opportunities for seniors and adults with disabilities. the program model we're basing is in already in prais. it's operation and the reserve program and started in 2005 in new york city and was successful there and ex357bded to other locations in the east coat and midwest and now bringing to san francisco. through the procurement process the contractor submitted a well thought out comprehensive model here they will serve as an a liliate to the program and use infrastructure such as program trls and a data base system. they're able to access reserve executive staff in new york for consultation during the roll out and operation. some of the steps taken to adapt this program to san francisco include most notably the inclusion with adults with disabilities as a target population for services in this program. it's a 55 plus model on the east koacht. they have a advisory group to advise on the program. they have met in january. they have secured commitments from at least a dozen non-profits for possible work site development so how does the program work? there are three main things going. they will recruit seniors and adults with disabilities looking for part time work and meanwhile there is recruitment and development of work sites throughout the community which will play host to these part time work roles. finally there will be the maxing of the reserve to the work placement. they will handle the on going of that placement. wages are initially fully subsidized. this is used as an incentive for the work sites to develop these work opportunities. the idea though is that as the work site -- as the work role continues the work site themselves are asked to contribute an increasing portion to depray the cost. by doing this the program has an element of self funding in order to grow the program. the idea there is they might be 100% subsidized but as it goes on and money is brought to defray the placement and starts to start new subsidy start it is elsewhere at other sites so in sum we know that seniors and disabilities want to work and have experience and skills that great benefits to employers. we know there are barriers they face with employment. during the program we're hoping to remove some or if not all of the barriers. in addition to economic benefits for the reservists and the work site placements part participants have additional benefits sense of purpose, increased connections with others and contribute to the communities. with that i am happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. any comments or questions from the commission? it sounds like a very good program. >> we're very excited about it. >> that i think will provide tremendous improvement and self worth of seniors who feel marginalized and they have nothing to contribute so it's a psychological benefit that is difficult to quantify but a good idea. any comments or questions from the public? hearing none call the question. all in favor say aye. >> aye. >> any opposed? thank you the motion carries. item 9 any announcements? commissioner simms. >> i have one. i would like to invite everyone who is interested to join us at the open house community residents grand opening and the bob ross senior service grand opening on march 23 at 3:00 o'clock at 55 laguna and plan long planning and housing for the lgbt community of senior san francisco and come join us for the phase one completion. >> what date again? >> march 23, 3:00 o'clock. >> i would also like -- >> [inaudible] [off mic] >> yes. the old uc extension campus. >> [inaudible] [off mic] >> yes. >> [inaudible] [off mic] >> the date is march 23 at 3:00 p.m. >> i would like to the 30th street senior center. i would like to invite the commissioners and audience to our annual fundraiser. this time we will be doing a luncheon at the st. francis hotel and we're featuring the work of dr. mario martinez and a neuropsychologist and how we feel can make us sick and science based and international and joining us both for lunch as a keynote speaker and providing a continuing ed conversation afterwards for those that want to dive deeper into his information so i have things here. can i put it over the table for you. >> >> i hope you come and join us and remember that all of the agencies that you support definitely need to do fundraising and hopefully have fun and education while we do it. >> can you repeat the date and time please. >> thursday march 16 at noon and then the continuing ed conversation will be from two to four and a networking event afterwards with wine and cheese. >> thank you. any other announcements? cathy. >> first an apology. i should have been making a report when the advisory council did but i wasn't here. i was on the bus. i am the representative to tacc which is represent from all the advisory councils in the state. we meet quarterly and the state commission on aging sets it up, runs it, and keeps us going. i think we had a meeting last month but i think what is really important is that we had a speaker, a couple of speakers on the budget and what came out is no one was certain what was going to happen with the budget yet. it was going to be less some way about what was going to go? they were watching and we were feeling extremely -- like everybody here what was going on uncomfortable with what should we do or how should it be? seems to me that you have with your state staff members excellent people, good. they're bright. they have good connections to all the different programs in the state again and again i see that and the speaker on this, so if you're at a point where you really want to ask and get some answers about what is happening with this funding now which is so confusing they're the people. call -- they're the people. call sandy in the state office. they will get you the people who are right on top of this and the people who can come out. you can talk to or someone will come here and talk if you need someone about some issue to talk to the group, so we're very fortunate to have the people who are in your staff office up there but hey you have the resources if you really -- you know, to look into this and keep track of what is going on with it, and they're super nice, and that leads into the fact that i am appointed hereby supervisor norman yee and i was in the office and came to give me an alert which i am sure he wants me to pass on to you. the city budget and finance committee is going to meet here on march 9 at ten in the morning and guess what? it's a hearing on senior services city-wide and they're going to have a bla, whatever that is, performance audit from july 2016 in light of the dignity fund. his suggestion to me was -- what he was saying to me he felt seniors should be there at that meeting. there should be seniors and people from -- some senior agencies. this is our budget, and finance committee, so i'm going to try to be there, but hey guys we need to get out and get seniors. they're talking about our money and what they're going to do at the city budget. we need seniors there. that's the advice i am handing on to you and that's my report. >> thank you very much. >> could i clarify that the march 9 is a hearing before the budget committee of the board of supervisors and the department of aging is responding to an audit that was done by the bla as cathy said. the budget and legislative analyst for the board of supervisors and so the iewd itd was completed last year and supervisor yee is calling for it and we will have a response and he would like it to be a way to highlight services for seniors in san francisco, so at the same time it's a response to an audit i think he wants to make it as positive as possible and that's why he is asking people to come out for it. >> thank you. >> can i ask a question? >> yeah,. >> you said it's july so it's about seven or eight months ago. you certainly have saw the report of the audit. what is the general tone of the audit, very generally? >> well, i think it has -- you know really i think the idea was to have the audit come out before the dignity fund to make sure that the department of aging is really ready to be able to responsibly allocate and then track the money for the dignity fund so it looks at some of the practices around that and has some suggestions and talks about things we're doing well and that's basically the nature of it and i think supervisor yee just wanted to make sure that we can highlight we're ready to spend this money that we have the processes in place. >> thank you. any other announcements? any public comment? >> i just have one public comment, and in terms of the going to washington, d.c. i am just wondering if you could maybe one. commissioners who is well informed about the budget could go along, our vice president. think about that in your budget but i think it could be well represented in washington, d.c.. it would be helpful. >> yeah, absolutely and that's been a good opportunity in the past when we did that, right, for commissioners to go. let me look because this is different from the other meeting we went to. this is the policy briefing. have you gone to that before? because we can certainly look into it. it would be a good opportunity for one of the commissioners. >> thank you for volunteering. >> [inaudible] [off mic] >> any additional public comment? hearing none motion to adjourn. >> adjourn. >> thank you. thank you very much. >> call this meeting for transbay joint power authority board of directors to order. would you call the roll, please. >> gee, present. kim, here. reiskin, here. nuru, present. sartipi, present. harper recollect present. mr. chairman you have a quorum. >> next item. >> next item item 3 and 4 chair harper requested to move those items to the end of the regular calendar agenda. if there are no objections, that will be communication and board of directors new and old business. >> thank you. >> with that your next item is executive drether report, item 5. >> good morn ing director. january 19 the california transportation commission approved the 25 year lease for bus storage facility with 85 percent reduction in lease rates for fair market value. we have provided ac transit based on lease terms. ac transit board is expected to approve the sublease later this month. we also expect to be receive bids on the bus storage facility later this mung. we plan to bring the caltrans lease, ac transs and bus contract to the board for approval in march. follow tupe last month discussion regarding the boards desire to invite the california high-speed rairl rail to join the board. morales appreciated the invitation and agreed adding added high-speed rail is a benefit now that phase one is complete and [inaudible] cal tran high-speed rail. given the high-speed rail authority is one the largest operators when phase opens and expected to make contributions to funding phase 2 inclusion on the board is a porent step. morales informed to discuss with the board and get back with next steps. as i reported last months meeting our allocation request was included on thujepda fl the january 4 24 transauthority meeting. the commissioners felt they needed more time to understand and dejust detail thofz re ques so the items was continued to the february 25 commission meeting. we have briefed commissioner fewer on the project and scheduled meetings with commissioners [inaudible] sheehy and [inaudible] before the february meeting to brief. we are doing so with staff so we are doing it together. we hope to invite the new commissioners before the transit center february 28. request of $6.8 million will allow to move next steps we highlighted including the events and design to 30 percent. updating risk assessment and right of way analysis to minimize impact to the property ies. this will help produce a fair cost estimate for phase two that will [inaudible] experiencing in phase one. on the direction from the board the december meeting i met with director john ram and his team on january 31 to discuss the development ofant grated schedule for phase 2 and city's study go frgward. the existing director, ken rich director och development with economic and workforce development and [inaudible] director of transportation [inaudible] joined the meeting. we exchange schedule information for our project jz discussed the parameters frl next steps for both the [inaudible] schedules. based on the discussion it is agreed more time is needed. we exchanged for both projects so will continue discussion and hopefully update the board in the near future. the team also provided director ram and team with update on the progress of the supplemental document study and the [inaudible] report and shared the responses to city comments. director ram and team are reviewing our responses and will provide with input. they also provided preliminary input we are considering at this time. we continue to advocate the engineering and design work we propose to [inaudible] produce information that is useful for all [inaudible] in consideration and allow the policy makers to make better decision based on that information. we will continue to work on the planning in the mayor's office to invest studies for successful completion. joined staff from the mayors office of planning on a trip to sacramento to meet with california [inaudible] we presented with state of san francisco [inaudible] delegation and staff. the purpose of the trip is discuss the potential to reducements or deuce leases for the caltrans own parcel for [inaudible] that we expect to have next to the transit sent squr other parcels located under freeways the city wish tooz turn into parks. caltrans informed for them to be anal to provide discount leases for areas under freways requires new legislation so will work with them and city folk tooz make that work. with that, that concludes my remarks. >> any questions, comments? >> one question. you made reference to city feedback that you received on supplementing eis draft, is there other feedback that tjpa received and that's i guess of substance and shaping the final? >> not that i know of. not sure if mark did we receive anything? the only feedback we received is from planning. we think we can address it. >> thank you. next item. >> item 6 is construction update. >> good morning director. ron [inaudible] will give our monthly construction update. and yet another stormy day. despite all the rain we had so far we are reporting we are still on schedule. thankfully to a good part moefs it work is under cover at this point and roof elements work mostly in the rain so it is a good thing. our graphic here shows that the progress is continuing well. on the roof park the biggest element that is different is we have a lot of mcguire and hester rooftop park elements. bus deck just all the concrete for the bus deck isle is done and will be done by the end of the month. they have to do a lot of overhead work. when you get to the ground level and the second level, most is like glass is going in and a lot of build out of the rooms, so it is starting to take shape. and below grade these levels focus on getting the important electrical rooms. the west end or upper left area just about whether the rooms are done and will finish up at the east end after those as we progress through. showing pictures and bullet points in the western zone. working the skylights. has all the grass in. the restaurant is starting to take shape, a lot of walls are being poured and mep throughout all levels is progressing and then the concrete masonry unit or a lot of walls for the rooms are just about done. and then our rooms are all getting ready for energy. the last vehicle bike ramperize coming along. in the central zones in the picture that is the biggest change. trees show aed up. we have 20 of hundreds that will show up but learning turns like monkey puzzle and horn beam that are beautiful trees that will all start taking shape as it starlts progressing throughout the year. also in the central zone mep is the focal point as well. it is really a lot of element and focus is on the electrical and continue to build out the rooms as well. the first street temporary bridge is progressing well and just about up and finished. they will finish most the work this month and progress to beale shortly. in the eastern zone, the like home skylight has the glass in it so thankfully for the storm weez had this week we have glass that is helping tremendously keeping water running or having to deal with drainage issues. bus deck drive is complete and eastern zone is just as critical and really more taking off the western and central zones have been the focus as we work from west to east. all the cmu walls as well are all must done. the cmu is coming close to completion. the bus ramp, all the concrete is pour frd the viaduct and frame work. they are finishing up the southern area near harrison street and also at the transit center frame 5 that gap is where most the work happening at this point besides all the clean up as we focus towards the march 30 completion date. items working on is the railing on the cable stay. also, the drop in span that is a 50 foot section next to that they are smalling that. there will be-once that is smalled they can do a lot of final work on frame 4 which is cable stay and cut cap the cable squz do the lift off and make the cable stay in the final configuration. we are doing under ground utilities and drainage and final connections needed to complete that particular part of the project. one item i want to note is we have a upcoming close yrb, beale street. beale street is different than first and fremont in the sake that beale has ocs lines. when we remove the first and fremont we are able to do that on a stage construction element, but because of the major disruption to ocs we started a process of asking about the removal of the ocs linesx leave them down for a period of time to doall our work and get the ocs lines back up and do everything we possibly need to do in this limits of work area and it's working through the process and believe we are moving forward with the march 4 closure. it is close thd month of march. >> ocs. >> the over head lines. >> they don't have in the least bay. >> what we have done through various elements of the project, impacting the muni system in piece meal which we if we did how we do first and fremont it would have impacted the muni service over a 7 month period because of the operation. we are onlt going in and out in a 28 day period. do it in the month of march and get it over with and it is lot less pain and wriping the band aid off faster is less impactful to the system and will be from march 4-we have april 1 a 28 day period and developing a hour by hour schedule. now we have high level and will get to day by day and hour by hour to insure that we beat april 1. we have internal goals to insure we are done by april 1 and there will be no hick ups to insure the lines are back up for muni to be back it normal operation by the end of the month of march. regarding safety and labor, we got recordable and recording is zero. there was no lost time incident. yesterday we found out that one of our january 1 days got reclassified as a recordable particularly gentlemen had his thumb identified a continued to hurt and wnt to medical and found out it was fractureed so had to reclassify as of yesterday. he is on modified duty so we will report next there was one recordable in january. we have surpassed 3 million craft hours by far now. we are at 3 million 59 thousand with 104 thousand just january alone. with that, i will turn it over to ron to complete the rest of the presentation. thank you. >> good morning directors. thank you dennis. it is good to see the progress in the field despite the weather we made a great strides particularly seeing trees arrive and believe the bus deck is all but done in terms of concrete and all, so good progress. moving or focusing on budget overview, our estimated cost of completion is staying steady at $2.146 billion and our current program expenditure has reached 1.64 roughly about a $26.3 million uptick over the month. committed fund had $19 million uptick having the arrival of the city funding and nob nub come in allowed to free up a bunch of ntt so we'll be minimizing or diminishing the practice of a hand to mouth ongoing work. that brings the budget to 72 percent and contract time at 86 percent. with respect to contingency cost expenditures relatively light month with $2.3 million overall draw. something to do with complicationwise [inaudible] and a good measure of it for the buy ouft the gas and emergency raid radio system infrastructure. in forcast we got about 300 k on the horizon, so fairly low on the contingency piece currently. schedule, blissfully boring t. is pretty much steady state. eager to see the lease finally lapd with the bus storage and the bids come in so we can start getting some traction on the bus storage facility. and the bus ramp we saw the post substantial completion work at the bus ramp, which is beyond april of this month, has a little-it is reflecting catch up work below the ramp. street lighting and utilities that we anticipate will be punch list activity but all in all it is pretty much reflecting the last few months of schedule stabilization. in terms of risk, we have moved out of the challenge zone and more of a risk zone as relate toog schedule. we continue to look ahead and treat everything as if it's on the critical path. a culture of seeing what as i call it rocks in the road ahead of us to insure we tackle problems before they become insur mountable. examples of that, dennis mentioned the beale street removal. some clever resequencing and compression of time there and in fact we were geared to do fremont street ahead of beale and recognized constraints with neighbors activities so leapfrogged over that and also bought us time to remove some of the columns below the bridge prior to disrupting traf recollect. we are always looking for opportunity to readdress our approach in the interest of addressing the issues own the horizon. the last topic as i have been doing the last few months is operational readiness. still eager to see the arrival of the master lease e. we raffted up the transition planning meetings to weekly basis. as i noted last month, we are still kind of on our trufjectory of ac transit starting opraigdss march 2018. we did meet with muni recently. they reiterated their training timelines of 45 to 60 days, which bumps up close to march as well. i did start getting some dialogue about what i mentioned last month about a measured migration or a soft opening. starting some discussions around focusing on the weekend routes. maybe a few weeks ahead of the bulk of it to start teasing out issues with a as i call it a measured migration. i haven't moved the needle too far away from march as of yet. um, and i thought i would start to encourage discussion and thought and maybe future discussion. what does this all mean or where is it taking us? stepping back and looking at clearly there is need for ramp up with the operational staff as well as the transit staff. i think realistically december we'll have completion. we will probably get some done prior to that but all intensive purpose i think january and february are the fwo months prior to march to focus on what it looks like, what are the expectations in terms of onboarding the operations as well as what are the opportunities to start celebrating the arrival of the transit center. we met with ac transits communication arm as well in terms of talking about what is the public relations or the public messaging so people are ready to arrive when we arrive and understand what's coming. you know, i think we need to further discussions around soft opening among the stakeholders. i gonet what the boards vision is, is there a public open house or a art reception? a lot of things have happened usually prior to fully opening, so i encourage some thought from the board on that and maybe in the future have discussion on communication on expectations on what this rollout will like look like in about a year. >> that was discussed last night at the ac transit board extensively. their notion and question was-there is going be a celebration. do you want it as buses running then and there or later or buss about to run because of this end up being very important in terms of what kind of service we will have given the date the city and think the city is really in the driver seat here determining when will be the big opening and what capability do they want ar transit to be showing at that point. so we start planning because we have to do our driver sign up in march will control a whole lot and if we don't have the celebration just before that, it's going to a celebration with full blown service and that may be good. who knows, but we have to decide. >> i want to encourage it had discussion because distinction being the odd ball arch tect in the group i recognize transportation is used to cutting the ribbon and having a stack of vehicles flowing, where us folks with buildingstened to slow walk to it, tease out the issues, take moments to celebrate various components of open house and education. >> i mention once before, i don't know if i have given mark the contacts but the pacific bus history museum wants to have interesting vehicle thrz and celebration and everything because they got a lot of history of the terminal on wheels, so it is just to add that in there. >> that will be good. >> lots of coordination to be done. >> that is the intent of the transition planning meetings are to start encouraging that. any other questions i might address? >> just to that last point, i suggest rather than asking us what do we think the opening should look like, i think it is good to get toort with maybe the commune ication staff from the various operator agencies and city to come up with suggestions for heres what it could look like. i think there are people much smarter and expert than i. >> we'll bring in others. >> i just want to get preliminary feedback from the board what you are expecting? >> i don't want to be too presumpative. >> muni wouldn't be ready to march [inaudible] >> [multiple speakers at same time] >> we poured so much money and effort into the facility i feel we should get the benefits as soon as we can. >> one question on the in terms of your concerns with master lease onboarding impact, what assumptions do you currently have in the schedule in terms of when we would be issuing ntp to run? >> the last articulation is february or march so we are on the brink. >> i don't think zee approval item today so it won't be february. >> we are very close to concluding the negotiation so it could be later this month or march at the latest, but we areilate already. >> so what is the impact of-the best we could possibly do is have something for the board to consider at the march meet ing? >> you may be able to do a special session between now and march. >> and then there is time after that to ntp so i knress guess my question is that is the best case and you are saying we are already late. what is the impact of if that continues to slide past march into april? >> i think we have done a good job having proxys at the table to tease through the issues. it is really just diminishing the length of the run way if you will to educate-have them educate themselves, be participant in the commissioning. the last transition meeting i was looking at some plans on kind of when will certain segments of the building be needed or available in terms of diminishing of web core activity to afford a opportunity to bring in master lease with tenant improvement said to get ready for gray hound and amtrak or retail, so there is a lot of those dimensions that when we prefer a longer run way than a shorter. >> if i can clarify, there is a component of them knowing what the systems in the building we have and how to opwrait the building and that is probably the most pornl component. turn oen the light jz systems and we are belined there already. there is the improvement said that will take a long time and more we delay the less revenue the sooner we want because [inaudible] take their own path. and there is activating the [inaudible] and activating the tenter center. the most component is know what systems we have and how to operate it and ewoo will screez them hard to get that done and be comfortable doing it in [inaudible] we want them to take over the bimding. >> again to the point we spent a lot of money and effort to get the center completed and feel to the benefit the public put to use as soon as we can it is helpful for the board to understand at what point can we not start operations upon completion of the building project because of delay get thg operator on board? >> we'll bring in more information next meeting. hopefully we will be able to award a contract and show you a schedule. >> a squej of all the details of different people and when you think some things will happen. >> okay. >> thank you. following up own director reiskins comment in your schedule chart here you don't have the master lesee coming on board and one of the concerns that director reiskins comments brought to mind is someone still needs to oversee the master lessee tenant improvement work and by the absence in the chart it implies it isn't you and your team so it has to be somebody . >> i'm glad you brought that up because there was a piece of that i meant to mention while going through the presentation. i expect and have been stepping in where i can to get the process keep going in terms of the transition planjug what have you. we anticipate developing a comparable and did a rough draft of a more granular schedule and overview schedule with respect to standing up to facility. i'm still bringing people to the table. i didn't run too fast with too many proxys still needing to put input for what that schedule might look like, but fully expect to begin to articulate that stream of activity in a scheduled slide soon as well. i'm hopeful for earlier rather than latter. i think realty is within the first half june to at least roughed out schedule high level schedule on those different components. we started to initiate those, i didn't want to trot it out too premu churly. >> the other part, if there is a gap between the master lesee and operations, there is a financial component that goes with that. >> right. >> whether it is no revenue or oversight cost or the longer that gap is, the more cost it is to the organization so that needs to be part of that mix also. i want to add my voice ron as a architect in the room. i'm not used to finishs a project completely before someone moves so encourage phased occupancy and working backwards or whatever. it would be very disappointing situation-the hard work of the team to bring this on board, online and meet the schedule and just have empty buses running for three months. >> there are a lot more moving parts and we'll enrich the circle of public relation folks and different departments because i kind of see the public open house as a education opportunity so people understand what to transit center is all about and preplan their move in to the facility in terms of their daily routine or commute and give them a run way as well. lots to tease out in the next coming year. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> iletm 7 is citizen advisory committee update. bruce [inaudible] chair unable to be present but he asked the agency to read comments into the record. we have a liaison. >> good morning. bruce had minor foot surgery so he's in recovery and our cac coshare loren post isn't able to attend today as well so give their apologies and asked us to read a statement. as our cac was canceled my comments are brief and limit today two subjects, number one, cac cochair loreen post atrnded a meeting january 19 promect team member jz jeff cukinsky and sam dodge from department of homelessness and supportive housing. we were pleased with the discussion and possibilities identify frd the groups to work together to ready the transit center and neighborhood frz the opening to support the homeless population which will be etrauckted. it would have been advantages to have the discussion earlier. there is a sense of urgency and potential opportunities and next steps were identified. the cac looks forward to the presentation on elementoffs a plan and schedule within the next few mupth said. iletm tworks we continue to encourage and look forward to seeing a argument between the tjpa project team and san francisco planning department on a fully funded roadmap tocomplete the planning efforts for phase 2 of the project. the downtown extension. this includes phase 3 of the study, which provides the decision maker with a complete analysis and recommendations on preferred alignment for the dt x. thank you for the opportunity to provide the update and look forward providing update in person next month. >> next is public comment. opportunity for members opthe public to address you with matters not on todays calendar. patrick. >> see someone. >> good morning jim patrick with patrick and caempt in san francisco. i argued in front oaf the board quite a wile ago we needed to move briskly with onboarding of the master leeee. we chose not to do that and now i will argue we need to compress that time as much as we can to make this be a successful opening. we have opportunity costs that sit vacant for a period of time. don't allow that to happen. we got to do what we need to make it happen. number tworks i was disappointed that we didn't get the funding from the transportation authority in san francisco for the completion of the environmental impact report. what a tragedy. this is the same scheduling that is putting the dtx down the line. we'll forget about it in 4 years, i dont question that, but these are critical items and need to be funded and moved along and board and other people need to support that and i will hopefully appear before the board and try to support that at the nest next meeting february 28. it is a shame so we need to be more aggressive getting these things done. thank you. >> thank you. >> that conclude members of the public that wanted to be under that item. move to consent calendar. >> yes. consent calendar. >> matters are listed to be routine. there will be no separate discussion. the matter will be removed and considered separately. we haven't received [inaudible] to have items severed. your items are 9.1 approvaling the minutes of january 12 meeting and 9.2, authorize the executive [inaudible] to extend the term of agreement to december 31, 2018. >> is there any-move approval? motion and second without objection the consent calendar is approved. next item. >> moving into your regular calendar. item 10, presentation by boston properties of interest and capabilities with respect to managing the terminal. >>o cay. i must preface with a disclosure this presentation is a result of my initiative. our staff has not been involved. the modal chosen by the board and specified in request for proposal is true master lesee which in exchange will bear most of the risk of the expense of operating and maintaining the terminal. because mow respondent to the rfp would agree to be a true master leeee, we have been forced in a negotiating based on asset management model fully bears the liability for operation and maintenance costs. because under the terminals operating agreement, 60 percent of the near term operating and maintenance loss must be paid by ac transit and 30 percent by the city. this issue is of critical importance to ac transit. if ac transit must hold for example even $3 million back to each year as a reserve to pay its portion of these losses, 36 fewer buses can be allocated to serve the weekly commute to and from the terminal. probably no entity will agree to be a true master lessee negotiating with a assect manager that does vpt a steak in the neighborhood is to allow profit maximaization by that entity to be the controlling factor. loss and properties, owner of the sales force tower, and 535 mission, indicated because of their vested interest in the immediate neighborhood, and their existing in-house expertise in building operations, maintenance, leasing, and dealing with homelessness in the city of san francisco, their profit is comparatively of little importance to them. for that reason, they are #234r9 interested giving limit jz guarantees the entities we negotiate with are entirely reluctant to do. they like to at least meet once with our staff to see if both our staff and they can very quickly determine if there is a mutual interest in their long term role in that capacity. i see no reason why staff cannot have one such meeting while continuing on the course of present negotiations with the other parties. and i am asking the board to so direct staff prior to the end of this meet ing. >> athank you director harper. i'm steechb coleven senior vice president boston property said in the greater bay area and incharge of praurj opraigdss. let me preface my comments. boston properties fully understands you are in the middle of procurement process and actival rfp. we understand and respect that process, but as director harper said, my remarks will be along the line what we can do to help you and as a neighbor of the transit center. a little about boston properties, we are rel estate investment trust. little over 47 million square feet managed and owned and 164 office properties. i have folks here i want to briefly introduce which is our service delivery team that director harper referenced. first of all, just order, if you can stand up, this is john loftus is no stranger to city hall. prior to boston properties served with station for 30 years with police department retiring as deputy chief. next is kevin fitzpatrick who is our expert in regional property manenment. next is aaronmic numarrow who does the retail leases for the region and then helen is our director of marketing. a year ago helen looked very stressed and that is because helen was work wg the super bowl city and she is much happier working on the sales force tower project and thank goodness the super bowl was a great success but thank god it is over for us. boston properties watched with great interest the progression of the transitsent squr as director harper says we have a vested interest in the success of that center not only from a local community standpoint about the fact we have significant investments adjacent to the property. sales force tower the largest of the investments but also the property at 535 mission street. we also have a easement agreement with you and a security agreement with you that ties sales force tower to it transit center qu have been working on these issues really since early 2012. we have been hopeful a world class operator will emerge for the management. somebody that maintains the center like boston property. we look at our tenants not as customers but guest. we believe that and live it every day and feel it is very important that the transit center and park maintained with that type of mindset. boston properties has a long history maintaining high profile public spaces. if you have been to boston the prudential center and town sent squr dc and probably the most iconic building in new york, that the gm building where we have the flag ship apple store occupying space in that building. we utilize as folks that i introduced amoment ago a cod rea of inhouse expertise, so security, marketing, leasing, development, construction services. we got probably the expert on facility engineering in the market. we do this in a seamless active expeditious nation. aerfblg we do we feel we do with quality but get things done quuckly. we also do it in san francisco with union labor and have a excellent relationship with all the unions, trade and service unions in san francisco. so, as i mentioned from the outset, we are hopeful that a owner operator manager with capabilities similar to ours would be involved in operating and managing the transit center. we feel that there is no better opilator than boston properties given our proximity ohad project and what we can bring to the table. again, we fully recognize that you are growing through a active rfp process with a master lesee component and read all it documents and we understand that and we respect that. we only ask that you consider sitting down with us and examining what we can do and bring to the table to do that would be to cancel the rfp. that is bhaut we request and we would respectfully request that we open a dialogue on next step and what we can do for the transit center. thank you for listening today. thank you. >> next item? >> any questions? any comments? seeing none next item. >> item 11. authorize a site lice agreement with concourse communications group, subsidty to boinging wireless for 20 year term with upfront payments toteying 1 millions additional payments tolet aelg 2.5 million and up to 25 percent of gross revenue or $125,000 whatever is greater. >> good morning, sarah [inaudible] this is a a ward of a contract and have to say it is a strange but not unpleasant experience to be standing before you asking not for approval to spend or borrow but to award a contract that will bring in revenue to tjpa and provide a service to the public. so, the distrebted antenna system insures there is cellular coverage in the transit center and while there are a few diagrams slides and technical slides i won't pretend to explain the technical aspects of the contract to you. my understanding is this will insure people are not walking through the transit center saying can you hear me now. when i conclude my prezen tailgz we have prebs from the design time that can address that. we are recommending a ward to boingo wireless and will market to the major wireless service providers and under the 20 year term of the agreement keep the system updated as technology changes and improves. we'll provide operational revenue to the tjpa. these are the diagrammatic slides i mentioned. again, if you have questions we have member thofz technical team here but you can see the coverage areas within the transit center. full coverage on all levels and then the agreement would allow for when phase two operations begin for expansion of the system to make sure the train passengers have service as well. to summarize the procurement we put out a rfp last summer. we received 9 proposals, interviewed 7 firms and narrow down to 3 firms for further discussions with and then based primarily on the financial offers because all the firms are able to provide the services, base ond the financial terms we did narrow the negotiation down to boingo wireless. the proposal from each team are summarized in the staff report as well as here but i like to go into boingo-what is called for in the agreement. there would be $500 thousand paid within 10 days o. execution, another $500 thousand within 45 day squz 30 days of finding agreement with the first carrier or 270 days of execution paid another 2.5 million $2.5 million. by the ochbd the year we put that into operational reserve and that is available to help cover operations moving forward. then they will continue to market the system to carriers and within 30 days of the second area signing would be another 3 quarters of a million payment and half million dollar payment when the third carrier sign squz those are garen teed payment and there are folks from boingo's team and believe there is strong interest from the carriers providing coverage in the center so don't think they or tjpa will be anywhere near 5 year tooz get 3 or 4 carriers to sign but if something happens and not signed within 5 years the payments are garen teed and receive the $1.25 million at the 5 year mark. if a 4th carrier signs another $5 year mark. if a 4th carrier signs another half million dollar payment so the garen teed payments are 3 and a half million 4 million potential total and addition they collect revenue from the providers that they sign agreements with and we'll get a 25 percent share of gross revenues or $125,000 minimum annual guarantee if the revenues are below $125,000. with that, we have members from boingo here and member thofz design team here and i can answer any questions. >> just clarify one thing, infrastructure would be paid by boingo, not us? we are not paying for infrastructure? >> my question to uis this any of this income calculated as part of the revenue for operating or this is all new? >> this is new. included in my numbers last month. last month- >> you have this? >> yeah. >> okay. >> two questions, one, is this wifi or just cellular? >> just cellular, not wifi. >> and then i guess a question, i think- >> what are we doing about wifi? >> the greater demand for wifi and when phase 2 st. complete does the mag increase? >> we have not had specific discussions about the mag in phase 2. the agreement of phase 2 that open certainly does something that we can look and address. the wifi question i will ask a member of the can zine team to come up. dave. >> the overall system that's being discussed here is primarily- >> introduce yourself. >> david [inaudible] engineering design firm associate would the phase 1.5 technology deployment for the overall systems mpt the cellular reinforcement is part of the 1.5 technology implementation. under the base contract that's recently been procured under the previous trade package which is aural awarded and wifi deployment is a system owned qu operated by the master lesee. this system is primarily for cellular reinforcement but it also encompasses the master lessee radio from a operational perspective and accounts for the future rail component as well. it is not just the cellular aspect there are other things embeded ipthe boingo responsibility said. >> the wifi is owned by tjpa. >> owned and operated by tjpa. >> whatdize that mean >> the wifi network is part of our correction contract and owned and operated by us. >> tjpa is installing the wifi system? >> yes. part of the construction contract. >> 1.5 contract deployed the active network components. >> this will allow cellular services on the bottom levels as well? >> yes. >> potentially in the train box? >> that is correct. >> i have a question how it will work. so i know how boingo works in a airport which is kind of remote as compared to downtown san francisco just in terms of area. so, if i'm coming in on a bus from the east bay and on a bus and i pull to our bus deck and using verizon or at&t or any of the usual biggies from my phone call, and i get on to the bus deck of the terminal, now what will verizon or at&t have to have done with-will are i have to deal with boingo or will i have depend on verizon or at&t cut a deal with boingo to continue my phone call? >> you have to be dependent on a deal between the wireless carrier and boingo and as those deals are signed, that's the revenue share portion that goes back to the overall project. as mentioned by sarah, there is extreme interest associate would the carriers participating in this project. there are several business models you deploy from a cellular perspectives. some are associated with tjpa owning and operating similar to wifi. there are other business model wheres the carrier can install that equipment and own and operate that equipment themselves and in this model you have a third party who is a neutral host that will engage with the carriers to install their equipment and boingo pits in the infrastructure and operate and maintain that equipment. >> the bus deck is underneath the park. i presume on the park anybody in the park if they have verizon or at&t they probably have coverage? >> due to increased capacity of south 67 a of market area, the overall carriers are also look frg additional infrastructure to support the over monopoly all growth of the city and their networks cannot accommodate the current gloget let alone once the majority of the buildings under construction now are fully occupied by their tenants, so i would envision as we work through the engineering shop draw jgz overall design that solicit to the carriers because at&t and verizon will review and comment and design team and outcome of that will be coverage throughout. >> i don't know how it fits in-our buses are going to have what i call wifi on them. phone calls i always presume if you had a carrier you can make a phone call on the bus, but if someone is making a phone call on a bus or phone call on a bus through whatever we got, i don't know--i guess there is phone over internet but when comes to portable woy that isn't applied. i don't want a break. so eve n a break saying you have to deal with this polk around and sign up with here or switch carriers and that shouldabout shouldn't have to happen. >> when you are at the airport and launch a page squou see the boingo complimentary internet, that wim not happen hence the reason we felt best interest of tjpa to own and operate the wifi system themselves and then the cellular aspect will be completely seamless. if you are on the phone talking on the bridge coming to the city you get on to the bridge and get on the bus deck there is seamless coverage throughout. >> okay. no more questions. alright. motion for approval and second. >> to address you on item, director gee, aye. kim, aye. reiskin, aye. nuru, aye. harper, aye. item 11 is approved. item 12 is authorizing the executive drether to execute amendment to the professional service agreement withu rs corporation to accommodate interest. >> i like to bifurcate as to the amount required for them to continuing and finishing up and the amount for getting into dtx so we could do that. to have-because my position is i don't want to have the tjpa project the image that the dtx is already been toll held and put their foot in the door and the chances of somebody coming in because that is a big thing that i think should be isolated and should go out on a rfp and we should do the whole thing on dtx and specialize on what we need from the company from who ever helps on dtx so why i want to bifurcate it. people can vote the way they want. but my vote on the dtx will be no, let's go on a r frkts p and do that rather than have them start dtx engineering now particularly given where we with the city and county of san francisco where we are supposed to be in a holding pattern that we can use this to go out for a rfp and do it right instead of giving this image of a continuation that we don't need. y if i can make a comment. that isn't the image we want to project. what we need is a transition period. this is for project control, not for design. so and we need a transition period between the existing team and dtx team and this allows us to do that is give the transition period and will look for a new rfp for project management and control. >> at this stage what is there in project management and control with respect to rks detx because we are not in the design phase? >> we need the money to do the 30 percent. >> unless we get the money to do the 30 percent? >> yes. the report- >> we are not committing really but why are we bothering? >> we want enough money in the contract to be able to go with the study. be able to our estimate of construction estimates and so forth when the 30 percent comes in. after that we go after the rfp for project measure and control when we decide what the next steps are. don't want 2 teams together, one for the remainder of the dtx and phase 1 and after that we do go out for project measure and control team. the same people are doing [inaudible] work. >> dennis tur sean and will go through my presentation and to your point, chair harper, i have separated it into phase 1 and 2 element and that is for this situationism in 2014 we did selectu rs to a formal procedure to get them on board as our program management program, program control consultant rchlt they proposed a fee of $38 $2014 we did selectu rs to a formal procedure to get them on board as our program management program, program control consultant rchlt they proposed a fee of $38 million and cut to basically what fsh the absolute necessary. it agreed at $21.7 million duration with 4 year duration contract which basically puts through june 2018. also negotiated is reduction in fee similar to the turner dropping from 9 to 7 percent. so, after that negotiation now we got to this point in time and very close to near the completion and much clearer picture where we are at. there are a couple elements that we are part of this request. the prose polls are and purpose is in three buckets. two are phase one and separated out the phase 2 element of this clearly. phase one is when we negotiate td we only held to 3 and a half years of those 4 years back in 2014. it was fair amount of unknowns at that point and felt why should we negotiate more than necessary back in 2014. steel hadn't started yet so why we held the $21.7 million and negotiated amount only for the first 3 and a landfall of the 4 years. now, where we are in space and time today we do request that the original scope be extended for remaining 6 months and that is trending at what we need them for their day to day original scope is $2.1 million of the request. another element is other phase 1 scope necessary and essential to deliver the program and can go through the details of that quickly on the next slide. the fird third bucket is phase 2 element which is identified as mark said as consistent with board direction in june 2016. phase 1, so the phase 1 additional scope beyond the original scope extension of 6 months as ark logical and qaqc, it, dealing with procurement process, the project and master lesee start up and scope transfer of the last item is specific to the it system procurement under the shop that was under web corp previously and took that back from them. >> you took back the-right from web corp. my question is if you add those up it is $3.2 million. >> correct >> you are saying additional activities are only $2 million. which of these things-- put on hold. >> the $3 million there are credit so all we need is additional $2 million because there are other items in the orig fll scope that showed a credit. >> we saved items. >> the net is applied to this and why the ask is solid $2 million. >> what is the additional security consulting? >> the additional securityly had to do with the rpa dealing with rfp and manage with con ops and design guidance criterias utilize the pmpc staff for their program and then the safety and security management plan. safety and security safety plan needed to be developed and where the staff helped coordinated and bringing to what was needed. does that answer- >> there was 2014, 2015 timeline and they helped with the managing the concept of operations. we hired [inaudible] to produce the report but [inaudible] experts help manage that effort. we also updated the [inaudible] as we went to construction we encountered some conflicts in construction and needed to make adjustments and we went back and we find [inaudible] requirements so money well spent. >> i thought the ark logical was the most interesting, are we still digging? >> [inaudible] >> it started with the human remains found back when that was beyond so additional work at the bus ramp and bus storage that will start next week. >> we have to dig for the bus storage facility- >> we expect something? >> well, we anticipate- >> the areas in the bus storage are limited because a significant portion sthof work was already done 10 plus years ago but there are items that this project will touch that were not touched in previous activities. >> they wont be the archeologist or the diggers? they have archeologist on staff? >> let me explain. we have the project machbjure and control as a contract and if we need subcontractors they do it so if they don't-they have a large team with other firms so archeology will be done by somebody else. >> they will pay for the archeology? >> yes. and even the cost estimate update. some is other firms under them. they are part of a team, we just use them-it isn't just one company, it is a team. >> i'm sorry, i couldn't understand your response to director nurus question on there risk and vulnerability consultant, so who is that going to and what is that covering? >> that money went to- >> you said went to that sound like past tense. >> some took place in 20s 14 kwr 15. it was a line item weep went over. we had it in budget and [inaudible] in the overall budget. >> you are asking to approve the overage? >> the effort that went over and above what we expected. we saved some items- >> i don't feel comfortable with that line item and can't support that today without more information. >> i guess the board approved a contract with-to do several items >> who? >> project manager-u rs to do several items for us. >> who did the risk and vulnerability consulting? >>u rs. their team. >> and they wnt ovabout half a million? >> for what we [inaudible] their efforts when we developed the budget- >> i dopet feel comfort supporting that until i gelt more information. >> just so i can understand because i didn't get from the staff report that this was a reto active approval, so and maybe it is not. is the authority that the board gave director and approving the contract, did that give you as the director the ability to move money between line items or are we actually approving ret roactively over expenditures in line items? >> i have to say i think-- >> the contract you approvaled a contract with a total over all budget not specific line items so as time has gone on and services are required as noted there are credits, i caept speak to what the credits are but where money wasn't needed money was moved to the services like security consultant that was needed but the board hadn't previously approved a specific budget. for work to continue budget augmentation is needed because of the additional $2 million net and so that's what we request approval for today. increase to the contract for work moving forward because of overages in certain line items ovthe past couple years. >> the 4.1 we ask for we haven't spent that money. >> creth. >> we are asking for that money to do the what we need to do moving for ward. within the ovall budget the board approved there were line items that savings and [inaudible] i thought that was within my-yeah to be able to manage the day to day operations. >> i guess i need to understand this better. so, i agree that within the 4 corners of the agreed contract-i'm open to flexibility moving money back and forth but now you ask to increase the contract because of the overages so you maxed out the contract? and asking for additional funding? >> the contract isn't maxed out yet, but to continue work until june 30, 2018 the increase is required >> so you are asking to increase the contract? >> correct, not sulely due oo overages though. i'm not sure if this is clear. we tried to explain this in the staff report, but at the time the amount was negotiated, we were very aggressive negotiating and it was a significantly lower amount that had been proposed, but because we didn't know how long servicess would be needed until, the contract was-the term went to june 30, 2018, the contract was sized through june 30, 2017 budget wise. now, the construction schedule is clear and we are on schedule thankfully. we do need the services through close out of the construction contract so to june 30, 2018. part the increase is making sure there is funding for that extra year that wasn't included in the original amount. >> i think that is a problem. i don't have a issue with money getting moved within a contract, but if you are moving it around to such a extent you run out of money before what the board approved timeline is, then i don't feel comfortable supporting this additional funding. i think that you have to stay within your means within the time line you expect so if you know the contract isn't running out for a year you have to come to the board then. you are over spending i understand within the budgetary constraint but spending down the money very quickly and early and asking the board to supplement at the end so don't feel comfortable with that decision making. >> one thing i like to clarify, when we executed the contract [inaudible]u rs, the timeline was 4 years but we funded it for 3 and a half years because of the time completion of the building was august 2017. not december 2017. so, at the time when i negotiated the contract and did not know past in the 2018 timeframe what efforts we needed from them, so yid did not fund work beyond december 2017 for that work. now that we know what we need, we want to add that teerflt the contract. that effort was never included-that work wasn't included in the original contract. any scope changes? $2.2 million is for serbs between december 2017 and june 2018 for closing out the construction contract. that was never part of the contract executed in 2014. the funding. so, if we don't give them the $2.1 million they will pack up and 11 december 2017 and have nobody from project management help closing out the construction contract and maybe ron can elaborate more on that. >> sure. there is a lot of history and why we had historic background introduced, but if i can step back and give context to the nature of this contract was a overall budget pretty much time and material, having knowledgeed team at the ready to respond to things that happen out in the field so we can be agile much like surprising with arch logical or surprises or rethinking with the rav. it worked in that context of having a knowledgeable

Related Keywords

Fremont , California , United States , New York , Boston , Massachusetts , , Sacramento , Washington , San Francisco , Serbs , Mario Martinez , John Loftus , John Ram , Kevin Fitzpatrick , Jim Patrick , Bob Ross , Norman Yee ,