read the woman, "comfort women"
it is in the library branch. It is a political and controversial subject.
It is unnecessary to introduce
this dispute into our city.
This monument is not art work.
Instead, it is used as a
political tool as a human rights
issue to fracture the U.S./japan
alliance and -- [Bell]
>> it is for their own political gain. I argue that you should not accept the gift. Thank you.
>> supervisor cohen: thank you for your public comment.
Next speaker, please. >> good morning. I am strongly against the proposal.
We have been explained that what
is this agreement to present the
pact and not hen slaved by the japanese military.
There was no such thing that
they did in their war-time captivity.
And they asked three days ago it needs to be discussed among parties, which submits a different opinion.
They stopped taking one-side
opinions, like san francisco.
Supervisors, are you going to allow san francisco to be an
unfair city? Are you going to
allow north korea in the city of
san francisco? San francisco
should spend time and money
against sex trafficking and help for those women who are
suffering right now, right here
in san francisco.
I have the last and the most
important question: supervisors,
do you want san francisco to be
a real freedom city or a city
controlled by the chain yeaz
government? Please, supervisors
in this room, have courage for justice. Thank you.
>> supervisor cohen: thank you.
Next speaker. >> thank you.
I am against this comfort women.
It is being used by chinese propagandists and the council
has been deceived by these prop good
good propagandists in this city of freedom and democracy.
This action is absolutely wrong.
It will read racial conflict
among asian countries and we can
try between japan and the united alliance, which is promoting peace, freedom, and democracy for the world.
There are many factual errors on
this inscription of the memorial.
There was not any sexual slaves that existed who was forced and God killed.
The fact is that comfort women were prostitutes who were
recruited mostly by korean brokers. There was no
enforcement and they got paid extremely well.
Did you know that the city of
mayor -- city mayor of osaka, Mr. Yoshima, clearly stated that
he will stop being san francisco's sister city -- [Bell]
>> since 1957 if the city will
not create this terrible mistake regarding comfort women statute.
San francisco and osaka have been sister cities for 60 years.
I live in san francisco now, but we are asking you seriously to
stop this nonsense as soon as possible. >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker.
>> I thank you very much for
this opportunity to speak.
And I'm against this resolution
or this agenda 171070 regarding
the comfort women statute.
This comfort women issue is a
topic among japan and korea.
And the topic of this comfort women was whether it was forced
by the imperial army or not.
And there were issues such as the professor park of san francisco university concluded
that they were comfort women, these comfort women's were well-paid. That means that they're not sex slaves.
Also in the vietnam war, there
were spouse yandz of vietnamese
women -- there were thousands of vietnamese women raped by the
army and they made press
conferences in washington in 2015.
But there is nothing like this
regarding south korea and japan.
So what I would like you to know that please don't listen to just one side of the history.
And I think it's not so wise or
san francisco to spend on this statute.
Thank you very much.
>> supervisor cohen: thank you. Next speaker.
>> I talk about the comfort
women statute. And if they are in the group
then the black people,
native-american, they should look at the future.
Number two we cannot view the
future and in any sort of human relation, we cannot be pointing
for the pave whether we are in
for a brighter future. Number three. What will this monument bring
other than hatred. And finally, number four.
We've got such a huge amounts of homeless on the streets of san
francisco and a great amount of
cars' windows that are being broken. It shows that our citizens, they need and look for other priorities other than that. Thank you very much.
>> supervisor cohen: thank you. Next speaker.
>> my name is michael wong. I'm from veterans for peace. I just want to say the
inscription was vetted by
multiple hearings, and the arts commission -- in the arts
commission and in the visual arts committee in the art commission. Every r he word was examined
very closely and was found to be accurate and was voted on multiple times.
So the description is very
accurate. All of this has been documented
by multiple sources including
witnesses and observers,'s captive from the army and independent observations made by other parties. So I urge you to go ahead and approve this resolution.
Thank you.
>> supervisor cohen: thank you. Next speaker.
>> hi. My name is judith merkinsonn.
I'm from the comfort women justice coalition. We weren't
going to speak, but we feel like
we have to set the record state, actually. First of all, what is
this statue? It is a very beautiful statue of three young
women, chinese, korean, and philippina. They stand together. and looking up together is a
statute of hoxin kim, who was
the first korean to speak out in 1991.
When she gazes up at them, she sees her past, her present, and
her future. And this is a
statue that is for all women to
say that there should be no
sexual violence. When people deny history, they
are not just denying facts.
They are deniers of women's
experience. When we see what is going on
with harvey weinstein and
everyone else, these women from
two countries, it does the opposite. Everyone goes there and starts crying because their experience is mirrored in the eyes of these young women. Also, I would just want to say
to the people who want to deny
this history and said we should spent the money on something else this, is all private money. This is all done. The statue is there. And san francisco is so proud to
be the recipient of a statue of
this kind.
>> supervisor cohen: okay. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public that would like to speak? All right.
Public comment is closed on this item. Supervisor ronen?
>> supervisor ronen: yeah. I'd like to say I'd like to be
added as a co-sponsor to this item. Especially at this time in our history when women are
finally finding a voice and platform to stand up and speak
out against sexual violence which permeates every country in
the world and has throughout
history that I'm so proud that
san francisco has brought this
beautiful, powerful piece of art
to our city and to have women of -- of color, survivors of sex
awal violence stand up in such a powerful, fierce way is a point of pride for me personally.
And I just wanted to thank judge singh and all of the advocates
who made this possible.
>> supervisor cohen: all right.
Thank you, supervisor ronen.
Supervisor tang? No? Thank you. Okay. I'd like to make a motion to send this to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> so moved.
>> supervisor cohen: thank you. We'll take that without objection. All right.
Could you please call item two.
>> clerk: item two.
Emergency declaration of repair
work on the mocka sin powerhouse
unit 2 generator step-up transformer with a total
estimated cost not to exceed $4-d00,000.
>> supervisor cohen: okay. Thank you.
>> estimated cost not to exceed $400,000. >> we have steve richie to present. The floor is yours.
>> thank you, supervisors.
I'm steve richie from the sfpuc
for the powerhouse unit. This is currently out of service
because of the failure of the transformer.
It calls for the repair of the
electrical work and bushings which fit on the transformer.
While this is generated for electricity the most critical nature is that it puts the
ability for the water to put that at risk.
Unit 1 is out of service it would restrict the water for an unknown period of time. We
contacted two potentially viable
vendor and concluded that one big valley is serving as the
prime and the transformers'
service are working as specialty subcontractors.
The bush work is complete and
the bushings will be delivered in early December. We estimate that the unit will be returned to work in January and it will
not be below the exceeded value. I'd be happy to answer any questions.
>> supervisor cohen: thank you.
I just want to confirm there is
sufficient funding for this in
the maintenance fund?
>> there yes, there is.
>> supervisor cohen: and big valley will continue to serve as the contractor on this project? >> yes.
>> supervisor cohen: okay. Colleagues, there's any other questions? Seeing none it goes to the bla.
>> good morning supervisor cohen, supervisor ronen and
supervisor tang, I am from the budget office.
Under the admin code, this
department has 60 days to notice the board of supervisors of the emergency work. They did submit resolution to the board within
36 days so they did meet the emergency code provisions. The
budget is $400,000.
There is a contipping si of
$35,000 within that budget for
oil reconditioning of the transformer if needed there. Is
a contingency of $35,000 within that budget for oil reconditioning of the transformer if needed there. We vote for approval. >> thank you very much. We ask public comment on item number two. Seeing none, public comment is closed. >> the chair will make a motion
to accepted item two to the full board with positive recommendation and not as a committee report.
>> supervisor cohen: okay. We'll take that without objection. Thank you very much.
Item three, please h. Item three, amendment agreement
exchange easements in connection
with the pipeline in exchange
for a quick claim owned by the
city as part of the public ewe kilts commission water system improvement project fund project.
>> supervisor cohen: okay.
We've got brian morrelli from the sfpuc here. Good morning.
>> good morning. Brian morrelli
from sfpuc it is between the
open peninsula and middle peninsula. The site is the ease will
exchange located near the dunbarton bridge off of east
university avenue and east palo alto. You can see that on the graphic in the bay area.
The easement exchange started in
2010 as part of the bay tunnel project. The project required
subtunnel easements under the
bay from sam-trans and the fish
and wildlife service.
Resolution 4910 on October
22nd, 2010, the board of supervisors approved the
easement exchange between the
sfpuc and mid-pen.
The sfpuc got the project and in
exchange, mid peninsula got an
easement on the S.F. Ravenwood
property to study a easement,
which will be an extension of
the bay trail system.
Pardon me. Let's go to the next slide. So the next slide shows where
the trail is across the ravenswood property.
It is the alignment in green.
Again, it will be part of the
bay trail system that is
facilitated in this part by mid
peninsula open-space district.
Now the parties wish to conduct
the final exchange of easement
so mid peninsula will quick
claim the easement back to the sfpuc and, in exchange, sfpuc
will grant to mid-peninsula a
new 20-foot-wide public trail easement he tirely within the original 50-foot wide area.
So the benefit and value of the
tunnel easement so the sfpuc exceeded the value to the open-space easement and subsequently the easement to
mid-pen.
Therefore, the parties.
The last slide depicts the
mid-peninsula route through its entirety.
If you have any questions, please ask. I will try to answer those for you.
>> supervisor cohen: okay.
We appreciate that. Any questions? There is no ble
report either. Pretty easy. Let's go to public comment. Public comment? All right. Seeing none, public comment is closed. Is there a motion?
>> I'll make a motion to send forth item three to the full board with positive recommendation.
>> supervisor cohen: okay.
We'll take that with recommendation.
Item four?
>> clerk: four aggregate bond
not to exceed $325 few few for the purpose of providing financing for the acquisition, development and construction of
a 550-unit, mixed-income multi family rental housing project
located in the city at 1500 to 1580 mission street.
>> supervisor cohen: thank you.
This is a piece sponsor by mayor
lee and we have someone from mae lee's office to answer questions
if needed. My understanding is there are questions specifically related to the bid process. I'd
like to spend the next week getting clarifying questions to -- getting clarifying answers to the questions that I hope you'll be able to support, and I hope that you'll be able to support a continuance today. Do you have any questions?
We've got Mr. Cr ay -- Mr. Kray here.
Do you have any announcements to make? >> should I wait until next week to present the fundamentals of the deal?
>> supervisor cohen: I don't
have anything to say at this point.
>> supervisor cohen: okay. Let's go ahead and take public comment on this item.
>> thank you, supervisors alex lansworth with the S.F. Electrical industry. We're here to request the continuance. Thank you for moving it forward for the time being.
The issue for us is actually
quite simple. There is a large
project mainly funded and enabled by the city funds. We want to make sure that the bidding process is both as transparent as possible and we
have the highest level of
workmanship on this project at
the end of the day, $320 million is not a small sum of money. From what we learned at the end of last week was that -- was that the developer was actually
pushing what we would consider a
consider a less-than-capable
contractor to do this type of cloth h. Because of -- because
of the way the bidding process
has unfolded, none of these
documents are public.
It is part of the bidding process. And with that being out there
the city's participation in it,
we have the highest level of workmanship, we have the highest level of participation that we do what we can to make sure that funds that the city is effectively spending on this project come back to the city and into our economy.
So we're going to be trying to
un -- you know, get into it in the next week. We continue to look forward to it and
presenting it to you. >> thank you very much.
>> supervisor cohen: are there any public comments? Seeing
none, public comments are closed.
I'd like to make a motion to
continue this for one week Madam
Clear and colleagues one week to
November 9th, the next budget
and finance meeting. >> so moved.
>> supervisor cohen: without objection. Madam Madam clerk,
could you call the next one.
>> and a list of tools with
additional equipment added to the vehicles during the
production phase of the contract
for an amount of approximately $17.5 million.
>> supervisor cohen: okay.
We have gary chang here. This is a contract expected to
be paid through local and regional funds.
I believe the board approved the
original contract in December of 2014.
Since then we've approved two contract amendments to exercise all five of the one-year options.
And now we have 424 buses. Mr. Chang, the floor is yours. Thank you for joining us. >> sure.
Good morning, chair, and also
supervisors. Gary chang with sfmta.
I want to, again, first of all, thank the board for all of your support so we can move forward
with the procurements and bringing in new buses into san francisco.
Thank you very much.
And moving on to the next slide.
The current in 2012, the rubber
tire inventory. Sfmta has been one of the
leading agencies in sustain built operating the largest
fleet of zero-emission vehicles in north america. Prior to 2012 we were operating
about 400 diesel buses, 8 #
hybrids and 383 electric trollies.
And then thanks to the support
of the board we started to
procure vehicles in 2018. By
2019, our agency would expect to take delivery of the rubber
tires for the trolleys. By 2019
we will be operating at 1 hon
percent low and zero-emission vehicles.
With all of the lessons learned
recently, sfmta have these
guided principles. Abling of the fleet. We try to keep that within five to eight years. By doing so, we are introducing this staggering procure will.
Instead of procuring a big bash of the year, we are separating them.
So constantly we are looking for newer features, safety feet
yours to incorporate it into the vehicles. Maintenance standards. We do have a robust maintenance practice.
And then we always, from
time-to-time exceeding the oem schedules. One thing I can point out is
like our brake inspections.
Typically, for the oem guideline, it's 6,000 miles.
Actually, we do conduct brake
inspections every 1k, every 1,000 miles. And the next slide is showing
the beautiful buses that are currently operating in the san
francisco district there. The top left-hand corner, those are the -- that's a trolley. And then the other three photos
are the beautiful hybrids.
these are the main buses. So the key features lessening the
time for the passengers to get on. One thing is the differences
between the high-floor ramp versus the lift. Indeed, the high-floor lift, the picture on the right-hand side
there is a very complex mechanical moving mechanisms. Indeed, it was one of the highest failure rate on our buses.
So by moving it onto the ramp,
it reduces the maintenance troubleshooting problem of it. But in addition, when the lift -- when the ramp is not functioning there, we can easily
deploy it by a human. And during the course of the
procure wills, we are also incorporating different safety feet yours onto the vehicles.
The picture on the lower left-happened corner, those are
the nylon hand-straps.
In the old days, we have that
nylon straps. It glides along with the vehicle when it comes to a stop, so we make that difference there. Then the pictures on the lower right-hand
corner, those are the turn-signal indicators. The main feet your for that are actually for the cyclists. When the cyclists are riding alongside the vehicle there and the vehicle needs to make a left turn or right turn, sometimes the cyclist May not be able to see that. So by having the turner
indicator light on the exterior mirror, it helps.
And then additional safety feet
yours is we putting in this do
not stand decal on the flooring
pronouncing a warning annunciator to the pay relationships and not standing
by the doors.
And speaking of of ada feet
yours, on any bus that people get on to, we have three-point
secure areas for wheelchair users. So the differences in san francisco than a lot of the rest of the nation, a lot of the
properties, they have two wheelchair areas. Most of them are having them side by side.
What muni does differently, we have them design it different
staggering so performing more turning radius for the user.
Then we have rear facing
securement and then another feet
your we added was the stroller
storage parking lot on the lower right-hand corner.
Another nice touch was the led interior sign. In the past the color has always
been red. We changed it to amber. Something I'm learning, too. Because actually according to
some study, actually, the color
of amber actually helps the visually-impaired person to see things better. >> hmm.
>> there are more. We have full color destination signs so, for any special event, we can throw
in some nice graphics on the
front sign there.
For all of the bus was air conditioning, we actually have air conditioning on it. The next picture is to reduce the glare. So this is referring to the picture on the right corner. This is the lighting, the led strip there. to provide lighting for the
aisle. Interestingly enough,
sfmta has been getting concerns sitting across from the aisle lighting. We too I to take these comments and do the best
we can and provide the best we can from the public. We are
putting in glare shield.
We are breaking this all down by the year, by the hybrids and by the trolleys.
So by 2019, again, we would have
100% low-emission vehicles
operating in sfmta.
So today I'm here asking for the
board approval for contract
amendment number three to the
hybrid procurement.
This is the contract for 2017.
We are seeking approval to
increase the contract total
amount not to exceed $413,774
and I'm sorry.
$413 million, in 774, in ---- 413774, 673. And we are adding on this priority for our vehicles and
the new improved wheelchair ramp
and additional interior camera for the surveillance camera
system providing safety to the
patrons. We are looking into
adaptive vehicles and we are
looking into batteries.
Sfmta will have 100% electric
fleet by 2025 and a group has
formed to evaluate this battery bus program.
This committee will actually
establish some guidance and then also steering the technology. It will look at the batteries that they are using. There are two types of batteries that they are offering.
One is a short range that runs
maybe 15 to 30 miles. Then have you to constantly charge it. There is something that has long-term batteries. That can
range anywhere from 100 to 200 miles. And the complexity of the battery technology is really leaping forward.
There are multiple chemmous --
chemistries, and there is long-term charging. We are in the process of doing research and study on that.
One thing I want to point out is evaluating the cost of the vehicles and maintenance,
evaluating the facility. Disability impacts of developing the infrastructure in the bus
yards at the end of the line locations.
And if houstono decided to
purchase the buses and that is one thing we want to take into consideration, too.
We have over 500 buses charging at night at the same time.
We have to make sure our back-end support infrastructure
is ready. And then with this committee, we'll be able to establish a timeline for the pilot program.
And that pretty much ends up --
ends the powerpoint presentations. If there are any other questions that I can answer?
>> supervisor cohen: thank you very much for making yourself
available for questions. I don't think we have any at this time. >> okay.
>> supervisor cohen: I would
like to hear the budget analyst
thoughts on item five.
>> chair cohen, members of the committee, the board of supervisors previously approved the original contract and two amendments, so the contract
amount is 412.2 million currently.
This cover covering the ordering
of 424 buses, which have already
been ordered, and there is a
balance of 155 buses that will
be delivered between now and 2019.
As Mr. Chang said, the purchase
of this change order to $1.5 million net increase to the contract. And it's to add accessories to
the buses. He's gone over the
wheelchair ramps, radio systems,
traffic signal priority system. And our understanding is that they don't expect any other significant change orders to this contract at this point. I
think we do raise one question -- one policy issue,
which is simply in terms of the funding of the contract, the amounts that have been
identifies and secured by now, $264.7 million. That does leave a balance. I know this question
was raised to the department,
and they have identified other funding sources. But because they are sort of federal and state sources, those will come
in and be secured between now and 2019 as the buses are delivered. But if you have any questions, we're available to answer. And we do recommend approval.
>> supervisor ronen: I just, on behalf of parents out there and
a regular bus rider when my daughter was in a stroller, I'm
so excited about the stroller parking. >> thank you.
>> supervisor ronen: I just
wanted to mention that. It's a needed change on the bus.
>> supervisor cohen: I have two
questions. I understand the funding out of the entire
contract is $now -- the entire
contract is now $413 million. Where do we expect that funding
to come and at what pace?
>> indeed, our ceo, Mr. Bowles, has been communicating with the funding committee. So the funding will be coming
from a variety of federal, state, and local funding source
to cover the gap, including like the federal funding for annual fleet replacement program
through mtc, prop k,
obag-sbi-rm-2, t-2045 revenues.
Development fees, population
baseline just to name a few
until they are allocated to
sfmta, sfmta cannot consider
them as committed. But we feel
strongly and certain that the $149-million funding gap will be
addressed. We typically -- we partially encumbered all large contracts, such as this one, when fundings become certain. This is actually our standard way to fund the large projects,
like the vehicle procurements.
>> supervisor cohen: all right. Thank you.
Will we be looking to implement more change orders on our vehicles in this contract? >> there could be some minor changes to it. For example, as
the technology improves, we do
see newer feet yours we can incorporate on vehicles, we would certainly like them to be included in the contract.
>> supervisor cohen: all right. Thank you very much.
Let's go ahead and take public comment. ladies and gentlemen of the public that are interested in
speaking on item number five, please come up to the podium. The time is yours. You'll have two minutes.
Already seeing no public comment, public comment is closed. Thank you. I'd like to make a motion to send this to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> so moved.
>> supervisor cohen: thank you.
So moved without objection.
Item six please.
>> clerk: item six resolution to
he extend a term of a lease for 20,000 square feet for the law
library at a base rent of 1.2
million annually with 3% annual increases.
>> supervisor cohen: okay. So the authorization would extend the lease for the law library and it also increases the annual rent. >> correct. So tell us about that.
Good morning, chair cohen I'm
claudia gohrrans, assistant director of real estate.
This is a resolution to exercise
a five-year option to renew the existing lease at the law
library at 1145 market. The premises are the entire fourth floor and partial of the second floor, consisting of about 20,000 square feet. That remains the same. The base rent does increase. We did have an appraisal done,
which set the rent at $65 or fair-market rent at $65 per
square foot. Our transaction agent negotiated with the
landlord and received a
approximately $59 per square
foot value which is less than
90%. I think it's 90% to 91% of fair-market value so that is a
little over $1 million, 300 per
year. We got an annual increase from 4 percent perjuries down to 3%. Then this would take the law library to remain in its
same location until about June
30th, 2023. I don't have a representative of
the law library here. She was going to be here but she's not. I will try to answer any questions that you have.
>> supervisor cohen: thank you. I appreciate that.
I assume supervisor tan goodwill
have questions. I will ask a follow-up.
>> supervisor tanging: tanging I am sorry the department head
is not here but perhaps we can
talk to them at a future meeting. And at this location, I'm just
wondering how much we are using on those floors.
>> there are fixtures on those floors. I believe there is space available for books on the second floor.
I have an appraisal, which I reviewed, which has photographs.
I spoke with Mr. Updike of the property and he has taken a tour. I have not taken a tour of the site there.
Is much available space on the second floor. I have a photo.
>> I would love to see a photo.
I got a photo sfgov-tv, overhead.
>> there is a large area on the second floor -- >> please speak into the mic. >> there is another area that is not being used. There is another large area that is behind a closed door, I believe.
I don't know if it is glass or
wood that is for security purposes. If you want a book behind there, that is also not being used. I
am informed that and they have some rare books.
>> but we don't know where they are at? >> they might have books that they want to put into this secured area but right now they are not being used.
There is a lot of room in the law library that is not being used. >> colleagues, I hope that you see this visual.
At first when I saw it we were
paying $59 a square foot and
there was this empty space and shelves. At the same time, there was a law forth brought forth against
the city.
This lease is for about 20,000 square feet; is that right? I think the lawsuit asked for
about 30,000 square feet of space and that that was adequate
for a law library. So when I see space like that
that is not used, I truly don't understand why the lawsuit was brought forth in the first place, but also given the
changing nature of how people do
legal research this these, it is
an issue that I brought up every budget season.
How many people use the law
library? Today I have not receive a count.
And it is not a knock to you but
the department head is not here. When I bring her back, I will ask her. They answered that the suit was never dismissed.
So I was wondering if the city
attorney could speak to that
issue.
>> so the charter says that the law library is suitable and provide more detail but definitely not the kind of
prescription of how many square
feet are required or what the location May be. When we moved the law library out of the war memorial building
in 2013, the law library filed
suit as supervisor tang mentioned stating or arguing that we were violating our duty
under the charter by giving them a smaller space than they thought was adequate and suitable.
The law library moved for a preliminary junction in superior
court right after filing that lawsuit. The court ruled in the city's favor.
So the court did not order the city to give the law library
more space.
And since then, the law library
had taken no steps to extend the suit. There's been no discovery, there have been no
summary judgment motion filings.
The law library could
voluntarily dismiss the case. Courts will -- the court will,
at our request, dismiss the case for failure to prosecute after it's been dormant for five years. We're coming right up on
that five-year period and si believe we are four or five months away.
We sent a letter to the
library's council asking whether they will voluntarily dismiss the case, just so it is no longer on the court's docket. But from our perspective, the case is not active in any way at this point. We expect that, if they don't dismiss, the court
will dismiss it in a few months. >> thank you very much for that explanation. In reading the charter language
as well, to me it doesn't state
a specific square footage. It's very proud, as you said. But I think also, again, when
you see the visual and what is
being used, what is not being
used, that does raise flags for me.
I also heard that we are storing
some law library books in brooks hall; is that correct? >> that's correct.
So there are many law books at brooks hall that the department
of real estate and especially Mr. Updike have been attempting
to have the law library and/or
its representatives review, look through and then try to move out of brooks hall and similarly to the law library and then also
get rid of books that are no
longer usable or no longer valid
>> and how much space is being taken up from brooks hall?
>> I've seen it. It is a large area. I don't know how many square feet it takes up.
But I will say it is a number of bookshelves.
>> supervisor cohen: okay.
>> many, many bookshelves.
>> what --
>> supervisor cohen: what I
heard from Mr. Updike is 20,000 square feet of books is being taken up.
When the director comes back, I want to know where we will put these books.
If we can put them on the second floor, more people will use them. Me asking this question, I'm not
trying to say the law library is not important. I this I it is a resource for people, especially
if you are a sole practitioner and you don't have the resources and you need to do something on
your own, whether it is books or online research. I do believe there May be more efficient ways for us to several the public with our charter
duties, but maybe providing more subscription access for online
services or lexus nexus or what have you. Again, I'll ask more of these questions when the director comes next time. But today, colleagues, I would say that I would like to continue this item to the call of the chair until we can get some answers.
>> supervisor cohen: all right.
Let's do that.
We'll take public comment. Hillary?
>> supervisor ronen: I was just
curious of the other existing libraries, if there is any unused space where the law library could use -- >> you mean at any locations around the city?
>> supervisor ronen: I don't believe so. Those are used and filled to the
brim, as it is, and used for other public purposes.
>> supervisor ronen: mm-hmm. >> so I don't believe so. Now, there there would be computer access that you could get onto the computer programs
and lexus nexus or whatno -- or
what not, I am not sure.
>> and I know there are a lot of questions.
>> supervisor cohen: yes. I don't know why Ms. Bell
decided to take this week off.
>> we were informed this week
that weigh was out of the office.
>> supervisor cohen: how inconvenient. Do have you any comments you want to share with us?
>> I believe this was covered covered.
This was a five-year renewal beginning 5/2018. The lease provided for the rent
to be at 95% of fair-market value.
The real estate division did do April appraisal.
The increase is 30%.
It still represents 90% of fair-market value. The cost to the city and this is
a general cost, is $6.4 million. As discussed, we consider this a policy matter because of the pending litigation.
>> supervisor cohen: okay. Thank you.
Is there any member of the public who would like to speak
on item six? Please come up to
the podium. Seeing none, public comment is closed.
>> I'll continue this motion to
continue this to the chair.
>> supervisor cohen: okay. We'll take that without objection.
Madam Clerk, number seven, please.
>> a checked baggage
modernization program with a project with a total amount not
to exceed approximately $10.7
million and improving modification with a total
amount, not to exsaid $s 14.5 million.
>> thank you.
We have a contract with cage international for construction
services for the airport's
international terminal
checked-baggage system and system modification projects. Modification number 10 extends
the contract term and increases
the contract amount by $750,000
for a new contract amount of $10.7 million.
As part of the airport five-year capital improvement plan, the
checked baggage system modernization program provides
for the upgrade and replacement
of the airport's inspection and checked-baggage resolution areas in our international terminal.
Under the tsa's recapitalization
program the total contract
not-to-exceed ballot is $14.5
million, of which $2.3 million
will be reimbursable by the tsa. The cage contract provides construction management support services for this baggage, these baggage projects.
And the modification extends the
programming and design support for completion of the project through December of 2020. Since the initial award of this
contract, the airport has begun awarding construction-related
support services contracts on a
one-year and it is based on the
service that you provided it is
the contract term and the board approved the contract through 2020. Airport staff is committed through the stated contract amount in this resolution and
would prefer to return to the
board when we extend it based on
performance and come back so I
would be happy top answer any questions beyond those specifics.
>> supervisor cohen: okay.
Let's hear from the budget analyst. >> yes. As she said this has been approved through 2011. It's been modified nine times.
The amount has stayed just below
the $10 million threshold requiring board approval. We actually did talk to the airport about this.
As Ms. Wagner said their practices with these construction contracts is to renew them annually to be able to maintain some type of oversight on the contract. We've seen this practice in
other contracts. This agreement would increase
the contract by $750,000.
It puts it at $10.7 million.
They're looking at advanced approval of future amendments
for a total contract amount of $14.5 million and an extension through 2020. We recommend approval that
increases it through $750,000
and extends it by one year. We consider future increases to be a policy matter. This is not consistent with charter language.
I was wondering if you do could respond to the recommendation for future approvals. >> so through the chair, that is
what I was trying to address when I said it is the project manager's practice at the airport when we have these construction services contracts
is that they allow themselves or give themselves the opportunity to just award it and just extend it on a yearly basis so that
they can go back and make sure that they are getting the service that they need to
complete the project. And we ask you to approve this contract through the completion of the
upgrade to the baggage handling system rather than come back
every year when they renew it. But that's completely -- that's
just from an efficiency
standpoint. We have other cases.
There is a precedent for it.
If your desire is to come back
every year, we will do that.
>> supervisor cohen: thank you. All right. We'll go to public comment. Seeing that there is no public comment, public comment is
closed.
[Gavel] Through the chair?
>> supervisor cohen: I'm sorry. Real quick. Supervisor ronen?
>> supervisor ronen: sure. i'm filming in for the committee
so I'm new to this.
I as a matter of practice, don't think the board should give up
our ability to approve the
contract.
>> to do what?
>> supervisor ronen: to come back to the airport. >> and I would be okay for future approvals for this
particular contract.
>> supervisor cohen: so let's
make a motion or let's accept the amendment. >> I'll make a motion accepting
the amendment for the retroactivity date.
>> supervisor cohen: okay.
We can take that without objection. Without objection. Okay. The next action item?
>> well, I'll make a motion to,
as amended to send to the full
board. We can do a roll call vote if you would like. >> sure. >> okay. >>
>> clerk: on the motion supervisor tang? >> aye. >> supervisor cohen?
>> no.
>> supervisor ronen? >> aye.
>> clerk: there are two ayes with no no. >> thank you. The item passes.
Could you call eight.
>> clerk: the lease agreement
for wells fargo bank with a
two-year option to extend with a
minimum annual guarantee of $475,000 for the first year of the lease.
>> supervisor cohen: we have Ms. Wydner to approve atm's in the domestic terminals for five years? >> yes.
>> chair cohen, kathy widner with the san francisco airport.
The item before you seeks
approval for 12A.T.M. Leases in locations throughout the
domestic terminals for an initial term of five year was two -- excuse me with one, two-year option to extend. The initial lease term has a
minimum annual guarantee rent of
$470,000 or 70% of the gross
revenues, whichof is greater.
The M.A.G. Will be adjusted annually bar the cbi. Under the term the airport
expects to collect $2.3 million in annual guaranteed rent.
The A.T.M. Lease is the result for a competitive request for
bid process. And the airport
originally set the guarantee at $150,000 in the hopes of encouraging multiple bids, however, wells fargo was the
sole bidder with the proposed M.A.G. That is before you today.
The budget analyst recommends approval.
I would be happy to answer any questions.
>> supervisor cohen: thank you.
We'll hear from the budget legislative analyst. >> yes.
As Ms. Wagner said, wells fargo was selected through a competitive process. They were
the only bidder. What we want
to point out the M.A.G. Is
$6,000 and the M.A.G. Under the
proposed lease is more and our understanding is that wells
fargo doesn't have sufficient
ways to pay the rent and the 67
over this lease was a little over $100,000. now, the other thing is that the
transaction fee, per-transaction
at the A.T.M. Is going up from
$1.50 to $2.50 so presumably, their revenues will go up. But we think that the reduction
in M.A.G. Is reasonable. >> when you say increase in revenue would go up.
Is that the increase of revenue for the airport or wells fargo?
>> excuse me. Wells fargo. The transaction fee that they are charged when
someone is using the A.T.M. Is
going up from $1.50 to $2.50. We don't think that that would be an increases to the airport. But because of the -- even with the reduction in the M.A.G.,
this was a competitive process.
We do think it is reasonable and
we recommend approval.
>> and so I'm understanding
correctly the minimum in rent is $474,000 that the airport receives?
>> that's correct.
>> supervisor cohen: okay. And what is an rfb?
>> rfp, request for proposal.
>> supervisor cohen: okay.
It was a typo. Got it. Okay. Colleagues, if there is no questions, I think what we could do is grow to public comment and hear what the public has to say on item eight. Any member of the public? Okay.
Seeing up in, public comment is closed. [Gavel] Supervisor ronen, do you have
any thoughts you want to share?
Supervisor tang? Okay. Let's send this to the full board. >> I'll make a motion to send to the full board with positive recommendation.
>> supervisor cohen: okay. We'll take that without objection.
Thank you. Please call items nine and 10 together. Clerk.
>> courtroom deputy: item number resolution approving the terms
of 2011 lease and use agreement
through the city and fiji
airways to conduct flight operations at the airport for
lease term to come mention
following board approval through
June 30, 2021.
10 resolution approving terms of
2011 lease and use agreement
through the airport for approval
through June 30th, 2021. >> supervisor cohen. Thank you. We have Ms. Wagner here again. >> good morning.
Kathy wagner. We are seek ago proval, air limited doing
business as fiji air ways and
air limited to the proposed use agreement.
The proposed use would add air
fiji and air india to the 2011
lease agreement with the other airlines that currently operate
at sfo. Lease and use agreement is the mechanism that allows airlines
to provide flight operations and terminal space at the airport.
This also provides a common set
such as rent and fees, permitted uses of terminal space and provides the legal framework to make the annual payment to the city. The airport projects rent
payments of $1.45 million in
terminal rent and $234,000 in
landing fees from fiji airways
and $1.86 million in terminal
rent and $470 in landing fees through air india through the remainder of the lease term. Each time a new carrier begins operations at the airport or increases service they have the ability to be added to this agreement and receive slightly
lower landing fee rates. It also provides the airport with a
commitment from the airline
through 2021 that allows us to
do financial and gate capacity
forecasting.
There is a bit of approval for that.
>> supervisor cohen: let's see what the questions are.
>> as Ms. Wagner said, this
would add fiji airlines and lease limited.
These would be there for four years, seven months. The agreement covers the lease space for cost in these two air
lines as well as the landing
fees for these airlines. Based on the current rates we think in the first year of the agreement the airport would receive $4 million in revenues
from adding these two airlines.
We are not able to adjust but we do recommend approval.
>> supervisor cohen: okay.
Let's go to public comment and I'll have some questions after public comment. Please come on up.
Public comment is open.
>> thank you, Madam Chair and supervisors. I'm here from local 2. I am here to express disagreement with air india, item number 10. As you know, city policy states that contractors will not discriminate against any employee on the basis of a person's gender identity, height
or weight under many factors.
Unfortunately, air india has a
unabashed process for women in particular tow meet stringent weight standards. I am sharing with you and I know
it's been passed out measuring
employees' body mass index and permanently grounding personnel
who fails to meet its criteria.
130 staff were declared unfit in 2015 another 37 were suspended
this year after failing to
satisfy a weight loss regimen.
Not only does air india defend
weight requirements they maintain different standards for women as to men. According to the airline women are considered
overweight at a bmi of 22, whereas men are held to a standard of 25.
This is not affront to working people but also flies in the
face of san francisco's non-discrimination policy. Rather than approve a airline
that defends these practices, I
urge you to continue to this item. Air india should come
before you that they have
abandoned these antisex and until then I don't think that
san francisco can in good
conscience enter into an agreement -- [Bell] At this time. >> thank you. Any other
speakers? Do we have a representative -- let me close public comment. Are there any representatives from air india here to talk
about these allegations? Ms. Wagner, what would happen if
we rejected these lease agreements?
>> kathy wagner san francisco saint. We were made aware of the objections to the lease yesterday. We did inform the station manager of air india but
I do not see them here today.
>> supervisor cohen: okay.
>> so I will definitely pass on this conversation.
It is worth noting that an
airline required by the F.A.A.
We have to let them fly at F.F.O. They are currently operating under permit which is what would
hatch if, for some reason, the board chose to reject the lease
they would still operate at S.F.O. Under permit. They would
pay a slightly higher
formula-based landing fee calculation.
>>> supervisor cohen: do you
know specifically when you say "slightly higher?"
>> it is 25% based on. So we estimate that their initial
landing fees under this, if they were to become a signatory
airline were $470,000. So it
would be an additional 25%. They also would be required to
give us six months' security deposit, rather than two.
That's the difference.
>> supervisor cohen: all right. So air india would still be
allowed to fly out of S.F.O.? >> yes.
>> supervisor cohen: and they
would still be there and what are they paying at terminal?
>> it is based on joint usage. My understanding that airlines that are not significant in a
towards pay 25% higher landing
fee rates. It would be 10% of $470,000 additionally. As well as they are required to
give us six months' security
deposit rather than two for signatory air lines.
>> supervisor cohen: so let me understand this correctly.
If we reject the lease, that
means they will required to pay more?
>> yes. We want airlines to
make a commitment to us through 2021 through the lease agreement for planning purposes so there
is a incentive for them to join on.
If they don't become a signatory
they pay the higher landing fee.
>> supervisor cohen: it is their use. Supervisor tang? >> thank you.
I thank them for bringing this
to our attention. And I would like to talk to air india if they are engaging in this practice and if they are, that is not acceptable. I would ask that we continue think item. >> May I ask that we separate
out the two? There are two separate resolutions.
If we can move forward with fiji, that would be helpful.
And I'll pass on your request.
>> supervisor cohen: to the best
of your knowledge, air fiji does
not employ these practices. >> I don't believe so. It's
never been brought to my attention.
>> supervisor cohen: >> supervisor ronen?
>> supervisor ronen: I'll make a motion that this is continued.
>> supervisor cohen: and we can thank this. Thank you local 2 for bringing this to our attention. I have to support you. Madam Clerk, is there any other
business before us?
>> clerk: there is no other business before us.
>> supervisor cohen: okay. ladies and gentlemen, we're adjourned.
