SAN FRANCISCO AIRPORT COMMISSION
MINUTES
March 29, 2016
Special Meeting
9:00 A.M.
Room 400 - City Hall
#1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
(400 Van Ness Avenue)
City and County of San Francisco
EDWIN M. LEE, MAYOR
COMMISSIONERS
LARRY MAZZOLA
President
LINDA S. CRAYTON
Vice President
ELEANOR JOHNS
RICHARD J. GUGGENHIME
PETER A. STERN
JOHN L. MARTIN
Airport Director
SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94128
Minutes of the Airport Commission Special Meeting of
March 29, 2016
CALENDAR AGENDA
RESOLUTION
SECTION
ITEM TITLE
NUMBER
PAGE
A.
CALL TO ORDER:
4
B.
ROLL CALL:
C.
ADOPTION OF MINUTES:
Special meeting of March 14, 2016 and the
Regular meeting of March 15, 2016
D.
E.
16-0090
ITEMS INITIATED BY COMMISSIONERS:
4
4
ITEMS RELATING TO ADMINISTRATION,
OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE:
1.
Award Sole Source Contract 10504.77 - Design-Build
Services for AirTrain System and Train Control
Upgrades - Bombardier Transportation (Holdings) 16-0091
2.
F.
4
4-5
Modification No. 1 to Contract 50061 - Davis & Assoc.
Communications, Inc.
16-0092
Modification No. 1 to Contract 50062 - Fuseideas/EIS
Design, a Joint Venture
16-0093
5-8
CONSENT CALENDAR OF ROUTINE
ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS:
3.
Modification No. 2 to Contract 10011.66 - Design-Build
Services for Terminal 1 Center Project - Hensel Phelps
Construction
16-0094
8
4.
5.
6.
7.
Modification No. 2 to Contract 10010.66 - Design-Build
Services for New Boarding Area B Project - Austin
Webcor, Joint Venture
16-0095
Reject All Proposals for Contract 50073.76 and
Authorization to Solicit New Bids for Solid Waste
Management Services
8
16-0096
8-10
Modification No. 3 to Professional Services Contract
10003.41 - Project Management Support Services
- Interim Boarding Area B Project - Hill International 16-0097
10
Modification No. 2 to Professional Services Contract
10050.43 - Architecture and Engineering Design
Services for Fire House No. 3 and South Field
Checkpoint Relocation Project - Shah Kawasaki/
YamaMar Joint Venture
16-0098
10
Minutes, March 29, 2016, Page 2
8.
Modification No.2 to Contract 10009.61 - Construction Services for Security Access Office and Customs Badge Seal Office Relocation Project - Galliera, Inc. dba Trico Construction
16-0000 10-11
9.
Authorization to Enter into an OTA and to Accept and Expend TSA Funds for the National Explosives Detection Canine Team Program
16-0100
11
G.
NEW BUSINESS:
11
H.
CORRESPONDENCE:
11
I.
CLOSED SESSION:
Public Employee Appointment: Airport Director
J.
ADJOURNMENT:
Minutes, March 29, 2016, Page 3
11-12
12
AIRPORT COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
March 29, 2016
A.
CALL TO ORDER:
The special meeting of the Airport Commission was called to order at 9:00 AM in Room
400, City Hall, San Francisco, CA.
*
B.
ROLL CALL:
Present:
Absent:
*
Hon. Larry Mazzola, President
Hon. Linda S. Crayton, Vice President
Hon. Eleanor Johns
Hon. Richard J. Guggenhime
Hon. Peter A. Stern
*
C.
*
*
*
ADOPTION OF MINUTES:
The minutes of the special meeting of March 14, 2016 and the regular meeting of
March 15, 2016 were adopted unanimously.
No. 16-0090
*
D.
*
ITEMS INITIATED BY COMMISSIONERS:
There were no items initiated by Commissioners.
*
E.
*
*
*
ACTION ITEMS RELATING TO ADMINISTRATION, OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE:
Item No. 1 was moved by Commissioner Guggenhime and seconded by Commissioner
Crayton. The vote to approve was unanimous.
1.
Award of Sole Source Contract No. 10504.77 - Design-Build Services for AirTrain
System and Train Control Upgrades - Bombardier Transportation (Holdings) USA,
Inc. - $56,930,000
No. 16-0091
Resolution awarding Sole Source Contract 10504.77,
Design-Build Services for the AirTrain Systems
Extension and Train Control Upgrades to Bombardier
Transportation (Holdings) USA Inc. in an amount of
$56,930,000 with a contract duration of 40 months,
and with a corresponding amount in contingency
authorization.
The extension of the AirTrain guideway and the
construction of the proposed Long Term Parking
Station at Lot DD are part of the Multi-Modal
Minutes, March 29, 2016, Page 4
Transportation Center project evaluated in a
Negative Declaration issued by the San Francisco
Planning Department (File No. 98.768E). The new
Hotel AirTrain Station was evaluated in an
Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report
for the Airport’s Master Plan and was issued by the
Planning Department (File No. 86.638E).
This activity is within the scope of the San Francisco
International Airport Master Plan Program approved
by the Airport Commission on November 3, 1992.
The Master Plan EIR prepared for the Master Plan
Program, including addenda thereto, adequately
described this activity and its potential environmental
effects for the purposes of CEQA.
Mr. Geoff Neumayr, Deputy Director, Design & Construction said this item
requests award of the sole source design build services contract for the AirTrain
Systems Extension and Train Control Upgrades to Bombardier Transportation in
an amount of $56.9 million and a contract duration of 40 months. Bombardier
Transportation is the manufacture operative of the Airport’s current AirTrain
system and it was in the best interest of the Airport to utilize their services for this
contract. The Airport Director has previously issued a memorandum to you
providing the written justification for using a sole source procurement process to
negotiate with Bombardier Transportation for this scope of work. Staff has
completed negotiations with Bombardier Transportation and they have agreed
with all the terms and conditions of the contract provided by the Airport including
the scope, cost, and schedule. This contract will provide design build services for
the AirTrain system extension to Lot DD and the Train Control upgrades. The
scope of work will include the design and construction of existing electronics and
control systems for the extension of the existing guideway to Lot DD, a new
station at the long term parking garage and at the new hotel. It will also provide
three new AirTrain cars for the system, retrofitting of existing guideway sections,
and retrofitting existing stations with line of sight train control systems technology.
Construction of the guideway and the new stations will be performed under a
separate contract. This contract will be a follow on contract upon completion of
the guideway and the new stations. The design scope of services for this contract
is highly specialized and proprietary in nature to Bombardier and as such cannot
be subcontracted. For that reason, the City’s Contract Monitoring Division has not
been able to establish a Local Business Enterprise (LBE) goal for design services.
However, CMD has established a 15% LBE subcontracting goal for construction
services and Bombardier is committed to meeting this goal.
Item No. 2 was moved by Commissioner Crayton and seconded by Commissioner
Guggenhime. The vote to approve was unanimous.
2.
Modification No. 1 to Contract No. 50061 - Davis & Associates Communications,
Inc. - $375,000
Minutes, March 29, 2016, Page 5
Modification No. 1 to Contract No. 50062 - Fuseideas/EIS Design, a Joint Venture
- $1,350,000
Each to Provide Communications and Marketing Services for Varied Scopes of
Work on an As-Needed Basis
No. 16-0092
No. 16-0093
Resolutions approving (1) Modification No. 1 to
Contract No. 50061 with Davis & Associates
Communications, Inc. to increase total not-to-exceed
amount by $375,000 for a new total not-to-exceed
amount of $1,800,000; and
(2) Modification No. 1 to Contract No. 50062 with
Fuseideas/EIS Design, a J.V., to increase the total
not-to-exceed amount by $1,350,000 for a new total
not-to-exceed amount of $2,850,000 to provide
Communications and Marketing Services for varied
scopes of work on an as-needed basis, and to
change the method by which the monies are
allocated from an annual basis to a contract term
basis.
Ms. Kandace Bender, Chief Marketing & Communications Officer said that a few
years ago the Commission authorized us to establish a pool of marketing and
communications firms. This is a new concept for us as in the past we had worked
exclusively with one marketing firm and one separate communications firm. The
goal was to create a pool whereby the marketing team and the communications
team can work together with one firm to create integrated campaigns. From the
pool of those five firms, three were selected. Davis & Associates and Fuseideas/
EIS Design for the primary contracts, and a much smaller contract was allocated
to Hill+Knowlton with whom we have worked before.
The total amount authorized by the Commission was $1.6 million per year for
three years with options to renew in subsequent years. Because two of these
firms, Davis & Associates and Fuseideas/EIS were brand new to us, we felt it was
important to begin slowly with them. We secured Commission permission to
allocate a total of $575,000 late last summer, roughly 1/3 of the total spending that
was authorized to us. We wanted to see how they did with that and if we could
get used to them and they used to us. We’ve had some growing pains but I’m
pleased to report that we’ve adjusted to one another and we are now seeing
quality work and respect for the deadlines from both firms. In fact, Air India and
Fiji Airways recently told us that our integrated social media and marketing
campaigns were among the best that they had experienced.
Based on the successful working relationship that we’ve forged, and current and
forecasted projects, we are seeking Commission approval to utilize the remaining
authority to increase both contracts to the maximum amount allowed. Secondly,
we are asking to change the not-to-exceed authority from a per year basis to a per
contract basis. In this case, the original term of three years for each one. At no
time will the Airport exceed the $1.6 million per year without the express approval
of the Commission.
Minutes, March 29, 2016, Page 6
Commissioner Crayton ... is the total amount for the contract what we see in front
of us right now?
Ms. Bender ... it is.
Commissioner Crayton ... and if you were to come back again it would be for a
whole new amount?
Ms. Bender ... it would. We’re asking for permission to not have to do that for two
more years.
Commissioner Crayton asked so that’s what this amount includes right now?
Ms. Bender ... correct. We’re very pleased with the work from both firms. Again,
it was a little bumpy in the beginning, but we’re getting there and we’re happy
Commissioner Crayton ... these are the only two firms that we’re using right now?
And that’s for an extended period?
Ms. Bender ... it’s primarily Davis & Associates and Fuseideas/EIS. The
Hill+Knowlton contract is quite small.
Commissioner Johns ... how long was the probationary or tryout period?
Ms. Bender ... it’s about seven-eight months.
Commissioner Johns ... so the bumps in the road have been worked out?
Ms. Bender ... yes, and they weren’t major. We demand a lot and we demand it
quickly. We work at a very fast pace in our division. I think there was a learning
process to get up to speed to be able to deliver things as quickly as we require
them. Also, to get a sense and a feel for the style that we like to use. I think that’s
normal with just about any new firm.
Commissioner Johns ... what types of projects do these firms do and how are they
different?
Ms. Bender ... both firms can perform many of the same functions. Davis does a
lot of web work and social media campaigns for us. Fuse primarily works on
branding and making sure that the brand is followed, and they do marketing
campaigns. The way it works now, and it’s working very well, is that if there’s a
project coming up like a new airline, the marketing team and the communications
team get together and work with one of the firms to create a new campaign. In
that way, both elements of marketing and communications are integrated.
Commissioner Crayton ... where would we see some examples of what they have
done? Have they done something or have they just marketed the Airport?
Ms. Bender ... they’re doing the creative design for us as well. All of the banners
that you see around the City, at the Airport, on-line, the social media, creative
Minutes, March 29, 2016, Page 7
component, all of that’s done by Fuse.
Commissioner Crayton ... is any of that done in conjunction with City and County
of San Francisco City and County, or just specifically for the Airport?
Ms. Bender ... specifically for the Airport.
*
F.
*
*
CONSENT CALENDAR OF ROUTINE ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS:
The Consent Calendar, Item Nos. 3 through 9, was moved by Commissioner Crayton
and seconded by Commissioner Guggenhime. The vote to approve was unanimous.
3. Modification No. 2 to Contract No. 10011.66 - Design-Build Services for the
Terminal 1 Center Project - Hensel Phelps Construction Co. - $30,000,000
No. 16-0094
Resolution approving Modification No. 2 to Contract
10011.66, Design-Build Services for the Terminal 1
Center Project with Hensel Phelps Construction Co.,
in an amount not to exceed $30,000,000 for a new
contract amount not to exceed $137,965,956, with a
corresponding amount in contingency authorization.
4. Modification No. 2 to Contract No. 10010.66 - Design-Build Services for the New
Boarding Area B Project - Austin Webcor, Joint Venture - $11,300,000
No. 16-0095
Resolution approving Modification No. 2 to Contract
10010.66, Design-Build Services for the New
Boarding Area B Project with Austin Webcor J.V., in
an amount not to exceed $11,300,000 for a new
contract amount not to exceed $95,833,605 with a
corresponding amount in contingency authorization.
5. Reject All Proposals for Contract No. 50073.76 and Authorization to Solicit New
Bids for Solid Waste Management Services
No. 16-0096
Resolution Rejecting All Proposals for Contract No.
50073.76, Solid Waste Management Services, and
authorizing the Director to solicit new Proposals for
Contract No. 50073.76 for a five year duration.
Commissioner Guggenhime ... why are we throwing out the bids?
Mr. Neumayr ... we only received one bid and it exceeded our estimated cost.
Upon a second look, we thought we could revise our internal business practices,
primarily around solid waste, and facilitate that process internally. If we removed
that from the scope we could reduce the cost of the contract.
Commissioner Mazzola ... is there really only one major company, Recology?
Minutes, March 29, 2016, Page 8
Mr. Neumayr ... the issue is that the sortation is a big thing right now. That’s
where items that will go to landfill are separated from those things that are
recyclable. A lot of the cost efficiency gets built in when the facilities are close by.
Long term, the Airport will handle this in-house. But right now, we’re trying to
meet our goal of zero waste and this is the situation we’re working with.
Commissioner Guggenhime ... how do you know you’re going to get more than
one bid next time?
Mr. Neumayr ... we don’t know.
Commissioner Guggenhime ... the other bid was 46% over the estimate?
Mr. John Martin, Airport Director ... historically, we’ve often only received one bid
from South City Scavenger. We are a very big part of their business in San Mateo
County, and we always compare the rate to market price to make sure we’re
getting a fair deal.
Commissioner Guggenhime ... your theory is that if they were 46% over on the
first go-around, that comes down quite a bit. Correct?
Commissioner Mazzola ... they will.
Commissioner Johns ... the last time this came before us you explained about the
issue of separation and that we couldn’t get any other competitive bids because
noone else was prepared to sort. I thought we were putting things in place for
more separation on site so we wouldn’t have this. What are we doing to achieve
that goal, otherwise we’re going to constantly be in the same situation?
Mr. Neumayr ... we have made a tremendous amount of progress on separation.
It’s a complicated issue because we have to change cultural behavior, starting
with our concessionaires, who have actually gotten better at it, but we still have to
deal with the public. Even if we put a series of receptacles out, people still make
mistakes. We have significantly diminished the amount of sortation that goes on.
As we continue to reduce it overtime, our goal and our intent is to be able to do
that with completely on-site, but it’s a process we have to go through.
Commissioner Johns ... what about our big on-site food service preparation facility
that Commissioner Crayton and I toured? Are they doing separation there?
Mr. Martin ... we do enforcement work with the major tenants to make sure they’re
doing separation, and we now have a rate structure so there’s an economic
penalty in effect for major companies that are not doing separation.
Ms. Julian Potter, Chief Administrative & Policy Officer ... a couple of months ago
you approved an RFP and we now have four proposals that we are reviewing.
The purpose of the proposals is to get us to zero waste. We’re looking at four
different companies that will prepare a master plan for us to look at all of the
enforcements, separation, different recycling containers, should we build an onsite sorting facility? All of these questions we know we have to answer to get to
Minutes, March 29, 2016, Page 9
the Mayor’s goal of zero waste by 2020. So, in this proposal to haul the waste we
decided to make very narrow and just about hauling the waste. There is a
potential that we might have another firm, I believe it’s Recology, that has a facility
where Candlestick used to be.
Commissioner Crayton ... did you put out a proposal for those four firms?
Ms. Potter ... yes, that proposal has been put out and we are in the final stages of
selecting a firm. We will probably come before you in the next month and tell you
which firm we’ve selected to come up with a zero waste plan.
Commissioner Crayton ... did any minority firms respond?
Ms. Potter ... I’m sorry Commissioner, I don’t have the data in front of me.
Commissioner Crayton ... No problem. Thank you.
6. Modification No. 3 to Professional Services Contract No.10003.41 - Project
Management Support Services for the Interim Boarding Area B Project
Hill International, Inc. - $2,600,000
No. 16-0097
Resolution approving Modification No. 3 to
Professional Services Contract 10003.41, Project
Management Support Services for the Interim
Boarding Area B Project with Hill International, Inc.,
in an amount not to exceed $2,600,000 for a new
contract amount of $7,450,000 and with a new total
contract duration of 32 months.
7. Modification No. 2 to Professional Services Contract 10050.43 - Architecture and
Engineering Design Services for Fire House No. 3 and South Field Checkpoint
Relocation Project - Shah Kawasaki/YamaMar Joint Venture - $827,441
No. 16-0098
Resolution approving Modification No. 2 to
Professional Services Contract No. 10050.43,
Architecture and Engineering Design Services for
the Fire House No. 3 and South Field Checkpoint
Relocation Project with Shah Kawasaki/YamaMar
Joint Venture, in an amount of $827,441 with a new
contract amount of $3,185,164.
8. Modification No.2 to Contract No. 10009.61 - Construction Services for the
Security Access Office and Customs Badge Seal Office Relocation Project
Galliera, Inc. DBA Trico Construction - $140,833
No. 16-0099
Resolution approving Modification No. 2 to Contract
No. 10009.61, Construction Services for the Security
Minutes, March 29, 2016, Page 10
Access Office and Customs Badge Seal Office
Relocation Project with Galliera, Inc. dba Trico
Construction, in an amount not to exceed $140,833
for a new contract amount not to exceed
$4,338,084, with a corresponding amount in
contingency authorization and with a new contract
duration of 375 consecutive calendar days.
9. Authorization to Enter into an Other Transaction Agreement and to Accept and
Expend Transportation Security Administration Funds in an Estimated Amount of
$3,067,875 for the National Explosives Detection Canine Team Program
No. 16-0100
Resolution authorizing staff to enter into an Other
Transaction Agreement and to accept and expend
Transportation Security Administration funds in an
estimated amount of $3,067,875 for the National
Explosives Detection Canine team program and any
additional amounts up to 15% of $3,067,875.
*
G.
*
*
CORRESPONDENCE:
There was no discussion by the Commission.
*
I.
*
NEW BUSINESS:
Discussion only. This is the “Public Comment” section of the calendar. Individuals
may address the Commission on any topic within the jurisdiction of the Airport
Commission for a period of up to two (2) minutes. Please fill out a “Request to Speak”
form located on the table next to the speaker’s microphone and submit it to the
Commission Secretary.
There were no requests to speak.
*
H.
*
*
*
CLOSED SESSION:
(a) Public comment on all matters pertaining to this agenda item.
(b) Discussion and vote in open session pursuant to the Brown Act (California
Government Code §54956.9) and the Sunshine Ordinance (San Francisco
Administrative Code §67.10(d)) on whether to invoke the attorney-client privilege and
conduct a closed session to confer with legal counsel. ACTION ITEM.
(c) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT – California Government Code
§54957(b)(1); San Francisco Administrative Code § 67.10(b) – Title of Position:
Airport Director. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION.
Minutes, March 29, 2016, Page 11
There are no other planned agenda items for the closed session. In the event
of any urgent matter requiring immediate action which has come to the attention of
the Airport Commission after the agenda was issued and which is an item
appropriately addressed in closed session, the Airport Commission may discuss
and vote whether to conduct a closed session under the Brown Act (Government
Code §54954.2(b)(2) and §54954.5) and the Sunshine Ordinance (Administrative
Code §67.11).)
(d) [RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION]
(i) [IF APPLICABLE] Report on action taken in closed session required by the
Brown Act (Government Code §54957.1(a)) and the Sunshine Ordinance (San
Francisco Administrative Code §67.12(b)).
(ii) Discussion and vote whether to disclose any or all discussions held in closed
session (San Francisco Administrative Code §67.12(a)). ACTION ITEM.
*
J.
*
*
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further calendared business before the Commission the meeting
adjourned at 9:27 AM.
(Original signed by: Jean Caramatti)
Jean Caramatti
Commission Secretary
Minutes, March 29, 2016, Page 12